NACE - ISO 15156 - VERSION 3 - 2015 1

[JHWC]

Hi All,

Many thanks for the help in advance. Truely appreciate all the reply.

My question here goes:

Since the latest version of ISO 15156 (Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Materials for use in H2S containing environments in oil and gas production), 3rd edition, has been released, I am wondering what about the NACE MR0175? though I understand both documents have the same informations and details.

Will it release sooner or everything has sticked to the ISO standard?

Thank you,
Jeffrey

 

[SJones]

NACE MR0175 will be released once it has passed the necessary balloting process to satisfy ANSI requirements.

Steve Jones
Corrosion Management Consultant

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

All answers are personal opinions only and are in no way connected with any employer.

 

[JHWC]

Thank you Steve for the information.

Sorry if I ask questions which may or may not be related to the thread.

1. Based on the IHS standards expert, it has appeared to me that the individual document of the NACE MR0175 (part 1,2,3 ) has been withdrawn but not the full document. Do you have any idea on this? Many apologies if I ask the wrong questions.

2. To my understanding, NACE MR0175 has the same contents as ISO 15156. So what is the major differences having 1 ISO standard and 1 NACE MR0175? Is it mainly due to ANSI requirements?

3. On the other hand, API 6A also shared similar contents with ISO 10423. However, API 6A has released the 20th edition while ISO 10423 is only on the 4th edition. I am wondering why there is a huge difference between both versions. I always thought that ISO should always be updated with API 6A or perhaps maybe extend to MR0175.

Thank you,
Jeffrey

 

[micalbrch]

"So what is the major differences having 1 ISO standard and 1 NACE MR0175?" ISO 15156 adopted the complete content of NACE MR0175. NACE was first and ISO made its content to a global standard.

 

[SJones]

ISO 15156 adopted the complete content of NACE MR0175

Not quite true, particularly with respect to SSC domains, and it also added HIC too. Now, the only difference is that the ISO tends to get published first whilst NACE goes through its balloting process and gets published later. There has been no technical difference between the two for a while; hopefully, this NACE ballot won't throw a spanner in the works.

@Jeffrey

1.
Have a look at document number 12 of 12 in your IHS search results: IHS have lumped everything under one document number and they still show the 2009 version as active along with all the circulars.

2.
There is no difference between the two.

3.
Do not follow the question. API Spec 6A shows it to be ISO 10423 (Modified) on the front cover. The modification is usually only the addition of a US Annex to change back everything that the US didn't like in the ISO and couldn't get voted out during the ISO approval process - see Annex O.

Steve Jones
Corrosion Management Consultant

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

All answers are personal opinions only and are in no way connected with any employer.

 

[EdStainless]

ISO specs are written by bureaucrats and imposed by governments.
Standards in the US must be voted on by a consensus of users and producers. The US government does not generate standards (not even MIL any longer).

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube

 

[SJones]

Oh dear Ed - that makes me a bureaucrat, thanks very much. Maybe you are confusing ISO with the EU. ISO standards are drafted by "appointed technical expert groups" which quite frequently include US members, and are voted on internationally in two stages by national standards bodies, ironically including the US, not governments. The national standards bodies take their steer from their participants. I would say that this makes the I in ISO truly international, as opposed to the likes of ASTM and NACE simply tagging the word 'International' into their title.

Steve Jones
Corrosion Management Consultant

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

All answers are personal opinions only and are in no way connected with any employer.

 

[EdStainless]

Sorry Steve, I didn't mean to sound like that.
But try joining an ISO committee, they are not 'open' or 'consensus' as AISI defines it and as we think of it.
I have never been on an ASTM, AMS, or NACE committee that was all US, country of origin doesn't matter.

Yes, the EN is really what I meant to say.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube

 

[jmec87]

Does anyone know when the NACE MR0175 balloting is expected to be completed?

Can anyone summarize the major changes in the new edition of ISO 15156?

 

[JHWC]

Hi Steve, EdStainless,

Thank you. I have to admit that I have learned and benefited a lot from both advises and professionals help given.

Hi jmec87,

You can check the foreword from individual document. The changes are stated there.

With regards to when it will be completed, I have no idea. I will keep a lookup.

Thanks,
Jeffrey

 

[MagBen]

ISO sounds to be more "international" than ASTM, but it sounds more political too. ASTM is pure technical, basically anyone could join it, any negative vote must be answered and settled down. It represents the volunteers efforts of the society's members. At least in my field, ISO or IEC can allow a limited voting members from different countries regardless of the size of the countries, and there is an unspoken rule that the chair of the subcommitee is always from the same one or two countries.