>That might not be such a bad thing though if it would encourage new piping
>engineers to learn something about piping rather than just diving into
>the analysis.
You sure got that right. As anyone on this list knows, I get pretty
exercized
over the dumb questions that spring from inability or unwillingness to
apply first principles of engineering--perform simple cross-checks like a
force balance or to use reference materials or pose problems logically.
Too many 'analysts' don't even know know how to check their work because
they don't understand the principles it's based on. They think the
software does the thinking.
>I think this sort of
>issue is going to be a regular problem in the EU where much of the
>existing plant is designed to ASME or other national codes. I have no
>idea if EN13480 take precedence over ASME VIII when tying into existing
>pipework, it would be nice if it could be sorted out by engineers
>rather than leaving it to the lawyers!
I've been exposed to a little of this based on the EU Pressure Equipment
Directive. The PED has administrative process for incorporating ASME Code
compliant components into EC service. It strikes me as mostly paperwork
and procedural matters but it seems to work.
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen. ___________________________| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw Received on Sat Jan 10 15:50:00 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 27 2008 - 20:24:02 EDT