There is now a code case 2901 which gives a clear method to perform an equivalent pressure check on welding neck flanges based on the work by Warren Brown.
Can this method be implemented in CII? Maybe as addition or replacement of the current equivalent pressure check?

We can definitely look into this. Thank you for your post.

Can somebody tell me if they have found an official issue of this code case?

I've just found an unofficial copy and after review I'm unsure whether this report has been officially issued. Much obliged if anyone can advise here.

The latest update of code cases I found is the 2017 BPVC Code case Supplement 1.
https://www.asme.org/shop/standards/bpvc-resources/code-cases-of-the-asme-boiler-and-pressure-vessel

Thank you

I looks to me (reviewing ASME proposals and ballots) that CC 2901 has its final approval. The ASME Standards Committee's (re)ballot closed in November last year with no negative votes. (The CC2901 record in their system was just updated yesterday.)

But this is listed as part of Supplement #4, not Supplement #1.

Thank you very much Dave

Hello all, I am trying to use CC2901 in PVElite. I check the ANSI Flange POressure reduction Options, and input some loads in the Loads/PartitionGasket Information tab. I find in the report a Pressure eq reduction, but don't find the calculation CC2901 itself. I mean changing the Pressure reduction method, the results are the same, and I don't know why.Any help please?

I've created the flange check files for Case 2901. If anyone interested, it will be necessary to delete .txt in the back of their name. After that it should be placed in ProgramData Caesar System folder.
Since the coefficient FM is different pending on the pipe size I had to split in to. One is for pipes up to 12" the other 12" up to 24".
These are simple text files based on the ASME-2009.flg & ASME-2009.G
where the values were multiplied by (1+FM) as per Case 2901.

Maybe someone will find useful. Of course you need to check first as you are the only responsible.

I forgot to tell that these files comes in pair. You will need both .flg and .G files in order to have complete info.

The de-rating option in PV Elite applies mainly to flanges on the end of nozzle necks attached to piping. There is a check box at the lower right of the 1st window of the nozzle dialog you must check the box to alert PV Elite to go through the procedure outlined in Code Case 2901.

This option does not apply to body flanges on heat exchangers and similar types of equipment, only nozzle flanges.

Code case 2901 is now part of UG-44 in ASME VIII-1

Hello Richard et al.
typically stress engineers using Kellogg method as the first level of screening since it is a conservative approach (and at the same time incomprehensive one but quick).
in fact, the whole philosophy behind this approach is its conservativeness.
as an example for an 8"#150, we know that it is almost impossible to meet the minimum required gasket seating stress if your gasket is a spiral wound (10000 psi), while in the new UG-44 this flange has the highest moment factor (1.2).
new changes make this approach neither more comprehensive nor more conservative, and in my opinion it cannot be used with a peace of mind.

I think that the main line is this:
Someone is concerned that the current calculation method is not conservative. Someone else came and say it is true and the coeficients are wrong and in fact we should consider other bigger coefficients. This will lead to an overall failure. Luckily, someone propose a solution that involve more resources and shows that in fact these coefficients are smaller and this solve your problem. But you have to employ more sofisticated software. One example is SIF determination and the other is the flange method approach.
In my opinion is good to have some official methods and to stick with them.
And to judge by yourself if something that you design is safe or not (by your self best knowledge as an engineer).
I bet a lot of the systems analysed 10 or more years ago will show failure under the new code.

Regards,

Dear Richard and Dave,
Greetings.

It is not included in the CAESAR configuration yet. Any technical reason of excluding it though it is approved by ASME also ?
It would be really helpful to convince client/PMC, if officially included in config editor.
Thank you.