×
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 Requirements
4

PWHT Requirements

PWHT Requirements

(OP)
I am working on a project to add some nozzles to vertical drums. Both of them were built in 1975 and the shell material is SA-285-C.

I have some confusion regarding the Post Weld Heat Treatment of the vessels. One has a 1-9/16" thick shell and the other has a 1-5/8" thick shell. The manufacturers data reports indicate that neither vessel was heat treated. According to table UCS-56, SA-285-C should be heat treated if its thickness is greater that 1-1/2"

Does anyone know of a reason why these vessels would not have been heat treated.

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

RE: PWHT Requirements

FixedEquipment;
If what you are reporting is accurate, the vessels should have been subjected to a thermal treatment after long seam and girth welding. Was the heat treatment reported as a re-normalization heat treatment versus a subcritical PWHT?

RE: PWHT Requirements

Does the Data reports state the shell thickness described or as 1 1/2"? In 1975, the requirements for PWHT were for T > 1 1/4" unless a 200F preheat was applied and the max nominal thickness was raised to 1 1/2".

Maybe somebody got paid under the table to look the other way or sheer incompetense by all parties involved.

RE: PWHT Requirements

you have to look at data report U-1a

if it shows 1 1/2" thick....it could have been preheated to skip the PWHT.

you only pwht ""greater"" than 1 1/2" thick

that is if they were code stamped

RE: PWHT Requirements

Could also be the difference between the nominal thickness used vs. the minimum thickness required.  Thicker steel may have been used for other mechanical reasons, like supporting a platform, or simply because they had it in stock or could get it from their supplier sooner.  Take a look at the minimums required for the unit.

RE: PWHT Requirements

(OP)
I have resolved the issue. The vessels are actually 9/16" and 5/8" thick. On the data reports the numbers are written exactly like this: 1-9/16" and 1-5/8" thick.

I don't know what they were trying to indicate, but it caused me quite a bit of confusion until I figured it out. Thanks to everyone for your responses to my question.

RE: PWHT Requirements

chaulklate makes a point which, to me, could lead to some comfusion.  
Per ASME Sec VIII UW 40, the governing thickness for determining the need for PWHT, is the thickness at the welded joint.  My point being, that regardless of minimum thicknesses required for design, the need for PWHT is driven by the thickness at the weld.  If I have a welded shell plate 1-9/16" thick, but, only require 1.25" for design, PWHT is required.

RE: PWHT Requirements

Please no more confusion wink  - the thickness for PWHT is based on nominal thickness as uniquely defined in Section VIII, Div 1 Part UCS-56 (a) and UW-40 (f).

RE: PWHT Requirements

1 ea. @ 9/16", 1 ea. @ 5/8"

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