×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

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!
  • Students Click Here

*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

Related Articles

Jobs

A-212-B versus A-515

A-212-B versus A-515

A-212-B versus A-515

(OP)
thread177-29735: ASTM A-212-B Firebox vs. ASTM SA515 and SA516
I am working on an old vessel that is constructed of A-212-B. Thickness is 2.35 inches. A-212-B was replaced by A-515. In regard to low temperature operation, the exemption curve UCS-66 lists A-515 under Curve B with no mention of whether or not it is normalized. Spec A-515 paragraph 5.2 states that thickness in excess of 2 inches shall be normalized. Curve C and D make no mention of A-515, only A-516. I do not have the old specification on A-212. Does anyone have any information as to whether there are requirements for normalization over a certain thickness. Based on information on A-516, the normalizing helps with the MDMT because it throws it into curve D of FIG. UCS-66. Does anyone have an old code book (pre 1967) that says what curve A-212 would be represented by in FIG UCS-66 or has any other information that would be helpful with my problem.

RE: A-212-B versus A-515

vragle I am looking at a '68 Code book. Part UCS 66 in its current form does not exist, i.e., no curves, etc. Part UCS-66 ('68) generally states no impact testing is required for MDMT to -20 F. SA-212 is not present in Table UCS-23, it appears it had been replaced by the '68 edition.

I don't have anything older that this, but the UCS-66 curves did not exist in those days.

Regards,

Mike

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

RE: A-212-B versus A-515

A-212B could be equivalent to A-515 or A-516 depending on whether it was made to fine grain melting practice or not. A-515 today is specified as being made to coarse grain melting practice and is governed by Curve B regardless of normalized or not. If your design needed low temp material you should have used A-516. To determine if your SA-212-B material was made to fine grain melting check the Al and the Vanadium and Niobium contents. Al should be > 0.020%. Back when your vessel was made the Curves did not exist but impact testing was still required for design temp below -20 F.

RE: A-212-B versus A-515

Most of the A 212B, even normalized, was coarse grained with normally poor notch toughness.

RE: A-212-B versus A-515

(OP)
Thank you all for your input. Its truly amazing that there were not more brittle fracture problems in the 50s and 60s. I am new to ENG-TIPS. Its good to know there are knowledgeable people out there willing to share their knowledge.

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!


Resources


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