Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / WPS / PQR question - Temper bead vs PWHT
- - By engineer1984 (*) Date 05-21-2019 17:44
Hi,

I'm a mechanical engineer that has been tasked with also doing Weld Engineer work as we lost ours.  A replacement doesn't seem likely.

We mainly do repairs (minor to extreme) on industrial sized compressors (think refineries). 

I have a very minor repair to a CA6NM casing (think 1/16" or so depth on a 2"+ casing wall).  The WPS's we have available are for 410 with a PWHT.  As far as I'm concerned, PWHT is a no go.  This is a finished casing with some dimensions as tight as .001".  Relative dimensions are also tight (.001" or so).  Our past W.E. used to specify temper bead as an option.  However, now that he is gone, it makes me wonder if this was something we needed to make 'legit' with a WPS / PQR dedicated to the temper bead method. 

He is a very smart person, so I'm not putting him down or think that his methods were incorrect.  But, I do wonder if we really needed dedicated documentation for this repair as opposed to taking the WPS and changing it.

What does AWS say about this?  I've been doing some looking, but this is a huge document.  Any help would be appreciated. 

PS: I would prefer 309 filler, but until I get a proper 309 / CA6NM WPS/PQR, I may not be able to perform this repair.

Thanks and cheers,
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 05-21-2019 18:09
From what I can see, this is a martensitic stainless steel that is heat treated to provided the necessary properties. AWS does not govern pressurized equipment. This sounds like an ASME type application to me.

Martensitic stainless steel is air hardenable. I don't believe a temper bead technique is applicable in this case.

Al
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / WPS / PQR question - Temper bead vs PWHT

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill