Re: [MW:24023] Re: PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Lower critical temp for CS is 723 degree Celsius, how u can allow it to 740

THANKS & BEST REGARDS,

KG.PANDITHAN, IWE,  AWS-CWI, CSWIP 3.1,

CONSULTANT-WELDING & QUALITY

On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Chandrakant Vaidya <clvaidya.2010@gmail.com> wrote:

Greetings.

In my view the CS temp.attachments can be welded with Gr 91 mtrl.but not job mtrl.as rightly stated by Pradip & Zakeria.

Regards

C.L.Vaidya

On Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 3:59:03 PM UTC+5:30, Tunisian Quality Engineer wrote:

Dear experts,

  Need your support.

We performed one PQR P91 grade ( P number 15E) to Carbon steel (P number 1) welded GTAW/SMAW ER90S-B9 / E9015-B9, 11mm thickness, PWHT @ 740°C - 40 minutes.

PQR and related WPS already approved by our client. but the Owner consulting agency sent to us some comments :

1- No possible to weld P91 directly to CS shall add transition material P11 grade : We answer that it's design issue and i requested some explain / calculation from design.

2- Should use filler metal compatible with lower grade material : i answer that can make choice of  filler metal between to material grades (included) so we can weld with lower, heigher or iontermediate filler metal when mechanical properties is ok and don't have ebjection from project spec.

3- this is the main issue : PWHT @ 740 °c is heigher than lower critical temperature for CS so we must perform PWHT in intermediate Temperature : in this case if will do like this WPS will not supported by Prepared PQR;

PQR approved by Client and weld already done, i propose to perform hardness test, PMI and metallographic replic in production ( just one weld) to confirm.


Need your support .



Regards.





--

زكرياء غراب
GHRAB Zakaria

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/8e8fded5-7f59-4ab2-8b7f-7e3e19baa019%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CAJzm4eNSSFfunj%2BBauBMXqo7scbCA_ZtQAFiWm2ucVEGDN91JA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24023] RE: 24018] Re: PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

As ur client said, Gr 91 cant be welded to carbon steel, u should introduce cs with gr 11, gr 11 with gr 22, gr 22 with gr 91

---

From: Chandrakant Vaidya
Sent: ‎31-‎12-‎2015 01:07 PM
To: Materials & Welding
Subject: [MW:24018] Re: PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Greetings.

In my view the CS temp.attachments can be welded with Gr 91 mtrl.but not job mtrl.as rightly stated by Pradip & Zakeria.

Regards

C.L.Vaidya

On Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 3:59:03 PM UTC+5:30, Tunisian Quality Engineer wrote:

Dear experts,

  Need your support.

We performed one PQR P91 grade ( P number 15E) to Carbon steel (P number 1) welded GTAW/SMAW ER90S-B9 / E9015-B9, 11mm thickness, PWHT @ 740°C - 40 minutes.

PQR and related WPS already approved by our client. but the Owner consulting agency sent to us some comments :

1- No possible to weld P91 directly to CS shall add transition material P11 grade : We answer that it's design issue and i requested some explain / calculation from design.

2- Should use filler metal compatible with lower grade material : i answer that can make choice of  filler metal between to material grades (included) so we can weld with lower, heigher or iontermediate filler metal when mechanical properties is ok and don't have ebjection from project spec.

3- this is the main issue : PWHT @ 740 °c is heigher than lower critical temperature for CS so we must perform PWHT in intermediate Temperature : in this case if will do like this WPS will not supported by Prepared PQR;

PQR approved by Client and weld already done, i propose to perform hardness test, PMI and metallographic replic in production ( just one weld) to confirm.


Need your support .



Regards.





--

زكرياء غراب
GHRAB Zakaria

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/8e8fded5-7f59-4ab2-8b7f-7e3e19baa019%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24023] Re: 15720] PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Dear Mr.Pradip Goswami'

                                   Please shared the remaining avrbation of B1,B3,B9 IN TABLE.

