Dear Vishal,

MAWP is based on min thickness (i.e. finished thickness after forming). If you see the report of your PVElite model following are the results;
1. MAWP of Bottom dish end = 8.285 bars
2. MAWP of Bottom Dish end straight face (SF) = 8.195 bars
3. MAWP of shell = 8.195 bars
4. MAWP of Top dish end = 8.25 bars
5. MAWP of Top dish end SF = 13.626 bars

PVElite considers (Finished thickness-CA) in the calculation. But in case of dish end when Designer mentions nominal thickenss PVElite considers the same thickness for the SF MAWP calculations, becuase for dish ends nominal thickness is min thickness (finished thickness) for SF.

Since you have mentioned nominal thickness of Top dish end, PVElite considers nominal thickness for the calculation of SF for MAWP. So MAWP of SF is different for both the dish ends.

So there is no glitch in PVElite atleast at this point.

@ princeR;

Nominal thickness is the thickness of the plate available in the market.
Finished thickenss is the thickness of the vessel after fabrication process.
In case of dish ends finished thickness is less than the nominal thickness because of thinning of the dish ends at knuckle area in forming process of dish ends. However for the cylinder in broader way finished thickness is same as nominal thickness.

If Designer doesn't mention nominal thickness in PVElite model, software considers finished thickness in calculation as stated above.

Nominal thickness plays role in calculating weight of equipment (mainly cylindrical parts).

Thanks & Regards

Prashant