Professional Documents
Culture Documents
#ASME #CODE #UG-46 #INSPECTION #OPENINGS
Dear Group,
I have some concern about what s happening to one of my Vendor for a pressure
vessel supply with size of 1200 mm. as below;
Our comment was that a manhole is requested for maintenance access as per below
ASME Code sentence;
Vendor reply;
a manhole for inspection or maintenance is impracticable, we thus comply to UG46 of
the code, the existing N3 & N4 nozzles (6” inches) are used as inspection openings
with the approval from their A.I.
Conclusion;
We confirmed our position as per code, Vendor will claim for money and delivery time
postponed, So, we will go in front of the lawyer for the dispute.
Any feedback is appreciate.
Giuseppe
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7049141080692314112/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android 1/5
4/7/23, 5:24 PM (1) Post | Feed | LinkedIn
342 72 comments
Reactions
…
Like Comment
Most relevant
48in vessel with a 24in man way is common. Sounds like they forgot to
account for it in the quoted price. Very common, unfortunately
Like Reply
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7049141080692314112/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android 2/5
4/7/23, 5:24 PM (1) Post | Feed | LinkedIn
Paul Anderson
Consulting
Without knowing what the internal layout of the vessel is and it's purpose, it
can be argued that it is not practical to have a manhole and therefore only
handholds will suffice.
The vessel is only 6ft seam to seam and at my height I would argue about it
being impractical to enter and stand in the vessel.
Like Reply
Dear,
Regarding your explanation, based on code manhole is mandatory and not
possible to replace with a nozzle which defined for something else but infront
of lawyer you should refer to your contract and list of documents priority
which generaly MDS is upper than code and if in your biding MDS manhole
has not been considered, maybe you will not have more chance.
Becase your comment has cost and time impact, only with refering to code
you can not easy succeed.
You have to check your contract and documents which refered.
Like Reply
Like Reply
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7049141080692314112/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android 3/5
4/7/23, 5:24 PM (1) Post | Feed | LinkedIn
Handhole.
For your vessel you have to attach a manhole.
Like Reply
From the user's perspective, will they accept nozzle N3 and N4 as inspection
openings? if not then in my opinion 1 manhole or 2 handholes shall be added.
Like Reply
The man hole requirement is not only for maintenance and inspection ,for
fixing internals also it is required ,if we can see detailed drawings for intended
purpose.
Like Reply
The purpose of a manway is to enter the vessel for inspection. Looking at the
manway's location, I see no internal rungs, a steam-out connection is not
apparent, so my question is, can someone safely enter the vessel? If something
occurred that required someone inside the vessel to need assistance to get
out, is there adequate room for a second person inside?
If this manway could be located near the bottom head, I would agree that it is
needed, but at the upper position shown I would accept the inspection
openings.
You need to look past the letter of the Code and develop a safe design
considering the maintenance and inspection requirements needed and
determine (working with end user) the safest ways to meet these
requirements.
Like 2 Reply
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7049141080692314112/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android 4/5
4/7/23, 5:24 PM (1) Post | Feed | LinkedIn
I would be asking
Why is a manhole required on such a small vessel 1.9m tan to tan OD 1.2m
What maintenance would be required from inside that couldn’t be done
external
Looks like an after thought from engineering
I don’t believe it’s necessary in this instance for the size of vessel
Like 2 Reply
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7049141080692314112/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android 5/5