EN 13480 with ASME SA 312 TP 316/316L

[pflow]

We have a project where the preferred piping design code is EN 13480 which requires the use of "harmonized" steel.

However, our client has accepted the use of ASME SA 312 TP 316/316L from Particular Material Appraisals (PMA).

So my question is: can we still design and inspect to EN 13480 and use the 316/316L approved via PMA ?

 

[XL83NL]

In terms of PED requirements (assuming you need to conform to the PED); yes, you can. However, the (I think real) problem is that there are no stress values for A312 316/316L in EN 13480.
You could use B31.3's stress allowables, but their basis is different from EN 13480. The PMA is a good approach, but only provides acceptance under PED. So how are you making sure you follow and conform to EN 13480?

What you could do is trying to source triple/quadruple certified pipe to A312 316/316L AND EN 10216-5 1.4401/1.4404. You can use stress allowables from EN 10216-5 and therefore (easily) meet the EN 13480 requirements.Most pipe in Europe is available under this quadruple spec.

Sourcing strictly EN 10216-5 1.4404/1.4401 would not be a problem too. Why would you use A312 316/316L anyways?

 

[pflow]

XL83NL, thank you for the reply.

Yes, I noticed EN 13480-2:2012, Section 4.3.3 allows using other materials if approved with PMA.

Our pipe stress package CAEPIPE will run under EN 13480 analysis with either 316/316L or 1.4401/1.4404 allowable stresses - so I was considering filing both these runs for completeness.

I was told the dual EN / ASME rated steel is difficult to purchase but I have no direct evidence to support this.

 

[XL83NL]

Well, our experience is that it is not that difficult actuially. It may depend on the size range and thickness though.
Furthermore, Ive found EN 13480 to be very difficult when it comes to sourcing fittings/components for moderate/above-average pressure piping (say anything beyond PN 16). The standard sizes like 2 mm are okay, but above that, having to find e.g. a type B fitting with 3.6 mm wall thickness in plain 316 (1.4404/1.4401) - man, what a nightmare.

Another thing to it is that you need to comply with your contract/spec. Not knowing what it is, Im assmuning EN 13480 compliance is required. Check the requirements for determination on stress allowables. Im pretty sure theyre different between the two codes. However, if satisfying PED is just the requirement, and you may apply any code, or even mix up codes (not a good idea though), i think you're okay.

Good luck.

 

[OSIRIS7]

I do not think mixing design codes is allowed in the PED. Which design code are you going to engrave on the name plate?

If you are using a PMA make sure that the manufacturer (in terms of the PED, not nescessarily the company that actually "builds" the system) accepts this PMA. You might be able to use ASME II part D table Y-1 values, but that has to be cleared with the client, the manufacturer and the NoBo. You can also require to order the material manufacturer to declare that the material does meet the values as mentioned in this ASME II part D table Y-1.

Be sure that in the PMA you check the requirements of the PED and EN 13480-2.

You can buy from companies like Butting.com , buhlmann-group.com and ernefittings.com for instance.

 

[XL83NL]

See guideline 9/6 on (partial) use of different codes.

 

[OSIRIS7]

You are right, I know about this Guideline. And you will most likely place yourself in an almost impossible situation if you would be mixing design codes. I read it more like it is allowed to use different codes in design, manufacturing and inspection. But indeed, close reading it can be explained using more than one code for instance in design.

 

[XL83NL]

Well, it'd more take it in the way that when applying one code, which lacks clear requirements at some point (e.g. B31.3), I'd use another code to fill this gap (e.g. some SIF's are not in B31.3 but are in EN 13480). Another thing I do, quite often actually, is applying EN 1092 flanges in B31.3 design - since a full EN 13480 design is just too cumbersome. Other than that Id stay away of mixing.

 

[OSIRIS7]

I recognise the lack of detail. We use the same between EN13480 and 13445 mainly. For instance the detailed explanation about hydrotesting in part 5 in which the 13445 is more clear about when creep is applicable. But other than that one has to be careful.