Weld slag removal question 2

[jari001]

Hi everyone,

I'm in the middle of sourcing a 450 gallon 304L IBC (intermediate bulk container) on short notice to meet a fast pace project. In order to get the IBC made quicker, the vendor has presented the option of not removing weld slag to decrease the lead time. I understand slag to be residual flux that was fused together during the welding process around the weld area, and if that is true, then I would want the flux to be removed so that the passivating liquid is not prevented from having thorough contact with all surfaces. The IBC will hold ambient water and steam condensate.

So my question is can weld slag interfere with the passivation process? I have concerns that in the instances the hot condensate is directly discharged into the IBC without mixing into ambient temp water, that the hot condensate become an issue for those areas that weren't properly passivated due to the slag not being removed.

I would appreciate your comments on this matter.

 

[gtaw]

The only difference is the AI's involvement and the ASME Data sheet that supports the nameplate attached to the code stamped vessel. Other than that, no difference.

Having said that, if the vessel was being installed in a state that had adopted the ASME code section as a legal requirement, the vessel had to be code stamped. Everything we shipped to Canada was code stamped. Several states in the lower 48 had not adopted ASME. I recollect working in Louisiana, where the decision to adopt ASME was left to the discretion of the Parishes. Some did and some didn't require code stamps.

I remember consulting for a refinery in Texas, one of the engineers informed me, “Hey Yank, we aren’t a jurisdiction state. We don’t have to comply with ASME”

I replied, “But if you want insurance coverage, you will comply with ASME.”

“You got me there Yank!” Everyone in the room had a good laugh and he and I became good friends after that.


Best regards - Al

 

[mfgenggear]

@gtaw
Lol funny story, thank you for the reply.