You are on page 1of 7

Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage

Standard 650 Edition 10th Nov. 1998 10th Nov. 1998 Section 3.7.7 650-I08/99 Inquiry # Question No. Reply

Does a flush-type cleanout built to API 650 require a machined surface on either the bolting flange or the cover plate?

650

3.7.7

650-I01/04

Question 1: When installing a flush-type cleanout fitting, is it mandatory to provide a bottom reinforcing plate width the as same as the annular plate width? Question 2: When an annular plate is provided, does API 650 permit provision of bottom reinforcing plate having lesser width than that of annular plate?

Reply 1: Yes. Refer to Figure 3-9, Note 2.

Reply 2: No. Refer to Figure 3-9, Note 2. Yes. See Section 2.2.1.2.3.

650

10th Nov. 1998 10th Nov. 1998 10th Nov. 1998 10th Nov. 1998 10th Nov. 1998 9th - May 1993 10th Nov. 1998

3.7.7

650-I53/02

Are plate under-tolerances permitted in API 650, Table 3-10?

650

3.7.7 Figure 3-10

650-I13/00

The width of the block out shown in detail “c” in Figure 3-10 is given as W + 300 mm (12 in.). For a 36 in. cleanout, would the width be 118 inches (W + 12 = 118 inches)?

Yes

650

3.7.7.6

650-I56/02

Do the minimum thicknesses listed in Table 3-10, and calculated by the equations in section 3.7.7.6 have a corrosion allowance?

No. See Section 3.3.2.

650

3.7.8 Figure 3-11

650-I18/00

Referencing Figure 3-11, does API 650 cover flush shell connections to be installed non-radially?

No.

650

3.7.8 Figure 3-12

650-I18/00

Referencing Figure 3-12, are flush-type shell connections smaller than 8 inches covered in API 650?

No.

650

3.7.8

Should the corrosion allowance used on the shell plate be included in the required thickness of the reinforcing pad?

No. A corrosion allowance for an external reinforcing pad is not required unless specified by the purchaser. No. Refer to API Std. 650 Section 3.7.8.2.

650

3.7.8

650-I52/00

Background: There is a need for flush-type fittings that reduce down to a smaller diameter pipe. Currently Figure 3-11, Section C-C, only shows the fitting being increased to a larger diameter. It is not unusual for a chemical or pulp/paper company to require a flush mounted fitting that is 4 in. or 6 in. diameter for use as a drain. Question: Does API Std. 650 allow an eccentric reducer to be installed between the nozzle neck and the flange of a flushtype fitting?

