ASME SECTION IX INTERPRETATIONS NOTE: THE NOTE: THESE SE INTERPRET INTERPRETATIO ATIONS NS ARE FOR ASME COMMITT COMMITTEE EE USE ONLY. THEY TH EY AR ARE E NO NOT T TO BE DU DUPL PLIC ICAT ATED ED OR US USED ED FO FOR R OT OTHE HER R TH THAN AN AS ASME ME COMMITTEE BUSINESS. WARNING: THERE MAY BE SOME TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN THIS DOCUME DOCUMENT. NT. PLEASE PLEASE REVIEW REVIEW TH THE E ACTUA ACTUAL L INTER INTERPRE PRETAT TATION ION FOR TH THE E EXACT WORDING. TO GET A PRINTED COPY OF AN INTERPRETATION, FIRST HIGHLIGHT THE PORTION PORTION DESIR DESIRED ED,, TH THEN EN GO GOTO TO File File ON TH THE E TO TOOL OLBA BAR, R, THE THEN N Print. Print... .. , THEN HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHT THE DOT DOT AT THE (Selection BUTTON, BUTTON, FINALLY PRESS THE OK BUTTON. BE CAREFUL NOT TO PRINT THE ENTIRE ENTIRE DOCUMENT (1 Page). Page).
VOLUME 33 Interpretation: IX-92-59 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-3 QW-306 06,, Com Combi bina nati tion on of Weldi elding ng Pro Process cesses es;; QWQW-45 452 2.1 and and QW-4 QW-452 52.3 .3,, Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-206
Background: The combination of welding welding processes and pipe diameters diameters listed below were were used for performance qualification: (1) 2 in. Sch. 80 (.218) pipe pipe with open butt using GTAW process. (2) 2 in. Sch. 160 (.343) (.343) pipe with consumable insert insert and fill pass using the GRAW process and the remainder welded with SMAW process. (3) 6 in. XXS (.864) (.864) using using SMAW process process with with backing. backing. Question: Using the combinations listed in the Background, Background, in accordance with QW-306, Note 2 of QW-452.1 to determine maximum thickness qualified, and QW-452.3 for minimum diameter qualification, is the welder qualified to weld on unlimited thickness and diameters above 1 in., using either an open butt joint or a consumable insert with the root la yer deposited with the GTAW process and the remainder deposited with the SM AW process? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-60 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-21 -214, Corr Corros osiion-R on-Res esiistan stantt Weld eld Meta Metall Overla erlay y Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-421
Question: When corrosion-resistant corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay is deposited deposited in a base material groove groove to a depth that is not included in the design calculations, must the deposit be tested as a groove weld?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-61 Subj Subjec ect: t: Sect Sectio ion n II, II, Part Part C; SFASFA-5. 5.13 13,, Spec Specif ific icat atio ion n for for Soli Solid d Surf Surfac acin ing g We Weld ldin ing g Rod Rodss and Electrodes Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-422
Question: May powdered filler metal be classified classified under Section II, Part C, SFA 5.13? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-62 Subject: QW-408.2, Shielding Gas Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-425
Question (1): When changing shielding gases of a specific mixture, is it permissible to adjust adjust the nominal percentage(s) of the minor component(s) by +/- 20% without requalifying the procedure? Reply (1): No. Question (2): In addition, when the absolute absolute value of +/- 20% times times the nominal percentage of a minor component is less than 1%, would it be permissible to make a +/- 1% adjustment to the gas mixture? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-92-63 Subject: QW-153.1, Tensile Strength Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-452
Question: A welding procedure qualification qualification test coupon is is welded using P-No. 23, SB-209, alloy 6061 aluminum aluminum base material in the (“o”) temper. After welding the test coupon, coupon, it is subjected to a “T-6” heat treatment. treatment. To establish acceptability acceptability of tensile tests per QW-153.1, QW-153.1, may the tensile requirements of QW-422 for SB-209, alloy 6061 (T4 and T6 tempers in the welded condition) be used? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-64 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-32 -322, Expi Expirratio ation n and and Ren Renewal ewal of Quali alific ficatio ation n Date Issued: May 26, 1993 File No: 93-148
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-61 Subj Subjec ect: t: Sect Sectio ion n II, II, Part Part C; SFASFA-5. 5.13 13,, Spec Specif ific icat atio ion n for for Soli Solid d Surf Surfac acin ing g We Weld ldin ing g Rod Rodss and Electrodes Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-422
Question: May powdered filler metal be classified classified under Section II, Part C, SFA 5.13? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-62 Subject: QW-408.2, Shielding Gas Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-425
Question (1): When changing shielding gases of a specific mixture, is it permissible to adjust adjust the nominal percentage(s) of the minor component(s) by +/- 20% without requalifying the procedure? Reply (1): No. Question (2): In addition, when the absolute absolute value of +/- 20% times times the nominal percentage of a minor component is less than 1%, would it be permissible to make a +/- 1% adjustment to the gas mixture? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-92-63 Subject: QW-153.1, Tensile Strength Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Febr Febru uary ary 22 22, 199 1993 3 File No: 92-452
Question: A welding procedure qualification qualification test coupon is is welded using P-No. 23, SB-209, alloy 6061 aluminum aluminum base material in the (“o”) temper. After welding the test coupon, coupon, it is subjected to a “T-6” heat treatment. treatment. To establish acceptability acceptability of tensile tests per QW-153.1, QW-153.1, may the tensile requirements of QW-422 for SB-209, alloy 6061 (T4 and T6 tempers in the welded condition) be used? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-64 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-32 -322, Expi Expirratio ation n and and Ren Renewal ewal of Quali alific ficatio ation n Date Issued: May 26, 1993 File No: 93-148
Background: A welding operator is in the process of renewing his/her his/her qualification using using machine GTAW welding equipment. equipment. During the process the machine machine malfunctions and burns through the root root pass of the test test coupon. No operator error error is noted. Following the the malfunction, the test coupon is repaired using using a manual GTAW process. process. After the repair, the machine welding welding equipment is used to complete the rest of the test coupon. Question: May a welding operator performance performance test coupon being welded for for qualification or renewal, be repaired prior to testing, using a manual welding procedure? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-65 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-4 QW-423 23.1 .1,, Alte Altern rnat atee Base Base Meta Metals ls for for We Weld lder er Qual Qualif ific icat atio ion n Date Issued: May 26, 1993 File No: 93-148
Question: In QW-423.1, is P-No. P-No. 42 included in P-No. 4X? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-66 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-2 QW-201 01,, Manu Manufa fact ctur urer er’s ’s or Cont Contra ract ctor or’s ’s Resp Respon onsi sibi bili lity ty Date Issued: May 26, 1993 File No: 93-377
Background: Company A and Company B merge divisions divisions to form new Company C. Question (1): May the new Company, Company, C, use PQRs and WPSs developed previously by Company A and Company B? Reply (1): Yes, provided operational operational control is in accordance with with QW-201. Question (2): May the new Company, Company, C, use the central materials laboratory of Company A to develop WPSs and PQRs? Reply (2): Yes, provided operational operational control is in accordance with with QW-201.
Interpretation: IX-92-67 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-2 QW-201 01,, Manu Manufa fact ctur urer er’s ’s or Cont Contra ract ctor or’s ’s Resp Respon onsi sibi bili lity ty Date Issued: May 26, 1993 File No: 93-391
Question: In a contract involving piping construction construction work, our company subcontracted the piping prefabrication work work to a subcontractor. This subcontractor subcontractor is managed by our company but has a different name. The subcontractor proceeded proceeded to qualify welding procedures procedures which were conducted in the presence and with the approval of our company’s welding engineer, who monitored the welding of the the test coupons and signed approval approval on the PQRs. The Quality Control System of the subcontractor and our company fully describe the operational control of
procedure qualifications. Was our client right in rejecting the use by our company of the subcontractor qualified welding procedures for the erection work of the prefabricated piping? Reply: This is a contractual issue, which ASME does not address.
Interpretation: IX-92-68 Subject: QW-306, Combination of Welding Processes; and QW-451, Groove Weld Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued: June 30, 1993 File No: 92-011A
Question: In using a single set of test specimens to qualify two or more processes or procedures, does Section IX specify a minimum weld deposit thickness to be included in each test specimen from each of the processes or procedures? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-69 Subject: QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued: June 30, 1993 File No: 92-011B, 92-228, 92-353
Question: Is it the intent of QW-409.1 that the heat input, to be recorded on the PQR, be calculated based on the parameters used at the location where the impact specimens were removed? Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 34 Interpretation: IX-92-70R Subject: QW-403.5, Base Metals Date Issued: June 4, 2001 File No: 00-470
Question (1): When a procedure qualification with supplemental notch toughness requirement is conducted with one P-Number material having multiple certifications in different Group Numbers, are WPSs qualified for all combinations of the Group Numbers? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): In the above question, does one set of HAZ impact specimens, when required, satisfy the requirements of Section IX? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): When a procedure qualification with supplemental notch toughness requirement is conducted with two materials of different P-Number each having multiple certifications in
different Group Numbers, are WPSs qualified for all combinations of the multiple certified Group Number of the first P-Number material to the multiple certified Group Number of the second P Number material? Reply (3): Yes. Question (4): In the above question, does one set of HAZ impact specimens from each P-Number material, when required, satisfy the requirement of Section IX? Reply (4): Yes. Question (5): In Question (3), are materials from the multiple certified Group Numbers qualified for welding a P-Number material to itself? Reply (5): No. Note: The term “multiple certifications” as used means any material for which a material test report indicates that the material meets all the requirements of two or more specifications, grades, types, or classes.
Interpretation: IX-92-71 Subject: QW-302.4, Visual Examination Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-365
Question: Are welders or welding operators qualified in accordance with Section IX, prior to the 1992 Addenda, for which the results of visual examination required by QW-302.4 were not documented on the WPQ, required to requalify in order that visual examination results may be documented? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-72 Subject: QW-381(c), Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay; QW-453 and QW-461.9, Performance Qualification Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-392
Question (1): May welder qualifications for corrosion-resistant overlays per QW-381 and QW453 be made on plate, when qualifying for welding on pipe/tubes parallel to the axis of the pipe/tubes? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2a): Should the side bends required in QW-453 consist of the base metal plus overlay thickness, after surface conditioning per Note 4 of QW-453? Question (2b): When the overlay test specimens are less than ⅜ in. thick, may the side bend specimen width be the test specimen thickness?
Question (2c): May the edges of the overlay be outside of the bent area as long as at least a 1½ in. width of overlay and HAZ are completely within the bend? Reply (2a): Yes. Reply (2b): Yes. Reply (2c): Yes. Question (3): may QW-461.9 Groove-Pipe be used for the position essential variable rules for welder qualifications on corrosion-resistant overlap? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-73 Subject: QW-321.3, Welder Qualification After Further Training or Practice Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-468
Background: A welder performance qualification test plate fails to meet the radiographic requirements for qualification. After further training a new performance qualification test plate is welded. Question: May the new test plate be evaluated by bend testing? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-74 Subject: QB-402.1, Base Metals Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-474
Question: When brazing material used for a procedure qualification test is not listed in QB-422 or Appendix C, but is similar to P-No. 107 or S-No. 107 materials listed in QB-422 or Appendix C, may this material be considered P-No. 107 or S-No. 107 material in accordance with QB402.1? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-75 Subject: QW-200.4(b), Combination of Welding Procedures Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-490
Question: When writing multi-process welding procedures per QW-200.4(a), where the tube wall thickness is less than 1 in., using a separate qualification for the root deposit only, must the root deposit qualification coupon be ½ in. minimum thickness as stated in QW-200.4(b)?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-76 Subject: QW-462, Test Specimens Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-515
Question: QW-462 defines W as “specimen width, ¾ in.”. Is ¾ in. a minimum or maximum dimension requirement for preparing a reduced section tensile specimen? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-77 Subject: QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures; and QW-451.4, Fillet Welds Qualified by Groove Weld Tests Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-518
Background: A butt welding procedure qualification was completed on a pipe with E6010 electrode (F-No. 3) for the root pass and E7018 electrode (F-No. 4) for the remaining process. Question (1): Will the above procedure qualification alone support a WPS to make a fillet weld with E7018 electrodes (F-No. 4) for all the passes for all fillet sizes on all base metal thicknesses when all the other essential variables under QW-253, SMAW process, are the same? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Will the above procedure qualification alone support a WPS to make a butt weld with E7018 electrodes (F-No. 4) for all the passes including the root pass within the limits of qualification of QW-451.1 and within the limits of the essential variables under QW-253, SMAW process? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-78 Subject: QW-200.2(b), Welding Procedure Qualifications Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-561
Question (1): May a company subcontract weld procedure development and qualification, including certification of the PQR, without a company representative present to witness the welding, testing and certification? Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May a company subcontract weld procedure development and qualification, including certification of the PQR, with a company representative present to witness the welding, testing and certification? Reply (2): No. Interpretation: IX-92-79 Subject: QW-151.1, Tension Tests, Reduced Section-Plate; and QW-462.1(a), Test Specimens Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-583
Question (1): Is it permissible to reduce a plate test coupon thickness beyond removing the reinforcement to allow for parallel surfaces? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): What percentage of the thickness is permissible to be removed for procedure qualification? Reply (2): The minimum necessary to obtain parallel surfaces.
Interpretation: IX-92-80 Subject: QW-103, Responsibility; and QW-210, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-584
Question: When a company changes names during the course of time must all the historical documents, such as PQRs and WPQs, be revised to show this new name? Reply: No, provided there is documented traceability from the new company name to the WPSs and PQRs qualified under the old company name.
Interpretation: IX-92-81 Subject: QW-103.1 and QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: October 18, 1993 File No: 92-306
Question (1): According to Section IX, para. QW-201, is it permissible for a manufacturer or contractor to have the welding of the test weldments performed by another organization? Reply (1): No. Question (2): According to para. QW-201, is it permissible to subcontract the work preparation of test metal for welding and subsequent work on preparation of test specimens from the completed weldment, performance of nondestructive examination, and mechanical test, provided that the manufacturer or contractor accepts the responsibility for any such work?
Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): If the manufacturer or contractor writes the WPS and the welder used to produce weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures are under full supervision and control of a representative of the manufacturer or contractor during the production of these test weldments, may the welder be an employee of another organization? Reply (3): No.
Interpretation: IX-92-82 Subject: Code Case 2141, Electrodes and Fluxes for Submerged Arc Welding, SFA 5.17 and SFA 5.23 Date Issued: November 22, 1993 File No: 93-434
Question (1): Does the “Manufacturer’s Date Report” in the Section IX Code Case 2141 mean the following: (a) Manufacturer’s Data Report required in PG-112 of Section I; (b) Data Report required in NCA-3770 of Section III; (c) Data Report required in UG-120 of Section VIII, Division 1; or (d) Manufacturer’s Data Report required in AS-300 of Section VIII, Division 2? Reply (1): A Manufacturer’s Data Report form is any data report from that is required in an ASME Code Book. Question (2): Is it required to describe this Code Case number on procurement and/or manufacturer’s specifications and certified material test report of welding consumables? Reply (2): Section IX does not address procurement and manufacturer’s specifications.
Interpretation: IX-92-83 Subject: QB-415, Brazing Variables Date Issued: September 22, 1993 File No: 93-527
Question (1): Does ASME Section IX permit braze welding qualifications, using the rules of Part QW, Welding? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): May a fabricator qualify hard-facing, using the brazing variables listed in QB-415? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-92-84 Subject: QW-407.2, Postweld Heat Treatment Date Issued: November 22, 1993 File No: 93-586
Background: A PQR was welded on a 2 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material and post weld heat treated at 1150°F for six hours (3 hrs/in.) with supplementary essential variable requirements. Question: Will this PQR support a WPS for a production weld in 2 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material that is PWHT at 1150°F for 2 hours (1 hr/in.)? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-85 Subject: QB-121 and AB-123, Brazing Test Positions Date Issued: November 22, 1993 File No: 93-655
Question: If the test material is oriented at 15 deg. above horizontal (i.e., 75 deg. down from vertical) and the brazing filler metal flows upward by capillary action through the joint, would the brazer then be qualified for both the flat-flow and vertical-upflow positions? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-86 Subject: QW-100.3, Welding General Requirements Date Issued: November 22, 1993 File No: 93-658
Question: May a hard-facing procedure qualification test that was performed in 1990 on a 1 in. thick test coupon and is used to support a welding procedure specification written in 1993, be used to deposit a hard-facing overlay on a base material 1 in. to unlimited thickness? Reply: Yes. QW-100.3 allows welding procedure specifications (WPSs) to be supported by procedure qualifications accomplished subsequent to 1962 without amending the WPS to include any variables required by later Editions and Addenda.
VOLUME 35 Interpretation: IX-92-87 Subject: QW-403.6, Base Metals; and QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued: February 14, 1994 File No: 93-151
Background: Two PQRs have been qualified to support a WPS with notch toughness requirements and having a qualified base metal thickness range f rom 5/16 in. to 2 in. inclusive. One PQR was qualified on 1 in. thick material with a maximum heat input of 85,000 J/in. The second was qualified on 5/16 in. thick material with a maximum heat input of 45,000 J/in. All other essential and supplementary essential variables are the same. Question (1): Is this WPS qualified for using 85,000 J/in. max. heat input on thicknesses 5/16 in. to 2 in.?
Reply (1): No. Question (2): Is the heat input value of 85,000 J/in. applicable to base metal thicknesses between ⅝ in. to 2 in. and the heat input value of 45,000 J/in. applicable to base metal thicknesses between 5/16 in. and ⅝ in.? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-88 Subject: QW-409.1 and QW-409.8, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued: February 14, 1994 File No: 93-593
Question: Section IX, QW-409.8 and QW-409.1, require that the volts and amps be specified in the WPS. Does Section IX require voltage to be measured at a specific location in the welding circuit or the current to be measured using a specific type of meter (RMS, averaging or other type)? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-89 Subject: QW-452.1, Groove Weld Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens; and QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter Limits Date Issued: February 14, 1994 File No: 93-653
Question: A welder has qualified on 3 in. O.D. ½ in. wall pipe in the 1G position and has also qualified on 1 in. O.D. ⅛ in. wall pipe in the 1G position. Is the welder qualified to weld 1 in. O.D. ⅜ in. wall in the 1G position? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-90 Subject: QW-461.9, Performance Qualification Position and Diameter Limitations Date Issued: February 14, 1994 File No: 93-753
Question: A welder has passed two separate tests; one on ⅝ in. O.D. by 0.049 in. thick pipe welded in the 6G position using GTAW process, and another on ½ in. thick plate welded in the 1G position using GTAW process. Do these two tests in combination qualify the welder to weld pipe of unlimited diameter in all positions up to 1 in. thick using GTAW? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-91 Subject: QW-300, General Welding Performance Qualifications Date Issued: February 14, 1994
File No:
93-755
Question: Does Section IX prohibit making editorial corrections to welder and welding operator performance qualification records? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-92 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility, Clarification Request to Interpretation IX-92-07, Date Issued: Oct. 7, 1991, File 91-156 Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 93-678
Question (1): Is the term “Organization” as stated in QW-201 and “Company A” in Interpretation IX-92-07 one and the same? Reply (1): No. Background: Two companies are contracted by a client company to undertake pipe work installation on its facility. All stages of the Welding Procedure Qualification Process for the two contracted companies are witnessed by the client companies representative and the documentation duly stamped and signed as accepted by the client. Question (2): May these procedures be used by the client company? Reply (2): No. Question (3): Does the client company have to requalify these procedures in order to perform inhouse maintenance at a later date using all the same essential and nonessential variables with its own qualified welders? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-93 Subject: QB-402.1, Brazing Data and Appendix C – Nonmandatory S-Numbers Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 93-752
Question (1): Does the brazing procedure qualification test with a base metal assigned one S Number, or S-Number plus Group-Number, qualify for all other base metals in the same S Number grouping? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Does the brazing procedure qualification test with dissimilar metals using one metal listed in one S-Number to one specific metal not listed in one S or P-Number qualify for the brazing of all other base metals in the same S-Number to themselves and to the specific base metal without S or P-Number?
Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-94 Subject: Section II, Part C – SFA-5.8 Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 93-754
Question: May AWS Classification Bag-34 be considered SFA-5.8 filler metal even though it does not appear in the 1992 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Part C (including the 1992 Addenda)? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-95 Subject: QW-200, General Welding Procedure Qualifications Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 94-008
Question: May a single WPS be qualified both with PWHT and without PWHT (two PQRs), thereby allowing the WPS to be used with or without PWHT? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-96 Subject: QW-300, General Welding Procedure Qualifications Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 94-102
Background: A welder is qualified on a NPS 2 Sch. 40 pipe test coupon using GTAW 1.6 mm deposited weld metal and SMAW 2.4 mm deposited weld metal. Question (1): Is the SMAW portion of the performance qualification considered welding with backing? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Is the welder qualified to weld NPS 4 single welded groove weld without backing using the SMAW process only? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-92-97 Subject: QW-200.4(a), Combination of Welding Procedures Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 94-167
Question: According to QW-200.4(a), when a qualified WPS for a combination process is available, must a new WPS be generated in only one of the processes is to be used in production, provided all requirements of Section IX for the process used are met? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-98 Subject: Appendix C, Nonmandatory S-Numbers Date Issued: May 20, 1994 File No: 94-236
Question: May steel produced to ASTM A-108 Grade 1018, UNS G10180, be considered S-1 material? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-99 Subject: QW-432.6, F-Numbers; and Section II, Part C – SFA-5.92 Date Issued: June 10, 1994 File No: 93-762 and 93-769
Question: May AWS 5.24 ER Zr4 be considered as an F-No. 61 filler metal? Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 36 Interpretation: IX-95-01 Subject: QW-200.1(b), General Welding Procedure Qualifications; and QW-402.4, Joints Date Issued: September 21, 1994 File No: 94-104
Question: If a WPS states that the GTAW process shall be used on root and second pass of open root or metal backed groove joints and the SMAW process shall be used on the remainder of the groove joint, is it necessary to state that the SMAW portion of the WPS must be performed with backing (i.e., the GTAW process)? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-02 Subject: QW-462, Test Specimens Date Issued: September 21, 1994 File No: 94-181
Question: What are the minimum and maximum tolerances for specimens shown in QW-462, where the figures show “approximate” dimensions? Reply: As stated in the Foreword, “The Code does not fully address tolerances. When dimensions, sizes, or other parameters are not specified with tolerances, the values of these parameters are considered nominal and allowable tolerance or local variances may be considered acceptable when based on engineering judgment and standard practices as determined b y the designer.”
Interpretation: IX-95-03 Subject: QW-202.2(b), Groove and Fillet Weld Tests; and QW-202.3(b), Weld Repair and Buildup Tests Date Issued: September 21, 1994 File No: 94-235
Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a full penetration weld on 1½ in. thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.2(b) states that qualification on 1½ in. or thicker base metal qualifies for making partial penetration welds on base metals with no upper limit of base metal thickness. No minimum thickness of base metal is addressed. Question (1): Does qualification of a 1½ in. thick base metal qualify for making partial penetration groove welds on base metals which are less than 3/16 in. thick? Reply (1): No, see para. QW-451.1 for minimum base metal thicknesses. Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a full penetration weld on 1½ in. thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.3(b) states that qualification on 1½ in. thick or thicker base metal qualifies for making weld repairs or weld build-ups on base metals of unlimited thickness. Question (2): Does qualification on 1½ in. base metal qualify for making weld repairs or weld build-ups on base metals which are less than 3/16 in. thick? Reply (2): No, see para. QW-451.1 for minimum base metal thicknesses.
Interpretation: IX-95-04 Subject: QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter Limits and Submerged Arc Wire Flux Combination Date Issued: September 21, 1994 File No: 94-296
Question (1): According to para. QW-452.3, is the inside diameter an essential variable for performance qualification? Reply (1): No. Background: A WPS for SAW process was qualified with a wire flux combination classified as F6P0-EL8, using one trade name for flux. This WPS was in use for several years. Now the flux manufacturer has changed the classification to F7P2-EL8 without changing the trade name of
flux. The flux trade name is mentioned on the WPS and PQR along with the former AWS classification. Question (2): Is it required to requalify this WPS due to the change in the AWS class of the wire flux combination by the flux manufacturer without changing its Trade Name? Reply (2): Yes, see para. QW-404.9(a).
Interpretation: IX-95-05 Subject: QW-422, P-Numbers Date Issued: September 21, 1994 File No: 94-365
Question: May SB-564 UNS N08825 be considered as P-No. 45, since it has identical properties to SB-425 UNS N08825 that is assigned P-No. 45 in QW-422? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-06 Subject: QW-153.1, Tension Tests Date Issued: September 21, 1994 File No: 94-542
Question: If a tensile specimen breaks in the weld metal, below the weld metal’s minimum specified tensile requirement, but not below the minimum tensile strength specified for the base metal, is the PQR considered acceptable? Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 37 Interpretation: IX-95-07 Subject: QW-420.2, S-Numbers Date Issued: March 17, 1995 File No: 94-522
Question: When qualifying a welding procedure using S1 group 2 for API 5LX60 pipe joining to MSS SP-75 or ASTM A860 WPHY-65 fittings, or when joining WPHY-60 fittings to each other, is it permissible to use the corresponding S-Number for the fitting as the same grade of high strength pipe when the physical properties are similar? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-08 Subject: QW-462.4(a), Fillet Weld Procedure Date Issued: March 17, 1995 File No: 94-543
Question (1): When weld required?
T 2
is greater than ¾ in. in Fig. QW-462.4(a), what is the maximum size fillet
Reply (1): ¾ in. Question (2): In QW-462.4(a), what does “size of fillet = thickness
T 2”
mean?
Reply (2): The length of each fillet leg(s) shall be nominally equal to the thickness of T 2. Question (3): Is there a tolerance for the fillet leg size? Reply (3): No. As stated in the 1992 Addenda to the Foreword, when tolerances are not specified, dimensions are considered nominal and allowable tolerances or local variances may be considered acceptable when based on engineering judgment and standard practices as determined by the designer.
Interpretation: IX-95-09 Subject: QW-153, Acceptance Criteria – Tension Tests Date Issued: March 17, 1995 File No: 94-570
Question: When welds between base metals of different minimum specified tensile strengths are being tested and tensile failure occurs in either of the base metals, does the reference to base metal within QW-153.1(d) mean the base metal with the lower minimum specified tensile strength? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-10 Subject: QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures Date Issued: March 17, 1995 File No: 94-662
Question: May a single process WPS be qualified by a combination process PQR where no essential variables for the process are changed? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-11 Subject: QW-408, Gas Date Issued: March 17, 1995 File No: 95-002
Question: Is it required to indicate the purity level by percent composition or descriptive terms of a single shielding gas on the WPS and on the PQR? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-12 Subject: QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal Thicknesses Date Issued: March 17, 1995 File No: 95-027
Question: Does QW-202.4 include butt joints and corner joints when joining dissimilar base metal thicknesses when prepared with a groove? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-13 Subject: QW-203, Limits of Qualified Positions for Procedures; and Section II, Part C, SFA-5.1 and 5.5 Date Issued: June 15, 1995 File No: 94-035
Question: Do the requirements for classification of filler metals in accordance with ASME Section II, Part C apply to the qualification of welding and brazing procedures in accordance with Section IX? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-14 Subject: QW-300.3, Welding Performance Qualifications Date Issued: June 15, 1995 File No: 95-040
Question: Are there any circumstances under which a non-employee person or organization can represent one or more participating organizations during welding of the test coupon in accordance with the requirements of QW-300.3? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-15 Subject: QW-160, Guided-Bend Tests; and QW-466 Note (b) – Test Jigs Date Issued: June 15, 1995 File No: 95-094
Question: Is it acceptable to measure the percent elongation of the tensile specimens in lieu of bend specimens to measure the ductility for welding procedure qualification acceptance? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-16 Subject: QW-255, Welding Variables Procedure Specifications for FCAW; and QW-
Date Issued: File No:
408.2, Gas June 15, 1995 95-095
Question: May a FCAW welding procedure, qualified without shielding gas, be used with a shielding gas without requalification? Reply: No.
VOLUME 38 Interpretation: IX-95-17 Subject: QW-302.4, Visual Examination Date Issued: October 19, 1995 File No: 95-035
Question (1): For the fillet weld coupon in welder performance qualification, does the macro examination required per QW-452.5 exempt the visual examination required per QW-302.4? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Does the visual examination of the fillet weld test coupon required per QW-302.4 refer to the final weld face side only? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-18 Subject: QW-409.8, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued: October 19, 1995 File No: 95-220
Question: Does Section IX require that a separate amperage range be specified for each filler metal size listed in the WPS? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-19 Subject: QW-300.3, Welding Performance Qualifications; and QW-322.1(b), Expiration of Welder Qualification Date Issued: October 19, 1995 File No: 95-221
Background: A welder simultaneously qualifies for ten different contractors in accordance with QW-300.3. QW-300.3 requires the contractor that rejects a welder to notify the other contractors who participated in the simultaneous test that the welder’s qualification has been revoked. One of the contractors subsequently revokes the welder’s qualification for specific reason in accordance with QW-322.1(b).