On Sunday, October 21, 2012 at 5:22:14 AM UTC+3, pgoswami wrote:

Hi Zakaria,

 

Dissimilar welds between Grade-91 to other lower alloyed steels e.g  grade 11 and grade 22 are quite common. However a straight change from Grade-91 to Carbon steel is a Bad Design, unless the margins provided by the OEM takes care of the service induced damages.

 

A straight service induced damages could be a few as mentioned:-

• Grade-91 steel operates at very high operating temperature regime (550-560 Deg C), which is is not safe for P1 material. P1 materials in the vicinity of the weld is  likely to get exposed to spheroidization (on exposure to this temperature range) and may result in failures by creep
• Thus welding of a intermediate or  transition  spool piece such as Grade-22 steel  would be a better design.

Grade-91 to Grade-22 could be welded in a few ways, see the following tables for welding materials selection and subsequent PWHT.

 

You may qualify a WPS /PQR , however that does not always mean that the good  engineering  design basis is maintained.

 

Also please see below the comments on your queries.

 

Thanks

 

 

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.IWE

Welding & Metallurgical Specialist

Ontario, Canada.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

Dissimilar Welding Filler Metal Selection-

 

Recommended PWHT Temperatures (

0F) for Dissimilar Welds

---

From: material...@googlegroups.com [mailto:material...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Zakaria ghrab
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:29 AM
To: material...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:15720] PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Dear experts,

 Need your support.

We performed one PQR P91 grade ( P number 15E) to Carbon steel (P number 1) welded GTAW/SMAW ER90S-B9 / E9015-B9, 11mm thickness, PWHT @ 740°C - 40 minutes.

PQR and related WPS already approved by our client. but the Owner consulting agency sent to us some comments :

1- No possible to weld P91 directly to CS shall add transition material P11 grade : We answer that it's design issue and i requested some explain / calculation from design. -- This  is a good and conservative design. If accepted one may have to weld the transition pieces, i.e involving welds between P91-P4 & P4-P1 base metal.The PWHT may be controlled to the better extent such that the P1 base metal would not get over tempered.

2- Should use filler metal compatible with lower grade material : i answer that can make choice of  filler metal between to material grades (included) so we can weld with lower, heigher or iontermediate filler metal when mechanical properties is ok and don't have ebjection from project spec. --If you're welding in the above sequence recommendation would be :

• P91-P4  -welds use -E/ER 8016/18 electrde/ filler metal
• P4--P1 -welds use -E/ER 8016/18 electrode/ filler metal

3- this is the main issue : PWHT @ 740 °c is heigher than lower critical temperature for CS so we must perform PWHT in intermediate Temperature : in this case if will do like this WPS will not supported by Prepared PQR; --740Deg Cis quite high a temeprature for P1 steel , which could cause over tempeating of this steel 

PQR approved by Client and weld already done, i propose to perform hardness test, PMI and metallographic replic in production ( just one weld) to confirm.


Need your support .



Regards.





--

زكرياء غراب
GHRAB Zakaria

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/MaterialsWelding-122787?home=&gid=122787&trk=anet_ug_hm
 
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.
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/e4eb41d5-5740-42a9-bcd1-303d45befad7%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24023] Re: PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Don't think that a successful PQR leads always to successful production welds. Do not forget that sound engineering judgement us the first consideration. Therefore I would suggest to use an intermediate low alloy in order to avoid PWHT temperatures which do not are in conflict with lower transformation temperatures

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

From: Chandrakant Vaidya Sent: Πέμπτη, 31 Δεκεμβρίου 2015 - 09:37 To: Materials & Welding Reply To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com Subject: [MW:24018] Re: PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Greetings.

In my view the CS temp.attachments can be welded with Gr 91 mtrl.but not job mtrl.as rightly stated by Pradip & Zakeria.

Regards

C.L.Vaidya

On Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 3:59:03 PM UTC+5:30, Tunisian Quality Engineer wrote:

Dear experts,

  Need your support.

We performed one PQR P91 grade ( P number 15E) to Carbon steel (P number 1) welded GTAW/SMAW ER90S-B9 / E9015-B9, 11mm thickness, PWHT @ 740°C - 40 minutes.

PQR and related WPS already approved by our client. but the Owner consulting agency sent to us some comments :

1- No possible to weld P91 directly to CS shall add transition material P11 grade : We answer that it's design issue and i requested some explain / calculation from design.

2- Should use filler metal compatible with lower grade material : i answer that can make choice of  filler metal between to material grades (included) so we can weld with lower, heigher or iontermediate filler metal when mechanical properties is ok and don't have ebjection from project spec.

3- this is the main issue : PWHT @ 740 °c is heigher than lower critical temperature for CS so we must perform PWHT in intermediate Temperature : in this case if will do like this WPS will not supported by Prepared PQR;

PQR approved by Client and weld already done, i propose to perform hardness test, PMI and metallographic replic in production ( just one weld) to confirm.


Need your support .



Regards.





--

زكرياء غراب
GHRAB Zakaria

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/8e8fded5-7f59-4ab2-8b7f-7e3e19baa019%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This message contains confidential information. To know more, please click on the following link: http://disclaimer.bureauveritas.com

Re: [MW:24018] DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

‎Check this link. For an new qualification you have to go with 9606

http://www.twi-global.com/technical-knowledge/job-knowledge/a-comparison-of-bs-en-287-part-12011-with-bs-en-iso-9606-part-1-130/

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

From: udaya bhaskar Sent: Πέμπτη, 31 Δεκεμβρίου 2015 - 04:41 To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com Reply To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com Subject: [MW:24017] DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

Dear sir,

As per EN Stander we need to do WQT.

kINDLY SUGGEST  WHICH STANDERS TO BE FOLLOW ON THESE TWO-EN-287 OR EN-9606.

kINDLY LET US KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO

--

uday

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CANii3ROLaM9-TLnWAkwj4cyFczMKjJGq8hf9M6aBOjY7Sq8MWA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This message contains confidential information. To know more, please click on the following link: http://disclaimer.bureauveritas.com

[MW:24018] Re: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

Hi,

We need to follow BS EN 9606-1 which supersedes BS EN 287-1.

In BS EN 9606-1, Clause 9.3 has been introduced regarding revalidation of a welder's qualification.

Regards,

Deepak Das.

On Thursday, 31 December 2015 04:41:31 UTC+2, dusroni wrote:

Dear sir,

As per EN Stander we need to do WQT.

kINDLY SUGGEST  WHICH STANDERS TO BE FOLLOW ON THESE TWO-EN-287 OR EN-9606.

kINDLY LET US KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO

--

uday

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/78ef7196-1e04-4b9c-9e0c-29a83ddcfdd8%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24018] Re: PQR - WPS - PWHT P91 to CS

Greetings.

In my view the CS temp.attachments can be welded with Gr 91 mtrl.but not job mtrl.as rightly stated by Pradip & Zakeria.

Regards

C.L.Vaidya

On Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 3:59:03 PM UTC+5:30, Tunisian Quality Engineer wrote:

Dear experts,

  Need your support.

We performed one PQR P91 grade ( P number 15E) to Carbon steel (P number 1) welded GTAW/SMAW ER90S-B9 / E9015-B9, 11mm thickness, PWHT @ 740°C - 40 minutes.

PQR and related WPS already approved by our client. but the Owner consulting agency sent to us some comments :

1- No possible to weld P91 directly to CS shall add transition material P11 grade : We answer that it's design issue and i requested some explain / calculation from design.

2- Should use filler metal compatible with lower grade material : i answer that can make choice of  filler metal between to material grades (included) so we can weld with lower, heigher or iontermediate filler metal when mechanical properties is ok and don't have ebjection from project spec.

3- this is the main issue : PWHT @ 740 °c is heigher than lower critical temperature for CS so we must perform PWHT in intermediate Temperature : in this case if will do like this WPS will not supported by Prepared PQR;

PQR approved by Client and weld already done, i propose to perform hardness test, PMI and metallographic replic in production ( just one weld) to confirm.


Need your support .



Regards.





