Dear friends
We have a WPS for welding 321-SS base metal with ER 308h+E 308h-16 which is approved by PQR but the matter is non-availability of E308H-16 and we would like to use E308H-17 instead.
There is no mechanical and chemical difference between these two according to ASME Sec II Part C, the only difference is in cover composition that makes -17 better for fillet welds in comparison with -16. But the question remains because our joint is groove and not fillet. What's your opinion? Could -17 be used for groove welding instead of -16 ( without need of a new WPS and PQR) ?
--
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.
We have a WPS for welding 321-SS base metal with ER 308h+E 308h-16 which is approved by PQR but the matter is non-availability of E308H-16 and we would like to use E308H-17 instead.
There is no mechanical and chemical difference between these two according to ASME Sec II Part C, the only difference is in cover composition that makes -17 better for fillet welds in comparison with -16. But the question remains because our joint is groove and not fillet. What's your opinion? Could -17 be used for groove welding instead of -16 ( without need of a new WPS and PQR) ?
--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
Comments