Interpretation VIII-1-83-341

[Jano6924]

Gentlemen:

Interpretation VIII-1-83-341 reads as follows:

Question: For the nozzle configuration shown in Fig. UG-40 sketches (e), (e-1), and (e-2), the rule given in the Note beneath the sketches is followed to establish te. Once te is established, limits of reinforcement are established according to UG-40(c). May all of the excess area of metal within these limits, as given in UG-40(c) and (d), be considered as metal available for reinforcement?
Reply: Yes.

I want to correctly understand this interpretation. Let’s assume that “Ln” is the limit normal to vessel wall as per UG-40(c), and let’s assume that “te” > “Ln”. Second formula for A2 in Fig. UG-37.1, with reinforcing element added, reads as follows:

A2 = 2(tn – trn)(2.5tn + te)fr2

For such formula what option shall I use for “te”?

Option 1: min(te, Ln)
Option 2: use “te” directly

Your comments will be appreciated.

 

[SnTMan]

Jano6924, see UG-40(a). You may not take credit for any metal lying outside the limits of reinforcement. In a configuration where te > Ln, you must use Ln. Option 1.

Regards,

Mike

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

 

[Jano6924]

Mike:

Thank you for your comments. You are right I shall use option 1. My doubt came because this interpretation uses the words “excess area of metal…”, so I prefer to ask.

Best Regards.

 

[SnTMan]

Jano6924, excess area as used here refers to area not required for pressure, corrosion, UG-22 loads, etc, but within the limits of reinforcement.

Best of luck

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

 

[Jano6924]

Mike:
That is correct. Thankk you again.