211823898 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 33

Interpretation: IX-92-59

Subject: QW-306, Combination of Welding Processes; QW-452.1 and QW-452.3,

Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens

Date Issued: February 22, 1993

File 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.


Subject: QW-214, Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay


File 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.


Subject: Section II, Part C; SFA-5.13, Specification for Solid Surfacing Welding Rods

and Electrodes


File No: 92-422

Question: May powdered filler metal be classified under Section II, Part C, SFA 5.13?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-408.2, Shielding Gas


File 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.


Subject: QW-153.1, Tensile Strength


File 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.


Subject: QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of Qualification

Date Issued: May 26, 1993

File 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.


Subject: QW-423.1, Alternate Base Metals for Welder Qualification


File No: 93-148

Question: In QW-423.1, is P-No. 42 included in P-No. 4X?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility


File 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.




File 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 company’s 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.


Subject: QW-306, Combination of Welding Processes; and QW-451, Groove Weld

Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens

Date Issued: June 30, 1993

File No: 92-011A

Question: In using a single set of test specimens to qualify two or more processes or procedures,

does Section IX specify a minimum weld deposit thickness to be included in each test specimen

from each of the processes or procedures?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics


File No: 92-011B, 92-228, 92-353

Question: Is it the intent of QW-409.1 that the heat input, to be recorded on the PQR, be

calculated based on the parameters used at the location where the impact specimens were

removed?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 34

Interpretation: IX-92-70R

Subject: QW-403.5, Base Metals


File No: 00-470

Question (1): When a procedure qualification with supplemental notch toughness requirement is

conducted with one P-Number material having multiple certifications in different Group

Numbers, are WPSs qualified for all combinations of the Group Numbers?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): In the above question, does one set of HAZ impact specimens, when required,

satisfy the requirements of Section IX?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): When a procedure qualification with supplemental notch toughness requirement is

conducted with two materials of different P-Number each having multiple certifications in

different Group Numbers, are WPSs qualified for all combinations of the multiple certified Group

Number of the first P-Number material to the multiple certified Group Number of the second P-

Number material?

Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): In the above question, does one set of HAZ impact specimens from each P-Number

material, when required, satisfy the requirement of Section IX?

Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): In Question (3), are materials from the multiple certified Group Numbers qualified

for welding a P-Number material to itself?

Reply (5): No.

Note: The term “multiple certifications” as used means any material for which a material test

report indicates that the material meets all the requirements of two or more specifications, grades,

types, or classes.


Subject: QW-302.4, Visual Examination

Date Issued: September 22, 1993

File No: 93-365

Question: Are welders or welding operators qualified in accordance with Section IX, prior to the

1992 Addenda, for which the results of visual examination required by QW-302.4 were not

documented on the WPQ, required to requalify in order that visual examination results may be

documented?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-381(c), Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay; QW-453 and QW-461.9,

Performance Qualification


File 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 ⅜ in. thick, may the side bend

specimen width be the test specimen thickness?

Question (2c): May the edges of the overlay be outside of the bent area as long as at least a 1½

in. width of overlay and HAZ are completely within the bend?

Reply (2a): Yes.

Reply (2b): Yes.

Reply (2c): Yes.

Question (3): may QW-461.9 Groove-Pipe be used for the position essential variable rules for

welder qualifications on corrosion-resistant overlap?

Reply (3): Yes.


Subject: QW-321.3, Welder Qualification After Further Training or Practice


File No: 93-468

Background: A welder performance qualification test plate fails to meet the radiographic

requirements for qualification. After further training a new performance qualification test plate is

welded.

Question: May the new test plate be evaluated by bend testing?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QB-402.1, Base Metals


File No: 93-474

Question: When brazing material used for a procedure qualification test is not listed in QB-422

or Appendix C, but is similar to P-No. 107 or S-No. 107 materials listed in QB-422 or Appendix

C, may this material be considered P-No. 107 or S-No. 107 material in accordance with QB-

402.1?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-200.4(b), Combination of Welding Procedures


File No: 93-490

Question: When writing multi-process welding procedures per QW-200.4(a), where the tube wall

thickness is less than 1 in., using a separate qualification for the root deposit only, must the root

deposit qualification coupon be ½ in. minimum thickness as stated in QW-200.4(b)?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-462, Test Specimens


File No: 93-515

Question: QW-462 defines W as “specimen width, ¾ in.”. Is ¾ in. a minimum or maximum

dimension requirement for preparing a reduced section tensile specimen?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures; and QW-451.4, Fillet Welds

Qualified by Groove Weld Tests


File No: 93-518

Background: A butt welding procedure qualification was completed on a pipe with E6010

electrode (F-No. 3) for the root pass and E7018 electrode (F-No. 4) for the remaining process.

Question (1): Will the above procedure qualification alone support a WPS to make a fillet weld

with E7018 electrodes (F-No. 4) for all the passes for all fillet sizes on all base metal thicknesses

when all the other essential variables under QW-253, SMAW process, are the same?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Will the above procedure qualification alone support a WPS to make a butt weld

with E7018 electrodes (F-No. 4) for all the passes including the root pass within the limits of

qualification of QW-451.1 and within the limits of the essential variables under QW-253, SMAW

process?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-200.2(b), Welding Procedure Qualifications


File No: 93-561

Question (1): May a company subcontract weld procedure development and qualification,

including certification of the PQR, without a company representative present to witness the

welding, testing and certification?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): May a company subcontract weld procedure development and qualification,

including certification of the PQR, with a company representative present to witness the welding,

testing and certification?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-151.1, Tension Tests, Reduced Section-Plate; and QW-462.1(a), Test

Specimens


File No: 93-583

Question (1): Is it permissible to reduce a plate test coupon thickness beyond removing the

reinforcement to allow for parallel surfaces?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): What percentage of the thickness is permissible to be removed for procedure

qualification?

Reply (2): The minimum necessary to obtain parallel surfaces.


Subject: QW-103, Responsibility; and QW-210, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s

Responsibility


File No: 93-584

Question: When a company changes names during the course of time must all the historical

documents, such as PQRs and WPQs, be revised to show this new name?

Reply: No, provided there is documented traceability from the new company name to the WPSs

and PQRs qualified under the old company name.


Subject: QW-103.1 and QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility

Date Issued: October 18, 1993

File No: 92-306

Question (1): According to Section IX, para. QW-201, is it permissible for a manufacturer or

contractor to have the welding of the test weldments performed by another organization?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): According to para. QW-201, is it permissible to subcontract the work preparation

of test metal for welding and subsequent work on preparation of test specimens from the

completed weldment, performance of nondestructive examination, and mechanical test, provided

that the manufacturer or contractor accepts the responsibility for any such work?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): If the manufacturer or contractor writes the WPS and the welder used to produce

weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures are under full supervision and control of a

representative of the manufacturer or contractor during the production of these test weldments,

may the welder be an employee of another organization?

Reply (3): No.


Subject: Code Case 2141, Electrodes and Fluxes for Submerged Arc Welding, SFA 5.17

and SFA 5.23

Date Issued: November 22, 1993

File No: 93-434

Question (1): Does the “Manufacturer’s Date Report” in the Section IX Code Case 2141 mean

the following: (a) Manufacturer’s Data Report required in PG-112 of Section I; (b) Data Report

required in NCA-3770 of Section III; (c) Data Report required in UG-120 of Section VIII,

Division 1; or (d) Manufacturer’s Data Report required in AS-300 of Section VIII, Division 2?

Reply (1): A Manufacturer’s Data Report form is any data report from that is required in an

ASME Code Book.

Question (2): Is it required to describe this Code Case number on procurement and/or

manufacturer’s specifications and certified material test report of welding consumables?

Reply (2): Section IX does not address procurement and manufacturer’s specifications.


Subject: QB-415, Brazing Variables


File No: 93-527

Question (1): Does ASME Section IX permit braze welding qualifications, using the rules of Part

QW, Welding?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May a fabricator qualify hard-facing, using the brazing variables listed in QB-415?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-407.2, Postweld Heat Treatment


File No: 93-586

Background: A PQR was welded on a 2 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material and post weld heat

treated at 1150°F for six hours (3 hrs/in.) with supplementary essential variable requirements.

Question: Will this PQR support a WPS for a production weld in 2 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2

material that is PWHT at 1150°F for 2 hours (1 hr/in.)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QB-121 and AB-123, Brazing Test Positions


File No: 93-655

Question: If the test material is oriented at 15 deg. above horizontal (i.e., 75 deg. down from

vertical) and the brazing filler metal flows upward by capillary action through the joint, would the

brazer then be qualified for both the flat-flow and vertical-upflow positions?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-100.3, Welding General Requirements


File No: 93-658

Question: May a hard-facing procedure qualification test that was performed in 1990 on a 1 in.

thick test coupon and is used to support a welding procedure specification written in 1993, be

used to deposit a hard-facing overlay on a base material 1 in. to unlimited thickness?

Reply: Yes. QW-100.3 allows welding procedure specifications (WPSs) to be supported by

procedure qualifications accomplished subsequent to 1962 without amending the WPS to include

any variables required by later Editions and Addenda.

VOLUME 35


Subject: QW-403.6, Base Metals; and QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics


File No: 93-151

Background: Two PQRs have been qualified to support a WPS with notch toughness

requirements and having a qualified base metal thickness range 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

⅝ in. to 2 in. and the heat input value of 45,000 J/in. applicable to base metal thicknesses between

5/16 in. and ⅝ in.?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-409.1 and QW-409.8, Electrical Characteristics


File No: 93-593

Question: Section IX, QW-409.8 and QW-409.1, require that the volts and amps be specified in

the WPS. Does Section IX require voltage to be measured at a specific location in the welding

circuit or the current to be measured using a specific type of meter (RMS, averaging or other

type)?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-452.1, Groove Weld Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test

Specimens; and QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter Limits


File No: 93-653

Question: A welder has qualified on 3 in. O.D. ½ in. wall pipe in the 1G position and has also

qualified on 1 in. O.D. ⅛ in. wall pipe in the 1G position. Is the welder qualified to weld 1 in.

O.D. ⅜ in. wall in the 1G position?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-461.9, Performance Qualification Position and Diameter Limitations


File No: 93-753

Question: A welder has passed two separate tests; one on ⅝ in. O.D. by 0.049 in. thick pipe

welded in the 6G position using GTAW process, and another on ½ in. thick plate welded in the

1G position using GTAW process. Do these two tests in combination qualify the welder to weld

pipe of unlimited diameter in all positions up to 1 in. thick using GTAW?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-300, General Welding Performance Qualifications


File No: 93-755

Question: Does Section IX prohibit making editorial corrections to welder and welding operator

performance qualification records?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility, Clarification Request to

Interpretation IX-92-07, Date Issued: Oct. 7, 1991, File 91-156


File No: 93-678

Question (1): Is the term “Organization” as stated in QW-201 and “Company A” in

Interpretation IX-92-07 one and the same?

Reply (1): No.

Background: Two companies are contracted by a client company to undertake pipe work

installation on its facility. All stages of the Welding Procedure Qualification Process for the two

contracted companies are witnessed by the client companies representative and the

documentation duly stamped and signed as accepted by the client.

Question (2): May these procedures be used by the client company?

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Does the client company have to requalify these procedures in order to perform in-

house maintenance at a later date using all the same essential and nonessential variables with its

own qualified welders?

Reply (3): Yes.


Subject: QB-402.1, Brazing Data and Appendix C – Nonmandatory S-Numbers


File No: 93-752

Question (1): Does the brazing procedure qualification test with a base metal assigned one S-

Number, or S-Number plus Group-Number, qualify for all other base metals in the same S-

Number grouping?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does the brazing procedure qualification test with dissimilar metals using one

metal listed in one S-Number to one specific metal not listed in one S or P-Number qualify for the

brazing of all other base metals in the same S-Number to themselves and to the specific base

metal without S or P-Number?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: Section II, Part C – SFA-5.8


File No: 93-754

Question: May AWS Classification Bag-34 be considered SFA-5.8 filler metal even though it

does not appear in the 1992 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Part C (including

the 1992 Addenda)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-200, General Welding Procedure Qualifications


File No: 94-008

Question: May a single WPS be qualified both with PWHT and without PWHT (two PQRs),

thereby allowing the WPS to be used with or without PWHT?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-300, General Welding Procedure Qualifications


File No: 94-102

Background: A welder is qualified on a NPS 2 Sch. 40 pipe test coupon using GTAW 1.6 mm

deposited weld metal and SMAW 2.4 mm deposited weld metal.

Question (1): Is the SMAW portion of the performance qualification considered welding with

backing?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is the welder qualified to weld NPS 4 single welded groove weld without backing

using the SMAW process only?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-200.4(a), Combination of Welding Procedures


File No: 94-167

Question: According to QW-200.4(a), when a qualified WPS for a combination process is

available, must a new WPS be generated in only one of the processes is to be used in production,

provided all requirements of Section IX for the process used are met?

Reply: No.


Subject: Appendix C, Nonmandatory S-Numbers


File No: 94-236

Question: May steel produced to ASTM A-108 Grade 1018, UNS G10180, be considered S-1

material?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-432.6, F-Numbers; and Section II, Part C – SFA-5.92


File No: 93-762 and 93-769

Question: May AWS 5.24 ER Zr4 be considered as an F-No. 61 filler metal?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 36


Subject: QW-200.1(b), General Welding Procedure Qualifications; and QW-402.4, Joints


File No: 94-104

Question: If a WPS states that the GTAW process shall be used on root and second pass of open

root or metal backed groove joints and the SMAW process shall be used on the remainder of the

groove joint, is it necessary to state that the SMAW portion of the WPS must be performed with

backing (i.e., the GTAW process)?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-462, Test Specimens


File No: 94-181

Question: What are the minimum and maximum tolerances for specimens shown in QW-462,

where the figures show “approximate” dimensions?

Reply: As stated in the Foreword, “The Code does not fully address tolerances. When

dimensions, sizes, or other parameters are not specified with tolerances, the values of these

parameters are considered nominal and allowable tolerance or local variances may be considered

acceptable when based on engineering judgment and standard practices as determined by the

designer.”


Subject: QW-202.2(b), Groove and Fillet Weld Tests; and QW-202.3(b), Weld Repair and

Buildup Tests


File No: 94-235

Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a full penetration weld on 1½ in.

thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.2(b) states that qualification on 1½ in. or thicker base metal

qualifies for making partial penetration welds on base metals with no upper limit of base metal

thickness. No minimum thickness of base metal is addressed.

Question (1): Does qualification of a 1½ in. thick base metal qualify for making partial

penetration groove welds on base metals which are less than 3/16 in. thick?

Reply (1): No, see para. QW-451.1 for minimum base metal thicknesses.

Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a full penetration weld on 1½ in.

thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.3(b) states that qualification on 1½ in. thick or thicker base metal

qualifies for making weld repairs or weld build-ups on base metals of unlimited thickness.

Question (2): Does qualification on 1½ in. base metal qualify for making weld repairs or weld

build-ups on base metals which are less than 3/16 in. thick?

Reply (2): No, see para. QW-451.1 for minimum base metal thicknesses.


Subject: QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter Limits and Submerged Arc Wire Flux

Combination


File No: 94-296

Question (1): According to para. QW-452.3, is the inside diameter an essential variable for

performance qualification?

Reply (1): No.

Background: A WPS for SAW process was qualified with a wire flux combination classified as

F6P0-EL8, using one trade name for flux. This WPS was in use for several years. Now the flux

manufacturer has changed the classification to F7P2-EL8 without changing the trade name of

flux. The flux trade name is mentioned on the WPS and PQR along with the former AWS

classification.

Question (2): Is it required to requalify this WPS due to the change in the AWS class of the wire

flux combination by the flux manufacturer without changing its Trade Name?

Reply (2): Yes, see para. QW-404.9(a).


Subject: QW-422, P-Numbers


File No: 94-365

Question: May SB-564 UNS N08825 be considered as P-No. 45, since it has identical properties

to SB-425 UNS N08825 that is assigned P-No. 45 in QW-422?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-153.1, Tension Tests


File No: 94-542

Question: If a tensile specimen breaks in the weld metal, below the weld metal’s minimum

specified tensile requirement, but not below the minimum tensile strength specified for the base

metal, is the PQR considered acceptable?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 37


Subject: QW-420.2, S-Numbers

Date Issued: March 17, 1995

File No: 94-522

Question: When qualifying a welding procedure using S1 group 2 for API 5LX60 pipe joining to

MSS SP-75 or ASTM A860 WPHY-65 fittings, or when joining WPHY-60 fittings to each other,

is it permissible to use the corresponding S-Number for the fitting as the same grade of high

strength pipe when the physical properties are similar?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-462.4(a), Fillet Weld Procedure


File No: 94-543

Question (1): When T2 is greater than ¾ in. in Fig. QW-462.4(a), what is the maximum size fillet

weld required?

Reply (1): ¾ 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.


Subject: QW-153, Acceptance Criteria – Tension Tests


File No: 94-570

Question: When welds between base metals of different minimum specified tensile strengths are

being tested and tensile failure occurs in either of the base metals, does the reference to base

metal within QW-153.1(d) mean the base metal with the lower minimum specified tensile

strength?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures


File No: 94-662

Question: May a single process WPS be qualified by a combination process PQR where no

essential variables for the process are changed?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-408, Gas


File No: 95-002

Question: Is it required to indicate the purity level by percent composition or descriptive terms of

a single shielding gas on the WPS and on the PQR?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal Thicknesses


File No: 95-027

Question: Does QW-202.4 include butt joints and corner joints when joining dissimilar base

metal thicknesses when prepared with a groove?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-203, Limits of Qualified Positions for Procedures; and Section II, Part C,

SFA-5.1 and 5.5


File No: 94-035

Question: Do the requirements for classification of filler metals in accordance with ASME

Section II, Part C apply to the qualification of welding and brazing procedures in accordance with

Section IX?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-300.3, Welding Performance Qualifications


File No: 95-040

Question: Are there any circumstances under which a non-employee person or organization can

represent one or more participating organizations during welding of the test coupon in accordance

with the requirements of QW-300.3?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-160, Guided-Bend Tests; and QW-466 Note (b) – Test Jigs


File No: 95-094

Question: Is it acceptable to measure the percent elongation of the tensile specimens in lieu of

bend specimens to measure the ductility for welding procedure qualification acceptance?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-255, Welding Variables Procedure Specifications for FCAW; and QW-

408.2, Gas


File 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


Subject: QW-302.4, Visual Examination


File No: 95-035

Question (1): For the fillet weld coupon in welder performance qualification, does the macro

examination required per QW-452.5 exempt the visual examination required per QW-302.4?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Does the visual examination of the fillet weld test coupon required per QW-302.4

refer to the final weld face side only?

Reply (2): Yes.




File No: 95-220

Question: Does Section IX require that a separate amperage range be specified for each filler

metal size listed in the WPS?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-300.3, Welding Performance Qualifications; and QW-322.1(b), Expiration

of Welder Qualification


File No: 95-221

Background: A welder simultaneously qualifies for ten different contractors in accordance with

QW-300.3. QW-300.3 requires the contractor that rejects a welder to notify the other contractors

who participated in the simultaneous test that the welder’s qualification has been revoked. One of

the contractors subsequently revokes the welder’s qualification for specific reason in accordance

with QW-322.1(b).

Question (1): Are the other nine contractors who qualified the welder simultaneously, required to

revoke the welder’s qualification per QW-322.1(b)?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): When a participating contractor revokes a welder’s qualification for a specific

reason, does QW-300.3 require the other participating contractors to retest the welder or welding

operator?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-300, Welding Performance Qualification


File No: 95-302

Question: If the manufacturer or contractor writes the WPS, and the welder used to produce the

weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures is under the full supervision and control of

the manufacturer or contractor during the production of these test weldments, may the welder be a

contracted employee, provided the Quality Control system or Quality Assurance Program of the

manufacturer or contractor describes the control of contracted welders?

Reply: Yes.




File No: 95-318

Background: A PQR is qualified in accordance with Section IX, with supplementary essential

variables, using a material from British Standard 1501-224-490A-LT50

Question: May this PQR be used to support a WPS utilizing a P-Number 1, Group Number 2

material with supplementary essential variables?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-424, Base Metals Used for Procedure Qualification

Date Issued: December 28, 1995

File No: 95-251

Question: Does a procedure qualification using an unassigned metal to an assigned P-Numbered

metal qualify for welding the base metals to themselves using all the nonessential, essential and

supplementary essential variables qualified?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-453, Notes (3) and (10), Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hard-

Facing and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays


File No: 95-428

Question (1): Notes (3) and (10) of QW-453 require a liquid penetrant examination of the surface

of the test coupon for hard-facing procedure and performance qualifications, respectively. May

the acceptance standards of QW-195.2 or other standards deemed appropriate by the qualifying

organization be used as acceptance criteria?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Must the acceptance criteria be specified on the WPS?

Reply (2): Yes.

VOLUME 39




File No: 95-194

Question: Does a WPS qualified using P-No. 1, Group No. 1 material, qualify welding for P-No.

1, Group No. 2 material, when notch toughness tests are not required?

Reply: Yes.




File No: 95-252

Question: If company A purchases company B, is it permissible for company A to write Welding

Procedure Specifications (WPS) in their name, supported by Procedure Qualification Records

(PQR) qualified by company B?

Reply: Yes.




File No: 95-303

Background: Company A owns company B and changes its name to C. The new company C

continues to use the WPSs and PQRs initially developed by B. After some time, company A (the

parent company) splits C back to B and C. Both B and C now operate independently, but under

company A.

Question: May company B use the WPSs and PQRs initially developed by B and also use WPSs

and PQRs qualified by company C before the last reorganization?

Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of QW-201 are satisfied.




File No: 95-482

Question: May a subcontractor use a WPS supported by a PQR which was qualified by the

contracting company and subsequently supplied to the subcontractor?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-403.10, Short Circuiting Mode


File No: 96-002

Question: Are the base metal thickness restrictions for the GMAW process short circuiting mode

stated in QW-403.10 and QW-404.32 also applicable to fillet weld tests, either in procedure

qualifications (QW-451.3, QW-451.4) or in performance qualifications (QW-452.4, QW-452.5

and QW-452.6)?

Reply: No.




File No: 95-302

Question: If more than one manufacturer or contractor agrees upon the use of one WPS, which is

to be followed during production of test weldments for qualification testing, may the welder used

to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification procedures, be under the full supervision

and control of each manufacturer or contractor during the welding, provided the Quality Control

System or Quality Assurance Program of each manufacturer or contractor describes the control of

welders?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-350, Welding Variables for Welders


File 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.


Subject: QW-361.2, Essential Variables – Machine Welding


File No: 96-141

Background: A welding operator has direct visual contact with a pipe weldment that is being

welded utilizing machine orbital pipe welding equipment. This welding operator is giving verbal

commands to a second welding operator, who does not have eye contact with the weldment, and

who is positioning the weld head and wire aimers located on the head remotely, during the

welding of the joint in accordance with the verbal commands of the first operator. Each welding

operator has been qualified to perform both remote and direct visual control welding.

Question: Are these welders qualified to make the subject weld in accordance with QW-361.2,

even though the welding operator having direct visual control is directing the positioning of the

orbital pipe welding equipment verbally and does not have “hands-on” control of the welding

head?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 40



Date Issued: July 1, 1996

File No: 95-302

Question: If more than one manufacturer or contractor agrees upon the use of one WPS, which is

to be followed during the production of test weldments for qualification testing, may the welder

used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures, be under the full

supervision and control of each manufacturer or contractor during the welding, provided the

Quality Control System or Quality Assurance Program of each manufacturer or contractor

describes the control of welders?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-403.10, Short-Circuiting Mode


File No: 96-001

Question: Does QW-403.10 limit the base metal thickness qualified to 1.1T for a combination

GMAW-S/SMAW PQR test coupon thickness “T” less than ½ in., when used to support a

combination GMAW-S/SMAW WPS?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-202.3, Weld Repair and Buildup


File No: 96-060

Background: Assurance of defect-free hardfacing deposits on cast surfaces is often improved if a

layer of weld metal is first deposited on the casting, acting as a substrate for the subsequent

hardfacing weld metal overlay.

Question (1): Does Section IX require qualification of the substrate (e.g., in accordance with

QW-202.3 or when the substrate is not included in the design minimum wall thickness in

accordance with QW-214) which will be subsequently covered by a hardfacing weld metal

overlay?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If the deposit of the substrate is included in a hardfacing weld metal overlay

procedure qualified to QW-216, is evaluation of the substrate to QW-202.3 or QW-214, as

applicable, required?

Reply (2): Section IX does not address qualification of a combination substrate/hardfacing WPS

in a single coupon.




File No: 96-287

Question: Is it permissible to use ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography to qualify welders

and welding operators in accordance with QW-300.1?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-300, Welding Performance Qualifications


File No: 96-314

Question (1): Would the successful qualification of a welder in a manual or semi-automatic

method qualify him to weld in production using a machine or automatic method in the same

process?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Since the essential variables are the same for both methods, would successful

qualification with testing in manual GTAW allow the same welder to weld in production using

semi-automatic GTAW without testing?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-404.9, Filler Metals


File No: 96-315

Question: In accordance with QW-404.9(c), does a change in the wire classification shown in

SFA-5.9, with no change in the flux composition, F-Number, or A-Number, require procedure

requalification?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 41


Subject: QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of Qualification

Date Issued: January 6, 1997

File No: 96-132

Question: Is it a requirement of QW-322 for a manufacturer to maintain records to demonstrate a

welder’s or welding operator’s continuing qualification for a process from the date of the original

qualification test?

Reply: Section IX does not address how conformance to QW-322 is demonstrated. Other book

sections my address the maintenance of records.


Subject: QW-304, Performance Qualification – Welders


File 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.




File No: 93-431 and 95-222

Background: Company A was a subsidiary of Company B. Company B sold Company A to

Company C, and Company A became a division of Company C.

Question: May Company A continue to use WPSs and PQRs previously developed by Company

B?

Reply: It is the intent of the Coe that when a manufacturer or contractor, or part of a

manufacturer or contractor, is acquired by a new owner(s), the PQRs and WPSs may be used by

the new owner(s) without requalification, provided all of the following are met:

(a) the new owner(s) takes responsibility for the WPSs and PQRs;

(b) the WPSs reflect the name of the new owner(s); and

(c) the Quality Control System/Quality Assurance Program reflects the source of the PQRs

as being from the former manufacturer or contractor.


Subject: QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test

Specimens for Hardfacing (Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays


File No: 97-028

Background: Corrosion-resistant weld overlay on P-No. 1 material needs to be carried out with

Nickel-Aluminum Bronze using E CuNiAl SMAW electrode (F-No. 37) and ER CuNiAl GMAW

filler wire (F-No. 37).

Question: For procedure qualification of the above to QW-453, can side bend test specimens of

⅛ in. thickness be used, bent to inner diameter of 2 1/16 in., as given for P-No. XX with F-No. 36

under QW-466.1?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-284, Seam Welding Equipment Qualification


File No: 97-044

Background: When qualifying resistance seam welding equipment for QW-284, testing and

acceptance criteria shall be in accordance with QW-196. QW-196.2.1 addresses shear test

specimens, but only deals with spot welding.

Question (1): When qualifying seam welding equipment, do the requirements for spot shear test

per QW-196.2.1 apply?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Do the rules of QW-286 for procedures qualification apply for equipment

qualification?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 42


Subject: QB-141.4, Sectioning Tests


File No: 97-304

Question: In QB-451.3, Note (1), is the Sectioning Test a substitute for the Peel Test?

Reply: Yes.




File No: 97-309

Question: May a manufacturer use another organization’s Welding Procedure Specifications in

fabrication of pressure vessels contracted to that organization, if the manufacturer works to

specifications controlling all fabrication processes from material procurement to final delivery,

including QC examination provided by the contracting organization?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-451, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens


File No: 97-479

Question: Does a partial penetration groove weld procedure qualification test assembly qualify

for full penetration production groove welds within the ranges indicated in QW-451?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-200.2, Welding Procedure Qualifications


File No: 97-481

Question: Does ASME Section IX require that a preliminary WPS be attached to the PQR?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 43



Specimens for Hardfacing (Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays

Date Issued: April 28, 1998

File No: 98-009

Question: In making repairs to hardfacing weld metal overlays, does the existing hardfacing weld

metal overlay deposit to be repaired, constitute a change in the original essential variable(s) (e.g.,

base material, thickness, etc.) thus requiring a new qualification?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-402.12(a) and (c) and QW-402.12, Joints


File No: 98-009

Question: Do the words “any change exceeding ±10%,” “change…greater than 10%,” “a

change…greater than ±10%,” and “an increase or decrease of more than 10%,” respectively, all

indicate a qualified range of 10% above and 10% below the value recorded in the PQR?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-410.42, Technique


File No: 97-302

Question (1): For PAW hardfacing and corrosion resistant weld metal overlay qualifications,

may the full range of oscillation qualified (including the “change of more than 10%”) also apply

to the combined minimum and maximum oscillation range qualified? (e.g., would the range

qualified for a 1 in. oscillation combined with a 1.5 in. oscillation be 0.9 in – 1.65 in.)

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May the minimum and maximum oscillation values be combined and qualified on

a single hardfacing weld metal overlay test coupon, assuming all other essential variables are the

same?

Reply (2): Section IX does not prohibit the qualification of more than one set of essential

variables on a single test coupon, provided each set of essential variables is tested in accordance

with the requirements of Section IX.


Subject: QW-432, F-Numbers


File No: 98-131

Question: A WPS is qualified with an SMA electrode that is not certified by the manufacturer as

conforming to an AWS classification. Are welders who were previously qualified with an

electrode classified as F-4, also qualified to use this unclassified electrode that conforms to the

deposit chemistry of EXXXX-G, in Table 2 of SFA-5.5 (within the other limitations of QW-

350)?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 44


Subject: QW-150 and QW-462.1, Tension Test Specimens for Pipe and Plate


File No: 97-302

Question: Would tensile tests performed in accordance with SA-370 be acceptable for meeting

ASME Section IX, QW-462.1(a) and (b)?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-407.1, Post Weld Heat Treatment


File No: 97-306/97-308

Question: Is it the intent of Section IX in QW-407.1 to permit reporting the results of more than

one PWHT condition on a single report, with a single PQR number, provided all the other

applicable essential and supplementary essential variables are identical and all required tests are

conducted and reported for both conditions?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-300, Welding Performance Qualifications


File No: 98-133

Question: May Company A retain the Company B employee responsible for welder performance

qualification, to review the welder qualification documents of both companies and qualify the

welders of Company B to the welding program of Company A without further testing of the

welders?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-451, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens


File No: 98-237/98-238

Question: May longitudinal bend specimens be used in lieu of transverse bend specimens when

the base metals or the base metal and the weld metal do not differ markedly in bending

properties?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-200.1, Welding Procedure Qualifications


File No: 98-239

Question: Are all-encompassing terms acceptable when addressing nonessential variables in a

WPS (e.g, for backing, “with or without”, for root spacing, “unlimited”)?

Reply: Section IX does not specify how nonessential variables are to be addressed; however, the

terms must provide direction to the welder/welding operator for making production welds to

Code requirements.


Subject: QW-361.2, Machine Welding Variables for Welding Operators; and QW-381,

Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay


File No: 98-447

Background: A multiple layer corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay performance qualification

(machine welding) is made with the first layer under Direct Visual control and the second layer

Remote Visual control.

Question (1): Is the welding operator qualified for both Direct and Remote Visual control

techniques applied either in single or multiple layers?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For the qualification described in the background, may two welding operators

qualify on one coupon, provided the requirements of QW-453 and QW-361.2 (which delineate

the welding operators “limits of qualification” as per QW-306) are addressed?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-405.3, Positions


File No: 98-448

Question: May a single-pass “seal weld” as defined in QW-492, used to seal boiler tubes to a

boiler tube sheet, be considered a “cover pass” or a “wash pass” for purposes of exemption form

QW-405.3?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-462.5(a), Chemical Analysis and Hardness Specimen Corrosion-Resistant

and Hard-Facing Weld Metal Overlay


File No: 99-453

Question: Is it permissible to use the surface of the test coupon as the “approximate fusion line”

when determining the minimum finished thickness for corrosion-resistant and hard-facing

overlays in accordance with QW-462.5(a)?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 45



Specimens for Hard-Facing (Wear Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays


File No: 98-055

Question: When performing corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay welding operator

qualification using a machine GTAW process, are the limitations on thickness qualified per QW-

453 applicable?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-201.1, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility


File No: 99-025

Background: When one of a company’s plants is sold, it is not clear if the new owner can use the

Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) and Procedure Qualification Records (PQR) qualified

by the original company, when the original company wishes to continue using those WPSs/PQRs.

Question: Company A sells one of its plants to Company B. May both Company A and

Company B use the WPSs/PQRs previously qualified by Company A?

Reply: Yes, provided the requirements of QW-201.1 are addresses by Company B.

VOLUME 46


Subject: QW-404, Filler Metals


File No: 99-409

Question: Is requalification required when the filler metal specified in the WPS and supporting

PQR is moved from one SFA specification to another SFA specification, or the AWS

classification is changed, or when a previously unclassified filler is classified by the filler metal

manufacturer as conforming to an SFA specification?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 47


Subject: QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base Metal Thickness


File No: 99-539

Question: When welding a corner joint with dissimilar base metal thickness, the thickness of

both members must be within the qualified thickness range of the WPS(s) being used. How is the

thickness for the thicker member defined in sketches (a), (b) and (c) below?

Reply: For sketch (a), the thicker of T or ts. For sketch (b), the thicker of T or ts. For sketch (c),

the thicker of flange a or hub b.

VOLUME 48


Subject: QW-403, Base Metal Requirement; QW-404, Filler Metal Requirement


File 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.




File No: 00-553

Background: A large majority of fabrication, contracted by a design Company A, is performed

by Manufacturers B and C. Each company is independent in ownership from the other two.

Companies A, B and C have developed a Welding Coalition. The top management of all three

companies has executed an Agreement and Commitment protocol, consenting to the

establishment of the Welding Coalition. The Welding Coalition controls all weld procedures

developed for use on Company A contracts by Companies B and C, under one designated

program. The Coalition does not control production welding at either of the manufacturing

companies. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company C are controlled by Company

A’s Quality Program. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company B are controlled by

Company B’s Quality Program that has been approved by Company A. Company C is on

Company B’s Approved Vendors List.

Question: Is it permissible to consider the Welding Coalition as “the organization which has

responsible operational control of production of the weldments to be made in accordance with

this Code”, such that Company B may use weld procedures qualified by Company C and vice

versa?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-194, Visual Examinations


File No: 00-519

Question: Is a welder’s performance qualification test coupon, in which undercut is present,

acceptable, provided that the rest of the examinations and tests are acceptable?

Reply: Yes. However, manufacturers may disqualify welders based on QW-301.2 when

discontinuities, such as undercut and porosity, do not comply with the quality requirement of the

manufacturer.


Subject: QW-304.1, Welder’s Test Coupon Examination


File No: 00-653

Question: Does QW-304.1 require that when radiography is used for examination of welder test

coupons for performance qualification, the visual examination per QW-302.4 be performed and

documented on the Welder/Welding Operator Performance Qualification record?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-200.2, Welding Procedure Qualification


File No: 00-654

Question: When a nonessential variable is recorded on a PQR, may a new or revised WPS

supported by the PQR specify a different range for that nonessential variable from that recorded

on the PQR?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-410.51, Addition/Deletion of Oscillation (1998 and Earlier Editions)


File No: 98-240

Background: QW-410.51, addition or deletion of oscillation is an essential variable for GTAW

hard-facing. QW-410.1, addition or deletion of weave bead is not a variable for the GTAW 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


Subject: QW-420.2, Material Grouping


File No: 01-029

Background: A PQR is qualified on a P-Number X material to a P-Number Y material.

Question (1): Does this PQR support a WPS for welding P-Number X to S-Number Y without

changes to any other essential variables?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does this PQR support a WPS for welding S-Number X to S-Number Y without

changes to any other essential variables?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-300.2, Transfer of Record of Performance Qualification


File No: 01-030

Question: When a new owner acquires a company, or part of a company, does QW-300.2

prohibit continued use of existing welder performance qualifications?

Reply: No. Section IX does not address rules applicable to performance qualification continuity

when a new owner acquires a manufacturer or contractor. If welder performance qualification

continuity is to be maintained by the new owner, the Quality Control System/Quality Assurance

Program should reflect to the source of the welder performance qualification records as being

from the former manufacturer or contractor.


Subject: QW-356, Welding Variables


File No: 01-032

Question: A welder was qualified to P-No. 1 material using the GTAW process without gas

backing using F-No. 6 filler material. Is he qualified to weld P-No. 8 material using the GTAW

process with gas backing using F-No. 6 filler material, provided all other essential variables

remain the same?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-144 and QW-194, Visual Examinations


File No: 01-073

Question: Are the requirements of QW-144 and QW-194 for visual examination of the test

coupon required for the qualifications of a welding procedure?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-510 and QW-540 in Article V, Standard Welding Procedure Specifications


File No: 01-089

Question (1): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only

GTAW if the SWPS is for combination GTAW root and SMAW E7018 fill?

Reply (1): No. All variables of the SWPSs are considered to be essential variables.


SMAW E7018 if the SWPS is for combination GTAW root and SMAW E7018 fill?



SMAW E7018 if the SWPS specifies both E6010 and E7018?


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?


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?



Subject: QW-322.2(a) and QW-452.1, Rule Change Affecting Welder Qualification


File No: 01-201

Background: ASME Section IX, 2000 Addenda, revised Table QW-452.1 reducing the coupon

size from ¾ in. to ½ in. to qualify the welder for “Maximum to be welded” when welding a

minimum of three layers.

Question (1): A welder qualified prior to the 2000 Addenda, and has remained qualified since his

original test. His original test coupon consisted of at least three weld layers and greater than ½ in.

but less than ¾ in. deposited weld metal. May the qualification recorded be revised from “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 ½ in. but less than ¾ in. deposited weld

metal. His renewal restores his original qualifications in accordance with QW-322.2(a). May the

original qualification record be revised from “2t” to “Max. to be welded” subsequent to the 2000

Addenda?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: References to Edition and Addenda


File No: 01-570

Question (1): The 1998 Code Edition, as published, incorporates the 1998 Addenda. When

providing reference to this Code Edition and Addenda within a Code-required document, may

only the Edition be listed (i.e, 1998 Edition)?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For the 1998 Edition only, is it necessary to revise Code-required documentation

where the term “1998 Edition” was used as meaning the 1995 Edition through the 1997

Addenda?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 50


Subject: QW-500, The Use of SWPSs


File No: 01-332

Question: May a manufacturer or contractor adopt and use SWPSs in accordance with the rules

of Article V for work on Code items built to an edition or addenda prior to the 1998 edition with

the 2000 Addenda, provided the construction code does not prohibit the use of SWPSs?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-300.2, Employer’s Responsibility


File No: 01-641

Background: Section IX requires that the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer “be

responsible for conducting tests to qualify the performance of welders which his organization

employs in construction of weldments built in accordance with the Code.” It also requires that

the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer provide supervision and control over welders

while they are welding test coupons for performance qualification.

Question (1): An employee of a contractor provides supervision and control over a welder during

welding of a test coupon, but that welder is not an employee of the contractor at the time of the

test. Is it required that the welder be an employee of that contractor at the time of qualification

testing?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Must the welder be an employee of any manufacturer or contractor at the time of

qualification testing?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: Code Case 2142-1 and 2143-1


File No: 01-641

Background: The submerged are welding process is being used to deposit corrosion-resistant

weld overlay for Section III, Subsection NB fabrication using a NI-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal

and flux combination. The strip filler metal does not meet the chemical requirements of Code

Case 2142-1 (bare electrode and 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 manufacturer’s brand names?

Reply (4): Yes.


Subject: QW-202.2(b), QW-202.3(b) and QW-407.4


File No: 01-615

Background: A groove weld procedure qualification test coupon 1.5 in. thick was welded with

the SMAW process using multiple passes of ½ in. max. thickness. The test coupon was given a

subsequent post weld heat treatment exceeding the upper transformation temperature prior to the

completion of mechanical testing.

Question: May this PQR be used to support the weld of partial penetration groove welds per

QW-202.2(b) or weld repair and buildup welds per QW-202.3(b) on base material thickness

exceeding 1.65 in.?

Reply: No. Per QW-407.4, a procedure qualification test coupon receiving a post weld heat

treatment in which the upper transformation is exceeded, the maximum qualified thickness for

production welds is 1.1 times the thickness of the test coupon.


Subject: QW-153.1, Acceptance Criteria for Tensile Strength


File No: 01-772

Question: Does the minimum specified tensile strength in QW/QB-422 supersede the AS/SB

material tensile strength for procedure qualification?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base Metal Thickness


File No: 01-811

Question: Does QW-202.4(b) permit the maximum weld deposit thickness limit to be extended

beyond the limit specified in QW-451.1?

Reply: No. QW-202.4 applies only to the base metal thickness limits.


Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number Reassignment


File No: 01-813

Question (1): May a procedure qualification record subject to variable QW-407.1(a) that

included only a PWHT below the lower transformation temperature be used to support a WPS

with PWHT above the upper transformation temperature and a subsequent PWHT below the

lower transformation temperature?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Does Section IX address the values to be used as transformation temperature?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 51


Subject: QW-151.1(d), Reduced Section – Plate; QW-200.4(b), Combination of

Processes; QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of Qualifications


File No: 01-035

Background [(1), (2), (3)]: A welder is qualified for manual SMAW and GTAW, and

semiautomatic FCAW and GMAW.

Question (1): Do welders maintain their qualifications for manual SMAW and GTAW by

welding with either semiautomatic GMAW or FCAW?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Do welders maintain their qualifications for both SMAW and GTAW by welding

with only one of the processes during the six-month period?

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Do welders maintain their qualifications 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.


Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number Reassignment


File 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.


Subject: QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal Thicknesses


File 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.


Subject: QW-200.4, Impact Test Qualification of Multi-process Welds


File 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.


Subject: Section II, Part C


File No: 01-815

Question: Does Section II, Part C mandate the use of SFA-5.01?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-100.3, The Use of the Referenced Edition of the Code


File 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.


Subject: QW-452.1, Nominal Coupon Thickness


File 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 ½ in. thick in order for a welder to be

qualified for “maximum to be welded”.

VOLUME 52




File 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.


Subject: Section II, Part C, SFA Specifications, Marking of Packages


File 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.


Subject: QW-403.5, Base Metal Requirements


File 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.


Subject: QW-423, Alternate Base Materials for Welder Qualification


File No: 02-2694

Question (1): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left

column of QW-423, weld any combination of P-Number base metals in the corresponding row

of the right column, within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified?

Reply (1): Yes.


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.


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.


Subject: QW-200.4(b), Root Pass Procedure Qualification


File No: 02-3449

Question: Do the provisions of QW-200.4(b) permit a GTAW procedure qualification test

weldment performed on a 13 mm thick coupon to support depositing a root pass in a

production joint of the qualified base metal having a thickness of 8 mm when impact testing is

required?

Reply: No. See QW-403.6.


Subject: QW-283, Welds with Buttering


File No: 02-3896

Background: In all cases described below, the manufacturers develop and follow WPSs and

PQRs based on the test coupons welded. The minimum buttering thickness in all cases will be

greater than 3/16 in.

Question (1): Manufacturer A qualifies a WPS by buttering the ends of the test coupons, which

are the same material. The buttered ends are heat treated, then the weld is completed using the

same filler metal as was used for the buttering. Manufacturer B welds a groove weld test coupon

of the same best metal using the same process, filler metal and other essential variables as

manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated in the same manner as the heat treatment used

for the buttering by manufacturer A. May manufacturer A weld parts that were buttered by

manufacturer B?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Manufacturer C welds a groove weld test coupon using the same base metal,

process, filler metal, and other essential variables as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat

treated in the same manner as the heat treatment used for buttering by manufacturer A. May

manufacturer A weld parts that were buttered by manufacturer C?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Manufacturer A receives parts that have been buttered by both manufacturers B

and C. May the parts buttered by manufacturer B be welded by manufacturer A to parts buttered

by manufacturer C?

Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): Manufacturer D receives parts that have been buttered by manufacturers A, B and

C. May manufacturer D weld the buttered parts together using a buttered groove weld test

coupon qualified using the same base metal, process, filler metal, and other essential variables as

manufacturer A?

Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): Manufacturer D receives parts that have been buttered by manufacturers A, B and

C. May manufacturer D weld the buttered parts together using a groove weld test coupon

qualified in accordance with QW-283.4(b) using the same process, filler metal, and other

essential variables that manufacturer A used to join the buttered parts (i.e., the as-welded portion

of the test) using a base metal that nominally matches the chemical 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


Subject: QB-203.1, Limits of Qualified Flow Positions for Procedures, and QB-408.4,

Joint Design; QB-303.3, Limits of Qualified Positions, and QB-408.1, Joint

Design


File No: 02-3541

Background (1): QB-203.1 states: “Qualification in pipe shall qualify for plate, but not vice

versa. Horizontal-flow in pipe shall qualify for flat-flow in plate.” QB-408.4 states: “A

change in the joint type, e.g., from a butt to a lap or socket, from that qualified. For lap or

socket joints, a decrease in overlap length from that qualified.”

Question (1): Do procedure qualifications in plate lap joints qualify for tube-to-tube socket

joints for brazing procedure qualifications?

Reply (1): No.

Background (2): QB-303.3 states: “Qualifications in pipe shall qualify for plate, but not vice

versa. Horizontal-flow in pipe shall qualify for flat-flow in plate.” QB-408.1 states: “A

change in the joint type, i.e., from a butt to a lap or socket, from that qualified. For lap or

socket joints, an increase in lap length of more than 25% from the overlap used on brazer

performance qualification test coupon.”

Question (2): Do performance qualifications in plate lap joints qualify for tube-to-tube socket

joints for brazer performance qualifications?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-451.1, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits


File No: 02-4075

Question (1): A test coupon is prepared as follows: A 1.75 in. plate is welded to 1.75 in. plate

with 1 in. thick weld. Per QW-451.1, is 8 in. the maximum thickness range of base metal

qualified?

Reply (1): Yes, except that further limits or exceptions may apply as stated in Notes (1) and (5)

of QW-451.1.

Question (2): Using the same test coupon as Question (1), where a single process was used to

deposit the entire weld thickness, is 8 in. the maximum thickness of the weld metal permitted per

QW-451.1?

Reply (2): Yes, except that further limits or exceptions may apply as stated in Notes (1) and (5)

of QW-451.1.


Subject: QW-301.4, Record of Welder Performance Qualification


File No: 02-4198

Background: For welder’s performance qualification, a multiple layer groove weld is made on a

single test coupon using one welder for first layer and another welder for the second.

Question: QW-301.4 requires a record of welder performance qualification. May a single form

be used to record the essential variables, the type of test and test results, and the ranges qualified

in accordance with QW-452 for each welder and welding operator?

Reply: Section IX specifies information required to be recorded, but does not specify the format

of the records.


Subject: QW-404.33, Change in SFA Specifications for Filler Metal Classification


File No: 03-263

Question: Does the expression “a change in the SFA specification filler metal classification”

refer to a change in the AWS classification?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Section II, Part C, SFA 5.1, Table 1


File No: 03-274

Question: May a welder qualify with E7018 electrode using either uphill or downhill

progression?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-401.3, Supplemental Essential Variable (Procedure)


File No: 03-469

Background: A company has qualified a PQR to satisfy all testing requirements other than notch

toughness for welding P1 Group 2 to P1 Group 2 by the SAW process. Another test coupon is

subsequently prepared using the WPS written on the original PQR and an additional PQR is then

qualified with only testing for notch toughness, as allowed by the Code, to supplement the

original PQR for welding with impact requirements. However, the preheat value (an essential

variable) used to qualify the original PQR was 150°F. The preheat temperature was less than

150°F.

Question: May the supplemental PQR with reduced preheat be used with the original PQR to

support a WPS for notch toughness application?

Reply: Yes, provided that the requirements of QW-406.1 are met.


Subject: QW-201/QW-201.1, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility


File No: 03-740

Background: Several manufacturing organizations within the same company perform welding

procedure qualifications in accordance with Section IX. Each manufacturing organization

performs these activities in accordance with specific Quality Assurance Program(s)/Quality

Control System(s) that comply with their ASME Construction Code Certificate(s) of

Authorization and describe operational control of qualifications.

Question: Is it permitted for any of the manufacturing organizations within the company to use

WPSs and PQRs qualified by any of the other manufacturing organizations?

