Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Reply: No definite limits are set with respect to metal that may be machined
off the original thickness. The test plate should be of substantially the same
thickness as originally welded, but if a little of the thickness is machined off
to obtain parallel rectangular surfaces, the specimen may be accepted. If
your procedure wishes to set definite limits, you may do so. Section IX is a
minimum safety requirement.
Reply: (1) Qualification in 3G and 4G plate with backing does not qualify a
2G position. (2) Qualification in the 3G and 4G positions does qualify the
1F and 2F positions. (3) Qualification in 3G also qualifies for 3F, within the
limits of applicable essential variables. (4) Qualification in the 4G position
qualifies for the 4F position within the limits of the applicable essential
variables.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
2/51
Reply: Revisions to Section IX have been made to clarify what positions are
qualified by specific test positions. Table QW-461.7, which was published
in the Winter 1976 Addenda to Section IX, summarizes the position
limitations for performance qualifications.
Reply: The Code requires that all welders, (including tack welders), must be
qualified per Section IX.
Reply 2: For Code boilers or vessels, filler material need not conform to a
particular specification. Procedures utilizing such filler material must be
qualified per Section IX.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
3/51
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-06
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is a welder qualified as of the day he makes his test welds?
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
4/51
Question: Does a welder, using a total alloy content F-4 electrode, also
qualify to use a higher total alloy F-4 electrode, within the nominal 6% total
alloy content, under the provisions of QW-310?
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
5/51
Reply: More than one welder may perform welding on a joint made by a
single process provided each welds only that portion of the thickness for
which he is qualified, and provided the procedure is qualified.
Reply: The mill test reports and typicals for procedures tests need not be
saved. QW-201.1 and QW-201.2 of Section IX provide for necessary
documentation of welding procedures and tests. Also, procedures and
qualifying tests are reviewed by the survey team, authorized inspectors, or
jurisdiction authorities, not our office.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
6/51
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
7/51
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
8/51
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it permissible for a Manufacturer to have the Welder
Performance Qualification test of his welders in accordance with Section IX
conducted on the premises of an organization other than the Manufacturer
without direct supervision from the Manufacturer as a subcontracted service
by an approved vendor as permitted in Section III?
Question 3: Can a weld material that is not SFA/AWS be used for Sections
I, III, IV, and VIII work provided it meets the required chemical and
physicals only, of an SFA/AWS Specification?
Reply 3: Yes. Sections I, III, IV, and VIII use several welding materials for
which an SFA Specification is not available. Section IX allows this and
specifically delineates qualification requirements for this situation as well as
for the situations for which an SFA Specification is available. Section III
additionally specifies requirements for chemical analyses and lot and batch
testing including mechanical property testing.
Question 4: Is the weld material for use in Sections I, III, IV, and VIII work
locked into SFA/AWS or equivalent or may it meet another criteria as
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
9/51
appears to be the intent of Section IX, QW-404.4. "A change from one F
Number in QW-432 to any other F Number or to any other filler metal not
listed in QW-432"?
Reply 4: No. The weld material is not "locked" into SFA/AWS, but - yes - it
may meet other criteria as allows in Section IX, but must meet all Section
IX criteria and other criteria specifically delineated in Book Sections.
Section III particularly includes additional criteria as described in Reply 3
above.
Reply 5: No. However, the welding materials must meet the requirements
delineated in Section IX and in the applicable book sections. When this is
done, they become ASME welding material whether or not an SFA
Specification for the specific welding material exists.
Reply 6: No. As described above, there are conditions for which an SFA
Specification does not exist or completely cover the condition. For such
situations, the welding materials are to be specifically qualified as part of
the Welding Procedure Qualification. Where an SFA Specification suitable
for the purpose does exist, the description of the welding materials is
simplified through reference to the specification. Also the number of
qualifications may be reduced. In addition to QW-404.4 which contains the
statement "or to any other filler metal not listed in QW-432," QW-404.12
contains the statement "or to a weld metal or filler metal composition not
covered by these specifications." Also other QW-404 items cover situations
for which SFA Specifications may not be available or fully cover the
situation. Some of these are QW-404.8, QW-404.9, QW-404.10, QW-
404.17, QW-404.18, QW-404.20, QW-404.24, QW-404.25, QW-404.26,
and QW-404.27.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
10/51
Reply: AWS A 5.17 and the corresponding SFA-5.17 tests are for
classification purposes only and are designed to minimize the number of
tests required. The Section IX requirement (QW-404.9) governs the
qualification requirements and the limits of qualification for Code
applications. Therefore, it is incorrect to interpret SFA-5.17, Table 4, Note
C as governing Section IX qualification requirements. Appendix A in
SFA-5.17 supplies additional information on the effects of different
electrode-flux combinations effects on strength, ductility, and notch
toughness.
Reply: It is the intent of the Code that QW-403.6 applies only to thickness
less than 5/8 in. where the thickness of the test coupon is the minimum
thickness qualified. For thicknesses over 5/8 in., the minimum thickness
qualified is as stated in QW-451.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected reply sent to the inquirer.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
11/51
Reply: The intent of QW-403.6 was further clarified in the Summer 1979
Addenda. For thickness less than 5/8 in., the thickness of the test coupon is
the minimum thickness qualified for production welds. For thicknesses 5/8
in. or greater, the minimum thickness qualified is 5/8 in.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation sent to the inquirer.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
12/51
be the same material pipe in diameters of 3/4 in. through 8 in. Welders are
qualified using 5 in. Schedule 80 pipe in 2G position. The joint design is a
single vee. In accordance with Performance Qualification, Section IX, QW-
452.3 and QW-461.7, this qualifies welders for groove weld in 2 in.
nominal pipe, minimum and fillet weld in all sizes of pipe in 2G and 2F
positions. Our interpretation of the Code is that the above qualifies welders
to weld nozzles of 3/4 in. through 8 in. into shells providing the minimum
diameter of the shell is not less than the qualified 2 in. Since the joint
design does not require full penetration on the nozzle pipe but only in the
shell, we interpret this as a fillet weld and not a groove weld on the nozzle
pipe. Does the welder have to requalify for 1 in. to 2 in. pipe and under 1
in. as outlined in QW-452.3?
Reply: Performance qualification using 5 in. diameter pipe does not qualify
a welder to perform work on groove welds having a diameter size less than
2-7/8 in. The example you have shown is not considered a fillet weld
application and is a groove weld application subject to the 2 in. nominal
pipe size (2-7/8 in. O.D.) minimum limitation. Therefore, for this
application, qualification of welders would be required on 3/4 in. (1 in.
O.D.) through 2 in. nominal pipe size groove weld test coupons.
Performance qualification using 2 in. Schedule 2X pipe in the 2G position
will qualify the welder to perform work on the following fabrication:
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
13/51
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Was it the intent of QW-410.16, as it pertains to the welder
performance qualifications, to exclude a welder qualified on a double-
welded vertical position joint (where only the root was placed using one
direction of progression and then removed to sound metal prior to welding
the second side) from production welding a single-welded backing strap
joint using the other direction of progression?
Reply: Under the conditions expressed in your inquiry where the root was
removed to sound metal in the qualification coupon, it was not the intent of
QW-410.16 to exclude a welder from production welding a single-welded
backing strap joint using the other direction of progression.
Reply: Under the conditions of your inquiry, the welders are qualified for
vertical up welding. It is the opinion of the Committee that as stated in the
second sentence of QW-410.16, the root pass may be welded upward or
downward when the root pass is removed to sound metal. It should be
pointed out that it is not critical that the root pass be completely removed.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
14/51
Replies: (1) The present Code rules allow a fillet weld qualification test
made in accordance with QW-462.4(a) on in. plate to qualify for all fillet
weld sizes and all plate thicknesses. (2) A WPS showing a sketch of a
groove weld does not have to be revised to show a fillet weld when that
WPS is to be used to make a fillet weld. The variable QW-402.1 refers to a
change in groove weld joint design and therefore does not apply to fillet
welds.
