My Account Log in

1 option

Validation of Pressure Vessels According to ASME VIII, Division 1 and AD 2000 Standards UNESP/FEG - CAMPUS DE GUARATINGUETÁ, GUARATINGUETÁ - SP - BR

SAE Technical Papers (1906-current) Available online

View online
Format:
Book
Conference/Event
Author/Creator:
Pereira, Mateus Penido, author.
Contributor:
Bimestre, Thiago Averaldo
Castro, Thais Santos
Dias, Erica Ximenes
Grandinetti, Francisco Jose
Martins, Marcelo Sampaio
Reis de Faria Neto, dos Antonio
Conference Name:
SAE Brasil 2025 Congress (2025-10-07 : Sao Paolo, Brazil)
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 online resource cm
Place of Publication:
Warrendale, PA SAE International 2025
Summary:
In this study, using the American Society of Mechanical Engineers - ASME VIII Div.1 and the German AD - MERKBLÄTTER 2000 (that is a code of practice for pressure vessels and other pressure equipment, it was drawn up by the German Pressure Vessel Association which includes many German associations and institutions specialized in boilers and pressure vessels). This pressure vessel had its geometry generated from the Inventor software, which has equipment specification for industrial applications. The validation of two types of horizontal cylindrical vessels was performed: one without and one with four nozzles (A, B, C, D). For this, two common parameters between both standards were considered: the minimum required thickness in millimeters (of the cylindrical shell, elliptical head, and nozzles A, B, C, and D), as well as the maximum membrane stress (in the presence and absence of nozzles). The percentage differences between both standards, considering the membrane stress of the vessel without nozzles, was not significant. However, regarding the vessel with nozzles, the percentage differences between nozzles B and D (18.26% and 13.64%, respectively) are considerable. Finally, for the case of the minimum required thickness, the percentage differences for each of the components (shell, head, nozzle A, nozzle B, nozzle C, and nozzle D) show high disparity (99.2%, 79.7%, 180.5%, 159.2%, 180.5%, 189.5%, respectively). Based on these percentage differences, comments and conclusions are drawn regarding the applicability of both standards in real-world pressure vessel validation contexts. For numerical simulations, Ansys Workbench software [15] was used, as well as DIMy, from the company TÜV NORD
Notes:
Vendor supplied data
Publisher Number:
2025-36-0042
Access Restriction:
Restricted for use by site license

The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.

My Account

Shelf Request an item Bookmarks Fines and fees Settings

Guides

Using the Library Catalog Using Articles+ Library Account