asme viii d1 (interpretação vol.28)

7/28/2019 ASME VIII D1 (Interpretação Vol.28)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/asme-viii-d1-interpretacao-vol28 1/22

Section VIII-1 - nterpretationsNo, 28 VIII-1-89-138R,WI- 1-89-2 07, VIII-1-89-20

Interpretation: VIII-1-89-138R

Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition , 1988 Ad den da), UG -20(f)

Date Issued: October 5, 1990

File:C89-217*

Question: If a vessel is con structed of a combination of P-No. 1 Group No. 1 or 2 materialsand other materials listed in Subsection C, may the rules of UG-20(f) in Section VIII, Division 1be app lied to the portion that is constructed of P-No. 1 Group No. 1or 2?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: VIII-1-89-207

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-l02(a).

Da te Issued: uly 3, 1990

File:C90-405

Question (1): Do the requirements of UG-102 (a) in Section VIII, Division 1 mandate that theindicating gage be physically located on the vessel?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Do the requirements of UG-l02(a) mandate that thendicating gage be physicallylocated at the highest point on the vessel?

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: VIII-1-89-207R

Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition ),UG-l02(a)

Da te Issued: Octobe r 10,990

File:C90-405*

Question (1): Do the requireme nts of UG-l0 2(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 mandate that theindicating gage be physically located on the vessel?

Reply (1):No. It s hall be directly connected to the vessel with no in terme diate valves.

Question (2): Do the equirements of UG-l02(a) mandate that thendicating gage be physicallylocated at the highest point on the vessel?

Reply (2): No.

American Society of Mechanical EngineersPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineers

censed by Information Handling Services



VIII-1-89-208,nI-1-89-209,II-1-89-210ectionIII-1 - nterpretations No. 28

.Interpretation: VIII-1-89-208

Subject:ectionVIII,Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-15(d)

Date Issued: uly3,1990

File:

Question: Are reinforcing plates of nozzles having open telltale hoies and meeting the require-ments of UW-lS(d) in Section VIII, Division 1considered pressure retaining parts?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: VIll-1-89-209

Subject:ectionVIII,Division 1 (1989dition),UG-32(o)

Date Issued:uly , 990

File:

Question: Is it the intent of UG -32(o) in Section VIII, Division 1 that Formula (1) of UG-34(c)(2) be used to calculate the maximum diam eter of a flattened spot o r surface on a torispherical,ellipsoidal, or hemispherical head, where d would represent the maximum diameter, C = 0.25, andP, S, , and E would be as defined in UG-34(b)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1989Edition), UG -l16(e) nd UW -l2(d)

Date Issued: July.9, 1990

File: BC90-418

Question: Which of the marking requirements unde r U G- l16( e) in Section VIII, Division 1apply for a vessel that consists of seamless ellipsoidal or torispherical hea ds when th e vessel jointsare spot radiographed and after the circumferential seams attaching the heads are separately spotradiographed’per UW -l1(5)(b)?

Reply: “RT-3”.





Section VIII-1 - nterpretationsNo. 28 VIII-1-89-211, W I-1- 89- 212 , WII-1-89-21


Subject: Section VIII , Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-99(h)


File:C90-480

Question: Is itmandatory that the metal temperature be30°Fabove the minimum design metaltemperature during the hydrostatic test?

Reply: No.


Subject:ection VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition ), UCS-56


File:C90-493

Question: Is it requiredy UCS-56 in Section.VII1, Division1 o postweld heat treat attachmen twelds .joining auste nitic bellows to pressure vessel shells of any size and th ickness in P-Nos. 1,3, 4,and 5 when he bellows material thickness d 118 in. and the attachmentweld is made with austeniticweld materials?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: Vlll-1-89-212R

Subject: Section VIII , Division 1 (1989 Editio n), UCS-56

Da te Issued: Octob er 4, 990

File:C90-493*

Question: Is it requ ired by UCS-56 in Section VIII, Division 1 o postweld heat treat attachmentwelds joining auste nitic bellows to pre ssu re vessel shells of any size and thickness in P-Nos. 1, 3, 4,and 5 when th e bellows material thickness S /8 in. and th e a ttachmen t weld is made with a usteniticweld materials?

