The issue of reinforcing openings after takeover
Thread Content
Regarding the reinforcement of the openings in the tube box connections shown in the drawings, there are issues related to the scope of reinforcement as well as to combined reinforcement – how do fellow marine engineers handle this?
Consider using each hole to limit the reinforcement range~
I agree with what was said above; it’s better to directly limit the reinforcement area for each hole. Although this approach is somewhat conservative, it won’t cause any problems.
Try to lengthen the tube sections or change the orientation of the openings...
Enter the actual value for reinforcement range B based on the location of the welds and tube sheets
As indicated in the diagram, the range is limited during calculation. However, I agree with the view above: if possible, the length of the tube section should be increased as much as possible
This post was last edited by zjq1962 on 2018-1-5 at 16:10. Has it been considered that if the distance between the two holes is less than 4/3 of their average diameter, then no metal material between those holes can be used for reinforcement, and calculations must be done as if imaginary holes were present. At this point, it is necessary to consider whether the diameter of the hypothetical hole still falls within the maximum allowable opening diameter specified in GB150. In this example, the diameter of the cylinder is 1000, and the diameter of the hypothetical hole clearly exceeds this range. Even if, as mentioned on the second floor, each case is considered valid based on its own effective opening range, it is still incorrect; this situation does not apply to this example and is merely a hypothesis.
First, perform individual reinforcement calculations based on the effective range of each reinforcement; once these calculations are successful, proceed with combined reinforcement calculations. Only when both types of calculations are successful can it be considered qualified.