The confusion begins when non API 5L linepipe equivalent materials are used for pup pieces. It is often the case that these are only impact tested for energy absorption. However, I would agree that API 5L linepipe pup pieces should be tested accordingly, as that is covered by the linepipe speciciation.
PJ
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Pablo Acelajado <pjacelajado@npc.com.sa> wrote:
January 15, 2010
From my understanding, the pup pieces made up from API 5L line pipe should
also be subjected to the same tests.
PJA
E-mail : pjacelajado@npc.com.sa
SAVE TREES - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT
-----Original Message-----
From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
[mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Jevons
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 3:44 AM
To: Materials & Welding
Subject: [MW:4043] Transition (pup pipes) testing requirments
Pipelines are subject to the rigours of fracture control e.g. ductile
fracture via impact energy absorption and brittle fracture via shear
area fracture appearance. This is often done by CVN and DWT.
Should pup pieces made up from API 5L xx linepipe be subjected to the
same tests? Or should they by tested only via impact energy absorption
as are the fittings to which they are attached.
PJ
--
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment