Materials & Welding

Dear Mr. Anand, You can do it but it is advisable as a good engg. practice to get the UT done before welding to ensure free from cracks, lamination or segregations. Thanks & regards, C. R. GANDHI On Wednesday, March 29, 2023 at 08:51:01 AM GMT+5:30, Anand Mathur <anand.mathur16@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Experts, In imergency can we get welding done, skipping lamination examination by ut? can it be cover up by complete ut examination after welding? Please let me know. Thanks and regards, Anand -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- 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+...

Dear Experts, In imergency can we get welding done, skipping lamination examination by ut? can it be cover up by complete ut examination after welding? Please let me know. Thanks and regards, Anand -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CAHh2n5MEUcY3GwwW1nBcyhg4sfQa2%3DEprW%3D9Wa40Nzam0tvzJw%40mail.gmail.com .

Hi Simple, Get the hydrotest package flow chart and follow the requirements. In other way plenty of requirements from procedure to til re instatement On Tue, 28 Mar 2023, 13:43 Vishal Jaiswal, < vis469jaiswal70@gmail.com > wrote: Dear All, Please give suggestions about hydro testing  Like what points check in it. -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CAF6t40-O1%2BBxM1ubaDsXBUxes3rYnwc1ExKUH_zenWpCtSJ1DQ%40mail.gmail.com . -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- You received this message because you are subscribed t...

Dear All, Please give suggestions about hydro testing  Like what points check in it. -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CAF6t40-O1%2BBxM1ubaDsXBUxes3rYnwc1ExKUH_zenWpCtSJ1DQ%40mail.gmail.com .

Hi,  You are correct, Minimum refers to the one cycle for which this part will expose until final work shop PWHT. hence mill test certificate shall include this.  Max. SPWHT, refers to additional cycles of heat treatment that are reserved for future repairs during equipment lifetime.  Again, these simulated no. Of cycles shall be specified in MTC.  The idea is we need to make sure that steel mechanical properties are not compromised upon exposure to multiple repairs (i e 4 cycles in your case).  One could say, if steel is subjected to 4 cycles and is ok, then it should by defacto be good for one cycle, yet, this is wrong assumption cause mechanical problems and microstructure of materials varies accordingly based on no. Of cycles for which material will expose. This is apparent in alloy steel and especially for impact test values as an example.  In your case, this forged CS with properties before PWHT can be understood to be " as forged" condition (i.e. Wit...

Hi  Client has required 4 cycle for SA266 GR4N, They requested the certificate shall included all required test at both conditions, min and max simulated PWHT Cycles, Our forging mill has issued MTC with mechanical property, before PWHT and after PWHT But they commented " test after SPWHT performed after 4 cycles(max condition-i think after 4 times we mentioned the result as after SPWHT) and missing test after min condition"(I think there is missing test result of min SPWHT condition) Could anyone give us idea how to solve this issue and what test result shall be added  Can we say min and max SPWHT? We performed 4 times of SPWHT as client's request..  what you guys think min SPWHT condition? Regards, ham -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving e...

Good day friends. The marks are uniform derived from forming process. If material is fatigue prone this can prove dangerous. An Ultrasonic examination can be done on visually predominant marks to find any discontinuities. Hydro test is good. Crack propagation point of view need to be analysed for useful time. Mohan Ananthanarayanan Retd QA Mechanical ISRO On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 8:30 AM 'james gerald' via Materials & Welding < materials-welding@googlegroups.com > wrote: just to add. 1. Minimum and maximum thickness to be checked and verified with Design requirement for both vessel subjected to External pressure and Internal Pressure. 2. According to ASME Sec.VIII Div.I, there is no surface roughness requirement for UCS section except for UCI & UCD.  ( Believe this is carbonm steel vessel DE made of SA105 or SA350LF2 and is paintedmcorrect me if I am wrong). 3. According to ASME Sec.IIA, there is no surface requirements for SA 105 or SA 350LF2, except for SA 182 fo...

just to add. 1. Minimum and maximum thickness to be checked and verified with Design requirement for both vessel subjected to External pressure and Internal Pressure. 2. According to ASME Sec.VIII Div.I, there is no surface roughness requirement for UCS section except for UCI & UCD.  ( Believe this is carbonm steel vessel DE made of SA105 or SA350LF2 and is paintedmcorrect me if I am wrong). 3. According to ASME Sec.IIA, there is no surface requirements for SA 105 or SA 350LF2, except for SA 182 forgings as per snap shot below. "> Please consult your AI for further requirements. Thanks & Regards J.Gerald Jayakumar On Thursday, 23 March, 2023 at 01:18:48 pm IST, 'james gerald' via Materials & Welding <materials-welding@googlegroups.com> wrote: Perform a thickness check and verify it ...

Not accept They have been used to  wrong method to get disc shaping hammering or pressing On 23 Mar 2023 13:18, "'james gerald' via Materials & Welding" < materials-welding@googlegroups.com > wrote: Perform a thickness check and verify it meets design requirement and consult AI Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 at 9:26, ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com < ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com > wrote: Hi,  One of our pressure vessel manufacturer recently supplied Oil and Gas separator having distinct forming marks on dish ends. Supplier claims that those marks are aesthetic and do not hamper vessel performance. Photo is attached herewith.  Being the end user we are not in position to make final decision whether to accept the pressure vessel with distinct marks on dish ends and put under operation or not. The pressure vessel is designed as per ASME sec VIII Div I and vessel is U Stamped. The vessel is hydro tested and holds good. ASME inspect...

hi expert   could we weld API 5L GrB with API 5L X65  We have API 5L GrB : thick 17.05 and API 5L X65 : thick 14.27 please expert i need response with reference to standard  -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/b661d541-2b3c-422c-9097-a1fcdd5b10dcn%40googlegroups.com .

I think 3rd Party Who released this Vessel must be contacted to confirmed their out put. It end surface area shall be smooth.  On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, 08:25 Vasagan Balaji, < 7vasagan@gmail.com > wrote: In 22 years of experience, Myself alone inspected more than 1k U stamped pressure vessels but never encountered as such enclosed. Strange ! Better to consult some reputed third party agencies. On Thu, 23 Mar, 2023, 9:26 am , < ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com > wrote: Hi,  One of our pressure vessel manufacturer recently supplied Oil and Gas separator having distinct forming marks on dish ends. Supplier claims that those marks are aesthetic and do not hamper vessel performance. Photo is attached herewith.  Being the end user we are not in position to make final decision whether to accept the pressure vessel with distinct marks on dish ends and put under operation or not. The pressure vessel is designed as per ASME sec VIII Div I and vessel is U Stamped. The vessel is hydro tested and...

Dear experts, I would like to ask regarding these four materials if the two listed below are equivalent and able to use the same WPS. 1. LH690-40 vs S690QL 2. LH355-40 vs S355J2 Thank you. -- https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787 --- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/f64ab7b5-62cf-46be-96c1-086e3ab4ad8fn%40googlegroups.com .

Perform a thickness check and verify it meets design requirement and consult AI Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 at 9:26, ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com <ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com> wrote: Hi,  One of our pressure vessel manufacturer recently supplied Oil and Gas separator having distinct forming marks on dish ends. Supplier claims that those marks are aesthetic and do not hamper vessel performance. Photo is attached herewith.  Being the end user we are not in position to make final decision whether to accept the pressure vessel with distinct marks on dish ends and put under operation or not. The pressure vessel is designed as per ASME sec VIII Div I and vessel is U Stamped. The vessel is hydro tested and holds good. ASME inspector has not commented anything on forming marks or pressing marks in their release note.  Please guide should we accept it or to ask supplier to rectify the same or any section of ASME code confirms non acceptance of sam...

Ameer Basha, In my entire experience of the pressure vessel manufacturing industry and being a Sr.Design Engineer as well, I never ever witnessed such a strange bulge on any head. Seems It's straight away not ACCEPTABLE.  However, further I am not aware about the vessel design conditions but yes if external pressure is present for this vessel then AI always ask to check and witness the head curvature with allowable maximum deviation & chord length. (Attached below reference image from my one of the project) On top of it, even we as EPC contractors always ask vendors to submit their "Head forming procedure" to understand whether they are going to form the head by HOT or Cold way. There are few vendors who follow the COLD forming way & also it depends on thickness but never ever saw such visible bulge on it.  Further check of Head forming also takes place in ITP e.g. If Extreme fiber elongation exceeds then, Heat treatment, PWHT involve and production test coupon, p...

In 22 years of experience, Myself alone inspected more than 1k U stamped pressure vessels but never encountered as such enclosed. Strange ! Better to consult some reputed third party agencies. On Thu, 23 Mar, 2023, 9:26 am , < ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com > wrote: Hi,  One of our pressure vessel manufacturer recently supplied Oil and Gas separator having distinct forming marks on dish ends. Supplier claims that those marks are aesthetic and do not hamper vessel performance. Photo is attached herewith.  Being the end user we are not in position to make final decision whether to accept the pressure vessel with distinct marks on dish ends and put under operation or not. The pressure vessel is designed as per ASME sec VIII Div I and vessel is U Stamped. The vessel is hydro tested and holds good. ASME inspector has not commented anything on forming marks or pressing marks in their release note.  Please guide should we accept it or to ask supplier to rectify the same or any section of AS...

not acceptable if they have done spinning after progressive pressing, these would disappear. it will be stress raisers in operation. THANKS & BEST REGARDS, KG.PANDITHAN, BE, IWE,  CSWIP 3.1, ISO 9712 Level 2 in VT, ASNT-Level II in PT,MT,RT & UT, LA ISO 9001-2015, International Welding Engineer.  CONSULTANT-WELDING & QUALITY Mobile no: +919940739349 On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:26 AM < ameerbashasheikh@gmail.com > wrote: Hi,  One of our pressure vessel manufacturer recently supplied Oil and Gas separator having distinct forming marks on dish ends. Supplier claims that those marks are aesthetic and do not hamper vessel performance. Photo is attached herewith.  Being the end user we are not in position to make final decision whether to accept the pressure vessel with distinct marks on dish ends and put under operation or not. The pressure vessel is designed as per ASME sec VIII Div I and vessel is U Stamped. The vessel is hydro tested and holds good. ASME inspector has not...

Hi,  One of our pressure vessel manufacturer recently supplied Oil and Gas separator having distinct forming marks on dish ends. Supplier claims that those marks are aesthetic and do not hamper vessel performance. Photo is attached herewith.  Being the end user we are not in position to make final decision whether to accept the pressure vessel with distinct marks on dish ends and put under operation or not. The pressure vessel is designed as per ASME sec VIII Div I and vessel is U Stamped. The vessel is hydro tested and holds good. ASME inspector has not commented anything on forming marks or pressing marks in their release note.  Please guide should we accept it or to ask supplier to rectify the same or any section of ASME code confirms non acceptance of same in pressure vessel.  Regards,  Ameer Basha  Sent from my iPhone

it is not 321+321 joints ( if use TIG, 321 can be used,but if we use SMAW, for same combination,  we have to use only 347.. it is a 304 +321.  On Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 3:22 PM 'james gerald' via Materials & Welding < materials-welding@googlegroups.com > wrote: Snap shot of API RP 582 below recommends either 308 or 347 but it is for SMAW process. ER321 can be used for TIG welding and that is the idea behind the mail. New introduction. Thanks & Regards J.Gerald Jayakumar On Wednesday, 22 March, 2023 at 10:05:41 am IST, Kannayeram Gnanapandithan < kgpandithan@gmail.com > wrote: For Dissimilar 304 +321, what is the problem in using 308L THANKS & BEST REGARDS, KG.PANDITHAN, BE, IWE,  CSWIP 3.1, ISO 9712 Level 2 in VT, ASNT-Level II in PT,MT,RT & UT, LA ISO 9001-2015, International Welding...

I think no any problem for using 308L... On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 10:05 AM Kannayeram Gnanapandithan < kgpandithan@gmail.com > wrote: For Dissimilar 304 +321, what is the problem in using 308L THANKS & BEST REGARDS, KG.PANDITHAN, BE, IWE,  CSWIP 3.1, ISO 9712 Level 2 in VT, ASNT-Level II in PT,MT,RT & UT, LA ISO 9001-2015, International Welding Engineer.  CONSULTANT-WELDING & QUALITY Mobile no: +919940739349 On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 9:08 AM 'james gerald' via Materials & Welding < materials-welding@googlegroups.com > wrote: Suitable for TIG with  Inert Gases. Shielding with Inert gas prevents the Titanium from reacting. Thanks & Regards J.Gerald Jayakumar On Tuesday, 21 March, 2023 at 01:06:36 pm IST, Mohd Siraj < mohd52100@gmail.com > wrote: AWS A5.9 ER347 is best, AW...

Snap shot of API RP 582 below recommends either 308 or 347 but it is for SMAW process. ER321 can be used for TIG welding and that is the idea behind the mail. New introduction. "> "> Thanks & Regards J.Gerald Jayakumar On Wednesday, 22 March, 2023 at 10:05:41 am IST, Kannayeram Gnanapandithan <kgpandithan@gmail.com> wrote: For Dissimilar 304 +321, what is the problem in using 308L THANKS & BEST REGARDS, KG.PANDITHAN, BE, IWE,  CSWIP 3.1, ISO 9712 Level 2 in VT, ASNT-Level II in PT,MT,RT & UT, LA ISO 9001-2015, International Welding Engineer.  CONSULTANT-WELDING & QUALITY Mobile no: +919940739349 On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 9:08 AM 'james gerald' via Materials & Welding < materials-welding@googlegroups.com > wrote: Suitable for TIG with  Inert Gases. Shielding with ...