I have seen a drawing in which perephere of hole cut in Vessel for Nozzle fixing just touches circ seam weld and cuts at some area ? Is iit acceptable ? Nozzle has not been fitted yet. Is there any way to accept this as per code ?

Yes. Just mind your E value.

_________________
Konrad Anikiel

Yes. calculate compensation or perform RT on joint in way (for a circle=opening diameter)
mauro

yash : pl. refer UW-14.

Akonrad : may i know, how this would affect on E value?

I think, there is not change in E value, if UW-14 is taken care.

This is my private opinion only, you may need to find an official interpretation on this. My understanding of UW-14(b) is following: it only gives an additional condition to be fulfilled when you want to use UG-36(c)(3) exemption. It doesn't tell you what you can or have to do in other cases. And now, when you go to page 41, UG-37(a), definition of E1, it is clear enough to defend my statement without further discussion. The next page shows where E1 is used in formulae.
Regards

PS I just realised that in the first place I whote E, not E1. Sorry for this mistake.

_________________
Konrad Anikiel

Sir, your private opinion is correct. But code has made very clear in first statement of UW-14 (a), i am re-writing same here : Any type of opening that meets the requirements for reinforcement given in UG-37 or UG-39 may
be located in a welded joint.

Now, if we look on page 41, E1 = 1 for Category B joint & Table UW-12 to be referred for other Category. Let us say Category A. Now, this E1 is used in Area Available in Shell (Base Metal).
Means, Opening is Longitudinal(Long.) weld seam & Radiography of that Long. Seam is full. then E1=1. Therefore, degree of RT will be decide Area available in shell. not vise-verse.

Also, Code has mentioned UG-36(C)(3) specifically in UW-14(b) : As code doesn't want to left any defect around the opening, which has not be reinforced. It's different aspect.

Regards
Vishal Tailor

There are three "=" signs in the definition of E1. Which means it depends. It's not automatic, you have to take the correct value considering the weld you are crossing. In this particular case, as described by the Original Poster, it's not certain what is the category, type and degree of egzamination of the given weld, so I wrote my cautionary note. Hope this is clear now.

PS I really don't know what is the reasoning for E1=1 for a B joint, regardless of its joint efficiency. Not a lot of logic...

_________________
Konrad Anikiel

UW 14 also depends on the material .
Please see ULT-18 which is applicable for Nickel steels .