ASME demonstrator pressue vessel - UC DRC Home

ASME Demonstrator Pressure Vessel

A Baccalaureate thesis submitted to the Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering

College of Engineering and Applied Science University of Cincinnati

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Bachelor of Science

in Mechanical Engineering Technology

by

Christopher Ridle

April 2014

Thesis Advisor: Professor Janak Dave, Ph.D.

ASME Demonstrator Pressure Vessel Christopher Ridle

1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My father, William Ridle, has been my inspiration to pursue a career in engineering. His

knowledge in all facets of engineering is impressive, but his mastery of fluid dynamics and

pressurized equipment is exceptional. He presented this design opportunity to me, and I am

grateful that he offered the challenge.

Professor Janak Dave has served as my academic guide through this endeavor. His

experience in industry applied directly to the design and fabrication of the vessel.

Jennifer Ridle, my beautiful wife, and I made it through a very challenging time

together. Her father passed shortly after the start of this project. This coincided with the

beginning of a challenging semester. The additional trials required to support each other and

the family nearly caused us to put our academic pursuits on hold for another semester or

year. It was through her strength and perseverance that we were able to find our way through

that difficult time without delaying or abandoning our academic pursuits.

Specialty Piping Corporation of Davisville, West Virginia provided an excellent but

unexpected partner in this endeavor. A mutually beneficial relationship was formed in which

they received a code compliant design and calculations at no cost. I received the vessel once

they no longer needed it. They also allowed me to observe their Joint Review which was a

valuable learning experience. Special thanks goes to the Quality Control Manager, Steve

Zoller. He was my point of contact, and he was always available to answer questions and

share his knowledge.

John Groh of American Muscle Street Rods and Classics plus Dean Brown of the

Little Miami Golf Center assisted with testing.


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................... 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... 2

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. 3

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... 4

ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. 5

INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH ..................................................................................... 6

PROBLEM STATEMENT .................................................................................................................................... 6 RESEARCH ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 INTERVIEWS................................................................................................................................................. 11

CUSTOMER SUPPLIED INFORMATION .......................................................................... 12

SURVEY AND RESULTS................................................................................................................................. 12 PROCESSING SURVEY RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 14

PRODUCT OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................... 15

DESIGN .................................................................................................................................. 17

DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................................................... 17 DESIGN SELECTION...................................................................................................................................... 21 SHELL ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 HEADS ........................................................................................................................................................ 23 NOZZLES ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 WELDS ........................................................................................................................................................ 27 ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS ......................................................................................................................... 29 FINAL DESIGN ............................................................................................................................................. 31

PRESSURE LOADING ANALYSIS ..................................................................................... 33

ASME ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................ 33 SUPPLEMENTARY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 35 COMPARING ANALYSES ............................................................................................................................... 36

FABRICATION, JOINT REVIEW & TESTING .................................................................. 37

FABRICATION .............................................................................................................................................. 37 JOINT REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................. 43 TESTING ...................................................................................................................................................... 46

SCHEDULE AND BUDGET ................................................................................................. 48

SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................................... 48 BUDGET ...................................................................................................................................................... 49

CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 50

WORKS CITED ..................................................................................................................... 52

APPENDIX A – RESEARCH ................................................................................................ 54

APPENDIX B – SURVEY RESULTS ................................................................................... 59

APPENDIX C – QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD) ...................................... 60


3

APPENDIX D – PRODUCT OBJECTIVES .......................................................................... 61

APPENDIX E – SCHEDULE AND BUDGET...................................................................... 62

APPENDIX F – BILL OF MATERIALS ............................................................................... 63

APPENDIX G – PROOF OF DESIGN .................................................................................. 64

APPENDIX H – COMPONENT DRAWINGS ..................................................................... 65

APPENDIX I – MATERIAL REFERENCE VALUES ......................................................... 73

APPENDIX J – ASME CALCULATIONS ........................................................................... 75

APPENDIX K – SUPPLEMENTAL CALCULATIONS ...................................................... 83

APPENDIX L – COMPARING ANALYSES ....................................................................... 85

APPENDIX M – JOINT REVIEW CHECKLIST.................................................................. 86

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Steel pipe marked for identification. (4) 7

Figure 2 – Design calculation example (Shell Thickness). (8) 8

Figure 3 – Demonstration vessel. (8) 9

Figure 4 – Petrochemical storage tank. (1) 10

Figure 5 – Refinery vessel. (1) 10

Figure 6 – Rectangular pressure vessel for use in an effluent treatment plant. (11) 17

Figure 7 – Spherical pressure vessels for the storage of liquid natural gas. (12) 18

Figure 8 – Liner-less composite pressure vessel for FASTRAC 1 satellite. (13) 18

Figure 9 – SolidWorks rendering of composite pressure vessel. 19

Figure 10 – SolidWorks rendering of a spherical vessel produced from sections. 19

Figure 11 – Hemispherical head cap. (14) 20

Figure 12 –Hemispherical caps joined to produce a pressure vessel. 20

Figure 13 – Flat head. (17) 24

Figure 14 – Torispherical head. (17) 24

Figure 15 – Semi-elliptical head. (17) 24

Figure 16 – Hemispherical head. (18) 25

Figure 17 – Conical head. (17) 25

Figure 18 – One inch, 3000 lb.-rated, threaded coupling. 26

Figure 19 – Single-V butt-joint. (19) 27

Figure 20 – Beveled weld with strengthening fillet. (20) 28

Figure 21 – Gauge, ball valve and fittings for outlet nozzle. 30

Figure 22 – Ball valve and fitting for inlet nozzle. 30

Figure 23 – Decanter pressure vessel construction drawing. 31

Figure 24 – Components welded by SPC. 32

Figure 25 – Rendering of assembled vessel. 32

Figure 26 – Exploded view of vessel. 32

Figure 27 – Pressure Retention Capabilities of Welded Components. 34

Figure 28 – Plot of interior stresses within shell. 35

Figure 29 – Pressure vessel after completion of welding. 38

Figure 30 – Alternate view of pressure vessel with all welds complete. 38


4

Figure 31 – Specialty Piping Corporation’s fabrication shop. 38

Figure 32 – Example of a Specialty Piping Corporation process piping project. 38

Figure 33 – Ball valve, gauge, and fittings connections using PTFE tape. 39

Figure 34 – Maximum pressure and maximum temperature indicated in large lettering. 39

Figure 35 – Included for public display at the University of Cincinnati. 40

Figure 36 – Data plate with machined lettering. 40

Figure 37 – Data plate lettering accentuated with hobby paint. 41

Figure 38 – Prepared data plate adhesion surface. 41

Figure 39 – Completed Vessel (front). 42

Figure 40 – Completed Vessel (rear). 42

Figure 41 – Former ASME marking system example. (6) 43

Figure 42 – New ASME marking system example. (1) 44

Figure 43 – Pressure gauge during pressure test. 46

Figure 44 – Vessel heating using an acetylene torch. 47

Figure 45 – Temperature readings using a laser surface thermometer. 47

Figure 46 – Shell 65

Figure 47 – Head with cut-out for nozzle. 66

Figure 48 – 1 inch, 3000 pound rated H-coupling for use as nozzle. 67

Figure 49 – C-channel for use as data plate bracket. 68

Figure 50 – Data plate. 69

Figure 51 – Exploded view of Specialty Piping fabricated and joined components. 70

Figure 52 – Overall dimensions of vessel with fittings. 71

Figure 53 – Exploded view of vessel with bill of materials. 72

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 – Scoring results from survey. 12

Table 2 – Relative Importance of Engineering Characteristics. 14

Table 3 – Pipe sizes available for use as shell. (16) 22

Table 4 – Schedule for vessel planning, fabrication, testing and presentation. 62

Table 5 – Bill of materials with component costs. 63

Table 6 – Material reference values for pressure vessel shell (SA-53). (7) 73

Table 7 – Material reference values for pressure vessel heads (SA-234). (7) 73

Table 8 – Material reference values for pressure vessel nozzles (SA-106). (7) 74

Table 9 – Material reference for pressure vessel nozzle (SA-105). (7) 74

Table 10 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 shell thickness calculations. 77

Table 11 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 head thickness calculations. 78

Table 12 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 nozzle thickness calculations. 79

Table 13 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 nozzle thickness calculations (continued). 80

Table 14 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 minimum fillet weld size for nozzles. 80

Table 15 – Tank weight calculations. 81

Table 16 – Tank capacity calculations. 81

Table 17 – Maximum pressure retention of components ASME equations. 82


5

ABSTRACT

The intention of this project was to provide a pressure vessel design to aid a fabrication

shop in obtaining or maintaining its American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) accreditations. The vessel was to be built by the

fabrication shop to demonstrate their Quality Control (QC) systems and fabrication practices

during a Joint Review. A Joint Review is a triennial process in which the practices, designs

and materials used by the shop are examined to assure compliance with code. Accreditations

can only be granted after a candidate organization shows adherence to code during this

process.

The resulting vessel was designed to the standards presented in ASME BPVC Section

VIII Division 1. It was then fabricated by the Specialty Piping Corporation (SPC) of

Davisville, West Virginia. Construction of the vessel coincided with SPC’s triennial Joint

Review. Before and during the review, the vessel was used to demonstrate SPC’s quality

control and fabrication procedures to an authorized inspector (AI) and a review board, which

included an examiner from the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors. The

National Board is generally referred to as the NBIC due to the National Board Inspection

Code.

The vessel design assisted SPC in earning a renewal of their ASME “U” stamp with “W”

designator for pressurized vessels. The “U” indicates certification to construct pressure

vessels, and the “W” indicates welding is the certified form of fabrication.


6

INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH

PROBLEM STATEMENT

The American Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and the National Board of

Inspectors (NBIC) have both developed quality systems and practices regarding boilers and

pressure vessels. Typically, these two organizations work in tandem to ensure the safety and

quality necessary to prevent the loss of life and property due to the failure of high pressure

equipment. Fabrication shops dealing with boilers and pressure vessels require certification

in the standards and practices mandated by ASME and NBIC. These certifications must be

periodically maintained after their initial issuance.

This undertaking will provide the engineering design, fabrication drawings and

calculations to an ASME Code fabrication shop for the purpose of securing or maintaining its

high pressure vessel accreditation. The fabrication shop will need to provide certified

welders, a quality control system, and methods of material purchase and control. All work

provided will meet all of the requirements of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,

Section VIII, Division 1. This section is entitled Design and Fabrication of Pressure Vessels.

This activity will result in both shop certification and the fabrication of a demonstration

pressure vessel.

ASME offers 21 certifications based on the scope of industrial activities. Specialized

accreditations include certifications for the construction, inspection, and maintenance of

power boilers, heating boilers, pressure vessels, transport tanks, fiber-reinforced pressure

vessels, nuclear facility components, and nuclear in-service inspection. (1)


7

RESEARCH

Gaining ASME accreditation is an intensive task for fabrication operations, and it

typically requires an investment of between $5,000 and $10,000 for fees and inspection costs.

This includes costs paid to the Authorized Inspection agency, the National Board and ASME.

The Authorized Inspection agency (AI) is a third party company that provides code experts to

fabrication shops to assure work is being completed within ASME code. Additionally, AI’s

assist fabrication shops in preparation for inspection by NBIC. The AI agency is contacted,

and a contract is secured for in-process inspections. The vessel must be designed to code and

fabricated from traceable materials. Certified welders are required to function in industry.

The vessel is to be constructed as if it was going to be applied to service in industry. The AI

witnesses critical steps of fabrication. The fabrication process is followed by a Joint Review.

A Joint Review is a meeting of representatives from NBIC, the AI agency, the fabrication

shop’s quality program, and the shop’s management staff. The fabrication shop’s quality

control system is reviewed, as is the design, calculations, and materials of the vessel.

Issuance of ASME certifications is conditional on successful completion of an appropriate

Joint Review. (4)

The Joint Review assesses the applicant’s Quality Control (QC) manual and Quality

Control System (QCS), as well as their implementation. QC manuals must adhere to

ASME’s guidelines of control requirements. The control requirements are dictated by the

scope of work performed at the fabrication shop and may not include all controls

implemented by ASME. The fabrication shop must demonstrate its QCS by performing the

administrative and fabrication activities in accordance with both its own QC manual and

ASME code. Designs supplied to the fabrication shop must adhere to ASME code and

facilitate implementation of the shop’s QCS. (5)

The Joint Review examines the applicant’s material control system. This system ensures

that the material received by the applicant is properly identified with documentation.

Certificates of Compliance or Material Test Reports satisfy code requirements. These

documents can be either hard-copy or electronic. (6) Compliant material is received from the

supplier labeled with its material type and accompanying document number as in Figure 1.

Compliant material properties are listed in tables in ASME BPVC Section II. (7)

Figure 1 – Steel pipe marked for identification. (4)


8

Analysis of code calculations occurs during the Joint Review process. Typically,

calculations are generated using computer software. However, applicants must be able to

verify computer generated results. This can be done by using hand calculations or another

computer program. A letter from the software vender verifying the software has been

reviewed is acceptable in some cases. Calculation verification may not be requested, but it

should be expected. (8) Code calculation packages contain roughly 20 pages for simple

vessels. However, the number of calculation pages and calculations required increases as

complexity increases. The properties and abilities of all components and welds must be

analyzed mathematically to determine the vessel’s safety. A calculation sheet example is

depicted in Figure 2.

Figure 2 – Design calculation example (Shell Thickness). (8)


9

Proper shape is vital in pressure vessel design. Edges and corners create stress

concentrations, so rectangular shapes are typically not suitable for pressurized equipment.

Spherical vessels can be safely loaded with roughly twice the pressure as a cylindrical vessel

of the same material thickness. (9) However, spheres are very expensive and difficult to

produce. Cylindrical vessels with semi-elliptical heads, or end-caps, are economical and

effective. (10) The most basic pressure vessel configuration consists of a cylindrical shell,

two semi-elliptical end-caps, and two cylindrical nozzles. This shape is conducive to

fabrication, because seamless pipe may be used to fabricate shells and nozzles. Additional

fittings and supports are applied to vessels depending on their applications. Demonstration

vessels require only one inlet and one outlet, and they may be only partially assembled and

welded for a Joint Review. However, they are often fully completed, and modified later to

perform tasks in industry. Modification requires amending designs and calculations. Figure

3 is a design drawing of a demonstration pressure vessel. Figure 4 is a petrochemical storage

tank. Its design is simple but effective. Figure 5 is a more complex vessel. Its construction

includes lifting points, mounting points, bolted and flanged nozzles and supports. Such

fittings should only be applied as necessary, because the added complexity increases costs.

Figure 3 – Demonstration vessel. (8)


10

Figure 4 – Petrochemical storage tank. (1)

Figure 5 – Refinery vessel. (1)

See Appendix A for research notes.


11

INTERVIEWS

William Ridle, founder and operator of Southport Services, relates that pressure vessels

must be built to ASME code to ensure safety. Customers provide the design conditions for

their pressure vessel, and the task of designing it to code lies with the engineer. Typically,

the customer represents a small entrepreneurial fabrication shop without an engineer on staff.

(2)

Don Didion runs such a business. Didion Mechanical has been operating for 37 years,

and it first gained ASME accreditation in 1989. Currently, 99% of its business is fabricating

ASME code pressure vessels and heat exchangers. His first priority when fabricating a

pressure vessel is that the design meets code. The second priority is that the design package

includes all of the applicable calculations. The third priority is that the vessel is followed by

an in-plant traveler during fabrication. A traveler is a document that technicians use to assure

proper materials are being used. The technicians also sign-off their work on the document.

The fourth priority is that the design includes fit up points for the Authorized Inspector (AI)

to witness. An AI serves as a third party to assure that the vessel is built to code. Mr. Didion

relates that the documentation for all pressure vessels must be organized and retained for at

least three years. (3) However, Didion Mechanical retains these documents for five years.

See Appendix A for additional interview notes.


12

CUSTOMER SUPPLIED INFORMATION

SURVEY AND RESULTS

Fabrication shops which have developed specialties in piping and pressurized equipment

comprise the customer base for ASME Code demonstrator pressure vessel designs. These

shops tend to be small operations, and they obtain the majority of their work from general

contractors with limited experience concerning pressurized equipment. These shops

generally do not have an engineer on staff, and they contract engineers for their services

regarding ASME code. (2)

Surveys were distributed to ASME accredited fabrication shops, and the returned

surveys provided data regarding customer features. The survey consisted of three sections.

The first section asked the customers to rate the importance of pressure vessel design

features. The second asked the customers to rate their satisfaction regarding their previous

ASME demonstrator pressure vessel designs. The third section asked the customer how

much they are willing to pay for such a design. The survey results are displayed in Table 1.

Table 1 – Scoring results from survey.

Custo

me

r im

po

rta

nce

Desig

ne

r's M

ultip

lier

Curr

en

t S

atisfa

ctio

n

Pla

nn

ed

Sa

tisfa

ctio

n

Imp

rovem

en

t ra

tio

Mo

difie

d Im

po

rta

nce

Rela

tive

we

igh

t

Rela

tive

we

igh

t %

ASME Code Compliant 5 1.1 5 5 1.0 5.5 0.36 36%

Safe 4.8 1.1 5 5 1.0 5.3 0.35 35%

Ease of Fabrication 3 0.9 3.6 3 0.8 2.3 0.15 15%

Cost 2.4 0.9 3 3 1.0 2.2 0.14 14%

Code compliance and safety are the most important customer features, but ease of

fabrication and cost show the largest potentials for improvement. Therefore, the best strategy

for improving upon demonstration pressure vessel design is gearing the design to be

conducive to fabrication and control cost. This must be done without adversely affecting

code compliance or safety. However, improvement areas are addressed in the designer’s

multiplier of table 1. The designer’s multiplier is assigned to customer features based on the

engineering judgments of the designer. A multiplier of one is a neutral value, it does not

affect the relative weight of the feature to which it is applied. Multipliers less than one

decrease the features’ relative weights, and multipliers greater than one increase their

weights. Even though customers are satisfied with safety and compliance, they must be

considered before all else. It is necessary to apply multipliers that reflect their importance.

This is why code compliance and safety are given multipliers of 1.1. Ease of fabrication and

cost can be improved upon, but their importance is not as great as compliance and safety.


13

This is why ease of fabrication and cost receive reduced designer’s multipliers of 0.9.

Planned satisfaction levels for ease of fabrication are actually less than current satisfaction

for that customer feature. This indicates the greater importance of code compliance and

safety to ease of fabrication. The designer is willing to see a decrease in the ease of

fabrication satisfaction rating to assure code compliance and safety.

See Appendix B for the details of the customer survey.


14

PROCESSING SURVEY RESULTS

Engineering characteristics and their corresponding relative importance values are listed

in table 2.

Table 2 – Relative Importance of Engineering Characteristics.

Engineering Characteristics Relative

Importance

Design in accordance with ASME Section VIII Division 1 26%

Compliant weld media 25%

Shape 17%

Volume 16%

Welder access to joints 10%

Facilitates authorized inspector’s (AI) activities 6%

The most important engineering characteristic is that the pressure vessel design be in

accordance with ASME Section VIII, Division 1. Proving code compliance is the point of

the product. Therefore, designing within the code takes first priority. Compliant weld media

is nearly as important. Again, this characteristic deals with compliance, and proving

compliance is the purpose of the pressure vessel design.

Shape and volume are secondary characteristics. They dictate the design and

construction of the vessel, but are secondary to compliance. Dimensional characteristics can

vary greatly, but the vessel must be compliant regardless of volume and shape.

Welder joint access and AI facilitation are important. However, they are tertiary

characteristics for the design process. It is necessary to address these characteristics, but

their formation and modification will be dictated by the primary and secondary

characteristics.

See Appendix C for the quality function deployment (QFD) tool used to develop the

weights for the engineering characteristic.


15

PRODUCT OBJECTIVES

ASME Section VIII, Division 1 Compliant – 36%

Code compliance is the most important objective of a demonstrator pressure vessel. Its

purpose is to prove to ASME and NBIC that the fabrication shop is capable of building such

a vessel to code while adhering to an approved QCS. ASME applies controls to all aspects of

pressure vessel design and construction, so one missed detail in either will cause a shop to

fail a joint review. Such an occurrence is a waste of time, money and effort. Furthermore, it

could cause an organization to lose professional credibility, which results in lost work and

revenue. Code compliance received a relative weight of 36 percent for customer

requirements, because code compliance is the point of the product.

Safety – 35%

Pressurized equipment is dangerous. ASME issued its first boiler and pressure vessel

code in 1914 to combat frequent industrial explosions due to such equipment. (1) Sub-

standard equipment can injure, kill and/or destroy property. Therefore, the demonstration

vessel design must be able to meet or exceed the mandatory specifications for pressure

loading with the assurance that the vessel will not fail in service if properly constructed,

inspected and maintained. This customer requirement received 35 percent relative weight.

The combined weight with code compliance, which ensures safety, is 71 percent. Built to

code equates with built for safety.

Ease of Fabrication – 15%

Fabrication shops want to earn accreditation to build or continue building equipment for

industry. They do not want to dedicate excessive time, personnel, materials or facilities to

fabricating a demonstration pressure vessel. Therefore, the designer must take into account

the ease in which the vessel can be constructed. The shape of the vessel must be conducive

to welding, and it must allow the welder easy access to seams. Additionally, the shape of the

vessel should allow easy observation and inspection by the AI. The AI and the Joint Review

may only require a portion of the vessel to be completely welded by the time of the joint

review. This facilitates the operations of the fabrication shop, while satisfying the AI and

ASME in the shop’s ability to fabricate pressure vessels.

The size of the vessel must be large enough to permit access to welders and inspectors,

but it should be small enough to facilitate handling during the fabrication process. It is also

desirable that the vessel be of a size that is useful in industry. This will permit the shop to

incorporate the vessel into future projects. Vessel weight should allow handling and

transport. The capacity of trucks, fork lifts, cranes and other handling or transportation

equipment must not be exceeded. A target weight limit of under 1000 pounds is instated to

assure the vessel is able to be readily fabricated and transported.

Cost – 14%


16

Vessels are often constructed using lengths of seamless pipe and forged or cast end-caps.

Components are attached by welding using common weld media. These materials are

relatively inexpensive compared to the labor rates of certified welders. It is necessary to

account for both material costs and labor costs in the design process. Target goals are set to

prevent the fabrication shop from expelling more resources than necessary on the

demonstration pressure vessel. The fabrication shop should not have to spend more than

$2000 on materials, and the vessel should require no more than 50 labor hours to fabricate.

See Appendix D for details of product objectives.


17

DESIGN

DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Traditionally, pressure vessels are constructed from steel cylinders with caps on each

end. However, other shapes and materials are available for consideration.

Pressure vessels may be constructed to any shape which forms an enclosure to retain a

fluid. Vessels may be shaped to fit irregular cavities and utilize limited available space.

However, corners and complex shapes are most often avoided in vessel design. Corners

provide points and seams for stress concentrations. Square or rectangular shaped vessels are

possible, but corners are rounded to reduce concentrations. Such vessels are limited to the

degree in which they can be safely pressurized when compared to spherical or cylindrical

vessels of similar volume. Complex shapes are difficult to analyze for safe operation, and

they are difficult to construct. Irregular or rectangular vessels can be economical when mass

produced for use in consumer products. Generally, they are poorly suited for industrial

applications, which tend to require custom vessels. Occasionally, industrial vessels of

rectangular shape are built to suit a specific need, such as the vessel pictured in Figure 6.

Although it is possible that a fabrication shop seeking ASME accreditation may need to build

a rectangular or irregularly shaped pressure vessel, the shops would avoid using a rectangular

design whenever possible.

Figure 6 – Rectangular pressure vessel for use in an effluent treatment plant. (11)

Spheres provide the most efficient shape for pressure retention. A spherical vessel can

retain roughly twice the pressure of a cylindrical vessel of the same wall thickness. (9)

However, spherical vessels are relatively rare. This is due to the difficulty of fabricating the

shape. Vessels, such as that depicted in Figure 7, are relatively expensive compared to

cylindrical types of comparable volume.


18

Figure 7 – Spherical pressure vessels for the storage of liquid natural gas. (12)

Composite materials are gaining use in pressure vessel construction. These materials

allow for light-weight vessels with the pressure retention capabilities of their steel

counterparts. Composite pressure vessel are generally employed to save weight within a

system. Typical applications include aerospace, diving, and compressed natural gas (CNG)

transport. Until recently, these vessels have required a metal or plastic liner to provide a base

structure and prevent leakage through micro-cracks in the composite resin matrix. The

composite material is then wrapped around the structure. However, Composite Technology

Incorporated of Lafayette, Colorado has recently fabricated an all-composite, liner-less vessel

for installation in the US Air Forces’ FASTRAC 1 satellite, which is depicted in Figure 8.

(13) Although composite vessels provide weight savings, their construction is extremely

expensive. Typically, small shops seeking ASME accreditation do not have the capital to

produce composite vessels with or without liners.

Figure 8 – Liner-less composite pressure vessel for FASTRAC 1 satellite. (13)

The design of composite vessels was explored using SolidWorks design software.

Figure 9 illustrates the software’s ability to render carbon fiber texture on parts.


19

Figure 9 – SolidWorks rendering of composite pressure vessel.

SolidWorks was also used to explore the design of spherical vessels. The vessel

depicted in Figure 10 is comprised of eight sections. Four sections are joined to produce a

hemisphere, and two hemispheres are joined to produce a sphere. Large spherical vessels,

such as those shown in Figure 7, are constructed by joined sections. However, this is done

only when necessary because the complex shape of each section is difficult to fabricate.

Figure 10 – SolidWorks rendering of a spherical vessel produced from sections.

Hemispherical shapes, such as that in Figure 11, are available for use as pressure heads

from process piping and pressure vessel suppliers. These components are custom fabricated

and typically produced from sand casting or forging. They are generally very heavy and

thick. Their typical applications are very high pressure vessels of great size. Two such

hemispheres could be joined to produce a pressure vessel as depicted in Figure 12. However,

the size, weight, and cost of these components make them impractical for use in a

demonstration pressure vessel.


20

Figure 11 – Hemispherical head cap. (14)

Figure 12 –Hemispherical caps joined to produce a pressure vessel.

Fabrication shops seeking accreditation in ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, will

typically construct their demonstration vessels from steel pipe, pipe caps, and fittings. These

materials are common in fabrication shop operations, and they are readily available. If the

demonstration vessel will be used in an industrial application, the application dictates the

design of the vessel. However, if the vessel will only be used for accreditation, the design

reflects the shop’s current work-scope. Often, demonstration pressure vessels are designed

and constructed to utilize materials already on hand.


21

DESIGN SELECTION

Specialty Piping Corporation (SPC), of Davisville, West Virginia, specified

requirements for a demonstrator pressure vessel design. SPC serves the Mid-Ohio Valley

area as a general construction contractor. Their listed contracting specialties include

mechanical, structural, architectural, pipe fabrication, civil, plumbing, electrical, and

excavation. (15) The company currently holds ASME “U” and “PP” stamps, which indicates

their qualifications for Section VIII division 1 pressure vessels and pressure piping. The “U”

stamp is accompanied by a “W” designator to indicate the certification is for vessels

fabricated by welding. This pressure vessel design and Joint Review will maintain their

ASME “U” stamp with “W” designator.

The vessel is a demonstration vessel, but it will be designed as a decanter. A decanter is

a vessel which holds the decantation of a liquid. Decantation is the process of separating

sediment from a liquid by removing a top layer of liquid after the sediment settles. This tank

holds the decanted fluid, but it does not separate the fluid from the sediment.

The specified design temperature is 300°F, and the design pressure is 50 pounds per

square inch. The company would like to utilize excess steel piping located at their facility.

At this point, it is necessary to rule out composite materials for the design of the vessel.

Specialty piping does not have the ability to construct composite vessels, and their work-

scope and experience favors steel components. Additionally, spherical shapes can be ruled

out as well. The company wants a small vessel to demonstrate their fabrication and quality

control systems. A spherical pressure vessel consisting of segments would prove difficult to

produce, especially on a small scale. Two joined hemispheres may not be appropriate to

satisfy the AI and Joint Review examiner of the shop’s quality control system. Furthermore,

the hemispherical vessel halves would be expensive to procure. A cylindrical design is most

appropriate for this application. SPC is skilled and knowledgeable in fabricating vessels in

this manner, and it will satisfy the AI and review board.

The design was dictated by the ASME approved material already on hand at SPC. The

vessel will have a conventional arrangement. Its basis will be a cylindrical shell, and the

shell will be closed at both ends by semi-elliptical end-caps. Two nozzles will be affixed to

the heads, one at each end. One will serve as an inlet port, and one will serve as an outlet

port. Provisions for a data plate are required, but an actual data plate is not required.

Various sizes of seamless steel pipe were in stock at the shop. This material is commonly

used to produce pressurized piping systems for SPC’s customers. Additionally, semi-

elliptical pipe heads and fittings were available in various sizes at the shop. A six inch

diameter nominal pipe size was selected to form the vessel’s shell. A shell length of two feet

was specified to provide a compact a size, but allow the vessel enough area to dissipate heat

during welding processes. The compact size allows the vessel to be moved and oriented by

one technician during fabrication. This decreases the labor costs required to build the vessel.

Semi-elliptical heads were selected to provide pressure retention efficiency, and they were

sized to match the shell. Semi-elliptical heads produce less pressure concentrations than flat

or torispherical heads, but they are not as expensive as hemispherical or conical heads.


22

Additionally, they were available at the shop. Threaded fittings used as nozzles permits easy

installation to an exterior system.

A proof of design statement is available in Appendix G. This states the criteria on which

the design of the vessel will be judged.

SHELL

The shell serves as the basis of the pressure vessel. Its dimensions determine the size of

the heads, the volume of the vessel, and much of its ability to retain pressure. The shell’s

diameter must be large enough to facilitate welding, and allow the AI unrestricted access

during in-process weld inspections. Furthermore, the shell’s diameter coupled with its length

must provide sufficient volume to hold decanted fluid. Costs increase as shell diameters

increase. Therefore, it is important to design the shell with a diameter that is large enough to

serve as a decanter, plus facilitate fabrication and inspection. However, it should be no larger

than necessary.

The shell’s material composition and wall thickness determine its ability to retain

pressure without the risk of rupture. The shell must not only be strong, but it must also be

thick enough to retain sufficient strength after a layer of corrosion has formed within it. The

wall thickness must not be so great as to needlessly reduce the interior volume of the vessel.

Furthermore, an unnecessarily thick wall requires unnecessary grinding and welding to join

the other components. Shell design or selection requires a balance of factors. For this case,

it is desirable to choose an appropriate shell size, select mating components, and analyze

each of them to determine the safety of the vessel. Prefabricated steel pipe performs well as

pressure vessel shells, and commercially available pipe sizes are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 – Pipe sizes available for use as shell. (16)


23

SPC indicated that the vessel should weigh less than 70 pounds, and be small enough for

handling by one person. This would allow the vessel or its components to be moved easily

within their shop. SPC also indicated that several pipe sizes were available to construct the

vessel. These included schedule 40 nominal inch sizes 5, 6, 8, 10 and larger. The larger

sizes were eliminated from consideration due to their cost and the costs associated with

welding large diameter pipe. Additionally, larger sizes would produce a vessel heavier than

100 pounds and require more than one person to handle. Five inch nominal pipe was also

eliminated due SPC’s lack of 5 inch semi-elliptical end caps to which the shell would mate.

Six inch nominal diameter schedule 40 pipe was selected, because it is small enough to

form the structure of a compact vessel. SPC had both the pipe and its end-caps on hand. The

length of the shell was sized for handling by one person. The pipe weighs slightly less than

20 pounds per foot of length. Two feet would produce a shell of 40 pounds and leave 30

pounds for the heads, nozzles, fittings and bracket. One foot of length would produce a

compact vessel, but the vessel would only have one and a half gallons of capacity.

Additionally, welding is likely to be complicated by such a small shell due to the lack of

surface area to dissipate heat. This may cause the components to warp. A 36 inch shell

would weigh nearly 60 pounds. This would only leave 10 pounds for the other components,

and it may produce an overweight condition. 24 inches was stipulated to provide for a

compact vessel with minimal weight, but supply sufficient volume for a decanter and allow

adequate surface area for heat dissipation during welding. A vessel formed from six inch

nominal diameter pipe of 24 inches in length suits both SPC’s and the AI’s needs for the joint

review.

HEADS

Common types of cylindrical pressure vessel heads include semi-elliptical heads,

torispherical (dished) heads, conical heads, flat heads and hemispherical heads.

Flat heads are useful in pressure vessel applications where pressures are not exceedingly

high. They are often used on large vessels to minimize length when positioned horizontally,

or minimize height when the vessel is positioned vertically. The flat head design is

employed when space is a concern at the ends of the vessel. A vertical vessel may employ

this head to provide clearance between the vessel and a ceiling or overhead equipment. In

some applications, brackets or feet are welded directly to the lower head of a vertically

oriented pressure vessel. This aids stability when the vessel is rested directly on the head.

Flat heads are limited in their ability to retain pressure by the 90° transition between vertical

and horizontal surfaces, as seen in Figure 13. This transition is an area of stress

concentration. Increasing the radius of the transition reduces the stress concentrations, but

increasing the radius also increases the head’s height. This negates the space saving attribute

of the flat head.


24

Figure 13 – Flat head. (17)

Torispherical heads are comprised of a domed (or dished) section of a fixed radius, and a

flange, or knuckle, for fitment to a shell. The dome is relatively shallow, and it drastically

transitions to the knuckle as can be seen in Figure 14. This transition produces an area of

potential stress concentration for a pressurized vessel. For like sizes, thicknesses and

pressures, the torispherical head is better for pressure retention than flat heads.

Figure 14 – Torispherical head. (17)

Semi-elliptical (2:1) heads, as illustrated in Figure 15, are deeper than torispherical

heads, so they are more difficult to form. They are often referred to as 2:1 or “two to one”

heads. This is because the depth of the ellipse is roughly half of the head’s radius. When

compared to dished heads, the increased radius of the head permits a smoother transition

from the flange to the domed section. This reduces possible stress concentrations and allows

for a greater pressure retention.

Figure 15 – Semi-elliptical head. (17)

Hemispherical heads provide the best pressure retention ability amongst heads of the

same wall thickness. The shape provides the greatest surface area and the best distribution of

pressure for any size of vessel or thickness of wall. Unlike the heads discussed previously,

there is no transition between vertical and horizontal elements of the head, because it is

comprised of one surface, as seen in Figure 16. Hemispherical heads are more expensive

than other types due to their material requirements and relative difficulty to form. These

heads also require more space at the ends of the vessel.


25

Figure 16 – Hemispherical head. (18)

Conical heads provide pressure retention attributes similar to those of dished heads.

Their areas of stress concentration are at the transitions between surfaces, but increasing radii

of transitions or decreasing the angles between the sides of the conical walls (α in Figure 17)

decreases stress concentrations. Conical heads have a greater height per diameter than types

discussed previously, so they are employed when needed. They are used for specialized

applications in vertical vessels. A conical head may be positioned at the top of a vertical

vessel to trap gasses or vapors, such as in distillation tanks. Conical heads may be used at the

bottom of a vertical tank to trap particulate, such as in brewery mash tanks.

Figure 17 – Conical head. (17)

Conical heads are not needed for Specialty Piping’s demonstration vessel. It is assumed

the decanter will hold decanted fluid, not trap particulate. Hemispherical heads are ruled out

as well. The added size and cost is not warranted. It is desirable to avoid the stress

concentrations prevalent in flat and torispherical heads. Semi-elliptical heads are preferred

over the other two remaining types due to their pressure retention capabilities. They are a

common fitting which SPC stocks in bulk.

NOZZLES

Nozzles connect pressure vessels to the systems which they service. This task can be

achieved using a variety of methods. Pipes and pipe fittings are the most common

connections. Typically, they are either threaded or flanged to provide a means with which to

connect to a system without the leakage of fluid between the system and its surroundings.

Specialty Piping has indicated the need for the nozzle to be a 1 inch 3000 pound-rated

threaded coupling as pictured in Figure 18. SPC commonly uses this type of fitting and it is

readily available. This fitting, used as a nozzle, allows the vessel to be installed to a system

with the use of standard 1 inch pipe. The couplings can be welded directly into a port cut

either in the shell or in the heads of the vessel. For this application, the customer calls for the


26

nozzles to be installed at opposing ends of the vessel. This requires the nozzles to be welded

into cavities cut into the apex of each head.

Figure 18 – One inch, 3000 lb.-rated, threaded coupling.


27

WELDS

Considerations for weld design include accessibility, penetration, strength, and economy.

Accessibility ensures that the welder has access to the joint, which provides her or him with

the ability to join the components. Penetration ensures that a bond is formed through the

entire thickness of the joining components. Full penetration prevents irregularities in the

material. For pressure vessels, irregularities produce stress concentrations, and stress

concentrations weaken the vessel. Economy is considered for both the sake of the fabrication

shop operator and the quality of the product. Fabrication shop operators prefer to spend less

money on frequently used supplies such as weld media, and they prefer not to spend money

on labor rates for unnecessary welding. Furthermore, excessive welding increases the

possibility of imperfections in the system and detracts from the product’s appearance.

However, it is necessary to design a welded joint strong enough to fulfil its function. These

considerations require balance.

The size of the vessel dictates that welding can only be performed from the outside.

Therefore, it is necessary to select weld designs that deliver full penetration from the exterior

of the vessel. Butt-welds are acceptable for joining vessel heads to shells. (6) (UW-13).

However, a square butt joint is not acceptable for this application, because such joints do not

have the penetration to bond the metal entirely through the thickness of the vessel wall.

Single beveled butt-joints require shallow angled cuts from one side to achieve full

penetration. Such shallow angled cuts require excessive part preparation and weld media.

Therefore, it is practical to utilize a single-V butt-joint or a single-U butt-joint to form the

seam. These joints provide full penetration, but they require the removal of parent metal.

This necessitates the use of additional weld media to fill the space left from the removed

metal. Single-V joints are easier to produce than single-U joints, because the V shape

requires the components on both sides of the joint to receive a simple fillet as can be seen in

Figure 19. The U shape requires more complex cutting. The single-V butt weld benefits

from a convex crown over the exterior of the weld. This minimizes internal stresses which

form as the metal and weld media cool. This type of welded joint is selected to join the shell

and heads of the vessel.

Figure 19 – Single-V butt-joint. (19)

The head to nozzle joints require a different weld design, because the parts do not mate

in the same manner. Instead the goal is to affix a cylinder, the nozzle, into a hole at the apex

of a dome shape, the head. Only material removal from the head will permit access to the

root of the weld. The minimum amount of material should be removed to prevent elongating

the cavities which accept the nozzles. Additionally, minimizing material removal minimizes

weld material required to fill the space left by beveling. This joint requires beveling for full

penetration of the root welds, but the bevel provides limited access to the joint for the welder.

Fortunately, the welder can approach the joints directly from the front and rear of the vessel


28

to improve access. Additional strengthening for the joint is applied through a fillet weld,

which is positioned over the root welds at the base of the nozzle, as depicted in Figure 20.

Information on welded connections to pressure vessels can be found in paragraphs UW-15,

UW-16, and UW-18 of the ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 1. (6)

Figure 20 – Beveled weld with strengthening fillet. (20)

The welds to affix the bracket are specified as two sided fillet welds. The welds are 1

inch long and spaced at five inch intervals. The C-channel bracket makes irregular angles to

the surface of the cylindrical shell. Fillet welds can bridge enough space between the shell

and the bracket to fill around the shallow penetrations at the root of the welds. A two sided

approach improves strength. The bracket is 7.5 inches long, and the welds are spaced at 5

inch intervals. This permits the welds to be laid without reaching into the space between the

bracket and the shell. The four, one inch welds provide enough strength to affix the bracket

to the shell.


29

ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS

ASME requires the application of data plates to all pressure vessels applied to industrial

service. This includes demonstration pressure vessels applied to industry, but it does not

include demonstration vessels that are not put into service in industry. In the case that this

vessel were to be applied to industry, its data plate would display the ASME logo, the

certifying authority (National Board of Inspectors), the name of the fabrication firm

(Specialty Piping Corporation), the firm’s location (Davisville, WV), the maximum

allowable working pressure at maximum temperature (50 psi at 300°F), the maximum

operating pressure at minimum temperature (50 psi at -20°F), the manufacturer’s serial

number, and the year of fabrication (2013). The data plate would also contain the “U” and

“W” symbols to indicate the vessel has been fabricated under ASME BPVC for pressure

vessel construction by welding fabrication.

This vessel will not be applied to industry. Instead, it will be tested and displayed as a

demonstrator. A data plate is desirable to emulate a vessel applied to industry. However,

ASME compliance markings and a corresponding NBIC registration are expensive and

unnecessary. Therefore, the data plate can include all of the elements listed above except for

ASME or NBIC symbols and markings. The data plate is also to contain the phrase “Not an

ASME or NBIC data plate.” This indicates that the vessel is not registered as an industrial

service vessel and should not be used as such. This is intended to prevent legal

complications or confusion concerning this vessel’s use. This vessel’s purpose is to gain

accreditation, and industrial use requires registration.

The data plate mounts to the bracket, which is welded to the vessel. Rivets or adhesive

fix the data plate to the bracket. C-channel provides the material for the bracket. The

channel is available in various sizes and it can be cut to length to accommodate the data

plate. The runners, or legs, of the channel can be welded to the outer surface of the shell.

The back of the channel provides a flat surface for mounting the bracket.

Additional components are required for the vessel to retain pressure and to control fluid

flow into and out of the vessel. Ball valves are easy to use, inexpensive and capable of

retaining the required pressure. The size of the valves are matched to the size of the nozzles.

The pressure retaining capabilities of the valves are verifiable using the valve manufacturer’s

data sheet. (21)

It is necessary to measure the pressure within the vessel, and gauges are readily

available. It is desirable to select a gauge with a range which includes the operating and

design pressures plus 50 to 100% to read over pressurized conditions. Gauges should be easy

to read. When possible, select a gauge in which the operating pressure is at the middle of the

range. This provides an easy to recognize visual condition in which the needle points up

when the vessel is retaining its operating pressure. The gauge’s pressure rating is indicated

on its packaging and dial face.

Pipe nipples and fittings are required to mate the valves and gauge to the pressure vessel.

The plumbing nipples are rated at 700 psi (22), and the pressure gauge adapter and tee are


30

both rated at 300 psi at design temperature. (23) (24) All prefabricated components are rated

to pressures well above the design pressure.

Vessel inlet and outlet fitting arrangements are pictured in Figures 21 and 22. These

components are available for minimal cost at most local hardware stores. In this case, their

pressure ratings are well above the design pressure of the vessel.

Figure 21 – Gauge, ball valve and fittings for outlet nozzle.

Figure 22 – Ball valve and fitting for inlet nozzle.


31

FINAL DESIGN

The final design incorporates a shell made from schedule 40 pipe with a six-inch

nominal diameter and a length of 24 inches. The shell is capped at the ends with two semi-

ellipsoidal heads, which provide pressure retention strength with economy of both size and

cost. Nozzles are mounted at the center of each head to provide connections to an exterior

system, and C-channel is used to form a flat bracket for mounting a data-plate. The shell’s

dimensions determine the overall size and volume of the vessel. The size is a benefit to the

fabrication shop due to the reduced material and labor costs of fabricating a compact vessel.

The volume has little effect on the fabrication shop’s desired accreditation, so the volume of

roughly three and one-half liters is adequate. Figure 23 is the shop drawing supplied to SPC

for fabrication of the vessel, and Figure 24 is a solid rendering of the components which they

joined to form the vessel.

Figure 23 – Decanter pressure vessel construction drawing.


32

Figure 24 – Components welded by SPC.

Figure 25 is a solid rendering of the vessel complete with valves, a gauge, couplings, and

the fittings required to link the components. Figure 26 is an assembly view of the vessel with

fittings.

Figure 25 – Rendering of assembled vessel.

Figure 26 – Exploded view of vessel.

See appendix H for Component drawings and illustrated bill of materials.


33

PRESSURE LOADING ANALYSIS

ASME ANALYSIS

ASME’s design analysis system is complex. It has been constructed and adapted over

many years to reflect vessel design, construction and use in industry. The calculations

include multipliers such as joint efficiencies. Joint efficiencies are factors relating the

confidence a designer, fabricator, customer or examiner may have in the joints of a

prefabricated component or a newly constructed joint. A joint that has received a full

radiographic inspection without the detection of defect can be assigned an efficiency of one.

Joints which have receive a spot inspection without the detection of defect receive a joint

efficiency factor of 0.85. Joints which have not been inspected, but have been fabricated by

competent and certified firms or individuals are assigned joint efficiencies of 0.7. An

efficiency of 0.85 is assigned to the seamless steel pipe which forms this pressure vessel’s

shell with the knowledge that the pipe has been supplied from a reputable and certified

manufacturer, and samples of the pipe have been radiographically inspected. ASME takes

such factors into account in order to be safe-sided.

In ASME Code, the design thickness is the smallest acceptable thickness of a pressure

vessel component. The wall thickness of the pipe used to form the shell of the vessel is over

three times greater than the calculated design thickness. The actual thickness of the head is

three and one-half times the design thickness of the head. The nozzle is the weakest

component of the vessel with an actual thickness of two times its design thickness. The

vessel is sufficiently strong enough to retain 50 psi of pressure. The selections of shell,

heads, nozzles and welds are acceptable under the standards set forth by the ASME Boiler

and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section VIII Division 1. (6)

Pressure retention capabilities of the vessel components were calculated following

their selection, and their pressure retention capabilities are compared in Figure 27. The

ASME design thickness formulas were algebraically rearranged to yield the maximum

allowable pressure for each component given their material strengths, dimensions and joint

efficiencies. The shell proved to be the pressure retention limiting component of the vessel.

