Steam Engines
[Home] - [HELP] - [Forums] - [Groups] - [Classified Ads] - [Subscribe] - [Books] - [Sponsors] -

Go Back   SmokStak > SmokStak® Old Iron and Tractor Community > Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines
Forgot Password? Join Us!

Notices

Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines Antique steam engines, their boilers, pumps, gauges, whistles and other related things that make them run.

Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines

National Board Historic Boiler Meeting


this thread has 19 replies and has been viewed 3230 times

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-20-2005, 11:27:08 AM
Jim Jake Templin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

The NB is meeting in Corpus Christi next month, does anyone have the particulars, place, time, ect. thanks.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 12-20-2005, 11:40:45 AM
Ken Majeski's Avatar
Ken Majeski Ken Majeski is offline
Subscriber
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: South Lawton, Wisconsin
Posts: 2,826
Thanks: 1,600
Thanked 2,447 Times in 850 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Well, I decided to remove this so somebody don't show up at the Canceled meeting
__________________
Ken Majeski, Ellsworth Wis.

Last edited by Ken Majeski; 12-23-2005 at 06:34:12 PM. Reason: Remove time and place
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-20-2005, 02:30:21 PM
Bruce E. Babcock Bruce E. Babcock is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Amanda, Ohio USA
Posts: 313
Thanks: 60
Thanked 282 Times in 74 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

The meeting in Corpus Christi has been cancelled.

Last week, I received a copy of a 72 page document "Appendix C -Historical Boilers Draft 1 Rev 3" along with a ballot that provided the option to vote "Approved," "Disapproved," "Abstain," or "Not Voting."

I understand that the other task group members and some of the visitors also recieved the same material.

I voted "Disapproved."

Maybe some of the other members will pitch in with more details.

Sincerely,

Bruce
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-20-2005, 03:03:58 PM
Mike McKnight Mike McKnight is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mason, Tennessee USA
Posts: 6,578
Thanks: 7,196
Thanked 6,615 Times in 2,422 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce E. Babcock
The meeting in Corpus Christi has been cancelled.

Last week, I received a copy of a 72 page document "Appendix C -Historical Boilers Draft 1 Rev 3" along with a ballot that provided the option to vote "Approved," "Disapproved," "Abstain," or "Not Voting."

I understand that the other task group members and some of the visitors also recieved the same material.

I voted "Disapproved."

Maybe some of the other members will pitch in with more details.

Sincerely,

Bruce
Bruce,
Can you sum up in 100 words or less what the 72 page document was about? Or is there some link to it that will take us there? I, and I'm sure tons of other folks, are curious to see the contents.
Mike McKnight
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-20-2005, 03:33:08 PM
Bruce E. Babcock Bruce E. Babcock is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Amanda, Ohio USA
Posts: 313
Thanks: 60
Thanked 282 Times in 74 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Here is the ballot I submitted to the National Board. I will let the other members speak for themselves.

Bruce E. Babcock
11155 Stout Road
Amanda, Ohio 43102

(740) 969-2096

babcock2@gte.net


December 16, 2005
Robin Heilman, NBIC Secretary
1055 Crupper Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43229


Ms. Heilman,

My vote on Letter Ballot NB03-2201 Task Group on Historical Boilers National Board Inspection Code is: Disapproved. My explanations, as requested on the ballot, are as follows:


I am not satisfied that the proposed revision of Appendix C will be effective in assuring the continued safe operation of historical boilers.

My specific concerns include, but are not limited to:

Appendix C includes no provision for assuring the competence of the operators of historical boilers. Information published in past issues of the Board's Bulletin makes it obvious that incidents with historical boilers, as with all boilers of any age or type of construction, are most often the result of the operators' failures to comprehend the cause and nature of incidents and the means of preventing these causes or dealing with them in a safe manner. Wording in the draft of Appendix C clearly acknowledges this issue; "It should be recognized that safety of these boilers is dependent upon the knowledge and training of the operator in proper use, construction, maintenance and safe operation of each specific boiler proposed to be operated."

Appendix C does not allow for each boiler to be evaluated on its own merits. One example can be seen in C-7000 where arbitrary joint efficiencies are listed with no reference to any scientific or engineering basis.

