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 MintJulep on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Vacuum Stiffener Ring radiography 1
- Thread starter vinstein
- Start date
Assuming you refer to the butt weld closing the ring, then no, the ring is in compression, so there's no reason to RX, and it is not required by code.
prex
: Online engineering calculations
: Magnetic brakes and launchers for fun rides
: Air bearing pads
prex
: Online engineering calculations
: Magnetic brakes and launchers for fun rides
: Air bearing pads
- Thread starter
- #3
Ask a question please and specify your conditions (code, internal/external ring, full or partial circle,...).
Anyway, a ring for vacuum is a non pressure part for the code, and there is no specific requirement for RX of non pressure parts.
prex
: Online engineering calculations
: Magnetic brakes and launchers for fun rides
: Air bearing pads
Anyway, a ring for vacuum is a non pressure part for the code, and there is no specific requirement for RX of non pressure parts.
prex
: Online engineering calculations
: Magnetic brakes and launchers for fun rides
: Air bearing pads
The ring is essential to the structural integrity, but it is not part of the pressure boundary. No RT required per ASME.
Since the weld is in compression, it makes no structural difference if the weld is cracked or not. It still holds the weight - pressure.
Since the weld is in compression, it makes no structural difference if the weld is cracked or not. It still holds the weight - pressure.
- Thread starter
- #6
bernoullies123
Mechanical
The ring is resisting the collapse of a compression load (external pressure). Per Newtons 3rd law (I think), of equal and opposite loads, the ring should be acting in tension.
Anyway, as noted above, a non-pressure boundary weld doesn't require RT, nor would you anyway as most welds would be a fillet. In the event that it was a full penetration, then again RT wouldn't really be feasible per the configuration.
Anyway, as noted above, a non-pressure boundary weld doesn't require RT, nor would you anyway as most welds would be a fillet. In the event that it was a full penetration, then again RT wouldn't really be feasible per the configuration.
-
1
- #8
rizkifaizal
Mechanical
- Apr 28, 2011
- 1
Agree that welded attachment between stiffener ring and shell doesn’t require a radiographic, please check at ASME VIII Div.1 part UG-29 and UG-30, the stiffener may be attached by continuous, intermittent or the combination of continuous and intermittent, no specific requirement for radiographic.
- Thread starter
- #10
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
