Overview of Revisions to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 3 for the 2015 Edition and Near Future

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Peters ◽  
Adam P. Maslowski
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Stress Analysis ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Elastic Stress ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Chemical Safety ◽  
Linear Elastic ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
American Society ◽  
Near Future

This paper is to give an overview of the major revisions pending in the upcoming 2015 edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section VIII Division 3, Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels, and potential changes being considered by the Subgroup on High Pressure Vessels (SG-HPV) for future editions. This will include an overview of significant actions which will be included in the upcoming edition. This includes action relative to test locations in large and complex forgings, in response to a report from the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) report of a failed vessel in Illinois. This will also include discussion of a long term issue recently completed on certification of rupture disk devices. Also included will be a discussion of a slight shift in philosophy which has resulted in the linear-elastic stress analysis section being moved to a Non-Mandatory Appendix and discussion of potential future of linear-elastic stress analysis in high pressure vessel design.

Overview of Revisions to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 3 for the 2019 Edition and Near Future

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam P. Maslowski ◽  
Gregory Mital ◽  
Daniel Peters ◽  
Kannan Subramanian
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
American Society ◽  
Near Future

Abstract This paper provides an overview of the significant revisions to the upcoming 2019 edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section VIII Division 3, Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels, as well as potential changes to future editions under consideration of the Subgroup on High Pressure Vessels (SG-HPV).

Overview of Revisions to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 3 for the 2021 Edition and Near Future

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam P. Maslowski ◽  
Melanie Sarzynski ◽  
Daniel Peters ◽  
Kannan Subramanian
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
American Society ◽  
Near Future

Abstract This paper provides an overview of the significant revisions to the upcoming 2021 edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section VIII Division 3, Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels, as well as potential changes to future editions under consideration by the Subgroup on High Pressure Vessels (SG-HPV).

Overview of Revisions to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 3 for the 2017 Edition and Near Future

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Peters ◽  
Gregory Mital ◽  
Adam P. Maslowski
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Central Area ◽  
Local Strain ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Conformity Assessment ◽  
Inspection Planning ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
American Society ◽  
Rules Changes

This paper provides an overview of the significant revisions pending for the upcoming 2017 edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section VIII Division 3, Alternative Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels, as well as potential changes to future editions under consideration of the Subgroup on High Pressure Vessels (SG-HPV). Changes to the 2017 edition include the removal of material information used in the construction of composite reinforced pressure vessels (CRPV); this information has been consolidated to the newly-developed Appendix 10 of ASME BPVC Section X, Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Pressure Vessels. Similarly, the development of the ASME CA-1, Conformity Assessment Requirements standard necessitated removal of associated conformity assessment information from Section VIII Division 3. Additionally, requirements for the assembly of pressure vessels at a location other than that listed on the Certificate of Authorization have been clarified with the definitions of “field” and “intermediate” sites. Furthermore, certain design related issues have been addressed and incorporated into the current edition, including changes to the fracture mechanics rules, changes to wires stress limits in wire-wound vessels, and clarification on bolting and end closure requirements. Finally, the removal of Appendix B, Suggested Practice Regarding Post-Construction Requalification for High Pressure Vessels, will be discussed, including a short discussion of the new appendix incorporated into the updated edition of ASME PCC-3, Inspection Planning Using Risk Based Methods. Additionally, this paper discusses some areas in Section VIII Division 3 under consideration for improvement. One such area involves consolidation of material models presented in the book into a central area for easier reference. Another is the clarification of local strain limit analysis and the intended number and types of evaluations needed for the non-linear finite element analyses. The requirements for test locations in prolongations on forgings are also being examined as well as other material that can be used in testing for vessel construction. Finally, a discussion is presented on an ongoing debate regarding “occasional loads” and “abnormal loads”, their current evaluation, and proposed changes to design margins regarding these loads.

Square Root 3: Background to the New Design Margin for High Pressure Vessels

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Keltjens ◽  
Philip Cornelissen ◽  
Peter Koerner ◽  
Waldemar Hiller ◽  
Rolf Wink
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Design Code ◽  
Code Change ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Background Material ◽  
Practical Information ◽  
High Pressure Equipment ◽  
Design Margin

The ASME Section VIII Division 3 Pressure Vessel Design Code adopted in its 2004 edition a significant change of the design margin against plastic collapse. There are several reasons and justifications for this code change, in particular the comparison with design margins used for high pressure equipment in Europe. Also, the ASME Pressure Vessel Code books themselves are not always consistent with respect to design margin. This paper discusses not only the background material for the code change, but also gives some practical information on when pressure vessels could be designed to a thinner wall.

Comparison Between the ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 3 and the Chinese Regulation TSG 21-2016 With Regard to the Design of High Pressure Vessels

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Fuenmayor ◽  
Rolf Wink ◽  
Matthias Bortz
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Chinese Economy ◽  
High Pressure Vessel ◽  
Safety Technology ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Design Construction

There are numerous codes covering the design, manufacturing, inspection, testing, and operation of pressure vessels. These national or international codes aim at providing assurance regarding the safety and quality of pressure vessels. The development of the Chinese economy has led to a significant increase in the number of installed high-pressure vessels which in turn required a revision of the existing regulations. The Supervision Regulation on Safety Technology for Stationary Pressure Vessel TSG 21-2016 superseded the existing Super-High Pressure Vessel Safety and Technical Supervision Regulation TSG R0002-2005 in October of 2016. This new regulation covers, among others, the design, construction, and inspection of pressure vessels with design pressures above 100 MPa. This paper provides a technical comparison between the provisions given in TSG 21-2016 for super-high pressure vessels and the requirements in ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 3.

Development of Japanese High Pressure Vessel Standard HPIS C106 With ASME Section VIII Division 3

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susumu Terada
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Crystal Growth ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Design Code ◽  
Isostatic Pressing ◽  
High Pressure Vessel ◽  
Cyclic Operation ◽  
Section Viii

Many high pressure vessels are used in isostatic pressing, polyethylene process and crystal growth application. The design condition of these high pressure vessels becomes more severe in pressure, temperature and cyclic operation. It was desired that design code for such high pressure vessels be issued enabling more reasonable design than ASME Section VIII Div.1 and Div.2. Against above request, ASME Sec. VIII Div.3 was issued in 1997. While in Japan the subcommittee for high pressure vessels in HPI was started in October 1997 in order to issue the Japanese code for high pressure vessels. At first the background of ASME Div.3 was investigated and then “Rules for Construction of High Pressure Vessels: HPIS C 106” was issued in 2005. That was some differences from ASME Div.3, because we considered that ASME Div.3 should be modified. The author has also been appointed as a member of ASME SG-HPV Committee since 2003. The author has proposed some modification and addition of rules for ASME Div.3 since 2000 and most of them already have been approved and incorporated in ASME Div.3. The background of these modification and addition of rules are shown in this paper.

Fatigue Life of Commercial High Pressure Tubing

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Mann
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Fatigue Life ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Thick Wall ◽  
Pressure Tubing ◽  
Safety And Reliability ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Critical Components ◽  
Axial Fatigue

Design guidance for high pressure components, has undergone a dramatic change with the release of ASME Section VIII division 3 pressure vessel code. For the first time, a thorough design criteria is available for design of thick wall pressure vessels. The most critical components of a design are safety and reliability. Ultra high-pressure vessels, in most cases, do not have an “infinite” life. The design must therefore be “leak before break” and a design cycle life must be specified. This paper looks at the effects of fatigue on commercial high-pressure tubing under tri-axial fatigue. The tubing investigated is 316 stainless steel 9/16″ and 3/8″ diameter 4100 bar (60,000 psi) tubing. The testing was performed using a tri-axial fatigue machine originally designed by Dr. B. Crossland, Dr. J. L. M. Morrison and Dr. J. S. C. Perry in 1960 and upgraded by the Author. This investigation compares the fatigue life prediction per KD3 in the ASME pressure vessel code Section VIII division 3 and actual test results from the fatigue machine. This verification gives important reliability data for commercial hardware used in high-pressure piping.

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.

A Comparison Study of Pressure Vessel Design Using Different Standards

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frode Tjelta Askestrand ◽  
Ove Tobias Gudmestad
Keyword(s):  
Stress Analysis ◽  
Elastic Stress ◽  
Limit Load ◽  
Technical Committee ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Elastic Plastic ◽  
Load Analysis ◽  
American Society ◽  
Division 2

Several codes are currently available for design and analysis of pressure vessels. Two of the main contributors are the American Society of Mechanical Engineers providing the ASME VIII code, Ref /4/ and the Technical Committee for standardization in Brussels providing the European Standard, Ref /2/. Methods written in bold letters will be considered in the discussion presented in this paper. The ASME VIII code, Ref /4/, contains three divisions covering different pressure ranges: Division 1: up to 200 bar (3000 psi) Division 2: in general Division 3: for pressure above 690 bar (10000 psi) In this paper the ASME division 2, Part 5, “design by analysis” will be considered. This part is also referred to in the DNV-OS-F101, Ref /3/, for offshore pressure containing components. Here different analysis methods are described, such as: Elastic Stress Analysis Limit Load Analysis Elastic Plastic Analysis The Elastic Stress Analysis method with stress categorization has been introduced to the industry for many years and has been widely used in design of pressure vessels. However, in the latest issue (2007/2010) of ASME VIII div. 2, this method is not recommended for heavy wall constructions as it might generate non-conservative analysis results. Heavy wall constructions are defined by: (R/t ≤ 4) with dimensions as illustrated in Figure 1. In the case of heavy wall constructions the Limit Load Analysis or the Elastic-plastic method shall be used. In this paper focus will be on the Elastic-plastic method while the Limit Load Analysis will not be considered. Experience from recent projects at IKM Ocean Design indicates that the industry has not been fully aware of the new analysis philosophy mentioned in the 2007 issue of ASME VIII div.2. The Elastic Stress Analysis method is still (2012) being used for heavy wall constructions. The NS-EN 13445-3; 2009, Ref /2/, provides two different methodologies for design by analysis: Direct Route Method based on stress categories. The method based on stress categories is similar to the Elastic Stress Analysis method from ASME VIII div. 2 and it will therefore not be considered in this paper.

Design Philosophy of Pressure Vessels for Service Above 10 ksi (70 MPa)

1976 ◽  
Vol 98 (4) ◽  
pp. 266-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. E. Witkin ◽  
G. J. Mraz
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Strength Criteria ◽  
Material Quality ◽  
Test Pressure ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Practical Sense

This paper discusses design criteria for pressure vessels intended for service above 10 ksi (70 MPa). Since the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code cannot, in a practical sense, be applied to the construction of such vessels, suitable supplementary and alternative criteria are proposed to serve as a design basis for such vessels. It is hoped that they can also serve as the basis for development of Design Rules for High Pressure Vessels by the ASME. Topics considered include: Use of yield strength criteria; Use of alternative fatigue criteria; Use of burst and plastic flow criteria; Alternative hydrostatic test pressure criteria; Criteria for prestressing; Material quality standards. These show that suitable criteria for high pressure vessel design require a higher level of precision than now exists in the Code. Higher levels of material quality and testing are needed to insure required minimum levels of properties without the need to compensate (by elements of the factors of safety) for excessive variation. More detailed and comprehensive analysis, to make the mathematical models more truly reflect the actual stress conditions than are usually used in Section VIII of the Code, are found to be necessary.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document