C-3230 specifies "Ultrasonic thickness testing results in areas of generalized thinning (3 in. in diameter or greater) or where grooved thinning is noted (2 in. in length or greater) are to be used in calculating MAWP in accordance with C-7000." I do not understand the engineering or scientific basis for using the thickness of a spot in one area of a boiler to determine the strength of a riveted joint in another area of the boiler.

The Board's decision to move the questionable wording regarding the quality of older boiler steels from the draft of Appendix C to the Draft 2006 Addendum, seemed deceptive, and raised questions as to the sincerity of the Board's relationship with the members of the Appendix C task group.


Appendix C will be of no value to the owners, operators, and inspectors of historical boilers unless it is a stand-alone document that is readily available to everyone who is involved. The following are examples of references in Appendix C to other codes or standards that will be meaningless to anyone who does not have access to these documents:

RB-2000 (of the NBIC?) in C-2000
RB-3000 (of the NBIC?) in C-2000
RB-4000 (of the NBIC?) in C-2000
RB-3200 (of the NBIC?) in C-2031
RB-4000 (of the NBIC?) in C-3100
Appendix 3 in C-8100
Part RA (of the NBIC?) in C-8200, C-8400, and C-8600
Appendix 4 in C-8600
Part RD (of the NBIC?) in C-8700

References to the 1971 edition of the ASME Code will create confusion. How will the owners, operators, and inspectors know what information is to be used and how it is to be used? How will we all know how to deal with the information in the 1971 Code that contradicts information in Appendix C?

It is my hope that my dissenting vote on the revisions to Appendix C will not, in any way, affect the ability of the National Board and the historical boiler community to work together to find ways to assure the continued safe operation of our historical boilers. I want to express my appreciation of the Board's willingness to hear us out on the multitude of issues that we discussed in the three meetings. Even a quick glance at the resulting document discloses that many of our ideas and concerns were incorporated into the final draft.

I was not elected by the historical boiler community to represent them to the National Board. However, from many conversations over the last two years, I believe there is strong support for what I advocated. Much of what I said in the meetings was simply an attempt to convey to the Board the concerns and suggestions that were presented to me by the owners, operators, and inspectors of historical boilers.

If the task group accomplished nothing else, it demonstrated how desperately we need a national historical boiler standard, and it forced us to think long and hard about what that standard must include. There is no doubt but what there is now enough support in enough states that a new standard will eventually evolve. The statement in C-1030, It should be recognized that safety of these boilers is dependent upon the knowledge and training of the operator in proper use, construction, maintenance and safe operation of each specific boiler proposed to be operated., provides the common ground needed for the development of a workable standard. As I have said many times, if a standard is going to contribute to the continued safe operation of our historical boilers, it must, among other things: (1) Address the qualifications of the operator, (2) Be a stand-alone document, (3) Allow every boiler to be judged on its own merits, and (4) provide the same information to the operators, owners, and inspectors in a form that is readily accessible and easy to understand.

The ball is now in our court.

Sincerely,
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-20-2005, 03:43:29 PM
Jim Jake Templin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Extremely well put, and Amen.

I think that there is a huge amount of warrented distrust in our steam community and the actual motivies of the NBIC. If the new appendix C is put forth, from what little I know, owners won't have a clue what to do, and niether will any inspectors.

It seems we are headed for a situation much like the IRA; no one will understand the code and about anything and everything is illegal unless you pay some one to figure it out.

I appreciate your efforts, Bruce.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-20-2005, 04:35:04 PM
GaarScott's Avatar
GaarScott GaarScott is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zimmerman, Minnesota
Posts: 2,042
Thanks: 3,032
Thanked 1,934 Times in 595 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Bruce,

As usual your thoughts are well presented and thought out. I know that I am thankful that someone of your stature has been representing the interests of the hobbyist and I full heartedly concur with what you stated in your reply to the N.B.I.C. Thanks for a job well done and I support you in your continued efforts on our behalf.