Reply: Yes for P-Nos. 4 and 5, and no for P-Nos. 1 and 3.





VIII-1-89-213, I-1-89-214,I-1-89-215 Section VIII-1 - nterpretations No. 28


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989dition);UG-37(d)

Date.Issued: July,990

File:

Question: Un der the equirements of UG-37(d) inSection'VIII, D ivi sio ~ ,is t used to calculateA determined by the rules for external pressure?

Reply: Yes.


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989dition),UG-120


File:

Question (1): Un der the requirements of UG -120 in Section VIII, Division 1, must a partsManufacturer supply a U-2 or U-2A Manufacturer's Partial Data Rep ort Form for heat exchangertube bundles which do not have seal welded or strength welded tube-to-tubesheet attachments?

Repiy (1): No.

Question.(2): Must tubesheets manufactured by o ther than the heat exchanger manufacturerbe supported by a U-2 or U-2A M anufacturer's Partial Data Rep ort Form?

Reply (2): No, unless welding is performed during the fabrication of the tubesheet.


Subject:ectionVIII,Division 1 (1989dition),UG-43(d)


File:

Question: Do the requirements of UG-43(d) in Section VIII, D ivision 1 apply to tapped holes,which do not penetrate any adjacent shell sections, in a reverse flange as shown in Fig. 2-13?

Reply: No.

450





Section VIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28

Interpretation: VllI-1-89-216

VIII-1-89-216, Vm-1-89-217,

Subject: Section VIII , Division 1 (1989 Edition), UCS-66

Date Issued:August 17, 990

File:OO-399

Que stion: Un der the requirem ents of UCS-66 in S ection VII I, Division 1,must the hydrostatictest temperature be a factor in determining impact test exempt criteria?

Reply: No. [See UG-99(h) regarding metal temperature during hydro test.]


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UCS-66(a)(3)

Date Issued:August 17, 990

File:C90-496

Question: Are lifting lugs, supports, ladder andplatform clips, etc., exempted from the requ ire-ments of UCS-66(a)(3) in Section VII I, Division l ?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: VIII.1-89-218

Subject: Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition), W - 2 ( b ) and HA-51(b)(5)

Date Issued:August17,1990

File: BC90-520

Question: For a shell and tube hea t exchanger, wh ere the ma terial s of 304 stainless steel andthe tube side design temperature is - 20°F, does the exemption provision in UH A-S l(b) in Sec tionVIII, Division 1void the requirements of UW-2(b) for weld joints?

Reply: No.





VIII-1-89-219,III-1-89-220, VIII-1-89-221 SectionIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28


Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 1989Edition,1989 Addend a), SealWeld or Corner Joint,Fig. UW-13.2 Sketch (g)

Date Issued:September 7, 1990

File:

Question: A noncircular pressure vessel is constructed with aorner joint as shown in Fig.UW-13.2 sketch (g). Does SectionVIII, Division 1prohibit the use of a seal weld between welds , an da, to form a continuous sealing surface?

Reply: No .

Interpretation:VIII-1-89-220

Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1989Edition, 989 Addenda), UW -l6(f)(3)(a)

Date Issued: September 7, 1990

File:

Question: A steel fitting is machined to AN SI B16.22 from SA-106 Gr ade B Schedule 80 pipe.Th e fitting is welded to th e vessel with the m achined en d extending outside the weld joint are a forfield brazing of copper tube. If the requirements of UW-l6(f)(3)(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 aremet, can this part be attach ed by a fillet weld from he outside on ly?

Reply: Yes.


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989dition), UW-l3(b)(4)(c)

Date Issued:September 7, 1990

File:

Question: Can radiographic examination, under th e requirements of UW-51, be used as analternative for magnetic particle examination requirements in UW-l3(b)(4)(c) in Section VIII, Di-vision l?

Reply: No.

452





Section VIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28 VIII-1-89-222,III-1-89-223,II-1-89-224

Interpretation: V III-1-89-222

Subject:ection VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition),UW-l3(b)(4)(b)

Da te Issued: September 7, ‘1990

File:C90-522

Question: Is it the intent f UW-l3(b)(4 )(b) inSection VIII , Division 1 o allow the use of realtime radioscopic examination in lieu of magnetic particle examination for the longitudinal weld inthe shell of a pres sure essel after being offsetand before theattachm ent of the heads or next shell?

