Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
ASME SA 570 Gr.B
- Thread starter tejas1
- Start date
According to my 2001 Edition/2003 Addendum of the ASME B&PV code, there is no SA 570 material specification. There may be an ASTM A 570. However, this plate is not an approved material per ASME B&PV code.
I also checked several resources on plate specifications - I found nothing on SA 570. What is your specific application?
I also checked several resources on plate specifications - I found nothing on SA 570. What is your specific application?
- Thread starter
- #3
Hi metengr,
I'm trying to develop a table of plate thickness values (tmin)for air receivers. I was told the material was SA 570 Gr.B but I have not been able to locate it either. Based on your response I may have the incorrect material spec. I'll double check and post back.
Thanks for your quick response, it's appreciated since I'm trying to take care of this today.
I'm trying to develop a table of plate thickness values (tmin)for air receivers. I was told the material was SA 570 Gr.B but I have not been able to locate it either. Based on your response I may have the incorrect material spec. I'll double check and post back.
Thanks for your quick response, it's appreciated since I'm trying to take care of this today.
- Thread starter
- #4
ASTM A570 is not a plate spec. It is a sheet spec.
Steve Braune
Tank Industry Consultants
Steve Braune
Tank Industry Consultants
- Thread starter
- #6
Air receivers are pressure vessels and would fall under ASME Section VIII, Div 1 Code requirements. As such, ASTM A 570 is not an ASME code approved material. Therefore, it would not be specified for use in air receiver design and construction, per Code.
- Thread starter
- #8
Hi Metengr,
That's where I was going with my previous post.
I just wanted to make sure that I had not overlooked the material in Sect. 2 Pt. D.
I take it that the "A" designation ie. A 570, is not a material that I would find in Sect. 2 Pt. D and as such is not suitable for PV fabrication as you stated?
That's where I was going with my previous post.
I just wanted to make sure that I had not overlooked the material in Sect. 2 Pt. D.
I take it that the "A" designation ie. A 570, is not a material that I would find in Sect. 2 Pt. D and as such is not suitable for PV fabrication as you stated?
- Thread starter
- #9
ASME material specs are often identical to the ASTM material specs. If that is the case the ASME spec acknowledges that fact.
In the case of the material you mentioned... SA516-Grade 70 is the ASME designation. A516-Grade 70 would be the ASTM designation.
Steve Braune
Tank Industry Consultants
In the case of the material you mentioned... SA516-Grade 70 is the ASME designation. A516-Grade 70 would be the ASTM designation.
Steve Braune
Tank Industry Consultants
As SteveBraune mentioned, ASTM materials are often acceptable for B&PV fabrication. For a Code reference, see II-A Appendix A on page xlv. A quick quote: "... however, material produced under an ASTM Specificaiton may be used in lieu of the corresponding ASME Specificaiton as listed in this Appendix." Common materials such as SA515 and SA516 are listed as identical to A515 and A516 on page l (that's Roman 50, not one). Its usually easy to order material to the SA spec, and it is the "preferred" way, and it will most often avoid annoyed AI's and customers, so given a choice, just order the SA spec.
jt
jt
I've found over time it is essential to order PV materials under the ASTM Designation.
Ordering by the ASTM Standard insures you have everything needed to insure that is what you order is what you get. You don't gain anything by ordering to an ASME designation as the manufacturing, ordering and tracking standards is to ASTM or it's equivalent depending on location.
Ordering by the ASTM Standard insures you have everything needed to insure that is what you order is what you get. You don't gain anything by ordering to an ASME designation as the manufacturing, ordering and tracking standards is to ASTM or it's equivalent depending on location.
No, there is a contradiction here and there, Sec II tell ytou to order the materials to the A designation (it is all over Sec II), but that does not fly in Code construction where materials must be ordered to the SA designation, or is it that most QCManuals do not want to let it out (the SA) ordering specification and once it is in your manual, you must use it as it is written or...
