×
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

Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

(OP)
Dear sir,

When we need to segment reinforcement pad, please define whether we have to R/T and require welding efficiency F=1
as we know, ASME not define NDE requirement on this.

RE: Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

cmryu,

As far as I know there is no such requirement.

However, in the reinforcement calculation, you will need to select the joint effeciency for the pad accordingly, whether you are performing RT on the pad before attaching.  Obviously, if you are attaching in 2 pieces/ halfs onto the shell/ head then the joint effenciency is as "No R/T."

The weld seam of the pad is normally orientated in the circumferential direction, with two tell tail holes on each halves if they are attached seperately.

Regards.

RE: Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

Please read ABSA's information bulletin.  I was employed there when it was published and MANY jurisdictions will require compliance with that bulletin for a design to be acceptable.

EJL

RE: Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

eliebl
What was the reason for ABSA to issue this bulletin?
Were there any problems with spilt pads in the field?

RE: Welding seam on nozzle ref. pad

Widla,

To my knowledge there have not been any problems with split reinforcing pads.  My biggest concern is that the spilt was not documented on the drawing and as such the designers of the vessel commonly did not know it was happening.  The decision to split the pad was made by someone on the shop floor without consideration of weld detal or required NDE.

If I remember correctly one of the driving factors was the fact that there was a weld seam but it was not addresses anywhere by the code.  When the code does not address an item a designer could apply U-2(g) but there was little condiseration given to the weld joint and a type 3 (or 2) joint with no radiography was used.  This would have resulted in an efficiency for the reinforcing pad of 0.6 or 0.65.  This efficiency was not being applied to the allowable stresses of the re-pad.

EJL

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