Tuesday, January 31, 2012

[MW:13596] WPS with baking for welding single side welded Joint without backing with qualified Welder without backing

Dear experts,
 
Could you please clarify following;
 
If I have qualified WPS with backing & qualified Welder without backing; with this can we weld single side welded joint without backing.Please reply me in the light of ASME SEC IX.
 
Thanks in advance
 
Ali Mhaskar
 
 
 

Re: [MW:13589] Decrease in bevel angle - Essentail variable as per Shell DEP

width & depth ratio is applicable for each pass (or welds completed with one welding run). There are narrow gap welding techniques (I am dealing with a pipeline where the thickness is 20mm and the bevel angle is 10 degrees.

I want to add another item to what Mr. J.Gerald Jayakumar mentioned:
Higher bevel angel helps the gas and slag to get out of molten weld metal. This along with lack of sidewall fusion are defects associated with welded joints with small bevel angel. This becomes critical in welding metals with low melt point such as Aluminum where you have to use 90 degrees joint configuration (instead of conventional 60-70 degrees).
 
Ramin  Kondori
   QC/Welding Engineer 
         IWE AT 0070
  


On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:29 PM, james gerald <gerry_tup@yahoo.com> wrote:
Welding Bevel angle is Provided for below reasons,

1. ACCESSIBILITY for the torch and electrode from the Root to the Cap.
2. DECREASE the Heat Conductivity along the bevel edges, more the bevel angle lesser the Heat conductivity
3. PROPER FUSION along the bevel edges, narrow the bevel will result in improper fusion(lack of side wall fusion)
4. BETTER FLOAWABILITY of the Liquid metal.

From the above it is clear that for some special materials like DSS, decrease in weld bevel will result in more conductivity and increased Heat input along the bevel edges and HAZ, may be one of the reason for its restriction.
 
Thanks & Regards J.Gerald Jayakumar 0091-9344954677

From: N VENKATESWARA PRASAD <weldengr.velosi@gmail.com>
To: materials-welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 10:06 AM
Subject: [MW:13564] Decrease in bevel angle - Essentail variable as per Shell DEP

Dear All,

As per  Shell DEP 30.10.60.18, the decrease in angle is essentail
variable.  What is concept behind it?  Is is applicable for  Compound/
composite angle joint design also.  As per this joint design up to 19
mm the bevel will be 37.5 degrees, later it will be only 10 degres.


My concept is the anlge is only for accessability and in case of DSS,
Nickel alloys higher anlge for  better wetting.  It should not
applicable for carbon steels.
Please debate on this.

The Clause as per DEP as given  below:


11.1 Add new clause 11.1.4 It is the Manufacturer's responsibility to
ensure that
welding operations are carried out in accordance with the
parameters as specified on the qualified WPS. Unless
otherwise specified by local regulations, welding procedures
shall be qualified in accordance with ISO 15607 and/or
ASME IX. Irrespective of the design code, welding procedure
qualifications shall be re-qualified when any of the following
conditions occur:
• Joints
- A change from double sided to single sided welding, or
vise versa (delete) but not the converse;
- A decrease in welding groove angle of more than 10
degrees.
• Consumables
- Any change of consumable classification;
- Any change in consumable brand name when corrosion
testing or impact testing is required;
- Any change in size of more then 1 mm of consumable in
the root run of single sided welds.
• Welding position
Change in welding direction (vertical up to vertical down
welding or vice versa).

--
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.


--
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.

--
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.

Re: [MW:13588] RE: 13556] Welding API 5L X70 By ER 80S-Ni1 + FOX EV 60

Dear Mohamed:

If it is pipeline, go with GMAW or FCAW but if it is a piping spool you'd better use GTAW for root & hot pass and filling & cap with SMAW or FCAW.

Whatever filler metal you use (should be Ni-alloyed), do not exceed the base metal strength by more than 10 ksi since it won't do any good except more cost and care during welding. Check the vendor catalogue for instructions.
  
Ramin  Kondori
   QC/Welding Engineer 
         IWE AT 0070
  


On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Fitria Rahman <t.chintaqa@gmail.com> wrote:
in most situations, you will receive numerous suggestions with several
electrodes falls under E80XX. If you are not going with PWHT, i would
rather suggest you to go with E81T1.

To me, TIG process is not suitable for large diameter - 30".