Reply: NO.

Interpretation: V llI-1-89-223

Subject: Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addend a), U -2(f)(3)


File:C90-535

Question: May a Certificate Ho lder of a U Cod e Symbol whose scope includes field extensions,fabricate Co de items at a facility ow ned or leased by the Certificate Holder which is not identifiedas the primary location on Certificate of Authorization?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: V III-1-89-224

Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda),G-l16(e)(4), UW-

ll(a)(5)(b), and UW-ll(b)


File:C90-543

Question (1): If a constructed vessel satisfies bo th th e requirements of U W -ll(a)(S )(b) andU W -ll(b ) in Section VIII, Division 1, would the required marking under the Code Symbol be“RT-4”? .

Reply (1):Yes.

Question (2): Is it required under the provisions of Section VIII, Division 1 o indicate underRemarks on the Manufacturer’s Data Rep ort that the requirements of UW -ll(a)(S )(b) have beenmet?

Reply (2): No.





VIII-1-89-225,III-1-89-226 Section VIII-1 - nterpretationsNo, 28

Interpretation: Vlll-1-89-225

Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UCS-66

Da te Issued: September 7, 1990

File:

Question: Are the requirements of UCS-66 in Section VIII, Division 1 applicable to a carbonsteel base ring which is welded o a carbon steel support skirt, which in turn is welded to a vessel?

Reply: No .


Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), Appendix 24

Date Issued:Septe'mber 7, 1990

File:

Question: A continuous o ne piece clamp ban d similar to the cross-sectional view A-A of Fig.24-1 in Section VIII, Division 1,but utilizing parallel bearing surfaces, is used s a holding elementfor connecting a ead to a cylindrical vessel r connecting two cylindrical vessel sections. he clampband is used with two hubbed flanges an d is usually fitted with an over-center toggle to open andclose th e clamp band so that a head may be o pened as a quick actuated closure, meeting therequirements of UG-35. Occasionally two bolts a re used to hold the ends of the one piece clampband together for infrequent opening. Do the rules of the mandatory Appendix 24 apply to th eabove described clamp connections?

Reply: No. See U-2(g).

454





Section VIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28 MII.1-89-227, II-1-89


Subject: Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW -ll(a) and Fig.UW-13.2 Sketch (m)

Da te Issued: Septem ber 26, 990

File:C90-412

Question. (1):A onepiece seamless pipe (SA-53 Grad e B) is welded o a bolting flange at eachend, whe re the weld is of full penetration and forms a Category C.c orn er joint as shown in Fig.-UW-13.2 sketch (m) in Section VIII, Division 1.Assuming no radiog raphic examination is requ iredby the Code, would any adiograp hic examination of this corn er joint affect the jointefficiency usedin' calculating the required thickness for the seamless shell under internal pressure?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): With no radiographyf this corn er joint, ould the joint efficiency of the seamlessshe ll used in calculations be E = l ?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Would the requirements of UW -ll(a)(S)(b) ever need to be met for the cornerjoint described above?

Reply (3): No.


Subject:ection VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition),UG-l16(a)(4)


File:C90-427

Question: For a vessel where the design pressure is used, as the maximum allowable workingpresssure, can the value of the pressure corresponding to the minimum design metal temp erature,as required by UG-l16(a)(4) in Section VIII, Division 1,be less than the design pressure?

Reply: Yes.





MII-1-89-229,MII-1-89-230, W I-1-89-23 1 SectionIII-1 - InterpretationsNo. 28


Subject:ection VII I, Division 1 (1986 Edition), UW -40(a)(5)

Date Issued: Septem ber 26, 990

File: BC90-438

Question: Due to service conditions, a vessel is required to have PW HT in acco rdance withUW-2(a) in Section VIII, Division 1, and the vessel’s dimensions allow hea ting it a s a whole in anenclosed furnace. Is it permissible und er UW -40(a)(5) to apply only local PW HT to the vessel andnozzle seams at different times?

Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of PWHT for parts are satisfied.


