HCBBS Forum (English)
Submit Chemical Projects / Find Solutions
Amplify Your Requirements on a Broader Chemical Platform *Engineering · Technology · Equipment · Solutions*
Submit Request

Determination of the welding coefficient for tower equipment

2018-08-14View Original

Thread Content

There is a tower-type equipment unit, about 40 meters high and with a diameter of 1.6 meters; it handles a second type of medium and is classified as a category II vessel. What should be the value used for the welding joint coefficient of its main structure?
Reply #22018-08-15
The selection of the weld joint coefficient is related to the weld type, inspection ratio, and acceptable quality level. Since local inspection is possible for the second group of media, the weld joint coefficient can be set at 0.85. If it is special material equipment, such as titanium, zirconium, etc. To minimize the wall thickness, a welding joint factor of 1.0 can also be used
Reply #32018-08-15
Both cylinder 1 and 0.85 are fine; it depends on your company
Reply #42018-08-15
Some people believe that due to the high pressure and height of the tower, a welding joint coefficient of 1 should be used; I personally think this view is rather questionable.
Reply #52018-08-17
The selection of the welding joint coefficient has nothing to do with the tower height!
Reply #62018-08-18
The welding joint coefficient is related to the thickness used in calculations; if the weld area is subject to stress in certain cases, a value of 1.0 must be used, depending on the requirements of the project
Reply #72018-08-22
We design the welding coefficient of the cylinder to be 0.85, unless there are special requirements from the process.
Reply #82018-08-22
The welding joint coefficient can be selected in accordance with GB150
Reply #92018-08-22
In fact, the selection of the welding joint coefficient is related to the issue of the inspection ratio; unless standards and specifications explicitly require a value of 1, values of 1 or 0.85 can also be used, as both meet the requirements – it’s just a matter of determining which one is more appropriate. Personally, I think 0.85 is a more reasonable choice. To increase the requirements, select 1; it is possible but not economical. There is no best design, only a more reasonable one.

Submit a Project

**Looking for Chemical Technology, Equipment & Solutions?** No Registration Required Broader Platform Exposure | Global Chemical Service Provider Connections

Submit Request — Free Consultation

Disclaimer

This is an automated machine translation of the original thread. Some technical terms may have inaccuracies; the original text shall prevail. Click "View Original" at the top right to access the source page, which supports IP-based automatic real-time language translation. Please watch out for contact details and sales inducements to prevent fraud. All content and translations are for reference only, representing solely the poster's personal views. For enquiries, email service@hcbbs.com.