×
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

SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

(OP)
Hello All. I am looking at some "legacy" drawings, whch we will use to build some more or less duplicate units to a new specification.

The tubing, per SA-688-316L, and the tubesheet (SA-182 F316L)are called out on existing drawings as 0.05% max carbon. The new spec has no such requirement, so my thinking was to change this callout to relect what is permitted by the material specs.

While I have not researched SA-182 yet, I find for the tubing that per SA-688, product tolerance is per A-480, unless C is 0.04% or less, in which case it does not apply. Per A-480, Table A1.1 does not apply to heat analysis.

I do not know whether the supplier will perform heat or product analysis, although I will check to get their take on this situation.

So, per the applicable specs, is there any upper tolerance on carbon content? If so, what would it be?

Thanks in advance,

Mike

RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

The SA 182 standard specification lists the maximum carbon content for F316L as 0.030% max.

RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

(OP)
metengr, what's your opinion on the tubing?

Thanks,

Mike

RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

Mike;
The ASME SA 688 standard specification states that a test report shall be provided to the Purchaser. The test report shall contain the heat analysis, hardness and tensile properties.

A product analysis can be performed, but it must be specified on the PO by the Purchaser. The tolerance for product analysis does not apply for carbon contents at or below 0.04%.

Since the 316L tubing is stated to have 0.035% max carbon, this is the maximum value.

RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

(OP)
OK, taking another look at the original docs, the materials were straight grade, with limited carbon. They are now L grade with carbon, per the materials specs, lower than the callout for the straight grades. I feel safe in just dropping the max carbon callout of 0.05%.

Agree/disagree?

metengr, after looking at SA-182 I agree that no upper tolerance exists for carbon. Thanks for your help with this.

MIke



RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

In my opinion, if your original materials were straight grade with limited carbon content, your allowable stress values were for straight grade materials.

If you simple switch to "L" grade materials, you'll have lower allowables and will need for verify the orignal design is still OK.

I would not just blindly duplicate with out qualification of the design at the lower allowables.

NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas

RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

Agree with the above, including reviewing the design using the lower allowable stress value from ASME Section II, Part D. for low carbon grade.

RE: SA-688-316L Composition Conundrum

(OP)
NozzleTwister, metengr, you both are right, the lower allowables will be accounted for. The change in grades is a customer requirement. The old job had a god-awful set of notes for tubing requirements, while the new one has a new and different god-awful set of notes for the tubing requirements.

The old job had some extended verbiage for UT of a cup forging, while the new job has some new and different extended verbiage for the UT.

I am hoping to get this cleaned up so that when we go to buy materials we don't have requirements that don't make sense or can't be met.

Thanks again

Mike

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