PE Status for PVs 5

[PipingEquipment]

Hello all,

I am a Masters Student and an engineer and am curious as to the relevancy of getting my PE with my focus being on pressure vessels. At the code shop I work at there is no PE that signs off on vessels, as this is not a requirement of the code.
So, is there an application of a PV PE that I am unaware of?
Would this be a pointless avenue to pursue or is there work that would require a PV PE?

I suspect the design of vessels at engineering firms may be a potential opportunity...

 

[TGS4]

Where in the world are you located (this is a worldwide forum, and you could be from anywhere)?

This shop you work for - do they have their U-stamp, or maybe they have their U-2 stamp as well? That information is relevant.

 

[PipingEquipment]

I'm in the central USA.
We have our U stamp and R stamp and some piping stamps to.

 

[vesselfab]

div 1 has no PE requirement

div 2 does have it.

go ahead and get it, always nice to have.

 

[JStephen]

Plan on getting it. Even if you don't routinely need it you may on occasion have customers that require it. Also, it is not unknown for people to wind up working at places other than what they planned.

 

[PipingEquipment]

Thanks guys I this is what I will plan on doing.

 

[PipingEquipment]

*think

 

[stanweld]

Jurisdictions may also require sign off by a P.E.

 

[EngAddict]

Wow, no PE sign off for Div1 in the USA?? Is this regardless of pressure and contents? So you don't have to get designs verified at all? Sounds dangerous to me.

 

[REGRUMBLE]

In Ontario and I think all Canadian Provinces a PE must sign off on the design and calculations before a vessel can be fabricated.

 

[DG72]

"Wow, no PE sign off for Div1 in the USA?? Is this regardless of pressure and contents? So you don't have to get designs verified at all? Sounds dangerous to me."

What's dangerous about that? I don't remember there being anything pertinent to Div. 1 on PE exam.

 

[EngAddict]

The contents of the PE exam is irrelevant but it proves they are competent engineers (usually). I would think it dangerous to not have a licensed engineer sign off on medium to high risk vessels.

 

[PipingEquipment]

Even though there is no engineer signing off on the PV, most (if not all) companies have an insurance company that provides (at a cost) an Authorized Inspector (AI), that signs off on every code PV. This assures that the PV has been designed to Section VIII, which in turn assures that the PV is safe due to it being designed to the requirements of the accepted code.

 

[dcasto]

we work with a code shop that has a person with a degree in botnay doing the designs. Their inspector who is not a PE checks the information and the QC for the materials and assembly. This is in the US.

In Canada, a PE is granted upon graduating from college (well after a review, but no testing of engineering skills and little if any waiting period). You also get a silver band for your pinky finger.

Clipped
In part because of CEAB's close monitoring, candidates for the P.Eng. title who are graduates of Canadian B.Eng. programs are not tested in engineering principles after graduation. However, to receive the P.Eng. title, the provincial engineering associations have additional requirements beyond the B.Eng. degree. These typically involve additional work experience past graduation, letters of reference, and an examination (known as the Professional Practice Examination, PPE) covering ethics, intellectual property protection, and provincial law. This "law and ethics exam" is based on a national syllabus established by the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, but it is administered by each province. For example, applicants in Quebec must be familiar with aspects of Napoleonic law, while applicants in English-speaking provinces must be familiar with elements of English common case law. Applicants must be fluent in the language of business used in their province or territory.

 

[EngAddict]

"we work with a code shop that has a person with a degree in botnay doing the designs. Their inspector who is not a PE checks the information and the QC for the materials and assembly. This is in the US."

This is what I mean. And 'PipingEquipment' does your inspector check the design aswell as manufacture? What if the vessel is built correctly but the design is undersized? Yeah it may not fail due to the large safety factors but add some corrosion or some cyclic loading and it may not be so safe.

Like dcasto said we are also Professional Engineers after graduating, however to sign off on designs we must be chartered. We also require 3rd party verification for most vessels, whereby the design verifier must have their CPEng and be able to sign off on the compliance certificate.

 

[DG72]

PE's are nice, but irrelevant to the issue at hand. Hire competent personnel and you will do great. The Botanist example is an unfair argument. (You went from one extreme to the other.) I know many shops that have non-degreed personnel and they do okay, but I require engineers with degrees at mine--they are very competent. (they don't give Engineering degrees away these days)

 

[PipingEquipment]

EngAddict our AI is different than some companies (I think, I've only worked at this one shop) in that he is associated with our insurance company. Not only does he go over the calculations, he makes us prove the software we use (which I believe everyone has a responsibility to do anyways). Then on top of that we have several audits, one with the insurance agency, and one with ASME. These can get pretty intensive, and if we do bad enough we could be stripped of our stamp and/or our insurance.

