where expertise comes together - since 1996 -

The Largest Open Access Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)

Conference Proceedings, Articles, News, Exhibition, Forum, Network and more

where expertise comes together
- since 1996 -

3195 views
Technical Discussions
jarno de jonge
jarno de jonge
06:12 Apr-01-2008
comparing UT acceptance ASME VIII, B31.1 and B31.3

Dear Colleagues,

After comparing the acceptance criteria from these 3 codes it seems like the acceptance for B31.3 is much less stringent then for the other two codes.

Is this correct and does anbody know why this is? Or am I just overlooking something in B31.3?

The acceptance for ASME VIII and B31.1 seem to be exactly the same. They don't allow linear discontinuities over 20% DAC and reject rounded discontinuities when they exceed a certain length and 100%DAC.

As far as I can find; B31.3 does not reject rounded discontinuties. And linear discontinuties are allowed to have some length and are allowed to produce indications up to 100% DAC (similar as is allowed for the rounded indications in VIII and B31.1).

Looking forward to an explanation.

Kind Regards,

Jarno de Jonge



    
 
 
bob sudharmin
Engineering, Reliability and Integrity Eng
Shell Malaysia Trading, Malaysia, Joined Jan 2008, 54

bob sudharmin

Engineering, Reliability and Integrity Eng
Shell Malaysia Trading,
Malaysia,
Joined Jan 2008
54
06:05 Apr-02-2008
Re: comparing UT acceptance ASME VIII, B31.1 and B31.3

Acceptance criteria does not necessarily be the same when comparison is being made against different code requirements.
ASME Viii is a pressure vessel code, B31.1 - Power Piping and B31.3 - Process Piping.
It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than 105Kpa (15psi)

----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Dear Colleagues,
: After comparing the acceptance criteria from these 3 codes it seems like the acceptance for B31.3 is much less stringent then for the other two codes.
: Is this correct and does anbody know why this is? Or am I just overlooking something in B31.3?
: The acceptance for ASME VIII and B31.1 seem to be exactly the same. They don't allow linear discontinuities over 20% DAC and reject rounded discontinuities when they exceed a certain length and 100%DAC.
: As far as I can find; B31.3 does not reject rounded discontinuties. And linear discontinuties are allowed to have some length and are allowed to produce indications up to 100% DAC (similar as is allowed for the rounded indications in VIII and B31.1).
: Looking forward to an explanation.
: Kind Regards,
: Jarno de Jonge
------------ End Original Message ------------




    
 
 
Ryan Burns
Ryan Burns
00:44 Apr-03-2008
Re: comparing UT acceptance ASME VIII, B31.1 and B31.3
Quote "It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than 105Kpa (15psi)"

Mr. Sudharmin, this is not correct. 31.3 most certanly allows for pressures above 15psi.

Regards,

RB

----------- Start Original Message -----------
:
: Acceptance criteria does not necessarily be the same when comparison is being made against different code requirements.
: ASME Viii is a pressure vessel code, B31.1 - Power Piping and B31.3 - Process Piping.
: It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than 105Kpa (15psi)
: : Dear Colleagues,
: : After comparing the acceptance criteria from these 3 codes it seems like the acceptance for B31.3 is much less stringent then for the other two codes.
: : Is this correct and does anbody know why this is? Or am I just overlooking something in B31.3?
: : The acceptance for ASME VIII and B31.1 seem to be exactly the same. They don't allow linear discontinuities over 20% DAC and reject rounded discontinuities when they exceed a certain length and 100%DAC.
: : As far as I can find; B31.3 does not reject rounded discontinuties. And linear discontinuties are allowed to have some length and are allowed to produce indications up to 100% DAC (similar as is allowed for the rounded indications in VIII and B31.1).
: : Looking forward to an explanation.
: : Kind Regards,
: : Jarno de Jonge
------------ End Original Message ------------




    
 
 
jarno de jonge
jarno de jonge
08:43 Apr-03-2008
Re: comparing UT acceptance ASME VIII, B31.1 and B31.3
There seems to be only an exclusion in B31.3 for this pressure range under certain circumstances. This means that we are just as well talking about pressurised piping.