It can safely retain just under seven-hundred pounds per square inch of pressure. The

tangential stress around the circumference of the shell is the likely point of failure if the

vessel is over-pressurized to 700 pounds per square inch. These calculations assumed

maximum loss of material due to corrosion by incorporating the design corrosion allowance.

However, these calculations do not incorporate the possibility of imperfections in the welds

which join the components. Additionally, these calculations do not consider the pressure

retention abilities of the fittings, valves, and gauges required to monitor and control the flow

of fluid into and out of the vessel. Even though the smallest pressure retention component

value was greater than the rated pressure of the vessel, the design pressure of 50 pounds per

square inch at 300°F should not be exceeded.


34

Figure 27 – Pressure Retention Capabilities of Welded Components.

Reference values for allowable material stresses are available in Appendix I. Vessel

weight, capacity, design thickness and component pressure retention capability calculations

are available in Appendix J. (7)


35

SUPPLEMENTARY ANALYSIS

A supplementary analysis of the vessel shell was conducted. The secondary analysis

was performed using equations derived in texts regarding machine elements. (25) The

additional analysis presents a second tool for comparison against ASME vessel design code

calculations.

This method of shell analysis produces a map of internal stresses within the shell of the

vessel. Figure 28 illustrates that tangential stresses are greatest at the interior surface of the

shell, and that the radial stresses are most negative at this point. A negative radial stress

indicates a state of radial compression. The tangential stresses decrease slightly toward the

exterior of the vessel. The radial stresses grow less negative toward the exterior of the vessel

until there is a radial stress value of zero at the exterior surface of the vessel.

Figure 28 – Plot of interior stresses within shell.

The supplementary analysis has produced low values for compressive radial stresses and

relatively low values for circumferential tensile stresses. The highest value for tensile stress

obtained from this method is 567 pounds per square inch. This is well below the steel’s

allowable stress of 14,600 pounds per square inch at design temperature.

Appendix K contains the stress calculations used in this supplementary analysis.

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

3.0325 3.0825 3.1325 3.1825 3.2325 3.2825

Str

ess

(lb/i

n2)

Distance from shell centerline (in)

Stress within Shell

Radial Stress Tangential Stress


36

COMPARING ANALYSES

Comparing the ASME analysis with the supplementary analysis requires they provide

values for the same variable. The ASME analysis for circumferential stress was arranged to

yield values for stress.

The circumferential stress values for the analysis methods differ by 17%. The reason

for the difference is that the ASME equation is a guideline for the design of a vessel. It is

meant to deliver safe sided results. The joint efficiency, E, is the code equation’s factor of

safety. Replacing the design joint efficiency of 0.85 with the ideal joint efficiency of 1

produces a circumferential stress value of one percent of the supplemental analysis.

The supplementary analysis supports the ASME analysis without the inclusion of the

joint efficiencies. Both indicate that the maximum circumferential stress within the shell of

the loaded pressure vessel is four percent of the maximum allowable stress of 14,600 pounds

per square inch.

The calculation comparisons are available in appendix L.


37

FABRICATION, JOINT REVIEW & TESTING

FABRICATION

Fabrication of the vessel was performed by the Specialty Piping Corporation of

Davisville, West Virginia. The construction of the vessel served as a vehicle to demonstrate

their material control, quality control, welding and fabrication procedures for their Joint

Review on Tuesday, December 19, 2013. Some procedures were selected as critical

inspection processes by the AI. These procedures were witnessed by the AI to assure that

they adhered to ASME code and the shop’s quality control manual.

Material selection and preparation commenced on Tuesday, December 10, 2013.

Material for the vessel’s shell, heads and nozzles were removed from SPC’s stock and

segregated in an area specified for the vessel. Documentation on file at the fabrication shop

included the material purchase orders, material receiving reports, and material transfer

reports. This documentation included the points of origin of the materials, as well as the

materials’ specifications and grades. This information was then transferred to a document

called a traveler. A traveler is a document originated by the fabrication shop. It includes a

list of welds, hold points (for AI inspection or observation), job number, drawing number,

customer, and test requirements. Each fabrication procedure is accompanied by a space in

which a qualified technician may sign for her or his work. After completion of the vessel,

the traveler is retained on file by the fabrication shop for a minimum of 3 years. Fabrication

commenced after the required materials had been gathered and the traveler had been

prepared.

Fabrication was performed by SPC’s personnel. The personnel are certified under

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) Section IX – Brazing and Welding

Qualifications. The components were prepared for assembly by cleaning and grinding of the

mating surfaces. This formed the angles between mating components necessary to achieve

full weld penetrations and conformance to design drawings. After surface preparations, the

components were tack-welded to form the shape of the vessel. This allowed the AI to assure

the fit conformed to alignment tolerances stipulated in ASME BPVC. After the AI was

satisfied with the alignment of the components, he gave permission to SPC personnel to

perform the nozzle to head weld at one end of the vessel. Additionally, permission was given

to complete half of the shell to head joint at one end of the vessel. This partial welding

permitted the AI and NBIC examiner to inspect both sides of the welded joints during the

Joint Review.

The remaining seam welds were performed following the Joint Review on December 19.

The welding was completed by the first week of January 2014 following 2 weeks of reduced

production at SPC due to the holiday season. Figures 29 and 30 present the vessel following

the completion of welding.


38

Figure 29 – Pressure vessel after completion of welding.

Figure 30 – Alternate view of pressure vessel with all welds complete.

Figure 31 presents Specialty Piping’s fabrication shop in Davisville, West Virginia, and

figure 32 presents an example a process piping assembly prepared at their shop.

Figure 31 – Specialty Piping Corporation’s fabrication shop.

Figure 32 – Example of a Specialty Piping Corporation process piping project.


39

Additional components were applied to the pressure vessel to permit attachment of

the vessel to a pressurized system. These components included valves, a gauge, couplings,

and the fittings required to mate adjacent parts as pictured in Figure 33. Threaded pipe

fittings received polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tape to lubricate the threads, so they may be

turned more easily to the point of plastic deformation. This provides an effective seal. The

fittings, valves and gauge were installed using specialized pipe and standard wrenches.

Figure 33 – Ball valve, gauge, and fittings connections using PTFE tape.

Following pressure testing, paint was applied to the vessel. A high temperature

spray-can paint was selected from Rustoleum. Black was selected for the base color to hide

discoloration in a dirty or sooty environment. White was selected for the lettering due to its

contrast with the black body of the vessel. As can be seen in Figure 34, the lettering displays

the maximum pressure rating at the maximum temperature to provide a clear indication of the

limits of the vessel. This acts in conjunction with the operating range specified on the data

plate. Stenciling reading, “University of Cincinnati” is applied in red to the back side of the

vessel to prepare the vessel for public display as pictured in Figure 35.

Figure 34 – Maximum pressure and maximum temperature indicated in large lettering.


40

Figure 35 – Included for public display at the University of Cincinnati.

This vessel will not be applied to industry. Instead, it will be tested and displayed as a

demonstrator. However, a data plate is desirable to emulate a vessel applied to industry.

Therefore, the data plate includes the manufacturer name, the firm’s location, the maximum

allowable working pressure at maximum temperature, the maximum operating pressure at

minimum temperature, the manufacturer’s serial number, and the year of fabrication. ASME

compliance markings and a corresponding NBIC registration are expensive and unnecessary,

so this data plate states, “Not an ASME or NBIC data plate.” This vessel’s purpose is to gain

accreditation, and industrial use requires registration. The plate had been cut from a sheet of

0.100 stainless steel. The lettering pictured in Figure 36 was cut into the plate using a Jet

350017 milling machine. The lettering was enhanced using black acrylic hobby paint to

accentuate the lettering as can be seen in Figure 37.

Figure 36 – Data plate with machined lettering.


41

Figure 37 – Data plate lettering accentuated with hobby paint.

The data plate was applied following painting. Originally, the data plate was to be

affixed with four solid rivets, one at each corner. However, the rivets proved difficult to

deform at the buck-tail due to the small space between the data plate bracket and the shell.

This area did not have sufficient clearance to fit a bucking bar to deform the rivets, so JB

Weld’s two part epoxy high temperature adhesive was used instead. This adhesive has a

rated strength of 3,960 psi when cured, and it can withstand temperatures of 550°F. Use of

this bonding agent requires that mating surfaces be prepared by paint removal and cleaning

before the application of the adhesive. Surface preparation on the data plate bracket is

pictured in Figure 38.

Figure 38 – Prepared data plate adhesion surface.

Vessel fabrication was completed on Monday, March 17, 2014. The front view is

pictured in Figure 39, and the rear view is pictured in Figure 40.


42

Figure 39 – Completed Vessel (front).

Figure 40 – Completed Vessel (rear).

An illustrated bill of materials is in Appendix H, and a complete list of components is

available in the bill of materials in Appendix F. Appendix H illustrates the assembled

components, and Appendix F lists these components plus all consumable materials used on

the vessel. The consumable materials include weld media, paints, sealants and adhesives.


43

JOINT REVIEW

Specialty Piping Corporation’s triennial Joint Review occurred on Thursday, December

19, 2013. Attendees included:

Quality Control Manager of Specialty Piping Corporation (SPC)

Examiner from The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors (NBIC)

Code Services Supervisor from Hartford Steam & Boiler (HSB) Global Standards

Authorized Inspector from HSB Global Standards

Senior Engineer from Southport Services (Specialty Piping’s engineering services contractor)

Engineering Assistant for Southport Services

ASME provides a checklist for applicants to complete before Joint Review. The

checklist summarizes the requirements of applicant shops, and serves as a guide for the Joint

Review process. (5) Common practice amongst ASME accredited shops is to modify the

checklist to produce a list customized to the specific shop and its work scope. Such a

checklist was used by SPC to prepare for the Joint Review. See Appendix M for an example

of a modified checklist. (26)

The Joint Review was presided over by the examiner from the National Board of Boiler

and Pressure Vessel Inspectors. The proceedings began with introductions, roll call, and a

brief preview of the planned sequence of the review.

The shop’s quality control manual was reviewed to assure clarity and adherence to the

latest standards of ASME’s BPVC. The examiner from NBIC suggested revisions to the

wording of SPC’s quality manual to improve its perceptibility. Unnecessary wording was

recommended for deletion. Required changes were specified to conform to the latest

revisions of the code. First, ASME is changing the schedule in which the BPVC is issued.

Previously, a new version of the BPVC was issued every three years, with addenda issued

every year between versions. Starting in 2014, ASME will issue a new version of the code

every 2 years with no addenda between versions. Another change to ASME code involves

changes to the stamping system on code compliant vessels. Previously, ASME compliant

equipment was marked with the letters ASME surrounded by a clover-like symbol and a

designator located below it, such as in the example depicted below (Figure 41). The “U”

designator indicates a high pressure vessel.

Figure 41 – Former ASME marking system example. (6)


44

As shown in Figure 42, ASME’s new equipment marking system will have the

designator surrounded by the clover-like symbol for simplicity.

Figure 42 – New ASME marking system example. (1)

Revisions to the QC manual were recommended to clarify welder requirements

regarding weld marking. ASME code requires that each weld on a vessel be signed for by

the performing welder on the traveler. According to the code, marks made by the welder on

the vessel, adjacent to the applicable welds, are optional. SPC requires that their welders

mark each of their welds on the vessel. One weld mark is acceptable if the only one welder

worked on the vessel. Specialty Piping acknowledged their intention to continue their vessel

weld marking practices, even though they exceed code requirements.

SPC’s Quality Control manual required revisions regarding subcontractors. Firms or

individuals contracted by the shop for non-destructive inspections are required to follow

ASME code inspection standards, and firms or individuals contracted to calibrate SPC’s

equipment must abide by ASME’s calibration standards. Subcontracted firms and

individuals require current certifications at the time of their service for SPC, and this is to be

annotated per the QC manual.

The demonstrator vessel’s design and calculations were then reviewed to assure

compliance to code. One discrepancy in the code calculations was discussed during the Joint

Review. The discrepancy concerned nozzle thickness calculations. To determine the

required wall thickness of the nozzles, the nozzle is treated as a piece of straight seamless

pipe. Once the required thickness of the straight seamless pipe is determined, equivalent

fittings can be selected from ASME/ANSI table B16.11. The initial calculation for the

required nozzle thickness used the maximum allowable material stress value for the schedule

80 pipe equivalent of the forged nozzle. The maximum allowable material stress value for

the forged steel fitting should have been used. This resulted in an initial required thickness

which was greater than the actual required thickness of the nozzle. The initial calculation

was more conservative than required. The required nozzle thickness was recalculated during

the Joint Review, and all components were determined to be within code requirements.

The welding procedures and practices used to fabricate the demonstration vessel were

examined to assure SPC’s adherence to code and the design drawings. The storage for the

weld media was inspected, and the weld procedure specifications (WPS) used on the vessel

were examined. A WPS is a formal written document describing welding procedures, which

provides direction to the welder for making sound and quality production welds as per the

code requirements. SPC’s applicable WPS’s were on file and removed for examination

during the Joint Review.


45

The vessel had received partial welding before the Joint Review. The heads, nozzles and

bracket had been tac-welded to the shell of the vessel. Seam welds had not been applied.

The AI checked the component alignment and surface preparations in the presence of the

examiner from the NBIC. After they were both satisfied with the work already

accomplished, they gave permission for SPC to perform a seam weld on the vessel. A

certified SPC weld technician applied a portion of the head to shell seam and a complete

nozzle to head seam. These welds adhered to the design and SPC’s WPS for that material

and shape. The joint review continued to review the design calculations while the welds

were accomplished, and returned later for inspection. The partially welded vessel permitted

the AI and examiner to inspect the interior side of the welded joint for complete penetration

at the weld root. They were satisfied with the quality of the welds performed, and they

continued with the joint review.

The Joint Review determined that SPC’s practices regarding pressure vessels

construction adhere to ASME code. This determination was made through the examination

of the shop’s QC manual, welding documentation, and sub-contracting requirements.

Additionally, the shop’s construction of the code compliant vessel design permitted SPC to

demonstrate that its fabrication practices adhere to code. Specialty Piping was permitted to

renew its ASME BPVC credentials with the signature of the examiner from NBIC.


46

TESTING

Preliminary testing of the vessel’s pressure retention capability commenced on the

evening of Sunday, January 26, 2014 at American Muscle Street Rods and Customs in

Loveland, Ohio. It was initially tested at an ambient temperature of 60°F. The vessel’s inlet

coupling was connected to a 100 psig shop air system. The outlet valve of the vessel was

closed and the inlet valve was opened slightly to allow the vessel to receive air pressure. Air

was applied until the vessel’s internal pressure reached 50 psig. At this point, the inlet valve

was closed to trap the pressurized air within the vessel. The vessel was observed in this

pressurized condition for 30 minutes to assure there was no leakage from the vessel, fittings

or valves. The vessel retained pressure for the time interval, and it was determined there was

no leakage.

An attempt was made to test the vessel at its design temperature and pressure. The

vessel was emptied of pressurized air, and then disconnected from the external air source.

Both valves were closed. The exterior surface of the vessel was heated using a propane

torch. Initially, the torch was continually moved over the surface of the vessel to evenly

distribute heat, and the surface temperature of the vessel was monitored using a laser

thermometer. However, the design temperature of 300°F proved difficult to obtain. The

vessel was heated using a propane torch designed for melting plumbing solder. This proved

unable to provide enough heat to sustain the required surface temperature. 300°F could be

reached at localized areas by allowing the torch to linger over one spot, but the temperature

could not be sustained or applied uniformly over the surface of the vessel. During both tests,

the vessel retained pressure as shown in Figure 43. It showed no signs of cracking or fracture

due to stress within the materials. However, the vessel needed to be retested to assure it

could retain design pressure at design temperature.

