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 -
3854 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



 
 Reply 
 
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 ------------




 
 Reply 
 
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 ------------




 
 Reply 
 
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 ------------




 
 Reply 
 
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 ------------




 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

Cygnus 6+ PRO Multi-Mode Ultrasonic Thickness Gauge

The Cygnus 6+ PRO thickness gauge is the most advance gauge within the Cygnus range with key featu
...
res including: comprehensive data logging; A-scan and B-scan display; manual gain control; Bluetooth connectivity; and much more. With its unique dual display and three measuring modes (Multiple-Echo, Echo-Echo and Single-Echo), this surface thickness gauge offers maximum versatility for inspections.
>

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.
>

FD800 Bench Top Flaw Detectors

The bench-top FD800 flaw detector range combines state-of-the-art flaw detection with advanced mater
...
ial thickness capabilities. Designed for use in the laboratory these gauges are the tool you need for all your flaw detecting needs.
>

SITEX CPSERIES

Teledyne ICM’s CPSERIES has been designed with a view to revolutionizing the handling and perfor
...
mances of portable X-Ray sets. Despite having managed to halve the weight of similar portable X-Ray generators available on the market (while continuing to provide the same power output), the SITEX CPSERIES generators feature a shutter, a laser pointer, a beryllium window, an aluminum filter and two integrated diaphragms (customized sizes are available upon request). Without compromising the robustness and reliability for which ICM products are renowned, the small size and light weight of the SITEX CPSERIES will radically change the way that you perform your RT inspections. And you will see a positive impact in terms of both quality and return on investment (ROI).
>

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