All times are UTC + 2 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Acess opening in skirt
PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:32 am 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 58
Dear All!
We have vertical vessel supported on skirt. Usually we have in skirts access opening for maintenance and inspection purposes, but is it written somewhere in the ASME code, that such openings in skirts are required? We have unusual request to do skirt without opening.

Thanks for reply.
malyl.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:49 am 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:55 pm
Posts: 270
Location: DESCON Engineering Limited, Pakistan
In my opinion, it is nowhere written in Section VIII.

_________________
Thanks & Regards,
Nasir
Welding Engineer
DESCON Engineering Limited.
Lahore, Pakistan.
Mobile # 0092-336-4145402


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:42 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:11 am
Posts: 480
Location: England
Not explicitly. But I think I can imagine a skirt which renders inspection of some welds impossible, where in the design they are assumed to be inspected. Or telltale holes. Or simply some dimensions. I feel there is some dispute going on and someone is trying to challenge some arguments, but it's hard to guess what's the matter...
Possibly Malyl could be less enigmatic.

_________________
Konrad Anikiel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 7:07 am 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 58
Konrad, you are right. We want to have the possibility to inspect the bottom head and outlet nozzle with elbow.
More details about vessel: The vessel has OD 940mm, above the vessel there is the pipe rack without any place to extend the skirt (now it is 670mm high) to add access opening.
We know now it is not possible to add opening, but I wanted to be sure that it will not be against the code and additionally PED 97/23/EC (vessel is designed acc. to the code and CE marked).
The only thing what we could do is to add two 2" vent holes in skirt, below insulation on bottom head.

Hope this clarifies situation a bit.
regards
malyl


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:31 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:11 am
Posts: 480
Location: England
Usually we (I mean design engineers) have to convince our Inspectors that something CAN be done the way we want it. But sometimes it's the other way around: we have to convince them that this or that CAN'T be done. Perhaps you're in such a situation: get your AI's opinion on paper, but convince him first. Then use this as an argument in your dispute with the client. This usually works.

PS What is the argument against those openings? Can they be done with covers?

_________________
Konrad Anikiel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:33 am 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 58
Konrad the only argument against is no space for it. We already discussed the issue with NoBo and there will be special notice in operating manual regarding testing of bottom head and making endoscopy through vent holes (if necessary)

Thanks for answers.
malyl


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 2 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

phpBB SEO