ASME STS(Revision of A5ME 5T) Steel Stacks AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD Sold fo:DOOSAN HEAVY. Buy ASME STS Steel Stacks from SAI Global. 27 Aug The purpose of a stack is to vent process exhaust gases to the atmosphere. The mechanical design of stacks is now controlled in part by air.
|Published (Last):||8 June 2012|
|PDF File Size:||8.56 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.85 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The sections of the stack that do not satisfy eq. And, I suspect that your FY should really be F gamma.
That code has been suspect since the 1st day the 1st edition was aasme. I actually found asme sts 1 older books on buckling that may point me in the right direction near the end of the day today. I am not familiar with this standard but the way I read section 4.
Design of stacks – Modalyse
This also apears to not be the case as FY is on the right side of the formula stronger steel would allow larger thicknesses The pure Asme sts 1 to t ratio is what was throwing me off. Dhengr, im still looking for some of your other references asme sts 1 the number same my coworkers who are puzzled or interested by this is growing daily Once stresses are calculated, the design would require mm plate at the base.
They talk about out-of-roundness of 1 or 2t, and very small differences in edge or lateral loading as having large differences in buckling strength. You would still follow STS for other aspects of the design Vortex shedding, etc. D and t are intimately related in this type of buckling problem.
Our foreign counterparts design the above stack with most thickness around or over 20mm over the lower half of the stack. Compression and Bending F.
And here is where the above asme sts 1 Loads, asme sts 1, wind, eq, ice, etc all come into play We have the cases automated with excel and STAAD and I can see that the thickness provided by my European colleagues of mm are required at the base for this stack to pass design.
I’m not so sure that I would be so bold as to say you have a compact asme sts 1. Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts. Download Now Over the past three decades, 3D printing has developed a reputation as an essential manufacturing process zts prototype parts.
How can asme sts 1 steel have a lower allowable at a constant D? It is purely D to t. Resources Digital transformation may be the most ssme misunderstood and misused term in business discourse today.
Design of stacks
Terio, i also had that thought Asme sts 1 note that since this is the personal opinion of a committee member, it is not endorsed by ASME. The significant discrepancy between the two approaches is explained by the very high overturning force at the top of the stack given by the static procedure, as a result of the very high mass of the supporting structure. I agree that the Asme sts 1 equation makes little sense. Finally, asme sts 1 is noticed that the Scruton number Sc, defined as.
Before i can debate which method is acceptable i have to understand why on Earth the ASME would be limiting thickness based on D in steel stacks. Do you need strakes on this stack?
A lot of variance in opinion. Can anyone comment in agreement or disagreement with the above methodology? Is this interpretation correct? Red Flag This Post Please let us know here why this asme sts 1 is inappropriate.
There should have been asme sts 1 of asme sts 1 standard in their proceedings before it was adopted, and there might well be a code case on this very question.
Table 14 summarises the equivalent seismic loads associated with the first two vibration modes along each direction. There will be a blip in our design criteria, and in our design approach as we move from one theoretical regime, or buckling regime to another. Are you an Engineering professional?
I’ll try to look a little deeper asme sts 1, if I don’t see any more activity on your thread. What do you do when Eq is not satisfied If the answer to the above is yes, what design method is acceptable. With no reference to height in the prerequisite it was just mind-boggling. Thus the large difference asme sts 1 empirical approaches, different guy’s best guesses.
This makes no sense to me. Your back-asswards thoughts are exactly what the senior structural guys i talked to thought, but reversing the signs would make less sense as it would be setting a required asmd thickness of mm