[MW:4868] Calibration of MPI yoke and validity.
Nishad AK
--
Thanks and Regards
Nishad AK
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
Bathula Raghuram (Mumbai - PIPING)
From: material...@googlegroups.com [mailto:material...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nishad AK
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 2:06 PM
To: material...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:4868] Calibration of MPI yoke and validity.
Shashank Vagal
N,
If your weight is certified, traceable to any national standard, recalibration by lifting capacity is usually enough. Additionally, if you have a ferromagnetic plate with artificial flaws at different depths (like in a Keto's ring), it would be more in your favour if you demonstrate to what depth your yoke is good enough.
SV
|
|
Nishad AK
My question is on validity of the MPI instument say for the purpose of project is valid only if that posess a Calibration certificate by a TP agency.or otherwise is acceptable.
Eng/ Mostafa Kamel Hussein
What are the precautions before welding the ductile cast iron in pipe with Ø20?
Is there any NDT can applied after welding?
What is the applicable code for this welding??
SASA
SENTHILKUMAR SWAMINATHAN
In my Org we are doing in house calibrationwith written procedure, but lifting block weight is certified by third party.
Regards,
S.Senthilkumar |
|
Kale, Bhaskar M
with the weigh scale (weight measuring equipment) from the reputed
manufacturer. No calibration certificate of calibration block required
unless any client have the specific requirement. If any one asking to
do the calibration from third party its just wasting of time and
money.
Regards, Bhaskar
On 4/20/10, SENTHILKUMAR SWAMINATHAN <skuma...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> In my Org we are doing in house calibrationwith written procedure, but
> lifting block weight is certified by third party.
>
> Regards,
> S.Senthilkumar
>
> --- On Mon, 19/4/10, Nishad AK <nish...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Nishad AK <nish...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [MW:4871] Calibration of MPI yoke and validity.
> To: material...@googlegroups.com
> Date: Monday, 19 April, 2010, 2:37 PM
>
>
>
>
> My question is on validity of the MPI instument say for the
> purpose of project is valid only if that posess a Calibration certificate by
> a TP agency.or otherwise is acceptable.
>
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Bathula Raghuram (Mumbai - PIPING)
> <R.Ba...@ticb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> In house is acceptable with a written calibration procedure. Permanent
> magnet type shall be calibrated ( check magnetic power) prior to use on
> daily base, and electromagnetic type on yearly basis.
>
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/materials-welding/subscribe?hl=en
>
--
धन्यवाद,
भास्कर मनोहर काळे
+60149129098
Nishad AK
Darcy Morin
pgos...@sympatico.ca
Hi Sasa,
Attached are some guidelines on electrode selection and for welding of cast iron. Cast irons (SG and grey CIs) are weldable to a certain degree, white cast irons are not weldable. The conventional ways are to use Pure Nickel (99% ENi-CI) or Iron Nickel(55% Ni, E-NiFE-CI) electrodes. The later is more suited for welding on rusty, oiled and greased surfaces.
Cast iron could be inspected by conventional LPI and MPI techniques. Often in LPI, the castings would have a tendency to bleed due to entrapment of excessive penetrant, hence proper cleaning of the penetrant are required.
ASME Sec VIII, DIV-1(Chapter UCI) is on cast iron pressure vessel. However welding is not greatly encouraged. Cast iron welding techniques are still more repair welding as of now.
Thanks.
From: pgos...@sympatico.ca [mailto:pgos...@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 10:42 AM
To: GOSWAMI Pradip -THERMAL
Subject: FW: [MW:4880] Welding of cast iron
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 07:39:28 -0700
From: mkh...@yahoo.com
Subject: [MW:4880] Welding of cast iron
To: material...@googlegroups.com
THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Ontario Power Generation Inc.
Arunachalam A
(a) Prior to use, the magnetizing power of electromagnetic
yokes shall have been checked within the past year.
The magnetizing power of permanent magnetic yokes shall
be checked daily prior to use. The magnetizing power of
all yokes shall be checked whenever the yoke has been
damaged or repaired.
have a lifting power of at least 10 lb (4.5 kg) at the maximum
pole spacing that will be used.
shall have a lifting power of at least 40 lb (18 kg) at the
maximum pole spacing that will be used.
reputable manufacturer and stenciled with the applicable
nominal weight prior to first use. A weight need only be
verified again if damaged in a manner that could have
caused potential loss of material.
ARUNACHALAM.A
050-5257122
IT'S BETTER TO LOSE YOUR EGO TO THE ONE YOU LOVE.
THAN TO LOSE THE ONE YOU LOVE ....... BECAUSE OF EGO
Shashank Vagal
The gimmick here is what exactly to take for a "reputable manufacturer" of (weights and) scales and what would be the acceptable scale to weigh and confirm weight. What accuracy is allowed in weighing? The same weight measured by 2 or 3 scales of the same reputed manufacturer can vary. Then what?
As we do, we check the magnetizing power to detect certain depth defects in a mock up; while the stated ASME rulings are observed as a routine guideline.
Even a coil's performance depends a lot on how it is stored, one year is a long enough time when it can deteriorate and won't be as functional as in the beginning.
Just some cautious soundings............
--- On Fri, 23/4/10, Arunachalam A <arun...@gmail.com> wrote: |
|
Kale, Bhaskar M
Hello Mr. Andrew
Here is what I mean from ASME SEC V T-762 Lifting Power of Yokes (MR. Arunachalam A, already provide the exact wording of code what I am trying to say)
So I again repeat no third part calibration certificate required for the weight of calibration only the weight used for calibration must be from reputable manufacture. Unless it is specific requirement from client, seeking the calibration certificate from third party is wasting of money and time.
(d) Each weight shall be weighed with a scale from a reputable manufacturer and stenciled with the applicable nominal weight prior to first use. A weight need only be verified again if damaged in a manner that could have caused potential loss of material.
TK, Sathyaprakash
One of our flange vendors have used Sptroscope JR for performing PMI on SDSS (ASTM A182 F53) flanges.
It is violating two of our requirements
1. Our purchase requisitions wants vendor to remove any PMI marks before supplying the items to us, vendor did not comply
2. Our construction specification allows us only XRF machines for PMI, we did not take this into consideration while approving vendor’s PMI procedure.
Vendor has advised the marks shall only be removed by grinding and their pickling and passivation which was shown as the last stage in the manufacturing ITP was not able to remove the marks.
Now that the items are at our site Please advise
1. If there is any adverse metallurgical effect on the SDSS material because of the sparking on the surface?
2. We have tried removing the spark marks by touching it by pencil grinder and is getting removed is that advisable?
Regards,
Sathyaprakash
_______________________________________________
This message, including any attachments, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, or authorised to receive information on behalf of the recipient, please contact the sender by reply email, and delete all copies of this message. While we have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that this message and any attachments are free from viruses, we cannot guarantee that they are virus free and accept no liability for any damage caused by this message or any attachments. Messages sent or received through our networks may be monitored to ensure compliance with the law, regulation and/or our policies.
______________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________
Declan Foley
there should be no metallurgical problems with this as the depth of penetration of the spark is very small. It would never have been any use as a met tool if the testing caused metallurgical damage.......I had one of these some years ago and just used a file or some emery paper to remove most of the marks. XRF is definitely a better tool to use as you probably know it leaves no marks. Removing the sparks should not cause you any problems as they are just cosmetic in this instance.
regards
Declan
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5248 (20100703) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com