Figure 43 – Pressure gauge during pressure test.


47

The vessel was tested for a second time on Saturday, March 8, 2014 at the Little

Miami Golf Center (LMGC) in Newtown, Ohio. The grounds maintenance shop of the

facility offered 100 psi shop air and an acetylene torch. The acetylene torch, as pictured in

Figure 44, was able to provide the heat required to obtain and maintain the vessel’s surface

temperature at or above 300°F. Temperature measurement was accomplished with a laser

surface thermometer as can be seen in Figure 45. The vessel was pressurized to 50 psig and

heat was applied using the torch. Continual movement of the torch provided a uniform heat

distribution through the vessel. Fourteen minutes of heating were required to build the heat

on the vessel’s surface to design temperature. Heating continued after the desired

temperature had been obtained to maintain the design temperature. The vessel’s outlet valve

was opened slightly three times during the heating process to maintain the climbing pressure

at its design value. The vessel maintained 50 psig at 300°F for thirty minutes before the test

was deemed successful.

Figure 44 – Vessel heating using an acetylene torch.

Figure 45 – Temperature readings using a laser surface thermometer.


48

SCHEDULE AND BUDGET

SCHEDULE

This undertaking began in September 2013 with research regarding the requirements of

fabrications shops in gaining and maintaining ASME BPVC accreditations. Research lasted

into October, and it produced the basis for a proof of design document. The proof of design

establishes the criteria against which the project is judged.

Following research and the proof of design, design concepts were generated and then

evaluated. Several concepts were eliminated from consideration due to their expense or lack

of applicability to the potential customers’ expected work-scope. The final design concept

was determined to be a conventionally shaped and constructed pressure vessel.

In the beginning of November, Specialty Piping Corporation specified design criteria for

a demonstration pressure vessel. The vessel was to be built to fulfil requirements of their

Joint Review on December 19. A vessel design was generated with the knowledge of what

materials were available to SPC. Then, the design was analyzed according to the rules

presented in ASME BPVC Section VIII, Division 1. Specialty Piping received the design

and analysis calculations on November 25. Material was selected and removed from SPC’s

stock on Tuesday, December 10, 2013, and the initial steps of fabrication started that week.

The Joint Review occurred on December 19, 2013 at SPC’s facility in Davisville, WV.

The review was an all-day process, and it included fabrication procedures on the vessel. The

reviewers were satisfied with the weld processes before all welds were complete, so the

vessel was finalized over the course of the following three weeks. This period included two

shortened work weeks due to holidays.

The vessel was received on Wednesday, January 15, 2014. It was then fitted with inlet

and outlet valves, a pressure gauge, shop air adapters, and the fittings required to mate the

components. The added components prepared the vessel for preliminary testing, which

occurred on January 23, 2014. Final testing occurred on March 8, 2014. The vessel was

pressurized to design pressure at design temperature, and it was able to maintain its pressure

without fracture or signs of excessive stress. The vessel was then prepared for presentation.

This includes painting and attachment of the data plate, which occurred on March 17, 2014.

Appendix E presents the schedule with completion dates, academic submission dates and

intervals.


49

BUDGET

Material costs are divided into two categories. The first contains the costs incurred by

SPC for the vessel components assembled and welded for the purpose of their Joint Review.

The seconds includes the costs of the hardware used to fit the vessel to an external system for

testing and presentation.

SPC provided the shell, heads, nozzles, C-channel and weld media required to produce

the form of the vessel. Additionally, they provided the labor and expertise to weld the

components together. The material costs for the fabrication shop totaled under $200. The

exact amount of weld media required to fabricate the vessel is difficult to determine, but an

estimated cost of $20 is appropriate to cover the cost of one roll of weld media.

The valves, fittings, adapters, tees, gauge, data-plate and paint were not provided by

SPC, but were applied and installed for testing and presentation. These materials are

available at most hardware stores, and their costs are relatively small. The total cost of these

materials is slightly more than $100.

The largest expense associated with earning or maintaining ASME accreditations is the

costs associated with the Joint Review. The AI, Code Services Supervisor, and examiner

each have an associated cost of between $1000 and $1500 a day, and their services are

required for at least two days. One day is for in-process inspections and review of the QC

manual, and the second day is for the Joint Review. Additionally, fees to ASME for

registration and certification may easily reach well over $1000 depending on the stamp and

designators. Joint Review and certification costs range from five to ten thousand dollars.

These costs are incurred by the shop seeking accreditation.

Typical design and calculation services range from $600 to $900 for a demonstration

vessel. The cost varies according to the complexity and size of the required vessel. In this

case, Specialty Piping was not charged for engineering services in exchange for the vessel.

Material costs are presented in Appendix F.


50

CONCLUSION

The ASME BPVC constitutes 13 volumes and totals over 17,000 pages, but fabrication

shops need only be certified in the portions of the code that relate to their work-scopes. This

results in 21 possible certifications which ranges from miniature pressure vessels

construction to nuclear process piping inspection.

The demonstration pressure vessel plays a large role in ASME BPVC certification for

fabrication shops seeking pressure vessel construction accreditation. This certification is

indicated on pressure vessels with a “U” stamp surrounded by a 4 leaf clover symbol. The

demonstration vessel is only one part of a substantial process. To earn accreditation for

pressure vessel construction, a fabricator is required to produce a compliant Quality Control

Manual and demonstrate a Quality Control System. Traceability is required of all materials

used for fabricating ASME compliant equipment, and certifications are required of

fabrication technicians. The demonstration vessel serves as a vehicle to demonstrate these

requirements during a Joint Review, and it is vital to the process.

The primary concern when designing an ASME demonstration vessel is that it is code

compliant, and its compliance is proven with code calculations. Compliance ensures safety,

and other features constitute lesser importance. Mathematical analysis is required of each

pressure retaining component to safely withstand the stresses of applied pressure.

Furthermore, the means by which the components are joined require adherence to code and

mathematical analysis. Therefore, the design of a vessel is accompanied with a calculation

packet, which proves the design’s adherence to code.

Construction of the vessel begins before the Joint Review with an Authorized Inspector

present. The AI reviews the design for code compliance, then reviews the material for

traceability. Hold points are designated in the vessel’s traveler to indicate processes to be

witnessed by the AI and the Joint Review Board. This board includes an examiner from the

National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors. In this case, the vessel components

were tac-welded before the Joint Review, and some seams were completed and inspected

during the Joint Review. The review board was satisfied with the fabricator’s systems before

the vessel was fully welded. The board was convinced that the fabricator’s quality control

and construction practices adhered to code, so the shop was permitted to renew their “U”

stamp with “W” designator certification.

Welding was completed after the Joint Review to test and present the vessel as a

demonstration vessel. Following the completion of welds, the vessel was fitted with

couplings, valves and a gauge. These components facilitated pressure testing to assure the

vessel met its design parameters. The vessel met its design requirements without evidence of

damage due to stress caused by applied pressure. Paint and a data-plate were applied to the

vessel for presentation purposes, because this vessel will not see industrial use. However, if

this vessel were registered and applied to industry, it would meet all American Society of

Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code requirements for a vessel designed at

its specific operating temperature and pressure.


51

The time and expense dedicated to ASME certification ensures that fabrication shops

produce safe pressurized equipment.


52

WORKS CITED 1. ASME. ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code - An International Code. asme.org.

[Online] 2013. [Cited: 08 27, 2013.]

http://files.asme.org/Catalog/Codes/PrintBook/34011.pdf.

2. Smith, Carlisle R. Building you first ASME code vessel, start to finish.

thefabricator.com. [Online] July 16, 2013. [Cited: August 22, 2013.]

http://www.thefabricator.com/article/arcwelding/building-your-first-asme-code-vessel-start-

to-finish.

3. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Guide for ASME Review Teams for

Review of Applicants for ASME Certificates of Authorization (A, M, PP, S, E, V, HV, H,

HLW, H (Cast Iron/Cast Aluminum), UD, UV, UV3, U, UM, U2, U3, RP, T, TD, TV).

asme.org. [Online] August 2011. [Cited: August 26, 2013.]

http://files.asme.org/asmeorg/codes/certifaccred/certification/810.pdf. A1.20-8/11 .

4. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee on Pressure Vessels. 2010 ASME Boiler

& Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII Division 1. New York : American Society of

Mechanical Engineers, 2010. 56-3934.

5. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee on Materials. 2010 ASME Boiler &

Pressure Vessel Code, Section II Part D . New York, NY : American Society of Mechanical

Engineers, 2010. 56-3934.

6. Pressure Vessel Engineering. Design Calcs Sample - Audit Vessel. pveng.com. [Online]

April 5, 2012. [Cited: August 26, 2013.]

http://www.pveng.com/ASME/ASME_Samples/Audit/Audit.php. PVE-5918.

7. Hearn, EJ. Mechanics of Materials 1, An Introduction into the Elastic and Plastic

Deformation of Solids and Structural Materials - 3rd Edition. s.l. : Butterworth-Heinemann,

1997. ISBN 0-7506-3265-8.

8. Mahmud, Arshad. Pressure Vessels Ensure Safety. asme.org. [Online] August 2012.

[Cited: 08 29, 2013.] https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/pressure-

vessels/pressure-vessels-ensure-safety?cm_sp=Pressure%20Vessels-_-

Feataured%20Articles-_-Pressure%20Vessels%20Ensure%20Safety.

9. Ridle, William. ASME Code Pressure Vessels. Medina, August 20, 2013.

10. Didion, Don. Operator of Didion's Mechanical. Bellevue, 9 3, 2013.

11. MID. Rectangular/Square Process Vessels. Thermosetfrp. [Online] MID. [Cited: 12 9,

2013.] http://www.thermosetfrp.com/product1.html.

12. CTCI Machinery Corporation. All Products. [Online] All Products, 2013. [Cited: 12 9,

2013.] http://www.allproducts.com/tami/ctci-kfs/07.html.

13. Composites World. Next Generation Pressure Vessels. [Online] Gardner Business

Media, Inc, 2013. [Cited: 12 10, 2013.] http://www.compositesworld.com/articles/next-

generation-pressure-vessels.

14. Caps & Heads. Act On. [Online] ACT Inc. [Cited: 12 10, 2013.] http://act-

on.ca/acton/Product/Cap%20&%20Head.htm.

15. Home. Specialty Piping Corp. [Online] Kaslo Design. [Cited: 12 10, 2013.]

http://specialtypiping.com/pipefab.htm.

16. Pipe Chart. All Steel Pipe. [Online] 2013. [Cited: 12 10, 2013.]

http://www.allsteelpipe.com/Pipe-Dimensions-Weights-Chart.pdf.

17. Baker Tankhead Incorporated. Tank Heads. Baker Tankhead. [Online] 2013. [Cited:

12 11, 2013.] http://bakertankhead.com/products/tank-heads.htm.


53

18. Head Types. Dished Heads. [Online] Dished Heads, 2011. [Cited: 12 11, 2013.]

http://dishedheads.com.au/documents/1601-Head-Types.

19. Butt Joints. TPUB Integrated Publishing. [Online] TPUB. [Cited: 12 11, 2013.]

http://constructionmanuals.tpub.com/14250/css/14250_51.htm.

20. Unknown. T joint pipe weld. Weldsmith. [Online] [Cited: 12 11, 2013.]

http://weldsmith.co.uk/tech/welding/learn_proc/pipe/stl_SMA_0605/pipe_t.html.

21. Ferguson Enterprises. Figure 410A Brass Body Ball Valves. FNW Valve. [Online] 8

2012. [Cited: 12 11, 2013.]

http://www.fnwvalve.com/FNWValve/assets/images/PDFs/FNW/FNW_Fig.410A.pdf.

22. Home Depot USA. Mueller Global 1 in x 12 in Galvanized Steel Nipple. Home Depot.

[Online] 2013. [Cited: 12 11, 2013.] http://www.homedepot.com/p/Mueller-Global-1-in-x-

12-in-Galvanized-Steel-Nipple-565-120HN/100194453#.UqjDSroo6cw.

23. Shinnecock Hardware. Ace fittings 511-941BG Galvanized Iron Hex Bushing 3/4"

MIP. Hardware to Go. [Online] Dotcomweavers, 2010. [Cited: 12 11, 2013.]

http://www.hardwaretogo.com/product/bushing-hex-galv-34x14.html.

24. —. Mueller Industries 510-754BG Malleable Iron Galvanized Reduc. Hardware to

Go. [Online] Dotcomweavers, 2010. [Cited: 12 11, 2013.]

http://www.hardwaretogo.com/product/redcng-tee-1x1x34galv.html.

25. Spotts, M.F. Design of Machine Elements, 8th Edition. Upper Saddle River : Pearson

Prentice Hall, 2003. 0130489891 .

26. Zoler, Steve. QA Manager. Davisville, WV, 12 19, 2013.

27. Grainger. Coupling, 1 In., Socket Weld. Grainger. [Online] 1994. [Cited: January 20,

2014.] http://www.grainger.com/product/Coupling-1MNX2?functionCode=P2IDP2PCP.

54

APPENDIX A – RESEARCH

Interview with design engineer: William Ridle of Southport Services.

3326 East Smith Rd. Medina, OH 44256 08/20/13

William Ridle has over forty years of engineering experience ranging from automobile

tire production to environmental protection and monitoring equipment. He started

Southport Services in 1986 to provide engineering support to small fabrication shops, and

he has supplied ASME code design packages since 1989.

The primary concern for all pressure vessels is that they are safe. Safety is ensured by

adherence to ASME code. Pressure vessels must be designed within the confines of the

code. The vessels must be constructed of approved and traceable materials. Weld material

must be approved and traceable. Welders must be certified.

Customers provide design conditions for their required pressure vessel, even demonstrator

pressure vessels. These conditions typically include operating pressures, temperatures,

environments, and size requirements. The role of the engineer is to design the appropriate

pressure vessel in accordance with ASME code. The customer, or fabricator, is

responsible for building the pressure vessel with approved materials and certified

personnel. A third party inspector reviews the design and inspects the vessel, during and

after construction, to assure it adheres to code.

Interview with fabrication shop owner Don Didion of Didion’s Mechanical

1027B County Road 308, Bellevue, OH 44811 09/03/13

Don Didion has operated Didion’s Mechanical for 37 years. The business started with the

fabrication of process piping. The company pursued ASME accreditation for pressure

vessels in 1989 and has maintained its accreditations since. Currently, 99% of this

company’s business centers on fabricating pressure vessels, boilers and heat exchangers

within compliance to ASME code. Didion’s Mechanical holds accreditations for Section

VIII, Divisions 1, 2 and 3 of ASME’s Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.

Typical pressure vessels, including demonstrator pressure vessels, must be built to adhere

to Section VIII of ASME’s Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. To ensure adherence;

They must meet ASME Code

Design package must have ASME Code Calculations

The vessel must be accompanied by an in-plant traveler during fabrication

Include fit-up-points for the AI to witness assembly and welding

Typical construction; 1. Shell – body of vessel (often a large diameter schedule 40 pipe).

2. Head – convexed end (often a casting).

3. Caps – disks welded into one end.

4. Nozzles – typically 2, inlet/outlet, often with a relief valve.

Paperwork must be organized and retained for at least 5 years. ASME Accreditation is expensive. Didion’s Mechanical spent $35,000 to maintain

accreditations in 2013.