3. how are we to compute the new thickness of a cover plate whose integrity has been compromised by the addition of a hole into which a smaller adapter nozzle has been placed.8. 1998 3. 1998 10th Nov.8. per Section 3.1 650-I45/03 Does API 650 allow butt-welded connections without flanges outside the tank shell? Yes.8.8.3.2 650-I51/00 API 650. Refer to API Std.3 regarding how to compute the new thickness after a nozzle has been added.4 Figure 3-13 Does API 650.8. 1998 3. 1998 10th Nov. Question 1: In determining the thickness of a cover plate and bolting flange in which product mixing equipment is installed.3 only directs the reader to Table 3-8 to find the thickness of unadulterated cover plates. 650 3.7 Figure 3-18 In Figure 3-18. 1998 3.1 650-I42/02 Is radiography required for a circumferential weld in a nozzle between the tank shell and the flange? API 650 does not require radiography of this weld. No mention is made in 3. It is not unusual for a chemical or pulp/paper company to require a flush mounted fitting that is 4 in. However.1 650-I53/00 Referring to API 650. Grade C)? 650 3. No.2.8. Question: Does API Std.1. Section 3. 650 3. if the requirements of this section have been satisfied.2 650-I52/00 Background: There is a need for flush-type fittings that reduce down to a smaller diameter pipe.8.4 times greater than the thickness required by Table 3-3.3.8. 650 3. 1998 10th Nov.2 states: "a cover plate with a nozzle attachment for product-mixing equipment shall have a thickness at least 1. when the material group is of Group I (A 283.8 650-I50/00 Referring to API 650 Section 3.3. diameter for use as a drain.3." Section 3. Figure 3-13 require the roof manhole neck to project below the bottom of the roof plate? No.3.8. 650 allow an eccentric reducer to be installed between the nozzle neck and the flange of a flushtype fitting? 650 10th Nov.8.8. .9. Question 2: If we are to adhere to 3.3.8. or 6 in.2 and 5. Currently Figure 3-11.3.g. is it permissible to make permanent attachments of any size. 650 10th Nov. shape or thickness? Yes.3.8. 1998 10th Nov. 1998 10th Nov.2. details b and e include the thickness of the stiffener in the width of the shell whereas detail c does not. Reply 1: No.4) are covered by specific rules that affect size. Is it therefore required that the minimum neck thickness on a mixer manway be the lesser of 140% of the flange thickness value in Table 3-3 or the shell thickness? No.3. or thickness. Section C-C.8 650-I14/02 Background: Section 3. stiffening rings. is magnetic particle testing applicable for inspecting permanent attachments to the shell and at temporary attachment removal areas. Reply 2: API does not provide consulting on specific engineering problems or on the general understanding of its standards. is there a conflict between 3.650 10th Nov.2 d. Refer to section 1. the minimum thickness shall be that given for flanges in Table 3-8". 1998 3. only shows the fitting being increased to a larger diameter.3. 650 10th Nov. Which is correct? The thickness of the stiffener is to be included in the width of the shell.8. 650 Section 3.8.8. Footnote b under Table 3-4 requires the minimum manway neck thickness to be the lesser of the flange thickness or the shell plate. 3.7.7. certain attachments (e. There seems to be a conflict between these two sections in that when the thickness specified by Table 3-3 (at max liquid level) is increased by 40%.3. See 3.7. 650 3.8. shape.5.8. requires mixer manway bolting flanges to be 40% thicker than the values shown in Table 3-3. We can only provide interpretations requirements that are stated in an API standard or consider revisions based on new data or technology. No.2 and 3.2.3 also states that "when cover plates (or blind flanges) are required for shell nozzles. it is still thinner than the thickness specified by Table 3-8.

Reply 2: The minimum of the ASTM tolerance or as specified in API 650. The Section is referring to variations in local climatic conditions that might not show up on the isothermal charts. thickness tolerance specified for plate in API 650.2.1. Note 2.2 650-I06/04 Question 1: Does the 0.9.May 1993 2. Section 3. Yes.May 1993 2.May 1993 2. per Section 2.2.8.10. Otherwise. for A 283 Grade C plates specified in Section 2. Refer to Table 2-3b.9 650-I49/02 Background: Referencing Figure 2-1 and Table 2-3a. Figure 2-1 implies a 25 mm (1 in.1 What API group number is A 36? 2. except for plates welded to the shell. the use of A 36 material also requires that other conditions. and/or bottom plate on a stainless tank.650 9th . 650 9th . all Group I steels listed in Table 2-3a have a thickness limitation of less than or equal to 25 mm (1 in.2.a? 650 9th . Refer to S.7. such as those described in Figure 2-1 and Table 2-3.1. Yes.9 650-I44/03 Question: Does API 650 require manganese content between 0. or 2.2. 1998 10th Nov.2.9 Table 2-3 2. 650 10th Nov.May 1993 9th .1.2. does A 36 plate material meet the requirements of Section 2.1.9? No.) on their use except for National Standard Grade 250 semi-killed. .May 1993 9th . 1998 2.2.2. 2.2.75 in.May 1993 9th .4. 650 2.1.2. does the ASTM under-run tolerance apply? A 36 can be a Group I or Group II material.1. does the phrase "experience or special local conditions justify another assumption" mean that a tank is permitted to be designed for temperatures higher than the specified 15°F above the lowest one-day mean ambient temperature of the locality if the stored product was "normally warmer" than this specified temperature? No. are met.2.9.2c Does the thickness limitation of 1 in. No. 650 650 9th . the document does not yet provide data for locations not covered in Figure 2-2. 650 2. 1998 2.2.7. 650 2.2.9. However.2% for A 36 plate less than 0.2. Grade 250 steel plate to 25 mm (1 in.1.2.1.01 in.9 or 2.8% and 1.3. Refer to 2. such as Alaska and Hawaii.2.8. such as the thickness of the bottom reinforcing plate and bolting flange and cover plate for flush-type cleanout fittings in Table 3-12? 650 9th .c of API 650 apply to the type of plates used in construction of a tank. 2. see Section 2.3 apply to carbon and stainless coil product? Question 2: When purchasing hot-rolled coil-processed steel for use as roof.9 Referring to Section 2. Sections 2.)? No. API 650 does require that the material be impact tested.2.2. 1998 3.2. if it complies with the respective footnotes in Table 2-3 of API 650 Reply 1: Yes. shell.2.2. shall apply. see Table 2-3. 650 Does API 650 require that the material used for the tank shell is of the same group that the material used for manhole reinforcement plates? No. the plate would be classified as Group I. Question: Does API 650 limit the thickness of Group I. However.9 650-I11/01 650 Does API 650 require that all A 36 material be killed or semi-killed? Yes.2.9 Is it permissible to use Group I plates for a tank bottom.5. is the "as-ordered thickness" equal to the "new condition" or the "corroded condition"? The "new condition".2. 650 2.2a Referring to API 650. Note 6.2.3. for tanks with a -50°F design metal temperature? Does Table 2-3 only relate to plates that are to be heat-treated? API 650 only addresses toughness of bottom plates welded to the shell.May 1993 10th Nov. All requirements of the base document apply to an Appendix S tank unless specifically changed or waived by a statement in Appendix S.9 650-I33/03 Are roof materials required to meet the toughness requirements in 2.9 Table 2-3 2. if the thickness is greater than that allowed by the exemption curve in Figure 2-1. and their notes.2. however.) thickness limitation on all Group I steels.2. 1998 10th Nov. to be classified as a Group II material? Yes.May 1993 10th Nov.2 Referring to API 650.2.

