For reinforcement of large openings, what methods do people use for calculations?
Thread Content
For situations where methods such as the GB150 equal-area method cannot be used for calculation, the HG pressure-area method can be employed. Since the organization responsible for formulating GB150 does not recognize HG’s pressure area method, is it legitimate to use this method for calculations and then produce a calculation report? If problems arise later on, can the designer’s liability be waived?
GB150-2011 offers an analytical design method, which is really a huge advantage.
It is impossible to exempt the designer from responsibility. Since it has been clearly stated that it cannot be used, if something goes wrong after using it, it is definitely the designer’s responsibility
PV Desktop includes ASME calculations for large openings
If the customer agrees, it’s okay; if they disagree or don’t give a response, it should be not allowed, at most as a reference only
Thank you for your reply. Does your company use the ASME calculation methods for all its large-scale projects?
In the analysis method for GB150, the effect of reinforcement rings cannot be taken into account for open-type reinforcement. Based on this calculation, the wall thickness would have to be very thick.
Stress analysis: some commercial software is quite useful
Bending stress plays a significant role when the opening is large; when it is not possible to perform calculations using the stress method, ANSYS stress analysis is employed (of course, the stress method is also a type of stress analysis). Even with equal-area reinforcement, any problems that occur are the responsibility of the design, as clearly stated in the introduction to GB/T150.
Why must it be an ASME stress analysis? For GB projects, using the ASME method can serve as a reference, but the specifications aren’t the same, right?