Question (1): Are the other nine contractors who qualified the welder simultaneously, required to revoke the welder’s qualification per QW-322.1(b)? Reply (1): No. Question (2): When a participating contractor revokes a welder’s qualification for a specific reason, does QW-300.3 require the other participating contractors to retest the welder or welding operator? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-95-20 Subject: QW-300, Welding Performance Qualification Date Issued: October 19, 1995 File No: 95-302
Question: If the manufacturer or contractor writes the WPS, and the welder used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures is under the full supervision and control of the manufacturer or contractor during the production of these test weldments, may the welder be a contracted employee, provided the Quality Control system or Quality Assurance Program of the manufacturer or contractor describes the control of contracted welders? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-21 Subject: QW-403.5, Base Metals Date Issued: October 19, 1995 File No: 95-318
Background: A PQR is qualified in accordance with Section IX, with supplementary essential variables, using a material from British Standard 1501-224-490A-LT50 Question: May this PQR be used to support a WPS utilizing a P-Number 1, Group Number 2 material with supplementary essential variables? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-22 Subject: QW-424, Base Metals Used for Procedure Qualification Date Issued: December 28, 1995 File No: 95-251
Question: Does a procedure qualification using an unassigned metal to an assigned P-Numbered metal qualify for welding the base metals to themselves using all the nonessential, essential and supplementary essential variables qualified? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-23 Subject: QW-453, Notes (3) and (10), Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for HardFacing and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays Date Issued: December 28, 1995 File No: 95-428
Question (1): Notes (3) and (10) of QW-453 require a liquid penetrant examination of the surface of the test coupon for hard-facing procedure and performance qualifications, respectively. May the acceptance standards of QW-195.2 or other standards deemed appropriate by the qualifying organization be used as acceptance criteria? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Must the acceptance criteria be specified on the WPS? Reply (2): Yes.
VOLUME 39 Interpretation: IX-95-24 Subject: QW-403.1, Base Metals Date Issued: March 19, 1996 File No: 95-194
Question: Does a WPS qualified using P-No. 1, Group No. 1 material, qualify welding for P-No. 1, Group No. 2 material, when notch toughness tests are not required? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-25 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: March 19, 1996 File No: 95-252
Question: If company A purchases company B, is it permissible for company A to write Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) in their name, supported by Procedure Qualification Records (PQR) qualified by company B? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-26 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: March 19, 1996 File No: 95-303
Background: Company A owns company B and changes its name to C. The new company C continues to use the WPSs and PQRs initially developed by B. After some time, company A (the
parent company) splits C back to B and C. Both B and C now operate independently, but under company A. Question: May company B use the WPSs and PQRs initially developed by B and also use WPSs and PQRs qualified by company C before the last reorganization? Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of QW-201 are satisfied.
Interpretation: IX-95-27 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: March 19, 1996 File No: 95-482
Question: May a subcontractor use a WPS supported by a PQR which was qualified by the contracting company and subsequently supplied to the subcontractor?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-28 Subject: QW-403.10, Short Circuiting Mode Date Issued: March 19, 1996 File No: 96-002
Question: Are the base metal thickness restrictions for the GMAW process short circuiting mode stated in QW-403.10 and QW-404.32 also applicable to fillet weld tests, either in procedure qualifications (QW-451.3, QW-451.4) or in performance qualifications (QW-452.4, QW-452.5 and QW-452.6)? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-29 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: May 30, 1996 File No: 95-302
Question: If more than one manufacturer or contractor agrees upon the use of one WPS, which is to be followed during production of test weldments for qualification testing, may the welder used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification procedures, be under the full supervision and control of each manufacturer or contractor during the welding, provided the Quality Control System or Quality Assurance Program of each manufacturer or contractor describes the control of welders? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-30 Subject: QW-350, Welding Variables for Welders
Date Issued: File No:
May 30, 1996 96-073
Question (1): Do the essential variables of QW-350 apply to welding operators carrying out corrosion resistant overlay? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Are welding operators qualified for submerged arc welding, also qualified for Electroslag welding and vice versa? Reply (2): No. Question (3): Is a welding operator qualified to QW-360 and QW-381 of Section IX in submerged arc weld overlay using wire electrode, a lso qualified to use strip electrodes with the same process? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-31 Subject: QW-361.2, Essential Variables – Machine Welding Date Issued: May 30, 1996 File No: 96-141
Background: A welding operator has direct visual contact with a pipe weldment that is being welded utilizing machine orbital pipe welding equipment. This welding operator is giving verbal commands to a second welding operator, who does not have eye contact with the weldment, and who is positioning the weld head and wire aimers located on the head remotely, during the welding of the joint in accordance with the verbal commands of the first operator. Each welding operator has been qualified to perform both remote and direct visual control welding. Question: Are these welders qualified to make the subject weld in accordance with QW-361.2, even though the welding operator having direct visual control is directing the positioning of the orbital pipe welding equipment verbally and does not have “hands-on” control of the welding head? Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 40 Interpretation: IX-95-32 Subject: QW-300.2, Welding Performance Qualifications Date Issued: July 1, 1996 File No: 95-302
Question: If more than one manufacturer or contractor agrees upon the use of one WPS, which is to be followed during the production of test weldments for qualification testing, may the welder used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures, be under the full supervision and control of each manufacturer or contractor during the welding, provided the
Quality Control System or Quality Assurance Program of each manufacturer or contractor describes the control of welders? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-33 Subject: QW-403.10, Short-Circuiting Mode Date Issued: September 24, 1996 File No: 96-001
Question: Does QW-403.10 limit the base metal thickness qualified to 1.1T for a combination GMAW-S/SMAW PQR test coupon thickness “T” less than ½ in., when used to support a combination GMAW-S/SMAW WPS? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-34 Subject: QW-202.3, Weld Repair and Buildup Date Issued: September 24, 1996 File No: 96-060
Background: Assurance of defect-free hardfacing deposits on cast surfaces is often improved if a layer of weld metal is first deposited on the casting, acting as a substrate for the subsequent hardfacing weld metal overlay. Question (1): Does Section IX require qualification of the substrate (e.g., in accordance with QW-202.3 or when the substrate is not included in the design minimum wall thickness in accordance with QW-214) which will be subsequently covered by a hardfacing weld metal overlay? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): If the deposit of the substrate is included in a hardfacing weld metal overlay procedure qualified to QW-216, is evaluation of the substrate to QW-202.3 or QW-214, as applicable, required? Reply (2): Section IX does not address qualification of a combination substrate/hardfacing WPS in a single coupon.
Interpretation: IX-95-35 Subject: QW-300.1, Welding Performance Qualifications Date Issued: September 24, 1996 File No: 96-287
Question: Is it permissible to use ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography to qualify welders and welding operators in accordance with QW-300.1? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-36 Subject: QW-300, Welding Performance Qualifications Date Issued: September 24, 1996 File No: 96-314
Question (1): Would the successful qualification of a welder in a manual or semi-automatic method qualify him to weld in production using a machine or automatic method in the same process? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Since the essential variables are the same for both methods, would successful qualification with testing in manual GTAW allow the same welder to weld in production using semi-automatic GTAW without testing? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-37 Subject: QW-404.9, Filler Metals Date Issued: September 24, 1996 File No: 96-315
Question: In accordance with QW-404.9(c), does a change in the wire classification shown in SFA-5.9, with no change in the flux composition, F-Number, or A-Number, require procedure requalification? Reply: No.
VOLUME 41 Interpretation: IX-95-38 Subject: QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of Qualification Date Issued: January 6, 1997 File No: 96-132
Question: Is it a requirement of QW-322 for a manufacturer to maintain records to demonstrate a welder’s or welding operator’s continuing qualification for a process from the date of the original qualification test? Reply: Section IX does not address how conformance to QW-322 is demonstrated. Other book sections my address the maintenance of records.
Interpretation: IX-95-39 Subject: QW-304, Performance Qualification – Welders Date Issued: January 6, 1997 File No: 96-331
Question (1): Would the successful performance qualification of a welder in a manual or semiautomatic type (e.g., GMAW, GTAW, SAW) per QW-304 qualify the same welder to operate as welding operator in machine or automatic type welding? Reply (1): No. Question (2): If a welder used GMAW (short-circuiting mode) for the root pass and SAW for the hot and fill passes of test coupon, may the test coupon be testing using radiography for the SAW portion of the weld, in accordance with QW-304 and QW-306? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-40 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: January 21, 1997 File No: 93-431 and 95-222
Background: Company A was a subsidiary of Company B. Company B sold Company A to Company C, and Company A became a division of Company C. Question: May Company A continue to use WPSs and PQRs previously developed by Company B? Reply: It is the intent of the Coe that when a manufacturer or contractor, or part of a manufacturer or contractor, is acquired by a new owner(s), the PQRs and WPSs may be used by the new owner(s) without requalification, provided all of the following are met: (a) the new owner(s) takes responsibility for the WPSs and PQRs; (b) the WPSs reflect the name of the new owner(s); and (c) the Quality Control System/Quality Assurance Program reflects the source of the PQRs as being from the former manufacturer or contractor.
Interpretation: IX-95-41 Subject: QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hardfacing (Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays Date Issued: March 6, 1997 File No: 97-028
Background: Corrosion-resistant weld overlay on P-No. 1 material needs to be carried out with Nickel-Aluminum Bronze using E CuNiAl SMAW electrode (F-No. 37) and ER CuNiAl GMAW filler wire (F-No. 37). Question: For procedure qualification of the above to QW-453, can side bend test specimens of ⅛ in. thickness be used, bent to inner diameter of 2 1/16 in., as given for P-No. XX with F-No. 36 under QW-466.1? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-95-42 Subject: QW-284, Seam Welding Equipment Qualification Date Issued: May 20, 1997 File No: 97-044
Background: When qualifying resistance seam welding equipment for QW-284, testing and acceptance criteria shall be in accordance with QW-196. QW-196.2.1 addresses shear test specimens, but only deals with spot welding. Question (1): When qualifying seam welding equipment, do the requirements for spot shear test per QW-196.2.1 apply? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Do the rules of QW-286 for procedures qualification apply for equipment qualification? Reply (2): No.
VOLUME 42 Interpretation: IX-98-01 Subject: QB-141.4, Sectioning Tests Date Issued: December 15, 1997 File No: 97-304
Question: In QB-451.3, Note (1), is the Sectioning Test a substitute for the Peel Test? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-02 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: December 15, 1997 File No: 97-309
Question: May a manufacturer use another organization’s Welding Procedure Specifications in fabrication of pressure vessels contracted to that organization, if the manufacturer works to specifications controlling all fabrication processes from material procurement to final delivery, including QC examination provided by the contracting organization? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-98-03 Subject: QW-451, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued: December 15, 1997 File No: 97-479
Question: Does a partial penetration groove weld procedure qualification test assembly qualify for full penetration production groove welds within the ranges indicated in QW-451? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-04 Subject: QW-200.2, Welding Procedure Qualifications Date Issued: December 15, 1997 File No: 97-481
Question: Does ASME Section IX require that a preliminary WPS be attached to the PQR? Reply: No.
VOLUME 43 Interpretation: IX-98-05 Subject: QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hardfacing (Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays Date Issued: April 28, 1998 File No: 98-009
Question: In making repairs to hardfacing weld metal overlays, does the existing hardfacing weld metal overlay deposit to be repaired, constitute a change in the original essential variable(s) (e.g., base material, thickness, etc.) thus requiring a new qualification? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-98-06 Subject: QW-402.12(a) and (c) and QW-402.12, Joints Date Issued: April 28, 1998 File No: 98-009
Question: Do the words “any change exceeding ±10%,” “change…greater than 10%,” “a change…greater than ±10%,” and “an increase or decrease of more than 10%,” respectively, all indicate a qualified range of 10% above and 10% below the value recorded in the PQR? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-07 Subject: QW-410.42, Technique Date Issued: April 28, 1998 File No: 97-302
Question (1): For PAW hardfacing and corrosion resistant weld metal overlay qualifications, may the full range of oscillation qualified (including the “change of more than 10%”) also apply
to the combined minimum and maximum oscillation range qualified? (e.g., would the range qualified for a 1 in. oscillation combined with a 1.5 in. oscillation be 0.9 in – 1.65 in.) Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): May the minimum and maximum oscillation values be combined and qualified on a single hardfacing weld metal overlay test coupon, assuming all other essential variables are the same? Reply (2): Section IX does not prohibit the qualification of more than one set of essential variables on a single test coupon, provided each set of essential variables is tested in accordance with the requirements of Section IX.
Interpretation: IX-98-08 Subject: QW-432, F-Numbers Date Issued: April 28, 1998 File No: 98-131
Question: A WPS is qualified with an SMA electrode that is not certified by the manufacturer as conforming to an AWS classification. Are welders who were previously qualified with an electrode classified as F-4, also qualified to use this unclassified electrode that conforms to the deposit chemistry of EXXXX-G, in Table 2 of SFA-5.5 (within the other limitations of QW350)? Reply: No.
VOLUME 44 Interpretation: IX-98-09 Subject: QW-150 and QW-462.1, Tension Test Specimens for Pipe and Plate Date Issued: October 9, 1998 File No: 97-302
Question: Would tensile tests performed in accordance with SA-370 be acceptable for meeting ASME Section IX, QW-462.1(a) and (b)? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-98-10 Subject: QW-407.1, Post Weld Heat Treatment Date Issued: October 9, 1998 File No: 97-306/97-308
Question: Is it the intent of Section IX in QW-407.1 to permit reporting the results of more than one PWHT condition on a single report, with a single PQR number, provided all the other applicable essential and supplementary essential variables are identical and all required tests are conducted and reported for both conditions?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-11 Subject: QW-300, Welding Performance Qualifications Date Issued: October 9, 1998 File No: 98-133
Question: May Company A retain the Company B employee responsible for welder performance qualification, to review the welder qualification documents of both companies and qualify the welders of Company B to the welding program of Company A without further testing of the welders? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-98-12 Subject: QW-451, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued: October 9, 1998 File No: 98-237/98-238
Question: May longitudinal bend specimens be used in lieu of transverse bend specimens when the base metals or the base metal and the weld metal do not differ markedly in bending properties? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-98-13 Subject: QW-200.1, Welding Procedure Qualifications Date Issued: December 22, 1998 File No: 98-239
Question: Are all-encompassing terms acceptable when addressing nonessential variables in a WPS (e.g, for backing, “with or without”, for root spacing, “unlimited”)? Reply: Section IX does not specify how nonessential variables are to be addressed; however, the terms must provide direction to the welder/welding operator for making production welds to Code requirements.
