Internal Baffle Welding to Pressure Boundary

[Outlaw500]

I'm designing a vessel with SA-240 304L and a SA-240 304L internal baffle.

I have the weld detail called out for a 3" on 6" pattern staggered both sides. Our customer would like it fully welded both sides. Is there any code reason why a 3" on 6" pattern both sides is not acceptable?

3" on 6" is acceptable for vacuum rings etc.

Thanks!

 

[metengr]

There is no code requirement that describes the specific method of attachment for an internal baffle. If the customer wants continuous welds and is willing to pay for it, do it.

 

[Duwe6]

Concur with metengr. Do it any that makes good enginering sense. Section VIII is silent on baffles, except that proper welding practices & filler, and a certified welder & WPS must be used. You, as the Engineer-of-Record, have the responsibility to do the eng. calc's to justify your decision. Otherwise, "the skys the limit"

 

[Outlaw500]

Thanks for the input.

Looks like we are going to get the customer to pay for the extra work involved. I can see if it wasn't staggered both sides to get a full weld you could see stress concentration from the unsupported area under pressure.

With it staggered the full weld both sides it seems a bit overkill.

Thanks again.

 

[bernoullies123]

The requirement for both sides welded is not a structural requirement (checks required), but is more for corrosion prevention by preventing the contents from sitting in the space between the outside of the support and inside of the vessel. This crevice can promote crevice corrosion.

The extra bit of fillets far outweigh the potential corrosion issue.

 

[roca]

Baffle bypassing comes to mind...?

 

[MJCronin]

I believe that you may want to consult the TEMA guide for shell-and-tube HXs.

There are some guidelines for baffles contained