Você está na página 1de 853

Companion Guide to the

ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code

Criteria and Commentary on Select Aspects of the
Boiler & Pressure Vessel and Piping Codes
Fifth Edition

Volume 1

K. R. Rao
© 2018, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), 2 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA (www.asme.org)
All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this
publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
ASME shall not be responsible for statements or opinions advanced in papers or . . . printed in its publications (B7.1.3). Statement from the
For authorization to photocopy material for internal or personal use under those circumstances not falling within the fair use provisions of the
Copyright Act, contact the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, tel: 978-750-8400, www.copyright
Requests for special permission or bulk reproduction should be addressed to the ASME Publishing Department, or submitted online at https://
ASME Press books are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums or for use in corporate training programs. For more information,
contact Special Sales at CustomerCare@asme.org
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Rao, K. R., 1933- editor. | American Society of Mechanical Engineers, issuing body.
Title: Companion guide to the ASME boiler & pressure vessel code : criteria and commentary on select aspects of the boiler & pressure vessel
and piping codes.
Description: 5th edition. | New York : ASME, [2017] | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017043045 | ISBN 9780791861301 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Steam-boilers--Standards. | Pressure vessels--Standards. | American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Committee. ASME boiler and pressure vessel code.
Classification: LCC TJ289 .C66 2017 | DDC 621.1/830218--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017043045
Dedication to the First Edition
THIS MONUMENTAL EFFORT IS DEDICATED TO THE the formation of an ASME technical divi-sion, the Pressure Vessel
TO TWO SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS TO THE DEVEL- Many of us who became involved in the PVP Division in the
OPMENT OF THE DESIGN-BY-ANALYSIS CONSTRUCTION early years were drafted by the leaders in the field to help prepare
RULES IN THE MODERN ASME CODE. a compendium of the technical information on pressure vessel
This two-volume compendium dedication is not the first recog- and piping technology. The Decade of Progress volumes, as they
nition of the achievements of Bernard F. Langer and William E. were known then, were published by ASME in the early 1970s,
Cooper. The Bernard F. Langer Nuclear Codes and Standards covering the most significant contributions to pressure vessel
Award, established in 1977, provides a posthumous and lasting and piping design and analysis; materials and fabrication; and
tribute to one of these contributors, an intellectual giant who was operations, applications, and components. The Decade of Pro-
instrumental in providing the leadership and statesmanship that gress volumes should be considered the antecedents of these two
was essential to the creation of construction rules for nuclear ves- volumes. Both sets of volumes should be considered as integral
sels and related equipment. William E. Cooper, the first recipient parts of the technical literature supporting the Code and the Cri-
of the Bernard F. Langer Nuclear Codes and Standards Award, is teria document.
another intellectual giant instrumental in the creation of the mod- The PVP Division has acted with great vigor over the years
ern ASME Code. In addition, Dr. Cooper acted in a number of to continue to provide the technical forums needed to support
ASME Codes and Standards leadership positions. It was my plea- improvements in the modern ASME Code. This year marks the
sure to join many of my colleagues in April 2001 for the presenta- Division’s 35th anniversary. When I first became involved in PVP
tion to Dr. Cooper of the ASME President’s Award from the 120th Division activities, the second year had just been completed, with
President of ASME International, William A. Weiblen. That most Vito Salerno as the second Chair of the Division Executive Com-
prestigious award recognized a lifetime of achievement in ASME mittee. Dana Young had been the first Chair, during 1966–1967,
and, in particular, in ASME Code activities. and Gunther Eschenbrenner was ready to become the third Chair,
Bernie Langer and Bill Cooper were essential in both the devel- for the 1968–1969 year. Planning was well underway for the first
opment of the modern ASME Code and in the creation of the International Conference on Pressure Vessel Technology (ICPVT),
forums for technical information exchange that support the Code scheduled for Delft, the Netherlands, in the following year. The
rules. The publication of these two volumes by ASME Interna- plan was to hold such an international conference every four years,
tional is a legacy of that duality. These volumes continue a long with the Secretariat rotating between Europe (1969), the United
and productive relationship between the development of the mod- States (San Antonio, 1973), and Asia (Tokyo, 1977). Nine of these
ern ASME Code and the technical exchanges on pressure vessel international conferences have now been held, the most recent in
and piping technology sponsored by the ASME Pressure Vessels Sydney, Australia, in April 2000.
and Piping Technical Division. This process of technical informa- At the same time, initial planning for the First U.S. National
tion exchange, through conference paper and panel presentations, Congress on Pressure Vessels and Piping, to be held every four
and through refereed paper publication, is an essential step in the years in the United States, was also underway. It was my privilege
reduction to standard practice, standard practice that is eventually to be the Technical Program Chair for the Second U.S. National
embodied in the rules of the ASME Code. Information exchange Congress on PVP in 1975 in San Francisco, and the Conference
at technical conferences and in technical publications goes hand in Chair for the Third U.S. National Congress on PVP in 1979, also
hand with the deliberations of ASME Code bodies. in San Francisco. In addition, the activity within the PVP Divi-
This relationship goes back to the pivotal events leading up to sion was such that we cosponsored ASME technical conferences
the development of the modern ASME Code — the appointment with the Materials Division, the Nuclear Engineering Division,
of the Special Committee to Review Code Stress Basis in the late and the Petroleum Division in alternate years. This has since led
1950s. The principles formulated by that group became the basis to the annual PVP Conference, the most recent being PVP 2001 in
for Section III and Section VIII, Division 2 (design by analysis) Atlanta, Georgia, in July 2001.
of the Code. These basic principles were published by ASME in The paper flow from the technical conferences and the network
1968 under the title “Criteria of the ASME Boiler and Pressure of contributors for the Decade of Progress volumes eventually
Vessel Code for Design by Analysis in Sections III and VIII, Divi- led to the creation of the ASME Transactions Journal of Pressure
sion 2.” At the same time that the work of the Special Committee Vessel Technology in late 1973, only seven years after formation
to Review Code Stress Basis was nearing fruition, leaders in the of the Pressure Vessel and Piping Technical Division. Dr. Irwin
field of pressure vessel design, including Bernie Langer and Bill Berman was its first Senior Technical Editor, with two Technical
Cooper, recognized that an improved forum for fundamental tech- Editors representing the PVP Division and the Petroleum Division.
nical information exchange was needed. The need eventually led to Once again, I consider it a privilege to have been selected as the
iv t Dedication

Technical Editor for the PVP Division, later becoming the Senior Next.” Both articles clearly identified the additional commitment
Technical Editor in 1978. The Journal and the technical confer- that we all share to bring sound information to the attention of the
ences have provided robust mechanisms for the needed technical general public and to policymakers in federal, state, and local juris-
information exchange. dictions. In the almost three decades since the publication of those
But ASME Code rules and the associated technical information two articles, this commitment has been extended, as the reach of
exchange is not enough. In one of the very early issues (Novem- ASME International, the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,
ber 1974) of the Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, two arti- and the PVP Division covers the entire world. We owe a debt of
cles were published on the duty and responsibility of engineers gratitude to these two giants, and these two volumes represent a
and their engineering societies to address public concerns about the “down payment” on that debt.
safety and reliability of power plants. One, by Bernie Langer, was
titled “The Role of the Engineering Societies in Obtaining Public Robert E. Nickell, Ph.D. William E. Cooper, Ph.D, P.E.
Acceptance of Power Plants.” The other, by Bill Cooper, was titled 1999–2000 President
“Nuclear — Pressure Vessels and Piping — Materials: Where to

Dedication to the Fifth Edition

Since the initial first edition, this publication had not been dedicated; dedicating this edition, as well as saluting her for her contin-
for this edition both front and back cover pages have been revised to ued enthusiasm which keeps me going.
show that this edition is considerably enlarged in coverage to reflect
the changing times and development in the Boiler & Pressure Vessel - Late Dr. N. K. Jain, Founder and Executive VP, International
Codes and Standards. Much the same, this fifth edition is dedicated Society of Tea Science who was a close friend and an associ-
to two persons who have immensely influenced in my dedication to ate of mine, although from an entirely different field of exper-
this publication: tise enthused me with his cross-Atlantic discussions about
the value of my participation and contribution. Dr. NK Jain’s
- Dr. K. Indira Rao had immense support since my first envi- passing away in 2016 will cut short the intellectual discourses
sioning this project for the first edition and ever since for and for its value and memory I dedicate this “classic” work,
each of the subsequent editions, for which she was grate- which stimulates me to engage in similar challenging tasks.
fully acknowledged in each of the preceding four editions.
However, for her dedication to the cause of this publication, K. R. Rao, Ph.D., P.E.
as much as I have been and continue to be dedicated, I am Editor
Acknowledgements to the
First Edition
The editor is indebted to several individuals and organizations in My special thanks to Professor Dr. Robert T. Norman, Univer-
the preparation of this two-volume book. Some of them are identi- sity of Pittsburgh, for the untiring pains he had taken in training me
fied for their assistance in completion of this effort. My thanks are to undertake efforts such as these — from their very initiation to
to all of the thirty-nine contributors whose dedicated efforts made their logical conclusion.
this possible by their singular attention to detail, even while they This unique two-volume publication, which Dr. Frederick
succinctly conveyed the voluminous information. Moody aptly called a “monumental effort,” would have never
I wish to thank Dr. Jack Ware, Pressure Vessels and Piping Divi- taken off had it not been for the vision and sustained support pro-
sion who suggested this effort. My thanks are in particular to Martin vided by the staff of ASME Technical Publishing. My thanks to
D. Bernstein who had from the start of this project been my inspira- them for their support.
tion to rally around during several ups and downs. I also thank Dr. Finally, all of this saga-type effort, spread over three years,
Robert E. Nickell for his encouragement to see the end of the tunnel. would have never been possible had it not been for the con-
This effort would not have been possible but for the encourage- stant encouragement and untiring support provided by my wife,
ment and support provided by my employer, Entergy Operations Dr. Indira Rao, that included all of the sundry chores associated
Inc., and in particular by Frederick W. Titus, William R. Camp- with this project. In addition, I wish to thank other members of
bell, John R. Hamilton, Willis F. Mashburn, Raymond S. Lewis, my family, Uma and Sunder Sashti, and Dr. Ishu V. Rao, for their
Jaishanker S. Brihmadesam, Brian C. Gray, and Paul H. Nehrenz. zealous support.

Acknowledgements to the
Second Edition
This second edition following the success of the first edition has Editor intends to once again thank Entergy Operations for their
an enlarged scope including the addition of a third volume. This continued support. Thanks are especially due to Dr. Indira Rao
warranted the addition of several contributors who are all experts whose support in several capacities made this voluminous effort
in their respective specialties. The editor appreciates their contri- possible. My thanks are to the staff of ASME publishing for their
butions, as well as the continued support of the contributors from continued zeal and support.
the first edition.
Acknowledgements to the
Third Edition
This third edition follows the unprecedented success of the pre- Ranganath, Roger F. Reedy, Wolf Reinhardt, Peter C. Riccardella,
vious two editions. Everett C. Rodabaugh, Robert J. Sims Jr., James E. Staffiera, Stanley
As mentioned in the first edition, this effort was initiated with Staniszewski, Richard W. Swayne (Rick), Anibal L.Taboas, Elmar
the ‘end user’ in mind. Several individuals and a few organizations Upitis and Nicholas C. Van Den Brekel.
had provided support ever since this effort started. Similarly the editor thanks the contribution of authors who
In the second edition the success of the first edition was enlarged joined this effort in this third edition. Sincerity and dedication of
in scope with the addition of a third volume, with experts in their the authors who joined in this effort is evident from two instances
respective specialties to contribute chapters they authored. — in one case, a contributor hastened to complete his manuscript
In response to the changing priorities of Boiler and Pressure before going for his appointment for heart surgery! In another
Vessel (B&PV) industry and global use of ASME B&PV Codes case, when I missed repeatedly a correction made by a contribu-
and Standards the scope and extent of this edition has increased. tor, he never failed to draw my attention to the corrections that I
The result of the current effort is in a 2,550 page book spread in missed!
three volumes. Thus, the editor wishes to appreciate efforts of authors who joined
The editor pays homage to the authors Yasuhide Asada, Martin in this edition and worked zealously to contribute their best for the
D. Bernstein, Toshiki Karasawa, Douglas B. Nickerson and Robert completion of this ‘saga’. The authors are Joseph F. Artuso, Hansraj
F. Sammataro who passed away and whose expertise enriched the G.Ashar, Peter Pal Babics, Paul Brinkhurst, Neil Broom, Robert G.
chapters they authored in the previous editions. Brown, Milan Brumovsky, Anne Chaudouet, Shin Chang, Yi-Bin
This comprehensive Companion Guide with multiple editions Chen, Ting Chow, Howard H. Chung, Russell C. Cipolla, Carlos
spanning over several years has several authors contributing to this Cueto-Felgueroso, K. B. Dixit, Malcolm Europa, John Fletcher,
effort. The editor thanks authors who had contributed to the previ- Luc H. Geraets, Stephen Gosselin (Steve), Donald S. Griffin, Kunio
ous editions but did not participate in the current edition and they Hasegawa, Philip A. Henry, Ralph S. Hill III, Kaihwa Robert Hsu,
are Tom Ahl, Domenic A. Canonico, Arthur E. Deardorff, Guy D. P. Jones, Toshio Isomura, Jong Chull Jo, Masahiko Kaneda,
H. Deboo, Jeffrey A. Gorman, Harold C. Graber, John Hechmer, Dieter Kreckel, Victor V. Kostarev, H. S. Kushwaha, Donald
Stephen Hunt, Yoshinori Kajimura, Pao-Tsin Kuo, M. A. Malek, Wayne Lewis, John R. Mac Kay, Rafael G. Mora, Dana Keith
Robert J. Masterson, Urey R. Miller, Kamran Mokhtarian, Den- Morton, Edwin A. Nordstrom, Dave A. Osage, Daniel Pappone,
nis Rahoi, Frederick A. Simonen, John D. Stevenson, Stephen V. Marty Parece, Michael A. Porter, Clay D. Rodery, Wesley C.
Voorhees, John I. Woodworth and Lloyd W. Yoder. Rowley, Barry Scott, Kaisa Simola, K. P. Singh (Kris), Alexander V
The editor appreciates the effort of the continuing contributors Sudakov, Peter Trampus, K. K. Vaze, Reino Virolainen, Raymond
from the previous editions, who had a remarkable influence on (Ray) A. West, Glenn A. White, Tony Williams.
shaping this mammoth effort, few of them from the very beginning The editor thanks Steve Brown of Entergy Operations for his
to this stage. The editor gratefully acknowledges the following help in the search for expert contributors for this edition.
authors Kenneth Balkey, Warren Bamford, Uma Bandyopadhyay, This edition was initiated by me in August 2006 and has taken
Jon E. Batey, Charles Becht IV (Chuck), Sidney A. Bernsen, over 3000 hours of computer connection time. My thanks are
Alain Bonnefoy, Marcus N. Bressler, Marvin L. Carpenter, especially to my wife, Dr. Indira Rao whose sustained support for
Edmund W. K. Chang, Kenneth C. Chang, Peter Conlisk, Joel this effort and participation in several chores related to editing.
G. Feldstein, Richard E. Gimple, Jean-Marie Grandemange, In addition, I appreciate her tolerating my working on it during a
Timothy J. Greisbach, Ronald S. Hafner, Geoffrey M. Halley, 4-month overseas vacation.
Peter J. Hanmore, Owen F. Hedden, Greg L. Hollinger, Robert I. The editor thanks the staff of ASME Technical Publications
Jetter, Guido G. Karcher, William J. Koves, John T. Land, Donald for their unstinted zeal and support in aiming at this publication’s
F. Landers, Hardayal S. Mehta, Richard A. Moen, Frederick J. target of ‘zero tolerance’ for ‘errors and omissions’.
Moody, Alan Murray, David N. Nash, W. J. O’Donnell, David E. Finally, the editor thanks all of you, readers and users of
Olson, Frances Osweiller, Thomas P. Pastor, Gerard Perraudin, this ‘Companion Guide’ and hopes it serves the purpose of this
Bernard Pitrou, Mahendra D. Rana, Douglas K. Rodgers, Sampath publication.
Acknowledgements to the
Fourth Edition
This fourth edition follows the unprecedented success of the pre- ing authors John R. MacKay, Elmar Upitis, Richard A. Moen,
vious three editions. Marvin L. Carpenter, Roger F. Reedy, Richard W. Swayne (Rick),
As mentioned in the first edition, this effort was initiated with David P. Jones, Uma S. Bandyopadhyay, Robert I. Jetter, Joseph
the ‘end user’ in mind. Hundreds of individuals and several organi- F. Artuso, Dana Keith Morton, Donald Wayne Lewis, Edwin A.
zations had provided support ever since this effort started. Nordstrom, Jon E. Batey, Thomas P. Pastor, Dave A. Osage, Clay
The success of the first two editions prompted us to enlarge the D. Rodery, Robert G. Brown, Philip A. Henry, Robert J. Sims Jr.,
scope with the addition of a third volume, with experts in the US Joel G. Feldstein, Owen F. Hedden, Russell C. Cipolla, James E.
and around the world to contribute the chapters. In response to the Staffiera, Warren Bamford, Hardayal S. Mehta, Mahendra D. Rana
changing priorities of Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) industry and Stanley Staniszewski.
and global use of ASME B&PV Codes and Standards the scope Similarly the editor appreciates contribution of authors who
and extent of the third edition had vastly increased resulting in a joined this effort in the current edition and worked zealously to
“mammoth” 2,550 page book spread in three volumes. contribute their best for the completion of this ‘saga’. The authors
The editor in the “acknowledgements to the third edition” paid are James T. Pillow, John F. Grubb, Richard C. Sutherlin, Jeffrey
homage to the authors Yasuhide Asada, Martin D. Bernstein, F. Henry, C.W. Rowley, Anne Chaudouet, Wesley C. Rowley, C.
Toshiki Karasawa, Douglas B. Nickerson and Robert F. Samma- Basavaraju, Jack R. Cole, Richard O. Vollmer, Robert E. Cornman
taro who passed away since the first edition and whose expertise Jr., Guy A. Jolly, Clayton T. Smith, Arthur Curt Eberhardt, Michael
enriched the chapters they authored. Since then it is with profound F. Hessheimer, Ola Jovall, James C. Sowinski, Bernard F. Shelley,
regret editor notes the passing away of Marcus N. Bressler and Jimmy E. Meyer, Joseph W. Frey, Michael J. Rosenfeld and Louis
Peter J. Conlisk who were not merely contributors to this “monu- E. Hayden Jr.
mental effort” but were in several ways the “stanchions” of not only The editor thanks Jimmy E. Meyer for his help in the search for
the chapters they authored but ‘ardent advisors’ from the onset of topics and expert contributors for several B31 Piping Chapters for
this effort to the time of their passing away. this edition.
This comprehensive Companion Guide spanning over several This edition was initiated by me in May 2011 and has taken just
years had several authors contributing to this effort. The editor over a year for completing this edition.
thanks authors who had contributed to the previous editions but did My thanks, as has been since I embarked on the first edition over
not participate in the current edition and they are Edmund W. K. a decade back, are especially to my wife, Dr. Indira Rao whose
Chang, Geoffrey M. Halley, Greg L. Hollinger, Donald F. Landers, sustained support for this effort and participation in several chores
John T. Land, Hansraj Ashar, Barry Scott, Chuck Becht IV, Guido related to editing of this edition. In addition, I appreciate her toler-
G. Karcher and Richard E. Gimple. Most of these contributors had ating my working on it during several vacations.
been associated with this effort from the very beginning and to The editor thanks the staff of ASME Technical Publications for
them the editor salutes them for their signal contribution, direction their continued patience, undivided support and focused effort in
and continued support. aiming once again at this publication’s target of ‘zero tolerance’
The editor appreciates the effort of the continuing contributors for ‘errors and omissions’.
from the previous editions, who had a remarkable influence on Finally, the editor thanks all of you, readers and users of
shaping this mammoth effort, few of them from the very begin- this ‘Companion Guide’ and hopes it serves the purpose of this
ning to this stage. The editor gratefully acknowledges the follow- publication.
Acknowledgements to the
Fifth Edition
This fourth edition continues the unprecedented success of the The editor appreciates the effort of the continuing contributors
previous four editions. from the previous editions, who had a remarkable influence on
As mentioned in the first edition, this effort was initiated with shaping this mammoth effort, few of them from the very begin-
the “end user” in mind. Hundreds of individuals and several organ- ning to this stage. The editor gratefully acknowledges follow-
izations had provided support ever since this effort started. ing authors Elmar Upitis, Roger F. Reedy, Richard W. Swayne
The success of the first two editions prompted us to enlarge the (Rick), Uma S. Bandyopadhyay, Robert I. Jetter, Dana Keith
scope with the addition of a third volume, with experts in the US Morton, Donald Wayne Lewis, Thomas P. Pastor, Dave A. Osage,
and around the world to contribute the chapters. In response to the Clay D. Rodery, Philip A. Henry, Robert J. Sims Jr., Russell C.
changing priorities of Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) industry Cipolla, James E. Staffiera, Warren Bamford, Hardayal S. Mehta,
and global use of ASME B&PV Codes and Standards the scope Stanley Staniszewski, Jimmy E. Meyer, John F. Grubb, Richard C.
and extent of the third edition had vastly increased resulting in a Sutherlin, Jeffrey F. Henry, Anne Chaudouet, Wesley C. Rowley,
“mammoth” 2,550 page book spread in three volumes for the third C. Basavaraju, Jack R. Cole, Richard O. Vollmer, Robert E. Corn-
edition which prompted us to break the third edition into three man Jr., Guy A. Jolly, Clayton T. Smith, Arthur Curt Eberhardt,
books. The fourth edition was strictly confined to “Companion Ola Jovall, James C. Sowinski, Bernard F. Shelley, Joseph W. Frey
Guide to the ASME B&PV Code”. This fifth edition is an update and Michael J. Rosenfeld.
of the fourth edition to the 2015 Code Edition. Similarly the editor appreciates contribution of authors who
The editor in the “acknowledgements to the previous three edi- joined this effort in the current edition and worked zealously to
tions” paid homage to the authors Yasuhide Asada, Martin D. contribute their best for the completion of this ‘saga’. The authors
Bernstein, Toshiki Karasawa, Douglas B. Nickerson, Robert F. are Ralph Hill III, Ed Ortman, Jay Vattappilly, William L. Lowry,
Sammataro and John D. Stevenson who passed away since the first William Newell Jr., Mark A. Gray, Thomas M. Musto, Ross R.
edition and whose expertise enriched the chapters they authored. Klein, Christopher A. Jones, G. Wayne Hembree, Charles Becht
Since then it was noted the passing away of Marcus N. Bressler V, John P. Swezy, Jr., Gary Park, Douglas Scarth, Kang Xu and
and Peter J. Conlisk who were not merely contributors to this William K. Sowder.
“monumental effort” but were in several ways the “stanchions” of This edition was initiated by me during the Atlanta Code Meeting
not only the chapters they authored but were ‘ardent advisors’ from in November 2015 and has taken this long due to several factors for
the onset of this effort to the time of their passing away. completing this edition, including soliciting replacement and new
This comprehensive Companion Guide spanning over several contributors as well as changes in Code Committee leaderships.
years had several authors contributing to this effort. The editor My thanks, as has been since I embarked on the first edition over
thanks authors who had contributed to the previous editions but did a decade back, are especially to my wife, Dr. Indira Rao whose
not participate in the current edition and they are Edmund W. K. sustained support for this effort and participation in several chores
Chang, Geoffrey M. Halley, Greg L. Hollinger, Donald F. Landers, related to editing of this publication. In addition, I appreciate her
John T. Land, Hansraj Ashar, Barry Scott, Chuck Becht IV, Guido tolerating my working on it during several vacations.
G. Karcher, Richard E. Gimple, John R. Mackay, James T. Pillow, The editor thanks the staff of ASME Technical Publications for
Richard A. Moen, Marvin L. Carpenter, David P. Jones, Robert E. their continued patience, undivided support and focused effort in
Cornman, Jr., Joseph F. Artuso, Michael F. Hessheimer, Edwin aiming once again at this publication’s target of “zero tolerance” for
A. Nordstrom, Jon E. Batey, Robert G. Brown, Joel G. Feldstein, “errors and omissions.” Thus, worthy of recording are efforts of Mary
Owen F. Hedden, Mahendra D. Rana, and Louis E. Hayden Jr. Grace Stefanchik and Tara Smith whose unbridled cooperation, sup-
Most of these contributors had been associated with this effort port and advice have made this publication an “ASME Classic.”
from the very beginning and to them the editor salutes for their Finally, the editor thanks all of you, readers and users of this Com-
signal contribution, direction and continued support. panion Guide and hopes it serves the purpose of this publication.
Contributor Biographies
AHL, THOMAS J. on Concrete Pressure Components for Nuclear Service), ASTM,
and NRMCA. He was a contributing editor of McGraw-Hill “Con-
Thomas J. Ahl earned a B.S.C.E. in 1960 and crete Construction Handbook.” Mr. Artuso was the Director of Site
M.S.C.E. in 1961 from University of Wisconsin. Quality Control for the Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley,
He is a Registered Structural and Professional Unit 2. He also supervised construction quality control activities on
Engineer in Illinois. He held the position of Prin- many nuclear power plants during the period of high construction
cipal Engineer in Nuclear & Pressure Vessel activity from the 1970’s to 1980’s.
Design Department, Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.,
Plainfield, IL, (1961–1998), and was engaged in
design and analysis of nuclear related vessels and structural com- ASHAR, HANSRAJ, G.
ponents. Ahl was a Member of ANSI Working Group ANS-56.8
that prepared the ANSI/ANS-56.8-1981—Containment System Mr. Ashar has a Master of Science degree in Civil
Leakage Testing Requirements standard. Engineering from the University of Michigan.
Ahl is a Member of ASCE, Member of ASCE Hydropower He has been working with the Nuclear Regula-
Development Committee, and Conventional Hydropower Sub- tory Commission for the last 35 years as a Sr.
committee. He served as Co-Chair of the Task Committee pre- Structural Engineer. Prior to that Mr. Ashar has
paring the publication “Manual of Practice for Steel Penstocks worked with a number of consultants in the U.S.
ASCE Manual No. 79,” Vice-Chair-ASCE Committee preparing and Germany designing Bridges and Buildings.
the “Guidelines for Evaluating Aging Penstocks,” and mem- Mr. Ashar has authored 30 papers related to structures in nuclear
ber of ASCE Hydropower Committee preparing “Civil Engi- power plants.
neering Guidelines for Planning and Design of Hydroelectric Mr. Ashar’s participation in National and International Stand-
Developments.” ards Organization includes Membership of the NSO and INSO
Two of these publications received the ASCE Rickey Award Committees such as American Institute of Steel Construction
Medal in 1990 and 1994. Thomas Ahl is a member of the Peer (AISC), Chairman of Nuclear Specification Committee (January
Review Group to Sandia National Laboratories and the U.S. 1996 to March 2008), (AISC/ANSI N690); Member of Building
Nuclear Regulatory Structural Engineering Branch for the Safety Specification Committee, and Corresponding of Seismic Provi-
Margins for Containment’s Research Program, 1980–2001. sions Committee.
Mr. Ashar’s professional activities with The American Con-
crete Institute (ACI) 349 Committees include Member of the Main
ARTUSO, JOSEPH F. committee, Subcommittee 1 on General Requirements, Materials
and QA, and Subcommittee 2 on Design. His professional activi-
Joseph F. Artuso is the CEO of Construction Engi- ties also include American Society of Mechanical Engineers
neering Consultants, Inc. He has over 40 years (ASME), Corresponding Member, Working Group on Inservice
experience in developing and managing quality Inspection of Concrete and Steel Containments (Subsections
control inspection and testing programs for con- IWE and IWL of ASME Section XI Code), Member, ASME/ACI
struction materials. He is also actively involved in Joint Committee on Design, Construction, Testing and Inspec-
the Code and Standards writing bodies of ACI and tion of Concrete Containments and Pressure Vessels; Member,
ASME. Mr. Artuso earned a B.S. in Civil Engi- RILEM Task Committee 160-MLN: Methodology for Life Pre-
neering at Carnegie Institute of Technology in 1948 and became a diction of Concrete Structures in Nuclear Power Plants; Mem-
Level III Inspection Engineer at the National Council of Engineer- ber, Federation Internationale du Beton (FIB) Task Group 1.3:
ing Examiners in 1975. He is a registered Professional Engineer in Containment Structures, and Consultant to IAEA on Concrete
the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, Florida, Maryland and Containment Database (2001 to 2005).
West Virginia, as well as being registered as Quality Control Engi- Mr. Ashar is a Professional Engineer in the State of Ohio and
neer in state of California. His memberships in national committees State of Maryland; Fellow, American Concrete Institute; Fellow,
include A.S.C.E. (Task committee on Inspection Agencies), A.C.I. American Society of Civil Engineers; Professional Meer – Post-
(Committees 214, 304 and 311), A.N.S.I. (N-45-3.5 Structural Con- tensioning Institute. Mr. Ashar is a Peer Reviewer of the Papers to
crete and Steel), A.S.M.E. (Committee 359 (ASME Sec. III, Div. be published in ASCE Material Journal, Nuclear Engineering and
2) Construction Materials and Exam.), ACI-ASME (Committee Design (NED) Periodicals and ACI Material Journal.
x t Contributor Biographies

BAMFORD, WARREN versity. He is a registered Professional Engineer. He is a fellow of the

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
Warren Bamford has been a member of Section He has been working as a Mechanical Engineer at the United States
XI since 1974, and now serves as Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) in the office of Nuclear
Subgroup on Evaluation Standards, whose charter Reactor Regulation (NRR) since 2006. Previously, he worked Bechtel
is to develop and maintain flaw evaluation pro- Power Corporation, Stone & Webster Corporation, and Duke Power
cedures and acceptance criteria. He is a member Company. He has been recognized with several awards which include
of the Executive Committee of Section XI, and Technical Specialist Award, Outstanding Technical Paper awards
is a 2007 recipient of the ASME Bernard Langer (Bechtel 1993, 2005), and Instructor of the Year award for his excep-
Award for excellence in Nuclear Codes and Stand- tional achievements, contributions, and innovative solutions to practi-
ards. He is a Life Fellow of ASME, and has taught a course on the cal engineering problems. Dr. Basavaraju has published 22 technical
Background and Technical Basis of the ASME Code, Section III papers, which are of value, and practical significance to the industry
and Section XI, for over 30 years. Warren was educated at Virginia and Engineering community on various topics in the areas of design
Tech, Carnegie Mellon University, and the University of Pittsburgh. and analysis of power plant piping systems and components, Creep,
Warren’s research interests include environmental fatigue crack Fatigue, Flow Induced Vibration, Applications of Finite Element
growth and stress corrosion cracking of pressure boundary materi- Analysis, Extrusion, Weld shrinkage, and Hypervelocity Impact.
als, and he has been the lead investigator for two major programs He contributed 3 chapters for internationally recognized refer-
in this area. He was a charter member of the International Coopera- ence handbooks. Technical papers written by him have broken new
tive Group for Environmentally Assisted Cracking, which has been grounds in providing innovative and cost effective approaches to
functioning since 1977. complex industry issues. He also has peer reviewed several techni-
Warren Bamford has been employed by Westinghouse Electric cal papers. His in-depth knowledge of analytical methods, exper-
since 1972, and now serves as a Consulting Engineer. He special- tise in finite element analysis techniques, and extensive application
izes in applications of fracture mechanics to operating power plants, experience in applying those techniques for design and analysis
with special interest in probabilistic applications. Over 85 technical of power plant piping and mechanical components have earned
papers have been published in journals and conference proceedings. him the respect of his peers and superiors. He has chaired sessions
of the ASME Conferences and he is serving as a member of the
ASME PVP Design & Analysis Technical Committee.
BANDYOPADHYAY, UMA S. Dr. Basavaraju has contributed chapters to the Piping Handbook
(6th Edition, 1992, & 7th Edition, 1999) and the Piping Databook
Bandyopadhyay received his BSME from (6th Edition, 2002) published by McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York, NY.
Jadavpur University (1970), Calcutta, India, In addition, he has reviewed sections of these two internationally
MSME from the Polytechnic Institute of Brook- used reference books. His input, suggestions and contributions have
lyn (School of Engineering, New York Uni- enriched the contents of these publications. Basavaraju provided
versity) (1974). He is a registered Professional support and background information for code changes to ASCE 7
Engineer in the states of New York, New Jersey, code, Tanks Seismic Group.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Virginia, Wyoming Technical Program Representative (TPR) for D&A Track of
and District of Columbia. He has 40 years of extensive experi- ASME PVP/CREEP8 Conference (2007).
ence in design, engineering and manufacturing of pipe supports Dr. Basavaraju is a member of the PVP Design and Analysis
and pipe support products for Water Treatment and Waste Water Technical Committee.
Treatment Facilities, Oil Refineries, Co-generation, Fossil and Serving as chair/vice chair at ASME PVP conference sessions
Nuclear Power Plants. Bandyopadhyay is currently employed by since 2002.
Carpenter and Paterson, Inc. as Chief Engineer and works as a Basavaraju also chaired & co-chaired sessions for ASME
consultant and Registered Professional Engineer for affiliate Bergen- ICONE10 conference.
Power Pipe Supports, Inc. Prior to his current employment, he Member, ASME Section III B&PV Code, SC III SG-D, WGPD
held the positions of Design Engineer (1977–1980), Project Engi- (Working Group on Piping Design).
neer (1980–1986) and Chief Engineer (1986–1992) with Bergen- Member, ASME Section III B&PV Code, SC III SG-D, WGV
Paterson Pipe support Corp. Bandyopadhyay is a member, ASME (Working Group on Vessels).
B&PVC Section III, Working Group on Supports (Subsection NF), Member, ASME Section III B&PV Code, SC III, SWG (Special
since 1993; was an alternate member, Subsection NF (1986–1993). Working Group on Plastic Piping).
He is also an alternate member, Manufacturer’s Standardization
Society (MSS), Committee 403-Pipe hangers (MSS-SP-58, 69, 89,
90 and 127) since 1992.
Jon Batey is an ASME Fellow who has been a
BASAVARAJU, CHAKRAPANI member of ASME Standards Committee V since
1995 and has served as Chairman since 2002.
Dr. Chakrapani Basavaraju, P.E., has over 30 years Jon has served on various sub-tier committees of
of experience, which includes more than 28 years Standards Committee V since 1990 and currently
in the power industry involving design of nuclear is a member of the Subgroup on Volumetric
and non-nuclear power plants, and 3 years in Examination Methods, the Subgroup on General
the teaching profession. He received Ph.D. in Requirements, Personnel Qualifications and Interpretations, the
Mechanical Engineering from Texas A&M Uni- Working Group on Radiography, the Working Group on Acoustic

Emission, and the Working Group on Guided Wave Ultrasonic basis, including fiber wrapped vessels. Mr. Becht has a Bachelors of
Examination. He is also a member of the ASME Post Construc- Science in Mechanical Engineering from Bucknell University, and a
tion Standards Committee and is Chairman of its Subcommittee Masters of Science in Nuclear Engineering from the Georgia Institute
on Inspection Planning. Jon was also a member of the ASME B-16 of Technology.
Standards Committee from 1979 to 1993.
Jon is the Global Inspection Leader for The Dow Chemical
Company in Freeport, TX. In his current role, Jon is responsible BERNSTEIN, MARTIN D.
for inspection performed by Dow or third-party inspectors at sup-
plier fabrication shops. He received a B.S. in Physics from Texas Mr. Bernstein was involved in the design and
State University. His certifications include NDT Level III in Radi- analysis of steam power equipment since join-
ography, Ultrasound, Liquid Penetrant, Magnetic Particle, Visual ing Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation in 1960.
and Leak Test Methods. Retired in 1996, he continued to serve as a con-
sultant to Foster Wheeler and as their representa-
tive on the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
BECHT IV, CHARLES Committee, on which he had served for more
than 25 years. He was Vice Chair, Subcommittee on Power Boil-
Dr. Becht is a recognized authority in pressure ers, Chair, Subcommittee on Safety Valve Requirements, a mem-
vessels, piping, expansion joints, and elevated ber of the Main Committee (Standards Committee) and past Chair
temperature design. He is President of Becht of Subgroup General Requirements and the Subgroup Design of
Engineering Co. Inc, a consulting engineering the Subcommittee on Power Boilers. Since 1986 he and Lloyd
company providing services to the process and Yoder taught a two-day course on Power Boilers for the ASME
power industries (www.becht.com, www.bechtns Professional Development Department. In 1998, ASME Press pub-
.com for the nuclear services division, and www lished Power Boilers—A Guide to Section I of the ASME Boiler
.techtraining.info for technical training); President of Becht Engi- and Pressure Vessel Code that Bernstein and Yoder developed
neering Canada Ltd.; President of Helidex, LLC (www.helidex from their course notes.
.com); and Director of Sonomatic Ltd. (also dba Becht Sonomatic, Mr. Bernstein was active for many years in ASME’s PVP Divi-
www.vsonomatic.com) a NDE company that provides advanced sion. He was also author and editor of numerous ASME publica-
ultrasonic imaging. Chuck was previously with Energy Systems tions, including journal articles on ASME design criteria, ASME
Group, Rockwell International and Exxon Research and Engineering rules for safety valves, flow-induced vibration in safety valve noz-
where he was a pressure equipment specialist. He received a PhD zles, and tubesheet design. Mr. Bernstein obtained a B.S. and M.S.
from Memorial University in Mechanical Engineering (dissertation: in civil engineering from the Columbia School of Engineering
Behavior of Bellows), a MS from Stanford University in Structural and Applied Science. He was elected an ASME Fellow in 1992,
Engineering and BSCE from Union College, New York. Chuck is a received the ASME Dedicated Service Award in 1994, and was
licensed professional engineer in 16 states and provinces, an ASME awarded the ASME J. Hall Taylor Medal in 1998. He was a Reg-
Fellow since 1996, recipient of the ASME Dedicated Service Award istered Professional Engineer in New York State. Mr. Bernstein
in 2001, and has more than 60 publications including the book, Pro- passed away in 2002.
cess Piping: The Complete Guide to ASME B31.3, and five patents.
Dr. Becht is Chair of the ASME B31.3, Process Piping Commit-
tee; Chair (founding) of the Post Construction Subcommittee on BRESSLER, MARCUS N.
Repair and Testing (PCC), and member of other ASME Committees
including the Post Construction Standards Committee (past Chair); Mr. Bressler is President of M. N. BRESSLER,
Post Construction Executive Committee (past Chair); B&PV Code PE, INC., an engineering consulting firm founded
Subcommittee on Transport Tanks; B&PV Code Subgroup on Ele- in 1977, specializing in codes and standards,
vated Temperature Design (past Chair); B31 Code for Pressure Pip- quality assurance, design, fabrication, inspec-
ing Standards Committee; B31 Mechanical Design Committee; B31 tion and failure analysis for the piping, power,
Executive Committee; and is a past member of the Board on Pres- petroleum and chemical industries. He has over
sure Technology Codes and Standards; the B&PV Code Subcom- 54 years of experience. He joined TVA in 1971 as
mittee on Design; and the B&PV Code TG on Class 1 Expansion Principal Engineer and was promoted in 1979 to Senior Engineer-
Joints for liquid metal service. He is a member of ASTM Committee ing Specialist, Codes Standards and Materials. He took early retire-
F-17, Plastic Piping Systems Main Committee; and the ASME PVP ment in 1988 to open up a private consulting practice. His previous
Division, Design and Analysis Committee. experience was with the US Army (1952) where he served as an
Industrial Hygiene Engineer; the Babcock & Wilcox Company
(1955), where he held the positions of Engineering Draftsman,
BECHT, CHARLES V. Stress Analyst, and Boiler Division Materials Engineer; Gulf &
Western Lenape Forge Division (1966) where he became Senior
Charles Becht V, is an experienced engineer famil- Design Engineer, and Taylor Forge Division (1970) as Product
iar with both the application and the development Development Manager. At Lenape Forge he developed a design
of the ASME BPVC Section VIII Divisions 1 for a quick-opening man way for pressure vessels and piping that
thru 3. Specifically, Mr. Becht is a member of the was granted a patent in 1971.
Working Group on Design under the Sub Commit- Mr. Bressler began his activities in Codes, Standards and Materials
tee SC VIII Div 3. Mr. Becht has participated in the in 1960. He has been a member of the ASME B&PV Standards Com-
design of a number of vessels using the Division 3 mittee since 1979 to 2009, and is now a member of the Technical
xii t Contributor Biographies

Oversight Management Committee. He is a member and past Vice American Society for Metals (ASM). In 1999 Dr. Canonico received
Chair of the Committee on Nuclear Certification. He is a member of the ASME Melvin R. Green C&S Medal. He was the 1994 recipient
the Standards Committees on Materials and on Nuclear Power, the of the ASME J. Hall Taylor Medal, in 1996 and 1999 respectively he
subgroup on Design (SCIII), the special working group on Editing was awarded the Dedicated Service Award, and the ASME Region
and Review (SC III), the Boards on Nuclear Codes and Standards XI Industry Executive Award. In 1978, 1979, and 1985 respectively
and on Conformity Assessment. He is the Chair of the Honors and AWS awarded him the Dr. Rene Wasserman Award, the James F.
Awards Committee (BNCS). Mr. Bressler is a member of the ASTM Lincoln Gold Medal, and the William H. Hobart Memorial Medal;
Committees A-01 and B-02 and many of their subcommittees. he was the 1983 Adams Lecturer. He is a member of the State of
Mr. Bressler holds a BME degree from Cornell University Tennessee Boiler Rules Board.
(1952) and an MSME degree from Case Institute of Technology He has written over 100 technical papers and given technical
(1960). In 1989 he received a Certificate of Achievement from talks in U.S., Canada, Mexico, Europe and Asia. He is named in
Cornell University for having pursued a course that, under today’s Who’s Who in Engineering and Men and Women of Science. Dr.
requirements, would have resulted in a Master of Engineering Canonico is an Adjunct Professor at the University of Tennessee,
degree. He was awarded the ASME Century Medallion (1980), Knoxville and on the Advisory Committee of the School of Engi-
and became a Fellow of ASME in 1983. He is now a Life Fellow. neering, University of Tennessee, Chattanooga.
He received the 1992 ASME Bernard F. Langer Nuclear Codes and
Standards Award and is the 1996 recipient of the ASME J. Hall
Taylor Medal. He received the 2001 ASME Dedicated Service CARPENTER, MARVIN L.
Award. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of
Tennessee (Retired). Marvin L. Carpenter graduated with honors from
Mr. Marcus N. Bressler passed away since the publication of the Michigan Technological University (MTU) with
third edition. a B.S. in Metallurgical Engineering. Continuing
at MTU, he received his Masters in Metallurgi-
cal Engineering in 1974. Since graduating, his
BROWN, ROBERT G. career has been focused on welding fabrication
and testing in accordance with the ASME Boiler
Mr. Brown is a Principal Engineer and Director of and Pressure Vessel Code. ASME Code Com-
Consulting for the Equity Engineering Group in mittees first caught his attention in the late seventies and he has
Shaker Heights, Ohio. He has experience as both remained active in the Code ever since. He served on the Standards
an owner-user and consultant providing engi- Committee on Welding, Brazing and Plastic Fusing (IX), Chaired
neering support to refineries and chemical plants the Subgroup on Brazing (IX), Chaired the Subgroup on Materi-
worldwide. Mr. Brown uses advanced skills in als (IX) and Chaired the Subgroup on Plastic Fusing. His major
Finite Element Analysis to provide practical accomplishment included the adoption of the rules for Plastic
and cost effective solutions to solve design and operational issues Fusing as a Part of Section IX and the complete revision of the
related to fixed equipment. P-Number tables. He is currently a Honorary member of Standards
Mr. Brown assisted with the development of API 579 Fitness- Committee IX.
For-Service and has been a consultant for the PVRC effort to Mr. Carpenter gained expertise in production welding, brazing,
develop the new ASME, Section VIII, Division 2, Boiler and Pres- failure analysis, coatings, and material testing while working for
sure Vessel Code, taking into consideration the latest developments major corporations including Westinghouse Electric Corporation,
in materials, design, fabrication, and inspection technologies. The Trane Company, and Bechtel Corporation. His experience
Mr. Brown is an active member of the Battelle International ranges from supervising a Welding Engineering Develop group to
Joint Industry Project on the Structural Stress Method for Fatigue establishing and operating a materials testing laboratory that per-
Assessment of Welded Structures and performs fatigue assess- formed chemical analysis, mechanical testing, metallography, and
ments/reviews of equipment in cyclic service. Mr. Brown also welding procedure and performance qualification.
serves on the ASME Subgroup on Design Analysis and performs In addition to his extensive materials and welding background,
code compliance calculations and interpretations for pressure ves- he was granted a patent in 1995 for a GTAW-HW circular weld-
sels. Mr. Brown is a registered Professional Engineer in the States ing system. He worked extensively for providers of power plant
of Ohio and Pennsylvania. equipment and retired in 2014 from his Principal Engineer position
with Bechtel Corporation. Mr. Carpenter has two children, Scott
and Michelle, and currently resides in Punta Gorda, FL with his
CANONICO, DOMENIC A. wife, Denise.

Dr. Canonico received his B.S. from Michigan

Technological University, M.S. and Ph.D. from CHANG, EDMUND W. K.
Lehigh University. He has over 40 years expe-
rience in pressure parts manufacturing. Dr. Edmund W.K. Chang, P.E., received his BSME
Canonico is currently employed by ALSTOM from the University of Hawaii (UHM), 1969.
POWER facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee. He Mr. Chang is currently employed as the Boiler &
is Past Chair of the ASME Boiler Pressure Vessel Welding Maintenance Engineer with Hawaiian
(BPV) Code Main Committee and a member of the ASME Council Electric Company, Inc., Power Supply Engineer-
on C&S and Vice President-elect Pressure Technology, C&S. He is ing Department, Honolulu, Hawaii. Mr. Chang’s
a Fellow in ASME, the American Welding Society (AWS) and the responsibilities include being in-charge of all

company boiler condition assessments, and National Board (NB) CIPOLLA, RUSSELL C.
“R” and “VR” Symbol Stamp repair programs. Mr. Chang is also
a NB commissioned O/U Inspector, in charge of in-service and Mr. Russell Cipolla is a Principal Engineer for
acceptance inspections. He is a AWS Certified Welding Inspector Intertek AIM, Santa Clara, California (USA). He
(CWI), in charge of welding program, and the company’s NDT has been very active in ASME Code Section XI
Level III in PT and MT in charge of the NDT program. since joining the Working Group on Flaw Evalu-
Mr. Chang’s professional affiliations include ASME Member- ation in 1975, for which he is currently Chair-
ship since 1971; association with ASME Hawaii Section as Chair- man. He is also a member of the Working Group
man 2008–2009, Honors & Awards Committee Chair, Webmaster, on Pipe Flaw Evaluation, Subgroup on Evalu-
Newsletter Editor, and Section Chair 1993–1994; ASNT Hawaii ation Standards, and Standards Committee on Nuclear Inservice
Section Director and Webmaster; AWS Hawaii Section Webmas- Inspection. He has participated in many ad hoc committees as well
ter; and Chair 1996 of Hawaii Council of Engineering Societies. on such topics as environmental fatigue methods, stress corrosion
Mr. Chang is a member of the Department of Mechanical Engi- cracking of austenitic materials, crack growth and fracture tough-
neering, UHM, Industry Advisory Board. ness reference curves for pressure vessels and piping, and steam
Mr. Chang’s professional publications include as a lead author generator tube examination and evaluation procedures. He has also
of “T91 Secondary Superheater Tube Failures Investigation,” 1997, given workshop/tutorials on the technical basis and application of
ASME PVP Conference, Orlando, Florida; and “Tangential-Fired the ASME Section XI flaw evaluation procedures.
Boiler Tube Failures, A Case Study,” 2007, EPRI International Con- Mr. Cipolla received his B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineer-
ference on Boiler & HRSG Tube Failures, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. ing from Northeastern University and his M.S. in Mechanical
Engineering from Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has
been active in the Nuclear Power Industry since the early 1970s
having worked at the nuclear divisions of Dynatech, Babcock &
CHAUDOUET, ANNE Wilcox, and General Electric companies in the area of ASME
Ms. Chaudouet earned a Master of Pure Maths at Section III design evaluations for both naval and commercial
Paris XIII University in 1974 and then obtained power plants systems. Mr. Cipolla has authored/coauthored over
a Mechanical Engineering Degree from ENSMP 80 technical papers on various subjects and assessments from his
(Mines) in Paris-France in 1976. The same year, past work.
she started her career at Cetim (French Technical Mr. Cipolla has specialized in stress analysis and fatigue and
Centre of Mechanical Industries) in R&D in the fracture mechanics evaluations of power plant components in
field of solid mechanics analysed by the Bound- operating plants. He has applied his skills to many service prob-
ary Element Method (BEM). lems to include stress corrosion cracking in reactor system com-
Soon after, she became in charge of the team responsible for ponents and steam turbine rotors/blades, mechanical and thermal
the development of all software developed at Cetim in the domain fatigue in power piping, and fitness-for-service of components
of 2D and 3D heat transfer and solid mechanics. In that role she and supports. He was also involved in resolving the US NRC
had the direct responsibility for the analyses of components by Generic Safety Issues A-11 and A-12 regarding fracture tough-
BEM and for fracture mechanics. In 1984, she became head of the ness and bolted joint integrity. He is well versed in the integ-
Long Term Research Service involved in more theoretical studies rity of threaded fasteners for both structural joints and pressure
and development of design rules for pressure vessels. In the same boundary closures.
year she initiated Cetim’s participation in PVRC (Pressure Vessel In recent years, he has been active in probabilistic methods and
Research Council). She is now retired and working as a consultant acceptance criteria for nuclear steam generators regarding pressure
in the domain of pressure equipment. boundary integrity in compliance with NEI 97-06 requirements.
Since 2003, Ms. Chaudouet has been actively involved in ASME In support of industry group efforts, he has made significant con-
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code organization where she is now tributions to the EPRI Steam Generator Management Program for
a member of the Board on Pressure Technology Codes & Stand- the assessment of tube integrity and leakage performance for vari-
ards and of the Technical Oversight Management Committee. At a ous degradation mechanisms affecting Alloy 600 and 690 tubing
more technical level she is a member of the Standard Committee on materials. He has developed methods for predicting tube burst and
Materials, of SG II/International Material Specifications (currently leak rates under various service conditions, which have become
Chair of this SG), of the Standard Committee on Pressure Vessels, an integral part of the integrity assessment guidelines for steam
and of SG VIII/Heat Transfer Equipment. She is also an active generators.
member of the ASME/API Joint Committee on Fitness for Service.
In France, Ms. Chaudouet is a member of AFIAP (French Asso-
ciation of Pressure Equipment Engineers). She has been a member COLE, JACK R.
of the Liaison Committee dealing with the European Directive on
Pressure Equipment and of the Liaison Committee dealing with the Jack Cole is a Senior Advisory Engineer for
French Order on Nuclear Pressure Equipment. Becht Engineering Nuclear Services Division
Ms. Chaudouet has published over 30 papers in French and in and he is an ASME Fellow. Mr. Cole has over
English in the domain of Boundary Elements, Fracture Mechan- forty years of experience in the nuclear power
ics and more recently on Fitness-For-Service. Most of these were industry, including nuclear waste management,
presented at International Conferences. Member of several PhD nuclear plant construction, and 30 years in com-
theses, she has developed professional courses on these topics. In mercial nuclear power plant design and opera-
the domain of pressure equipment she has also given short courses tion. Prior to joining Becht Engineering, Mr. Cole worked 30 years
on the European Directive (PED). for Energy Northwest, the operator of the Columbia Generating
xiv t Contributor Biographies

Station BWR. At Energy Northwest, Mr. Cole served as the Design CORNMAN, E. ROBERT JR.
Authority responsible for plant Civil/Structural/Stress licensing
basis compliance. Mr. Cole’s work activities have included design Bob Cornman is a Director of Product Engineer-
of pressure vessels and piping systems, development of ASME ing for the Flow Solutions Group of the Flowserve
Design Specifications for pressure components, operability assess- Corporation. He holds a BS degree in Civil Engi-
ments for degraded components, repair and replacement activities neering from Lehigh University and an MBA from
for mechanical components, plant vibration and thermal fatigue Lehigh University. Bob Cornman is a Registered
monitoring and support for major projects such as plant power Professional Engineer in the State of Pennsylvania.
uprate, pump and valve replacement, replacement of the plant con- He is an active ASME member and has been chair-
denser and heaters, and time limited aging evaluations for license man of ASME Nuclear Section III Working Group on Pumps for
renewal. Mr. Cole has served as technical consultant to IAEA in many years.
the area of aging management for mechanical components for plant Bob Cornman’s engineering career spans more than 40 years
life extension and is an instructor for courses in ASME Section III all of which has been spent working for Flowserve or its legacy
Code Design, Piping Design, and Fitness for Service. companies in the design and manufacturing of centrifugal pumps.
Mr. Cole retired from active Codes as Standards participation His primary areas of expertise are in the design, application, and
after serving for 32 years on various ASME Section III com- manufacturing of very large vertical single pumps and vertical
mittees. He is past Vice Chairman of the BPV Committee on multi-stage can pumps. He has authored numerous papers on ver-
Construction of Nuclear Facility Components (BPV III), past tical pump design, applications, and other associated equipment.
Chairman of the BPV III Executive Committee on Strategy and Past projects and work experience has involved major fossil and
Project Management, past Chairman of the Special Committee nuclear power generating stations, large drainage and flood control
on Interpretations (BPV III), past Member of the Subgroup on projects, and pump manufacturing test facilities.
Component Design (BPV III), past Member and Chairman of
the Working Group on Piping, and past member of the Working
Group on Supports (III). DEARDORFF, ARTHUR F.
Mr. Cole has a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Arthur F. Deardorff has a Mechanical Engineer-
Oregon State University (1972) with additional graduate stud- ing B.S., from Oregon State University (1964) and
ies at the University of Washington and Washington State Uni- MS, University of Arizona (1966). He is a Regis-
versity. Mr. Cole is a Registered Professional Engineer. He has tered Mechanical Engineer, State of California. He
published several papers on piping fatigue analysis and vibration is a Vice President, Structural Integrity Associates,
assessment. San Jose, California. His professional experience
includes 1987 to present with Structural Integrity
Associates, San Jose, CA, 1976–1987 with NUTECH, San Jose,
CONLISK, PETER J. CA, 1970–1976 with General Atomic Company, San Diego, CA
and 1966–1970 with The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA. His profes-
Dr. Conlisk’s has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineer- sional associations include American Society of Mechanical Engi-
ing and M.S. in Engineering Science from the Uni- neers and American Nuclear Society. He is a Past Member of the
versity of Notre Dame and Ph.D. in Engineering ASME Code Section XI Subgroup Water Cooled Systems, Working
Mechanics from the University of Michigan. He Group on Implementation of Risk-Based Inspection, Task Group
has forty years experience applying engineering on Erosion-Corrosion Acceptance Criteria, Task Group on Fatigue
principles, computers, experimental techniques, in Operating Plants, and Task Group on Operating Plant Fatigue
and Codes and Standards to solving design of pro- Assessment, and the ASME Code Post Construction Committee,
cessing equipment and vessels in the chemical industry. From 1960 Subgroup on Crack-Like Flaws.
until 1968, he worked in the Aerospace industry and from 1968 until Mr. Deardorff has expertise in fracture mechanics, stress analy-
his early retirement in 1993, Dr. Conlisk worked for the Monsanto sis and reactor systems evaluation, with a strong academic back-
Corporation, the last 19 years in the Engineering Department. He ground in thermal-hydraulics and fluid system. His expertise
was a key member in a team at Monsanto that developed acoustic includes PWR and BWR systems and fossil-fired power plants.
emission examination for fiberglass and metal tanks and vessels. His Art is known internationally for providing ASME Code training
services are now available through Conlisk Engineering Mechanics, in Section III design and analysis and Section XI flaw evaluation.
Inc., a consulting firm he formed in 1994. He has concentrated on
design of tanks and pressure vessel, especially fiberglass composite
(FRP) vessels. Dr. Conlisk is a nationally recognized authority in
FRP equipment design and analysis. He is a member of the ASME EBERHARDT, ARTHUR CURT
committee that developed the ASME/ANSI Standard: “Reinforced
Thermosetting Plastic Corrosion Resistant Equipment, RTP-1.” Dr. Eberhardt has a Bachelor of Architectural
Dr. Conlisk is past chairman and current vice-chairman of the Engineering from Iowa State University. Ames,
ASME B&PV Code subcommittee, Section X, governing FRP IA and a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at
pressure vessels. He is also a past member of the main committee Urbana, IL. He is a Registered Structural Engi-
of the ASME B&PV Code. Dr. Conlisk is a registered professional neer in the State of Illinois and a Registered
engineer in Missouri. Professional Engineer in the States of Texas and
Dr. Peter J. Conlisk passed away since the publication of the Illinois. Dr. Eberhardt is a Senior Consultant at Sargent & Lundy,
third edition. LLC in Chicago, Illinois, where he has worked for over 40 years on

projects involving nuclear plant design and analysis. Dr. Eberhardt Master of Power Piping Award for his work on developing Chap-
has gained a wide variety of structural engineering experience in ter VII Operation and Maintenance. He has focused mainly on
many areas including containment design, dry spent fuel storage the fabrication, erection, examination, and maintenance of power
structures, seismic analysis, blast analysis, plant modifications, piping. He is also a member of the B31 Main Committee and sev-
heavy loads analysis, design criteria development, design basis eral sub committees. Joe is a consulting engineer and the Power
reconstitution, configuration baseline documentation, high-density Practice Lead at Stress Engineering Services, Inc. (SES) in Hou-
spent fuel pool analysis, structural maintenance rule evaluations, ston, Texas. Joe has spent 35 years developing fitness for service
and 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluations. He has worked on projects programs for piping systems. Part of his work is the emergency
associated with more than 14 nuclear power plants. repair of piping and pressure vessels. Since joining SES, in 2004
Dr. Eberhardt has served on ASME BP&V Code Committees for Joe has worked several more emergency repairs, including twenty
more than 23 years. He is past Chair of the Joint ACI/ASME Com- four fire damage assessments and two coal silo cone weld failures.
mittee on Concrete Components for Nuclear Service (also known
as ACI Committee 359), which is responsible for the ASME Sec-
tion III, Division 2 Code for Concrete Containments. He is also GIMPLE, RICHARD E.
a member of the ASME Section III Committee on Construction
of Nuclear Facility Components and contributing member of the Richard Gimple has a BSME from Kansas State
ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards. University (1974) and is a Registered Professional
Engineer. Since 1982 he has been employed by
the Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation.
FELDSTEIN, JOEL G. Previous employment was with Sauder Custom
Fabrication (1979–1982) and Fluor Engineers
Joel Feldstein has a Metallurgical Engineering and Constructors (1974–1979).
B.S. (1967) and M.S. (1969) from Brooklyn Poly- As a nuclear utility employee, he has primarily been involved in
technic Institute. He has more than 30 years’ expe- implementation of ASME’s Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Sec-
rience in the welding field ranging from welding tion III and Section XI during construction and operation activities.
research for a filler metal manufacturer to welding Previous non-nuclear experience involved Section VIII pressure
engineering in the aerospace and power generation vessel and heat exchanger design and construction. At present, as
industries. He began his career in power generation a Principal Engineer, Mr. Gimple provides company wide assis-
with Babcock & Wilcox in 1972 at their R&D Division working on tance in the use of ASME Codes, with emphasis on Section III and
manufacturing-related projects and moved into plant manufacturing Section XI.
in 1984 as the Manager of Welding. There he became familiar with Mr. Gimple has been active in the Codes and Standards devel-
the construction of components for both nuclear and fossil applica- opment process since 1984. Mr. Gimple was the 2005 recipient
tions. His first assignment on coming to Foster Wheeler in 1993 was of the ASME Bernard F. Langer Nuclear Codes and Standards
in the Technical Center as Manager of Metallurgical Services later Award. He is currently a member of the B&PV Standards Com-
taking on the additional responsibility of the Welding Laboratory. mittee (since 2000), the Subcommittee on Inservice Inspection of
In 1998 he assumed the responsibility of Chief Welding Engineer. Nuclear Power Plant Components (since 1994, serving 5 years as
Joel, who is currently Chairman of the ASME BPV Code Tech- Chairman of Subcommittee XI during 2000–2004), the Section XI
nical Oversight Management Committee, a member of the Board Executive Committee (since 1992), and the Subgroup on Repair/
on Pressure Technology Codes & Standards and the Council on Replacement Activities (since 1987, serving as Chairman for 7 of
Standards & Certification, began his ASME Code involvement those years). Past Codes and Standards participation included 6
with the Subcommittee on Welding (the responsible committee for years on the Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards and member-
Section IX) in 1986. In 1992 he became Chairman of the Subcom- ships on the Subcommittee on Nuclear Accreditation, Subgroup
mittee on Welding and became a member of the B&PVC Stand- on Design (in Section III), and three Section XI Working Groups.
ards Committee. He is an ASME Fellow and recipient of the J Hall
Taylor Medal from ASME for the advancement of standards for
welding in pressure vessel and piping construction. He is also been
a member of the BPV Committee on Power Boilers (Section I). GRABER, HAROLD C.
He is also active in other professional societies including AWS Harold Graber works as an Independent Consult-
and the Welding Research Council where he served as Chairman ant. Previously he was with the Babcock Wilcox
of the Stainless Steel Subcommittee, the High Alloys Committee Company in the Nuclear Equipment Division for
and a member of their Board of Directors. 34 years. He was Manager of NDT Operations and
Manager of Quality Assurance Engineering. Harold
Graber is a Member of ASME for 15 years.
FREY, JOSEPH W. He is an active participant on the B&PV Code,
Subcommittee V on Nondestructive Examination. He was Vice
Joe Frey has a BSME from Louisiana Tech Uni- Chair Subcommittee V; Chair, Subgroup on Surface Examination.
versity (1980) and is a Registered Professional He was Member of Subcommittee V on Nondestructive Examina-
Engineer in the state of Texas. He is past Chair tion, Subgroup of Volumetric Examination, Subgroup on Person-
of the ASME B31.1 Power Piping Code Com- nel Qualification and Inquiries.
mittee and has been a member of that commit- Harold Graber is a Member, American Society for Testing Mate-
tee since 1992. Joe is a recipient of the B31.1 rials (ASTM) for 26 years. He was Chairman, Subcommittee E7.01
xvi t Contributor Biographies

on Radiology. His Committee memberships include Committee E-7 (all BPV II). Dr. Grubb is a Fellow of ASM International (the for-
on Nondestructive Examination, Subcommittee E7.02—Reference mer American Society for Metals). He is active in ASTM where he
Radiological Images, Subcommittee E7.06—Ultrasonic Method. has revised several materials and testing specifications and chair-
He is a Member, American Society for Nondestructive Testing man of ASTM’s Wrought Stainless Steels subcommittee.
(ASNT). He is a Past Chair, Cleveland, Ohio Section—1971.
Harold Graber is the recipient of ASTM Merit Fellow Award
(1992); ASTM Committee E-7—C.W Briggs Award (1989); HALLEY, GEOFFREY M.
ASNT Fellow Award (1978). His Certifications include ASNT;
Level III certificates in Radiography, Ultrasonic, Liquid Penetrant Geoffrey M. Halley, P.E. holds degrees in Elec-
and Magnetic Particle Methods. trical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and
Engineering Administration (Masters). He is a Reg-
istered Professional Engineer in Illinois. From
GRAY, MARK R. 1993 to the present he is the President of Sji Con-
sultants, Inc., a technical consulting company,
Mark Gray is a Fellow Engineer at Westinghouse providing services to the boiler industry in the
Electric Company near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. areas of product design, development, trouble shooting and foren-
He has worked for Westinghouse since 1981 in sic investigation/expert witness work. He has 40 years of boiler
areas related to design, analysis, and management industry experience, ranging from research/product development,
of nuclear power plant components and piping design and applications/installation, primarily in the institutional
systems. His work activities have included piping and industrial segments of the marketplace. He held various posi-
stress and fatigue analyses, structural evaluations tions at Kewanee Boiler Corporation from 1968 to 1986, initially as
to support license renewal, and development of Supervisor of Research and Development, and as Vice President –
solutions to industry issues such as surge line stratification, thermal Technical Director from 1979 onwards. From 1986 through 1992
stratification and cycling, pressurizer insurge/outsurge transients, he was president of Halcam Associates a Mechanical Contracting
and reactor water environmental effects on fatigue. His responsi- Company specializing in commercial, institutional and industrial
bilities also include the development of diagnostic and monitoring design/build/service and repair of boiler and HVAC systems. From
system software and its plant specific applications for fatigue and 1959 through 1968 he was employed in the Aerospace and the
transient monitoring. Related to these activities, he has also con- Nuclear Engineering industries.
tributed significantly to the development of fatigue aging manage- Geoffrey Halley was Chair of ABMA Joint Technical Commit-
ment solutions, led Westinghouse Owners’ Group programs, and tee (1981–1986), and has been a member of several boiler industry
participated in EPRI’s Fatigue Issues Task Group and Environ- advisory groups to the USEPA and USDOE. He currently is ABMA
mental Fatigue Expert Panel. He has worked on numerous envi- Director of Technical Affairs, and was Editor of ABMA Packaged
ronmental fatigue projects for plant specific and generic industry Boiler Engineering Manual. He has been an Instructor at boiler
evaluations. industry technician training schools offered by ABMA/NBBI,
Mr. Gray is a member of the ASME Section III Working Group and boiler manufacturers. He has authored a number of papers on
on Piping Design and the Working Group on Environmental boiler related topics, published in The National Board Bulletin,
Fatigue Evaluation Methods. He has co-authored over twenty con- Boiler Systems Engineering, and Maintenance Management.
ference papers or journal articles, and numerous industry reports. Geoffrey Halley currently is a member of the ASME CSD-1
His degrees from the University of Pittsburgh include Bachelors Committee, and the National Board Inspection Code Sub-committee
and Masters Degrees in Mechanical Engineering and a Nuclear on Installation.
Engineering certificate. He is a Registered Professional Engineer.


Louis Hayden has over 40 years of experience as
Dr. Grubb received his B.S. from Lehigh Univer- a mechanical engineer, project manager and vice
sity, M.S. and Ph.D. from Rensselaer Polytechnic president of engineering. This experience has
Institute. He has over 40 years’ experience with been in the design, analysis, fabrication, instal-
corrosion-resistant alloys. His primary areas of lation, startup and maintenance of industrial
expertise are in mate- rials environmental resist- piping and equipment systems have included
ance, behavior and applications. He is the author above and below ground piping and pipelines
of more than 50 papers as well as several hand- in process plants, fossil and nuclear power plants, transmission
book chapters. Dr. Grubb is currently retired from ATI Flat Rolled pipelines and industrial manufacturing facilities. He has managed
Products (Allegheny Ludlum). He is co-inventor of several patented and directed the manufacturer of high yield pipeline pipe fittings
corrosion-resistant alloys. and developed new pipeline closure and flange products as well
Dr. Grubb has been active with the ASME Boiler and Pres- as managed the efforts of new product development and research
sure Vessel Committees since 2001 and is the current vice chair groups.
of BPV II (Materials) and chairman of the ASME Sub-Group on Currently a consulting mechanical engineer and adjunct profes-
Physical Properties for Section BPV II as well as chairman of the sor of mechanical engineering at Lafayette College, Easton, PA.
ASME SubWorking-Group on Materials Data Analysis for Section Previous employers have been Fluor Corp., Houston; Brown &
VIII BPV II. He is also an active member of the Sub-Groups on Root Inc., Houston; Tube Turns, Inc., Louisville; Victaulic Corp.,
External Pressure, Ferrous Specifications, and Non-Ferrous Alloys Easton, PA.

Member of ASME B31 Piping Standards Committee since 1985. been a member of the ASME C&S Board on Nuclear Codes and
Vice Chair ASME B31 Piping Standards Committee 1990–1993 Standards, the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee, and B&PV
and 2001–2004. Subcommittees on Power Boilers, Design, and Nondestructive
Chairman ASME B31 Piping Standards Committee 1993–2001. Examination. He is active in ASME’s PVP Division. Mr Hedden
Member ASME Board on Pressure Technology Codes and was the first Chair of the NDE Engineering Division 1982–1984.
Standards 1993–2005. He has presented ASME Code short courses in the US and over-
Vice President of ASME Board on Pressure Technology Codes seas. He was educated at Antioch College and Massachusetts Insti-
and Standards 2008–2011. tute of Technology.
Vice Chair ASME Board on Pressure Technology Codes and His publications are in the ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel
Standards 2005–2008. Technology, WRC Bulletins and in the Proceedings of ASME PVP,
Chairman ASME Task Group for development of B31.12 ICONE, IIW, ASM, and SPIE. He is an ASME Fellow (1985),
Hydrogen Piping and Pipeline Code. received the Dedicated Service Award (1991), and the ASME Ber-
Member Board on Pressure Technology Codes and Standards nard F. Langer Nuclear Codes and Standards Award in 1994.
Materials for Hydrogen Service Task Group.

G. Wayne Hembree has nearly 50 continuous years
Mr. John Hechmer has a degree in I Mechanical of experience in the field of Nondestructive Exami-
Engineering from the University I of Notre Dame nation (NDE). He began his career after attending
(1957). He joined the I Babcock & Wilcox Co. the DOE (Department of Energy) intensive nine
(now owned by I McDermott, Inc.) for design month Physical Testing curriculum of TAT (Train-
and analysis I work for pressure vessels. His ing and Technology), held at the Y-12 facility of
work was I primarily for the power generation Union Carbide in Oak Ridge Tennessee (1967). He
and I defense industries. His experience included was employed by an NDE service company prior to his induction
project and engineering management, technology development, into the U. S. Army (1969) where he continued performing NDE on
and management. His Power Generation products were for both military aircraft during the early Vietnam era.
BWR and PWR nuclear electric plants. Defense Industries work Upon discharge, he was employed by a piping fabricator in South
addressed Class 1 pressure vessels for the nuclear navy program, Carolina (1971) prior to joining Combustion Engineering (C-E) in
primarily nuclear reactors and steam generators for aircraft carri- 1972 at their nuclear facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. His first
ers and submarines. Research products included Breeder Reactor Level III by examination was acquired in 1972 when he became the
Program, Sodium-steam Generator, Molten Salt Steam Generator. Chief NDE Level III Evaluator over the fabrication/manufacture of
Technology Development was spent in developing tools and pro- nuclear components. In 1976, he transferred to C-E’s Construc-
cedures for design-analysis interfacing with the Research Center tion Services organization at their Windsor, Connecticut facility.
and Engineering Fabrication of Babcock & Wilcox Co. This was He departed C-E in 1987 after performing as Manager of NDE
enhanced by many years of participation in ASME B&PV Com- Services over worldwide NDE operations. He immediately began
mittees, PVRC, and PV&P Conferences. These engineering efforts employment with TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) and retired
occurred for 40 years. after 27 plus years of government service in the power industry in
Mr. John Hechmer has more than 25 publications, addressing 2013. He oversaw the successful NDE completion of three SGR’s
primary and secondary stress evaluation, stress intensity factors, (steam generator replacements) as TVA’s Principal Level III. Mr.
finite element methods and its applications, brittle fracture, weld- Hembree is one of a few that has Manufacturing, Construction and
ing capability for fatigue, and material’s characteristic, examples Utility experience in the NDE power generation industry.
of this are PVRC Bulletins #429 (3D Stress Criteria Guidelines Mr. Hembree has recently performed as Adjunct Professor at
For Application) and #432 (Fatigue-Strength-Reduction Factors Chattanooga State Community College (CSCC) teaching NDE as
for Welds Based on NDE). part of CSCC Associate NDE degree program. He is the owner of
Industrial Image Interpretation & Consulting Inc. specializing in
ASME Code compliant images and ASME Code consulting ser-
HEDDEN, OWEN F. vices. He is twice elected as Chairman of Standards Committee V,
Nondestructive Examination, a member of Technical Oversight
Owen F. Hedden retired from ABB Combustion and Management Committee (TOMC) and a member of numerous
Engineering in 1994 after over 25 years of ASME working groups and subgroups. He has been an ASME Code com-
B&PV Committee activities with company sup- mittee member for nearly forty years.
port. His responsibilities included reactor vessel
specifications, safety codes and standards, and
interpretation of the B&PV Code and other indus- HENRY, JEFFREY F.
try standards. He Continued working part-time for
that organization into 2002. Subsequently, he has been a part-time Jeff Henry currently works as a Senior Associate at
consultant to the ITER project and several other organizations. Structural Integrity Associates, Inc. and formerly
Prior to joining ABB he was with Foster Wheeler Corporation was Director of ALSTOM Power Inc.’s Materials
(1956–1967), Naval Nuclear program. Since 1968 Mr. Hedden has Technology Center in Chattanooga, TN. His pro-
been active in the Section XI Code Committee, Secretary (1976– fessional experience has been concentrated on the
1978), Chair (1991–2000). In addition to Section XI, Owen has service performance of power plant materials, with
xviii t Contributor Biographies

particular focus on high temperature behavior, welding, and the Creep International, Morrison-Knudsen Co. Inc. and Sargent and Lundy
Strength-Enhanced Ferritic Steels, such as Grade 91. He has authored Engineers where he worked on the design and analysis of nuclear
over 60 technical papers. Mr. Henry is an ASME Fellow and is active containment structures. Mr. Hessheimer received his Bachelor and
on a number of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code technical Master of Science degrees in Structural and Civil Engineering from
committees where he chairs BPV II, the Materials Standards Com- Michigan Technological University. He is a Registered Professional
mittee, as well as the Task Group on Creep Strength-Enhanced Fer- Engineer in New Mexico. He is also a member of the American
ritic Steels. He also is a member of BPV I (Power Boilers) and of the Society of Civil Engineers, the American Concrete Institute and the
Management Oversight Technical Committee (TOMC). American Society of Mechanical Engineers. He is a member and
past chair of the ACI/ASME Joint Committee on Concrete Compo-
nents for Nuclear Service (ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
HENRY, PHILIP A. Section III, Division 2 Code for Concrete Containments.

