Skip to main content

[MW:1569] Re: 1555] Re: 1553] Re: burn through

By Materials & Welding
Dear Mr. Purohit,
 
According to AWS 3.0 - 2001 pag 6:
 

burn-through. A nonstandard term when used for excessive melt-through or a hole through a root bead.

 

Dear Mr. Ali,

 

The communication is one of the more important skills required for welding inspectors, therefore always try to do it by standard terms (AWS 3.0).

 

According to "Design for Welding" by AWS - 2001, tubular connection could be CJP or PJP therefore, melt through has to be related to joint penetration.

 

AWS 3.0 figs 26,  can be very helpfull for your purposes.

 

 

BR


 
From: ck@knm-group.com
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:1559] RE: 1555] Re: 1553] Re: burn through
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:38:07 +0800

Dear Ali,

 

Its not excessive, it is just required "Penetration". Excessive penetration will fall under "weld defect"

 

Regards.

 

C. K. Purohit

General Manager - QC

KNM Process Systems Sdn Bhd - Malaysia

 

HP No. : 6016-3376448

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ali Asghari
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 12:55 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:1555] Re: 1553] Re: burn through

 

hi

realy ,melt through is excessive penetration?

best regard

 

From: Chaitanya Purohit <ck@knm-group.com>
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 8:05:17 AM
Subject: [MW:1554] RE: 1553] Re: burn through

I do not agree with the interpretation of term "Melt Through" with Mr. César.

 

Melt Through is not a synonym for burn through. "Burn through" is the type of defect where the "Melt through" is the desired property for good weld. Melt through is considered as "Penetration" which we use during welding inspection. There shall be full penetration (no lack of penetration –LOP) if you interpret AWS correctly.

 

As correctly said if can not be seen visually but generally in UT , interpreters are putting as "No LOP Observed" which complies to AWS requirement stated. I am not the expert is AWS D1.1 and I am sure there are people in group who can through some light on this issue.  

 

Regards.

 

C. K. Purohit

General Manager - QC

KNM Process Systems Sdn Bhd - Malaysia

 

HP No. : 6016-3376448

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto: materials-welding@googlegroups.com ] On Behalf Of César Alexis Viteri Pérez
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 5:07 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:1553] Re: burn thrugh

 

Burn trough is a nonstandard term for melt through.
 
"melt-through.- Visible root reinforcement in a jointwelded from one side." - AWS 3.0
 
I'm not a structural eng but for tubular k,y,t conections where the inspection inside the pipe is difficult is preferrable guarantee full penetration and fusion, may be a structural could give us a better explanation.
 
BR 
 

 

Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 04:11:46 -0800
From: asghariali@rocketmail.com
Subject: [MW:1550] burn thrugh
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com

 

 

hi

melt through is excessive weld or burn through?

in aws d1.1 is written that"melt through is desirable in T,K,Y joint".(in 4.8.1).why?

thanks adv



</html





***DISCLAIMER NOTICE ***

"This email and any files transmitted with it is confidential and is intended only for the use of the recepient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, printing, copying or use the information contained in this message or any part thereof in other manner is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the email and any of its attachments. Any personal views or opinions expressed by the sender shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by KNM or any of the companies within the Group."









***DISCLAIMER NOTICE ***

"This email and any files transmitted with it is confidential and is intended only for the use of the recepient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, printing, copying or use the information contained in this message or any part thereof in other manner is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the email and any of its attachments. Any personal views or opinions expressed by the sender shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by KNM or any of the companies within the Group."




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Re: [MW:34105] SA266 GR4N 4 Cycle SPWHT

By Materials & Welding
Hi,  You are correct, Minimum refers to the one cycle for which this part will expose until final work shop PWHT. hence mill test certificate shall include this.  Max. SPWHT, refers to additional cycles of heat treatment that are reserved for future repairs during equipment lifetime.  Again, these simulated no. Of cycles shall be specified in MTC.  The idea is we need to make sure that steel mechanical properties are not compromised upon exposure to multiple repairs (i e 4 cycles in your case).  One could say, if steel is subjected to 4 cycles and is ok, then it should by defacto be good for one cycle, yet, this is wrong assumption cause mechanical problems and microstructure of materials varies accordingly based on no. Of cycles for which material will expose. This is apparent in alloy steel and especially for impact test values as an example.  In your case, this forged CS with properties before PWHT can be understood to be " as forged" condition (i.e. Wit...
Post a Comment
Read more

Materails FAQs

By Materials & Welding
Q: What are equivalents for standard Q 235 B (and Q 235 A) for U-channels? (asked by: boris.vielhaber@vait.com) A: DIN Nr. = 2393 T.2, 2394 T.2, EN 10025 W. Nr. DIN 17007 = 1.0038 Design DIN 17006 = RSt 37-2, S235JRG2 (Fe 360 B) Q: What is St DIN 2391 BK material? (asked by: dmcandrews@automaticstamp.com) A: Precision steel tubes, cold-finished/hard. Q: What is C.D.W. Boiler Tube? (asked by: montydude123@yahoo.com) A: Cold Drawn Welded Boiler Tube. Q: WHAT IS W.Nr. 1.4301? PLS TELL US IN EASY LANGUAGUE (asked...
21 comments
Read more

Heat tint (temper) colours on stainless steel surfaces heated in air // Heat tint

By Materials & Welding
Introduction The colour formed when stainless steel is heated, either in a furnace application or in the heat affected zone of welds, is dependent on several factors that are related to the oxidation resistance of the steel. The heat tint or temper colour formed is caused by the progressive thickening of the surface oxide layer and so, as temperature is increased, the colours change.   Oxidation resistance of stainless steels However, there are several factors that affect the degree of colour change and so there is no a single table of colour and temperature that represents all cases. The colours formed can only be used as an indication of the temperature to which the steel has been heated. Factors affecting the heat tint colours formed Steel composition The chromium content is the most important single factor affecting oxidation resistance. The higher the chromium, the more heat resistant the steel and so the development of the heat tint colou...
Post a Comment
Read more