55

Building you first ASME code vessel, start to finish

This article is a short explanation of the steps required for a fabrication

shop to obtain ASME certification for the construction of pressure

vessels. The steps are as follows:

1. Contact an Authorized Inspection Agency (AI).

2. Investment - typical costs range from $3000 to $5000.

3. Enter into contract with AI for in-process inspections.

4. Design and build vessel using approved and traceable,

materials, weld materials, and welders. Assure design and

design calculations adhere to ASME code. Stop at the assigned

points in the fabrication process to allow the AI representative

to witness critical steps of fabrication.

5. Joint Review – Representatives from the National Board of

Pressure Vessel Inspectors, ASME, the AI agency, the

applicant’s quality program, and the applicant’s management

staff meet to review the design, materials, and welder

certifications.

Issuance of ASME code certifications is conditional on proper design,

fabrication and documentation.

The AI is the key

to completing

this process with

the best

efficiency with

the minimal cost.

The

demonstrator

pressure vessel

must be built to

the same quality

standard as for

any ASME code

vessel.

Typical vessels

have one head,

the main body,

and two fittings. http://www.thefabricator.com/artic

le/arcwelding/building-your-first-

asme-code-vessel-start-to-finish

8/22/13

http://www.thefabricator.com/article/arcwelding/building-your-first-asme-code-vessel-start-to-finish



56

ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code – An International Code

This publication is a 28 page online brochure produced by ASME. It

informs the reader of the benefits of another publication called The

Companion Guide to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 4th

edition. The brochure has brief descriptions of each Section of code,

code symbols, their meanings and reference to material in the

Companion Guide. A short ASME history is included.

Pages 6, 8 & 9

of brochure are

useful.

Companion

Guide is $599

Design Calcs Sample – Audit Vessel This article is a short advertisement for the same design services I will

be offering. It comes from Pressure Vessel Engineering (PVE) of

Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

PVE’s services are described. They provide designs, the design

calculations, and the validations for the calculations to their customers

and ASME auditors. Designs are created in either SolidWorks or

AutoCAD.

This is the 2nd article to

mention the

Hartford Steam

Boiler

Inspection and

Insurance

Company.

Article sites

ASME Boiler &

Pressure Vessel

Accreditation

Guide for ASME

Review of

Applicants for

ASME

Certificates of

Authorization

Article links to

examples of

calculation

sheets and

drawings.

http://www.pveng.com/ASME/ASME_Sa

mples/Audit/Audit.p

hp 8/26/13

http://files.asme.org/Catalog/Codes/PrintBook/34011.pdf

http://www.pveng.com/ASME/ASME_Samples/Audit/Audit.php






57

Guide for ASME Review Teams for Review of Applicants for

ASME Certificates of Authorization (A, M, PP, S, E, V, HV, H,

HLW, H(Cast Iron/Cast Aluminum), UD, UV, UV3, U, UM, U2, U3,

RP, T, TD, TV) This guide is intended to aid both ASME Review Teams and Applicants

for ASME Certificates of Authorization. It is based on the following

portions of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code; Section I,

Section IV, Sections VIII Divisions 1, 2 and 3, Section X, and Section

XII. The Review Demonstration is a process to determine the

effectiveness of the applicant’s Quality Control System (QCS). One

Demonstration Item may be used for multiple Certificates of

Authorization, but additional calculations or documentation must be

included to qualify for the most stringent certifications.

This

publication

contains

ASME’s

Quality

System

Review

Checklist.

Useful

document for

a shop

seeking

ASME Code

Accreditation.

http://files.asme.org/asmeorg/codes/certifaccred/certification/810.p

df 8/26/13

http://files.asme.org/asmeorg/codes/certifaccred/certification/810.pdf



58

Pressure Vessels Ensure Safety

Arshad Mahmud starts this piece with asserting the importance of

pressure vessel safety and its effect on industry, communities and the

public. The history of pressure vessel technology illustrates his

assertions. The author then describes inspection techniques such as

ultrasonic testing. Ultrasonic testing is used to determine the thickness

of metal. International standards are discussed, and the various

international standards are listed. The final section of this piece is

entitled Shape Matters. This section describes common pressure vessel

shapes and their advantages and disadvantages. Spherical pressure

vessels can hold twice the pressure of a cylindrical pressure vessel.

However, spherical vessels are expensive due to difficulty of

manufacture.

Typical pressure vessels designs are:

1. Cylindrical

2. 2:1 semi-elliptical heads or end-caps

3. Can be fabricated from pipe and end-caps.

An economic shape of a 35-cu-ft, 3,600-psi pressure vessel has a

breadth of 36 inches, and a width of 67 in including the 2:1 semi-

elliptical domed end caps.

https://www.asme.org/engin

eering-

topics/articles/pressure-

vessels/pressure-vessels-

ensure-

safety?cm_sp=Pressure%20

Vessels-_-

Feataured%20Articles-_-

Pressure%20Vessels%20Ens

ure%20Safety

https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/pressure-vessels/pressure-vessels-ensure-safety?cm_sp=Pressure%20Vessels-_-Feataured%20Articles-_-Pressure%20Vessels%20Ensure%20Safety










59

APPENDIX B – SURVEY RESULTS

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS

BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE

DEMONSTRATOR PRESSURE VESSEL

CUSTOMER SURVEY

ASME BPVC Demonstrator Pressure Vessels are designed and constructed to certify

fabricating operations as ASME code compliant. The purpose of this survey is to prioritize

the desired features of your ASME BPVC, Section VIII, Division 1 demonstrator pressure

vessel. This survey will be used as a tool to better meet your ASME code design needs.

How important is each feature to you for the design of the demonstrator pressure

vessel?

Please circle the appropriate answer. 1 = low importance 5 = high importance AVG

Safety 1 2 3 4(1) 5(4) N/A 4.8

Code Compliant 1 2 3 4 5(5) N/A 5

Ease of Fabrication 1(1) 2(1) 3(1) 4(1) 5(1) N/A 3

Affordability 1(2) 2(1) 3 4(2) 5 N/A 2.4

How satisfied are you with your last demonstrator pressure vessel design?

Please circle the appropriate answer. 1 = very UNsatisfied 5 = very satisfied

Safety 1 2 3 4 5(5) N/A 5

Code Compliant 1 2 3 4 5(5) N/A 5

Ease of Fabrication 1 2(1) 3(1) 4(2) 5(1) N/A 2.8

Affordability 1 2 3(2) 4(2) 5(1) N/A 3

How much would you be willing to pay for demonstrator pressure vessel design

services?

$500-$600(2) $600-$700(2) $700-$800(1) $800-$900 $900-$1000

Thank you for your time.

60

APPENDIX C – QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD)

Engineering Characteristics Relative

Importance

Design in accordance with ASME Section VIII Division 1 26%

Compliant weld media 25%

Shape 17%

Volume 16%

Welder access to joints 10%

Facilitates authorized inspector’s (AI) activities 6%

Desig

n u

sin

g A

SM

E S

ect

VII

I D

iv 1

Com

plia

nt

weld

ing m

edia

Weld

er

access t

o join

ts

Volu

me

Shape

Facili

tate

s A

uth

orized I

nspecto

r's A

ctivitie

s

Custo

mer

import

ance

Desig

ner's M

ultip

lier

Curr

ent

Satisfa

ction

Pla

nned S

atisfa

ction

Impro

vem

ent

ratio

Modifie

d I

mport

ance

Rela

tive w

eig

ht

Rela

tive w

eig

ht

%

ASME Code Compliant 9 9 3 3 9 3 5 1.1 5 5 1.0 5.5 0.36 36%

Safe 9 9 1 3 3 0 4.8 1.1 5 5 1.0 5.3 0.35 35%

Ease of Fabrication 0 3 9 9 3 3 3 0.9 3.6 3 0.8 2.3 0.15 15%

Cost 9 3 0 9 1 1 2.4 0.9 3 3 1.0 2.2 0.14 14%

Abs. importance 7.67 7.26 2.77 4.74 4.89 1.67 29.0 15.2 1.0 1.0

Rel. importance 0.26 0.25 0.10 0.16 0.17 0.06 1.0

Rel. importance (%) 26 25 10 16 17 6

Christopher RidleASME Demonstrator Pressure Vessel

9 = Strong3 = Moderate1 = Weak

61

APPENDIX D – PRODUCT OBJECTIVES

Objectives

Survey data was used to quantify this list of product objectives. The product objectives

are features required for customer satisfaction, and they are prioritized according to their

percentage weights.

1. ASME Section VIII, Division 1 Compliant 36%

Does the vessel meet or exceed all ASME design code requirements?

2. Safe 35%

Is the vessel able to receive the customers specified pressure load without risk of failure?

3. Ease of Fabrication 15%

Under 1000 pounds

Does the design facilitate the Authorize Inspector’s ability to witness

fabrication?

4. Cost 14%

Under $2000 for materials

Under 50 labor-hours to fabricate

62

APPENDIX E – SCHEDULE AND BUDGET

Table 4 – Schedule for vessel planning, fabrication, testing and presentation.

TASKS Sep

29

-Oct

5O

ct 6

- 1

2

Oct

13

- 1

9

Oct

20

- 2

6

Oct

27

- N

ov

2

No

v 3

- N

ov

9

No

v 1

0 -

16

No

v 1

7 -

23

No

v 2

4 -

30

Dec

1 -

7

Dec

8 -

14

Dec

15

- 2

1

Dec

22

- 2

8

Dec

29

- J

an 4

Jan

5-

Jan

11

Jan

12

- 1

8

Jan

19

- 2

5

Jan

26

- F

eb 1

Feb

2 -

8

Feb

9 -

15

Feb

16

- 2

2

Feb

23

- M

ar 1

Mar

2 -

8

Mar

9 -

15

Mar

16

- 2

2

Mar

23

- 2

9

Mar

30

- A

pr

5

Ap

r 6

- 1

2

Ap

r 1

3-

19

Ap

r 2

0 -

26

Content review (advisor) 9

2

Proof of Design Agreement (advisor) 16

11

Concepts/Selection (advisor) 16

9

Preliminary design 23

13

Analysis 6

23

Final Design 13

25

Bill of Materials 20

12

Design Report to advisor 20

14

Shop Drawings 7

13

Fabriacation

8

Design presentation to faculty 27

23

Preliminary Testing

26

Modification/Changes

22

Final Testing

8

Observe Joint Review 20

19

Demonstration to Advisor 24

3

Tech Expo/Public Display 3

3

Project Presentation to Faculty 7

8

Project report to advisor review before library submission 14

3

Project Report to Library 23

15

Christopher Ridle

ASME Design Code Pressure

Budget

Expense Estimated Cost

Shell $170

Heads $170

Nozzles $80

Welding material $100

Labor $2,000

Electricity $40

Miscellaneous $512

Total $3,072

63

APPENDIX F – BILL OF MATERIALS

Table 5 – Bill of materials with component costs.

Item

Nu

mb

erD

escr

ipti

on

Mat

eria

l/P

art

Nu

mb

erQ

uan

tity

Un

it P

rice

Pri

ce

1Sh

ell

6" S

ched

ule

40, S

A-5

3-B

ER

W c

arbo

n st

eel p

ipe

161

.64

$

61

.64

$

2H

eads

6" S

ched

ule

40, S

A-2

34-W

PB c

arbo

n st

eel c

ap2

39.9

9$

79.9

8$

3C

oup

ling

1" -

300

0 lb

. SA

-105

car

bon

stee

l thr

eade

d H

-co

uplin

g2

7.19

$

14.3

8$

4B

rack

etC

6 X

8.2,

SA

-105

C-c

hann

el, 7

.5L

16.

41$

6.

41$

14W

eld

Med

ia(e

stim

ate)

120

.00

$

20

.00

$

SPC

To

tal

182.

41$

5N

ippl

eN

ippl

e, 1

X4"

galv

aniz

ed -

SKU

412

4558

37.

47$

22

.41

$

6Te

eR

educ

ing

tee,

1X1

X(3/

4)"

gal

vani

zed

SKU

406

6668

1

6.49

$

6.49

$

7D

ata

plat

eC

ode

pla

te (s

teel

)1

2.00

$

2.00

$

8A

dapt

erB

ushi

ng h

ex g

alva

nize

d (3

/4)X

(1/4

)" S

KU 4

0850

801

2.79

$

2.79

$

9V

alve

FNW

BR

S125

G b

rass

bal

l val

ve2

11.9

9$

23.9

8$

10H

ex B

ushi

ngH

ex B

ushi

ng, 1

X1/2

In.,

MN

PT X

FN

PT, 5

P517

23.

38$

6.

76$

11C

oup

ler

Co

uple

r Pl

ug, 1

/4 M

NPT

30E

657

22.

40$

4.

80$

12G

auge

Pres

sure

gau

ge 0

-100

LF

SKU

433

9933

111

.99

$

11

.99

$

15Pa

int

(Fla

t B

lack

)R

usto

leu

m, 2

5246

4, S

KU 5

5755

931

4.96

$

4.96

$

16Pa

int

(Sem

i-gl

oss

Whi

te)

Rus

tole

um

, 252

467,

SKU

5575

598

14.

95$

4.

95$

17Pa

int

(Sem

i Glo

ss R

ed)

Rus

tole

um

, 776

2830

, SKU

557

8207

13.

76$

3.

76$

18Ep

oxy

Adh

esiv

eJB

Wel

d, 8

265S

, B00

06O

1IC

E1

6.37

$

6.37

$

19PT

FE T

ape

Gra

inge

r In

tern

atio

nal 2

1TF4

91

3.36

$

3.36

$

20Pa

int

(Fla

t B

lack

)Ta

miy

a, T

M81

701

12.

50$

2.

50$

T&P

To

tal

107.

12$

TOTA

L2

89

.53

$

SPC Material

CostsTesting & Presentation Costs

Bill

of

Mat

eria

ls

64

APPENDIX G – PROOF OF DESIGN

Proof of Design

Compliance

o Meets ASME BPV Code Section VIII Division 1

Safety o Able to meet design pressure

Ease of Fabrication o Total weight under 1000 pounds

o Weld-points allow access for fabrication observation by Authorized Inspector

Cost

o Under $3000 for components/materials

o Under 50 labor hours to fabricate.

Designer: __________________________________________

Advisor: __________________________________________

65

APPENDIX H – COMPONENT DRAWINGS

Figure 46 – Shell

66

Figure 47 – Head with cut-out for nozzle.

67

Figure 48 – 1 inch, 3000 pound rated H-coupling for use as nozzle.

68

Figure 49 – C-channel for use as data plate bracket.

69

Figure 50 – Data plate.

70

Figure 51 – Exploded view of Specialty Piping fabricated and joined components.

71

Figure 52 – Overall dimensions of vessel with fittings.

72

Figure 53 – Exploded view of vessel with bill of materials.

