Design of Pressure Vessel using PV Elite – Material Selection as per ASME Section II Part A, B & D

A: Assuming corrosion behavior changes misses that normalization doesn't materially alter corrosion allowance planning. Fracture during hydro is unlikely here because toughness generally improves with normalization rather than degrades. MAWP doesn't drop at design temperature since Part D allowable stresses for normalized plate are typically equal or higher. The real gap is that allowable stress tables don't address impact test exemptions, so MDMT risk remains unmitigated.

A: Allowable stress alone doesn't fix MAWP because thickness sits directly in the hoop stress term. Halving pressure capacity exaggerates the effect and ignores that CA is a fraction of total thickness. A 25–30% drop assumes CA dominates required thickness, which isn't typical at this diameter. The reduction stays modest because required wall is driven by pressure plus joint efficiency, so a 3 mm delta trims MAWP by roughly a tenth.

A: MAWP isn't density-driven because stress equations don't include mass terms. Corrosion models don't reference density in this workflow. Saying there's no effect ignores that weight summaries drive load cases. The first miss shows up in support reactions and seismic checks where mass directly scales force.

A: Fabrication convenience doesn't address SSC susceptibility. Alloy steel doesn't grant immunity and can worsen cracking if hardness isn't managed. Treating NACE as a paperwork item ignores metallurgical limits. Carbon steel with controlled hardness and heat treatment aligns with NACE and avoids unnecessary alloy risk.