Sincerely,

Lawrence J. Swanz
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-20-2005, 05:40:42 PM
Scott's Avatar
Scott Scott is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nebraska USA
Posts: 869
Thanks: 189
Thanked 373 Times in 194 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Here's a link to the last meetings minutes.

http://www.nationalboard.org/Nationa...df/TG_hist.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-20-2005, 06:59:24 PM
Bruce E. Babcock Bruce E. Babcock is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Amanda, Ohio USA
Posts: 313
Thanks: 60
Thanked 282 Times in 74 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

I would like to clarify that the link that Scott mentioned is to the 98 page agenda for the August meeting in Spokane.

I do not know if there is a link to the minutes of that meeting.

Bruce E. Babcock
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-21-2005, 02:01:02 AM
Steamrguy's Avatar
Steamrguy Steamrguy is offline
Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Saugus, California
Posts: 458
Thanks: 2,530
Thanked 815 Times in 155 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

This is sort of a rebuttal to the previous post. There are two sides to every coin so I wanted to post the flip side to Bruce Babcock’s post to show that it is not all bad.
Bruce brings out some valid points. For what it is worth, here is my two cents.

“Assuring the operators competence”
What it does say is “ the owner, user and/or operator are responsible for ensuring that the boiler meets all the requirements of the jurisdiction where the boiler is operated, including inspections,repairs,licening,operating certificates,permits and operator training”
Remember that the goal is to make Jurisdictions in 50 states happy and that this a Non Mandatory code. No one is required to adopt it so to be useful as a national code it needs to be useful to everyone. For example, the state of Montana requires each boiler to be inspected and each operator to be licensed even if you are just running at home. California only requires a boiler to be inspected if there is a paid employee exposed to the boiler and Wyoming does (did?) not have a requirement for historical at all. Other states are a mix of both. The historical code obviously realizes that operator training is important but has left it up to the jurisdiction to decide how to manage it. I have tried to get California to offer a license for historical boiler operators. I believe in it myself but California is not the least bit interested in doing so. California would not adopt the historical code if that were made a requirement. Appendix C will have no value if no one is will to adopt it! Clearly making everyone happy is not an easy task.

Joint Efficiency.
the values given in the chart are a valid statistical average for a given type seam. A standard engineering practice. Given two boilers I recently did the calculations on. An Advance and CASE. The CASE calculated out to an efficiency of 71.1% and the Advance came out to 74.2 %. If every thing else is kept the same the difference in pressure is less than 8 pounds. I personally would not condemn the document on this. The advantage in using the table is that it takes the process of measuring and calculating the different failure modes away from us in an effort to simplify the certification process. If we are going to condemn the use of the longitudinal seam table then we must also forgo the tables on rivet diameters and shear strength for boilerplate. Perhaps even the assumption that all boilerplate has 55000-psi tensile strength. If we do all this we would be left with cutting test coupons from our boiler and having then tested. I don’t think we want to go that route! In fact if we are to calculate the seam and not use the table it follows that we should also calculate all the other failure modes. IE, Stay bolt pressure, flat stayed surfaces, Shell, Circumferential joint, flue sheet supports, etc etc. Surly that would make the Historical code over complicated and almost useless to most of us. As Bruce mentioned, it should be easy to understand. There are a few compromises being made in an effort to make the Appendix C historical code understandable and easy to use. The use of tables is one of them. I personally think that this compromise is well placed.

Along the same lines of thought. I do not think that this document can be made a stand-alone document and still be easy to use. It would have to include sections on plumbing for power boilers and another for miniature boilers. Also design considerations for fire tube boilers, Return tube boilers, vertical boilers, and miniature boilers. Perhaps welding and the forming of repair parts, riveting and a lot more.
The ASME code as a hole is barley self-standing and it is several thousand pages long. I just don’t see how it can be done.
Lastly, How does one determine the thickness of a longitudinal join accurately with out doing damage to the boiler or raising the cost immensely? Ultra sound will not do it. The sound waves will bounce at the first joint and never see the plate in the back of a lap or butt joint. Radiographic? I understand the complaint but what is the alternative? I concede my lack of knowledge here.

