C12A and Code Case.
description
Transcript of C12A and Code Case.
1
Progress Energy’s
Experiences with Quality
Issues on Cast C12A Valve
Bodies
2
Background
As part of the construction of the Richmond County 5 Combined Cycle Unit, large bore C12A valves had been ordered for HP and HRH steam lines
4 – 24” HRH valves and 2 – 16” HP steam valves were ordered.
Early indications of problems
During routine correspondence with the design company it was noticed that numerous base metal repairs had been performed on the valve bodies at the valve manufacturer.
As a result, Progress requested weld documentation including, filler metal chemistries, PWHT charts and hardness data.
The fabricator was unable to supply the data.
3
Emerging Problems
A shop visit was performed to audit the fabricators compliance with the Progress Energy Grade 91 specification.
It was discovered that the fabricator was unaware of the spec even though it had been provided with the contract.
As a result, none of the requirements of spec had been met.
4
Deficiencies discovered
The valves had been processed according to the fabricators standard practices.
The following deficiencies were noted:
Failure to adhere to Ni+Mn content in the filler metals
Inappropriate preheat practices
No moisture control between welding and PWHT
Minimal control of PWHT process
No formal hardness testing procedures
5
Follow up testing
Since the requirements of the spec had not been adhered to, follow up testing was performed.
MT surface examination was performed to ensure no surface cracking from SCC.
Random hardness testing was performed in areas where welds were supposedly performed. Some soft areas were identified.
6
Recovery Plan
Since the delivery schedule was being impacted, the fabricator decided to disassemble the valves, renormalize and temper.
To account for oxidation during heat treatment, the weld prep areas and areas on the bonnet were built up with weld metal.
7
Renormalization and Tempering
Initial attempts at renormalizing the HP valves was unsuccessful due to slow cooling rates.
8
Renormalizing and Tempering
It was also discovered that the standard method of temperature control was with a single TC located at the top of the furnace.
No base metal thermocouples were attached.
Comparisons of temperature trends showed up to 90 minutes of lag time.
After the challenges with N&T, there was also the unanticipated departure of the QC Manager.
9
Further casting problems
After N&T was completed, machining of the valves was started.
As the weld preps were being machined, cracking was found in the areas that were built up.
The cracking was oriented both circumferentially and longitudinally.
10
Crack Locations
11
Crack Locations
12
Crack repairs
The cracks were mostly machined out and those that extended in the base metal were ground and welded.
To ensure there was no further subsurface cracking, Progress requested RT of the bodies.
The RT’s showed no further cracking but revealed extensive casting and shrinkage voids in the 24” valves but not the 16” valves.
All valve bodies were 100% RT’d. 13
Voids
The voids discovered in the 24” valves ranged in size but some were quite extensive.
The voids were compared to reference radiographs to determine acceptability.
3 to 4 areas on each valve body were found to be unacceptable and required repair.
All unacceptable voids were ground out and repaired. Some extended almost through wall.
14
Example of excavations
15
Excavated Voids
16
Void Radiographs
17
Valve Completion
Finally, all valve repairs were completed and the assembled valves were shipped to the site for installation.
As precaution, Mr. Jeff Henry with Structural Integrity was contracted to review all of the QC documentation to ensure that the valves were fit for service.
All valves were found to be fit but numerous concerns had been raised that may need to be addressed at a code level.
18
Issues raised
Handling and processing of C12A cast material is problematic. Foundries and valve fabricators are clearly not up to speed on the proper procedures.
Little to no filler metal chemistry control
Poor preheat practices
Moisture control between welding and PWHT.
Poor PWHT practices, especially in furnace PWHT.
19
Issues continued
No requirement for volumetric examination unless specified by the customer (see A217 supplementary requirements).
QC documentation is not adequately retained. Especially dealing with base metal repairs at the foundry and the fabricator.
This is not an isolated occurrance. Similar issues were found at other fabricators although not to the same extent.
20
Other concerns
Follow up visits to the foundries uncovered other issues such as:
Sequence of heat treatment (N&T then weld repair then PWHT)
Adequacy of temperature monitoring during furnace heat treatment.
No volumetric examination requirements.
21
Now What?
Immediately revise the fabrication specification to include the following items:
Mandatory full volumetric examinations of all castings using radiography
Require thermocouples to be placed directly on the casting bodies at prescribed locations during normalizing, tempering and PWHT.
Require valve manufacturers to communicate requirements to foundries.
22
Existing Equipment
With the issues identified, what is the status of cast valves in the field?
A plan of action was developed to address the status of valves in service.
Review of fabrication documentation.
Development of NDE procedures to identify welds in existing valves.
23
Documentation Review
A review of existing valve fabrication documentation was initiated.
As expected, most of the relevant information did not exist. There was no standard practice for foundries to document weld repairs.
No N&T or PWHT charts were provided from the foundries.
Conclusions: No way to verify that valves were fabricated correctly.
24
NDE Development
Without documentation, the valves would
have to be evaluated individually.
Progress Energy NDE Services began research on how to detect weld repairs in existing valves.
A technique was developed using Eddy Current testing to detect changes in permeability.
This technique has now been used successfully in the field to detect repairs.
25
ASME Code Changes
As a result of the problems encountered, a presentation was made to the ASME Section II/IX Task Group on CSEF Steels.
Changes were proposed to Code Case 2192 to include:
Full volumetric examination
Renormalizing after major repairs
Requirement for attaching TC’s to base metal
Mapping of weld repairs
26
ASME Code Changes
Revised Code Case 2192-7 was passed by ASME Section I at the August Code meetings and was sent to letter ballot.
Next step: Submit the same proposal to ASME B31.1 for action.
27
Questions ?
28