2 require that seamless pipe be used for nozzles in shells made from Group I.May 1993 2. Is there any limit on the maximum width of a lap joint? Question 2: Can a lap joint consisting of two (2) ¼ in. V.5 to limit the maximum lap of a double welded lap joint to 2 in. which may or may not be identical to the parallel ASME bolt specification.7.2 yield strength reduction factor also be applied to the 0. No.650 9th .3. Part A for bolting? No.1.1.5. 1998 3.5.1. Section 3. 650 10th Nov. are bolt heads required to be marked according to ASME Section II.2 preclude the use of electric-resistance welded pipe meeting ASTM A 53. Yes 2. Section. Yes . 650 10th-add.2 be exceeded by the design pressure of the tank?" "Reply: Yes" I would suggest to complement the reply with. Section 3.5 650-I37/03 Is it the intent of 3. Any lap that exceeds the minimum is acceptable.3.3 Should the M. but allow use of electricfusion-welded pipe nozzles made from ASTM A 671? Yes.2 Reply 1: Yes. 650 3.472T terms of Section 2. 650 9th . IVA. is it permissible to lap roof plates with the inner (upper) plate lapping under the lower (outer) plate.2. can the Pmax calculation in F.May 1993 3. this question would complement Appendix D 650-I-30/03: "Question: For an anchored tank. 1998 2.1.5.2. 650 10th Nov. unless ASTM A 671 pipe is used. plates be lapped 3 in.3.1.5.1. 650 9th . Reply 2: Yes.4. Section 2.5.3.7. III. is there a maximum lap requirement for single welded lap joint bottoms and roofs? Would this constraint. 650 2. the details shown represent the typical or most common details. to protect against the tank contents condensing in the lap joint on the underside of the roof? Yes. If not.5 Figure 3-3a 650-I24/98 Referring to API 650. if any. API 650 does not cover an explanation of these factors. 1998 3.7 Referring to API 650.May 1993 3. or electricwelded pipe meeting API 5L.3.426T and 0.3.5 and Figure 3-3a. and a single welded lap joint to 1 in. in case the reply for question 1 above be affirmative: "Reply: Yes. II. does API 650.5 of API 650 specifies minimum lap joint dimensions. Section 2.1. for nozzles in shells made from Group IV.May 1993 10th Nov.3. also apply to bottom or roof repair or replacements governed by API 653.3. Please note the thickness limitations given in Section 2.1. or IIIA materials? Qustion 2: Does API 650. but other details are also permitted. 4 F. 650 9th . Pmax has to exceed design pressure" 1.5.2 650-I01/07 1. There are several factors which influence this. or VI materials. The appropriate combination of tank diameter and height is a design consideration. Reply 2: Yes.May 1993 3 Please furnish details on the maximum allowable tank diameter and height for tanks built in accordance with API 650.3. Refer to the applicable ASTM bolt specification. Section 3. Does the Design Pressure has to be larger than the Maximum Design Pressure? Further.3.4 Referring to API 650.4. for unanchored tanks.2.1.5.May 1993 9th .? Reply 1: API Standard 650 does not address maximum lap.5 What is the distance between vertical welds? Please refer to API 650.In an unanchored tank.b and Section 3.1 when determining the allowable stress S? 650-I15/00 Question 1: For nozzles made from pipe materials.1. 650 9th .1.5 650-I49/03 Question 1: Section 3. However.4. Refer to 3. is it required to make a full fillet lap seam weld (top side only) under the tank shell? Yes. 2.

7. can the design pressure be exceeded (as for example. Since section F. 4 3. section 3. 10th Edition.5.10. Question: Equation F. or.1.7.5.3 650-I03/07 pending 650 10th-add. section 4. API 650 classifies this material under Group V with MMT above -29C.10.8. since a large vertical component is added for uplift.2 – Venting is deleted. the maximum design pressure shall not be exceeded.8.1) In section 6.04)^0.2 for the calculation of Pmax produces a negative number when the revised calculation of the wind moment (M) is performed in accordance with 3.5} = {215*9/(7*1. Table 2-3a and Figure 2-1. Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage. Question : Is projection outside the shell (as per 3. but does not state the maximum pressure for emergency venting conditions.5. 9/2003.1 the clause states: „Radiographic inspection is not required for the following:…………welds in nozzle and manway necks made from plate‟ Which phrase is correct or am I not interpreting correctly? Surely a manway neck made from plate would have a longitudinal butt weld? Pending For a tank designed and built per API-650.2 minimum radial width of annular plate shall be (1) 600 + 50 (outside projection) + 50 (lap joint) + 7 (shell thickness) which is = 717 mm (2) As per equation {215*tb/(H*G)^0.2) and lap joint width is required to be added when calculated as per equation given in 3.8.2 650-I06/07 pending . API 2000.1. if required. Addendum 3. the design conditions for F. The specific question is – For emergency (fire) venting conditions and for a tank built per API-650. Appendix F – Design of Tanks for Small Internal Pressures.1.5} = 717 mm Accordingly 800 mm radial width used.1.8.4.2? Background: The revised calculations for wind increase the tank wind overturning moment. However.4.2 – Venting deleted from the API Standard 650? 650 10th-add.3 then refers to the requirements of API Standard 2000 for emergency venting.………….11 the clause states: „All longitudinal butt-welds in the nozzle neck and transition piece. In section 3. 4 3.2.5.2 650-I05/07 pending 650 10th-add. But this section of API-2000 also refers back Appendix F of API Standard 650. Appendix F. When used in Appendix F calculations for Pmax a negative number is produced. The same material with WT up to approx ½” is allowed to -48C by ASME 31. then it becomes 824 mm (717+107) which exceed the used width.shall receive 100% radiographic examination (see 6. Can the vertical component of wind be deleted from the calculation of Pmax.8.3 and sec VIII div 1. 4 F.10.8 –Tank Venting then apply? If yes.2 is deleted. 4 Table 2 650-I04/07 I have noticed a discrepancy between API and ASME for minimum metal temperature application of SA516-70N material. 4 3. for emergency venting (section 3. how is the negative number for Pmax to be interpreted? pending 650 10th-add.3) and for a tank equipped with pressure relief devices (not a weak roof-to-shell attachment).650 10th-add. API-620 allows for up to 20% above the maximum allowable working pressure under fire emergency conditions)? Why is section F. does section 3.f as the result of a large vertical component of wind now included as part of the overturning moment calculation. which now is deleted – section F.4. Background : As per 3..2. if we add outside projection+lap joint width+shell thickness (=107 mm) on calculated width.10.11 650-I02/07 My question relates to radiographic examination of nozzle joints on tanks.4 states that under normal operating conditions.

