ASME SECTION IX INTERPRETATIONS
SASME SECTION IX INTERPRETATIONS
NOTE: THESE INTERPRETATIONS ARE FOR ASME COMMITTEE USE ONLY.
THEY ARE NOT TO BE DUPLICATED OR USED FOR OTHER THAN ASME COMMITTEE
BUSINESS.
WARNING: THERE MAY BE SOME TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN THIS
DOCUMENT. PLEASE REVIEW THE ACTUAL INTERPRETATION FOR THE EXACT
WORDING.
TO GET A PRINTED COPY OF AN INTERPRETATION, FIRST HIGHLIGHT THE
PORTION DESIRED, THEN GOTO File ON THE TOOLBAR, THEN Print... ,
THEN HIGHLIGHT THE DOT AT THE (Selection BUTTON, FINALLY PRESS THE
OK BUTTON. BE CAREFUL NOT TO PRINT THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT (1
Page).
VOLUME 33Interpretation: IX-92-59Subject:QW-306, Combination of
Welding Processes; QW-452.1 and QW-452.3, Performance Qualification
Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued:February 22,
1993File No:92-206
Background: The combination of welding processes and pipe
diameters listed below were used for performance qualification:
(1) 2 in. Sch. 80 (.218) pipe with open butt using GTAW
process.(2) 2 in. Sch. 160 (.343) pipe with consumable insert and
fill pass using the GRAW process and the remainder welded with SMAW
process.(3) 6 in. XXS (.864) using SMAW process with backing.
Question: Using the combinations listed in the 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 layer deposited with the
GTAW process and the remainder deposited with the SMAW process?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-60Subject:QW-214, Corrosion-Resistant Weld
Metal Overlay Date Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-421
Question: When corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay is
deposited in a base material 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-92-61Subject:Section II, Part C; SFA-5.13,
Specification for Solid Surfacing Welding Rods and Electrodes Date
Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-422
Question: May powdered filler metal be classified under Section
II, Part C, SFA 5.13?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-62Subject:QW-408.2, Shielding Gas Date
Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-425
Question (1): When changing shielding gases of a specific
mixture, is it permissible to 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 value of +/- 20%
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-92-63Subject:QW-153.1, Tensile StrengthDate
Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-452
Question: A welding procedure qualification test coupon is
welded using P-No. 23, SB-209, alloy 6061 aluminum base material in
the (o) temper. After welding the test coupon, it is subjected to a
T-6 heat treatment. To establish acceptability of tensile tests per
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-92-64Subject:QW-322, Expiration and Renewal
of Qualification Date Issued:May 26, 1993File No:93-148
Background: A welding operator is in the process of renewing
his/her qualification using machine GTAW welding equipment. During
the process the machine malfunctions and burns through the root
pass of the test coupon. No operator error is noted. Following the
malfunction, the test coupon is repaired using a manual GTAW
process. After the repair, the machine welding equipment is used to
complete the rest of the test coupon.
Question: May a welding operator performance test coupon being
welded for qualification or renewal, be repaired prior to testing,
using a manual welding procedure?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-65Subject:QW-423.1, Alternate Base Metals
for Welder Qualification Date Issued:May 26, 1993File No:93-148
Question: In QW-423.1, is P-No. 42 included in P-No. 4X?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-66Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:May 26, 1993File
No:93-377
Background: Company A and Company B merge divisions to form new
Company C.
Question (1): May the new Company, C, use PQRs and WPSs
developed previously by Company A and Company B?
Reply (1): Yes, provided operational control is in accordance
with QW-201.
Question (2): May the new Company, C, use the central materials
laboratory of Company A to develop WPSs and PQRs?
Reply (2): Yes, provided operational control is in accordance
with QW-201.
