ASME U & R Stamp Scopes 1

[moeedalam01]

We have been working on a project of designing of a 250 MMSCFD Gas Processing Plant.....the plant has various process units such as Amine Unit, Dehydration Unit, LPG Recovery Unit etc. We have procured Amine Absorber Column which is now on site. The Column is designed and fabricated as per ASME Sect. VIII Div. 1 and Sect. IX and is U Stamped. Now during our site inspection of the column before installation, we observed that two cleats (shell attachments for platform support) were damaged during shipment. For installation the contractor has cut off the damaged cleats but only left its base plate which was attached with the shell. I want to know that whether this is the case for an R Stamping or not?

I am also confused whether the repairs will be as per NBIC or API 510? Please elaborate also.

Please also distinguish b/w the scope of U Stamping and R Stamping and their relation with NBIC and API 510....

any reference or literature support will be very much helpful.....

Detailed response will be heartly appreciated.....

Thanks in advance.....

 

[metengr]

Either API 510 or the NBIC can be used for weld repairs or alterations to the vessel. ASME U-stamp is only for new construction, signifying the vessel was designed and fabricated, and completed (hydrostatically tested and stamped) per ASME Section VIII, Div 1. Once the vessel is completed, subsequent weld repairs are under the NBIC or API 510, either code works.

 

[metengr]

I might add....The R-Stamp is only permitted when using the NBIC and the repair organization has a valid, National Board Certificate of Authorization for Repairs to Boiler and Pressure Vessels.

 

[moeedalam01]

Thanks metengr....

What would be a preferred solution for my problem...???

 

[moeedalam01]

Also, I discussed with my colleagues that if non-pressure parts (such as platform cleats etc.) of a column or pressure vessel require repairs..... will we need to have an R Stamp for repairs or not?

 

[metengr]

If petrochemical, I would use AI 510. If other, use the NBIC. Yes, I would require a contractor having a NB Certificate for an R-Stamp repair.

 

[Duwe6]

"If petrochemical, I would use API 510. If other, use the NBIC".
Exactly. And make d@mn sure that there is an Inspector involved during the entire process, including material specification & purchasing, and design of attachment(s). API-510 or AI, for API-510 or NBIC work [respectively].

 

[racookpe1978]

But it sounds like the contractor cut off the cleat, but left the base plate.

As a devil's advocate, does the repair to the cleat (above the baseplate weld-to-pressure-vessel weld) still require the R stamp?

 

[chicopee]

I don't think it requires a R stamp since welding would be done on the non pressure part of the base plate of the cleat. A picture of the remaining part of the cleat would help in this determination.

 

[metengr]

Regardless, using a contractor with an R-Certificate would at least provide a minimum level of competency with regard to welding versus taking your chances.

 

[jte]

I agree with metengr's wisdom of using an R stamp holder to perform the work.

As to whether or not this would be a code boundary repair, I'd lean towards siding with chicopee with "no". I'm envisioning what to me is a "typical" platform clip (ok, "cleat") which is either full-pen welded to the shell with fillets or simply has double fillets. If the clips were cut far enough from the shell such that the repair butt weld (my assumption) of the new clip material to the existing stub is roughly 1" (ok, 25mm since I sense this one's overseas, perhaps on a northwest shelf job) away from the shell, then I'd argue vigorously that this is not a Code / NBIC / 510 issue. If it's close enough such that the HAZ would extend to the shell, then I'd say it is a job which shall be overseen by an AI, most likely with paperwork but no R stamp.