--

زكرياء غراب
GHRAB Zakaria

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/8e8fded5-7f59-4ab2-8b7f-7e3e19baa019%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24018] DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

Dear Uday

This British Standard is the UK implementation of EN ISO 9606-1:2013. It is identical to ISO 9606-1:2012. It supersedes BS EN 287-1:2011 which is withdrawn.

On Thursday, 31 December 2015 8:11 AM, udaya bhaskar <dusroni@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear sir,

As per EN Stander we need to do WQT.

kINDLY SUGGEST  WHICH STANDERS TO BE FOLLOW ON THESE TWO-EN-287 OR EN-9606.

kINDLY LET US KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO

--

uday

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CANii3ROLaM9-TLnWAkwj4cyFczMKjJGq8hf9M6aBOjY7Sq8MWA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24022] DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

Sent from my ASUS

-------- Original Message --------
From:udaya bhaskar
Sent:Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:19:08 +0530
To:materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject:[MW:24017] DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

Dear sir,

As per EN Stander we need to do WQT.

kINDLY SUGGEST  WHICH STANDERS TO BE FOLLOW ON THESE TWO-EN-287 OR EN-9606.

kINDLY LET US KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO

--

uday

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CANii3ROLaM9-TLnWAkwj4cyFczMKjJGq8hf9M6aBOjY7Sq8MWA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/ve1lb2cvcvr7foms7m4dtgh6.1451533529350%40email.android.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24017] DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EN-287 OR EN-9606.

Dear sir,

As per EN Stander we need to do WQT.

kINDLY SUGGEST  WHICH STANDERS TO BE FOLLOW ON THESE TWO-EN-287 OR EN-9606.

kINDLY LET US KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO

--

uday

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CANii3ROLaM9-TLnWAkwj4cyFczMKjJGq8hf9M6aBOjY7Sq8MWA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24017] Exchanger Bolting SA 540 B23 Cl1 vs B24 Cl1 for low temp service

We are having U type exchanger with  Shell side MOC –SA 516 Gr 70  and Tube side MOC-Titanium2

Design code is ASME Sect VIII Div.2 Ed.2013

Girth flange Bolting for shell side specified as per FEED is SA 540 B24 Cl. 1 ( size is 3")

MDMT of Tube side and Shell side is -46 °C

 

 

However, due to regret letter received from fasteners manufacturers,Vendor  proposed to use SA 540 B23 Cl.1

 

The proposed MOC may be acceptable by designer since :

1.       Due to NO change in allowable stress, design of Girth flange will not change.

2.       Since these fasteners are externally coated with robust painting system before installation, slightly low % of Mo content can be taken care of.   

 

However, main concern is the Impact Testing requirement :

 

1.       B24 : Minimum energy values are shown in Note 3 of Table 2 of SA 540

2.       B23 :  Note 4 of Table 2 of SA 540 states that "No minimum values established and tests shall be run for information only".

3.       How to check these values are minimum required/acceptable for -46 deg.cel ?

 

Considering, MDMT of exchanger as -46 deg.cel, can it be allowed use SA 540 B23 Cl.1 ?

 

Request your views on same.

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/73115463-f2e5-43ff-ab0d-a6e69c2cceec%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24015] IMPACT EXEMPTION FOR DUPLEX FLANGES SA 182 Gr F51

Dear vish

In UCS-66 the governing thickness is important factor cause we have combination of minimum design metal temperature

 and governing thickness to the subject material. 

but in UHA-51 impact test requirement is based on the material properties and material thickness is not an essential variable . (except where noted)

UHA-51 IMPACT TESTS

Impact tests, as prescribed in (a),shall be performed

on materials listed in Table UHA-23 for all combinations

of materials and minimum design metal temperatures

(MDMTs) except as exempted in (d), (e), (f), (g), (h),or

(i). 

Best regards.

-------------------------------

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 10:59:30 AM UTC+3:30, Vish wrote:

Thanks MW,

But my question remains same that, what will be nominal thickness of duplex flanges to be consider ?
 

vish

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 2:58:57 PM UTC+5:30, MW wrote:

i guess you should use Appendix JJ, 

UHA -51(g)?

