Reconciliation SA-312 for ASME SECTION II 2015

[H Cameron]

Good morning guys,

I’m going to do reconciliation SA-312 for ASME SECTION II 2015.
In table II-200-1, in other accepted edition column, I see “88a through 13b”.

What’s the meaning of “a” and “b” here? I received a MTR per SA- 312-2013.

Is it acceptable?

thanks

 

[metengr]

The a and b refer to revisions in the year of the edition when they are approved. Previous Editions 1988-a through 2013-b are acceptable as using the current edition provided ASTM editions prior to -13b have corrections to the chemical composition for UNS S30451, S31002, and S31035 in Table 1.

The change for SA 312 for publication in the 2015 Edition of ASME Section II, Part A was to approve the adoption of the ASTM ferrous specification A312/A312M-13b except for the deletion of 5.2, revision of 6.2 to add "H" grade heat treatment requirements and editorial corrections to the nickel content of UNS S30451 and to the chemistry of UNS S31035 in Table 1.

 

[H Cameron]

Hi Metengr

The MTR is per SA- 312-2013. & ASTM A312-15

 

[metengr]

Second question - Yes because of the footnote(Identical with ASTM Specification A312/A312M-13b except for the deletion of 5.2, revision to 6.2 to add “H” grade heat treatment requirements and editorial corrections to the nickel content of UNS S30451 and to the chemistry of UNS S31035 in Table 1.)

So, the current SA 312 -13b has been adopted by the ASME B&PV Code committee for the 2015 Edition of Section II, Part A as SA 312-15

 

[H Cameron]

thanks,

And why i couldn't find any thing about acceptable hardness range in SA-312 standard?

 

[metengr]

Because the material in SA 312 is not hardenable by heat treatment.

 

[H Cameron]

but i have some record about hardness hrb in the MTR

 

[metengr]

Did you review SA 999 Standard Specification for
General Requirements for Alloy and Stainless Steel Pipe? The requirements must also be met.

 

[EdStainless]

There are max hardness listed for these alloys.
The ASTM specs use letters for editorial changes.
In general when people just use the year they are referring the version that was published in hard copy form. Though you should be able to query the QA dept at a mill and find out if the exact version.

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

 

[metengr]

There is no maximum hardness listed in SA 312. If there is hardness it is for information purposes and not required by the SA material specification.

 

[EdStainless]

Sorry Met, I was wrong on this. We invoke one internally to match the other autenitic tube and pipe specs.

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

 

[H Cameron]

As per ASME Sec. Part II A ,SA 240 Type 304L, hardness is given in the code. But for the forging SA 182 and SA 965 & Tubes SA 312 TP 304L, Hardness requirement is not specified.

Why hardness requirements are not given for the forging & Pipes of Austenitic stainless steel? Is there any metallurgical reason?

and why i see in the supplier MTR and what should i do about checing that out?

thanks

 

[metengr]

No problem EdStainless.

Why hardness requirements are not given for the forging & Pipes of Austenitic stainless steel? Is there any metallurgical reason?

The grades in SA 312 are not hardenable by heat treatment so hardness is unnecessary from a specification enforcement standpoint. Hardness is typically used as a qualitative check.

I would treat the reported hardness as information only.

 

[H Cameron]

thanks metengr

can I know what is the reson of having "..." in some table of ASME Section ii. i couldn't find any note ab that. for example ab titanium content for 316/316L we have {...}. what's the meaning of that? and if supplier has some titanium in the product is acceptable or not?

thanks

 

[metengr]

... means not specified or not reported

 

[H Cameron]

metengr

so it doesn't matter if we have it in the product or not? ASME is no comment?

 

[metengr]

Correct

 

[H Cameron]

thanks