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UW-l3(b )(4)(b)

Date Issued: . September 26, 1990

File:

Question: For a shell where he longitudinal seam is-welded fromoth sides and preparedpriorto offsetting, are the requirements of UW -l3(b )(4)(b ) in Section VIII, Division 1 satisfied when

after offsetting, either magnetic particle or liquid penetran t examination isperformed on the outsideof the shell weld only?

Reply: No.


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), U-l(c)(3)


File: BC90-479

Question: May a vessel which isot part of rotating o r reciprocating equipm ent, used to containtwo liquids under a differential pressure, separated by a floating piston be considered to be withinthe Sco pe of Section VIII, Division l ?

Reply: Yes.

456





Section VIII-1 - nterpretations No. 8 VIII-1-89-232,I-1-89-232R,m-1-89-23


Subject: Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition),Table UCS-56.1


File:C90-481

Question: May interpolation be used between temperature values listed in Table UCS-56.1 inSection VIII, Division.1 o arrive at minimum holding time at the decreased tempe rature?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: Vlll-1-89-232R

Subject: ection VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition ), T able UCS-56.1


File: BC90-481*

Question: May interpolation be used between temperature values listed in Tab le UCS-56.1 inSection VIII, Division 1 o arrive at minimum holding time at the decreased temperature?

Reply: Yes.


Subject:ection VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-37


File: BC90-490

Question: Is it permissible und er the requirem ents of UG-37 in Section VIII, Division 1 o usea nominal head thickness t when calcu latingA for openings in heads?

Reply: Yes.





VIII-1-89-234, VIII-1-89-235, WI-1-89-236 Section VIII-1 - nterpretationsNo, 28


Subject:ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition), UG-l20 (c)


File: BC90-497

Question: Under he requirements of U G-l20 (c) in Section VIII, Division 1 must a parts,Manufacturer supply th e original Partial Data Rep ort Form U-2 o r U-2A as on e of th e two foimsrequired to be furnished to thevessel Manufacturer?

Reply: No; however the original may be required for vessel registration.


Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), U-10)


File:

Question (1): In determining the volume limit for th e shell side of a shell-and-tube heat ex-changer under the requirements of U-10) in Section VIII, Division 1,may the volume of the tubesbe d educted from the total volume when the tube side is exempted from Code requirements?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Same as Question (l), but the tube side is. not exempted from the Code?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Adden da), U G -ll( b)


File:

Question: May the die formed thin heat transfer plates of plate type heat exchangers, that are

mechanically assembled without welding, be produced by Manufactu rers in accordance with th erequirements of UG -l l(b ) in Section VIII, Division l ?

Reply: Yes. ,

458





Section VIII-1 - nterpretationsNo. 28 VIII-1-89-237,III-1-89-238


Subject:Section VI II, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda ),Table UHA-23, Note (1)


File:C90-627

Question: When designinga flange per A ppendix 2,using SA-2.40plate, may the value for theallowable design tress for ma terial of flange at design tem pera ture S be the ower maximum allow-.able stress value shown in Table UHA-23 in Section VIII, Division 1 due to the reference to Note

(I)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Section VIII , Division 1 (1989 E dition), U G-llS (b)

Da te Issued: Octob er 2, 990

File:C90-464

Question (1): Is it th e intention that the term “certified documents” in UG-llS(b) in SectionVIII, Division 1 nclude fab rication drawings?

Reply (1): No. See also Interpretation VIII-1-89-183.

Question (2): May fabrication drawings be in the units selected by the Manufacturer providedthat the Authorized Inspector is satisfied that the Manufacturer’s Data Report, per UG-llS(b)(l)

or (2), accurately describes the vessel to be marked with the Code Symbol Stamp?

Reply (2): Yes.





VIII-1-89-239,III-1-89-240ection - Interpretations No. 28


Subject: ectionVIII,Division 1 (1986Edition, 988 Addenda), UCS-66(b)

Date Issued:October 9, 990

File:

Question (1): In addition to primary mem brane tensile stresses, must peak, bending, or sec-ondary stressesbe included when determining he stress in tension s defined by footnote 5 to UCS-66 in Section VIII, Division l ?

Reply (1): No, only primary membrane tensile stresses ar e considered.

