HSB Global Standards ASME Code Changes and Discussions

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "HSB Global Standards ASME Code Changes and Discussions"

Dana Pierce
6 years ago
Views:

1 HSB Global Standards ASME Code Changes and Discussions Presented by: David M. Allore Field Services Manager September 12, 2012

2 AGENDA Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files Overview of COMPRESS, APV and PV Elite Output Files What s New at ASME ASME B&PV Code Updates: 2011 Addenda 2

3 Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations Section VIII The Inspector has the duty of verifying that the applicable calculations have been made and are on file at the Manufacturer s plant at the time the Data Report is signed. Any questions concerning the calculations raised by the inspector must be resolved 3

4 Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations (Cont.) Interpretation: VIII Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, U-2(e) and UG-90(c)(1) Date Issued: July 26, 1979 File: BC Question (1): Is it the intent of U-2(e) of Section VIII, Division 1, that the Authorized Inspector shall check and accept (by signing the U-1 Form) the accuracy of the design calculations with respect to the proper choice of applicable design formulas, stress values for materials used, and mathematics? Reply (1): U-2(e) requires the Inspector to verify that the applicable calculations have been made and requires that any questions raised by the Inspector be resolved. The Inspector is not required to check the calculations. Question (2): Is the intent of U-2(e) in any way modified when Section VIII, Division 1 does not provide rules covering all the design details as per U-2(g)? Reply (2): No. 4

5 Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations (Cont.) Interpretation: I Subject: Sections I, IV, and VIII, Duties of Authorized Inspectors Date Issued: January 27, 1981 File: BC Question (1): As related to Section I, Section IV, and Section VIII - Division 1 of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, is the Authorized Inspector responsible for the accuracy of the calculations submitted for the finished Code component or part? Reply (1): No. It is the duty of the Authorized Inspector to determine to his own satisfaction that the necessary calculations were done in accordance with the Code. The responsibility for accuracy of the calculations lies with the Manufacturer. Question (2): What is the extent of Authorized Inspector responsibility in reviewing design calculations that are made available by the Manufacturer [UG-90(c)(1)(b)]? Reply (2): The Authorized Inspector must verify that all required design calculations applicable to the construction have been made in accordance with the Code, and that any questions raised by the Inspector are resolved. The Inspector is not required to check for accuracy of the calculations. The responsibility for accuracy of the calculations lies with the Manufacturer. 5

6 Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations (Cont.) necessary calculations or required design calculations Phrases interpreted to mean that all pressure retaining components covered by the Code Stamp must be supported by code calculations AI must have a clear understanding of what constitutes the Code Stamped Vessel when reviewing assembly drawing Complications include: Multiple chamber vessels, where one chamber may not be stamped Communicating chamber Mfg. includes additional piping under Code stamping 6

7 Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations (Cont.) Phrase more difficult to interpret done in accordance with the Code Two possible interpretations 1) Verify that each pressure retaining component is supported by a Code calculation using the correct Code equation, when one is published, or U-2(g) or equivalent. 2) Verify that each pressure retaining component is supported by a Code calculation using the correct Code equation, when one is published, or U-2(g) or equivalent. Additionally verify that all of the variables (dimensions, allowable stress, joint efficiency, etc.) substituted into the equation are correct. The AI is not responsible to perform the math. 7

8 Guidelines for AI Review of Design Calculations (Cont.) Interpretation 2 Can Present Some Challenges Variables substituted into the equation may not be readily available; for example Component dimensions Mixed use of units Allowable stress; need access to II-D; interpolation may be necessary depending on design temperature Joint efficiency; requires working knowledge of joint efficiency rules Complex calculations; e.g. Part UHX tubesheet calculations, App. 5 & 26 bellows, App. 13 noncircular vessels, App. 2 flanges Verification of correct test pressure (hydrostatic or pneumatic) 8