which without any clarifiers would normally mean the original specified thickness in common inch fractions.8.7. and width dimensions of the proposed shapes meet the area.4.10.1.3. the assumption should be that the corrosion allowance has been used up and is no longer available.). the size of the portion of the peripheral weld that attaches the reinforcing plate to the bottom plate shall conform to 3.3-4A. a pneumatic inspection of the reinforcement plates is required. Question: Does reinforcing and welding design in accordance with API-620 have to meet full fillet weld attachment specified in 3. The strength of the effective attachment weld shall be considered as the weld‟s shear resistance at the stress value given for fillet welds in 3. API 650. 10th-add. 4 J.1 where it says the calculation for the required compression area at the roof-to-shell junction is based on the "nominal material thickness less any corrosion allowance". may be altered as long as the thickness. however. length. The confusion stems from the use of the term "nominal thickness". 180 degrees apart. My recommendation is that "th" be defined the same as the wording near the end of paragraph F. paragraphs F. where the contract engineer was intending to use the full thickness of the roof plate in the design pressure calculation. and 3-5 and dimensioned in the related tables.7. which use the nominal roof thickness "th".4.8 With the approval of the purchaser.3. 34B and 3-5 and related tables.4.7.3.2. It is my belief that the nominal roof thickness "th" used in the calculations should be determined by subtracting any corrosion allowance from the nominal or actual roof plate thickness.7. 10th edition.7 The attachment weld to the shell along the outer periphery of a reinforcing plate or proprietary connection that lap welds to the shell shall be considered effective only for the parts lying outside the area bounded by vertical lines drawn tangent to the shell opening.2. This has been a point of confusion on a tank re-rate. I recommend that the definition of "th" be revised to make it clear that corrosion allowance should not be included in the thickness used in the calculations.3.5.7 650-I13/07 An agenda item will be taken out to clarify this issue.Design of Tanks For Small Internal Pressures Section F.3.2. provide formulas for calculating the design pressure "P" and the limiting design pressure "Pmax". 3-4B.7. since the purpose of corrosion allowance is expected metal loss over time.7. section 5.1.1. The lugs shall preferably be located at the top of the tank. Is this intended to be twice or half the empty weight of the tank? Appendix F . whichever is thinner.1.4. When low-type nozzles are used with a reinforcing plate that extends to the tank bottom (see Figure 3-5).8. but before the hydro test.8 for allowable stresses.5.650 10th-add. correct? ·3. and the reinforcement plate to shell to ensure that there is no leaking.3.2.2 650-I07/07 650 10th-add.2.4 it is stated that after fabrication is completed of the tank.8 and 3. illustrated in Figures 3-4A. The location of the lugs shall be agreed upon by the purchaser and the manufacturer.3 650-I11/07 No .2 Calculations for design pressure P and Pmax Question: API Standard 650 Appendix F. in pairs.1 and F. and spacing requirements outlined in 3.10. See 3. be it lifting lug plates or trunions.4 3.7. The size of the outer peripheral weld shall be equal to the thickness of the shell plate or reinforcing plate.3.2 There shall be a minimum of two lugs on each tank. Our Engineers often require that we add a reinforcement plate to the exterior of the tank for any attached lifting devices. The inner peripheral weld shall be large enough to sustain the remainder of the loading. J. Question: Does Reinforcing and welding of shell openings that comply with API Standard 620 require approval of the Purchaser? Please note that API-620 design may not be in accordance with Fig.3 Lugs and their attachment welds shall be designed to carry their share of the applied load (twice the empty weight of the tank) distributed in a reasonable manner and based on a safety factor of 4. It is my contention that for any design pressure calculation.4 650-I12/07 J. welding. but shall not be greater than 38 mm (11/2 in. the shape and dimensions of the shell reinforcing plates.4 Maximum Design Pressure and Test Procedure Paragraphs F.7. Please note that weld strength analysis per API-620 may not require full fillet weld attachment the basic question remains as to whether Rafters are to be considered as “Other Compression Members” or not pending pending Pending 10th-add. All of the inner peripheral weld shall be considered effective.8. without consideration of manufacturing tolerance or corrosion allowance.4.7.3.4 5.7. 3. Question: Does this section refer to only those reinforcement plates that are around an opening in the tank or does this also refer to all reinforcement plates attached to the tank? The purpose of this pneumatic test is to test the welds of the pipe to the through the shell.4 3. 4 F. Reinforcement and welding of shell openings that comply with API Standard 620 are acceptable alternatives.2 and 3. Is this correct? If the answer is yes. This statement of permissible alternatives of shell opening reinforcement does not apply to flush-type cleanout fittings and flush-type shell connections.1 and F.1 650-I08/07 10th-add. the outer peripheral weld shall be applied completely around the reinforcement.