73

APPENDIX I – MATERIAL REFERENCE VALUES

Table 6 – Material reference values for pressure vessel shell (SA-53). (7)

Table 7 – Material reference values for pressure vessel heads (SA-234). (7)

Addenda 0

Component: SHELL

Material:

Spec No SA-53 Type Grade: E/B

Alloy Design UNS Number: K03005 Class, Condition, Temper: 0

Product Form: Welded Pipe Size Thickness: 0

Limits I Limits III Limits VIII 1 Limits XII

NP = Not Permitted SPT = Supports Only 900 NP 900 650

Exterior Pressure Chart Number: CS-2

Notes: G3, G10, G24, S1, T1, W6

Nominal Composition: Carbon Steel Minimum Tensile Strength: 35000 lb/in2

P Number 1 Group Number 1 Minimum Yield Strength: 35000 lb/in2

At Design Temperature = 300 °F

Temperature (°F): Maximum Allowable Stress: Temperature (°F): Maximum Allowable Stress:

-20 to 100 14600 1200 0

150 14600 1250 0

200 14600 1300 0

250 14600 1350 0

300 14600 ←S value 1400 0

400 14600 1450 0

500 14600 1500 0

600 14600 1550 0

650 14600 1600 0

1650 0

Reference:

ASME Code Section II Part D, Table 1-A

Page number: 10

Line number: 37

1050

1100

1150

Maximum Allowable Stress:

13300

11100

9200

7400

5000

0

0

0

0

0

800

850

900

950

1000

ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code - Section II Pard D, 2010 US Customary Table

1A - Maximum Allowable Stress Values S for Ferrous Materials

Applicablility and Maximum Temperature Limits

Temperature (°F):

700

750

Component: Type Grade: WPB

Material:

Specification Number: SA-234

Alloy Design UNS Number: K03006 0

Product Form 0


NP = Not Permitted SPT = Supports Only 1000 700 1000 650

External Pressure Chart Number: CS-2

Notes G10, S1, T1

Nominal Compositiion Carbon Steel 60000 lb/in2

P Number: 1 Group Number 1 35000 lb/in2

At design Temperature = 300 °F

Temperature (°F)

-20 to 100

150

200

250

300

400

500

600

650

Reference:

Page number: 10

Line Number: 42

0


1650

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1400

4000

2500

0

Maximum Allowable Stress

1200

1250

1300

1350

1100

1150

0

0

Temperature (°F)

1450

1500

1550

1600

15600

13000

10800

8700

5900


850

900

950

1000

1050

17100

Minimum Tensile Strength:

Minimum Yield Strength:


17100

17100

17100

Temperature (°F)

17100

17100

17100

17100

17100

700

750

800

ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code - Section II Part D, 2010 US

Customary Table 1A - Maximum Allowable Stress Values S for

Ferrous Materials

Applicability & Maximum Temperature Limits

Head (Pipe Cap)

Seamless & Welded fittings

Class, Condition, Temper:

Size Thickness:

74

Table 8 – Material reference values for pressure vessel nozzles (SA-106). (7)

Table 9 – Material reference for pressure vessel nozzle (SA-105). (7)

Component:

Material:

Specification Number: SA-106 Type Grade: B


Product Form 0


NP = Not Permitted SPT = Supports Only 1000 700 1000 650


Notes G10, S1, T1




Temperature (°F)

-20 to 100

150

200

250

300

400

500

600

650

Reference:

Page number: 10

Line Number: 42

ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code - Section II Part D, 2010 US Customary

Table 1A - Maximum Allowable Stress Values S for Ferrous Materials

Nozzle


Seamless Pipe Size Thickness:




Maximum Allowable Stress Temperature (°F) Maximum Allowable Stress Temperature (°F) Maximum Allowable Stress

17100 700 15600 1200 0

17100 750 13000 1250 0

17100 800 10800 1300 0

17100 850 8700 1350 0

17100 900 5900 1400 0

17100 950 4000 1450 0

17100 1000 2500 1500 0

17100 1050 0 1550 0

17100 1100 0 1600 0

1150 0 1650 0


Component:

Material:

Specification Number: SA-105 Type Grade: 0


Product Form 0


NP = Not Permitted 1000 700 1000 650


Notes G10, S1, T2




Temperature (°F)

-20 to 100

150

200

250

300

400

500

600

650

Reference:

Page number: 18

Line Number: 5


ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code - Section II Part D, 2010

US Customary Table 1A - Maximum Allowable Stress Values S

for Ferrous Materials

Nozzle


Forgings Size Thickness:



Maximum Allowable Stress Temperature (°F) Maximum Allowable Stress Maximum Allowable Stress

20000 700 17200 1200 0

Temperature (°F)

1250 0

20000 800 12000 1300 0

0

20000 900 6700 1400 0

0

19600 1000 2500 1500 0

0

17800 1100 0 1600 0

SPT = Supports Only

18400 1050 0 1550

20000 950 4000 1450

20000 850 9300 1350

20000 750 14800


1150 0 1650 0

75

APPENDIX J – ASME CALCULATIONS

Design Conditions: Reference: Pressure Vessel Handbook – Internal Pressure (6)

Operating Pressure: The pressure which is required for the process served by the vessel.

The pressure at which the vessel is normally operated.

Design Pressure: psig

The pressure used in the design of the vessel. It is recommended that the design

pressure be the greater of:

Operating Pressure + 30 psig = 20.0

or: Operating Pressure + 10% = 45.5

To achieve the specified design pressure, the recommended operating pressure should

be:

45.5 psig (excluding head pressure).

The head pressure of the fluid should be taken into consideration when determining

design pressure. Static head is not added separately in the design calculations.

Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP): The internal pressure at which the weakest element of the vessel is loaded to the

ultimate permissible point when the vessel is assumed to be:

1. In the corroded condition

2. Under the effect of a designated temperature

3. In normal operating position at the top

4. Under the effect of other loadings which are additive to internal pressure.

When calculations are not made, the design pressure may be used as the MAWP.

Common practice limits the MAWP to shell or head, not flanges, nozzles, etc.

Shell and head calculations show MAWP in the new and corroded condition at design

temperature.

Maximum Allowable Pressure (MAP): A deviation of the MAWP definition, MAP calculations for shell and head are made

at vessel ambient (test) pressure. Component MAP can be checked against vessel test

pressure.

Shell and head calculations show MAP in the new and corroded condition at ambient

(test) temperature.

Hydrostatic Test pressure: Minimum hydrostatic test pressure is 1.3 times Design Pressure. If the stress value of

the vessel at the design temperature is less than the stress value at the test

temperature, the hydrostatic test pressure should be increased accordingly.

The test pressure shall be:

𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 1.3 ×𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑆𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛

50

76

Hydrotest Pressure = 65.0 psig

Based on shell material allowable stresses.

Design Clarifications and Assumptions: Per UG-11(c) – Heads are standard pressure parts listed in UG-44 and suitable for the rating

indicated by compatible pipe thickness calculations. Per paragraph UG-44, which requires

fittings be calculated as straight seamless pipe, the calculations have been performed using

material thickness calculations for ellipsoidal heads to satisfy the material is suitable for the

design conditions of the completed vessel.

Per UG-22 – The only loading considered is dead load on the vessel at the support lugs in the

hydrotest condition.

One inch inlet and outlet connections used as inspection openings per UG-46(d).

Per UW-12(e) – Welded pipe or tubing shall be treated in the same manner as seamless, but

with allowable tensile stress taken from the welded product values of the stress tables, and

the requirements of UW-12(d) applied.

77

Table 10 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 shell thickness calculations.

Description: Decanter

Design Conditions: Material:

Design Pressure = P 50 lb/in2 Type: Carbon Steel

Design Temperature = T 300 °F Density: 0.283 lb/in3

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in Construction: Seamless Pipe

Spec: SA-53-E/B

Material Stress Value = S 14600 lb/in2 Allowable Stress = 14600 Per Section II-D Table 1-A pg 10 line 37

Outside Diameter = DO 6.625 in Construction:

Outside Radius = RO 3.3125 in Degree of RT: Longitudinal Seam None

Inside Radius = Ri 3.033 in Circumferential Seam None

Shell Length = L 24 in

Joint Efficiencies

Longitudinal Joint = E 0.85 Per Paragraph UW-12(d)

Circuferential Joint = E 0.7 Per Paragraph UW-12(d)

Calculations:

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625

Calculated Design Thickness = 0.08530 in Calculated Design Thickness 0.07942(Considering Pipe

Manufacturer Undertolerance) 12.5%

(Considering Pipe

Manufacturer Undertolerance) 12.5%

Test for Limits of UG-27: Circumferential Stress Longitudinal Stress

(Longitudinal Joints): (Circumferential Joints):

P = 50 lb/in2 P = 50 lb/in2

.385SE = 4778 lb/in2 1.25SE = 12775 lb/in2

OK OK

Shell Thickness:

t = 0.08530 in

.5*Ri = 1.5163 in

OK

in

Shell Thickness Calculations

Paragraph UG-27 and Appendix 1 Paragraph 1-1.

Longitudinal Seam

(Circumferential Stress)

Circumferential Seam

(Longitudinal Stress)

Ref: ASME Code Section VIII Division 1 - 2010 Edition - 2011a Addenda

0.013324618

0.00810𝑡 =

𝑆 .

𝑡 =

𝑆 .

78

Table 11 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 head thickness calculations.



Design Pressure = P 50 lb/in2 Type: Carbon Steel

Design Temperature = T 300 °F Spec: SA-234-WPB

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in Allowable Stress: 17100 lb/in2

Reference: Section II-D Table 1-A pg 10 line 42

Material Spress Value = S 14600 lb/in2 Pipe cap/plate: Pipe Cap

Outside Diameter = DO 6.625 in

Outside Radius = RO 3.3125 in Construction:

Inside Depth of Ellipsoidal Head = h = 1.51625 Degree of Rt: None

Seamless Head: Yes

Joint Efficiency = E 0.85

Reference: Paragraph UW-12(d)

Calculations:

Assume: tnom = 0.280 and:

(Based on Nominal Shell Thickness)

Then: 6.065 in

0.01129 in

Corrosion Allowance 0.0625 in

Considering Pipe Manufacturer

Undertolerance 12.5%

Calculated Design Thickness 0.08301 in

Check:

tnom (selected)= 0.280 in ts/L Check:

Calculated Design Thickness= 0.08301 in D/2h = 2

Nominal Thickness > Design Thickness K1 = 0.81

L=K1*D = 4.9127

ts/L = 0.05700

Minimum ts/L = 0.002

ts/L > minimum ts/L

Ellipsoidal Head Calculations

Reference: ASME Code Section VIII Division 1 - 2010 Edition - 2011a Addenda

Paragraph UG-32 and Appendix 1 Paragraph 1-4(c).

0.9242

= 𝑡𝑛 =

=1

=

𝑡 =

𝑆 .1=

79

Table 12 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 nozzle thickness calculations.


Based on:

Reference:


Design Pressure = P 50 lb/in2 Type: Carbon Steel Density

Design Temperature = T 300 °F Pipe or Plate: Pipe

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in Construction: Seamless

Connection Type (Pipe or Fitting) Fitting Spec: SA-106-B

Material Stress Value = S 17100 lb/in2 Allowable Stress = 17100

Outside Diameter = DO 1.315 in Reference:

Outside Radius = RO 0.6575 in

Inside Radius = Ri 0.4785 in Construction

Nozzle Length = L 2 in Degree of RT:

Thread Spacing = n 11.5 threads/inch Longitudinal Seam:

Nozzle Location HEAD Circumferential Seam:Joint Efficiency (Longitudinal Joint) = E 0.85

Joint Efficiency (Circumferential Joint) = E 0.7

Calculations:

Determine ta:

Nozzle Circumferential Stress: Limits UG-27

0.0023 in

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in P = 50 lb/in2

Thread Allowance = .8/n 0.0696 in .385 SE = 5596 lb/in2

Pipe Manufacturer Undertolerance 12.5%

ta = Required thickness 0.1511 in

Minimum standard wall thickness 0.1566 P = 50 lb/in2

Rule UG-45(a) Compliant 1.25 SE = 14963 lb/in2

t = 0.179 in

0.5*Ri= 0.2393 in

Determine tb:

tb1 =

Nozzle located in: Head

tr = 0.0097 in Requirments of UG-16(b)

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in Vessel Type: Pressure Vessel

Required Thickness = tb1 0.0722 in Minimum Required Thickness: 0.0625 in

For Design Purposes: 0.0722 Governs

tb2 =

(Substitute External Design Pressure into Internal Design Pressure Equation)

Nozzle located in: Head No External Design Pressure

tr = 0 in

Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in Requirments of UG-16(b)

Required Thickness = tb2 = 0.0625 in Vessel Type: Pressure Vessel

For Design Purposes: 0 Governs Minimum Required Thickness: 0.0625 in

max(tb1, tb2) =

Nozzle located in: Head No External Design Pressure


Checks

Good

(Greater Value of tb1 or tb2)

Minimum Wall Thickness of Nozzle (Except for Access and Inspection Openings)

Minimum Wall Thickness of Shell or Head (Internal Pressure) at Nozzle Connection at E=1.0

Minimum Wall Thickness of Shell or Head (External Pressure) at Nozzle Connection at E=1.0

Minimum Wall Thickness of Shell or Head (Internal and External Pressure) at Nozzle Connection

NOZZLE THICKNESS CALCULATIONS

ASME Code Section VIII Division 1 -2010 Edition - 2011a addenda

Paragraph UG-45 and Appendix 1 paragraph 1-1

Inlet & Outlet

Shell Thickness:

Reference Paragraph

UW-12(d)

Section II-D Table 1-A pg 10 line 40

Access or Inspection Opening, t(UG-45) = ta Outside Diameter and radius

Circumferential Stress (Longitudinal Joints)

Longitudinal Stress (Circumferential Joints)

Checks

Good

Minimum Wall Thickness of Nozzle (Including Access and Inspection Openings)

Checks

Good

𝑡 𝑛 =

𝑆 .

80

Table 13 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 nozzle thickness calculations (continued).

Table 14 – ASME Section VIII Division 1 minimum fillet weld size for nozzles.

tb3 =

Pipe Outer Diameter = 1.315 in

Table UG-45 = 0.1164 in

Standard Wall Thickness = 0.1164 in

Corrosion Allowance = 0.0625 in


tb= The Required Nozzle Thickness 0.0722 in

ta = 0.1343 in

OR: tb = 0 in

SUMMARY:

0.1343 in**

SELECT: 0.179 Nozzle Neck Thickness Provided = 0.1566 in

11970 lb/in2

Material: Carbon Steel Thickness: 0.179 in

ASME Spec: SA-106-B Outside Diameter: 1.315 in

Estimated Weight 0 lb

Material Specification

**t(UG-45) = Minimum Required Thickness for Nozzle Neck to Satisfy Design Conditions =

**Design Calculations does not include External Nozzle Loads**

Inches Nominal Size

**Thickness Provided Meets Rules of UG-45**

UG-45(c) Allowable Stress for Shear in the Nozzle Neck (70% of Nozzle Allowable Stress) =

**Calculation Performed for Straight Seamless Pipe. Reference Paragraph UG-44**

Thickness of Standard Wall Pipe for Nozzle Connection

t(UG-45) = The Minimum Wall Thickness of the Nozzle Neck is the Greater of:

Access or Inspection

Opening - N/A

𝑡 = 𝑡 𝑡 𝑡 =

For Nozzle: Inlet and Outlet

Nozzle to shell Weld

Reference UW-16.1(c)

Full Penetration Weld

Integral Reinforcement

Design Conditions: Minimum Requirments:

t= Vessel Wall Thickness= 0.28 in

tn= Nozzle Wall Thickness= 0.2175 in tmin= 0.2175 in

Weld Size: Exterior Fillet Weld Size: 0.25 in

0.7*tmin= 0.15225 in

Throat Size: TC= Exterior Fillet Weld= 0.1768 in 0.15225 in

UW-16(b)OK - tC of selected fillet weld exceeds minimum size requirements

Smaller of 3/4" or thinnest part

joined by a fillet, single bevel, or

single J-weld.

