×
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

UW-11 interpretation
3

UW-11 interpretation

UW-11 interpretation

(OP)
Hello All

Would please let me know your technical interpretation of section UW-11(a,5).

Thank you

RE: UW-11 interpretation

2
farzam, UW-11(a)(5) says if your vessel components are designed using joint efficiencies from Table UW-12 Column (a), you must full RT Cat A & D joints.

UW-11(a)(5)(a) says Cat A & B joints shall be full penetration butt welds.

UW-11(a)(5)(b) says (this is more tricky) that for Cat B & C which intersect the Cat A welds or for joining seamless sections, with an exception for smaller nozzles, must be spot RT'd. The last sentence says this spot RT cannot be used to meet the requirements of UW-52(b)(1) for extent of radiography.

UW-11(a)(5)(b) allows, for example, the use of a joint efficiency of 1 (for a double welded butt joint) for, say, attaching a seamless head to a seamless pipe, as long as one spot RT is performed on this seam.

UW-11(a)(5)(b) also exempts seams in smaller nozzles from the spot RT requirement, for example a pipe to flange buttweld.

Hope you find this useful.

Regards,

Mike

RE: UW-11 interpretation

Well stated Mike.

RE: UW-11 interpretation

SnTMan,
A star to you.  That may be the simpliest explanantion that involved the dreaded UW-11(a)5(b) I have seen.  In your fourth paragraph I might point out that it's UW-12(d) that gives us E=1.0 for seamless heads of the extra spot RT is done on the B seam.  Also, I would point out that one spot is not always enough.  For a large vessel additional shots on the round seam may be required.

Joe Tank

RE: UW-11 interpretation

Thanks to dtn6770 and JoeTank, I agree that one spot is not enough, as hinted at in my third para. Also agree re UW-12(d), I was just limiting the scope of my post. Thanks again, and I hope the OP gets some good out of it.

Regards,

Mike

RE: UW-11 interpretation

farzam, no disrespect intended. Sorry if it came across that way.

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