OK Here is something I think is great about Appendix “C”. They realize that many inspectors do not have much experience with old boilers. They have always been taught that you condemn and old boiler. You do not de-rate it to be safe again. There is an inspection guideline laid out for inspector to follow. It’s pretty complete. If the inspectors have this to follow then they do not feel like they are putting their neck out by inspecting the boiler and putting their stamp on it. If they can say they followed the rules they will be much more likely to even do an inspection rather than not. It goes a long way in spelling out the requirements of the owner and inspector. It also describes the various inspections, what will be done at each and when.

My Grip about the code as of the December 7 Correspondence is what it may cost for the inspections. The initial inspection is quit complete and may take 8 hours or more time. In California, at $125 dollar an hour plus drive time that could be $1000 dollars for the first inspection. Subsequent inspection would be less but…

Clearly this is a complicated issue. Bruce, I hope I did not offend you. I do not believe the Schedule “C” non-mandatory code is perfect by any means but I see the other side of the coin.

OK. I out this out there lets see what comes back!

Dean Alling
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-21-2005, 01:00:42 PM
Ken Majeski's Avatar
Ken Majeski Ken Majeski is offline
Subscriber
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: South Lawton, Wisconsin
Posts: 2,826
Thanks: 1,600
Thanked 2,447 Times in 850 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Well.... I think that we have came a Long way as far as getting some reasonable criteria as far as inspections go.

True, the joint efficiencys are somewhat random BUT when you calculate the efficiency of a joint by rivet spacing and size it gets really complicated and generally comes out about the same anyway. The people that made these boilers weren't exactly Stoopid. We have inspectors that are having problems with even the barrel and stayed surface calculations now so I think the tables are a BIG Plus.

While Not Perfect from what I can see this is probably about the best we can do at this time. You know what happens when you get too Pushy... They may throw the whole thing out and then we have to start over...
__________________
Ken Majeski, Ellsworth Wis.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-22-2005, 11:26:54 AM
Bruce E. Babcock Bruce E. Babcock is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Amanda, Ohio USA
Posts: 313
Thanks: 60
Thanked 282 Times in 74 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

I just received the following message from Chuck Withers of the National Board:



Gentlemen,
Based on the voting and comments received, the letter ballot for the first draft of Appendix C has failed. However, there has been good progress and as it was pointed out by one commentor, we are approximately 80% complete. A conscience effort was made to not have another formal meeting with TG members because of the costs and time involved for all the volunteer members to travel. It is still hoped that this Appendix can be completed with your help by e-mail and telephone, but if needed we can have another formal TG meeting in the future if we can't accomplish this task.

Let me explain the procedure needed to complete (approve) this Appendix, as some concerns were raised. This Appendix is still a work in progress and the first draft was not expected to be perfect. The purpose of the first letter ballot sent was more to receive comments from yourselves because you have not had a chance to review a draft in its entirety and see the progress made. Sometimes it is difficult to see the whole picture when discussing specific issues at meetings. The letter ballot did accomplish its purpose and the comments received are not earth shattering to where we can not address them with some work ahead. Keep in mind also, that this draft does not go any farther in the approval process (to the SC and MC) until it is approved by the TG. So your comments are important and are part of this continued effort in accomplishing an acceptable draft Appendix.

The one big comment from all members who voted disapproved is the need to address operator competency. This task requires input from yourselves as owners and associtaions, therefore, it is requested that all members submit their thoughts or association procedures for competency of operators in order to address this issue. Please submit this information as soon as possible as most other comments have already been addressed and incorporated into the next draft to be presented to the TG after the holidays. Your input on this item will be incorporated into this draft for your approval.

On behalf of the National Board, Thank you for all your hard work and look forward to your continued effort to complete this Appendix and make this Appendix a stand alone section that can be used by all.

Enjoy this time with all your family, friends and relatives, as we look forward to next year,
Chuck




Bruce E. Babcock
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-22-2005, 09:26:09 PM
Steamrguy's Avatar
Steamrguy Steamrguy is offline
Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Saugus, California
Posts: 458
Thanks: 2,530
Thanked 815 Times in 155 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Operator competence is important. No doubt about it! I would like to see a licensing program myself and have pushed for that here (as mentioned above) but unless the powers that be in California have a change of heart, operator licensing could be the deal breaker for us. We will be interested in any solutions that are presented. I will have to bring the argument up again at the next meeting we have with the state and see how it goes.