Reply: A given qualified procedure may be used for Section I and/or III
and/or IV, and/or VIII. Other procedures written to various Codes which
reference Section IX may also utilize this procedure, if acceptable to their
inspection and quality control system. Alternatively, anyone may use
Section IX to suit their needs. The various Sections of the Code stipulate
ranges of temperature for PWHT. A procedure must be qualified within this
range. QW-407.1, an essential variable, requires a requalification when
PWHT temperature range is changed.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
15/51
This requirement does not apply when the WPS is qualified with a grain
refining austen-itizing heat treatment after welding.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
16/51
Reply: Flux cored arc welding (FCAW) is permissible under the Code and
is considered to come under the more general method of welding known as
gas metal-arc welding (GMAW). Welders do not have to be qualified
separately unless there is a change in any of the Essential Variables.
However, there is an Essential Variable for procedure qualification, QW-
404.23, that requires separate qualification for solid wire and for flux cored
wire for the GMAW process.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
17/51
Reply: The 2-7/8 in. O.D. pipe or coupling is considered a fitting such as a
nozzle and is attached by a groove or fillet weld and the diameter
limitations do not apply. If two pipes of 2-7/8 in. O.D. are butt welded
together, the diameter limits of the tables apply.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
18/51
Reply: WPS's and PQR's may be used by all Divisions of a Corporation the
same as provided in QW-201 for two companies of different names. The
QC Manual must describe the effective operational control of the
production of weldments, and if two or more divisions are involved, which
division is responsible for qualification of procedures and/or the
performance of welders and welding operators. The controlling division
must have the authority to control and the other divisions cannot overrule or
ignore direction from the one controlling. It is the responsibility of the
Authorized Inspector to determine that the described control is being
maintained.
Reply: Yes, the welder would be qualified by making a single test joint on
any thickness, position, or material to reestablish the welder's or welding
operator's qualification for any thickness, position, or material for which he
was previously qualified. This has been clarified in the Winter 1977
Addenda of Section IX.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
19/51
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation sent to the inquirer.
Reply: The WPS may be used down to 4.76 mm (approximate), 3/16 in.
within the range of essential variables of the WPS.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
20/51
Also, do the following PQRs together support the WPS-1? What changes in
thickness of weld deposit in each process would satisfy QW-201.3 to
support the WPS-1?
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
21/51
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
22/51
Reply: The Preamble reference to the use of the "current Edition" for
requalification or new qualification is to the latest Addenda of Section IX
that has been issued long enough to become mandatory and relates to
"normal" mandatory requirements. However, the Foreword overrides and
permits using the Addenda on the date of issuance so the Manufacturer has
the option of using it as the current Addenda. It is not the intent of the Code
to prohibit the use of the latest Addenda upon issuance.
Question (2): May a WPS and PQR that meet the requirements of the 1962
or later Editions of Section IX be used for work where the contract date is
any time prior to or after the qualification date?
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
23/51
In all cases, the PQR and WPS combination shall meet the requirements of
the same Section IX Edition and Addenda that is selected for use.
It is recommended that both the PQR and WPS designate which Edition and
Addenda of ASME Section IX the documents reflect.
Regarding the last two statements of the inquiry, it is the opinion of the
Committee that the date shown on the WPS and PQR will identify the
Edition of Section IX and Addenda.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
24/51
Replies: (1) It is the opinion of the Committee that "welding and brazing
procedures" specified in the Preamble of Section IX includes welding and
brazing procedure specifications. (2) It is the opinion of the Committee that
a WPS written to the 1962 Code may be used in Code construction today
without revision and does not require requalification, if the results of tests
meet the requirements of the 1962 Code or any later Edition. However, if a
revision to an essential variable is more restrictive than previous Editions,
the WPS should be revised and requalified. It is not the intent of the
Committee to cause extensive retesting of previously employed welding and
brazing procedures, welders, brazers, or welding and brazing operators.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
25/51
Question (2): Can a PQR or Q-1 be updated to reflect a later version of the
Code provided the required information of the later version is available?
