Search results for query: *

I need some help finding a machine that can weld from root to cap in a piperack with limited space . this machine should be able to produce a x ray quality weld under the following conditions ; bevel-approx 30 deg. ; gap- approx 1/8 " ; hi lo- approx 1/16" the pipe size will vary from 4" Std...

Thanks very much for your response gr2vessels , what you expressed is exactly what i thought was the case . i am looking for a little further clarification , when you say that every pressure containing component must be inspected as per the ASME code requirements I understand the concept , what...

I have a question on code requirements for welding pipe components that form the internals of a Section VIII vessel . What is the code of construction (if any ) for the welding of pressure retaining piping components that form part of the internal workings of a Section VIII vessel . If you can...

on this issue , can anyone explain to me why the efficency of the actual process is never taken into account or at least approximated in the calculation ?

thanks for asking metenger , here are the #'s , we have a 30 " forged fitting with .375 W.T. The damaged area can best be described as an indentation about 12 " in diameter (parabola shaped ) that is roughly .300 " deep at the center . i have looked at ASME B16.9 but don't see anything i can...

agreed rneil , and generally thats what i would do as well , this piece however is 30 " with a W.T. of 2.25" so i need to butter it and be able to stand behind the decision. thanks for the help metenger .

we have a piece of A106 B pipe that has damage on the bevelled end . we are working under B31.3 Normal Service , where would i look to find the appropriate code section that allows me to 'butter ' the bevelled end to correct the gap before welding the joint ? thanks

we have a fitting built under B16.9 , our code of construction is B31.3 normal service . the fitting (30 " elbow )has been damaged (don't know how and don't care ). can someone please tell me where i can look to find if the deflection measured now renders the fitting usable or headed for the...

weldtek i am glad you mentioned "We sometimes 'seal' the joint " that is the crux of this issue as far as i am concerned . the procedure we are using calls for a GMAW " 'seal' (can be done with or without backing -as usual ) , THEN followed by a SAW pass(es )because the SAW requires backing ...

thanks weld tek , i think my question is more along the lines of doesnt the backing have to be contigous ? ie; does 2 pieces of plate butted together that you can see daylight thru qualify as backing underSection IX?

thanks weldtek , my understanding of backing has always been that the backing has to be CONTIGUOUS . ( as in continous within the boundary ) , if this definition is applied , then 2 plates butted together cant qualify as backing for the SAW portion . what do you think ?

thanks joe , it seems that i havent done a good job of explaining the crux of the problem (if there even is a problem !)i agree totally that weld material is useable as backing and (weld with backing) is what we do when we back gouge and weld from the BACKSIDE , no question on this at all . my...

it's 2 pieces of 7/16 plate butted together ,they are forming a wall in a 120 ft dia. tank. they both have the tiniest beveled edge on them ( bevelled @60* included angle making it a single Vee groove ). so it isnt an issue of needing a backing bar unclesyd, there is lots of meat there to ACT...

Thanks QAFitz , i kind of think its skirting around Section IX myself but i just don't know if its an ' indictable ' offence .

i need some guidance .every one knows it's common practice in tank building/vessel manufacture to weld from one side ,backgouge then weld from the other side (following Section IX welder and welding procedure requirements ) . my question is this ; if the procedure being used calls for the SAW...

Thanks pipewelder , i thought i had this nailed , however i am glad you responded . i understand that procedure and performance qualification are different animals , however my confusion is this ;Welder 'A' is in possession of procedure qualification card which allows him to weld 'max to be...

Thanks again Metengr , i put job test in quotes on purpose . your answer to the second part of my question is very clear . With respect to the first part ,would it be fair to say that if we (the company i work for ) dont document a procedure on a form ( for simplicity ; the suggested one in...

Thanks again folks , i have another related question , we are using 4 different welding procedures (all properly approved ) on this particular job . Two of these are F3/F4. the difference is qualified thickness /preheat and postweld heat treatment requirements . the welders have PQR cards that...

Fair enough , didnt want to cherry pick , just wish the table read < 1/2 and >/= 1/2 , instead of ALL ,thanks for the info . sf

Thanks Weldtek , the problem i am having with your reasoning is this , 452.1 (b) say Max to be welded not max allowed by procedure .(obviously you can only use the thickness qualified on the procedure ). This is the crux of the issue , read individually these clauses are easy , makeing them...