Does NACE MR0103 require PWHT of P1 material?

[FLHTCUI]

We have received an order for an ASME Section VIII Div 1 vessel. The shell is SA 106 B, the heads are SA 516 70N and the flanges are SA 105N. Under the material section of the data sheet states it states heads and shell are to be per NACE MR0103. There is no mention of PWHT. The shell is 24" S/30 (.562"), the heads are 7/16" Min and the flanges are 300#. It is exempt from PWHT per ASME. Does NACE MR0103 require the vessel to be PWHT'ed?

 

[metengr]

Do you have a copy of NACE MR0103????? If not, purchase it especially if you are the vessel manufacturer. How did you even bid on this pressure vessel without having the above document?

https://www.nace.org/cstm/Store/Product.aspx?id=6e58e286-6132-4753-82d3-632d5e178892

 

[gr2vessels]

Don't get upset meterngr, there will always be low life miserable people trying to use others for cheap benefit. They won't succeeded in life and fade in oblivion as they deserve it. This miserable poster has never contributed to this great forum, thinking he's the smart one using stupid people's knowledge for personal benefit. He's just another example for the good people on the forum, how to help the genuine, honest engineers in need of honest help!

 

[FLHTCUI]

Due to illness I am forced to work from home and do not have access to our technical library. Our QC manager, who has the NACE library, is out of pocket for the next (2) weeks. The original spec stated the vessel was in lethal service so PWHT was required even though our estimating department missed it. I am trying to get AFC drawings and calc's so I can order material in order to complete the vessel as required. When the lethal requirement was deleted I was hoping the PWHT requirement was also deleted so we wouldn't have to take the financial hit but cannot find out for (2) weeks. I didn't realize it would cause so much anger just asking the question and I don't consider myself a low life miserable person. I apologize for asking.

 

[metengr]

FLHTCUI;
There is no anger from me. You must realize that on a forum folks like myself only see the exact question and in the context of how it is presented. Again, if you would have prefaced your question with some background information, I would have responded differently. Namely, call the home office and have them send the NACE document to you. You really need to have the specification in-hand to review for yourself rather than relying on an internet forum response.

 

[FLHTCUI]

metengr;
I fully intend to get the final determination from our QC manager. The only reason I posed the question was because I needed to keep the job moving to stay on schedule. I assumed there would be someone familiar with the standard that could give me a simple yes or no. I didn't expect anyone to spend time researching. That's why I tried to give all the pertinent information regarding the vessel.

gr2vessels
Regarding my lack of contribution. Although I don't get to spend a lot of time on the forum, when I am on I do look for issues I think I can be of assistance in order to repay the help I have received. Unfortunately, I have not run across an issue that I could answer that was not already answered and I will admit I feel bad about that. Perhaps I misunderstood the purpose of this forum and will refrain from asking anymore questions until I can answer, I guess, at least one. Is the correct protocol (1) asked for (1) answered? I am not purposely a "miserable poster".

 

[SJones]

Just to move on from the philosophical examination of the need for altruism in an online engineering forum: MR0103 defers to NACE SP0472 in the control of welding for H2S service. SP0472 dictates that HAZ hardness be controlled by one or more thermal methods selected from cooling time control, PWHT control (sic), or temper bead welding.

Steve Jones
Corrosion Management Consultant

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

All answers are personal opinions only and are in no way connected with any employer.