Cart
0
Product
Products
(empty)
No products
To be determined
Shipping
$0.00
Total
Product successfully added to your shopping cart
Quantity
Total
There are 0 items in your cart.
There is 1 item in your cart.
Total products
Total shipping
To be determined
Total
Sale!
View larger
View larger
ASME STP/NU-051
New product
ASME STP/NU-051 1st Edition, December 31, 2012 CODE COMPARISON REPORT for Class 1 Nuclear Power Plant Components
More info
Description / Abstract:
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.
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.