ASME STS(Revision of A5ME 5T) Steel Stacks AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD Sold fo:DOOSAN HEAVY. Fellow Engineers, I am running into an international difference in steel stack design. Per the ASME, STS-1, Section , Eq , allowable stress. 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.

Author: Kagagis Donos
Country: Japan
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Literature
Published (Last): 14 July 2008
Pages: 341
PDF File Size: 20.49 Mb
ePub File Size: 16.36 Mb
ISBN: 198-1-58509-977-9
Downloads: 24453
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Grohn

I have never seen a situation where thickening a plate made a buckling problem worse, at a given stress ets-1, unless it changes the buckling from one mode to another, and their asme sts-1 are based on the former.

A comparison between the base shear and bending moments calculated on the basis of the static procedure and of the response spectrum analysis is asme sts-1 in Table 15, considering a response factor R of 2.

How can thicker asme sts-1 have a lower allowable at a constant D? In reviewing the issue, compression was never the problem Join your peers on the Internet’s largest technical asme sts-1 professional community. Found this in Gaylord and Gaylord, edition.

Design of stacks – Modalyse

I could take about months to get an official response. Consistent improvement in parts stx-1 systems are a standard part of the job.

I don’t think testing ever comes up to the theoretical buckling strength. And, to wonder whether in some cases you should add an amplification factor or work at a lower asme sts-1 to account for low cycle fatigue. They talk about out-of-roundness asme sts-1 1 or 2t, and very small differences in edge or lateral loading as having large differences in buckling strength.

Asme sts-1 you need strakes on this stack?

I think you’re on the right track now. Their formulas are for thin shell, elastic buckling, and the thicker pl. Design of stacks Sts1 Please note that since this is the personal opinion of a committee member, it asme sts-1 not endorsed by ASME. Is this interpretation correct? The allowable longitudinal compressive stresses due asme sts-1 vertical load and and bending moment can be determined by: Given the fundamental frequencies of the chimney, this structure is assumed as rigid for the purpose of asme sts-1 assessment and therefore a static analysis was conducted based on the application of equivalent static loads.

So, it shouldn’t be hard to wrap your head asmd this, but it’s a min. The issue is asme sts-1 design of something like a 1.

Design response spectrum according to UBC and parameters from Table These asme sts-1 and moments were in both cases calculated by combination of the forces in correspondence with the two mode contributions along asme sts-1 direction using the square root of the sum of squares SRSS.

This makes no sense to me. In effect, the above is about what I meant when I said you are moving asme sts-1 of the thin shell regime, but into something of a no-mans land, since this sure isn’t a 16″ round pipe col.

Design of stacks

The biggest curve ball, to me, was no mention or relation to slenderness in equation My company desings and has designed steel stacks by the above 4 cases asme sts-1 years. Are they trying to force you asme sts-1 use a steel with an Fy way higher than the design stresses dictated by buckling with their eq. Am i mis-reading something here?

If your shell is thick you don’t need to check those and you only need to check the requirements of AISC. They don’t have your head scratcher, because they don’t worry about, or design from the standpoint of, asme sts-1 shell elastic buckling.

Digital transformation may be the most frequently misunderstood st-s1 misused term in business discourse today. It asme sts-1 a prerequisite to asme sts-1 the cases for allowable stress design per the asme STS1. Now days, you can’t trace three quarters of the stuff in the codes, their formulas, factors, limitations, etc.

Alternatively, t must increase asme sts-1 you want to work at a higher buckling stress, asme sts-1 less than.

If this was the case i would think there would be thorough documentation on the subject. I’m not sure why the thickness is so high mm. That is my interpretation as well, and this is what I have done in practice.

Yes, my wording was asme sts-1 in regards to table C Equation says i cant go above 16mm when using the design cases that result in a requirement of 22mm They are asme sts-1 forming their poles in 8, 10 or 12 sides, certainly as tall as your stack, and with much higher imposed stz-1 and moments.

Thanks for your reply.