Guidance Needed on ASME Section VIII Div 1/Div 2 (2015 versus 2017 ver.)

[kayriv]

Hello! I'm brand new to this forum but I was hoping to get some guidance on the latest on ASME BPV Section VIII Div 1 and Div 2.

I know that the 2017 version is not set to be released until the end of July. I was wondering if anyone would happen to know what the major differences between version 2015 and version 2017 for Section VIII Div 1 and Div 2. I was under the impression that Div 1 will have a PxV calculation to determine if the vessel is within scope.

I was also wondering if the new version of Div 2 will more than likely carry the same exclusions as Div 1. I'm new to the pressure vessel area so I'm not familiar with how the 2015 code is laid out and if in the past Div 2 also carried the same exclusions as Div 1.

We are trying to determine whether or not to use Div 2 versus Div 1 for our pressure vessel and any guidance on either versions would be extremely helpful! I tried searching in the forum for some relative posts but the last post made on this matter was from 2003.

 

[mk3223]

Welcome to join the Forums.
IMO, the vessel should be designed per current Code version and updated as necessary when the 2017 version published. Also, you may provide the process conditions to the vendor and find out which Code is better applied to the equipment.

 

[SnTMan]

kayriv, forget about second guessing future versions, they likely won't be that different. Study the current ones and make your decision as to Div 1 / Div 2 based on that. Hint: For very many classes of work, Div 1 is much simpler to comply with. IMO.

Regards,

Mike

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

 

[XL83NL]

TGS4 may shed some light from the committee he's wrt siginficant changes to both VIII-1 and VIII-2.

IMO, the vessel should be designed per current Code version and updated as necessary when the 2017 version published.

No. Dont 'update as necessary'. You either choose edition a or b and keep on using that edition all the way. Please note 2017 cant be used before it's effective date. If you choose the 2015 edition (or maybe even 2013 if that's dictated by e.g. state regulations in the USA), you use that version during your design and build stage, even if it where to take you say 5 years after purchase order/quotation date (usually code editions are defined in the quotation or PO stage) to finish the vessel.

 

[Caloooomi]

I've heard rumours of ASME wanting to push more people onto Div VIII-2 rather than sticking with VIII-1, but whether that is going to be this years edition or the next, who knows!

 

[XL83NL]

This was posted on the IHS website, maybe it's of any use (did not have time to review it yet); Key Changes for the 2017 Edition of the ASME BPVC

 

[kayriv]

Thank you so much everyone!! I was leaning more towards having the business unit go with using the latest release code versus trying to plan for the 2017 version.

Regarding the difference between Div 2 and Div 1 - I understand that Div 1 is easier to comply too, but is there a particular reason as to why you would use Div 2 for a pressure vessel design versus Div 1? Or is it based on the designer of the vessel?

 

[TGS4]

You could wait for the 2017 Edition of VIII-2 and specify a Div 2 Class 1 vessel. Depending on your materials of construction, it may prove to be right balance between you other two options: VIII-1(2015) and VIII-2(2015).

In the 2017 Edition, VIII-2 is going to introduce two classes of vessels: Class 1 and Class 2. Class 1 will have allowable stresses based on UTS/3.0 and/or YIELD/1.5, whereas Class 2 will have allowable stresses based on UTS/2.4 and/or YIELD/1.5. Both will require a UDS, but only Class 2 will require the UDS to be certified by a Certifying Engineer. Class 1 will also not permit Part 5 (Design-By-Analysis) to over-rule any of the rules in Part 4.

From my perspective, any and all future engineered vessels (as opposed to mass-produced vessels) should/ought to be designed and fabricated to Div 2 Class 1. Other than jurisdictional operating/repairing issues (which we, as an engineering community should be trying to fix), there is no technical advantage to using Div 1. It is a cumbersome and outdated Code, with more and more rules being removed with references being provided to Div 2. In Div 2, Part 4, we have very robust rules that are superior in every context to the Div 1 rules especially as they generally have a strong technical background.

Feel free to contact me directly to discuss off-line.

 

[kayriv]

Thank you so much TGS4!

 

[oknow]

In regards to the revisions/changes of the Code Editions the Hartford Steam Boiler Codes and Standards Staff compiles a very comprehensive and detailed explanation. Significant man days are spent to compile and is a great benefit to the ASME BPV industry. In the past they did provide to their Certificate Holders for free. Others were able to purchase from their web site. It is usually completed in the fall.