Reply: Yes, this is permitted by QW-201.

VOLUME 54


Subject: QW-151.3, Tension Test Turned Specimen


File No: 02-3586

Background: ASME Section IX, Paragraph QW-151.3(b) states, " For thicknesses over 1" (25

mm), multiple specimens shall be cut through the full thickness of the weld with their centers

parallel to the metal surface and not over 1" (25 mm) apart. The centers of the specimens

adjacent to the metal surface shall not exceed 5/8" (16 mm) from the surface."

Question (1): Does the specified distance between specimens of 'not over 1" apart' refer to the

distance between the centers of the specimens?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): How many tension tests would be required for a 2-1/2" thick groove welding

procedure qualification test coupon welded full thickness?

Reply (2): Two. See QW-451.1.

Question (3): When reduced section turned tension test specimens are used in accordance with

QW-462.1(d) for a 2-1/2" thick groove welding procedure qualification test coupon welded

full thickness, what is the minimum number of specimens that must be removed for each

tension test set?

Reply (3): Three.


Subject: QW-258.1 and QW-410.38


File No: 03-1029

Background: The elctroslag welding process is used to apply a corrosion-resistant overlay. The

essential variables in QW-258.1 apply. QW-410.38 is listed as an essential variable for 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.


Subject: QW-407.1 , Postweld Heat Treatment


File No: 03-1212

Question (1): May a procedure qualification record subject to the variable QW-407.1(a) which

qualified P-No. 8 to P-No. 8 with no PWHT support a WPS with PWHT?

Reply (1): QW-407.1(a) does not apply to P-No. 8 materials. See QW-407.1(b).

Question (2): Would application of controlled and monitored heat to the weld and surrounding

area for the correction of distortion in P-No. 8 material be considered a PWHT operation?

Reply (2): See QW-407.1(b).

Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 54. The “P8” has been corrected by

Errata to read “P-No. 8”.


Subject: QW-401.3 Supplemental Essential Variable


File No: 03-1246

Background: A WPS is supported by three PQRs. Two PQRs are recorded on 12 mm and 28.5

mm thick coupons using tensile, bend, and impact testing specimens. A third PQR was made

using 5 mm thick plate using the same welding parameters, but only impact specimens were

tested.

Question (1): May these PQRs be combined to support a WPS for welding 2.5 mm through 57

mm material requiring notch toughness testing?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): May these three PQRs be combined to support welding base metal thicknesses

of 4.8 through 57 mm with or without notch toughness?

Reply (2): Yes.

Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 54. The “WP” in Question (1) has

been corrected by Errata to read “WPS”.


Subject: QW-200.2(f) and QW-451


File No: 03-1583

Question: Two separate PQRs with identical welding process exist for a 6 mm and an 8 mm

base metal thickness. May these PQRs support a WPS, with all the essential and

supplementary essential variables unchanged, to weld a 28 mm thick production joint?

Reply: No, see QW-451.


Subject: QB-151.3, QB-451.3, and QB-462.1(e)


File No: 03-1664

Background: Two tubes under 3" diameter are separately torch brazed into each end of a coupling

using face fed filler in the same position with all the remaining brazing variables the same for

both joints. The coupon is pulled to failure which occurs in the weaker of the two brazed joints.

The resulting ultimate tensile strength exceeds the minimum specified values listed in QW/QB-

422.

Question (1): Does one tensile specimen, as shown in QB-462.1(e), brazed in this manner, fulfill

the requirement in QB-451.3 for two tension tests?

Reply (1): Yes, see QB-463.1(e).

Question (2): Since the same inside diameter, outside diameter, cross-sectional area ultimate

load, ultimate tensile strength, and type of failure exist for both lap joints, may the same values be

recorded for the two tension tests on the Brazing PQR?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-310.1, QW-452.3 and QW-461.9


File No: 03-1686

Question: Does QW-310.1 apply if the pipe coupon is welded in the 6G position?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 55


Subject: QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures


File No: 03-1770

Background: A combination weld process PQR was qualified using the GTAW for the root

pass, SMAW and SAW.

Question: May this PQR support a WPS for welding with only one or two of the processes

shown on the PQR?

Reply: Yes, provided the following are met:

a) The remaining essential, nonessential and supplementary essential variables, when

applicable, are applied.

b) The base metal and deposited weld metal thickness limits of QW-451 are applied.


Subject: QW-403.9, Base Metal Thickness


File No: 04-65

Background: An EGW procedure was qualified on 3/8 in. thick base material completing the

weld joint in one (1) single pass.

Question: Is the WPS qualified to make a weld deposit greater than 1/2 in., in one pass, in base

metal greater than 1/2 in. in thickness?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-202.2, Procedure Qualification Record Time Limits


File No: 04-601

Question: Is there a time limit on the validity of a PQR?

Reply: PQRs always remain valid, but may only be used to support WPSs, provided they meet

the requirements of the 1962 or later Edition of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section

IX. See QW-100.3.


Subject: QW-451.1, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens and

QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal Thicknesses


File No: 04-599

Background: A procedure qualification test coupon using the same P-Number material and

consisting of two plates of different thicknesses are welded together, where the thicker of the

two plates (T2 = 1-1/2” thick) has been tapered on a 4:1 taper down to the thinner plate

thickness (T1 = 1” thick).

Question (1): Does this test coupon qualify the WPS for a base metal thickness range of 3/16”

to 8”?

Reply (1): See Interpretation IX-86-43, Question (2).

Background: A procedure qualification test coupon using the same or different P-Number

materials and consisting of two plates of different thicknesses, T2 = 1-1/2” thick and T1 = 1”

thick welded with a single process. The thicknesses meet on the same plane with neither plate

being tapered. The joint is welded in accordance with the sketch below.

Question (2): Does this test coupon qualify the WPS for both base metals for a thickness

range of 3/16” to 8” on both sides of the weld joint?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Does this test coupon qualify the WPS for both base metals of different P

Numbers for a thickness range of 3/16” to 8”?

Reply (3): No. QW-202.4 requires both base metal thicknesses be in accordance with QW-

451.1. Base metal T1 is qualified 3/16” to 2” and base metal T2 is qualified 3/16” to 8”,

except as permitted by QW-202.4(b)(1).


Subject: QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics, Heat Input


File No: 04-1013

Question (1): Does QW-409.1 require that the highest heat input, to be recorded on the PQR, be

calculated on the parameters used at the location where the HAZ impact specimens are removed?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): GTAW is a non-consumable electrode welding process that would record zero

for the “per unit length of electrode” in QW-409.1(b). Therefore, can the weld volume method

detailed in QW-409.1 be used to control the heat input for a non-consumable electrode welding

process such as GTAW?

Reply (2): See Interpretation IX-92-40.


Subject: QW-322.2, Renewal of Qualification


File No: 04-1457

Background: A welder has been qualified for the GMAW process (short circuiting

transfer mode). The required mechanical bend tests were performed and found to be acceptable.

The welder did not weld with this process during the following six-month period, resulting in

expiration of the qualification.

Question: May a welder’s qualification be renewed by radiographing a production weld

performed with the GMAW process (short circuiting transfer mode)?

Reply: No. See QW-322.2(a).


Subject: QW-200.2, Procedure Qualification Record and QW-409.1, Electrical

Characteristics, Heat Input


File No: 04-1592

Question (1): Procedure Qualification tests were conducted with notch toughness testing.

When documenting the PQR with actual variables (Amps, Volts, Travel Speed) that were

recorded during welding of the test coupon, is it required that a single value be recorded for these

variables in the PQR?

Reply (1): No. See QW-200.2(b).