For this reason I found it remarkable that the acceptance is less stringent for B31.3 piping than for other pressure containing parts (vessels and B31.1 piping)

Jarno

----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Quote "It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than 105Kpa (15psi)"
: Mr. Sudharmin, this is not correct. 31.3 most certanly allows for pressures above 15psi.
: Regards,
: RB
: :
: : Acceptance criteria does not necessarily be the same when comparison is being made against different code requirements.
: : ASME Viii is a pressure vessel code, B31.1 - Power Piping and B31.3 - Process Piping.
: : It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than105Kpa (15psi)
: : : Dear Colleagues,
: : : After comparing the acceptance criteria from these 3 codes it seems like the acceptance for B31.3 is much less stringent then for the other two codes.
: : : Is this correct and does anbody know why this is? Or am I just overlooking something in B31.3?
: : : The acceptance for ASME VIII and B31.1 seem to be exactly the same. They don't allow linear discontinuities over 20% DAC and reject rounded discontinuities when they exceed a certain length and 100%DAC.
: : : As far as I can find; B31.3 does not reject rounded discontinuties. And linear discontinuties are allowed to have some length and are allowed to produce indications up to 100% DAC (similar as is allowed for the rounded indications in VIII and B31.1).
: : : Looking forward to an explanation.
: : : Kind Regards,
: : : Jarno de Jonge
------------ End Original Message ------------




    
 
 
bob sudharmin
Engineering, Reliability and Integrity Eng
Shell Malaysia Trading, Malaysia, Joined Jan 2008, 54

bob sudharmin

Engineering, Reliability and Integrity Eng
Shell Malaysia Trading,
Malaysia,
Joined Jan 2008
54
05:33 Apr-03-2008
Re: comparing UT acceptance ASME VIII, B31.1 and B31.3
My sincere apologies for the inadvertent mistake. I must have overlooked the fact that the statement was meant to be an exclusion of the code's scope. Thank you for the comment.

----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Quote "It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than 105Kpa (15psi)"
: Mr. Sudharmin, this is not correct. 31.3 most certanly allows for pressures above 15psi.
: Regards,
: RB
: :
: : Acceptance criteria does not necessarily be the same when comparison is being made against different code requirements.
: : ASME Viii is a pressure vessel code, B31.1 - Power Piping and B31.3 - Process Piping.
: : It is true that B31.3 is less stringent but then again take note it is a piping system designed for and above 0 but less than 105Kpa (15psi)
: : : Dear Colleagues,
: : : After comparing the acceptance criteria from these 3 codes it seems like the acceptance for B31.3 is much less stringent then for the other two codes.
: : : Is this correct and does anbody know why this is? Or am I just overlooking something in B31.3?
: : : The acceptance for ASME VIII and B31.1 seem to be exactly the same. They don't allow linear discontinuities over 20% DAC and reject rounded discontinuities when they exceed a certain length and 100%DAC.
: : : As far as I can find; B31.3 does not reject rounded discontinuties. And linear discontinuties are allowed to have some length and are allowed to produce indications up to 100% DAC (similar as is allowed for the rounded indications in VIII and B31.1).
: : : Looking forward to an explanation.
: : : Kind Regards,
: : : Jarno de Jonge
------------ End Original Message ------------




    
 
 

Product Spotlight

High-end Ultrasonic Flaw Detector with 32:128PR PAUT and 2-ch TOFD: SyncScan 2

SIUI’s newly launched SyncScan 2, is a high-end ultrasonic flaw detector with 32:128PR PAUT and
...
2-ch TOFD, which can maximize your efficiency for PA and TOFD. ● Support PA/TOFD/UT ● 32-ch PA is more suitable for inspection on extra-thick wall and high-attenuation material. ● 32-ch PA and 2-ch TOFD work simultaneously. ● Support PR mode for corrosion inspection.
>

Magnetic X-Ray Pipeline Crawler

Zhong Yi brand pipeline crawler is magnetic/micro-video controlled crawler with DC X ray unit inst
...
alled for checking welding of pipeline. Move steadily inside the pipeline 6''-60''diameter with speed of up to 18m/min, Max. moving diatance 5 kilometers and provide the efficient inspection of the pipeline.
>

High-performance Linear Phased Array Probes

Available to order from stock in a range of 5MHz – 7.5MHz and from 16 to 64 elements. Designed w
...
ith piezo-composite elements, Phoenix phased array probes provide high-resolution imaging to maximise sensitivity; accurate ultrasonic detection and sizing of defects in welds; and effective corrosion mapping. Housed in a rugged stainless steel case for on-site industrial NDT applications.
>

GUL QSR1® Scanning

How do you measure pipe wall thickness without direct access to the area? QSR® Scanning - Guide Wav
...
e Quantitative Short Range Scanning.
>

Share...
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Accept
top
this is debug window