E. Appendix V.1 equation E-1 has a mixture of units.47 are based on using R and D in units of feet. it says to use 32 tb In the example.8.3.8.8.8. 650 APP V 650 APP V The equations on Table P-2 do not correlate with the lines on Figures P-8A to H. E. 650 10th-add. and these top angles are butt welded.2 650-I21/06 650-I22/06 650-I23/06 In paragraph 2.4 10th-add.7.1 Xbtm is defined as 16 tb In V.3.7. the equation shown in V. There are several places especially in the subscripts where the 1‟s looks like I‟ Sec.4 V.5 should have the E1 values replaced with JEs and JEr. we are shown how to figure the length of effective roof plate and shell plate.1 650-I18/06 This editorial error has been identified and corrected.7. The factors 2. 4 10th-add. Appendix R. we are directed to use JEst for calculating the area of the top stiffener as shown in Figure V-1B.3.3 and V. I have included a sample problem. I would appreciate your having someone review my concerns. 4 E.9.1 650-I10/07 It is my opinion that the equation for H1 in Par. Appendix V there is a definition for JEc and a definition for JEst.6 * Fy with Fy being yield strength as shown in Table 3-2? 650 10th-add.8. In paragraph V.5 650 10th-add. Paragraph 2 will be editorially corrected to agree with V. 3. Equation E-7 650 10th-add. Ps used in V.4. The factors 0.43 are based on using R and D in units of inches.6 and 0.8. No. purchased last month.3 second paragraph where Iact is defined. Is this reference still valid? 650 650 10th-add. Which formula is to be used? Yes. Attached is a letter documenting my findings.6 of API 650.9.7.650 10th-add.7.3 and V. section E.1 instructs the user that "TL shall be taken as the mapped value found in ASCE 7" I could not find any reference to this variable nor maps for it in ASCE 7-02 Second Edition.3 is as defined in V. Both formulas give the same results.3. Wil Read 16tb 650 10th-add. 4 10th-add. V. 4 C. There is a coefficient Ci.7. we are shown how to solve for tmin using Ps in the formula.2 650-I20/06 Yes.1. can JEc be substituted for JEst in this formula? In paragraph 2 of the example.4 APP V 650-I19/06 The definition of Xbtm is correct.2.1 does not provide a factor of safety against buckling.8.4 APP.1 “Nomenclature” for definition of “f”. this reference is still valid and the variable and maps are included in ASCE 7-05.3. Is Paragraph "C. 10th edition.8.4 APP E.3.1. V. I have been actively engaged in development of design rules for buckling of cylindrical shells given in API Bulletin 2U and ASME Section VII CC 2286-1 as well as being primary author of the Chapter 14 in the SSRC Guide which is referenced in API 650.3 use Ps as defined under V.5. Yes.4 respectively and solve with different results. 4 APP E 650-I17/06 The equation does not equate properly.3.3.3.5.1.1 and 1.6 650-I09/07 650-I15/06 650-I16/06 Yes No. seconds" and section E. Are the equations correct or are the lines on the figures correct? Being corrected in the 11th edition Regarding API 650.4.1.5 V.3. paragraph V. COMPARTMENTS" applied to both Single and Double deck roof. See V.7.4 V.4 3.1. This editorial error has been identified and corrected. Paragraph 2 will be editorially corrected to be consistent with V. Addendum 4. The definition of JEc will be removed as JEc is a carry-over from previous drafts of the Appendix and is not used in any equations in the Appendix. we believe that the formula from V. The term (I/Tc) may need to be (1/Tc) and a K term added to the right side of the equation.7. feet for diameter and height.3. the last calculation uses Xbtm and calculates it using 16tb Which is correct? In Appendix E.2 be solving for Psmax in lieu of Ps and the formula in V.1.7. Is the formula units corrected by the coefficient or do all the units need to be converted to be similar? In V.3. Yes. Where a top angle is installed as shown in Details d or e of Figure F-2.3 650-I24/06 . In the definitions for Appendix V. Yes For your information.7. The formula used does not match the formula in the referenced paragraphs V.3.3.9. Is this correct? In Addenda 4.2 shows us how to solve for Ps.3.7.8.1.4. and lbs per in2 for elastic modulus.7.2 is the maximum pressure for which the stated equations are valid. 650 10th-add. Should the formula in V. lbs per ft3 for mass density.3. is f = 0.2 Notation defines TL as the "Regional-dependent transition period for longer period ground motion.1? In Addenda 4. Inches for plate thickness.8.4.1.3. 650 10th-add. In paragraph V. December 2005 Appendix E. The difference is in the units.