Missing ASME Nameplate and U1 Form

[GPACMAN]

We have an older heat exchanger that is missing its ASME nameplate and U1 form. The original drawing is also very generic and has no traceability reference data listed. It is my understanding that my only course of action here is to perform a complete Fit for Service evaluation (including internal and external inspections) and have an ASME certified company generate the new mechanical calculations. My question is what type of nameplate can they provide that will allow us to meet operating requirements?

 

[marty007]

Is the original manufacturer still in business?

If so, I'd recommend your first course of action should be to contact them and ask if they have any documentation remaining. If so, they may be able to provide a copy of the U-1 form, and could generate a replacement nameplate (per NBIC).

 

[GPACMAN]

Manufacturer is no longer in business.

 

[LittleInch]

This comes up many times here and in fact, IMHO, you don't have an "older heat exchanger" - what you have is a lump of scrap metal at the moment I'm afraid.

The U1 or anything similar also uses construction and testing data which you don't have anymore. anyone doing calculations needs to assume the worst case and hence your rating might be really quite low.

Now you could operate it without that, but this is possibly / probably illegal in your location and if it goes bang the insurance company won't cover you...

Now you could check with your local Authority or has this item just "appeared?"

You really need to ask your local boiler inspector what they will need to accept its use and the person giving the new certificate.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[GPACMAN]

I recently located to Arkansas from Louisiana (non-code state) where we had flexibility in this situation to conduct a Fit-for Service that would allow us to re-calcualte all of the mechanical calculations based on current full internal inspection results and current process specifications. A coded shop could then submit the full package of new calculations and nameplate that indicated "re-rate". Plants do lose original documentation from time to time and nameplates fall off over time as well. It seems like an awful waste to say that they have to completely replace the equipment when you have a means to determine that its still mechanically safe to operate.

 

[weldstan]

Do you have any real idea of when it was purchased and for whom it was purchased and the original manufacturer? If so you may be able to research National Board files to determine the Code Data Report.

 

[EdStainless]

Sorry GPAC, but you are going to sink a lot of work and money into this and in the end may not like the results.
There are a lot of old HX and vessels out there that were designed and built for specific uses. That doesn't mean that they are suitable for any other use. The internal material and fabrication methods may be very different from what you would expect today. And by the way, you do need to be able to insure this and that may be the stopper.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed

 

[LittleInch]

What is a "non-code state" ?

Re-rate is a lot different to start from scratch without knowing materials, or doing a whole lot of inspections.

BTW how "old" is this?



Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.