-DA-
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-22-2005, 11:32:03 PM
LAKnox LAKnox is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chandler, Arizona USA
Posts: 742
Thanks: 52
Thanked 258 Times in 172 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steamrguy
Operator competence is important. No doubt about it! I would like to see a licensing program myself and have pushed for that here (as mentioned above) but unless the powers that be in California have a change of heart, operator licensing could be the deal breaker for us. We will be interested in any solutions that are presented. I will have to bring the argument up again at the next meeting we have with the state and see how it goes.

-DA-
I find this a very interesting thread as it parallels what many states have gone through or are attempting in getting Concealed Carry Permits in place. Here in AZ, we have a 16 hour course with an 8 hour renewal every 4 years. Other states have lesser requirements and others have greater. Here in AZ, at least, one of the first major steps was in getting a course of study put together and accepted by both the shooting community as well as the law enforcement and political community. There is also a great push for a national standard by many people. To translate this into the current discussion, I'd be very interested to see if there is anyone who has a good study course for historic boiler operations. I am hoping to become more active in our local tractor club which owns an operable Case 65 and would love to know more about the correct operation of boilers. Having even a voluntary national standard study program would go a long way to helping spread the knowledge of "correct" boiler operation. Yes, I understand that each boiler type has its own peculiarities as well as different brand names, but the general principals are, as far as I can tell, pretty much the same. While I have operated a couple different stationary engines while at UC Davis, I know that my knowledge is skimpy at best and I now know that I did a lot of things incorrectly. Just my $0.02.

Lyle Knox
Chandler AZ
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-23-2005, 12:57:47 PM
Mark L. Jordan Mark L. Jordan is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Louisville, Kentucky USA
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 27
Thanked 2,471 Times in 547 Posts
Thumbs up Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

I don't have any answers yet, but this post is just to let everybody know that a "National Standard" guidebook is being considered for publication. This book will be meant to assist in standardizing a lot of things, and will be available to all (owner, inspector, repairman) who need to know common answers to questions concerning restoration, repair, operation, and maintenance of the antique steam machinery. [I]It will be a layman's guide to understand state codes as required (state by state) and will address the requirements set forth by NBIC Appendix C if adopted by the jurisdiction you are governed by.[/I] The existance of this type of document may be a year away, but it's in it's infant stages. There are a lot of people, including owners, inspectors, and repairmen, who are wanting this type of document. Bruce Babcock and I are willing and preparing to create the initial draft early in 2006. Your input is welcome. Please forward your concerns to markjordan@insightbb.com. I promise that a national standard guide will not make everyone happy , but a very fair effort will be made concerning owners, inspectors, and repairmen . Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-23-2005, 04:39:16 PM
Bruce E. Babcock Bruce E. Babcock is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Amanda, Ohio USA
Posts: 313
Thanks: 60
Thanked 282 Times in 74 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

The letter from the National Board that announced that the first draft of Appendix C had been voted down, requested that the task group members submit their thoughts regarding procedures for assuring operator competency. I submitted the following description of the requirements in Ohio.

Bruce E. Babcock


LICENSING
If you have been engaged in operating an historical boiler during at least two of the five twelve month periods prior to October 24, 2002, you may be eligible to obtain a license by simply completing an application and successfully passing an examination. To qualify, the law requires that you must have personally operated and attended the operation of one or more historical boilers in a location open to the people as a whole, whether or not such persons are required to pay any admission or other fee. This option, known as “grandfathering,” will be available only for a limited time.


If you do not apply for grandfathering, the law states that the board will issue you a license if you satisfy the following criteria:

Are sixteen years of age or older;

Have completed an historical boiler operator’s course that is approved by the board;

Have passed a written or verbal examination that is approved by the board;

Have at least one hundred hours of actual operating experience or training in the operation of historical boilers;

Have paid a one-time fee of $50.

Licenses are valid for the lifetime of the operator, unless they are revoked.


Training Courses

Any organization that wishes to have their steam school certified by the state of Ohio, so that their graduates will be qualified to take the State exam, must submit a proposal to the historical boilers licensing board.
As of September 2005, the steam school at Carriage Hill Farm Metropark, near Dayton, is the only school that has been approved. Their phone number is (937) 879-0461.


Examinations

Examinations will be available at the Department of Commerce by appointment. The examination will also be offered at locations around the state to accommodate organizations that may wish to sponsor them for their members as well as for the general public. Further information is available at (614) 644-2236.

Experience

The 100 hours of experience operating and attending the operation of historical boilers must be verified by a person who is licensed as an operator of historical boilers. Hours spent restoring or repairing boilers, and time spent in steam schools, can not be counted toward this requirement.
Persons who are under the age of 16 may be trained in the operation of historical boilers by serving as apprentices to licensed operators.

Ohio will honor historical boiler operators licenses from other states, if the licenses are based on requirements equivalent to Ohio’s. Minnesota’s requirements for licenses are considered to be equivalent to Ohio’s.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-23-2005, 10:55:03 PM
Jim Jake Templin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Will this new operator certification recognize papers already held? Texas doesn't license, but AR does, and I hold boiler operator certification there, as well as a locomotive (steam and diesel)license.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-24-2005, 12:22:13 PM
Mark L. Jordan Mark L. Jordan is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Louisville, Kentucky USA
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 27
Thanked 2,471 Times in 547 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Rev Jim,

It's WAY too early to answer questions like yours. Nobody knows what the operator requirements will be IF licensing will be required. My hunch is that a certain amount of "grandfathering" would be appropriate. Merry Christmas to all.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-25-2006, 01:29:02 PM
PTraubert PTraubert is offline
eMail NOT Working
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: North Texas USA
Posts: 277
Thanks: 0
Thanked 257 Times in 94 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

Any movement on the proposed changes to the inspection code relating to historic boilers?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-05-2006, 11:26:33 PM
Bruce E. Babcock Bruce E. Babcock is offline
Registered-III
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Amanda, Ohio USA
Posts: 313
Thanks: 60
Thanked 282 Times in 74 Posts
Default Re: National Board Historic Boiler Meeting

On Wednesday, May 3, I received the following message from The National Board.

The copy of the revised Appendix C is 1.85 MB, and is too cumbersom to handle on my dail-up connection. If interested, you may be able to obtain a copy from Robin Heilman at the National Board.

Email -- RHeilman@nationalboard.org

Sincerely,

Bruce E. Babcock


Gentlemen,

This is to inform all TG members that in order to finalize an acceptable version of Appendix C, TG members should plan to meet on Monday July 17th in Chattanooga, TN. The information for hotel arrangements is on the National Board website: www.nationalboard.org.

A new draft (excluding ASME Section I Requirements for Riveted Boilers)based on comments received by the TG members from letter ballot NB03-2201(disapproved) is attached. Please review this draft which contains information for boiler operators, safety valves and other changes and send any comments or suggestions before the July meeting to incorporate into a final draft for review and discussion at the July meeting.

If anyone has any questions or concerns please let me know.

Thank you,
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

F o r u m Jump

Similar Threads Chosen at Random
Thread Thread Starter F o r u m Replies Last Post
National 2DM in the virtual tour of a historic narrowboat HaraldJoergens Antique Marine Engines and Outboard Motors 0 09-29-2015 05:13:59 AM
Illinois Historic Boiler Assn. General Meeting Tom Runty Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines 0 02-22-2010 10:30:24 AM
Ohio Historial Boiler Board meeting 4/22 Mark Parsisson Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines 2 04-30-2009 06:09:14 PM
The National Board & Old Boiler Steel Bruce E. Babcock Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines 3 02-10-2006 04:31:55 PM
National Board Meeting Glenn Steam Stationary Engines, Traction Engines 0 02-09-2004 11:54:13 AM


Use "Ctrl" mouse wheel to change screen size.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55:52 PM.

Smokstak and Enginads site search!


All use is subject to our TERMS OF SERVICE
SMOKSTAK® is a Registered Trade Mark - A Community of Antique Engine Enthusiasts
Copyright © 2000 - 2019 by Harry Matthews P.O. Box 5612 - Sarasota, FL 34277