Mr. Henry, Principal Engineer for the Equity

Engineering Group in Shaker Heights, Ohio, is HILL III, RALPH S.
a specialist in the design, installation, sizing and
selection of pressure relief devices and reliev- Mr. Ralph S. Hill III retired from Westinghouse
ing systems. He is currently chairman of the API Electric Company at the end of August 2014
Pressure Relieving System Subcommittee’s Task and formed his own consulting company, Hill
Force on RP 520 related to the design and instal- Eng Solutions LLC. Mr. Hill has over forty
lation of pressure relieving systems. He conducts audits of pressure years of technical and management experience
relieving systems to ensure compliance with OSHA PSM legisla- including more than eighteen years in planning,
tion and ASME, API and DIERs standards, codes and publications. engineering design, construction, and modifi-
He also teaches the official API Pressure Relieving Systems course. cation for the nuclear power industry. Prior to
Mr. Henry is actively involved in the development of techno- retirement, he was a Westinghouse Electric Company Consult-
logy for the API Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) methodology. He ing Engineer for Nuclear Services. In the fourteen years prior to
is co-author of the re-write of API 581, Risked-Based Inspection Westinghouse, he provided strategic planning, system engineer-
Base Resource Document and is responsible for the develop- ing, risk management, process evaluation, and project manage-
ment and implementation of Risk-Based Inspection programs for ment consulting services to U.S. Department of Energy in spent
pressure relief valves and heat exchanger bundles at refining and nuclear fuel, radioactive waste management, and nuclear mate-
petrochemical plants. He also teaches the official API 580/581 rials disposition-related projects. Mr. Hill has extensive experi-
Risk-Based Inspection course. ence in project management, systems engineering, and systems
Mr. Henry provides technical support and engineering consulting analysis for high-level and low-level waste and nuclear materials
to all levels of refinery capital projects. He has been responsible for disposition systems.
the preparation of purchase specifications, bid tabulations, design Mr. Hill has been actively involved as a contributor and a leader
reviews and the development and validation of approved vendors in promulgation of ASME nuclear codes and standards for over
lists. He conducts project safety reviews for construction and pre- 35 years and has been awarded the Codes and Standards Distin-
startup phases of major capital projects. His responsibilities include guished Service Award. Currently, he Chairs the ASME Board on
developing and maintaining engineering specifications in the pres- Nuclear Codes and Standards and the Boiler and Pressure Vessel
sure relief and heat transfer areas and providing overall coordination. Code, Standards Committee for Construction of Nuclear Facility
Mr. Henry is a registered Professional Engineer in the States of Components (Section III). Mr. Hill is past-Chair of the ASME
Ohio and Texas. Subgroup on Component Design, and serves as member and/or
chair on numerous other nuclear code committees. He is actively
involved in bringing risk-informed probabilistic design methods
HESSHEIMER, MICHAEL F. into the ASME Code as well as initiatives to support both advanced
and next-generation nuclear reactors.
Mike Hessheimer is currently the Manager for
Mechanical Environments testing in the Engi-
neering Sciences Center’s Validation and Quali- HOLLINGER, GREG L.
fication Sciences Experimental Complex at
Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, Greg L. Hollinger is a Senior Principal Engineer
New Mexico. Prior to his current assignment, for BWX Technologies, Inc. in Barberton, Ohio.
he managed the Nuclear Power Plant Security He has responsibility for Mechanical/Structural
Assessment programs conducted for the US Nuclear Regulatory Technology Applications and Design Analysis of
Commission and was the Project Manager and Principal Investigator Navy Nuclear Pressure Vessel Components and
for the Cooperative Containment Research Project, jointly funded use of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code.
by the Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation of Japan and the US He chairs the Engineering Department’s Technical
NRC. His technical expertise is focused on the response of struc- Support Team responsible for developing technology procedures.
tures (with a special emphasis on containment vessels) subjected He is involved with both nuclear and non-nuclear ASME Certifi-
to extreme loads due to natural, accident and hostile events and is cates of Authorization for BWXT’s Nuclear Equipment Division.
the author of numerous reports and papers on this subject. Prior to Greg is a Fellow Member of ASME, and was the 2004 recipient
his employment at Sandia National Laboratories, Mr. Hessheimer of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Medal. He is the Chair-
was a consultant in private practice and was also employed by BDM man of the Subgroup on Design Analysis of the Sub-committee on

Design of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Greg is a B16 Standards Committee and currently serves as Vice Chair of
member of the Pressure Vessel Research Council (PVRC) and the B16 SC-N, Valve Committee. He is a past Chair of ASME B16
International Council on Pressure Vessel Technology (ICPVT). He Subcommittee F for fittings. He is active in the flange, valve,
has served on several Boards within the ASME Council on Codes fitting and material committees of B16. In 2017 he received the
and Standards, and he served as Chair of the ASME Pressure Ves- ASME B16 Hall of Fame Medal for lifetime exemplary service
sels and Piping Division in 1995. and leadership to ASME B16 Committees. He is a Member of
Greg is an Registered Professional Engineer (Ohio) with 30 years ASME B31.5, B31.12, B31MTC, and B31 Piping Standard Com-
of engineering practice in power-related industries. mittees. He is a past Chair of the Honors and Award Committee for
both ASME B16 and B31 Standards Committees. He also serves
on the ASME Nuclear Section III Working Group on Valves. He
JETTER, ROBERT I. has served as a USA expert of industrial valves at International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) conferences in the USA,
Mr. Jetter has over 50 years experience in the Yugoslavia, England, France, Italy and the Netherlands.
design and structural evaluation of nuclear com- Guy Jolly’s engineering career spans more than fifty years. He
ponents and systems for elevated temperature has made significant contributions to the piping industry while
service. He was a contributor to the original an employee of a NASA Contractor and a large manufacturer of
ASME Code Cases eventually leading to Sub- valves and fittings. While at Chrysler Space Division in Huntsville,
section NH. For over 25 years he chaired the AL he was the Project Engineer for developing and qualifying a
Subgroup on Elevated Temperature Design (SG- multi-shape piping standard for high-pressure liquid hydrogen
ETD). He is currently a member of the Committee on Construc- fuel systems that was published for use in space vehicles’ pip-
tion of Nuclear Facility Components (BPV-III), the Subcommittee ing systems. While with Chrysler Space Division he was a rep-
on Design, Subgroup on High Temperature Reactors, SG-ETD resentative on the “Marshall Center Zero Leakage Committee”
and Working Groups – High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors, with a goal to reduce leakage from piping and components aboard
High Temperature Liquid Cooled Reactors, Analysis Methods, space vehicles. Mr. Jolly’s accomplishments include the establish-
Creep-Fatigue and Negligible Creep, and Elevated Temperature ment and management of a Nuclear Products Group for the Henry
Construction. Mr. Jetter was a member of a Department of Energy Vogt Machine Co., which manufactured “N” stamp valves for
(DOE) steering committee responsible for elevated temperature the nuclear power industry. He has published a number of papers
design criteria, and was a consultant and reviewer on various DOE including those dealing with “leakage fluid mechanics” and “fugi-
projects. As a long time employee of Rockwell/Atomics Inter- tive emission issues.” Guy A. Jolly, Colonel, USAR, Retired, is a
national, he participated in and directed design activities as first retired 30-year veteran of the Army Reserve Program. His military
and second level manager on the early sodium cooled reactors education included the Air War College and the Command and
and space power plants through all the US LMFBR programs. He General Staff College.
currently consults on the development and application of elevated
temperature design criteria. He was an International Fellow for the
Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation at the JONES, CHRISTOPHER A.
Monju Fast Breeder Reactor site in Japan and co-authored the text
“Design and Analysis of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Com- Christopher A. Jones is presently a principal
ponents in the Creep Range.” member of the technical staff at Sandia National
He is a Fellow of the ASME and received its Dedicated Service Laboratories where he leads the Nuclear Power
Award in 2011. Reactor Containment Integrity Research pro-
gram within Sandia’s Nuclear Energy and Fuel
Cycle Programs Center. Dr. Jones has techni-
JOLLY, GUY A. cal expertise in the areas of computational
mechanics, particularly for transient dynamics
Guy A. Jolly is a consultant engineer for Samshin to include blast and impact loading, beyond design basis inter-
Limited of South Korea for ASME Codes and nal pressurization loading, as well as aging and degradation of
Standards issues. Guy Jolly retired as Chief Engi- cement-based materials. Funded primarily by the United States
neer of Flowserve/Vogt Valve in 2001. He holds Nuclear Regulatory Commission, he has authored a number of
a BS degree in Mechanical Engineering from publications on the subject of containment analysis. In addition
the University of Kentucky and a MA degree in to containment related research, he supports the United States
Mathematics from the University of Louisville. Department of Energy in the risk-based launch safety assessment
He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the for nuclear powered space missions and in the verification and
State of Kentucky with reciprocity capabilities. Guy Jolly is active validation for reactor simulation codes as a part of the Consortium
on the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) B16, for the Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors. Dr. Jones
B31 and Section III Code and Standards Committees. He served serves as a member of several professional committees includ-
on both the American Petroleum Institute Refining (API) and ing: the ASME BPVC Section III Division 2/ACI 359 commit-
the Manufacturing Standardization Society of the Valve and Fit- tee for Design of Concrete Containments for Nuclear Structures
ting Industry (MSS) standards writing committees for more than as well as ACI 349: Concrete Nuclear Structures, and ACI 236:
30 years. He is a past president of MSS. He is an ASME Fellow Materials Science of Concrete. Dr. Jones holds a Ph.D., M.S., and
and received the ASME Dedicated Service Award in 2008. He is a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Texas A&M University where
current member of ASME B16 Subcommittees C, N, F, MTC and he researched novel experimental characterization techniques for
the B16 Standards Committee. He is the past Vice Chair of ASME cement-based materials.
xx t Contributor Biographies

JONES, DAVID P. New Built projects in Scandinavia, including the third reactor
at Olkiluoto, Finland, now under construction. His engagement
Dr. Jones has 40 years experience in structural has mainly been related to issues regarding the reactor contain-
design analysis and is lead consultant and devel- ment structure. During the years, Mr. Jovall has also been heav-
oper on structural design procedures for SDB- ily involved in developing design requirements and guidelines for
63 (Structural Design Basis, Bureau of Ships, design of safety-related Civil structures at NPPs including reactor
Navy Dept., Washington, D.C.). Dr. Jones is an containments. He is Co-Author of a NPP Swedish Industry Stand-
expert on brittle fracture, fatigue crack growth, ard for concrete design in force at the NPP units in Sweden. He
fatigue crack initiation, elastic and elastic-plastic is on the behalf of the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority the
finite element methods, elastic and elastic-plastic perforated plate Main Author of the document “Guidelines for the design of con-
methods, limit load technology, linear and non-linear computa- crete containments and other concrete safety-related structures at
tional methods and computer applications for structural mechan- NPPs” (in Swedish) published 2012. Mr. Jovall is a current mem-
ics. Dr. Jones’s key contributions have been developing computer ber of various ASME Section III and ACI committees regarding
programs that allow use of complex three-dimensional finite ele- design, construction, testing and inspection of concrete contain-
ment stress and strain results for the evaluation of ASME structural ments and concrete nuclear structures including Joint ACI-ASME
design stress limits. He introduced numerical methods to compute Committee on Concrete Components for Nuclear Service (ASME
fatigue usage factors, fatigue crack growth, brittle fracture design Sect III Div 2/ACI 359), Working Group on Modernization (Vice
margins and the like that have now become standards for use in Chair), Working Group on Design, ACI Committee 349 Concrete
naval nuclear design. He is currently working on using finite ele- Nuclear Structures, and ACI 349 and ACI 359 Joint Committee
ment elastic-plastic analysis tools for evaluation of limit load, Task Group.
fatigue, shakedown, and ratchet failure modes.
Dr. Jones has been an active contributor to the ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code Committees; secretary and member of Sub- KARCHER, GUIDO G.
group on Fatigue strength, Member and chairman of the Subgroup
on Design Analysis, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Design, Guido G. Karcher, P.E. is a consulting engineer
and Chairman of the Task Force on Elastic-Plastic FEA. Dr. Jones with over 48 years of experience in the mechani-
was Chairman of Metal Properties Council Task Force on Fatigue cal engineering aspects of pressure containing
Crack Growth Technology. He has also served as Associate Edi- equipment. He retired from the Exxon Research
tor of the ASME Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping. He has and Engineering Co. after serving 30 years as
published over thirty papers on the topics of fatigue, fatigue crack an internationally recognized engineering advi-
growth, fracture mechanics, perforated plate technology, com- sor on pressure vessel, heat exchangers, pip-
putational structural mechanics methods, non-linear structural ing and tankage design, construction and maintenance. On retire
analysis methods, finite element code development for fracture from Exxon Research & Engineering Co. in 1994; he became a
mechanics applications, finite element applications for perfo- Consulting Engineer on fixed equipment for the petrochemical
rated plate analysis (elastic and elastic-plastic), post-processing industry and related industry codes and standards. Guido has also
finite element results for ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code functioned as the Technical Director of the Pressure Vessel Manu-
Section III assessment, limit load technology, and elastic-plastic factures Association, for 15 years, in the areas of mass produced
fracture mechanics. He has been awarded ASME PVP Literature pressure vessel construction and inspection requirements.
Award – Outstanding Survey Paper of 1992 in ASME Journal Guido’s code activities include over 35 years of participation
of Pressure Vessels and Piping and ASME PVPD Conference in ASME, PVRC and API Codes and Standards activities serving
Award – Outstanding Technical Paper form Codes & Standards – on numerous committees and technical development task groups.
July 26, 2000. Dr. Jones received his BS and MS degrees from the He was elected to the position of Chairman of the ASME Boiler
University of Toledo in 1967 and 1968 and his PhD from Carnegie & Pressure Vessel Standards Committee for two terms of office
Mellon University in 1972. Dr. Jones is a Fellow of ASME and has (2001–2007) and was elected to the office of Vice President Pres-
worked at the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory in West Mifflin, sure Technology Codes and Standards (2005–2008). Guido also
Pennsylvania since 1968 where he currently holds the position of served as Chairman of the Pressure Vessel Research Council and
Consultant Engineer. the American Petroleum Institute Subcommittee on Pressure Ves-
sels and Tanks. He has written numerous technical papers on sub-
jects related to pressure containing equipment.
JOVALL, OLA Guido is an ASME Life Fellow and a recipient of the J. Hall
Taylor Medal for outstanding contributions in the development
Ola Jovall has a Master of Science degree in Civil of ASME Pressure Technology Codes and Standards. Guido
Engineering from Chalmers University of Tech- was also recently awarded the 2007 Melvin R. Green Codes and
nology, Gothenburg, Sweden. He is an Associ- Standards Medal for outstanding contributions to the development
ate and Senior Expert of Scanscot Technology and promulgation of ASME Codes and Standards within the USA
AB, Lund, Sweden. His professional experience and Internationally. Other awards include the API Resolution of
includes more than 25 years working in the field Appreciation and Honorary Emeritus Membership of Pressure
of Structural Design Engineering. Mr. Jovall has Vessel Research Council. He earned a B.S.M.E. from Pratt Insti-
during his profession been involved in structural tute and M.S.M.E. from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and is a
investigations of 9 of the 12 reactor containment units present in registered Professional Engineer in the States of New York and
Sweden. Since 2004 he is involved in Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) New Jersey.

KLEIN, ROSS R. Design and Subgroup on Design. He continues as a member of these

Section III groups as well as Subcommittee III and also served as a
Ross R. Klein is the manager of the Stress & Ther- member of section XI and the BPVC Standards Committee.
mal Analysis and Materials Engineering group for Mr. Landers also served as a member of the Board on Nuclear
Curtiss-Wright Corporation in Cheswick, PA. He Codes and Standards and as Vice Chairman. He has served on
has more than twenty years of experience in the PVRC committees and was heavily involved in the PVRC research
design and analysis of pressure vessels and bolted that led to the new seismic design rules in Section III.
closures along with hands-on experience operat- He is an internationally recognized expert in piping design and
ing main propulsion plants in the U.S. Navy. He analysis and application of ASME Code and regulatory require-
is a licensed Professional Engineer in the Com- ments. Mr. Landers has authored over 20 technical papers related
monwealth of Pennsylvania. to design and analysis of pressure components.
Mr. Klein holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in Mechanical Engineer- He is currently involved in providing consulting services to the
ing from the Swanson School of Engineering at the University of utility industry in the areas of Life Extension, Code compliance,
Pittsburgh, and an M.B.A. from the Katz Graduate School of Busi- and Operability issues. Don continues to provide training and
ness. He is currently the Chairman of the ASME Section III Work- seminars on Code Criteria and application internationally. He is
ing Group on Pumps. recipient of the Bernard F. Langer Award, J. Hall Taylor Award,
and ASME Dedicated Service Award.

John T. Land, P.E., has been involved in the LEWIS, DONALD W.
design, analyses and manufacturing of Westing- Mr. Donald Wayne Lewis is the Director of Waste
house’s PWR nuclear primary equipment prod- Management for Westinghouse Electric Com-
ucts for almost thirty years. His product design pany with over 36 years of experience in com-
experience includes reactor internals, steam gen- mercial nuclear power and Department of Energy
erators, pressurizers, valves, and heat exchang- (DOE) nuclear related projects. His experience
ers. Mr. Land also contributed to the design and is on Mechanical/Structural engineering projects
development of the AP600 and AP1000 MWe Advanced Power including spent fuel management, nuclear power
Plants, the Westinghouse/Mitsubishi APWR 4500 MWt Reactor system design, NRC licensing and MOX fuel fabrication facility
Internals, and many of the currently operating Westinghouse PWR design.
domestic and international reactor internals components. In addi- He has spent 26 years in his primary area of expertise which is
tion, he has directed and reviewed the design and analysis efforts related to dry spent nuclear fuel storage and is currently Project
of engineers from Italy (FIAT and ANSALDO), Spain (ENSA), Director for several Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
Czech Republic, and Japan (MHI) on several collaborative West- (ISFSI) projects. He has also served as a design reviewer for the
inghouse international efforts. His experience included five years DOE Yucca Mountain Project concerning spent fuel processing
with Westinghouse as a stress analyst on nuclear valves in sup- and disposal.
port of the Navy’s Nuclear Reactor Program. Prior to working Mr. Lewis is a Member of the ASME Subgroup on Containment
for Westinghouse, Mr. Land spent eleven years with the General Systems for Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste Transport Pack-
Electric Company on the design and development of Cruise Fan agings. He is the author of five publications related to spent fuel
and XV-5A Vertical Take-Off and Landing aircraft propulsion storage which are in the 2003, 2005 and 2013 proceedings of the
systems. He also holds eleven patents from General Electric, and International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radio-
Westinghouse. Mr. Land received his BS in Mechanical Engineer- active Waste Management (ICEM) and 2015 and 2016 proceedings
ing from Drexel University and his MS in Applied Mechanics from of the Waste Management Conference; all sponsored by ASME.
the University of Cincinnati. Mr. Lewis received a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Montana
Over the past thirty years, John has been active in ASME B&PV State University in 1980. He is a Registered Professional Engineer
Code work. Mr. Land is currently member of the Working Group in New York, Ohio, Maine, Iowa, Utah and Colorado.
Core Support Structures and participates in the rule making and main-
tenance of Sub-Section NG. John is also a member of Sub-Group
Design that oversees Section III and Section VIII Design Rules.
Mr. Lowry has served as a member of ASME Code
LANDERS, DONALD F. Committees for 43 years. Currently he is an Hon-
orary Member of Section I-Power Boilers Code
Donald F. Landers, P.E., is currently Chief Engi- Committee following 30 years as a member of that
neer of Landers and Associates. He was General Committee.
Manager and President of Teledyne Engineering He received a BS in Mechanical Engineering
Services where he was employed from 1961 to from the University of Illinois in 1961 and a Masters of Business
1999. Mr. Landers, an ASME Fellow, has been Administration from the University of Oklahoma City in 1982.
involved in ASME Code activities since 1965 He has held Professional Engineering licensees in four states. He
serving as a Member of B31.7 and Chairman of taught the ASME Short Course on Section I-Power Boilers in 2014
their Task Group on Design, Section III Working Group on Piping through 2016.
xxii t Contributor Biographies

In 2012 Mr. Lowry was selected by ASME to lead the editing of MALEK, M. A.
Section VII-Recommended Guidelines for the Care and Operation
of Power Boilers. The editing of Section VII included requested M. A. Malek is a Professional Engineer (P.E.) reg-
input from 10 current and past Code members as well as respond- istered in the state of Maine, P. Eng. Canada reg-
ing to 29 peer reviewers. This effort led to the 2015 Edition as istered in the Province of I New Brunswick and
accepted by Section I-Power Boilers Committee. Prince Edward Island. Mohammad is a Certified
During his career, Mr. Lowry participated and directed the Plant Engineer, CPE, U.S.A., and has more than
mechanical design, construction, startup, revision and upgrading 27 years experience in boiler and pressure vessel
of steam and electric generation for municipal, industrial, utility technology. Presently he is the Chief Boiler Inspec-
and government entities. This work included steam and gas tur- tor for the state of Florida.
bines fueled with gas, oil, coal and nuclear. Mr. Malek has demonstrated leadership in B&PV boiler and
pressure vessel industry. His achievements include developing
and designing a special husk-fired, fire-tube boiler of capacity
500 lbs/hr at 50 psi for developing countries. He has vast knowl-
MACKAY, JOHN R. edge and experience in writing, and enforcing boiler and pressure
Mr. John Mackay has over 50 years experience vessel laws, rules, and regulations. He has written numerous arti-
as a mechanical engineering specialist in boilers, cles and published in several technical journals. Malek obtained
pressure vessels, steam accumulators, ASME his BSME degree from Bangladesh Engineering and Technology,
Code construction, Nondestructive examination, Dhaka (1972) and MBA from Institute of Business Administration,
heat transfer systems, combustion and municipal University of Dhaka (1979).
incinerator design and construction. John has a Malek has been a member of ASME since 1980 and Fellow of
Bachelor of Engineering (Mech.), 1951 from Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh. He is an instructor of ASME
McGill University, Montreal and followed it by numerous courses Professional Development courses, and serves on three ASME
over the years in Management, Management Techniques, and Committees including CSD-1 Committee, QFO-1 Committee, and
Post-graduate engineering and management courses at Concordia Conference Committee of the ASME B&PV Committee. Malek
University. has been a member of the National Board of Boiler and Pressure
Mr. John Mackay was an employee of Dominion Bridge Vessel Inspectors since 1997.
Company Limited in Montreal from 1951 to 1984 and has since
continued to work as a private consultant in his field. His major MASTERSON, ROBERT J.
accomplishments of the hundreds of projects he has been involved
include the Primary System Feeder Pipes for the CANDU nuclear Masterson has a BSME from University of Rhode
reactors, boilers for waste/refuse mass burn disposal systems and Island (1969) and course work for MSME, Uni-
design and maintenance of API Storage Tanks. John has extensive versity of Rhode Island (1973). He is a Registered
experience in the design and construction of heat recovery boil- Professional Engineer in states of RI, MA, IL,
ers for the metallurgical industry. John is recognized as one of the NE, MI and AK, and is currently self-employed
leading practitioners of his specialties in Canada. at RJM Associates in Fall River, MA. Masterson
Mr. John Mackay has been a member of ASME for over is a retired Captain, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
40 years, during which he has served on a variety of committees (1986). His professional experience included New England Electric
engaged in updating existing Codes, introduction of new Codes, System (1969–1970), ITT Grinnell Corporation, Pipe Hanger
and the investigation and resolution of questions referred to these Division, Providence, RI (1972–1979). With ITT Grinnell he was
committees. He has been a member of Section I Power Boiler a Manager of Piping and Structural Analysis for the Pipe Hanger
Subcommittee since 1968 to present time, Chaired it 1989–2004; Division (1974) and developed stress analysis, and testing for
Member Standards Committee, 1971–present; Subgroup Electric ASME Section III Subsection NF and provided training in Sub-
Boilers (SCI) and chaired it in 1978–84; Member & Chairman section NF for ITT Grinnell, several Utilities, AEs and support for
Adhoc Task group on Acceptance Criteria. John was a Member NRC Audit. In 1978 he became Manager Research, Development
and Chair of the Section V Subcommittee on Nondestructive and Engineering. He was Manager of Engineering (1979) at Engi-
Examination; Joint Task group B31.1/SCI. John is a member neering Analysis Services, Inc. East Greenwich RI later in 1990
of Subgroup on General requirements & Surface Examination called EAS Energy Services. He was Vice President of Operations
(SCV); and is a member of Subgroup on Materials (SCI). John (1984) and tasks included NRC audit support, turnkey projects and
was a member of Honors & Awards Committee (B&PV) from valve qualification.
1989–2006, and chaired in 1995–2006. He was a Member Execu- Masterson was an alternate member, Working Group on Com-
tive Committee (B&PV Main Committee) from 1992–2004. In ponent Supports (Subsection NF), 1973–1979; Member Subsec-
addition to ASME John is affiliated with several professional tion NF 1979 to the present. Chaired Task Groups for Subsection
organizations including Engineering Institute of Canada and Que- NF jurisdiction; Chair of Working Group on Supports (SG-D)
bec Order of Engineers. (SC III) since May, 2000 and Member of Committee for the First
John Mackay has several publications and has given lectures on Symposium on Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves, 1989,
engineering topics both in Canada and USA. John was a participant Washington, DC, NUREG/CP-0111.
of several PVP conferences and ASHRAE. He has several hobbies Prior to his present position, he was Chief Boiler, Elevator and
that include Contract Bridge and John is happily married with adult Tramway Inspector for the state of Maine, Deputy Chief Inspector
children. of state of Louisiana and Chief Boiler Inspector, Bangladesh.

MEHTA, HARDAYAL S. Past projects and work experience has involved major oil
refineries, petrochemical plants, fossil, nuclear, solar and alter-
Dr. Mehta received his B.S. in Mechanical Engi- native energy generation as well as cryogenic and vacuum test
neering from Jodhpur University (India), M.S. and facilities.
Ph.D. from University of California, Berkeley. He In addition to his engineering work, Jim is also an instructor for
was elected an ASME Fellow in 1999 and is a ASME teaching courses on ASME B31.1 and B31.3 though out
Registered Professional Engineer in the State of the world.
Dr. Mehta has been with GE Nuclear Divi-
sion (now, GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy) since 1978 and cur-
rently holds the position of Chief Consulting Engineer. He has
over 40 years of experience in the areas of stress analysis, linear- Mr. Miller is an ASME Fellow and has more than
elastic and elastic-plastic fracture mechanics, residual stress 30 years of experience in the pressure vessel indus-
evaluation, and ASME Code related analyses pertaining to BWR try. He has participated in ASME Pressure Ves-
components. He has also participated as principal investigator sel Code Committee activity for well more than
or project-manager for several BWRVIP, BWROG and EPRI 20 years. He is a Registered Professional Engineer
sponsored programs at GE, including the Large Diameter Piping in Indiana and Texas. He is currently a member
Crack Assessment, IHSI, Carbon Steel Environmental Fatigue of the following ASME Boiler and Pressure Ves-
Rules, RPV Upper Shelf margin Assessment and Shroud Integ- sel Committees: Boiler and Pressure Vessel Standards Committee
rity Assessment. He is the author/coauthor of over 50 ASME Subcommittee Pressure Vessels—Section VIII Subgroup Design—
Journal/Volume papers. Prior to joining GE, he was with Impell Section VIII (Chairman) Special Working Group for Heat Transfer
Corporation where he directed various piping and structural Equipment (past Chairman) Special Committee on Interpretations—
analyses. Section VIII Subcommittee Design.
For more than 25 years, Dr. Mehta has been an active member Mr. Miller has been the Chief Engineer with the Kellogg Brown
of the Section XI Subgroup on Evaluation Standards and asso- & Root Company (KBR), a major international engineering and
ciated working an task groups. He is also a member of Section construction company for the petrochemical industry, since 1992.
III Working Group on Core Support Structures. He also has been In this position, he consults on a wide array of subjects including
active for many years in ASME’s PVP Division as a member pressure vessel, heat exchanger, and piping design issues, includ-
of the Material & Fabrication and Codes & Standards Commit- ing application and interpretation of all ASME Code requirements.
tees and as conference volume editor and session developer. His He has had extensive experience with international projects. He
professional participation also included several committees of has provided significant engineering support and advice to KBR
the PVRC, specially the Steering Committee on Cyclic Life and projects throughout the world. In the role as Chief Engineer, he
Environmental Effects in Nuclear Applications. He had a key role has traveled extensively providing engineering support for projects
in the development of environmental fatigue initiation rules that in Brazil, Malaysia, Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Philippine Islands,
are currently under consideration for adoption by various ASME South Africa, United Kingdom, Mexico, etc. in addition to a vari-
Code Groups. ety of projects in United States. He has experience in refinery,
petrochemical, liquefied natural gas, ammonia, phenol, and other
types of projects. Previously, he held responsible positions related
to process pressure equipment at Union Carbide Corporation and
MEYER, JIMMY E. Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation. In addition, he has had over
Jimmy Meyer has over 40 years’ experience in eight years experience in designing pressure vessels for nuclear
refining petrochemical, chemical, power genera- power generation applications with the Babcock and Wilcox Co.
tion and industrial facilities. He is a principal engi- Mr. Miller has a Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering
neer at Louis Perry Group a CDM Smith Company, (cum laud) from the University of Evansville (Indiana).
a full-service engineering and architectural firm
in Wadsworth Ohio. Jim is experienced in over-
all project coordination/management, pressure MOEN, RICHARD A.
equipment, piping design, analysis, specifications,
support design, mechanical system requirements and documenta- Richard (Dick) Moen has been a member of numer-
tion requirements. Areas of technical competence include ASME ous Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code committees
piping and pressure vessel codes, stress analysis, and field trouble- since 1969. Richard (Dick) Moen was an active
shooting piping system support, vibration and expansion problems. member of various Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Mr. Meyer is a member of ASME and has been involved in Code committees from 1969, until his retire-
the ASME B31.1 and ASME B31.3 Section committees for over ment in 2005. During that time span, he served
35 years. He is currently Chair of the ASME B31.3 Process Pip- on the Standards Committee, the Subcommittee
ing Section Committee, Chair of the ASME B31 Pressure Pip- on Materials, the Subcommittee on Nuclear Power, and additional
ing Standards Committee, Vice Chair of ASME B31 Mechanical Subgroups and Task Groups serving in those areas. He is a life
Design Committee, and serves on the ASME Board on Pressure member of ASM International.
Technology Codes and Standards. In the past, Jim has served as Richard Moen earned a BS degree in Metallurgical Engineering
Chair of ASME B31.1 Power Piping Code Section Committee. from South Dakota School of Mines and Technology in 1962, with
xxiv t Contributor Biographies

additional graduate studies through the University of Idaho and the Subgroup on Containment Systems for Spent Nuclear Fuel and
the University of Washington. He has spent his entire professional High-Level Radioactive Material, a member of the Working Group
career in the field of nuclear energy, beginning in research and on High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors, a member of the Sub-
development, and then with commercial power plant construction, group on High Temperature Reactors, a member of the Subgroup
operation support, and maintenance. He now consults and teaches on Component Design, a member of the BPV III Executive Com-
through Meon Technical Services. mittee, a member of the Special Working Group on Editing and
Richard Moen’s primary area of expertise is in materials behav- Review, a member of the BPV III Standards Committee, and an
ior and applications. He has authored numerous papers and has Ex-Officio Member of the ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and
been involved in several national materials handbook programs. Standards. He has co-authored over twenty-five conference papers,
And with his long-time involvement in the ASME Boiler and Pres- one journal article, co-authored an article on DOE spent nuclear
sure Vessel Code, he has authored a popular book entitled “Guide- fuel canisters for Radwaste Solutions, and co-authored two chap-
book to ASME Section II, B31.1, and B31.3—Materials Index.” ters for multiple editions of the Companion Guide to the ASME
His classes are built around that book. Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code.
Mr. Morton received a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from
California Polytechnic State University in 1975 and a Masters of
MOKHTARIAN, KAMRAN Engineering in Mechanical Engineering from the University of
Idaho in 1979. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the state
Kam Mokhtarian graduated from the North-western of Idaho for both mechanical engineering and structural engineering.
University with a Master of Science degree, in 1964.
He worked for Chicago Bridge and Iron Company
from 1964 through 2000, in a variety of assign- MUSTO, THOMAS M.
ments. He was responsible for design and analysis
of nuclear vessels and pressure vessels for a number Tom Musto has a Bachelor of Science in Mechan-
of years. He also provided technical consulting to ical Engineering from Purdue University at West
the engineering staff. Lafayette, IN. He is a Registered Professional
Mr. Mokhtarian has been involved with the ASME B&PV Code Engineer in the States of Illinois and Kansas. Mr.
Committee, since 1980. He has served as member and chairman of Musto is a Senior Manager at Sargent & Lundy,
several committees. He was Chairman of Subgroup Design of Sub- LLC in Chicago, Illinois, where he currently
committee VIII and the Vice-chairman of Subgroup Fabrication and serves as the Discipline Manager for the Mechan-
Inspection. He is presently the Vice-chairman of Subcommittee VIII. ical Engineering Department of the company’s Nuclear Power
Mr. Mokhtarian is also a member of the Post Construction Stand- Technologies business group.
ards Committee and the Vice-chairman of the Subcommittee on During his career at S&L, Mr. Musto has had the opportunity to
Flaw Evaluation. He has also served as an associate editor of the work on a wide variety of projects for nuclear power plants includ-
ASME’s Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology for several years. ing the restarting of shutdown power stations, power uprates, major
Mr. Mokhtarian has been an active member of the Pressure Vessel component replacements, and system upgrades. He also served as
Research Council (PVRC) since 1980 and has served as Chairman of the S&L Program Manager and Mechanical Engineering Lead for
several committees. He is presently the Chairman of the PVRC. He the Callaway Nuclear Plant Buried ESW Piping Replacement pro-
has authored several WRC Bulletins, including Bulletin 297 that has ject, which was the first project in the United States to install high
become a major resource for pressure vessel designers. He has also density polyethylene (HDPE) piping in an ASME Class 3, nuclear
been teaching a number of pressure vessel related ASME courses. safety-related application.
Mr. Musto has been active in the development of ASME Codes
and Standards for non-metallic materials since 2008. He cur-
MORTON, D. KEITH rently serves as Chair of the Nonmetallic Pressure Piping Systems
(NPPS) Subcommittee on Nonmetallic Materials and Chair of the
Mr. D. Keith Morton retired from the Department BPV III Working Group on HDPE Design of Components. He is
of Energy’s Idaho National Laboratory (INL) also a member of the NPPS Standards Committee, the BPV III
after nearly 39 years of working in the Applied Subgroup on Component Design, the BPV III Working Group on
Mechanics group. Mr. Morton gained a wide vari- HDPE Materials, the BPV III Special Working Group on HDPE
ety of structural engineering experience in many Stakeholders and the BPV XI Working Group on Non-Metals
specific disciplines, including piping stress anal- Repair/Replacement Activities.
yses, performing plant walk downs, consulting
with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on plant structural
evaluations, developing life extension strategies for the Advanced NEWELL JR., WILLIAM F.
Test Reactor, performing full-scale seismic and impact testing of
components, developing the DOE standardized spent nuclear fuel Bill Newell, Jr. is Co-Founder/Vice President
canister, and establishing a test methodology that allows for the of Euroweld, Ltd., a supplier of specialty weld-
quantification of true stress-strain curves that reflect strain rate ing consumables and technology. He is also
effects. His most recent work has been as a consultant, supporting the President and Founder of W. F. Newell &
the Department of Energy’s advanced reactor efforts. Associates, a consulting firm that specializes in
Mr. Morton is active in many ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel welding engineering. Mr. Newell has been heav-
Code Committees for Section III. He is the Chair of the Working ily involved in the power generation (nuclear,
Group on Design of Division 3 Containment Systems, the Chair of fossil, hydro), industrial, manufacturing, heavy & highway

construction and auto racing industries for over 40 years, both NORDSTROM, EDWIN A.
domestic and internationally. Particular expertise includes pip-
ing, structural, pressure vessels, valves, and associated compo- On the personal side, Ed is a native of Kansas
nents as they relate to welding, materials, and nondestructive who was educated at the University of Kansas as
testing. Mr. Newell utilizes his diversified experience in imple- an undergraduate and the Massachusetts Institute
menting welding technologies toward procedure and process of Technology where he earned graduate degrees
evaluation, development and implementation of dry/wet welding in both Chemistry and Management – the latter
techniques, corrosion control, and reduction of residual stresses. from the Sloan School. He served in administra-
He also provides primary and third party review of procedures tive positions for 16 years on school boards and
and specifications, including domestic and international research 40 years in the Episcopal Church.
and development. Without an engineering degree, Ed rose to be Manager of Pro-
Clientele ranges from small operations to Fortune 500 corpora- cess Engineering for a chemical company and then to VP Engi-
tions. Mr. Newell has been very successful assisting clients during neering for A O Smith Water Products Division. In the latter post,
planned and unplanned shutdowns or turnarounds as well as new he became active in ASME where he has served on Section IV
projects. In addition to technical consulting, he actively provides for 25 years. This activity continued across job changes to Amtrol
component/hardware failure evaluations and project manage- [Manager, Hot Water Maker Sales]; Viessmann Manufacturing
ment of major turn-key repair operations. Specialized approaches, [COO for US operations]; Gas Appliance Manufacturers Associa-
techniques and/or equipment are utilized depending upon clients’ tion; and Heat Transfer Products.
An authority in his field, Mr. Newell also provides expert tes-
timony in welding-related areas. For nearly four decades, he has ORTMAN, ED
been giving technical presentations for AWS, EPRI, WRC and
other venues. In the last decade, much attention has been given Mr. Ortman earned a BSME from Worcester Poly-
to committee participation with ASME and AWS welding codes technic Institute and is currently a Principal Engi-
as well as making presentations in a variety of conferences and neer with GE Power. Ed has close to 30 years in
seminars. He also prepares and implements training programs for the power industry with GE Power and it’s pre-
management, engineering, craft, supervision and Quality Assur- decessor companies (CE, ABB, and Alstom). In
ance personnel. this time, Ed has worked in engineering and also
Mr. Newell holds an International Institute of Welding (IIW) in research and development. In both roles, Ed’s
International Welding Engineer (IWE) diploma and is a licensed focus has been on boiler pressure parts and piping and the applica-
Professional Engineer in Ohio, North Carolina, South Carolina, tion of associated international codes and standards such as ASME
Tennessee, Texas and Alberta, Canada. He holds four patents and a B&PVC Section I, B31.1, NBIC, and EN 12952. Ed is active on
Bachelor of Science in Welding Engineering from The Ohio State ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Committees and currently serves
University. as the Vice Chair of BPV I on Power Boilers, Chair of BPV I Sub-
Group General Requirements & Piping, and Chair of BPV I Sub-
Group Solar Boilers. Ed is a former member of BPV I SubGroup
NICKERSON, DOUGLAS B. HRSG (now disbanded) as well as a former member of the NBIC
Subcommittee on Repairs and Alterations.
Douglas B. Nickerson graduated from CalTech
with a BSME. He was a registered Engineer in
the State of California and is a Fellow of ASME. OSAGE, DAVID A.
He worked in the Aerospace Industry until 1965
when he founded his consulting business, Stress Mr. Osage, President and CEO of the Equity
Analysis Associates. During his tenure in the Engineering Group in Shaker Heights, Ohio, is
Aerospace Industry he developed the Hi-V/L ® internationally recognized as an industry expert
pump for aerocraft boosterpump application. He was active in and leader in the development and use of FFS
dynamic analyses of pumps and valves as a consultant to most of technology. As the architect and principal inves-
the commercial pump manufacturers including those manufactur- tigator of API 579 Fitness-For-Service, he devel-
ing nuclear pumps. oped many of the assessment methodologies and
As a corollary to the dynamic analysis of pumps and valves supporting technical information. As the chairperson for the API/
Mr. Nickerson developed a number of computer programs to carry ASME Joint Committee on Fitness-For-Service, he was instru-
out these analyses. Some of these programs were successfully mar- mental in completing the update to API 579 entitled API 579-1/
keted. Not only active in Engineering he helped organize the Fluid ASME FFS-1 Fitness-For-Service. Mr. Osage provides instruction
Machinery Section of the Local ASME Section. In recognition of on Fitness-For-Service technology to the international community
his activities he was made “Engineer of the Month” of Southern under the API University and ASME Master Class Programs.
California for August 1973. Mr. Osage is also a recognized expert in the design of new equip-
Mr. Nickerson was on the SURF Board of CalTech and was for- ment. As the lead investigator of the new ASME, Section VIII, Divi-
merly its Chairman. sion 2, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (VIII-2), he developed a new
Douglas Nickerson had served on a number of ASME Section III organization and writing style for this code and was responsible for
Committees and was Chairman of QR Subcommittee of QME. introducing the latest developments in materials, design, fabrication
Mr. Douglas B. Nickerson passed away since the completion of and inspection technologies. These technologies include a new brit-
the first edition. tle fracture evaluation method, new design-by-analysis procedures
xxvi t Contributor Biographies

including the introduction of elastic-plastic analysis methods, and a Committee, Board on Pressure Vessel Technology and Council
new fatigue method for welded joints. Mr. Osage is currently teaching on Codes and Standards. His principal accomplishment is his
ASME Master Classes in design-by-analysis and fatigue that covers role for the publication of common rules in ASME Code, Euro-
the background of existing rules in VIII-2 as well as next generation pean Code and French Code for the design of tube-sheets and
methods of analysis. expansion bellows. Osweiller is the recipient of several awards
Mr. Osage was a lead investigator in revamping the API Risk- and certificates from ASME and PVP and was elevated to the
Based Inspection (RBI) technology and software. The main focus of grade of Fellow by ASME in 2001 and is listed in the Who’s
this effort was a clean sheet re-write of API 581 Risk-Based Inspection Who in the World.
and the development of a new version of the API RBI software. He
is currently working on the next generation of RBI technology where
Fitness-For-Service assessment procedures will be used to compute PARK, GARY
the Probability of Failure for Risk-Based Inspection.
Mr. Osage is the Chairman of the Board of the Welding Research Gary Park is a Senior Program Engineer with
Council. The Welding Research Council (WRC) now incorporates Iddeal Solutions LLC. Mr. Park has worked
both the Materials Properties Council (MPC) and the Pressure Ves- in the Nuclear Industry since 1977. He has
sel Research Council (PVRC). These councils were created by the achieved Level III in many Nondestructive
Engineering Foundation, a coordinating organization of the major Examination Methods and managed Nuclear
engineering societies that was formed over one hundred years ago, Inservice Inspection Program both govern-
to meet the industry’s needs for knowledge regarding the proper- ment and utility. Mr. Park is currently the Chair of the Boiler
ties and performance of materials in engineering applications. Mr. and Pressure Vessel Standards Committee on Nuclear Inservice
Osage will be working to ensure that the vast amount of technology Inspection. He sits on the Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards
and data of these organizations is preserved and made available to as an Ex-Officio Member. He has been a member of the ASME
industry. Committees since 1996. Mr. Park has authored PVP Papers con-
Mr. Osage is an ASME Fellow, a licensed professional Engineer in cerning the change with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Sec-
the states of Ohio and Michigan and an EY Entrepreneur of the Year, tion XI Code. He has participated in the ASME Nuclear Training
2014 Regional Award Winner. Seminars providing presentation on ASME Code Pre-Service
As an Adjunct Visiting Assistant Professor at Stevens Institute of and Inservice Inspection and Testing along with Lessons from
Technology, Mr. Osage has taught graduate level courses in strength Past Construction Problems. Mr. Park is currently working with
of materials and elasticity, structural analysis and finite element meth- a number of utilities in updating their ASME Section XI Inspec-
ods, and structural optimization. tion Programs.


Francis Osweiller got international recognition Mr. Pastor has over forty years’ experience work-
for his expertise in French, European and ASME ing in the areas of stress analysis and pressure
Pressure Vessel Codes & Standards. He has been vessel design. He holds a Bachelors and Masters
the head of the French delegation to CEN/TC 54 degree in Civil Engineering from the University
(European Technical Committee for Unfired Pres- of Connecticut, with emphasis on structural design
sure Vessels) for several years and has chaired sev- and analysis.
eral committees such as Simple Pressure Vessels, Mr. Pastor began his career with Combustion
Testing & Inspection, Tubesheets and Bellows. Mr. Osweiller has Engineering in 1977, where he was a member of the structural
been actively involved in Europe with the development of the Pres- analysis group, responsible for performing load analyses of nuclear
sure Equipment Directive and the new CEN Standard for Unfired reactor internals subject to significant expertise in performing
Pressure Vessels. He gave several courses on these issues in France finite element analyses and scientific programming.
UK and USA. As member of the Main Committee of CODAP, he In 1986 Mr. Pastor joined the Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection
developed several design rules for the French Pressure Vessel Code and Insurance Co. (HSB) working in the Codes and Standards Group
(CODAP). His main contribution was the development of Tubesheet in Hartford, Ct. During his 31 year tenure at HSB, Mr. Pastor rose
Heat-exchanger rules to replace the existing (TEMA) rules. from staff engineer, to Manager Codes & Standards, Director, and
Francis Osweiller obtained a Mechanical Engineering degree in presently Vice-President Code & Standards. He has managed the
Paris, France. He started his career at CETIM-France with FEM Codes & Standards (C&S) Group for over 25 years, and led the
analysis applied to pressure vessels. He has published more than development of several knowledge based databases which are used
40 papers in France, UK, Germany and US on European Codes, today to provide Code technical support to over 3000 ASME Cer-
ASME Code and Pressure Equipment Directive and gave lectures tificate Holders and Inspectors worldwide. Mr. Pastor’s ASME code
at AFIAP, ICPVT (International Conference of Pressure Vessel expertise is in pressure vessels, and he has taught basic to advanced
Technology) and ASME-PVP (Pressure Vessel & Piping Confer- seminars on Section VIII, Division 1 over 150 times to audiences
ence). He has been the representative for France at ICPVT and around the world. He has authored numerous technical papers on the
ISO/TC11. subject of stress analysis and ASME Code developments, Mr. Pastor
Since 1985 Osweiller has been actively involved in ASME is a licensed Professional Engineer in the states of Connecticut
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code organization where he is mem- and Indiana. He is currently serves on several ASME Committees
ber of SCII/International Material Specifications, SCSVIII/ including the Board on Pressure Technology Codes & Standards
SWG on Heat Transfer Equipment, Post Construction Main (Chairman), BPV Technical Oversight Management Committee

(Chairman), Standards Committee on Pressure Vessels – BPV VIII, RANA, MAHENDRA D.

and the Subgroups Design and General Requirements – BPV VIII.
Mahendra, an ASME Fellow has a bachelor’s
degree in mechanical engineering from M.S. Uni-
versity in Baroda, India, and a master’s degree in
PILLOW, JAMES T. mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute
Mr. James (Jim) Pillow has over 35 years expe- of Technology, Chicago, Illinois. He is a regis-
rience as a quality assurance and quality control tered professional engineer in New York State.
specialist in installation, repair and maintenance He is an Engineering Fellow working in the
of ASME power boilers, pressure vessels and Engineering Department of Praxair, Inc. for the last 38 years. He is
ancillary equipment in utility and industrial power involved in the areas of fracture mechanics, pressure vessel design,
plants. Before joining Common Arc in 2007 as pressure vessel development, and materials testing. He is also
Chair of the Operating Committee, Jim worked involved in the structural integrity assessment, and fracture control
for over 30 years with APComPower, a wholly programs of pressure vessels. He is the Chairman of ASME Sec-
owned subsidiary of Alstom Power Inc., in Windsor, Connecticut. tion XII Transport Tanks Standards Committee. He is a member of
While there he managed the company’s quality, welding, NDE and several other ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code committees:
construction engineering groups. member of Section VIII Standards Committee, member of joint
Jim has been a member of the American Society of Mechani- API/ASME Fitness for Service Committee, member of the Techni-
cal Engineers for nearly 25 years, during which he has been cal Oversight Management Committee of the Boiler and Pressure
actively involved in numerous committees, subgroups and task Vessel Code and the member of Board on Pressure Technology,
groups, including: BPV I, Standards Committee – Power Boilers Codes and Standards. Mahendra is also a member of several ISO,
(Member 1997–present); BPV I – Subgroup General Requirements ASTM and CGA (Compress Gas Association) standards commit-
(Member 1988–present); BPV I – Subgroup Fabrication & Exami- tees. He has received several awards from the Pressure Vessel and
nation (Member 1988–present, Secretary 2001–2004, Chair 2004– Piping Division for his contribution in organizing Codes and Stand-
present); and the Board on Conformity Assessment (Member 2003– ards sessions in Pressure Vessel and Piping Conferences. He is also
2011). Jim has also been an active participant on the Committee on the recipient of ASME J. Hall Taylor Medal. He has given several
National Board Inspection Code (NBIC–2000 to present), the NBIC lectures in the pressure vessel technology topics in the USA and
Subcommittee-Repairs and Alterations (2002–present), and is cur- abroad. He has taught a course on ASME Section VIII, Division 1
rently Chair, NBIC Repairs and Alterations Subgroup – Specific. to ASME section of Buffalo New York. He is the co-recipient of
Jim is a recipient of the ASME Dedicated Service Award and two patents and the co-author of over 30 technical papers. He also
is co-author with Mr. John R. MacKay of the second edition of has written several technical reports for his company.
“Power Boilers: A Guide to Section I of the ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code.”
RAHOI, DENNIS Dr. Sam Ranganath is the Founder and Principal at
XGEN engineering, San Jose, CA. XGEN, founded
D. W. (Dennis) Rahoi is an authority on mate- in 2003, provides consulting services in fracture
rials used in the pharmaceutical/biotechnology, mechanics, materials, ASME Code applications
chemical process, fossil fuel, and nuclear power and structural analysis to the power plant industry.
industries. The author of more than 50 papers on Before that he held various leadership positions
materials, corrosion and oxidation, he received at General Electric for 28 years. Dr. Ranganath is
the Prime Movers Award in Thermal Electric a Fellow of the ASME and has been active in the development of
Generating Equipment and Practice by Edison Section III and Section XI, ASME Code rules for the evaluation and
Electric Institute for work published on solving problems in high inspection of nuclear pressure vessel components. Sam has a Ph.D.
pressure feedwater heaters. He currently consults in material selec- in Engineering from Brown University, Providence, RI and an MBA
tions, failure analysis and does other forensic metallurgical work. from Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA. He has also taught
Mr. Rahoi is also the current editor of Alloy Digest (an ASM Inter- Graduate Courses in Mechanical Engineering at Santa Clara Univer-
national, Inc. publication) and is an active consultant to the Nickel sity and Cal State University, San Jose for over 15 years.
Institute. Mr. Rahoi was the first chairman of NACE’s Power
Committee and is active on many stainless steel ASTM and ASME
(including B31) materials committees. He is the current chair- RAO, K. R.
man of the ASME Sub-Group Non-Ferrous Materials for Section
II and holds a master’s degree in metallurgical engineering from KR Rao retired as a Senior Staff Engineer with
Michigan Technological University. Entergy Operations Inc. and was previously with
Mr. Rahoi’s work on writing many new ASTM specifications, Westinghouse Electric Corporation at Pittsburgh,
his active sponsoring of 10 pipe and tube specifications and his PA and Pullman Swindell Inc., Pittsburgh, PA.
active involvement in Welding Research Council and EPRI KR got his Bachelors in Engineering from Banaras
research proposals on welding and repair keep him in constant University, India with a Masters Diploma in Plan-
touch with the needs of industry. This, combined with his other ning from School of Planning & Architecture,
experiences and consulting, allow him to contribute to the current New Delhi, India. He completed Post Graduate
chapter in this book with authority. Engineering courses in Seismic Engineering, Finite Element and
xxviii t Contributor Biographies

Stress Analysis, and other engineering subjects at Carnegie Mellon piping, and quick-actuating closures and before different regulatory
University, Pittsburgh, PA. He earned his Ph.D., from University of groups. His litigation and arbitration experience has included a num-
Pittsburgh, PA. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in Pennsyl- ber of international lawsuits. Because he is a structural engineer, he
vania and Texas. He is past Member of Operations Research Society has testified regarding both steel and concrete structures.
of America (ORSA). Mr. Reedy has written an important article regarding unsafe
KR was Vice President, Southeastern Region, ASME Inter- pressure vessels on cement trucks that was published by the
national. He is a Fellow of ASME, active in National, Regional, National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors in 2011,
Section and Technical Divisions of ASME. He has been the Chair, and another NBBPVI article on quick actuating closures for 2012.
Director and Founder of ASME EXPO(s) at Mississippi Sec- He also writes a summary of all changes made to the ASME
tion. He was a member of General Awards Committee of ASME B&PV Code in each Addenda published since 1950 to the pre-
International. He was Chair of Codes & Standards Technical sent, that is maintained in a computer database, RA-search. Mr.
Committee, ASME PV&PD. He developed an ASME Tutorial for Reedy has served on ASME BP&V Code Committees for more
PVP Division covering select aspects of Code. KR is a Member, than 45 years being Chair of several of them, including Section
Special Working Group on Editing and Review (ASME B&PV III for 15 years. He is still active on Section III and Section VIII.
Code Section XI) for September 2007 – June 2012 term. Mr. Reedy was one of the founding members of the ASME Pres-
Dr. Rao is a recipient of several Cash, Recognition and Service sure Vessel & Piping Division. Mr. Reedy is registered Engineer
Awards from Entergy Operations, Inc., and Westinghouse Electric in seven states. He is a recipient of the ASME Bernard F. Langer
Corporation. He is also the recipient of several awards, Certificates Award and the ASME Centennial Medal and is a Life Fellow
and Plaques from ASME PV&P Division including Outstanding Member of ASME.
Service Award (2001) and Certificate for “Vision and Leadership” Mr. Reedy has consulted with clients in Europe, Asia, Africa,
in Mississippi and Dick Duncan Award, Southeastern Region, and South America. He has helped develop a Nuclear Code Case
ASME. Dr. Rao is the recipient of the prestigious ASME Society for a European client that permits the use of a unique system of
Level Dedicated Service Award. piping supports that can significantly reduce the time of construc-
Dr. Rao edited “Energy and Power Generation Handbook: tion because welding is not involved.
Established and Emerging Technologies” published by ASME
Press in 2011. Dr. Rao edited the “Continuing and Changing
Priorities of ASME B&PV Codes and Standards” published in RODERY, CLAY D.
2014 and “Global Applications of ASME Boiler & Pressure Ves-
sel Code” published in 2016. Dr. Rao continues to be the editor Clay D. Rodery is the BP Downstream S&OR
of “Companion Guide to The ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel (Safety & Operational Risk) Segment Engineer-
Code” since the first edition published in 2000. Dr. Rao founded ing Technical Authority for Pressure Vessels and
the annual “Early Career Technical Conference (ECTC)” and Piping. He has over 36 years of experience pro-
Chair since then till 2014. Since then Dr. Rao is an “Advisor” for viding technical expertise in the areas of pressure
this conference which is holding its 17th Annual ECTC at UAB, vessels and piping to Amoco and BP Refining, Pet-
Birmingham, AL. rochemicals, and Upstream facilities and projects
Dr. Rao is a Fellow of American Society of Mechanical Engi- worldwide. After earning his B.S. in Civil Engineering from Purdue
neers, Fellow of Institution of Engineers, India and a Chartered University in 1981, he joined the Amoco Oil Company Texas City
Engineer, India. Dr. Rao was recognized as a ‘Life Time Member’ Refinery, where he worked in project, maintenance, and inspection
for inclusion in the Cambridge “Who’s Who” registry of execu- engineering roles. In 1990, he transferred to the Amoco Oil Refin-
tives and professionals. Dr. Rao was listed in the Marquis 25th ing & Transportation Engineering Department in Chicago as the
Silver Anniversary Edition of “Who’s Who in the World” as ‘one pressure vessel specialist in the Materials and Standards Group. In
of the leading achievers from around the globe’. 1995, he became the principal vessel specialist within the Amoco
Corporation Worldwide Engineering & Construction Department in
Houston in the Mechanical Equipment Team. Upon the BP-Amoco
REEDY, ROGER F. merger in 1999, he transfered to the BP Chemicals Technology &
Engineering Department Specialists Skills Team as pressure vessel
Roger F. Reedy has a B.S. Civil Engineering from and piping specialist, and in 2004 was appointed Pressure Vessel and
Illinois Institute of Technology (1953). His pro- Piping Advisor for the Petrochemicals Segment. In 2006, he assumed
fessional career includes the US Navy Civil Engi- a role as the Fixed Equipment Technical Authority for the BP Whit-
neering Corps, Chicago Bridge and Iron Company ing (Indiana) Refinery Modernization Project, where he served until
(1956–1976). Then he established himself as moving to his current role in 2011.
a consultant and is an acknowledged expert in Clay became active with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
design of pressure vessels and nuclear components Code in 1993. He joined the Subgroup on Fabrication & Examina-
meeting the requirements of the ASME B&PV Code. His experience tion (BPV VIII) in 1997, and the Subgroup on Design in 1999. In
includes design, stress analysis, fabrication, and erection of pressure May 2000, he was appointed Chairman of the Subgroup on Fab-
vessels and piping components for nuclear reactors and containment rication & Examination (a position he held until June 2015), and
vessels. He has expertise in the design, construction of pressure ves- member of the Committee on Pressure Vessels. Clay is Vice Chair
sels and piping components for fossil fuel power plants, chemical of the Post Construction Standards Committee, the Subcommittee
plants and refineries. Mr. Reedy has been involved in licensing, on Repair and Testing, and Subgroup on Mechanical Repairs. He
engineering reviews, welding evaluations, quality programs, project is currently Chairman of the Post Construction Subcommittee
coordination and ASME Code training of personnel. He testified as on Flange Joint Assembly that is responsible for ASME PCC-1,
an expert witness in numerous litigations involving pressure vessels, Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted Flange Joint Assembly.

As a member of the Design & Analysis Technical Committee and technical papers for EPRI, ASME, ICONE Conferences, NRC
of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division, Clay has been – ASME Pump & Valve Symposiums, and other industry events.
active as an Author, Reviewer, Session Developer/Chair/Co-Chair, He is a recognized industry technical expert on use of non-metallic
Editor, Technical Program Representative, and Tutorial Presenter, materials and the application of non-metallic structural repairs, as
and has received several awards from the Pressure Vessels and well as risk-informed inservice testing of pumps/valves/snubbers and
Piping Division for his contributions. Clay was elected an ASME large containment leakage rate testing.
Fellow in 2011, and was the recipient of the 2015 ASME Dedi- Mr. Rowley has performed consulting projects and repair pro-
cated Service Award. jects for numerous power plants, refineries, pipelines, hydro facili-
Clay is a member of the API Subcommittee on Inspection and ties, and petroleum storage facilities.
Mechanical Integrity and the Task Group on Inspection Codes. He He is a member of the ASME Post Construction Committee,
is former Team Leader of the Process Industry Practices (PIP) Ves- the Sub-committee on Repair & Testing, and the Chairman of the
sel Function Team. Sub-group on Non-metallic Repair. He is also a member of the
ASME Committee on Nonmetallic Pressure Piping Systems, the
Sub-committee on Nonmetallic Materials, the Sub-committee on
ROSENFELD, MICHAEL J. FRP Pressure Piping Systems, and the Sub-group on FRP Materi-
als. He is an honorary member of the ASME Operations and Main-
Michael J. Rosenfeld, PE is Vice President and tenance Committee and a delegate member of the ASME Board
General Manager of Kiefner/Applus-RTD (dba on Nuclear Codes and Standards (also past ASME Vice President/
Kiefner & Associates) in Worthington, Ohio. Chairman of the Board and member for over twenty years).
He holds a BS in mechanical engineering from Mr. Rowley is a retired Submarine Captain in the U. S. Naval
the University of Michigan (1979) and a MS in Reserve. He has a M.A. degree in International Relations and Stra-
mechanical engineering from Carnegie-Mellon tegic Studies from the Naval War College (1986). He also has a
University (1981). He began his career at West- B.S. in General Engineering (1965) and M.S. in Nuclear Engineer-
inghouse Electric where he worked on finite element analyses of ing from the University of Illinois (1967). Mr. Rowley is a Regis-
power plant generator stator structures. He then worked at EDS tered Professional Engineer.
Nuclear (later Impel Corporation) performing stress analyses of
piping systems, equipment, and site structures for nuclear power
stations. He then joined Battelle Memorial Institute-Columbus Lab-
oratories where he performed design and analysis work on indus-
trial and defense equipment, and became involved with research in The late Mr. Sammataro was Proto-Power’s Prog-
areas concerning natural gas pipeline integrity. ram Manager — ISI/IST Projects. He was respon-
The focus of Mr. Rosenfeld’s career has been on oil and gas pipe- sible for Proto-Power’s Inservice Inspection (ISI)
line integrity since joining Kiefner & Associates, Inc. (KAI) as Sen- and Inservice Testing (IST) programs. These pro-
ior Structural Engineer in 1991. He then served as President from grams included development and implementation
2001 to 2011. While at KAI, he has performed numerous pipeline of programs involving ISI, IST, design integrity,
failure investigations, stress analyses of buried pipelines subjected design reconciliation, 10CFR50, Appendix J, inte-
to geotechnical and live loadings, fitness for service evaluations for grated leakage rate testing, and in-plant and out-plant training and
pipelines affected by various types of degraded conditions, techni- consulting services.
cal procedure development for integrity management planning, and Mr. Sammataro was also responsible for Proto-Power’s ISI and
has carried out industry-funded research on pipeline damage mech- IST Training Programs has developed Proto-Power’s three-day
anisms. Mr. Rosenfeld is a current member of the ASME B31.8 Gas Workshop on Containment Inservice Inspection, Repair, Testing,
Transmission & Distribution Piping Section Committee, the ASME and Aging Management. He was recognized as an expert in con-
B31 Mechanical Design Technical Committee, the ASME B31 tainment inservice inspection and testing.
Standards Committee, and the ASME Board of Pressure Technol- Mr. Sammataro was the past Chair of the ASME PV&P Divi-
ogy Codes & Standards. He is also ASME Professional Develop- sion (1999–2000), General Chair of PVP Conference (1999) and
ment’s designated instructor for the B31.8 Code seminar, and was was the Technical Program Chair (1998).
the primary author of the recent major revision to ASME B31G. He was a member and chair of an ASME Section XI Subgroup
He is a past member of the API RP-1117 Task Group on Pipeline and a member of an ASME Section XI Subgroup Subcommittee.
In-Service Relocation, and the ASCE-ASME Joint Task Group He was a past member of the ASME BP&V Code Main Committee
that developed the American Lifelines Alliance “Guidelines for the (1989–1994). Mr. Sammataro was an ASME Fellow. Mr. Samma-
Design of Buried Steel Pipe.” He has authored or co-authored over taro earned BSCE and MSCE from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
40 technical papers on various pipeline-related subjects.

Douglas Scarth received a B.Sc. and M.Sc. in
C. Wesley Rowley is Vice President, Engineering Mechanical Engineering from the University
& Technical Services, with The Wesley Corpora- of Manitoba, and a Ph.D. in Materials Science
tion in Tucson, AZ. He has been with TWC since from the University of Manchester. Dr. Scarth
1985. Mr. Rowley manages engineering and non- is currently a Technical Director – Fracture
metallic structural repair activities for infrastruc- Programs with Kinectrics, Inc., in Toronto,
ture projects. He has published numerous reports Canada. He was previously with the Research
xxx t Contributor Biographies

Division of Ontario Hydro. His work experience includes struc- worked for almost 18 years designing all types of chemical pro-
tural integrity evaluations of nuclear and fossil plant components cessing equipment. He then left ICI to join BE&K and continued
containing flaws. Dr. Scarth has been involved in development of designing chemical processing equipment primarily for DuPont
methodologies for evaluating the structural integrity of nuclear before rejoining DuPont in 1995 to the 2012 when he retired. At
pressure boundary components, including CANDU reactor DuPont Mr. Shelley designed vessels, tanks and heat exchangers
Zr-Nb pressure tubes in the areas of delayed hydride cracking, both metallic and non-metallic. After retirement, Mr. Shelley has
fatigue and fracture toughness. He has participated in develop- worked part-time as a consultant to both DuPont and Chemours
ment of engineering codes and standards for fitness for service till the present continuing the design of metallic and non-metallic
assessments of pressure boundary components including Section process equipment. Mr. Shelley participated in the writing of the
XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Dr. Scarth is MTI/SPI Quality assurance report published in 1978 and has par-
a member of the Section XI Standards Committee on Nuclear ticipated in the ASME RTP-1 committee since its first meeting
Inservice Inspection, and the Section XI Subgroup on Evalua- in 1980 having served as Design and Fabrication Subcommittee
tion Standards. He is Chair of the Section XI Working Group on Chairman for almost 15 years and contributing heavily to several
Pipe Flaw Evaluation, and a member of the Section XI Work- sections of the RTP-1 standard. He also serves on the RTP-1 Cer-
ing Group on Flaw Evaluation. Dr. Scarth is also a member of a tification Subcommittee. In 1995 he became a member of ASME
number of Task Groups under Section XI that are associated with Section X and is responsible for the recent addition of Class III
structural integrity evaluations. vessels into this Code. He was elected vice-chair of Section X in
2014 and is continuing as vice chair for a second term. He also
serves on the ASME Boiler Code Technical Oversight Manage-
SCOTT, BARRY ment Committee, the Hydrogen Project Team, the Section VIII
Subgroup on Fabrication and Examination, the Boiler and Pressure
Barry Scott is currently Director of Quality Vessel Administrative Committee, the working group for the reor-
Assurance Department (Power) with responsi- ganization of Section V and the Structures for Bulk Solids commit-
bility to provide QA/QC support for the engi- tees. In addition, he is chairman of the NBIC FRP Subgroup where
neering, procurement and construction phases he helped developed inspection and repair procedures in the NBIC
of Power projects. Barry has experience in the for FRP tanks and vessels. He was also the leader of the PIP Ves-
development, implementation and auditing of sel Function teams where he developed the current FRP practice
Quality Programs. He has considerable knowl- based on RTP-1 and Section X. With his various Code committee
edge of industry Quality Standards, including ISO 9000, 10CFR50 memberships Mr. Shelley has assisted in many projects to further
Appendix B, NQA 1 and Government (DOE, DOD) requirements. the usefulness and safety of the design of vessels and tanks.
Barry has extensive experience with projects and project engineer- Mr. Shelley is a registered professional engineer in the State of
ing management with special expertise in the structural design of West Virginia.
Nuclear Power Plant structures including design of reinforced con-
crete Containment structures. Barry has been a Member of vari-
ous ASME Section III committees including Subgroup on General SIMS, ROBERT J.
Requirements, Subcommittee on Nuclear Power and Joint ASME-
ACI Committee on Concrete Components for Nuclear Service for Mr. Sims has over 50 years experience in design,
more than 30 years. analysis, troubleshooting, design audit, mechani-
Barry has a Master of Science in Civil Engineering from Drexel cal integrity evaluation, leading risk based reviews
University and is a licensed PE (Civil Engineering) in the states of and failure analysis. He is a recognized authority
Pennsylvania, California and Washington. He is a certified Lead in risk-based technologies for optimizing inspec-
Auditor in accordance with the requirements of ASME NQA-1 and tion and maintenance decisions, high pressure
previously held certification as an ACI Level III Concrete Inspec- equipment and mechanical integrity evaluation of
tor as required by the ASME Section III Division 2 Code. existing equipment.
Bob was President of ASME for 2014–2015 and is a past mem-
ber of the ASME Board of Governors, a past Chairman and Vice
SHELLEY, BERNARD F. Chairman of the ASME Post Construction Committee. Bob is a
past Vice Chairman of the ASME/API Joint Fitness-For-Service
Bernard F. Shelley has a B.S. in Mechanical Committee. He is also a past ASME Senior Vice President of Codes
Engineering from West Virginia Institute of and Standards, past ASME Vice President of Pressure Technology
Technology and a Masters of Mechanical and Codes and Standards, a current member and past Chairman of the
Aerospace Engineering from the University of ASME Subgroup on High Pressure Vessels, Section VIII, Div. 3,
Delaware. He has 44 years experience in apply- and past Chairman of the ASME Task Group on Risk Analysis
ing engineering principles, computers, and Codes for the Critical Assets Protection Initiative plus other committee
and Standards to solving design of processing equipment and ves- involvement such as the ASME B31.3 Subgroup on High Pressure
sels in the chemical industry. Mr. Shelley spent the first three Piping.
years of his career working for DuPont designing textile process- Bob is currently employed by Becht Engineering Co., Inc. and
ing equipment before joining the Franklin Institute Research Labs was previously employed by Exxon Research and Engineering Com-
and designing equipment for the bakery industry. He then spent pany as a Pressure Equipment Specialist. He has a BS in Mechani-
about 2 years at Hercules beginning his career in chemical equip- cal Engineering from Vanderbilt University and is an ASME Fellow
ment design and then moved to ICI Americas in 1975 where he with more than 20 publications and three patents.

