All times are UTC + 2 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 29, 2008 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:37 pm
Posts: 6
Location: UAE

Dear All

I have small confusion . During the manufacturing of pressure vessel 100 % RT is required. If one of the long seam of Nozzle neck is missed RT and already fabricated. And laterly RT is not possible to take in condition of nozzle to Shell/Dish head welded condition. Then can we use 100% UT in place of 100% RT.

is this acceptable in U stamp jobs?

Thanks in advance :roll: .

_________________
BE DARE
A positive a itude


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 29, 2008 3:39 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:11 am
Posts: 480
Location: England
Is the nozzle neck made of plate or pipe?

_________________
Konrad Anikiel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: UT instead of RT
PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 5:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 8:51 am
Posts: 4
PLEASE REFER TO CODE CASE 2235.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:27 pm 
Offline
----------------
----------------
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 1:00 am
Posts: 869
Location: Essen, Germany
Just to be sure:
Are you asking about RT of the joint nozzle-shell?
if so, Please indicate which Figure of UW-16 represents your configuration.

If not, I suggest that you read UW-11(a). Can you use the exemption by size?

If not, CC2235 may help, but has got some nasty conditions.

I advise you talk to your Inspector how to use it.

DK


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Thanks
PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 7:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:37 pm
Posts: 6
Location: UAE
Hello Sirs

Thanks to all of you.
Mr. akonrad it is clear the nozzle neck is made from Plate . Im discusing about RT of long seam of that fabricated nozzle.

Nozzle neck is prepared from plate.

Dr. Koelbl sir today i will go through on your suggestion .

Thanks again.. :-)

_________________
BE DARE
A positive a itude


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:28 am 
Offline
----------------
----------------
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 11:11 am
Posts: 480
Location: England
Interesting thoughts arise when it comes to the purpose of the radiography. If it's just because of the wall thickness of the nozzle (increased E in UG-27 formula), then it's clear that it has to be radiographed somehow or treated in accordance of CC2235. I don't know how the vessel is made, but I presume that there is some possibility to insert the film inside the nozzle and make an exposition with the source outside.
But if it's specified as radiographed because of the reinforcement of opening in shell, and the area of the radiographed nozzle is the factor- then it's kinf of an issue. Because you can make a shot of the weld from its attachment to shell to its attachment to flange, but not below or beyond these. And it's the point below the attachment to shell that makes the reinforcement business take any benefit of the radiography.

_________________
Konrad Anikiel


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 2 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

phpBB SEO