"The Opinion/idea expressed in this Topic has no experimentation/documentations proof, its entirely a personal idea with no approval in any forum. Keeping in view of critical condition of the ammonia converter weld joint, such ideas may emerge time and again and will be placed here just for sake of discussion and brain storming. Reader may agree/disagree."
Recently, as working in a petrochemical industry one of our high pressure equipment got leaked owing to crack in shell weld joint (110mm thick shell). After insulation removal, one thorough transverse crack was observed along with three more transverse subsurface cracks that were revealed in Ultrasonic Testing of faulty weld seam of the Ammonia converter. The thorough crack was boxed up using plate (110mm x 50mm x20mm) , however, it was decided nothing to do with the subsurface cracks and plant was put into operation.
My opinion was also the same to keep those subsurface crack untouched. In my point of view, if the patch-up plate was welded on these subsurface cracks then it would cause more harm to the weld joint. In my opinion, due to high pressure and temperature, the patch-plate may restrict the growth of transverse crack but the possibility of reorientation of these subsurface crack toward the circumference of the weld joint increases which may result total failure of complete weld joint. So let the subsurface crack loose their residual stresses by appearing on the surface as transverse crack. The point will come in trailing discussion about the advantage of installation of patch-up plate on open crack and disadvantage of installation of patchup plate on subsurface crack.
"Weld Cracks are not friendly but in the given condition(in case of faulty weld joint where we all are handicapped for the time being) the transverse cracks are far better than the circumferential cracks."
I am sorry if reader of this blog not agree what i am going to elaborate below. The idea just comes in mind and we have to brainstorm on it in a logical way keeping all merits and demerits in mind. I know that the cracks formation and their growth is a very complex phenomena (Nitriding, Hydrogen induced cracking, poor heat treatment, Fatigue, poor workmanship etc). May be some among us directly reject what am i writing about now but any silly idea may be thoroughly reviewed with open mind so i am putting this idea with a very simple assumptions.
Let us explore following three cases. In these cases suppose a sample segment from faulty weld joint of this high pressure equipment shell. Please click on the following picture so that all three cases can be viewed.
Again i am fully aware that the crack growth and initiation is a complex phenomena and their are many many variables involves. But,for the sake of discussion, lets proceed further:
Considering above cases, lets compare case-II with Case-III, In my opinion, case-III may at least restrict or minimize the growth of crack and initiation of new cracks as compare to case-II. So what comes in mind..PRESSURE BALANCING?... If you are not getting bored then keep reading as i am going to disclose some real example to prove this fact.
How the pressure balancing can be done on the shell weld joint? Here is a clamp design with factor of safety =9. Detailed engineering can be carried out on the clamp but my FEA results shows some major dimension of the clamp that can be further reduced as FOS =9 is a bit on higher side which is a positive sign.
The idea is to enclose the circumferential weld joint with a segmental PRESSURE BEARING clamp which is pressurized externally with a inert gas to the same pressure as within the shell.(All the segments of the clamp are welded together)
SUPPORTING POINTS TO PRESSURE BALANCING:
EXAMPLE-I:
Many of us had seen the Nozzle welded on the 1st crack on the same weld seam in the planned outage in 2012. Look the following picture:
Can you see a bigger crack inside the nozzle;) yes that one which is 1 inch width of slot, milled . In my Opinion, that 1inch slot is also a type of crack wide open inside the nozzle.
Following questions comes in mind:
1- Is the initial crack really eliminated by slot drilling/milling?
2- Are we sure there are no fissures/microcrack left in the slot periphery?
3- Why the plate was not welded on the above slot? Why the slot kept open?
4-What may be the disadvantage of welding of plate on the slot?
5- Are they getting the advantage of PRESSURE BALANCING with the open slot?
Some More Questions:
1- Can we install The PRESSURE BALANCING clamp instead of nozzle?
2- What is the difference between the Nozzle and the Properly designed box-up clamp?
3- Nozzle was welded on the shell membrane, can't we weld the boxup clamp similarly?
4- Nozzle has top blind with ring joint gasket, the boxup clamp does not require gasket as well as blind flange.
Now, we knew that it will be difficult to install nozzle arrangements if the cracks appears time and again due to limitation of space.
EXAMPLE-II:
At the time of first crack appeared on the weld of the equipment, we have welded 100mm x 50mm x20mm low-alloy plate. Actually that plate was also doing PRESSURE BALANCING as the crack was wide open and the plate was pressurized to reactor pressure after plant startup. The plate remained upto few months and crack didn't enlarged and escaped through the plate boundary. However, its better to cover more healthy area when we are talking about pressure balancing.
EXAMPLE-III:
Just after TA, a crack appeared on the downstream piping (ASTM A335 P1) of waste heat boiler at pipe-elbow weld joint . A clamp was welded on-line on that piping-elbow interface and was then removed in the next outage!.. It gave two year service and didn't propagated.
EXAMPLE-VI:
We can see thin partition plates inside high pressure vessel/exchangers that hold there shape even at higher pressure due to the fact of PRESSURE BALANCING.
ADVANTAGE OF PRESSURE BEARING- PRESSURE BALANCING CLAMP:
1- Retard the growth of existing cracks.
2- Retard the initiation of new cracks.
3- Pressure bearing, In case crack appear on surface within clamp periphery.
