scholarly journals Nondestructive examination acceptance standards: technical basis and development of boiler and pressure vessel code, ASME Section XI, Division 1. [PWR; BWR]

1980 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Maccary
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Nondestructive Examination ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Technical Basis

Technical Basis and Strategy for Consolidation of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Subsection NC (Class 2) and Subsection ND (Class 3) Into a Single Subsection

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Wen ◽  
Robert Keating ◽  
Timothy M. Adams
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Task Group ◽  
Detailed Result ◽  
Code Change ◽  
Component Design ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
The Status ◽  
Code Maintenance ◽  
Technical Basis

Abstract ASME Boiler Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1, Subsection NC, Class 2 components, and Subsection ND, Class 3 components, have significant technical and administrative similarities. The ASME BPV III Standards Committee has a long-standing goal of combining these two subsections (NC and ND). Consolidating Subsections NC and ND will simplify, reduce repetitions and make the Code easier to use. Additionally, a combined Subsection NC/ND will simplify Code maintenance. To facilitate this consolidation, the Subgroup on Component Design, under the BPV III Standards Committee assigned a Task Group to develop a strategy to combine the two subsections into a single subsection while maintaining both Class 2 and Class 3 as separate classes of construction. Both Subsections NC and ND of the Code have been completely reviewed, compared and the technical bases for the differences have been established. The conclusion of this review is that there are only a few major technical differences between the two code class rules; however, there are a significant number of editorial differences. Based on the review, the Task Group developed a strategy that completes the consolidation within two publishing cycles of Code edition. For the Code Edition 2019, two separate Subsections NC and ND books will be published to resolve editorial differences and otherwise align the two subsections. For the Code Edition 2021, a single merged subsection will be published. This paper provides the background for the proposed code change, discusses the detailed result of the NC/ND comparison, and provides the basis for the major technical differences. The paper will also update the status of the project and code actions needed to consolidate to a single subsection.

Technical Basis for Conversion of Non-Mandatory Appendix F of Section III of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code to a Mandatory Appendix: Part II — Associated Code Book Updates

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne McKillop ◽  
Jie Wen ◽  
Robert Keating ◽  
Timothy M. Adams
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Design Rules ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Past ◽  
Component Design ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class 1 ◽  
Service Loading ◽  
Technical Basis ◽  
Code Book

In 1974, the Level D Service Limits for Section III, Division 1, Class 1 components were published in Non-Mandatory Appendix F titled “Rules for Evaluation of Service Loading with Level D Service Limits”. Over the past 40 years, the scope of the Appendix F has been expanded to be applicable to certain Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 components and supports in Division 1 as well as in Division 3 and Division 5. With each addition, the organization and implementation of the rules in Appendix F became more cumbersome for the user and consistency between the Appendix and the Code Books1 was not maintained. At the same time, the use of these rules has evolved to the point where the non-Mandatory Appendix is essential the default for Level D Service Limits. Starting in the 2017 Code edition, the component design rules will reference Mandatory Appendix XXVII when Design by Analysis is used to determine Level D Service Limits. In particular, the component design rules, or rules specific to design of components and not Design by Analysis, were removed from Appendix XXVII and placed in the appropriate Code Book. This approach resulted in noteworthy updates to the support rules in Subsection NF, the core support rules in Subsection NG, the valve rules in NB-3500, and the piping rules in NB/NC/ND-3600. The detailed approach used to incorporate the component design rules into each Code Book are presented in this paper.

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.

Effects of Cladding on Reactor Pressure Vessel Integrity Based on the Revised PTS Rule (10 CFR 50.61)

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikram Marthandam ◽  
Timothy J. Griesbach ◽  
Jack Spanner
Keyword(s):  
Thermal Shock ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Pressurized Thermal Shock ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Vessel Integrity ◽  
Technical Basis ◽  
Reactor Pressure

This paper provides a historical perspective of the effects of cladding and the analyses techniques used to evaluate the integrity of an RPV subjected to pressurized thermal shock (PTS) transients. A summary of the specific requirements of the draft revised PTS rule (10 CFR 50.61) and the role of cladding in the evaluation of the RPV integrity under the revised PTS Rule are discussed in detail. The technical basis for the revision of the PTS Rule is based on two main criteria: (1) NDE requirements and (2) Calculation of RTMAX-X and ΔT30. NDE requirements of the Rule include performing volumetric inspections using procedures, equipment and personnel qualified under ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII. The flaw density limits specified in the new Rule are more restrictive than those stipulated by Section XI of the ASME Code. The licensee is required to demonstrate by performing analysis based on the flaw size and density inputs that the through wall cracking frequency does not exceed 1E−6 per reactor year. Based on the understanding of the requirements of the revised PTS Rule, there may be an increase in the effort needed by the utility to meet these requirements. The potential benefits of the Rule for extending vessel life may be very large, but there are also some risks in using the Rule if flaws are detected in or near the cladding. This paper summarizes the potential impacts on operating plants that choose to request relief from existing PTS Rules by implementing the new PTS Rule.