Rgds

2012/1/25, Lakshman Kumar.B <lakshmankumar4@gmail.com>:
> DEAR,
>
>
>
> Is GTAW is required?
>
> We used SMAW or GMAW for the root and remaining for with FCAW or GMAW which
> is more economical and good work progress.
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards................?
>
>
> cid:image001.jpg@01CC3048.5836D9B0
>
> Lakshman Kumar.B|Manager |Lanco Infratech Limited
>
> Plot No 1255 | Sanjeevani chowk | Mahanadi vihar | Cuttack 753004
>
> Phone : + 91 671 2445033 | Mobile : +91 9937286851 |www.lancogroup.com
>
> Go Green|The future will thank you
>
>
>
>
>
> From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mohamed Elsayed (
> BTG)
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 9:42 AM
> To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [MW:13556] Welding API 5L X70 By ER 80S-Ni1 + FOX EV 60
>
>
>
> Dear,
>
>
>
> We have material  API 5L X70 , 30" O.D ; Thk. 13.33mm , we are planning to
> do PQR using ER 80S-Ni1(mod) 2.4mm for GTAW and E8018-C3H4R - Bohler welding
> consumable. Is it correct?
>
>
>
> Please advice.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Mohamed
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.
>

--
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.

--
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.

[MW:13587] RE: 13583] Pipe damaged during fabrication

Hi

 

// I have problem in our site that, we found some fabricated pipes ( as per B31.3) the parent material thickness reduced by grinding (or due to any handling mark) more than 12.5% is not acceptable,//

 

I would like to clarify that, the 12.5% reduction in thk, mentioned by you is taken from material specification. Not from ASME B31.3. B31.3 specifies only the minimum thickness. See 304. So, it is Designers decision to say whether this piping can withstand the intended service or not.

 

See 328.4.2 (b)(4) and 328.4.3(c) for base metal repairs pertaining to alignment. But, for base material repairs on other areas, B31.3 neither specify nor prohibit.

 

In these situations, If the thickness is found to be less than the minimum required thickness, and confirmed by Designer/Owner,

you may do the repair as per material specification and carryout the necessary inspection.

 

Note that any repairs on the parent material requires owners/purchasers prior approval and done with the qualified procedure/welders.

 

BR

M.Vijayan

 

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of jesti fer
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 5:23 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:13583] Pipe damaged during fabrication

 

Dear Experts,

I have problem in our site that, we found some fabricated pipes ( as per B31.3) the parent material thickness reduced by grinding (or due to any handling mark) more than 12.5% is not acceptable,

is there any possibility to build up (Buttering) the base metals. Where can I will get the reference

 

jestifer

--
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.



This communication and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or information contained in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender, and delete the material from any computer. We reserve the right to monitor email communications through normal internal and external networks. We believe but not warrant that the email and the attachments are virus free. The statement and opinions expressed in this communication are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent those of Madina Group, whose registered office address is

P.O. Box 20459, Doha, Qatar.
Tel. +974 44600818
Fax. +974 44603143

Re: [MW:13586] Pipe damaged during fabrication

No, cann't be rectified by buttering  or built-up on pipe for new construction.

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:22 PM, jesti fer <jesti_fer@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear Experts,
I have problem in our site that, we found some fabricated pipes ( as per B31.3) the parent material thickness reduced by grinding (or due to any handling mark) more than 12.5% is not acceptable,
is there any possibility to build up (Buttering) the base metals. Where can I will get the reference
 
jestifer

--
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.

--
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.

[MW:13585] FW: 13583] Pipe damaged during fabrication

1st check with the designer about the required thickness based on pressure calculation and corrosion allowance

2nd if it is not accepted by the designer … use your welding procedure for filling this portion with filler metal … in my opinion (I did not checked B31.3) you are not in need for reference because you have approved PQR and WPS and it is a welding issue

3rd 12.5% is a +/- ratio for pipe factory fabricator not a design issue

 

Senior QC Eng.

Ahmed Osman

OCI Egypt

+20 122 5880434

 

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of jesti fer
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 4:23 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:13583] Pipe damaged during fabrication

 

Dear Experts,

I have problem in our site that, we found some fabricated pipes ( as per B31.3) the parent material thickness reduced by grinding (or due to any handling mark) more than 12.5% is not acceptable,

is there any possibility to build up (Buttering) the base metals. Where can I will get the reference

 

jestifer

--
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.

Re: [MW:13584] Pipe damaged during fabrication

You need to make commonly weld build up procedure ad submit to Client for Approval ...Once Client accept the the procedure ...you may proceed for further repair ,It is very important thing is you need to make sure that after the repair base metal completely free from defects by using NDT Methods . 

Regards

Suresh

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:52 PM, jesti fer <jesti_fer@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear Experts,
I have problem in our site that, we found some fabricated pipes ( as per B31.3) the parent material thickness reduced by grinding (or due to any handling mark) more than 12.5% is not acceptable,
is there any possibility to build up (Buttering) the base metals. Where can I will get the reference
 
jestifer

--
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.



--
Thanks  & Best Regards,

Suresh

Mobile No: 974 -  5 5 4 3 1 7 8 8  /  7 7 1 3 4 5 9 0 . ( Qatar )

 
                  91 - 92 92 905 905 ( India )

--
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.

Monday, January 30, 2012

[MW:13583] Pipe damaged during fabrication

Dear Experts,
I have problem in our site that, we found some fabricated pipes ( as per B31.3) the parent material thickness reduced by grinding (or due to any handling mark) more than 12.5% is not acceptable,
is there any possibility to build up (Buttering) the base metals. Where can I will get the reference
 
jestifer

Re: Re: [MW:13582] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

Hi,

Generally not required, but if Client insist to do so and pay for extra cost then go for it.

But performing these tests may be useful in future if ever encounter a client requesting the
same, in that case you might have to carry out new qualification, i have seen major
manufacturers doing these tests just to make sure that they do not re-qualify if ever client
request UT,Intergranular corrosion test..

Regards
Manpreet Singh


On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:47:24 +0530 wrote
>No requirement of UT & Intergranular corrosion tests.

Thanks
Regards
E.Jegan
Hp-65-96163449

>



From: Ghafor Mohamad
>To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
>Sent: Saturday, 28 January 2012 2:28 PM
>Subject: [MW:13576] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO
Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625
>
>

Dear Experts
>
>I am qualified a PQR for CRO Welding using Inconel 625 on Carbon Steel plate. As per ASME IX,
mandatory test is:
>

Dye Penetration Test
>
Transverse Side Bend Test
>
Chemical Analysis
Hardness (location may refer to ISO 15056 Fig 6 for NACE req.)
Macro Etch photo
What I am confusing is that Intergranular Corrosion (G28 Method A) and Ultrasonic Test is
applicable to conduct or not?
Thanks
BR; Abdul Ghafor Mohamad

>--
>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.
>

>
>



--
>
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.
>

Follow Rediff Deal ho jaye! to get exciting offers in your city everyday.

--
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.

Re: [MW:13581] Simulation Heat treatment of coupons

Hi,

Response to Que 1:- Intent of code is to account any expected scenario such as Repairs which
would call for multiple PWHT cycles (usually restricted to 3 cycles) therefore simulation heat
treatment is to be carried out for same PWHT cycles in order to know exactly by how far,
mechanical properties would be degraded. I am not familiar with mentioned code but per ASME Sec
viii div 1, UCS-85(c), following variables are to be accounted:-
• same heat treatment above A1
• min. 80% of total time at temperatures
• similar temperatures, time and cooling rates

Response to Que 2;- Just follow qualified PQR within the limits of essential/non-essential
variables and forget about given clause.

Regards
Manpreet Singh



On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:37:07 +0530 wrote
>Dear Experts,

As per Axens IN-42.0 Rev. 2.1 Cl. No. 4.1.3, The mechanical tests shall be carried out after
heat treatments simulating those anticipated along the fabrication that isPFHT, intermediate
H.T., if any, and final PWHT plus additional heat treatments to anticipate potential repair.

In our job there is no PFHT and intermediate H.T. Only final PWHT. As per PMC, we shall have to
cosider 1 job cycle + 2 additional S.R. cycle for simulation. My question is, shall we have to
take two seperate coupons for mechanical testing or we can simulate 3 S.R. cycle onsingle
coupon for mechanical testing? As per PMC, one job cycle to be simulated on coupon and
Mechanical testing to be carried out and 2 S.R. cycles to be simulated on another coupon and
Mechanical testing to be done. I am approaching to simulate 3 S.R. cycles on single coupon for
mechanical testing.

Further, as per Cl. No. 5.3 (Heading WeldingConsumables Chemical Analysis)of Axens IN-42.0 Rev.
2.1, The deposited weld metal shall basically match with the nominal chemical composition of
the base material as specified in ASME Sec. IIC for the selected electrodes. Basis on this, PMC
is approaching for chemical analysis of test coupon. Is there any need to carry out chemical
analysis of test coupon or we may consider batch test certificates of welding consumables for
chemical analysis?

Please reply me on the above at the earliest. It shall be very very thankful to me.

Thanks & regards,


C. R. GANDHI
(Manager- Q. C.)



--
>
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.
>

Follow Rediff Deal ho jaye! to get exciting offers in your city everyday.

--
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.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

RE: [MW:13580] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

Hi Abdul Ghafor Mohamad,
 
ASME Sec-IX is the procedure qualification code, not the code for design or construction of the components. If the component is intended for offshore applications and API-5LD- Specification for CRA Clad or Lined Steel Pipe is applicable  design document then corrosion testing (clause 8.2) as stated below would be required.
 
May be it would be a good idea to look  at the design documents for details.
 
Thanks
 
 

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.IWE

Welding & Metallurgical Specialist & Consultant

Ontario, Canada.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

 
  • Corrosion Testing

A corrosion sensitivity test shall be performed as a manufacturing procedure qualification test (MPQT) on the CRA layers of austenitic steel and N i-base alloy as described below. The purpose of this test is to assure proper manufacturing procedures for austenitic steel and Ni-base alloys. It is not a test to determine susceptibility for use with a particular environment.

a) Summary of test procedure. The testing procedure shall conform to the requirements of the latest editions of ASTM A262, Practice E or Practice B. or ASTM G28, Method A or ASTM G48, Method A (Section 8), whichever is suitable for the cladding or liner material and as agreed between the purchaser and manufacturer. The method thatis used shall be agreed to between the purchaser and the manufacturer. Other practices may be agreed upon.




From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Eswaran samikannu
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 4:55 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MW:13577] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

No requirement of UT & Intergranular corrosion tests.
 
Thanks
Regards
E.Jegan
Hp-65-96163449

From: Ghafor Mohamad <ghaformohamad@gmail.com>
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 28 January 2012 2:28 PM
Subject: [MW:13576] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

Dear Experts

I am qualified a PQR for CRO Welding using Inconel 625 on Carbon Steel plate. As per ASME IX, mandatory test is:
  1. Dye Penetration Test
  2. Transverse Side Bend Test
  3. Chemical Analysis
  4. Hardness (location may refer to ISO 15056 Fig 6 for NACE req.)
  5. Macro Etch photo
What I am confusing is that Intergranular Corrosion (G28 Method A) and Ultrasonic Test is applicable to conduct or not? 
Thanks
BR; Abdul Ghafor Mohamad

--
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.


--
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.

[MW:13579] Re: Clad Dish End / Repair / ASME CODE SEC VIII Div 1

Dear Vino,

If the Dish Head is welded ,Partial Data Report is Mandatory as per
ASME Sec VIII Div 1 ,UG-120 ,4(C) ,form U-2A to be signed by ASME
Authorised Inspector.Any weld repair to be cleared by Dish Head
manufacturer by approved WPS / PQR with approval of AI and End User.

Thanks and Regards,
R.Lenin

On Jan 26, 1:38 am, Vino Varghese <vinopvargh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Is it mandatory to request a Partial Data Report(PDR) signed by ASME A.I
> from the Contractor who manufactured Dish End for the Pressure Vessel?
> Actually the Dish End we requested was an Explosion bonded Clad Dish End,
> but dish end manufacturer found some repair on the clad portion and intent
> to do repair with Approved WPS/PQR.
>
> *The Service is LETHAL and the Final Vessel will be subjected to Heat
> Treatment  as per UW-2.*
>
> Whether we can accept this Dish End without a PDR as we are the sole
> responsible manufacturer of Pressure Vessel?
>
> Please let me know the relevant Records/Reports needed as per ASME Sec VIII
> Div 1 to be instructed to our Sub contractor while deliverying this Dish
> End and the Code reference.
>
> Looking forward all your postive reponse ASAP...
>
> *Thanks & Regards*
> *Vino -Doha, Qatar*

--
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.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Re: [MW:13578] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

Inter-granular test required for 625 material. UT is not require.If client spec specify that ut test require , if u have to do Utb test.\


On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Ghafor Mohamad <ghaformohamad@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Experts

I am qualified a PQR for CRO Welding using Inconel 625 on Carbon Steel plate. As per ASME IX, mandatory test is:
  1. Dye Penetration Test
  2. Transverse Side Bend Test
  3. Chemical Analysis
  4. Hardness (location may refer to ISO 15056 Fig 6 for NACE req.)
  5. Macro Etch photo

What I am confusing is that Intergranular Corrosion (G28 Method A) and Ultrasonic Test is applicable to conduct or not? 

Thanks

BR; Abdul Ghafor Mohamad


--
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.

--
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.

Re: [MW:13577] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

No requirement of UT & Intergranular corrosion tests.
 
Thanks
Regards
E.Jegan
Hp-65-96163449

From: Ghafor Mohamad <ghaformohamad@gmail.com>
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 28 January 2012 2:28 PM
Subject: [MW:13576] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

Dear Experts

I am qualified a PQR for CRO Welding using Inconel 625 on Carbon Steel plate. As per ASME IX, mandatory test is:
  1. Dye Penetration Test
  2. Transverse Side Bend Test
  3. Chemical Analysis
  4. Hardness (location may refer to ISO 15056 Fig 6 for NACE req.)
  5. Macro Etch photo
What I am confusing is that Intergranular Corrosion (G28 Method A) and Ultrasonic Test is applicable to conduct or not? 
Thanks
BR; Abdul Ghafor Mohamad

--
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.


[MW:13576] Ultrasonic Testing & Intergranular Corrosion Testing; G28 Method A for CRO Welding on Carbon Steel with Inconel 625

Dear Experts

I am qualified a PQR for CRO Welding using Inconel 625 on Carbon Steel plate. As per ASME IX, mandatory test is:
  1. Dye Penetration Test
  2. Transverse Side Bend Test
  3. Chemical Analysis
  4. Hardness (location may refer to ISO 15056 Fig 6 for NACE req.)
  5. Macro Etch photo

What I am confusing is that Intergranular Corrosion (G28 Method A) and Ultrasonic Test is applicable to conduct or not? 

Thanks

BR; Abdul Ghafor Mohamad


--
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.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

[MW:13575] RE: 13563] Interpret IX-04-15

Hi

 

 

The post weld heat treatment can be any of heat treatment type like normalizing & tempering, annealing, solution annealing, stress relieving (each having different temperature limits) etc depends upon the type of steel and code of construction. And similarly the time ranges also.

 

So, the Code restricts that the user to use the same heat treatment and time as encountered in the production joint.

That’s why it is restricted to use the PQR at least meeting the 80% of time(s) at temperature(s) as encountered on the production joint.

BR

M.Vijayan

 

From: Somkiat Patcharanaruemon [mailto:soiy7777777@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 5:37 AM
To: Vijayan Munuswamy
Cc: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: 13563] Interpret IX-04-15

 

Dear Vijayan

Thanks you very much for your advice but I still confuse because in QW 407.2 state that  "A change in temperature and time range" and this WPS change only in time range but temperature still the same so this clause shouldn't be essential variable otherwise  why the code shouldn't state"A change in temperature or time range" instead of "A change in temperature and time range" please advice.

BRG

Solomon

2012/1/25 vijayan <vijayan.m@madinagulf.com>

Hi

Because the wps is not written as per the QW.407.2. it means the WPS can
support only up to 108 minutes (not 3.5 Hours)

BR
M.Vijayan


-----Original Message-----
From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
[mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of solomon
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:45 AM
To: Materials & Welding
Subject: [MW:13563] Interpret IX-04-15

Dear Expert
.
According to interpretation below could you please explain why the answer is
"No". In my understanding WPS has change only time range but doesn't change
in the temperature(logic "and" mean change both time and temperature).

In SEC IX  QW-407.2 state that "A change in the postweld heat treatment (see
QW-407.1) temperature and time range"

Interpretation: IX-04-15
Subject: QW-403.7, Base Metal Thickness Qualification and QW-407.2, PWHT
Temperature and Time Range Date Issued: December 22, 2004
File: BC04-1595
Question (1): Will a procedure qualification test coupon on 1.5 in.
thick P-No. I, Gr. 2 material and
postweld heat-treated at I,lOO°F for 1.5 hr with supplementary essential
variable requirements met, support a WPS with supplementary essential
variable requirements for production welding on 8 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2
material that is PWHT at l,lOO°F for 3.5 hr?
Reply (1): No

--
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.



This communication and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or information contained in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender, and delete the material from any computer. We reserve the right to monitor email communications through normal internal and external networks. We believe but not warrant that the email and the attachments are virus free. The statement and opinions expressed in this communication are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent those of Madina Group, whose registered office address is

P.O. Box 20459, Doha, Qatar.
Tel. +974 44600818
Fax. +974 44603143

 



This communication and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or information contained in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender, and delete the material from any computer. We reserve the right to monitor email communications through normal internal and external networks. We believe but not warrant that the email and the attachments are virus free. The statement and opinions expressed in this communication are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent those of Madina Group, whose registered office address is

P.O. Box 20459, Doha, Qatar.
Tel. +974 44600818
Fax. +974 44603143

Re: [MW:13574] MODE OF METAL TRANSFER IN FCAW PROCESS

Dear Manoj,

Refer last two pages for the Metal transfer modes from the attached Document

Regards,
Vijay

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:30 PM, manoj john <manojacgnr@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,

I would like to know about mode of  metal transfer in FCAW welding process.  Please share some information regrading short circuting, globular transfer, spray transfer .

Thanks in advance.

Manoj

--
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.

--
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.

Re: [MW:13573] RE: 13556] Welding API 5L X70 By ER 80S-Ni1 + FOX EV 60

in most situations, you will receive numerous suggestions with several
electrodes falls under E80XX. If you are not going with PWHT, i would
rather suggest you to go with E81T1.

To me, TIG process is not suitable for large diameter - 30".

Rgds

2012/1/25, Lakshman Kumar.B <lakshmankumar4@gmail.com>:
> DEAR,
>
>
>
> Is GTAW is required?
>
> We used SMAW or GMAW for the root and remaining for with FCAW or GMAW which
> is more economical and good work progress.
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards................?
>
>
> cid:image001.jpg@01CC3048.5836D9B0
>
> Lakshman Kumar.B|Manager |Lanco Infratech Limited
>
> Plot No 1255 | Sanjeevani chowk | Mahanadi vihar | Cuttack 753004
>
> Phone : + 91 671 2445033 | Mobile : +91 9937286851 |www.lancogroup.com
>
> Go Green|The future will thank you
>
>
>
>
>
> From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mohamed Elsayed (
> BTG)
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 9:42 AM
> To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [MW:13556] Welding API 5L X70 By ER 80S-Ni1 + FOX EV 60
>
>
>
> Dear,
>
>
>
> We have material API 5L X70 , 30" O.D ; Thk. 13.33mm , we are planning to
> do PQR using ER 80S-Ni1(mod) 2.4mm for GTAW and E8018-C3H4R - Bohler welding
> consumable. Is it correct?
>
>
>
> Please advice.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Mohamed
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
> --
> 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.
>

--
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.

[MW:13572] Re: 13563] Interpret IX-04-15

Dear Vijayan
Thanks you very much for your advice but I still confuse because in QW 407.2 state that  "A change in temperature and time range" and this WPS change only in time range but temperature still the same so this clause shouldn't be essential variable otherwise  why the code shouldn't state"A change in temperature or time range" instead of "A change in temperature and time range" please advice.
BRG
Solomon
2012/1/25 vijayan <vijayan.m@madinagulf.com>
Hi

Because the wps is not written as per the QW.407.2. it means the WPS can
support only up to 108 minutes (not 3.5 Hours)

BR
M.Vijayan


-----Original Message-----
From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
[mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of solomon
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:45 AM
To: Materials & Welding
Subject: [MW:13563] Interpret IX-04-15

Dear Expert
.
According to interpretation below could you please explain why the answer is
"No". In my understanding WPS has change only time range but doesn't change
in the temperature(logic "and" mean change both time and temperature).

In SEC IX  QW-407.2 state that "A change in the postweld heat treatment (see
QW-407.1) temperature and time range"

Interpretation: IX-04-15
Subject: QW-403.7, Base Metal Thickness Qualification and QW-407.2, PWHT
Temperature and Time Range Date Issued: December 22, 2004
File: BC04-1595
Question (1): Will a procedure qualification test coupon on 1.5 in.
thick P-No. I, Gr. 2 material and
postweld heat-treated at I,lOO°F for 1.5 hr with supplementary essential
variable requirements met, support a WPS with supplementary essential
variable requirements for production welding on 8 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2
material that is PWHT at l,lOO°F for 3.5 hr?
Reply (1): No

--
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.



This communication and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or information contained in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender, and delete the material from any computer. We reserve the right to monitor email communications through normal internal and external networks. We believe but not warrant that the email and the attachments are virus free. The statement and opinions expressed in this communication are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent those of Madina Group, whose registered office address is

P.O. Box 20459, Doha, Qatar.
Tel. +974 44600818
Fax. +974 44603143


--
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.

[MW:13571] Clad Dish End / Repair / ASME CODE SEC VIII Div 1

Dear All,
 
Is it mandatory to request a Partial Data Report(PDR) signed by ASME A.I from the Contractor who manufactured Dish End for the Pressure Vessel?
Actually the Dish End we requested was an Explosion bonded Clad Dish End, but dish end manufacturer found some repair on the clad portion and intent to do repair with Approved WPS/PQR.
 
The Service is LETHAL and the Final Vessel will be subjected to Heat Treatment  as per UW-2.
 
Whether we can accept this Dish End without a PDR as we are the sole responsible manufacturer of Pressure Vessel?
 
Please let me know the relevant Records/Reports needed as per ASME Sec VIII Div 1 to be instructed to our Sub contractor while deliverying this Dish End and the Code reference.
 
Looking forward all your postive reponse ASAP...
 
Thanks & Regards
Vino -Doha, Qatar

--
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.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

[MW:13567] RE: 13563] Interpret IX-04-15

Because the supplementary essential variables must be met, the proposed WPS is not allowed - i.e. in QW-407.2 there is a maximum limit on time at temperature. Specifically, "The procedure qualification test coupon . . . at least 80% of the aggregate time at temperature."

Thus the maximum time (Tmax) at temperature is : (Tqual/Tmax) X 100 = 80

Or Tmax = Tqual X ( 100/80) = 1.5 hr X (5/4) = 1.875 hours

So the PQR does not have a long enough hold time to support the proposed WPS's 3.5 hour hold time.


John A. Henning
Senior Welding & Materials Engineer

-----Original Message-----
From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of solomon
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 7:45 PM
To: Materials & Welding
Subject: [MW:13563] Interpret IX-04-15

Dear Expert
.
According to interpretation below could you please explain why the answer is "No". In my understanding WPS has change only time range but doesn't change in the temperature(logic "and" mean change both time and temperature).

In SEC IX QW-407.2 state that "A change in the postweld heat treatment (see QW-407.1) temperature and time range"

Interpretation: IX-04-15
Subject: QW-403.7, Base Metal Thickness Qualification and QW-407.2, PWHT Temperature and Time Range Date Issued: December 22, 2004
File: BC04-1595
Question (1): Will a procedure qualification test coupon on 1.5 in.
thick P-No. I, Gr. 2 material and
postweld heat-treated at I,lOO°F for 1.5 hr with supplementary essential variable requirements met, support a WPS with supplementary essential variable requirements for production welding on 8 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material that is PWHT at l,lOO°F for 3.5 hr?
Reply (1): No

--
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.

--
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.

Re: [MW:13570] Decrease in bevel angle - Essentail variable as per Shell DEP

Welding Bevel angle is Provided for below reasons,

1. ACCESSIBILITY for the torch and electrode from the Root to the Cap.
2. DECREASE the Heat Conductivity along the bevel edges, more the bevel angle lesser the Heat conductivity
3. PROPER FUSION along the bevel edges, narrow the bevel will result in improper fusion(lack of side wall fusion)
4. BETTER FLOAWABILITY of the Liquid metal.

From the above it is clear that for some special materials like DSS, decrease in weld bevel will result in more conductivity and increased Heat input along the bevel edges and HAZ, may be one of the reason for its restriction.
 
Thanks & Regards J.Gerald Jayakumar 0091-9344954677

From: N VENKATESWARA PRASAD <weldengr.velosi@gmail.com>
To: materials-welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 10:06 AM
Subject: [MW:13564] Decrease in bevel angle - Essentail variable as per Shell DEP

Dear All,

As per  Shell DEP 30.10.60.18, the decrease in angle is essentail
variable.  What is concept behind it?  Is is applicable for  Compound/
composite angle joint design also.  As per this joint design up to 19
mm the bevel will be 37.5 degrees, later it will be only 10 degres.


My concept is the anlge is only for accessability and in case of DSS,
Nickel alloys higher anlge for  better wetting.  It should not
applicable for carbon steels.
Please debate on this.

The Clause as per DEP as given  below:


11.1 Add new clause 11.1.4 It is the Manufacturer's responsibility to
ensure that
welding operations are carried out in accordance with the
parameters as specified on the qualified WPS. Unless
otherwise specified by local regulations, welding procedures
shall be qualified in accordance with ISO 15607 and/or
ASME IX. Irrespective of the design code, welding procedure
qualifications shall be re-qualified when any of the following
conditions occur:
• Joints
- A change from double sided to single sided welding, or
vise versa (delete) but not the converse;
- A decrease in welding groove angle of more than 10
degrees.
• Consumables
- Any change of consumable classification;
- Any change in consumable brand name when corrosion
testing or impact testing is required;
- Any change in size of more then 1 mm of consumable in
the root run of single sided welds.
• Welding position
Change in welding direction (vertical up to vertical down
welding or vice versa).

--
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.


[MW:13569] Re: need your help please : Can I take CSWIP 3.2 without hold CSWIP 3.1 ?

Mohammed Maher,

You can do CSWIP 3.2 with out attending CSWIP 3.1

But You have to attend CSWIP 3.1 exam then immediately the day after
you can sit CSWIP 3.2

Once if you passed CSWIP 3.1 then only TWI allows you to attend CSWIP
3.2

I am Navaneetha from England,

My suggestion is CSWIP 3.1 is not at related to expeience. Even 15
years experience holder in Welding usually fails in CSWIP 3.1

The Unique of CSWIP 3.1 is Measuring & Recording the Weld defects, Its
like a Police Training.

How much knowledge you have to cathch the weld defects.

So bettet attend CSWIP 3.1 & wait for one year.Then attend CSWIP 3.2

In CSWIP 3.2 you have good & deep knowledge in Heat Treatment, RTFI
otherwise CSWIP 3.2 is Big bang for you

Best of Luck

Regards
NAV

On Jan 22, 12:08 pm, mohamed maher <mohamed.ahmed.ma...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> dear, all
> I need to take CSWIP 3.2 but I am not certified CSWIP 3.1 and
> according to Requirements for the Certification of Visual Welding
> Inspectors, Welding Inspectors and Senior Welding Inspectors (fusion
> welding) - (Document No CSWIP-WI-6-92 11th Edition September 2011).
> Implementation Date September 2011 ,
>  I can take CSWIP 3.2 directly with no need to be certified with CSWIP
> 3.1 if i have 5 years experince .
>
>   My question now , I  want to take the exam of CSWIP 3.2 and I am
> not certify with CSWIP 3.1 and I have more than 6 years experince .
>
>  Thank you for your time and consideration ,Looking forward to hear
> from you.

--
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.

Re: [MW:13568] Decrease in bevel angle - Essentail variable as per Shell DEP

this always associated with width & depth ratio. the ratio supposed to
be in acceptable range - should not be below 0.8.

Suppose the ratio exceed 0.8, it lead to solidification crack. Depth &
width ratio is one the factors contribute solidification crack.

Rgds

2012/1/25, N VENKATESWARA PRASAD <weldengr.velosi@gmail.com>:
> Dear All,
>
> As per Shell DEP 30.10.60.18, the decrease in angle is essentail
> variable. What is concept behind it? Is is applicable for Compound/
> composite angle joint design also. As per this joint design up to 19
> mm the bevel will be 37.5 degrees, later it will be only 10 degres.
>
>
> My concept is the anlge is only for accessability and in case of DSS,
> Nickel alloys higher anlge for better wetting. It should not
> applicable for carbon steels.
> Please debate on this.
>
> The Clause as per DEP as given below:
>
>
> 11.1 Add new clause 11.1.4 It is the Manufacturer's responsibility to
> ensure that
> welding operations are carried out in accordance with the
> parameters as specified on the qualified WPS. Unless
> otherwise specified by local regulations, welding procedures
> shall be qualified in accordance with ISO 15607 and/or
> ASME IX. Irrespective of the design code, welding procedure
> qualifications shall be re-qualified when any of the following
> conditions occur:
> • Joints
> - A change from double sided to single sided welding, or
> vise versa (delete) but not the converse;
> - A decrease in welding groove angle of more than 10
> degrees.
> • Consumables
> - Any change of consumable classification;
> - Any change in consumable brand name when corrosion
> testing or impact testing is required;
> - Any change in size of more then 1 mm of consumable in
> the root run of single sided welds.
> • Welding position
> Change in welding direction (vertical up to vertical down
> welding or vice versa).
>
> --
> 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.
>

--
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.

Re: [MW:13560] need your help please : Can I take CSWIP 3.2 without hold CSWIP 3.1 ?

Dear Mr Mohmad,
 
                  First try to aquire 3.1 and then try 3.2. In 3.2 itself there are 2 category do you know that? so please try 3.1 and try 3.2 with RT or without RT interpretation. Because many dont get 3.1 eventhough they have got very good qualifications and experiences so I would suggest you to attend the course where you would gain something that you dont learn in college and field of welding.
 
          Good luck
Regards
 
IK
 


 
On 23 January 2012 14:17, sajidalam mohd. <engineer_makes_world@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
yes you can write 3.2 directly.but you have to subbmitt required documents.
 
regards
md.sajid alam

From: mohamed maher <mohamed.ahmed.maher@gmail.com>
To: Materials & Welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, 22 January 2012 3:08 PM
Subject: [MW:13541] need your help please : Can I take CSWIP 3.2 without hold CSWIP 3.1 ?

dear, all
I need to take CSWIP 3.2 but I am not certified CSWIP 3.1 and
according to Requirements for the Certification of Visual Welding
Inspectors, Welding Inspectors and Senior Welding Inspectors (fusion
welding) - (Document No CSWIP-WI-6-92 11th Edition September 2011).
Implementation Date September 2011 ,
I can take CSWIP 3.2 directly with no need to be certified with CSWIP
3.1 if i have 5 years experince .

  My question now , I  want to take the exam of CSWIP 3.2 and I am
not certify with CSWIP 3.1 and I have more than 6 years experince .

Thank you for your time and consideration ,Looking forward to hear
from you.

--
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.


--
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.

--
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.

[MW:13566] RE: 13553] PWHT requirements -ASME B31.3

Hi

 

See below the interpretation. The weld build thickness may be considered as governing thickness for PWHT. but, B 31.3 does not address this weld build up.

 

However, as per material specification ( I think you are using SA105), any weld repair requires heat treatment.  See below.

 

 

B3 1.3 Interpretations No. 14 14-01

Interpretation: 14-01

Subject: ASME B31.3b-1994 Addenda, Para. 331.1.3(b), and Table 331.1.1, Heat Treatment

Requirements

Date Issued: June 22, 1995

File: B3 1-94-064

Question (1): In accordance with ASME B3 1.3-1993 Edition, Addenda b, does the portion of para.

331.1.3@) which states “the thickness through the weld in any plane” refer to the weld thickness?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): In accordance with ASME B31.3-1993 Edition, Addenda b, does the minimum

material thickness stated in para. 331.1.3(b) refer to the requirements of Table 331.1.1?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): In accordance with ASME B31.3-1993 Edition, Addenda b, can the BHN (Brinell

Hardness Number) equivalent of tensile strength of material before PWHT be considered a minimum

value?

Reply (3): The Code does not address BHN equivalent of tensile strength or minimum BHN.

 

 

Excerpt from SA105

 

 

BR

M.Vijayan

 

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Vikas Bhandari
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 6:19 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:13553] PWHT requirements -ASME B31.3

 

Dear all

 

My question is that  if a 15 mm build is to be carried out on a 25 mm thick flange face, would I require to do a post weld heat treatment? What would be the governing thickness in this case?

Section 3331.1.3 states that governing thickness shall be that of thicker component measured at the joint except in case of branch and fillet.

So does that implies weld joint? i.e. 15 mm in this case?

 

Any supporting document (eg ASME clarifications) would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Best regards

--
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.



This communication and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or information contained in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender, and delete the material from any computer. We reserve the right to monitor email communications through normal internal and external networks. We believe but not warrant that the email and the attachments are virus free. The statement and opinions expressed in this communication are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent those of Madina Group, whose registered office address is

P.O. Box 20459, Doha, Qatar.
Tel. +974 44600818
Fax. +974 44603143

[MW:34820] RE: 34813] Clarification in Rate of heating and cooling.

Hello,   Please see the response below.   Regards.   P. Goswami, P. Eng, IWE.   From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com <materials-weld...