4- Can borrow us time for coming up to long term solution.
The discussion is kept open. Comments are appreciated.
Recently, as working in a petrochemical industry one of our high pressure equipment got leaked owing to crack in shell weld joint (110mm thick shell). After insulation removal, one thorough transverse crack was observed along with three more transverse subsurface cracks that were revealed in Ultrasonic Testing of faulty weld seam of the Ammonia converter. The thorough crack was boxed up using plate (110mm x 50mm x20mm) , however, it was decided nothing to do with the subsurface cracks and plant was put into operation.
My opinion was also the same to keep those subsurface crack untouched. In my point of view, if the patch-up plate was welded on these subsurface cracks then it would cause more harm to the weld joint. In my opinion, due to high pressure and temperature, the patch-plate may restrict the growth of transverse crack but the possibility of reorientation of these subsurface crack toward the circumference of the weld joint increases which may result total failure of complete weld joint. So let the subsurface crack loose their residual stresses by appearing on the surface as transverse crack. The point will come in trailing discussion about the advantage of installation of patch-up plate on open crack and disadvantage of installation of patchup plate on subsurface crack.
"Weld Cracks are not friendly but in the given condition(in case of faulty weld joint where we all are handicapped for the time being) the transverse cracks are far better than the circumferential cracks."
I am sorry if reader of this blog not agree what i am going to elaborate below. The idea just comes in mind and we have to brainstorm on it in a logical way keeping all merits and demerits in mind. I know that the cracks formation and their growth is a very complex phenomena (Nitriding, Hydrogen induced cracking, poor heat treatment, Fatigue, poor workmanship etc). May be some among us directly reject what am i writing about now but any silly idea may be thoroughly reviewed with open mind so i am putting this idea with a very simple assumptions.
Let us explore following three cases. In these cases suppose a sample segment from faulty weld joint of this high pressure equipment shell. Please click on the following picture so that all three cases can be viewed.
Again i am fully aware that the crack growth and initiation is a complex phenomena and their are many many variables involves. But,for the sake of discussion, lets proceed further:
Considering above cases, lets compare case-II with Case-III, In my opinion, case-III may at least restrict or minimize the growth of crack and initiation of new cracks as compare to case-II. So what comes in mind..PRESSURE BALANCING?... If you are not getting bored then keep reading as i am going to disclose some real example to prove this fact.
How the pressure balancing can be done on the shell weld joint? Here is a clamp design with factor of safety =9. Detailed engineering can be carried out on the clamp but my FEA results shows some major dimension of the clamp that can be further reduced as FOS =9 is a bit on higher side which is a positive sign.
The idea is to enclose the circumferential weld joint with a segmental PRESSURE BEARING clamp which is pressurized externally with a inert gas to the same pressure as within the shell.(All the segments of the clamp are welded together)
SUPPORTING POINTS TO PRESSURE BALANCING:
EXAMPLE-I:
Many of us had seen the Nozzle welded on the 1st crack on the same weld seam in the planned outage in 2012. Look the following picture:
Can you see a bigger crack inside the nozzle;) yes that one which is 1 inch width of slot, milled . In my Opinion, that 1inch slot is also a type of crack wide open inside the nozzle.
Following questions comes in mind:
1- Is the initial crack really eliminated by slot drilling/milling?
2- Are we sure there are no fissures/microcrack left in the slot periphery?
3- Why the plate was not welded on the above slot? Why the slot kept open?
4-What may be the disadvantage of welding of plate on the slot?
5- Are they getting the advantage of PRESSURE BALANCING with the open slot?
Some More Questions:
1- Can we install The PRESSURE BALANCING clamp instead of nozzle?
2- What is the difference between the Nozzle and the Properly designed box-up clamp?
3- Nozzle was welded on the shell membrane, can't we weld the boxup clamp similarly?
4- Nozzle has top blind with ring joint gasket, the boxup clamp does not require gasket as well as blind flange.
Now, we knew that it will be difficult to install nozzle arrangements if the cracks appears time and again due to limitation of space.
EXAMPLE-II:
At the time of first crack appeared on the weld of the equipment, we have welded 100mm x 50mm x20mm low-alloy plate. Actually that plate was also doing PRESSURE BALANCING as the crack was wide open and the plate was pressurized to reactor pressure after plant startup. The plate remained upto few months and crack didn't enlarged and escaped through the plate boundary. However, its better to cover more healthy area when we are talking about pressure balancing.
EXAMPLE-III:
Just after TA, a crack appeared on the downstream piping (ASTM A335 P1) of waste heat boiler at pipe-elbow weld joint . A clamp was welded on-line on that piping-elbow interface and was then removed in the next outage!.. It gave two year service and didn't propagated.
EXAMPLE-VI:
We can see thin partition plates inside high pressure vessel/exchangers that hold there shape even at higher pressure due to the fact of PRESSURE BALANCING.
ADVANTAGE OF PRESSURE BEARING- PRESSURE BALANCING CLAMP:
1- Retard the growth of existing cracks.
2- Retard the initiation of new cracks.
3- Pressure bearing, In case crack appear on surface within clamp periphery.
4- Can borrow us time for coming up to long term solution.
The discussion is kept open. Comments are appreciated.














