SA-106-B Normalized 1

[chaulklate]

Is there any merit in normalizing SA-106-B?

I'm on a job now where the request is as per above for use on vessels subject to sulfide stress cracking. I've heard people say that SA-106-B has no merit to normalizing as it will not move it from curve B material to curve C material as per UCS-56, as UCS-56 indicates not only a normalizing requirement but also a 'fine grain practice' requirement. ASME defines 'fine grain practice' as it applies to SA-20 as per interpretation VIII-1-92-100, SA-20 is a plate spec and would therefore not apply to SA-106-B. We could probably all agree that you could normalize it, normalizing is really a heat treatment and anything (within reason) can be heat treated.

So, if someone requests SA-106-B normalized, does this request have any value?

 

[vesselfab]

YEP see that all the time.

our answer is, we aint gonna normalize a-106-b

either take 106-b in the as drawn condition or we can go to a normalized spec such as 333-6

 

[doct9960]

NACE MR0175 requires that carbon steel pipe be either hot finished or heat treated. If your SA-106-B is hot finished, you don't need to heat treat (normalize) it.

My opinion only

 

[stanweld]

Normalizing A-106 B will provide some grain refinement, which will result in a decrease in the ductile to brittle temperature and an increase in absorbed energy. I have known some Engineers (and I use that term loosely)who have specified A-106 with wall thicknesses, which required impact testing under B31.3. In some cases these pipes had to be normalized to meet the impact requirements.

Normalizing, properly performed, will also assure that the material hardness will be more uniform. It may be that hardness uniformity is the principal concern of the specifier to assure hardness that will render the pipe immune from SCC.