×
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

Interpretation of Radiographs UW-51/UW-52?

Interpretation of Radiographs UW-51/UW-52?

Interpretation of Radiographs UW-51/UW-52?

(OP)
Interpretation of indications revealed by RT UW-52/UW-51
Example:  3/8" thick ss material  radiographed to RT-4  

1.0 Junction of girth seam and long. seam radiographed Per UW 11(a)(5)(b): shall meet the minimum requirements for spot radiograph UW-52

2.0 UW -52 slag inclusions/elongated indications greater than 2/3t are rejectable; in the example above maximum allowable indication would be 1/8" in length.

3.0 If this radiograph were to be evaluated to UW-51, the maximum allowable elongated indication would be 1/4" (in materials up to 3/4" in thickness).  

Could this radiograph be evaluated to UW-51, as this would exceed the minimum requirements of UW-52 as stated in 1.0 above?

My interpretation is no, UW-52 would be correct without exception. This has come up in the past with fabrication shops, with the radiographed rejected based upon UW-52 but only with some resistance from the fabrication shop. These vessels were designed for RT-4 and could not pass UW-52, how could UW-51 be applicable?  In addition if you evaluate to UW-51 then rounded indications would be a factor in seam welds and nozzles greater than 10" NPS etc...  If evaluated to UW-51 but radiographed to UW-52 what do you stamp on the ASME nameplate?

Appreciate your input on this matter.
WBH

RE: Interpretation of Radiographs UW-51/UW-52?

If I am understanding your series of questions correctly, I agree with your conclusion that UW-51 may not be used to satisfy the spot radiography requirement of UW-11(a)(5)(b).

However, I would take the "...as a minimum..." part of the sentance in UW-11(a)(5)(b) to mean that you may do a full RT to the seam per UW-51 and still stamp RT2 or RT4.

I don't know why you would want to though... unless you were building a RT1 vessel anyway the point would be moot...

Cheers,
WRW

RE: Interpretation of Radiographs UW-51/UW-52?

As per your statement (2)
2/3 of t is aceptable, in which case 2/3 of 3/8" is 1/4". I think there is no conflict amongst the clauses mentioned (Atleast in those which you have mentioned).

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