Three issues

1. Provide an alternate input item for a reinforcement pad width. Both PVElite and CodeCalc require Pad OD. This is particularly inconvenient for an offset nozzle where the nozzle opening is not a circle. To the best of my knowledge, nearly all pads are fabricated to a constant width regardless of the nozzle opening shape. Other users please comment.

2. PVElite and CodeCalc use the corroded cross sectional profile for an inside fillet when determining cross-sectional area for nozzle reinforcement. I have always used the uncorroded cross sectional profile since corrosion allowance does not exist behind the legs of the fillet weld. If you extend the corroded profile at the inside surface of the shell or head and the outside surface of the nozzle neck, inside the vessel, you will see that a full uncorroded profile remains available for nozzle reinforcement area. (The calculation for the strength of this weld is a different matter. I am only reflecting only on nozzle reinforcement area.) I would like to see this calculation changed. Other users please comment.

3. I have uncovered a number of what I will describe as inconsistancies regarding the nozzle reinforcement limits normal to the vessel surface. I have forwarded an E-Mail, with attachments, to Scott Mayeux for detailed evaluation. I will let him report on his findings after he has had a chance to study my E-mail.

Item 3 has been addressed by Coade. They have fixed the problems and the fixes are in the PVElite 4.3 version and CodeCalc 6.4 version.

Item 2 is also addressed. Under "Tools" "Configuration" there is a box for "No Corrosion on inside welds"

Item 1 still a valid request. It would simplify the use of the nozzle reinforcement module to have an alternate input of "Pad Width". IF OTHERS AGREE, PLEASE ADD A REPLY TO THIS REQUEST. THANKS.

One confusion of using the width of a pad for design is the construction gap, 1/8" for example, needed between the nozzle and the pad to be attached. A question arises, should this 1/8" be added to the width of pad or not? For this reason our vessel design drawings, like others, only mark the O.D. of a reinforcing pad. Let the PVElite keep the O.D. representation, that I would prefer.

I am suggesting an alternate input item of pad width. I'm not suggesting eliminating the Pad OD input item. What do you do for an offset nozzle in a head or a hillside nozzle on a cylinder, where the opening is not a circle. What diameter do you input since it changes at every degree of orientation? Pads for these configurations are built to a constant width, at least in my experiance.

The question regarding the gap applies to either input type. The program ignores the gap currently when pad OD is input. I suggest the same logic apply to the pad width option; ignore the gap for calculating nozzle reinforcement area.

I would also like to see the option to input pad width.

To All,

As discussed above, the alternative input for pad width has been added to PVElite. This field is set next to the pad diameter input. When a pad width is entered, the program recalculates the pad diameter and updates the input automatically.

In the nozzle plot, you may note that the pad width is shown.

This new feature will appear in the next version of PVElite to be released later this year. We have also added several other new features based on user suggestions.