Interpretation: IX-92-67Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:May 26, 1993File
No:93-391
Question: In a contract involving piping construction work, our
company subcontracted the piping prefabrication work to a
subcontractor. This subcontractor is managed by our company but has
a different name. The subcontractor proceeded to qualify welding
procedures which were conducted in the presence and with the
approval of our companys welding engineer, who monitored the
welding of the test coupons and signed 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-92-68Subject:QW-306, Combination of Welding
Processes; and QW-451, Groove Weld Procedure Qualification
Thickness Limits and Test SpecimensDate Issued:June 30, 1993File
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-92-69Subject:QW-409.1, Electrical
Characteristics Date Issued:June 30, 1993File 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-92-70RSubject:QW-403.5, Base MetalsDate
Issued:June 4, 2001File 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-92-71Subject:QW-302.4, Visual Examination
Date Issued:September 22, 1993File 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-92-72Subject:QW-381(c), Corrosion Resistant
Weld Metal Overlay; QW-453 and QW-461.9, Performance
QualificationDate Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-392
Question (1): May welder qualifications for corrosion-resistant
overlays per QW-381 and QW-453 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 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 1 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-92-73Subject:QW-321.3, Welder Qualification
After Further Training or Practice Date Issued:September 22,
1993File 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-92-74Subject:QB-402.1, Base Metals Date
Issued:September 22, 1993File 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 QB-402.1?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-75Subject:QW-200.4(b), Combination of
Welding Procedures Date Issued:September 22, 1993File 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 in. minimum thickness as
stated in QW-200.4(b)?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-76Subject:QW-462, Test Specimens Date
Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-515
Question: QW-462 defines W as specimen width, in.. Is in. a
minimum or maximum dimension requirement for preparing a reduced
section tensile specimen?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-77Subject:QW-200.4, Combination of Welding
Procedures; and QW-451.4, Fillet Welds Qualified by Groove Weld
TestsDate Issued:September 22, 1993File 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-92-78Subject:QW-200.2(b), Welding Procedure
QualificationsDate Issued:September 22, 1993File 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-92-79Subject:QW-151.1, Tension Tests, Reduced
Section-Plate; and QW-462.1(a), Test Specimens Date
Issued:September 22, 1993File 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-92-80Subject:QW-103, Responsibility; and
QW-210, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date
Issued:September 22, 1993File 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-92-81Subject:QW-103.1 and QW-201,
Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:October 18,
1993File 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-92-82Subject:Code Case 2141, Electrodes and
Fluxes for Submerged Arc Welding, SFA 5.17 and SFA 5.23 Date
Issued:November 22, 1993File No:93-434
Question (1): Does the Manufacturers Date Report in the Section
IX Code Case 2141 mean the following: (a) Manufacturers 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) Manufacturers Data Report required
in AS-300 of Section VIII, Division 2?
Reply (1): A Manufacturers 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 manufacturers specifications and certified
material test report of welding consumables?
Reply (2): Section IX does not address procurement and
manufacturers specifications.
Interpretation: IX-92-83Subject:QB-415, Brazing Variables Date
Issued:September 22, 1993File 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-92-84Subject:QW-407.2, Postweld Heat
Treatment Date Issued:November 22, 1993File 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 1150F 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 1150F for 2 hours
(1 hr/in.)?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-85Subject:QB-121 and AB-123, Brazing Test
Positions Date Issued:November 22, 1993File 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-92-86Subject:QW-100.3, Welding General
RequirementsDate Issued:November 22, 1993File 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-92-87Subject:QW-403.6, Base Metals; and
QW-409.1, Electrical CharacteristicsDate Issued:February 14,
1994File 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 from 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 in. to 2 in. and the heat input
value of 45,000 J/in. applicable to base metal thicknesses between
5/16 in. and in.?
Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-88Subject:QW-409.1 and QW-409.8,
Electrical CharacteristicsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File
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-92-89Subject:QW-452.1, Groove Weld Procedure
Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens; and QW-452.3,
Groove Weld Diameter LimitsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File
No:93-653
Question: A welder has qualified on 3 in. O.D. in. wall pipe in
the 1G position and has also qualified on 1 in. O.D. in. wall pipe
in the 1G position. Is the welder qualified to weld 1 in. O.D. in.
wall in the 1G position?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-90Subject:QW-461.9, Performance
Qualification Position and Diameter LimitationsDate Issued:February
14, 1994File No:93-753
Question: A welder has passed two separate tests; one on in.
O.D. by 0.049 in. thick pipe welded in the 6G position using GTAW
process, and another on 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-92-91Subject:QW-300, General Welding
Performance QualificationsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File
No:93-755
Question: Does Section IX prohibit making editorial corrections
to welder and welding operator performance qualification
records?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-92-92Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors Responsibility, Clarification Request to Interpretation
IX-92-07, Date Issued: Oct. 7, 1991, File 91-156Date Issued:May 20,
1994File 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 in-house maintenance at a later date
using all the same essential and nonessential variables with its
own qualified welders?
Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-93Subject:QB-402.1, Brazing Data and
Appendix C Nonmandatory S-NumbersDate Issued:May 20, 1994File
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-92-94Subject:Section II, Part C SFA-5.8Date
Issued:May 20, 1994File 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-92-95Subject:QW-200, General Welding
Procedure QualificationsDate Issued:May 20, 1994File 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-92-96Subject:QW-300, General Welding
Procedure QualificationsDate Issued:May 20, 1994File 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-92-97Subject:QW-200.4(a), Combination of
Welding Procedures Date Issued:May 20, 1994File 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-92-98Subject:Appendix C, Nonmandatory
S-Numbers Date Issued:May 20, 1994File No:94-236
Question: May steel produced to ASTM A-108 Grade 1018, UNS
G10180, be considered S-1 material?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-92-99Subject:QW-432.6, F-Numbers; and Section
II, Part C SFA-5.92Date Issued:June 10, 1994File 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-95-01Subject:QW-200.1(b), General Welding
Procedure Qualifications; and QW-402.4, Joints Date
Issued:September 21, 1994File 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-95-02Subject:QW-462, Test Specimens Date
Issued:September 21, 1994File 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 by the designer.
Interpretation: IX-95-03Subject:QW-202.2(b), Groove and Fillet
Weld Tests; and QW-202.3(b), Weld Repair and Buildup TestsDate
Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-235
Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a
full penetration weld on 1 in. thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.2(b)
states that qualification on 1 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 1 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 1 in. thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.3(b)
states that qualification on 1 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 1 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-95-04Subject:QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter
Limits and Submerged Arc Wire Flux CombinationDate Issued:September
21, 1994File 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-95-05Subject:QW-422, P-Numbers Date
Issued:September 21, 1994File 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-95-06Subject:QW-153.1, Tension TestsDate
Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-542
Question: If a tensile specimen breaks in the weld metal, below
the weld metals 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-95-07Subject:QW-420.2, S-NumbersDate
Issued:March 17, 1995File 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-95-08Subject:QW-462.4(a), Fillet Weld
Procedure Date Issued:March 17, 1995File No:94-543
Question (1): When T2 is greater than in. in Fig. QW-462.4(a),
what is the maximum size fillet weld required?
Reply (1): in.
Question (2): In QW-462.4(a), what does size of fillet =
thickness T2 mean?
Reply (2): The length of each fillet leg(s) shall be nominally
equal to the thickness of T2.
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-95-09Subject:QW-153, Acceptance Criteria
Tension TestsDate Issued:March 17, 1995File 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-95-10Subject:QW-200.4, Combination of Welding
ProceduresDate Issued:March 17, 1995File 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-95-11Subject:QW-408, GasDate Issued:March 17,
1995File 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-95-12Subject:QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal
Thicknesses Date Issued:March 17, 1995File 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-95-13Subject:QW-203, Limits of Qualified
Positions for Procedures; and Section II, Part C, SFA-5.1 and 5.5
Date Issued:June 15, 1995File 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-95-14Subject:QW-300.3, Welding Performance
QualificationsDate Issued:June 15, 1995File 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-95-15Subject:QW-160, Guided-Bend Tests; and
QW-466 Note (b) Test JigsDate Issued:June 15, 1995File
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-95-16Subject:QW-255, Welding Variables
Procedure Specifications for FCAW; and QW-408.2, GasDate
Issued:June 15, 1995File No: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-95-17Subject:QW-302.4, Visual Examination
Date Issued:October 19, 1995File 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-95-18Subject:QW-409.8, Electrical
Characteristics Date Issued:October 19, 1995File 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-95-19Subject:QW-300.3, Welding Performance
Qualifications; and QW-322.1(b), Expiration of Welder Qualification
Date Issued:October 19, 1995File 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 welders
qualification has been revoked. One of the contractors subsequently
revokes the welders 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 welders qualification
per QW-322.1(b)?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): When a participating contractor revokes a welders
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-95-20Subject:QW-300, Welding Performance
QualificationDate Issued:October 19, 1995File 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-95-21Subject:QW-403.5, Base MetalsDate
Issued:October 19, 1995File 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-95-22Subject:QW-424, Base Metals Used for
Procedure QualificationDate Issued:December 28, 1995File
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-95-23Subject:QW-453, Notes (3) and (10),
Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hard-Facing and
Corrosion-Resistant OverlaysDate Issued:December 28, 1995File
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-95-24Subject:QW-403.1, Base Metals Date
Issued:March 19, 1996File 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-95-25Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:March 19, 1996File
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-95-26Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:March 19, 1996File
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-95-27Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:March 19, 1996File
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-95-28Subject:QW-403.10, Short Circuiting
ModeDate Issued:March 19, 1996File 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-95-29Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:May 30, 1996File
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-95-30Subject:QW-350, Welding Variables for
WeldersDate Issued:May 30, 1996File No: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, also qualified to use strip electrodes with the same
process?
Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-31Subject:QW-361.2, Essential Variables
Machine WeldingDate Issued:May 30, 1996File 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-95-32Subject:QW-300.2, Welding Performance
QualificationsDate Issued:July 1, 1996File 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-95-33Subject:QW-403.10, Short-Circuiting
ModeDate Issued:September 24, 1996File 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 in., when used to support a combination
GMAW-S/SMAW WPS?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-95-34Subject:QW-202.3, Weld Repair and
BuildupDate Issued:September 24, 1996File 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-95-35Subject:QW-300.1, Welding Performance
QualificationsDate Issued:September 24, 1996File 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-95-36Subject:QW-300, Welding Performance
QualificationsDate Issued:September 24, 1996File 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-95-37Subject:QW-404.9, Filler MetalsDate
Issued:September 24, 1996File 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-95-38Subject:QW-322, Expiration and Renewal
of QualificationDate Issued:January 6, 1997File No:96-132
Question: Is it a requirement of QW-322 for a manufacturer to
maintain records to demonstrate a welders or welding operators
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-95-39Subject:QW-304, Performance
Qualification Welders Date Issued:January 6, 1997File No:96-331
Question (1): Would the successful performance qualification of
a welder in a manual or semi-automatic 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-95-40Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:January 21, 1997File
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-95-41Subject:QW-453, Procedure/Performance
Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hardfacing
(Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant OverlaysDate Issued:March
6, 1997File 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 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-95-42Subject:QW-284, Seam Welding Equipment
QualificationDate Issued:May 20, 1997File 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-98-01Subject:QB-141.4, Sectioning TestsDate
Issued:December 15, 1997File No:97-304
Question: In QB-451.3, Note (1), is the Sectioning Test a
substitute for the Peel Test?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-02Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:December 15, 1997File
No:97-309
Question: May a manufacturer use another organizations 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-98-03Subject:QW-451, Procedure Qualification
Thickness Limits and Test SpecimensDate Issued:December 15,
1997File 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-98-04Subject:QW-200.2, Welding Procedure
QualificationsDate Issued:December 15, 1997File No:97-481
Question: Does ASME Section IX require that a preliminary WPS be
attached to the PQR?
Reply: No.
VOLUME 43
Interpretation: IX-98-05Subject:QW-453, Procedure/Performance
Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hardfacing
(Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant OverlaysDate Issued:April
28, 1998File 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-98-06Subject:QW-402.12(a) and (c) and
QW-402.12, Joints Date Issued:April 28, 1998File No:98-009
Question: Do the words any change exceeding 10%, changegreater
than 10%, a changegreater 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-98-07Subject:QW-410.42, TechniqueDate
Issued:April 28, 1998File 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-98-08Subject:QW-432, F-Numbers Date
Issued:April 28, 1998File 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
QW-350)?
Reply: No.
VOLUME 44
Interpretation: IX-98-09Subject:QW-150 and QW-462.1, Tension
Test Specimens for Pipe and Plate Date Issued:October 9, 1998File
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-98-10Subject:QW-407.1, Post Weld Heat
TreatmentDate Issued:October 9, 1998File 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-98-11Subject:QW-300, Welding Performance
QualificationsDate Issued:October 9, 1998File 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-98-12Subject:QW-451, Procedure Qualification
Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued:October 9, 1998File
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-98-13Subject:QW-200.1, Welding Procedure
Qualifications Date Issued:December 22, 1998File 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-98-14Subject:QW-361.2, Machine Welding
Variables for Welding Operators; and QW-381, Corrosion-Resistant
Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued:December 22, 1998File 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-98-15Subject:QW-405.3, Positions Date
Issued:December 22, 1998File 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-98-16Subject:QW-462.5(a), Chemical Analysis
and Hardness Specimen Corrosion-Resistant and Hard-Facing Weld
Metal Overlay Date Issued:December 22, 1998File 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-98-17Subject:QW-453, Procedure/Performance
Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hard-Facing
(Wear Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays Date Issued:March
23, 1999File 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 QW-453 applicable?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-98-18Subject:QW-201.1, Manufacturers or
Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:March 23, 1999File
No:99-025
Background: When one of a companys 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-98-19Subject:QW-404, Filler Metals Date
Issued:September 24, 1999File 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-98-20RSubject:QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base
Metal ThicknessDate Issued:June 8, 2000File 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 ts. For sketch (b),
the thicker of T or ts. For sketch (c), the thicker of flange a or
hub b.
VOLUME 48
Interpretation: IX-01-01Subject:QW-403, Base Metal Requirement;
QW-404, Filler Metal Requirement Date Issued:October 11, 2000File
No:00-514
Question (1): If a WPS is written using the GMAW-S process
alone, is T limited to 1.1T per QW-403.10 and t limited to 1.1t per
QW-404.32?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): If a WPS is written using FCAW process alone, is T
limited to 2T per QW-403.8 and t limited to 2t per QW-404.30?
Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-02Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or
Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:October 11, 2000File
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 As
Quality Program. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company
B are controlled by Company Bs Quality Program that has been
approved by Company A. Company C is on Company Bs 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-01-03Subject:QW-194, Visual Examinations Date
Issued:January 3, 2001File No:00-519
Question: Is a welders 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-01-04Subject:QW-304.1, Welders Test Coupon
Examination Date Issued:January 3, 2001File 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-01-05Subject:QW-200.2, Welding Procedure
Qualification Date Issued:January 3, 2001File 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 recorded on the PQR?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-06RSubject:QW-410.51, Addition/Deletion of
Oscillation (1998 and Earlier Editions)Date Issued:February 9,
2001File 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 hard-facing
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-01-07Subject:QW-420.2, Material GroupingDate
Issued:June 4, 2001File 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-01-08Subject:QW-300.2, Transfer of Record of
Performance QualificationDate Issued:February 26, 2001File
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-01-09Subject:QW-356, Welding VariablesDate
Issued:February 26, 2001File 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-01-10Subject:QW-144 and QW-194, Visual
ExaminationsDate Issued:February 26, 2001File 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-01-11Subject:QW-510 and QW-540 in Article V,
Standard Welding Procedure SpecificationsDate Issued:June 4,
2001File 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-01-12Subject:QW-322.2(a) and QW-452.1, Rule
Change Affecting Welder QualificationDate Issued:June 4, 2001File
No:01-201
Background: ASME Section IX, 2000 Addenda, revised Table
QW-452.1 reducing the coupon size from in. to 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 in.
but less than in. deposited weld metal. May the qualification
recorded be revised from 2t 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 in. but less
than 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 2t to Max. to be welded
subsequent to the 2000 Addenda?
Reply (2): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-13Subject:References to Edition and
AddendaDate Issued:June 26, 2001File 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-01-14Subject:QW-500, The Use of SWPSsDate
Issued:September 25, 2001File 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-01-15Subject:QW-300.2, Employers
ResponsibilityDate Issued:September 15, 2001File 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-01-16Subject:Code Case 2142-1 and 2143-1Date
Issued:December 18, 2001File 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 rod),
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 2142-1 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 manufacturers brand
names?
Reply (4): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-17Subject:QW-202.2(b), QW-202.3(b) and
QW-407.4Date Issued:December 18, 2001File 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 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-01-18Subject:QW-153.1, Acceptance Criteria
for Tensile StrengthDate Issued:December 18, 2001File 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-01-19Subject:QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base
Metal ThicknessDate Issued:December 18, 2001File 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-01-20Subject:QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number
ReassignmentDate Issued:December 18, 2001File 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-01-21Subject:QW-151.1(d), Reduced Section
Plate; QW-200.4(b), Combination of Processes; QW-322, Expiration
and Renewal of QualificationsDate Issued:January 19, 2002File
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 for
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 a Trade Name
wire-flux combination that conforms to a classification in ASME
Section II, Part C.
Question (4): Does the substitution in the qualified 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 of a 60 mm PQR test
plate was divided into three pieces. The sum of the thickness of
the three specimens was less than 60 mm.
Question (5): What is the allowable percentage thickness
reduction from the original base metal thickness?
Reply (5): Section IX does not address this issue.
Interpretation: IX-01-22Subject:QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number
ReassignmentDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-679
Question: May a previous 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.
