NDT in Lieu of Hydrotesting

Date 06-28-2005 04:04

I'm a little confused. I came across this B31.3 Interpretation.

ASME B31.3 Interpretations No. 17.
Interpretation: 17-10, which states the following:

"Date Issued: May 19, 1998

File: B31-98-011

Question: In accordance with ASME B31.3b, paragraph 345.9(a), is 100% UT examination an acceptable substitute for 100% radiography?

Reply: No!"

Para. 345.9 describes the examination requirements for welds that will not be subjected to hydrotesting.

I am looking at B31.3 2002 Edition, however, Para. 345.9 states 100% radiography or 100% UT shall be performed.

Has the code committee changed their position on this or am I reading it wrong? If so, has this interpretation been deleted?

By jon20013 (*****)

Date 06-28-2005 11:48

Very good question. I haven't looked at the latest edition but I suggest you copy your question and contact Joe Wendler; wendlerj@asme.org for a response, if you do, how about updating us?

By NDTIII

Date 06-28-2005 13:16

Thanks Jon. I've aready sent Joe an email and am waiting for his response. I will keep you posted.
I also found this interpretation: 18-15 Dated Nov. 1, 2000. File No. B31-00-031; which basically states the same thing as the other interpretation.

By NDTIII

Date 01-18-2006 11:18

FYI:
I have received a response from the B31.3 Committee regarding this issue and they have indicated that the 2002 Edition of the code has been changed to supercede the response to Inquiry 17-10.

By jon20013 (*****)

Date 01-18-2006 13:08

Very cool! I've found ASME to be very responsive to inquiries and interpretation requests. A very good organization.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 01-18-2006 14:21

Jon,
Does it really take a half a year to get an answer to a question?
John Wright

By tito

Date 01-18-2006 15:09

lol! I thought the exact same thing when I saw the duration between responses.

By jon20013 (*****)

Date 01-18-2006 16:19

John; when requests are received, they are assigned a number and , just like AWS, then forwarded to the Committee and Subcommittee Chairs as applicable for action.

It really depends on when the request was sent in, if it were sent just after (or during) a time when the committee had either just met or were currently meeting, naturally a response would take longer. If it were received just before a committee meeting but in time to forward to the working unit the answer might come sooner!

Six months really isn't a horribly long time to wait considering the committee's meet only once every three months... one has to remember that when inquiries or requests for interpretations are received the are answered by the consensus Committee, not by a technical secretary.

Anyone who has sent a similar request to AWS would find approximately the same times, if not even longer.