Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations MintJulep on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

L-shaped pressure vessel

Status
Not open for further replies.

xphiliac007

Aerospace
Oct 1, 2007
5
Hi there,

Is there any ASME code or other standard out there that talks about L-shaped pressure vessels? I know that Section VIII Div 1 Appendix 13 covers non-circular vessels, but none of the geometry matches to what I am analyzing, which is an L-shaped hydraulic cart that sits on a platform. Any comments/suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Do you mean something like was discussed here thread794-198564 or something else?

jt
 
The shape of the junction is elliptical. Internal pressure will try to make it go egg-shaped. I ran into this problem a lomg time ago when doing some design work on wind tunnel elbows with turning vanes for the airflow. Equations for bending momnets came from a very long nomograph by NACA, the forerunner to NASA.

Joe Tank
 
Thx for replying jte, but it's not quite like in the previous thread you mentioned. The pressure vessel itself has a rectangular cross-section, but is configured in an "L" shape, not simply vertical or horizontal. It is a specialized hydraulic reservoir and is not code-stamped. I believe VIII-2 would allow me to perform FEA on it with the appropriate acceptance criteria, but if I'm not mistaken would require 100% radiography to meet code requirements.
 
xphiliac007,
Does your vessel have a name plate? Does it qualify to be a pressure vessel at all? Is there any identification for the design code used in the design / fabrication of your vessel?
A specialised pressurized hydraulic reservor can be employed only if it is provided with a valid nameplate, in accordance with one of the world wide approved design codes.
Can you please clarify this issues for us?
cheers,
gr2vessels
 
xphiliac-

I believe you are correct with regard to the new Div. 2 (2007) Part 5 analysis, and probably with the 100% RT issue. Is there a problem with the RT?

gr2vessels provided some good questions you should get some answers to. You may have an argument that this container is "an integral part or component" as described in Div. 1 U-1(c)(2)(c). Consult with the jurisdiction where this will be installed if you are not sure whether the container needs a stamp. Either way, don't forget to consider fatigue if this container is going to see pressure cycles. The stresses at the corners may work for a few cycles but kill the fatigue design.

jt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor