Sunday, March 4, 2012

[MW:13817] Re: using E308H-17 instead of E308H-16

Dear Peyman,
ASME II C, IX reference may not always be enough. Check the
manufacturer's data sheet and verify compatibility. Sometimes you get
valuable information from it peculiar to your application. In your
case, I checked. You can use -17 for -16 and vice versa.
Thanks,
Tarantula Ghosh

On Mar 1, 4:18 pm, Peyman Hafezi <peymanhaf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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) ?
>
>  -16 and -17 electrodes ASME II C -2010.pdf
> 56KViewDownload
>
>  Chemical composition of undiluted weld metal- ASME II C -2010.pdf
> 61KViewDownload
>
>  Mechanical requirements of weldmetal- ASME II C -2010-2.pdf
> 55KViewDownload

--
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:

Re: [MW:35289] Welding consumable for S355J2WP material

S355 J2 WP  is a weathering structural steel  It has better atmospheric corrosion resistance. Use E 8018 - W1/W2  Electrodes This is regular...