9 Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files Common Design Mistakes Identified During Design Reviews Codes & Standards design review process not only verifies that pressure/temperature (P/T) rating for vessel described on drawing is correct, but that the P/T rating for all vessel components are fully supported by the calculations Most common mistake Discrepancies between drawings and calculations Multiple revisions to drawings not always reflected in calculations Difference in dimensions Difference in material specification or grade RT marking versus joint efficiency, E, used in calculations Design pressures 9

10 Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files (Cont.) Drawings lack details needed to verify calculations Vessel support dimensional information Material information; calculations often require detailed information about material ( e.g. spec/grade/class, normalized or Q&T, impact tested (Yes or No) Weld sizes ( e.g. nozzle, supports) UG-22 Manufacturers should indicate on either drawings or calculations that UG-22 loads have been considered 10

11 Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files (Cont.) Openings Reinforcement Taking credit for material that does not exist 11

12 Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files (Cont.) Openings Overlapping limits of reinforcement Some commercial and Mfg. in-house software do not look at the location of opening in relation to other openings 12

13 Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files (Cont.) Small opening weld size Small openings that are exempt from reinforcement per UG-36(c)(3) and weld strength per UW-15, still require their attachment welds to satisfy UW-16 13

14 Frequent Mistakes on ASME Design Files (Cont.) Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Not enough information provided Finite element calculations often only include stress result plots Critical information missing Type of analysis performed; e.g. elastic, limit load, elastic-plastic Description of finite element model; e.g. 3-D, axisymmetric Description of model elements used Description of boundary conditions applied Description of applied loads List of assumptions, including some technical justification for the assumption Reference back to drawings Summary with code allowable stress comparisons; stress classification per VIII- 2 Wrong stress theory comparison Sections VIII-1 based on Maximum Principle Stress Theory; incorrect to use von Mises stresses 14

15 Overview of COMPRESS, APV and PV Elite Output Files Most common commercial software used for VIII-1 calculations COMPRESS by Codeware APV (Advanced Pressure Vessel) by Computer Engineering PV Elite or CodeCalc by Coade (or Intergraph) 15

16 COMPRESS Summary Tables usually in the front of the package 16

17 COMPRESS Summary Tables - continued 17

18 COMPRESS Most of the programs also have listing of UG-22 loads and whether they were considered. 18

19 COMPRESS The Weight Summary is also a good place to see if they accounted for items such as insulation and other attached equipment. These would add weight to the vessel support structure. 19

20 COMPRESS Also important to review is the hydrostatic/pneumatic test summary. 20

21 COMPRESS Drawbacks of the summary tables: Location of nozzles Nozzle (UW-16) or SO flange weld sizes (UW-21) Sizes of supports Should check these against the drawing 21

22 APV APV does not have a summary section. Need to review each page to determine if the correct materials, diameters, thicknesses, efficiencies, etc. have been used. Be careful The cover page is just that - a cover page. It could have different pressures, temperatures, RT indication and MDMT than the actual calculation package uses. 22

23 APV Each page/section will have the inputs (materials, sizes, thicknesses, efficiencies) that need to be compared to the information on the drawing. 23

24 APV Some issues to be aware of when looking at APV calculations: Does not look at location of nozzle in relation to anything else Joint efficiency is a manual input regardless of what RT or type of joint is chosen. Joint efficiency for the longitudinal and circumferential stress equations can be different and is a manual input not dependent on type of joint (i.e. designer needs to know the Code well) 24

25 PV Elite PV Elite and CodeCalc both produced by Coade. Similar in structure but PV Elite has more for the overall pressure vessel designer. 25

26 PV Elite Summary tables like COMPRESS but they tend to be at the back of the reports. Summarizes not only nozzle size and thicknesses but also locations, actual weld sizes for the attachment of nozzles and SO flanges. 26

27 PV Elite Does list the inputs (materials, sizes, pressures, etc.) at the front of the report but does it from a point (node) to point (node) basis. Difficult to interpret sometimes and to check that they have all components in the report. 27

