pipingdesignonline.com

Topic Options
#73759 - 09/12/19 01:51 AM B16.9 reducer
Huub Offline
Member

Registered: 01/15/10
Posts: 4
Loc: Netherlands
How does one define in PVElite that a cone conforms to B16.9, and therefore doesnt require calculation as per ASME VIII-1 UG-44(a)?

Right now I have inserted a cone to represent a B16.9 reducer. This 'cone' requires a wall thickness that is greater than the wall thickness of the cylindrical section at the large end; this is in conflict with the above referenced section frm VIII-1.

Top
#73844 - 09/30/19 12:30 AM Re: B16.9 reducer [Re: Huub]
Huub Offline
Member

Registered: 01/15/10
Posts: 4
Loc: Netherlands
Anybody?

Top
#74159 - 11/14/19 08:09 AM Re: B16.9 reducer [Re: Huub]
Huub Offline
Member

Registered: 01/15/10
Posts: 4
Loc: Netherlands
Is no one reading this forum (anymore) or is this such a difficult question?

Top
#74163 - 11/14/19 01:57 PM Re: B16.9 reducer [Re: Huub]
corne Offline
Member

Registered: 07/09/07
Posts: 392
Loc: The Netherlands
As far as I know you can't. PVElite is made to perform calculations according to ASME VIII (and other codes), not to exclude items from the calculation.
Although this is sort of done for standard flanges where the P/T rating can be used.

B16.9 fittings are strange things as B16.9 doesn't state the thickness of the fittings. It only states that it may be considered as a straight pipe with the same schedule as for which the fitting is tested. This however doesn't say anything about the exact shape and thickness. Therefor calculating the MAWP based on geometrical parameters is difficult.

Best thing to do is to model a cone, and add a note in your report that the calculation is not required with reference to B16.9.

Top
#74212 - 11/21/19 02:41 AM Re: B16.9 reducer [Re: corne]
Huub Offline
Member

Registered: 01/15/10
Posts: 4
Loc: Netherlands
Hi corne, thanks for your input. I agree, just wasnt sure such a feature would be there. Seems like such a simple and easy improvement to PVElite.
Originally Posted By: corne

Best thing to do is to model a cone, and add a note in your report that the calculation is not required with reference to B16.9.

To be Code compliant, that should read
Quote:

Best thing to do is to model a cone, and add a note in your report that the calculation is not required with reference to ASME VIII-1 UG-44(a).


Top



Who's Online
2 registered (SandeepTiwana, yongwon), 247 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
January
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Forum Stats
11725 Members
14 Forums
16122 Topics
72240 Posts

Max Online: 191 @ 11/16/19 10:39 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
Richard Ay 9
Vanman 8
Michael_Fletcher 8
Borzki 5
bthorne 4