Nelson,

The link below is for the Pressure Vessel and Piping Design Forum at the ASME site. These are the people who have standards for this kind of repair. I suggest that to place your question there.

Don
dleffingwell@snet.net


http://www.asme.org/bboard/main-frame.tcl?topic=Pressure%20Vessel%20and%20Piping

When working for a manufacturer of piping components we at times made standard forms and instructions regarding pressure vessel components based on calculations. This allowed the "designers" to proceed with a design. The engineer responsible signed off on the design to verify the table was used properly.

This method allowed some "standard" work processes with people not capable of code certification, but still had the engineer in the loop. We only did these standards where we had a large amount of repeat usage.

I wonder if you could not use such an internal standard to streamline your work process while maintaining the oversite necessary to assure any thing out of the ordinary did not escape engineering oversite.

Well we do intend to create an internal standard for temporary emergent repairs. The purpose of my inquiry was to determine if similar standards currently exist in industry, so that we could determine what the best current recommended practices are.  If any other readers are interested, I have identified two API publications through the help of DonLeffingwellPE and Mr. John Quigley at the ASME site:  ANSI/API RP 1107 - Pipeline Maintenance Welding and ANSI/AP 570 - Insp, Repair, Alteration and ReRating of In-Service Piping Systems.  We are in the process of procuring these publications.

Sorry I missed part of the intended thrust of your question. I have used the standards above in analysis of systems, but they do not provide a detailed proscription like what you asked for. The standards are in my view are necessary to consider when determining whether a particular repair should be undertaken.

When doing such repair designs in the past I have relied on ASME Section VIII Div. I and Div. II. The API standards allow you to evoke Div. II rules. This allows more flexibility and experience judgement in the design by the engineer. All this leads in my experience to more options not less and thus less specifics not more.

go with the api 570. We have use it as the basis When we develop our own standard/policy/procedure for the inspection and repair of process piping.
Note that Plidco has some clamps available for quick fix. The thing u really wanted to do is to ensure u have enough meat on your exisitng pipeline before doing the weld - should not be less than 5 mm minimum to prevent burnthrough.
The other reference u may want to consider is the AWS Welding Tech Sereis "Pipeline Welding and Inspection"

Thanks for the help Ralph.  You're right; we almost always do a UT of existing pipe wall to ensure adequate thickness prior to repair welding.  I'd seen the AWS Pipeline Welding & Inspection a while back - I'll look at it again.
Thanks for posting,
Nelson