Must not have been included in the distribution list for the memo, John. Couldn't find any mention of no foreign engineering being considered in this thread stated as official word until your posting. Seems pretty arrogant and arbitrary to me, but then I'm just a practical mechanic and not a number cruncher. I sincerely apologise for promoting respect for the work of engineers from other countries, and will try not to do it publicly again.....

dave

Lots of debate! My head hurts.........

At least COLLEGE professors can spell their title correctly. I hope you were wearing a helmet, because that must have been quite the fall off your high horse.


Jeff F.

Director of the Anti-Pretention Board

Dear Dave

Looking at an issue from many directions is wise and prudent thing to do. I appreciate your efforts in that direction. I want to state that nothing I have written in this thread is ment by me to be a personal attack. If anything has been taken that way I am sorry. If we could look at the technical issues and move forward I believe the industry will be better for it in the long run. To that end I have some questions which I need to work out before moving forward particularly in the direction of design life of a boiler. If you have any info from your sources I would appreciate it.

Repectfully

Robby Peartree

Jeff F.

Indeed, that was a painful fall from my high horse. I do so admit my failure in catching that minor error. One more for the lesson book. This is why I love RYPN...we tend to debate and nit pick the minor mistakes, while we grossly overlook the realities of the situation. Shall we return to the issue at hand?......that of actually learning something? I just proved I can learn from my mistakes.....anybody else? I reiterate....this will be a fun debate!

Fallen and so badly bruised.....glad I had my hard hat on....the fallen.....but not shaken and undeterred......

Mr. Rimmasch

Pardon if I failed to catch any other miss-spelled words...not a "collage professer!" Field mechanic, with experience.


Oh yes....Dave L. You have made no mistake in noting foreign codes. I was noting that it was made clear in the meeting that it would NOT be considered. It was made VERY clear......"crystal" clear! I suggest that you do mention foreign codes. If nothing else, the history is valid.

I'm always astounded at the senseless need of this industry to continually "reinvent the wheel." I didn't think metallurgical physics changed from one country to another...

John Rimmasch,

Are you aware that Robby Peartree has a Bachelors of Science Degree in Metallurgical Engineering?
If I remember correctly, your post secondary education is a Vocational Technician Certificate in Welding.
Either of you gentlemen correct me if I am wrong.

M Austin

PS Regarding your "those that can't do, teach" comment, if you invoke that I would have to say that "greater than or equally" applies to community college welding instructors. Further more, most college professors spend half their time working on research projects delving into arenas no one has gone before. 100 years ago we would all be discussing this at Purdue. I have designed over a dozen pressure vessels for different departments at the University of Hawaii including a 17 ton test tube for 10,000 psi service for the Dumand Project (now defunded 600 square mile neutrino detector array) and the State's Hyperbaric Treatment Chamber operated by the UH School of Medicine. I basically function as an interpreter for "those that can't do" by taking what they conceptually ask for and convert it to real word verbiage so the professors get what they want and not what they ask for.
John, can you generate a differential equation to calculate the change of moment of inertia, section modulus or radius of gyration for the full length of a Tross bolt? This has to be done before it goes to ASME..... (along with the FEA as stated earlier).

Hi Matt,

To confirm what Matt said about me, my Metallurgy degree was earned for the University of Texas at El Paso in Dec 1994. UTEP is the only school in the State of Texas that I am aware of that offers this degree. UTEP's Metallurgy Department is an ABET accredited program. There are several talented professors in this department which I have had the pleasure of not only studying under but I can honestly call them friends. Also I spent time involved with the R&LHS in El Paso and donated significant amount of effort to restoration/preservation projects there and other places.

Respectfully,
Robby Peartree

John, I assumed that equine comment was directed at me since it made no sense in any case. keep your skin thick and continue to do your good work. I'm grateful your company has managed to do a lot of crossover work with foreign operators, and am always pleased to read about whatever information about their standards and practices - and the entire experience - you care to share.

Matt Austin is one of the most brilliant people it has been my good fortune to get to know, and wish my realm of knowledge allowed for me to have more substantive discussions with him on technical subjects - the conceptual things we can communicate about are truly fascinating.

I'm also grateful to see younger guys like Robbie get into these talks - us graybeards get stuck into traditional ways and miss opportunities to grow our collective capabilities.

Thanks to you all. Keep talking and posting.