Reply (2): Yes, provided that the original document is maintained and
available.
Reply: It is the opinion of the committee that a WPS and welders qualified
on a single-welded butt joint without the use of a consumable insert, will
require requalification when a consumable insert is to be used in the
fabrication of single-welded butt joints. This requirement is specified in
QW-404.13 for WPS qualification and QW-404.22 for performance
qualification. Regarding your inquiry of a consumable insert being
considered as a backing for single-welded butt joints, it is the opinion of the
Committee that a consumable insert is not to be considered backing.
Regarding your questions in the last paragraph, it is the opinion of the
committee that: (1) consumable inserts are considered to be filler metal; and
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
26/51
Reply: QW-201 permits one PQR to support more than one WPS. QW-
201.3 permits the deletion of one or more processes from production welds,
provided the processes used in production are qualified for the thickness
range specified in QW-202.2, QW-403, and QW-451. Requalification is not
required for a new WPS written to cover production welds made with the
process used in depositing the root layer of a multiprocess qualification test,
provided the WPS limits the thickness of production welds to 2t the
deposited thickness of the root layer.
Reply: The in. dimension refers to bead thickness for a groove weld and
the throat distance of a single-pass fillet weld. The in. measure has no
relationship to the width of a single bead or weave.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
27/51
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Suppose a design is given that requires production of a laminated
joint (see sketch) where several 0.020 in. sheets of P-No. 8 material are
clamped together and the ends welded to effect a weld deposit that later
becomes part of a butt weld. For purposes of procedure qualification, can
the assembled thickness ("T" on sketch) of the production joint, rather than
the individual sheet thickness, be considered as the thickness that the
procedure must cover, since the sheets are assembled prior to arc initiation?
Reply: Yes.
Reply (1): The quoted statement intends the Manufacturer shall follow the
variables of a WPS when making the test coupons for procedure
qualification testing. The essential variables used, the test results, and the
WPS followed when welding the test coupons shall all be recorded on the
PQR form. The PQR therefore reflects the test results and the conditions
used when welding the test coupons. This PQR may now be used to support
several additional WPSs without any change, since all the conditions used
during the welding of the test coupons are recorded in the original PQR.
Each WPS supported by a PQR need not be listed on the supporting PQR.
Only the WPS used during the procedure qualification testing needs be
listed on the PQR.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
28/51
Question (2): If a new WPS, which uses an already written PQR, is written,
must the PQR be revised to include it?
Reply (2): A new WPS may be written and may be supported by an already
qualified PQR, without any change or revision to the PQR.
Question (4): Is it necessary to revise the present PQRs to include the WPSs
which they support?
Reply (4): It is not necessary to revise present PQRs to include the WPSs
which they support.
Replies: (1) WPSs and PQRs may be used by all divisions of a corporation
the same as provided in QW-201 for two companies of different names. The
QC Manual must describe the effective operational control of the
production of weldments, and if two or more divisions are involved, which
division is responsible for qualification of procedures and/or the
performance of welders and welding operators. The controlling division
must have the authority to control and the other divisions cannot overrule or
ignore direction from the controlling division. It is the responsibility of the
Authorized Inspector to determine that the described control is being
maintained. (2) In QW-403.9, the statement "greater than in. (13 mm)"
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
29/51
refers to depth of the weld pass. (3) In a production joint qualified by two
processes or procedures, one may be deleted providing the remaining
process or procedure has been, in the specific combination welding process
or procedure qualification, qualified (within the thickness limits specified in
QW-202.2, QW-403, and QW-451) for the deposited weld metal thickness
range for the remaining process or procedure used in the production joint.
Reply: Several electrodes in SFA 5.9 may be used under one qualified
procedure within the limits of all applicable essential variables. Please note
QW-404.9.
Reply: WPSs and PQRs may be used by all divisions of a corporation the
same as provided in QW-201 for two companies of different names. The
QC Manual must describe the effective operational control of the
production of weldments, and if two or more divisions are involved, which
division is responsible for qualification of procedures and/or the
performance of welders and welding operators. The controlling division
must have the authority to control and the other divisions cannot overrule or
ignore direction from the controlling division. It is the responsibility of the
Authorized Inspector to determine that the described control is being
maintained.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
30/51
(2) Is a welder who successfully qualifies on our 6 in. pipe test following a
combination open root GTA/SMA procedure using one pass GTA also
qualified for SMA welding on backing on production joint thicknesses from
3/16 in. to maximum welded? We contend that the welder has made his
SMA weld on 0.750 in. minimum thickness pipe (QW-452) and he has also
deposited 0.750 in. of weld metal including coverbead reinforcement (QW-
351).
Replies: (1) The welder who successfully qualifies on your 6 in. pipe test
following a combination open root GTA/SMA procedure is qualified for
combination open root GTA/SMA welding on production joint thicknesses
from 3/16 in. to maximum welded restricted only to a GTA deposit of 2
times the GTA deposit thickness of the test weld. (2) The welder who
successfully qualifies on your 6 in. pipe test following a combination open
root GTA/SMA procedure using one pass GTA is also qualified for SMA
welding on backing on production joint thicknesses from 3/16 in. to
maximum welded. The welder has made his SMA weld on 0.750 in.
minimum thickness pipe, but he has deposited 0.750 in. of SMA weld metal
only if the coverbead reinforcement is included. In this case, in order to take
advantage of the coverbead reinforcement to qualify the welder for
unlimited deposit weld metal thickness, the coverbead reinforcement should
not be removed for making the side bend tests. If the coverbead
reinforcement is removed for making the side bend tests (as is ordinarily
done to prepare the specimen for best assurance of passing the bend test),
the intent is that the 2t maximum qualified for the specific case would be 1
1/4 in.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
31/51
Replies: (1) The Code has grouped the commonly used base materials and
filler materials deposit analysis into P-Numbers and A-Numbers. There are
many materials, however, that have not been grouped. The base materials
without P-Numbers and the filler materials without A-Numbers must have a
separate procedure qualification for Code use. (2) Materials may be added
to the Code at the request of the user and approval of the appropriate Code
Committee.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation sent to the inquirer.
Replies: (1) Materials approved for welded construction under the rules of
the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee are grouped into
P-Numbers in relation to their effects upon the welding processes employed
in these constructions. Section IX lists only those materials which are
approved by other Sections of the Code for welded construction. New
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
32/51
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
33/51
Question (3a): There is no specification for the mild and low-alloy steel
welding rods for gas tungsten arc welding in Section II, Part C. Is it
permissible to use SFA-5.18 for welding rods for gas tungsten arc welding
except that this welding rod is used for gas tungsten arc welding and the
type of package does not meet SFA-5.18.
Reply (3a): Yes, provided the rods conform to the requirements of the
specific AWS classification in SFA-5.18 with respect to chemistry and
mechanical properties.
Reply (4): The intent of the Code is that the welder or welding operator be
welding with the specific process on either Code work or non-Code work,
and that documentation is required.
Question (6): When the welding procedure qualification test for repair or
built-up welding is performed by groove welding, is it permissible to use a
joint which is made between base metals of two different groups, provided
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
34/51
that one of the base metals is the same group as the other used for the
production?
Question (7): The postweld heat treatment was not required for nonferrous
materials in the Edition of Section IX published before 1974. Can the
welding procedure qualified before 1974 be used in the construction of the
vessel to be subjected to the postweld heat treatment, even if the test coupon
was not subjected to the postweld heat treatment, or is the requalification
required?
Reply (7): The welding procedure qualified before 1974 cannot be used in
the construction of the vessel to be subjected to postweld heat treatment if
the test coupon was not subjected to the postweld heat treatment.
Requalification is required.
ATTENTION
The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected replies sent to the inquirer.
Reply (1): No, the material must be to a specification of P-No. 1; see QW-
310.4. The Code has provisions where a stamp holder may take a material
or electrode and reidentify it to an appropriate Code recognized
specification, providing the material meets the requirements of that
specification.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
35/51
Reply: QW-201.1 states that the WPS shall list in detail the filler metals to
be used. The particular electrode classification, or trade name, must
therefore be listed on the WPS. QW-404.12 is a variable which also
requires the listing of the AWS classification.
Reply: When two WPSs are combined to provide direction for a third
combination of welding, a new WPS will usually be required. The support
PQRs from the original WPS should be listed on the new WPS.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
36/51
Reply: Yes, provided that you have a WPS for 9 Chrome alloy steel with an
E505 electrode qualified in accordance with the requirements of the Code.
Reply: A P-No. 5 Group 1 base metal of tensile strength 70,000 psi may be
used when a welder is qualified on P-No. 5 Group 2 base metal of 60,000
psi, within the limits of the other remaining applicable essential variables,
and when notch toughness is not required. You are cautioned that strength
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
37/51
Reply: A 0.203 in. test coupon is required to meet the intent of QW-403.6.
This would qualify from 0.203 in. to 0.406 in. A second test coupon is
required to qualify welding up to 0.906 in. This coupon could be 0.453 in.
or greater. The 0.453 in. test coupon alone qualifies from 0.453 in. (per
QW-403.6) to 0.906 in. but when combined with the 0.203 in. test coupon,
would qualify for welding from 0.203 in. thru 0.906 in. There is no need to
weld a third test coupon to qualify the gap between 0.406 in. and 0.453 in.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
38/51
Reply: Yes. QW-404.3 deals with filler material and QW-404.6 deals with
the tungsten electrode. QW-409.12 also deals with the tungsten electrode.
Question (2): When welding procedures are to be used for Section VIII
work, is it necessary to state in QW-410, Cleaning, on QW-482, that
surfaces must be dean for a distance of in. from the weld joint (UW-32)?
Reply (2): Cleaning required by Section VIII must be specified on the WPS.
Reply (3): Requirements of each pass must be specified on the WPS. This
can be done in any manner suitable to the Manufacturer.
Question (4): Is it necessary to specify the type of NDE for checking back
gouging or to specify any NDE at all on a WPS? Should a separate written
procedure be submitted for approval with the WPS to fill in areas not
covered by the WPS?
Reply (4): NDE is not required on the WPS. Separate written information
may be attached to the WPS to cover areas of welding not on the WPS.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
39/51
Question (6): When multiple values for current, voltage and filler sizes are
used, how do you fill in Form QW-483?
Reply (6): All values used in qualifying the WPS shall be recorded on the
PQR in any manner acceptable to the Manufacturer.
Question (7): In QW-462.1(a) values are given for test specimen sizes. If a
in. thick specimen is 0.997 in. wide, is this reason to reject a procedure
qualification?
Reply (7): The values are approximate where stated but the 1 in. minimum
is required if t does not exceed 1 in.
Question (8): When a combined process is used, how are welders listed on
QW-483 and what is each welder qualified for?
Reply (8): It must be clearly shown what welding each welder has done on
the PQR. Each welder is qualified for the amount of welding he has done in
accordance with QW-300.
Question (9): When qualifying welders for combined processes, are both
welders listed on one QW-484?
Question (10): If each welder has his own qualification, does the welder
who performed the other portion of the combined process have his name on
the qualification of the first?
Question (12): How are multivalues for current, voltage, and filler size
listed in QW-484?
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
40/51
Questions: (1) Can the GTAW process be deleted, as per QW-201.3 and a
WPS written for: (a) A single welded "Vee" groove joint, using SMAW
against a backing with a thickness limit of 0.187 in. to 0.489 in.? (b) Fillets
and socket welds using SMAW with a thickness weld deposit range of
0.1875 in. to 0.489 in. in all thicknesses of metal? (2) Can the SMAW
process be deleted, as per QW-201.3, and a WPS written for a single
welded "Vee" groove joint using GTAW with a consumable insert and a
thickness limit of 0.1875 in. to 0.375 in.? (3) The question in regards to
QW-403.13 is why is it that, when the consumable insert is deleted from the
PQR previously described, the procedure is not qualified to weld single
"Vee" groove joints with a backing, fillets, and socket welds using both
processes?
Replies: (1) and (2). In answer to Questions Nos. 1 and 2; you are permitted
to prepare Welding Procedure Specifications in accordance with the
provisions of QW-201.3 to meet the conditions of your inquiry. (3) In
answer to Question No. 3; QW-404.13 was revised in the 1977 Summer
Addenda to Section IX.
Reply: No. The 0.505 in. diameter is a convenient diameter for calculation
of square area. It is not required that the 0.505 in. diameter be maintained.
Any diameter that covers the full weld may be used.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
41/51
Question (2): If a welder is going to weld in the flat position only for a
particular job and if more than one position is allowed on each procedure,
may the welder use the multiple-position procedure for a job requiring only
one position?
Question (4): Could a procedure that specifies grinding and air-arc use only
grinding (or vice-versa)?
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
42/51
Reply (4): Yes, if the WPS specifies grinding or air-arc. If the WPS
specifies grinding and air-arc, then both must be used.
Question (5): Could a procedure that prescribes two types of electrodes use
only one type of electrode?
Reply (5): Yes, if directions are provided for each type electrode and the
WPS specifies one electrode or the other. If both are specified in a specific
sequence, then both must be used.
Reply: Note (2) was added to QW-451.1 because many people were
overlooking the additional restrictions of QW-403. The example given is
correct. The thickness range is 5/8 in. min. to 1 in. max. The answer to the
specific situation is affirmative. A WPS must be qualified using a in.
thick test coupon which would qualify for a thickness range of in. min. to
in. max. We are not in agreement with the other interpretations in your
letter which you have received from the industry.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
43/51
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
44/51
Reply: The term 1G relates to position of the test assembly pipe in QW-
122.1 during the performance of the welding for the performance
qualification test and may be single or double welded, with or without
backing. The test joints, as shown in QW-469, may be used for welder
performance qualification in addition to weld joint configurations contained
in the qualified Welding Procedure Specification used in the performance
welding.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
45/51
Reply (2): The written form of the Welding Procedure Specification (WPS)
and the Procedure Qualification Record (PQR) can be varied to meet the
requirements of the Manufacturer or contractor. It is necessary that there be
some record of a proposed Welding Procedure Specification prior to the
actual test welding for the Procedure Qualification Record. This may be the
completion of that portion of a Manufacturer's or contractor's form prior to
welding and subsequent completion of the form with the test results when a
combined WPS and PQR are desired.
Reply (2): The thickness of the weld with respect to both procedure
qualification for welding and consideration of postweld heat treatment
requirements is confirmed by the appropriate Section of the Code; that is,
Sections I, III, IV, or VIII. The Sections have approached this requirement
by stating that the thickness of the weld shall be the depth of the weld
deposit; such as, in UW-16.1 of Section VIII, Division 1, design (a) is the
thickness through the nozzle neck and design (c) through the vessel shell
thickness.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
46/51
Reply (3): Yes, except for QW-260 and QW-261, joint design is not an
essential variable in the Weld-ing Procedure Specification.
Reply (4): Each welding process, as listed in QW-350, must be reviewed for
the appropriate essential variable under QW-402. The addition or deletion
of backing may be an essential variable, depending on the welding process.
Reply (5): The welder who performed the GTAW welding is qualified to
twice the thickness of the weld metal deposited with the minimum of 1/16
in. using GTAW process. The welder using the SMAW process is qualified
to twice the thickness qualified with the minimum as specified in QW-452.1
with the SMAW process. Your attention is also invited to QW-351 when a
combination of processes are being employed. The welding operator is
qualified for all thicknesses with the SAW welding process. See QW-305.
Reply: The electrodes up to F-No. 4 are for the ferritic steels, as indicated in
QW-310.4(a). For the use of A-No. 8 or A-No. 9 composition filler metals,
QW-310.4(b) specifically mentions F-No. 5 electrodes for joining various
base metals (and allows use of carbon steel P-No. 1 plate or pipe to be used
for the performance qualification).
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
47/51
Question (2): SFA-5.14 and SFA-5.11 lists Class ERNiCrMo-3 filler metals
with an as-welded tensile strength of 110,000 psi while the tensile strength
in SB-443 is listed as 120,000. What is the correct minimum tensile strength
for this material?
Reply (2): The tensile strengths given in the specifications for both the filler
metals and the base metals are correct. The SB-443 material is one of those
rare cases in the Code where the tensile strength requirements for the base
materials specification are higher than for the filler metal used to join that
material. This fact is accounted for in the stress tables in which SB-443 is
listed. The allowable stresses are based upon the strength of the weld metal,
110,000 psi minimum.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
48/51
Should not the pipe-groove process 2G also include the 2FR process under
the pipe fillet weld column?
Reply (2): Yes. Position 6G is included in this same table under pipe-groove
qualification test as qualifying for all positions in both plate and pipe
welding.
Reply: If the tension test specimen breaks in the weld or fusion line, it shall
have a tensile strength not less than that required in QW-153.1(a), (b), or
(c).
Sample Weld Coupon Qualifies for Minimum Maximum Nom. Size Nom.
Thickness O.D.1 Thickness O.D. Thickness 1/2 in. 0.188 in. 0.840 in.
0.0625 in. Any 0.376 in. 1-1/2 in. 0.145 in. Over 1 in. 0.0625 in. Any 0.290
in. 6 in. 0.280 in. 2.875 in. 0.0625 in. Any 0.560 in.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
49/51
1 Also please note comments on "job size" pipe in QW-310.1, last sentence.
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): QW-303.6 permits the qualifying for small diameter pipe fillet
welds when actually qualifying with a groove weld test. Is the man qualified
for all small diameter pipe fillet welds (no limitations on base metal
thickness or pipe diameter) or only for fillet welds on pipe where the pipe
thickness and diameter are within the limits of the qualified groove weld
test?
Reply (2): Qualifying with a groove weld test, whether it be a plate or weld
test, qualifies for all fillet welds with no limitations on base metal thickness
or pipe diameter, within the limits of the other welding variables in QW-350
for the applicable welding process.
Reply: The flux cored arc welding process shall meet the provisions of QW-
255 for procedure qualifications and QW-355 for performance
qualifications. The use of the provisions of QW-253 are not applicable to
flux cored arc welding.
Reply: It is the intent of the Code that electrodes of SFA-5.1 of Section II,
Part C shall conform to F-Numbers of QW-432 and A-Numbers of QW-442
of Section IX, as given below.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
50/51
Reply: The intent of the Code is to require requalification for a change from
one (AISI) type of stainless steel filler metal to another. For example, a
change from 309 to 308 or 312 would require requalification. However, a
change from 308-15 to 308-16 or vice versa would not require
requalification.
Reply (1): Weld reinforcements and backing strips and backing rings shall
be removed flush with the undisturbed surface of the base material.
Question (2): Is there any maximum or minimum length required for the
performance qualification test plate in QW-463.2(a)?
Reply (2): The length of the qualification test plate shall be adequate to
permit removal of the bend tests specified in QW-452.1 or QW-452.2 and
to permit their preparation to meet the dimensional requirements in QW-
462 for the appropriate bend test being prepared.
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
51/51
Question: Where fabrication will require A-No.2 weld metal for the joining
of P-No.1 materials to meet the strength requirements as affected by
postweld heat treatments, is the A-No.2 weld metal considered a P-No.3
material in subsequent fabricating operations requiring both P-No.1 to
P-No.1 and P-No.1 to P-No.3 procedure qualifications?
Copyright 2016 by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. No reproduction may be made of this material without
written consent of ASME
https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4