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.

A Study of Axial Compression in the ASME B&PV Code for Pipe Supports and Restraints

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip E. Wiseman ◽  
Zara Z. Hoch
Keyword(s):  
Axial Compression ◽  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Slenderness Ratio ◽  
Elastic Buckling ◽  
Allowable Stress ◽  
Linear Elastic ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
American Society ◽  
Allowable Stress Design

Axial compression allowable stress for pipe supports and restraints based on linear elastic analysis is detailed in the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF. The axial compression design by analysis equations within NF-3300 are replicated from the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) using the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) Method which were first published in the ASME Code in 1973. Although the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code is an international code, these equations are not familiar to many users outside the American Industry. For those unfamiliar with the allowable stress equations, the equations do not simply address the elastic buckling of a support or restraint which may occur when the slenderness ratio of the pipe support or restraint is relatively large, however, the allowable stress equations address each aspect of stability which encompasses the phenomena of elastic buckling and yielding of a pipe support or restraint. As a result, discussion of the axial compression allowable stresses provides much insight of how the equations have evolved over the last forty years and how they could be refined.

Technical Basis for ASME Section VIII Code Case 2235 on Ultrasonic Examination of Welds in Lieu of Radiography

2000 ◽  
Vol 123 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahendra D. Rana ◽  
Owen Hedden ◽  
Dave Cowfer ◽  
Roger Boyce
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Mechanics ◽  
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics ◽  
Acceptance Criteria ◽  
Ultrasonic Examination ◽  
Linear Elastic ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Elastic Fracture ◽  
Technical Basis ◽  
Division 2

In 1996, Code Case 2235, which allows ultrasonic examination of welds in lieu of radiography for ASME Section VIII Division 1 and Division 2 vessels, was approved by the ASME B&PV Code Committee. This Code Case has been revised to incorporate: 1) a reduction in minimum usable thickness from 4″ (107.6 mm) to 0.5″ (12.7 mm), and 2) flaw acceptance criteria including rules on multiple flaws. A linear elastic fracture mechanics procedure has been used in developing the flaw acceptance criteria. This paper presents the technical basis for Code Case 2235.

A more accurate method for predicting the stresses in a flat steel ribbon wound pressure vessel

1999 ◽  
Vol 213 (8) ◽  
pp. 787-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Y Zheng ◽  
P Xu ◽  
L Q Wang ◽  
G H Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Accurate Method ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Friction Model ◽  
Interfacial Friction ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Helical Winding ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Flat Steel ◽  
Steel Ribbon

Flat steel ribbon wound pressure vessels have been adopted by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 1 and Division 2. An excellent safety and service record has been built up in the past 34 years. Based on the interfacial friction model proposed by Zheng [1], a more accurate method for predicting the stresses in a flat steel ribbon wound pressure vessel is offered in this paper, taking account of the axial displacement, the change in the helical winding angle, the interfacial friction between ribbon layers and the effect of lamination. Comparison between experimental results of five test vessels with an inside diameter varying from 350 to 1000 mm, four different helical winding angles (18, 24, 27 and 30°), two width—thickness ratios of the ribbon (20 and 22.86) and results of calculation using the stress formulae available demonstrates that the method in this paper is more accurate and that interfacial friction gives a marked strengthening contribution to the axial strength of the vessel.

Analysis of Pressure Vessel Sloshing

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. M. McGuffie ◽  
M. A. Porter
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Time History ◽  
Transient Time ◽  
Closed Form Solutions ◽  
3 Dimensional ◽  
Fluid Sloshing ◽  
History Analysis ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Section Viii ◽  
Computational Fluid Dynamics Cfd

ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 1 Paragraph UG-22 (f) requires consideration of the loadings from seismic conditions. For a vessel containing a fluid, the loading due to sloshing must be considered. ASCE Standard 7-02 (Section 9.14.7.3) states that a damping value of 0.5% can be used to account for the fluid sloshing. This can lead to an overly conservative design by over-estimating the loads on the tank structure. A time-history analysis was performed on a horizontally mounted pressure vessel experiencing 3-axis time history loads in order to determine if this method is more accurate in determining the loads. The analysis employed a 3-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model, using transient time-history techniques. The reactions at the mounting locations were compared to the reactions computed using closed form solutions, demonstrating good correlation. The results show that CFD is an excellent tool for investigating seismic sloshing loads in vessels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document