All times are UTC + 2 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:42 pm
Posts: 5
We have fabricated a Pressure vessels as per ASME SEC VIII DIV 1,in which Ovality exceeds the tolerance given in UG 80.Fabrication of vessel is completed . We tried to reduce the ovality by External stiffeners, but we are not able get the ovality with in tolerance. Please advice how to solve this


Prasanna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:05 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 207
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
We have fabricated a Pressure vessels as per ASME SEC VIII DIV 1,in which Ovality exceeds the tolerance given in UG 80.Fabrication of vessel is completed . We tried to reduce the ovality by External stiffeners, but we are not able get the ovality with in tolerance. Please advice how to solve this

Prasanna,

Make a design change as non-Code vessel and then call your client if they will accept the vessel as is, otherwise cut your loses and scrap the vessel. ASME Code Section VIII-1 will not provide you a solution and your AI will not allow this. Next time consider using stiffeners to control ovality and adhere to 1% limit of UG-80.

leem817


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:03 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 7:57 am
Posts: 79
What is the diameter and thickness ?
and
How are you checking Ovality ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:24 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:11 am
Posts: 480
Location: England
Prasanna,
The vessel section doesn't have to be circular. It can be obround, rectangular, or any shape you can imagine. Thus, nothing prevents you from making a "not truly round" shell. It only needs to be designed the proper way. You can't use UG-27, and other rules as they are. Perhaps you will have to go to U-2(g), develop some way of dealing with local bending stresses etc. And of course, talk your client and your AI into it. As you can see, it's just a matter of your attitude: it can be a scrapping problem (as leem817 suggests) or an engineering (a paper) problem. As a design engineer, I would suggest redesigning rather than scrapping. A quick cost calculation should help with choosing the right way.

_________________
Konrad Anikiel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:42 pm
Posts: 5
Outside diameter=2500 mm,thickness=10 mm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:40 am 
Offline
----------------
----------------

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 6:07 am
Posts: 24
Location: Shanghai PRC
Prasannaraja wrote:
Outside diameter=2500 mm,thickness=10 mm


I think you may not use roller to form you shell, hehe

otherwise, 1%*2500=25mm. it is much big enough for forming/

maybe you use two half or some other method to fabricate the course?

_________________
Paul Wei


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:42 pm
Posts: 5
Inside dia measured are 2457 & 2490 mm.1% of Individual Dia are with in tolerence but the difference of Dmax and Dmin is more than 1%


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 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