Interpretation: IX-01-23Subject:QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal
ThicknessesDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-789
Question: A WPS is qualified to weld base material from 1.6 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-01-24Subject:QW-200.4, Impact Test
Qualification of Multi-process WeldsDate Issued:March 11, 2002File
No:01-814
Question: A welding procedure qualification is made using
multiple welding processes on a single test plate for an
application where 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 a single set of
specimens?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-25Subject:Section II, Part CDate
Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-815
Question: Does Section II, Part C mandate the use of
SFA-5.01?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-26Subject:QW-100.3, The Use of the
Referenced Edition of the CodeDate Issued:March 11, 2002File
No:01-826
Background: A designer specifies a specific year of the ASME
Code to be complied 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 use for
qualifying welders/welding operators?
Reply (1): Welders are qualified in accordance with the current
edition and addenda of Section IX in effect at the time of the
qualification. See QW-100.3.
Question (2): What year of Section II does the installer use for
purchasing welding materials?
Reply (2): Section IX does not address this issue. The question
should be addressed to the applicable construction code.
Interpretation: IX-01-27Subject:QW-452.1, Nominal Coupon
ThicknessDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:02-111
Question: A welder welds a NPS 6 Schedule 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 must be at least in.
thick in order for a welder to be qualified for maximum to be
welded.
VOLUME 52
Interpretation: IX-01-28Subject:QW-409.4, Electrical
CharacteristicsDate Issued:May 22, 2002File No:02-2691
Question: Does QW-409.4 apply to the current type used to
preheat the filler metal wire when welding GTAW Hot-Wire Automatic
or machine corrosion-resistant overlay?
Reply: No.
Interpretation: IX-01-29Subject:Section II, Part C, SFA
Specifications, Marking of PackagesDate Issued:October 3, 2002File
No:02-2692
Background: ASME Section II, Part C, SFA Specifications state in
the Marking of Packages paragraphs that the AWS specification and
classification designations must be marked on the outside of each
unit package.
Question (1): Must filler metal procured to an ASME SFA
specification be marked with the ASME SFA specification, such as
ASME SFA-5.XX?
Reply (1): No.
Question (2): Is marking the package with the AWS specification
and classification, such as AWS A5.XX EXXXX required?
Reply (2): Yes.
Question (3): May the material manufacturer add the ASME
specification (e.g., SFA-5.XX) to the required AWS markings on the
unit container?
Reply (3): Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-30Subject:QW-403.5, Base Metal
RequirementsDate Issued:December 30, 2002File No:02-2693
Question: When impact testing of a heat-affected zone is
required for 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-01-31Subject:QW-423, Alternate Base Materials
for Welder QualificationDate Issued:December 30, 2002File
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-01-32Subject:QW-200.4(b), Root Pass Procedure
QualificationDate Issued:December 30, 2002File 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-01-33Subject:QW-283, Welds with ButteringDate
Issued:December 30, 2002File 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 analysis 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 QW-283.4(b), join parts buttered by manufacturer
E?
Reply (6): Yes.
VOLUME 53
Interpretation: IX-01-34Subject: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
DesignDate Issued:March 13, 2003File 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-01-35Subject:QW-451.1, Procedure
Qualification Thickness LimitsDate Issued:March 13, 2003File
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-01-36Subject:QW-301.4, Record of Welder
Performance QualificationDate Issued:March 13, 2003File
No:02-4198
Background: For welders 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-01-37Subject:QW-404.33, Change in SFA
Specifications for Filler Metal ClassificationDate Issued:May 19,
2003File 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-01-38Subject:Section II, Part C, SFA 5.1,
Table 1Date Issued:May 19, 2003File No:03-274
Question: May a welder qualify with E7018 electrode using either
uphill or downhill progression?
Reply: Yes.
Interpretation: IX-01-39Subject:QW-401.3, Supplemental Essential
Variable (Procedure)Date Issued:May 19, 2003File 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 150F.
The preheat temperature was less than 150F.
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-01-40Subject:QW-201/QW-201.1, Manufacturers
or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:May 19, 2003File
No:03-740
Background: Several manufacturing organizations within the same
company perform welding procedure qualifications in accordance with
Section IX. Each manufacturing organizationperforms 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-04-01Subject:QW-151.3, Tension Test Turned
SpecimenDate Issued:September 15, 2003File No:02-3586Background:
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-04-02Subject:QW-258.1 and QW-410.38Date
Issued:September 15, 2003File 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
corrosion-resistant 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-04-03Subject:QW-407.1 , Postweld Heat
TreatmentDate Issued:September 15, 2003File 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-04-04Subject:QW-401.3 Supplemental Essential
VariableDate Issued:September 15, 2003File 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 test