Background of the Half-Pipe Jacket Rules in Section VIII, Division 1

1994 ◽  
Vol 116 (3) ◽  
pp. 336-338
Author(s):  
M. H. Jawad
Keyword(s):  
Background Information ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Made In

New rules for the design of half-pipe jackets were developed by the ASME Subgroup on Design of Section VIII. This article gives the background information for the derivation and various assumptions made in developing the rules.

Using Finite Element Analysis Combined With Strain Gage Testing to Do Proof Test to Establish MAWP

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald J. Florizone
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element Analysis ◽  
Finite Element ◽  
Strain Gage ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Proof Testing ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Test Pressure ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Non Destructive ◽  
Made In

An amine reboiler was constructed with very large openings in one semi-elliptical head. The openings extended beyond the “spherical” portion of the head into the knuckle region. The vessel was designed to 1998 ASME Section VIII Division 1 (VIII-1). Initially the manufacturer of the amine reboiler vessel chose the proof test after the calculations submitted to the approval agency were not accepted. Non-destructive strain gage proof testing per VIII-1 UG-101(n) was planned, but the minimum proof test pressure to achieve the desired MAWP exceeded the maximum firetube flange test pressure therefore an alternate method was chosen. Finite element analysis (FEA) was done in addition to the strain gage testing. The strain gage results at the maximum hydrotest pressure were used to verify the FEA calculations. The FEA calculated strains were higher than the measured strains. This indicated that the assumptions made in the computer model were conservative. By combining FEA with strain gauge testing, the design was proven to meet Code requirements.

Progress and Prospects for the Development of Computer-Generated Actors for Military Simulation: Part 1-Introduction and Background

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin R. Stytz ◽  
Sheila B. Banks
Keyword(s):  
Research Area ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Life Cycle Costs ◽  
Material Management ◽  
Reasoning System ◽  
Force Structure ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Future Work ◽  
Level Training ◽  
Made In

The development of computer-generated synthetic environments, also calleddistributed virtual environments, for military simulation relies heavily upon computer-generated actors (CGAs) to provide accurate behaviors at reasonable cost so that the synthetic environments are useful, affordable, complex, and realistic. Unfortunately, the pace of synthetic environment development and the level of desired CGA performance continue to rise at a much faster rate than CGA capability improvements. This insatiable demand for realism in CGAs for synthetic environments arises from the growing understanding of the significant role that modeling and simulation can play in a variety of venues. These uses include training, analysis, procurement decisions, mission rehearsal, doctrine development, force-level and task-level training, information assurance, cyberwarfare, force structure analysis, sustainability analysis, life cycle costs analysis, material management, infrastructure analysis, and many others. In these and other uses of military synthetic environments, computer-generated actors play a central role because they have the potential to increase the realism of the environment while also reducing the cost of operating the environment. The progress made in addressing the technical challenges that must be overcome to realize effective and realistic CGAs for military simulation environments and the technical areas that should be the focus of future work are the subject of this series of papers, which survey the technologies and progress made in the construction and use of CGAs. In this, the first installment in the series of three papers, we introduce the topic of computer-generated actors and issues related to their performance and fidelity and other background information for this research area as related to military simulation. We also discuss CGA reasoning system techniques and architectures.

Praise in Gifted Education: Analyses on the Basis of the Actiotope Model of Giftednesss

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 306-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidrun Stoeger ◽  
Albert Ziegler
Keyword(s):  
Gifted Education ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Practical Advice ◽  
Excellent Opportunity ◽  
Alternative Theories ◽  
Made In

In contrast to alternative theories of giftedness, the Actiotope Model of Giftedness focuses on actions. Praise presents an excellent opportunity to encourage and reinforce the appearance of new or more effective actions. However, several investigations have shown that, in practice, the opportunities which arise to grant praise are not fully taken advantage of, and that praise is often given in inappropriate, dysfunctional manners. Frequent consequences of this are detrimental influences on the development of gifted individuals. In this contribution we will first, on the basis of the Actiotope Model of Giftedness, offer theoretical background information pertaining to the praise of gifted individuals. Afterward, practical advice will be proposed, and the most frequent errors made in the practice of praise will be addressed in conjunction with alternative actions.

scholarly journals ANALISA STIFFENER RING DAN KONSTRUKSI VESSEL HP FLARE KO DRUM PADA PROYEK PUPUK KALTIM-5 MENGGUNAKAN SOFTWARE COMPRESS 6258

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Fadhlika Ridha
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Knock Out ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii

Pada proses pembuatan pupuk di PKT-5, berbagai gas limbah berbahaya dimusnahkan dengan cara membakarnya melalui Flare, sebelum terbakar di Flare gas-gas tersebut dialirkan dan ditampung pada sebuah Vessel bertekanan atau biasa disebut Vessel High Pressure Flare Knock Out Drum. Dalam perancangan konstruksinya perlu dilakukan analisis sehingga desain dari vessel tersebut sesuai dengan yang diharapkan dan aman untuk dioperasikan. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan mensimulasikan desain dari Vessel KO Drum menggunakan perhitungan manual sesuai 2007 ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 1 dan Software Compress 6258. Perhitungan dilakukan pada desain head, shell, saddle, nozzle, stiffener ring secara manual dan menggunakan software untuk mengetahui tegangan-tegangan yang terjadi. Selanjutnya dari kedua metode tersebut akan dibandingan hasil perhitungan manual & software.

