Rami Abbaszade I agree with you on what normally done for the design. Based on the reasons I have stated above I believe it is an oversight in ASME Section VIII Div.1. IMO the lifting lug is a support it is just that that the forces and moments are in a different direction but the Vessel is...
Read again, "oknow, I'm not sure I follow why the weight during hydro would be important?" Clearly I have waisted my time as your replies paint a picture.
You asked a question and I answered. It is about compliance. You choose not to accept it that is your choice. Save your insults for FB, tells me all I need to know.
Well if they hurt or kill some one in the shop they may be eating much more than the cost of the Vessel. There are legal folks who specialize in Pressure Equipment and have experts on retainers. A few questions about the design of the lugs
will close the case quickly. Negligent with the design IMO.
What is the Edition of ASME Section VIII Div.1 used for Construction? The 2019 Edition incorporated the CC 2901 into UG-44 so the CC 2901 cannot be implemented. If an earlier Edition is requested you need to review Appendix 43 requirements and confirm it will meet the Jurisdictional Requirements...
ColinPearson- ASME Section VII Div.1 UG--54(a) states the "maximum imposed loadings" must be considered when designing supports (UG-22). This is a weight issue and the addition of the water weight at hydrostatic test needs to be included in the calculation. Depending on the size of the vessel...
As I know it, depending on the situation if ASME is notified they will investigate. If this happens in the USA the Chief Inspector of the State responsible for Boilers and Pressure Vessel enforcement will also investigate and he may ask for the assistance of the National Board. The National...
Ironic metallurgist,
My thread was a cautionary comment to check the MTR not to Mandate normalizing over PFHT.
Because of availability my former company would have to do this many times and we had no problem with UCS material. As one who personally did the HT the placement of the heads in the...
Be careful, SA-516-70 is not required to be normalized at 22 mm. That was a design requirement. Confirm that it was normalized on the MTR and the material markings. If not normalized then it shall be normalized after forming.
What did your AIA explain when you asked them?
Contact the Insurance Company that provides coverage for the item in question. Any interaction with the Jurisdiction or Insurance Company should be documented and filed.
IMO you may use Appendix 43 of ASME Section VIII Div. 1 2019 Edition. Having...
