×
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

U-1 Vs Name Plate

U-1 Vs Name Plate

U-1 Vs Name Plate

(OP)
I'm in the process of rerating a PV and just found that materials listed in U-1 forms are different from materials listed in nameplate.

PV was built back in 1972.

Which one should I use?

Thanks,

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

Corgas, you maybe better use the actual MOC's

Regards,

Mike

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

(OP)
SnTman,

Do you mean materials listed on nameplate?

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

No - he means the ACTUAL.  If the U-1 and the nameplate are different, what makes you think that what they used were reflected on one or the other?  Maybe both the nameplate and U-1 are wrong...

Get a PMI there and use that as your baseline.  If it's a material grade issue, you're stuck getting coupons and testing.  I certainly wouldn't trust either nameplate or U-1 in that situation.

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

(OP)
TGS4:

Problem is that it's a material grade issue and I just can't cut a hole on the PV to get coupons and testing.

Thanks,

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

Well, I don't think that you can just throw up your hands and run away screaming. Corgas could have done that all by himself without coming here for constructive ideas. bugeyed

If any engineering or fab drawings are available, see if the material is listed on them. Hopefully it'll match one of the other two sources. I'm ok with going with two out of three.

I presume that the sucess of this rerate depends on the material grade? If not, take the weaker one and run with it. How 'bout running the calc's with the weaker one and seeing if the design is sufficient for the original design conditions. If it is, chances are the vessel was fabricated of the weaker material. If it is not, then its not unreasonable to presume that the higher grade is the correct one.

Finally, you can cut a hole in the vessel on the run if you need to get coupons for testing. If the tmin on the vessel is less than 3/8", I think you just might happen to need a new 3" nozzle somewhere on the vessel! Hot tap a new nozzle in as a repair since reinforcement calc's are not necessary, and keep the coupon for testing. Its not done frequently, but more often than you might think!

jt

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

If I had to pick just one, I'd probably go with the U-1. Presumably a little more scrutiny is involved.

Regards,

Mike

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

(OP)
Materials listed on drawings corresponds to U-1.

Vessel is 4.75" thick!!!!!!! with corrosion allowance of 1/16".

I'll go with materials listed on U-1 forms.

Thanks everyone for your comments and advise.

Corgas.

RE: U-1 Vs Name Plate

Another option is to go back to the manufacturer.  If they have the old records, they have at least three other points of reference - what is in the old calcs, what is on the bill of material, and what they purchased, and material test reports if you're really lucky.   

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