Investigation of Nozzle on Knuckle Region of Dished Head

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sujay S. Pathre ◽  
Ameya M. Mathkar ◽  
Shyam Gopalakrishnan
Keyword(s):  
Stress Pattern ◽  
Design Specification ◽  
Specific Location ◽  
Bending Effect ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
User Design ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Design Requirements ◽  
Induced Stresses

Abstract ASME Code Section VIII Division 1 [1] provides rules for the shape of openings, size of openings, strength and design of openings, however, the existing rules do not provide any restrictions on the specific location of the nozzle on the dished head knuckle region. Many corporate guidelines/ user design requirements meant for pressure vessel design and specification suggest avoiding placement of any type of nozzle in the knuckle area of a dished head and generally state in their design specification to limit the placement of a nozzle including its reinforcement within the crown area. This applies to Torispherical and Ellipsoidal dished heads. Code [1] rule UG-37(a) provides the benefit in reinforcement by reducing the required thickness (tr) of the dished head when the nozzle is in the spherical portion of the dished head for the Ellipsoidal and Torispherical dished head. High stresses occur in the knuckle region of the dished head due to the edge bending effect caused as the cylinder and head try to deform in different directions. For various reasons the user design requirements insist on placing the nozzle in the knuckle region, further compounding the complexity of the stress pattern in the knuckle area. The work carried out in this paper was an attempt to check whether it is safe to locate a nozzle in the knuckle region of the dished head since the knuckle portion is generally subjected to higher stresses in comparison to the crown portion of a dished head and the Code [1] and [2] does not impose any restrictions for the placement of nozzles in the knuckle region. Also, in this paper an attempt was made to evaluate the induced stresses when equivalent sizes of nozzles are placed in the crown as well as the knuckle portion of the dished head.

The Applicability of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XII, Transport Tanks, for Use in U.S. Federal Maritime Regulations

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Selz ◽  
Daniel R. Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Road Transport ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Department Of Transportation ◽  
The Road ◽  
Dangerous Goods ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
The Us ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Marine Applications

Developed at the request of the US Department of Transportation, Section XII-Transport Tanks, of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code addresses rules for the construction and continued service of pressure vessels for the transportation of dangerous goods by road, air, rail, or water. The standard is intended to replace most of the vessel design rules and be referenced in the federal hazardous material regulations, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). While the majority of the current rules focus on over-the-road transport, there are rules for portable tanks which can be used in marine applications for the transport of liquefied gases, and for ton tanks used for rail and barge shipping of chlorine and other compressed gases. Rules for non-cryogenic portable tanks are currently provided in Section VIII, Division 2, but will be moved into Section XII. These portable tank requirements should also replace the existing references to the outmoded 1989 edition of ASME Section VIII, Division 1 cited in Title 46 of the CFR. Paper published with permission.

A Study of the Conservatism in ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 2 Opening Design for External Pressure

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Millet ◽  
Kaveh Ebrahimi ◽  
James Lu ◽  
Kenneth Kirkpatrick ◽  
Bryan Mosher
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Internal Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
External Pressure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Finite Element Analyses ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Allowable Compressive Stress ◽  
Division 2

Abstract In the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, nozzle reinforcement rules for nozzles attached to shells under external pressure differ from the rules for internal pressure. ASME BPVC Section I, Section VIII Division 1 and Section VIII Division 2 (Pre-2007 Edition) reinforcement rules for external pressure are less stringent than those for internal pressure. The reinforcement rules for external pressure published since the 2007 Edition of ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 2 are more stringent than those for internal pressure. The previous rule only required reinforcement for external pressure to be one-half of the reinforcement required for internal pressure. In the current BPVC Code the required reinforcement is inversely proportional to the allowable compressive stress for the shell under external pressure. Therefore as the allowable drops, the required reinforcement increases. Understandably, the rules for external pressure differ in these two Divisions, but the amount of required reinforcement can be significantly larger. This paper will examine the possible conservatism in the current Division 2 rules as compared to the other Divisions of the BPVC Code and the EN 13445-3. The paper will review the background of each method and provide finite element analyses of several selected nozzles and geometries.

Weld Joint Efficiency in Design by Analysis

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trevor G. Seipp
Keyword(s):  
Weld Joint ◽  
Joint Efficiency ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2

In the original ASME Section VIII, Division 2, no consideration was given to partial weld joint efficiencies (values of the factor E less than 1.0) because that version required full radiography and only permitted weld joint efficiencies of unity. In the new (post-2007) Section VIII, Division 2, partial weld joint efficiencies as small as 0.85 are now permitted. Furthermore, much Design By Analysis work is performed on vessels fabricated to ASME Section VIII, Division 1 and the ASME B31 Codes, which all permit partial weld joint efficiencies. However, no guidance is provided on how to account for these values in Deign By Analysis to ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 5. This paper provides the technical justification for the proposed changes to ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Part 5 and API RP-579/ASME FFS-1 regarding weld joint efficiency. Guidance is also provided on how to incorporate this change into ASME Section VIII, Division 1 by way of U-2(g) and the B31 Codes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document