28 PV Elite It appears that the designer selects the RT marking in the inputs and the program then selects the efficiencies. 28

29 PV Elite Hydrostatic Test pressure determined for each component. Nozzle flanges P-T ratings summarized in the report 29

30 PV Elite Some advantages to PV Elite is that is contains Appendix 13 rules as well as some of the more popular International wind and seismic Codes. 30

31 Miscellaneous We have not seen any programs that evaluate the weld joint (fillet and groove sizes) of UW-13 for the attachment of flat heads or tubesheets. APV does not have a Division 2 option where COMPRESS and PV Elite do. Although they all have their pros/cons, drawbacks and idiosyncrasies, if the correct inputs are used, the Code calculation part of the process is correct. 31

32 What s New at ASME? 2011 Publication ASME published complete reprints (white pages) for all B&PV Code books Some books were published with their old software and some with new software (xml) Even though it is a complete reprint, it is considered an Addenda On Data Reports, 2010 Edition and 2011 Addenda would be listed, not like when the 1998 Edition came out Next publication will be the 2013 Edition No Addenda in 2012 Code Cases will still be published quarterly Errata will be published on ASME website as soon as approved Special Safety Notices may be published on website Can subscribe to notifications on website 32

33 What s New at ASME? Code Symbol Stamp phased out separate stamps (such as the U) for each Code Moved to a single mark for all codes new term: "Certification Designator or Designator defines the area in which the Certificate Holder is certified by ASME For example, for VIII-1, "U", "UV" or "UD marked on the nameplate directly under the Certification Mark Non-nuclear Code Case for 18 month transition 2710 (I, IV, X, XII), 2714 (VIII) See Code Services Discussion database postings for further details Numerous errata in 2011 Addenda ASME posted FAQ s regarding use of the new Mark. U 33

34 What s New at ASME? Code Construction at Location Other than that Listed on Certificate Certificate Holder may request ASME to authorize code construction at another location Intended for situations where Cert. Holder needs additional production space to handle overflow work, or perhaps access to a larger crane Certificate Holder would apply to ASME requesting permission to fabricate at additional location (temporary shop) ASME would request AIA to audit Temporary Shop and verify that it is suitable for intended construction activity Following receipt of the AIA s audit report, ASME may issue a Letter authorizing temporary use of a new shop location for a period of not longer than one year or to the time the Certificate Holder s Certificate will expire 34

35 What s New at ASME? Adding Additional Shop Location to Current Certificate New Policy - Issued April 2012 Permits adding one or more locations to existing certificate w/o audit by ASME Intended for shop locations near ( approx. 6 miles ) address on certificate Requires AIA audit to verify all necessary controls in place to ensure Code compliance at both locations Requires same AI to service all locations According to Bob Wielgoszinski, there may be some future restrictions placed on this new policy in near future 36

36 SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS FROM 2011 ADDENDA 37

37 Significant Revision 2011 Addenda Section VIII, Division 1 UG-11 Prefabricated or Preformed Pressure Parts Complete rewrite of paragraph Combination of restructuring existing requirements, significant clarifications and additional rules NET RESULT - clearer rules may be viewed as new rules Major changes include: Emphasis that all UG-11 parts must comply with applicable rules, including design Each part must be supported by documentation to demonstrate Code compliance relative to materials, basis for P/T rating, welding complies with Section IX Cert. Holder can subcontract welded part fabrication to a non-certificate holder 38

38 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Section VIII, Division 1 UG-90(c)(1)(n) acceptance by the Inspector Statement added that by the Inspector s acceptance, an Inspector does not assume any responsibilities that belong to the Manufacturer UG-93 and App 3 Material documentation UG-93(a)(1): expanded documentation requirements for plate material App 3: revised definition of certificate of compliance, material, material supplier and Material Test Report 39

39 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Section VIII, Division 1 UW-11(a) Requirements for full radiography Rewrite of UW-11(a)(1) through (a)(4) [See Interpretation VIII ] Revisions prompted by inquiry Changes involve: UW-11(a)(2) changed vessels to shell and heads of vessels to be consistent with UW-11(a)(1); also relocated small nozzle and communicating chamber exemption to UW-11(a)(4) UW-11(a)(3) Added coverage for unfired steam boilers with design pressure < 50 psi (350 kpa) Separate full radiography requirements for nozzles and communicating chambers from vessels [UW-11(a)(2)] and place the requirements in UW-11(a)(4) Net Result Unfired steam boiler with P < 50 psi and thickness at welded joint exceeding thickness limits defined in UW-11(a)(2) will require Full RT 40

40 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Section VIII, Division 1 UW-21 use of B16.5 Flanges Code change and Intent Interpretation rules apply to B16.5 socket and slip-on flange welds, no matter where they are installed on the vessel Question: Is it the intent that the socket and slip-on flange attachment details given in Fig. UW-21 for ASME B16.5 flanges apply only to attachments to nozzle necks? Reply: No; These attachment details shall be used wherever an ASME B16.5 slip on flange is used on a Section VIII, Division 1 vessel. Note: The revision to Fig. UW-21shows that the dimensional requirement of the ID fillet weld is only for sizing the weld. The artwork was corrected by Errata. It now shows that the fillet weld is not necessarily flush with the face of the flange. 41

41 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Section VIII, Division 1 UW-50 pneumatic test NDE clarify that the required NDE is to take place prior to pneumatic testing UW-51(a)(4) incorporation of CC 2235 (UT) Refers to VIII-2 paragraph for UT procedure, flaw evaluation and acceptance criteria UT may be used for t > ½ in. (13mm) VIII-1 Cert. Holder will need to purchase VIII-2 for UT rules UB-30 subcontracted brazers Made consistent with UW-26(d) permit subcontracted brazers only at the location(s) at which ASME has authorized the Manufacture to do work 42

42 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Sections VIII-1 & VIII-2 COMMON RULES UCS-67 and 3.11 toughness rules completely rewritten for production testing Some technical changes Paragraphs deleted and reformatted for better clarity UW-3 and weld joint Categories Clarified that not all weld joints are assigned to a Category For example, jacket closure-to-shell and bellows expansion joint fillet welds 43

43 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Sections VIII-1, VIII-2 & VIII-3 Tolerances Insert the contents regarding tolerances in the Forewords New paragraphs: VIII-1 = U-5, VIII-2 =1.5, VIII-3 = KG-160 Foreword not part of the Code Updated referenced standards VIII-1 = Table U-3, VIII-2 = Table 1.1, VIII-3 = Table KG-141 If the Table references Latest Edition for the Year, this would be the latest edition publicly available by the standard developing organization (e.g., ASME or ASTM) as of the contract date (similar to setting the Edition/Addenda) Other editions may be accepted on a case-by-case basis subject to concurrence by the AI (and SCS and/or Home Office, if necessary) 44

44 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Section IX Diffusion Welding Added as a new welding process QW-185 paragraphs added QW-266 new table of variables QW-4XX new variables added QW-386 new welding operator requirements QW/QB-492 new definition added QW specimens allow multiple specimens to be taken across the weld the entire weld and heat affected zones are tested 45

45 Significant Revisions in 2011 Addenda Section IX QW-264 Laser Beam Welding (LBW) Deleted and added references to existing variables and added new variables Made less restrictive Will require evaluation of WPS s and PQR s 46

FORM A-1P MANUFACTURER'S DATA REPORT FOR PLATE HEAT EXCHANGERS As Required by the Provisions of the ASME Code Rules, Section VIII, Division 2

Page of FORM A-1P MANUFACTURER'S DATA REPORT FOR PLATE HEAT EXCHANGERS As Required by the Provisions of the ASME Code Rules, Section VIII, Division 2 1. Manufactured and certified by: 2. Manufactured for: