Materials & Welding: February 2011

Monday, February 28, 2011

Re: [MW:10061] Re: basic funda

Nowadays plates come with cross rolling, they are rolled at 90degrees in consequent rolling operations.

2011/2/28 sandy <sandeepdhiman63@gmail.com>

Hi

The main reason is that the mechanical properties are better in the
rolling direction compare to transverse direction.
But it is not mandatory that you weld in this way.
If you weld the material in the way wht u r asking may be possible
that you will get lesser strength or other required things
as compare to long. side welding.

Regards
Sandeep

On Feb 28, 5:29 am, "Kathalingam Babu" <kathalingam.q...@ppl.com.sg>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> It is only optional, not mandatory in many codes.
>
> Due to the fact that, there is variation in mechanical properties in Trans
> direction.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> K. Babu
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "Pratik Kshirsagar" <pratiks...@gmail.com>
> To: "Materials & Welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 12:08 AM
> Subject: [MW:10030] basic funda
>
> > Dear all,
> > I am having a simple question which seems to be stupid but
> > just it's the basic thing. I want to know why to weld a plate in the
> > direction of rolling? What happens if the welding is carried out in
> > transverse direction that of rolling?
>
> > --
> > 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
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.

regards,

Harish.

--
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:10055] excess penetration for butt weld joints

Dear Mr.Abhay,

Have you refer the trailing mail table ASME B 31.3 ,342.3.2 table then you will ask the next question.

I think just like feeding Everything is not good refer it for internal protrusion or excess penetration limits.

Regrds,

PSR

On 28 February 2011 18:01, Abhonkar, Abhay (NAR) <AAbhonkar@dresser-rand.com> wrote:

My question is on excess penetration for root and not for excess reinforcement.

Generally it is to be minimum for smooth flow of media but I want to know acceptance standard from ASME sec IX or B 31.3.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offense. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Fitria Rahman
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 1:00 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MW:10036] excess penetration for butt weld joints

Please refer to table 341.3.2 ASME B31.3 for criteria of height of reinforcement

2011/2/24 Abhonkar, Abhay (NAR) <AAbhonkar@dresser-rand.com>

What is the acceptable excess penetration as per the B31.3 or ASME sec?

Whether we can consider the same as defect or discontinuity?

Pl advise.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offense. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.

--
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:10060] RE: 10032] hydro test

It is because the gauge installed at 30 m height shows only the fluid presssure inside the circuit while the one installed 30 m lower not only shows the fluid pressure but also the head of the fluid above it i.e -->
pressure at 30 m lower gauge = fluid pressure + (density of fluid * acc due to gravity * height).
pressure at 30 m high gauge = fluid pressure

----- Original Message -----
From: Pablo J Acelajado
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 16:10:19 +0530 (IST)
Subject: [MW:10041] RE: 10032] hydro test

February 27, 2011 Hi! Pressure is equal to height x density. P (psi) = [30 meters x 3.28 ft/ meter x 12 inches/ft] x [62.4 pounds per cu. ft. x 1/1728] = 42.64 psi, which is roughly equal to 3 bars. Best regards. PJA

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of k.ilangkumaran ilangkumaran
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 9:59 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:10032] hydro test

Dear experts,

Could you explain me that why there is big difference pressures between two gauges installed while hydro testing? The first pressure gauge shows 3barg less than the one installed in 30meters above.

regards

Ilan

--

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:10059] In-service welding qualification of SS pipe line

Hii
First you need to specify whats construction code you are using ...

I think particularly there is no code for In Service welding WQT
test,Generally we arre following ASME SECTION IX .

Suresh

On 2/28/11, joshi jaydeep <jaydeep.p.joshi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> As per the scope of API 1104, It is restricted to be used for CS and LAS
> material.
>
> Which code is to be followed for In-service welding qualification of SS pipe
> line.
>
>
>
> *Jaydeep Joshi | Welding Engineer, TDW India Limited*
>
> Plot No 16 | Phase –III | Alindra – Savli G.I.D.C | Taluka : Savli |
> Vadodara – *391 775*
>
> *Board* : +91-2667- 619900 | *Fax *: +91- 2667- 619501| *Extension : 7845*
>
> E-Mail : jaydeep.joshi@tdwilliamson.com <samyak.sahani@tdwilliamson.com> |
> *www.tdwilliamson.com*
>
> Cell: +91 9978959626
>
> P *Before printing, Think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsibility*
>
> --
> 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: 91-92 92 905 905

[MW:10058] Difference between impact testing by ASTME23 and ASTM A370

Dear all,

I have a procedure in which impact testing should have been done as per ASTM A370 but it has been done as per ASTM E23

Is there any difference between the standard on how the impact tests are conducted? Would the difference effect the final values?

tha material was UNS 31803 pipe and was tested at minus 50 degree centigrade.

Thanks

[MW:10054] Re: 10053] excess penetration for butt weld joints

Please see (Criterion Value Notes for Table 341.3.2) B31.3

Depends on thickness

From: Abhonkar, Abhay (NAR)

Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 4:01 AM

To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com

Subject: RE: [MW:10053] excess penetration for butt weld joints

My question is on excess penetration for root and not for excess reinforcement.

Generally it is to be minimum for smooth flow of media but I want to know acceptance standard from ASME sec IX or B 31.3.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offense. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Fitria Rahman
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 1:00 PM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MW:10036] excess penetration for butt weld joints

Please refer to table 341.3.2 ASME B31.3 for criteria of height of reinforcement

2011/2/24 Abhonkar, Abhay (NAR) <AAbhonkar@dresser-rand.com>

What is the acceptable excess penetration as per the B31.3 or ASME sec?

Whether we can consider the same as defect or discontinuity?

Pl advise.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offense. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mailto:materials-welding%2Bunsubscribe@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:10053] excess penetration for butt weld joints

My question is on excess penetration for root and not for excess reinforcement.

Generally it is to be minimum for smooth flow of media but I want to know acceptance standard from ASME sec IX or B 31.3.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

Please refer to table 341.3.2 ASME B31.3 for criteria of height of reinforcement

2011/2/24 Abhonkar, Abhay (NAR) <AAbhonkar@dresser-rand.com>

What is the acceptable excess penetration as per the B31.3 or ASME sec?

Whether we can consider the same as defect or discontinuity?

Pl advise.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

Re: [MW:10052] Welding filler metal for H2+HCBN TRACES medium ( hydrocracker unit)

dear

no,but it is recommended the filler be low H2 ELECTRODE(7018,7018-1,etc.)

H.KASHKOUSHA

From: GRH <grhashemi2010@gmail.com>
To: Materials & Welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, February 28, 2011 9:40:34 AM
Subject: [MW:10051] Welding filler metal for H2+HCBN TRACES medium ( hydrocracker unit)

Dear Mr./Miss./Mrs.
The air cooler in HYDROCRACKER unit (oil refining plant)have the below
specifications,Please guide me about the welding procedure ,filler
metal and any requirements in conform to service.
design pressure:55.3 bar/f.v
design temperature:171 celsius
fluid circulated: H2+HCBN TRACES
X-ray examination:spot
PWHT:yes (Max. weld hardness;200 brinnel)
Materials:SA-516Gr.60 , SA-105 , SA-234WPB
Headers Thk.:30 mm.
This air cooler is in first steps of construction and only the main
drawing is available.the old equipment shall be replaced by the new.
Any supplementary date or detail is out of availability.
in API 661 some requirements like as low hydrogen content , ... is
mentioned, but it is possible the medium/service make the more
restriction that is not mentioned or detailed in this standard,
Is there any requirement for filler metal or welding process in
relation to medium (H2+HCBN TRACES) or service (hydrocracking)?
With best regards.
GRH
28.02.2011

--
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:10049] GTAW SMAW Pipe PQR use for plate Welding

Hi all,

I have GTAW/SMAW PQR, i need use to qualify SMAW plate WPS, think it's possible only for Fillet weld. i'm right ?

--
GHRAB Zakaria

[MW:10050] In-service welding qualification of SS pipe line

Dear all,

As per the scope of API 1104, It is restricted to be used for CS and LAS material.

Which code is to be followed for In-service welding qualification of SS pipe line.

Jaydeep Joshi | Welding Engineer, TDW India Limited

Plot No 16 | Phase –III | Alindra – Savli G.I.D.C | Taluka : Savli | Vadodara – 391 775

Board : +91-2667- 619900 | Fax : +91- 2667- 619501| Extension : 7845

E-Mail : jaydeep.joshi@tdwilliamson.com | www.tdwilliamson.com

Cell: +91 9978959626

P Before printing, Think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsibility

[MW:10051] Welding filler metal for H2+HCBN TRACES medium ( hydrocracker unit)

Dear Mr./Miss./Mrs.
The air cooler in HYDROCRACKER unit (oil refining plant)have the below
specifications,Please guide me about the welding procedure ,filler
metal and any requirements in conform to service.
design pressure:55.3 bar/f.v
design temperature:171 celsius
fluid circulated: H2+HCBN TRACES
X-ray examination:spot
PWHT:yes (Max. weld hardness;200 brinnel)
Materials:SA-516Gr.60 , SA-105 , SA-234WPB
Headers Thk.:30 mm.
This air cooler is in first steps of construction and only the main
drawing is available.the old equipment shall be replaced by the new.
Any supplementary date or detail is out of availability.
in API 661 some requirements like as low hydrogen content , ... is
mentioned, but it is possible the medium/service make the more
restriction that is not mentioned or detailed in this standard,
Is there any requirement for filler metal or welding process in
relation to medium (H2+HCBN TRACES) or service (hydrocracking)?
With best regards.
GRH
28.02.2011

Re: [MW:10048] MW:10003- Nitrogen Purging for SB 409 Alloy 800H

Dear Mr.Pradip Goswami,

Thanks for the article, it was informative.

I think the reason behind restricting Nitrogen as a purging gas (ARAMCO standard) when welding austenitic stainless steels is probably due to the fact that it can react with the weld metal and hence reduce the ferrite level to dangeroulsy lower levels. But the gas - metal reactions are much faster/efficient when Nitrogen is included in the shielding gas rather than purging.

I have extensively used forming gas (95% Nitrogen + 5% Hydrogen) to weld grade SS321 with good results, I have noticed this yellowish tint on the weld root, but it has never been a problem. Probably not much of a study has been done about this yellow tint as described in the article.

I think we can expect the same yellow tint to form on the root when we weld alloy 800H which has Titanium in it.

Most of the times we have this stigma to use Argon as purging gas and most client specifications also insist the same, I think its a little too conservative.

With Regards,

Praveen Alavandar

--- On Sun, 2/27/11, pgoswami <pgoswami@quickclic.net> wrote:

From: pgoswami <pgoswami@quickclic.net>
Subject: [MW:10026] MW:10003- Nitrogen Purging for SB 409 Alloy 800H
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 27, 2011, 10:31 AM

Hello, Mr.. Rao & Praveen Alavander,

There are conflicting arguments on the use of Nitrogen alone as backing gas for austenitc stainless steels and Nickel alloys.Nitrogen is quite popular as a mixed gas with Argon. The pros of nitrogen is it's relative less expensive compared to other shielding gases, cons chances for undesirable phases, brittle phases like nitrides. ASME Sec-IX does not insist change of backing gas as an essential variable, hence fabricators do not have any mandatory requirement of procedure re-qualification.

Perhaps a good way would be would be to micro structural evaluation on the root of single sided welds to check for any hard , brittle phases. Micro-hardness check from the root to at least 1/4" to the top ad the corrosion tests (if required) in addition to ASME Sec-IX qualification tests.

Appreciate if you could circulate the observations as convenient. Some clients are very specific on use of Nitrogen Backing ( see below the hyperlink).

The attached article is quite interesting on the effects of various types shielding gases for welding. The highlighted texts are on the effects of nitrogen.

Thanks.

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.IWE

Welding & Metallurgical Specialist & Consultant

Ontario,Canada.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

http://www.oilfieldtrash.com/custom/php/files/1260853475AESW010%20Welding%20Requirements.pdf---- Clause 11.14.4

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of praveen alavandar
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 12:25 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MW:10003] Nitrogen Purging for SB 409 Alloy 800H

Dear Rao,

One thing for sure is Nitrogen is used as a purging gas for welding duplex/super duplex stainless steels.

Nitrogen is nonflammable and does not support combustion and is slightly lighter than air.

Nitrogen is inert except at arc welding temperatures where it will react with some materials like Aluminium, Magnesium and Titanium.

Personally I have not tried on Nickel based alloys but you can give a try. I dont see any harm to weld a test coupon, check for mechanical and corrosion properties if its come out to be ok, you can use it on you job.

As regards nitrogen purity, the AWS A5.32 Specification for Welding Shielding Gases specifies minimum nitrogen purity of 99.9% and maximum dew point of the gas as -51 Deg.C. The AWS classification for this gas is SG-N. This AWS A5.32 is for shielding gas, how ever you can take it as a guidance for selecting your purging gas.

Excess nitrogen in the order of 5% and above in the shielding gas (usually with Argon) can erode the tungsten electrode.

If you purge with nitrogen and an open root there should be no issue of nitrogen contamination of the tungsten electrode provided the purging pressure is not excessive.

The argon flow from the GTAW torch as shielding gas will protect the tungsten electrode.

Regards,

Praveen Alavandar

--- On Wed, 2/23/11, P.Rao <vasantharao2009@rediffmail.com> wrote:

From: P.Rao <vasantharao2009@rediffmail.com>
Subject: [MW:9985] Nitrogen Purging for SB 409 Alloy 800H
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Date: Wednesday, February 23, 2011, 5:06 PM

Dear All,

Can i use nitrogen Purging for GTAW Welding of subject material.

Are there any consumables available with Flux cored type?

I have a requirement to weld subject material from single side with ERNiCr-3 wire + ENiCrFe-2 electrodes. Single side only accessible.

Pl. provide your values inputs.

P.Rao

--
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:10057] Re: WPS & WPQR

Yes, you can do that untill you are fulfiiling the requirement of the
essential variables and supplementary variables (if applicables)for
welder.

Regards
Sandeep Kumar

On Feb 27, 1:08 pm, manoj john <manojac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear members,
>
> I have one welder qualified with one WPS.
>
> My question is can I employ that welder to weld in accordance with other
> WPS, if the essential variables for welder performance are same.
>
> Thanks & Regards.
> Manoj.

[MW:10056] Re: basic funda

The main reason is that the mechanical properties are better in the
rolling direction compare to transverse direction.
But it is not mandatory that you weld in this way.
If you weld the material in the way wht u r asking may be possible
that you will get lesser strength or other required things
as compare to long. side welding.

Regards
Sandeep

On Feb 28, 5:29 am, "Kathalingam Babu" <kathalingam.q...@ppl.com.sg>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> It is only optional, not mandatory in many codes.
>
> Due to the fact that, there is variation in mechanical properties in Trans
> direction.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> K. Babu
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pratik Kshirsagar" <pratiks...@gmail.com>
> To: "Materials & Welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 12:08 AM
> Subject: [MW:10030] basic funda
>
> > Dear all,
> > I am having a simple question which seems to be stupid but
> > just it's the basic thing. I want to know why to weld a plate in the
> > direction of rolling? What happens if the welding is carried out in
> > transverse direction that of rolling?
>
> > --
> > 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

RE: [MW:10047] Corten & carbon Steel weldability

Mr. Zakaria,

Attached are some information on Corten Steel/Weathering Steel which would be of help to you. This steel is a micro alloyed, typically added with Copper (major) and other alloying elements, such as Nickel to improve atmospheric corrosion resistance.

ASTM A-588 is one of the specifications which cover such (weathering) steel. See the attached data sheets for further references.

Corten is quite weldable, with the required precautions to be adopted as per manufacturers guidelines.

AWS SFA 5.5 covers the required specs for welding electrodes,recommended electrodes are E-7018W for Corten A, E-8018W for Corten-B steel.See the atatched data sheet of a popular electrode manufacturer in North America, Air Liquide.

ASME Sec-IX includes weathering steel, under specification A-588. These steels have S-Nos but do not have any P No.Welding procedure qualification on these ASTM specification specific. PQR qualified for these steels apply for welding these grades or to others. It's advisable to use welding electrodes matching the Corten chemistry for welding dissimilar materials.

What's grade or specification of corten to be fabricated. If you specify more details , perhaps may get more appropriate guidelines.

Thanks.

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.IWE

Welding & Metallurgical Specialist & Consultant

Ontario,Canada.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of muthusrinivasan muthuselvam
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 1:30 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MW:10007] Corten & carbon Steel weldability

Carton steel is microalloyed carbon steel material mainly used for weathering action.. basically this material is developed for special application... in India equvalent material is IRSM 41-- If you check the chemistry and mechanical in internet you will get it..

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 12:33 PM, k.ilangkumaran ilangkumaran <k.ilangkumaran@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear MSMS,

E7018 W? How? could you please explain us? because the material is unassigned as mentioned so we dont know what chemical composition and tensile strength is? some standards para if possible please?

Ilan

--- On Fri, 2/18/11, muthusrinivasan muthuselvam <msms2k@gmail.com> wrote:

From: muthusrinivasan muthuselvam <msms2k@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MW:9922] Corten & carbon Steel weldability

To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Date: Friday, February 18, 2011, 3:32 PM

Dear Mr.Zakaria..

Corten is unspecified material as per ASME... you can say that as unassigned and preferred electrode is E 7018 W -made to order.

I hope this is for chimney or some container..

br,

msms

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Zakaria ghrab <zakaria.ghrab@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I need to know the P number of corten steels, i have on PQR according ASME sect IX corten to corten, i need to use it to prepare WPS for Carbon steels but i have doute Corten is PN°1 or PN°3, serashing in internet : Equivalent Corten is ASTM SA 242, is it true?
--
GHRAB Zakaria

--
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:10044] piping modification after PWHT

Hi Abhay,

What' re the design requirements??

There're two issues out here,.ASME Code and NACE -Sour service.If you're asking a specific technical query related to PWHT note and make sure that operating media has a strong influence on determining the applicability of PWHT and mention something about the media also. Plus what's the design code ???, B-31.3 or anything else.

Regarding the PWHT:-the thickness mentioned here,1 inch sch 80 and thickness up to 10 inch sch 40 CS SA106 Gr B would not call for any PWHT. Look up in B-31.3-Table 331.1.1.The minimum thickness for mandatory PWHT for carbon steels is 20mm (3/4") and above.
If there is NACE sour service requirement then PWHT is usually mandatory.However MR-0175 Clause A-2.1.4 provided some waiver from PWHT for some C-Mn steels and allows them to be accepted in as welded condition. You may find the details in MR-0175.

So for the pipes as mentioned above based on the criteria the design documents should specify if PWHT is a requirement or not. To be on the safe side if as welded hardness is below 22 HRC then you can pitch an argument for waving PWHT.

RT requirements are mandated by piping design code. One has to meet that criteria, every time any welding is performed.

Thanks.

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.IWE

Welding & Metallurgical Specialist & Consultant

Ontario,Canada.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of renga raja
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 7:39 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [MW:10013] piping modification after PWHT

Hai

first of all, SA 106 Gr.B Material above 19mm only we need to do the PWHT. at what specification you are following the PWHT for sch40 pipes.

in case of your specification, you have to do PWHT, then you have to go for the new modified joint also. then go for RT.

generally, modified weld also must do the similar way for other joints. RT also should take.

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Abhonkar, Abhay (NAR) <AAbhonkar@dresser-rand.com> wrote:

Dear Sir,

This is case for discussion.

Let us assume that piping for SA106 Gr B pipes are fabricated and radiographed and found OK. Then as per the requirement, next stage is Post weld heat treatment.

Size of the piping is vary between 1 inch sch 80 and extends upto 10 inch sch 40 CS SA106 Gr b NACE material.

Now if one completed the PWHT cycle and during mounting of the piping it seems that without doing the re cutting and rewelding it will not fit then, how we should go forward,

1)       Can piping accepted by means of radiograph after rewelding and if RT OK then we can go ahead for final hydro test without PWHT.

2)       One has to do again PWHT for that modified joint.

3)       What is AEME verdict about that?

4)       Whether UCS – 56 is mentioned about that, as it will seems that code mentioned about repair weld only and not for new weld after modification.

Pl have your views on above.

Regards,

Abhay

Ext 448

IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This email may be confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offense. Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.

--
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.

--
Regards,

Rengaraja.T

Re: [MW:10046] basic funda

It is only optional, not mandatory in many codes.

Due to the fact that, there is variation in mechanical properties in Trans
direction.

Thanks & Regards,

K. Babu

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pratik Kshirsagar" <pratikshir@gmail.com>
To: "Materials & Welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 12:08 AM
Subject: [MW:10030] basic funda

>
> Dear all,
> I am having a simple question which seems to be stupid but
> just it's the basic thing. I want to know why to weld a plate in the
> direction of rolling? What happens if the welding is carried out in
> transverse direction that of rolling?
>
> --
> 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, February 27, 2011

Re: [MW:10045] hydro test

Hii

there should be static head pressure difference when line is at
different levels in terms of heights.

For each 10m height , 1 Bar difference is allowabale as per design
calculations ...

It is normal practice for all pipelines ....when you are doing hydrotest ..

Thank you

Suresh

On 2/27/11, k.ilangkumaran ilangkumaran <k.ilangkumaran@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear experts,
>
> Could you explain me that why there is big difference
> pressures between two gauges installed while hydro testing? The first
> pressure gauge shows 3barg less than the one installed in 30meters above.
>
> regards
> Ilan
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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: 91-92 92 905 905

[MW:10043] Re: Tank Peaking/Banding Issue, API 650

Hi…..
I am agreeing with Mr.Abdul...