Minimum thickness =

Minimum = Smaller of 1/4" or 0.7tmin=

Minimum Fillet Weld Size for Nozzles

81

Table 15 – Tank weight calculations.

Table 16 – Tank capacity calculations.


Weight Calculation Based on: Carbon Steel Density 0.283 lb/in3

Vessel Shell Shell Length (in) Outside Diameter (in) Shell Thickness (in) Inside Diameter (in) Weight (lb)

Shell 24.000 6.625 0.280 6.065 37.909

Conical Transition Axis Length (in) Large Outside Diameter (in) Small Outside Diameter (in) Shell Thinkness (in) Weight (lb)

None - - - - 0

Head: Type Outside Diameter (in) Shell Thickness (in) Inside Diameter (in) Weight(lb)

Top or Left 2:1 Elliptical 6.625 0.280 6.345 5

Bottom or Right 2:1 Elliptical 6.625 0.280 6.345 5

Straight Flange: Straight Flange Height (in) Weight(lb)

Top or Left 2.000 3.000

Bottom or Right 2.000 3.000

Nozzles

Quantity Outside Diameter (in) Thickness (in) Length (in) Flange OD (in) Thickness (in) Weight(lb)

Inlet 1 1.750 0.218 1.625 0

Outlet 1 1.750 0.218 1.625 0

Miscellaneous Supports and Internals Quantity Weight (lb) of each Weight(lb)

Nameplate 1 3.400 3.400

Estimated Weight of Vessel

Shell 37.909

Shell Transition 0

Heads 10.000

Nozzles 0

Supports and Internals 3.400

Total Vessel Weight 51.309

Weight of Fluid (100% Capacity) 27

Vessel + Contents Weight (Flooded Condition) 78.309

Tank Weight Summary


Vessel Shell: Shell Length (in) Outside Diameter (in) Shell Thickness (in) Inside Diameter (in) Volume (ft3) Volume (Gallons) Fluid Weight (water) (lb)

Shell 24.000 6.625 0.280 6.345 0.439 3.285 27.403

Conical Transition: Axis Length (in) Large Outside Diameter (in) Small Outside Diameter (in) Shell thickness Volume (ft3) Volume (Gallons) Fluid Weight (water) (lb)

None - - - - - - -

Head: Type Outside Diameter (in) Shell Thickness (in) Inside Diameter (in) Volume (ft3) Volume (Gallons) Fluid Weight (water) (lb)

Top or left 2:1 Elliptical 6.625 0.280 6.345 0.016 0.120 0.998

Bottom or Right 2:1 Elliptical 6.625 0.280 6.345 0.016 0.120 0.998

Head Flange: Outside Diameter (in) Shell Thickness (in) Inside Diameter (in) Volume (ft3) Volume (Gallons) Fluid Weight (water) (lb)

Top or left 6.625 0.280 6.345 0.037 0.274 2.284

Bottom or Right 6.625 0.280 6.345 0.037 0.274 2.284

Nozzles: Outside Diameter (in) Thickness (in) Inside Diameter (in) Length (in) Volume (ft3) Volume (Gallons) Fluid Weight (water) (lb)

Inlet 1.75 0.218 1.532 1.625 0.002 0.013 0.108

Outlet 1.75 0.218 1.532 1.625 0.002 0.013 0.108

TOTALS: Volume (ft3) Volume (Gallons) Fluid Weight (water) (lb)

0.548 4.098 34.184

Tank Capacity Summary

82

Table 17 – Maximum pressure retention of components ASME equations.

Shell HeadsLongitudinal Seam tnom 0.280 in Do 6.625 in

Circumferential Stress CA 0.0625 in h 1.516 in

Manu UT 12.5 % 6.065 in

S 14600 lb/in2

E 0.85

Ro 3.3125 in

NozzlesCircumferential Seam Longitudinal Seam

Longitudinal Stress Circumferential Stress

E 0.7 Corrosion Allowance = CA 0.0625 in 0.85 Reference Paragraph

Material Stress Value = S 17100 lb/in2 0.7

Outside Diameter = DO 1.315 in

Outside Radius = RO 0.6575 in Circumferential Seam

Inside Radius = Ri 0.6575 in Longitudinal Stress

Nozzle Length = L 2 in trn 0.179 in

t 0.1165 in

lb/in2

lb/in2

lb/in2

4565

Joint Efficiency (Longitudinal Joint) = E

Joint Efficiency (Circumferential Joint) = E

854.0

2772

0.9242

lb/in2

in

P 1152 lb/in2

t 0.1825

P 699.1𝑡 =

𝑆 .

=𝑆 𝑡

. 𝑡

𝑡 = 𝑡𝑛 𝑡𝑛 𝑢

𝑡 =

𝑆 . =

𝑆 𝑡

. 𝑡

𝑡 =

𝑆 .1 =

𝑆 𝑡

𝑡 . 𝑡

=1

= 𝑡𝑛

𝑡 =

𝑆 . =

𝑆 𝑡

. 𝑡𝑡 =

𝑆 .

= 𝑆 𝑡

. 𝑡

83

APPENDIX K – SUPPLEMENTAL CALCULATIONS

The governing equations present radial and tangential stresses in terms of the cylinder’s inner

radius, outer radius, radius of stress investigation, and pressure.

= 𝑠 𝑑𝑒 𝑟 𝑑 𝑢𝑠 ( ) = 3. 3 5

𝑏 = 𝑢𝑡𝑠 𝑑𝑒 𝑟 𝑑 𝑢𝑠( ) = 3.31 5

𝑝 = 𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑙

𝑖𝑛2= 5

𝑙

𝑖𝑛2

𝑟 = 𝑟 𝑑 𝑢𝑠 𝑓 𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑔 𝑡 ( ) 𝜎 = 𝑟 𝑑 𝑙 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝜎𝑡 = 𝑡 𝑔𝑒 𝑡 𝑙 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠

Radial and tangential stresses are presented in the following equations:

𝜎 = 𝑝

𝑏 (1

𝑏

𝑟 )

𝜎𝑡 = 𝑝

𝑏 (1

𝑏

𝑟 )

At the outer edge of this pressure vessel shell, 𝑟 = 3.31 5 .

𝜎 =(3. 3 5 ) (5

𝑙𝑏 )

(3.31 5 ) (3. 3 5 ) (1

(3.31 5 )

(3.31 5 ) )

𝜎 =

𝜎𝑡 =(3. 3 5 ) (5

𝑙𝑏 )

(3.31 5 ) (3. 3 5 ) (1

(3.31 5 )

(3.31 5 ) )

𝜎𝑡 = 517. 𝑙𝑏

At a radius half way between the inner radius and outer radius, 𝑟 = 3.17 5 .

𝜎 =(3. 3 5 ) (5

𝑙𝑏 )

(3.31 5 ) (3. 3 5 ) (1

(3.31 5 )

(3.17 5 ) )

𝜎 = 3.3𝑙𝑏

84

𝜎𝑡 =(3. 3 5 ) (5

𝑙𝑏 )

(3.31 5 ) (3. 3 5 ) (1

(3.31 5 )

(3.17 5 ) )

𝜎𝑡 = 5 7.5𝑙𝑏

The stresses are at their maximum at the inner edge of the vessel. At this point 𝑟 = ,

and 𝜎 = 𝑝. Tangential stress at this point is given by the equation:

𝜎 = 𝑝 = 5 𝑙𝑏

𝜎𝑡 = 𝑝 [1 ( /𝑏)

1 ( 𝑏⁄ ) ]

𝜎𝑡 = (5 𝑙𝑏

) [1 (

3. 3 5 3.31 5

)

1 (3. 3 5 3.31 5

) ]

𝜎𝑡 = 5 7. 𝑙𝑏

85

APPENDIX L – COMPARING ANALYSES

= 𝑗 𝑡 𝑒𝑓𝑓 𝑐 𝑒 𝑐𝑦 = .85

= 𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑙 𝑑𝑒𝑠 𝑔 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 5 𝑙𝑏

= 𝑠 𝑑𝑒 𝑟 𝑑 𝑢𝑠 = 3. 3 5

𝑆 = 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 ( 𝑢 𝑙𝑙 𝑤 𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑆𝑀 𝑒𝑞𝑢 𝑡 ) 𝑡 = 𝑠 𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑡 𝑐𝑘 𝑒𝑠𝑠 ( . 𝑙𝑙 𝑤 𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑠 𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑡 𝑐𝑘 𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑆𝑀 𝑒𝑞𝑢 𝑡 ) = . 8

Circumferential stress (6) (UG-27)

𝑡 =

𝑆 .

𝑆 =

𝑡 .

𝑆 =(5

𝑙𝑏 ) (3. 3 5 )

.85( . 8 ) .

5 𝑙𝑏

.85

𝑆 = . 𝑙𝑏

Supplemental Analysis

𝜎𝑡 = 5 7. 𝑙𝑏

ASME calculation with joint efficiency = 1

𝑆 =(5

𝑙𝑏 ) (3. 3 5 )

1( . 8 ) .

5 𝑙𝑏

1

𝑆 = 5 1.5𝑙

𝑖𝑛2

86

APPENDIX M – JOINT REVIEW CHECKLIST

Requirements for PreJoint Review

1) List of QC manual holders and verify all manual sections meets all current ASME

code editions and addenda.

2) Letter documenting code editions & addenda reviews.

3) Drawings and Calculations (for demonstration vessel)

a. Calculations to include

Job Number

Vessel Specs

Code Paragraphs

Attachments (Lugs, Supports, Saddles etc.)

Loads (on nozzles, supports, wind, seismic etc.)

Reinforcement requirements

Joint efficiencies (include NDE requirements for joint efficiencies)

Minimum weld size requirements

Post weld heat treat requirements

Weld strength calculations

Temperatures of operation (highs and lows)

Pressure requirements (highs, lows, internal and external)

Material requirements

Code and addenda of construction

b. Drawings to include:

Base metal preparation (cleaning, preheat, grinding, etc.)

Post weld heat treat requirements (if required)

NDE requirements

Operating pressures (minimum design metal temperature)

Welding processes

Required welding procedures (WPS’s)

Design of weld joints

Weld symbols, weld ID numbers matching traveler.

Dimensional Requirements (Minimum and Maximum alignment tolerances,

include piping, shell, heads, out of roundness and welds)

Material requirements (bill of materials, include SA or SB number)

Drawing number or numbers and revision number

Hydrostatic requirements

Data plate stamping requirements

4) Purchase Orders:

a. Material Specifications SA 106 B etc.,

b. Size 10” ID etc.,

c. Thickness Sch. 40 or .375” etc.,

d. Material marking requirements

e. Post weld heat treat requirements (if required)

87

f. NDE requirements (if required)

g. Material test reports (MTR’s required with shipment)

h. Material conformance requirement per ASME Section II (list current edition

and addenda required and legible markings)

Note: For heads purchase order shall include: Minimum thickness required,

Minimum straight flange length, knuckle radius, crown radius and all code

paragraphs.

5) Material:

a. Purchase Orders (for all materials used on pressure equipment)

b. Material receiving reports (record size, thickness and Heat numbers, verify

markings and supplier’s markings if sub-divided)

c. Verify MTR’s and/or partial data reports

d. Transfer markings to cut material

e. Use rejection tags/NCR if material doesn’t meet purchase order or receiving

requirements.

f. Separate code material from all non-code materials (ASME Code Material

Area Only)

g. Sub-divider’s information if material is divided by vendor or material.

6) Traveler:

a. List all welds (both external and internal)

b. Indicate all hold points (include drawing, calculations, material reviews)

c. List all welders ID usd to fabricate demonstration vessel.

d. List all required information (job number, drawing number, customer,

pressure gauge number, etc.)

e. List all test requirements and dates completed (NDE, PWHT, hydro-static

testing, etc.)

f. Complete all inspections dates as required.

7) Welding:

a. Review all WPS’s and PQR’s used to fabricate demonstration vessel to meet

current ASME Section IX requirements.

b. Review all WPQ’s of welders for qualifications.

c. Continuity logs on all welders back 3 years.

d. Weld material issue log (7018’s).

e. Welding material storage boxes (locked and marked for ASME ONLY)

f. Thermometer in storage if storing 7018’s.

g. WPS’s are accessible to welders.

8) NDE

a. NDE procedures are current.

b. NDE sub-contractor’s procedures are current.

c. NDE personnel qualifications are current.

d. NDE sub-contractor’s personnel qualifications are current

88

e. Eye exams on both in-house and sub-contractor’s personnel are current.

f. Current edition of SNT-TC-1A.

g. Accepted film comparison strip and/or densitometer.

9) Heat treatment:

a. Sub-contractor’s procedures are current.

10) Test equipment:

a. All pressure gauges are within acceptable calibration (12 months maximum).

b. Gauges, micrometers, densitometer and UT thickness meters have serial

numbers.

c. Calibration labels on all items listed above.

d. Current calibration records or log.

e. Hydro-static test equipment.

The following items will also need to be verified and/or completed.

National Board log (National Board numbers and data reports are logged and sent within the

60 day requirement.)

National Board repair form log (repair form numbers and data reports are logged and sent

within the 60 day requirement.)

Copy of the latest completed ASME data report (section 1).

Complete job file for Section VIII-1 Appendix 10.

Copy of the latest completed National Board repair form.

Fill out but do not sign the required ASME/National Board data report for the demonstration

vessel.

Fabricate the demonstration vessel (tacks only, no completed welds).

Verify demonstration vessel has all required markings, (weld numbers match traveler,

welder’s ID, material ID’s, heat numbers, job numbers etc., material sub-divider if other than

stamp holder).

Review WPS for all variables addressed, weld pass limits (1/2 inch maximum), reasonable

ranges for amps and volts, and that they are accessible to welders. (Make sure all essential

and supplementary variables are addressed.)

Review PQR to make sure they are acceptable to the WPS, tensile and bend test results are

shown and correct with qualified/certified documents.

Review WPQ for essentials, actual, qualification ranges, dates and signatures.

Drawings and calculations indicate correct materials, thicknesses, formulas, variables,

89

openings, sizes, weld design, sizes, symbol and location.

Flanges, fittings, etc. have the correct markings such as B16.9, B16.5, SA105, and SA182.

Traveler includes all weld joints/inspections, weld joint ID’s, NDE locations/inspections,

hold points, review acceptance, AI hold points marked and or accepted.

Purchase orders indicate ASME Section II requirement addressed, material specification

same as drawing and calculations, documentation requirements and marking requirements

listed.

Materials traceability, MTR’s review for physicals, chemicals, and testing requirements,

manufacturer’s markings, material issued, material storage, receiving inspections,

dimensional checks, code and non-code segregation.

Demonstration vessel inspection, joint design, fit-ups, and documented material identification

and maintained, weld ID, tack preparation, welding, internal inspection, weld appearance,

weld sizes correct, heat numbers and/or traceable codes.

Data plate complete and correct info, letter sizes and depth, NDE marking (RT), post weld

heat treatment marking (PWHT), operational requirements (high and low temperatures,

internal and external pressures, minimum and maximum) indicated on drawing.

Data report covers addresses, locations, minimum thicknesses, corrosion allowances,

materials, openings, reinforcement materials, dimensions, supports, joint efficiencies, impact

requirements or exemptions, design conditions, relief valve requirements, weld joint design

(UW 16.1 (c) etc.). List all required information in remarks such as code cases, exemptions

and/or requirement with supporting ASME Code Paragraphs, Authorization Number,

expiration date, signatures, dates.

Documents

ASME demonstrator pressue vessel - UC DRC Home