Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations IDS on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Category D Joint - Bevel

Status
Not open for further replies.

10000psi

Mechanical
Jan 16, 2009
12
We have a subcontractor fabricating our vessels. I noticed that, a hillside(offset)nozzle has inside bevel on one half and outside bevel on other half. I had not seen it before in other shops. It is not double bevel, but it is inside bevel on one half and outside bevel on other half. Is is allowed by code to have two different bevels on one nozzle? I could not see satisfying figure on code. Please help.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

10000psi, is this a set-on nozzle? Is it a full penetration detail?

I'd guess that if the former, the inside bevel is on the "crotch" or "uphill" side. Nozzle is possibly welded out before the opening is cut.

If a full-pen detail otherwise meeting Code requirements, I doubt it would matter much how it is beveled. I'd want assurance that where the two bevels meet a sound, full penetration weld is achieved.

Regards,

Mike




The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
 
Where is the approved detail drawing?, check it with your contractor.

Regards
r6155
 
Hi Mike,

It is a set through nozzle requiring full penetration weld. What the fabricator claims is it meets the other code requirements. A particular example I saw in their shop shows, enough room for a full penetration weld. But, it is always possible to have less than full penetration weld at the transition of inside and outside bevel. My major concern here is such configuration is not part of the Code's 'some acceptable weld' figures and I do not see them addressed anywhere. That does not automatically prohibit, but is is acceptable by Code?


r6155,
their drawing in fact shows the both bevels ;)
 
10000psi, I can only assume the fabricator is doing this for access to make the welds.

I still think it is acceptable, provided a sound, full penetration weld is achieved, 100%. I'd be less concerned about the transition if it were double welded.

Regards,

Mike

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
 
It's acceptable by Code if the weld meets the design and weld details per the wps used.
 
See UW-16 (d) sketch (j) and restrictions in UW-2

Regards
r6155
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor