scholarly journals Engineered Pressure Vessels for Marine Service Using ASME Section VIII, Division 2 and Division 3 Pressure Vessel Codes

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis E. Hayden ◽  
J. Robert Sims
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Service Use ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Design Codes ◽  
Rule Approach ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Improved Design ◽  
Division 2

The need for more efficient and cost effective design of ship board equipment has never been greater. Pressure vessels on board ships can account for significant volume and weight and thus affect the overall performance of the vessel. Classically ship board pressure vessels have been designed to ASME Section VIII, Division 1. This code requires pressure vessels that are designed using a basic design by rule approach with a 3.5 to 1 design margin on specified minimum tensile strength. In recent years the ASME Standards Committee that is responsible for Section VIII has developed two design codes, Section VIII, Division 2 Alternative Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels and Section VIII, Division 3 Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels. These pressure vessel design codes offer lower design margins, an improved design by rule approach for Division 2 and allow or require design by analysis based on the vessel operating conditions and environment such as cyclic service. Use of these codes can improve ship board vessel design by lowering the weight of vessels while providing a safe reliable pressure vessel. Paper published with permission.

Modernization of Pressure Vessel Design Codes ASME Section VIII, Division 2, 2007 Edition

2007 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-758
Author(s):  
T. P. Pastor ◽  
D. A. Osage
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Computer Aided Design ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Design Codes ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Aided Design ◽  
Division 2

The technology for pressure equipment design continues to advance each and every day. The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code has been keeping pace with these advances over the last 92 years. As far back as the 1960s, it was recognized that the special requirements for design of pressure vessels operating at pressures over 2000 psi (13.7 MPa) called for special rules, and ASME issued Sec. VIII, Division 2 of Alternative Rules for Pressure Vessels. Since that time, the understanding of failure mechanisms and advances in material science, nondestructive testing, and computer-aided design has progressed to the stage where a new approach was needed not only in the content of design codes but in the way they are presented and organized. This paper introduces the newly issued ASME Sec. VIII, Division 2 of 2007 edition and explores the technical concepts included and the new format designed for ease of use. Included are results of test exercises sponsored by ASME giving actual applications of the new Code for design of vessels. This paper demonstrates ASME’s commitment to provide manufacturers and users of pressure equipment with the most up-to-date technology in easy to use standards that service the international market.

scholarly journals An Ability to Adapt and Change

2014 ◽  
Vol 136 (11) ◽  
pp. 36-37
Author(s):  
Madiha El Mehelmy Kotb
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Electronic Format ◽  
The World ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2 ◽  
Service Inspection ◽  
Technical Services

This article reviews about the views of Madiha El Mehelmy Hotb, the Head of the Pressure Vessels Technical Services Division for Regie Du Batiment Du Quedec, on how ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code has evolved over the years. Hotb reveals that during the 1980s, ASME’s regulatory approach covered all aspects of the life cycle of a boiler or a pressure vessel from design to being taken out of service. It also confirmed every step in between – fabrication, installation, repair and modification, and in-service inspection. During later years, the institution moved toward accreditation of authorized inspection agencies, changed the publication cycle from three years to two, eliminated addenda, and restructured the Code committees. New Section VIII and division 2 were written, and the Codes were published in digital electronic format. Hotb believes that the Code will continue to be widely used and adopted in future. It will have a bigger and larger input from all over the world and will have further outreach and adoption by far more countries.

A Comparison of Different Design Codes on Fatigue Life Assessment Methods

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinhua Shi ◽  
Liwu Wei ◽  
Claude Faidy ◽  
Andrew Wasylyk ◽  
Nawal Prinja
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Fatigue Analysis ◽  
Life Assessment ◽  
Design Codes ◽  
Fatigue Life Assessment ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2 ◽  
Nuclear Association

Different pressure vessel and piping design codes and standards have adopted different fatigue analysis methods. In order to make some contribution to current efforts to harmonize international design codes and standards, a review of fatigue analysis methods for a number of selected nuclear and non-nuclear design codes and standards has been carried out. The selected design codes and standards are ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III Subsection NB and Section VIII Division 2, EN 12952, EN 13445, EN 13480, PD 5500, RCC-M, RCC-MRx, JSME, PNAEG and R5. This paper presents the initial review results. The results of the study could be used as part of the on-going work of the Codes and Standards Task Force of the World Nuclear Association (WNA) Cooperation in Reactor Design Evaluation and Licensing (CORDEL) Working Group.

Fatigue Consideration of Layered Vessels

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kang Xu ◽  
Mahendra Rana ◽  
Maan Jawad
Keyword(s):  
Fatigue Life ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Cyclic Service ◽  
Gap Height ◽  
Technical Basis ◽  
Division 2

Abstract Layered pressure vessels provide a cost-effective solution for high pressure gas storage. Several types of designs and constructions of layered pressure vessels are included in ASME BPV Section VIII Division 1, Division 2 and Division 3. Compared with conventional pressure vessels, there are two unique features in layered construction that may affect the structural integrity of the layered vessels especially in cyclic service: (1) Gaps may exist between the layers due to fabrication tolerances and an excessive gap height introduces additional stresses in the shell that need to be considered in design. The ASME Codes provide rules on the maximum permissible number and size of these gaps. The fatigue life of the vessel may be governed by the gap height due to the additional bending stress. The rules on gap height requirements have been updated recently in Section VIII Division 2. (2) ASME code rules require vent holes in the layers to detect leaks from inner shell and to prevent pressure buildup between the layers. The fatigue life may be limited by the presence of stress concentration at vent holes. This paper reviews the background of the recent code update and presents the technical basis of the fatigue design and maximum permissible gap height calculations. Discussions are made in design and fabrication to improve the fatigue life of layered pressure vessels in cyclic service.

Review of Section VIII, Division 1 and 2 Changes, 2008–2010

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Pastor
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Major Event ◽  
The Past ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2

Three years ago the major event within Section VIII was the publication of the new Section VIII, Division 2. The development of the new VIII-2 standard dominated Section VIII activity for many years, and a new standard has been well received within the industry. As expected with any new standard, some of the material that was intended to be published in the standard was not ready at the time of publication so numerous revisions have taken place in the last two addenda. This paper will attempt to summarize the major revisions that have taken place in VIII-2 and VIII-1, including a detailed overview of the new Part UIG “Requirements for Pressure Vessels Constructed of Impregnated Graphite”. I have stated in the past that the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code is a “living and breathing document”, and considering that over 320 revisions were made to VIII-1 and VIII-2 in the past three years, I think I can safely say that the standard is alive and well.

A Strength Calculation of a Nozzle Using Comparative Methods

2014 ◽  
Vol 601 ◽  
pp. 84-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Serban Vasilescu ◽  
Costin Ilinca
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Comparative Methods ◽  
The Finite Element Method ◽  
Finite Element Program ◽  
Element Program ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Torsional Loads ◽  
Division 2

The stresses and deflections developed due to all piping loads produce some significant deformation in the nozzles of the pressure vessels. In this paper a spherical pressure vessel with two cylindrical nozzles are analyzed. The stresses in the nozzles are evaluated using two comparative methods: one of them represents the classical way of using the superposition of the axial, bending and torsional loads; the other one is based on the requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Cod, Section VIII, Division 2 and is developed by a FE analysis. In order to obtain the loads (forces and moments) at the end of the nozzle a specialized finite element program has been used. This program (Coade Caesar 5.30) allows studying the strength and flexibility behavior of the pipes that connect the analyzed nozzle with the rest of the plant. The results obtained are compared in order to find when the using of the classical methods of strength of materials can be used as conservative approaches. The finite element method is applied in order to check the most important load cases that appear during the interaction between pipes and shell. In this respect the sustained (proper gravity loads), expansion (thermal loads) and occasional (wind and seismic loads) are combined in order to check all the requirements of ASME. This study contains also the effect of the pressure trust and the influence of the real geometry of the junction (nozzle-shell) in the peaks of the stresses.

Fourier Series Analysis of Cylindrical Pressure Vessel Subjected to External Pressure

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gurinder Singh Brar ◽  
Yogeshwar Hari ◽  
Dennis K. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Fourier Series ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Large Diameter ◽  
External Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Buckling Load ◽  
Critical Buckling Load ◽  
Cylindrical Pressure Vessel ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2

This paper presents the comparison of a reliability technique that employs a Fourier series representation of random asymmetric imperfections in a cylindrical pressure vessel subjected to external pressure. Comparison with evaluations prescribed by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 2 Rules for the same shell geometries are also conducted. The ultimate goal of the reliability type technique is to predict the critical buckling load associated with the chosen cylindrical pressure vessel. Initial geometric imperfections are shown to have a significant effect on the load carrying capacity of the example cylindrical pressure vessel. Fourier decomposition is employed to interpret imperfections as structural features that can be easily related to various other types of defined imperfections. The initial functional description of the imperfections consists of an axisymmetric portion and a deviant portion, which are availed in the form of a double Fourier series. Fifty simulated shells generated by the Monte Carlo technique are employed in the final prediction of the critical buckling load. The representation of initial geometrical imperfections in the cylindrical pressure vessel requires the determination of appropriate Fourier coefficients. Multi-mode analyses are expanded to evaluate a large number of potential buckling modes for both predefined geometries and associated asymmetric imperfections as a function of position within a given cylindrical shell. The probability of the ultimate buckling stress that may exceed a predefined threshold stress is also calculated. The method and results described herein are in stark contrast to the “knockdown factor” approach as applied to compressive stress evaluations currently utilized in industry. Recommendations for further study of imperfect cylindrical pressure vessels are also outlined in an effort to improve on the current design rules regarding column buckling of large diameter pressure vessels designed in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 2 and ASME STS-1.

Design Optimization of Pressure Vessel in Compliance With Elastic Stress Analysis Criteria for Plastic Collapse Using an Integrated Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 143 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingjue Zhou ◽  
Artik Patel ◽  
BoPing Wang ◽  
Weiya Jin ◽  
Yuebing Li
Keyword(s):  
Stress Analysis ◽  
Design Optimization ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Maximum Stress ◽  
Elastic Stress ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Optimization Methods ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Design Codes ◽  
Division 2

Abstract The design and verification of pressure vessels is governed by the design codes specified by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC). Convention design satisfying the ASME BPVC code requirements would lead to a conservative design. This situation will to be solvable by modern structural optimization methods. The size optimization of pressure vessel complying with design-by-analysis requirements within the ASME Sec. VIII Division 2 specification is discussed in this paper. This is accomplished by an integrated approach in which the stress analysis is carried out by ANSYS. These results are used by an optimization code in matlab to perform design optimization. The integrated approach is fully automated and applied to the optimal design of a real pressure vessel. The results show that the material used by the pressure vessel can be minimized while satisfying the maximum stress specified in the BPVC.

scholarly journals Finite Element Analysis of Gasket in Pressure Vessel

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 1390-1393
Author(s):  
Sanjana Jaishankara
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Design Procedure ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Project Work ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Applied Loading ◽  
Sealing Performance ◽  
Riveted Joints ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Division 2

Abstract: Pressure vessel is a closed container designed to hold liquids or gases at a pressure which are higher than the surrounding atmospheric pressure. These pressure vessels are not made as a single component but manufacture with an assembly of many other components and connected through bolted joints or riveted joints or welded joints. These joints are susceptible to failure and cause leakage of the liquid or gas which are very dangerous and sometimes causes heavy loss of life, health and property. Hence proper care has to be taken during the design analysis processes by following ASME section VIII division 1 which specifies the design-by-formula approach while division 2 contains a set of alternative rules based on design by Analysis (FEA) to determine the expected deformation and stresses that may develop during operation. The ASME section-VIII division-2 standards are used for the design of pressure vessel. Leakage in gasketed flanged joints have always been a great problem for the process industry. The sealing performance of a gasketed flanged joints depends on its installation and applied loading conditions. The present project work involves the design procedure and stress analysis (Structural Analysis) for the leak proof pressure vessel at the gasket under three different gasket conditions. Keywords: 1. FEM, 2. ASME, 3. ANSYS, 4. Gasket,5. Displacement,6. Stress

ASME B&PV Code Section VIII Pressure Vessel Design: A Comparison — Division 1 Versus Division 2

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dwight V. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Main Design ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Design Requirements ◽  
Division 2

Historically, the ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII, Division 2, Alternative Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels (Div.2), ASME [1], was usually considered applicable only for large, thick walled pressure vessels. Otherwise, ASME B&PV Code, Section VIII, Division 1, Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels (Div. 1), ASME [2], was typically applied. A case can also be made for the application of the Div. 2 Code Section for some vessels of lesser thicknesses. Each vessel should be closely evaluated to ensure the appropriate choice of Code Section to apply. This paper discusses some of the differences between the Div. 1 and Div. 2 Code Sections, summarizes some of the main design requirements of Div. 2, and presents a ease for considering its use for design conditions not usually considered by some, to be appropriate for the application of Div. 2 of the ASME Code.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document