Interpretation: IX-98-14 Subject: QW-361.2, Machine Welding Variables for Welding Operators; and QW-381, Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued: December 22, 1998 File No: 98-447
Background: A multiple layer corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay performance qualification (machine welding) is made with the first layer under Direct Visual control and the second layer Remote Visual control.
Question (1): Is the welding operator qualified for both Direct and Remote Visual control techniques applied either in single or multiple layers? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): For the qualification described in the background, may two welding operators qualify on one coupon, provided the requirements of QW-453 and QW-361.2 (which delineate the welding operators “limits of qualification” as per QW-306) are addressed? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-15 Subject: QW-405.3, Positions Date Issued: December 22, 1998 File No: 98-448
Question: May a single-pass “seal weld” as defined in QW-492, used to seal boiler tubes to a boiler tube sheet, be considered a “cover pass” or a “wash pass” for purposes of exemption form QW-405.3? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-98-16 Subject: QW-462.5(a), Chemical Analysis and Hardness Specimen Corrosion-Resistant and Hard-Facing Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued: December 22, 1998 File No: 99-453
Question: Is it permissible to use the surface of the test coupon as the “approximate fusion line” when determining the minimum finished thickness for corrosion-resistant and hard-facing overlays in accordance with QW-462.5(a)? Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 45 Interpretation: IX-98-17 Subject: QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hard-Facing (Wear Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays Date Issued: March 23, 1999 File No: 98-055
Question: When performing corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay welding operator qualification using a machine GTAW process, are the limitations on thickness qualified per QW453 applicable? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-18 Subject: QW-201.1, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: March 23, 1999 File No: 99-025
Background: When one of a company’s plants is sold, it is not clear if the new owner can use the Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) and Procedure Qualification Records (PQR) qualified by the original company, when the original company wishes to continue using those WPSs/PQRs. Question: Company A sells one of its plants to Company B. May both Company A and Company B use the WPSs/PQRs previously qualified by Company A? Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of QW-201.1 are addresses by Company B.
VOLUME 46 Interpretation: IX-98-19 Subject: QW-404, Filler Metals Date Issued: September 24, 1999 File No: 99-409
Question: Is requalification required when the filler metal specified in the WPS and supporting PQR is moved from one SFA specification to another SFA specification, or the AWS classification is changed, or when a previously unclassified filler is classified by the filler metal manufacturer as conforming to an SFA specification? Reply: No. VOLUME 47 Interpretation: IX-98-20R Subject: QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base Metal Thickness Date Issued: June 8, 2000 File No: 99-539
Question: When welding a corner joint with dissimilar base metal thickness, the thickness of both members must be within the qualified thickness range of the WPS(s) being used. How is the thickness for the thicker member defined in sketches (a), (b) and (c) below? Reply: For sketch (a), the thicker of T or t s. For sketch (b), the thicker of T or t s. For sketch (c), the thicker of flange a or hub b.
VOLUME 48 Interpretation: IX-01-01 Subject: QW-403, Base Metal Requirement; QW-404, Filler Metal Requirement Date Issued: October 11, 2000 File No: 00-514
Question (1): If a WPS is written using the GMAW-S process alone, is QW-403.10 and t limited to 1.1t per QW-404.32?
T limited
to 1.1 T per
Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): If a WPS is written using FCAW process alone, is and t limited to 2 t per QW-404.30?
T limited
to 2 T per QW-403.8
Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-02 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: October 11, 2000 File No: 00-553
Background: A large majority of fabrication, contracted by a design Company A, is performed by Manufacturers B and C. Each company is independent in ownership from the other two. Companies A, B and C have developed a Welding Coalition. The top management of all three companies has executed an Agreement and Commitment protocol, consenting to the establishment of the Welding Coalition. The Welding Coalition controls all weld procedures developed for use on Company A contracts by Companies B and C, under one designated program. The Coalition does not control production welding at either of the manufacturing companies. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company C are controlled by Company A’s Quality Program. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company B are controlled by Company B’s Quality Program that has been approved by Company A. Company C is on Company B’s Approved Vendors List. Question: Is it permissible to consider the Welding Coalition as “the organization which has responsible operational control of production of the weldments to be made in accordance with this Code”, such that Company B may use weld procedures qualified by Company C and vice versa?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-03 Subject: QW-194, Visual Examinations Date Issued: January 3, 2001 File No: 00-519
Question: Is a welder’s performance qualification test coupon, in which undercut is present, acceptable, provided that the rest of the examinations and tests are acceptable? Reply: Yes. However, manufacturers may disqualify welders based on QW-301.2 when discontinuities, such as undercut and porosity, do not comply with the quality requirement of the manufacturer.
Interpretation: IX-01-04 Subject: QW-304.1, Welder’s Test Coupon Examination Date Issued: January 3, 2001 File No: 00-653
Question: Does QW-304.1 require that when radiography is used for examination of welder test coupons for performance qualification, the visual examination per QW-302.4 be performed and documented on the Welder/Welding Operator Performance Qualification record? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-05 Subject: QW-200.2, Welding Procedure Qualification Date Issued: January 3, 2001 File No: 00-654
Question: When a nonessential variable is recorded on a PQR, may a new or revised WPS supported by the PQR specify a different range for that nonessential variable from that r ecorded on the PQR? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-06R Subject: QW-410.51, Addition/Deletion of Oscillation (1998 and Earlier Editions) Date Issued: February 9, 2001 File No: 98-240
Background: QW-410.51, addition or deletion of oscillation is an essential variable for GTAW hard-facing. QW-410.1, addition or deletion of weave bead is not a variable for the GTAW hardfacing process.
Question: Is it the intent of Section IX that a PQR developed with a machine or automatic GTAW hard-facing process, with or without oscillation, may be used to qualify a WPS for a manual, or a semiautomatic GTAW hard-facing process, with or without weave? Reply: Yes. Note that recent actions by Section IX have defined oscillation as applicable to machine and automatic processes and weave as applicable to manual and semiautomatic processes.
VOLUME 49 Interpretation: IX-01-07 Subject: QW-420.2, Material Grouping Date Issued: June 4, 2001 File No: 01-029
Background: A PQR is qualified on a P-Number X material to a P-Number Y material. Question (1): Does this PQR support a WPS for welding P-Number X to S-Number Y without changes to any other essential variables? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Does this PQR support a WPS for welding S-Number X to S-Number Y without changes to any other essential variables? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-08 Subject: QW-300.2, Transfer of Record of Performance Qualification Date Issued: February 26, 2001 File No: 01-030
Question: When a new owner acquires a company, or part of a company, does QW-300.2 prohibit continued use of existing welder performance qualifications? Reply: No. Section IX does not address rules applicable to performance qualification continuity when a new owner acquires a manufacturer or contractor. If welder performance qualification continuity is to be maintained by the new owner, the Quality Control System/Quality Assurance Program should reflect to the source of the welder performance qualification records as being from the former manufacturer or contractor.
Interpretation: IX-01-09 Subject: QW-356, Welding Variables Date Issued: February 26, 2001 File No: 01-032
Question: A welder was qualified to P-No. 1 material using the GTAW process without gas backing using F-No. 6 filler material. Is he qualified to weld P-No. 8 material using the GTAW
process with gas backing using F-No. 6 filler material, provided all other essential variables remain the same? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-10 Subject: QW-144 and QW-194, Visual Examinations Date Issued: February 26, 2001 File No: 01-073
Question: Are the requirements of QW-144 and QW-194 for visual examination of the test coupon required for the qualifications of a welding procedure? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-11 Subject: QW-510 and QW-540 in Article V, Standard Welding Procedure Specifications Date Issued: June 4, 2001 File No: 01-089
Question (1): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only GTAW if the SWPS is for combination GTAW root and SMAW E7018 fill? Reply (1): No. All variables of the SWPSs are considered to be essential variables. Question (2): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only SMAW E7018 if the SWPS is for combination GTAW root and SMAW E7018 fill? Reply (2): No. All variables of the SWPSs are considered to be essential variables. Question (3): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only SMAW E7018 if the SWPS specifies both E6010 and E7018? Reply (3): No. All variables of the SWPSs are considered to be essential variables. Question (4): Does Section IX, Article II apply when the fabricator chooses to use SWPSs? Reply (4): No. Ref. para. QW-100.1. Question (5): When using SWPSs under Article V of Section IX, may a single welding process of a multiple SWPSs be used to complete a weld? Reply (5): No. Ref. paras. QW-540(a) and (c). Question (6): When using SWPSs under Article V of Section IX, may a single process SWPS for E7018 and a single process SWPS for GTAW be used to complete a weld, assuming all other variables are within the SWPS parameters? Reply (6): No. Ref. paras. QW-540(a) and (c).
Question (7): When using SWPSs under Article V of Section IX, may a single process SWPS for E7018 and a single process SWPS for E6010 be used to complete a weld, assuming all other variables are within the SWPS parameters? Reply (7): No. Ref. paras. QW-540(a) and (c).
Interpretation: IX-01-12 Subject: QW-322.2(a) and QW-452.1, Rule Change Affecting Welder Qualification Date Issued: June 4, 2001 File No: 01-201
Background: ASME Section IX, 2000 Addenda, revised Table QW-452.1 reducing the coupon size from ¾ in. to ½ in. to qualify the welder for “Maximum to be welded” when welding a minimum of three layers. Question (1): A welder qualified prior to the 2000 Addenda, and has remained qualified since his original test. His original test coupon consisted of at least three weld layers and greater than ½ in. but less than ¾ in. deposited weld metal. May the qualification recorded be revised from “2 t ” to “Max. to be welded” subsequent to the 2000 Addenda? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): A welder was qualified prior to the 2000 Addenda. His qualification has lapsed due to not welding with the original weld process for greater than 6 months. His original test coupon consisted of at least three layers and greater than ½ in. but less than ¾ in. deposited weld metal. His renewal restores his original qualifications in accordance with QW-322.2(a). May the original qualification record be revised from “2 t ” to “Max. to be welded” subsequent to the 2000 Addenda? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-13 Subject: References to Edition and Addenda Date Issued: June 26, 2001 File No: 01-570
Question (1): The 1998 Code Edition, as published, incorporates the 1998 Addenda. When providing reference to this Code Edition and Addenda within a Code-required document, may only the Edition be listed (i.e, 1998 Edition)? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): For the 1998 Edition only, is it necessary to revise Code-required documentation where the term “1998 Edition” was used as meaning the 1995 Edition through the 1997 Addenda? Reply (2): No.
VOLUME 50 Interpretation: IX-01-14 Subject: QW-500, The Use of SWPSs Date Issued: September 25, 2001 File No: 01-332
Question: May a manufacturer or contractor adopt and use SWPSs in accordance with the rules of Article V for work on Code items built to an edition or addenda prior to the 1998 edition with the 2000 Addenda, provided the construction code does not prohibit the use of SWPSs? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-15 Subject: QW-300.2, Employer’s Responsibility Date Issued: September 15, 2001 File No: 01-641
Background: Section IX requires that the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer “be responsible for conducting tests to qualify the performance of welders which his organization employs in construction of weldments built in accordance with the Code.” It also requires that the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer provide supervision and control over welders while they are welding test coupons for performance qualification. Question (1): An employee of a contractor provides supervision and control over a welder during welding of a test coupon, but that welder is not an employee of the contractor at the time of the test. Is it required that the welder be an employee of that contractor at the time of qualification testing? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Must the welder be an employee of any manufacturer or contractor at the time of qualification testing? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-01-16 Subject: Code Case 2142-1 and 2143-1 Date Issued: December 18, 2001 File No: 01-641
Background: The submerged are welding process is being used to deposit corrosion-resistant weld overlay for Section III, Subsection NB fabrication using a NI-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal and flux combination. The strip filler metal does not meet the chemical requirements of Code Case 2142-1 (bare electrode and r od), but both filler metal and weld deposit meet the chemical composition limits of Code Case 2143-1 (covered electrodes).
Question (1): Must the Ni-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal used for the SAW process meet the chemical composition requirements of Code Case 2142-1 to be classified as F-43 for procedure and performance qualifications? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): May Ni-Cr-Fe alloy filler metal that is not designated as F-43 per Code Case 21421 be used for welding if the welding procedure is qualified separately per QW-404.37? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): If the Ni-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal meets the chemical composition requirements of Code Case 2143-1 and was produced to the requirements of SFA-5.14, except for the chemical analysis, may the filler metal be classified as F-43 for procedure and performance qualification? Reply (3): No. Question (4): If the Ni-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal is not classified in an SFA specification, and is not covered in Code Case 2142-1 or 2143-1, is it permissible to identify the filler metal and flux on the WPS, PQR and WPQ by the manufacturer’s brand names? Reply (4): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-17 Subject: QW-202.2(b), QW-202.3(b) and QW-407.4 Date Issued: December 18, 2001 File No: 01-615
Background: A groove weld procedure qualification test coupon 1.5 in. thick was welded with the SMAW process using multiple passes of ½ in. max. thickness. The test coupon was given a subsequent post weld heat treatment exceeding the upper transformation temperature prior to the completion of mechanical testing. Question: May this PQR be used to support the weld of partial penetration groove welds per QW-202.2(b) or weld repair and buildup welds per QW-202.3(b) on base material thickness exceeding 1.65 in.? Reply: No. Per QW-407.4, a procedure qualification test coupon receiving a post weld heat treatment in which the upper transformation is exceeded, the maximum qualified thickness for production welds is 1.1 times the thickness of the test coupon.
Interpretation: IX-01-18 Subject: QW-153.1, Acceptance Criteria for Tensile Strength Date Issued: December 18, 2001 File No: 01-772
Question: Does the minimum specified tensile strength in QW/QB-422 supersede the AS/SB material tensile strength for procedure qualification?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-19 Subject: QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base Metal Thickness Date Issued: December 18, 2001 File No: 01-811
Question: Does QW-202.4(b) permit the maximum weld deposit thickness limit to be extended beyond the limit specified in QW-451.1? Reply: No. QW-202.4 applies only to the base metal thickness limits.
Interpretation: IX-01-20 Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number Reassignment Date Issued: December 18, 2001 File No: 01-813
Question (1): May a procedure qualification record subject to variable QW-407.1(a) that included only a PWHT below the lower transformation temperature be used to support a WPS with PWHT above the upper transformation temperature and a subsequent PWHT below the lower transformation temperature? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Does Section IX address the values to be used as transformation temperature? Reply (2): No.
VOLUME 51 Interpretation: IX-01-21 Subject: QW-151.1(d), Reduced Section – Plate; QW-200.4(b), Combination of Processes; QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of Qualifications Date Issued: January 19, 2002 File No: 01-035
Background [(1), (2), (3)]: A welder is qualified for manual SMAW and GTAW, and semiautomatic FCAW and GMAW. Question (1): Do welders maintain their qualifications for manual SMAW and GTAW by welding with either semiautomatic GMAW or FCAW? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Do welders maintain their qualifications for both SMAW and GTAW by welding with only one of the processes during the six-month period?
Reply (2): No. Question (3): Do welders maintain their qualifications qualifications for semiautomatic semiautomatic GMAW and FCAW by welding with either GMAW or FCAW during the six-month period? Reply (3): Yes. Background [(4)]: A WPS was qualified using using a Trade Name wire-flux combination combination that conforms to a classification in ASME Section II, Part C. Question (4): Does the substitution substitution in the qualified WPS WPS of a different Trade Name wire-flux combination that conforms to the same SFA Specification and classification in ASME Section II, Part C require requalification? Reply (4): No. Background [(5)]: The tensile specimens specimens of a 60 mm PQR test plate was divided into into three pieces. The sum of the thickness of the three specimens was less than than 60 mm. Question (5): What is the allowable percentage thickness reduction reduction from the original base metal thickness? Reply (5): Section IX does does not address this issue.
Interpretation: IX-01-22 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-10 -100.3 0.3 and and QW-420 -420.1 .1,, P-N P-Number ber Reas Reassi sig gnmen nmentt Date Is Issued: March 11 11, 20 2002 File No: 01-679
Question: May a previous qualified WPS, written written to permit the welding of P-No. P-No. 5, Group 1 material to P-No. 5, Group 4 material prior to the establishment of P-Nos. 5A, 5B and 5C be used to weld SA-213 T22 to SA-213 T91 materials? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-23 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-20 -202.4 2.4, Diss issimil imilar ar Bas Base Meta Metall Thic Thickn knes esse sess Date Is Issued: March 11 11, 20 2002 File No: 01-789
Question: A WPS is qualified qualified to weld base base material from 1.6 mm mm to 20 mm. May that WPS be used for welding a part 30 mm thick that has been tapered to 15 mm thick to another 15 mm part? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-24 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-2 QW-200 00.4 .4,, Im Impact pact Test Test Qual Qualif ific icat atio ion n of Mult Multii-pr proc oces esss We Weld ldss Date Is Issued: March 11 11, 20 2002
File No:
01-814
Question: A welding procedure qualification is made using multiple multiple welding processes on a single test plate for an application where notch-toughness notch-toughness testing is required. The weld coupon was welded with two passes, each of GTAW and FCAW, and the remainder with SAW process. Is it required to take multiple sets of weld metal impact test specimens to include all welding processes, when all welding could not be included in in a single set of specimens? specimens? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-25 Subject: Section II, Part C Date Is Issued: March 11 11, 20 2002 File No: 01-815
Question: Does Section II, Part C mandate the use of SFA-5.01? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-26 Subj Subjec ect: t: QW-10 -100.3 0.3, Th The Us Use of of th the Ref Refeeren renced ced Edi Edittion ion of of th the Cod Codee Date Is Issued: March 11 11, 20 2002 File No: 01-826
Background: A designer specifies a specific specific year of the ASME Code to be complied with with for the fabrication of a component, i.e., including 96 Addenda, and this component is installed in 2003. Question (1): What year of Section IX does the installer installer use for qualifying qualifying welders/welding operators? Reply (1): Welders are qualified in accordance with the current edition edition and addenda of Section IX in effect at the time of the qualification. qualification. See QW-100.3. Question (2): What year of Section II does the installer installer use for purchasing welding welding materials? Reply (2): Section IX does does not address this issue. The question should be addressed addressed to the applicable construction code.
Interpretation: IX-01-27 Subject: QW-452.1, No Nominal Co Coupon Th Thickness Date Is Issued: March 11 11, 20 2002 File No: 02-111
Question: A welder welds a NPS 6 Schedule 80 80 test coupon that is 0.432 in. thick. He uses one welding process, one set of essential variables, and deposits at least three layers of weld metal in that test coupon. Is that welder qualified to weld “maximum to be welded”?
Reply: No. The nominal coupon thickness thickness must be at least least ½ in. thick in order for a welder welder to be qualified for “maximum to be welded”.
VOLUME 52 Interpretation: IX-01-28 Subject: QW-40 -409.4, Electric rical Characteristics Date Issued: May 22, 2002 File No: 02-2691
Question: Does QW-409.4 apply to the the current type used to preheat the the filler metal wire when welding GTAW Hot-Wire Automatic or machine corrosion-resistant overlay? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-29 Subj Subjec ect: t: Sect Sectio ion n II, II, Part Part C, SFA SFA Spec Specif ific icat atio ions ns,, Mar Marki king ng of Pack Packag ages es Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Octob ctober er 3, 200 2002 File No: 02-2692
Background: ASME Section II, Part C, SFA Specifications state state in the “Marking of Packages” paragraphs that the AWS specification specification and classification designations must must be marked on the outside of each unit package. Question (1): Must filler metal procured to an ASME ASME SFA specification be marked with with the ASME SFA specification, such as ASME SFA-5.XX? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Is marking the package with the the AWS specification and classification, classification, such as AWS A5.XX EXXXX required? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): May the material manufacturer add the ASME ASME specification (e.g., SFA-5.XX) to the required AWS markings on the unit container? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-30 Subject: QW-403.5, Ba Base Metal Requirements Date Date Issu Issued ed:: Decem ecembe berr 30 30, 20 2002 File No: 02-2693
Question: When impact testing of a heat-affected heat-affected zone is required for nonferrous nonferrous base materials of the same P-Number, does a PQR with a UNS number designation (e.g., SB-619, UNS N06022) qualify a WPS that specifies a different UNS number designation (e.g., SB-619 UNS N10276) within the same P-Number?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-31 Subject: QW-423, Alternate Base Materials for Welder Qualification Date Issued: December 30, 2002 File No: 02-2694
Question (1): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left column of QW-423, weld any combination of P-Number base metals in the corresponding row of the right column, within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left column of QW-423, weld one of the P-Number base metals in the corresponding row of the right column to any other (dissimilar) P-Number in the corresponding row of the right column, within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left column of QW-423 welded to an unassigned base metal, weld any combination of P-Number base metals in the corresponding row of the right column to the unassigned metal, within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-32 Subject: QW-200.4(b), Root Pass Procedure Qualification Date Issued: December 30, 2002 File No: 02-3449
Question: Do the provisions of QW-200.4(b) permit a GTAW procedure qualification test weldment performed on a 13 mm thick coupon to support depositing a root pass in a production joint of the qualified base metal having a thickness of 8 mm when impact testing is required? Reply: No. See QW-403.6.
Interpretation: IX-01-33 Subject: QW-283, Welds with Buttering Date Issued: December 30, 2002 File No: 02-3896
Background: In all cases described below, the manufacturers develop and follow WPSs and PQRs based on the test coupons welded. The minimum buttering thickness in all cases will be greater than 3/16 in. Question (1): Manufacturer A qualifies a WPS by buttering the ends of the test coupons, which are the same material. The buttered ends are heat treated, then the weld is completed using the same filler metal as was used for the buttering. Manufacturer B welds a groove weld test coupon of the same best metal using the same process, filler metal and other essential variables as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated in the same manner as the heat treatment used for the buttering by manufacturer A. May manufacturer A weld parts that were buttered by manufacturer B? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Manufacturer C welds a groove weld test coupon using the same base metal, process, filler metal, and other essential variables as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated in the same manner as the heat treatment used for buttering by manufacturer A. May manufacturer A weld parts that were buttered by manufacturer C? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): Manufacturer A receives parts that have been buttered by both manufacturers B and C. May the parts buttered by manufacturer B be welded by manufacturer A to parts buttered by manufacturer C? Reply (3): Yes. Question (4): Manufacturer D receives parts that have been buttered by manufacturers A, B and C. May manufacturer D weld the buttered parts together using a buttered groove weld test coupon qualified using the same base metal, process, filler metal, and other essential variables as manufacturer A? Reply (4): Yes. Question (5): Manufacturer D receives parts that have been buttered by manufacturers A, B and C. May manufacturer D weld the buttered parts together using a groove weld test coupon qualified in accordance with QW-283.4(b) using the same process, filler metal, and other essential variables that manufacturer A used to join the buttered parts (i.e., the as-welded portion of the test) using a base metal that nominally matches the chemical a nalysis of the buttering used by manufacturer A, B, or C? Reply (5): Yes. Question (6): Manufacturer E welds a groove weld test coupon of another base metal using the same filler metal as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated and tested in accordance with QW-202.2(a). May manufacturer F, who has welded a test coupon in accordance with QW283.4(b), join parts buttered by manufacturer E? Reply (6): Yes.
VOLUME 53 Interpretation: IX-01-34 Subject: QB-203.1, Limits of Qualified Flow Positions for Procedures, and QB-408.4, Joint Design; QB-303.3, Limits of Qualified Positions, and QB-408.1, Joint Design Date Issued: March 13, 2003 File No: 02-3541
Background (1): QB-203.1 states: “Qualification in pipe shall qualify for plate, but not vice versa. Horizontal-flow in pipe shall qualify for flat-flow in plate.” QB-408.4 states: “A change in the joint type, e.g., from a butt to a lap or socket, from that qualified. For lap or socket joints, a decrease in overlap length from that qualified.” Question (1): Do procedure qualifications in plate lap joints qualify for tube-to-tube socket joints for brazing procedure qualifications? Reply (1): No. Background (2): QB-303.3 states: “Qualifications in pipe shall qualify for plate, but not vice versa. Horizontal-flow in pipe shall qualify for flat-flow in plate.” QB-408.1 states: “A change in the joint type, i.e., from a butt to a lap or socket, from that qualified. For lap or socket joints, an increase in lap length of more than 25% from the overlap used on brazer performance qualification test coupon.” Question (2): Do performance qualifications in plate lap joints qualify for tube-to-tube socket joints for brazer performance qualifications? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-01-35 Subject: QW-451.1, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits Date Issued: March 13, 2003 File No: 02-4075
Question (1): A test coupon is prepared as follows: A 1.75 in. plate is welded to 1.75 in. plate with 1 in. thick weld. Per QW-451.1, is 8 in. the maximum thickness range of base metal qualified? Reply (1): Yes, except that further limits or exceptions may apply as stated in Notes (1) and (5) of QW-451.1. Question (2): Using the same test coupon as Question (1), where a single process was used to deposit the entire weld thickness, is 8 in. the maximum thickness of the weld metal permitted per QW-451.1? Reply (2): Yes, except that further limits or exceptions may apply as stated in Notes (1) and (5) of QW-451.1.
Interpretation: IX-01-36 Subject: QW-301.4, Record of Welder Performance Qualification
Date Issued: File No:
March 13, 2003 02-4198
Background: For welder’s performance qualification, a multiple layer groove weld is made on a single test coupon using one welder for first layer and another welder for the second. Question: QW-301.4 requires a record of welder performance qualification. May a single form be used to record the essential variables, the type of test and test results, and the ranges qualified in accordance with QW-452 for each welder and welding operator? Reply: Section IX specifies information required to be recorded, but does not specify the format of the records. Interpretation: IX-01-37 Subject: QW-404.33, Change in SFA Specifications for Filler Metal Classification Date Issued: May 19, 2003 File No: 03-263
Question: Does the expression “a change in the SFA specification filler metal classification” refer to a change in the AWS classification? Reply: Yes. Interpretation: IX-01-38 Subject: Section II, Part C, SFA 5.1, Table 1 Date Issued: May 19, 2003 File No: 03-274
Question: May a welder qualify with E7018 electrode using either uphill or downhill progression? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-39 Subject: QW-401.3, Supplemental Essential Variable (Procedure) Date Issued: May 19, 2003 File No: 03-469
Background: A company has qualified a PQR to satisfy all testing requirements other than notch toughness for welding P1 Group 2 to P1 Group 2 by the SAW process. Another test coupon is subsequently prepared using the WPS written on the original PQR and an additional PQR is then qualified with only testing for notch toughness, as allowed by the Code, to supplement the original PQR for welding with impact requirements. However, the preheat value (an essential variable) used to qualify the original PQR was 150°F. The preheat temperature was less than 150°F. Question: May the supplemental PQR with reduced preheat be used with the original PQR to support a WPS for notch toughness application? Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of QW-406.1 are met.
Interpretation: IX-01-40 Subject: QW-201/QW-201.1, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: May 19, 2003 File No: 03-740
Background: Several manufacturing organizations within the same company perform welding procedure qualifications in accordance with Section IX. Each manufacturing organization performs these activities in accordance with specific Quality Assurance Program(s)/Quality Control System(s) that comply with their ASME Construction Code Certificate(s) of Authorization and describe operational control of qualifications. Question: Is it permitted for any of the manufacturing organizations within the company to use WPSs and PQRs qualified by any of the other manufacturing organizations? Reply: Yes, this is permitted by QW-201.
VOLUME 54 Interpretation: IX-04-01 Subject: QW-151.3, Tension Test Turned Specimen Date Issued: September 15, 2003 File No: 02-3586 Background: ASME Section IX, Paragraph QW-151.3(b) states, " For thicknesses over 1" (25 mm), multiple specimens shall be cut through the full thickness of the weld with their centers parallel to the metal surface and not over 1" (25 mm) apart. The centers of the specimens adjacent to the metal surface shall not exceed 5/8" (16 mm) from the surface."
Question (1): Does the specified distance between specimens of 'not over 1" apart' refer to the distance between the centers of the specimens? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): How many tension tests would be required for a 2-1/2" thick groove welding procedure qualification test coupon welded full thickness? Reply (2): Two. See QW-451.1. Question (3): When reduced section turned tension test specimens are used in accordance with QW-462.1(d) for a 2-1/2" thick groove welding procedure qualification test coupon welded full thickness, what is the minimum number of specimens that must be removed for each tension test set? Reply (3): Three.
Interpretation: IX-04-02 Subject: QW-258.1 and QW-410.38 Date Issued: September 15, 2003
File No:
03-1029
Background: The elctroslag welding process is used to apply a corrosion-resistant overlay. The essential variables in QW-258.1 apply. QW-410.38 is listed as an essential variable for corrosionresistant overlay. Question (1): When a single layer is recorded in the PQR, is a WPS qualified for application of multiple layers? Reply (1): No. Question (2): When multiple layers are recorded in the PQR, is a WPS qualified for application of single layer? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-04-03 Subject: QW-407.1 , Postweld Heat Treatment Date Issued: September 15, 2003 File No: 03-1212
Question (1): May a procedure qualification record subject to the variable QW-407.1(a) which qualified P-No. 8 to P-No. 8 with no PWHT support a WPS with PWHT? Reply (1): QW-407.1(a) does not apply to P-No. 8 materials. See QW-407.1(b). Question (2): Would application of controlled and monitored heat to the weld and surrounding area for the correction of distortion in P-No. 8 material be considered a PWHT operation? Reply (2): See QW-407.1(b). Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 54. The “P8” has been corrected by Errata to read “P-No. 8”.
Interpretation: IX-04-04 Subject: QW-401.3 Supplemental Essential Variable Date Issued: September 15, 2003 File No: 03-1246
Background: A WPS is supported by three PQRs. Two PQRs are recorded on 12 mm and 28.5 mm thick coupons using tensile, bend, and impact testing specimens. A third PQR was made using 5 mm thick plate using the same welding parameters, but only impact specimens were tested. Question (1): May these PQRs be combined to support a WPS for welding 2.5 mm through 57 mm material requiring notch toughness testing? Reply (1): No.
Question (2): May these three PQRs be combined to support welding base metal thicknesses of 4.8 through 57 mm with or without notch toughness? Reply (2): Yes. Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 54. The “WP” in Question (1) has been corrected by Errata to read “WPS”.
Interpretation: IX-04-05 Subject: QW-200.2(f) and QW-451 Date Issued: December 30, 2003 File No: 03-1583
Question: Two separate PQRs with identical welding process exist for a 6 mm and an 8 mm base metal thickness. May these PQRs support a WPS, with all the essential and supplementary essential variables unchanged, to weld a 28 mm thick production joint? Reply: No, see QW-451.
Interpretation: IX-04-06 Subject: QB-151.3, QB-451.3, and QB-462.1(e) Date Issued: December 30, 2003 File No: 03-1664
Background: Two tubes under 3" diameter are separately torch brazed into each end of a coupling using face fed filler in the same position with all the remaining brazing variables the same for both joints. The coupon is pulled to failure which occurs in the weaker of the two brazed joints. The resulting ultimate tensile strength exceeds the minimum specified values listed in QW/QB422. Question (1): Does one tensile specimen, as shown in QB-462.1(e), brazed in this manner, fulfill the requirement in QB-451.3 for two tension tests? Reply (1): Yes, see QB-463.1(e). Question (2): Since the same inside diameter, outside diameter, cross-sectional area ultimate load, ultimate tensile strength, and type of failure exist for both lap joints, may the same values be recorded for the two tension tests on the Brazing PQR? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-07 Subject: QW-310.1, QW-452.3 and QW-461.9 Date Issued: December 30, 2003 File No: 03-1686
Question: Does QW-310.1 apply if the pipe coupon is welded in the 6G position? Reply: No.
VOLUME 55 Interpretation: IX-04-08 Subject: QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures Date Issued: April 1, 2004 File No: 03-1770
Background: A combination weld process PQR was qualified using the GTAW f or the root pass, SMAW and SAW. Question: May this PQR support a WPS for welding with only one or two of the processes shown on the PQR? Reply: Yes, provided the following are met: a) The remaining essential, nonessential and supplementary essential variables, when applicable, are applied. b) The base metal and deposited weld metal thickness limits of QW-451 are applied.
Interpretation: IX-04-09 Subject: QW-403.9, Base Metal Thickness Date Issued: April 1, 2004 File No: 04-65
Background: An EGW procedure was qualified on 3/8 in. thick base material completing the weld joint in one (1) single pass. Question: Is the WPS qualified to make a weld deposit greater than 1/2 in., in one pass, in base metal greater than 1/2 in. in thickness? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-04-10 Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-202.2, Procedure Qualification Record Time Limits Date Issued: June 10, 2004 File No: 04-601
Question: Is there a time limit on the validity of a PQR? Reply: PQRs always remain valid, but may only be used to support WPSs, provided they meet the requirements of the 1962 or later Edition of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX. See QW-100.3.
Interpretation: IX-04-11
Subject: Date Issued: File No:
QW-451.1, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens and QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal Thicknesses December 22, 2004 04-599
Background: A procedure qualification test coupon using the same P-Number material and consisting of two plates of different thicknesses are welded together, where the thicker of the two plates (T 2 = 1-1/2” thick) has been tapered on a 4:1 taper down to the thinner plate thickness (T 1 = 1” thick). Question (1): Does this test coupon qualify the WPS for a base metal thickness range of 3/16” to 8”? Reply (1): See Interpretation IX-86-43, Question (2). Background: A procedure qualification test coupon using the same or different P-Number materials and consisting of two plates of different thicknesses, T 2 = 1-1/2” thick and T 1 = 1” thick welded with a single process. The thicknesses meet on the same plane with neither plate being tapered. The joint is welded in accordance with the sketch below.
Question (2): Does this test coupon qualify the WPS for both base metals for a thickness range of 3/16” to 8” on both sides of the weld joint? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): Does this test coupon qualify the WPS for both base metals of different P Numbers for a thickness range of 3/16” to 8”? Reply (3): No. QW-202.4 requires both base metal thicknesses be in accordance with QW451.1. Base metal T1 is qualified 3/16” to 2” and base metal T 2 is qualified 3/16” to 8”, except as permitted by QW-202.4(b)(1).
Interpretation: IX-04-12 Subject: QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics, Heat Input Date Issued: December 22, 2004 File No: 04-1013
Question (1): Does QW-409.1 require that the highest heat input, to be recorded on the PQR, be calculated on the parameters used at the location where the HAZ impact specimens are removed? Reply (1): No.
Question (2): GTAW is a non-consumable electrode welding process that would record zero for the “per unit length of electrode” in QW-409.1(b). Therefore, can the weld volume method detailed in QW-409.1 be used to control the heat input for a non-consumable electrode welding process such as GTAW? Reply (2): See Interpretation IX-92-40.
Interpretation: IX-04-13 Subject: QW-322.2, Renewal of Qualification Date Issued: December 22, 2004 File No: 04-1457
Background: A welder has been qualified for the GMAW process (short circuiting transfer mode). The required mechanical bend tests were performed and found to be acceptable. The welder did not weld with this process during the following six-month period, resulting in expiration of the qualification. Question: May a welder’s qualification be renewed by radiographing a production weld performed with the GMAW process (short circuiting transfer mode)? Reply: No. See QW-322.2(a).
Interpretation: IX-04-14 Subject: QW-200.2, Procedure Qualification Record and QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics, Heat Input Date Issued: December 22, 2004 File No: 04-1592
Question (1): Procedure Qualification tests were conducted with notch toughness testing. When documenting the PQR with actual variables (Amps, Volts, Travel Speed) that were recorded during welding of the test coupon, is it required that a single value be recorded for these variables in the PQR? Reply (1):
No. See QW-200.2(b).
Question (2): Must the volts, amps and travel speed used to calculate heat input for each process per QW-409.1 be measured in the same weld pass or unit length of weld? Reply (2):
Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-15 Subject: QW-407.2, Base Metal Thickness Qualification and QW-407.2, PWHT Temperature and Time Range Date Issued: December 22, 2004 File No: 04-1595
Question (1): Will a procedure qualification test coupon on 1.5 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material and post weld heat treated at 1100 deg. F. for 1.5 hours with supplementary essential variable
requirements met, support a WPS with supplementary essential variable requirements for production welding on 8 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material that is PWHT at 1100 deg. F. for 3.5 hours? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Based on the conditions stated in Question 1, could the PWHT time on the 8 in. thick weldment be increased to 4 hours and 10 minutes at 1100 deg. F. and still be in compliance with Code requirements? Reply (2): No.
VOLUME 56 Interpretation: IX-92-69 Subject: QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued: May 19, 2005 File No: 05-635 Note: Interpretation IX-92-69 has been withdrawn
Interpretation: IX-04-16 Subject: QW-403.5, Qualification of Dissimilar Group Number Base Metals Date Issued: March 8, 2005 File No: 04-1418
Question (1): A PQR is qualified with impact testing using API 5L X56, which is an S-No.1, Group 2 material. Does that PQR support a WPS for impact tested welding API 5L X52 and X46 which are S-No.1, Group 1 materials? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Does a PQR qualified with impact testing conducted using an unassigned material welded to an S-No.1, Group 2 material support a WPS for welding the same unassigned material to S-No.1, Group 1 material? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-04-17 Subject: QW-409.8, QW-256, SFA Specifications, GTAW Electrode Characteristics Date Issued: March 8, 2005 File No: 05-24
Question: May current levels outside the range of SFA 5.12 Table AI for specific tungsten electrode diameters be specified in a WPS in accordance with Section IX? Reply:
Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-18 Subject: QW-200.4(b), Combination Procedure Qualification Records Date Issued: March 8, 2005 File No: 05-25
Background: A combination GTAW and SMAW WPS is supported by two PQRs. PQR A is welded with SMAW to join 38 mm (1-½ in.) thick plates with 38 mm (1-½ in.) of SMAW deposit. PQR B is welded with GTAW and SMAW to join 13 mm (½ in.) thick plates, with 3 mm (1/8 in.) of GTAW deposit, and 10 mm (3/8 in.) of SMAW deposited. Question (1): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 5 mm (3/16 in.) to 200 mm (8 in.) when impact testing is not required? Reply (1):
Yes.
Question (2): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a maximum deposited weld metal thickness of 6 mm (¼ in.) for the GTAW process and 200 mm (8 in.) for the SMAW process? Reply (2):
Yes.
Question (3): When impact tests are performed for both PQRs with acceptable results, do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 13 mm (½ in.) to 200 mm (8 in.) when impact testing is required? Reply (3):
Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-19 Subject: QW-404.36, Filler Metals, Testing of Recrushed Slag Date Issued: March 8, 2005 File No: 05-26
Question: Does QW-404.36 require that each batch or blend of recrushed slag, as defined in SFA-5.17, be tested in accordance with Section II, Part C regardless of the source of slag? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-20 Subject: QW-407.1, Welding Procedure Specification, Postweld Heat Treatment Date Issued: March 8, 2005 File No: 05-293
Question: A WPS for joining P-No.4 to P-No.4 specifies that the PWHT be performed at 1125 deg. F +/- 25 deg. F, which is below the lower transformation temperature for the material. May this WPS be revised to specify a PWHT performed at 1225 deg. F +/- 25 deg. F, which is also below the transformation temperature, without requalification of the procedure? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-21 Subject: QW-184 and QW-322.1, Production Welds, Revoking Welder Qualifications Date Issued: May 19, 2005 File No: 05-528
Question (1): A welder qualified for fillet welds by a qualification test on a plate groove weld is required to weld a fillet weld of 3/8 in. (10 mm) leg on a nozzle to shell weld. Is the welder required to produce fillet welds with legs having a maximum difference in length of 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) as per QW-184? Reply (1):
No, QW-184 does not apply to production welds.
Question (2): The same welder, qualified as per previous question, produces fillet welds with one leg size twice the size of the other (3/8 versus 3/4 in.). Is this cause for questioning his/her ability to weld within the qualification parameters and revoke his/her qualification for fillet welds, in terms of QW-322.1(b)? Reply (2):
Section IX does not establish criteria for revoking welder qualifications.
Interpretation: IX-04-22 Subject: QW-407.4, Qualified Thickness Range when Exceeding the PWHT Upper Transformation Temperature Date Issued: May 27, 2005 File No: 04-1301
Question: When variable QW-407.4 applies per QW-250 for test coupons with postweld heat treatment exceeding the upper transformation temperature is the maximum thickness qualified 1.1 times the thickness of the test coupon for ferrous P number materials; P-No.1 through P-No.7 and P-No. 9A through P-No11B? Reply: Yes
Interpretation: IX-04-23 Subject: QW-211 and QW-310.2, Procedure Qualification for Groove Welds with Backing (2004 Edition) Date Issued: August 18, 2005 File No: 05-784
Background: A performance qualification test is performed using solid round bar machined to 42.20 mm (1.66 in.) O.D. with a machined circumferential weld groove that is 14.6 mm (0.575 in.) deep and has integral backing. Welding is performed in the 6G test position with a single welding process. At least three weld layers are deposited. The test coupon will be subjected to radiographic examination.
Question: May the test coupon described above be used for a performance qualification test in the 6G position welded with a single process to qualify for all position welding of unlimited weld metal thickness with backing and for all diameters 25 mm (1 in.) O.D. and greater? Reply: Yes, however, multiple test coupons are required to provide a minimum weld length of 150 mm (6 in.) for radiographic examination and the radiographic examination requirements of QW-191 are met.
Interpretation: IX-04-24 Subject: QW-461.9, Performance Qualification – Position and Diameter Limitations (2004 Edtion) Date Issued: November 15, 2005 File: 05-1195
Question: A welder was qualified on pipe 5/8” thick in the 6G position using the GTAW process without backing for his root pass, and SMAW with F4 filler metal to complete the joint. He is also qualified to weld using SMAW on plate in the 1G position without backing. May this welder deposit a root pass using SMAW with F4 filler in the 6G position without backing? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-04-25 Subject: QW-151.3 and QW-451, Tension Test Requirements for Turned Specimens (2004 Edition) Date Issued: November 17, 2005 File No: 05-1404
Background: A test coupon of 1 1/8” thickness was welded. Only two (2) turned 0.505 inch diameter tension specimens were prepared and tested. The test results were acceptable for the specimens tested. Question (1): Do the tension tests performed satisfy the requirements of QW-150 and QW-451? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Are the requirements of QW-150 and QW-451 satisfied if the WPS and this PQR supports is limited to a base metal thickness range of 3/16 to 2 inches instead of a base metal thickness range of 3/16 to 2-1/4 inches that would have been permitted had a sufficient number of tension specimens been tested? Reply (2): No.
VOLUME 57 Interpretation: IX-04-26
Subject: Date Issued: File No:
QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility (2004 Edition) February 22, 2006 05-1196
Background: Two independent companies A and B form a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) to perform work requiring ASME Section I Code Stamp. The LLP has obtained valid ASME Certificates of Authorization. Each company also has valid, existing ASME Certificates of Authorization. The organization effective operational control of welding procedure qualification is described in each of the partner’s Quality Control System Manuals and the LLP’s Quality Control System Manual. The welding procedure qualification tests and production welding are under the full supervision and control of the same individual representing both the LLP and company A. Question: May the LLP use PQR’s qualified by company A after the formation of the LLP? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-04-27 Subject: Units of Measurement Date Issued: February 22, 2006 File No: 05-1215
Question (1): Is it acceptable to maintain welder performance qualification records in SI units, with a conversion table as part of the welding manual to ensure that qualification limits are not exceeded? Reply (1): Yes. Code Case 2523 provides information about when such conversions are required and the requirements for performing such conversions. Question (2): Is it acceptable to maintain welding procedure specifications that are dual dimensioned with SI units primary and US Customary units in parenthesis, with a conversion table as part of the welding manual to ensure that qualification limits are not exceeded? Reply (2): Yes. Code Case 2523 provides information about when such conversions are required and the requirements for performing such conversions.
Interpretation: IX-04-28 Subject: QW-405.2, Welding Position (2004 Edition) Date Issued: June 21, 2006 File No: 06-323
Question (1): If a Stud Welding Procedure Qualification is performed in the 4S position does the same procedure qualification qualify for the 1S position? Reply (1): No. Question (2): If a Stud Welding Procedure Qualification is performed in the 4S and 2S position
does the same procedure qualification also qualify for all positions? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-04-29 Subject: QW-407.1(b), Postweld Heat Treatment Date Issued: June 21, 2006 File No: 06-462
Question: Does QW-407.1(b)(2) address the temperature ranges for stress relieving, stabilizing and/or solution annealing heat treatments? Reply: No, QW-407.1(b)(2) addresses PWHT within a specified temperature range. Section IX requires the temperature range to be specified on the WPS and the PQR supporting the WPS be within the specified PWHT temperature range. (See the fourth paragraph of the Introduction.)
VOLUME 58 Interpretation: IX-01-22R Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number Reassignment (2004 Edition) Date Issued: September 11, 2007 File No: 01-679, 04-600
Question: May a previously qualified WPS, written to permit the welding of P-No. 5, Group 1 material to P-No. 5, Group 4 material prior to the establishment of P-Nos. 5A, 5B, and 5C, be used to weld SA-213 T22 to SA-213 T91 materials? Reply: Yes, if the WPS is revised to limit the materials qualified for welding to the P- or S Number(s) and Group number(s) assigned to the specific material(s) originally used for the procedure qualification test coupon in the applicable edition and addenda of Section IX.
Interpretation: IX-07-01 Subject: QW-407.1(b), Postweld Heat Treatment (2004 Edition) Date Issued: February 6, 2007 File No: 06-285
Background: A manufacturer has fabricated multi-convolution bellows of SB-409 UNS N08800, N08810 or N08811 (P-No. 45), in accordance with ASME Section VIII Div. 1, and Mandatory Appendix 26, Pressure Vessel and Heat Exchanger Expansion Joints. Although the Code does not require it, the manufacturer performs heat treatment (at 1750 deg. F) subsequent to completing all welding and forming. Question: Is the heat treatment described above considered Postweld Heat Treatment for the purpose of welding procedure qualification in accordance with Section IX, para. QW-407.1(b)? Reply:
Yes.
Interpretation: IX-07-02 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility (2004 Edition) Date Issued: August 17, 2007 File No: 06-912
Background: Three construction companies have participated in a nuclear power plant construction project as a consortium contractor. They have a unified Quality Assurance Program but the consortium does not hold a Certificate of Authorization. Each of the construction companies holds their own Certificate of Authorization. Question: Does “two or more companies of different names in an organization” in QW-201 apply to the consortium described in the background? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-07-03 Subject: QW-409.2, FCAW Mode of Transfer (2004 Edition) Date Issued: August 17,2007 File No: 07-1041
Question: Does QW-409.2, the transfer mode variable, apply to the flux cored arc welding process? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-07-04 Subject: QW-404.23, Filler Metal Product Form (2007 Edition) Date Issued: August 17, 2007 File No: 07-1343
Question (1): Is the requirement to document essential variable QW-404.23 satisfied when the AWS filler metal classification is specified in the WPS and recorded on the supporting PQR? Reply (1):
Yes.
Question (2): Does QW-404.23 require the words “solid wire”, “bare wire” or “flux cored” be specified in addition to the AWS filler metal classification in the WPS and supporting PQR? Reply (2):
No.
Interpretation: IX-07-05 Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, Change of P-No. as an Essential Variable with Respect to Reassignment of P-No.5 into P-No. 5A, 5B, and 5C (2004 Edition) Date Issued: September 11, 2007 File No: 04-600
Background: A welding procedure was qualified in 1975 (without impact testing) for joining P No.5 materials, using SA-213-T9 in the PQR test coupon. P-No.5 has since been deleted, and CrMo materials have been reassigned to P-Nos.5A, 5B, and 5C, with SA-213-T9 being assigned to P-No.5B. It can be demonstrated that SA-213-T9 is now designated as a P-No.5B material. Question (1): QW-100.3 allows the continued use of welding procedures qualified under previous Editions and Addenda of the Code without revision to include any variables required by later Editions and Addenda. Is it the intent of QW-100.3 to allow the use of this WPS to join P-No.5A, .P-No.5B or P-No.5C materials without requalification when toughness is not a consideration? Reply (1): No. QW-100.3 applies when later Code Editions and Addenda have added new variables for a given welding process. While this WPS can be shown to be qualified for welding P-No.5B materials to each other, it is intended that the WPS be editorially revised to show applicability of the WPS to the originally qualified materials under the material grouping assignment found in the applicable Edition and Addenda of Section IX. See QW-420.1 and QW200.2(c). Question (2): Is it the intent of Section IX that the WPS described above is acceptable for joining all materials previously assigned P-No.5? Reply (2): No. Based upon the original PQR, the WPS is qualified only for joining materials assigned to P-No.5B under the current Section IX rules. See QW-403.13.
Interpretation: IX-07-06 Subject: QW-407.1 and QW-407.2, Postweld Heat Treatment (2007 Edition) Date Issued: December 11, 2007 File No: 07-1708
Background: A weld test coupon for a PQR was welded using P-No. 1, Group 2 plate material to itself and postweld heat treated at 1110°F - 1130°F (600°C - 610°C) for ten hours. The PQR documents all supplementary essential variable notch-toughness requirements. Notchtoughness is required and all qualification ranges are supported by the PQR for production welds. Question: Will this PQR support a WPS that specifies a PWHT temperature range below the lower transformation temperature provided the time at temperature does not exceed 12.5 hours? Reply: Yes.
VOLUME 59 Interpretation: IX-07-07R Subject: QW-404.22, Use of Consumable Inserts (2007 Edition) Date Issued: February 12, 2008 File No: 08-40
Background: QW-356 lists the essential variables for Welder Performance Qualification for manual GTAW. QW-404.22, the use of consumable inserts, is an essential variable for
Welder Performance Qualification within QW-356. An individual performs the following two qualification tests: (a) Groove weld using the GTAW-machine process on a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe coupon with a consumable insert. (b) Groove weld using the GTAW-manual process on a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe coupon with an open root. Each qualification test is performed independently and welded full thickness by the process used to make the root weld Question (1): Is this individual qualified to weld a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe groove weld by making the root weld with the GTAW-machine process with a consumable insert and then completing the weld using the GTAW-manual process? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Is this individual qualified to make non-through wall weld repairs using the GTAW-manual process to a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe groove weld that was originally performed using the GTAW-machine process with a consumable insert? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): Is this individual qualified to make through-wall repairs using the GTAWmanual process to the root of a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe groove weld that was originally performed using the GTAW-machine process with a consumable insert if the defect removal results in a repair cavity with an open root? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-07-08 Subject: QW-200.2(c), Changes to PQR (2007 Edition) Date Issued: February 12, 2008 File No: 08-209
Question (1): Can additional tests and data that are not required by Section IX (i.e., hardness ferrite, corrosion, etc.) be added to a PQR at a later date when the testing was not performed as part of the original PQR, but followed the conditions of the original qualification? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): If the tests and data noted in Question 1 are added to the PQR, would recertification, including date, be required? Reply (2): Yes. All changes to a PQR require recertification (including date) by the manufacturer or contractor per QW-200.2(c).
Interpretation: IX-07-09
Subject: Date Issued: File No:
QW-401.3 and QW-403.6, Thickness Range Qualified for Impact Testing (2007 Edition) May 1, 2008 08-576
Background: A welding procedure qualification was performed on a 1 in. (25 mm) thick test coupon. Tension and bend tests were performed on the 1 in. (25 mm) plate. A second welding procedure qualification was performed on a 0.24 in. (6 mm) plate and only impact testing was performed. All of the essential and supplementary essential variables remained the same except for the coupon thickness. Question: May the above PQRs be used to support a WPS for materials requiring notch toughness with a qualified thickness range of 0.1875 in. (5 mm) to 2 in. (50 mm)? Reply: Yes. Interpretation: IX-07-10 Subject: QW-201.1 Date Issued: September 18, 2008 File No: 08-1002
Question: Does QW-201.1 allow maintaining effective operational control of PQRs and WPSs under different ownership than existed during the original procedure qualification when the ownership of one company has been transferred more than once? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-07-11 Subject: QW-301.2, Qualification Tests Date Issued: November 26, 2008 File No: 08-1607
Question: Does QW-301.2 require that a person making adjustments to the welding equipment settings, under the supervision and control of the welder or welding operator performing the weld, also be a qualified welder or welding operator? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-07-12 Subject: QW-466.1 Date Issued: December 3, 2008 File No: 08-1161
Question: In Table QW-466.1, when the material P-No. is assigned as “All Others” and the material specification of the ASME Code Section II does not have any requirements for reporting elongation, is the manufacturer limited to performing a base metal tension test to determine the proper test jig dimensions A, B, C, and D of Table QW-466.1? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-07-13 Subject: QW-483 and QW-484 Date Issued: December 3, 2008 File No: 08-1464
Question (1): May the manufacturer or contractor, subcontract the certification of procedure or performance qualification records? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Does Section IX specify the qualifications for the individuals who certify procedure or performance qualification records? Reply (2): No.
VOLUME 60 Interpretation: IX-07-14 Subject: QW/QB-422 Date Issued: June 4, 2009 File No: 09-486
Question: Does the assignment of P-No. 8, Group No. 3 to SA-479, Type XM-19, UNS S20910 include all three (3) of the heat treatment conditions (annealed, hot-rolled and strain-hardened) specified by SA-479? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-01 Subject: Article III - QW-302.1 & QW-302.2 Date Issued: August 18, 2009 File No: 09-567
Question (1): If radiographic examination per QW-302.2 is done for qualification of 2 welders on a single pipe coupon welded in the 6G position, must each welder complete the entire circumference of the pipe coupon? Reply (1): Yes. Question 2: If mechanical testing per QW-302.1 is done for qualification of 2 welders on a single pipe coupon welded in the 6G position, must each welder complete the entire circumference of the pipe coupon in order to remove the required bend specimens in accordance with QW-463.2(d) or QW-463.2(e)? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-02 Subject: QW-300.2(b) Date Issued: August 18, 2009 File No: 09-747
Question: Is the manufacturer or contractor required to provide full supervision during the performance qualification testing, so that issues such as the essential variables and inspections during the test can be verified and satisfied for each welder or welding operator qualified? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-03 Subject: QW-304 & QW-355 - FCAW Date Issued: August 18, 2009 File No: 09-1012
Question (1): May radiographic examination meeting the requirements of QW-304 be used to qualify a welder using the Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) process, provided the transfer mode is not the short circuiting mode? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): When qualifying a welder in accordance with the essential variables listed in QW355 for the Gas Metal-Arc Welding (GMAW) process and the requirements of QW-304 are met, is the welder also qualified for the Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) process if the essential variables are unchanged? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-04 Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1 Date Issued: November 12, 2009 File No: 09-490
Background: A later Edition /Addenda of Section IX assigns a P-number different from that assigned by the Edition/Addenda of Section IX that was in effect at the time of qualification. Question (1): Is it required that the WPS be revised or a new WPS be written to identify the new P-number when the applicable code edition/addenda lists the material under the new P-number? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Is it required that the WPS be revised or a new WPS be written to identify the new P-number when the applicable code edition/addenda lists the material under the old P-number? Reply (2): No Question (3): Is it required that a supporting PQR be amended to show the new P-number assignment?
Reply (3): No. Question 4: May a supporting PQR be amended to show the new P-number assignment? Reply (4): Yes. Question (5): May a supporting PQR be amended to show both the old and the new P-number assignments? Reply (5): Yes. Background: A later Edition/Addenda of Section IX assigns a F-number different from that assigned by the Edition/Addenda of Section IX that was in effect at the time of qualification. Question (6): Is it required that the WPS or PQR be amended to reflect the new filler metal F No. assignment? Reply (6): No. Question (7): May the WPS or PQR be amended to reflect the new filler metal F-No. assignment? Reply (7): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-05 Subject: QW-452.5 & QW-181.2.1 Date Issued: December 2, 2009 File No: 09-1596
Background: A fillet weld performance qualification test is performed using a production assembly mockup. Question: Must a welder or a welding operator using a production mockup assembly be qualified for a change in fillet size, base material thickness, or configuration of the mockup? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-06 Subject: QW-452.5 Date Issued: December 11, 2009 File No: 08-210
Question: Is it the intent of QW-452.5 to permit welder or welding operator fillet weld performance qualification testing to be conducted using test coupon thicknesses greater than 3/8” thick? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-07 Subject: QW-250 Date Issued: December 31, 2009 File No: 09-588
Question (1): Is it the intent of the Code that Variables QW-403.6, QW-406.3, QW-409.1, QW410.9, and QW-410.10 apply when specified in QW-250 for P-No. 10H materials? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Is it the intent of the Code that Variable QW-407.4 applies when specified in QW250 for P-No. 10H materials? Reply (2): Yes.
VOLUME 61 Interpretation: IX-10-08 Subject: QW-407.2 Date Issued: February 17, 2010 File No: 09-513
Question: May a procedure qualification subject to the variable QW-407.2, for P-No.8 material with solution annealing PWHT at 1060ºC (1940ºF) for 1 hour and impact tested, support a WPS for production with both solution annealing at 1060ºC (1940ºF) and stabilization heat treatment at 950ºC (1742ºF) for 2 hours? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-10-09 Subject: QB-451.3 and QB-451.5, Workmanship Coupons Date Issued: February 17, 2010 File No: 09-883
Question: For components such as valve bodies and seats in which materials of suitable geometry and thickness are not normally available to make up lap joint test coupons as required by QB451.3, is it the intent of the Committee that the materials to be brazed shall be qualified using any convenient thickness and geometry suitable for performing the tension and section testes required by QB-451.3, and that a greater range of base metal thickness may be qualified using workmanship test coupons in accordance with QB-451.5? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-10 Subject: QW-163 and QW-466.1 – Guided Bend Test Specimen Dimensions Date Issued: February 17, 2010 File No: 09-2140
Background: A welding procedure was qualified for welding on thick base metals. Due to the thickness of the test coupon required, the width of the face of the weld is 5 inches. Per QW-163, the weld and heat-affected zone shall be completely within the bent portion of the bend specimen. For a material with 20% or greater elongation, the standard 3/8” thick bend specimen provides a bent portion that is 3.53 inches long on the OD of the specimen. Question (1): Does it meet the requirements of ASME Section IX, if the bend radius and bend test specimen thickness are increased, such that 20% outer fiber elongation is achieved, and the OD of the specimen contains the entire width of the weld and HAZ? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Does it meet the requirements of ASME Section IX, if a set of multiple specimens having the standard 3/8” thickness and representing the entire width of the weld and both HAZs are removed and tested to meet the requirements for testing the entire width of the weld? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): Assuming that both of the base metals in the test coupon are of the same P-No., does it meet the requirements of ASME Section IX, to use standard 3/8” thick bend specimens representing at least one HAZ and as much weld metal as possible, when performing the required bend test? Reply (3): No.
Interpretation: IX-10-11 Subject: QW-453 – Minimum Qualified Thickness for Corrosion Overlay Date Issued: February 17, 2010 File No: 09-2141
Question: For corrosion resistant overlay welding procedure qualifications, where a chemical analysis is not required, is there a minimum qualified deposit thickness? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-10-12 Subject: QW-181.1 & QW-424.1 – Procedure Qualification Using Production Assembly Mockup Date Issued: February 17, 2010 File No: 10-13
Question: Does ASME Section IX allow the use of materials having the same P-No. as the actual production materials, to produce a test specimen for fillet welding procedure qualification, using a production assembly mockup? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-13 Subject: QW-404.5(b), Change in trade designation of filler metal Date Issued: June 25, 2010 File No: 09-1368
Background: A PQR using GTAW process was qualified using filler metal classified in accordance with ASME Section II Part C, SFA 5.28, ER80S-G classification, with chemistry meeting A-Number 2. A footnote was used in the PQR to document the filler metal Trade Name used in the qualification. Question: A WPS supported by the above PQR using the same filler metal classification ER80SG and A-No. 2, but with a different Trade Name was specified. When notch toughness (QW404.12) does not apply, does a change in the filler Trade Name specified on the WPS require requalification? Reply: No
Interpretation: IX-10-14 Subject: QW-200.4 Date Issued: June 25, 2010 File No: 09-2144
Background: A production weld joint was made using a qualified welding procedure, welding P3 to P8 using an unassigned filler metal. In order perform a repair to this joint, a 2 nd welding procedure was qualified using an assigned filler metal. Question (1): If the 2 nd procedure is qualified by welding P3 to P8, is this procedure qualified to repair the production weld between the P3 & P8 material made with an unassigned filler metal? Reply (1): Yes. However, see QW-431. Question (2): For the same situation as question 1, is this procedure qualified to repair the production weld between the P3 & P8 material if the repair is entirely within the previously deposited weld metal? Reply (2): Yes. However, see QW-431. Question (3): If the 2 nd procedure is made by welding P-number material that nominally matches the composition of the unassigned filler metal similar to QW-293.4, is the 2 nd procedure qualified to make a repair to the production weld between the P3 & P8 material provided that the repair is entirely within the previously deposited weld metal? Reply (3): Yes. However, see QW-431.
Interpretation: IX-10-15 Subject: QW-202.3, Weld Repair and Buildup Date Issued: August 26, 2010 File No: 10-359
Question: May a WPS be used to perform a weld repair per QW-202.3 on a groove weld previously welded using the same WPS, without revising the WPS to include the groove design of the repair cavity? Reply: Yes. Also see interpretation IX-79-72.
Interpretation: IX-10-16 Subject: QW-200.1(b), Contents of the WPS; QW-200.2(b), Contents of the PQR; QW-404.24 and QW-404.27, Supplemental Filler Metal Date Issued: August 26, 2010 File No: 10-1159
Background: QW-404.24 and QW-404.27 are essential variables for the SAW process. A procedure qualification test was conducted using the SAW process without the use of supplemental filler metal. Question: Is it required that the PQR indicate that supplemental filler metal was not used and must the WPS specify it is not to be used? Reply: Yes. However, Section IX does not specify the manner in which this is documented on the PQR or specified on the WPS. The method of recording information on the PQR and WPS may be by statement, sketch or other means as long as the essential variables are addressed.
Interpretation: IX-10-17 Subject: QW-322.1(a) Date Issued: August 26, 2010 File No: 10-1161
Background: A welder successfully completes a performance qualification test. During the next six months, the welder used the welding process multiple times during the first four months, but did not use the welding process in the fifth or sixth month. Question: When maintaining the welder's qualification, is the welder continuity based on the last date the welder used the welding process? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-18 Subject: QW-256.1; Joining of Clad Materials Date Issued: November 17, 2010 File No: 09-994
Background: A composite (clad) material having a carbon steel base and alloy 825 cladding is to be joined by welding. The alloy 825 cladding is not included in the design calculations. The contractor has a PQR for joining the base metal whose qualified ranges are appropriate for welding conditions. The contractor also has a PQR for overlaying carbon steel with alloy 625
filler metal using GTAW, whose qualified ranges of essential special process variables for corrosion resistant overlay welding are applicable to the welding conditions. Question (1): When joining the clad layer of a composite (clad) material using GTAW where the clad thickness is not considered in the design calculations, are the essential special process variables or QW-256.1 applicable to the clad portion of the weld? Reply (1): Yes. See QW-217 and QW-251.4. Question (2): When completing the clad portion of a weld using the GTAW process, is a WPS qualified to deposit corrosion resistant weld metal using alloy 625 (UNS N06625) filler metal, also qualified for depositing a corrosion resistant weld metal overlay using alloy 825 (UNS N08065) filler metal, when the carbon steel base metal has the same P-No. as the base metal qualified by the WPS? Reply (2): No. See QW-256.1 and QW-404.37.
Interpretation: IX-10-19 Subject: QW-2004. - Procedure Qualification, Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued: November 17, 2010 File No: 09-2143
Background: A corrosion resistant weld metal overlay was applied to P-No.3 base metal with WPS qualified for the SAW process using an unassigned strip filler metal, with resulting deposit chemistry nominally matching F-No.43 filler metal. It is later determined a greater thickness of corrosion resistant weld metal overlay or a repair to the overlay is needed. An alternate WPS is proposed for depositing the weld metal overlay to increase the overlay thickness or perform the repairs. The alternate WPS was qualified using a different welding process, applying SFA-5.11 ENiCrFe-7 filler metal to produce a corrosion resistant weld metal overlay with a deposit chemistry nominally matching F-No.43 on P-No.3 base metals. Question: Is any WPS qualified for depositing a corrosion resistant weld metal overlay with a known chemistry, also qualified for applying additional layers or repairs to an existing corrosion resistant overlay surface having a nominally matching chemistry? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-20 Subject: QW-405.3 Date Issued: November 18, 2010 File No: 10-1489
Question: When a welder qualifies with the vertical up progression on weld coupons in the 3G, 5G, or 6G test positions, is that welder qualified to weld with the vertical down progression when QW-405.3 is a performance qualification essential variable? Reply: No.
VOLUME 62 Interpretation: IX-10-21 Subject: QW-402 and QW-404 Through QW-410 Date Issued: March 11, 2011 File No: 10-496
Question: When impacts are waived by a book section for the base metal (HAZ notch toughness is not required), but are required for the weld metal, do the supplementary essential variables of QW-402 and QW-404 through QW-410 apply per the applicable tables QW-252 through QW265? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-22 Subject: QW-200.2, Use of Preliminary WPS Date Issued: March 14, 2011 File No: 10-1158
Question: Does ASME Section IX require a preliminary WPS be used during procedure qualification testing, or that a WPS number be recorded on the PQR? Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-10-23 Subject: QW-433 and QW-452.1(b) Date Issued: March 14, 2011 File No: 10-1918
Background: A welder tests on an NPS 6 Sch. 80 (0.432 in. wall) coupon, depositing 0.100 in. of E6010 and the balance of 0.332 in. using E7018. Question (1): Using E6010, is the welder qualified to deposit 0.864 in. maximum of weld metal? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Using E7018, is the welder qualified to deposit 0.664 in. maximum of weld metal? Reply (2): Yes. Question (3): Is the welder qualified to deposit 0.864 in. of weld metal using E6010 plus 0.664 in. of E7018 weld metal deposit thickness for a total of 1.528 in. in the same groove? Reply (3): No. See QW-452.1(b).
Interpretation: IX-10-24 Subject: QW-409.2, Combination of Processes
Date Issued: File No:
March 14, 2011 11-216
Background: A welder was tested on an SA-516 Gr. 70 plate, using the GMAW process. Short arc mode was used for depositing the root, and spray arc mode was used for depositing the balance of the weld in a single coupon. Question: Is it permissible, according to ASME Section IX, QW-409.2, to use two modes of metal transfer in a single test coupon? Reply: Yes; the deposit thickness for each transfer mode shall be recorded as required by QW306.
Interpretation: IX-10-25 Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility Date Issued: May 23, 2011 File No: 11-44
Question: May an organization with more than one ASME Certificate of Authorization, under different names and in different locations, describe in its quality assurance programs the operational control of procedure qualifications and the use of welding procedures properly qualified under one certificate holder, under another certificate holder within the organization, but without separate qualification, as permitted by Section IX, QW-201? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-26 Subject: QW-304, Volumetric Examination Date Issued: June 13, 2011 File No: 09-744
Question: Does Section IX require a welder to qualify for small diameter butt welds by preparing more than one small diameter pipe coupon to provide a minimum circumferential weld length when qualified by volumetric examination under the provisions of QW-304? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-27 Subject: Section IX, QW-452.5 Date Issued: August 1, 2011 File No: 08-210
Question: Is it the intent of QW-452.5 to permit welder or welding operator fillet weld performance qualification testing to be conducted using test coupon thicknesses greater than ⅜” thick? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-28 Subject: Section IX, QW-250 Date Issued: August 1, 2011 File No: 09-558
Question (1): Is it the intent of the Code that Variables QW-403.6, QW-406.3, QW-409.1, QW-410.9 and QW-410.10 apply when specified in QW-250 for P-No. 10H materials? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Is it the intent of the Code that Variable QW-407.4 apply when specified in QW-250 for P-No. 10H materials? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-29 Subject: Section IX, QW-300.3 - Simultaneous Performance Qualifications Date Issued: August 1, 2011 File No: 10-339
Question: Is it the intent of Section IX, paragraph QW-300.3 to permit an AWS Standard Welding Procedure Specification adopted by a contractor to be used in lieu of a PQR to support the range of variables for a single WPS proposed for use in conducting simultaneous welder performance qualification testing? Reply: Yes
Interpretation: IX-10-30 Subject: Section IX, QW-420 - ASTM Materials' P-No. Assignment Date Issued: August 1, 2011 File No: 10-1189
Question: Is it the intent that material produced under an ASTM specification shall be considered to have the same P-Number or P-Number plus Group Number as that of the P-Number or P Number plus Group Number assigned to the same grade or type material in the corresponding ASME specification (e.g., SA-240 Type 304 is assigned P-No. 8, Group No.1; therefore, A 240 Type 304 is considered P-No. 8, Group No.1)? Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-31 Subject: Section IX, QW-404.5 - A-Number Date Issued: August 25, 2011 File No: 11-918
Background: A procedure qualification test coupon was prepared and tested, which included a chemical analysis of the weld metal. The chemical analysis results were as follows, C: 0.08%, Cr: 0.044%, Mo: 0.14%, Ni: 1.48%, Mn: 1.45%, Si: 0.19% Question (1): Does this chemistry meet an A-1 Classification? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Does this chemistry meet an A-10 Classification? Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-32 Subject: Section IX, QW-182 - Fracture Tests Date Issued: August 25, 2011 File No: 11-939
Question (1): Is it required by QW-182 that the sum of all rounded indications (regardless of diameter) be considered in addition to the sum of the lengths of inclusions in determining the 3/8” in. (10 mm) maximum allowed for acceptance? Reply (1): Yes. Question (2): Is it permissible to apply the porosity size limitation of 1/32” or greater as specified in QW-191.1.2.2 (b)(3) to a ½” in. (12 mm) welded coupon to the fracture test acceptance criteria of QW-182? Reply (2): No.
Interpretation: IX-10-33 Subject: Section IX, QW-404.5, A-No. Essential Variable for GMAW Weld Metal Date Issued: November 14, 2011 File No: 11-1339
Question (1): According to QW-404.5, may the A-No. of GMAW weld metal be established from the chemical analysis of a weld deposit prepared according to the filler metal specification when the shielding gas used for the chemical analysis was different from that used in the procedure qualification? Reply (1): No. Question (2): According to QW-404.5, may the A-No. of GMAW weld metal be established from the chemical analysis of a weld deposit prepared according to the filler metal specification provided the shielding gas used for the chemical analysis was the same as that used in the procedure qualification? Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): Are the GMAW rules in QW-404.5 for establishing A-Numbers also applicable to FCAW? Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-10-34 Subject: Section IX, QW-200.4(b) Date Issued: December 8, 2011 File No: 10-1966
Background: PQR A is welded with SMAW to join 5/8 in. (16 mm) thick plates with 5/8 in. (16 mm) of SMAW deposit. PQR B is welded with GTAW and SMAW to join 5/16 in. (8 mm) thick plates with 1/8 in. (3 mm) of GTAW and 3/16 in. (5 mm) of SMAW deposit. PQR C is welded with GTAW to join 3/16 in. (5 mm) thick plates with 3/16 in. (5 mm) of GTAW deposit. Question (1): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 1/16 in. (1.5 mm) to 1¼ in. (32 mm) when impact testing is not required? Reply (1): No. Question (2): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 1/16 in. (5 mm) to 1½ (38 mm) when impact testing in not required? Reply (2): No. Question (3): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a maximum deposit weld metal thickness range of 1/4 in. (6 mm) for the GTAW process and 1¼ in. (32 mm) f or the SMAW process? Reply (3): No. Question (4): Do PQRs A and C qualify the combination WPS for a maximum deposit weld metal thickness range of 3/8 in. (10 mm) for the GTAW process and 1¼ in. (32 mm) for the SMAW process? Reply (4): No. Question (5): Do PQRs A and C qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 1/16 in. (1.5 mm) to 1¼ in. (32 mm) when impact testing is not required? Reply (5): No. Question (6): Do PQRs A and C qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 1/16 in. (1.5 mm) to 1½ in. (38 mm) when impact testing is not required? Reply (6): No. Question (7): Do the provisions in QW-200.4(b) affect the responses to the above questions? Reply (7): No.