Even so I see your point. I'm sure that some companies pass vessels that should not be, and they slip through the layers designed to ensure all vessels pass, but I'm sure the same is true for anywhere else including the UK and Canada. When I started working here I was the only engineer with a degree working on vessels, and I have corrected some mistakes, but they had been building vessels for some 20 years and none have failed. Even so they saw a need for somebody who understands the principles of science that the other PV people simply didn't have the training for...so I guess my point is that every shop should have at least one trained engineer, even if they are not a PE. Like DG72 said they don't just give out engineering degrees, engineers have done far more complex calculations than are presented in section viii, (calculus 1-3 and differential equations), heck I've only seen algebra in section viii! The real advantage to having engineers in the mix at a shop is to have the theory behind some of these equations and rules, that and we are use to using the graphs and figures and we know how to do research better than the average joe. So, engineers in my opinion will make the design process a bit easier, and a PE will likely make it a bit better but is unnecessary.

 

[vesselfab]

""What if the vessel is built correctly but the design is undersized? Yeah it may not fail due to the large safety factors but add some corrosion or some cyclic loading and it may not be so safe.""

Size of vessel is determined by process guys.
Corrosion is determined by process/corrosion guys
Cyclic conditions are determined by process/operating guys.

The poor old fab shop has to determine if the mechanical design is good for all conditions furnished to him as listed above as well as wind, seismic, vibration, and the pressure conditions per code.

Why should a PE have to sign off on a simple design to division 1. It is a "given calculation" format that any High school graduate can do with a minimum of training as long as the "Manager of Engineering" of the fabrication shop reviews the calculations for accuracy.

The fabrication shop does not do the overall HAZOP and site review and do not know about conditions there and the overall design. That is what the PE on the overall project is for.

 

[EngAddict]

@ vesselfab
By size I meant thickness, accounting for pressure, reinforcing, external loadings, etc. I doubt a school kid could accurately design a vessel. I am sure they could apply one or two formulas but to apply a code properly in combination for a variety of vessels takes a long time to master. Not all designs are simple, I wouldn't expect a PE to sign off on a 'simple' design.

Why do you assume I was talking about a fabrication shop? It could be a design office. People make mistakes and by enforcing 3rd party verification for high risk vessels (or at high risk locations) it reduces the risk and improves QA. To verify a design someone needs to take responsibility, even if the design is done by an engineer, there still should be a signatory who is licensed.

@DG72 & PipingEquipment
Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with engineers doing the work, I am one myself and am not licensed. Where I work only engineers do the design and verification of vessels, not usually a Chartered engineer. But for some vessels we require an internal verification, signed off by the CPEng; for others we require external verification, to be signed off by a CPEng at another company. It builds in redundancies. I verify designs that come from many other companies and there are always mistakes, it is human nature. Usually always minor changes but every so often you get something though could be dangerous if sent to fabrication without checking.

I have no doubt that someone without formal qualifications could very competently design vessels if they have been doing it for years but that is not really my point. It is more the quality assureance side of things.

Like PipingEquipment we get audits for ISO 9001, which allows us to verify designs. W/o this we also couldn't get insurance. Who takes responsibilty at a fabrication shop if the design fails? A PE can be taken to court but what are the legal responsibilites if there is no signatory?

I am not trying to criticize the way you do things more trying to understand how it works to ensure the same level of QA. Please don't take it the wrong way.

 

[vesselfab]

""Why do you assume I was talking about a fabrication shop? It could be a design office. People make mistakes and by enforcing 3rd party verification for high risk vessels (or at high risk locations) it reduces the risk and improves QA. To verify a design someone needs to take responsibility, even if the design is done by an engineer, there still should be a signatory who is licensed.""

Well, I suppose I said fab shop, because you were talking about fab shop AI. And the fact that the fab shop is the one ultimately responsible for the mechanical design and fabrication of the vessel. Yep, the fab shop is responsible to make sure the vessel is correctly designed and fabricated to be suitable for conditions stated in purchase order and specifications and ASME code (here in the states).

We do have a PE here that reviews every design calculation.
We have an EIT that is preparing to take his test for PE.
We also have another EIT that is a few years away from his PE stamp.

BUT back to the original question about a code vessel shop.
Div 1 no PE Div 2 PE required.

I would suggest that the original poster get his PE stamp