ASME STP/NU-051

ASME STP/NU-051

CODE COMPARISON REPORT for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant Components
CODE COMPARISON REPORT for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant Components

: In stock

Format
$20.00

Standard Details

Scope:
Background and Scope

The Multinational Design Evaluation Programme (MDEP) Code Comparison Project was initiated in late 2006 in response to a request by the MDEP Codes and Standards Working Group (CSWG) formerly known as the Working Group on Component Manufacturing Oversight (WGCMO). The CSWG invited the organizations responsible for development of major nuclear component construction codes and standards, Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), to make presentations regarding the requirements of their respective codes and standards pertaining to light water cooled nuclear power plants along with comparisons between those respective codes and standards.

In an effort to facilitate consistent design and manufacturing processes among the 10 MDEP countries for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant components, the CSWG requested the various SDOs to develop a comparison of the requirements of their respective codes and standards and those of the others.

The SDOs from the USA, France, Japan, Korea, and Canada (ASME, AFCEN, JSME, KEA, and CSA, respectively) agreed to participate in this code comparison project and develop comparisons of the requirements for Class 1 vessels, piping, pumps and valves. The SDO from Russia (NIKIET) subsequently also joined in this effort, and this revision of the report includes a comparison of the NIKIET PNAE-G-7 requirements to those of ASME Section III for Class 1 components.

As the project was initiated, the SDOs determined that development of comparisons between every code and each of the others would be very complicated. Recognizing that the CSA, JSME, KEA, and AFCEN Codes were all originally developed based on ASME Section III, the SDOs agreed to define ASME Section III as the baseline for the comparison and compare each of the other Codes to ASME Section III and also to base the comparisons on the 2007 editions of each of the Codes.

Organization: ASME International
Document Number: asme stp/nu-051
Publish Date: 2012-12-31
Page Count: 501
Change Type: COMPLETE REVISION
Available Languages: EN
DOD Adopted: NO
ANSI Approved: NO
Most Recent Revision: YES
Current Version: YES
Status: Active

Publication Date: 12/31/2012 - Complete Document

Description :

Background and Scope

The Multinational Design Evaluation Programme (MDEP) Code Comparison Project was initiated in late 2006 in response to a request by the MDEP Codes and Standards Working Group (CSWG) formerly known as the Working Group on Component Manufacturing Oversight (WGCMO). The CSWG invited the organizations responsible for development of major nuclear component construction codes and standards, Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), to make presentations regarding the requirements of their respective codes and standards pertaining to light water cooled nuclear power plants along with comparisons between those respective codes and standards.

In an effort to facilitate consistent design and manufacturing processes among the 10 MDEP countries for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant components, the CSWG requested the various SDOs to develop a comparison of the requirements of their respective codes and standards and those of the others.

The SDOs from the USA, France, Japan, Korea, and Canada (ASME, AFCEN, JSME, KEA, and CSA, respectively) agreed to participate in this code comparison project and develop comparisons of the requirements for Class 1 vessels, piping, pumps and valves. The SDO from Russia (NIKIET) subsequently also joined in this effort, and this revision of the report includes a comparison of the NIKIET PNAE-G-7 requirements to those of ASME Section III for Class 1 components.

As the project was initiated, the SDOs determined that development of comparisons between every code and each of the others would be very complicated. Recognizing that the CSA, JSME, KEA, and AFCEN Codes were all originally developed based on ASME Section III, the SDOs agreed to define ASME Section III as the baseline for the comparison and compare each of the other Codes to ASME Section III and also to base the comparisons on the 2007 editions of each of the Codes.

Document Type : Complete Document

Language : English

Page Count : 501

Publication Date : 12/31/2012

Revision : 1

Status : Current

Title : CODE COMPARISON REPORT for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant Components

Publication Date: 01/27/2012 - Complete Document

Description :

The Multinational Design Evaluation Programme (MDEP) Code Comparison Project was initiated in late 2006 in response to a request by the MDEP Codes and Standards Working Group (CSWG) formerly known as the Working Group on Component Manufacturing Oversight (WGCMO). The CSWG invited the organizations responsible for development of major nuclear component construction codes and standards, Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), to make presentations regarding the requirements of their respective codes and standards pertaining to light water cooled nuclear power plants along with comparisons between those respective codes and standards.

In an effort to facilitate consistent design and manufacturing processes for Nuclear Power Plant Class 1 components among the ten MDEP countries, the CSWG requested the various SDOs to develop a comparison of the requirements of their respective codes and standards and those of the others.

The SDOs from the USA, France, Japan, Korea and Canada (ASME, AFCEN, JSME, KEA, and CSA, respectively) agreed to participate in this code comparison project and develop comparisons of the requirements for Class 1 vessels, piping, pumps and valves.

The objective of this report is to identify and summarize the differences between major international nuclear codes and standards for Class 1 equipment; namely those of AFCEN (RCC-M), ASME (Section III), CSA (N-285), JSME (S NC1) and KEA (KEPIC-MN).

The reader is reminded that each of the codes is a set of consistent rules. The requirements of one area may be, and often are, dependent on the requirements in other sections. Since a line-by-line comparison has been done, it may be tempting to judge the entire code based on the differences between these individual points, but this may not lead to a correct conclusion. This exercise identifies the different requirements of the different codes. It was not within the scope of this report to provide conclusions relative to the full implementation of the various Codes.

Document Type : Complete Document

Language : English

Page Count : 380

Publication Date : 01/27/2012

Revision : 12

Status : Historical

Title : CODE COMPARISON REPORT for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant Components

Quick Add

$423.00
$289.00
$485.00