Contact US

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!

*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

ASTM A106 Marking requirements-below 2"

ASTM A106 Marking requirements-below 2"

ASTM A106 Marking requirements-below 2"

A106-B states that marking shall be per ASTM A530.  A530 allows bundle tags for sizes below 2" Nominal Diameter.  In A106 however, the material spec specifically states that 1 1/2", 1 1/4", 1" & 3/4" SHALL BE MARKED per A530.  My interpretation is that A106 intends for each lenght of pipe in these diameters to be marked with the information outlined in A530.  Is there a code case that clarifys this point?

Thanks in advance for any input--

RE: ASTM A106 Marking requirements-below 2"

I read thru SA-106. For pipe less than 2" NPS it does indeed refer you to SA-530. In SA-530, part 24, for pipe 2" NPS or less and pipe under 3 feet in length, the required information may be placed on a tag securely fixed to the bundle or box in which the tubes are shipped.

RE: ASTM A106 Marking requirements-below 2"

Thanks Metengr.  I understand your comments.  My concerns:

A106 specifically states:
"For sizes  1 1/2, 1 1/4, 1, & 3/4 EACH LENGTH SHALL BE MARKED".  A106 also states that for sizes less than 3/4", the marking may appear on a bundle tag.

Since A106 is the prevailing spec, it supercedes the A530 requirement which allows use of bundle tags for this size range (1 1/2" thru 3/4").

There's no doubt that the marking and full traceability is mandated by most petrochemical plants and my feeling is that A106 (2005 & 2006) is trying to address the requirements of the industry.  I was hoping for a code case or some form of clarification on this point.

As a matter of note, I work for a major pipe producer.  I'm at odds with one of our mills on this point.  Having come from the nuclear industry, I find it strange that A106 would have gone to the trouble to specifically address these sizes.  It would have been much less confusing to refer to A530 on this point if the intent was to use bundle tags.

Thanks Again--

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! Already a Member? Login


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close