NOTICE

When migrating the old forums over to our new forums we were unable to retain the identity of the authors, so the old posts will show up as "anonymous". All NEW posts will show up credited to their authors. So please participate and share knowledge just as you have in the past.

You must log in if you are an existing user or register if you are a new user in order to contribute to the discussions.

Discussion Forums - The Hendrix Group
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsGeneral Corrosi...General Corrosi...Approach on weld inspectionApproach on weld inspection
Previous
 
Next
New Post
8/4/2009 10:00 AM
 
Hi, I have a query regarding inspection approach different consultants follow in terms of alloy steel pipe welds mainly P11 and P22 pipes. We have come across a spec where it insists 100% radiography all the weld joints for all alloy steel joints. We have also worked in similar projects where alloy steel piping with same criticality had only 25% radiography if it follows the same WPS and carried out by same welders. Is it wise to have 100% RT for alloy steel? And also, it is worth having second RT or UTI after heat treatment on such joints? regards
 
New Post
8/4/2009 10:00 AM
 
Bigpond P 11 & P 22 alloy steel welds should be 100% RT only to meet code practices. WPS / PQR should also specify only 100% RT. Some project engineering specifications and purchase orders, using P 11 or P 22, do specify second RT / UT Flaw detection after heat treatment just to ensure that during heat treatment any undue stresses from forming or welding in HAZ or parent plate does not show up as sub-surface cracks or any surface or sub surface cracks had not developed after heat treatment. If you experience hard zones after H.T and you propose to use this P 11 or P 22 material in high temperature hydrogen or syn gas services, second RT and UTF would certainly help. If it is meant for hydrogen or syn. gas service at high temperature, it is worth doing second RT (100% and not any random 25%) and again 100% UT Flaw check of the welds Hope this helps C.V.Srinivasan Nishi Engineers Pvt Ltd India August 4, 2009 E-mail : nishi@vsnl.com >Hi, I have a query regarding inspection approach different >consultants follow in terms of alloy steel pipe welds mainly >P11 and P22 pipes. We have come across a spec where it >insists 100% radiography all the weld joints for all alloy >steel joints. We have also worked in similar projects where >alloy steel piping with same criticality had only 25% >radiography if it follows the same WPS and carried out by >same welders. Is it wise to have 100% RT for alloy steel? >And also, it is worth having second RT or UTI after heat >treatment on such joints? >regards
 
New Post
8/6/2009 10:00 AM
 
Thanks regards
 
New Post
5/26/2010 10:00 AM
 
I am sure that my reply would be late. Just want to add my comments: 1. It is advisable to have 100% RT on all weld joints in P11 or P22 material whatever the weld joint thickness and type is. It may be waived off on socket welds having throat thickness below 8 mm provided they have not to be operated in hydrogen service. 2. What we have experienced is that UT after PWHT on P11 or P22 does not yield any finding. You just need to monitor PWHT in the right way. But yes on P5 and P9 having higher chromium content, this should be the practice to conduct 100% UT after PWHT as probability of crack initiation during PWHT is higher due to higher Cr content. Hope this would help. Regards, Ashfaq Anwer http://forums.thepetrostreet.com
 
New Post
5/29/2010 10:00 AM
 
I dont agree with Ashfaq, P11 and P22 needs critical control pre, during and post welding. These material depending upon J and X factor are susceptible to delayed hydrogen cracking and temper embrittlement. This careful NDT control is required. RT is suggested minimum 72 hrs after welding. In normal practice no welding team is 100% full proof and thats why careful NDT is desired. UT is often dictated by QC Inspectors and Consultants as an ultimate NDT after PWHT as UT can detect finer cracks which can generate in P11 and P22 material due to material chemistry, impurities and lack of control in welding / PWHT. Thus it is better to keep 100% RT followed by UT as best engineering practise but depending on service criticality and cost of failure impact on Plant and Management this need to be decided by the Inspection and Planning team. regards >1. It is advisable to have 100% RT on all weld joints in P11 >or P22 material whatever the weld joint thickness and type >is. It may be waived off on socket welds having throat >thickness below 8 mm provided they have not to be operated >in hydrogen service. >2. What we have experienced is that UT after PWHT on P11 or >P22 does not yield any finding. You just need to monitor >PWHT in the right way. But yes on P5 and P9 having higher >chromium content, this should be the practice to conduct >100% UT after PWHT as probability of crack initiation during >PWHT is higher due to higher Cr content. > >Hope this would help. > >Regards, >Ashfaq Anwer >http://forums.thepetrostreet.com
 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeDiscussionsDiscussionsGeneral Corrosi...General Corrosi...Approach on weld inspectionApproach on weld inspection


  

News

The safe operation of oil refineries in the United States is under constant r...read more
When: January 30, 2017 - February 2, 2017 Where: Galveston Island Conventi...read more

View all articles

Stay Current

Sign up for our quarterly newsletter

covering updates on corrosion