ASME code interpreation as for ASME , Sect. 1 PG-38 Multi opening. (Si

[LSThill]

ASME code interpreation as for ASME , Sect. 1 PG-38 Multi opening. (Similar to Div. 1)
One of the nozzle is located within less than half length of distance of nozzle diameter, so this is to be subject to Multi opening, PG-38 naturally.

However, nozzle opening compansation is sufficient for only single opening in a our reinforcement calculation,
Therefore, I think that this case need not to apply for PG-38, multi opening.

And my openion is that this nozzle( HCBI and ICBI) opening shall not be of mandatory requirement because each single nozzle reinforcement area satifys for each single opining required area without additional compensation area of adjacent nozzle opining with combaine area with multi opening regulation, PG-38.

Consequently, this nozzle is not necessary to take PG-38 code varification in our code calculation

Question: confirm me of this PG-38 is mandatory regulation regardless of opening compensation.

Leonard

 

[deanc]

Isthill: Greetings

If I understand your question?---please see the last sentence of PG-38.1.

 

[prex]

In my opinion you need to pass through and satisfy PG-38 and to mention this in the calculation.
Of course, in the conditions you state, PG-38 will be automatically satisfied, so you don't need any additional calculation to prove the conformity.

prex

http://www.xcalcs.com

Online tools for structural design

 

[GenB]

you will have to calc for staggered openings
including efficiency of ligament which may affect the shell or head t,
unless compensation is suffient or reinforce is added.
genb