×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

PWHT with impact test

PWHT with impact test

PWHT with impact test

(OP)
Hi all,

we have a filter(OD=508mm, 25thk, 714mmLG)and material is A516 Gr60.based on MDMT=-45c, impact test is required and the service is not lethal, but our client has made a comment that PWHT is mandatory with reference to UCS-79.
please let me know your idea and direct me to find the best solution.

Thank you very much

RE: PWHT with impact test

Its a boarderline case. The calculated fiber elongation is 4.92% so it does not exceed 5%. According UCS-79 no heat treatment required. If actual wall thickness is 25.5mm or more the Client is correct.

RE: PWHT with impact test

I'm not up to the ins and outs of ASMEVIII, being in Australia, but as a client my default would be to spec PWHT in that circumstance.

I would be happy to entertain an argument to the contrary though from my PV fabricator or designer - as it might result in savings.

However, hanging on 0.5mm seems like splitting hairs and natural conservativeness might say "Stick with the PWHT". What if the plate thickness came in over tolerance??

Some other considerations: What weld process is planned? What NDE is specified??

A 25mm full thickness pressure welds mean a good chance for undetected defects to lurk and possibily bring the vessel undone should the low temp be reached and combine with detrimental residual stresses...

... I think I just convinced myself to stick with PWHT.

Cheers

Rob


RE: PWHT with impact test

Most Codes of Construction provide MIMIMUM requirements for design and fabrication. Once can always specify more requirements that go above and beyond code. In this case, I would go with PWHT.

RE: PWHT with impact test

The ASME Code para UCS-79 has nothing to do with welds. It is about Heat Treatment of plates/heads after cold deformation. In that respect PWHT is not the correct abrivation. Better use PFHT (post forming heat treatment)

RE: PWHT with impact test

...hehehehe, well I did say I wasn't ASMEVIII savvy.

Still, if you're swinging on a 0.5mm / 0.08% argument... doesn't sound like much of an argument.

The practical logisitics of PV manufacture in Australia would drive the vessel to be PWHT'd.

Cheers

Rob

RE: PWHT with impact test

1) Please, read UCS-79 slowly: fiber elongation is greater than 5%
2) Plate SA 516-60 t=25 mm shall be normalized and Charpy test shall be at -51°C (see SA-20), the WPQT impact test shall be at -45°C.

I you think that these test pass the requirements without PWHT ...so no PWHT be performed.

I recommend PWHT

Remember: all weld shall be full penetration

Regards
rhg

RE: PWHT with impact test

(OP)
Thanks to all

regarding ucs79, for fabrication by cold forming, when the fiber elongation is more than 5% and the material requires impact test, PWHT is mandatory,but in my case, the elongation is not more than 5%,and PWHT requirement is not mentioned at my clinet SPEC.but for this case they insist to perform PWHT.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources