Regarding the selection of pipe materials and the determination of standard year numbers
Thread Content
This post was last written by gn_Edited by 1984 on 2017-8-8 13:15 Basically all the referenced standards in GB/T150-2011 do not have the year number written, and they are regarded as the latest standards. Only the pipe standard GB6479-2000 has the year number written. Question one: When you encounter pipes in GB6479 when designing or manufacturing, would you like to use the latest version 2013 directly or follow the 2000 version? Question 2: If the design has already used the 2000 version, do you need to contact the designer during manufacturing to purchase and produce pipes according to the 2013 version? Question three: If it is a design, the 10# pipe in GB6479 should be used, but the corresponding mechanical properties and allowable stress at different temperatures of this material cannot be found in GB/T150.2-2011. Does this mean that this material cannot be used? Or if you want to use it, how do you handle it when calculating? And are there any objections to the supervisory inspection after product design using materials whose corresponding mechanical properties and allowable stresses at different temperatures cannot be found in GB/T150.2-2011?
In the second article of the general provisions of GB150.2, I wonder if it is that requirement.
Our design directly adopts GB/T6479-2013, without using the 2000 version. The 2013 version meets the requirements of the 2016 version of the solid content regulations for the S and P content of steel pipes. We have not used 6479 10-tube steel pipes in our design, but I think it should be possible to use 9948 10-tube related parameters. However, it is best to communicate with the supervisory inspection in advance.
With that said, does it require a technical review to use the 10# steel in GB6479? In the past, it could still be used in the 98 version of the standard, but now there is no 10# steel in GB6479 in GB/T151-2011. I wonder if the person who wrote the standard missed it, or for some other reason?
When we design, we also directly use the latest 2013 standards. Logically speaking, the design institute should be more familiar with and use the new standards more freely. Why is it that the 2013 version has been in effect for two or three years, and design institutes are basically still using the 2000 version? I wonder if they have any concerns during the design or what? unknown.
For those who use steel grades not included in GB/T150.2-2011 and have experience in using them before, this should be possible. The design should be discussed with the pot inspection institute. From a procedural point of view, it should be best to write a technical review according to the standard requirements, which should be very troublesome. I also replied on the second floor. I personally doubt that the 10# steel in GB6479 was omitted when writing the standard. :lol:lol
For those who use steel grades not included in GB/T150.2-2011 and have experience in using them before, this should be possible. The design should be discussed with the pot inspection institute. From a procedural point of view, it should be best to write a technical review according to the standard requirements, which should be very troublesome. I also replied on the second floor. I personally doubt that the 10# steel in GB6479 was omitted when writing the standard. :lol:lol
Our design directly adopts GB/T6479-2013
The poster has a very good question. We also have a lot of confusion. Only 6479 in the reference standard of GB150.2 has a year number, and it also stipulates many restrictions. At a later training, I heard experts explain why this belongs to the Compliance Committee and the Standard Editorial Committee, so I can’t say more. Our approach is: 1. The design drawings should use GB6479-2000 according to the requirements of GB150. 2. Apply for a material change order during manufacturing and propose to replace it with Q345D or E of the 13th edition. The design will approve it and put forward corresponding requirements. 3. There must be a reason why No. 10 steel of 6479 was not selected for GB150. It is better to implement the design according to 150 to save trouble.
Coincidentally, this time the company received a batch of external drawings, designed by the design institute. It is the 10# steel in GB6479-2000. When I looked up the standards, I found that this steel number is not included in 150. For manufacturing, we can only propose new standard materials. Regarding the design, I am just very confused, and I don’t know how the design institute did it during the design. So I brought it up for discussion with everyone.