chanock

Let other Pipers know:

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 46 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #3959
    chanock
    Participant

    reza,

    The nonolithic joint is it like monoblock?
    well in this link http://www.oilstates.com/fw/main/Pipeline-Insulating-Joint-455.html you can find it.

    but this say that:

    Pipe Insulating Joints are designed in accordance with ASME Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 1, unless another recognized code is specified. Each PIJ is designed to be at least as strong as a comparably rated pipeline when subjected to external loads.

    #2253
    chanock
    Participant

    reza,

    The nonolithic joint is it like monoblock?
    well in this link http://www.oilstates.com/fw/main/Pipeline-Insulating-Joint-455.html you can find it.

    but this say that:

    Pipe Insulating Joints are designed in accordance with ASME Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIII, Division 1, unless another recognized code is specified. Each PIJ is designed to be at least as strong as a comparably rated pipeline when subjected to external loads.

    #3593
    chanock
    Participant

    Jop,

    If it is definition #2 then also consider the weight and C.G. of the spool, due to the capacity of the crane to be use.

    #2071
    chanock
    Participant

    Jop,

    If it is definition #2 then also consider the weight and C.G. of the spool, due to the capacity of the crane to be use.

    #1874
    chanock
    Participant

    JOP,

    Your comments is about onshore, but on offshore the shipping size. The 54′ x 180′ is the typical size for the barges that would carry prefabricated piping (side taps, expansions curves, risers, goose neck, spools, etc.)

    Regards.

    #1819
    chanock
    Participant

    Hello to all again,

    I try looking for the Weight of the Radial Flow Tees, but i can’t. I need the weight for the tee 20″x20″x10″ and 20″x20″x12″,

    Thanks for your time.

    #1745
    chanock
    Participant

    Nipper,

    my apologies you have reason is on ASME B31.4, i’m sorry was a finger error.

    #1743
    chanock
    Participant

    chaucheung,

    If you have a difference of more 3/32″ between thickness you must make a transition piece, accord with the asme b31.3 (Fig 434.8.6).

    Regards

    #1739
    chanock
    Participant

    Sabir,

    see the TABLE 331.1.1 of the ASME B31.3

    #1729
    chanock
    Participant

    Juan,

    thank you for comments and your time, but in the field not always the things are accord the drafts.

    saludos

    #1639
    chanock
    Participant

    HELLO AGAIN,

    IF THIS PIPELINE IS WITH THE CODE ASME B31.8 AND BUT I NEED MAKE A WPHT CAN I IMPLEMENT THE TABLE OF 331.1.1 ASME B31.3?

    ´´REQUIREMENTS FOR HEAT TREATMENT´´

    THANKYOU FOR YOUR TIME

    #1621
    chanock
    Participant

    11echo,

    the ASME 31.8-2003 don’t say nothing about repair overlap with WPHT. do you would show me some codes about overlaps?

    This problem is because the client needs the technically support for approve it.

    thanks

    #1614
    chanock
    Participant

    You have not explained why the cold bend option was not considered.

    GPSVN,

    BECAUSE THE JOB WAS MADE IT… THE ELBOW HAVE A 1.5″ CLEARANCE (BETWEEN WELDS) AND THE OTHER SIDE WE HAVE OVERLAP WELDS.

    ELL DATA]

    Thanks and happy new year

    #1582
    chanock
    Participant

    Read it and understand it.

    #1573
    chanock
    Participant

    to all,

    i apologize for be so fool.
    really i’m so sorry

    thanks

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 46 total)