ER
ER
I agree with deanc, and recommend careful review of the PREFACE in Section II. However, we should be clear regarding materials for Code construction. The SA material designation implies that the ASME B&PV code committee has REVIEWED AND ENDORSED the materials specification issued by ASTM. In some cases, there are both editorial and technical differences between ASTM and ASME material specifications.
Over the years, ASTM and ASME have been working very closely to bridge this gap - thus the issuance of Appendix A. This appendix has helped to allow the use of ASTM material specifications in Code construction. As stated in Section II and in Apendix A..."materials for Code use should preferably be ordered, produced and documented on this basis (meaning SA material specifications).....
Over the years, ASTM and ASME have been working very closely to bridge this gap - thus the issuance of Appendix A. This appendix has helped to allow the use of ASTM material specifications in Code construction. As stated in Section II and in Apendix A..."materials for Code use should preferably be ordered, produced and documented on this basis (meaning SA material specifications).....
metengr is correct and it is perferable to order to SA. However after review of several thousand MTRs(seems like millions) this happens maybe 50% of the time. This is esp.true when steel is bought on the open market-cause you are lucky to find it these days.
The Forward and UG-4 gives you some options-be careful,if Sec II lists ASTM 96 and the steel is made to ASTM 03 it may not be the same. It is up to the Manuf. to assure the AI that the ASTM requirements of a piece of steel,the paperwork,and the steel will meet all the requirments of the SA spec.
Record a statement on the MTR ie:Meets requirements of****. The Manuf. must sign and date. Then beg the AI to sign(Ha-Ha).
You have some latitude if your ducks are in a row.
The Forward and UG-4 gives you some options-be careful,if Sec II lists ASTM 96 and the steel is made to ASTM 03 it may not be the same. It is up to the Manuf. to assure the AI that the ASTM requirements of a piece of steel,the paperwork,and the steel will meet all the requirments of the SA spec.
Record a statement on the MTR ie:Meets requirements of****. The Manuf. must sign and date. Then beg the AI to sign(Ha-Ha).
You have some latitude if your ducks are in a row.
deanc
ASTM 03 was a committee on gray iron castings and was merged into ASTM 04 Iron Castings.
ASTM A3 is a standard for railroad splice bars and is still good in force.
ASTM A96 was withdrawn in 1965 and was a standard for high temperature bolting.
As you state order materials by both standards as you will find most suppliers don’t keep ASME section II on hand. Most have the ASTM compilations of standards for fasteners or of chemical processing materials.
Additionally I have check the last 100 orders at a bolt distributor and found only 3 orders for fasteners that call out SA 193 B7, et all. All the other orders specify ASTM standards for the fastener materials.
My canvas only included people who would be concerned with needing ASME code materials and flagged as such on the order system.
At a sister piping distributer the sales manager stated that the orders run about 20% for SA materials and the rest are ASTM.
One thing to note is on MTR's is the occasional use of the word "typical". Usually in small print at the header. The fastener people have actually have been ask to pay for the actual MTR.
ASTM 03 was a committee on gray iron castings and was merged into ASTM 04 Iron Castings.
ASTM A3 is a standard for railroad splice bars and is still good in force.
ASTM A96 was withdrawn in 1965 and was a standard for high temperature bolting.
As you state order materials by both standards as you will find most suppliers don’t keep ASME section II on hand. Most have the ASTM compilations of standards for fasteners or of chemical processing materials.
Additionally I have check the last 100 orders at a bolt distributor and found only 3 orders for fasteners that call out SA 193 B7, et all. All the other orders specify ASTM standards for the fastener materials.
My canvas only included people who would be concerned with needing ASME code materials and flagged as such on the order system.
At a sister piping distributer the sales manager stated that the orders run about 20% for SA materials and the rest are ASTM.
One thing to note is on MTR's is the occasional use of the word "typical". Usually in small print at the header. The fastener people have actually have been ask to pay for the actual MTR.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question