SMITH, CLAYTON T. at the Department of Energy’s Idaho National Energy Labora-

tory (INEL) and then was assigned to the ITER (International
Principle Member, Smith Associates Consulting Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) fusion project on-site in
Group, LLC, expertise in nuclear and non-nuclear Germany and France from 2004–2008 as the Responsible Officer
industry Codes and Standards. and Division Head Quality Assurance for the ITER Project. From
Mr. Smith’s over 30 years of experience includes 2008–2009 he was employed as an Expert Consultant reporting
extensive 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, ACI, to the ITER’s Director General and his Deputy Director General
ASME Section III, ASME Section XI, and NQA-1 for Safety and Security. He helped develop and write the manage-
Quality Assurance program creation. He special- ment systems for ITER to manage their interfaces with interna-
izes in Nuclear Safety Related, ASME Section III, tional organizations such as IAEA, ASME, JSME and ISO and
Division 1 & 2 design, construction, and procurement; Section XI to demonstrate how the ITER Project would satisfy the require-
nuclear power plant repair and replacements, coupled with tradi- ments of the various nuclear management standards and those of
tional non-nuclear ACI, ASME and AWS Code design, construc- the French Nuclear Regulator. He is a member of various ASME
tion, fabrication & installation; and National Board Inspection Code Section III Committees, NQA-1 Committees, and is an ASME
(NBIC) alteration and repair activities. BNCS member. He was also a member of the US TAG to TC 176
Mr. Smith’s background also includes 12 years of Safety Con- (ISO 9001) for ten years until 2016.
scious Work Environment program assessment, development,
implementation, & maintenance. He is a member of the National
Association of Employee Concerns Professionals (NAECP) and a SOWINSKI, JAMES C.
trained employee concerns investigator. In 2009 he worked with
others in the creation of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) “Guide- Mr. Sowinski is a Consulting Engineer for The
lines for Establishing a Safety Conscious Work Environment for Equity Engineering Group, Inc. in Shaker Heights,
New Nuclear Power Plant Construction Sites” (NEI 09-12) docu- Ohio. He has experience in the refining and pet-
ment, which was published in February 2010. Most recently, he rochemical industries as an owner-user and as a
has been a representative for a large EPC for the on-going efforts in consultant providing engineering support. He pro-
the commercial nuclear industry to implement NEI 09-07 “Foster- vides plant engineering support to maintenance
ing a Strong Nuclear Safety Culture.” and inspection personnel and performs design/analysis/re-rate cal-
Mr. Smith is a multidiscipline NDE and QC Level III, and culations of pressure containing equipment to evaluate mechanical
holds various ACI certifications. He is the Vice Chair of the integrity and improve reliability. Mr. Sowinski is responsible for
ASME Board of Nuclear Codes and Standards (BNCS); a mem- Equity’s “R” Certificate of Authorization issued by The National
ber of Board of Conformity Assessment (BCA), ASME Section Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors.
III Standards Committee (BPV III) and Committee for Nuclear Mr. Sowinski was involved in the development of the new ASME,
Certification (CNC); and as chair/vice-chair, as well as being an Section VIII, Division 2, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and was
active member, in many other ACI, ASME, and AWS Standards a contributing author of the ASME Section VIII, Division 2, Criteria
Development Organization Committees. Finally, Mr. Smith is a and Commentary. He is Vice-Chair of the ASME Boiler and Pressure
member of the NEI industry support groups for SCWE and QA, Vessel VIII Subgroup on Design and also serves on the Subgroup on
as well as ICONE Technical Program Chair of the ASME Nuclear General Requirements.
Engineering Division (NED) Executive Committee (EC), Chair of Mr. Sowinski is a Registered Professional Engineer in the States
the NED EC Technical Committees, and participates on the IAEA of Ohio and Texas.
sector for International Codes and Standards.

Jim E. Staffiera earned a BS in Mechanical
William K. (Ken) Sowder, PhD is a Senior Engineering from Drexel University in 1971
Consultant to the nuclear industry with Qual- and a Masters in Business from Old Dominion
ity Management Services LLC. He works University in 1975. He has been involved with
with manufactures and suppliers to help them nuclear power plant containment vessel and steel
develop their management systems and quality structure design, fabrication, construction, and
management programs to meet the requirements operation since 1971. Originally employed by
of codes and standards such as ASME Section Newport News Shipbuilding and then Newport
III, NQA-1, ISO 9001 and IAEA GS-R-3. He is a certified Lead News Industrial Corporation (a subsidiary company specializing
Auditor to ASME Section III and ASME NQA-1 requirements; in commercial nuclear activities), he assisted with the develop-
and is also an instructor for ASME and teaching 4 of their Pub- ment of commercial nuclear fabrication programs for ASME
lic Courses. These courses were developed to help the nuclear Code N-type Certificate authorization. This progressed into
users understand and effectively use the ASME nuclear codes nuclear component fabrication and construction activities, even-
and standards to meet today’s nuclear challenges. He worked tually resulting in his employment with FirstEnergy Corporation
with various engineering and construction companies during the at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio, where he worked
1970–1980 in engineering and quality assurance and also held in the Contract Administration, QA/QC, Structural Mechanics,
a Nat’l Board Commission as an Authorized Nuclear Inspector and Project Engineering Units and was frequently involved with
(ANI). During the 1990–2008 time frame he worked 17 years Code-related issues.
xxxii t Contributor Biographies

Jim has been a member of ASME since 1972 and has been STEVENSON, JOHN D.
involved in numerous ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
Committee activities since 1981, holding positions as Chair, Sec- Dr. John D. Stevenson is a Senior Consultant for
retary, and Member of various Section XI committees on require- J.D. Stevenson, Consulting Engineer Co. He has
ments for commercial nuclear power plants. He chaired the extensive experience worldwide in the nuclear
Subgroup and Working Group on Containment and was a member power field where he served as a consultant to the
of the Subgroup on Water-Cooled Systems. He is a past mem- IAEA and several non U.S. utilities and consult-
ber of the Subcommittee on Nuclear Inservice Inspection and is ing firms. He holds a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering
currently a long-term member of the Special Working Group on from Case Western Reserve University. He has
Editing and Review. provided structural-mechanical consulting services to the nuclear
Jim is an active member of the ASME Pressure Vessels and Pip- power industry in the U.S. and abroad for the past 35 years and
ing (PVP) Division, having been Chair of the Codes and Standards has been a member of various committees of ASME and B&PVC
(C&S) Technical Committee, C&S Technical Program Represent- Section III for the past 35 years. He is currently also a member of
ative for the annual ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Confer- several of American Society of Civil Engineers, American Nuclear
ence, and Publicity Chair for the Division. Society, and American Concrete Institute committees and consult-
He has been a member of the American Society for Quality ant to government agencies dealing with the structural-mechanical
(ASQ) since 1975, with two three-year periods of certification as a safety of nuclear facilities.
Certified Quality Engineer (CQE).
Jim has been involved in several nuclear industry initiatives, most
recently as a member of the Expert Panel for the EPRI Containment SUTHERLIN, RICHARD C.
Integrated Leak-Rate Test (ILRT) Interval Extension Project.
He is now retired from full-time employment and doing con- Richard Sutherlin is the President of Richard
sulting work for nuclear facilities, specializing in security-related Sutherlin PE Consulting, LLC. He has over
initiatives and compliance with regulatory requirements for threat 40 years of experience in reactive and refractory
mitigation. metals (titanium, zirconium, niobium and tanta-
lum) in corrosion, welding, melting, R&D, Out-
side Fabrication, failure analysis and applications
engineering. Mr. Sutherlin holds a B.Sc. in Metal-
STANISZEWSKI, STANLEY (STAN) lurgical Engineering from the Montana School of Mines, Univer-
sity of Montana. Mr. Sutherlin has taught classes in many locations
Stanley Staniszewski is a senior Mechanical worldwide on the welding of reactive metals in addition to train-
Engineer with the U.S. Department of Trans- ing classes on the corrosion, fabrication, safety, design, inspection
portation, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials and the application of reactive metals in the chemical processing
Safety Administration. He is a ‘76 Alumni of industry. He has authored numerous technical papers and as well as
the Fenn College of Engineering, from Cleve- several major handbook chapters. He has performed many reactive
land State University of Ohio and has completed metal failure analyses and also holds several patents on the produc-
graduate level course work in Business Admin- tion of reactive metal products.
istration at Johns Hopkins University and advanced engineering Mr. Sutherlin is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State
degree work at the University of Virginia. Mr. Staniszewski has of Oregon. He serves on the ASME Boiler and Pressure code com-
been a member of the American Society of Mechanical Engi- mittees, Member of BPV II, Member of the BPV II Executive
neers, since joining as a student. He currently serves on the ASME committee, Chairman of BPV II Subgroup Non-ferrous alloys and
Section XII SubCommittee on Transport Tanks, Vice Chairs the Member of BPV VIII, Sub-group of Materials. He is a member
Sub Group on General Requirements, and is a member of the of NACE (National Association of Corrosion Engineers). Richard
ASME Hydrogen Steering Committee, and various taskgroups. serves as Chairman of the American Welding Society A5K Sub-
Mr. Staniszewski is also a member of the National Board Inspec- committee of Titanium and Zirconium Filler Metals, Chairman of
tion Code, Main Committee, Subgroups RB, and Nonmandatory the G2D Subcommittee on Reactive Alloys and a member of the
Appendices. He has experience in the international standards AWS G2 – Committee on Joining Metals and Alloys and a mem-
arena through membership and participation as a governmental ber of the A5 – Committee on Filler Metals Materials.
technical expert to the United Nations and International Stand-
ards Organizations on various Technical Committees, Sub-Com-
mittees and Work-Groups on gas cylinders, cryogenic vessels
and Hydrogen technologies.
He has 10 years of varied experience in the private sector span- Mr. Swayne works for Reedy Engineering, Inc.
ning tool & die, manufacturing, research and product development, He has worked as a metallurgist, welding engi-
design, construction and inspection. Within the federal government neer, quality assurance manager, and consultant,
he has spent 20 years in the areas of mechanical/electrical/chemical in the pressure vessel and piping industry, since
project engineering, management, inspection and enforcement 1975. He has experience in design, fabrication,
issues that affect hazardous materials/dangerous goods in national and operation of various power and refinery
and international commerce. plant components, including valve design and

application, welding and materials engineering, and quality assur- engineering consulting business under the name Boiler Code Tech,
ance program management for construction and operation. He is LLC, providing responsive, professional engineering consulting
an expert and well-known instructor in inservice inspection, inser- services to a wide variety of ASME Code pressure equipment
vice testing, and repair/replacement programs in operating power manufacturers. In December of 2013 this business became John’s
plants. He has assisted many organizations in preparation for new full time occupation.
and renewal ASME Certificates of accreditation and has partici-
pated in many ASME National Board Accreditation Surveys. Mr.
Swayne has been an active participant since 1977 as a member UPITIS, ELMAR
of ASME and ASTM Codes and Standards Committees. He is
the Chair of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee Elmar Upitis received a B.S. degree in Civil
on Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plants and a member Engineering from University of Illinois in 1955
of several sub-tier committees. He is Vice Chair of Operations and did postgraduate studies at the Illinois Insti-
for the ASME Council on Standards and Certification. He is a tute of Technology. He served in the US Army
member and past Chair of the ASME Board on Nuclear Codes and was employed by Chicago Bridge & Iron
and Standards, and a member of the ASME Technical Oversight Company from 1955 to 1995 in various capaci-
Management Committee. Mr. Swayne is also a past member of the ties, including Chief Design Engineer, Manager
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Standards Committee, the Subcommit- of Metals Engineering, and Senior Principal Engineer–Materials.
tee on Materials, and several working groups under the Subcom- He was also responsible for oversight of CBI engineering in South
mittee on Nuclear Power. He has served as a consultant to utilities, America, Europe and Africa and Middle East. Mr. Upitis provides
architect/engineers, manufacturers, and material manufacturers engineering consulting services in the areas of codes and standards
and suppliers. He has been a Qualified Lead Auditor, and a Quali- (ASME, API, ASTM, etc.), design of plate structures, fitness-for-
fied Level II Examiner in several nondestructive examination service evaluation, and materials related issues. He is a licensed
methods. He has been involved in engineering reviews, material professional and structural engineer in the State of Illinois, ASME
selection and application, and quality assurance auditing. Fellow and a member of various technical committees in the
ASME B&P Vessel Code, ASTM Fellow and a member of sev-
eral ASTM technical committees, former Chair of Pressure Vessel
Research Council (PVRC) and an active participant in the PVRC,
SWEZY JR., JOHN P. and a member of AWS and WRC. He is involved in the develop-
ment of the new B&PV Code to replace the present Section VIII,
John has an Associate of Science from the Uni- Division 2 and several other projects related to the ASME B & PV
versity of the State of New York, with extensive Code.
knowledge and expertise gained from his Navy Mr. Upitis is a co-author of WRC Bulletin 435 on design mar-
experience, military and civilian training, and gins in ASME Section VIII, Divisions 1 and 2, WRC Bulletin 447
extensive self-study in the areas of welding, NDE, on evaluation of operating margins for in-service pressure equip-
and pressure equipment design. ment, WRC Bulletin 453 on minimum weld spacing requirements
John’s engineering career began as a Nuclear for API Standard 653, PVRC report on the European Pressure
Trained Machinists Mate in the “Silent Service” Equipment Directive, and several other published papers on Cr-Mo
of the US Navy onboard nuclear powered Submarines. Receiv- steel pressure vessels.
ing an Honorable Discharge after 15½ years of active duty as
a Disabled Veteran, John entered civilian employment in 1990
as a National Board Commissioned Boiler and Pressure Vessel VATTAPPILLY, JAYARAM
Inspector, and served as an Authorized Inspector, Authorized
Inspector Supervisor, and as a Staff Technical Consultant for Jay holds a Mechanical Engineering degree from
ASME Accredited Authorized Inspection Agencies providing the University of Calicut, India, a Master of Engi-
Codes and Standards technical support to Authorized Inspectors, neering degree in Welding from National Institute
Authorized Inspector Supervisors, and ASME Code Manufactur- of Technology (NIT), Tiruchirappalli, India and a
ers around the world. John also began serving as an ASME Codes second Master’s degree in Advanced Design and
and Standards volunteer on ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Manufacturing from the University of Waterloo,
Committees in 1996, and on ASME B31 Piping Committees in Ontario, Canada.
2010. Mr. Vattappilly provides technical support/code consulting on
Additionally, John served on the staff of UT Battelle at Oak ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Sections I, IV, VIII & IX.
Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, TN as a Pressure Sys- He is HSB’s subject matter expert on the Indian Boiler Regulations
tems Engineer at the Spallation Neutron Source project, and as (IBR). He teaches Section VIII, I, IX, B31.1 and NBIC courses for
a Mechanical Engineer in the Fabrication, Hoisting and Rigging HSB’s clients and Inspectors. He also assists HSB with Design
Division. He developed the inservice inspection program for pres- Reviews.
sure equipment at ORNL after achieving National Board accredita- Jay’s previous work experience has principally been in the
tion for UT-Battelle, LLC as a Federal Inspection Agency. area of pressure equipment construction, working in the role of
In 2002, John recognized a need for economical and profes- a QA/QC Engineer, an Inspection Engineer for a large engineer-
sional engineering design and consulting services, and started an ing consulting firm servicing refineries and petrochemical plants,
xxxiv t Contributor Biographies

a welding engineer responsible for both structural and pressure Married to Louise for 25 years with two sons. Reside in Allen-
vessel welding activity, and as a design engineer of pressure equip- town, PA. Hobbies include hunting, shooting and golf.
ment constructed to ASME Sections I, IV, B31.1, and VIII.
Jay presently holds a Professional Engineering license from
Ontario, Canada and National Board Commission with “NS” & WOODWORTH, JOHN I.
“A” endorsements. He is the Chair of Subgroup on Design – BPV I
and a member of Committee on Power Boilers – BPV I. He is John I. Woodworth has BSME from Univ. of
also a member of the Subgroup on Design – BPV VIII, Subgroup Buffalo, 1948. He is engaged in consulting on
on Toughness – BPV VIII, Special Committee on Interpretations- Steam and Hot Water (hydronic) heating systems
BPV VIII and Subgroup on Materials – BPV I. and Codes and Standards. He provides informa-
tion for legal proceedings of hydronic heating
systems and equipment. He was previously with
VOLLMER, RICHARD O. Fedders Corp. (1948–1959), as Technical Director
of Hydronics Institute (predecessor Institute of Boiler and Radiator
Mr. Vollmer graduated with honors from Lehigh Manufacturers), 1959–1990. Woodworth’s professional activities
University in Bethlehem, PA (BSME 1989), and 1990 to date are supported by Hydronics Institute Division, GAMA.
was elected to Tau Beta Pi and Pi Tau Sigma. He is a member of ASME, and a member of several ASME Code
He has been a member of ASME since 1989, Committees such as Section IV, (1967–date), Cast-Iron Subgroup;
and is a Registered Professional Engineer in the Chair, ASME Section VI; Vice-Chair Controls and Safety Devices
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. He is a member for Automatically-Fired Boilers Standards Committee (1973–
of the ASME Working Group on Core Support 2000). He was a consultant with the National Institute of Science
Structures (WG-CSS) and Working Group on and Technology (formerly the National Bureau of Standards).
Design Methodology (WG-DM). Woodworth is a Life Member of ASHRAE, Member of several of
Mr. Vollmer has worked in the electric power industry since its Technical Committees, Secretary, Vice Chair and Chair of SPC.
1989, with expertise in the design and analysis of pressure ves- He has written numerous technical articles for trade magazines.
sels, valves, reactor internals, and power plant structures. He has John received ASME Distinguished Service Award (1991), Ded-
broad experience with nuclear industry codes & standards, includ- icated Service Award (2000) and ASHRAE Standards Achieve-
ing the ASME B&PV Code and U.S. naval nuclear design codes. ment Award (1996). He was a Member, National Fuel Gas Code
He is currently a Fellow Engineer specializing in advanced reactor Committee, VP, Uniform Boiler and Pressure Vessel Laws Society
internals at Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Prior to joining and Liaison to Building Energy Codes & Standards Committee. He
Westinghouse, Mr. Vollmer was a senior engineer at MPR Asso- was a Member of technical advisory committees for Brook-haven
ciates, providing consulting services to fossil and nuclear power National Laboratories.
utilities and equipment vendors.

Kang is currently the Pressure Vessel Consultant
Employed in the Authorized Inspection Agency in Praxair. He has a Ph.D. degree in materials engi-
sector since 1976 with Factory Mutual, Commer- neering from Univ. of Maryland at College Park.
cial Union Insurance Company, Hartford Steam He has been working in the industrial gas indus-
Boiler I and I, and OneBeacon America Insurance try in areas of pressure vessels, structural integrity
Company. Duties have included inspection of all assessment, materials selections and failure analy-
types of boilers, pressure vessels, heat exchang- sis for 14 years. Before joining Praxair, he worked
ers, nuclear components as well as supervision of as a senior engineer in the steel industry. His experience also extends
these activities and finally management of same. to fracture mechanics testing and analysis for aerospace and nuclear
Currently serves on Section IV Heating Boilers as Vice Chair, industries. He serves in ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
Section XII, Transport Tanks as a member and Chair of Sub-Group Committees in Section VIII and Section XII. He is the Vice Chair of
Fabrication and Inspection, and serve as member of the Standards Section II/VIII Subgroup on Toughness and the Secretary of Section
Committee. VIII Subgroup on Materials. He is also a member of NACE, ASTM
From 1970 to 1974 served in the US Navy in the Western Pacific and CGA (Compressed Gas Association) technical committees. He
on destroyers as a boiler technician. authored and co-authored 28 peer reviewed technical publications.

Dedication to the First Edition 1.5 Distinction between Boiler Proper Piping and
Robert E. Nickel and William E. Cooper. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iii Boiler External Piping 1-13
1.6 How and Where Section I is Enforced and
Dedication to the Fifth Edition Effective Dates 1-14
1.7 Fundamentals of Section I Construction 1-16
K. R. Rao. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
1.8 Future Changes 1-35
Acknowledgements (to the First Edition) . . . . . . . . . . . .v 1.9 References 1-36
1.10 Design Exercises 1-37
Acknowledgements (to the Second Edition) . . . . . . . . . v
CHAPTER 2 Section VII—Recommended Guidelines
Acknowledgements (to the Third Edition) . . . . . . . . . . .vi for the Care of Power Boilers
William L. Lowry and James T. Pillow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
Acknowledgements (to the Fourth Edition) . . . . . . . . .vii
2.1 Introduction - Chapter 2 2-1
Acknowledgements (to the Fifth Edition) . . . . . . . . . . viii 2.2 Introduction - Section VII 2-2
2.3 Fundamentals of Watertube Boilers - Article 100 2-3
Contributor Biographies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix 2.4 Boiler Operation—Article 101 2-9
2.5 Boiler Auxiliaries—Article 102 2-15
Preface to the First Edition 2.6 Appurtenances—Article 203 2-17
K. R. Rao and Robert E. Nickell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xli 2.7 Instrumentation, Controls, and Interlocks—
Article 104 2-23
Preface to the Second Edition 2.8 Examinations—Article 105 2-24
K. R. Rao. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlii 2.9 Repairs, Alterations, and Maintenance—
Article 106 2-26
Preface to the Third Edition 2.10 Protecting Heat Transfer Surfaces—
Article 200 2-27
K. R. Rao. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xliii
2.11 Preventing Boiler Failures—Article 201 2-30
2.12 Documents, Records, and References 2-32
Preface to the Fourth Edition
2.13 Firetube Boilers, Article 300 2-32
K. R. Rao. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xliv 2.14 Electric Steam Boilers, Article 301 2-32
2.15 Utility Boilers, Article 302 2-32
Preface to the Fifth Edition 2.16 Stoker-Fired Boilers, Article 400 2-32
K. R. Rao. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlv 2.17 Pulverized-Coal-Fired Boilers, Article 401 2-32
2.18 Ash Removal, Article 402 2-32
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlvii 2.19 Maintenance, Article 403 2-32
2.20 Glossary 2-33
Organization and Operation of the ASME Boiler 2.21 Final Notes 2-33
and Pressure Vessel Code Committees . . . . . . . . . . . .lxi 2.22 References 2-34

CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Power Boilers CHAPTER 3 Part 2, Section II—Materials and

John R. MacKay, Ed Ortman and Jay Vattappilly. . . . . . .1-1 Specifications
Elmar Upitis, Richard A. Moen, Marvin L. Carpenter,
1.1 Introduction 1-1
William Newell Jr., John F. Grubb, Richard C. Sutherlin,
1.2 History and Philosophy of Section I 1-1
Jeffrey Henry, C. W. Rowley and Anne Chaudouet. . . . . 3-1
1.3 The Organization of Section I 1-3
1.4 Scope of Section I: Pressure Limits 3.1 History of Materials in the ASME Boiler and
and Exclusions 1-8 Pressure Vessel Code 3-1
xxxvi t Contents

3.2 Basis for Acceptance of Materials for Code 5.7 Article NCA-7000 Reference Standards 5-28
Construction—Section II, Part A: Ferrous 5.8 Article NCA-8000 Certificates, Nameplates,
Material Specifications 3-7 Code Symbol Stamping, and Data Reports 5-28
3.3 Basis for Acceptance of Materials for Code 5.9 Article NCA-9000 Glossary 5-34
Construction—Section II, Part B: Nonferrous
Material Specifications 3-13 CHAPTER 6 Subsection NB—Class I Compo.nents
3.4 Section II, Part C: Specification for Welding David P. Jones and Chakrapani Basavaraju. . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Rods, Electrodes, and Filler Metals 3-27
3.5 Basis for Acceptance of Materials for Code 6.1 Introduction 6-1
Construction—Section II, Part D: Properties 3-74 6.2 Design 6-4
3.6 Basis for Acceptance of Material for Code 6.3 Analysis 6-7
Constructions—Section II, International Material 6.4 Primary Stress Limits 6-12
Specifications 3-91 6.5 Primary-Plus-Secondary Stress Limits 6-21
6.6 Fatigue 6-25
CHAPTER 4 A Commentary for Understanding 6.7 Special Procedures 6-32
and Applying the Principles of the ASME Boiler 6.8 Elastic-Plastic FEA 6-44
and Pressure Vessel Code 6.9 References 6-44
6.10 Summary of Changes 6-46
Roger F. Reedy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.1 Introduction 4-1 CHAPTER 7 Section III: Subsections NC and ND—
4.2 Design Factors Used in the ASME Code 4-3 Class 2 and 3 Components
4.3 Design Specifications and Design Reports 4-5 Chakrapani Basavaraju and Marcus N. Bressler. . . . . . . 7-1
4.4 Section III versus Section VIII 4-6
4.5 Design Life and Commutative-Usage Factors 4-6 7.0 Introduction to Chapter 7.0 7-1
4.6 Service-Level Loadings 4-6 7.1 Articles NC-1000 and ND-1000 7-2
4.7 Seismic Evaluations 4-7 7.2 Articles NC-2000 and ND-2000, Material 7-4
4.8 Engineers, Design, and Computers 4-7 7.3 Articles NC-3000 and ND-3000 (Design) 7-9
4.9 Nuclear Containment Vessels 4-8 7.4 Articles NC-4000 and ND-4000 (Fabrication
4.10 Tolerances, Significant Figures, and Nominal and Installation) 7-30
Dimensions 4-8 7.5 Articles NC-5000 and ND-5000 (Examination) 7-32
4.11 Corrosion and Erosion 4-9 7.6 Articles NC-6000 and ND-6000 (Testing) 7-34
4.12 Forming Operations 4-9 7.7 Articles NC-7000 and ND-7000 (Overpressure
4.13 Post–Weld Heat Treatment 4-10 Protection) 7-34
4.14 Nondestructive Examination 4-10 7.8 Articles NC-8000 and ND-8000 (Nameplate,
4.15 Hydrostatic Test 4-10 Stamping, and Reports) 7-35
4.16 Quality Assurance 4-11 7.9 Summary of Changes 7-40
4.17 Design Loadings and Stresses Compared 7.10 Summary of Changes 7-42
to Actual Conditions 4-12 7.11 References 7-45
4.18 Post-Construction Postulated Loadings 7.12 Summary of Changes (2015 and 2013 Code
and Stresses 4-13 Editions) 7-46
4.19 Maintenance of Design Margins 4-14
4.20 Thermal Relief Devices 4-14 CHAPTER 8 Subsection NB, NC, ND-3600 Piping
4.21 Code Cases 4-14 Mark A. Gray and Jack R. Cole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-1
4.22 ASME Interpretations 4-14
4.23 Code Simplification 4-14 8.1 Background 8-1
4.24 Future Considerations for Cyclic Service 4-15 8.2 Nuclear Class 1, NB-3600 8-2
4.25 New ASME Code–2007 Edition of 8.3 Nuclear Class 2 and 3 NC/ND-3600 8-17
Section VIII, Division 2 4-15 8.4 Design Process 8-23
4.26 Summary 4-17 8.5 Design Specification Discussion 8-26
4.27 References 4-17 8.6 Recommendations for Code Committee 8-27
8.7 References 8-27
CHAPTER 5 Subsection NCA—General
Requirements for Division 1 and Divi.sion 2 CHAPTER 9 Subsection NE—Class MC Components
Richard W. Swayne. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 Roger F. Reedy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
5.1 Introduction 5-1 9.1 Introduction 9-1
5.2 Article NCA-1000 Scope of Section III 5-1 9.2 Scope of Subsection NE 9-1
5.3 Article NCA-2000 Classification of Components 9.3 Boundaries of Jurisdiction of Subsection NE 9-1
and Supports 5-4 9.4 General Material Requirements 9-5
5.4 Article NCA-3000 Responsibilities and Duties 5-6 9.5 Certified Material Test Reports 9-6
5.5 Article NCA-4000 Quality Assurance 5-21 9.6 Material Toughness Requirements 9-7
5.6 Article NCA-5000 Authorized Inspection 5-26 9.7 General Design Requirements 9-9

9.8 Qualifications of Professional Engineers 9-9 11.14 Special Bolting Ments (NG-3230) 11-19
9.9 Owner’s Design Specifications 9-10 11.15 Code Cases (NCA-1140) 11-20
9.10 Certified Design Report 9-10 11.16 Interpretations for Subsection NG 11-20
9.11 Design by Analysis 9-10 11.17 Elevated Temperature Applications 11-22
9.12 Appendix F 9-11 11.18 Additional Considerations 11-22
9.13 Fatigue Analysis 9-12 11.19 Beyond the State-of-the-Art 11-23
9.14 Buckling 9-13 11.20 References 11-25
9.15 Reinforcement of Cone-to-Cylinder Junction 9-14 11.21 Abbreviations and Nomenclature 11-25
9.16 Plastic Analysis 9-15 11.22 Summary of Changes 11-25
9.17 Design by Formula 9-15
9.18 Openings 9-15 CHAPTER 12 Nonmetallic Pressure Piping System
9.19 Bolted Flange Connections 9-16 Components
9.20 Welded Connections 9-16
C. Wesley Rowley and Thomas M. Musto . . . . . . . . . . .12-1
9.21 General Fabrication Requirements 9-17
9.22 Tolerances 9-18 Part A. Experience with Nonmetallic Materials in
9.23 Requirements for Weld Joints 9-18 Structural/Pressure Boundary Applications 12-2
9.24 Welding Qualifications 9-18
9.25 Rules for Marking, Examining, 12A.1 Introduction 12-2
and Repairing Welds 9-19 12A.2 Types of Nonmetallic Materials 12-2
9.26 Heat Treatment 9-19 12A.3 Design Specification 12-3
9.27 Examination 9-20 12A.4 Nonmetallic Components 12-4
9.28 Qualifications and Certification of NDE Personnel 9-22 12A.5 Joining of Nonmetallic Components
9.29 Testing 9-22 (and Sub-Components) 12-5
9.30 Overpressure Protection 9-22 12A.6 Application Problems 12-6
9.31 Nameplates, Stamping, and Reports 9-23 12A.7 Quality Assurance (QA) 12-8
9.32 Recommendations 9-23 12A.8 Sensitive Aspects of Nonmetallic Fabrication
9.33 References 9-23 Processes 12-8
9.34 Summary of Changes 9-23 12A.9 Conclusions 12-9
Part B. NM-1, Construction Standard for
CHAPTER 10 Subsection NF—Supports Thermoplastic Pressure Piping Systems 12-9
Uma S. Bandyopadhyay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10-1 12B.1 Introduction 12-9
10.1 Executive Summary 10-1 12B.2 Design 12-10
10.2 NF-1000 Introduction 10-1 12B.3 Materials 12-11
10.3 NF-2000 Materials 10-6 12B.4 Standard for Piping Components 12-12
10.4 NF-3000 Design 10-14 12B.5 Fabrication, Assembly, and Erection 12-12
10.5 NF-4000 Fabrication and Installation 10-28 12B.6 Inspection, Examination, and Testing 12-12
10.6 NF-5000 Examination 10-29 12B.7 Metallic Piping Lined with Thermoplastics 12-13
10.7 NF-8000 Nameplates, Stamping, and Reports 10-31 12B.8 Multilayered Reinforced Thermoplastic
10.8 NF Appendices 10-32 Piping Systems 12-13
10.9 Code Cases and Interpretations 10-34 Part C. Construction Standard for Fiber-Reinforced
10.10 Summary of Changes 10-35 Thermoset-Plastic (FRP) Pressure
10.11 ASME B31.1 and B31.3 Supports 10-35 Piping Systems 12-13
10.12 References 10-37
12C.1 Introduction 12-13
CHAPTER 11 Subsection NG—Core Support 12C.2 Design 12-14
Structures 12C.3 Constituent Materials 12-14
12C.4 Standard for Piping Components 12-15
Richard O. Vollmer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11-1
12C.5 Fabrication, Assembly, and Erection 12-15
11.1 Introduction 11-1 12C.6 Inspection, Examination, and Testing 12-15
11.2 Definition of Core Support Structures (NG-1120) 11-3 12C.7 Mandatory Appendices 12-18
11.3 Jurisdictional Boundaries (NG-1130) 11-4 12C.8 Nonmandatory Appendices 12-19
11.4 Unique Conditions of Service 11-4
Part D. Nonmetallic Materials 12-19
11.5 Materials of Construction (NG-2000) 11-5
11.6 Special Materials 11-6 12D.1 Introduction 12-19
11.7 Design (NG-3000) 11-6 12D.2 Thermoplastic Specifications 12-19
11.8 Fabrication and Installation (NG-4000) 11-15 12D.3 Potential Future Thermo Plastic Specifications 12-19
11.9 Examination (NG-5000) 11-17 12D.4 Thermoset Plastic Specifications 12-19
11.10 Testing 11-19 12D.5 Potential Future Thermoset
11.11 Overpressure Protection 11-19 Plastic Specifications 12-22
11.12 Nameplates/Stamping Effects (NG-8000) 11-19 12D.6 Other Nonmetallic Materials 12-22
11.13 Environmental Effects (NG-3124) 11-19 12D.7 Physical Material Properties 12-22
xxxviii t Contents

12D.8 Engineering Material Properties 12-23 15.16 Practical Nuclear Power Plant Containment
12D.9 Allowable Stress and Physical Property Designed to Resist Large Commercial Aircraft
Tables and Data Sheets 12-23 Crash and Postulated Reactor Core Melt 15-19
12D.10 Thermoplastic Property Performance 12-23 15.17 Items Which Should be Considered in Future
12D.11 Thermoset Plastic Property Revisions of the Code 15-22
Performance 12-23 15.18 Summary 15-24
12D.12 References 12-24 15.19 References 15-25

CHAPTER 13 Nuclear Pumps CHAPTER 16 Containments for Transportation

and Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level
Robert E. Comman, Jr. and Ross R. Klein . . . . . . . . . . 13-1 Radioactive Material and Waste
13.1 Introduction 13-1 D. Keith Morton and D. Wayne Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-1
13.2 General Section III Requirements 13-1
13.3 Specific Pump Requirements 13-3 16.1 Introduction 16-1
13.4 General Requirements for Class 1 Pumps 13-4 16.2 Historical Development 16-1
13.5 NC-3400 Class 2 Pumps 13-4 16.3 Scope of Subgroup Nupack 16-2
13.6 ND-3400 Class 3 Pumps 13-7 16.4 Code Development 16-2
13.7 General Requirements for Class 2 and 3 Pumps 13-7 16.5 General Provisions 16-2
13.8 Changes in Future Code Editions 13-8 16.6 Specified Loading Categories 16-3
13.9 References 13-8 16.7 Allowable Stress 16-3
13.10 Additional Documents of Interest 13-8 16.8 Materials Fabrication, Installation,
Examination, and Testing 16-5
16.9 Code Text Organization 16-5
CHAPTER 14 Nuclear Valves 16.10 Incorporation of Strain-Based Acceptance
Guy A. Jolly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-1 Criteria—A Major Change 16-8
16.11 Current Activities in Division 3 16-9
14.1 Introduction 14-1 16.12 Interaction with Section XI and the Proposed
14.2 General Section III Requirements 14-2 ISI Code Case for Storage Containments 16-10
14.3 Specific Valve Requirements 14-3 16.13 Suggested Enhancements for the Future 16-10
14.4 NC-3500 and ND-3500, Class 2 16.14 References 16-11
and Class 3 Valves 14-11 16.15 Summary of Changes 16-11
14.5 Changes in the 2013 & 2015 Editions 14-12
14.6 Other Valve Standards 14-14
CHAPTER 17 Division 5—High Temperature Reactors
14.7 References 14-14
14.8 Additional Documents of Interest 14-14 Robert I. Jetter and D. Keith Morton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-1
17.1 Introduction 17-1
CHAPTER 15 Code for Concrete Containments 17.2 Scope 17-1
Arthur C. Eberhardt, Clayton T. Smith, Michael F. 17.3 Background 17-1
Hessheimer, Ola Jovall, and Christopher A. Jones . . . .15-1 17.4 Organization of Division 5 17-2
17.5 Graphite General Requirements and Design/
15.1 Introduction 15-1 Construction Rules 17-37
15.2 Future Containment Development 15-7 17.6 Future Expectations 17-42
15.3 Background Development of Concrete 17.7 Summary 17-43
Containment Construction Code Requirements 15-8 17.8 References, Including Annotated
15.4 Reinforced-Concrete Containment Behavior 15-11 Bibliographical Notations 17-43
15.5 Concrete Reactor Containment Design
Analysis and Related Testing 15-12 CHAPTER 18 ASME Section IV: Rules for the
15.6 Code Design Loads 15-13 Construction of Heating Boilers
15.7 Allowable Behavior Criteria 15-13
Clayton T. Smith. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18-1
15.8 Analytical Models and Design Procedures 15-13
15.9 Special Design Features 15-13 18.1 Introduction 18-1
15.10 Current Organization of the Code 15-14 18.2 Part HG: General Requirements for
15.11 Article CC-4000: Fabrication All Materials of Construction 18-4
and Construction 15-18 18.3 Part HF: Requirements for Boilers Constructed
15.12 Article CC-5000: Construction Testing and of Wrought Materials 18-27
Examination 15-18 18.4 Part HF, Sub-part HW: Requirements
15.13 Article CC-6000: Structural Integrity Test for Boilers Fabricated by Welding 18-32
of Concrete Containments 15-18 18.5 Part HF, Sub-part HB: Requirements for
15.14 Article CC-7000: Overpressure Protection 15-19 Boilers Fabricated by Brazing 18-36
15.15 Article CC-8000: Nameplates, Stamping, 18.6 Part HC: Requirements for Boilers
and Reports 15-19 Constructed of Cast Iron 18-37

18.7 Rules of Part HA: Hot Water Heating Boilers CHAPTER 20 Nondestructive Examination (NDE)
Constructed Primarily of Cast Aluminum 18-42
18.8 Part HLW: Requirements for Potable-Water Jon E. Batey and G. Wayne Hembree . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20-1
Heaters 18-44 20.1 Introduction 20-1
18.9 Considerations Likely to be in Future Code 20.2 History 20-1
Editions 18-56 20.3 Organization of Section V 20-2
18.10 What Should the ASME Code Committees 20.4 Relation to Other ASME Code Book Sections 20-3
and Regulators Consider, Recognizing the 20.5 Article 1: General Requirements 20-4
Intent of the ASME B&PV Code? 18-56 20.6 Article 2: Radiographic Examination 20-6
18.11 References 18-56 20.7 Article 4: Ultrasonic Examination Methods
for Welds 20-11
CHAPTER 19 ASME Section VI: Recommended 20.8 Ultrasonic Examination Methods for Materials 20-16
Rules for the Care and Operation of Heating 20.9 Article 6: Liquid-Penetrant Examination 20-16
Boilers 20.10 Article 7: Magnetic-Particle Examination 20-18
20.11 Article 8: Eddy-Current Examination 20-19
Clayton T. Smith. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19-1
20.12 Article 9: Visual Examination 20-20
19.1 Introduction 19-1 20.13 Article 10: Leak Testing 20-21
19.2 General 19-2 20.14 Acoustic Emission Examination 20-21
19.3 Types of Boilers 19-7 20.15 Article 11: Acoustic Emission Examination
19.4 Accessories 19-10 of Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Vessels 20-22
19.5 Installation 19-14 20.16 Article 12: Acoustic Emission Examination
19.6 Fuels 19-18 of Metallic Vessels During Pressure Testing 20-22
19.7 Fuel-Burning Equipment and Fuel-Burning 20.17 Article 13: Continuous AE Monitoring 20-23
Controls 19-19 20.18 Article 14: Examination System Qualification 20-23
19.8 Boiler-Room Facilities 19-22 20.19 Article 15: Alternating Current Field
19.9 Operation, Maintenance, and Repair Measurement 20-23
of Steam Boilers 19-23 20.20 Article 16: Magnetic Flux Leakage 20-24
19.10 Operation, Maintenance, and Repair of 20.21 Article 17: Remote Field Testing 20-24
Hot-Water-Supply and Hot-Water-Heating 20.22 Article 18: Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry
Boilers 19-30 (APR) Examination 20-24
19.11 Water Treatment 19-35 20.23 Article 19: Guided Wave Examination Method
19.12 General Comment 19-38 for Piping 20-24
19.13 Considerations Likely to be in Future Code 20.24 Technical Changes to Section V 20-25
Editions 19-38 20.25 Future Changes Anticipated for Section V 20-25
19.14 Summary of Changes 19-39 20.26 Acknowledgements 20-25
19.15 Reference 19-39 20.27 References 20-25
Preface to the First Edition

This book provides “The Criteria and Commentary on Select hazards. Spread over several volumes and thousands of pages of
Aspects of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel and Piping Codes” text, tables, and graphics, it is not easy to decipher the criteria and
in two volumes. The intent of this book is to serve as a “Primer” to the basis of these Codes.
help the user weave through varied aspects of the ASME Codes and Thus, given the importance of these ASME Codes related to
B31.1 and B31.3 Piping Codes and present a summary of specific the industry and the attendant technological advances, it becomes
aspects of interest to users. In essence, this Primer will enable users a professional expediency to assimilate and appropriately apply the
to understand the basic rationale of the Codes as deliberated and wealth of information contained in the Codes. The first step, then,
disseminated by the ASME Code Committees. This book is dif- is to ask, “Where is what?” The Code is spread over eleven Sec-
ferent from the Code Cases or Interpretations of the Code, issued tions; attending the tutorials is one way to understand first-hand the
periodically by these ASME Code Committees, although these are various Sections of the Code. However, this is not within the reach
referred in the book. It is meant for a varied spectrum of users of all of the engineers in the industry. The next best solution is to
of Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) and B31.1 and B31.3 Pip- have expert authors, versatile in the individual Sections and Sub-
ing Codes in United States and elsewhere in the world. This book sections, to make the subject matter understand-able to the practic-
should be considered as a comprehensive guide for ASME B&PV ing engineers in a book format such as “A PRIMER.”
Code Sections I through XI, B31.1 and B31.3 Piping Codes. The In this book, all of the Sections I through XI of the B&PV and
contents of these two volumes can be considered as a companion B31.1 and B31.3 Piping Codes are summarily addressed with
book—a criteria document—for the latest editions of the Code, examples, explanatory text, tables, graphics, references, and anno-
written by thirty-six professionals with expertise in its preparation tated bibliographical notes. This permits engineers to more eas-
and use. ily refer to the material requirements and the acceptance criteria
ASME and the industry volunteers have invested immense whether they are in the design basis or in an operability situation of
resources in developing Codes and Standards for the Power and a nuclear plant or process piping. In addition, certain special top-
Petrochemical Industry, including nuclear, non-nuclear, fossil, ics of interest to engineers are explicitly addressed. These include
and related. The industry has been relying on these documents, Rules for Accreditation and Certification; Perspective on Cyclic,
collectively referred to as the ASME Code, on a day-today Impact, and Dynamic Loads; Functionality and Operability Cri-
basis, and regulators consult them for enforcing the rules. Research teria; Fluids; Pipe Vibration; Stress Intensification Factors, Stress
and development, in both the material science and analytical areas, Indices, and Flexibility Factors; Code Design and Evaluation
find their results in the revisions and updates of the Codes. Over for Cyclic Loading; and Bolted-Flange Joints and Connections.
a period of time, these B&PV and Piping Codes, encompassing Important is the inclusion of unique Sections such as Sections I, II,
several disciplines and topics, have become voluminous Standards IV through VII, IX, and X that enriches the value of the book as a
that belie the intent and expectations of the authors of the Codes. comprehensive companion guide for B&PV and Piping Codes. Of
In a word, the B&PV Codes can become a “labyrinth” for an occa- considerable value is the inclusion of an in-depth treatment of Sec-
sional user not conversant with the information contained in the tions III, VIII, and XI. A unique aspect of the book chapters related
Code. Thus, given the wealth of information contained in the Code, to the Codes is the treatment of the ori-gins and the historical back-
these cannot be easily discerned. For example, the B&PV Code, ground unraveling the original intent of the writers of the Criteria
even though it is literally an encyclopedia of rules and standards to of the Codes and Standards. Thus, the current users of these Codes
be followed by engineers in the nuclear or fossil or related indus- and Standards can apply their engineering knowledge and judg-
tries, is not easy to comprehend and conform to. Alphanumeric text ment intelligently in their use of these Codes and Standards.
and graphics are loaded with information, arrived at by a consensus Although these two volumes cannot be considered to be a per-
process from the deliberations of practicing engineers, profession- fect symphony, the subject matter orchestrates around a central
als, academia, and regulators meeting several times a year. A lack theme, that is, “The Use of B&PV and Piping Codes and Stand-
of understanding of the Code, therefore, can cause not only pro- ards.” Special effort is made by the contributors, who are experts in
fessional errors but also misplaced confidence and reliance on the their respective fields, to cross-reference other Sections; this facili-
engineer’s interpretation that could lead to serious public safety tates identifying the interconnection between various B&PV Code
xlii t Preface

Sections, as well as the B31.1 and B31.3 Piping Codes. The Table with examples to elucidate the points citing the Code Subsections
of Contents, indexing, and annotated notes for individual Chapters and Articles.
are provided to identify the connection between varied topics. It
is worth mentioning that despite the chapters not being of equal K. R. Rao, Ph.D., P.E. Robert E. Nickell, Ph.D.
length, comprehensive coverage is ensured. The coverage of some Editor 1999–2000 President
sections is intentionally increased to provide in-depth discussion, ASME International

Preface to the Second Edition

This edition continues to address the purpose of the first edition chapter contributed by recognized authorities. With the increased
to serve as a “Primer” to help the user weave through varied aspects use of computer–related analytical tools and with ASME Codes
of the ASME Codes and B31.1 and B31.3 Piping Codes and pres- explicitly addressing them, a chapter has been devoted to the
ent a summary of specific aspects of interest to users. In providing Applications of Elastic Plastic Fracture Mechanics in ASME Sec-
the “end user” all of these aspects, the first edition has been revised tion XI Code.
appropriately to be consistent with the current 2004 Codes. ASME Codes are literally used around the world. More impor-
Contributors of the first and second volumes had taken immense tantly the European Community, Canada, Japan and UK have been
pains to carefully update their write-ups to include as much of the increasingly sensitive to the relevance of ASME Codes. In this sec-
details that they could provide. Significant changes can be seen in ond edition, experts conversant with these country Codes had been
Sections II, III, VIII and XI with repercussions on Sections I, IV, V, invited to detail the specifics of their Codes and cross-reference
VII, IX and X. Thus, these consequences had been picked up by the these to the ASME Codes.
contributors to bring their write-up up-to-date. Similarly changes of Public Safety, more so than ever before, has become extremely
Power Piping (B31.1 Code) and B31.3 (Process Piping) have also relevant in today’s power generation. Experts hade been invited to
been updated. provide a perspective of the regulations as they emerged as well
Included in this edition is a third volume that addresses the crit- as discuss the salient points of their current use. These include
ical issues faced by the BWR and PWR Nuclear facilities such the transportation of radioactive materials and the new ASME
as BWR Internals, PWR Reactor Integrity, and Alloy 600 related Section XII Code, Pipe Line Integrity and pertinent topics involved
issues. With the aging of the Nuclear Plants, the regulators per- in decommissioning of nuclear facilities.
spective can be meaningful, and this has been addressed by experts
in this area. In today’s industrial spectrum the role of Probabilistic K. R. Rao, Ph.D., P.E.
Risk Analysis has taken an important role and this volume has a Editor
Preface to the Third Edition
This edition continues to address the purpose of the previous edi- intensification factors, stress indices and flexibility factors; Code
tions to serve as a “Primer” to help the user weave through varied design and evaluation for cyclic loading; and bolted-flange joints,
aspects of the ASME Codes and B31.1 and B31.3 Piping Codes, connections, code design and evaluation for cyclic loading for
in addition to a discussion of “The Criteria and Commentary on Code Sections III, VIII and a new chapter that discusses Safety
Select Aspects of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel and Piping of Personnel using Quick-actuating Closures on Pressure Vessels
Codes” of interest to “end users”. This publication has been revised and associated litigation issues. While few chapters have been
in providing all of the aspects of the previous editions, while updat- addressed by new authors who added fresh perspective, the efforts
ing to the current 2007 Codes, unless otherwise mentioned. This of continuing authors have provided their insights with additional
book in three volumes strives to be a comprehensive ‘Companion equations, figures and tables in addition to extensive textual matter.
Guide to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code’. The third volume of this edition is considerably enlarged to
Since the first edition, a total of 140 authors have contributed expand the items addressing changing priorities of Codes and
to this publication, and in this edition there are 107 contributors Standards. Continuing authors who addressed these topics in the
of which 51 are new authors. Several of the new contributors are previous edition have discussed these with respect to the ASME
from countries around the world that use ASME B&PV Codes, 2007 Code Edition. The discussions include chapters on BWR
with knowledge of ASME Codes, in addition to expertise of their and PWR Reactor Internals; License Renewal and Aging Manage-
own countries’ B&PV Codes. All of these authors who contributed ment; Alloy 600 Issues; PRA and Risk-Informed Analysis; Elastic-
to this third edition considerably updated, revised or added to the Plastic Fracture Mechanics; and ASME Code Rules of Section XII
content matter covered in the second edition to address the current Transport Tank Code. Chapters covering ‘U.S. Transportation
and futuristic trend as well as dramatic changes in the industry. Regulations for Radioactive Materials’; ‘Pipeline Integrity and
The first two volumes covering Code Sections I through XI Security’, and ‘Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities’ have been
address organizational changes of B&PV Code Committees and considerably revised.
Special topics relating to the application of the Code. Considering In Volume 3 experts around the world capture ‘Issues Critical
significant organizational changes are taking place in ASME that for the Next Generation of Nuclear Facilities’ such as Management
reflect the industry’s demands both in USA and internationally, of Spent Nuclear Fuel, Generation III1 PWRs, New Generation
the salient points of these have been captured in this publication by of BWRs and VERY High Temperature Generation IV Reactors.
experts who have first hand information about these. The impact of globalization and inter-dependency of ASME
Volume 1 covers ASME Code Sections I through VII, B31.1 and B&PV Codes had been examined in the previous edition in Euro-
B31.3 Piping Codes. Continuing authors have considerably updated pean Community, Canada, France, Japan and United Kingdom.
the text, tables, and figures of the previous edition to be in line with Contributors who authored these country chapters revisited their
the 2007 Code, bringing the insight knowledge of these experts in write-up and updated to capture the current scenario.
updating this Volume. Fresh look has been provided by new authors, Significant contribution in the third volume is the inclusion of
who in replacing previous contributors of few chapters, have pro- additional countries with changing priorities of their Nuclear Facil-
vided an added perspectives rendered in the earlier editions. In one ities. In-depth discussions cover the international experts of these
case, the chapter had been entirely rewritten by new experts, with a countries which own and operate nuclear reactors or have nuclear
new title but addressing the same subject matter while updating the steam supply vendors and fabricators that use ASME B&PV Code
information to the 2007 ASME Code Edition. Sections I through XII. This information is meant to benefit inter-
ASME Code Committees have spent time and considerable national users of ASME Codes in Finland, Belgium, Germany,
resources to update Section VIII Division 2 that was completely Spain, Czech and Slovakia, Russia, South Africa, India, Korea and
rewritten in the 2007 Code Edition, and this effort has been cap- Taiwan that have been added in this third edition.
tured in Volume 2 by several experts conversant with this effort. A unique feature of this publication is once again, as in the pre-
Volume 2 has chapters addressing Code Sections VIII through XI, vious editions, the inclusion of all author biographies and an intro-
refurbished with additional code material consistent with the cur- duction that synthesizes every chapter, along with an alphabetical
rent 2007 Code edition. Notable updates included in this Volume listing of indexed terms.
relate to maintenance rule; accreditation and certification; perspec-
tives on cyclic, impact and dynamic loads; functionality and oper- K. R. Rao, Ph.D., P.E.
ability criteria; fluids; pipe vibration testing and analysis; stress Editor
Preface to the Fourth Edition

This edition continues to address the purpose of the previous rendered in the earlier editions. In certain cases, the chapters had
editions to serve as a “Primer” to help the user weave through var- been entirely rewritten by replacement experts, with new titles but
ied aspects of the ASME Codes and B31 Piping Codes, in addi- addressing the same topics while revising in its entirety and updat-
tion to a discussion of “The Criteria and Commentary on Select ing the information to the 2010 ASME Code Edition.
Aspects of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel and Piping Codes” Volume 1 has chapters 3 and 15 covering Code Sections II and
of interest to “end users”. This publication has been revised in pro- Section III Division 2, respectively that have additional experts
viding all of the aspects of the previous editions, while updating to address topics which had not been covered in the third edition.
to the current 2010 Codes, unless otherwise mentioned. This book An additional chapter to cover Code Section III Division 5 has
strives to be a comprehensive ‘Companion Guide to the ASME been included in this third edition by experts conversant with Code
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code’. Committee activity. Other chapters covering the updates of Code
All of the 48 authors who contributed to 38 Chapters in this Sections I, III Divisions 1, 2 and 3, Section IV, V and VI have been
fourth edition considerably updated, revised or added to the con- completely updated to ASME 2010 Code.
tent matter covered in the third edition to address the current and Volume 2 has chapters addressing Code Sections VIII through
future trends as well as dramatic changes in the industry. Unlike XII with additional code material consistent with the current 2010
the previous third edition, this edition has two volumes dedicated Code edition. Notable updates relating to Section VIII are chapters
entirely to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Sections I covering Divisions 1, 2 and 3 and chapter dealing with “Safety of
through XII. Personnel”. ASME Section IX has been updated by a Code expert
Not only have chapters of the third edition altered but the since the initial rendering in the first edition. Code Section X has
restructuring of chapters made it possible for a smoother flow of been addressed by an expert replacing the original author with
chapters relating to Sections I through XII that proceed B31 Piping considerable changes. Code Section XI that is perhaps crucial for
Codes appearing in Volume 2. Chapters not covering Code Sec- operating nuclear plants has been reorganized consistent with the
tion I through XII which were in Volume 2 of third edition have current trends with expert authors who are members of the respec-
been dropped from this fourth edition, and consequently chapters tive committees who updated the chapters with 2010 Code. A sig-
of third edition have been renumbered. In this edition pagination of nificant addition in this edition is the retention of a chapter from the
chapters is different from the previous editions, starting from page third edition pertaining to Elastic-Plastic Mechanics in Section XI.
1 and ending with the last page of the chapter. Unique for this fourth edition is the addition of several B31 Pip-
Considering significant organizational changes taking place in ing Codes and Standards in Part 11 dealt by new authors covering
ASME that reflect the industry’s demands both in USA and inter- B31.9 Building Services and ASME Standards For Piping; B31T
nationally, the salient points of these have been captured in both Standard For Toughness Requirements For Piping; B31.5: Refrig-
the volumes by experts who have first hand information about eration Piping and Heat Transfer Components; B31E Standard
these. Each of the volumes 1 and 2 have Index provided at the end for Seismic Design and Current ASME Edition Retrofit of above
of each volume as a quick reference to topics occurring in different Ground Piping Systems; B31J Standard for Test Method for Deter-
Code Sections of that volume. mining Stress I- Factors for Metallic Piping Components; B31.4
Volume 1 covers ASME Code Sections I through VII, and Vol- Standard for Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydro-
ume 2 addresses ASME Code Sections VIII through XII. In several carbons and Other Liquids; B31.11 Standard for Slurry Trans-
instances continuing authors, in some cases replacement authors portation Piping; B31G: Manual for Determining the Remaining
have considerably updated the text, tables, and figures of the previ- Strength of Corroded Pipelines and B31Q: Qualification of Pipe-
ous edition to be in line with the 2010 Code, bringing the insight line Operators; and B31.12: Hydrogen Piping and Pipelines.
knowledge of these experts in updating the previous edition. Fresh
look has been provided by new authors, who in replacing previous K. R. Rao, Ph.D., P.E.
contributors of few chapters, have provided an added perspectives Editor

This edition continues to address the purpose of the previous edition. Fresh look has been provided by new authors, who in
editions to serve as a “Primer” to help the user weave through var- replacing previous contributors of few chapters, have provided
ied aspects of the ASME Codes and B31 Piping Codes, in addi- added perspectives rendered in the earlier editions. In certain cases,
tion to a discussion of “The Criteria and Commentary on Select the chapters had been entirely rewritten by replacement experts,
Aspects of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel and Piping Codes” with new titles but addressing the same topics while revising in
of interest to “end users”. This publication has been revised in pro- its entirety and updating the information to the 2015 ASME Code
viding all of the aspects of the previous editions, while updating to Edition and topics pertinent to 2017 B&PV Code.
the current 2015 Codes and topics pertinent to 2017 B&PV Code. Volume 1 has Chapter 1 covering “Section I—Introduction to
This book strives to be a comprehensive Companion Guide to the Power Boilers” which has been authored by two new contributors,
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. replacing the previous one, who revised this chapter considerably.
This fully updated and revised fifth edition of this classic refer- Likewise Chapter 2 “Section VII—Recommended Guidelines for
ence work has addressed in 40 chapters ASME 2015 Boiler Pres- The Care Of Power Boilers” has a replacement author who has
sure Vessel & Piping Codes and Standards, whereas the fourth revised the chapter to a considerable extent. Chapter 3 for this edi-
edition addressed 2010 Code edition and 2011 addenda. In this tion has been reorganized considering the changes in the applica-
entirely new publication experts discussed several ongoing issues tion of material properties; accordingly Section 3.6 of Chapter 3
even beyond 2015 Code edition. With entirely new and extensively of the fourth edition, “Non-metallic Material used in Structural
re-written chapters, the Code Experts had in mind the use of this Applications”, has been dropped for the fifth edition and a consid-
publication focused on the Addenda leading to the 2017 B&PV erably enlarged version of this topic is Chapter 12 for this edition.
Code. Considerable changes in this chapter, including graphics, have
This edition is available in a convenient two-volume format been updated and included in this edition.
that focuses on all twelve sections of the ASME Code, and has In volume 1 Chapters 4 through 7, 9 through 11, 14 and 16 of
two additional chapters covering the foreseeable new trends of the the fourth edition, have been updated and revised considerably by
ASME boiler and pressure vessel codes. Several chapters are com- the continuing authors. Chapter 12 of this edition addresses new
prehensively covered for this edition by 51 ASME B&PV Code code material “Report on Committee on Nonmetallic Pressure
experts, whose biographical data is included in the two volumes. Piping Systems, with its published requirements in three separate
An easy and quick to understand introduction in the front matter standards: NM-1 Thermoplastic Pressure Piping Systems; NM-2
of each of the volumes succinctly explains what is elaborated in FRP Pressure Piping Systems; and NM-3 Nonmetallic Materials
nearly 2000 pages of this 2-volume publication. Another feature (includes specifications and material properties similar to BPV
of this publication is all users of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Code Section II)” by code experts. Chapters 13, 18, 19 and 20 have
can identify from the index the 8000 individual Code related items. new authors replacing the previous contributors and thereby con-
All of the 51 authors who contributed to 40 Chapters in this fifth siderably revising fourth edition content of these chapters. Chapter
edition considerably updated, revised or added to the content mat- 15 covering Code Section III Division 2 has a replacement author
ter covered in the fourth edition to address the current and future in addition to others experts to address topics which had not been
trends as well as dramatic changes in the industry in the ASME covered in the previous editions. Chapter 17 that covers “Divi-
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Sections I through XII, and B31 sion 5—High Temperature Reactors” authored by Code experts
Piping Codes that appear in Volume 2. has considerable material from Chapter 12 of the fourth edition,
Considering significant organizational changes are taking place who authored it in the fourth edition, included in this Chapter 17
in ASME that reflect the Industry’s demands both in USA and of the current fifth edition. Chapter 8 has a replacement author for
internationally, salient points of these have been captured in both this fifth edition.
the volumes by experts who have firsthand information about Volume 2 has chapters addressing Code Sections VIII through
these. Volume 1 covers ASME Code Sections I through VII, and XII with additional code material consistent with the current 2015
Volume 2 addresses ASME Code Sections VIII through XII. Con- Code edition and topics pertinent to 2017 B&PV Code. Chapters
tinuing and replacement authors have considerably updated the 25, 27 and 38 have replacement authors in lieu of the fourth edition
text, tables, and figures of the previous edition to be in line with contributors, whereas in Chapter 22 a contributor has dropped out
the 2015 Code and topics pertinent to 2017 B&PV Code, bringing for this edition. Chapters 21 and 23 have a contributor in addi-
the insight knowledge of these experts in updating the previous tion to continuing authors, whereas Chapter 34 has a replacement
xlvi t Preface

author in addition to the continuing contributor. Chapters 24, 26, Standard for Seismic Design and Current ASME Edition Retrofit
28 through 33, 35 to 37 have continuing authors contributing for of above Ground Piping Systems; B31J Standard for Test Method
the fifth edition. for Determining Stress I- Factors for Metallic Piping Compo-
In volume 1 Chapter 12 is a new chapter, and in volume 2 only nents; B31.4 Standard for Pipeline Transportation Systems for
Chapters 39 and 40 are new chapters which are addressed by code Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids; B31.11 Standard for
experts with chapter 39 being a futuristic chapter covering fusion Slurry Transportation Piping; B31G: Manual for Determining
energy devices and Chapter 40 being a chapter tracing the histori- the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines and B31Q: Quali-
cal background of code rules for nuclear vessels. fication of Pipeline Operators; and B31.12: Hydrogen Piping and
Continuing chapters of the fourth edition are chapters cover- Pipelines.
ing B31.9 Building Services and ASME Standards For Piping;
B31T Standard For Toughness Requirements For Piping; B31.5: K. R. Rao, Ph.D., P.E.
Refrigeration Piping and Heat Transfer Components; B31E Editor
This fifth edition is in two volumes composed of 11 Parts, with Volume 1 has five Parts, each addressing a unique aspect of the
Parts 1–5 in Volume 1, Parts 6–11 in Volume 2. Common to both Code. Part 1 covers Power Boilers (Code Sections I and VII); Part 2
volumes is the front matter, including the Organization of the Code. covers Materials and Specifications (Code Section II). Scope of
Organization and Operation of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Ves- Part 2 has been considerably enlarged to address the “sub-topics”
sel (B&PV) Committee has been initially authored by Martin D. of “material specifications” which are the essence of the B&PV
Bernstein for the first edition, appropriately updated in the second Codes and Standards. Basis for Acceptance of B&PV Codes for
and third editions by Guido G. Karcher capturing the dramatic “International Material Specifications” are also addressed. Consid-
changes in the ASME B&PV organization. The fourth edition was ering the importance of current and future nonmetallic construc-
updated by Joel G. Feldstein and Thomas P. Pastor. The current tion codes and standards, coverage of Section 3.6 of Chapter 3 of
fifth edition is updated by Thomas P. Pastor, Ralph Hill III, and fourth edition has been included in the discussions of Chapter 12
Richard (Rick) Swayne who hold senior leadership positions in the of this fifth edition.,
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committees. Part 3 provides an in-depth commentary on Rules for Construction
An index is provided at the end of each volume as a quick refer- of Nuclear Power Plant Components (Code Section III, Division 1).
ence to topics occurring in different Code Sections of that volume. Previously, “Pumps” and “Valves” were addressed in a single chapter
In addition to indexing several topics covered in this publication, in the third edition. This edition continues the coverage of fourth edi-
it is also meant to assist in reviewing the overlaps of the ASME tion Chapter 13 dealing with nuclear pumps and Chapter 14 addressing
Boilers & Pressure Vessel Code Sections/Subsections/Paragraphs nuclear valves. In addition, changes in this fifth edition are in Chap-
occurring in the particular volume. In each chapter, all discussions ters 12 and 17. Chapter 12 discussed Subsection NH in previous
generally pertain to the latest 2015 Code Edition unless noted oth- editions. However, because Subsection NH has been incorporated
erwise by the chapter author(s). into Section III, Division 5, the discussion previously presented in
The fourth edition was published in 2012 in two volumes and Chapter 12 has been incorporated in Chapter 17. On the other hand
had a total of 147 contributors for this publication, since the initial Chapter 12, in this edition is based on a Report on Committee on
first edition. Nonmetallic Pressure Piping Systems detailing NM-1 Thermoplas-
The third edition published in 2009 in three volumes was split tic Pressure Piping Systems; NM-2 FRP Pressure Piping Systems
into three separate books - the first was the fourth edition of and NM-3 Nonmetallic Materials which includes specifications
the “Companion Guide to the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel and material properties similar to BPV Code Section II.
Code” published in 2012 and the other two books were “Con- As in the previous editions, Section III Division 2 continues to be
tinuing and Changing Priorities of ASME Boiler & Pressure included in Part 3, addressed by several additional contributors with
Vessel Codes and Standards” published in 2014; and “Global expertise in their respective areas. Section III Divisions 3 and 5 are
Applications of The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code” included in Part 3, with Division 5 addressing the “Generation IV
published in 2016. Nuclear Reactors”, which is an add-on-aspect of this edition.
Unique for this edition with two volumes which addresses Code Part 4 covers Sections IV and VI of B&PV Code. Part 5 cover-
Sections I through XII, in addition to several ASME B31 Piping ing Nondestructive Examination (NDE), Code Section V of B&PV
Codes is the inclusion of two additional chapters addressed by Code is now included in Volume 1.
ASME Code experts who cover “Section III Div 4: Fusion Energy Volume 2 covers Parts 6–11, with Part 6 covering Section VIII–
Devices” and “History, Philosophy, & Background of Section Ill, Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels. In Part 6, experts
& Development of ASME Code Rules for Nuclear Vessels”. dealing with Divisions 1, 2, and 3 provide in-depth criteria and
Each of the 51 contributors covering 40 chapters of the cur- commentary of Code Section VIII with the latest of the code stipu-
rent fifth edition captured ‘up-to-date’ Boiler and Pressure Vessel lations. In addition there is a chapter by an expert of the B&PV
Codes and Standards, making this publication once again a com- Code who discusses safety and litigation issues.
prehensive “Companion Guide Book”. Part 7 addresses welding and brazing qualifications of Code
The ASME Code is generally accepted in the United States (and Section IX by the contributor with expertise at the helm of Code
in many foreign countries) as recognized minimum safety standard Committee deliberations.
for the construction of pressure vessels and piping. Toward that Part 8 covering Code Section X pertains to fiber-reinforced plas-
end, these two volumes can be considered “a primer.” Although tic pressure vessels has been considerably revised by the current
this primer is authored by several Code Committee members who contributor for this edition.
are considered experts in their respective fields, the comments and Part 9 providing in-depth discussions of Code Section XI in
interpretations of the rules contained in this publication are strictly Chapters 27 through 34 is updated by authors associated with the
the opinions of the individual authors; they are not to be consid- specific subgroups and subcommittees dealing with the topics
ered official ASME Code Committee positions. addressed in the previous editions. A chapter from the third volume
xlviii t Introduction

of the third edition dealing with Applications of Elastic-Plastic certification by stamping and the use of data reports. A number of
Fracture Mechanics is included in this volume. design examples have also been included in this chapter.
Part 10 covering Code Section XII dealing with Transport Tank The design and construction of power boiler involves the use
Code which was in the third volume of the third edition is now of other sections of the ASME Code besides Section I, such as
included in this part. Section II, Materials; Section V, Nondestructive Examination;
Part 11 updates the coverage of ASME B31 Codes and Stand- and Section IX, Welding and Brazing Qualifications. In a rather
ards in Chapters 35 through 38. Chapter 35 has Code for B31.1 unusual arrangement, the construction rules for boiler piping are
Power Piping and Chapter 36 updates B31.3 Process Piping and found partly in Section I and partly in the B31.1 Power Piping
B31.5, B31E, B31J and B31T. Chapter 37 updates the coverage of Code. This arrangement has led to considerable misunderstanding
fourth edition topics B31, B31.8, B31.11 and B31Q; and Chapter and confusion, as explained in Chapter 1, Section 1.5, where the
38 updates B31.12. distinction between boiler proper piping and boiler external piping
Two additional chapters are covered in a new Part 12 of this is discussed.
fifth edition which provides in two separate and consecutive chap- In the 1st edition Mr. Bernstein stated “The ASME B&PV Code
ters ‘futuristic’ and ‘historical’ aspects of ASME B&PV Codes changes very slowly but continuously. Thus, although this chapter
and Standards. Chapter 39 provides the futuristic aspect – a new provides a substantial body of information and explanation of the
“Section III Div 4: Fusion Energy Devices” and in chapter 40 the rules as they now exist, it can never provide the last word. Nev-
“history and philosophy of Section III” are discussed. ertheless, the chapter should provide the User with a very useful
introduction and guide to Section I and its application.” His words
are still true for the reason that Chapter 1, as updated, retains the
VOLUME 1 philosophy and intent of the original author, Martin D. Bernstein.
Chapter 2, authored by William L. Lowry in the current update,
Chapter 1 of the 1st edition was authored by the late Martin covers ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section VII, Recom-
D. Bernstein. It discussed Power Boilers, Section I of the ASME mended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers. This Section
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. His objective was to provide an was reorganized since the 4th Edition of the Guide, by Mr. Lowry
overview of the intent, application and enforcement of Section I with input from 10 current and past members of Code Commit-
rules for the construction of power boilers. This chapter was an tees and reviewed by 29 Peer reviewers prior to a review, edits
abbreviated version of the book Power Boilers, A Guide to Sec- and approval by Section I, Power Boilers Committee. The primary
tion I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, which was discussion is about industrial, gas or oil fired, watertube boilers,
used as the textbook for a two day ASME professional develop- which constitute the vast majority of Power Boilers constructed.
ment course on Section I developed and taught for many years by Other boiler types are discussed in separate Subsections of Section
Martin D. Bernstein and Lloyd W. Yoder. Mr. Yoder reviewed and VII. No information was discarded from the previous Edition of
updated Chapter 1 for the 2nd edition to commemorate his close Section VII. The purpose of Section VII is stated in the Introduc-
friend and associate. In doing so, he found that only minor changes tion of Section VII, “The purpose is to promote safety in the use
and updating were required because the 1st edition Chapter 1 was of power boilers. These guidelines are intended for use by those
so well crafted by Mr. Bernstein, like all of the many things he was directly responsible for operating, maintaining, and examining
known to have written. power boilers.”
Chapter 1 was reviewed and updated for the third edition by The subject of Subsection 1 is Watertube Drum-Type Industrial
John R. MacKay, long-time member and past chairman of Stand- Steam Boilers. The Articles that follow deal with Fundamentals
ards Committee I (BPVI), formerly Subcommittee I. Mr. MacKay such as Steam Generation, Combustion, and Boiler Efficiency;
also reviewed and updated the chapter for the fourth edition to Boiler Operation; Boiler Auxiliaries; Appurtenances; Instrumenta-
cover revisions to Section I, Power Boilers through the 2010 Edi- tion, Controls, and Interlocks; Examination; Repairs, Alterations,
tion, 2011 Addenda. Significant additions were included that per- and Maintenance. Subsection 2 subjects pertain to all steam boilers.
tain to the addition of PG-26 Weld Strength Reduction Factor and The Articles address Protecting Heat Transfer Surfaces; Prevent-
changes to PG-58 Boiler External Piping and Boiler Proper Con- ing Boiler Failures; Documents, Records and References. Subsec-
nections and PG-105 Certification Marks. tion 3 covers Other Boiler Types. All information regarding other
Chapter 1 has been updated for the fifth edition by Ed Ortman boiler types from previous Editions of Section VII is contained
and Jay Vattappilly, both current members of BPV I as well as along with several additions. Article 301 Electric Steam Boilers
some of its various subgroups. This edition brings Chapter 1 up is completely new and a ‘must read’ prior to purchasing one of
to the 2015 Edition of Section I and also includes a paragraph the several designs available. Subsection 4 includes all informa-
on items the Committee is working on for the 2017 Edition and tion specifically addressing Coal-Fired and Other Solid-Fuel-Fired
beyond. A couple of major updates are new riveting rules pub- Boilers.
lished in Part PR in the 2013 Edition of Section I and new rules Subsection 5 is a single Glossary combined from the three
for locomotive boiler published as a new Part PL in the 2015 separate Glossaries of prior Editions and coordinated with the
Edition. latest edition of American Boiler Manufacturers Association’s
Chapter 1 covers some of the more important aspects of Section ‘Lexicon’. Checklists for Maintenance Examinations are contained
I construction, including the history and philosophy of Section I: in Appendix A.
how the ASME Code works; the organization and scope of Section It is suggested that the reader also review existing literature, such
I; the distinction between boiler proper piping and boiler external as manufacturer’s instructions or existing company procedures,
piping; how and where Section I is enforced; and the fundamen- for additional details. Section VII is a Nonmandatory Standard,
tals of Section I construction. These fundamentals include per- and it provides recommended practices and serves as a guideline.
mitted materials; design; fabrication; welding and postweld heat However, Section VII touches on many activities that the Owner–
treatment; NDE; hydrostatic testing; third-party inspection; and Operator personnel must be aware of before a power boiler is

commissioned. New personnel who are not familiar with boiler relations to the ANSI/AWS specifications. Section II, Part C does
operation, maintenance, and examination can use Section VII as not include all the welding and brazing materials available to the
an introduction to these activities. Experienced personnel will find industry—only those Specifications applicable to ASME Code
Section VII to be a good review of the essentials of operation, Construction. Discussions also include Code Cases pertinent to
maintenance, and examination, with useful figures and references. this chapter. Chapter 3.4 highlights the major features of the Weld-
Chapter 2 of this Guide also contains some insights and infor- ing Material Specifications contained in Section II, Part C and the
mation from previous Editions of the Guide that are not currently relationship of these Specifications to other Sections of the Code,
contained in Section VII. including Section IX. Included are the electrode classification sys-
Chapter 3 has multiple authors, and in Chapter 3.1, History of tem, material descriptions, welding material applications, welding
Materials in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Domenic material procurement, and filler-metal certification. Chapter 3.4
Canonico traces the chronological evolution of materials and asso- should prove useful for one to gain a basic understanding of ASME/
ciated technologies, from the need for materials to accommodate AWS Welding Material Classification and Specification.
riveted construction to the acceptance of fusion welding as a fab- Chapter 3.5 has been revised by John Grubb and Jeff Henry who
rication process. Included in this discussion are the application of reviewed important aspects of Section II, Part D – Properties. The
advanced materials, the revisions to the basis for setting allowable discussion includes the properties of ferrous and nonferrous alloys
stress values, and the acceptance of Material Specifications other used in the design of components for the B&PV and Nuclear Con-
than those approved by ASTM. Also covered is the evolution of struction Codes. Explanations are provided for the use of tables
materials, from their humble beginning as a 35-page inclusion in within Section II, Part D, including the tables of maximum allowa-
the 1914 Edition of the Boiler Code to the 3994-page, four-Part ble stresses and design stress intensity values for the alloys adopted
2001 Edition of Section II of the ASME B&PV Code. Chapter 3.1 by the Construction Codes, as well as the tables of yield strength
provides some insight not only into the materials needed for the and ultimate tensile strength values at a range of temperatures. The
design and fabrication of power boilers but also into the determi- discussion also addresses the use of the external pressure charts
nation of the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure. With the as well as the values collected in the Physical Properties tables
aid of tables, Domenic discusses the Material Specifications from that are required for Code design. Explanations are provided for
the 1914 through the present Code Editions. Chapter 3.2, authored how the allowable stresses for the different Construction Codes are
by John Grubb in the current update, discusses Code Section II, developed and the data requirements for new materials briefly are
Part A—Ferrous Material Specifications, adopted by ASME for reviewed. The chapter is a useful overview to understanding how
the construction of boiler, pressure vessel, and nuclear power plant the compendium of information on relevant material properties
components. He notes that all materials accepted by the various that is collected in Section II, Part D can be successfully exploited
Code Sections and used for construction within the scope of the by Code users.
Code Sections’ rules must be furnished in accordance with the Chapter 3.6, authored by Anne Chaudouet and Elmar Upitis,
Material Specifications contained in Section II, Parts A, B, or C, or discusses Section II, Part A and Part B—International Material
referenced in Appendix II of Part A—except where otherwise pro- Specifications adopted by ASME for the construction of boiler,
vided in the ASME Code Cases or in the applicable Code Section. pressure vessel, and nuclear power plant components. Most ASME
Discussions in Chapter 3.2 include The Organization of Section II, material specifications are based on ASTM specifications. ASME
Part A, Guideline on the Approval of New Materials, Appendices, Section II also includes rules for acceptance of material specifica-
and Interpretations. tions of recognized National or International organizations other
In Chapter 3.3, Richard C. Sutherlin provides the basis of a com- than ASTM. ASME does not have permission to publish such
mentary on Section II, Part B – Nonferrous Material Specifications, specifications. Section II includes cover sheets giving the addi-
adopted by ASME for the construction of boiler, pressure vessel tional ASME requirements for specifications which ASME has
and nuclear power plant components. He notes that all materials adopted for ASME Code construction. Chapter 3.6 also discusses
allowed by the various Code Sections and used for construction the process of adoption of the CEN specifications in Europe with
within the scope of the Code Sections’ rules must be furnished in consequences on the corresponding ASME specifications. The EN
accordance with the Material Specifications contained in Section material specifications are restricted to European specifications
II, Part B or referenced in Appendix II of Part B, except where themselves with no national endorsement, foreword and annexes
otherwise provided in the ASME Code Cases or in the applicable and dated as the year of approval by CEN.
Code Section. Richard discusses Alloy Definitions; Organization Chapter 3.6 describes the following international specifications
of Section II, Part B; Material Specifications included in Section II, that are adopted by ASME and included in Section II: Australian
Part B: Guidelines for Approval and Use of Materials for ASME Standard basis of SA/AS 1548 Specification for Steel Plates for
Code Construction; Submittal of Technical Inquiries to the Boiler Pressure Equipment; Canadian Standard basis of SA/CSA-G40.21
and Pressure Vessel committee; Acceptable ASTM and non-ASTM Structural quality steel; European Standards bases of SA/EN
Editions; Guidelines on Multiple Marking of Materials; Appendi- 10025 Hot rolled products of structural Steels—Part 2 Non-alloy
ces; ASME Code Cases; Interpretations; and the use of Nonferrous structural steels, of SA/EN 10028 Flat products made of steels for
Material Specification in the Piping Codes 31.1 and 31.3. Richard pressure purposes—Part 2 Non-alloy and alloy steels with speci-
also provides cross references to weldability; the ASME Code Sec- fied elevated temperature properties, Part 3 Weldable fine grain
tion I, III, IV, VIII and IX; and Piping Codes B31.1 and B31.3. steels, normalized, Part 4 Nickel alloy steel with specified low
Chapter 3.4, authored by Marvin Carpenter and William Newell, temperature properties and Part 7 Stainless steels, SA/EN 10088
discusses Section II, Part C—Specification for Welding Rods, Elec- Stainless Steels—Part 2 Sheet/plate and strip for corrosion resist-
trodes, and Filler Metals. Welding plays a major role in the fabrica- ing steels for general purposes, SA/EN 10216 Seamless steel tubes
tion of pressure vessels and related components to the requirements for pressure purposes—Part 2 Non-alloy and alloy steel tubes with
of the ASME B&PV Code. Marvin provides the basis for the Speci- specified elevated temperature properties, SA/EN 10217 Welded
fications and Standards enveloped by Section II, Part C and their steel tubes for pressure purposes—Part 1 Non-alloy steel tubes with
l t Introduction

specified room temperature properties, and of SB/EN 1706 Alu- responsibilities and quality assurance program requirements of the
minum and Aluminum Alloys—Castings—Chemical Composition different entities involved in nuclear power plant construction—
and Mechanical Properties; Chinese Standard basis of SA/GB 713 from the Material Organization to the Owner—are addressed.
Steel Plates for Boilers and Pressure vessels; Indian Standard basis Requirements for ASME accreditation, application of the ASME
of SA/IS 2062 Steel for General Structural Purposes, Japanese Code Symbol Stamp, and use of Code Data Reports are described.
Standards bases of SA/JIS G3118 Carbon steel plates for pressure With in-depth information, Mr. Swayne outlines the basis for
vessels for intermediate and moderate temperature services, SA/ exemptions, component classification, load combinations, respon-
JIS G4303 Stainless steel bars and of SA/JIS G5504 Heavy-walled sibilities, Certificate of Authorization Holders and Quality System
ferritic spheroidal graphite iron castings for low temperature ser- Certificate Holders. Also, Mr. Swayne provides cross-referencing
vice, and French standard basis of SA/NF A 36-215 Weldable to other Code Sections and Subsections, such as Sections III and
fine grain steels for transportation of dangerous substances. Some XI, as well as to pertinent Regulatory Guides, such as the U.S.
grades of international material specifications are approved for Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Code construction by use of Code Cases. Chapter 3.6 also includes Chapter 6 has been updated by Chakrapani Basavaraju and David
a brief discussion of these materials. Jones to address changes in 2013 and 2015 versions of the Code. The
In Chapter 4, Roger Reedy provides commentary for under- major highlights include expression for flexibility factor, and more
standing the principles of the ASME B&PV Code. Roger traces accurate expressions for C2 and K2 indices for reducers, C3’ and C3
the history of the Code, from its initial publication in 1914 to the indices for straight pipe, updated piping seismic criteria in NB-3200,
present. He also identifies the role of the volunteers who write the and PWHT exemptions for certain P number material weld joints. It
Code and the process used to establish Code with the outstanding should be noted that 2010 version of the Code includes discussions
safety record that has been achieved by the current consensus pro- Code Cases N-761 and N-792 pertaining to the evaluation of fatigue
cess. Roger suggests that Code Users apply common sense when effects of components exposed to LWR environments, and discus-
using and interpreting the Code He emphasizes that “the Code is sion on changes to the rules on temper bead welding.
not a handbook and cannot substitute for the use of engineering Authors cover Subsection NB, Class 1 Components. In present-
judgment.” Also, Roger emphasizes the need for a better under- ing the rules and requirements for Section III, Subsection NB, the
standing of the basic principles of the Code. It is necessary to authors discuss the theories, on which the rules and requirements
understand the application of design factors for each Section are based, the appropriate application for applying the rules and
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, recognizing there are a requirements, and the interfaces for design, analysis, and construc-
number of different design factors and stress theories in the differ- tion. The chapter emphasizes the analytical rules and requirements,
ent Code Sections and Divisions. Roger states that the term “safety and makes reference to the Criteria of the ASME Boiler and Pres-
factor” is both incorrect and misleading, because a reduction in sure Vessel Code for Design by Analysis in Sections III and VIII,
the factor seems to indicate a reduction in safety. In fact, when the Division 2, 1968 that is considered the basis document for Sections
Code Committee considers a reduction in design factor, it allows III and VIII. John provided the design theory and ramifications of
the reduction only after it determines that other changes in Code the key considerations, with cross-references to other Code Sections
requirements have compensated for the resulting increase in allow- discussing the subtle differences between the Section III design cri-
able stress values. There have been very significant reductions in teria and the Section I and Section VIII, Division 1 design criteria.
design factors in the past few years, and more will come in the near In addition, commentary is provided on the Code require-
future. ments of Class 1 for design by analysis “because of the promi-
Reedy points out concerns with the use of Finite Element Anal- nent role played by stress analysis in designing vessels by the
ysis when it is used in design activities. He emphasizes that the rules of Section III . . . and because of the necessity to integrate
ASME Code of Ethics must be followed when designing pres- the design and analysis efforts.”—The authors emphasize against
surized equipment. Other issues addressed are evaluation of new the design by analysis theme of NB is to provide high assurance
hypothetical loads on equipment that has been Code Stamped, and that the failure modes of burst, plastic collapse, excessive plastic
the purpose of the hydrostatic test of pressurized equipment. deformation, fatigue, ratcheting, brittle fracture, elastic instability
Chapter 5, authored by Richard W. Swayne, describes the general (buckling), stress corrosion, and corrosion fatigue. The intent of
requirements of Section III applicable to all Construction Classes, the rules of NB is to provide assurance that high quality is reached;
including concrete structures and steel vessels, piping, pumps, and therefore, stress analysis is added to the “NB rules for all of the
valves. It identifies how to classify components and describes how disciplines and their interaction” in an effort to reach high quality.
the jurisdictional boundaries of Section III define what is within Chapter 6 has been updated by Greg Hollinger and David Jones to
and what is outside the scope of the Code. This chapter includes the 2007 version of the Code including discussions of the differ-
coverage of Subsection NCA, which pertains to general require- ences between Section VIII Division 2 and Section III NB. Discus-
ments for Divisions 1, 2, and 3 of Section III. Division 1 includes sions have been added on the Section VIII Division 2 rules dealing
steel items such as vessels, storage tanks, piping systems, pumps, with Limit Analysis, Finite Element Analysis and Environmental
valves, supports, and core support structures for use at commercial Fatigue, and new methods for fatigue of weldments.
nuclear power plants; Division 2 includes concrete reactor vessels Chapter 7 has been updated by Chakrapani Basavaraju to
and concrete containment vessels; and Division 3 includes require- address changes in 2013 and 2015 versions of the Code. The
ments for the construction of containment vessels for transportation major highlights include standard design rules for classes 2 and
of spent nuclear fuel. The scope of Division 3 now also includes 3 valve ends of socket welded type, and non-welded type used in
requirements for construction of storage canisters and transporta- instrument, control, and sampling line of nominal pipe size (NPS)
tion containments for spent nuclear fuel. 1 (DN 25) and smaller, revised Tables NC/ND-3673.2(b)-1 to
Chapter 5 also explains the use of Code Editions, Addenda, and provide stress intensification factors for branch connections with
Code Cases. The requirements for design basis, design and con- branch to run mean radii ratio (r/R) £ 0.5, and PWHT exemptions
struction specifications, and design reports are described, and the for certain P number material weld joints. It should be noted that

2010 version of the Code includes new seismic rules for piping discuss recent Code changes to piping rules that include the adop-
design, and alternate rules for axial compressive membrane stress tion of Code Cases for evaluation of reactor coolant environmen-
in the design of cylindrical storage tanks. This addresses pressure tal fatigue evaluation, update of the Code Case for construction of
atmospheric tanks, and 0–15 psig tanks as presented in the ASME Class 3 HDPE pipe, alternate rules for simplified elastic plastic
B&PV Code, Section III, Division 1, Subsection NC, Class 2 Com- analysis using Ke, and upcoming changes for buried Class 2 and 3
ponents and Subsection ND, Class 3 Components. This chapter pipe design rules.
does not address piping, pumps, and valves; these are addressed Chapter 9, has been authored by Kamran Mokhtarian for the first
in Chapter 8 for Class 2 and Class 3 Piping, and in Chapter 13 for two editions and updated for the 3rd edition by Roger F. Reedy
Nuclear Pumps and Valves. This chapter discusses, in order, each who continues the discussion of Subsection NE, Class MC Com-
of the eight major Code Articles: Introduction; Materials; Design, ponents. This chapter summarizes some of the more significant
Fabrication and Installation; Examination; Testing; Overpressure requirements of Section III, Subsection NE and provides a com-
Protection and Name Plates; and Stamping and Reports. In the mentary on such requirements. Kamran’s comments and interpre-
1971 Edition, Subsection NB was fully developed in the evolution tations of the rules are based on his several years of experience in
of the Nuclear Codes; all other were written by using the outline design, analysis, and construction of containment vessels, as well
established for NB. Consequently, many of the basic paragraphs as his participation in various ASME Code Committees. Some
contained in Subsection NB and other reference documents were comparisons of the rules of Section VIII are included for informa-
included verbatim in both Subsections NC and ND, when the sub- tion. The analysis procedures are not dealt with in any great detail,
sections were published as separate volumes in the 1974 Edition. for they are similar to those of Subsection NB and the old Section
Subsections NC and ND are a combination of rules and require- VIII, Division 2. However, more emphasis is placed on the unique
ments taken from Section III, Subsection NB and Section VIII. In features of Subsection NE. Further, the stress analysis procedures
Chapter 7, Thomas has referenced all of these Codes and meticu- do not in any way compare with the stress analysis procedures in
lously identified both obvious and subtle differences between Sub- the current Section VIII, Division 2 Code for pressure vessels.
section NB, the parent Code, and Subsections NC and ND. Thus, A number of Code Cases and references regarding the rules of Sub-
because Thomas addresses the Articles of Subsections NC and ND section NE are cited, with cross-references to other Code Sections
in this part of the commentary, he presents comparisons, the most and Subsections. This chapter is based on the 2010 Edition of the
probable source of origin of the Code requirements, certain insights Section III Code. The items covered in Chapter 9 include Scope
as well as contradictions that seem to exist, and the specific source of Subsection NE; Boundaries of Jurisdiction of Subsection NE;
document and some of the underlying theory. He provides cross- General Material Requirements; Certified Material Test Reports;
references to other Code Sections/Subsections/Paragraphs where Material Toughness Requirements; General Design Requirements;
applicable. Marcus has taken this work and simplified it where Qualifications of Professional Engineers; Owner’s Design Specifi-
possible, and updated it to the 2007 Edition. cations; Certified Design Report; Design by Analysis; Appendix F;
Chapter 8, was authored by Don Landers for the first through Fatigue Analysis; Buckling; Reinforcement of Cone-to-Cylinder
third Editions, Jack Cole updated the chapter for the fourth edition, Junctions; Plastic Analysis; Design by Formula; Openings; Bolted
and now Mark Gray has worked with Jack to complete the update Flange Connections; Welded Connections; General Fabrication
for the fifth Edition. This update covers the changes in place and Requirements; Tolerances; Requirements for Weld Joints; Weld-
underway for the 2015 Edition of Section III, Division 1 (Piping). ing Qualifications; Rules for Making, Examining, and Repairing
Chapter 7 indicates that the requirements of Section III, Division 1 Welds; Heat Treatment; Examination; Qualification and Certifi-
provide for three classes of components. Chapter 8 indicates that cation of NDE Personnel; Testing; Overpressure Protection; and
each Class can be considered a quality level, with Class 1 the high- Nameplates, Stamping, and Reports.
est and Class 3 the lowest. These quality levels exist because of the Because of the new nuclear power plants soon to be constructed,
various requirements for each Class in Section III related to materi- the rules of Subsection NE should be modified to address the needs
als, fabrication, installation, examination and design. Design was of the industry for the new plants. There are many changes that can
placed last on the list because sufficient evidence exists to indicate be made without sacrificing safety. The chapter has been updated
that the other considerations listed are more important than the to identify all significant changes to the Subsection NE Code from
design requirements in constructing an acceptable piping system. 2007 to 2015.
In Chapter 8, Don, Jack, and now Mark develop the above list of Chapter 10 was authored for the first edition by Robert J. Masterson,
considerations in the commentary regarding the criteria and basis who covered Subsection NF (Supports). The second, third and fourth
for requirements of the Subsections NB, NC, and ND for Piping. editions had been updated by Uma S. Bandyopadhyay with the current
They provide the stress requirements for Nuclear Classes 1, 2, third edition addressing the changes of the 2010 Code Edition. Robert
and 3 piping and the corresponding design processes and Design traced the historical background of this Subsection, which provides
Specifications, with pertinent references, tables, and figures. Their a single source of rules for the design, construction, fabrication, and
commentary provides insight into load classifications and the examination of supports for the nuclear industry. Section III, Division
responsibility of Owners. The Code rules ensure that violation of 1, Sub-section NF was developed to provide rules for the estimated
the pressure boundary will not occur if the Design Specification 10,000 piping and component supports existing in a typical nuclear
satisfactorily addresses all issues necessary for Code compliance. power plant. The criteria and commentary of Chapter 10 provides
In the commentary, Donald, Jack, and Mark show the subtle dif- information on the origin and evolution of design rules and is intended
ferences between the piping rules and design by analysis, and they to allow designers, engineers, and fabricators to make better use of
explain what items the analyst should be concerned with in satis- Subsection NF. Topics of greatest interest are discussed from both a
fying Code requirements. They provide cross-references to B31.7 technical and a historical viewpoint. However, it is not the intent to
Code techniques and discuss the recent regulatory acceptance of the address every detail associated with the use of Subsection NF.
seismic design requirements for piping in Section III, Division 1. Subsection NF rules have evolved dramatically over the past
In the fifth edition, Jack and Mark have provided updates that 30 years so that today’s support rules seldom resemble the original
lii t Introduction

rules of 1973. In Chapter 10, commentary is provided to explain documents already published for many years are the ASME BPV
how the criteria are used, the source and technical basis for equa- Code, Section X, Fiber Reinforced Plastic Pressure Vessels and
tions and rationale, and the reasons for change. Robert covers the ASME RTP-1 Standard, Reinforced Thermoset Plastic Corrosion-
scope and classification of the types of supports and attachments. Resistant Equipment. Three more related documents will be pub-
Subsection NF contains rules for the material, design, fabrication, lished in early 2018: NM-1 Thermoplastic Piping Systems, NM-2
examination, testing, and stamping of supports for Classes 1, 2, 3, Glass Fiber Reinforced Thermoset Plastic Piping Systems, and
and MC construction. Robert provides cross-referencing to Sub- NM-3 Nonmetallic Materials.
sections NB, NC, ND, NE, and NG, as well as to the B31.1 and ASME BPV Code Section X addresses glass/carbon/aramid rein-
B31.3 Codes, and he also addresses Code Cases and Interpreta- forcing fibers and epoxy/polyester/vinyl ester/phenolic/furan poly-
tions. Discussions include Subsection NF Appendices and with mer materials. ASME RTP-1 Standard addresses glass reinforcing
the help of figures, tables, and references, it is anticipated that the fiber and vinyl ester polymer materials. Initially ASME NM-2 and
reader will develop a better understanding of Subsection NF and NM-3 only address glass reinforcing fibers and polyester/vinyl
appreciate its complexities and usefulness. ester polymer materials.
Chapter 11, authored by Richard O. Vollmer, deals with Subsec- ASME BPV Code Section X addresses design requirements
tion NG (Core-Support Structures). This chapter provides commen- for nominal pressures of 150-psig to 3000-psig and nominal tem-
tary and practical examples on the materials, design, fabrication, peratures for –65°F to +250°F. ASME RTP-1 Standard addresses
installation, and examination requirements for core-support struc- requirements up to 15-psi pressure (typical tank limit) and 180°F
tures in Section III, Division 1, Subsection NG. In addition, com- temperature. ASME NM-1 Standard addresses design requirements
mentary on Section XI as it applies to core-support structure repair, with the following statements:
replacement, examination, and inspection requirements is presented.
The objective of the Subsection NG rules is to provide a Code for the t “The service temperatures and pressures for such applications
design and manufacture of structures that support the core in pres- are limited by the properties of the specific pipe material
surized water reactors (PWRs) and boiling water reactors (BWRs). selected for the given application.”
These rules are similar to the Subsection NB rules, though there t “The temperatures limits for each thermoplastic material shall
are important differences due to differences in basic requirements contain a maximum continuous-operating temperature and
between pressure boundary and reactor internals structures. With the pressure and a maximum short-term operating temperature
aid of figures, tables, and examples, important considerations in the and pressure for a given time.”
design of core-support structures, the Owner’s Design Specification,
and the jurisdictional boundaries between core-support structures ASME NM-2 Standard addresses requirements of pressures
and reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) are discussed. The differ- between 15-psig to 250-psig. ASME NM-3 addresses material
ences between core-support structures, internal structures, threaded specifications and material properties for both thermoplastic and
structural fasteners, and temporary attachments are explained. Dis- thermoset plastic with glass reinforcing fibers. Currently the vari-
cussions also include unique conditions of service; construction ous B31 piping codes have requirements for nonmetallic piping
materials; special materials; fabrication and installation rules; exam- (not necessarily consistent across the various applications), but
ination and repair; general design rules; design by analysis; testing the long-term plan is for those various B31 piping codes to adopt
and overpressure protection; and examples of load combinations for the NM-1 and NM-2 Standards for pressure piping systems. The
core-support structures. NM-1 and NM-2 Standards reference NM-3 Standard for applica-
The first edition was written based on the 1998 Edition ASME ble material specifications and material physical and engineering
B&PV Code. In the second edition, the 2001 Edition of the Code property data.
up to and including July 2003 Addenda was used for examples and Chapter 13 was authored for the first edition by the late Douglas
discussion points. The third edition was updated to the 2007 Edition B. Nickerson. The current edition has been revised by Ross R. Klein
of the Code, with new or additional commentary covering: Back- of Curtiss-Wright Corporation in Cheswick, PA. This chapter dis-
ground on Subsection NG Development; Discussion of Typical cusses those items that are the driving and controlling forces in
Materials Used in CSS, IS, and TSFs; Owner’s Design Specifica- hydraulic systems for nuclear power plants. The pump in each sys-
tion, and Design Reports; Environmental Effects; CSS Code Cases; tem drives the flow through the piping to provide the transfer of
Improvements in Subsection NG; Material Degradation Issues; energy from one component to another. The fluid systems have
Compatibility of Subsection NG with Other International Codes; varying degrees of criticality, depending on their function. This
Trends Towards Realistic Design Loads in Reactor Internals; and chapter explains the relevancy of the ASME Code requirements for
a summary of changes to the Code through the 2007 Edition. The safety-related nuclear pumps using the latest edition of the Code.
fourth edition has been updated to the 2010 Edition of the Code with Since the Code is limited to pressure-boundary requirements, most
2011 Addenda, and expanded to provide additional discussion on of the conditions necessary for the satisfactory design of a nuclear
stress classification, special stress limits, Code Cases and Interpreta- pump are not subjected to Code rules. The Design Specification
tions, and potential additions and improvements to the NG rules. The defines the operational requirements of the pump and is the most
fifth edition has been updated to reflect the 2015 Edition of the Code important element in the function and approval. This chapter not
as well as to address new or revised Code Cases and Interpretations. only defines the applicable Code, but it also explains how these
Chapter 12 discussed Subsection NH in previous editions. How- components function in their applications.
ever, because Subsection NH has been incorporated into Section The chapter provides a historical perspective for the Code
III, Division 5, the discussion previously presented in Chapter 12 rules, cross-referencing other Subsections of the Code. The Own-
has been incorporated in Chapter 17. ers Responsibilities for the system design plays an important
Chapter 12, authored by Wes Rowley and Tom Musto, dis- part in establishing the rules applicable to the Design Specifica-
cusses the current and future nonmetallic construction codes and tion for each safety-related pump. The authors have drawn upon
standards using nonmetallic plastic polymers. The two major considerable practical experience in their discussion on operational

and qualification requirements for the procurement of these pumps Chapter 15 describes the bases and provisions of the Code for
from the Manufacturer. Non-mandatory Appendix U divides pump Concrete Containments updating to 2015 Code Edition. The Chap-
internal parts into various categories and sets up requirements ter describes the concrete containment general environment, types
for appropriate quality levels. Currently the Working Group for of existing containments, future containment configurations, and
Pumps of Section III is in the process of proposing a revision to background development including the regulatory bases of con-
Appendix U in order to make it more useful. crete containment construction code requirements. The description
The 5th Edition organization has been retained with the pumps covers sequentially the following topics: Introduction, Concrete
now covered under Chapter 13 and valves under Chapter 14. Guy Reactor Containments, Types of Containment Systems, Future
A. Jolly volunteered to update Chapter 14 specific to valves for Containment Development, Concrete Containments of Future
the 4th and 5th Editions. Much of the commentary in Chapter 14 Reactors, Background Development of Concrete Containment
has been retained from the Nickerson and Bressler input related to Construction Code Requirements, Reinforced Concrete Contain-
valves from the Chapter 13, 3rd Edition. Nickerson discusses those ment Behavior, Concrete Reactor Containment Design Analysis
items that are the driving and controlling forces in hydraulic sys- and Related Testing, Code Design Loads, Allowable Behavior Cri-
tems for nuclear power plants. The valves control the flow through teria, Analytical Models and Design Procedures, Special Design
these fluid systems and thus the operation of the systems. Fluid sys- Features, Current Organization of the Code, Fabrication and Con-
tems have varying degrees of criticality, depending on their func- struction, Construction Testing and Examination, Containment
tion. This commentary explains the relevancy of the ASME Code Structural Integrity Testing, Containment Overpressure Protection,
requirements for safety-related nuclear valves using the latest issue Nameplates, Stamping and Reports, Practical Nuclear Power Plant
of the Code. The Code is limited to pressure-boundary require- Containment Designed to Resist Large Commercial Aircraft Crash
ments. Douglas states that because of this limitation of the scope of and Postulated Reactor Core Melt, Items that should be considered
the Code, most conditions necessary to the satisfactory design of a in Future Revision of the Code, Summary and References.
nuclear valve are not subjected to Code rules. The Design Specifica- The basic format of this chapter is kept the same as in the previ-
tion specifies operational requirements and thus is the most impor- ous edition. The initial edition of this chapter was developed by
tant element in their function and approval. This commentary not John D. Stevenson. For this latest Edition, the updates and addi-
only defines the applicable Code but also explains how these com- tional information relating to the regulatory bases for the code
ponents function in their applications. Chapter 14 also discusses the requirements, future containment designs and considerations for
role of system design and component design engineers, as well as future revisions of the Code are based upon contributions from
the integrity of the Manufacturer. Nickerson provides a historical Arthur C. Eberhardt, Christopher A. Jones, Ola Jovall and Clayton
perspective for the Code rules, cross-referencing other Subsections T. Smith.
of the Code. He notes that Owner’s Responsibilities for system In Chapter 16, authored by D. Keith Morton and D. Wayne
design plays an important part in establishing the rules applicable Lewis, a commentary is provided regarding the containments used
to the Design Specification for each safety-related valve. Drawing for the transportation and storage packaging of spent fuel and high-
upon considerable practical experience, Nickerson covers opera- level radioactive material and waste.
tional and qualification requirements for the procurement of these In 1997, ASME issued the initial version Division 3 of Section
items from the Manufacturer. He discusses these items for differ- III. Before the publication of Division 3, Section III, the Section
ent service conditions with the aid of schematics and references. applicable to the construction of nuclear pressure-retaining com-
Marcus Bressler, a member of the subgroup on Design since 1974, ponents and supports had only two divisions: Division 1, for metal
and Chairman of the working group on Valves from 1974 to 1977, construction, and Division 2, for concrete construction. Division
provides the background to the development of the design rules for 3 was added to cover the containments of packaging for nuclear
valves, and updates the Chapter to the 2007 Edition of the Code. materials. Currently, the scope for Division 3 is limited to trans-
Jolly provides details of the ASME B16.34 historical development portation and storage containments for only the most hazardous
and provides the current reference dimensional standards from the radioactive materials—namely, spent fuel and other highly radi-
2013 and 2015 Code for use in the construction of “N” stamped oactive materials, such as high-level waste. Division 3 contains
valves based on the Code’s B16.34 reference. He also provides three published subsections: Subsection WA providing general
a list of widely used Valve Standards referenced in ASME B31 requirements, Subsection WB addressing rules for transportation
piping codes. Valves constructed under the scope of these stand- containments, and Subsection WC addressing storage containment
ards normally are required to meet the wall thickness and pres- rules. Subsection WD, which is scheduled to be published in the
sure temperature requirements of ASME B16.34 but include other 2017 Edition of Section III, will provide the construction rules
requirements (stem and seat size, stem retention structures, pack- applicable to internal support structures (baskets) for the transpor-
ing chamber details, etc.), which have produced valves that have tation and storage containments covered by Subsections WB and
a successful operational history in the chemical, petroleum and WC. Consistent with current Code practice, the primary concern
power industries. Imposing the design rules of a selected standard of Division 3 is the integrity of these containments under design,
from this group on the non-pressure retaining nuclear valve items operating conditions (including normal, off-normal, and accident),
could go far in validated the nuclear valve successful functioning and test conditions. In particular, the structural and leak-integrity
in service. These standards could be used as reference for the writ- of these containments is the focus of the ASME B&PV Code rules.
ing of a valve Design Specification and construction of an “N” Division 3 is also concerned with certain aspects of containment-
stamped valve. Jolly has increased the coverage on pressure-relief closure functionality because of the potential for leakage, which is
valves to include detailed activity underway at Section III to clarify a key consideration in the containment function. Division 3 cov-
requirements related to pilot operated and power actuated pressure ers all construction aspects of the containment, including admin-
relief valves. He has also included details relating to QME-1 relat- istrative requirements, material selection, material qualification,
ing to qualification testing required for active valves for functional design, fabrication, examination, inspection, testing, quality assur-
adequacy for nuclear power plant service. ance, and documentation.
liv t Introduction

In Chapter 17, authored by Robert I. Jetter and D. Keith Morton, or liquid fuels. However, the authors do not cover the operation,
a commentary is provided regarding the development of Section repair, alteration, rerating, and maintenance of such boilers, but
III, Division 5. This Division was first issued in November 2011. they do cover potable-water heaters and water-storage tanks for
Currently, the scope for Division 5 is High Temperature Reactors, operation at pressures not exceeding 160 psi and water tempera-
addressing both high temperature gas-cooled reactors and high tem- tures not exceeding 210°F.
perature liquid-cooled reactors. Division 5 identifies rules based In the first edition, Chapter 18 addressed the Code Interpreta-
on only two classifications, Class A for safety-related components tions, the Addenda, and the Code Inquiry procedure as they relate
and Class B for non-safety related but with special treatment com- to Section IV. The authors mentioned that the format used for this
ponents. Division 5 contains general requirements for both metals chapter is compatible with the format used in Section IV (1998
and graphite in Subsection HA, Subpart A and Subpart B, respec- Edition, 1999 Addenda, and Interpretations). For the current edi-
tively. Rules for Class A metallic pressure boundary components, tion using the 2015 Code, this is still valid. For easy identifica-
Class B metallic pressure boundary components, and Class A core tion, the exact numbers of paragraphs, figures, and tables from the
support structures at both low temperature conditions (under Sub- Code book have been used in the running text. The appendices
part A) and elevated temperature conditions (under Subpart B) are include Method of Checking Safety Valve and Safety Relief Valve
contained in Subsections HB, HC, and HG, respectively. Rules for Capacity; Examples of Methods of Calculating a Welded Ring
Class A and B metallic supports are contained in Subsection NF, Reinforced Furnace; Examples of Methods of Computation of
Subpart A. Finally, new rules for non-metallic core support struc- Openings in Boiler Shells; Glossary; and two examples of Manu-
tures (graphite) are contained in Subsection HH, Subpart A. Con- facturer’s Data Report Forms.
sistent with current Code practice, the primary concern of Division Chapter 19 provides criteria and commentary for ASME Sec-
5 is the integrity of these components under design, operating con- tion VI, Recommended Rules for the Care and Operation of Heat-
ditions (including normal, upset, emergency, and faulted), and test ing Boilers. This chapter that had been initially authored by M. A.
conditions. Division 5 covers all construction aspects of these com- Malek was updated for the second edition by Geoffrey M. Halley,
ponents, including administrative requirements, material selection Edwin A. Nordstrom was as the author of the third and fourth edi-
and qualification, design, fabrication, examination, inspection, test- tion, and Clayton T. Smith updated the current 5th edition. While
ing, quality assurance, and documentation. heating boilers are designed and constructed safely under Section
The discussion of Subsection NH, (Class 1 Components in IV, the rules of this Section are nonmandatory guidelines for the
Elevated Temperature Service) previously covered in Chapter 12 safe and efficient operation of steam-heating boilers, hot-water-
has been moved to Chapter 17 because Subsection NH has been supply boilers, and hot-water-heating boilers after installation.
incorporated into Section III, Division 5. In Section III, elevated These rules, however, are not applicable to potable-water heaters.
temperature is defined as 700°F for ferritic steels and 800°F for This chapter is divided into nine parts, along with the necessary
austenitic stainless steels and nickel-base alloys. Elevated tem- figures and tables for each part: General, covering the scope, use of
perature behavior and associated failure modes are discussed to illustrations, manufacturer’s information, references to Section IV,
provide background for the unique features of the elevated tem- and glossary of terms; Types of Boilers; Accessories and Installa-
perature rules. The authors presume that readers have a basic tion; Fuels; Fuel-Burning Equipment and Fuel-Burning Controls;
familiarity with the rules for construction of Classes 1, 2, and 3 Boiler-Room Facilities; Operation, Maintenance, and Repair of
components and core-support structures contained in Subsections Steam Boilers and Hot-Water Boilers; and Water Treatment. The
NB, NC, ND, and NG, respectively, that are discussed in other authors have several years of professional field experience in over-
chapters of this book. Thus, cross-referencing to these Code Sub- seeing Code implementation and are conversant with regulatory
sections is provided. Based on 40-plus years in the development practice; as such, they discuss the jurisdictional responsibilities and
and implementation of elevated temperature design and construc- role of licensing agencies.
tion rules, the authors, with the aid of figures, tables, and refer- The authors note that the format used for this chapter is compat-
ences, provide a historical perspective to establish the criteria for ible with the format used in Section VI 2015 Code Edition. For
the rules for metallic structures previously contained in Subsection easy identification, the exact numbers of paragraphs, figures, and
NH, now in Section III, Division 5. Also discussed are current and tables from the Code book have been used in the running text. The
future needs. Exhibits include the maintenance, testing, and inspection log for
Chapter 18, was authored by M. A. Malek and John I. Woodworth steam-heating boilers and the maintenance, testing, and inspection
for the first edition, and co-authored by Geoffrey M. Halley for log for hot-water-heating boilers and tests. Bibliographical refer-
the Second edition. The third and fourth edition has been revised ences and notes are also provided.
by Edwin A. Nordstrom. The current fifth edition was revised by Chapter 20 was initially authored by Harold C. Graber and the sub-
Clayton T. Smith. In the first edition, the chapter covered Section sequent second edition and third edition were revised by Jon Batey.
IV, Rules for Construction of Heating Boilers, using the 1998 Edi- The current fifth Edition was authored by G. Wayne Hembree. The
tion, 1999 Addenda, and Interpretations and has now been updated authors discuss Section V, Nondestructive Examination (NDE).
to the 2015 edition. To assist the reader in understanding and using The purpose of this chapter is to provide Users of Section V
the Code, this chapter is presented in a simplified manner, with insight into the significant requirements, the NDE methods, the
the understanding that it is not a Code book and is not written to NDE methodology, the relationship of Section V with other Code
replace the Code book published by ASME. A historical perspec- Sections, and the use of ASTM Standards. The information pro-
tive of Section IV is provided to trace the criteria covered by the vided is based on the 2015 Edition of Section V, dated July, 2015.
Code. The authors define the boilers that fall within the jurisdic- The charter and scope of this Section is to develop and main-
tion of this Section and provide a detailed discussion of the mini- tain Code rules for NDE methodology and equipment involved
mum requirements for the safe design, construction, installation, with the performance of surface and volumetric testing methods.
and inspection of low-pressure-steam boilers and hot-water boil- These examination methods are used for the detection and sizing
ers, which are directly fired with oil, gas, electricity, or other solid of defects, discontinuities, and flaws in materials and weldments

during the manufacture, fabrication and construction of parts, affect shell-to-tubesheet joints, Appendix 26 expansion joints and
components, and vessels in accordance with the ASME B&PV Appendix M.
Code and other ASME Codes, such as B31.1 (Power Piping). The Third Edition of the Guidebook covers revisions to Section
Harold, Jon and Wayne provide commentary on the contents VIII, Division l from the 2004 Edition through the 2007 Edition.
of Section V, including Subsection A, which contains Articles Included are detailed descriptions of several new Nonmandatory
and both Mandatory and Nonmandatory Appendices that address Appendices, including Appendix FF: Guide for the Design and Oper-
general requirements, examination methods, and specific Code ation of Quick-Actuating (Quick Opening) Closures, and Appendix
requirements and acceptance criteria; and Subsection B, which GG: “Guidance for the Use of U. S. Customary and SI Units in the
contains the ASTM Standards adopted by the ASME B&PV Code. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code”. This Chapter also includes
This chapter addresses an audience that includes manufactur- extensive updating of referenced figures and tables from the 2007
ers (including equipment manufacturers), insurance companies, Edition of Section VIII, Division I.
architect-engineers, research organizations, utilities, consultants, The Fourth Edition of the Guidebook covers revisions to Sec-
and the National Board. The authors address additions, revi- tion VIII. Division I from the 2007 Edition, 2008 Addenda through
sions, inquires, interpretations, and Code Cases relevant to Sec- the 2010 Edition, 2011 Addenda. Included is a detailed descrip-
tion V. An important aspect of this chapter is its coverage of the tion of Code Case 2695 which will allow a Section VIII, Division
interconnection of Section V with other Code Sections and Subsec- 1 Certificate Holder to use the design rules of Section VIII, Divi-
tions. This coverage provides insight into how the relationships of sion 2 Part 4 for the design of VIII-1 vessel. This Code Case is
the Code Sections are integrated. ground breaking in that it represents the first step in a long range
plan by the Section VIII Committee to encourage pressure vessel
manufacturers to consider using Section VIII, Division 2 for the
VOLUME 2 design of custom engineered vessels. Also covered is the move by
ASME to utilize a single mark in place of the current 28 stamps
Chapter 21 initially authored by Urey R. Miller has been revised that are used with the different pressure equipment accreditation
by Thomas P. Pastor and Jayaram Vattappilly for the current fifth programs. A detailed description of the new Part UIG, Require-
edition. This chapter covers Section VIII, Division 1, Rules for ments for Pressure Vessels Constructed of Impregnated Graphite,
Construction of Pressure Vessels. The author discusses the histori- is provided, as well as the expanded set of requirements covering
cal background of this Section in relation to the construction and mass production of pressure vessels in Appendix 35. Similar to
safe operation of boilers and pressure vessels. the Third Edition, numerous Figures and Tables have also been
Section VIII, Division 1 is written to cover a wide range of indus- updated.
trial and commercial pressure vessel applications. This Section is The Fifth Edition of the Guidebook covers revisions to Section
applicable to small compressed air receivers as well as to very large VIII, Division 1 from the 2013 and 2015 Editions. Some of the
pressure vessels needed by the petrochemical and refining industry. more significant changes to Section VIII, Division 1 include a new
Section VIII Division l is intended for the construction of new pres- paragraph UG-6, that provides explicit rules for use of forgings
sure vessels. Miller discusses the applicability of Code and Code in the construction of pressure vessels. Specifically this paragraph
jurisdictions, as well as situations of the inapplicability and exemp- will now permit tubesheets and hollow cylindrical forgings to be
tions from this Section. This chapter provides an overview to each fabricated from SA-105 with some additional requirements. In the
of the parts of Section VIII, Division 1 Code. The commentary pressure test area, rules were introduced in UG-99 and UG-100
includes Subsection A-General Requirements for All Methods of concerning restrictions on painting or coating a vessel prior to
Construction and Materials; Subsection B-Requirements Pertain- the pressure test. Another major change involves the removal of
ing to Methods of Fabrication of Pressure Vessels; Subsection C— all Conformity Assessment requirements from UG-117; these
Requirements Pertaining to Classes of Material; Mandatory Appen- requirements now directly referenced to a new ASME standard
dices; Non-Mandatory Appendices; and Bibliography. The intent titled “Conformity Assessment Requirements – CA-1”.
of the author is to provide a broad perspective for the reader to A new Appendix, Appendix 43: Establishing Governing Code
have better understanding of the Codes intent, and to point out, by Editions and Cases for Pressure Vessels and Parts, was added.
example, some of the subtleties that may not be evident. It is not These new mandatory rules now clearly define what Edition must
the objective of this Chapter to provide the reader with a detailed be used for construction of pressure vessels and parts. Finally a
“how to” handbook. The user of the equipment must define the new nonmandatory appendix, Appendix NN: Guidance to the
requirements that are needed for a specific application. With the Responsibilities of the User and Designated Agent, has been added.
help of equations, tables, figures and examples Miller provides In all there are over 80 references to the User and/or Designated
detailed commentary of Section VIII, Division l. He comments Agent in Section VIII, Division 1. Appendix NN addresses the
about several pertinent Code Interpretations and Code Cases per- important responsibilities of the User, and provides a convenient
taining to this Section. cross-reference table to all of the paragraphs in the Code where the
There have been a number of significant changes to Section VIII User is cited.
Division l since the First Edition of this Guidebook. The most sig- Chapter 22 has been revised by David A. Osage, Thomas P. Pastor,
nificant is that the previously non-mandatory rules for tubesheets Clay D. Rodery, Philip A. Henry, and James C. Sowinski for the cur-
(Appendix AA) and flanged and flued expansion joints (Appen- rent fifth edition. This chapter covers Section VIII, Division 2, Rules
dix CC) are now mandatory and are in Part UHX and Appendix 5 for Construction of Pressure Vessels, Alternative Rules. The authors
respectively. Also, a new mandatory appendix (Appendix 32) has have updated the applicable sections in accordance with the 2015
been added to the Code to allow consideration of local thin spots Edition of Section VIII, Division 2.
in shells and heads, and Appendix 33 has been added to define the Since its introduction in 2007 as a re-written, technologically
standard units to be used in Code equations. The 2nd Edition of the advanced, and modernized standard, Section VIII, Division 2 has
Guidebook was updated to cover the ongoing Code revisions that continued to evolve. As covered in Chapter 22, the authors have
lvi t Introduction

highlighted significant changes made to Section VIII, Division 2 Chapter 24 was previously an Appendix to Part 7, has been
including: authored by Roger Reedy. This Chapter written by Roger F. Reedy
Part 2 updates to the User’s Design Specification to reflect deals with the Safety of Personnel Using Quick-Actuating Closures
changes for fatigue design life, changes to the Quality Control Sys- on Pressure Vessels and Associated Litigation Issues.
tem, updates and relocation of related requirements to conform- Chapter 24 was written because of the number of lawsuits
ity assessment from Annex 2-G to a new ASME standard titled against manufacturers of quick-actuating closures on pressure
“Conformity Assessment Requirements—CA-1, and the introduc- vessels. Often manufacturers are sued even though the closures
tion of Annex 2I Establishing Governing Code Editions and Cases had been operating with no accidents for 20 or 30 years. Because
for Vessels and Parts; of Worker’s Compensation rules, the owner of the equipment
Part 3 introduced a new paragraph for the material Design Val- often cannot be sued, so the lawyers search for “deep pockets” to
ues for Temperatures Colder than –30°C (–20°F) and updates to compensate their clients and themselves. In order to bring forth
Annex 3.F which introduced new smooth bar curve-fit equations litigation, these lawyers would skillfully take words in the Code
and corresponding fatigue life curves; completely out of context. The Appendix is based on Roger’s
Part 4 introduced design rules for flanged-and-flued or flanged- personal experience in a number of litigations involving quick-
only expansion joints, new Annexes regarding deflagration load- actuating closures during the last 25 years. He identifies each
ing and tube expanding procedure qualifications, one general set of of the changes made to the Code rules in Section VIII, Division
equations applicable to both hydrostatic and pneumatic test condi- 1, from 1952 to the 2007 Edition of the ASME Code. In every
tions, and updates to design load considerations and design load case where Roger has testified as an expert witness, the manu-
combinations; facturer of the quick-actuating closure was not at fault, and the
Part 5 also includes updates to design load considerations, and ASME Code rules had been properly followed. However, some
design load combinations for elastic, limit load, and plastic analysis; attorneys for the injured party may misinterpret the Code rules to
Part 6 significant changes include incorporation of requirements accuse the manufacturer of not having complied with the Code
to cover creep enhanced ferritic steels, new equations for calculat- when the closure was made. Based on experience, Roger warns
ing forming strains, and the introduction of an informative annex the writers of the ASME Code to assure that the rules are clear,
on positive material identification; concise and understandable to the common man. The most impor-
Part 7 updates to requirements for qualification of nondestruc- tant point however, is for everyone to understand that in order
tive personnel, tables which address the extent and location of non- to avoid severe accidents, users of quick-actuating closures must
destructive examination, and extended flaw acceptance criteria to maintain the equipment and ensure that inferior components are
welds; not used as replacement parts, and that the design is not modified
Part 8 changes include the introduction of general equations for or changed in any way. The other key element for safety is that
hydrostatic and pneumatic testing with variables to provide for owners of pressure vessels that have quick-actuating closures are
flexibility of incorporating alternate design margins for future ref- responsible for training all employees regarding the proper care
erence; and and use of the equipment. This training has been neglected by the
Part 9 updates to Annex 9.A regarding Best Practices for the employer in most accidents.
Installation and Operation of Pressure Relief Devices. Further, it is extremely important that the closure and all the
Chapter 23, authored by J. Robert (Bob) Sims, Jr. and Charles equipment associated with the closure be continually maintained by
(Chuck) Becht V, discusses Section VIII, Division 3 (Alternative the user. In almost every litigation associated with quick-actuating
Rules for the Construction of High-Pressure Vessels). It is intended closures, the user (company) failed in training employees and main-
to be used as a companion to the Code by Manufacturers and Users taining equipment. In an important New Jersey lawsuit in 2011, the
of high-pressure vessels and also provides guidance to Inspectors, jury cleared the manufacturer from any liability for the cause of
materials suppliers, and others. The chapter’s text is generally pre- a worker’s severe injuries, when he improperly forced the closure
sented in the same order in which it appears in the Code. Comments open by hammering it with a small sledge hammer.
are not given about each Paragraph, but Paragraph numbers are The chapter has been updated and editorially modified and iden-
referenced as appropriate. The comments apply to the 2015 Edi- tifies that the rules in Section VIII, Division 1 will incorporate
tion. The ASME Subgroup on High-Pressure Vessels (SG-HPV) of many of the suggestions identified in this chapter. New rules for
Subcommittee VIII developed the Code. The comments herein are quick-actuating closures on pressure vessels will be published in
Bob’s and Chuck’s opinions; they should not be considered Code the 2017 Edition.
Interpretations or the opinions of the Subgroup on High-Pressure Chapter 25, originally authored by Joel G. Feldstein, and now
Vessels or any other ASME Committee. updated by John P. Swezy, Jr., discusses Section IX, Welding,
This chapter provides commentary that is intended to aid indi- Brazing, and Fusing Qualifications. As the title indicates, this
viduals involved in the construction of high-pressure vessels, but it chapter deals with the qualification of welding, brazing and fusing
cannot substitute for experience and judgment. Bob covers general, procedures as well as the qualification of individuals performing
material, and design requirements; supplementary requirements those procedures as required by the Construction Codes of the
for bolting; special design requirements for layered vessels; design ASME B&PV and Piping Codes. Joel and John discuss the organi-
requirements for attachments, supports, and heating and cooling zation of the 2015 Edition of Section IX: Part QG, covering the
jackets; fracture mechanics evaluation; design using auto-frettage; general requirements applicable to all joining methods, Part QW,
special design requirements for wirewound vessels and frames; covering welding, Part QB, covering brazing, and Part QF, cov-
design requirements for openings, closures, heads, bolting, and ering Plastic Fusing. Each of the Parts which address a specific
seals; scope, jurisdiction and organization of Division 3; fatigue joining process are divided into four Articles. The development
evaluation; pressure-relief devices; examination, fabrication, and of Part QG sought to consolidate requirements which are applica-
testing requirements; marking, stamping, reports, and records; and ble to all material joining methods in a centralized location, while
Mandatory and Nonmandatory appendices. leaving general requirements that are unique to a specific material

joining process within their respective Parts. The coverage for Part the philosophy behind many of the revisions. Through an exten-
QW includes general requirements for both welding procedure and sive tabulation of Code Interpretations, this chapter also attempts
welder performance qualification and the variables applicable to to give the Code User some insight into clarification of many Sec-
welding procedure and welder performance qualification. Part QB tion XI requirements. In the more recent revisions of Section XI,
has a similar format: general requirements for brazing procedure feedback from operating plants has resulted in new requirements
and brazer performance qualification and the variables applicable to address stress corrosion cracking and other corrosion related
to brazing procedure and brazer performance qualification. Part QF mechanisms, weld overlay and other piping repair techniques, and
follows the established model, by discussing general requirements revisions to inspection and test requirements to address a number
for fusing procedure and fusing machine operator performance of other current issues.
qualifications, and identifying the variables applicable to fusing The authors note that subsequent chapters of this book address the
procedure and fusing machine operator performance qualification. major areas of Section XI: inservice inspection examination and test
Commentary is provided for each of the Articles with the aid of programs, repairs and replacements, acceptance and evaluation crite-
figures and tables, and Code Interpretations are used to provide the ria, containment programs, and fatigue crack growth. Non-destructive
Code User with some insight into the requirements of Section IX. examination (NDE) is addressed in this chapter, as its requirements
Joel provides a description of the more common welding processes evolve. The authors mention that Section XI initially had only
used in Code construction, reviews the qualification rules, pro- 24 pages in 1970 but that it now has over 600 pages. Although origi-
vides commentary on those requirements, and covers the historical nally it covered only light-water reactor Class 1 components and pip-
background leading to the increased use of welding in manufactur- ing, now it includes Class 2 and Class 3 systems, metal and concrete
ing operations. John introduces the plastic fusing process for join- containment, and liquid metal cooled reactor plants. With their asso-
ing high density polyethylene (HDPE) piping, and describes the ciation with Section XI Code Committee activities for a significant
qualification rules for this joining process and its various modes of number of years, the authors are in a good position to comment on
application. Where comments are provided, they represent Joel’s important areas that should not be overlooked.
and John’s opinions, and should not be regarded as the positions of In Chapter 28, Richard W. Swayne addresses the requirements of
the ASME Code or its Standard Committee on Welding. IWA-4000 for repair/replacement (R/R) activities for nuclear power
In Chapter 26 Bernard Shelley covers Section X, Fiber-Reinforced plant items. Rick examines the background of these R/R activities
Plastic Pressure Vessels, and ASME RTP-1, Reinforced Thermoset and the changes in R/R activity requirements since the original
Plastic Corrosion-Resistant Equipment. The author mentions that 1970 Edition, and reviews in detail the requirements in IWA-4000
this chapter is tailored for engineers and designers whose experience in the 2015 Edition of Section XI. This information is beneficial to
with vessels is primarily with metal equipment, although he adds personnel performing R/R activities (e.g., designing plant modifi-
that those with experience using fiberglass equipment but not using cations, obtaining replacement items, and performing welding, braz-
Section X or RTP-1 will also find this chapter useful, especially its ing, defect removal, installation, examination, and pressure-testing
discussions on fiber-reinforced plastic (FRP) technology. Section X activities). Although the 2015 Edition is used to discuss IWA-4000
has been enacted into law in 37 jurisdictions in the United States requirements, discussions involving earlier editions and addenda of
and Canada, whereas RTP-1, although usable as a Code, has been Section XI have been retained from previous editions of the Com-
enacted into law in only one state (Delaware), and; therefore, at pre- panion Guide. The thorough discussion of changes from earlier
sent, it is a voluntary Standard in most jurisdictions. Both Standards editions and addenda will be very beneficial to personnel using ear-
govern vessels constructed of thermosetting resin reinforced with lier editions and addenda, especially those updating their Repair/
glass fibers, but Section X addresses vessels reinforced with carbon Replacement Programs.
or aramid fibers as well. The pressure scope of Section X is 15 psig In Chapter 28, Mr. Swayne uses his unique professional exper-
internal pressure up to 15,000 psig. RTP-1 covers tanks and vessels tise to discuss R/R activity requirements and provides the basis and
with design pressures of 0 to 15 psig. Both Standards have provi- pertinent explanations for the requirements. The discussion of the
sions for vessels with external pressures of full vacuum to 15 psig. scope and applicability of Section XI R/R activities is informative
Neither RTP-1 nor Section X is meant to be handbook or text- to both new and longtime users. Rick notes that Section XI is used
book on FRP vessel design. Chapter 26 is intended to be a manual in many countries, such that it is often recognized as an interna-
on the use of these documents. An engineer who specifies an FRP tional Standard. Therefore, he has written Chapter 27 such that it
vessel does not need to understand FRP to the same extent that a applies regardless of the country where the Section is used. To ben-
vessel designer does; however, in specifying the vessel, an engi- efit the reader, numerous Code Interpretations and Code Cases are
neer necessarily makes many design choices. Bernie discusses the included in this chapter to help clarify and implement R/R activi-
basics of FRP technology; the fabrication methods and stress anal- ties. Commentary is provided regarding Interpretations that might
ysis of FRP vessels; the scope of Section X and RTP-1; the design be of great benefit in understanding the Code. With over 25 years
qualification of Section X, Class I, Class II, Class III, and RTP-1 of association with Code Committee activities, Mr. Swayne pro-
vessels; the design qualification overview; Section X example of a vides clarity and in-depth understanding of Section XI.
Design Specification and its calculations; RTP-1 design examples; Chapter 29, authored by Richard W. Swayne, discusses the Sec-
and quality assurance of Section X and RTP-1. He provides equa- tion XI rules for inservice inspection and testing of nuclear power
tions, tables, and figures as well as annotated bibliographical notes plant components. This chapter covers the general requirements
indicating the relevance of the cited references. of Section XI applicable to all Classes of components, including
In Chapter 27, Gary Park and Douglas Scarth provide an over- concrete structures and steel vessels, piping, pumps, and valves.
view of the stipulations of Section XI, Rules for Inservice Inspection It identifies the limits of applicability of Section XI, that is, what
of Nuclear Power Plant Components. A chronological overview of is within and outside the scope of the Code. Interfaces with appli-
the development of Section XI is presented, from its inception in cable regulatory requirements are addressed, and use of Code Edi-
1968 up to the 2015 Edition. The chapter traces the development, tions, Addenda, and Cases is explained. Mr. Swayne comments on
Edition-by-Edition, of important elements of the Code, including the periodic NDE and pressure testing required to ensure integrity
lviii t Introduction

of components, other than containment vessels, within the scope of managed via monitoring. These Cases provide the basis for con-
jurisdiction of this Code. These requirements include NDE, from tinued operation until repair can be implemented at a later time.
personnel qualification to conduct of the NDE. They also include In addition, this chapter has been updated to discuss very recent
the type and frequency of NDE required, including sample expan- and future developments in flaw evaluation methodologies for
sion and increased frequency required because of defect detection. components and piping to include improvements in calculations
Mr. Swayne also addresses periodic pressure testing and pres- techniques, material reference curves, and flaw acceptance criteria.
sure testing following R/R activities. Responsibilities and quality Wherever possible, the authors cite references to published doc-
assurance program requirements of the different entities involved uments and papers to aid the reader in understanding the technical
in examination and testing of a nuclear power plant are discussed. bases of the specified Code flaw evaluation methods and accept-
This chapter addresses many controversial issues and topics of ance criteria. The authors also cite related Section XI requirements
current concern, including the applicability of recent U.S. Nuclear that are discussed in other chapters of the Companion Guide.
Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letters and Information This is the fourth update of Chapter 31 authored by Jim E.
Notices, and describes ways in which readers can use recent revi- Staffiera (this Chapter in the 1st Edition of the Guide was authored
sions of Section XI to their advantage. References to ASME Inter- by the late Robert F. Sammataro). Chapter 31 addresses ASME
pretations are included to explain how the Code requirements can Code Section XI, Subsections IWE and IWL, for nuclear power
be applied to common problems. This Edition contains new infor- plant containments. Subsection IWE, Requirements for Class MC
mation from Mr. Swayne on risk-informed inservice inspection and Metallic Liners of Class CC Components of Light-Water-
and reliability integrity management programs for non-light-water Cooled Plants, specifies requirements for preservice and inservice
reactors. examination/inspection, repair/replacement activities, and testing
In Chapter 30, which was originally written by Arthur F. Deardorff, of Class MC (metal containment) pressure-retaining components
and updated and expanded by Russell C. Cipolla, the flaw accept- and their integral attachments and repair/replacement activities
ance criteria and evaluation methods specified in the 2007 Edition and testing of Class CC (concrete containment) pressure-retaining
through 2015 Edition, of ASME Section XI Code are discussed. components and their integral attachments for BWRs and PWRs.
Coverage includes the evaluation of flaws in nuclear power plant Similarly, Subsection IWL, Requirements for Class CC and
components and piping using ASME Section XI procedures. The Metallic Liners of Class CC Concrete Components of Light-Water
authors discuss flaw acceptance criteria based on the use of pre- Cooled Plants, specifies requirements for preservice and inservice
defined acceptance standards and of detailed fracture-mechanics examination/inspection, repair/replacement activities, and testing
evaluations of flaws. Commentary is provided on flaw charac- of the reinforced-concrete and post-tensioning systems of Class
terization and acceptance standards, Class 1 vessel flaw evalua- CC (concrete containment) components for BWRs and PWRs.
tion, piping flaw evaluation (for austenitic and ferritic materials), Together with Subsection IWA, General Requirements, a compre-
and evaluation of piping thinned by flow-assisted corrosion. The hensive basis is provided for ensuring the continued structural and
authors discuss the background and philosophy of the Section XI leak-tight integrity of containments in nuclear power facilities.
approach for evaluating inservice degradation, including the rules Subsections IWE and IWL also provide requirements to ensure
for inservice inspection of nuclear power plant components and that critical areas of primary containment structures and compo-
piping as they relate to the criteria, to determine if flaws are accept- nents are examined to detect degradation that could compromise
able for continued operation without the need for repair. structural integrity. These two Subsections received significant
Drawing upon their participation in Code Committees and pro- industry attention once the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
fessional experience with both domestic and international nuclear sion (USNRC) mandated nuclear-industry compliance with these
plants, the authors discuss step-by-step procedures for the evalu- requirements through revision of Paragraph 50.55(a) of Title 10,
ation of flaws in austenitic and ferritic components and piping. Part 50, of the Code of Federal Regulations [10 CFR 50.55(a)] in
The underlying philosophy of Section XI evaluation of degraded September 1996. In incorporating Subsections IWE and IWL into
components is to provide a structural margin consistent with that the regulations, the NRC identified its concern with the increasing
which existed in the original design and construction code. Russ extent and rate of occurrence of containment corrosion and degrada-
has expanded the chapter to describe the updated flaw evaluation tion. Since that time of initial incorporation, numerous changes have
procedures for piping, which were added to Section XI in 2002. taken place in all aspects of nuclear power plant inservice inspec-
Also discussed are revised flaw acceptance criteria for Class 1 fer- tion requirements. With increasing industry emphasis on plant life
ritic vessels in IWB-3610, updated structural factors for austenitic extension, these changes have resulted in several initiatives currently
and ferritic piping in Appendix C, and revised fatigue crack growth moving through the ASME Code ‘consensus-committee’ process,
reference curves (e.g., Code Case N-809 for fatigue crack growth including action items addressing the need for more appropriate and
in austenitic stainless steel in PWR environments), along with the effective examinations/inspections and the expanded use of risk-
technical basis for these changes. informed inservice inspection activities.
Russ has also added the historical development and technical This 5th-Edition Update of Chapter 31 includes a brief history of
basis for Appendices E, G and K, which deal with evaluations for the development of ASME Code requirements (with emphasis on
fracture prevention during operating plant events/conditions in the development of inservice inspection requirements for nuclear
the fracture-toughness transition temperature region, and at upper power plant containments), the latest information on USNRC regu-
shelf. Further, recent Code Cases N-513 and N-705 to Section XI latory review and incorporation of recent ASME Code Editions
are described, including new revisions, which cover the require- and Addenda, and current listings of U.S. ‘construction-complete’
ments and procedures for temporary acceptance of service induced commercial nuclear power plants and their containment types and
degradation in piping and vessels in moderate energy Class 2 operating status. A summary of recent nuclear industry develop-
and 3 systems. The degradation can be associated with various ments in advanced plant designs and a discussion of the as-yet-
mechanisms (cracking, pitting, general wall thinning, etc.) and can unrealized ‘U.S. nuclear renaissance’ are also presented, along
include through-wall degradation where leakage can be adequately with information on the global demand for energy and the current

status of commercial nuclear power around the world. Lastly, the application has been the evaluation of RPVs with projected upper
current Subsection IWE and IWL Commentaries, as approved shelf energy less than that required by 10CFR50. The technical
and maintained by the ASME Working Group on Containment background of Section XI Code Case N-512 and non-mandatory
(WGC), are included as attachments to Chapter 31. These Com- Appendix K is provided. Finally, a proposed Code Case currently
mentaries are important documents for users of the Code because under consideration by appropriate Section XI Working Groups, is
of the background information provided and the technical justifi- discussed in detail that would permit the use of EPFM methodol-
cation for changes made to these two subsections over the years. ogy for RPV flaw evaluations per IWB-3610. The updated chapter
However, users are cautioned that these Commentary documents considers the developments up to 2010 ASME Code as they relate
are the collective opinions of WGC members only and, although to EPFM flaw evaluation methods discussed. Incorporation of direct
approved by WGC, are not products of the ASME Code ‘consen- use of Master Fracture Toughness Curve in EPFM evaluations, such
sus-committee’ process. As such, the Subsection IWE and IWL as in the ASME Code Case N-830, is briefly described. The current
Commentaries are not part of the ASME Code, nor do they repre- activity within the ASME Section XI Code Groups related to the
sent the official position of any ASME Code Committee. potential revision of N-830, is summarized.
In Chapter 32, Warren H. Bamford discusses the Code evaluation The authors have included extensive bibliographical references
of fatigue crack growth, consistent with the evaluation methods of from their own publications, research publications, international
Section XI. Fatigue has often been described as the most common journals and related EPRI and ASME publications.
cause of failure in engineering structures, and designers of pressure Chapter 34, initially authored by Mahendra D. Rana, Stanley
vessels and piping have incorporated fatigue considerations since Staniszewski provide a Description of Rules of ASME Section XII
the first Edition of Section III in 1963. The development of this covering Transport Tank Code of the 2007 edition.
technology and its application in Section III is discussed in Chap- This chapter was revised by Mahendra D. Rana and Stanley
ter 39 of third edition; its application in Section XI is discussed in Staniszewski to incorporate the latest Code changes in 2010 edi-
Chapter 32. With the advancement of the state of the art has come tion. This Code provides rules for construction and continued ser-
the capability for allowing the presence of a crack, for predicting vice of pressure vessels used in transportation of dangerous goods
crack growth, and for calculating the crack size that could lead to via highway, rail, air or water.
failure. This capability has been a key aspect of the Section XI flaw The authors provide an overview of Section XII while covering
evaluation procedures since the 1974 edition of Section XI; it is specific topics such as the scope and general requirements, mate-
discussed thoroughly in Chapter 32. rials and design, fabrication, inspection and testing requirements.
Warren discusses the background of the criteria for fatigue crack The need for a pressure vessel code dealing with the whole spec-
growth analyses and crack growth evaluation methods. Drawing trum of tanks to transport dangerous goods was a result of the review
upon his considerable experience in formulating these criteria of USDOT (U.S. Department of Transportation) regulations.
and his professional expertise in these analyses and evaluations, The regulations had become cumbersome to use, and in a global
Warren provides commentary on the calculation of crack shape market without compromising safety the need to make the rules for
changes; calculation of elastic–plastic crack growth with the aid of transport tanks acceptable internationally became urgent. Hence
crack growth rate reference curves for ferritic and austenitic steels the inaugural edition of ASME’s Section XII focus was Portable
in air environments; and crack growth rate curves for ferritic and Tanks. The subcommittee prepared the Code to be transparent with
austenitic steels in water environments. The fifth edition contains existing ASME Code requirements such as Section VIII, Div. 1,
an update on the recent revision of fatigue crack growth of aus- while including the existing DOT requirements that impacted the
tenitic steels in PWR environments, as well as treatment of SCC scope of the charter to prepare the Section XII Code.
growth for austenitic steels in BWR environments. He also dis- This chapter had been coordinated by Mahendra Rana with
cusses operating plant fatigue assessment with the aid of Appen- the help of experts covering topics in their respective fields. Stan
dix L of Section XI. Also included are discussions pertaining to Staniszewski dealt with the scope and general requirements of the
Appendix A, fatigue evaluation, and flaw tolerance evaluation. He Code including rules on pressure relief devices, stamping, marking
provides extensive bibliographical notes and references. certification, reports and records. The scope of the Code applies
Chapter 33, authored by Hardayal Mehta and Sampath Ranganath, to pressure vessels 450L and above, including additional compo-
recognized authorities on the Elastic-Plastic Fracture Mechanics nents and criteria addressed in Modal Appendices that are to be
(EPFM), are providing in this chapter a review of EPFM applications used along with applicable regulations and laws. Mahendra Rana
in ASME Section XI Code. The early ASME Section XI flaw evalu- revised the sections on fabrication, inspection and testing require-
ation procedures have been typically based on LEFM. Early progress ments of Section XII 2010 edition. From the perspective of fab-
in the development of EPFM methodology is first reviewed. A key rication and inspection, Section XII is a mixture of familiar and
element in the application of EPFM to flaw evaluation is the estima- new concepts to the Section VIII Division 1 Boiler and Pressure
tion of the fracture parameter J-Integral. Therefore, the applied J-Inte- Vessel Code. Mahendra Rana covered the sections on materials
gral estimation methods developed by EPRI/GE are first reviewed. and design rules. The coverage included Design Conditions and
Basics of the J-T stability evaluation are then discussed. The first Allowable Stresses, Design Temperatures, Design and Allowable
application of EPFM methodology to flaw evaluation of austenitic Working Pressures, Loadings, Design of Formed Heads, Tori-
piping welds is discussed. The extension of EPFM techniques to flaw spherical Heads, External Pressure Design, Flat Heads and Covers,
evaluations in ferritic piping is then covered. Technical background Openings and Reinforcements, Design of Welded Joints, and Arti-
and evolution of Section XI Code Cases (N-463, N-494) and non- cles covering Portable Cryogenic Tanks including Materials and
mandatory Appendices (C and H) related to pipe flaw evaluation is Design. The rules for fatigue design are also given in the article
then provided. Another EPFM based pipe flaw evaluation procedure covering Portable Cryogenic Tanks. Information on new cold-
using the so-called DPFAD approach is also covered. streched vessel technology has been incorporated in this chapter.
Drs. Mehta and Ranganath then describe the application of EPFM As in the 2017 Edition Code revision, Chapter 34 was further
methods to the flaw evaluations of reactor pressure vessel. An early updated with revised toughness rules for high alloyed steels, a new
lx t Introduction

Code Case that allows using 1% yield strength of austenitic stain- Historically this started with B31G, a manual for evaluate the
less steels as the basis for allowable stresses, designs with higher remaining strength of corroded pipelines. More recently, regula-
compressive allowable stress for shell and heads, and updated rules tory pressure led to the development of B31.8-S, a standard for
on UT in lieu of RT with less restrictive thickness limitations. managing gas pipeline integrity, and B31Q, a standard for pipeline
Chapter 35 authored by Jimmy Meyer and Joe Frey covers the operating personnel qualifications. These standards have gained
Power Piping Code. The chapter is based on the 2016 edition of wide acceptance in the US and worldwide.
the ASME B31.1 Power Piping Code. The chapter is written with Chapter 38 provides an insight to ASME B31.12 Hydrogen Pip-
the assumption the reader has an edition of the Power Piping Code ing and Pipeline Code. This piping/pipeline code is ASME’s first
at hand. The intention of the chapter is to supplement and provide design code to be written for a specific fluid service. As such it
additional insight to the proper use of the code. Frequently refer- provides information about hydrogen system design along with
enced is how the Power Piping Code interfaces with other codes general piping and pipeline system design requirements.
and standards, both in the B31 series as well as other ASME, API, Hydrogen interacts with carbon steel piping and pipeline sys-
AWWA, ASTM, et cetera. tems in ways that can result in premature system failure. This code
Chapter 36 also authored by Jimmy Meyer covers the ASME has taken a conservative approach to system design that will pro-
B31.3 Process Piping Code as well as the ASME B31.5 Refrig- vide a safe design. Material performance factors have been utilized
eration, B31.9 Building Services. Also addressed are a few new to take into account the effects of hydrogen embrittlement within
standards in the ASME B31 series including ASME B31E Seismic the range lowest service recommended service temperature up to
Design, B31J Stress Intensification Factors and B31.T Toughness 300°F (150°C) for carbon and low alloy steels. Currently stain-
Requirements. The chapters are written based on the assumption the less steels do not have any material performance factors provided
various codes are at hand, however for some of the newer standards, for their use in hydrogen systems. For service temperatures above
enough information is given to provide the user a good idea if they 300°F (150°C), API 941 should be consulted for assistance in
are required for their specific activities. material selection. Engineers are cautioned that hydrogen embrit-
Chapter 36A is the largest of the subchapters and it primarily tlement cracking may occur during shutdown conditions for sys-
addresses the Process Piping Code, however it does give insight tems with service temperatures above the embrittlement range. The
into how the other documents are related and used to supplement only requirement for hydrogen embrittlement cracking is tensile
the requirements in ASME B31.3. The object of the chapter is not stress, hydrogen and time.
to repeat the Process Piping Code, but rather to provide additional Chapter 39, new for this Edition and prepared by William K.
insight into why it is organized the way it is and provide the reader Sowder PhD, provides insight into the current and new approaches
a better understanding of why some of the chapters and require- for fusion energy being used today. These include experimental
ments are there. Frequent references are provided for the reader facilities, new fusion construction projects and the next generation
who would like to explore a topic in more depth, likewise a num- fusion facilities. Due to the lack of relevant codes and standards
ber of simplified approaches are also provided to help the reader for use by the international fusion community the ASME Board
understand the general principles associated with the requirements of Nuclear Codes and Standards (BNCS) approved the formation
of the Code(s). and staffing of a new division to the ASME BPV Committee on
Chapter 37, prepared by Michael Rosenfeld, discusses several Construction of Nuclear Facility Components (III), Division 4
standards developed for oil, gas, or slurry transportation pipelines. “Fusion Energy Devices”. This new division has five work groups.
Standards for the design, construction, operation, and maintenance Their membership is drawn from equipment manufacturers and
of pipelines are represented by B31.4 and B31.8; standards asso- suppliers, users, international laboratories and currently involves
ciated with integrity management are represented by B31.8-S, 28 individuals developing these new fusion related code rules.
B31G, and B31Q. The technical basis for important differences Countries represented in this effort include China, India, South
in design principles and practices between buried transmission Korea, USA, UK and others within the EU.
pipelines and above-ground piping (embodied in B31.1 and B31.3) In Chapter 40, Mr. Reedy identifies that the ASME Section III
is examined in Chapter 37. These differences, which arise from Nuclear Code is completely compatible with Sections I and VIII.
the unique needs of pipelines and the environment they operate in, Before the Nuclear Code was published, Code Cases for Sections I
are profound and include allowable stress levels, material selec- and VIII were written for the first Nuclear Plants in the early
tion, and fabrication or installation requirements. It is also noted 1950’s. Some plants used Section I and some used Section VIII.
that the two pipeline standards (B31.4 and B31.8) address opera- In Chapter 40, these Code Cases are identified and explained. The
tion and maintenance through the full life-cycle of the facility, an chapter also contains the original Commentaries for both Section III
important distinction from B31.1 and B31.3. Each of the pipeline and Section VIII, Division 2, which is based on Section III reactor
standards (B31.4 and B31.8), in turn, are tailored to suit the par- pressure vessel rules with the same design factor 3. Because these
ticular needs and attributes of their respective services. They share Code Cases and Commentaries are now out of print and not availa-
many similarities among each other, but carry important differ- ble from ASME, he felt it was necessary to publish these documents
ences as well, which are reviewed. Finally, pipelines operate in in a safe place for future reference and understanding by users of the
the public. Failures can affect public safety and the environment, ASME Code. His concern is the fact that ASME no longer saves or
and are not readily tolerated. A need and desire by the industry to archives some technical documents that are not in current use. That
manage risk in an aging infrastructure has pushed the development fact makes it difficult for Code users who are trying to understand
of technical standards that promote pipeline integrity management. the background and technical basis for current Code requirements.
Organization and
Operation of the ASME
Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code Committees
Thomas P. Pastor, Ralph Hill III, and Richard (Rick) Swayne1

ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY t BPV Committee on Welding, Brazing and Fusing respon-
sible for Section IX and Section II – Part C with 23 voting
In 1911 the ASME set up a committee for the purpose of formu- members.
lating standard rules for the construction and fabrication of steam t BPV Committee on Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Pressure Vessels
boilers and other pressure vessels. The committee is now known responsible for Section X with 24 voting members.
as the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (BPV) Committee. From t BPV Committee on Nuclear Inservice Inspection responsible
one section promulgated by one committee of 7 members in 1911, for Section XI with 34 voting members.
the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (the Code) has grown to thir- t BPV Committee on Transport Tanks responsible for Section
teen standards committees with a 2016 total membership of over XII with 10 voting members.
1500 volunteers in the overall committee structure. Of this total t BPV Committee on Overpressure Protection responsible for
there are approximately 500 international members. the development of the future Section XIII with 15 voting
The organization now consists of the Technical Oversight Man- members.
agement Committee with 30 members, a Boiler and Pressure Ves- t Committee on Boiler & Pressure Vessel Conformity Assess-
sel Administrative Committee with 12 members. There are thirteen ment responsible for the accreditation programs for associ-
standards committees whose responsibilities are described below: ated with Sections I, IV, VIII Divisions – 1, 2 and 3 and X
with 15 voting members.
t BPV Committee on Power Boilers responsible for Sections I t Committee on Nuclear Certification responsible for nuclear
and VII with 26 voting members. certification programs associated with Section III, Divisions –
t BPV Committee on Materials responsible for Section II – 1, 2, 3 and 5 with 17 voting members.
Parts A, B and D with 26 voting members.
t BPV Committee on Construction of Nuclear Facility The membership of the thirteen BPV standards committees is
Components responsible for Section III – Divisions 1, 2, 3, 4 balanced among various interest categories so that no one inter-
and 5 with 32 voting members. est category can dominate the actions of a committee. The major
t BPV Committee on Heating Boilers responsible for Section interest categories include users, design and construction firms,
IV and VI with 13 voting members. regulatory agencies, material manufacturers, fabricators, author-
t BPV Committee on Nondestructive Examination responsible ized inspection, and general interest, among others.
for Section V with 20 voting members. There are also a number of sub tier committees that report to the
t BPV Committee on Pressure Vessels responsible for Section standards committees. These groups are known as subcommittees,
VIII – Divisions 1, 2, and 3 with 31 voting members. subgroups, working groups, special working groups, task groups,
project teams and special committees. The total number of groups
within the structure responsible for the development of the Code
The initial first edition of this publication this chapter appearing in the
currently stands at just over 200.
“front matter” was authored by Late Martin D. Berstein and the second and
third editions was updated by Guido G. Karcher. For the fourth edition this Recent figures show over 3300 positions are held on all com-
chapter was revised by Joel Fieldstein and Thomas P. Pastor. For this fifth mittees. The total number of committee positions is larger than the
edition this chapter has been updated by Thomas P. Pastor, Ralph Hill III total volunteer membership mentioned previously since many in-
and Richard (Rick) Swayne. – Editor dividuals serve on more than one committee.
lxii t Organization and Operation of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committees

There are four other groups that act in an advisory capacity to and they also serve as the highest levels for appeals. However the
the thirteen standards committees. These are called the Conference majority of the technical development and balloting occurs at the
Committee, the Marine Conference Group, and the International standards committee level.
Interest Review Group (IIRG) and the ASME Delegate program The personnel of the standards committees, subcommittees,
described below. These advisory committees represent legal ju- subgroups, and working groups are listed in the front of all book
risdictions or other authorities that have made the Code a legal sections. The standards committees are made up of a cross sec-
requirement. Each state in the U.S., each province in Canada, and tion of members from each of the subcommittees, subgroups and
certain large cities that have adopted one or more sections of the working groups that report to it. Usually the chair and vice chair
ASME Code and maintain a department that enforces the Code is of the subordinate groups will be members of the standards com-
invited to appoint a representative to act on the Conference Com- mittee as well as some other senior members of the sub tier com-
mittee. There are about 60 such representatives on the Conference mittees. This arrangement of overlapping membership facilitates
committee. An analogous committee is the Marine Conference the work of the standards committees, because certain members of
Group, composed of representatives of marine interests that prom- the standards committees are quite familiar with items originating
ulgate and enforce regulations based on the ASME Code. All these in their respective sub tier committees, and can thus explain and
advisory functions have direct access to the standards committees, answer questions about the items when the standards committees
and can bring to them any problems with respect to implementa- considers them.
tion of Code requirements. They are all entitled to participate in
discussion at the standards committee and in voting by letter ballot
for items that are receiving first consideration (explained below
under Voting by the standards committees). On items receiving
reconsideration, such advisory Committee members’ participa- Since its inception in 1911 when the Boiler and Pressure Vessel
tion is limited to discussion, without vote. This participation by Committee was established, it has been ASME policy that mem-
the regulatory authorities fosters their willingness to accept Code bers should represent a balance of interests to avoid domination by
rules in their jurisdictions and assists in uniform administration of any one interest group. This is one of the ways by which the ASME
the Code. tries to ensure that actions of a standards committee represent a
The principal objectives of both the International Interest Re- valid technical consensus, fair to all and free of any commercial
view Group (IIRG) and the ASME Delegate programs are im- bias. Above all, the goal is to promote the welfare and safety of
proved international communications and to reduce the barriers to the public. In furtherance of this goal, each committee member
participation in ASME standards development activities by people must sign an agreement to adhere to the ASME policy on avoid-
living outside the U.S. and Canada. A delegate is an individual ance of conflict of interest and to conform to the ASME Code of
appointed to a committee or sub tier group who represents an or- Ethics. The ASME has also established procedures to provide for
ganization that is outside the U.S. and Canada, and that is recog- due process in committee operations (e.g., hearings and appeals),
nized within its country. Members of the group could work in their thus safeguarding the members and the ASME against any charges
native language, and designate an English-speaking representative of unfairness.
as a voting member of an ASME codes and standards commit- Members of a standards committee are categorized according to
tee. These groups could be trade organizations such as manufac- the interests they represent. ASME has designated 25 categories of
turers’ associations or user groups, national standards committees, interest involved in BPV codes and standards activities. Seventeen
or organizations responsible for oversight of a particular industry. of these categories are represented on the thirteen Boiler and Pres-
Delegates may be appointed to any committee, group, or project sure Vessel Standard Committees:
team needed to support the development, update and maintenance
1. Constructor
of ASME codes and standards. The IIRG consists of appointed
2. Design/Engineering Organization
representatives from any national agency that accepts one or more
3. Designer/Constructor
Sections of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code as a means
4. General Interest, such as educators
of meeting regulatory requirements for which they have respon-
5. Insurance/Inspection
sibility. Not only does participation give national jurisdictional
6. Laboratories
authorities knowledge of proposed changes to the ASME Code, it
7. Manufacturer
also gives them an opportunity to contribute to the process based
8. Material Manufacturer
on the needs of their industry and their organization’s responsibil-
9. Owner
ity to protect the safety of the public. The balloting and advisory
10. Oil Refining/Production
privileges of a Delegate and the members of the IIRG are essen-
11. Regulatory, e.g., representatives of local, state, or federal
tially identical to the members of the Conference Committee and
the Marine Conference Group.
12. Consultant
Many members of ASME and Code users may not have a clear
13. User, i.e., a user/owner of the products to which the Code
picture of its overall organizational structure and just how and
where the Boiler and Pressure Vessel committees fit in. In this re-
14. Utility, e.g., power plant user/operator
gard, the top ASME level of authority is the Board of Governors
15. Wrought Boiler Manufacturer
(BOG). The ASME Council on Standards & Certification reports
16. Cast Boiler Manufacturer
directly to the BOG. The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
17. Water Heater Manufacturer
Committee report to the Council on Standards & Certification via
18. Pressure relief Device Manufacturer
the Board on Pressure Technology Codes and Standards and the
Board on Nuclear Codes & Standards. Major policy and organi- Individuals typically become members of a Boiler and Pressure
zational decisions and directions are developed at the Board level Vessel standards committee by attending committee meetings as

guests (meetings are open to the public), by indicating their desire standards committee and book titled, “Rules for Overpressure Pro-
to join, by participating in discussions, and assisting in the techni- tection,” which will become Section XIII. The plan is for the BPV
cal activities of the committee. There is a practical limit to the size construction codes to remove the technical rules covering over-
of these various active committees, and as openings arise, the chair pressure protection and to directly reference these requirements
chooses members to maintain a balance of interests on the commit- from Section XIII. It is expected that Section XIII will be approved
tees and, also, seeks out individuals with particular expertise. New and published in time for the 2019 Edition, and shortly thereafter
members usually start by joining a subgroup or working group, and each BPV construction code committee will begin taking action to
as they gain experience in committee operations and demonstrate remove the technical rules related to overpressure protection from
their ability by contributing their own expertise, they eventually their books and directly reference Section XIII. The Section XIII
move up within the committee organization. Prospective members standards committee will report to the Board on Pressure Technol-
should be aware that they need employer or personal support for ogy Codes and Standards.
committee participation, to cover the travel and time expenses re- Until 1989, a service committee known as the Subcommittee on
quired to participate and attend meetings. Properties of Metals (SC-P) established the allowable stresses for
In addition to the many volunteer members of the commit- all the materials used throughout the Code. In 1989, this committee
tee, who are supported in these activities by their companies, the was merged with Subcommittee on Material Specifications (SC II)
ASME maintains a staff of directors and secretaries who facilitate into a new committee called the standards committee on Materials
the work of the committees by managing meeting arrangements, (SC II), which carries out all the duties formerly handled by the
preparation of meeting agenda and minutes, arrangements for pub- two separate committees.
lication of the Code, scheduling, record keeping, correspondence, The reference Sections are also used by other pressure equip-
and telephone inquiries from the public. Staff secretaries prepare ment Codes and Standards, such as the B31 Piping Code, B16
the agenda and take minutes at the standards committee level. At Components Standards and Bioprocessing Equipment Code.
the subcommittee, subgroup, and working group levels, one of the
volunteer members of the committee usually serves as secretary.
THE CODE SECTIONS AND THEIR RELATED As explained in the discussion of the various Code symbol
STANDARD COMMITTEES stamps in section, no organization may do Code work with-
out first receiving from the ASME a Certificate of Authorization
The formulation of “standard rules for the construction of steam to use one of the Code symbol stamps. The accreditation commit-
boilers and other pressure vessels” on which the committee started tees issue these certificates to applicants found to be qualified by
in 1911 eventually became the first edition of Section I of the ASME review teams and by the volunteer accreditation commit-
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, in 1915. That first edi- tees. The Committee on Boiler & Pressure Vessel Conformity
tion actually dealt only with boilers. Section VIII, covering pres- Assessment (CBPVCA) handles this work for boiler and pressure
sure vessels for other than steam, was added later, in 1925, as part vessel activities. The Committee on Nuclear Certification (CNC)
of the expanding coverage of the Code. (Section VIII now covers does the same for nuclear activities. Any disagreements as to the
all kinds of vessels, including those containing steam.) There are qualifications of applicants and any allegations of Code violations
now thirteen sections of the Code, designated by Roman Numerals are dealt with by one or the other of these two accreditation com-
I through XIII. Section XIII is under development and provides mittees, in deliberations that are not open to the general public.
rules for the construction and installation of pressure relief devices. An ASME Certificate of Authorization can be revoked by cause,
The thirteen Sections of the Code can be divided into two basic following hearing and appeal procedures.
categories, which are “product Sections” (i.e., components are In February 2009, the ASME Board on Conformity Assessment
constructed to the rules), and “reference Sections” (i.e., the rules (BCA) formed the Committee on Conformity Assessment Require-
are used via reference by the product Sections) as shown in Table ments. The mission of this Committee was to develop a separate
1. The various sections of the ASME Code (sometimes called the standard that includes the necessary ASME conformity assessment
book sections) and the committees directly responsible for each are requirements currently contained in various ASME Codes and
shown in Table 1. Standards. The first edition Conformity Assessment Requirements
(ASME CA-1) was published in 2013. The current version of CA-
1-2014 contains conformity assessment requirements for all of
THE SERVICE COMMITTEES the ASME BPV nonnuclear sections, as well as the Bioprocess-
ing Equipment Standards (BPE) and Reinforced Thermoset Plastic
In addition to the thirteen Standard Committees governing the Corrosion Resistant Equipment standards (RTP). Future editions
various book sections, there is one service committee under the of CA-1 will include coverage for the nuclear construction codes.
Technical Oversight Management Committee, called a service Coincident with this activity, each of the BPV construction codes,
committee because it serves the book sections. as well as BPE and RTP, have taken action to remove the conform-
The Subcommittee on Safety Valve Requirements (SC-SVR) ity assessment requirements from their individual standards and
deals with the design, construction, testing, and certification of replace them with a direct reference to CA-1.
the pressure relief devices. Currently rules for overpressure pro-
tection are published in each of the construction codes, and the
SC-SVR provides technical support to the different construction COMMITTEE OPERATIONS
codes when there is a need to update these rules. In July 2016, the
Board on Pressure Technology Codes and Standards and the Coun- Since 1986, the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committees
cil on Standards and Certification approved the creation of a new have had four major meetings a year, during four weeks known
lxiv t Organization and Operation of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committees


Code Section Governing Committee

Section I, P Standard Committee on Power Boilers (BPV I)
Rules for the Construction of Power Boilers

Section II, R Standard Committee on Materials (BPV II)


Section III, P Standard Committee on Construction of Nuclear

Rules for the Construction of Nuclear Facility Components Facility Components (BPV III)

Section IV, P Standard Committee on Heating Boilers (BPV IV)

Heating Boilers

Section V, R Standard Committee on Nondestructive Examination

Nondestructive Examination (BPV V)

Section VI, R Subgroup on Care and Operation of Heating Boilers

Recommended Rules for the Care and Operation (of BPV IV)
of Heating Boilers

Section VII, R Subgroup General Requirements (of BPV I)

Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power

Section VIII, P Standard Committee on Pressure Vessels (BPV VIII)

Rules for the Construction of Pressure Vessels

Section IX, R Standards Committee on Welding and Brazing

Welding and Brazing Qualifications (BPV IX)

Section X, P Standard Committee on Fiber-Reinforced Plastic

Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Pressure Vessels Pressure Vessels (BPV X)

Section XI, P Standard Committee on Nuclear Inservice Inspection

Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power (BPV XI)
Plant Components

Section XII, P Standard Committee on Transport Tanks (BPV XII)

Rules for the Construction of and Continued Service
of Transport Tanks

Section XIII, R Standard Committee on Overpressure Protection

Rules for Overpressure Protection (BPV XIII)

* P denotes a product Code

* R denotes a reference Code

as Code weeks. The committees used to meet six times a year, observe and participate as guests or conference committee mem-
but decided to reduce the number of meetings as an economy bers at the various Code committee meetings. The Technical
measure. The four meetings are scheduled to result in approxi- Oversight Management Committee always meets on Friday; the
mately equal time intervals between meetings (i.e., February, Standard Committees meet earlier in the week. Section II, IX,
May, August and November). The May meeting is held jointly XII and the Accreditation Committees meet on Tuesday, Sec-
with the annual meeting of the National Board of Boiler and tion IV on Wednesday, and Sections I, III, VIII, and XI meet on
Pressure Vessel Inspectors. The chief inspectors of the various Thursdays of a Code week. Subgroups and working groups usu-
states and provinces of Canada who comprise the membership ally meet earlier in the week than their parent Standard Commit-
of the National Board are the top officials who enforce those tees. This arrangement facilitates an orderly and timely flow of
sections of the Code that are adopted into the laws of their juris- information from the sub tier committees upward to the Standard
dictions. This meeting also provides an opportunity for them to Committees.

HOW THE COMMITTEE DOES ITS WORK rationale of Code rules. These form letters explain that the standard
committee cannot or does not answer such questions and advises
The thirteen Boiler and Pressure Vessel Standard Committees the inquirer to pose only questions that pertain to existing wording
administer the Code. The major technical work of the committees and addressing particular Code requirements, or to make specific
falls into four categories; providing interpretations of the Code in recommendations for any proposed Code changes with supporting
response to inquiries, developing Code Cases, revising the Code, technical reasons or data. The standards committees also issue “in-
and adding new provisions to it. This work usually starts at the tent interpretations,” as described below.
sub tier levels of the committee structure (i.e., the subgroups and In 1983, to reduce the work involved in replying to inquiries,
working groups). Many items (Code changes for instance) require mandatory appendices that give instructions on how to prepare
consideration by the standards committee. Actions of the standards technical inquiries were added to the various book sections. (See,
committee are subject to procedural approval by one or the other of for example, Appendix I of Section I). Today, Code users seeking
the two Boards above the standards committee (one for nuclear and an interpretation of a particular Code paragraph can submit their
the other for non-nuclear items). All proposed, revised, or with- request via ASME’s online tool at: https://cstools.asme.org/Inter-
drawn standards are announced on the ASME Web site for public pretation/InterpretationForm.cfm. Once submitted, the request is
review. A notification is also included in Mechanical Engineering assigned a tracking number, after which the Secretary of the stand-
that, at a minimum, directs interested parties to the ASME Web ards committee usually reviews the files of previous inquiries to see
site for public review announcements, and provides instructions on if the same question or a similar one has previously been answered.
obtaining hard copies of the public review proposals. Because all If such a reply is found, it is sent to the new inquirer. If not, there
proposed Code revisions also require ANSI approval, they are also are three ways to handle an interpretation of an inquiry as follows:
announced in ANSI Standards Action.
These approval actions by the Supervisory Boards as well as t Standards Committee: Interpretations are approved by a vote
the public review are conducted concurrently with the standards of the standards committee. No member interest category
committee voting following the respective standards committee shall have a majority on the committee.
meetings. Thus these items have received very careful technical t Special Committee: Interpretations may be approved by the
consideration within the Committee and are also open to review unanimous vote of a special committee. Members of the spe-
by the public to avoid any inequity, hardship, or other problem that cial committee shall be members of the consensus committee
might result from a Committee action. Any comments received responsible for the standard or subordinate group responsible
during public review delay an item until the originating committee for the standard. No member interest category shall have a
considers those comments. The several categories of the commit- majority on the special committee. The special committee
tee work are now described. shall have at least five members, one of which shall be the
ASME staff secretary responsible for the subject standard.
Special committee members shall be appointed by the Chair
CODE INQUIRES AND INTERPRETATIONS of the standards committee.
t Intent Interpretations: The basic objective of an interpretation
Anyone who has used the Code knows the aptness of the second is to clarify words or requirements that exist in the Code.
paragraph of the preamble to Section I and similar statements in Sec- However in some cases technical inquiries that cannot be
tions IV and VIII, Div. 1 & Div. 2: “The Code does not contain rules answered on the basis of existing wording of the pertinent
to cover all details of design and construction.” What it contains standard may be answered by an “intent” interpretation.
rather are many rules for what might be called standard construction Intent interpretations can answer questions about subjects that
covering most typical and common construction details. This has address industry construction practices not specifically cov-
evolved over the past 90 plus years as modern boiler and pressure ered in the Code or clarify conflicting or incorrect wording.
vessel construction have evolved, presenting new situations, new An intent interpretation shall be submitted to the standards
arrangements, and new equipment. It is thus not surprising that so committee for approval along with a proposed revision(s) to
many inquiries are received by the standards committees, asking for the standard that supports the intent interpretation. Both the
guidance in the application of specific provisions of the Code. intent interpretation and the revision(s) to the standard must
The ASME has established procedures and controls on responding be approved for the interpretation to be issued.
to inquiries and publishes the questions and replies for the guidance
of all users of the Code. These procedures are intended to protect the ASME staff may also offer informal responses to inquiries, as
committee members and the ASME from any inference that a spe- a means of providing guidance. Such individual responses are not
cific industry or company has an undue influence in the formulation published and are accompanied by a statement making it clear that
of the questions or replies, or may benefit to the detriment of others. they are the opinion of the individual, and not an official interpre-
Sometimes inquirers ask questions that the standards committees tation. These responses may be either verbal or written. If written,
can’t answer, for various reasons. The standards committees are not the response shall not be on ASME interpretation letterhead. Af-
in the business of consulting engineering. They do not have the re- ter approval, all inquiries and replies are published, in an on-line
sources to study plans and details sent in by inquirers and pass judg- database. The database can be accessed at https://cstools.asme.org/
ment on those designs. They are also in no position to undertake Interpretation/SearchInterpretation.cfm.
the potential liability for making such judgments. Accordingly, the
ASME Secretaries use one of four form letters for responding to the
most common types of questions considered inappropriate: Indefi- ADDITIONS AND REVISIONS OF THE CODE
nite questions that don’t address some particular Code requirement;
semi-commercial questions; questions that would involve review or The Code is subject to continuous change – some provisions are
approval of a specific design; and questions that ask for the basis or revised, others deleted, still others added. Although some changes
lxvi t Organization and Operation of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committees

originate high in the committee structure (e.g., the mandatory ap- ASME WEB SITE TOOLS AND “CODES &
pendices in each book section on preparation of technical inquir- STANDARDS CONNECT”
ies), most start at the subtier level, in response to an inquirer’s
request for a change or a request by members of the standards In 2001 ASME started an intensive program to use the Internet
committee to clarify, update, or expand existing Code provisions. for managing and coordinating C&S activities and balloting. This
The development of a Code change follows a path similar to that started very basically with what was called the WBPMS (Web-
of a technical inquiry. Depending on the nature of the work, the Based Project Management System). The WBPMS began by sup-
cognizant subtier chair assigns either a Project Manager or a task porting standards committee balloting and has since grown into a
group to do the work. In appointing the task group, the chair tries major tool in the development, coordinating and balloting of C&S
to maintain a balance of interests while making sure to include actions. In September 2004 the WBPMS was changed to “Codes &
members with the specific expertise appropriate for the task. If and Standards Connect” (C&S Connect) and is an electronic tool used
when the subgroup approves the change proposed by the Project by both Staff and Volunteers to process many committee functions.
Manager or task group, the proposal is forwarded to the standards C&S Connect is currently made up of 13 sections or Tabs, six of
committee for consideration, with documentation giving the back- which form the backbone of this system.
ground of the proposed change. 1. My Committee Page Tab – Enables access to standards com-
At this stage consideration of the proposed revision is handled a mittee and any subtier group pages. Future meeting dates,
couple of different ways by the BPV Standard Committees. Some minutes, agendas, rosters, etc. can be retrieved from this.
Standard Committees (e.g., BPV I, BPV IV, and BPV XI) will re- The charter of the committee and the contact information
view a proposal during their open meeting prior to placing the item of the secretary (ASME staff member) and other interesting
onto a ballot for a formal vote. This gives the Standards Committee information are posted on this page.
members an opportunity to hear from the Project Manager or Task 2. My Items Tab – the “My Items” tab lists all records for which
Group concerning the background for the change, and gives mem- the logged-in member is the Project Manager, either Tech-
bers the opportunity to ask questions, and in many cases offer both nical or Administrative. Updates can be performed except
editorial and technical improvements to the item prior to placing it when the item is out for ballot. Responses can be posted
on the standards committee first consideration ballot. through this page to comments or negatives during the
For other standards committees, such as BPV VIII, proposals ballot.
for revision from subtier committees are immediately placed on 3. Ballots Tab – the “Ballots” tab lists all open ballots for the
first consideration ballot by the standards committee, Conference logged in member. This would include ballots for approval
Committee and Supervisory Board. The reason BPV-VIII handles and also review and comment. Closed ballots may be ac-
their work in this manner is that the volume of proposals generated cessed through the Search Tab.
by subtier committees each meeting is so large that it would not be 4. Search Tab – The “Search” tab is used to locate records, bal-
possible to consider presentations on all these items in a one-day lots and cases by their number or by other criteria such as
meeting during Code week. By having all of the proposals initially keyword, project manager name, level, committee, Stand-
submitted directly to a ballot, many of the simpler items are ap- ard, etc.
proved, and only those items that receive one or more negatives or 5. VCC Tab – The Volunteer Contact Center (VCC) tab pro-
significant technical comments are held over to the next meeting vides a method for sending e-mails to other volunteers,
of the standards committee for consideration and/or resolution of committees, or a stored distribution list. So long as volun-
the negatives. Although all of the BPV standards committees op- teers accurately maintained their profiles, including their
erate according to a common set of ANSI-accredited procedures, current e-mail address, the VCC provides the most effi-
there is enough flexibility within these procedures to allow each cient, direct method for sending e-mails concerning com-
committee to manage their workload in a manner that assures a mittee business.
high quality technical review as well as efficient use of available 6. AS-11 Tab – The AS-11 tab allows a volunteer to query the
resources. ASME membership database and locate contact informa-
In preparing an item for consideration by the standards com- tion and committee assignments for all volunteers and
mittee, the Project Manager writes a paragraph of background ex- ASME staff.
planation that accompanies each item on the standards committee
letter ballot, in what is called “an action box” for the item. This The C&S Connect has greatly streamlined the standard develop-
explanation may include other technical information supporting ment process and allows hundreds of volunteers to more efficiently
the proposed action, such as a paper from an ASME conference carry out the work of updating and maintaining the different
describing a new or improved design method. This explanation is ASME standards. Only Codes & Standards members have access
very helpful, because the first time a standards committee member to C&S Connect which can be reached at: https://cstools.asme.org/
sees an item that hasn’t come from his own subtier committee is csconnect.
when it appears on the standards committee letter ballot.
Code Cases are issued to clarify the intent of existing require-
ments or provide, when the need is urgent, rules for materials or VOTING BY THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE
constructions not covered by existing Code rules, or alternatives to
the existing requirements. It is a common practice to issue a Code The standards committee letter ballot contains all items ap-
Case for new or enhanced materials, testing practices, or design proved by the sub tier committees that require further approval
methods, and then after a trial period, the Code Case requirements by the standards committee. This letter ballot is also distributed to
are incorporated into the Code book requirements and the Code the Conference Committee and the Technical Oversight Manage-
Case is annulled. Code Cases and their use are explained in more ment Committee (TOMC) for technical review and comment. The
detail in section 1.3.3 of Chapter 1 of this volume. boiler and pressure vessel items are sent to the Board on Pressure

Technology Codes and Standards (BPTCS) and the nuclear items DUE PROCESS
are sent to the Board on Nuclear Codes and Standards (BNCS) for
technical comment. Typical B&PV standards committee ballots Persons who consider themselves injured by an action of the
are open for thirty days. Committee regarding a technical revision, response to an inquiry,
All voting on ballots is carried out electronically on C&S Con- or the refusal to issue a certificate of authorization, can request
nect, including those committees that are included in the ballot for a hearing to present their side of the story. Such hearings start at
Review and Comment. Members, who register a disapproved vote, the standards committee that originated the item. If the standards
must support their negative in writing. The Project Manager for an committee can’t reach a mutually acceptable solution, the appeal
item must respond to any comments or negative votes within the may be submitted to the appropriate supervisory board and, if nec-
C&S Connect record. essary, to the Board on Hearings and Appeals of the Council on
At the close of the letter ballot, the C&S Connect system auto- Standards and Certification. This careful attention to due process
matically generates a tally of the vote, and determines whether or is the result of an unfortunate event that happened in 1971, the
not the item is approved based on the voting procedures adopted infamous Hydrolevel Corporation case. Here is the essence of that
by the particular standards committee. Items that are not approved case.
during this first consideration ballot are carried over for considera- Section IV stipulates that boilers must have an automatic low-
tion at the next meeting of the standards committee. water fuel cutoff that stops the fuel supply when the surface of
Items coming before the standards committee are considered the water falls to the lowest visible part of the water gage glass.
within two categories: first consideration and reconsideration, usu- Hydrolevel had developed a new probe-type low-water fuel cut-
ally called second consideration. A new item appearing for the first off that relied on an electrode on the probe. Water covering the
time on a letter ballot is given “first consideration” by the Com- electrode completed a circuit that maintained fuel flow. When the
mittee. Items that did not receive negatives from members of the water level fell below the electrode and uncovered it, the circuit
standards committee or objections from the advisory committees, was broken and the fuel was stopped.
BPTCS, and BNCS are reported as “approved” at the standards At that time, another manufacturer dominated the low-water fuel
committee meeting and require no further action. A single negative cutoff market with a float-operated device. That rival manufacturer
vote is sufficient to stop a first consideration item and return it to happened to have a representative serving as vice-chair of the Sec-
the originating sub tier committee for reconsideration. Technical tion IV committee. Court records subsequently showed that three
objections from the advisory committees, BPTCS, and BNCS are officers of the rival manufacturer, including that vice-chair, met
treated like negative votes received from members of the standards with the chair of the committee to draft an inquiry to the commit-
committee, and responses must be provided to those objections. tee. The inquiry asked whether a low-water cutoff with a time-
When a negatively voted item is returned to a sub tier committee, delay feature met the Code. The Section IV chair at that time had
several different actions may be taken. The item may be held in the authority to respond to the inquiry on the ASME’s behalf with-
abeyance for the time being, with no action taken at the sub tier out the endorsement of the full committee. His letter of response
committee level, pending further work. implied that the device did not meet Section IV requirements and
Another possibility is that the sub tier committee is not persuaded would not provide adequate safety. Hydrolevel subsequently al-
by the reasons given by the negative voter, and, at its meeting dur- leged that the inquiry was deliberately intended to put the probe-
ing the Code week following the letter ballot, the sub tier commit- type of device in a bad light, and that copies of the ASME response
tee responds to that effect, perhaps with rebuttal arguments, and were used by the rival manufacturer’s sales force to discredit Hy-
reaffirms its earlier action. In that case the item proceeds to the drolevel’s device. When a former Hydrolevel customer reported
standards committee meeting, where it is then given what is con- this to Hydrolevel in 1972, Hydrolevel complained to the ASME
sidered “second consideration” (because this is the second time the and asked for a clarification of the ruling. This time the ruling was
standards committee has seen the item). During second considera- put before the entire Section IV subcommittee (the vice president
tion, four negative ballots are required to stop and, in effect, “kill of the rival manufacturer had by this time become chair of the com-
the item.” If the originating sub tier committee wants to pursue the mittee), where it was reaffirmed, perhaps because of the commit-
matter further, it may start all over, usually by making sufficient tee’s belief that the Code required the fuel to be cut off as soon as
revision to satisfy the objections raised. A subsequent appearance the water level was no longer visible in the water gage glass (and
of the item might be a new first consideration. On the other hand, not after a time delay). However, the standards committee reversed
if on second consideration an item receives less than four negative the ruling and issued an official communication to Hydrolevel say-
votes, it is considered approved by the standards committee, and it ing that the Section IV paragraph in question did not prohibit the
proceeds to the next two approval levels, the BPTCS for boiler and use of low-water cutoff with a time delay.
pressure vessel items, and the BNCS for nuclear items, and public In 1975 Hydrolevel sued the parties, including the ASME, alleg-
review. At this stage, the only basis for a negative vote at the Board ing conspiracy in restraint of trade. The other parties settled, but
is an assertion that proper procedures had not been followed by the the ASME contested the charge, in the understandable belief that
lower committees. it had done no wrong. A district court judge awarded Hydrolevel
Most of the items considered by the standards committees are $7.5 million in damages. The ASME appealed, lost that appeal,
proposed changes in the various book sections of the Code. Fairly and then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which affirmed the
regularly, some items fail to pass because of strong objections by appellate court’s decision. The essence of the court’s finding was
other standards committee members who perceive the change as that the ASME had put certain committee members in positions
having negative consequences to safety or representing an unwork- where they appeared to represent the ASME and had thereby con-
able situation when applied to other comparable circumstances. ferred on those agents the ASME’s so-called apparent authority.
This is part of the give-and-take of committee actions, which are Even though the ASME is a nonprofit professional organization,
intended to achieve a technical consensus of the membership, but it was found liable for the willful, anticompetitive, wrongful con-
with concern for safety always being paramount. duct of its agents. With interest on the triple damages called for by
lxviii t Organization and Operation of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Committees

the antitrust act, ASME had to pay almost 10 million dollars (in tion of applicable code, standard or committee. Within the Boiler
addition, of course, to legal fees). This was a heavy price for an and Pressure Vessel organization, requests for research projects
educational nonprofit organization that gets much of its financial are submitted to the Technical Oversight Management Commit-
support from the dues of its members. In an ironic twist of fate, the tee (TOMC) where a Subgroup on R&D evaluates the project re-
principal owner of Hydrolevel died of a heart attack shortly after quests and makes a recommendation to the TOMC. Requests for
hearing the news of the Supreme Court decision. nuclear research projects are submitted to the Board on Nuclear
Following that decision, the ASME developed improved proce- Codes and Standards.
dures in an attempt to ensure the fairness of interpretations and to ASME ST-LLC publishes project deliverables as Standards
provide for hearings and appeals for anyone who considers himself Technology Publications (STPs), which are available through the
injured by an action of the Code committee, such as an Interpreta- ASME Catalog and Digital Store. (https://www.asme.org/shop/
tion or a proposed Code change. These procedures should prevent standards#des=STP).
any further cases like the Hydrolevel case.


ASME formed the Codes and Standards Technology Institute In February 2007 the BNCS and BPTCS approved motions to
(CSTI) in November 2001 to ensure that ASME codes and stand- move forward with the concept of realigning the ten BPV subcom-
ards committees are provided with a continuing source of research mittees and the one B&PV standards committee that they reported
in the technologies that they cover. In August 2004 the ASME to. The need for such realignment was based on the observations
Standards Technology, LLC (ASME ST-LLC) was formed, re- that the organization was strained, considering the current climate
placing CSTI. ASME ST-LLC is a not-for-profit Limited Liability and projected future workloads in both the nuclear and non-nuclear
Company with ASME as the sole member, formed to carry out areas and the need to prepare for the future. Considering this the
work related to newly commercialized technology. The ASME ST- following Code and Standards vision and mission statements were
LLC mission includes meeting the needs of industry and govern- developed for guidance:
ment by providing new standards-related products and services, Vision: ASME aims to be the essential resource for mechanical
which advance the application of emerging and newly commer- engineers and other technical professionals throughout the world
cialized science and technology and providing the research and for solutions that benefit humankind.
technology development needed to establish and maintain the tech-
nical relevance of codes and standards. Visit www.stllc.asme.org Mission: ASME’s mission is to serve diverse global communi-
for more information. ties by advancing, disseminating and applying engineering knowl-
Historically, ASME has periodically identified needs for spe- edge for improving the quality of life; and communicating the
cific research projects to support the codes and standards develop- excitement of engineering.
ment process. This research was previously performed by outside In addition to these global guidance statements the following
organizations with ASME support. ASME ST-LLC has helped en- specific categories were also addressed:
hanced the coordination and long range planning and management
of codes and standards development activities while strengthening t Volunteer work loads
volunteer participation in developing the technology for codes and t Responsiveness to Industry-Specific Needs
standards. t Global Acceptance
ASME’s approach to standards development for emerging t Integrity/Credibility of Standards
technologies recognizes the important role of technically relevant t Turnaround/Cycle Time
standards in advancing the commercialization, enhancing consumer t Volunteer Recruitment and Retention
confidence, and protecting public health and safety. ASME ST-LLC
research and development (R&D) projects strive to bridge the gaps Using the above as metrics a facilitated workshop meeting
between technology advancement and standards development. was held in January 2008 with the participation of a broad cross-
ASME’s involvement in R&D projects helps produce results that section of Volunteer, Regulatory, ASME Staff and International
respond to the needs of voluntary consensus committees in devel- participation. The outcome of that workshop and subsequent de-
oping technically relevant codes and standards. ASME identifies liberations by the BPTCS, BNCS, and Council Standards & Certi-
and prioritizes R&D needs to help focus the use of limited resources fication resulted in the formulation of a plan that would transition
in these priority areas. Collaboration in R&D projects helps to mini- the ten BPV Subcommittees that promulgated rules in the ASME
mize individual investment while maximizing benefits. BPV Code book sections into separate standards committees each
As of early 2011, ASME ST-LLC was managing over 40 sep- reporting to their respective Boards (BPTCS or BNCS). Between
arate development projects. Some examples of ASME ST-LLC the ten new standards committees and the Boards would be a new
projects include the rewrite of ASME Pressure Vessel Code, Sec- Technical Oversight Management Committee (see Figure X). This
tion VIII, Division 2, hydrogen infrastructure standards devel- new committee would be responsible for:
opment, high temperature materials for Generation IV reactors,
probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) training development, and (1) Overseeing technical adequacy and consistency across the
fusion magnet code development. Projects can be initiated by BPV standards committees,
anyone, but require a clear scope definition, a legitimate business (2) Provide advice and recommendations to the Boards on stra-
need, establishment of any funding requirements, and identifica- tegic issues and R&D initiatives,


Technical Oversight

Joint Project Teams


Safety Valve
Service Related


(3) Supervise subordinate groups responsible for specialized membership and, most importantly, each new standards committee
areas or activity (e.g., Safety Valve requirements), member understood their voting responsibility as a member of a
(4) Maintain the Foreword which was common to all the Book standards committee.
Sections. The realignment of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee
was introduced in February 2009 and has been operating success-
Shortly after the realignment plan was approved a Task Group fully since then. It is felt that this realigned organization structure
was established to implement the proposed changes with a target has met the objectives above while continuing to assure safe pres-
date of February 2009 (the first meeting date for consideration sure containing structures via ASME C&S and ANSI consensus
of changes to the next Edition of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel requirements for Codes and Standards. In addition, technical inter-
Code). The time was needed for development and approval of changes and liaisons between the nuclear and non-nuclear Codes
charters for each of the new standards committees and TOMC, to and regulatory organizations (e.g., NRC, National Board, Jurisdic-
assure that the committees met the required interest-balance of its tions, etc.) have continued without disruption.

Introduction to Power Boilers
John R. MacKay, Ed Ortman and Jay Vattappilly1
1.1 INTRODUCTION use of those other book sections is mentioned in this chapter when
appropriate. Section II, Materials [4], provides detailed specifica-
Power Boilers, Section I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Ves- tions for materials and welding consumables, as well as tabula-
sel Code [1], provides rules for the construction of power boilers, tions of allowable stresses and material properties, such as yield
but since it is neither a textbook nor a design handbook, its rules strength and tensile strength as a function of temperature. Section
are accompanied by very little explanation. The objective of this V, Non-destructive Examination [5], contains a series of standards
chapter is to provide an overview of Section I rules, their intent, that provide the methodology for conducting the various non-
and how they are applied and enforced. destructive examinations used in Section I construction. Section
This chapter is an abbreviated version of the book Power Boil- IX, Qualification Standard for Welding, Brazing, and Fusing Pro-
ers, A Guide to Section I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel cedures; Welders; Brazers; and Welding, Brazing, and Fusing Op-
Code [2]. That comprehensive guide formed the basis for a two- erators [6], provides the information necessary to qualify the weld
day ASME Professional Development course on Section I, devel- procedures and the welders required for Section I construction. In a
oped and taught by Martin D. Bernstein and Lloyd W. Yoder. The rather unusual arrangement, the construction rules for boiler piping
Second Edition [3] of the book, revised by John R. MacKay and are found partly in Section I and partly in the B31.1 Power Pip-
James T. Pillow, was published in May 2011. The ASME Profes- ing Code [7]. This has led to considerable misunderstanding and
sional Development course on Section I (PD665—BPV Code, confusion, as explained in section 1.5 of this chapter, Distinction
Section I: Power Boilers) is still offered by ASME. The course Between Boiler Proper Piping and Boiler External Piping. For a
outline and registration for this week long course can be accessed fuller description of those other code sections refer to the specific
on the ASME website (www.asme.org). chapters in this volume that cover them.
Some of the more important aspects of ASME Section I con- Those unfamiliar with the ASME Code may be confused at
struction are covered here, these are: first by a number of terms in it. Examples include Manufacturer,
third-party inspection, Authorized Inspector (AI), Authorized In-
t History and Philosophy of Section I spection Agency, jurisdiction, Maximum Allowable Working Pres-
t How the ASME Code Works (the System of ASME Code sure (MAWP), boiler proper, boiler external piping, interpretation,
Construction) Code Case, accreditation, Manufacturer’s Data Report, and Certifi-
t Organization of Section I cate of Authorization (to use the Certification Mark). These terms
t Scope of Section I are explained in the text wherever appropriate.
t Distinction between Boiler Proper Piping and Boiler External Although the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code changes
Piping very slowly, it does change continuously. The rate of change in
t How and Where Section I Is Enforced recent years seems to have increased, perhaps due to technologi-
t Fundamentals of Section I Construction: cal innovation and international competition. Thus, although this
t Permitted Materials chapter provides a substantial body of information and explanation
t Design of the rules as they now exist, it can never provide the last word.
t Fabrication Nevertheless, it should provide the user with a very useful intro-
t Welding and Postweld Heat Treatment duction and guide to Section I and its application.
t Nondestructive Examination
t Hydrostatic Testing
t Third-Party Inspection 1.2 HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY
t Certification by Stamping & Data Reports OF SECTION I
The design and construction of power boilers involves the use It is helpful to begin the study of Section I of the ASME Boiler
of other sections of the ASME Code besides Section I, and the and Pressure Vessel Code with some discussion of its character and
philosophy. According to the dictionary, the term code has several
meanings: a system of principles or rules; a body of laws arranged
Late Martin D. Bernstein was the originator of this chapter for the 1st systematically for easy reference; a systematic statement of a body
edition. Lloyd W. Yoder updated this chapter for the second edition and of law, especially one given statutory force. Section I is primar-
John R. MacKay updated for both the third and fourth editions. ily a system of rules. When the ASME decided in 1911 that the
1-2 t Chapter 1

country needed a boiler code, it assigned a committee and gave it a Advancements in design and materials and evidence of experience
mandate to formulate standard rules for the construction of steam have been recognized.
boilers and other pressure vessels. The first edition of what is now This Code contains mandatory requirements, specific prohibi-
known as Section I was finally approved by the ASME in 1915, tions, and non-mandatory guidance for construction activities and
and incorporated what was considered at the time to be the best inservice inspection and testing activities. The Code does not ad-
practice in boiler construction. However, the guiding principle, dress all aspects of these activities and those aspects that are not
then as now, was that these are safety rules. specifically addressed should not be considered prohibited. The
Part of the foreword of Section I explains the guiding principles Code is not a handbook and cannot replace education, experience,
and philosophy of Section I, and also of the Boiler and Pressure and the use of engineering judgment. The phrase engineering
Vessel Committee (the Committee), which continues to administer judgement refers to technical judgments made by knowledgeable
the Code. As done in the Foreword, where this chapter refers to engineers experienced in the application of the Code. Engineer-
“the Committee,” each of the committees listed in the Foreword ing judgments must be consistent with Code philosophy, and such
are included individually and collectively. Here are some excerpts judgments must never be used to overrule mandatory requirements
from the Foreword from the 2015 Edition: or specific prohibitions of the Code.
In 1911, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers es- Certain points in these paragraphs should be stressed. Section I
tablished the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee to formulate covers the construction (materials, design, fabrication, examina-
standard rules for the construction of steam boilers and other pres- tion, inspection, testing, certification, and pressure relief) of boil-
sure vessels. In 2009, the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee ers, that is, it covers new construction only. Other rules cover repair
was superseded by the following committees: and alteration of boilers and pressure vessels in service, for exam-
ple, the National Board Inspection Code [8] (see also section 1.6.4
(a) Committee on Power Boilers (I)
in this chapter) and the API Pressure Vessel Inspection Code, API
(b) Committee on Materials (II)
510 [9]. Although there is general agreement that Section I should
(c) Committee on Construction of Nuclear Facility Compo-
apply to new replacement parts, and such parts are usually speci-
nents (III)
fied that way, until the appearance of the 1996 Addenda, Section I
(d) Committee on Heating Boilers (IV)
had no clear provisions dealing with replacement parts other than
(e) Committee on Nondestructive Examination (V)
how they should be documented. That addenda included changes
(f) Committee on Pressure Vessels (VIII)
to PG-106.8 and PG-112.2.4 that require the manufacturers of re-
(g) Committee on Welding, Brazing, and Fusing (IX)
placement parts to state on the data report form (the documenta-
(h) Committee on Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Pressure Vessels (X)
tion that accompanies the part, see section 1.7.10, Certification by
(i) Committee on Nuclear Inservice Inspection (XI)
Stamping and Data Reports) whether or not the manufacturer is
(j) Committee on Transport Tanks (XII)
assuming design responsibility for those replacement parts. Please
(k) Technical Oversight Management Committee (TOMC)
note that this was further clarified with the addition of a new des-
Where reference is made to “the Committee” in this foreword, ignator, “PRT,” in the 2015 Edition (see, Certification
each of these committees is included individually and collectively. Marks and How They are Obtained, for more information.) Also
The Committee’s function is to establish rules of safety relat- mentioned in the foreword is the objective of the rules: reason-
ing only to pressure integrity, which govern the construction2 of ably certain protection of life and property, but with a margin for
boilers, pressure vessels, transport tanks, and nuclear components, deterioration in service to provide a reasonably long, safe period of
and the inservice inspection of nuclear components and transport usefulness. This is an acknowledgment of the fact that no equip-
tanks. The Committee also interprets these rules when questions ment lasts forever, and that boilers do have a finite life.
arise regarding their intent. The technical consistency of the Sec- The Foreword (of all book sections) now includes cautions that
tions of the code and coordination of standards development ac- the designer using computers is responsible for assuring that any
tivities of the Committees is supported and guided by the Technical programs used are appropriate and are used correctly. It is also now
Oversight Management Committee. This code does not address mentioned that material specifications of recognized national or
other safety issues relating to the construction of boilers, pressure international organizations other than ASTM and AWS may be ac-
vessels, transport tanks, or nuclear components, or the inservice ceptable in ASME construction (see and
inspection of nuclear components or transport tanks. Users of the The Section I rules have worked well over many years. They
code should refer to the pertinent codes, standards, laws, regu- were based on the best design practice available when they were
lations, or other relevant documents for safety issues other than written, and have evolved further on the same basis. Rules have
those relating to pressure integrity. Except for Sections XI and XII, been changed to recognize advances in design and materials, as
and with a few other exceptions, the rules do not, of practical ne- well as evidence of satisfactory experience. The needs of the users,
cessity, reflect the likelihood and consequences of deterioration in manufacturers, and inspectors are considered, but safety is always
service related to specific service fluids or external operating en- the first concern. Today, the committee that governs, interprets,
vironments. In formulating the rules, the Committee considers the and revises Section I is called the Standards Committee on Power
needs of users, manufacturers, and inspectors of pressure vessels. Boilers, also known as BPV I, (it is also sometimes referred to as
The objective of the rules is to afford reasonably certain protec- the Section I Committee, but that is an unofficial designation.).
tion of life and property, and to provide a margin for deteriora- Another basis for the success of Section I is the Committee’s in-
tion in service to give a reasonably long, safe period of usefulness. sistence that the rules are to be understood as being general and are
not to be interpreted as approving, recommending, or endorsing any
proprietary or specific design, or interpreted as limiting a manufac-
Construction, as used in this Foreword, is an all-inclusive term compris- turer’s freedom to choose any design or construction that conforms
ing materials, design, fabrication, examination, inspection, testing, certifi- to the Code rules. The Committee deems the manufacturer to be
cation, and pressure relief. ultimately responsible for the design of its boiler and leaves certain

aspects not covered by Section I to the manufacturer. Traditionally, Section VIII, the Committee completely reorganized Section I
the manufacturer has recognized this and borne the responsibility into its present, improved arrangement of parts, in which each
for such things as functional performance of the boiler, thermal part covers a major topic or particular type of boiler or other
expansion and support of the boiler and its associated piping, and Section I device. That reorganization was merely a reshuffling
the effects of thermal stress, wind loading, and seismic loading on of the existing requirements, with no technical changes from
the boiler. Further evidence of the flexibility and reasonableness of the previous version. Here is the arrangement based on the 2015
Section I—and another key to its success as a living document—is Edition:
found in the second paragraph of the preamble:
t Foreword
The Code does not contain rules to cover all details of design t Statements of Policy on the Use of the Certification Mark and
and construction. Where complete details are not given, it is Code Authorization in Advertising
intended that the manufacturer, subject to the acceptance of t Statement of Policy on the Use of ASME Marking to Identify
the Authorized Inspector, shall provide details of design and Manufactured Items
construction which will be as safe as otherwise provided by t Submittal of Technical Inquiries to the Boiler and Pressure
the rules in the Code. Vessel Standards Committees
t Personnel
This important paragraph, along with similar wording in PG- t Preamble
16.1, has provided a way to accept new or special designs for t Summary of Changes
which no rules are provided by allowing the designer to prove to t Part PG, General Requirements for All Methods of Construction
the satisfaction of an Authorized Inspector (AI); (see definition in t Part PW, Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Welding
Section 1.7.9, Third-Party Inspection) that the safety of the new t Part PR, Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Riveting
design is equivalent to that of traditional designs. If necessary, the t Part PB, Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Brazing
AI can seek the assistance of the organization by which he or she is t Part PL, Requirements for Locomotive Boilers
employed, a so-called Authorized Inspection Agency, in determin- t Part PWT, Requirements for Watertube Boilers
ing the acceptability of new designs. t Part PFT, Requirements for Firetube Boilers
According to one of the definitions cited above, a code is a body t Part PFH, Optional Requirements for Feedwater Heater
of laws arranged systematically for easy reference. Although this (When Located within Scope of Section I Rules)
may be true of Section I, it is not at first easy to use or understand, t Part PMB, Requirements for Miniature Boilers
as it is a collection of rules that have been revised and expanded t Part PEB, Requirements for Electric Boilers
over the years with very little accompanying explanation. These t Part PVG, Requirements for Organic Fluid Vaporizers
rules mandate the fundamental construction features considered t Part PFE, Requirements for Feedwater Economizers
necessary for a safe boiler (one that is a safe pressure container), t Part PHRSG Requirements for Heat Recovery Steam Generators
but typically do not provide any advice on how to design a boiler t Mandatory Appendix II, Standard Units for use in Equations
from the standpoint of what size or arrangement of components t Mandatory Appendix III, Criteria for Reapplication of a Cer-
should be used. There are no provisions, for example, dealing with tification Mark
the thermal performance and efficiency of the boiler or how much t Mandatory Appendix IV, Local Thin Areas in Cylindrical
steam it will produce (other than for some approximate guidelines Shells and in Spherical Segments of Heads
for judging the adequacy of the safety-valve discharge capacity). t Mandatory Appendix V, Additional Rules for Boilers Fabricated
It is assumed that the boiler manufacturer or designer already has by Riveting
this knowledge, presumably from experience or available techni- t Mandatory Appendix VI, Establishing Governing Code
cal literature. Many rules seem, and indeed are, arbitrary; but as Editions, Addenda, and Cases for Boilers and Replacement
explained before, they were originally written to incorporate what Parts
was considered good practice in the industry. t Nonmandatory Appendix A, Explanation of the Code Con-
Code construction under the rules of Section I takes place as taining Matter Not Mandatory Unless Specifically Referred
follows: The ASME accredits a manufacturer (i.e., after appropri- to in the Rules of the Code
ate review and acceptance of the manufacturer’s quality control t Nonmandatory Appendix B, Positive Material Identification
system, the ASME authorizes the manufacturer to engage in code Practice
construction). The manufacturer then constructs, documents, certi- t Endnotes
fies, and stamps the boiler in compliance with the rules of Sec- t Index
tion I. The manufacturer’s activities are monitored and inspected
by a third party (the AI). The boiler is then acceptable to jurisdic- The user will notice that Section I skips from Part PHRSG to
tions with laws stipulating ASME construction of boilers. Section Mandatory Appendix II, with no Mandatory Appendix I. Prior to
VIII [10] construction (of pressure vessels) and Section IV [11] the 2013 Edition, Section I included Mandatory Appendix I, Sub-
construction (of heating boilers) is carried out in similar fashion. mittal of Technical Inquiries to the Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Committee. Starting with the 2013 Edition, the content from that
appendix is now located in the front of Section I before the listing
1.3 THE ORGANIZATION OF SECTION I of committee personnel as shown above.
The front of the volume contains the Foreword and Pream-
The original edition of Section I was not well organized. Over ble, which provide a fundamental description of Section I and its
the years the contents changed as portions were moved into other application. First time users of Section I often skip the Foreword
sections of the code and more and more provisions were add- and the Preamble and proceed directly to the body of the book.
ed. In 1965, following a precedent set by the Committee with This is a mistake because this introductory material contains a
1-4 t Chapter 1

good deal of useful information about Section I, its scope, how resemble Part PW welding rules, but are much less extensive.
the Code works, and definitions of various types of power boilers. One notable difference is that the maximum design temperature
Also in the front of the book is a current listing of the personnel of depends on the brazing filler metal being used and the base metals
the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee, which administers all being joined. Maximum design temperatures for the various braz-
sections of the Code, and information on how to submit technical ing filler metals are given in Table PB-1. Brazing procedures and
inquiries to that committee. the performance of brazers must be qualified in accordance with
Section IX by methods similar to those described in section 1.7.4
1.3.1 The Parts of Section I for qualifying weld procedures and welders. The design approach
used for determining the strength of brazed joints is given in PB-9: Part PG. Part PG is the first major section of Section I the manufacturer must determine from suitable tests or from expe-
and provides general requirements for all methods of construction. rience that the specific brazing filler metal selected can provide a
It covers such important topics as scope and service limitations; joint of adequate strength at design temperature. The strength of
permitted materials; design; cold forming of materials; require- the brazed joint may not be less than that of the base metals being
ments for piping, valves, fittings, feedwater supply, and safety joined. This strength is normally established by the qualification
valves; permitted fabrication methods; inspection; hydrostatic of the brazing procedure. If the manufacturer desires to extend the
testing; and certification by stamping and data reports. The general design temperature range normally permitted by Table PB-1 for
requirements of Part PG must be used in conjunction with specific the brazing filler metal selected, the manufacturer must conduct
requirements given in the remainder of the book for the particular two tension tests of production joints: one at design temperature,
type of construction or type of boiler used. A number of Part PG T, and one at 1.05 T. The joints must not fail in the braze metal.
topics are covered in later sections of this chapter. Some acceptable types of brazed joints are illustrated in Figure
PB-15. Non-destructive examination of brazed construction relies Part PW. The second major section is called Part PW, primarily on visual examination, supplemented by liquid penetrant
Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Welding. Since almost all examination if necessary. PB-49 provides guidance on inspection
boilers are now welded, this is a broadly applicable part containing and any necessary repairs.
much important information. It covers such topics as responsibil- The remainder of Section I is composed of parts providing spe-
ity for welding; qualification of welding procedures and welders; cial rules applicable to particular types of boilers or other Section I
acceptable weld joint designs; types of welding permitted; post- components, such as feedwater heaters.
weld heat treatment of welds; radiography, inspection, and repair
of welds; and testing of welded test plates. The rules of Part PW Part PL. A committee was formed in 2010 to look at
are described and explained further in Section 1.7.4, Welding and publishing a modern set of rules for locomotive boilers. Prior to
Postweld Heat Treatment. that, the last time the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code con-
tained rules for locomotive boilers was the 1952 Edition of Section Part PR. With the gradual replacement of riveting by III (Section III later became Rules for Construction of Nuclear
welding, the Committee decided that no purpose was served by Facility Components, first published in 1963). While locomo-
continuing to maintain and reprint in each edition the special rules tive boilers are not as prevalent as they were in the early 1900s,
applicable to riveted construction, Part PR. Accordingly, the 1974 there is an industry that maintains and operates both historical
and subsequent Editions of Section I mandate the use of Part PR and hobby locomotive boilers. The result of this modernization,
rules as last published in the 1971 Edition. This all changed with Part PL, was first published in Section I in the 2015 Edition. As
the publication of the 2013 Edition. noted above, this committee has also helped to modernize Part
Riveted construction has been used extensively in the locomo- PR, Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Riveting (see
tive industry in both historical and hobby locomotives. When the
Committee formed a new committee to look at incorporating mod- Part PWT. Part PWT, Requirements for Watertube
ernized rules for locomotive boilers (see, Part PL), that Boilers, is a very brief collection of rules for this type of boiler,
committee determined that the industry would also benefit from with some of the rules pertaining to construction details rarely
updated rules for riveting. While mandating the use of Part PR used today. All large high-pressure boilers are watertube boilers.
from the 1971 Edition worked for a time, it began to pose limita- Most construction rules for these boilers are found in Parts PG and
tions for the industry over time. One example is that some of the PW, and Part PWT is merely a brief supplement. It is, however,
referenced materials were no longer being manufactured. With the the only place where rules for the attachment of tubes to shells and
publication of the revised rules in Part PR (and associated rules headers of watertube boilers can be found. Part PWT is an example
in A-1 through A-6 of Nonmandatory Appendix A and in the new of the retention by Section I of certain old rules and construction
Mandatory Appendix V), the industry now has a modern set of details because some manufacturers might still use them.
rules for riveting. This includes controls for set up and execution
of riveted joints, a listing of modern materials acceptable for rivets, Part PFT. Part PFT, Requirements for Firetube Boilers,
a requirement that longitudinal riveted joints in drums be of butt- is a much more extensive set of rules, still very much in use for
and double strap construction (elimination of riveted lap seams in this popular type of boiler, which is quite economical for generat-
drum fabrication), and updated lap seam rules for steam domes. ing low-pressure steam. Except in special cases, the large-diameter
shell places a practical limit on design pressure at about 400 psi, Part PB. The next section, Part PB, Requirements for although most firetube boilers have lower pressures. Part PFT
Boilers Fabricated by Brazing, first appeared in the 1996 Addenda covers many variations within the type in considerable detail.
to the 1995 edition of Section I. Although brazing had long been Requirements cover material, design, combustion chambers and
used in the construction of certain low-pressure boilers, no brazing furnaces, stayed surfaces, doors and openings, domes, setting,
rules had ever been provided in Section I. Part PB brazing rules piping, and fittings.

A good deal of Part PFT dates back to the original 1915 edition Part PEB. This part, Requirements for Electric
of Section I. However, extensive revisions were made in the 1988 Boilers, was added to Section I in 1976. Until that time, manu-
Addenda. A much larger selection of materials was permitted, and facturers had been building these boilers as Section VIII devices.
allowable stresses for the first time became a function of tempera- However, Section VIII had no specific rules for electric boilers and
ture, as is the case elsewhere in the Code. In addition, the design the various openings, valves, and fittings normally mandated by
rules for tubes and circular furnaces under external pressure were Section I (blowoff, drain, water gage, pressure gage, check valve,
made consistent with the latest such rules in Section VIII, from etc.). Also, the manufacturers were not formally assuming design
which they were taken. In the mid-1990s, Part PFT was further responsibility for the boiler. The rules of Part PEB remedied these
revised and updated. shortcomings.
Part PFT was further revised in the 2011a Addenda based on Part PEB covers electric boilers of the electrode and immersion
an inquiry received regarding immersion electric heating elements resistance type only and doesn’t include boilers in which the heat is
(see, Part PEB). That inquiry, on electric boilers covered applied externally by electrical means. The boiler pressure vessel
by Part PEB, highlighted to the Committee that the only place that may be a Section I vessel or may have been constructed as an un-
Section I addressed external pressure, other than access and in- fired steam boiler under special rules of Section VIII, Division 1.
spection openings in PG-28, was in Part PFT. To make the exter- Note that those rules require radiography and postweld heat treat-
nal pressure rules available for other boilers or devices, the rules ment, as explained later, in section 1.4.4, under The Use of Section
for thickness and MAWP for components under external pressure VIII Vessels in a Section I Boiler.
were relocated from the Part PFT to PG-28. Under the provisions of Part PEB, a manufacturer can obtain
from the ASME a Certificate of Authorization to use the Certifica- Part PFH. Part PFH, Optional Requirements for tion Mark and the “E” designator (see section 1.7.10, Certification
Feedwater Heater (When Located Within Scope of Section I by Stamping and Data Reports), which authorizes the manufac-
Rules), applies to feedwater heaters that fall within the scope turer to assemble electric boilers (by installing electrodes and trim
of Section I by virtue of their location in the feedwater piping on a pressure vessel). The manufacturer must obtain the pressure
between the Code-required stop valve and the boiler. A feedwater vessel from an appropriate Certificate Holder. The E-designator
heater, for the purposes of this part, is a heat exchanger in which holder is limited to assembly methods that do not require welding
feedwater to be supplied to a boiler is heated by steam or water or brazing. Electric boilers may, of course, also be constructed by
extracted from the boiler or the prime mover. The reader will certificate holders authorized to use the Certification Mark with an
note that while a feedwater heater and the feedwater economizers S or M designators. The E-designator holder becomes the manu-
covered in, Part PFE, both result in heating feedwater, the facturer of record, who is responsible for the design of the electric
source of heat is different (steam or water as opposed to flue gas). boiler. This is stipulated in PEB-8.2.
Under these circumstances, the heater may be constructed in com- The Data Report Form P-2A (see section 1.7.10, Certifica-
pliance with the rules in Section VIII, Pressure Vessels, Division tion by Stamping and Data Reports) for electric boilers is in two
1, for unfired steam boilers, which are more strict in a number of parts: one for the vessel manufacturer and one for the manufac-
respects than those applicable to ordinary Section VIII vessels, as turer responsible for the completed boiler, who may be a certificate
explained in section 1.4.4, The Use of Section VIII Vessels in a holder authorized to use the Certification Mark with an E, S, or M
Section I Boiler. designator. If the vessel is constructed to the Section VIII, Divi-
The primary side of the heater must be designed for a higher sion 1, rules for unfired steam boilers, it must be stamped with the
pressure than the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) Certification Mark with a U designator and documented with a U-1
of the boiler, per 122.1.3 of Power Piping, ASME B31.1. (Remem- or U-lA Data Report (these are Section VIII data report forms). In
ber: This heater is in the feedwater piping, and rules for the design such a case, the Section I master Data Report P-2A must indicate
of feedwater piping are within the scope of B31.1.) Part PFH also this fact, and the U-lA form must be attached to it.
stipulates how the heater is to be stamped and documented. Electric boilers of the resistance element type must be equipped
If a feedwater heater within the scope of Section I is equipped with an automatic low-water cutoff, which cuts the power before
with isolation and bypass valves, there is a possibility that it could the surface of the water falls below the visible part of the gage
be exposed to the full shut-off head of the boiler feed pump. PG- glass. Such a cutoff is not required for electrode type boilers (which
58.3.3 cautions about this and notes that control and interlock sys- use the water as a conductor), since these in effect cut themselves
tems are permitted to prevent excessive pressure. (It is impractical off when the water level falls too low.
to provide sufficient safety valve capacity in these circumstances.) Part PEB was revised in the 2010 Edition based on intent inter-
pretation I-10-15 (shown below). PEB-2.4 was revised to include Part PMB. Part PMB, Requirements for Miniature heating elements enclosed in pipe that is then immersed in wa-
Boilers, contains special rules for the construction of small boilers ter. This interpretation then prompted a change to Part PFT (see
that do not exceed certain limits (16 in. [400 mm] inside diameter, Part PFT).
of shell, 20 ft² [1.9 m²] of heating surface, 5 ft³ [0.14 m³] gross vol-
ume, 100 psig [700 kPa] MAWP). Because of this relatively small Interpretation: 1-10-15
size and low pressure, many requirements normally applicable to Subject: PEB-2.4 (2007 Edition)
power boilers are waived. These have to do with materials, mate- Date Issued: June 30, 2010
rial marking, minimum plate thickness, postweld heat treatment
and radiography of welds, and feedwater supply. To compensate Question: A boiler is heated by electric heating elements.
somewhat for this relaxation of the normal rules, and to provide Each element is inserted into a pipe well with the opposite
an extra margin of safety, PMB-21 stipulates that miniature boiler end closed. Each pipe well extends into the boiler and may
pressure vessels are to be given a hydrostatic test at a pressure be installed by welding, threading, or flange. The pipe well
equal to three times the MAWP. is immersed in the fluid of the boiler and separates the fluid
1-6 t Chapter 1

from the electric heating element. Is it the intent that such an because the valves have no lifting levers by which they can be
assembly meets the definition of an immersed resistance heat- tested periodically, PEB 12.2 requires the removal and inspection
ing element in PEB-2.4? of these valves at least yearly. This is a rare instance of Section I
reaching beyond its normal new-construction-only coverage.
Reply: Yes.
As a further means of reducing unintentional discharge of or-
ganic fluid to the environment by leakage through safety valves,
There were also some changes to Part PEB in the 2013 and 2015 and to prevent the gumming up of these valves, Section I permits
Editions that are worth mentioning. The 2011a Addenda to Section installation of rupture disks under the valves. This is the only use
VIII included a new appendix (Mandatory Appendix 41, Electric of such disks permitted by Section I. Special rules are also pro-
Immersion Heater Element Support Plates). This appendix was vided for calculating safety valve capacity. The required capacity
based on the rules in Section VIII Part UHX, specifically those in of these valves is based on the heat of combustion of the fuel and
UHX-12 which provides rules for the design of u-tube tubesheets. the latent heat of vaporization of the organic fluid. This capacity is
The Committee felt that these rules would be beneficial to flanged determined by the manufacturer.
electric immersion heaters constructed to Section I so added a new
paragraph, PEB-8.3, in the 2013 Edition pointing to Section VIII Part PFE. This part, added in the 2015 Edition,
Mandatory Appendix 41. Unfortunately, the way the paragraph provides rules for feedwater economizers. This part was added
was written only provided two choices, follow the rules in Section primarily to provide rules regarding when an economizer must be
I paragraphs PG-31 through PG-35 or use Section VIII Manda- constructed to Section I and when it may be constructed to either
tory Appendix 41. This inadvertently disallowed the more com- Section I or Section VIII and also when austenitic stainless steels
mon practice of using standard pressure parts under PG-11 and also may be used. It also provides information on selecting both the
could be interpreted to not permit parts constructed by a Section maximum allowable working pressure and design temperature.
VIII Certificate Holder and documented on a Form U-2 Manufac-
turer’s Partial Data Report. This was addressed by the Committee Part PHRSG. This part provides rules for a heat
in intent interpretation I-13-21 together with a revision to PEB-8.3 recovery steam generator, HRSG, that has as its principal source of
in the 2015 Edition. thermal energy a hot gas stream having high ramp rates and tem-
peratures such as the exhaust of a gas turbine. Such an HRSG may
Interpretation: 1-13-21 utilize supplemental firing and may have one or more superheat-
Subject: PEB-8.3 (2013 Edition) ers, reheaters, evaporators, economizers, and/or feedwater heaters,
Date Issued: February 25, 2014 which are housed in a common gas path enclosure. The sections
cannot be individually isolated from the gas stream.
Question (1): Is it the intent of PEB-8.3 to prohibit the use of
a miscellaneous pressure part per PG-11 as a manufacturer’s Mandatory Appendices. Following is a list of con-
standard pressure part? tents in the 2015 Edition.
Reply (1): No. t Mandatory Appendix II—Standard Units for use in Equations
Question (2): Is it the intent of PEB-8.3 to prohibit the use t Mandatory Appendix III—Criteria for Reapplication of a
of pressure parts manufactured by a Section VIII, Division Certification mark
1, “U” Certificate Holder when the element support plate is t Mandatory Appendix IV—Local Thin Areas in Cylindrical
designed per the rules of Section VIII, Division 1, Manda- Shells and in Spherical Segments of Heads
tory Appendix 41 and documented with a U-2 Partial Data t Mandatory Appendix V—Additional Rules for Boilers Fab-
Report? ricated by Riveting
t Mandatory Appendix VI—Establishing Governing Code
Reply (2): No. Editions, Addenda, and Cases for Boilers and Replacement
Parts Part PVG. This part provides rules for organic fluid
vaporizers, which are boiler-like devices that use an organic fluid NonMandatory Appendix A. Nonmandatory Appendix
(such as Dowtherm™) instead of steam as the working fluid. The A contains a great deal of miscellaneous information, some of it
principal advantage of using these organic fluids is that they have dating from the first edition. Much of this is nonmandatory explana-
much lower vapor pressures than water at a given temperature. tory material, unless it is specifically referred to in the main body of
Thus they are particularly suitable for heating in industrial pro- Section I. The diversity of the subjects can be seen from this list of
cesses requiring high temperatures at low pressure. On the other contents:
hand, these liquids are both flammable and toxic, and Part PVG
contains a number of special provisions because of these draw- t Riveted Joints
backs. t Braced and Stayed Surfaces
To prevent the uncontrolled discharge of organic fluid or va- t Method of Checking Pressure Relief Valve Capacity by
por to the atmosphere, the use of gage cocks is prohibited. Safety Measuring Maximum Amount of Fuel that can be Burned
valves must be of a totally enclosed type that will discharge into t Automatic Water Gages
a pipe designed to carry all vapors to a safe point of discharge. t Fusible Plugs
The safety valve lifting lever normally required on Section I safety t Proof Tests to Establish Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
valves is prohibited, and valve body drains are not mandatory. Be- t Suggested Rules Covering Existing Installations
cause the polymerization of organic fluids can cause clogging or t Pressure Relief Valves for Power Boilers
otherwise adversely affect the operation of safety valves, and also t Repairs to Existing Boilers

t Examples of Methods of Computation of Openings in Vessel Interpretation: 1-10-23

Shells Subject: PHRSG-3.4 (2010 Edition)
t Examples of Computation of Allowable Loading on Structural Date Issued: April 4, 2011
Attachment to Tubes
t Example Computations of Typical Nozzle Fittings Attached Question: Is it the intent of “quick-opening” type valve in
by Rivets PHRSG-3.4 to provide draining within a specific time?
t Preheating
t Heating and Cooling Rates for Postweld Heat Treatment Reply: No. The intent of PHRSG-3.4 is to provide draining
t Rounded Indication Charts capacity such that condensate pooling is prevented.
t Methods for Magnetic Particle Examination (MT)
t Methods for Liquid Penetrant Examination (PT) Historically, a purchaser of a new edition of any Code section
t Quality Control System would receive the interpretations for that section that were issued
t Acceptance of Testing Laboratories and Authorized Observers since the last addenda. With each addenda for the edition pur-
for Capacity Certification of Pressure Relief Valves chased, they would also receive any interpretations issued since
t Cylindrical Components Under Internal Pressure the last edition or addenda. When the publication cycle for the
t Data Report Forms and Guides Code was changed after the 2011a Addenda (see 1.6.5, Effective
t Codes, Standards and Specifications Referenced in the Text Dates of the Code and Code References), new interpretations were
t Guide to Information Appearing on Certificate of Authorization posted in January and July at http://cstools.asme.org/interpretations.
t Sample Calculations for External Pressure Design cfm. Following the 2015 Edition, interpretations will not be in-
t Guidance for the Use of U.S. Customary and S.I. Units in the cluded in editions; they will be issued in real time in ASME’s In-
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code terpretations Database at http://go.asme.org/Interpretations. When
t Guidelines Used to develop S.I. Equivalents the interpretations were published with the Code books, many us-
t Soft Conversion factors ers found it convenient to bind all of the interpretations together for
easy reference. To continue that, ASME has included the historical Nonmandatory Appendix B Positive Material Iden- interpretations in the database referenced above.
tification Practice. This appendix is provided as a guide for use An example of the designation of a Section I Interpretation is
by a Manufacturer developing a Positive Material Identification I-98-27. The “I” signifies that the interpretation pertains to the
Practice that may form part of their material control system. rules of Section I; the “98,” is the year the “27,” is a sequential
number. Before 1983, the year of the interpretation denoted the Endnotes. With the publication of the 2011a Addenda, year it was issued. After that, it indicated the edition of Section I
all footnotes have been compiled and relocated to a single location to which it pertained, unless a specific year was mentioned in the
at the end of Section I entitled “Endnotes.” interpretation. For example, the subject for interpretation I-10-22
is PG-58.3.2 (2007 Edition), Steam Stop-Check Valves, which in- Index. The index provides a cross reference of some of dicates that it applies to the 2007 Edition even though it has a 10
the more common terms used throughout Section I. designation. Starting with I-15-01, the year designation will again
be the year issued and the interpretation will identify in the subject
1.3.2 Interpretations line which edition it applies to.
Since 1977, the ASME has published all the replies from the
ASME staff on behalf of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel 1.3.3 Code Cases
Committee to inquiries on the interpretation of Section I (and One of the many definitions of the word case is “a special situ-
also the other book sections). Despite the fact that interpretations ation,” which is a good description of the circumstances covered
are said not to be a part of the Code, they can be very useful by what the Committee calls a Code Case. In the early application
in explaining its application and in resolving disputes regarding of the first edition of the Code, users sought Committee guidance
what the Code intends which is why most Code users and AIs for circumstances not specifically covered by the Code or when the
generally accept interpretations as the equivalent of Code rules. intent of the Code rules was not clear. The Committee considered
Also note that as stated in the front matter of Section I, “ASME a number of these special situations and issued formal guidance in
accepts responsibility for only those interpretations of this docu- the form of what it called a Case. This is the origin of the practice
ment issued in accordance with the established ASME procedures of issuing numbered Code Cases. In those days, no distinction was
and policies, which precludes the issuance of interpretations by made between a Case and what we now call an interpretation.
individuals.” Today, Code Cases are used for several purposes:
Interpretations are supposed to clarify the existing rules and are
not to create “rules by interpretation,” with one exception. That t To provide for early implementation of new or revised Code
exception is what is referred to as an intent interpretation. Some- rules, since a Code Case can be approved and published
times when the committee reviews an inquiry, they determine that more quickly than the text of the Code can be revised. A text
the existing code words do not really convey what the committee change can take well over a year after approval by the ASME
intended and must be revised for clarity. These “intent interpreta- Boiler and Pressure Vessel Standards Committee before it
tions” will typically include the words “Is it the intent…” as part of is published, while a Code Case can be approved in as lit-
the question and the paragraph will be revised in the next edition tle as one Codeweek meeting cycle (Codeweek is the name
or addenda to further clarify. An example of this is interpretation given to the week of Code committee meetings held four
I-10-23. In the 2011a Addenda, PHRSG-3.4 was revised to clarify times a year.). Thus, a Code Case may be usable two or three
that capacity is required “…such that condensate pooling in super- months after the inquiry is submitted to the ASME Boiler and
heaters and reheaters is prevented.” Pressure Vessel Standards Committee.
1-8 t Chapter 1

t To permit the use of new materials or new forms of construc- boilers, high-temperature water boilers, heat recovery steam genera-
tion not covered or not otherwise permitted by existing Code tors, solar receiver steam generators, some fired pressure vessels,
rules, when the need is urgent. and organic fluid vaporizers. Since the precise definitions of these
t To gain experience over a period of time with new materials, various types of boilers are not generally known, the following defi-
new forms of construction, or new design rules before chang- nitions, found in footnotes to the preamble, are helpful:
ing the Code to include them. This is particularly useful for
(1) Power boiler—a boiler in which steam or other vapor is
rapidly evolving technology.
generated at a pressure of more than 15 psi (100 kPa) for
use external to itself.
Initially, Code Cases had a limited life, usually three years.
(2) Electric boiler—a power boiler or a high-temperature wa-
They automatically expired at that point unless the Committee re-
ter boiler in which the source of heat is electricity.
affirmed them for another three years. In March 2005, the Com-
(3) Miniature boiler—a power boiler or high-temperature wa-
mittee took action to eliminate Code Case expiration dates. This
ter boiler in which the limits in PMB-2 are not exceeded.
means that all Code Cases listed in Supplement 3 of the 2004 Code
(4) High-temperature water boiler—a water boiler intended
Edition and beyond will remain available for use until annulled by
for operation at pressures in excess of 160 psi (1.1 MPa)
the Committee.
and/or temperatures in excess of 250°F (120°C).
Code Cases may be used beginning with the date of approval
(5) Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG)—a boiler that has
shown on the Case. Annulled Code Cases will remain in the Numeric
as its principal source of thermal energy a hot gas stream
Index until the next Edition, at which time they will be deleted.
having high ramp rates and temperatures such as the ex-
The digit following a Case number is used to indicate the num-
haust of a gas turbine.
ber of times a Code Case has been revised. Code Cases are ar-
(6) Solar receiver steam generator—a boiler system in which
ranged in numerical order and each page of a Case is identified at
water is converted to steam using solar energy as the prin-
the top with the appropriate Case number.
cipal source of thermal energy. The solar energy is typically
Code Cases may be annulled at any time by the Committee.
concentrated onto the solar receiver through the use of an
Usually, a Code Case is annulled six months after its contents have
array of mirrors that focuses solar radiation on the heat
been incorporated and published in the Code. Note that Code Cases
transfer surface.
are nonmandatory; they are permissive only. In effect, they are an
(7) Fired pressure vessel—reheaters, isolable superheaters,
extension of the Code. Most Code Cases require the Code Case
economizers located outside the limits of boiler external pip-
number to be listed on the Manufacturers’ Data Report (see section
ing, and non-integral separately fired superheaters.
1.7.10 for a description of data reports). Although there used to be
pressure to incorporate all Code Cases into the Code as soon as Section I doesn’t provide an explicit definition of an organic fluid
adequate experience had been gained with their use, it is now rec- vaporizer, which is a boiler-like device that uses an organic fluid
ognized that some Cases do not lend themselves to incorporation instead of steam as the working fluid. However, the last paragraph
and should be left as Cases indefinitely. One problem with Code of the Preamble states that a pressure vessel in which an organic
Cases is that some jurisdictions will not allow their use. Manufac- fluid is vaporized by the application of heat resulting from the com-
turers are thus cautioned to check acceptability of Code Cases with bustion of fuel shall be constructed under the provisions of Section
the jurisdiction where the boiler will be installed. I. (Those provisions are found in Part PVG.) Thus, so far as Section
With each new Code edition, the ASME publishes all current I is concerned, an organic fluid vaporizer is a boiler-like device in
Code Cases in two Code Case books: Code Cases: Boilers and which an organic fluid is vaporized as just described. (Note that a
Pressure Vessels [12] and Code Cases: Nuclear Components [13]. key factor is the vaporization of the organic fluid. If the organic
Supplements with the latest Cases and annulments are now sent fluid is merely heated without vaporizing, the device does not fall
quarterly to purchasers of the Code Case books until the publication within the scope of Section I; it might fall instead under the scope
of the next edition of the Code, when a new Code Case book must be of Section VIII as a pressure vessel.) The Preamble then provides
purchased. Theoretically, issuing the new Cases quarterly enables a notable exception to the Section I definition of an organic fluid
the publication of new Cases as soon after each ASME Boiler and vaporizer: “Vessels in which vapor is generated incidental to the
Pressure Vessel Standards Committee meeting as possible. In addi- operation of a processing system, containing a number of pressure
tion, Cases are made available on an ASME website from the time vessels such as are used in chemical and petroleum manufacture,
they are passed until they are then sent out as a supplement (https:// are not covered by the rules of Section I.” Again, if Section I rules
cstools.asme.org/csconnect/CommitteePages.cfm?Committee do not cover these vessels, what rules do? The answer is the rules of
=N20050000&CommitteeCodeCases=yes). This site does not pro- Section VIII, Pressure Vessels. Those rules cover all kinds of pres-
vide access to all Cases, just those that have passed since the last sure vessels, including in some cases fired pressure vessels.
supplement was sent out. Although the origin of the above exception to Section I domin-
ion is uncertain, a possible explanation can be surmised. Note
that the vessel in question would probably be used in a chemical
1.4 SCOPE OF SECTION I: plant or petroleum refinery. Such plants are normally owned and
PRESSURE LIMITS AND EXCLUSIONS operated by large companies with a capable engineering staff and
well-trained operators. Those companies can usually demonstrate
1.4.1 Scope a good record of maintenance and safety. Furthermore, vaporizing
Section I applies to several types of boilers and components of organic liquids inside pressure vessels is a routine matter for them.
boilers, such as economizers, superheaters, reheaters, and in some They might also argue that it really does not make much difference
circumstances feedwater heaters. Although its title is Power Boilers, whether a properly designed vessel is built to the rules of Section
the scope of Section I is somewhat broader. The Preamble to Sec- I or Section VIII, nor does it matter whether the source of heat is
tion I explains that it covers power boilers, electric boilers, miniature from direct firing, from hot gases that may have given up some of

their heat by having passed over a heat-transfer surface upstream, The Preamble also explains that the piping beyond the valves
or from a hot liquid that is being processed. There are also eco- required by Section I is not within the scope of Section I. Thus
nomic reasons why an Owner might prefer a Section VIII vessel these valves define the boundary of the boiler, and Section I juris-
over a Section I vessel, as explained later in the discussion of fired diction stops there. Note that the upstream boundary of the scope
versus unfired boilers. of Section I varies slightly, depending on feedwater valve arrange-
The Preamble does not explain the precise meaning of “vapor ments. Different valve arrangements are required for a single boiler
generation incidental to the operation of a processing system.” It fed from a single source, as opposed to two or more boilers fed
apparently means the generation of vapor in a vessel or heat ex- from a common source, with and without bypass valves around
changer that is part of a processing system in a chemical plant or the required regulating valve (see the solid and dotted lines shown
petroleum refinery where this vapor generation is only a minor or in Figure PG-58.3.1(a), reproduced in this chapter). The required
secondary aspect of the principal business of the plant, such as re- boiler feed check valve is typically placed upstream of the feed stop
fining oil. Thus, certain equipment normally constructed to Section valve, except that on a single boiler-turbine unit installation, the
I rules could, under this exception, be constructed instead to the stop valve may be located upstream of the check valve. Changes in
rules of Section VIII, provided the appropriate authorities in the the Section I boundary can have some significance in the choice of
jurisdiction where the equipment is to be installed have no objec- design pressure for the feed water piping and valves, which is gov-
tion. These so-called jurisdictional authorities have the last word in erned by the rules of B31.1, Power Piping (see paragraph 122.1.3).
deciding which Code section applies (see How and Where Section An exception to this coverage of boiler piping is found in the
I is Enforced and Effective Dates in Section 1.6). treatment of the hot and cold reheat piping between the boiler and
There is also some imprecision in the use and meaning of the a turbine, (see Figure PG-58.3.1(c), reproduced in this chapter)
term power boiler. This term is sometimes understood to mean which is excluded from the scope of Section I. Occasionally, some-
a boiler with steam that is used for the generation of power, as one asks how and why reheat piping was left outside the scope of
opposed, for example, to a boiler with steam that is used for Section I. The explanation offered some years ago by a senior mem-
chemical processing or high-pressure steam heating. However, ac- ber of the Committee is as follows: Although reheaters date back to
cording to the definition in the Preamble, a boiler that generates the earliest days of Section I, the rising steam pressures employed
steam or other vapor at a pressure greater than 15 psi for external in large utility boilers in the 1940s led to their increased use. The
use is considered by Section I to be a power boiler, irrespective reheat piping became larger, heavier, and more complex. In those
of how the steam might be used. Although exceptions exist, most days, the General Electric Company and Westinghouse made virtu-
jurisdictional authorities follow the ASME Code in defining and ally all of the turbines used in the United States, and it was custom-
categorizing boilers and pressure vessels. ary for those turbine manufacturers to take responsibility for the
Note from the definition of a power boiler that the steam or other design of the reheat piping. Whenever some Committee members
vapor generated is for use external to the boiler. This is supposed to suggested that it might be time to consider bringing reheat pip-
distinguish a power boiler from certain other pressure vessels, such ing into the scope of Section I, those two companies objected. On
as autoclaves, that may similarly generate steam or vapor at a pres- the basis of their long, successful experience, they convinced the
sure greater than 15 psi but not generally for external use. These Committee that such a change was unnecessary and that they were
pressure vessels, often used as process equipment in the chemical perfectly capable of designing that piping. Thus the reheat piping
and petroleum industries, and for cooking or sterilization in other remained outside the scope of Section I.
industries, are designed to meet the rules of Section VIII. In the late 1980s, failures of hot reheat piping occurred at
From the Preamble definitions, it is apparent that a high- two major utilities, with injuries and loss of life. This reopened
temperature water boiler, which generally produces pressurized hot the question of whether Section I should cover reheat piping and
water for heating or process use, is not considered a power boiler. whether the failed piping, designed in the 1960s, might not have
However, as a practical matter, the particular characterization of a failed had it been within the scope of Section I. (Current Section I
device by Section I as a power boiler or something else is less im- rules call for all boiler components to be manufactured, inspected,
portant than the fact that it is indeed covered by Section I rules. certified, and stamped under a quality control system, a require-
The Preamble explains that the scope of Section I covers the ment imposed in 1973. Moreover, any piping within the scope of
complete boiler unit, which is defined as comprising the boiler Section I is generally inspected yearly, with the rest of the boiler,
proper and the boiler external piping. This very important dis- although finding potential leaks or failures under the insulation is
tinction needs further explanation. The term boiler proper is an not so readily accomplished.) However, investigators were not able
unusual one, chosen to distinguish the boiler itself from its external to agree on the causes of the failures, and the idea of bringing the
piping. The boiler proper consists of all the pressure parts com- reheat piping within Section I jurisdiction died for lack of support.
prising the boiler, such as the drum, the economizer, the super- Code coverage of this reheat piping and also of piping beyond
heater, the reheater, waterwalls, steamgenerating tubes known as the boiler external piping varies. Normally in power plant design,
the boiler bank, various headers, downcomers, risers, and transfer the owner or the architect engineer will select the B31.1, Power
piping connecting these components. Any such piping connecting Piping Code, for the reheat piping, and either that Code or the
parts of the boiler proper is called boiler proper piping. The boiler B31.3, Process Piping Code [14] (formerly called the Chemical
external piping is defined by its extent: it is the piping that begins Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping Code), for the piping beyond
at the first joint where the boiler proper terminates and extends to the boiler external piping. The reader should also note that the ju-
and includes the valve or valves required by Section I. risdiction (state or province) may have laws mandating use of one
The importance of all these definitions and distinctions is that or the other of these two Codes to cover piping that isn’t within the
the construction rules that apply to the boiler proper and boiler scope of Section I.
proper piping are somewhat different from those that apply to the Some unfired steam boilers are constructed to the requirements
boiler external piping. This is explained in Section 1.5, Distinction of Section VIII, as permitted by the preamble. Section VIII rules
Between Boiler Proper Piping and Boiler External Piping. deal only with the vessels themselves; they do not deal with any
1-10 t Chapter 1


piping attached to the vessels. In such cases, the choice of an ap- Section I are gage pressure.) For high-temperature water boilers,
propriate design Code for the piping may be left to the plant de- Section I applies if either the pressure exceeds 160 psi (1.1 MPa) or
signers; otherwise, the jurisdictional authorities may mandate a the temperature exceeds 250°F (120°C). The vapor pressure of wa-
particular piping Code. ter at 250°F (120°C) is approximately 15 psi (100 kPa). Thus, if the
water temperature is less than 250°F (120°C), saturation pressure
1.4.2 Pressure Range of Section I Boilers is less than 15 psi (100 kPa). Boilers designed for pressures below
As explained in the Preamble, Section I covers boilers in which 15 psi (100 kPa) are usually constructed to the rules of Section IV,
steam or other vapor is generated at a pressure of more than 15 psi Heating Boilers. However, such units could be built, certified, and
(100 kPa) for use external to the boiler. (All pressures used in stamped as Section I boilers if all the requirements of Section I are


met. Section I has no upper limit on boiler design pressure. The occasional disagreement between the Committee on Power Boilers
design pressure (also called by Section I the Maximum Allowable and the Committee on Pressure Vessels. The Preamble to Section
Working Pressure, or MAWP) of large, natural-circulation boilers I states that:
used by electric utilities can be as high as 2975 psi (20 MPa). At
higher pressures, approaching the critical point of water and steam A pressure vessel in which steam is generated by the appli-
3206 psia (21.4 MPa) and 705.4°F (372.5°C), the difference in cation of heat resulting from the combustion of fuel (solid,
density between steam and water becomes so small that natural liquid, or gaseous) or from solar radiation shall be classified
circulation in the boiler would be inadequate. The design pres- as a fired steam boiler.
sure of what is known as a forced-flow steam generator with no Unfired pressure vessels in which steam is generated shall
fixed steam and water line can be substantially higher, approaching be classed as unfired steam boilers with the following excep-
5000 psi (35 MPa) for advanced ultra-super critical boilers. tions:
(a) vessels known as evaporators or heat exchangers;
1.4.3 Fired versus Unfired Boilers (b) vessels in which steam is generated by the use of heat
Section I rules are intended primarily for fired steam or high- resulting from operation of a processing system contain-
temperature water boilers and organic fluid vaporizers. There are, ing a number of pressure vessels such as used in the
however, boilers called unfired steam boilers that do not derive manufacture of chemical and petroleum products.
their heat from direct firing. These unfired steam boilers may be
constructed under the provisions of either Section I or Section It is these exceptions that cause the confusion, for several rea-
VIII, Pressure Vessels. The definition of an unfired steam boiler sons. Sometimes it is not apparent whether a boiler using waste heat
is not as clear as it might be, which has led to some confusion and is fired or unfired. Furthermore, it may be difficult to distinguish
1-12 t Chapter 1

between an unfired steam boiler using waste heat and certain heat One of the criteria some Committee members use to distinguish
exchangers also using waste heat. Another difficulty arises from between fired and unfired boilers is whether a flame from a poorly
the source of the waste heat. If it stems from the combustion of adjusted burner can impinge directly on pressure parts and over-
fuel, the device is generally considered fired. However, some juris- heat them. This is clearly a possibility in a fired boiler, and it is
dictions have permitted boilers to be considered unfired if they use one reason for some of the conservativeness of Section I rules, and
waste heat from a combustion turbine. The presence of auxiliary for the typical practice of requiring annual outages for inspection.
burners in a boiler using waste heat from another source would By contrast, hot gases from some upstream source are less likely
cause that boiler to be considered fired. This was affirmed in the to cause overheating of those same pressure parts because they are
first question and reply in Interpretation I-92-20. less likely to be misdirected and, presumably, no actual flames can
reach the downstream steam generating pressure parts.
Question (1): If the main heat source of a Section I boiler is An interesting change in the 2015 Edition was the addition of
the exhaust from a combustion turbine, and a secondary fired solar receiver steam generator to the preamble (see 1.4.1, Scope).
heat source, e.g., a duct burner, is provided for intermittent These steam generators use solar energy and not combustion of a
use, is the boiler classified as a fired boiler? fuel as their primary source of thermal energy. With the increased
interest in using solar energy for power generation, ASME con-
Reply (1): Yes. tracted with a consultant for a gap analysis of ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Codes as they relate to concentrated solar power
The reader should note that this interpretation was issued before (CSP) systems where the solar radiation is concentrated on a re-
Part PHRSG was added in the 2007 Edition and before the Pream- ceiver. As part of this gap analysis, it was determined that the Ju-
ble was revised in 2008 to include heat recovery steam generators risdictions in the US with the greatest CSP potential would not all
within Section I. With those two changes, Section I has clarified classify the various systems the same, some classified a particu-
that heat recovery steam generators are within Section I, even if lar system (such as the solar receiver steam generator mentioned
they do not have supplemental firing. above) as a boiler while others classified them as pressure vessels.
All ASME Code sections routinely caution users that laws or Based on this gap analysis, the Committee formed a new com-
regulations at the point of installation may dictate which Code sec- mittee to address solar power (see 1.8, Future Changes) and the
tion applies to a particular device and that those regulations may first step was the definition in the preamble of solar receiver steam
be different from or more restrictive than Code rules. The jurisdic- generators.
tions may also have rules that define whether a device is consid-
ered a boiler or a heat exchanger and whether it is considered fired 1.4.4 The Use of Section VIII Vessels in a Section I
or unfired. Boiler
Electric boilers can be considered fired or unfired, depending
Usually all parts of a Section I boiler are constructed to Sec-
on the circumstances. An inquiry on this subject was answered by
tion I rules, but there are a few exceptions worth noting. Pressure
Interpretation I-81-01, as follows:
vessels for electric boilers (see PEB-3), unfired steam boilers (see
code case 1855, below), and feedwater heaters that fall under Sec-
Question: The preamble of Section I defines an electric boiler tion I jurisdiction by virtue of their location in the feedwater pip-
as “a power boiler or a high-temperature water boiler in ing (see PFH-1.1) are among those boiler components that may
which the source of heat is electricity.” Would you define be constructed under the special rules for unfired steam boilers in
whether or not an electric boiler is considered to be a fired or UW-2(c) of Section VIII Division 1. One other type of Section
an unfired steam boiler? VIII vessel that can be used in a Section I boiler is mentioned in
Reply: PEB-2 provides criteria for determining if an electric the next-to-last paragraph of the preamble. That vessel is an expan-
boiler is considered to be a fired or an unfired steam boiler. An sion tank used in connection with what is defined in footnote 4 to
electric boiler where heat is applied to the boiler pressure ves- the preamble as a high-temperature water boiler. This is the only
sel externally by electric heating elements, induction coils, or mention of such tanks in Section I, and nothing is said about their
other electrical means is considered to be a fired steam boiler. construction having to meet the special Section VIII requirements
for unfired steam boilers. Thus it seems that an ordinary Section
An electric boiler where the medium (water) is directly heated VIII vessel would serve the purpose.
by the energy source (electrode type or immersion element Although it might seem that components built to Section VIII
type) is considered to be an unfired steam boiler. are just as safe as those built to Section I and therefore should be
virtually interchangeable, this is unfortunately not the case. When
An unfired steam boiler constructed to Section VIII must meet Section I does permit the use of Section VIII vessels, it insists
rules more stringent than run-of-the-mill Section VIII vessels. For on invoking certain special Section VIII rules for unfired steam
example, these rules require additional radiographic examination, boilers. These rules are a little more stringent than those for run-
postweld heat treatment, and possibly impact testing of materials of-the-mill Section VIII vessels. The rules are found in U-1(g)(1),
and welds, as more fully described in the next section, The Use of UG-16(b)(3), UG-125(b) and UW-2(c) of Section VIII, Division 1.
Section VIII Vessels in a Section I Boiler. The most important requirements called out in these several para-
Some owners of steam generating vessels would prefer to avoid, graphs are the following:
if possible, the classification of boiler or fired boiler because most
states and provinces require an annual shutdown for inspection of t Safety valves are to be furnished in accordance with the
boilers, although some states permit longer periods of operation. requirements of Section I insofar as they are applicable.
The interval between inspections mandated for Section VIII ves- t For design pressures exceeding 50 psi (350 kPa), radiography
sels is typically much longer, permitting longer uninterrupted use of all butt-welded joints is required, except for circumfer-
of the equipment. ential welds that meet the size and thickness exemptions of

UW-11(a)(4). (Those exemptions cover welds in nozzles that heaters, under Part PFH; pressure vessels for electric boilers, cov-
are neither greater than NPS 10 (DN 250) nor thicker than ered under Part PEB; and a “Section VIII Unfired Steam Boiler in a
118 in. (29 mm)). Section I System,” covered under the provisions of code case 1855.
t Postweld heat treatment is required for vessels constructed of The title of case 1855 is a little confusing, as is the case itself. Some
carbon and low-alloy steel. feel that the case only permits complete unfired steam boilers (such
t A minimum thickness of ¼ in. (6 mm) is required for shells as rotor air coolers used in some combined cycle plants) to be in-
and heads, exclusive of any corrosion allowance. cluded in a Section I system while others feel that it permits individ-
ual parts or components (such as drums, headers, economizers, etc.)
Another extra requirement imposed on an unfired steam boiler to be constructed to Section VIII Division 1 and included in a Sec-
constructed to Section VIII rules applies to all Section VIII vessels tion I system. Some of the confusion has been eliminated through
made of carbon and low-alloy steels. The designer must establish the publication of Part PFE (see and two additional Code
a Minimum Design Metal Temperature (MDMT), the lowest tem- Cases, 2485 and 2559. Case 2485 was issued to permit steam drums
perature expected in service at which a specified design pressure for a HRSG to be constructed to Section VIII Division 2. This al-
may be applied. Unless the combination of material and thickness lowed design by analysis to be used to reduce thickness of the drum
used is exempt by the curves of UCS-66 at the MDMT, impact and improve its fatigue tolerance for cyclic service. After this case
testing of the material is required, and the Weld Procedure Qualifi- was issued, the obvious question was then “Why should this only
cation would also have to include impact testing of welds and heat- apply to HRSG drums and not to other components or other boiler
affected zones. This is not explicitly mentioned in the paragraphs types?” The Committee then issued Case 2559 which permits Sec-
dealing with unfired steam boilers because it is a requirement that tion VIII Division 2 components to be installed in Section I boilers
was added to Section VIII in the mid-1980s, long after those other without limiting the type of component or type of boiler. With each
paragraphs were written and probably because the Committee of these cases, the Committee imposed additional rules beyond the
members assumed that everyone knew that impact testing was rou- requirements of Section VIII (such as materials, pressure testing,
tinely required unless the vessel materials met certain exemptions certification, and documentation).
provided in UCS-66.
What is also notable about these rules for unfired steam boil-
ers is the fact that the ordinary Section VIII exemptions for post- 1.5 DISTINCTION BETWEEN BOILER
weld heat treatment (PWHT) are not available, even for welds in PROPER PIPING AND BOILER
relatively thin P-No. 1 materials. Moreover, the Section VIII non- EXTERNAL PIPING
destructive examination rules must be followed even if volumetric
examination might not be required by Table PW-11. For many years, Section I made no distinction regarding the
An example of the consequences of overlooking these some- piping of a boiler; it was all considered just boiler piping. In the
what obscure rules occurred when a boiler manufacturer placed late 1960s, some members of the Committee decided that Section
an order for a sweetwater condenser with a manufacturer of Sec- I rules were no longer adequate to cover the design of modern
tion VIII pressure vessels without specifying that the condenser, high-pressure, high-temperature steam piping because the Section
as a type of feedwater heater, had to meet the UW-2(c) rules for I rules for the design of boiler proper piping are actually quite lim-
unfired steam boilers. (A sweetwater condenser is a shell-and-tube ited, covering the design of pipe for internal or external pressure
heat exchanger connected directly to the boiler drum that receives only. Far more extensive rules are provided in the B31.1 Power
saturated steam from the drum on the shell side and has feedwater Piping Code. In addition to pressure, those rules cover many other
going to the drum inside the tubes. The steam condenses on the loads that piping might be subject to, such as mechanical loads
tubes, giving up its heat to the feedwater and providing a supply of that may develop from thermal expansion and contraction of the
water pure enough to use as spray water in the superheater. These piping, impact loading, gravity loads, and seismic loads. Although
condensers are used where the regular feedwater supply is not of such comprehensive rules are not provided by Section I for the
sufficient quality to use as spray water.) design of the boiler proper piping, boiler manufacturers over the
After the condenser was installed and the boiler was ready for years have managed to design this piping—often by using the de-
the hydrostatic test, the authorized inspector (AI) inquired about sign methods of B31.1—so that it serves its purpose in a satisfac-
the presence of a Section VIII vessel in a Section I boiler. He was tory manner.
told that it was a feedwater heater furnished to the rules of Part After due consideration, the Committee decided to divide all
PFH of Section I. The AI reviewed those rules and asked about piping within the scope of Section I into two categories. The pip-
the required radiography and postweld heat treatment, which it ing that was actually part of the boiler (such as downcomers, risers,
turned out had not been done because the boiler manufacturer had and transfer piping) was designated as boiler proper. Construction
ordered the condenser as an ordinary Section VIII vessel. The con- rules for this piping were retained in Section I. The piping that led
denser had to be cut out of the installation, shipped back to the to or from the boiler (such as feedwater, steam, vent, drain, blow-
manufacturer, radiographed, and given a postweld heat treatment. off, and chemical feed piping) was designated into a new category,
This PWHT had to be conducted very slowly and carefully, us- boiler external piping, an appropriate name since it is typically
ing thermocouples during heating and cooling to avoid too great a external to the boiler. This piping was defined by its extent: from
temperature difference between shell and tubes, which could cause the boiler to the valve or valves required by Section I (the bound-
excessive loading on the tubes, tube welds, or tubesheet. Fortu- ary of the complete boiler unit). These valves were also defined as
nately, the radiography and PWHT were quickly and successfully part of the boiler external piping. In 1972, responsibility for most
accomplished and the condenser was reinstalled in the boiler with aspects of the construction of this piping was transferred from Sec-
minimal delay. tion I to the Power Piping Code, ASME B31.1. That is, rules for
Three circumstances have been mentioned in which Section VIII material, design, fabrication, installation, and testing of boiler ex-
Division 1 vessels can be used as part of a Section I boiler: feedwater ternal piping were now contained in B31.1, but Section I retained
1-14 t Chapter 1

its usual certification requirements (with Authorized Inspection Except as noted above, states and provinces with boiler laws
and stamping). Designers of boiler piping, whether boiler proper typically enforce the Code by means of an appointed board or
or boiler external piping, are thus faced with a mixed bag of inter- commission that writes and revises boiler rules and an appointed
related rules and should be aware of a number of special provisions chief inspector with the necessary enforcement staff. The juris-
and potential pitfalls. dictional authorities also depend on the efforts of AIs working for
To clarify the distinction between the two categories of piping, Authorized Inspection Agencies, whose function is to ensure that
the Committee expanded Figure PG-58.3.1 to show each category of the boiler manufacturer has complied with Section I (see Section
piping. A comparable figure appears in the front of B31.1. Compli- 1.7.9, Third-Party Inspection.) These same authorities also have
cating matters further, a new category of piping—called non-boiler the responsibility for overseeing the care and operation of boilers
external piping—had to be established within B31.1. Non-boiler once they are completed.
external piping is the piping beyond the scope of Section I that is The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors
connected to the boiler external piping. Figure PG-58.3.1 has been provides a registration service for ASME B&PVC products. Users
expanded into three figures as of the 2015 Edition, Figure PG- should note that some of the jurisdictions that require the use of
58.3.1(a), Figure PG-58.3.1(b), and Figure PG-58.3.1(c). Figure PG- Section I may also require registration with the National Board.
58.3.1(a) is reproduced in this chapter for ready reference. Even when not required by the jurisdiction, many Manufacturers
Transferring coverage of the boiler external piping to B31.1 choose to register their products for ease of retrieval of the ASME
made available, at a stroke, detailed and comprehensive rules not Manufacturer’s Data Reports.
provided by Section I for such important aspects of piping design as Before an organization may register their product, they must ob-
flexibility analysis and hanger design. By retaining complete cover- tain a Certificate of Authorization to Register from the National
age of piping within the boiler proper jurisdiction, Section I contin- Board. This is covered in the National Board publication, NB-264,
ued its policy of providing minimal guidance in the design of this Criteria for Registration, available on the National Board website
piping, which has traditionally been left to the boiler manufacturers. (www.nationalboard.org).
The transfer of the design of boiler external piping to B31.1
has resulted in some negative consequences. For one thing, an 1.6.2 International Acceptance
entirely different committee governs the Power Piping Code. In- Section I is recognized internationally as an acceptable construction
quiries about boiler external piping typically are answered by that code, along with other codes and standards, such as EN 12952, the
committee, and occasional differences develop between it and the European Standard for Water-tube boilers and auxiliary installations.
Committee on Power Boilers. In the early 1990s, this problem was At one time the Mexican mechanical engineering society AMIME
addressed by an action of the Board of Pressure Technology Codes translated Section I into Spanish for use in Mexico, but it was appar-
and Standards, which reaffirmed that the B31.1 section committee ently little used, in part due to the difficulty of keeping up with the
had primary responsibility for the rules governing the design of ongoing changes in Section I. Before the 1970s, the ASME allowed
boiler external piping. Also, despite the best efforts of both com- only U.S. and Canadian companies to engage in ASME Code Con-
mittees, minor differences that exist between the respective rules struction. However, as a result of legal action at that time, the ASME
result in different treatment of piping on the same boiler, depend- has been under specific instructions from a consent decree requiring
ing on whether it is boiler external piping or boiler proper (e.g., cooperation with non-U.S. manufacturers to allow their accreditation
requirements for postweld heat treatment and volumetric exami- as ASME Certificate Holders, provided those manufacturers’ quality
nation differ for the two categories of piping). While both sets of control systems pass the ASME review process. There are now many
rules are more than adequate, unwary designers who do not pay manufacturers outside of North America who are ASME Certificate
sufficient attention to what type of piping they are designing can Holders and can engage in Code Construction of boilers and pressure
run into expensive delays should an AI notice at the last minute that vessels. More recently, the provisions of North American Free Trade
the piping does not meet the appropriate rules. Agreement (NAFTA) and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) require a level playing field for domestic and foreign manu-
facturers, and the ASME has been active in seeking acceptance of its
1.6 HOW AND WHERE SECTION I IS code by the European Community.
ENFORCED AND EFFECTIVE DATES The ASME encourages participation in the various committees
by users from around the globe. There are many Committee mem-
1.6.1 United States and Canada bers from outside the United States but there are still others which
Section I is a set of rules for the construction of boilers. These may wish to contribute but circumstances may prevent them from
rules are not mandatory unless they are adopted into the laws of meeting the expectations of committee membership. To address
a government. The applicable territorial and political units within this and further the international use of Section I, the Committee
a government are usually referred to as jurisdictions, a term that has established International Working Groups (IWG). An IWG is
derives from the range of their governmental authority. A juris- a group of stakeholders based in a common geographic location
diction can be a government subdivision, that is, state, province, outside the United States that functions in a subordinate role to
county, or city. If there happen to be no jurisdictional require- the committee. The IWGs hold their meetings in their geographic
ments regarding Code coverage, the purchaser of a boiler may location and are expected to both develop and review proposed
specify to the manufacturer that construction to Section I rules is standards actions for consideration by the Committee. This pro-
a requirement. vides benefit to the IWG members through better understanding of
Currently (2016), laws requiring Section I construction of boil- code requirements and the opportunity to influence those require-
ers have been adopted by all but two states (Idaho and Wyoming ments. The Committee benefits from a better understanding of the
being the exceptions) and by all of the provinces of Canada. In ad- needs of users outside the United States. Currently (2016), there
dition to the states and provinces, about 16 cities and counties also are two IWGs for Section I, one in India (established in 2014) and
have laws requiring Section I construction. one in Germany (established in 2015).

For field-assembled boilers (those too large to be completed the NBIC is to continue to follow the rules of the original code of
in the shop), full compliance with the ASME Code requires that construction insofar as practicable. When there is no such code,
field assembly be accomplished by appropriate certificate holders or when it is unknown, the ASME Code is used as a default. Any
and also that an Authorized Inspection Agency provide the nec- welding used in repairs or alterations must be done in accordance
essary field inspection. Jurisdictions outside of North America do with the code used for the original construction. For example, for
not generally insist on full compliance with the ASME Code but ASME Section I construction, the National Board requires that any
some purchasers or owners may still require it. When full com- welding used in repairs or alterations must be done to the same
pliance with the ASME Code is not required by the jurisdiction strict standards as required by Section I, using welders and weld
or owner, the field assembly of some projects is performed by an procedures qualified in accordance with Section IX; the excep-
organization that does not hold the appropriate ASME Certificate tion to this is that the NBIC has permitted the use of some ANSI/
of Authorization. Consequently, although the components of such AWS Standard Welding Procedure Specifications since 1995 but
boilers may have been designed and manufactured in accordance the ASME did not until mid-2000. (In a fairly significant change,
with Section I, the completed boilers do not meet all the require- the 2000 Addenda to Section I and Section IX, and the other book
ments that would permit full Code stamping and certification. In sections of the code, provided for the use of a number of ANSI/
this circumstance, the use of the ASME Certification Mark or even AWS Standard Welding Procedure Specifications with some ad-
a reference to ASME on the nameplate is prohibited (see The State- ditional restrictions, as explained in Section 1.7.4, Welding and
ment of Policy on the Use of ASME Marking to Identify Manufac- Postweld Heat Treatment.) The National Board Inspection Code
tured Items in the front of Section I). also requires that all the safety appurtenances of a Section I boiler
(e.g., safety valves and gages) be maintained in good order. Thus
1.6.3 Adoption of Uniform Requirements it could be said that the National Board Inspection Code takes up
where Section I leaves off. As of 2016, 44 states of the United
by Jurisdictional Authorities
States and 12 provinces and territories of Canada have made the
To provide the advantages of uniformity of construction and
NBIC mandatory, and most other jurisdictions will accept it. Many
inspection, the Uniform Boiler and Pressure Vessel Laws Soci-
locations outside of the United States and Canada that do not have
ety, Inc., was founded in 1915, just three months following the
their own laws regarding repairs and alterations of pressure equip-
official adoption of the first ASME Boiler Code. This society pro-
ment will also often accept the use of the NBIC.
vided model legislation to jurisdictions and supported nationally
accepted codes, such as Section I and Section VIII, as standards
for the construction of boilers and pressure vessels. In general, 1.6.5 Effective Dates of the Code
the society encouraged adoption of uniform requirements by the and Code References
jurisdictional authorities. Manufacturers traditionally strongly sup- Since the Code is in a constant state of evolution, to apply it
ported this effort because it promoted the manufacture of economi- properly, the user needs to understand the effective dates of the
cal standard products and obviated custom designed features for Code and Addenda. In 2010 the ASME decided to change the
different jurisdictions. Besides the model legislational promotion method and frequency of publishing the Code. Up until that time,
activity of the society, it provided a publication entitled SYNOPSIS the Code was issued every three years (2004, 2007 etc.) with an
of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Laws, Rules and Regulations [15], addendum issued annually. The date of publication was July 1st
which was arranged by states, cities, counties, provinces and other of each calendar year. The change proposed in 2010 was to issue
international jurisdictional entities. Originally this covered just the the Code on a 2-year cycle, without an interim addenda. To im-
United States and Canada but was expanded to include information plement this change, the 2010 edition, which contains everything
about the laws in a number of other countries. in the 2007 edition (including the 2008 and 2009 addenda), plus
Now that most states have boiler laws and many have pressure additional changes that were approved subsequent to the 2009 ad-
vessel laws, the original mandate of the UBPVLS society can be denda but in time for the 2010 edition publication, was published
considered essentially fulfilled. As a consequence of the low vol- with changes noted in the front matter as “Summary of Changes”
ume sale of boilers, resulting from a recession, funding for the so- and noted in the code book with [10]. In 2011 the code book was
ciety’s efforts diminished substantially and it was found necessary republished in its entirety with new code changes noted with (a).
to dissolve this historical significant organization. Many of the This edition of the Code was entitled “2010 ASME Boiler & Pres-
functions it provided have been picked up by the National Board sure Vessel Code, 2011a Addenda. There was no addenda issued
(see 1.6.4 below). A National Board Synopsis of Boiler and Pres- in 2012 and the next publication was the 2013 Edition. The Code
sure Vessel Laws, Rules and Regulations, NB-370, is available on will continue to be published on a two year cycle (2015 Edition,
the National Board website (www.nationalboard.org). 2017 Edition, etc.). To implement some changes that have been
approved by the Committee and are awaiting publication, informa-
1.6.4 National Board Inspection Code tion on how to access errata and special notices has been added to
the Summary of Changes in the front of the Code. The following is
Section I covers only new construction, and once all of its re-
from the 2015 Edition.
quirements for a new boiler have been met and the necessary data
reports have been signed, Section I no longer applies. In jurisdic-
tions that accept the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC) [8], After publication of the 2015 Edition, Errata to the BPV Code
that code is applicable for installation of new boilers and inservice may be posted on the ASME Web site to provide corrections
inspection, repair, or alteration. The stated purpose of the NBIC to incorrectly published items, or to correct typographical or
is to “maintain the integrity of pressure-retaining items after they grammatical errors in the BPV Code. Such Errata shall be
have been placed into service by providing rules and guidelines used on the date posted.
for inspection, repair, and alteration, thereby ensuring that these Information regarding Special Notices and Errata is pub-
objects may continue to be safely used.” A guiding principle of lished by ASME at http://go.asme.org/BPVCerrata.
1-16 t Chapter 1

Revisions become mandatory six months after the date of issue, The ASME, or SA, specifications are used as purchase specifi-
except for boilers contracted for before the end of the six-month cations. Each specification contains a variety of information appro-
period. In effect, this gives a manufacturer a six-month grace pe- priate to that product and deals with how the material is ordered, the
riod during which any Code changes affecting new contracts are manufacturing process, heat treatment, surface condition, chemical
optional. Note that once the edition of Section I to be used for the composition requirements, tensile and yield requirements, hard-
construction of the boiler is established, the manufacturer is not ness requirements, various test requirements, and how the material
obliged to implement any changes made in subsequent addenda is to be marked. The purchaser may also invoke supplementary,
or editions. This is a practical approach that recognizes that any nonmandatory requirements dealing with such things as stress re-
changes to Section I are now incremental and are very unlikely to lief, nondestructive examination, limits on chemistry (within the
have any influence on safety. One exception to this general princi- range permitted by the specification) and additional testing. All of
ple is if the change is deemed critical to the intended service con- these requirements have evolved over the years in response to the
ditions of the boiler or part. These changes need to be considered needs of the users.
by the manufacturer. An example of this would be if the allowable The purchaser orders by specification number, and the supplier
stresses for a material were significantly reduced. In such cases, it certifies that the material complies with that specification. In most
might be prudent for the manufacturer of as yet uncompleted com- cases, a Certified Material Test Report, giving the results of various
ponents to use the new, lower allowable stresses. tests required by the specification, is furnished with the material.
The edition and addenda of B31.1 to which the boiler external
piping is ordinarily constructed (unless a later version is selected) Using Section II. Section II of the Code, Materials, is a
is found in the Appendix of Section I in Table A-360: Codes, compilation of all the material specifications adopted by the ASME
Standards, and Specifications Referenced in Text. for use by the various book sections of the Code. However, as a
The Committee has received numerous inquiries about selecting general rule, a material cannot be used for pressure parts unless it
the governing edition and addenda of the Code for the boiler, boiler is also adopted and listed within the section of the Code covering
parts, and boiler external piping. To further clarify the issue, a new the construction. Section I lists permitted materials in PG-5 through
Mandatory Appendix VI, Establishing Governing Code Editions, PG-14. PW-5 adds further requirements for materials used in
Addenda, and Cases for Boilers and Replacement Parts was added welded construction. In addition, Section I sets temperature limits
in the 2013 Edition. for the use of the various materials; they must be used within the
temperature range for which allowable stress values (often called
design stresses) are provided.
1.7 FUNDAMENTALS OF SECTION I With the publication of the 1992 edition of the Code on July 1,
CONSTRUCTION 1992, the allowable stress tables that formerly appeared in Sec-
tions I, III, and VIII were consolidated and reformatted into a sin-
The technique used by Section I to achieve safe boiler design gle volume, Section II, Part D. This consolidation was supposed to
is a relatively simple one. It requires all those features consid- facilitate uniformity among those Code sections that use the same
ered necessary for safety (e.g., water glass, safety valve, pres- criteria for establishing allowable stress. (Note that some sections,
sure gage, check valve, and drain) and then provides detailed such as Section VIII, Division 2, use different criteria, which gen-
rules governing the construction of the various components erally result in higher allowable stresses than those of Section I
comprising the boiler. This approach is analogous to the old say- and Section VIII, Division 1). The new arrangement lost the con-
ing that a chain is no stronger than its weakest link. For a boiler, venience of having the allowable stresses included in Section I.
the links of the figurative chain are the materials, design (formu- Fortunately the ASME has made many of the tables in Section II
las, loads, allowable stress, and construction details), fabrica- available electronically to the user. This was originally done by sup-
tion techniques, welding, inspection, testing, and certification by plying a CD with the hard copy of the Code but is now done by pro-
stamping and data reports. If each of these elements meets the viding login credentials for a website which contains these tables.
appropriate Section I rules, a safe boiler results. The boiler can
then be described as a Section I boiler, meaning one constructed Use of Non-ASME Materials and Material Not Fully
to meet all the requirements of Section I of the ASME Boiler & Identified. Both Section I and Section VIII, Division 1, have long
Pressure Vessel Code. An important element of this construction had provisions (PG-10 and UG-10) dealing with the acceptance of
process is a quality control program intended to ensure that the material that is not fully identified. These provisions involve dem-
code has been followed. Each aspect of the process will now be onstrating that the material in question complies with chemical
discussed. requirements and physical properties within the permitted range
of an acceptable ASME material specification. In 1987, these
1.7.1 Materials provisions were expanded to provide more guidance on what must
be done and who may do it when a material is requalified as the How Materials are Ordered. Materials are a fundamen- equivalent of an acceptable ASME material. These changes also
tal link in the chain of Code construction, and great care is taken to aid in the recertification of material manufactured to international
ensure their quality. The Code does this by adopting material speci- specifications, such as DIN or JIS, as the equivalent of ASME
fications that have first been developed by the American Society specifications suitable for Section I or Section VIII construction.
for Testing Materials, the ASTM. The ASME material specifica-
tions are thus usually identical to those of the ASTM. The ASTM Use of International Material Specifications. With
issues specifications designated by letter and number; for example, the increasing emphasis on global competition, the Committee
A-106, Seamless Carbon Steel Pipe for High-Temperature Service. has sought ways in which to gain wider international acceptance
When the ASME adopts ASTM specifications, it adds the letter S. of ASME Code construction. This is a two-way street, and the
The equivalent ASME specification is thus SA-106. ASME recognizes the need to remove unnecessary barriers to

the use of ASME construction in the hope that other countries I by reference in PG-42 that had never been listed in the Section
will reciprocate. One of these barriers was the ASME’s previ- I stress tables. No AI had previously challenged the use of those
ous insistence that only ASME or ASTM materials be used in materials in these product standards because their use was (and
ASME construction. Recognizing that many areas of the world still is) explicitly sanctioned by PG-11. However, a problem arose
have economic constraints or local rules that may necessitate the once the designation NP appeared in Part D. One company found
use of non-ASME materials, the ASME relaxed its policy, and in itself facing the following situation: It had designed and subcon-
1997 approved the first two non-ASTM material specifications tracted to another certificate holder the fabrication of an austenitic
for inclusion in the 1998 addenda to Section II. Those two speci- stainless steel superheater with return bends that were purchased as
fications cover a Canadian structural steel, CSA-G40.21 (similar standard elbows made in accordance with ASME B16.9, Factory-
to SA-36), and a European steel plate, EN 10028-2 (similar to Made Wrought Steel Buttwelding Fittings. The manufacture of
SA-516 Grade 65). In the 2015 Edition, sixteen non-ASTM speci- B16.9 elbows starts with pipe or tube made from a material that is
fications have been approved, either entirely or for specific grades, designated only by class and grade (e.g., WP 304) and that meets
and their allowable stress values have been added to Section II, the chemical and tensile requirements of SA-403, Specification
Part D. The ASME establishes the allowable stresses for these for Wrought Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipe Fittings. When the
non-ASTM materials on the same basis used for ASTM materials. elbow is completed in accordance with the provisions of SA-403
For further discussion of the acceptance and use of international and ASME B16.9, it is given a new material designation, A-403 or
material specifications, see this volume’s chapter on Section II. SA-403, as a fitting. Unfortunately, Section I had never listed that
material, but it had been listed in Section VIII. Accordingly, the Special Concerns. There are a number of Section I Section II, Part D column for Section I applicability listed SA-403
material applications that deserve special mention. The use of aus- as NP (not permitted); apparently, it was permitted only for Section
tenitic stainless steels is one of these and is explained in Endnote VIII construction.
1 to PG-5.5 (note that prior to the 2011a Addenda, Endnotes were The AI at the fabricator saw that listing and proclaimed that the
previously published as footnotes within the main body of the elbows could not be used in Section I construction, a decision that
book). Austenitic steels are particularly susceptible to chloride stopped fabrication of the superheater whose contract specified
stress corrosion. Consequently, paragraph PG-5.5 of Section I heavy daily penalties for late completion. Fortunately, the Author-
limits the use of these steels to what it calls steam-touched service ized Inspection Agency providing the AI at the job site had knowl-
and prohibits their use for normally water-wetted service where edgeable Code committee members who quickly agreed that the
chlorides might be present, except for gage glass bodies (PG-12), designation NP should not apply in these circumstances or, rather,
miniature electric boilers operated on deionized water (PEB-5.3), should not mean NP if PG-11 provided otherwise or as long as the
and some economizers (PFE-4). Those stainless steels listed material is not specifically prohibited within the body of Section I.
in PG-9.1 for boiler parts (normally water-wetted) are ferritic Section I subsequently issued Interpretation I-92-97, which solved
stainless steels, which are not susceptible to chloride corrosion. the problem for these particular fittings, and more generically ad-
Another concern is the problem of graphitization that occurs in dressed the issue in Interpretation I-95-38, but did nothing about
some carbon steels after long service at temperatures above 800°F the generic problem of the potentially misleading NP designation
(425°C). Graphitization can severely affect the strength and duc- in Section II, Part D. An attempt to have the Committee on Ma-
tility of these steels, particularly the heat-affected zone of welds. terials modify the NP designation with a note referring to PG-11
Notes in the allowable stress tables caution about this problem. proved unavailing, so the unwary designer faces a potential trap in
The use of cast iron and non-ferrous metals is limited by Section situations similar to the one just described.
I to those applications mentioned in PG-8. Interpretation I-92-97 is as follows:
Material requirements for boiler external piping are contained in
B31.1, Power Piping, 123.2.2. That paragraph permits a manufac- Question: May SA-403 austenitic fittings made to ASME/ ANSI
turer to use ASTM Specifications equivalent to those of the ASME standards accepted by reference in PG-42 be used for Section
by demonstrating that the requirements of the latter have been met. I steam service?
Reply: Yes. Miscellaneous Pressure Parts. Miscellaneous pressure
parts (see PG-11), such as valves, fittings, and welding caps, are
Interpretation I-95-38 is as follows:
often furnished as standard parts. Standard parts made to a manu-
facturer’s proprietary standard or to an ASME standard not adopted
Question: Does PG-9 prohibit the use of ASTM materials for
in PG-42, must be made of materials permitted by Section I. When
standard pressure parts which are permitted in PG-11 and
those parts meet the requirements of the ASME product standards
which comply with the American National Standard products
adopted by reference in PG-42, Section I accepts the materials
listed in PG-42?
listed in those standards. Prior to the 2015 Edition, the use of mate-
rials listed in these ASME product standards included an additional Reply: No, except for materials specifically prohibited or be-
caveat “not of materials specifically prohibited or beyond the use yond the use limitations of Section I.
limitations listed in this Section”. This had never presented a prob-
lem until 1992, when Section II, Part D, introduced the composite PG-11 underwent a complete rewrite for the 2015 Edition. The
stress tables for Sections I, III, and VIII. In those tables, the letters Committee formed a task group to review how each of the book
NP (not permitted) that appear in the columns on applicability of Sections (Section I, Section IV, Section VIII, and Section XII) ad-
material for a given book section were applied by default if that dressed standard pressure parts and to try to harmonize the require-
material had not been listed for use in that book section before the ments across all Sections. Some of the rewrite was just a reordering
advent of Part D. Therein lies a problem, because there are many of some requirements (for example some of the requirements from
materials listed in the ASME product standards accepted by Section the previous PG-11.3.2 are now in PG-11.4) but other changes
1-18 t Chapter 1

were more significant and are worth mentioning. The first signifi- that a material is of weldable quality is established when the pro-
cant change was to the title on PG-11, changing from Miscellane- cedure used to weld it is qualified. For carbon and low-alloy steels,
ous Pressure Parts to Prefabricated or Preformed Pressure Parts PW-5.2 also stipulates another requirement for weldability: the
Furnished Without a Certification Mark. This clarifies that the carbon content may not exceed 0.35%.
main purpose of this paragraph is to provide rules for which parts
may be used in a boiler without requiring certification of the part 1.7.2 Design
through data reports and stamping of the part. The next significant
change was the elimination of the words “furnished by other than Design Methods. For the most part, Section I uses
the Manufacturer responsible for the completed boiler,” clarifying an experience-based design method known as design-by-rule.
that the Manufacturer responsible for the completed boiler can use (Certain other sections of the Code, namely Section III, Subsection
their own standard parts. Another significant change was related to NB, and Section VIII, Division 2, use a newer method, known as
the issue above on materials. The wording “not of material specifi- design-by-analysis.) Design-by-rule is typically a process requir-
cally prohibited” has been removed, making it clear that materials ing the determination of loads, the choice of a design formula, and
listed in the ASME product standards may be used, even if the al- the selection of an appropriate design stress for the material to be
lowable stress line in Section II Part D shows “NP.” There was also used. Rules for this kind of design are found throughout Section I,
additional clarity added regarding welding, PWHT, and NDE for with most being in Part PG (the general rules). Other design rules
welded parts. One of the most significant changes was the addition are found in those parts of Section I dealing with specific types of
of PG-11.5 which permits and provides controls for when a manu- boilers or particular types of construction.
facturer subcontracts welding services to an individual or organiza- The principal design rules are found in Part PG, paragraphs PG-
tion that does not hold an ASME Certificate of Authorization. 16 through PG-56. There are formulas for the design of cylindri-
cal components under internal pressure (tube, pipe, headers, and Electric Resistance Welded (ERW) Materials. When drums), heads (dished, flat, stayed, and unstayed), stayed surfaces,
the code first accepted tubes and pipes formed of electric resist- and ligaments between holes. Rules are also provided for openings
ance welded materials, it imposed a 15% penalty on allowable or penetrations in any of these components, based on a system
stress, except for tubes within the boiler setting whose design of compensation in which the material removed for the open-
temperature was 850°F (455°C) or lower. There was apparently ing is replaced as reinforcing in the region immediately around
some doubt about the welding, and normal allowable stress was the opening, called the limits of compensation (see PG-36). All
permitted only for tubes inside the protective barrier of the setting. of these formulas involve internal pressure except for the rules in
Because of the good service record of these tubes, some thought PG-28 and PG-56. PG-28 provides rules for components under ex-
was given to removing the penalty on ERW tubes. As a first step in ternal pressure and PG-56 provides rules for loads from structural
this direction, in 1988, several Code Cases were passed permitting attachments.
the use of ERW tubes at any temperature without the 15% reduc- The second paragraph of the Preamble contains rules to be ap-
tion in allowable stress, provided the tubes are given extra non- plied when design criteria are not given in Section I. Unfortunately
destructive examination (angle beam ultrasonic inspection and an many Code users were not aware of these rules in the Preamble,
electric test in accordance with ASME specification SA-450), are so they have been reproduced in paragraph PG-16.1 in the 2009
no larger than 3 ½ in. outside diameter, and are enclosed within Addenda. These rules are essentially identical to U-2(g) of VIII-
the setting. Subsequently the Code Cases have been incorporated 1. PG-16.1 offers appropriate analytical methods, rules from other
and annulled. See notes G4 and W13 for the particular materials design codes, or proof test (PG-18, Appendix A-22). Usage of any
in Section II, Part D, Table A1. For pipe and tube that exceeds the of the provisions of PG-16.1 requires acceptance of the Inspector,
3 ½ in. (89 mm) outside diameter limitation or is located outside and shall provide details of design that will be as safe as those pro-
the setting, there is an alternate stress line in Section II, Part D, vided by the rules of Section I.
Table 1A that retains the 15% reduction. Proof Test is an experience-based method used to establish a
Code users often wonder just what the term “within the setting” safe design pressure for components for which no rules are given
means, since this term is not defined in Section I. However, vari- or when strength cannot be calculated with a satisfactory assurance
ous books on boiler construction typically define the setting as the of accuracy. In this type of proof test, a full-size prototype of the
construction surrounding the boiler and or the tubes: refractory, in- pressure part is carefully subjected to a slowly increasing hydro-
sulation, casing, lagging, or some combination of these. In former static pressure until yielding or bursting occurs (depending on the
years, heavy casing and refractory were used so that a case could test). The maximum allowable working pressure is then established
be made that a failed tube would not represent much of a danger to by an appropriate formula that includes the strength of the material
someone standing nearby. With the evolution of simpler and lighter and a suitable safety factor. In the 1999 addenda, Section I joined
construction, there now may be only insulation and lagging outside Section VIII in allowing a burst test to be stopped before actual
the tubes or enclosing a header. Although such construction may bursting occurs, when the test pressure justifies the desired design
not provide so strong a barrier as was the case formerly, the tubes pressure. The particular component so tested may never be used
are still “enclosed within the setting,” and if they meet the other for Code Construction (because it might have been on the verge
provisions, they would be entitled to the full allowable stress with- of failure). The design factor, or so-called safety factor, used in the
out the 15% penalty. burst test formula for ductile materials has been 5 since the 1930s,
when one of the factors used to establish allowable design stress Non-Pressure Part Materials. Non-pressure parts, such was one-fifth of the Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS). That factor
as lugs, hangers, brackets, and fins, are not limited to being made on UTS has been reduced over the years from 5 to 4 (circa 1950)
of materials listed in the stress tables, but must be of weldable and from 4 to 3.5 in the 1999 addenda. Thus the design factor used
quality. “Weldable quality” is a rather vague term, and the choice in the burst test was seen to be out of date and due for a reduction.
of non-pressure-part material is thus left to the designer. The fact In 2000, as an interim measure, both Section I and Section VIII

approved a reduction in this factor to 4.0 for ductile materials only. high-alloy materials such as stainless steel). The allowable stress
The Subcommittee on Design was continuing to study whether any tables in Section II Part D have notes indicating at what temperature
further reduction was warranted, and also whether a similar change time dependent properties govern determination of the allowable
might be appropriate for non-ductile cast materials. Proof testing stress value. With the exception of parts of some superheaters, most
may not be used if Section I has design rules for the component, boilers are made of ferritic materials. Some manufacturers also use
and in actual practice, such testing is seldom employed. However, fatigue rules from other international standards such as those con-
it can be a simple and effective way of establishing an acceptable tained in EN 12952, the European Standard for Water-tube boilers
design pressure for unusual designs, odd shapes, or special fea- and auxiliary installations.
tures that would be difficult and costly to analyze, even with the
latest computer-based methods. A common application of proof Choice of Design Pressure and Temperature. Section
testing before the advent of sophisticated analytical methods was I does not tell the designer what the design pressure (MAWP) and
in the design of marine boiler headers of D-shaped or square cross design temperature of a boiler should be. These design conditions
section. must be chosen by the manufacturer or specified by an architect-
Tests that are used to establish the maximum allowable working engineer, user, or others. Section I requires only the MAWP to be
pressure of pressure parts must be witnessed and approved by the stamped on the boiler, not the design temperature. When discuss-
AI, as required by Appendix A-22.10. The test report becomes a ing design temperature, it is necessary to distinguish between
permanent reference to justify the design of such parts should the metal temperatures and steam temperatures, either of which may
manufacturer want to use that design again for other boilers. vary within the boiler. As a practical matter, the designer must
know and choose an appropriate design (metal) temperature for Design Loads. When Section I was written, its authors each element of the boiler, because the allowable stress values are
understood so well that the internal working pressure of the boiler based on these temperatures. In many cases, the design tempera-
was the design loading of overriding importance that virtually no ture of an individual element such as a superheater tube may be
other loading was mentioned. To this day there is very little dis- much higher than the design steam temperature of the boiler. This
cussion of any other kind of loading, except for paragraph PG-22, stems from the fact that the metal temperature of a heated tube is
which cautions that this Section does not fully address additional always higher than that of the steam within and from the need to
loadings other than those from working pressure and static head, provide a design margin for potential upsets in gas temperature or
and provides no guidance regarding how to take such loads into steam flow.
account, thus leaving it to the designer. Actually, internal pressure In a natural-circulation boiler, most of the pressure parts are de-
is the principal loading of concern, and it appears in all Section signed for the MAWP. However, slightly different design pressures
I design formulas. The pressure inside the boiler is called the are used for some components, since paragraph PG-22 stipulates that
working pressure. For design purposes, Section I uses the term hydrostatic head shall be taken into account in determining the mini-
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure, or MAWP, to define what mum thickness required “unless noted otherwise.” The formulas for
engineers usually understand to mean design pressure. determining the thickness of cylindrical components under internal
There are many other loads on a boiler in addition to pressure. pressure found in paragraph PG-27 are of two types: one described
Among these are the weight of the boiler and its contents, seismic as applicable to “tubing—up to and including 5 in. (125 mm) outside
loads, wind loads, and thermal loads. Section I has no provisions diameter,” and the other applicable to “piping, drums, and headers.”
specifically dealing with the last three, but it is the responsibility Having only these two categories of design formula sometimes puz-
of the designer to consider them. As boiler designs evolved over zles inexperienced designers who are not sure which formula to use
the years, the manufacturers have recognized and made provisions for tubing larger than 5 in. (125 mm) outside diameter. They soon
for these loads. learn the accepted practice for such tubing, which (by the process
In recent years, more of the utilities’ base load, fossil-fired boilers of elimination) is to use the formula for “piping, drums, and head-
are increasingly being used in cyclic service, with frequent start- ers.” Advice to this effect is stated in the first paragraph of PG-27.1
ups and shutdowns. Cyclic service also occurs with the increasing as follows: “… the equations under this paragraph shall be used to
use of HRSGs fired by combustion turbines. This type of operation determine the minimum required thickness or the maximum allow-
has the potential for causing repeated, relatively high transient ther- able working pressure of piping, tubes, drums, shells, and headers
mal stress and may require careful analysis for fatigue and creep in accordance with the appropriate dimensional categories as given
damage. Although Section I has successfully considered creep and in PG-27.2.1, PG-27.2.2, and PG-27.2.3 …” The two types of wall
creep rupture in setting allowable stresses, it has no specific rules thickness formulas have other differences worth noting, as they are
at this time for creep-fatigue interaction or even for simple fatigue a source of confusion to designers and have led to quite a number
(see 1.8.7, Material Traceability). Nevertheless, designing against of inquiries to The Committee on Power Boilers. See, Other
fatigue, creep, and their interaction remains the responsibility of the Factors Applicable to Tube and Pipe Design.
manufacturer. Elevated-temperature design for fatigue and creep is With the 2006 Addendum, Appendix A-317 CYLINDRICAL
a complex subject for which no complete rules have yet been de- COMPONENTS UNDER INTERNAL PRESSURE was added to
veloped. Such Code rules that are available appear in Section III, Section I. The designer may use the requirements of this appendix
Subsection NH, Class 1 Components in Elevated Temperature Ser- to determine the minimum required thickness or the maximum al-
vice. Subsection NH is based on Code Case N-47, which dealt with lowable working pressure of piping, tubes, drums and headers in
nuclear power plant components in elevated-temperature service place of the requirements of PG-27.
and whose earliest version dates back to the late 1960s. Elevated- In the 2013 Addenda, the rules of Code Case 2664 were incor-
temperature service means service above that temperature when porated in Section I. These rules permit the design of components
creep effects become significant. This threshold is usually taken as that have multiple design conditions by considering the coincident
700°F (370°C) for many ferritic materials (carbon and low-alloy pressures and temperatures for boilers that operate through a range
materials) and 800°F (425°C) or higher for austenitic materials (the of operating conditions. The case was originally written for HRSGs
1-20 t Chapter 1

but when incorporated, it was made applicable to any boiler. A new use in mid-1998. One problem with the new Cases was that some
paragraph PG-21.4 is added specifically to address the design of jurisdictions were reluctant to accept them, or had no ready mecha-
components with multiple design conditions. PG-21.4.2 provides nism that would permit their prompt adoption. However, by 1999,
some useful definitions such as “Sustained conditions,” “Normal the Committee had completed its review and revision of stresses,
operating conditions,” “Transient condition,” “Coincident pressure permitting incorporation of the new stress values into Section II,
and temperature,”: and “Start up and shut down.” Part D, in the 1999 addenda.
In the future, it is possible that the design factor on tensile Design Stresses: Past, Present, and Future. The Section I strength may be reduced further or eliminated altogether, depend-
basis for determination of allowable stress is explained in Section II, ing on the results of these first steps and further studies. Note that
Part D, Mandatory Appendix 1, where the various safety factors, the change in design factor applied to tensile strength from ¼ to
or design factors, and quality factors applied to the various tensile, /3.5 is a 14% change. However, few allowable stresses changed
yield, and creep strengths are presented in Table 1-100. See the chap- that much, because the higher allowable stress may be determined
ter on Section II in this volume for further details. and controlled by the factor ⅔ applied to yield strength, rather than
The so-called safety factors, or design margins, now used in tensile strength. Also note that the higher stresses are applicable
establishing allowable stresses with respect to the various failure below the creep range only.
modes, such as yielding or creep rupture, have evolved over the The above-described methods of setting maximum allowable
life of the Code. Before World War II, the factor used on tensile (design) stress values have been used by the Code committees
strength was 5. It was temporarily changed to 4 to save steel during since the mid-1950s. During that time, new data have been ob-
the war, and that change was made permanent around 1950. Start- tained and analyzed to revise design stresses as appropriate, based
ing in the late 1970s, the factor on yield strength was changed from both on new laboratory tests and reported experience from equip-
⅝ to ⅔, a change that was carried out over quite a long period. The ment in service. There have been times when the analysis of new
factor on the 100,000 hour creep rupture strength was formerly 0.6, data has resulted in a significant lowering of the allowable stresses
but around 1970, this was changed to the current factor of 0.67. at elevated temperature. In all but a few instances, however, the
These reductions in design margins, or safety factors, were adopted fine safety record of equipment built to the ASME Code has dem-
over time as improvements in technology permitted. These im- onstrated the validity of the material data evaluation, design crite-
provements included the development of newer and more reliable ria, and design methods used.
methods of analysis, design, and non-destructive examination. The
imposition of quality control systems in 1973 and a record of long, Hydrostatic Head. The tubing design formula refers
satisfactory experience also helped justify reducing some of the to PG-27.4.9, which states that the hydrostatic head need not be
design conservatism. included when this formula is used. Thus, the design pressure, P,
The factor on ultimate tensile strength was again reviewed in the is taken as just the MAWP for all tubes having a 5 in. and under
late 1990’s. It happens that this design factor is a significant one outside diameter. The additive term 0.005D in the tube design
because it controls the allowable stress for many ferritic (carbon formula was chosen by the Committee when the current version
and low-alloy) steels below the creep range. However, the use of of the tube design formula was adopted in the 1960s. The new
a factor of 4 put users of the ASME Code at a disadvantage in formula initially proposed at that time gave somewhat thinner
world markets, where competing designs are able to utilize higher walls than the previous formula, leading to a concern on the part
allowable stresses based just on yield strength. The inequity of this of some Committee members that tubes for low-pressure boilers
situation caused the Code committees to reconsider the usefulness would lack adequate strength to sustain any occasional mechani-
and necessity of using a factor of 4 on tensile strength as one of cal loading to which they might be subjected. The 0.005D term
the criteria for setting allowable stress. In 1996, the Pressure Ves- was a compromise value selected by the Committee in response
sel Research Council (PVRC), a research group closely associated to this concern, an attempt to provide a little extra strength in the
with the code committees, was asked to determine whether the de- tubes. No similar note excluding consideration of hydrostatic head
sign factor on tensile strength could safely be reduced. The PVRC applies to the design formulas for piping, drums, and headers.
prepared a report reviewing all the technological improvements in Accordingly, the design pressure, P, used in those formulas must
boiler and pressure vessel construction that have occurred since the include the hydrostatic head, which on a large utility boiler could
early 1940s, which was when the design factor on tensile strength add as much as 50 psi to the MAWP for a lower waterwall header
was first reduced from 5 to 4. On the basis of that report’s favora- or a downcomer, since the height of such units may equal that of
ble recommendation, the Committee decided, as an initial step, to a 15-story building. Of course, the additional hydrostatic head
change the factor on tensile strength from about 4 to about 3.5 for would be much less for a header near the top of the boiler, such as
pressure vessels constructed under the provisions of Section VIII, a roof-outlet header. Incidentally, traditionally the hydrostatic head
Division 1. is measured from the elevation of the drum centerline, since that
The Committee decided to make the same change for Section I is the normal waterline.
and, in 1997, established a task group to investigate the potential The exclusion of hydrostatic head in the tube-design formula
effects of such a change and how best to implement it. That task but not in the pipe-design formula came about from the adop-
group concluded that Section I could safely join Section VIII in in- tion of slightly different formulas, which in one case (tubing) had
creasing its allowable stresses. The actual determination and pub- evolved for equipment of modest height, where hydrostatic head
lishing of new allowable stresses took the Committee some time, was considered negligible, and in the other case (piping), where it
because it was quite a task. To expedite the process while the Com- was thought necessary to include hydrostatic head. This arbitrarily
mittee completed its work, new stresses for a limited group of ma- different treatment of hydrostatic head has little significance in
terials were introduced by means of Code Cases, one for Section I most practical instances. A much larger potential difference in wall
and two for Section VIII, since Code Cases can be issued far more thickness for pipe versus tube results from a number of factors pre-
quickly than Code addenda. The three Cases were approved for scribed by PG-27 to account for the effects of expanding tubes,

threading pipe, or the need for structural stability, as described piping such as blowoff piping and feed water piping. For example,
next. ASME B31.1, paragraph 122.1.4 (A), requires the design pressure
of blowoff piping to exceed the maximum allowable working Other Factors Applicable to Tube and Pipe Design. pressure of the boiler by either 25 percent or 225 psi (1550 kPa),
The first of these several factors is e, defined as a thickness fac- whichever is less, but shall not be less than 100 psig [690 kPa
tor for expanded tube ends, that is applied to tubes below certain (gage)]. Also see Design Exercise No. 3, Choice of Feedwater
minimum sizes. PG-27.4.4 lists e values (f values from A-317.3(d) Stop Valve.
when using A-317) required for various sizes of tubes. The thick-
ness factor is an extra 0.04 in. (1.0 mm) thickness required over Bend Design. Another difference in the design of pip-
“the length of the seat plus 1 in. (25 mm) for tubes expanded into ing according to Section I versus B31.1 is in their respective
tube seats.” This provides a slightly heavier wall for that portion treatment of bends. Historically B31.1 paragraph 102.4.5 has
of the tube that is rolled, or expanded, into the tube hole. In the required that the minimum wall thickness at any point in a bend
rolling process, the tube undergoes considerable cold-working and not be less than that required for the equivalent straight pipe.
some thinning, and the extra 40 mils (1.0 mm) wall thickness was Ordinary bending methods usually result in some thinning of the
intended to ensure a sound joint no weaker than the unexpanded wall on the outside of bends and some thickening on the inside.
portion of the tube. This extra 40 mils (1.0 mm) applies only to Consequently, under the B31.1 rule, a bend thinning allowance
very thin tubes, as stipulated in Note 4. Such tubes are usually used must be added to the wall of a straight pipe so that the finished
only for very-low-pressure boilers. bend will meet the required minimum thickness. Table 102.4.5 of
Another of these factors is C, described as a “minimum allow- B31.1 provides recommendations for minimum thickness prior to
ance for threading and structural stability.” which is intended for bending as a function of the radius of the pipe bend. If good shop
application to threaded pipes. Prior to the 2008a Addenda, this C practices are followed, these allowances should result in bends
factor was also applied to non threaded pipe 3½ in. (89 mm) di- of the required minimum thickness. In the 2002 Addenda, B31.1
ameter and smaller for structural stability. This made the thickness added a second method for determining the required thickness
calculation for this size pipe very conservative compared to the of a bend, located in paragraph 102.4.5(B). The new equations
B31.1 calculation. When used as a threading allowance, C provides provided provide a method to calculate bend thickness, allowing a
extra wall thickness to make up for material lost in threading. Para- certain level of thinning at the extrados of the bend but requiring a
graph PG-27.4.3 and A-317.3(c) stipulate a C value of 0.065 in. certain thickening at the intrados of the bend. The user can choose
(1.65 mm) for pipe NPS ¾ (DN 20) and smaller, and a C value between the two methods. Section I does not have corresponding
equal to the depth of the thread for pipe larger than that. However, rules, and over the years, quite a few inquiries have been received
PG-27.4.3 and A-317.3(c) make it very clear that the allowances regarding guidance on this subject. Before 1977, the Committee
for threading and structural stability are not intended to provide for responded to questions by a letter known as an informal reply, but
conditions of misapplied external loads or for mechanical abuse. since January 1977, Committee responses have been published as
Interpretations (see section 1.3.2). Section I’s design approach to Some Design Differences: Section I versus B31.1. As bends, for both pipe and tube, is explained in Interpretation I-83-
explained in section 1.5 on the distinction between boiler proper 23, a composite of earlier, informal replies. Because the accept-
piping and boiler external piping, design rules for the latter are ance of pipe or tube bends by the AI as meeting the rules of either
found in the ASME B31.1 Power Piping Code. The formula for the Section I or B31.1 is crucial to the timely completion of the boiler,
design of straight pipe under internal pressure in paragraph 104.1 the designer should always be aware of which rules apply. Here is
of B31.1 looks the same as the design formula for piping, drums, Interpretation I-83-23:
and headers in paragraph PG-27.2.2 of Section I, except that the
additive term C of Section I is called A by B31.1. In either case (A Question: What rules does Section I impose with respect to
or C), the intention is to account for material removed in thread- wall thinning and flattening of bends in boiler tubing?
ing, to provide some minimum level of mechanical strength and,
if needed, to provide an allowance for corrosion or erosion. There Reply: Section I does not provide specific rules directly appli-
are, however, some slight differences between Section I and B31.1 cable to wall thinning and flattening of bends in boiler tubing.
that should be mentioned, since occasionally designers forget that However, the Subcommittee on Power Boilers intends that the
certain piping, such as piping from the drum to water level indica- manufacturer shall select a combination of thickness and con-
tors, or vent and drain piping, is boiler external piping for which figuration such that the strength of the bend under internal
B31.1 rules apply. Paragraph 102.4.4 of B31.1 recommends an pressure will at least equal the minimum strength required for
increase in wall thickness where necessary for mechanical strength the straight tube connected to the bend.
or, alternatively, requires the use of design methods to reduce or The Subcommittee on Power Boilers’ position, based on
eliminate superimposed mechanical loading. Thus, B31.1 gives many years of service experience, has been that thinning and
the designer a choice: provide some (unspecified) increase in wall flattening of tube bends are permissible within limits estab-
thickness or take measures to limit mechanical loads. In Section I, lished by the manufacturer, based upon proof testing.
PG-22.1 states that the designer shall consider additional loading.
In either case, the details are left to the judgment of the designer. To understand the reason for the difference in design approach
According to 104.1.2(C) of B31.1, pipe used for service above cer- used by B31.1 and Section I for bends, remember that the Commit-
tain pressures or temperatures must be at least a schedule 80 pipe. tee on Power Boilers has always recognized satisfactory experi-
This paragraph is similar to PG-27.4.5 of Section I. Another major ence as an acceptable basis for design. When the issue of the wall
difference is that PG-27 allows the option of using the formulas in thickness of tube and pipe bends was raised in the late 1960s, the
A-317, B31.1 does not have a similar option. Also note that B31.1 Committee had available a long record of satisfactory experience
has some very specific design requirements for certain types of to justify the design approach traditionally used for bends by the
1-22 t Chapter 1

major boiler manufacturers. There are, however, further arguments information provided by the user of the vessel or the user’s agent.
to support such an approach. First, bends are components with two Section VIII also states that extra material provided for this pur-
directions of curvature, having inherently greater strength than pose need not be of the same thickness for all parts of the vessel if
straight pipe, which has only one direction of curvature. Second, different rates of attack are expected for the various parts. Finally,
a pipe bend resembles a portion of a torus. Membrane stresses in Section VIII provides that no additional thickness needs to be pro-
a torus happen to be lower on the outside diameter than on the in- vided when previous experience in like service shows that corro-
side, so the change in wall thickness from bending a straight pipe sion does not occur or is of only a superficial nature.
tends to put the material just where it is needed [this is the basis The Power Piping Code, B31.1, 102.4, requires a corrosion or
for the bend calculation method in B31.1 paragraph 102.4.5(B)]. erosion allowance only when corrosion or erosion is expected and
Third, the bending process usually increases the yield strength in accordance with the designer’s judgment. Thus, the same gen-
of the metal by work hardening. Unless the bend is subsequently eral approach to corrosion and erosion is seen in Section I, Section
annealed, it retains this extra strength in service. When bends are VIII, and B31.1.
proof tested to failure, they typically fail in the straight portion, not
in the bend, showing that the bend is stronger. This is the basis on Weld Joint Strength Reduction Factor. As men-
which Section I accepts them. It is also true that bends in Section I tioned in 1.7.4, Welding and Postweld Heat Treatment, welds have
tubes and pipe are more likely to be within the setting of the boiler, been assumed to be equivalent to the base material it joins. A man-
where there is less chance that a bend failure would be dangerous ufacturer noted that B31.1 permitted the use of fusion welded pipe
to people. (with filler metal added) while Section I did not permit the use of
The Committee again addressed bends in a 2016 interpretation. welded pipe. They then noted that there was nothing in Section
The Committee received an inquiry questioning whether a proof I that would prohibit them from rolling plate into a cylinder,
test is the only way to design pipe and tube bends. The follow- welding a long seam, and using as a boiler part. The Committee
ing Interpretation was published which offers the clarification that then chartered a Task Group with members from the Boiler and
proof test is just one of the methods (but not the only method) that Pressure Vessel Code committees as well as B31 Piping commit-
could be used to design per PG-16.1. tees to review the issue and develop technically equivalent rules
that would be implemented in Section I, B31.1, and B31.3. The
Question: Section I has design rules for straight tubes and result of this effort was the addition of PG-26 Weld Joint Strength
pipes, but no specific rules for the design of tubes or pipes Reduction Factor in the 2008a Addenda.
with bends. Shall PG-16.1 be used for the design of tubes or As noted in PG-26, these reduction factors apply to longitudinal
pipes with bends? butt welds (which includes spiral or helical welds) and to hemi-
spherical heads or any other spherical sections that comprise seg-
Reply: Yes.
ments joined by welding. It then goes on to caution the designer
that they are responsible for determining the applicability of weld Corrosion/Erosion Allowance. PG-27.4.3 and A-317.3(c) joint strength reduction factors to other welds. Note that the weld
indicate that the design formulas do not include any allowance for strength reduction factor is not applicable to any material that has
corrosion and/or erosion and that additional thickness should be a maximum design temperature of 800°F (425°C) or less (may be
provided where they are expected. Thus, the designer is given the higher for some materials). Also, note that PG-26 and Table PG-
responsibility for deciding whether such allowances are needed and, 26 are not applicable to carbon steel pipe and tubes (Note 3 of the
if so, their amount and location. table). The terminology of weld strength reduction factor can be
Boiler manufacturers in the United States do not normally add a little misleading to some as it is really a strength factor, not a
a corrosion or erosion allowance when calculating the design thick- strength reduction factor. For example, when Table PG-26 shows a
ness of boiler pressure parts. Experience has shown such allowances factor of 0.7 for a given condition, the user multiplies the allowable
to be unnecessary under normal service conditions. Ordinarily, the stress (or strength) by this factor, reducing it by 30%, not by 70%.
boiler water treatment controls oxygen levels, dissolved solids, B31.1 Power Piping and B31.3 Process Piping Code also ad-
and pH so that corrosion on the waterside is insignificant. Simi- dress weld strength reduction factors in paragraphs 102.4.7 and
larly, fireside corrosion has not been a problem except under unu- 302.3.5 respectively. The B31.3 approach is somewhat different
sual circumstances attributable to certain temperature ranges and in that it also provides a procedure (see paragraph 302.3.5(f) and
some particularly corrosive constituents in the fuel. Even in these Note 9 of Table 302.3.5) to calculate the weld joint strength reduc-
cases, it is not usually practical to solve the problem by a corrosion tion factors for materials for which the Table doesn’t explicitly list
allowance. In the unusual circumstance of severe local corrosion the reduction factors. Section I, doesn’t have the same provision
or erosion, any extra wall thickness allowance might at best serve and hence in 2015 Edition weld strength reduction factors of few
to prolong component life for only a short time. Furthermore, extra Nickel Base Alloys were added to Table PG-26 which now permits
thickness added to the wall of a heated tube raises the temperature the usage of Nickel Base alloys fabricated with longitudinal and
of the outside surface, thereby tending to increase the rate of corro- spiral (helical) seam welds in the creep range.
sion. Some other solution to the problem is usually necessary, such
as elimination of the corrosive condition, a change in material, or
the provision of shielding against fly-ash erosion. 1.7.3 Fabrication
It is interesting to compare similar provisions for corrosion or Fabrication is not specifically defined in Section I, but it is gen-
erosion found in Pressure Vessels, Section VIII of the ASME Code, erally understood to mean all those activities by which the manu-
and in the Power Piping Code, B31.1. Section VIII provides simi- facturer converts material (plate, tube, pipe, etc.) into completed
lar but somewhat more specific guidance on corrosion and erosion boiler components. Such activities include welding, bending,
than Section I in paragraphs U-2(a)(1) and UG-25. Allowances for forming, rolling, cutting, machining, punching, drilling, broaching,
corrosion or erosion are left to the designer’s judgment based on reaming, and others. Section I permits the manufacturer very broad

latitude in fabrication because of the wide variations in manufac- including special welding rules in each of the book sections cover-
turing practice, machinery, and trade methods. ing boilers or pressure vessels. The reader is also directed to the
Section I provides only a limited number of general rules for separate chapter on Section IX in this volume for further informa-
fabrication in PG-75 through PG-82. (Welding is covered exten- tion on welding. Section I rules for welding are found in Part PW
sively in Part PW, and a brief discussion of those rules is given (Requirements for Boilers Fabricated by Welding), which refers
next, in section 1.7.4, Welding and Postweld Heat Treatment.) The to Section IX for qualification of weld procedures and welder per-
general rules in Part PG specify tolerances for drums and ellip- formance and, in addition, provides rules specifically applicable
soidal heads, and limit certain cutting, drilling, and punching pro- to boilers and their components, including boiler proper piping.
cesses so that subsequent machining will remove all metal with The rules for the welding of boiler external piping (as opposed to
mechanical and metallurgical properties that have been affected by boiler proper piping) are not found in Section I; they are found in
the earlier process. B31.1, Power Piping (see 1.5, Distinction Between Boiler Proper
The manufacturer is permitted to repair defects in material if Piping and Boiler External Piping). Power Piping also invokes
acceptance of the AI is first obtained for both the method and the Section IX for the qualification of weld procedures and welder
extent of repairs. performance, but is some-what more liberal with respect to the
transfer of procedures and welders from one organization to Cold Forming of Austenitic Materials. Older Editions another.
of Section II, Part D used to contain a caution which stated in part: Among the many aspects of welding covered by Part PW are
“Cold forming operations performed during manufacture of auste- the following: responsibilities of the manufacturer or other organi-
nitic stainless steel pressure parts may cause impaired service per- zation doing the welding; the materials that may be welded; the
formance when the component operates in the creep range [above design of welded joints; radiographic and ultrasonic examination
1000°F (540°C)]. Heat treatment after cold forming at temperature of welds and when such examination is required; the welding of
given in the material specification will restore the intended prop- nozzles; attachment welds; welding processes permitted; qualifi-
erties of the material and will minimize the threat of premature cation of welding; preparation, alignment, and assembly of parts
failure due to recrystallization during the time of operation.” to be joined; the use of backing strips; advice on preheating; re-
For this reason Section I introduced PG-19 COLD FORMING quirements for postweld heat treatment; repair of weld defects;
OF AUSTENITIC MATERIALS with the 1999 Addendum. For exemptions from radiography; the design of circumferential joints;
cold bending operations Section I permit’s exemption from the the design of lug attachments to tubes; duties of the AI related to
post cold-forming heat treatment requirements when the forming welding; acceptance standards for the radiography and ultrasonic
strains are less than the proscribed maximum strain limits in Table examination required by Section I; preparation of test plates for
PG-19. However, PG-19.2 requires heat treatment in accordance tension and bend tests; and welding of attachments after the hydro-
with Table PG-19 for flares, swages and upsets regardless of the static test. Some of these topics are discussed here.
amount of strain. An important aspect of welding, compared to some of the other
PG-19 includes the formulas for calculating the forming strain in means of construction, is the absolute need for careful control of
cylinders, spherical or dished heads, pipes and tubes, Table PG-19 the welding process to achieve sound welds. The ASME Code at-
currently (2015 Edition) lists 28 austenitic or nickel based mate- tempts to achieve this control by allowing welds to be made only
rials permitted by Section I which may be subject to post cold- by qualified welders using qualified procedures. Section IX pro-
forming heat treatment. vides the rules by which the welders and the weld procedures may
be qualified. However, there are many other aspects of welded con-
struction besides qualification, and rules covering these other as- Cold Forming of Creep Strength Enhanced Ferritic
pects are found in the other ASME book sections covering welded
Steels. Similar to the concerns with cold forming austenitic mate-
construction (Sections I, III, IV, and VIII).
rials (see, Cold Forming of Austenitic Materials), testing
The ultimate goal of welding procedure and performance quali-
of creep strength enhanced ferritic steels has shown that cold
fication is to achieve a weldment with properties that are at least
forming can have an adverse effect on the long term creep proper-
the equivalent of the base material being joined, as demonstrated
ties of the materials. To address this, the Committee added PG-20
by certain tests. Qualification of the procedure establishes that
Cold Forming of Creep Strength Enhanced Ferritic Steels (CSEF)
the weldment will have the necessary strength and ductility when
to the 2010 Edition. This provides heat treatment requirements
it is welded by an experienced welder following that procedure.
for cold formed material based on material grade, level of strain,
Qualification of the welder establishes that he or she can deposit
and design temperature of the material. The 2010 Edition initially
sound weld metal in the positions and joints to be used in produc-
included grades 91 and 92 but this was later changed in the 2013
tion welding.
Edition by removing grade 92. Grade 92 was still a code case
An assumption implicit in the welding rules of Section I is that
material and the cold forming requirements were moved to the
a weld is the equivalent of the base material it joins; accordingly,
associated code case (2179). Cold forming rules for other CSEF
a properly made weld does not weaken the vessel. Consequently,
steels have been included in their associated code cases.
there is no bar to superimposing attachments on welds or having
nozzles or other openings placed where they intersect welds (this
1.7.4 Welding and Postweld Heat Treatment is stated explicitly in PW-14). There is also no rule that would
An important factor in the evolution of today’s efficient high- prevent a manufacturer from making an opening for a nozzle in
pressure boilers was the development of welding as a replace- a vessel, then deciding the nozzle isn’t needed, and replacing the
ment for the riveted construction used in the 19th and first half material removed for the opening with a properly designed and
of the 20th centuries. The ASME has recognized the importance welded patch. This position changed to some degree with the addi-
of welding by instituting Section IX (Welding and Brazing Quali- tion of PG-26 Weld Joint Strength Reduction Factor in the 2008a
fications, first published as a separate Code section in 1941) and Addenda (see, Weld Joint Strength Reduction Factor).
1-24 t Chapter 1 Qualification of Welding Procedures. It is a general must be conducted for each welder to establish the welder’s ability
rule under any Section of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel to deposit sound weld metal. In general, this welder performance
Code and the ASME Code for Pressure Piping, B31, that all weld- qualification is accomplished by mechanical bend tests of perfor-
ing must be done by qualified welders using qualified welding mance test coupons, radiography of a test coupon, or radiography
procedures. With some rare exceptions, every manufacturer (or of the welder’s initial production weld. When welders are qualified,
other organization doing the welding, such as an assembler or identification marks are assigned to them so that all welded joints
parts manufacturer) is responsible for the welding it does and is can be identified by the identity of the person who made them.
also responsible for conducting the tests required by Section IX For various reasons, performance qualification tests do not
to qualify the welding procedures used and the performance of qualify welders to weld for other manufacturers or contractors,
the welders who apply those procedures. The manufacturer does except in the case of similar welding work on piping using the
this by preparing certain documentation, known as a Welding same procedure. Among the reasons for this prohibition is a desire
Procedure Specification (WPS) and a Procedure Qualification to ensure that each manufacturer will take full responsibility for
Record (PQR) that documents and supports the WPS. The WPS welding done by his or her organization. The Committee appar-
comprises a set of instructions, primarily for the welder (but also ently believed that requiring performance qualification for each
for the Authorized Inspector), regarding how to make a produc- new employer would achieve better results than a system that per-
tion weld to Code requirements. These instructions are written in mits one manufacturer to rely on performance testing supposedly
terms of certain welding parameters that are called essential, non- carried out by another organization. Some manufacturers share a
essential, and, when required, supplemental essential variables related view; if they are to be held responsible for their welding,
(see below). they want to conduct their own welder performance qualifications
The Procedure Qualification Record (PQR) is a formal record rather than relying on others.
of the welding data (the actual value of the variables recorded
during the welding of the test coupons) for each welding process Welding Variables. In the development of the WPS, it
used and the results of mechanical test specimens cut from the test is necessary to establish which variables of the welding process
coupons. Non-essential variables used during the welding of the are so-called essential variables in the production of qualifying
test coupon may be recorded at the manufacturer’s option. The tests welds and those that are not (non-essential variables). An essential
(usually tensile and bend tests) are used to demonstrate that a weld- variable is one that, if changed, would affect the properties of
ment made using the WPS has the required strength and ductility the weldment and thus require requalification of the procedure,
for its intended application. Various other tests are sometimes used that is, additional testing and issuance of a new PQR to support
instead of the bend and tensile tests. All of these tests are more fully the changed WPS. A non-essential variable for a weld procedure
explained in Section IX. The variables used in production welding is one that can be changed without requiring requalification,
may vary somewhat from those used during the welding of the test although it would require a change in the WPS. Essential vari-
coupons. Note that the purpose of the Procedure Qualification test ables for weld procedures include material thickness, P-Number
is just to establish the properties of the weldment and not the skill (which refers to material category; see below), filler metal alloy,
of the welder, although it is presupposed that the welder performing the use or omission of backing, and the use or omission of preheat
the procedure qualification test is a skilled worker. or postweld heat treatment. Examples of nonessential variables for
With the 2000 addenda, all book sections of the ASME Code be- procedure qualification are groove design, root spacing, method of
gan to permit the use of a number of ANSI/AWS Standard Welding back gouging or cleaning, change in electrode size, and the addi-
Procedure Specifications (SWPS) as an alternative to requiring the tion of other welding positions to any already qualified.
manufacturer or contractor to qualify its own procedures. Require- Variables may be categorized differently, depending on whether
ments were added to ensure that each manufacturer would have they are applied to weld procedure or welder performance qualifi-
some experience with standard welding procedures before using cation. For example, the addition of other welding positions to any
them. The standard procedures accepted are listed in Section IX, already qualified is an essential one for performance, since weld-
Appendix E. Paragraph PW-1.2 and Appendix paragraph A-302.7 ing in a new position, such as vertical instead of horizontal, could
of Section I advise that the use of Standard Welding Procedure certainly affect the ability of the welder to deposit a sound weld.
Specifications is acceptable, provided the welding meets the ad- However, it is a nonessential variable for procedure qualification
ditional requirements of Section I. Section IX simultaneously because qualifying the procedure demonstrates the properties of
added a new Article V, Standard Welding Procedure Specifica- the weldment, not the skill of the welder or welding operator. Such
tions, which provides details and restrictions on the use of standard a welder would presumably deposit sound metal in any position,
welding procedures. The Code Committee wanted to make sure and the properties of the resulting weldment would be unaffected.
that any organization using an SWPS would first establish its com- Section IX has a great number of tables summarizing procedure
petence with respect to key aspects of the welding. To that end, an and performance variables for all common welding processes.
employee of the manufacturer or contractor must sign and date the
SWPS, as evidence that the organization is acknowledging respon- Material Categories (P-Numbers). One important essen-
sibility for its use. With some exceptions, the organization must tial variable is the type of base material being welded. There are
then demonstrate its ability to control welding using an SWPS by several hundred different materials permitted for Code construction
welding and testing one groove weld coupon, and must record de- by the various book sections. If every change in base material meant
tailed information about the welding variables used (see below). that weld procedure specifications and welder performance had to
For further details on the use of SWPS, see the chapter in this vol- be requalified, the qualification of procedures and welders for all
ume on Section IX. these materials would be an enormous task. To reduce this task to
manageable proportions, the ASME has adopted a classification Qualification of Welder Performance. To complete the system in which material specifications are grouped into categories,
qualification process for welded construction, performance tests based on similar characteristics such as composition, weldability, and

mechanical properties. Each category is defined by a P-Number. includes not only deliberate heat treatment such as solution anneal-
Within the P-Number category are sub-categories called Group ing, but also the thermal cycle that the weld and HAZ undergo in
Numbers for ferrous base metals that have specified impact require- the welding process.
ments. Although Section I does not use Group Numbers in relation Various expressions, known as carbon equivalency (CE) formu-
to impact testing, it does sometimes establish different postweld heat las, have been developed to predict a steel’s hardenability by heat
treatment requirements for the different Group Numbers within a treatment. Thus they have also proven to be rough indicators of the
given P-Number category. A numerical listing of P-Numbers and relative weldability of steels, their susceptibility to cracking during
Group Numbers can be found for all Section II materials, by specifi- welding, and the need for preheat to prevent cracking during or
cation number, in Table QW/QB-422 of Section IX. after welding. This type of cracking is variously described as cold
A welding procedure that has been qualified for a particular base cracking, hydrogen cracking, and delayed cracking (because it
material may be used for any other base material with the same may occur some hours after welding is completed). ASME Boiler
P-Number. (On the other hand, if a base material has not been as- and Pressure Vessel Code—Section I has adopted the following
signed a P-Number, it requires an individual procedure qualifica- version of Carbon Equivalent (CE) in Table PW-39.1:
tion.) Similarly, a welder who has been qualified for a base metal
of a particular P-Number may be qualified for quite a few other CE = C + (Mn + Si)/6 + (Cr + Mo + V)/5 + (Ni + Cu)/15
P-Number base materials (see QW-423).
Note: If the chemistry values of the last two terms are not avail-
QW-423.2 permits assigning a P- or S- Number to materials con-
able, 0.15% shall be substituted as follows:
forming to national or International Standards or Specifications,
providing the material meets the mechanical and chemical require- CE = C + (Mn + Si)/6 + 0.15
ments of the assigned material.
Welding filler metals (electrode, bare wire, cored wire, etc.) are Thus carbon equivalency (CE) is the sum of weighted alloy
categorized by F-Number in Table QW-432 of Section IX. Part C contents, where the concentration of alloying elements is given in
of Section II lists American Welding Society filler metal specifica- weight percent. From this equation, it is seen that carbon is indeed
tions that have been adopted by the ASME and designated as SFA the most potent element affecting weldability. The formula also
specifications. shows the relative influence of other elements that might be pre-
Although a specific definition of each P-Number in terms of sent in pressure vessel steels, compared to that of carbon.
chemical composition is not given in the code, the P-Number cat- Associated with the various carbon equivalency formulas are
egories for commonly used Section I materials are as follows: weldability guidelines. A certain value of carbon equivalency, per-
haps 0.35% or less, might indicate good weldability; a higher value
t P-No. 1 covers plain carbon steels, C–Mn–Si, C–Mn, and might indicate that preheat and/or postweld heat treatment are re-
C–Si steels. quired to avoid excessive hardness and potential cracking in the
t P-No. 3 covers low-alloy steels obtained by additions of up to welds; and a still higher value might mean that the material is very
5/4% of Mn, Ni, Mo, Cr, or combinations of these elements. difficult to weld and both high preheat and postweld heat treatment
t P-No. 4 alloys have higher additions of Cr or Mo or some Ni will be needed to obtain satisfactory welds. The maximum permit-
to a maximum of 2% Cr. ted CE for the application in Section I is 0.45%. However to use
t P-No. 5 covers a broad range of alloys varying from 2.25 Cr-1 this exemption in Section I, a minimum preheat of 250°F (120°C)
Mo to 9 Cr-1 Mo. This category is divided into three group- is required and no individual weld pass may exceed ¼ inch (6 mm).
ings: 5A, 5B, and 5C. The 5A grouping covers alloys up to 3% The same carbon equivalency formula as shown above is given in
Cr; 5B covers alloys with from 3% to 9% Cr; and 5C covers the supplementary (nonmandatory) requirements of ASME Speci-
alloys with strength that has been improved by heat treatment. fications SA-105 and SA-106. For SA-105 forgings, the carbon
t P-No.15 covers a class of materials referred to as creep equivalent is limited to 0.47 or 0.48, depending on thickness; for
strength ferritic steels (CSEF). This category is further broken SA-106 pipe, the limit is 0.50. There would be little likelihood of
down into six groups designated 15A through 15F. Currently making successful welds in these materials with CE values higher
(2016), only 15E has any materials assigned to it, Grade 91 than those limits, even with high preheat.
(9Cr-1Mo-V) and Grade 92 (9Cr-2W). Although various carbon equivalency formulas have been de-
t P-No. 6 covers 12-15% Cr. Ferritic Stainless Steels including veloped over the years for specific alloys, no universal formula has
Types 403, 410, and 429. been devised that works well for all the low-alloy steels. In fact the
t P-No. 7 covers 11-18% Cr. Ferritic Stainless Steels including more complex the alloy becomes, the more difficult it is to devise
Types 405, 409, 410s, and 430. an equivalency formula. More recent formulas for low-alloy steels
t P-No. 8 covers the austenitic stainless steels. involve more complex interactive terms rather than the simple ad-
ditive terms of the formula cited above. Weldability. Materials are said to have good weldabil-
ity if they can be successfully joined, if cracking resulting from Bending Stress on Welds. Most of the design formulas in
the welding process can be avoided, and if welds with approxi- both Section I and Section VIII are based on the use of membrane
mately the same mechanical properties as the base material can be stress as the basis for design. In a boiler, the tubes, the piping, the
achieved. PW-5.2 prohibits welding or thermal cutting of carbon headers, and the shell of the drum are all designed for the membrane
or alloy steel with a carbon content of over 0.35%. Higher carbon stress in their cylindrical walls. Bending stress and the effects of
can cause zones of high hardness that impart adverse proper- stress concentration are not calculated, although they are known to
ties to the weld and heat-affected zone (HAZ) and may increase be present to some extent. This is explained not in Section I, but
susceptibility to cracking, for regions of high hardness often lack in UG-23(c) of Section VIII. In fact, there are bending stresses in
ductility. In fact, carbon strongly affects weldability because of its such pressure vessel components as flat heads, stayed heads, dished
influence on hardenability during heat treatment. Heat treatment heads, hemispherical heads, and cylinder-to-cylinder junctions.
1-26 t Chapter 1

In recognition of the existence of these largely unavoidable bend- Some Acceptance Criteria for Welds. Part PW includes
ing stresses, and perhaps still reflecting some lack of confidence in fabrication rules covering welding processes, base metal prepara-
the soundness of welded construction, Section I contains a number of tion, assembly, alignment tolerances, and the amount of excess
design rules intended to minimize bending stresses on welded joints. weld that may be left on the weld joint (so-called reinforcement).
For instance, PW-9.3 provides requirements for transitions at butt In general, butt welds in pressure-containing parts must have com-
welds between materials of unequal thickness. For circumferential plete penetration, and the weld groove must be completely filled.
welds in tube and pipe components, the transition shall not exceed To ensure that it is filled and that the surface of the weld metal is
a slope of 30 degrees from the smaller to larger diameter. For welds not below the surface of the adjoining base metal, extra weld metal
in shells, drums, and vessels or welds attaching heads to shells, a may be added as reinforcement on each face of the weld. A table
gradual taper, no greater than 1 : 3, is required. A 1 : 3 slope, or taper, in PW-35 gives the maximum amount of reinforcement permitted,
represents an angle of a little over 18 degrees. This paragraph was as a function of nominal thickness and whether the weld is circum-
revised in the 2015 Edition to include a new figure (see Figure PW- ferential or longitudinal. Requirements for butt welds are found in
9.3.3) to illustrate how the transition may be made between heads PW-9, PW-35, and PW-41.2.2. PW-9 and PW-35 stipulate that butt
and shells. For each of these transitions, the weld may be partly or welds must have full penetration. PW-41.2.2 adds that complete
entirely in the transition or may be adjacent to the transition. penetration at the root is required for single-welded butt joints
Long after these rules were formulated, finite element analyses and that this is to be demonstrated by the qualification of the weld
have demonstrated their validity. That is, the discontinuity stresses procedure. Lack of penetration is a reason for rejection of welds
developed at these gradual changes in thickness have generally requiring volumetric examination. PW-35.1 limits undercuts to the
been found to be unremarkable and well within the limits that lesser of 1/32 in. (0.8 mm) or 10% of the wall thickness, and they
would apply if the design-by-analysis methods of Section VIII, Di- may not encroach on the required wall thickness. Some concavity
vision 2, were to be applied. in the weld metal is permitted at the root of a single-welded butt
For decades, paragraph PW-9.4 had prohibited construction in joint if it does not exceed the lesser of 3/32 in. (2.5 mm) or 20% of
which bending stresses were “brought directly on a welded joint.” the thinner of the two sections being joined. When concavity is per-
This paragraph had also specifically prohibited a single-welded mitted, its contour must be smooth, and the resulting thickness of
butt joint if the joint would be subject to bending stress at the root the weld, including any reinforcement on the outside, must not be
of the weld, as illustrated in Figure PW-9.2. In 1996, the Com- less than the required thickness of the thinner section being joined.
mittee recognized that bending stresses routinely occur on welded
joints in all boilers and pressure vessels with no untoward results Preheating. Deposited weld metal is cooled very
and that this broad prohibition against bending stresses was un- quickly by its surroundings. Once it solidifies, it forms various
warranted. Accordingly, the general prohibition against subjecting microstructural phases—solid solutions of iron and carbon (and
weld joints to bending stress was deleted, and PW-9.4 was revised other alloying elements). These phases include ferrite, pearlite,
so that it now prohibits only the single-welded corner joints illus- bainite, martensite, and austenite (in the higher alloy materials).
trated in Figure PW-9.4. The formation of any particular phase depends on the cooling
rate and alloying elements such as chrome or nickel that may be Attachment Welds. Section I provides requirements for present. Certain phases, such as untempered martensite or bainite,
attachment welds attaching nozzles and other connections to shells, can impart unfavorable properties (e.g., high hardness, lack of
drums, and headers. The accompanying figure, Figure PW-16.1, ductility, and lack of fracture toughness) to the resulting weldment.
illustrates some acceptable nozzles and connections and provides One way to address this problem is through the use of preheating,
requirements for minim weld sizes. With the exception of illustra- which, by raising the temperature of the surrounding base metal,
tions (z-1) and (z-2), these illustrations all define the minimum slows the cooling of the weld and may prevent the formation of
weld sizes in a plane through the nozzle parallel to the longitudinal undesirable phases.
axis of the shell with no guidance on the profile the around the rest Preheat serves another useful function: It helps to ensure that
of the circumference of the nozzle. With no guidance given, most the weld joint is free of any moisture, which can otherwise serve
users took this to mean that the same minimum weld size should as a source of hydrogen contamination in the weld. Hydrogen can
be maintained around the circumference of the nozzle. This works dissolve in liquid weld metal and by various mechanisms can cause
well for nozzles with an outside diameter up to about half the diam- cracking in the weld (known variously as cold cracking, hydrogen-
eter of the shell but becomes difficult as the nozzle size increases. assisted cracking, and delayed cracking). Maintaining the weld-
This was addressed in the 2010 Edition with the addition of a new ment at preheat temperature during and after welding promotes the
paragraph, PW-16.7, which provided requirements for weld sizes evolution of dissolved hydrogen.
around the circumference of the nozzle. Although preheating a weld joint can be beneficial, Section I
For welded connections such as nozzles, Section I requires suf- does not mandate the use of preheat, except as a condition for the
ficient weld on either side of the connection to develop the strength omission of postweld heat treatment (as provided in Table PW39).
of any non-integral reinforcement (compensation) through shear However, it is often specified for new construction welding and
or tension in the weld. The allowable stress values for weld metal for repair welding, especially when the walls are relatively thick.
are a function of the type of weld and loading, varying from 49% A brief guide to preheating practices is included in Nonmandatory
to 74% of the allowable stress for the vessel material. Figure PW- Appendix A-100.
15 Examples of Weld Strength Calculations illustrates how the re-
quired weld strength (see PG-37.2) may be calculated. Postweld Heat Treatment. As explained under
Weld strength calculations for nozzle attachments are not re- preheating, rapidly cooling weld metal and the adjacent heat-
quired (PW-15.1.6) for certain configurations shown in Figure affected zone are subject to the formation of adverse phases that
PW-16.1. For these connections, the welds still have to satisfy the can result in zones of high hardness, lack of ductility, and poor
minimum weld sizes shown in Figure PW-16.1. fracture toughness in the weldment. In addition, the differential

cooling of the weld metal compared to the surrounding base metal Unlike some other book sections, Section I does not specify any
can lead to the formation of very high residual stresses. Again, particular heating or cooling rate to be used in PWHT. PW-39.3
the extent to which any of these effects take place is a function stipulates only that the weldment shall be heated slowly to the re-
of the cooling rate, alloy composition, relative thickness of the quired holding temperature. It goes on to say that after being held
parts being joined, and whether preheat is applied. Experience at that temperature for the specified time, the weldment shall be al-
has shown that preheating and postweld heat treatment (PWHT) lowed to cool slowly in a still atmosphere to a temperature of 800°F
are often unnecessary for relatively thin weldments, especially (425°C) or less. This is to avoid high thermal stresses and poten-
those of plain carbon steel. However, the general rule imparted tial distortion caused by large differential temperatures throughout
in paragraph PW-39 is that all welded pressure parts of power the component. Over time, many manufacturers have developed
boilers must be given a postweld heat treatment unless otherwise their own requirements for heating and cooling rates and these may
specifically exempted—for example, by PFT-29 for staybolts vary based on the material grade, component arrangement, and/or
or PMB-9 for miniature boilers, or by the notes in the tables in heat treatment method. To provide guidance for manufacturers in
PW-39. The materials in Table PW-39 are listed in accordance developing their procedures, a new paragraph, A-101, was added
with the P-Number grouping of Table QW/QB-422 of Section to Nonmandatory Appendix A, containing suggested heating and
IX. See Section, Material Categories (P-Numbers), above cooling rates.
for details. The subject of welding and postweld heat treatment is a complex
While preheating is aimed at preventing or limiting the forma- one. For further guidance, see the chapter on Section IX in this
tion of adverse phases, postweld heat treatment is used to amelio- volume.
rate their effects. Postweld heat treatment is capable of tempering
or softening hard phases, and it can restore a large measure of duc- 1.7.5 Brazing Rules
tility and fracture toughness in the weld and heat-affected zone. At Although brazing had long been used in construction of certain
the same time, it relieves the residual stress caused by the cooling low pressure boilers, prior to the 1996 Addenda, no brazing rules
of the weld metal. The goal of PWHT, therefore, is to restore the had ever been provided in Section I. Thus Part PB brazing rules
properties of the weldment as nearly as possible to those of the resemble the Part PW welding rules, but are much less extensive.
original base metal. One notable difference is that the maximum design temperature is
In PWHT the components to be treated are slowly heated dependent on the brazing filler metal used and base metals being
(either in a furnace or locally) to the temperature specified in joined. Brazing procedures and the performance of brazers must
Table PW-39. They are held at that temperature for the time be qualified in accordance with Section IX by methods similar to
specified, usually 1 hr/in. (1 hr/25 mm) of thickness plus an ad- those used for qualifying weld procedures and welders. The de-
ditional 15 min/in. (15 min/25 mm) over a certain thickness. This sign approach used for determining the strength of brazed joints is
is intended to ensure that the centermost portions of thick sections given: the manufacturer must determine from suitable tests or from
have sufficient time to reach the minimum holding temperature. experience that the specific brazing filler metal selected can pro-
The nominal thickness in Table PW-39 used to determine PWHT vide a joint which will have adequate strength at design tempera-
requirements is the thickness of the weld, the pressure-retaining ture. The strength of the brazed joint may not be less than that of
material, or the thinner of the sections being joined, whichever is the base metals being joined. This strength is normally established
the least. The time-at-temperature requirement can be satisfied by by the qualification of the brazing procedure. Some acceptable
an accumulation of postweld heat treatment cycles. When it is im- types of brazed joints are illustrated and Part PB provides guidance
practical to heat treat at the specified temperature, it is permissible on inspection and any necessary repairs. Nondestructive examina-
to heat treat at lower temperatures for longer periods of time, but tion of brazed construction relies primarily on visual examination
only for P-No. 1 and P-No. 3 materials. Table PW-39.1 lists these supplemented by dye penetrant inspection if necessary.
alternative longer times and shows that for a 50°F (28°C) decrease
in the minimum specified holding temperature, the holding time 1.7.6 Riveting Rules
doubles. This shows how strongly temperature-dependent the un- As indicated in, Part PR, the 2013 Edition was the first
derlying creep relaxation process is. time riveting rules had been published since the 1971 Edition.
As mentioned above, the tables in PW-39 which provide exemp- Some of the riveting information in the 2013 Edition is a direct
tions to PWHT are arranged by P-Number. Within those tables, copy from the 1971 Edition but there were also some significant
the exemptions are then based on things like type of weld (e.g. updates. For example, the new Mandatory Appendix V, Additional
circumferential butt weld, fillet weld, combination groove and Rules for Boilers Fabricated by Riveting, is a consolidation of in-
fillet, weld overlay, etc.), thickness of weld, weld process, level formation about riveting that was scattered through the 1971 Edi-
of preheat, etc. There have been a series of revisions to the table tion in parts PG, PFT, and PWT while the information in PR-2 and
for P-No. 1 materials, starting with the 2009b Addenda, to greatly PR-23 are new requirements.
simplify the exemptions. In the 2009b Addenda, two new general Riveting, like welding and brazing, requires a certain level of
notes were added, (a)(1) and (a)(2) which exempted some welds skill and experience but unlike those methods, the use of riveting
based on thickness and preheat and in the case of (a) (2), also weld is not as widespread so an experienced workforce is not as read-
pass size and carbon equivalency. These new exemptions applied ily available. To recognize this, the Committee added PR-2 which
to welds up to ¾ in (19 mm) thick for note (a)(1) and up to 1½ in states that the Manufacturer is responsible for all riveting but pro-
(38 mm) thick for note (a)(2). This is a departure from previous ad- vides conditions under which they may use individual riveters that
denda as these exemptions do not depend on the type of weld, that are not under their direct employment.
is, they apply equally whether a butt weld, fillet weld, combination To ensure proper riveting while avoiding burdening the
groove and fillet etc. The table was further simplified in the 2011a Manufacturer with requirements to qualify riveters and riveting
Addenda by eliminating nine notes, all of which were now covered procedures, the committee decided to instead place limits on cer-
by notes (a)(1) and (a)(2). tain riveting variables. This includes using a factor of safety of 5
1-28 t Chapter 1

in lieu of 3.5 (PR-8.2 multiplies the allowable stress value by 0.7), accept the results of nondestructive examinations in accordance
limiting the maximum rivet hole size (PR-21.1), and the additional with written criteria (except for RT and UT examinations). A Level
requirements on the riveting process itself in the new PR-23 (such II individual has sufficient additional training and experience so
as the temperature of the rivet before driving). that under the direction of a Level III person, he or she can teach
Another important rule, or actually removal of a 1971 allow- others how to conduct, interpret, and accept the results of nonde-
ance, is related to lap joint construction. In the 1971 Edition, PR- structive examinations. A Level III examiner is the most qualified
16.2 permitted the use of lap joint construction for longitudinal and can develop and write procedures as well as establish a writ-
seams in shells and drums which did not exceed 36 inches in diam- ten practice for his or her employer. A Level III examiner can also
eter with an MAWP ≤ 100 psig. The Committee felt that this was administer examinations to qualify Level I, II, and III examiners.
an inferior construction so have deleted this allowance when de- The American Society for Nondestructive Testing has another
veloping the 2013 Edition so now all drum long seams fabricated document, entitled Standard for Qualification and Certification of
by riveting must be of butt- and double-strap construction (PR-10). Nondestructive Testing Personnel, CP-189, which is an alternative
to SNT-TC-1a (remember, the latter is only a recommended prac-
1.7.7 Nondestructive Examination tice). CP-189 requires Level III individuals to pass an examination
There are several related terms applied to Code construction given by the ASNT and calls for the employer to give a further
that are somewhat imprecisely used. These are examination, in- examination, since the first examination may not assess the full
spection, and testing. Within the context of Section I, examina- range of capability needed. In 1997 the Committee voted to allow
tion usually describes activities of the manufacturer; inspection CP-189 to be used as an alternative to SNT-TC-1A, with the choice
refers to what the Authorized Inspector does; and testing refers left to the certificate holder. This alternative standard appeared in
to a variety of activities, usually performed by the manufacturer. the 1997 addenda to Section I.
Some confusion arises from the fact that nondestructive examina- PW-51 requires a complete set of radiographs for each job to
tion (NDE) includes activities defined as examinations but which be retained and kept on file by the manufacturer for at least five
are often called tests. NDE is an indispensable means of ensuring years. This requirement is based on the reasonable idea that the
sound construction because, when properly used, these examina- radiographs might be of assistance in determining responsibility
tions are capable of discovering hidden flaws in material or welds. (or lack of responsibility) for any defects, alleged or actual, subse-
The examinations referenced by Section I in the NDE category quently discovered, or other problems that might occur in service.
are the following: radiographic examination, ultrasonic exami- Similarly, PW-52 requires a manufacturer who uses ultrasonic ex-
nation, magnetic-particle examination, and liquid-penetrant ex- amination to retain a report of that examination for a minimum of
amination (also called dye penetrant examination). Although not five years. Again, these records might prove useful should prob-
explicitly mentioned in Section I, the use of visual inspection is lems occur in service.
certainly implied and is called out in B31.1 for application to the In 1990 the Committee added an explanation at the beginning
boiler external piping. These examinations are often referred to of paragraph PW-11 to guide users in resolving disagreements that
in the industry by the shorthand terms RT (radiographic test), UT sometimes arise under the following circumstances. Section I nor-
(ultrasonic test), MT (magnetic-particle test), PT (liquid-penetrant mally exempts certain welds from radiography, such as circumfer-
test), and VT (visual examination). ential welds in tubes complying with limits specified in PW-41.
Section I generally follows the Code practice of referring to Occasionally, a user will have these welds radiographed, revealing
Section V, Nondestructive Examination, for the rules on how to imperfections that would have been cause for rejection if the welds
conduct the various examinations and also provides its own accept- were ones for which Section I required radiography. The explana-
ance standards. For example, Table PW-11 calls for certain welds tion added to PW-11 is intended to help resolve the dilemma posed
to be examined by RT in accordance with PW-51 or UT in ac- by such a situation, and illustrates Section I’s philosophy of accept-
cordance with PW-52. These paragraphs in turn reference Section ing long satisfactory experience as a basis for code rules. Here is
V, Article 2 and Section V, Article IV, Mandatory Appendix VII that explanation: “Experience has demonstrated that welded butt
respectively but to the acceptance criteria contained within PW-51 joints not requiring volumetric examination by these rules have
and PW-52. Similarly, PG-25, Quality Factors for Steel Castings, given safe and reliable service even if they contain imperfections
calls for MT or PT of all surfaces of castings in accordance with which may be disclosed upon further examination. Any exami-
Section V, but provides acceptance criteria within its own domain nation and acceptance standards beyond the requirements of this
(i.e., in paragraph PG-25). Section are beyond the scope of this Code and shall be a matter
Personnel performing and evaluating radiographic, ultrasonic, of agreement between the Manufacturer and the User.” This guid-
and other nondestructive examinations are required to be quali- ance, while helpful, has unfortunately not sufficed to prevent dis-
fied and certified as examiners in those disciplines, in accordance putes arising from the provisions of PW-11.
with a written practice of their employer (see PW-50). This writ-
ten practice must be based on a document called Recommended 1.7.8 Hydrostatic Testing
Practice for Nondestructive Testing Personnel Qualification and The hydrostatic test is one of the last steps in the construction
Certification, SNT-TC-1A, published by the American Society for of the boiler. Hydrostatic test requirements are given in PG-99 and
Nondestructive Testing. Note the use of the word testing, rather PW-54. These tests may be made either in the manufacturer’s shop
than examination in this title, showing again that the industry tends or in the field using water. Unlike Section VIII, Section I does not
to use these terms interchangeably. SNT-TC-1A establishes three permit the use of other fluids or pneumatic testing.
categories of examiners, depending on experience and training, The hydrostatic test serves a number of purposes. Many mem-
designating them as Level I, II, or III, with Level III being the high- bers of the Code Committees believe that its major purpose is to
est qualification. The lowest ranking examiner, Level I, is qualified establish that the boiler (or pressure vessel) has been properly con-
to perform NDE following written procedures developed by Level structed and that it has a significant design margin, or safety mar-
II or Level III personnel. A Level I individual can also interpret and gin, above and beyond its nominal maximum allowable working

pressure. (The hydrostatic test pressure is normally 1.5 times modifying specifications for material ordered to achieve a finer
MAWP.) In this sense, the hydrostatic test is seen to demonstrate grained material with greater fracture toughness). Also, in some
the validity of the design as a pressure container. Another impor- instances the manufacturers of large boilers recommended to their
tant aspect of the hydrostatic test is that it serves as a leak test. Any customers that any future hydrostatic tests of existing boilers be
leaks revealed by the test must be repaired, and the boiler must be conducted using warm or even hot water, to ensure ductile behav-
retested (see PW-54). ior at the time of the test. This became potentially hazardous for the
The first edition of Section I in 1915 called for a hydrostatic test Authorized Inspector, and the Committee placed a 120°F (50°C)
at 1.5 times the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure, a basic limit on metal temperature during the hydrostatic test at the request
rule essentially unchanged to this day. We may surmise that the of the National Board. Also around this time, most boiler manu-
choice of this pressure followed the practice of the time and was facturers switched from the use of SA-515 to SA-516 plate for
seen to provide evidence that the boiler had been constructed with heavy-walled boiler drums, because the latter has greater fracture
a significant design margin. If a higher test pressure had been cho- toughness. Even so, heavy SA-516 plate is often examined metal-
sen, the stress in the components might have begun to approach lurgically by boiler manufacturers to determine its NDTT, and if
their yield strength, a situation to be avoided. To ensure that the that temperature is not well below 70°F (20°C), a hydrostatic test
test was under control, a requirement that the test pressure not be using water warmer than 70°F (20°C) is recommended.
exceeded by more than 6% was also included. The concerns described above can be illustrated by considering
Because of the increase in allowable stresses (see there the design of a thick-walled drum for a large high-pressure boiler.
was some concern that the hydrostatic test at 1.5 times the design Such a drum would typically be made of SA-516 grade 70 plate.
pressure could bring stresses during the test close to the yield The allowable stress used for designing the drum is about 18 ksi
strength of the material. Consequently the Committee changed (after an increase of 9% in 1999; see discussion in Design Stresses:
PG-99 in the 1999 Addenda to limit the primary membrane stress Past, Present, and Future in Section and Test Pressure for
during a hydrostatic test of any kind of boiler to 90% of the yield Drum-Type Boilers in Section Accordingly, during the hy-
strength of the pressure parts. With the addition of the 90% yield drostatic test, the actual average membrane stress in the drum wall
requirement, some questioned why the 6% control tolerance on is approximately 1.5 times 18 ksi (124 MPa), or 27 ksi (186 MPa).
the 1.5 MAWP pressure was required so the 6% tolerance was re- At first glance, this seems to be a reasonable margin below the
moved in the 2004 Edition. minimum cold yield strength of this material, which is about 38 ksi
(262 MPa). Unfortunately, this is not the case, because in a real Prevention of Brittle Fracture. PG-99 requires the vessel there are always irregularities of various kinds present
hydrostatic test to be conducted using water “at no less than that act as stress raisers. Examples include welds with undercuts,
ambient temperature, but in no case less than 70°F (20°C).” This grooves, or ridges. Ligaments between openings can also act as
stipulation about the water temperature is intended to minimize stress raisers, as can changes in vessel geometry at transitions be-
the possibility of catastrophic brittle fracture of heavy-walled pres- tween materials of different thickness and at nozzle-to-shell junc-
sure parts during the test. Brittle fracture is a type of behavior that tions. These stress-raising irregularities, sometimes loosely called
can occur when metal is under tensile stress when its temperature notches, may cause a stress concentration of two or more. Thus in
is at or below its so-called nil-ductility transition temperature a drum undergoing hydrostatic testing, it is very likely that local
(NDTT). Above this temperature, the metal behaves in a ductile surface stress at some of these notches may approach or exceed
manner; below this temperature, its behavior is brittle. Contrasting the yield stress. At such a time, it is important that the boiler plate
examples of these two types of behavior are the bending of a wire material be warm enough for its behavior to be ductile so that local
hanger compared with the bending of a glass rod. The wire, which yielding can occur without significant danger of initiating a brittle
is ductile, bends easily when its yield strength is exceeded and can failure. When the boiler is in normal service, it is, of course, at a
be restored to its original shape. The glass rod can carry a certain temperature that ensures ductile behavior. It is also at a pressure
amount of bending load, but then suddenly fractures in a brittle much lower than that during the hydrostatic test, so that the stress
manner when its yield strength is reached. even at notches is likely to be well below the yield stress.
Any flaw, notch, or other discontinuity can raise stress at some
local area to the yield point. If the material is ductile, it can yield Test Pressure for Drum-Type Boilers. For most boil-
locally with little harm done. If the material is below its NDTT, it ers, the hydrostatic test is conducted by slowly raising the pressure
behaves in a brittle manner; when stress reaches the yield point, the to 1.5 times the MAWP. Close visual inspection is not required
material may tear or form a crack, which can then grow suddenly during this stage, in the interest of safety of the Inspector. The
through the thickness, causing a catastrophic failure. The ability of pressure is then reduced to the MAWP, and the boiler is carefully
a material to resist tearing or cracking is a measure of its fracture examined for leaks or other signs of distress.
toughness. In 1999, after careful consideration, certain allowable design
Brittle fracture is generally not a concern for relatively thin stresses were increased below the creep range by changing in both
materials. The manufacturers of steels used in boilers have devel- Sections VIII and I the design factor on tensile strength from about
oped melting practices that usually result in nil-ductility transition 4 to about 3.5. There had been some concern that to avoid yielding
temperatures well below 70°F (20°C), ensuring adequate fracture in any of the pressure parts, this might require a reduction in the
toughness during hydrostatic tests. The component of greatest hydrostatic test pressure. The Committee investigated the ramifi-
concern in a large utility boiler (so far as brittle fracture is con- cations of what was really only a modest increase in some design
cerned) is the drum, since it has very thick walls. (It happens that stresses and concluded that a reduction in hydrostatic test pressure
thick vessels and headers are more susceptible to brittle fracture was unnecessary. However, the rules for hydrostatic tests in PG-99
than thinner components.) After a number of brittle failure acci- were modified in the 1999 addenda to stipulate that “At no time
dents in the 1970s, the manufacturers of large boilers took steps to during the hydrostatic test shall any part of the boiler be subjected
lower the NDTT of heavy-walled parts such as drums (by slightly to a general primary membrane stress greater than 90% of its yield
1-30 t Chapter 1

strength (0.2% offset) at test temperature.” The new words charac- As might be expected, the maximum permitted hydrostatic test
terizing the limit as applicable to general primary membrane stress pressure has occasionally been exceeded, and in a few cases, the
were the first use of such terminology by Section I. They were cho- Authorized Inspector had refused to accept the boiler because PG-
sen to make clear that the goal is to limit average membrane stress 99.1 states that the desired test pressure is never to be exceeded
through the wall of the components, and not the bending stress or by more than 6%. What to do? Inquiries came to the Committee,
peak stress at the surface. A subsequent review of the materials where the sentiment was on the side of common sense, namely, that
used in Section I construction showed that there is still a significant if the manufacturer could demonstrate to the AI, by some means,
margin between actual stresses during a hydrostatic test and yield perhaps through calculations, that stresses during the test had not
strength, as just noted in the discussion under Prevention of Brittle exceeded the yield strength of the parts and that no damage had
Fracture. been done to the boiler, the AI could accept the boiler. In 1981
Hydrostatic tests for Section VIII vessels can be conducted at a Interpretation I-81-27, Maximum Hydrostatic Test Pressure, was
much higher pressure than those for Section I boilers, because the issued, as follows:
factor used to determine test pressure includes the ratio of the al-
lowable stress at room temperature to the allowable stress at design Question: Under what circumstances may the hydrostatic test
temperature. Because of this higher pressure, the Committee was pressure stated in PG-99 be exceeded?
concerned about potential yielding during a hydrostatic test and
reduced the longstanding hydrostatic test pressure factor from 1.5 Reply: The test pressure may be exceeded when the manu-
to 1.3 at about the same time as the new, somewhat higher stresses facturer demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Authorized
were adopted in the 1999 addenda. Inspector that no component has been overstressed.
In addition to the 90% of yield strength limit for membrane
stress during a hydrostatic test introduced in the 1999 addenda, This Interpretation is also consistent with Section VIII’s design
historically PG-99.1 also required that the test pressure “be under philosophy, as expressed in UG-99, the counterpart to PG-99 in
proper control at all times so that the required test pressure is never Section I. Section VIII does not establish an upper limit for hy-
exceeded by more than 6%.” drostatic test pressure. Section VIII, UG-99(d) says that if the test
The rule that the test pressure must not be exceeded by more than pressure exceeds the prescribed value, either intentionally or ac-
6%, that is, not more than (1.06)(1.50)(MAWP) = (1.59) (MAWP), cidentally, to the degree that the vessel is subjected to visible per-
while arbitrary, is not unreasonable. As explained under the topic manent distortion, the Inspector shall reserve the right to reject the
Design Stresses: Past, Present, and Future in Section, one vessel.
of the criteria for setting allowable stress is two-thirds of the yield The Committee considered such an approach to be reasonable
strength of the material. Therefore, a hydrostatic test at 1.5 times and, at one point in the 1980s, actually voted to add a similar provi-
MAWP could theoretically utilize 100% of the yield strength of sion to Section I to settle future inquiries on this topic. However,
those components with allowable stress that is based on the yield the Main Committee would not approve the change. Among the
strength at room temperature. There would then be little margin objections offered was the assertion that it was too difficult for an
for over-shooting the prescribed test pressure. However, this is not Inspector to see the slight deformation that would indicate yielding
the case for several reasons. First of all, for most Section I materi- had taken place. The fact that Section VIII had for years granted the
als, the allowable stress at room temperature is actually based on Inspector the discretion to make such a judgment was insufficient
31.5 of the ultimate tensile strength, which is quite a bit lower than to convince the negative voters, and the Committee abandoned the
two-thirds of the yield strength at that temperature. Moreover, the effort. Interpretation I-81-27 cited above should serve to resolve
yield strength (and ultimate tensile strength) of most materials as most problems about overshooting the prescribed hydrostatic test
received from the mill is somewhat stronger, often by 10% or more, pressure. Many felt that with the addition of the 90% yield criteria
than the minimum called for by the material specification, although in the 1999 Addenda that the 6% overpressure limit was no longer
no credit may be taken for this extra strength. Also, any components needed so in the 2004 Edition, the 6% overpressure limit was re-
intended for service at elevated temperature are designed using al- moved from the Code. Section I now has only the requirement that,
lowable stresses lower than those at room temperature (allowable at no time during the hydrostatic test, shall the primary membrane
stress for many Section I materials is relatively constant from room stress exceed 90% of the yield strength at test temperature. This
temperature to about 500°F (260°C) and then begins to fall off as the would permit a reasonable degree of the test pressure exceeding
temperature increases). Thus at test temperature, these components the 1.5 times the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP)
have extra strength available to provide a margin against yielding. without damage to the component. This is true with most materials
During a typical hydrostatic test, a pump capable of providing a utilized in Section I construction but the Manufacturer is respon-
large volume of water at relatively low pressure is used to fill the sible to check to ensure that the selected hydrostatic test pressure
boiler. Various vents are left open to permit all the air to escape, does not exceed the 90% yield criteria.
and when the boiler is full of water, all valves are closed and a
different kind of pump is used, one that can achieve the high pres- Forced-Flow Steam Generators with No Fixed Steam
sure required. Often the pump used for the hydrostatic test is a and WaterLine. The usual hydrostatic testing procedure is
piston-type pump that slowly builds pressure as any remaining air modified for forced-flow steam generators with no fixed steam
pockets are filled with water. When the water-holding volume of and water-line. These boilers are designed for different pressure
the boiler reaches the stage where it is essentially solid water, each levels along the path of water-steam flow, with a significant dif-
piston stroke raises the pressure substantially due to the essentially ference between economizer inlet and superheater outlet. In one
incompressible nature of water. It thus may be difficult to achieve such boiler, for example, those design pressures were 4350 psi
the desired test pressure without overshooting the mark. Test per- (29 MPa) and 3740 psi (25 MPa), respectively. The design pres-
sonnel must be attentive at this time to avoid exceeding this test sure or MAWP at the superheater outlet is the design pressure
pressure tolerance (established by the designer). stamped on this type of boiler and is called the master stamping

pressure. In the first stage of the hydrostatic test, a pressure equal the new Ontario organization is called the Technical Standards
to 1.5 times the master stamping pressure (but no less than 1.25 and Safety Authority (TSSA). The Canadian government passed
times the MAWP of any other part of the boiler proper) must be a bill allowing the delegation of authority over this public safety
applied. In the example given, the 1.5 factor controls, at 5610 psi program, formerly vested in the provincial governments, to not-
(37 MPa). For the second or close-examination stage, the pressure for-profit nongovernment organizations. The new organizations
may be reduced to the MAWP at the superheater outlet. are Crown Corporations, the administrators of which are dual em-
ployees of the jurisdiction and the newly privatized corporations. Welding After Hydrostatic Test. Formerly, the hydro- The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors has
static test completed the construction of the boiler, and no further accepted the new corporations as representing the jurisdiction.
work (i.e. welding) was permitted as part of the ASME new- The chief inspectors of the new corporations are National Board
construction process. However, around 1980, the Committee members, as they were before the change. Other provinces may
added provisions to PW-54 permitting non-pressure parts to be follow the example set by Alberta and Ontario. As Code construc-
welded to the pressure parts after the hydrostatic test if certain tion becomes increasingly an international activity, the National
conditions are met. (Welding is limited to P-No. 1 materials; Board may recognize and accept other foreign jurisdictions and
attachment is done by stud welds or small fillet welds; 200°F their inspection agencies, provided they meet certain criteria.
(95°C) preheat is applied when the thickness of the pressure part Through reference to QAI-1, the Authorized Inspector must be
exceeds ¾ in. (19 mm); and the completed weld is inspected by qualified by written examination under the rules of the National
the Authorized Inspector before he or she signs the Manufacturers’ Board NB-263. When an Inspector is so qualified, he or she may
Data Report Form for the completed boiler.) This change granted obtain a commission, or certificate of competency, from the ju-
relief from delays that arose when miscellaneous structural steel risdiction where they are working. The National Board of Boiler
parts to be welded to the pressure parts were not available, but the and Pressure Vessel Inspectors (the National Board) also grants
pressure parts were ready for the hydrostatic test. commissions to those who meet certain qualifications and pass a
In 1999 Code Case permission was granted for the welding of National Board examination.
carbon steel attachments not classified as P-No. 1 material, but As a condition of obtaining from ASME a Certificate of Au-
having a maximum carbon content of 0.2%, to P-No. 1 pressure thorization to use the Certification Mark, each Section I man-
parts after the hydrostatic test. Incorporation of the Code Case into ufacturer or assembler must have in force a contract with an
Section I was approved and it was published in the 2004 Addenda. Authorized Inspection Agency spelling out the mutual respon-
sibilities of the manufacturer or assembler and the Authorized
1.7.9 Third-Party Inspection Inspector. The manufacturer or assembler is required to arrange
Third-party inspection refers to the system evolved by the for the Authorized Inspector to perform the inspections called
Code Committee to ensure that manufacturers or other Certificate for by Section I. Paraphrasing the words of A-300 (the Quality
Holders will actually follow the Code rules. In the simplest situ- Control System): the manufacturer shall provide the Authorized
ation, a boiler manufacturer and the boiler purchaser are the first Inspector access to all drawings, calculations, specifications, pro-
two parties, and an Authorized Inspector (AI) is the independent cess sheets, repair procedures, records, test results, and any other
third party. It is the function of the AI to ensure and verify that the documents necessary for the Inspector to perform his or her du-
manufacturer complies with the Code. ties in accordance with Section I. Section I lists many duties of
Historically, an Authorized Inspector was defined by Section the Authorized Inspector, all of which are intended to ensure code
I in PG-91 as an inspector employed by a state or municipality compliance. In 1997 the Committee approved the expansion of
of the United States, a Canadian province, or an insurance com- PG-90 on Inspection and Tests to include a comprehensive list
pany authorized to write boiler and pressure vessel insurance. of the AI’s duties and references to the paragraphs where those
The employer of an Authorized Inspector is called an Authorized duties are further described. The revised PG-90 appeared in the
Inspection Agency (AIA). Thus an AIA can be either the inspec- 1998 addenda. However, even when Section I does not specifi-
tion agency of an insurance company or of a jurisdiction that has cally describe the duties of an AI with respect to some provision
adopted and enforced at least one section of the code. In the United of the code, it is understood that the AI has very broad latitude in
States, the Authorized Inspection Agencies providing authorized carrying out the mandate to verify compliance by the Certificate
inspection for ASME Certificate Holders traditionally have been Holders with all applicable Code rules.
private insurance companies such as the Hartford Steam Boiler During Committee deliberations, a number of members who
Inspection & Insurance Company, Factory Mutual Insurance Com- happen to be Authorized Inspectors have explained that once they
pany, or One CIS Insurance Company among others. Starting with have established that a manufacturer is following its approved
the 2000 Addenda, PG-90.1 now refers to ASME QAI-1 [16] as quality control system, they merely spot-check the manufacturer’s
part of the definition of an AIA. This standard covers the quali- activities. As a practical matter, an AI cannot be expected to check
fication requirements for Authorized Inspection Agencies as well every detail of a manufacturer’s Code construction operation.
as Authorized Inspectors and Authorized Inspector Supervisors. It may be recalled from the discussion of the preamble in Section
For the Authorized Inspector, this standard then refers to National 1.2 of this chapter that “the Code does not contain rules to cover all
Board document NB-263 which is RCI-1, Rules for Commissioned details of design and construction” and that when complete details
Inspectors [17]. In Canada, until 1996, the provincial governments are not given, the manufacturer must provide details of design and
had provided authorized inspection services through offices such construction as safe as those the Code does provide in its rules,
as the department of labor. However, in an effort to cut the cost subject to the acceptance of the Authorized Inspector. An AI may
of government, two provinces (Alberta and Ontario) have privat- have sufficient experience to make a decision in such a situation,
ized their authorized-inspection activities by spinning them off in which case approval may be a simple matter. At other times,
into self-sustaining private companies. The new Alberta organiza- because of new or unusual construction, the AI may seek guid-
tion is called the Alberta Boilers Safety Association (ABSA), and ance from a higher authority within his or her organization (many
1-32 t Chapter 1

Authorized Inspection Agencies maintain an engineering staff) or must sign the form as confirmation that the work complied with
via an inquiry to the Code Committee, to determine whether the the applicable Code rules. That form becomes part of the complete
proposed construction is acceptable. documentation assembled by the manufacturer of record. In gen-
If a symbol stamp holder fails to comply with the Code, the AI eral, the manufacturer of record has the duty of obtaining from all
has several powerful remedies. The Authorized Inspector can re- organizations which have done any Code work on the boiler their
quire rework, additional NDE, or simply refuse to accept the boiler proper Code certification for that work.
(or other component). Without the AI’s signature on the Data Re- The same approach is used to certify that portion of the work
port Form, the boiler is not complete and cannot be sold or used called field assembly for those boilers that are too large to be com-
where the Code is enforced. For repeated violations, the AI might pletely assembled in the shop. The Manufacturers’ Data Report
also recommend that the contract for Authorized Inspection not be Form typically has a certification box for use by the assembler of
renewed. Finally, if the violations were flagrant, the matter could a boiler.
be brought to the attention of the Committee on Boiler and Pres-
sure Vessel Conformity Assessment. The Committee would then Manufacturers’ Data Report Forms and Their
conduct a hearing that could lead to the revocation of the offender’s Distribution. Section I has 13 different Manufacturers’ Data
Certificate of Authorization to use the Certification Mark. The loss Report Forms (MDRFs) that have evolved over the years to cover
of the Certificate of Authorization could impact their business so various types of boilers and related components. These forms
third-party inspection provides a very effective means of assuring serve several purposes, one of which is to provide a documented
Code compliance. summary of certain important information about the boiler: its
manufacturer, purchaser, location, and identification numbers.
1.7.10 Certification by Stamping and Data Reports Most forms also provide a concise summary of the construction
details used: a list of the various components (drum, heads, head- Certification and Its Significance. For the Code to ers, tubes, nozzles, and openings), their material, size, thickness,
be effective, there must be some means of ensuring that it has type, etc., and other information such as the design and hydrostatic
been followed. Each phase of the work of designing, manufactur- test pressures and maximum designed steaming capacity.
ing, and assembling the boiler must be done in accordance with The forms and their use are described in PG-112, in PG-113,
the Code. Assurance that a boiler is constructed to the Code is and in Appendix A-350, which contains examples of all the forms
provided in part by a process called Code certification, described and a guide for completing each one. Also in the Appendix (page
in PG-104. In the simplest case of a complete boiler unit made by A-357) is a so-called Guide to Data Report Forms Distribution.
a single manufacturer, the manufacturer must certify on a form This guide explains which forms should be used in ten differ-
called a Manufacturers’ Data Report Form (see below) that all ent circumstances involving several types of boilers that may be
work done by the manufacturer or others responsible to the manu- designed, manufactured, and assembled by different Certificate
facturer complies with all requirements of the Code. When some Holders. There are so many forms and combinations of forms that
portion is performed by others not responsible to the manufacturer, can be used that the subject can often be quite confusing. What is
the manufacturer must obtain the other organization’s Code cer- important to remember is the purpose of the forms: to provide a
tification that its work complied with the Code. In addition, the summary of essential information about the parts composing the
manufacturer must stamp the boiler with the Certification Mark, boiler and to provide for certification, as appropriate, by all those
which signifies that it has been constructed in accordance with the involved (the various manufacturers and inspectors) that all com-
Code. Certification thus is an integral part of a quality assurance ponents of the boiler were constructed to the rules of Section I. At
program, which establishes that the same time, it is also important to understand that the MDRFs
were never intended to be all-inclusive catalogs or parts lists for
(1) the organization that did the work held an appropriate ASME
the boiler or substitutes for the manufacturers’ drawings. If more
Certificate of Authorization to use the Certification Mark;
information is needed than is found on the forms, it can be found
(2) the organization has certified compliance with the Code
on those drawings.
rules by signing and furnishing the appropriate Manufac-
Certain of the forms are sometimes called Master Data Report
turers’ Data Report Form;
Forms. A Master Data Report Form, as the name implies, is the
(3) the organization has applied the Certification Mark to iden-
lead document when several different forms are used in combina-
tify the work covered by its Data Report Form; and
tion to document the boiler. The P-2, P-2A, P-2B, P-3, P-3A, and
(4) a qualified Inspector has confirmed by his or her signature
PL-1 forms can be used as Master Data Report Forms. The other
on the Data Report Form that the work complied with the
forms (the P-4, P-4A, P-4B, and P-6) usually supplement the infor-
applicable Code rules.
mation on the Master Data Report Forms and are attached to them.
In the case of a complete boiler unit that is not manufactured Manufacturers Data Report Forms P-7 and P-8 cover the manufac-
and assembled by a single manufacturer, the same principles are turer and assembly of Safety and Pressure Relief Valves.
followed. There is always one manufacturer who must take the PG-112.3 requires copies of the Manufacturers’ Data Report
overall responsibility for ensuring through proper Code certifica- Forms to be furnished to the purchaser, the inspection agency, and
tion that all the work complies with the requirements of the Code. the municipal, state, or provincial authority at the place of instal-
If, for example, the manufacturer of a boiler buys the drum (or lation. In addition, many jurisdictions require registration of the
any other part) of the boiler from another manufacturer, that other boiler with the National Board, which would then be sent copies
manufacturer must follow similar certification and stamping pro- of the Manufacturers’ Data Report Forms. Many boiler manufac-
cedures. The part manufacturer must have a Certificate of Authori- turers routinely register all their boilers with the National Board.
zation to use the Certification Mark, certify compliance with all Thus the concerned organizations have available a valuable sum-
the Code rules on a Manufacturers’ Data Report Form, and stamp mary of the design data and the technical details of the boiler. This
or otherwise identify the part; in addition, an Authorized Inspector can be very helpful many years later for investigations, repairs, or

alterations when original plans may have disappeared or are not below the Certification Mark in the 6 o’clock position. The Desig-
readily available. Surprisingly, this is often the case. Having such nators applicable to Section I construction (from the 2015 Edition)
information as the applicable Code edition and the details of origi- are listed below:
nal components can facilitate any subsequent work on the boiler.
The designer then knows the design pressure, the size, thickness, (a) S—power boiler Designator
material, allowable stress, and design formulas originally used and (b) M—miniature boiler Designator
can make appropriate choices for repair, replacement, or altera- (c) E—electric boiler Designator
tion. Copies of Data Report Forms on file with the National Board (d) A—boiler assembly Designator
can be readily obtained from that organization, and this is a major (e) PP—pressure piping Designator
benefit of National Board registration (a service available for both (f) V—boiler pressure relief valve Designator
boilers and pressure vessels). (g) PRT—fabricated parts Designator

Except under certain carefully controlled circumstances, no Certification Marks and How They are Obtained.
organization may do Code work (e.g., fabricate or assemble any
The ASME committee that formulated the first edition of the Code
Section I boiler components) without having first received from
in 1915 recognized a need to identify in a unique way any boiler
the ASME a Certificate of Authorization to use the Certification
constructed to meet the Code. They decided to do this by having
Mark with one of the Designators. Before an organization can ob-
the manufacturer stamp the boiler with a Code symbol. Paragraph
tain such a certificate, it must meet certain qualifications, among
332 of that original edition stipulates, in part, “Each boiler shall
which are the following.
conform in every detail to these Rules, and shall be distinctly
stamped with the symbol shown in Fig. 19, denoting that the boiler 1. The organization (manufacturer, assembler, or
was constructed in accordance therewith. Each boiler shall also be engineering-contractor) must have in force at all times
stamped by the builder with a serial number and with the builder’s an agreement with an inspection agency (the Authorized
name either in full or abbreviated. . . .” The official symbol for Inspection Agency, or AIA), usually an insurance company
such a boiler was then, an S enclosed in a cloverleaf. That symbol authorized to write boiler and pressure vessel insurance,
is evidence that the boiler complies with the Code and represents or with a government agency or government authorized
an assurance of safe design and construction. A great many provi- agency (see Section 1.7.9, Third-Party Inspection) that
sions of Section I are directed to making sure that this will be so. administers a boiler law in that jurisdiction. This agreement
Over the years, Section I has added other symbol stamps, and covers the terms and conditions of the authorized Code in-
there are now a total of six covering different aspects of boiler con- spection to be provided and stipulates the mutual responsi-
struction. Until the late 1970s, there was also an L stamp, used for bilities of the manufacturer or assembler and an inspector
locomotive boilers, but by that time there were only two manufac- provided by the inspection agency. These inspectors, called
turers who were still authorized to use the L stamp. The Committee Authorized Inspectors, must be qualified by written ex-
decided to abolish what had become an obsolete stamp, and those amination under the rules of any state of the United States
last two manufacturers were given S stamps instead. or province of Canada whose boiler laws have adopted
In 2011 ASME changed the code symbol stamp to a Certifica- Section I. Authorized Inspectors provide the inspection
tion Mark (see Figure PG-105.1—included here for reference) to be required by Section I during construction or assembly and,
used with a Designator. The Designator will be located immediately after completion, of any Section I component.


1-34 t Chapter 1

2. A further requirement for obtaining a Certificate of code QC requirements is recognition that each manufacturer has its
Authorization to use the Certification Mark is that the own established practices and that these are acceptable if a docu-
manufacturer or assembler must have, and demonstrate, mented system can be developed showing control of the operation
a quality control system to establish that all Code re- in conformance with Code requirements. It is also recognized that
quirements will be met. These pertain to material, design some of the information included in a written description of a qual-
(except for the PRT designator as noted below), fabrica- ity control system is proprietary, and no distribution is required
tion, examination by the manufacturer or assembler, and other than to the Authorized Inspector.
inspection by the Authorized Inspector. An outline of the An outline of features to be incorporated into a Section I quality
features required in the quality control system is provid- control system is found in the A-302 paragraphs. These paragraphs
ed in paragraph A-300 of the Appendix and is discussed are a list of requirements that have proven to be relatively easy to
in Section 1.7.11 below. understand and have worked well. To begin, the authority and re-
3. Finally, before the ASME issues (or renews) a Certificate of sponsibility of those performing quality control functions must be
Authorization, the manufacturer’s or assembler’s facilities established. That is, the manufacturer must assign an individual with
and organization are reviewed by a team consisting of a rep- the authority and organizational freedom to identify quality problems
resentative of the inspection agency (AIA) and an individ- and to recommend and implement corrective actions should they be
ual certified as an ASME Designee, who is selected by the needed. In addition, the written system must include the following:
legal jurisdiction involved. The manufacturer or assembler
must make available to the review team a written descrip- t The manufacturer’s organization chart, showing the relation-
tion of the quality control system that explains what docu- ship between management, engineering, and all other groups
ments and procedures will be used to produce or assemble involved in the production of Code components and what the
a Code item. On recommendation of the review team, the primary responsibility of each group is. The Code does not
ASME issues (or renews) a Certificate of Authorization to specify how to set up the organization, nor does it prevent the
use the Cerification Mark, normally for a period of three manufacturer from making changes, so long as the resultant
years. organization is appropriate for doing Code work.
t Procedures to control drawings, calculations, and specifica-
The “PRT” designator was added in the 2015 Edition and has tions. That is, the manufacturer must have a system to ensure
one important distinction when compared to the other designators. that current drawings, design calculations, specifications, and
This designator is for fabrication of parts only and does not include instructions are used for the manufacture of Code components.
design responsibility. Many organizations build to print and note in t A system for controlling material used in Code fabrication to
the Remarks section of Form P-4 that the design was performed by ensure that only properly identified and documented material
others. The issue for these Manufacturers is that even though they is used.
never perform design, they still had to demonstrate design ability t An examination and inspection program that provides ref-
as part of the process of obtaining a Certificate of Authorization to erences to Nondestructive Examination Procedures and to
use the Certification Mark (see the next paragraph). With the addi- personnel qualifications and records needed to comply with
tion of the “PRT” designator, an organization that does not perform the Code. Also required is a system agreed upon with the
design can now obtain a Certificate of Authorization without hav- Authorized Inspector for correcting nonconformities. A non-
ing to demonstrate design ability. conformity is any condition that does not comply with the
rules of the Code, whether in material, manufacture, or the
1.7.11 Quality Control System provision of all required appurtenances and arrangements.
In 1973, the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee Nonconformities must be corrected before the component can
adopted comprehensive and detailed rules for what is called a be considered to comply with the Code.
quality control (QC) system in Sections I, IV, and VIII, the boiler t A program to ensure that only weld procedures, welding
and pressure vessel sections of the Code. In Section I, these rules operators, and welders that meet Code requirements are used
are found in PG-105.4 and Appendix A-300, both entitled Qual- to produce Code components. This is normally one of the
ity Control System. Each manufacturer (or other certificate holder, most detailed and important sections of the QC Manual, and
such as an assembler) is required to have a documented quality it describes how qualified weld procedures are maintained
control system that is fully implemented into its manufacturing and used and who within the organization is responsible for
operations. See Appendix J of B31.1 Power Piping Code Quality them. It also includes details on how welder qualifications are
Control Requirements for Boiler External Piping (BEP). established and maintained.
The QC system is intended to control the entire manufacturing t A system to control postweld heat treatment of welded parts
process from design to final testing and certification. The scope and any other heat treatment, such as might be required fol-
of such systems may vary significantly among manufacturers, lowing tube bending or swaging. This system must also pro-
since the complexity of the work determines the program required; vide means by which the Authorized Inspector can verify that
however, the essential features of a QC system are the same for the heat treatment was applied.
everyone. Each manufacturer is free to determine the length and t A system for calibration of examination, measurement,
complexity of its Quality Control Manual, making it as general or and test equipment used in Code construction to ensure its
detailed as desired. It is not advisable to include detailed practices accuracy. The Code does not require such calibrations to be
in the manual that are not actually followed in the shop. Also, when traceable to a national standard such as those maintained at
shop practices are revised, the manual must be updated to reflect the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST). It
the revisions. Otherwise the Authorized Inspector is likely to find merely states that the equipment must be calibrated.
nonconformities, which will cause considerable extra work before t A system of record retention for such items as radiographs
full compliance with the code can be demonstrated. Implicit in the and Manufacturers’ Data Reports.

t Procedures covering certain other activities of the manufac- pressure parts shall be subjected to a hydrostatic test…” The
turer, such as hydrostatic testing. Committee has passed an intent interpretation together with a re-
t Procedures and controls for any intended subcontracting of vision to PW-54 for publication in a future edition (intended to
any aspect of Code construction, such as design, radiography, publish in the 2017 Edition) that will clarify that the hydrostatic
or heat treatment. test referenced in PW-54 is the hydrostatic test of the completed
boiler in PG-99.
Appendix A-300 concludes with the admonition that the quality
control system shall provide for the Authorized Inspector to have 1.8.2 Digital Radiography
access to all drawings, calculations, records, procedures, test re- As mentioned in 1.7.7, Nondestructive Examination, Section I
sults, and any other documents necessary for him or her to perform requires the Manufacturer to keep a complete set of radiographs for
the inspections mandated by Section I. The objective is to ensure a period of 5 years. With the development of digital radiography
the quality of the construction and compliance with the Code. Note and the technology to convert radiographic film to digital images,
also that the quality control system may not be changed without some users have questioned whether storing digital images satis-
obtaining the concurrence of the Authorized Inspector. fies Section I requirements. This was addressed by the Committee
As explained in Section, Certification Marks and How in two interpretations issued in 2015.
They are Obtained, one of the conditions for the issuance or re-
newal of a Certificate of Authorization to use one of the ASME Question: Does the phrase “A complete set of radiographs”
Certification Mark with the appropriate Designator is that the man- in PW-51.4 cover the Digital Radiographs taken using DR/
ufacturer or assembler must have a quality control system that is CR (Digital Radiography/Computed Radiography) Industrial
intended to ensure all Code requirements will be met. Furthermore, Radiography Systems?
the QC system must be demonstrated to a review team.
The issuance by the ASME of a new Certificate of Authoriza- Reply: Yes.
tion or the required triennial renewal of an existing Certificate of Question: Radiographic film is often converted to digital im-
Authorization is based on a favorable recommendation after a joint ages to ease storage, reproduction, and distribution of the
review of the written quality control system by a representative of images. Is it acceptable per the requirements of PW-51.4 to
the manufacturer’s Authorized Inspection Agency and a represent- retain the converted digital images in-lieu of retaining the ra-
ative of the legal jurisdiction involved. In those areas where there diograph film?
are no jurisdictional authorities or when the jurisdiction declines
to participate, the second member of the review team is a qualified Reply: No.
ASME review team leader.
For the interpretation regarding converting film to digital im-
ages, many on the Committee felt that it would be acceptable but
had to answer “No” as there were no words in the Code to support
a “Yes” reply. To address that, the Committee has passed a revision
As mentioned at the end of the Introduction in section 1.1, to PW-54.1 which when published in a future edition (intended
Section I is a living document and is continually updated. At the to publish in the 2017 Edition) will clarify that radiographs may
time of updating this book (2016), the Committee is working to- be stored as film or digital images and that if film is digitized, the
wards publication of the 2017 Edition and is also working on items digitization shall be in accordance with Section V, Article 2, Man-
for the 2019 Edition. This section highlights some of the items be- datory Appendix III.
ing worked on which may be included in a future publication of
Section I. 1.8.3 Advanced NDE
In the 2015 Edition of Section V, a new Mandatory Appendix II
1.8.1 Replacement Parts was added to Article 1. This mandatory appendix provides guid-
Pressure testing of replacement parts has long been a grey area ance for employers in developing their written practice for quali-
between Section I, the NBIC, and the jurisdictions. Section I has fying personnel on some of the more advanced NDE techniques
requirements for pressure testing a completed boiler in PG-99 (computed radiography, digital radiography, phased array UT, and
and pressure testing of parts in PW-54. Under PW-54, it indicated time of flight diffraction UT). The Committee has approved a revi-
that the testing of the part may be made in the shop or in the field. sion for publication in a future edition (intended to publish in the
Some questioned whether it was acceptable to stamp a part and 2017 Edition) which references Section V, Article 1, Mandatory
ship to the field for a field assembled boiler without performing a Appendix II.
hydrostatic test of the part before applying the stamp to the part.
This was addressed with a change to PG-106.8 in the 1996 Ad- 1.8.4 Corrosion
denda to clarify that parts could be stamped without being pres- As indicated in Corrosion/Erosion Allowance, the
sure tested prior to shipment, as they would receive a pressure designer has the responsibility to determine whether a corrosion
test with the completed boiler. This has caused confusion with allowance is needed and, if so, the amount and location. There
some users and Jurisdictions when installing replacement parts in have been multiple inquiries over the years regarding the need for
existing units. The NBIC has alternates to full hydrostatic pres- a corrosion allowance and how to apply it so the Committee has
sure tests for repairs and alterations (including installing parts as approved revisions for publication in a future edition (intended to
part of those repairs and alterations). This means that the welds publish in the 2017 Edition) which provide guidance on how to
made in the fabrication of the parts themselves may never receive apply corrosion allowance (when specified) in design equations.
a full hydrostatic pressure test. Some felt that this was then a These changes are somewhat consistent with UG-16(e) of Section
violation of PW-54 which states that “…drums and other welded VIII Division 1.
1-36 t Chapter 1

In a related action, the Committee has approved the addition of address these advancing conditions. To address this, the Commit-
a new nonmandatory appendix for publication in a future edition tee formed a task group to review Section I, other sections of the
(intended to publish in the 2017 Edition) that will provide guidance Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, and other international standards
for manufacturers in regards to minimizing the effects of fireside to identify areas that need to be addressed. Items being considered
corrosion, erosion, and steam side oxidation for high temperature are how to perform fatigue assessments, restrictions on certain ge-
components in coal fired boilers. ometries for cycling service, allowing design by analysis in place
of or to compliment the use of design by rule, tighter controls on
1.8.5 PWHT of P-No. 1 Group 1 welding and heat treatment, advanced NDE or more stringent ac-
As mentioned in, Postweld Heat Treatment, the table of ceptance criteria, etc.
exemptions for P-No. 1 materials has been simplified to provide
exemptions for welds up to 1½ in. (38 mm) regardless of type of 1.8.9 Solar
weld. The Committee has approved another change for to Table As noted in 1.4.3, Fired versus Unfired Boilers, the Committee
PW-39-1 for publication in a future edition (intended to publish in formed a new committee to address solar power. This committee is
the 2017 Edition) that extends the exemption for P-No. 1 Group 1 working on requirements for molten salt solar receivers for publish
materials by removing the 1½ in. (38 mm) upper limit. The exist- in a future edition and maybe an early implementation Code Case.
ing limitations will now only apply to P-No. 1 Groups 2 and 3.
1.8.10 Liquid Phase Thermal Fluid Heaters
1.8.6 Local PWHT of Creep Strength Enhanced Some jurisdictions require that liquid phase thermal fluid heat-
Ferritic Steels ers be constructed and stamped in accordance with Section I. The
The class of materials known as creep strength enhanced steels, only place in Section I that currently addresses these devices is in
particularly the P-No. 15E materials, are not only dependent on PG-2.4 which states that they may be constructed and stamped in
chemistry to achieve the desired properties but also on the ther- accordance with Section I provided all applicable requirements are
mal processing history of the materials. A big part of that history met. There is no guidance on which requirements are applicable
is PWHT and industry studies and experience have demonstrated (or which may not be). The Committee received a request from a
that local PWHT must be tightly controlled to be effective. To ad- Manufacturer to revise Section I to clarify which requirements are
dress this, a new nonmandatory appendix has been approved by the applicable. The task group assigned is working on developing a
Committee for publication in a future edition (intended to publish new Part for these devices.
in the 2017 Edition) that provides recommendations for the set-up
and application of local PWHT to P-No. 15E materials using elec-
1.8.11 Cold Forming of Carbon
tric resistance heating elements. and Carbon-Molybdenum Steels
In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, cold bends in some boiler
circuits made from carbon steel and carbon-molybdenum steel
1.8.7 Material Traceability
were prone to premature and catastrophic failure in the extrados
PG-77 provides requirements for marking of plate material used
of the cold bends. Each US boiler manufacturer developed pre-
for shells, furnace sheets, and heads and requires that the markings
ventative actions that alleviated failures but these actions have not
be visible when the boiler is completed. The requirements are unique
been incorporated into the rules of Section I. Many current manu-
in that they only apply to plate materials. There are no corresponding
facturers are not aware of these failures, or more importantly the
requirements for other material product forms other than the require-
preventative actions, so the Committee is considering adding cold
ment in A-302.4 that the manufacturer have a material control system
forming rules for carbon and carbon moly steels.
that ensures that only the intended material is used in Code construc-
tion. There is no other information on what should be included in that
material control system. A user requested clarification of the applica-
bility of the PG-77 requirements to other product forms so the Com-
mittee has approved a revision to PG-77 for publication in a future 1. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section I, Power Boilers.
edition (intended to publish in the 2017 Edition). Unlike the require- s.l. : The American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
ments for plate, this will not specifically require that the markings 2. Bernstein, Martin D and Yoder, Lloyd W. Power Boilers: A Guide to
on other product forms be visible in the completed boiler but instead Section I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. NewYork :
will require that the identification of material be maintained until the ASME Press, 1998.
data report for the item containing the material is complete. As an
3. MacKay, John R and Pillow, James T. Power Boilers: A Guide to
example, if the material is a pipe used in construction of a header and
Section I of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Second
the header is documented on a Form P-4 Manufacturer’s Partial Data Edition. New York : ASME Press, 2011.
report, the identification must be maintained until that data report is
completed; any markings on the pipe are not required to be visible in 4. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Materials. s.l. :
the completed boiler. The revised paragraph will provide guidance American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
on some of the acceptable ways for maintaining identification (color 5. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section V, Nondestructive
coding, abbreviated marking, written record, etc.). It should be noted Examination. s.l. : American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
that the identification only has to be to the material type (such as 6. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX, Qualifications
grade 22, grade 91, etc.), not to the MTR for the material. Standard for Welding, Brazing, and Fusing Procedures; Welders;
Brazers; and Welding, Brazing, and Fusing Operators. s.l. : American
1.8.8 Modernization of Section I Society of Mechanical Engineers.
As pressure, temperature, and cycling requirements continue 7. ASME Code for Pressure Piping B31, Power Piping—B31.1. s.l. :
to increase, some feel that Section I needs to be “modernized” to American Society of MEchanical Engineers.

8. National Board Inspection Code. s.l. : The American National PD

Standards Institute/The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel t= +C
2SE + 2 yP
Inspectors. ANSI/NB-23.
9. Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating,
Repair, and Alteration. s.l. : The American Petroleum Institute. API D = outside diameter of cylinder = 10.75 in.
510. C = minimum allowance for threading and structural stability
(see PG-27.4.3) = 0
10. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII, Pressure
E = efficiency (see PG-27.4.1) = 1.0
Vessels. s.l. : American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
P = maximum allowable working pressure = 1020 psi
11. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IV, Heating Boilers. S = maximum allowable stress value at design temperature =
s.l. : American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 10,800 psi
12. Code Cases: Boilers and Pressure Vessels. s.l. : American Society of y = temperature coefficient (see PG-27.4.6) = 0.4
Mechanical Engineers.
We can then find from that formula that the minimum thickness
13. Code Cases: Nuclear Components. s.l. : American Society of Mechanical required is 0.49 in., as follows:
14. ASME Code for Pressure Piping B31, Process Piping - B31.3. s.l. : (1020)(10.75)
t= = 0.49 in.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 2(10800) + 2(0.4)(1020)
15. SYNOPSIS of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Laws, Rules, and
We now go to a standard table of pipe sizes and thickness that is
Regulations. Louisville, KY: Uniform Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Laws Society, 2000.
derived from ASME B36.10, Welded and Seamless Wrought Steel
Pipe [18]. Note that for any diameter, the wall thickness varies in
16. Qualifications for Authorized Inspection. ASME QAI-1. accordance with the so-called schedule number of the pipe. The
17. Rules for Commisioned Inspectors. s.l. : The National Board of Boiler table shows that schedule 60 NPS 10 appears to have just about the
and Pressure Vessel Inspectors. NB-263, RCI-1. wall thickness we need: 0.50 in. However, this is not the case be-
18. Welded and Seamless Wrought Steel Pipe. s.l. : The American Society
cause the thickness listed in the table is nominal and is subject to an
of Mechanical Engineers. ASME B36.10M-2015. undertolerance, as explained in PG-27.4.7. This 12.5% undertoler-
ance on thickness is given in ASME Specification SA-530 cover-
19. Valves—Flanged, Threaded, and Welding End. s.l. : The American ing general requirements for carbon and alloy steel pipe. It is also
Society of Mechanical Engineers. ASME B16.34-2013.
found in the individual pipe specifications listed in PG-9, for ex-
ample, in paragraph 19.3 of the SA-106 pipe specification. Accord-
ingly, we must go to the next commonly available wall thickness
1.10 DESIGN EXERCISES among the specifications approved by the ASME. The table shows
that 0.562 in wall thickness pipe is available and this would satisfy
1.10.1 Design Exercise No. 1, Design of a Header our needs (0.562 × 0.875 = 0.491 in). The schedule sizes listed in
This first problem illustrates the use of Section I’s method of B36.10M are often more readily available than the intermediate
design-by-rule, using the rules of paragraph PG-27 to design a thickness listed so a user may decide to select schedule 80, with a
header. The reader is advised to review PG-27 before attempting nominal wall thickness of 0.594 in. Even with an undertolerance of
to solve the problem or looking at the solution. When reviewing 12.5%, the minimum thickness at any point in this pipe would be
PG-27, note that slightly different formulas are used for designing 0.875 * 0.594 in. = 0.52 in., which satisfies our required minimum
pipe and tubes. of 0.49 in. Our final choice would therefore be an NPS 10 schedule
It has been decided to make a certain cylindrical superheater 80 SA-106 Grade B pipe of whatever length is required.
header from pipe, using 10 in. nominal pipe size (NPS) of appro-
priate wall thickness for a maximum allowable working pressure Alternate Solution to Design Exercise No. 1: PG-27.1
of 1020 psi. Applying Section I formula PG-27.2.2 with a 10.75 in. permits the use of the equation given in A-317 of Appendix A in
outside diameter and an allowable stress of 10,800 psi (at an 800°F lieu of the equation provided in PG-27 for the calculation of cylin-
design temperature) for SA-106 Grade B pipe material, determine drical components under internal pressure.
the minimum wall thickness required. Then select the lightest pipe Using the same parameters as used in Design Exercise No.1,
adequate for this design pressure, from a table showing standard calculate the required header thickness using the equations in Ap-
pipe sizes and wall thicknesses varying according to schedule pendix A-317. The minimum required thickness of the header may
number. Assume the constant C (for threading and structural sta- be calculated from the formula shown in A-317.2.1, as follows:
bility) in formula PG 27.2.2 is zero, and determine the tempera-
ture coefficient y from the table in PG-27.4.6. Assume also that é æ Pöù
ç- ÷
no corrosion allowance is needed, that the hydrostatic head, which D ê1 - eè SE ø ú
ê ú
t= ë û +C + f
normally must be included in the design pressure when design-
ing pipe, is negligible in this case, and that there are no openings 2
or connections that would require compensation or ligament effi-
ciency calculations. For ready reference, a table of pipe sizes from where:
ASME B36.10M-2015 has been included at the end of this chapter. D = outside diameter of cylinder = 10.75 in.
C = minimum allowance for threading and structural stability Solution to Design Exercise No. 1: The minimum (see A-317.3, Note 3) = 0
required thickness of the header may be calculated from the for- E = efficiency (see A-317.3, Note 1) = 1.0
mula shown in PG-27.2.2. as follows: e = the base of natural logarithms
1-38 t Chapter 1

P = maximum allowable working pressure = 1020 psi Solution to Design Exercise No. 2(C): The thickness
S = maximum allowable stress value at design temperature = of a full hemispherical shaped head is calculated in accordance
10,800 psi with the formula in PG-29.11 as follows:
E = efficiency (see A-317.3, Note 1)
f = thickness factor for expanded tube ends (see A-317.3, Note 4) t=
2Sw - 0.2P
é æ
1020 ö ù
÷ where:
10.75 ê1 - eè (10800)(1) ø ú
ê ú L = radius to which the head was formed, measured on the con-
t= ë û + 0 + 0 = 0.48 in. cave side of the head = 10.75/2-0.594 = 4.781 in.
2 P = maximum allowable working pressure = 1020 psi
S = maximum allowable working stress, using values given in
Section II, Part D, Subpart 1, Table 1A = 12,000 psi
1.10.2 Design Exercise No. 2, Design of a Head t = minimum thickness of head
Design Exercise No. 1 consisted of the design of a cylindrical w = weld joint strength reduction factor per PG-26 = 1
header, which turned out to be an NPS 10 schedule 80 SA-106
Grade B pipe (with a 10.75 in. OD and a nominal wall thickness of (1020)(4.781)
t= = 0.21 in.
0.594 in.). In this exercise, various heads for that header will be de- 2(12000)(1) - 0.2(1020)
signed starting with a so-called dished head and using the rules of
paragraph PG-29.1. (Dished heads are usually standard catalog items Note that L is the inside radius of the head. In this case, it was
furnished as standard pressure parts under the rules of para-graph PG- chosen to match the nominal inside radius of the piece of pipe used
11). Again the reader is advised to review PG-29 before proceeding. for the header in Design Exercise No. 1.
(A) For the same maximum allowable working pressure of 1020 psi From the results of these three head-thickness calculations, it is
and design temperature of 800°F, determine the required thickness of clear that the hemispherical head is the most efficient shape, re-
a blank, unstayed dished head with a 10 in. radius L on the concave quiring a thickness only a fraction of that required for a dished or
side of the head. Assume the head is made of SA-516 Grade 70 mate- an ellipsoidal head, and only about half that of the header to which
rial. The maximum allowable working stress, S, from Section II, Part it is attached. This is because a hemispherical head carries pres-
D, is determined to be 12,000 psi. Verify this value if you have avail- sure loads predominantly by developing membrane stresses, while
able a copy of Section II, Part D. Notice that the allowable stress for the ellipsoidal and especially the dished heads develop significant
this material is higher than that of the pipe material. bending stresses in addition to the membrane stresses.
(B) PG-29.7 provides a rule for the design of a semiellipsoidal- Note also that paragraph PG-16.3 establishes the minimum
shaped head. What minimum thickness would be needed if this thickness of boiler plate under pressure as 1/4 in. (6 mm) in most
type of head were used? cases.
(C) PG-29.11 provides the rules for designing a full
hemispherical-shaped head. What minimum thickness would be 1.10.3 Design Exercise No. 3, Choice of Feedwater
required if this type of head were used? Stop Valve
From the provisions of PG-42, it is seen that most boiler valves Solution to Design Exercise No. 2(A): The minimum are furnished in compliance with the ASME product standard for
required thickness of the head is calculated using the formula in valves, ASME B16.34, Valves—Flanged, Threaded, and Welding
PG-29.1 as follows: End [19]. This standard provides a series of tables for various mate-
rial groups, giving pressure-temperature ratings according to what
t = 5PL /4.8Sw
are called pressure classes. The classes typically vary from the 150
where: class (the weakest) to the 4500 class. For each class, the allowable
L = radius to which the head is dished, measured on the con- pressure is tabulated as a function of temperature. The allowable
cave side of the head = 10 in. pressure at any temperature is the pressure rating of the valve at
P = maximum allowable working pressure (hydrostatic head that temperature. Temperatures range from the lowest zone, –20°F
loading need not be included)—1020 psi to 100°F, to 850°F and higher, depending on the material group.
S = maximum allowable working stress, using values given in The allowable pressure for the valve falls with increasing tempera-
Section II, Part D, Subpart 1, Table 1A = 12,000 psi ture, since it is based on the allowable stress for the material.
t = minimum thickness of head The designer of a valve for Section I service must select a valve
w = weld joint strength reduction factor per PG-26 = 1 whose pressure rating at design temperature is adequate for the
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) of the boiler.
5(1020)(10) However, feedwater and blowoff piping and valves are designed
t= = 0.89
(4.8)(12000)(1) for a pressure higher than the MAWP of the boiler, because they
are in a more severe type of service called shock service. Design
rules for feedwater piping are found in paragraph 122 of B31.1, Solution to Design Exercise No. 2(B): Power Piping. The shock service somewhat complicates the choice
t = 0.49 in. of the valve; to clarify the choice, Subcommittee I issued Interpre-
tation I-83-91. The following example illustrates the choice of a
The explanation is that PG-29.7 says that a semiellipsoidal head feedwater stop valve following the procedure outlined in the fourth
shall be at least as thick as the required thickness of a seamless reply of that interpretation.
shell of the same diameter. Thus, the answer derived in Design The problem here is to select a feedwater stop valve for a boiler
Exercise No. 1 applies. with a Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) of 1500 psi.

Note that the design rules for a valve that is part of the boiler exter-
nal piping are found in paragraph 122 of B31.1, Power Piping. Solution to Design Exercise No. 3: The first step in
this problem is to determine the design pressure and temperature
required for this valve. According to paragraph 122.1.3(A.1) of
B31.1, the design pressure of a feedwater valve must exceed the
MAWP of the boiler by 25% or 225 psi, whichever is the lesser.
1500 psi + 225 psi = 1725 psi
1500 psi * 1.25 = 1875 psi
The design pressure PF is taken as the lesser value, 1725 psi. The
design temperature is found from paragraph 122.1.3(B) of B31.1
to be the saturation temperature of the boiler. That temperature for
a MAWP of 1500 psi is found to be 596°F from any steam table. (Source: ASME SECTION I)
Thus we must now find a valve designed for 1725 psi at 596°F.
We next turn to the tables of valve materials and ratings from
the governing valve standard, ASME B 16.34, Valves—Flanged, t Tube design temperature T = 800°F
Threaded, and Welding End (for ready reference, these pages are t Tube diameter D = 4.0 in.
included at the end of this chapter). Assume the valve material is a t Tube wall thickness t = 0.30 in.
forging, SA-105, which is a carbon steel suitable for the relatively t Lug thickness = 1/4 in.
low temperature of feedwater service. Notice that the standard uses t Lug attachment angle (the angle subtended by the lug width;
the ASTM designation A-105, rather than the ASME designation see Table PG-56.2) = 7 degrees.
SA-105 (it makes no difference in this case, because PG-11 permits t Design stress for tube at 800°F, Sa = 16,600 psi (increased
use of the materials in the ASME product standards accepted by ref- from its former value of 15,000 psi by the new stress criteria
erence in PG-42). It is seen from the Table 1 list of material speci- adopted in the 1999 addenda).
fications that A-105 falls in what is known as material group 1.1.
The task now is to find the lowest valve class adequate for the
design conditions we have established. As indicated in paragraph Solution to Design Exercise No. 4: The first step in
2.1.1(f) of B16.34, ratings intermediate to tabulated values are de- the solution to this problem is to determine K, the tube-attachment-
termined by linear interpolation between temperatures. To simplify angle design factor, by interpolation in Table PG-56.2. K is found
this exercise, we will round up the design temperature to 600°F. to be 1.07. Also needed is the value of the variable X, which is
Turning to Table 2-1.1, the ratings for group 1.1 materials, we enter defined in PG-56.2. In this example,
with 600°F and look for a valve class adequate for 1725 psi. The X = bD/t2
first such class is a 1500 (standard class) valve. However, an alter-
native choice is available from the ratings table for special class where:
valves. From that table, it is seen that a 900 special class valve b = unit width = 1.0 in.
would also be adequate. (Note that the difference between the rat- D = outside diameter of tube = 4.0 in.
ings of these two classes is based on the amount of NDE used in t = tube wall thickness = 0.3 in.
their manufacture. The additional NDE required for special class
valves provides ensurance that critical locations are free of signifi- X = (1)(4)/0.32 = 44.4
cant defects and justifies their higher pressure ratings.) The final
choice of valve then becomes one of cost and delivery time. The load factor, Lf, is now determined either by reading it from
the plot in Fig. PG-56.2 or by using the appropriate load-factor
1.10.4 Design Exercise No. 4, Design of a Tube equation in PG-56.2(a) or PG-56.2(b), depending on whether the
for Lug Loading lug is applying compression or tension loading to the tube. The
PG-56 (which used to be in PW-43) provides a method for deter- load-factor equations follow.
mining the allowable load on a tube lug. When PW-43 was revised in For compression loading,
1992, the sample problems in the Section I Appendix paragraphs A-71
to A-74, which illustrate the determination of allowable loading on L f = 1.618 X [ -1.020 -0.014(log X )+ 0.005(log X )
tube lugs, were revised to show the new method. Somehow, the expla-
nation of the examples as printed was not as clear as the subcommittee For tension loading,
had intended, and the examples are a little hard to follow. Accordingly,
the first of the sample problems, that shown in A-71, is explained here L f = 49.937 X [ -2.978 -0.898(log X )+ 0.139(log X )
to serve as a guide to the method. The problem is described as follows.
A tube is suspended by a welded attachment with a 1500 lb de- In either case, the load factor is a function of X, which has al-
sign load and the dimensions shown in Fig. A-71 (shown below for ready been determined to be 44.4. It is hard to read the plot with
convenience). This is a condition of direct radial loading on the tube. an accuracy greater than two significant figures (which ought to
The allowable lug loading is calculated for the following conditions: be good enough for the design of a tube lug). However, if the
equations are used, greater accuracy can be obtained. Note that
t Tube material is SA-213 T-22 the log terms in the equations are logarithms to the base 10. Sub-
t MAWP = 2258 psi stituting X = 44.4 in those equations gives a tension load factor
1-40 t Chapter 1

Lf = 0.0405 and a compression load factor Lf = 0.0326. The prob- S = pressure stress in tube determined by the equation in
lem as stated concerns a tension load on the lug, but the values PG-27.2.1 = 15,000 psi
of both load factors are derived to illustrate that there can be a
significant difference in allowable load, depending on the direc- Thus, St is seen to be twice the allowable tube stress less the
tion of the load. membrane pressure stress, S, at MAWP determined from equa-
The next step is to determine St, the amount of the allowable tion PG-27.2.1. (Notice that if there were no stress due to pressure,
stress that is available for the lug loading. St is found from the the equation would give a value of St equal to twice the allowable
equation in PG-56.2: membrane pressure stress. This is not unreasonable because the
bending stress in the wall of the tube caused by lug loading is con-
St = 2.0Sa - S sidered to be a secondary bending stress.) In the present example,
where: S is found to be 15,000 psi. Thus
Sa = allowable stress value from Section II, Part D, Subpart 1,
Table 1A = 16,600 psi St = 2(16,600) - 15,000 = 18,200 psi






Section VII—Recommended
Guidelines for the Care
of Power Boilers
William L. Lowry and James T. Pillow1
2.1 INTRODUCTION - CHAPTER 2 Section VII and this Chapter 2 is written from the perspective of
Owner–Operators’ personnel experienced in operating, maintaining,
ASME Section VII, Recommended Guidelines for the Care of and examining industrial and utility power boilers. Certain parts of
Power Boilers, falls within the purview of the BPV Committee this chapter are, in some instances, reiterations of Section VII Sub-
on Power Boilers (BPV I). The purpose of these Recommended sections, which was done to stress the importance of the information
Guidelines, as stated in the “Organization of Section VII” is; already provided; in other instances, however, additional information
is provided where it is felt to be warranted. Where there are no com-
The purpose is to promote safety in the use of power boilers. ments on a section, the material is believed to have been covered suf-
These guidelines are intended for use by those directly respon- ficiently to not need additional clarification. The reader is suggested
sible for operating, maintaining, and examining power boilers. to review existing literature, such as manufacturer’s instructions or
company procedures, for additional pertinent information.
The 2015 Section VII is the 2013 Edition reorganized, edited Section VII, along with Section VI [1], contains recommended
and with new material added as a result of input from 30 Peer Re- practices and thus serves as a guideline. Consequently, it is consid-
viewers and 10 additional volunteers. The primary discussion is ered a non-mandatory standard; however, Section VII does discuss
about industrial, gas or oil fired, watertube boilers, which consti- many activities that the Owner–Operator personnel must master
tute the vast majority of Power Boilers constructed. Other boiler before a power boiler is commissioned. New personnel, who might
types are discussed in separate Articles. No information was dis- not be familiar with boiler operation, maintenance, and examina-
carded from the previous Edition. tion, can use Section VII as an introduction to these activities.
The 2015 Edition of Section VII uses the term ‘examiner’ when Experienced personnel, too, can use Section VII, for they will find
addressing the Owner-Operators personnel actions previously re- it to be a good periodic review of the essentials of power boiler
ferred to as ‘inspecting’. The Boiler Code, Section I, identifies an operation, maintenance, and examination.
‘Authorized Inspector’ as the reviewer of work by a stamp holder Unlike how they treat other Sections of the ASME Boiler and Pres-
when fabricating, assembling and stamping a new boiler. After this sure Vessel Code, jurisdictional authorities do not adopt Section VII,
work is completed and the boiler has been placed ‘inservice’, the so consequently its use does not become mandatory. Nor does Sec-
National Board of Boiler Inspectors (NBBI) provides rules applying tion VII require interpretations (which are much-needed for the
to an operating boiler, repairs and alterations thereof. The personnel other sections), for its relative user-friendliness enables any operator
trained by the NBBI and licensed by the Jurisdictions (States, Mu- of power boilers to use it in its present state. In light of the rela-
nicipalities and Provinces) are called ‘inspectors’. The ‘Glossary’ of tively recent emergence of the “on demand” power availability and
Section VII has brief definitions of these terms and many other terms consumption requirements, particularly in the United States, many
that are used with regard to a boiler plant and its operation. large industrial boiler operators and also operators of utility size HRSG
The five Subsections—1 thru 5—of Section VII discuss guide- boilers are shutting boilers off when not required, even when the
lines for safe, reliable operation as well as avoiding unsafe condi- off cycle is for a relatively short period of time. This obviously can
tions in the power boilers. significantly increase the number of operating cycles, often on boilers
that were not designed for highly cyclic operating conditions. This
Edmund W. K. Chang and Geoffrey M. Halley were the authors of changed mode of operation often results in fatigue type failures of vari-
this chapter for the second and third edition that was initially authored by ous boiler structural elements. Experience has shown that the majority
Edmund W. K. Chang for the first edition. Fourth edition was updated by of boiler failures are due to miss-operation in the field either due to
James T. Pillow which is now completely revised by William L. Lowry. improper operator training, or a change in operating conditions, pres-
– Editor. sured by economics or environmental conditions.
2-2 t Chapter 2

Most U.S. jurisdictions and all Canadian provincial and territorial for Maintenance Examinations’ is included in Section VII as
jurisdictions have adopted certain ASME Boiler and Pressure Ves- examples of the organization and detail of typical checklists.
sel Code Sections into law. Many have also become members of the Throughout Section VII, the reader is reminded to consult the
National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors (NBBI, or following:
simply the NB). Typically U.S. and Canadian jurisdictions require
new boilers and pressure vessels to be registered with the NBBI and (1) manufacturer’s instructions;
repairs and alterations to be performed by holders of an NBBI Repair (2) the ASME Code Section I;
Symbol Stamp (R-Stamp, or VR-Stamp in the case of pressure relief (3) the National Fire Protection Association’s Codes;
valves). This means that all work performed on the pressure-retaining (4) the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC);
parts of a boiler must be performed by accredited organizations using (5) the Authorized Inspector or Insurance Inspector.
approved material control and repair or alteration methods. (6) Other pertinent reference documents

A listing of all Section VII referenced documents and the

2.2 INTRODUCTION - SECTION VII publisher of each is also provided in Article 202 of Section VII.
Many Owner–Operators are familiar with the Electric Power
The ‘Organization of Section VII’ clearly states that the Sec- Research Institute (EPRI). Some may be members of EPRI and
tion VII guidelines apply to power boilers that produce steam for thus have access to its publications regarding boiler concerns. Of
external use at a pressure exceeding 15 psig from the application these publications, some may be relevant to Section VII guidelines
of heat, which may come from the combustion of fuels, from var- for which an Owner–Operator requires additional information.
ious hot waste gases, or from the application of electrical energy. Many independent books have been published as guidelines that
The guidelines apply to the boiler proper and to the boiler exter- cover the safe, reliable operation, maintenance, and examination of
nal piping as specified in the Code jurisdictional limits diagrams power boilers. Unlike Section VII, however, these other guidelines
in ASME Section I, Figs. PG-58.3.1a (given here as Fig. 2.1) and do not receive ongoing administration and updating, making
PG-58.3.2 [2] or in ASME B31.1, Figs. 100.1.2(a) and (b) [3]. Section VII a logical first reference. Section VII was added to the
Furthermore, the reader should note that power boilers, as they Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code in 1926 as a branch of Section I
are applied in this guide, do not include Section I-type locomotive, and can be compared to an attachment operating manual or guide.
high-temperature water, and miniature boilers; Section III-type The title, “Recommended Rules for Care of Power Boilers,”
nuclear power plant boilers; Section IV-type heating boilers remained as such until the 1980s, when the word “Rules” was
(recommended rules are covered in Section VI [1]); and Section replaced with the more appropriate word “Guidelines.” For many
VIII-type pressure vessels; and marine-type boilers. The reader years, a separate subcommittee existed to administer Section VII
should also note that once-through-type boilers are also not with the greatest attention focused on large electric-generating
included in the discussions. This chapter clarifies who should system boilers. However, with declining interest in Section VII, the
use Section VII to enable users of excluded boilers to go to other subcommittee became a subgroup of the Subcommittee of Power
sources for the needed information. Boilers (now BPV I) in the 1970s, with efforts made toward giving
Section VII guidelines do not address all of the details required attention to smaller boilers. Because the care and maintenance
to operate, maintain and examine a power boiler. However, Section practice of boilers changed little over the years, there was seldom
VII does provide an overview of the activities necessary for safe, a need to revise Section VII. With the issue of the 1995 edition,
reliable power boiler operation, maintenance, and examination. The Section VII was no longer listed as a subgroup. Presently, Section
guidelines stress the importance of the checklist, of which those in VII is still administered by the Section I Standards Committee
the Appendices are both helpful and essential to the boilers’ safe, and is still issued with new editions of the Boiler and Pressure
reliable operation, maintenance, and examination, and should be Vessel Code. The 2015 Edition of Section VII is a reorganized and
adapted by all Owner–Operators for use in their own particular updated presentation, containing all the previous information as
installations. Owner–Operator personnel can become complacent, well as some new information.
believing that they will remember the required steps in any activity Deregulation trends in power generation and greater permitting
without using a checklist—a bad habit, for it will in all likelihood and citing difficulty of new plants add additional problems for
create serious consequences in the future. For example, if less- Owner–Operators. The need to extend the life of existing boilers
experienced personnel are required to act as replacements for the requires renewed emphasis in generating assets management and
normal boiler operators, they are likely to overlook some crucial care of the power boilers. The task of the Section I Standards
item if they do not use checklists. Committee is directing the preparation and inclusion in Section
A checklist is a listing of required activities in which each VII of new technology and trends such as heat recovery steam
item is “signed off” as it is completed. Although a checklist is generator (HRSG) and solar boiler provisions.
not the procedure, it is as an important tool for ensuring that The five Subsections—1 thru 5—of Section VII are reviewed
repetitive procedures are done correctly by listing the sequence individually in this chapter to explain the reasons for which each
of steps that must be followed. Many Owner–Operators have subsection exists.
assembled company procedures for the operation, maintenance, The user of these guidelines should note that throughout this
and examination of power boilers. In some cases, however, the review, ASME Section I, “Rules for Construction of Power
company’s procedure book is kept at a location remote from Boilers” [2], provides rules for the construction of power boilers,
the operating personnel and is therefore not readily available whereas the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC) [4] provides
if needed. Ideally, these procedures should be under constant rules for boilers already placed into service.
review, updated whenever changes are made to the boiler The reader of this chapter should particularly note the first few
installation or operating system, and made readily available sentences of each Article and section, for they preface the basic
to plant personnel. Nonmandatory Appendix A, ‘Checklists information to follow.

2015 ASME B&PV Code)

WATERTUBE DRUM-TYPE INDUSTRIAL does attempt to introduce the Fundamentals of Watertube Boilers
STEAM BOILERS-SUBSECTION 1 (Article 100), the principals of Boiler Operation (Article 101),
the associated Auxiliaries (Article 102), Appurtenances required
by Section I (Article 103), Instrumentation necessary (Article
2.3 FUNDAMENTALS OF WATERTUBE 104), Examinations to be performed by boiler operators and
BOILERS - ARTICLE 100 staff (Article 105), and the requirements for Repairs, Alterations
and Maintenance (Article 106). Where additional information is
Although it is obvious that this brief Subsection 1 does not needed, the user should consult such resources as the boiler and
cover everything relative to Watertube Industrial Steam Boilers, it equipment manufacturer’s installation, operating, and maintenance
2-4 t Chapter 2

manuals. It should be noted that if a variance exists between the Many references are available for readers to familiarize themselves
equipment manufacturer’s instructions and any other reference, the with the different boiler and system components so that they may
normal practice is to follow the manufacturer’s instructions. perform the operation, maintenance, and examination functions in
It is important that the boiler is operated in the manner for which a safe, reliable manner.
it was designed. For example, a boiler which has been designed for The Subsection 3, Article 300 provides the basic facts concerning
baseload operation (steady state) may well suffer from fatigue type firetube boilers that include the following:
problems if operated in a cyclic fashion (swing loaded) or nightly
shutdowns and morning restarts, due to varying thermally induced (1) common use is for small capacity, low-pressure applica-
operating stresses. It is therefore important that the boiler owner- tions in industrial process plants;
operator and the manufacturer each have a clear understanding of (2) they are available in either dryback (refractory) or water-
the manner in which the boiler is going to be operated if problems back construction;
are to be avoided down the road. Similarly if the operating mode (3) combustion gases pass through the inside of the tubes, with
of an existing boiler installation is to be changed significantly water surrounding the outside of the tubes; and
for reasons of economy or environmental concern, then it would (4) they make applying superheaters (when required) more
behoove the owner-operator to advise the manufacturer and seek difficult.
assistance in minimizing any operational effects that may impact Advantages of this boiler design include its simple construction
on boiler life or reliability. and less rigid water treatment requirements. Disadvantages include
the excessive weight of the boiler and contents per pound of steam
2.3.1 Boiler Types generated, the excessive time required to raise pressure because of
The Fundamentals Article 100 states that there are three basic the relatively large volume of water contained within the boiler,
types of power boilers—watertube (this Subsection), firetube and the inability to respond quickly to load changes because of that
(Subsection 3, Article 300), and electric (Subsection 3, Article relatively large volume of water. See Fig. 2.2 for a typical firetube
301)—and that these are the types that most operators will be boiler layout.
involved with at some time during their careers. Thus, operators The various types of electric boilers are discussed in Subsection
should be familiar with how the components differ between 3, Article 301. Electric resistance heating coil boilers are very-low-
the three boiler types to understand their functions and also capacity boilers. The basic facts regarding the other type of electric
to communicate intelligently with other personnel. The three boiler (the electrode type) include the following:
types can be further classified as either package boilers or field-
assembled boilers; firetube and electric boilers as well as the (1) they use boiler water conductivity to generate the steam;
smaller watertube boilers comprise the package boiler population, (2) the insulators supporting the electrodes must be cleaned or
whereas most field-assembled boilers are the watertube type. replaced periodically;


(3) high voltages (up to 16 kV) may be used; Another example is a boiler in which the outer insulation has
(4) protection is needed for ground faults, over current, and fallen out in places and the condition is neglected rather than
loss of phase. repaired. By understanding the fundamentals, it is obvious that the
It should be noted that for item (1) of the preceding list, natural circulation may be adversely affected. If the insulation is
depending on the design of the electrode boiler and the working missing in the upper areas, cooling may occur, making the fluid
voltage, the water conductivity required may be very high or inside the tubes heavier. In addition, for tangent-tube waterwalls
very low, making it imperative that the boiler manufacturer’s the covered tube may expand and contract differently from
specifications be adhered to. adjacent uncovered tubes—a difference that, if the tube-to-header
Watertube boilers discussed in Subsection 1 comprise most power connections are rolled and seal-welded, may cause the connections
boilers as well as the majority of the larger high-pressure industrial to loosen. The boiler operating personnel must be aware that the
and utility boilers. Basic facts include the following: natural circulation flow rate will differ throughout the boiler. This
is especially helpful when evaluating boiler tube failures. The
(1) water flows inside the tube and the combustion gases flow longer water flow circuit with multiple tube bends will definitely
on the outside; have less flow. This will promote deposit formation inside the
(2) lower unit weight of boiler per pound of steam generated; tubes and most likely resulting in tube metal overheating.
(3) less time is required to raise steam pressure; In Article 104, further emphasis is placed that the required level
(4) greater flexibility for responding to load changes; of water must be maintained in the steam drum at all times. An
(5) greater ability to operate at high rates of steam generation; unacceptably low steam drum water level can reduce the natural
and circulation flow rate to a level that may cause the generating or
(6) close control of boiler water chemistry is required. waterwall tubes to overheat. National Board Statistical data on
Throughout the rest of the Section VII Subsections, the reader the causes of boiler accidents spread over many years shows that
should remember that the circulation of water through a natural failure of the low-water fuel-cutoff device from lack of proper
circulation boiler depends solely on the difference in the weight of maintenance is the most common cause of boiler accidents. The
the steam–water mixture in the generating or waterwall tubes and low-water fuel-cutoff device must be maintained in good working
the weight of the water in the downcomers. Section VII, Figure condition on all types of boilers to ensure that, while the boiler is
100.2-2 (Steam Drum with Tubes) is a basic diagram showing operating, the water level does not drop to an unsafe level. This
a simple natural circulation loop and is presented as Fig. 2.3 in fact should be remembered when the reader reviews other Articles
this chapter. As the water is heated in the generating or waterwall that cover water level.
tubes, steam bubbles are formed and the heated steam-water The importance of the steam drum of watertube boilers in
mixture rises through the tubes from the force of the weight of the separating the steam from the steam-water mixture will be
denser, unheated water in the downcomers, thereby establishing more easily understood after reviewing the steam drum cross-
circulation. sectional views in Section VII, Figs. 100.2-3 and -4 (Steam Drum
Considering the natural circulation concept applied to actual Internals), which are given here in this chapter as Figs. 2.4 and
conditions, take for example an older tangent-tube waterwall 2.5, respectively. Of all the different watertube boiler components,
boiler. The waterwall tubes’ fireside surfaces should not be covered the steam drum has the most parts, of which the design differs
with any refractory to repair or prevent hot spots caused by the from manufacturer to manufacturer. Operating and maintenance
deteriorated outer sealing refractory. If refractory is applied on the personnel must understand the function of each part to effectively
fireside surfaces contrary to original design, the natural circulation operate, maintain, and examine a power boiler. In some designs,
in the refractory-covered tubes may be affected, possibly leading the crawl space is so tight that the drum internal parts should be
to deposit buildup in sloped tube sections and to problems with removed during each overhaul outage to ensure that the internal
tube expansion and contraction and causing damage at the tube-to- parts near the middle of the drum are not loose, defective, or
header connections. missing.

2-6 t Chapter 2

FIG. 2.4 STEAM DRUM INTERNALS: BAFFLE-TYPE (Source: Fig. 100.2-3, Section VII of the 2015 ASME B&PV Code)

The steam drum is also a critical element of boiler internal without a distribution system, the feedwater somehow has to be
examination. During firetube boiler inspections, the shell, furnace, able to distribute evenly throughout the drum length to ensure that
tubesheets, and the rear waterwall of water-backed boilers are downcomers have nearly equal amount of water to circulate. This
important examination areas. By inspecting inside the steam- and/ and maintaining proper water level will help ensure good circulation
or mud drums of watertube boilers, or inside the shell and outside is established to prevent overheating. In firetube boilers feedwater is
the furnace and flue tubes of firetube boilers, a good assessment directed along the inside of the shell away from any heated surfaces,
of boiler water chemistry (or treatment) is obtained. Access must which minimizes the possibility of any damaging thermal effects
be provided for a thorough examination to be made in all the caused by cool-water impinging on the hot furnace or flue tubes.
aforementioned areas. Another example to show why maintenance and examination
Feedwater enters the steam drum below the normal water level. personnel should be familiar with the different boiler parts is that,
In most watertube designs, the feedwater is directed toward the in certain steam drum designs, several small nozzles come off the
downcomers to minimize the flow of steam bubbles to them, which feedwater pipe and are directed downward toward the downcomers.
would reduce the head available to maintain natural circulation. Sometimes the maintenance personnel did not remove the internals
If the incoming feedwater enters at the ends of the steam drum for access and so did not know that some of these nozzles were

FIG. 2.5 STEAM DRUM INTERNALS: CYCLONE SEPARATOR–TYPE (Source: Fig. 100.2-4, Section VII of the 2015 ASME B&PV

missing; in other cases, the maintenance personnel did not pipe holes are in the correct orientation and spaced properly.
understand the function of these nozzles and therefore did not list Examination personnel should be wary that the pipe holes are
the missing nozzles on a punchlist. normally positioned at the top of the pipe so deposits are not
The steam drum deflection baffles are another component sucked in to the CBD pipe, but collect on the bottom to be drained
used to aid in separating the steam from the steam-water mixture out. The piping should be cleaned out during outages. Obviously,
that enters the drum with which the operating, maintenance, this aids in the boiler water chemistry to control conductivity and
and examination personnel should be familiar. As the steam- deposits.
water mixture enters the steam drum from the heated risers, the If chemical feed piping is provided, the pipe holes orientation
deflection baffles help separate the water from the mixture by and spacing also needs to be checked along with holes plugging.
directing the water to the downcomers as free of steam bubbles as The holes are normally placed on the underside of these pipes.
possible. These deflection baffles are designed so that individual
pieces can be passed through the drum manhole for removal or
2.3.2 Economizers and Superheaters
replacement. The pieces are held in place by brackets, welded
Some may argue that the economizer is not a part of the boiler
studs, and acorn-type nuts—the latter covering the ends of the
because, in firetube boilers and packaged watertube boilers, the
studs to slow the corrosion process. Many parts are needed, all of
economizer is a separate piece of equipment. However, in many
which should be in good condition. Maintenance and examination
watertube boilers, it is made of bundled tubes and is supported
personnel should be fully aware that loose parts can break away,
similarly to the superheater—usually within the boiler enclosure.
causing flow restrictions or preventing the proper separation of
See Fig. 2.6 Typical Economizer.
steam and water. The basic criterion is that the boiler’s natural
Starting up an economizer is not discussed in Section VII. Three
circulation is aided by keeping the steam separate from the water
items when “Placing in Service” are worthy of discussion:
inside the steam drum. Additional information is helpful here or
in section Article 103, section 103.5 Boiler Blowdown to add to (1) steaming during start-up,
an examination checklist that the continuous blowdown piping (2) thermal shock, and
(CBD) shown in Fig. 2.4 should be examined to ensure that the (3) severe external corrosion.

FIG. 2.6 TYPICAL ECONOMIZER (Source: Fig. 100.4-1 Section VII of the 2015 ASME B&PV Code)
2-8 t Chapter 2

Steaming is inherent to the economizer. Steaming can occur surface area exposed to air for faster, more complete burning. The
during start-up, if the feedwater flow is low or nonexistent. combustion of coal is improved by crushing or grinding the coal
Moreover, feedwater is not normally added to the boiler during into small particles and by creating turbulence with the air supplied
its initial start-up, so there would not be any flow through the to thoroughly mix the fuel and air (See Subsection 3. Article 401).
economizer. The hot start-up gases pass the economizer and may The combustion of oil is improved by atomizing the oil into a very
form steam inside the tubes that pass to the steam drum, leaving fine mist and by creating turbulence with the air supplied, again to
vapor spaces in the economizer. Once the feedwater pumps promote thorough mixing. Fuel oil is atomized either mechanically
start flowing water through the economizer, water hammer may with the high-pressure drop across the oil-gun tip or by using steam
result and possibly cause damage. To avoid water hammer, an or air to create an emulsion that is then subjected to a shearing
economizer-recirculating line is installed from the boiler’s lower action at the nozzle tip.
water space to the economizer inlet header, which will prevent the These sections provide only the very basic information about the
formation of any pockets or vapor spaces that steaming may tend combustion process. The reader should consult other references to
to create and also prevent damaging water hammer from occurring fully understand the process.
when the feedwater line flows.
Thermal shock is also inherent to the economizer. It can occur 2.3.4 Boiler Efficiency
due to the hot and thick economizer inlet header as it is being fed Boiler operators should understand the fundamentals of boiler
colder feedwater. Design wise, not much can be done to prevent efficiency, particularly as fuel prices increase, and they can optimize
thermal shock except to examine for cracking during outages. fuel usage by knowing what factors affect boiler efficiency. Stack
Examinations are focused on the feedwater inlet area of the losses are the predominant factor affecting boiler efficiency. Stated
economizer inlet header. Operating personnel should be aware simply, boiler efficiency is dependent on how much of the heating
that economizer thermal shock problems are possible whenever value of the fuel is lost as either sensible heat or by incomplete
feedwater heaters must be taken out of service because of feedwater combustion. Sensible heat loss is the heat content of the various
tube leaks. stack gas components (primarily nitrogen, carbon dioxide, oxygen,
Severe external corrosion is possible whenever the fuel is laden and water vapor) that, upon traveling up a stack, are lost to the
with sulfur, vanadium, iron, and sodium. The theory is that sulfur atmosphere—losses that may be caused by the oversupply of
and sodium combine at temperatures typical of the convection pass excess air, by moisture in the fuel, or by humidity in the air.
to form a sticky deposit on the economizer surfaces. Vanadium It is important to remember that (as stated previously) air is
in the sticky deposit helps to catalyze sulfur dioxide (SO2) into about 78% nitrogen and 21% oxygen. Nitrogen does not support
sulfur trioxide (SO3). Moisture from leaks or residual boiler combustion; it travels up the stack with any unused oxygen and
washwater will combine with the SO3 to form a corrosive acid, helps to cool the boiler flame. The more excess air, the more heat
so obviously any leaks in and around the economizer should be nitrogen traveling up a stack takes with it. Moisture in the fuel,
repaired immediately. During the boiler wash, a neutralization enhanced by ambient air humidity, becomes superheated steam
process should be considered to minimize residual boiler wash- produced as the fuel burns; it too is lost to the atmosphere upon
water reacting with the SO3. traveling up the stack. This section briefly mentions that hydrogen
Superheaters are tubular heat transfer surfaces used to increase in this moisture also combines with available oxygen, to form
the steam temperature after the steam has exited the drum of a superheated steam, which makes less oxygen available for the
watertube boiler. Steam inside the tubes is heated as the combustion combustion process. This steam travels up the stack with the heat
gas passes over the outside of the bare or extended surface tubes. normally used for the water in the tubes.
The final-pass superheater is located at the boiler furnace exit The cleanliness of boiler tubes both inside and out and of air
where the gases of combustion are hot enough to achieve the final preheaters whether tubular or regenerative affects boiler efficiency.
steam temperature desired. External cleaning of watertube boiler tubes is performed with
Superheaters may be drainable, but many are “pendent” timely sootblowing. Steam sootblowing should only be done when
configuration and not drainable. necessary. Excessive steam sootblowing will lead to an over use of
Manufacturer’s instructions should be followed when starting steam requiring additional water makeup and heating. Maintaining
boilers with economizers and or superheaters. clean watertube boiler tube interior is accomplished with proper
boiler water chemistry and occasional cleaning either chemically
2.3.3 Combustion or mechanically.
Article 1, sections 100.6 and 100.7 reviews the following basic Another contributor to the loss of fuel heating value is incomplete
requirements for combustion: fuel, oxygen, and heat. Coal, oil, and combustion. The subsection states simply that poor mixing of fuel
gas are the most common fuels used in boilers. and air causes it, as does a lack of sufficient air supply. Poor mixing
Although nonflammable, oxygen is needed to support the in oil-fired boilers may be attributed to poor atomization and the
combustion of fuels. (Air is approximately 21% oxygen and 78% poor mixing action of the fuel and oxygen. A sufficient supply of
nitrogen.) One should remember that even though nitrogen carries air (which denotes a sufficient supply of oxygen) means a delicate
away heat and makes no contribution to the overall combustion balance of air. Too little air produces unburned hydrocarbons and
process, it does react with oxygen to form nitric oxide (NOX) may cause flame instability, whereas too much air may allow an
compounds that are limited by environmental regulations. More excessive amount of heat to be lost up a stack into the atmosphere.
air for the combustion beyond the excess air recommendations of Including more basic information is helpful to understand
burner manufacturers normally reduces boiler efficiency. Heat is why a component is important. This information is helpful here
required to raise the fuel to its kindling or ignition temperature. or in section 102.2, Oil Systems. For example, the flames of oil-
Probably the most useful information covered in these sections fired burners must provide as complete combustion as possible.
is the discussion about oil and the need for maximizing the fuel Optimum flame condition of traditional burners is affected by

conditions of atomizer and refractory throat, position of the by input. The ASME Performance Test Code PTC 4, “Fired Steam
air register or damper, and orientation of swirlers or stabilizers. Generators,” covers the testing methods.
See Fig. 2.7 Simple Circular Oil Burner. The atomizer helps The Fundamentals subsection provides basic information that
break down the oil into smaller particles for the mixing with fosters thinking and helps to explain why and how power boiler
air. Atomizers wear out and need to be replaced regularly. The components function.
bell-mouth shaped refractory throat help create the aerodynamic
conditions for proper flame shape and combustion. Deteriorated
refractory or incorrect throat contour and dimensions will affect 2.4 BOILER OPERATION—ARTICLE 101
flame shape and satisfactory combustion and should be examined
regularly. The air register or damper delivers air into the burner This may be the most useful Article for boiler-operating
with the desired amount of rotation and velocity and helps control personnel. Despite the title, however, maintenance, examination,
the flame shape. Throttling the air register door produces a higher and engineering personnel will also find reading this article to be
rotary velocity of air through the burner, increases the rapidity of of value—either as new knowledge or as a refresher for existing
combustion and tends to shorten the flame. The swirler or stabilizer knowledge.
further creates rotation of air around a turbulent flame resulting Again, the reader is reminded that one purpose of Section VII
in laminarization of the jet flow and improves flame stability. is to help the Owner–Operator achieve safe, reliable power boiler
Understanding the function of the components will help the boiler operation. This Article provides boiler-operating procedures for
operator recognize why the components must be in satisfactory industrial watertube boilers, but it can also be applied to other
condition and properly installed for optimum boiler efficiency. boiler types to help provide safe, reliable operation. It is stressed
Although not mentioned in Section VII, the heat rate is commonly that training, written procedures and checklists should be developed
used to measure efficiency in power generating plants-a measure and used by operating, maintenance, and examination personnel.
that simply determines how much energy or fuel must be burned This Article provides most of the information necessary to
to produce a certain amount of electrical energy that can be sold. develop step-by-step boiler-operating procedures for the individual
The units of heat rate are measured in Btu/kWh. This efficiency stages of operation. The “Preparing for Operation” section
performance pertains to the power plant, not just to the boiler. provides just a sampling of the checklists throughout Section VII:
Industrial boiler efficiency is typically expressed as output divided for example, “Safety Checklist for Examination,” “Water-side


2-10 t Chapter 2

Checklist,” “Fire-side Checklist,” and “External Checklist.” The minimum a review of operating procedures should be performed
other sections of ‘Boiler Operation’ Article 101, although they lack annually with quizzes included to encourage attentiveness and to
the title “Checklist,” can also be easily adapted for checklists used demonstrate that an ongoing training program is established for
by operating, maintenance, and examination personnel. the record.
Because of the heavy volume of information to remember in
the safe, reliable operation of a boiler, relying on memory alone 2.4.2 Other General Guidelines
would be foolish. It is hoped that boiler operator readers will This section continues with reminders and includes precautions
review existing procedures, or else develop their own procedures covered in more detail in subsequent subsections. Here again these
and checklists after they review Section VII. precautions should be covered in the Owner-Operators’ procedures
and checklists. To prevent explosions, there is a constant reminder
2.4.1 Operator Training for one to purge the fireside of the boiler, during which the proper
Some jurisdictions require qualified boiler operators or com- water level and the proper furnace pressure must be maintained.
petent attendants of power boilers. As a minimum to be qualified, Clearance for boiler expansion must also be maintained.
the operator may be required to be familiar with the Section VII Section 101.1.4, Maintaining Proper Furnace Pressure, mentions
contents. As the Boiler Operation Article and the rest of Section that boilers with positive pressure furnaces have furnace pressure
VII are reviewed, the reader will see that valuable information is varying from 5 in. to 25 in. of water (1.3 kPa to 6.2 kPa) as the boiler
provided for safe, reliable power boiler operation, and will also operates from minimum to maximum, and that design pressure of
see that the Section VII contents can be adapted to develop boiler furnaces rarely exceeds 28 in. of water (6.9 kPa) because of the cost
operator training courses and examinations. of reinforcing the furnace wall support system. Boiler operators can
The Operator Training section is short and clearly written. Safe, be misinformed when changing their alarm and trip setpoints for
reliable operation does depend largely on the skill and attentiveness high furnace pressure. The boiler manufacturer specifications may
of the operating personnel. In some plants, the operating and state that the furnace is designed to withstand an internal pressure
maintenance personnel can be the same persons. Operator training (furnace design pressure) of 26.5 in. of water (6.6 kPa) gage with
and retraining is a must, and operator attitude must be one of no permanent deformation of the furnace buckstay system and as
attentiveness. recommended by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
Operator training should include a knowledge of fundamentals standard NFPA-85, Boiler and Combustion Systems Hazards
such as that which is presented in the Fundamentals Article. To have Code. The boiler operator may be confronted with the nagging
an appreciation of his or her job, and also for the encouragement of problem of high furnace pressure caused be dirty air preheater
attentiveness, the operator should understand why certain functions baskets and believe that he can change the high furnace pressure
are required to be performed—an understanding that may help trip setpoint to as high as 26 in. of water (6.5 kPa). However, they
prevent accidents or damage to the boiler. Operator training should may be unaware that the boiler manufacturer’s design terminology
also include familiarity with equipment, in which one’s knowledge may have a different meaning.
will develop with on-the-job experience and periodic refresher For one boiler manufacturer the furnace design pressure is really
training, and one’s pride in work and attentiveness is fostered. the furnace yield point. They design the furnace with a margin of
This Article reminds the user that following the manufacturer’s safety between expected maximum operating furnace pressure
instructions enhances his or her operating and maintenance skills. and the pressure at which the furnace begins to yield and suffer
Some manufacturers issue periodic service bulletins to alert the permanent deformation, which may be 60 percent of the yield
Owner–Operator of experiences indicating that modifications point. The boiler operator should, therefore, follow a trip setpoint
or corrections to his or her equipment may be necessary. Plant of 16 in. of water (4.0 kPa) or 60 percent of 26.5 in. of water
supervisors should ensure that these changes are communicated to (6.6 kPa) (furnace yield point).
operating and maintenance personnel. It is particularly important According to design practice, the furnace yield point must be
that product-recall bulletins on component parts be directed to the at least equal to or greater than the forced draft (FD) fan capacity.
appropriate personnel and then followed. Many reference books If the FD fan capacity is 26.5 in. of water (6.6 kPa), the furnace
have been written about boiler operations, and interactive computer yield point must be at least equal to this to withstand the maximum
programs have been developed to assist with continuous training. pressure the FD fan can supply. However, this is not a safe operating
Written procedures prepared before and during the commis- pressure. For example, in a worst-case situation of a “run-away-
sioning period are of special importance. As was stressed pre- fan,” the unit must trip long before the yield point or possibly suffer
viously, procedures and checklists are extremely important for permanent damages to waterwalls and points beyond. In addition,
all stages of boiler operation, but just having them is not enough; since control systems may not function instantaneously it would be
the procedures and checklists must be used and revised whenever risky to have the trip setpoint so close to the furnace yield point.
necessary. Unfortunately, many procedures and checklists are Before changing high furnace pressure alarm and trip setpoints,
published into books that are rarely used. It is recommended that the boiler operator must know and understand the furnace design
a periodic review of operating procedures be handled in the same practices and the risks.
way that safety programs are handled. A general list of reference resources is provided in section 101.1.6
Safety training and refresher training classes become mandatory for use as power boiler guidelines. In addition to the documents
to help ensure that personnel will be conditioned to practice safe and organizations listed in those references, persons with access
work habits and to show regulators that the company is serious to EPRI and NBBI literature may find the information provided
in preventing workplace accidents. Unless there are laws with by these organizations highly useful. This section reminds readers
serious consequences to lawbreakers specific work practices, that most types of operational problems have previously occurred
such as following operating procedures and use of checklists, will and that certain problems can be avoided by learning from the
usually not be practiced. In addition, as with safety programs, at a combined knowledge and experiences of these resources.

2.4.3 Preparing for Operation sliding the hand over the tube surfaces to feel for bulges or
Once the new power boiler is erected or installed, and inspec- blistering along the fireside surfaces). The noting of defects
tions are complete in accordance with ASME Section I by an during examination is stressed rather than relying on memory
Authorized Inspector, it is time for one to prepare for its operation. until the end of the examination.
This section provides the checklist format to ensure that nothing External Checklist—for use especially with new power boil-
is missed before the fires are started. The first reminder is related ers. The examination includes, for example, ensuring that free
to jurisdictional inspection requirements; states (U.S.), provinces access to burner equipment exists, as well as removing any
(Canada), and some cities have different inspection requirements, temporary shipping or construction restraints, verifying free
for some follow the provisions of the NBBI, others require expansion, verifying that all instrumentation and controls are
installation permits, and still others require operating permits. operational, and checking that personnel protection from hot
The reader should note that a permit is generally required from surfaces is provided. When saying that “Piping should be free
the local air pollution control authority before the commencement to move from cold to hot position,” operations and mainte-
of construction or installation, and as one of the first steps in nance personnel should be aware that any high energy piping,
preparing for operation, the responsible Owner–Operator must be such main steam piping, should be floating, except at the desig-
knowledgeable of local jurisdictional requirements. In most cases, nated rigidly supported areas. Routine examination of the con-
the Authorized Inspection Agency will assist the Owner–Operator stant and variable spring supports should indicate no topped or
with the inspection and permit requirements. bottomed out conditions of the spring supports. Pressure relief
The next reminder is chemical cleaning. (Internal cleaning is valve outlet guidelines are also provided, for the outlet part
also covered in Subsection 2, section 200.2 “Internal Cleaning of of the pressure relief valve is not designed to hold the pres-
Boilers.”) For new power boilers, both alkaline boilout and solvent sures seen at the inlet, thereby necessitating precautions when
(acid or base) cleaning is necessary. The alkaline boilout is for attaching the discharge piping. The rule provided here is that
removing grease and oils; the solvent cleaning, for removing rust the pressure relief valve should not support a weight exceed-
and mill scales. ing the weight of a short elbow and drip pan or a comparable
Section VII does not mention steam blowing as one of the weight, and when one is in doubt, he or she should consult the
preliminary steps. New boilers with separate superheat or reheat pressure relief valve manufacturer. For pressure relief valves
sections usually include steam blow to remove manufacturing outdoors, wind load can add stress to the valve, especially if,
mill scale and erection debris in these steam circuits to prevent the discharge piping exceeds the short elbow and drip pan cri-
damage to downstream components such as the turbine. For in- teria. The proper location of the pressure relief valve discharge
service boilers when superheat and reheat tube replacements are away from potentially deleterious positions (i.e., where it could
required, steam blow may or may not be necessary depending on cause injury or property damage) is also stressed.
the confidence in the fabricator and erector leaving the tube free
of debris. The subject of hydrostatic testing completes the Preparing for
The following are brief synopses gathered from the preopera- Operation section. It should be remembered that all jurisdictions
tional checklists presented in this section. Readers are reminded do not follow the same rules. For example, jurisdictions who have
to pay particular attention to the details of this section, for the adopted ASME Section I requirements for new construction [2]
information as provided is good for training. These preopera- may or may not have adopted the NBIC requirements for existing
tional checklists are preludes to the discussion in Article 105, boilers [4]. Therefore, the boiler operator must first be aware of his
“Examinations.” or her jurisdiction’s requirements. ASME Section I requirements
apply to new construction or new boilers, whereas the NBIC
Safety Checklist for Boiler Examination—for the safety of requirements apply to inservice boilers. When the boiler passes
examination personnel entering the boiler. Part 2, Inspection, the hydrostatic test and the manufacturer’s data report is signed by
of the NBIC provides useful guidelines to follow that con- the Authorized Inspector, repairs become the responsibility of the
sider inspection to be the primary business of the NBBI, and NBIC [4]; however, for both Section I and the NBIC, usually an
it also stresses the importance of lockout and tagout proce- Authorized Inspector is required to witness the initial hydrostatic
dures [4]. testing. Where permitted by the jurisdiction, the boiler operator who
Waterside Checklist—to ensure that the accessible internals holds an NB Owner/User Inspection Organization accreditation
are free of erection and/or manufacturing debris, with the may permit his or her NB Owner/User Commissioned Inspector
inclusion of precautions related to relocated or inservice to witness the hydrostatic testing after weld repairs are completed.
power boilers. The checklist includes examining the inside of This section recommends that new power boilers be subjected to
steam- and mud-drums for deposits, loose or missing parts, a hydrostatic test of 1.5 times the design pressure. However, for a
and erosion-corrosion. In addition, similar comments apply boiler in service for an extended time period, such a hydrostatic test
to the shell internals of firetube boilers. is unreasonable because of advanced age and normal deterioration.
A provision of Part 2, Inspection, of the NBIC addresses use of a
Fireside Checklist—to cover the examination of ducts, flues, pressure test at the discretion of the Inspector. The method used for
furnaces, windboxes, and vestibules. The discussion includes the test is to be as agreed by the owner-user and the Inspector. This
looking for overheating in relocated or inservice power boil- provision goes on to say that pressure tests for repairs or alterations are
ers. Common areas to examine are given as well. Dirty boil- to be in accordance with Part 3, Repair and Alterations, of the NBIC.
ers or internal tube deposits at high-heat flux areas or where It should be noted that the purpose of the initial hydrostatic test prior
burner flame impingement can occur can be examined visu- to stamping a new boiler is to verify component tightness and to check
ally by using a flashlight beam directed parallel to the outside for gross design errors; it is not a proof test. Hydrostatic leak tests
of the tube surfaces, or they can be examined by touch (e.g., subsequent to the initial stamping are for leak tightness only.
2-12 t Chapter 2

This section defines the normal, good practices in preparing for This section reminds the reader of an often neglected or forgotten
the hydrostatic test, such as using new gaskets and ensuring that the fact: that ASME Section I, PG-60.3.7, specifies that shut-off valves
pressure gage has been recently calibrated. For pressure relief valves between boiler and gage glasses be locked or sealed open [2].
welded in place on high-pressure boilers, either gags or hydrostatic PG-67.3.7 goes on to explain that the valves need not be locked