On 24 December 2015 at 13:11, VISHNU <vishnu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear sir,

I have one query regarding to above subject,

One of the definition of governing thk when using fig. UCS-66 - Governing thickness of flat non welded parts, such as bolted flanges, tubesheet and flat head is the flat component thickness divided by 4

But what about Duplex flanges ? UHA is not giving such clause, so what will be governing thickness to be consider for duplex flanges (SA 182 F51) ?

Thanks in advance

Regards

vishnu 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/e38957c7-58ab-4ad1-a378-e7a7732f8c36%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24014] Re: S.A. 2.5 surface profile

Hello,

No. Without Sand/Grit blast it is not possible to achieve Sa 2.5 cleanliness grade. This grade is only obtained by blasting with various abrasives.

Thanks,

Kiran

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 10:04:06 AM UTC+3, Jasim Ahmed wrote:

Dear experts,

I badly need to know - is it possible to create S.A. 2.5 surface profile for joint wrapping without sand blasting?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/fc28d76d-199d-4111-b1a9-0b4ed6704b6f%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24013] IMPACT EXEMPTION FOR DUPLEX FLANGES SA 182 Gr F51

Thanks MW,

But my question remains same that, what will be nominal thickness of duplex flanges to be consider ?
 

vish

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 2:58:57 PM UTC+5:30, MW wrote:

i guess you should use Appendix JJ, 

UHA -51(g)?

On 24 December 2015 at 13:11, VISHNU <vishnu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear sir,

I have one query regarding to above subject,

One of the definition of governing thk when using fig. UCS-66 - Governing thickness of flat non welded parts, such as bolted flanges, tubesheet and flat head is the flat component thickness divided by 4

But what about Duplex flanges ? UHA is not giving such clause, so what will be governing thickness to be consider for duplex flanges (SA 182 F51) ?

Thanks in advance

Regards

vishnu 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/40269871-9939-415e-8563-80b29b024ff0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24012] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Dear Azam,

Welder Qualification shall be performed by each Qualifying Organisation according to ASME Sec.IX.

Yes the previous Qualification made by the X welder before leaving the organisation will be valid by qualifying a single test coupon for that process.

 

Thanks & Regards

J.Gerald Jayakumar

0091-9344954677

---

From: Mohd Azam <azam1976@gmail.com>
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 5:48 PM
Subject: [MW:24008] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Dear Expert,

"X" welder working with company and left the organization. Again after Two or three year he is joining back same company. All earlier certificate is available with company with proper documentation.

 

Is it possible to renew his earlier certificate with one sample based on RT or visual inspection OR All new qualification is to be done New. Qualification code is ASME SEC IX.

 

Pls provide your valuable input with standard reference.

 

Thanks & Regards,

Mohd. Azam

Doha-Qatar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CABD%2BRXSMVhvN0Fje56BbuQb6V3KSYO%3Dz17%2BLtshZO1u3Vt%2Bkhg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24009] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Welder X should go for Re qualification because he left the company and he Re joined after 3 years and a welder qualification is required if he didn't welded any joint for 6 month in the same location or same company.

Sent from my ASUS

-------- Original Message --------
From:Mohd Azam
Sent:Sun, 27 Dec 2015 17:48:23 +0530
To:materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject:[MW:24008] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Dear Expert,

"X" welder working with company and left the organization. Again after Two or three year he is joining back same company. All earlier certificate is available with company with proper documentation.

 

Is it possible to renew his earlier certificate with one sample based on RT or visual inspection OR All new qualification is to be done New. Qualification code is ASME SEC IX.

 

Pls provide your valuable input with standard reference.

 

Thanks & Regards,

Mohd. Azam

Doha-Qatar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CABD%2BRXSMVhvN0Fje56BbuQb6V3KSYO%3Dz17%2BLtshZO1u3Vt%2Bkhg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/5nyt7jlpjicl3k90fgfy0h31.1451235649985%40email.android.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24009] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

He has to be qualified again since he has stopped working for a period longer than 6 months

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

From: Mohd Azam Sent: Κυριακή, 27 Δεκεμβρίου 2015 - 16:32 To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com Reply To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com Subject: [MW:24008] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Dear Expert,

"X" welder working with company and left the organization. Again after Two or three year he is joining back same company. All earlier certificate is available with company with proper documentation.

 

Is it possible to renew his earlier certificate with one sample based on RT or visual inspection OR All new qualification is to be done New. Qualification code is ASME SEC IX.

 

Pls provide your valuable input with standard reference.

 

Thanks & Regards,

Mohd. Azam

Doha-Qatar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CABD%2BRXSMVhvN0Fje56BbuQb6V3KSYO%3Dz17%2BLtshZO1u3Vt%2Bkhg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This message contains confidential information. To know more, please click on the following link: http://disclaimer.bureauveritas.com

Re: [MW:24009] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Dear you can check his continue progress record of earlier based on that will able to test with RT or bend test.

On Dec 27, 2015 8:01 PM, "Mohd Azam" <azam1976@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Expert,

"X" welder working with company and left the organization. Again after Two or three year he is joining back same company. All earlier certificate is available with company with proper documentation.

 

Is it possible to renew his earlier certificate with one sample based on RT or visual inspection OR All new qualification is to be done New. Qualification code is ASME SEC IX.

 

Pls provide your valuable input with standard reference.

 

Thanks & Regards,

Mohd. Azam

Doha-Qatar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CABD%2BRXSMVhvN0Fje56BbuQb6V3KSYO%3Dz17%2BLtshZO1u3Vt%2Bkhg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CAELgRrUiS%2BLJEYHYoZEprFufNpf2UdmmiBR-U7WLGLMweMjQHA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MW:24008] Welder Qualification as per ASME SEC IX

Dear Expert,

"X" welder working with company and left the organization. Again after Two or three year he is joining back same company. All earlier certificate is available with company with proper documentation.

 

Is it possible to renew his earlier certificate with one sample based on RT or visual inspection OR All new qualification is to be done New. Qualification code is ASME SEC IX.

 

Pls provide your valuable input with standard reference.

 

Thanks & Regards,

Mohd. Azam

Doha-Qatar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CABD%2BRXSMVhvN0Fje56BbuQb6V3KSYO%3Dz17%2BLtshZO1u3Vt%2Bkhg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24007] Iron Dilution in 70-30 Cu-Ni W.D. on P-No. 1 Base Metal.

Dear Experts,

Welding Process is GTAW- Manual. Barrier layer with 1.6 mm. Dia. ERNi-1 and subsequent two layers with 1.6 mm. Dia. ERCuNi. Preheat temp. is ambient temp. and maximum Interpass temp. is 96º C. HI for barrier layer is 1.543 KJ/ mm. Tungsten Electrode Dia. 2.5 mm. 2% thoriated, Technique String bead.

I think it is very difficult to achieve undiluted chemistry at 1 mm. from fusion. Now, my concern is client's DS are silent about undiluted chemistry. It has specified only 3 mm. 70-30 Cu-Ni W.D. and strength design of the components is done by client considering 3 mm. W.D. Client's spec. speaks that Minimum thickness of undiluted finished weld overlay from top shall be 2 mm. or as specified in the drawing. What does it mean? In MDS 3 mm. W.D. is specified means at 3 mm. from fusion line, undiluted chemistry shall be achieved?

Now, it is matter of an interpretation.   

Thanks & regards,

C. R. GANDHI

---

From: Joseph <nithindsilva4u@gmail.com>
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: [MW:24004] Iron Dilution in 70-30 Cu-Ni W.D. on P-No. 1 Base Metal.

Hi,

You have to give full details like what was the no of layers, total height of cladding and what welding process was used for PQR etc.

When doing cladding, first layer will always be diluted. In your below email you have specified that you achieved undiluted chemistry at 3mm from weld interface. And client requirement is 2mm undiluted chemistry from top. In order to achieve this your welding should be 3mm (where you have achieved undiluted chemistry + 2mm minimum (client requirement) deposition.

Sent from my iPad

On 24-Dec-2015, at 15:03, 'Prakash Hegde' via Materials & Welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Hi!

It is very difficult to achieve at 1mm from fusion line the undiluted chemistry unless you go on grinding of layers at least twice which is not a good proposal in such case you qualify the PQR with utmost precaution of overlap and heat input and  get the approval from client .

Regards

Hegde

On Wednesday, 23 December 2015 4:14 PM, Vanchinath S.A. <vanchinaths@gmail.com> wrote:

If you are analysing by spectro it should meet at 1mm. Otherwise you take chips from 1mm to 3mm and analyse the chemistry and prove it meets the requirement. In my opinion 5mm WD is required to meet 2mm undiluted weld.  Vanchinath

On 23 Dec 2015 15:52, "'CHINTUKUMAR GANDHI' via Materials & Welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Dear Experts, 

Greetings of the day. 

 I need your expert advise on an issue. In one of our project, 70-30 Cu-Ni W.D. to be done on P-No. 1 base metal. As per client's Data sheet, 3.0 mm. W.D. is specified. Accordingly we have qualified WPS to get the undiluted chemistry on 3 mm. W.D. from interface as per ASME Sec. IX. But in client's project spec. it is specified- "in case a higher deposition thickness and multiple weld layers are required to achieve the minimum specified undiluted deposit metal, the same shall be done only after taking prior approval of client. Minimum thickness of undiluted finished weld overlay from top shall be 2 mm. or as specified in the drawing. Now, my concern is shall we have to certify undiluted chemistry at 1 mm. from fusion surface considering (3 mm. required W.D. as per Data sheet - 2 mm.) or at 3 mm. viz. top surface. 

Please revert at the earliest. 

 Thanks & regards, 

 C. R. GANDHI

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/1264702308.2732768.1450865939902.JavaMail.yahoo%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CA%2B6Tn1%2BnY-QFMfxo7mMUBk0XFRATuz-LHFfff9o56Rvw%2BM9LRA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/416352862.3027078.1450955027956.JavaMail.yahoo%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/AD028C30-448C-44CC-933C-B515C65F510F%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [MW:24006] UG84.6 IMPACT SPECIMEN CLARIFICATION

Hi
Based on my previous experience I have replied.

I suggest Mr Venkatesan shall approach Client/PMC for acceptance.

With kind regards

Govindan

On 25 Dec 2015 09:52, "Joseph" <nithindsilva4u@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Govindan,

Can you please clarify, where it is stated in code that each welding process need to be covered? As per my interpretation on ASME Div 1 &2, both speaks about weld impact specimens to be taken at 1.5mm from surface. It's nowhere specified, each welding process need to be covered.

Sent from my iPad

On 22-Dec-2015, at 20:48, Perumal Govindan <perumalgovindan@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi
All 3 welding process shall be covered for impact testing.

Please confirm the joint is single vee or double vee.
In case if double vee joint what will be the welding process on back side welding or after back chipping, in case after back chipping if smaw process was used, needed to select impact test specimens for smaw and saw process.

Please note that sub size specimens will also be acceptable with subsequent temp. reduction.

Answer for your query: No,  3 welding process impact test specimens are required for acceptance if no back chipping was carried out.

With kind regards
Govindan

On 22 Dec 2015 19:52, "venkat guru" <g.venkatesan06@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

Code: ASME VIII

Condition : PQR/PTC completed with combination of 3 welding process

During testing,  impact test specimen taken as per UG84 but 2 welding process not covered due to some reason
(I.e) all 10x10x55 specimen only cover one process out of 3 process.

After impact testing,  all results are accepted.

Now, Is these accepted results applicable only for tested one process or initial 3 process?

pls reply with appropriate justification

Thanks
Venkatesan
g.venkatesan06@gmail.com
+65 84392538

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CACoj_XSc7xw8F-RyXStsw5iT0WX5EYvg5DiB6GRBsM8gcbYmCg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CANiuf9dTHp_rhW6NtZiHykTFDQPwyHRu3hWD1d-e%3DQ98kHx_fA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/E61C76D8-3089-4482-92C0-40A1661F1E56%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CANiuf9dj3ySnj3bJvxk17Aew3v545XtG-oKwK4S87001VkiV5w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.