A 6 / A 6M for receiving inspection not for after fabrication of the
plate...
After fabrication your should follow API 650

Adi
KSA

On Feb 27, 8:19 am, Fitria Rahman <t.chint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Abdul
>
> A 6/A 6M indicates the requirements and acceptance criteria when you
> purchase and receive the material required for project, let say, plate. I
> have seen A 6 standard is attached on purchase order document in several
> occasion. The QC shall do inspection upon receipt of material. You still
> require A 6 on that time.At final inspection, the QC shall issue a
> "receiving inspection report" which the inspector has decided fulfill the
> requirement of qualification test and certificates, purchase order document,
> A 6 standard and whatever you said in PO.
>
> After issuance of " receiving inspection report', the the material delivered
> to fabrication stage. A standard of A6 is not required in here. You have to
> refer to API 650 during fabrication and installation of the tank.
>
> let this helps
>
> 2011/2/26 Abdul Wahab <awengin...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> > Dear Sir,
>
> > Thank you very much for replying, but problem is that API 650 by itself
> > refering to mentioned standard like ASTM A 6M etc.
>
> > Please advice,
>
> > Abdul Wahab
>
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Suresh <bobsures...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Hii Abdul ,
>
> >> You should follow API 650 for tank consrtuction , not ASME code .
>
> >> In my best of my knowledge , you need to refer to API 650 and follow
> >> tolarances which was mentioned in API 650 .
>
> >> Thank you
>
> >> Suresh
>
> >> On 2/26/11, Abdul Wahab <awengin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Dear All,
>
> >> > I am Abdul Wahab working in KSA as QA/QC Inspector, I have an issue
> >> > which is confusioning me. Below there is copy of Paragraph of API 650.
> >> > Plumbness, peaking, banding & flat spot discussed in this & tolerances
> >> > are provided but along with tolerance of API 650, also refering to
> >> > ASTM standards, those standards have tolerances aproximately a double
> >> > values as compared to API 650 Tolerances. Do we need to follow those
> >> > as ASTM is not a tank construction code but provide guidance about
> >> > matrial manufacturing,testing & handling etc.
>
> >> > We have Banding Value for 6 mm Plate of 13 mm max, can we consider a
> >> > dent as a banding problem in tank shell.
>
> >> > Please see below & advice.
>
> >> > 7.5.2 Plumbness
>
> >> > a. The maximum out-of-plumbness of the top of the shell relative to
> >> > the bottom of the shell shall not exceed 1/200 of the total
> >> > tank height. The out-of-plumbness in one shell course shall not exceed
> >> > the permissible variations for flatness and waviness as
> >> > specified in ASTM A 6M/A 6, ASTM A 20M/A 20, or ASTM A 480M/A 480,
> >> > whichever is applicable.
>
> >> > 7.5.4 Local Deviations
>
> >> > c. Flat spots measured in the vertical plane shall not exceed the
> >> > appropriate plate flatness and waviness requirements given in
> >> > 7.5.2.
>
> >> > If there is any confusion to understand, please ask.
>
> >> > Abdul Wahab
> >> > Mechanical Inspector
> >> > KSA
>
> >> > --
> >> > 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: 91-92 92 905 905
>
> >> --
> >> 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Materials & Welding

Monday, February 28, 2011

Re: [MW:10061] Re: basic funda

Re: [MW:10055] excess penetration for butt weld joints

Re: [MW:10060] RE: 10032] hydro test

Re: [MW:10059] In-service welding qualification of SS pipe line

[MW:10058] Difference between impact testing by ASTME23 and ASTM A370

[MW:10054] Re: 10053] excess penetration for butt weld joints

RE: [MW:10053] excess penetration for butt weld joints

Re: [MW:10052] Welding filler metal for H2+HCBN TRACES medium ( hydrocracker unit)

[MW:10049] GTAW SMAW Pipe PQR use for plate Welding

[MW:10050] In-service welding qualification of SS pipe line

[MW:10051] Welding filler metal for H2+HCBN TRACES medium ( hydrocracker unit)

Re: [MW:10048] MW:10003- Nitrogen Purging for SB 409 Alloy 800H

[MW:10057] Re: WPS & WPQR

[MW:10056] Re: basic funda

RE: [MW:10047] Corten & carbon Steel weldability

RE: [MW:10044] piping modification after PWHT

Re: [MW:10046] basic funda

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Re: [MW:10045] hydro test

[MW:10043] Re: Tank Peaking/Banding Issue, API 650

[MW:35346] Cast-iron welding

Search This Blog

Wikipedia

Followers