Hallo!

Is there is a guideline of the german chemical industry (VCI) requiring an ASME U stampholder for manufacturing vessels under PED with ASME as technical standard?

If yes, is this document available to the general public.

Auf wiedersehen

Sharjeel,

I remember that I have read the guideline some time ago.

If I remember correctly, it says that if a vessel is specified ASME Code, this includes the Code stamping. If not stamped, it is not ASME.

Basically this is in line with my opinion. When the specification says construction code ASME, Stamping is required.

Every vessel with "ASME intend" or "similar to ASME" or "ASME equivalent" is only somewhere from 1 to 99% ASME. We all have learnt very sobering lessons with these vessels. That is why I can support this opinion.


In PED, however, there is no requirement that ASME stamp shall be required. PED requires the manufacturer to perform a hazard analysis and prepare a design package. In this design, he may use all codes that he wants, or the Owner specifies.

I advise to read and follow the Owner's specification of the vessel.
When he specifies a blue car, he can not complain when he gets a Tata rather than a BMW, as long as the car is blue.

If he wants to show the world how good he is, he can use no code at all!

_________________
Konrad Anikiel

Sure, Konrad, that is what some people try even though a Code is specified.

But serious, the Essential Safety Requirements from Annex 1 shall be met, how the manufacturer does this, is his business unless the owner orders a particular code.

In this context I can recommend to read the PED, Annex 1 and Guideline 6/9. I have the image that the PED is not read often enough.

DK

There was a story to remember, it was the last nail in the coffin to one of big ship yards in Poland. They got an order for few ferries from Italy. There was a serious mistake in the order specification, but they didn't tell it to the purchaser. They made the vessels exactly as they were ordered. Unfortunately, the design violated the rules of the naval class society involved, and the inspectors didn't sign the papers. The customer sued the shipyard, and they won. The shipyard had to rebuild the ships on their cost (20m USD), just because they were too lazy to talk to the customer in the right time.

_________________
Konrad Anikiel

In context to your comments that "When he specifies a blue car, he can not complain when he gets a Tata rather than a BMW, as long as the car is blue."

I am looking for some clarification with regard to the ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION VIII, DIVISION I. Does this section of the code require (or specify) that the vessel must be fabricated in a "U" stamp facility in order for the "VESSEL DESIGN AND FABRICATION TO COMPLY FULLY WITH THE ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION VIII, DIVISION I"?

To give you some context, we are currently manufacturing a number of portable air compressor systems that are to be sold to a client who's technical specifications indicate that "VESSEL DESIGN AND FABRICATION MUST COMPLY FULLY WITH THE ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION VIII, DIVISION I". It also indicates that "ALL PRESSURE VESSELS MUST BE REGISTERED WITH THE NATIONAL BOARD OF BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL INSPECTORS (NB), OR ALBERTA BOILER SAFETY ASSOCIATION (ABSA) OR CANADIAN REGISTRATION NUMBER (CRN) IN LIEU OF NATIONAL BOARD NUMBER."

We have had a number of pressure vessels fabricated in a Canadian facility that is not an ASME "U" stamp certificate of authorization holder. They are however a TSSA certificate of authorization holder approved for pressure vessel fabrication and registration under the Canadian Registration Number (CRN) program. I understand that the fabrication facility must hold a valid certificate of authorization in order to stamp the vessel with the "U" stamp, and that the the "U" stamp certifies that the "VESSEL DESIGN AND FABRICATION COMPLY FULLY WITH THE ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION VIII, DIVISION I". While the vessels clearly cannot be stamped with a "U"stamp, is it fair to say that the vessel does not have to be manufactured by a "U" stamp certificate of authorization holder in order to have the "VESSEL DESIGN AND FABRICATION COMPLY FULLY WITH THE ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION VIII, DIVISION I"?

I would appreciate any insight you can offer into the code requirements in this regard.

Derekk,

In our part of the world, we do not have any regulatory requirement for code/ 'U' stamping and therefore requirement of code stamping is defined based on user's project philosophy.

In case user require code stamping you have not alternative other than to fabricate the vessel in an ASME authorised fabrication shop.

If code stamping is not a requirement, it can be fabricated in any shop and as long as design/ fabrication is in line with ASME, we call it "VESSEL DESIGN AND FABRICATION COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE, SECTION VIII, DIVISION I".

Even if an equipment fabricated in a ASME authorised shop and inspected by AI, it may not have code stamping, again depending on user's requirement. This is generally the case when an ASME authorised shop receive order for equipment which does not require code stamping and have a resident AI. It becomes easy and economical for them to employ AI rather than calling another inspector for the inspection.

All the third party inspection agencies also provide certificate accordingly.

Regards