Question (2): For Part UCS components of stationary vessels, where the ratio of design stressin tension to allowable tensile stress is equa l to o r less than 0.4, may a 105°F credit be tak en p erFig. UCS-66.1 for minimum design metal temperatures of -50°F and warmer?

Reply (2); Yes.

Question (3): For Part U CS components of stationary vessels, where the ratio of design stressin tension to allowable tensile stress is equal to or less than 0.4, and for minimum design me taltemperature colder than -50"F, are impact tests required?

Reply (3): No.


Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 989 Addenda), UCS-67(a)

Date Issued:October , 990

File: BC89-226

Question (1): Does UCS-67(a) in Section VIII, D ivision 1 require production impact testing ofwelds and heat-affected zones in accordance with UG-84 when:

(a) the m inimum design metal temperature for the material is below the applicable curve ofFig. UCS-66 for he governing thickness even fter applying any adjustments er UCS-66(b) or UCS-68(c)?

(b) the end-user requires impact testing of the material even though the conditions describedin Question (l)(a ) do not apply?

Reply (1): (a) Yes, (b) Not required by Code rules.

Question (2): Is it the inten t that UCS-67(a) requires production impact testing of welds andheat-affected zones in accordance with UG-84 whenhe SA specification for he material used (e.g.,SA-333 Gr. 6 ) requires impact testing but neither the conditions described in Questions (l)(a) nor(l) (b ) above apply?

Reply (2): No.

460





SectionIII-1 - Interpretations No.8 WI-1-89-24 1, VIII-1-89-

Interpretation: VIII-1-89-241-

Subject:SectionVIII,Division 1 (1986Edition,1988 Addenda), Appendix9, 9-7


File:C89-237

Question (1): A pod type partia l jacket, as shown in Fig. 9-7 in Section VIII, Division,withoutstays or penetrations, meets the limitations of 9-5(c)(l). May it be closed all around including thelongitudinal sides with a single fillet weld in accordance with Fig. -5 sketch (a)?

Reply (1): Yes, provided a proof test is performed in accordance with UG -lOl(p).

Question (2): For t he jacket described in Question (l ), may an unreinforced hole of any sizeand shape be provided through the shell under the jacket, so that the shell pressure and jacketpressure are equalized at all times?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: ection VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition), Appendix G 7

Da te Issued: October 9, 1990

File:C90-404

Question (1):A nozzle wall has a CategoryA joint with a joint efficiency of 0.85. The nozzleis not through a Category A joint of the vessel shell. In determining t he area of excess thickness in

the vessel wall available for reinforcement A , in UG-37(a) in Section VIII, Division 1, is the valueof E , equal to 1.0?

Reply (1):Yes.

Question (2): If a two piece reinforcing pad is provided for the nozzle in Question (1) and noradiographic exam ination is performed or the weld joining he two pieces, mustA , in Question (1)be recalculated using E , = 0.7?

Reply (2): No.





VIII-1.89-243, WI-1-89-244 Section VIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28

Interpretation: VIll-1-89-243

Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Ad denda ), UG -lO(a)

Date Issued: , October 22, 1990

File:

Question: A subcon tractor of forming services ut A 825, Grade C plate,material and transferredonly the heat number. A review of th e MTR demonstrates that the chemical properties of the heatand the mechanical properties of th e heat and th e mechanical properties of each test'piece are incompliance with the material specifications. Is this sufficient to dem ons trate compliance with UG-lO(a) in Section VIII, D ivision l ?

Reply: No.


Subject: Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Adden da),Use ofSA-105 Material


File: BC90-656

Question: May the body flanges and hubs of c arbon s teel. pres sure vessels that will be built inaccordance with Section VIII, Division 1,with inside shell diameters larger than 24 in., be madefrom SA-105 forgings?

Reply: Yes.

462





Section VIII-1 - InterpretationsNo. 28 MII-1-89-24 5, VIII-1-89-2


Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Ad dend a), UG -gO(c)(l)(l)


File:C90-649

Question (1):Vessels fabricated of SA-372 Q p e V Grade 1 Class B are forged by a materialmanufacturer as seamless unibody vessels. All requiremen ts of SA-372 are met. T he forgings arebase d-on design drawings hat show the MAW P and hy drostatic test pressure, supplied by the StampHolder, May the ma terial manu facturer perform the requ ired hydrostatic test on th ese vessels andcertify the test pressure as part of the material test report?

Reply (1):No.

Question (2): Must th e C ode Symbol Stamp H older take responsibility for performing thehydrostatic test, and have it witnessed by the Inspectors as required in UG-gO(c)(l)(l) in SectionVIII, Division l?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addend a), U-2(i)


File:C90-650

Question (1):Wh en a vessel Man ufacturer designs and fabricates a large vessel in two sectionsand ships them to a field location for final assembly by anoth er party, is the vessel Manu facture rthe party required to com plete the U-1 Manufacturer’s Data Report for the “Certificate of ShopCompliance” portion?

Reply (1):Yes,

Question (2): Must the vessel Manufacturer apply the U S tamp to the vessel after com pletionof the field assembly?

Reply (2): Yes. See U-2(i)(3).

4





WI-1-89-247, MU-1-89-248, MII-1-89-249 Section VIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28


Subject: ectionVIII,Division 1 (1989Edition, 989 Addenda), UW -26(d)


File:

Question (1): May a Manufacturer, who holds a validASME Certificate of Authorization andCode Symbol Stamp, contract a non-Code stamp shop to build vessels requiring the ASM E Co deStamp when he shop’s welders are qualified unde r the Certificate Holder’sWPS’s, and all provisionsof UW-26 in Section VIII, Division 1are met, and be under the control of the Certificate Holder’squality control manager?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If Reply (1) is yes, can an employee of the non-Code shop be assigned as a fieldquality control representative if th e Certificate H older’s quality control m anager take s full respon-

sibility for the vessesl?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989Edition, 989 Add enda), UG-20(9

Date Issued:October 30,1990

File:

Question: May pressure vessels that satisfy the requirements of UG-20(f)(l), (3), (4), and (5 )in Section VIII, Division 1,but are pneum aticaily tested in accordance with Code Case 1518-3 or2055 be exempted from impact testing by UG-20(f)?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation:Vlll-1-89-249

Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989Edition, 989 Addenda), Fig. -4

Date Issued:November 9, 1990

File: BC90-653

Question: For pressure vesselshat are also operated u nder vacuum, can he internal fillet weldon the flanges shown in Fig. 2-4 sketches 3) , (3a), (4), and (4a) in SectionVIII, Division 1be stitchwelded rather than continuously welded?

Reply: No.

464





Section VIII-1 - InterpretationsNo.28 WII-1-89-250,I-1-89-251,III-1-89-252

Interpretation: VlIl-1-89-250

Subject:Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Addenda), UG:90(b)

Date Issued:November 2, 990

File:C90-725

Question: Would the provisions of U G-90(b) in Section VIII, Diyision 1 allow a productionworker, such as welder, to verify the manufacturing opera tion of weld joint fitup and eld con tour?

Reply: Yes, providedhat thewritten Q uality Control System accounts for such implemen tation,is fully implemented at all times, and that the com pleted vessel meets Cod e requiremen ts.


Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Add end a),UW-Sl(b)

Da te Issued: Decem ber 4, 990

File:C90-743

Question (1): Are the provisions of UW-Sl(a) in Section VIII, Division 1 satisfied when aradiograph, taken after repair,meets all of the requirementsof Article 2 in Section V including theminimum density limitations, even when the density differs considerab ly from tha t of the in itialradiograph for the same weldment?

Reply (1): Yes, as long as all other requiremen ts of UW-51 are m et.

Question (2): Can a weld seam.be accepted after such a procedure as described in Question(1) is performed?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1986 Edition , 1988 Add end a), Appendix 22, 22-3

Date Issued: December 7,1990

File: BC90-686

Question: Is it the intent that themaximum allowable stre ss value for design in 22-3 in SectionVIII, Division 1 be determined using the minimum tensile strength specified in the material speci-fication (Section 11) for the Type, Grade, and Class used?

Reply: Yes.





