api 934f task group discussion items based on comments received on initial rough draft n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
API 934F Task Group – Discussion Items Based on Comments Received on Initial Rough Draft PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
API 934F Task Group – Discussion Items Based on Comments Received on Initial Rough Draft

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 5

API 934F Task Group – Discussion Items Based on Comments Received on Initial Rough Draft - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 360 Views
  • Uploaded on

API 934F Task Group – Discussion Items Based on Comments Received on Initial Rough Draft. API 934F Task Group Meeting September 23, 2014, Alexandria, VA. Jim McLaughlin Editor, API RP-934F. Discussion Items.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'API 934F Task Group – Discussion Items Based on Comments Received on Initial Rough Draft' - kaye-moon


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
api 934f task group discussion items based on comments received on initial rough draft

API 934F Task Group – Discussion Items Based on Comments Received on Initial Rough Draft

API 934F Task Group Meeting

September 23, 2014, Alexandria, VA

Jim McLaughlin

Editor, API RP-934F

discussion items
Discussion Items
  • Starting point temperature for fast fracture considerations based on temper embrittlement considerations
    • Guidance based on industry experience and Charpy 40 ft-lb transition temperature
      • It is noted Charpy data indicates higher 40 ft-lb transition temperature for some specific examples compared with guidance on starting point temperature
      • Specific examples typically included welds that would not be considered limiting in an assessment – circumferential and pad support welds
      • Data of concern – one case where base plate had a transition temperature about 400°F
  • Use of curve for a hydrogen concentration ratio of 1.54 for Level 2 assessment procedure – Is it conservative enough to address most likely crack geometries to be encountered in a reactor vessel?
    • Hydrogen concentration ratio is 0.92 for compact tension test samples
    • Similar but less deep crack geometries expected in reactor vessels
discussion items continued
Discussion Items (continued)
  • Temperature dependence of HEAC in 2¼-1Mo-V steel
    • Summary/continuation of Dr. Nibur discussion
    • Additional funding for HEAC testing at higher temperatures
  • J-factor for high impurity tested plate is 312 and X-bar for high impurity tested weldments is 25
    • Current industry chemistry control is J-factor 100 or less and X-bar 12 or less
    • See plot for typical heats before chemistry control employed – several heats have J-factor above 312
  • Growth of embedded crack-like flaws
    • Industry experience and 2 sets of testing show that embedded crack-like flaws do not grow
    • Draft document concludes that growth of embedded crack-like flaws is a non-credible event
    • Is this conclusion supported by the Task Group?
discussion items continued1
Discussion Items (continued)
  • Should the document include more information on Dr. Anderson’s approach to hydrogen assisted slow stable crack growth
    • Present plan is to include this approach as an example of a Level 3 MPT assessment
  • Other discussion items
  • Next steps for API 934F document
    • Include Level 3 examples into the document
    • Include Appendices into the document
      • Appendix C needs to be written
    • Continue to include comments/corrections as received into document
    • Before Spring 2015 meeting have document edited by Mary Buchheim