Materials & Welding

If the ultimate design strength is within 60ksi you can use it. Normally in structural welding using root and hot with 6013 and others with 7018. No code saying don't use such matters. Like don't use 6013 or should use only 7018 except particular company standard. Wth regards Maharaja Elavarasan Welding inspector Cswip 3.1 ASNT LEVEL II ( PT, MT, RT, UT, VT, RTFI) Internal auditor iso 9001:2008 From: TDK YOKESH Sent: ‎30-‎11-‎2016 13:50 To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [MW:25780] Limits of E6013 in pressure vessel (sec viii div 1) E7018 (basic electrode ) is recommended as it satisfies the mechanical properties than E6013 . If the joint is not going to experience any mechanical load nor and NDT you can go for it . I am not sure if code says about the electrode to be used . On 30 Nov 2016 3:26 p.m., "Prasad Rode" < purode333@gmail.com > wrote: Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 ele...

Hello Expert,     I have to develop  Procedure Qualification for  AISE 4130 to P1 material, no PWHT and also to meet NACE requirements.   I feel that buttering process GTAW/SMAW using ER 70 S2 and E7018.  Initially Buttering with 7018 both the bevel and joint fit-up and continue buttering process.   Do you have any comment?   Bala Nechur,  

What is the base material of pressure vessel? Sent from my iPhone On Nov 30, 2016, at 14:55, dilintas < dilintas@gmail.com > wrote: The Asme Code is not a hand book, so you will no find any restrictions in Section VIII-1. However the Code says that you have to match the properties of the base metal Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. -------- Original message -------- From: Prasad Rode < purode333@gmail.com > Date: 30/11/2016 09:52 (GMT+02:00) To: Materials & Welding < materials-welding@googlegroups.com > Subject: [MW:25779] Limits of E6013 in pressure vessel (sec viii div 1) Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 electrode. Is any where given in code of sec viii div 1, about limits of E6013, or only E7018 is allow. Regards Prasad Rode -- http://www.linkedin.com/groups/MaterialsWelding-122787?home=&gid=122787&trk=...

Hi, It is either 6013 or 7018 - whatever it may be, you have to establish a WPS and then qualify the PQR - If all the particulars (mechanical, chemical and etc.) are complying to the specifications and to client requirements in the established PQR - then there will not be any issue of using any consumable. Or... If your client specification has called for any specific requirement of the electrode (say E 7018) then u have to qualify the PQR with that only. Or... If you have any constrain in using any electrode (practical problem, approach, easiness in welding, weld metal deposition rates, any power source limitations, any specific NDT requirement and many more particulars) then also, you may opt for 7018 or any other grade to suit requirement - But in and overall - you have to qualify the PQR with all the variables... Hope u understand... Thanks & Regards, Lakshman Kumar B, Project Manager. Navayuga Engineering Company LTD Corp Off: Plot no 379,...

The Asme Code is not a hand book, so you will no find any restrictions in Section VIII-1. However the Code says that you have to match the properties of the base metal Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. -------- Original message -------- From: Prasad Rode <purode333@gmail.com> Date: 30/11/2016 09:52 (GMT+02:00) To: Materials & Welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com> Subject: [MW:25779] Limits of E6013 in pressure vessel (sec viii div 1) Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 electrode. Is any where given in code of sec viii div 1, about limits of E6013, or only E7018 is allow. Regards Prasad Rode -- 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...

what is material specification THANKS & BEST REGARDS, KG.PANDITHAN, IWE,  AWS-CWI, CSWIP 3.1, CONSULTANT-WELDING & QUALITY Mobile no: +919940739349 On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Prasad Rode < purode333@gmail.com > wrote: This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! ( purode333@gmail.com ) Add cleanup rule | More info Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 electrode. Is any where given in code of sec viii div 1, about limits of E6013, or only E7018 is allow. Regards Prasad Rode -- 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 ...

E7018 (basic electrode ) is recommended as it satisfies the mechanical properties than E6013 . If the joint is not going to experience any mechanical load nor and NDT you can go for it . I am not sure if code says about the electrode to be used . On 30 Nov 2016 3:26 p.m., "Prasad Rode" < purode333@gmail.com > wrote: Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 electrode. Is any where given in code of sec viii div 1, about limits of E6013, or only E7018 is allow. Regards Prasad Rode -- 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....

What is the base material grade ? Regards Prem Nautiyal  Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. -------- Original message -------- From: Prasad Rode <purode333@gmail.com> Date: 30/11/2016 13:22 (GMT+05:30) To: Materials & Welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com> Subject: [MW:25779] Limits of E6013 in pressure vessel (sec viii div 1) Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 electrode. Is any where given in code of sec viii div 1, about limits of E6013, or only E7018 is allow. Regards Prasad Rode -- 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 uns...

Dear sir, In fabrication of pressure vessel from 10mm thk plate, would we allow to use E6013 electrode. Is any where given in code of sec viii div 1, about limits of E6013, or only E7018 is allow. Regards Prasad Rode -- 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 . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/4e2ec747-1d48-40dd-a8de-522e133423bd%40goo...

Are we talking about position or progression? Please clarify.... 2016-11-29 5:03 GMT+02:00 Mohit Aggarwal < aggarwalmohit05@gmail.com > : Dear Sir, It states of PQR is qualified with 1G position then it will qualify for all positions, if there is no impact requirements in job and wps can be used for all positions for non impact requirement. And if PQR is qualified for 1G position and if we will have to support it with impact requirement job , then WPS will be used for 1G position only. With impact PQR should be qualified in either 3G in case of plate and In 5G or 6G in case of pipe to qualify all positions with impact requirement. Regards, Mohit Aggarwal. Sr. Engineer-Welding. On Mar 25, 2014 4:16 PM, "Anban" < gane2478@hotmail.sg > wrote: Dear Experts Position only a Supplementary essential variable (ie when CVN-Impact test required). QW-405.2 A change from any position to the vertical position uphill progression. Vertical‐uphill progression (e.g., ...

Hi Prince, As Interpass temperature is essential variable for your Client; then keep your interpass temperature as 68 + 55°C ie 123°C as addressed in ASME Sec IX. Aly On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Prince C thomas < princecthomas@gmail.com > wrote: Dear Sir's, Kindly reply to  my below query: We have project approved WPS with following details: Material Spec: ASTM A106 Gr.B P no:1/Group no:1 Material thickness: 1.5 -14.22 mm Welding process: GTAW+SMAW GTAW-Filler wire : ER 70S-2 SMAW-Electrode: E 7018 Preheat - 10 deg minimum Interpass temp: 200 Deg C Maximum In the PQR: pre heat temperature:38 deg C                   Interpass temperature: 68 deg C maximum Since interpass temperature is not a essential variable (Impact test is not applicable); but still our client is asking to recheck the max.interpass temperature value ( 200 Deg C) in the WPS. How to convince client to get approval on the same? -- http://www.linkedin.com/ groups/MaterialsWelding- 122787?home=...

Dear sir, Refer to QW-406.8 of ASME sect. IX. An increase in the maximum interpass temperature of more than 56degC from that achieved on the test coupon and record on the PQR. In your PQR, interpass is 68degC. So, max.interpass is 68+55 = 123degC. Regards Kurniatullah sirajudin -- 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 . To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/...

As far as non essential variable is concern and impact is not required interpass is ok but if client have some requirement mention in their specifications then that should be followed and as thk range 1.5 to 14.22 mm is concerned interpass can be 150 degree also. Regards, Mohit Aggarwal. On Nov 29, 2016 8:04 AM, "Prince C thomas" < princecthomas@gmail.com > wrote: Dear Sir's, Kindly reply to  my below query: We have project approved WPS with following details: Material Spec: ASTM A106 Gr.B P no:1/Group no:1 Material thickness: 1.5 -14.22 mm Welding process: GTAW+SMAW GTAW-Filler wire : ER 70S-2 SMAW-Electrode: E 7018 Preheat - 10 deg minimum Interpass temp: 200 Deg C Maximum In the PQR: pre heat temperature:38 deg C                   Interpass temperature: 68 deg C maximum Since interpass temperature is not a essential variable (Impact test is not applicable); but still our client is asking to recheck the max.interpass temperature value ( 200 Deg C) in the WPS...

Sir If client spec addresses the IP temp restriction we have to follow the same Generaly.some of the clients are particular about IP.Heat input as.it controls the properties of weld.Haz Therefore it is better to follow to avoid any any further argument with client  Hegde Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Mon, 28 Nov, 2016 at 22:47, Prince C thomas <princecthomas@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Sir's, Kindly reply to  my below query: We have project approved WPS with following details: Material Spec: ASTM A106 Gr.B P no:1/Group no:1 Material thickness: 1.5 -14.22 mm Welding process: GTAW+SMAW GTAW-Filler wire : ER 70S-2 SMAW-Electrode: E 7018 Preheat - 10 deg minimum Interpass temp: 200 Deg C Maximum In the PQR: pre heat temperature:38 deg C                   Interpass temperature: 68 deg C maximum Since interpass temperature is not a essential variable (Impact test is not applicable); but still our client is asking to recheck t...

Dear Sir, It states of PQR is qualified with 1G position then it will qualify for all positions, if there is no impact requirements in job and wps can be used for all positions for non impact requirement. And if PQR is qualified for 1G position and if we will have to support it with impact requirement job , then WPS will be used for 1G position only. With impact PQR should be qualified in either 3G in case of plate and In 5G or 6G in case of pipe to qualify all positions with impact requirement. Regards, Mohit Aggarwal. Sr. Engineer-Welding. On Mar 25, 2014 4:16 PM, "Anban" < gane2478@hotmail.sg > wrote: Dear Experts Position only a Supplementary essential variable (ie when CVN-Impact test required). QW-405.2 A change from any position to the vertical position uphill progression. Vertical‐uphill progression (e.g., 3G, 5G, or 6G position) qualifies for all positions. In uphill progression, a change from stringer bead to weave bead. This variable does not ap...

Dear Siraj, Yes, it was changed. Please refer to the attached. Regards, Sathish K Cswip3.1, API510 Jazan, KSA. On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Mohd Siraj < mohd52100@gmail.com > wrote: DEAR ALL, REFER API 570 2009 VERSION AND API570 FEB2016 VERSION, SHORT TERM CORROSION FORMULA IS CHANGED?? AS PER API-570 2009, ST=       t previos -tactual                -------------------------         time (years) t previous-t actual AS PER API-570 2016, ST=           t inital -t actual               -----------------------------         time (years) t previos-t actual  pl confirm this change in equation. -- 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 Gro...

Dear Sir's, Kindly reply to  my below query: We have project approved WPS with following details: Material Spec: ASTM A106 Gr.B P no:1/Group no:1 Material thickness: 1.5 -14.22 mm Welding process: GTAW+SMAW GTAW-Filler wire : ER 70S-2 SMAW-Electrode: E 7018 Preheat - 10 deg minimum Interpass temp: 200 Deg C Maximum In the PQR: pre heat temperature:38 deg C                   Interpass temperature: 68 deg C maximum Since interpass temperature is not a essential variable (Impact test is not applicable); but still our client is asking to recheck the max.interpass temperature value ( 200 Deg C) in the WPS. How to convince client to get approval on the same? -- 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...

in ASME Code context For Procedure qualification Vertical up or down is an nonessential variable. Impact is not an issue since it is not a supplementary essential variable. For Performance qualification it is an essential variable.  If you read QW-405.3 in ASME IX, you will find out that: 1.impact is not an issue at all 2. A change on progression requires requalification of performance except for the cover pass and the root pass if the later is removed 2016-11-28 14:21 GMT+02:00 Kannayeram Gnanapandithan < kgpandithan@gmail.com > : When impact is there, 3G Uphill qualify all positions On 28-Nov-2016 8:16 am, "George Dilintas" < dilintas@gmail.com > wrote: Where did you read in ASME that Uphill qualifies Downhill? 2016-11-25 10:17 GMT+02:00 raiyan bahrin < raiyanbahrin1993@gmail.com > :   Hi, i want to ask what is the difference between uphill and downhill in ASME IX and API 1104 ? The second question is why the ASME IX qualified uphill a...

When impact is there, 3G Uphill qualify all positions On 28-Nov-2016 8:16 am, "George Dilintas" < dilintas@gmail.com > wrote: Where did you read in ASME that Uphill qualifies Downhill? 2016-11-25 10:17 GMT+02:00 raiyan bahrin < raiyanbahrin1993@gmail.com > :   Hi, i want to ask what is the difference between uphill and downhill in ASME IX and API 1104 ? The second question is why the ASME IX qualified uphill and downhill as uphill not qualified API 1104 downhill .    Thank you and hope get answer...hehehehee -- 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....

residual stresses are usually tensile stresses. This would be the case when residual stresses were compressive ones. 2016-11-28 12:32 GMT+02:00 Alan Denney < alan@denney1.freeserve.co.uk > : PWHT can open up lack of fusion defects which were held closed prior to PWHT by the residual stresses (and were transparent to UT). Final acceptance is based on the article in its finished condition. NDT before PWHT is carried out so that repairs on the defects detected at that stage are cleared at that stage.   Alan Denney AKD Materials Consulting Ltd From: materials-welding@ googlegroups.com [mailto: materials-welding@ googlegroups.com ] On Behalf Of Zakaria ghrab Sent: 28 November 2016 08:52 To: materials-welding@ googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [MW:25766] Heat treatment impact on defect   In that case what'is the  advantage to perform NDE after PWHT.   Thank you.   2016-11-27 15:49 GMT-01:00 George Dilintas < dilintas@gmail.com >: Not at all unless you "burn" it   2...