ASME STS-1– (Revision of ASME STS-1–). Steel Stacks. AN AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD. Three Park Avenue • New York, NY Buy ASME STS Steel Stacks from SAI Global. ASME STS Steel Stacks. This Standard covers many facets of the design of steel stacks. It outlines the consideration that must be made for both the.
|Published (Last):||9 November 2016|
|PDF File Size:||4.25 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.83 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Dhengr, im still looking for some of your other references and the number of my coworkers who are puzzled or interested by this is growing daily My first look would be a number of Timoshenko books or Roark. Given a ‘D’, I would expect ‘t’ to have to increase as the design stress increased to guard against buckling. Equation says i cant go above 16mm when using the design cases that result in a ss of 22mm Usually same would add some vibration damping device or helical strakes to address the vortex shedding, otherwise if you increase the thickness to handle the vortex shedding loads then you will end up with a very thick stack.
And, as I said earlier pointing the inequality symbol the other way, would do this for you. If the document is revised or amended, you will be notified by email. But, that normally has more to do with a working stress level, dia.
Committee Pages – STS Steel Stacks
It is a prerequisite to use the cases for allowable stress design per the asme STS1. Resources Few production environments have the luxury of ordering new equipment to replace existing machines on their shop floor.
I think you’re on the right track now. Standards Subsctiption may be the perfect solution. I have a couple of ideas but they are no more than speculation, however, do check with ASME.
It emphasizes the important areas regarding fabrication and construction. With a little more digging and work, you and I could teach a seminar or semester course in steel stack design. So, it shouldn’t be hard to wrap your head around this, but it’s a min.
The tougher problem may be making this stack check as a zsme. And, I suspect that your FY should really be F gamma.
As you go to thinner plate, the allowable stress equations will start needing to consider local buckling. I and other coworkers stared at the line about “all other steel members shall comply with the requirements of the AISC Notice the reference and similarities to the ASME.
I and many other in my office are. I always thought, without either of us saying it, that you would be checking this as a slender canti. I sent an email and will update the thread with any response. This makes no sense to me. I’d look at plate, plate arch, pipe, pipe column, shells and the like, for discussion on buckling stress limitations.
Increasing plate 2mm to move beneath the lower bound would give me. I wasn’t saying you made a typo. Is this interpretation correct?
I just don’t see that thickening the pl. The stack in question is outside of our “normal design” in being so tall and slender, but i have a hard time just going with our forign design while not understanding this ASME stipulation. Y becomes 1 as noted in case 4. What circumferential stress do you expect? Ill write a little more later as it has been a hectic daybut perhaps these findings may spark some of your previous knowledge on the subject. As an example, a But what requirements do you check in the AISC?
The equation you show as seems bass acwards to me, the ‘less than’ asem should be pointing the other way. Thanks and Best regards. I am not familiar with this standard but the way I read section 4. What do the power transmission people do with their towers?
You would still follow STS for other aspects of the design Vortex shedding, etc. Do they mean a torsional loading or a pressure one way or another, or dynamic loads? The only thing i can possibly think of is that the rolling of thicker plate to smaller diameters could compromise the steel???
It certainly isn’t a rolling issue in the 1. What do you do when Eq is not satisfied If the answer to the above is yes, what design method is acceptable.
Or, as paddington suggested any discussions of the standards in journals, prior to adoption. But, I doubt that it’s the same one you are looking at, which I understand you see in Gaylord’s book. Thus, most of the design approaches are based std empirical eqs. Subscription pricing is determined by: When using the above method, I am able to calculate the exact thicknesses being used by my international colleagues.
If this was the case i would think there would be thorough documentation on the subject.
I think you should call ASME and find out who’s on the committee that works on that particular code. I think you are correct about contacting ASME about this, but im still hoping im missing something obvious here. Found this in Gaylord and Gaylord, edition. zsme
It gives the requirements for lighting and lightning protection based upon existing building and federal codes. D and t are intimately related in this type of buckling problem. The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take asem action.