VIII-1-89-253,III-1-89-254 SectionIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28


Subject: ectionVIII,Division 1 (1989Edition, 989 Adde nda), UW-19

Date Issued:December 3, 990

File:

Question (1): May the m inimum weld size pe r Fig. uw- 9.1 n Section VIII, Division 1 bebased on the required thickness of the thinner stayed plate instead of .th e nominal thickness whenan opening is located in ,th e stayed plate an d th e welded staybolt is outside the area of reinforce-ment?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): May the end of the staybolt that protrudes into the stayed plate be beveled toreduce the bevel needed on the stayed plate and still meet the requirements of W - l9 ( a ) ( l) andFig. UW -19.1?

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): May backing material tha t is left in place be used to achieve full penetrationwelds of welded staybolts as shown in Fig. UW-19.1 sketch (e)?

Reply (3): Yes.


Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1989Edition, 989 Add enda), UG -l27(a )(3)(b)

Date Issued: December 13, 1990

File: BC90-542

Question: Is it permissible under the requirements of UG -l27(a)(3)(b) in Section VIII, Division1 o use a ruptu re disk in co mbination w ith aressure relief valve w hen he disk’sbursting pressureis 300 psig and then the set pressure (pop action) of the valve is 400 psig?

Reply: No.

466





Section VIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28 WI-1-89-255, WI-1-89-256,III-1-89-


Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 1989 Edition, 1989 Add enda ), UG-25(e)

Date Issued: Decem ber 13, 990

File:C90-655

Question: Do the rules of UG-25(e) in Section VIII, Division 1 equire the depth of a telltalehole to be at least 80% of th e minimum required thickness of a seamless shell?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation:Vlll-1-89-256

Subject: Section VII I, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Add enda ), Appendix 1, 1-5 (e)

.Date Issued: Decem ber 13,.1990

File: BC90-688

Question: The equation forA , Formula (4) in 1-5 (e)-i n ection VIII, Division 1,uses t, in th esecond half of the formula. Is t, th e t, of th e small end of th e cone, based on the small diam eter?

Reply: Yes, t, is the required thickness of the cone at the point being considered.


Subject: Section VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Add enda ),UG-lOl(m)(2)(c) nd 17-W ( 1 )

Da te Issued.: December 3, 990

File: BC90-772

Question: When using the formula noted in U G-lO l(m)(2) (c) in Section VIII, Division 1 or aburst test on a dimpled panel per 1 7-l(a )(l) and (e), may a 0.80 efficiency be used as specified in

17-5(a)(l) provided UW -l9(c) and UG-47 have been met?

Reply: Yes.

4

American Society of Mechanical EngineersPYRIGHT American Society of Mechanical Engineerscensed by Information Handling Services



VIII-1-89-258, VIII-1-89-259, WI-1-89-260 SectionIII-1 - Interpretations No. 28


Subject:SectionVIII,Division 1 (1989 Edition,1989 Add enda), Fig.2-4 Sketch (3)


File:

Question: May ANSI B16.5 slip on flanges, utilized as described in Interpretation VIII-77-17,be attached as shown in Fig. 2-4 sketch (3) in Section VIII, Division l?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: ection VIII, Division 1 (1989 Edition, 1989 Adde nda), UCS-79(d)


File:

Question: May a forming subcontractor take exception to one o r both of items (1) an d (2) of

UCS-79(d) in Section VIII, Division 1 f it is unknown at th e time of forming whethe r o r not theyare app licable?

Reply: No,

Interpretation: VllI-1-89-260

Subject:Section VIII, Division 1 (1989Edition,1989 Addenda), UHT-18 and UHT-28


File:

Question (1): A pressure vessel iso be fabricated from SA-508C1. 4 material, and will accom-mod ate both external and interna l attachm ents (e.g,, insulation clips, internal supports, instrumen-tation leads). Weld build-up padsill be used, whichmeet all Code requirements. Ar e theproposedvessel attachments exempt fromhe requirements of UHT-18 and UHT-28 in SectionVIII, Division1 regarding the specified minimum strength requirem ents?

Reply (1):Yes.

Question (2):.Is capacitor discharge welding perm itted in Section VIII, Division 1 for theattachment of instrumentation leads to the vessel’s inside diameter?

Reply (2): Yes.

asme viii d1 (interpretação vol.28)

Documents