Matt - if Tross himeself or another qualified engineer has done the calculations you require, and published them even in German, would a translation be adequate? I'd imagine the numbers would be the same even if the words were in another language.

I don't attend the meetings, John. Not disinterested, just not free to get away to do so. Don't assume I'm aware of what goes on at them unless it is mentioned here or in TrainLine.

dave

Hello All:

I've been following this thread and would like to put in my own opinion.

First, honest discussion of alternatives in design of fired pressure vessels is part of the design process.

Second, the alternative designs need to be evaluated on the same basis in order to determine which solution is the optimal solution for the requirements at hand; i.e., the same solution may not be the optimal solution in all situations.

The one item that I have not seen in this discussion is a heads up strength analysis of the fillet welded staybolts vs the conventional threaded staybolt.

Has anyone evaluated the required weld strength of the weld in a fillet welded staybolt?

Even though the ASM B&PV Code may give weld dimensions based upon plate thickness, how does the strength of this weld compare to the load on the staybolt which is in turn based upon the staybolt spacing, plate thickness and working pressure?

Another question is: How does the strength of the weld in a fillet welded staybolt compare to the threaded connection of a threaded staybolt?

What of pre and post weld heat treatment required for welding? Even though the materials of construction may all be P-1 materials, a postweld heat treatment may be required.

Given the spacing of staybolts typical in locomotive boilers, is there potential for warping due to the heat input from the welding process?

What would be the means of inspection for the fillet welded staybolts? If no radiography can be done, what would then be used for the weld efficiency?

What about repairs to the fillet weld if defects are found during the NDE process?

Another item that I haven't seen mentioned is the effect of flame impingement on the firebox side.

Before you can come up with an answer, you need the question.

hth

pkurilecz

All,

First, I wonder who created the alias of Jeffrey Fefferlyn to post...

Second, while I am not suggesting that such things will be accepted (as Mr. R pointed out) into the fillet welded discussions, I would like to point out that the ASME has been lowering the required factor of safety to stay current in a global market. Foreign code has then influenced the ASME though it may not in this current matter being discussed.

Third, the argument has been made by Mr. P that fillet welded bolts can be dangerous due to corrosion around the bolt where it passes through the sheet. My thought on that consists of great confusion as to why ones boiler chemistry would be so bad as to allow for corrosion on the waterside. Should not those operating locomotive boilers be testing to insure proper chemistry is sustained? Mr. Porta proved out that his treatment (as implemented on the french national railways) does effectively eliminate scale build up and CORROSION. Something that has been learned so many times over in this country is that "joe's chemical", located just down the street with a low low price, does not posses the knowledge to develop a treatment program that can effectively protect a locomotive boiler. If we are engaging in industrial steam generation than he is our guy, but....

Last to Mr. Rimmasch/Mr. Janssen, hip-hip-hooray I say to you both!

Hi All

Has anybody heard how the ASME meeting in Atlanta, GA went for the selection of people for the committee ASME is forming to look at this issue?

Robby Peartree

Thought I would post some pictures from my staybolt collection. This picture is of a BDR 26 staybolt and cross-section of the surrounding wrapper sheet from a German Class 01 Pacific built in the late 40's and removed from service in 2005. One can see the shiny area from the 6mm fillet weld removed from the bolt and not much going on in the crevice. This boiler was on an excursion locomotive with operating characteristics and water treatment typical to the U.S. It also started out a coal burner and was converted to oil firing. Germany is very humid, and the wrapper is pretty corroded, however, I did not get specifics on why the boiler was being replaced. Boiler life in Germany and surrounding countries is typically 50 years and the locomotive number is related to the frame as opposed to the boiler.

Here are two staybolts from a locomotive in the U.S. with a 1940's or 50's era firebox. It has a very similar service history to the German boiler boiler I posted the pictures of. These threaded staybolts were "seal-welded" at some point in its service life, probably because they were leaking. The threaded area of the bolt with the firebox sheet removed (close) shows clear signs of working in the sheet. The far staybolt has had the "seal-weld" removed - it now freely articulates on the sheet and could probably be pulled off by hand. The staybolt was functioning well in service, however, and was replaced due to firebox sheet corrosion. This is a great example of an undocumented and unintentional conversion to fillet-welded staybolts and is probably not limited to this example in the U.S.