Piping Class - Combining EN material with ASME standard for pipe dimensions

[nikolastrojman]

Hi all,

quick question. Is possible to assemble a piping class based on a material according to European norm e.g. 1.4571 in combination with ASME B36.10/B36.19 standards for dimensions,
E.g. a pipe with 114.3mm x 4.78mm (STD 30 wall thickness acc. to B36.10) made out of 1.4571 material and not out of ASTM A 312 TP 316L.

BR

 

[LittleInch]

Can't see why not.

One is dimensions, one is material.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[XL83NL]

Which design code, B31.3? That determines your options to imo.

Huub
- You never get what you expect, you only get what you inspect.

 

[1503-44]

First check if your certifying agency will accept such a hybrid. Will you have to derate the material, because it is not listed in your actual design code. It may also be a real headache for future maintenance. I believe there may be bolt clearance differences in small size flanges, etc.. You might want to check that possibility in the specific sizes you want to use. I can see someone potentially eating a can of worms. I wouldn't do it unless the material could be double certified to comply with whatever your actual design code will be. What happens when a vendor supplies a fitting within tolerance for EU, but out of tolerance for ASTM, or V/V. I think I would also start looking for a job with a new company. This is one of those times when I feel like, "Maybe, but I know I shouldn't do it." In the end I always regret not having listened to my inner voice, otherwise known as "experience". Frankenstein started out with good intentions.

 

[XL83NL]

Dont make it more difficult for now 150344, the background is still unknown. If the design code is EN 13480, there’s nothing wrong here.
Also, who talked about flanges, let alone looking for another job? This guy may actually not be in the USA. There’s a whole different world out there, with other codes and other ‘standards’.

Huub
- You never get what you expect, you only get what you inspect.

 

[1503-44]

Oh yeah. I forgot.

I also threw away all my 8.5" x 11" and legal size paper supply. It was a good decision. Delivery was costing me a fortune from Amazon.

 

[nikolastrojman]

Actually, the design code is EN 14161, but for determining the wall thickness it relies on EN 13480-3.

I don´t think that the certifying agencies here are used to seeing this kind of combinations. My concern was also with the manufacturing of this kind of pipes, elbows...

BR

 

[LittleInch]

14161 is the pipeline code.

This refers to ISO 3183.

ISO 3183 refers to API 5L

API 5L refers to ASME B 36.10

So use B36.10

It also refers to ASME B 16.5 and MSS SP-44 in it's normative references.

So no issue as far as I can see

FOLLOW THE CODE!

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[1503-44]

And MMS SP-75

I still think I remember there are differences in small flanges between DIN and ASME.

 

[GD2]

LittleInch has given given an excellent example of how different regional standards are interwound and interlinked through ISO.

The best practice would be to keep to one class of standards instead of cross breeding to make the life of maintenance guys easy and avoid the mother of all swears.

There will be always some dimensional and manufacturing differences between different standards.

GDD
Canada

 

[LittleInch]

Also 14161 has its own calculation for wall thickness.

I don't understand the bit "but for determining the wall thickness it relies on EN 13480-3"

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[nikolastrojman]

Hi,

LittleInch you are right EN 14161 has it´s own paragraph where the calculation for hoop stress is defined, what I wanted to say is that the equation is "almost" the same as of EN 13480-3.
For EN 14161 for calculation of hoop stress you need to take into account the hoop stress design factor depending on the location of the pipeline.

Regarding the ISO 3183, I´m aware of this connection with EN 14161. The thing is that the client gave us the piping class which is assembled acc. to ASMEB31.3 and with material ASTM A 312 TP 316L.
They´ve used this class also for the existing line we are replacing now, to connect refinery with their tank farm which is several kilometers away from the refinery.
The thing is that they intend to use the 1.4571 material instead the ASTM material which is strange to me?

And also I´m not sure if they have to follow strictly the ISO 3183 norm for this part of routing in-between the refinery and the tank farm?

 

[GD2]

German Engineers traditionally specify 316Ti as opposed to 316L but both grades serves well for preventing inter-granular corrosion.
316L is very popular in refinery, chemical and petrochemical plants.
Look for what flanges and fittings you will use to match 316 Ti.
Keep one spec class if you can without mixing ASTM and DIN. The only situation you might mix is at the tie-ins. That should be perfectly fine.
It will be considered a pipeline ( as opposed to piping) as the replacement line is outside the refinery fence limit.
My guess is that you will be using a EN standard instead of B36.19 for the pipe dimensional standard. I am not familiar with EU standards.

GDD
Canada

 

[nikolastrojman]

I just discovered that for NPS 4" pipe they intend to use schedule 30 for the A 312 TP316L pipe!? Is this even possible?
ASME B36.19 defines the wall thickness sizes for the stainless steel pipes.

BR

 

[LittleInch]

This is quite interesting.

https://www.montanstahl.com/blog/stainless-steel-grades-1-4404-1-4571/

Surely they mean sched 30S?

It sounds like you need someone who understands pipelines as you're mixing a lot of different codes and standards.

I'm not aware of any different dimensional standard other than 36.10 and 36.19 applicable for pipelines designed to 14161 or b31.3.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[MartinLe]

We've had a discussion on 1.4404 vs 1.4571 here a while back:

https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=450663

 

[XL83NL]

30S doesn't exist, Sch 30 does.

Huub
- You never get what you expect, you only get what you inspect.