Question (2): Must the volts, amps and travel speed used to calculate heat input for each

process per QW-409.1 be measured in the same weld pass or unit length of weld?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-407.2, Base Metal Thickness Qualification and QW-407.2, PWHT

Temperature and Time Range


File No: 04-1595

Question (1): Will a procedure qualification test coupon on 1.5 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material

and post weld heat treated at 1100 deg. F. for 1.5 hours with supplementary essential variable

requirements met, support a WPS with supplementary essential variable requirements for

production welding on 8 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material that is PWHT at 1100 deg. F. for 3.5

hours?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Based on the conditions stated in Question 1, could the PWHT time on the 8 in.

thick weldment be increased to 4 hours and 10 minutes at 1100 deg. F. and still be in compliance

with Code requirements?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 56




File No: 05-635

Note: Interpretation IX-92-69 has been withdrawn


Subject: QW-403.5, Qualification of Dissimilar Group Number Base Metals


File No: 04-1418

Question (1): A PQR is qualified with impact testing using API 5L X56, which is an S-No.1,

Group 2 material. Does that PQR support a WPS for impact tested welding API 5L X52 and X46

which are S-No.1, Group 1 materials?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Does a PQR qualified with impact testing conducted using an unassigned material

welded to an S-No.1, Group 2 material support a WPS for welding the same unassigned material

to S-No.1, Group 1 material?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-409.8, QW-256, SFA Specifications, GTAW Electrode Characteristics


File No: 05-24

Question: May current levels outside the range of SFA 5.12 Table AI for specific tungsten

electrode diameters be specified in a WPS in accordance with Section IX?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-200.4(b), Combination Procedure Qualification Records


File No: 05-25

Background: A combination GTAW and SMAW WPS is supported by two PQRs. PQR A is

welded with SMAW to join 38 mm (1-½ in.) thick plates with 38 mm (1-½ in.) of SMAW

deposit. PQR B is welded with GTAW and SMAW to join 13 mm (½ in.) thick plates, with 3 mm

(1/8 in.) of GTAW deposit, and 10 mm (3/8 in.) of SMAW deposited.

Question (1): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range

of 5 mm (3/16 in.) to 200 mm (8 in.) when impact testing is not required?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a maximum deposited weld

metal thickness of 6 mm (¼ in.) for the GTAW process and 200 mm (8 in.) for the SMAW

process?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): When impact tests are performed for both PQRs with acceptable results, do

PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of 13 mm (½ in.) to

200 mm (8 in.) when impact testing is required?

Reply (3): Yes.


Subject: QW-404.36, Filler Metals, Testing of Recrushed Slag


File No: 05-26

Question: Does QW-404.36 require that each batch or blend of recrushed slag, as defined in

SFA-5.17, be tested in accordance with Section II, Part C regardless of the source of slag?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-407.1, Welding Procedure Specification, Postweld Heat Treatment


File No: 05-293

Question: A WPS for joining P-No.4 to P-No.4 specifies that the PWHT be performed at

1125 deg. F +/- 25 deg. F, which is below the lower transformation temperature for the material.

May this WPS be revised to specify a PWHT performed at 1225 deg. F +/- 25 deg. F, which is

also below the transformation temperature, without requalification of the procedure?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-184 and QW-322.1, Production Welds, Revoking Welder Qualifications


File No: 05-528

Question (1): A welder qualified for fillet welds by a qualification test on a plate groove weld is

required to weld a fillet weld of 3/8 in. (10 mm) leg on a nozzle to shell weld. Is the welder

required to produce fillet welds with legs having a maximum difference in length of 1/8 in. (3.2

mm) as per QW-184?

Reply (1): No, QW-184 does not apply to production welds.

Question (2): The same welder, qualified as per previous question, produces fillet welds with one

leg size twice the size of the other (3/8 versus 3/4 in.). Is this cause for questioning his/her ability

to weld within the qualification parameters and revoke his/her qualification for fillet welds, in

terms of QW-322.1(b)?

Reply (2): Section IX does not establish criteria for revoking welder qualifications.


Subject: QW-407.4, Qualified Thickness Range when Exceeding the PWHT Upper

Transformation Temperature


File No: 04-1301

Question: When variable QW-407.4 applies per QW-250 for test coupons with postweld heat

treatment exceeding the upper transformation temperature is the maximum thickness qualified

1.1 times the thickness of the test coupon for ferrous P number materials; P-No.1 through P-No.7

and P-No. 9A through P-No11B?

Reply: Yes


Subject: QW-211 and QW-310.2, Procedure Qualification for Groove Welds with

Backing (2004 Edition)

Date Issued: August 18, 2005

File No: 05-784

Background: A performance qualification test is performed using solid round bar machined to

42.20 mm (1.66 in.) O.D. with a machined circumferential weld groove that is 14.6 mm (0.575

in.) deep and has integral backing. Welding is performed in the 6G test position with a single

welding process. At least three weld layers are deposited. The test coupon will be subjected to

radiographic examination.

Question: May the test coupon described above be used for a performance qualification test in

the 6G position welded with a single process to qualify for all position welding of unlimited weld

metal thickness with backing and for all diameters 25 mm (1 in.) O.D. and greater?

Reply: Yes, however, multiple test coupons are required to provide a minimum weld length of

150 mm (6 in.) for radiographic examination and the radiographic examination requirements of

QW-191 are met.


Subject: QW-461.9, Performance Qualification – Position and Diameter Limitations

(2004 Edtion)


File: 05-1195

Question: A welder was qualified on pipe 5/8” thick in the 6G position using the GTAW process

without backing for his root pass, and SMAW with F4 filler metal to complete the joint. He is

also qualified to weld using SMAW on plate in the 1G position without backing.

May this welder deposit a root pass using SMAW with F4 filler in the 6G position without

backing?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-151.3 and QW-451, Tension Test Requirements for Turned Specimens

(2004 Edition)


File No: 05-1404

Background: A test coupon of 1 1/8” thickness was welded. Only two (2) turned 0.505 inch

diameter tension specimens were prepared and tested. The test results were acceptable for the

specimens tested.

Question (1): Do the tension tests performed satisfy the requirements of QW-150 and QW-451?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Are the requirements of QW-150 and QW-451 satisfied if the WPS and this PQR

supports is limited to a base metal thickness range of 3/16 to 2 inches instead of a base metal

thickness range of 3/16 to 2-1/4 inches that would have been permitted had a sufficient number of

tension specimens been tested?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 57


Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility (2004 Edition)


File No: 05-1196

Background: Two independent companies A and B form a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) to

perform work requiring ASME Section I Code Stamp. The LLP has obtained valid ASME

Certificates of Authorization. Each company also has valid, existing ASME Certificates of

Authorization. The organization effective operational control of welding procedure qualification

is described in each of the partner’s Quality Control System Manuals and the LLP’s Quality

Control System Manual.

The welding procedure qualification tests and production welding are under the full supervision

and control of the same individual representing both the LLP and company A.

Question: May the LLP use PQR’s qualified by company A after the formation of the LLP?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Units of Measurement


File No: 05-1215

Question (1): Is it acceptable to maintain welder performance qualification records in SI units,

with a conversion table as part of the welding manual to ensure that qualification limits are not

exceeded?

Reply (1): Yes. Code Case 2523 provides information about when such conversions are

required and the requirements for performing such conversions.

Question (2): Is it acceptable to maintain welding procedure specifications that are dual

dimensioned with SI units primary and US Customary units in parenthesis, with a conversion

table as part of the welding manual to ensure that qualification limits are not exceeded?

Reply (2): Yes. Code Case 2523 provides information about when such conversions are

required and the requirements for performing such conversions.


Subject: QW-405.2, Welding Position (2004 Edition)


File No: 06-323

Question (1): If a Stud Welding Procedure Qualification is performed in the 4S position does the

same procedure qualification qualify for the 1S position?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): If a Stud Welding Procedure Qualification is performed in the 4S and 2S position

does the same procedure qualification also qualify for all positions?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-407.1(b), Postweld Heat Treatment


File No: 06-462

Question: Does QW-407.1(b)(2) address the temperature ranges for stress relieving, stabilizing

and/or solution annealing heat treatments?

Reply: No, QW-407.1(b)(2) addresses PWHT within a specified temperature range. Section IX

requires the temperature range to be specified on the WPS and the PQR supporting the WPS be

within the specified PWHT temperature range. (See the fourth paragraph of the Introduction.)

VOLUME 58


Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number Reassignment (2004 Edition)


File No: 01-679, 04-600

Question: May a previously qualified WPS, written to permit the welding of P-No. 5, Group 1

material to P-No. 5, Group 4 material prior to the establishment of P-Nos. 5A, 5B, and 5C, be

used to weld SA-213 T22 to SA-213 T91 materials?

Reply: Yes, if the WPS is revised to limit the materials qualified for welding to the P- or S-

Number(s) and Group number(s) assigned to the specific material(s) originally used for the

procedure qualification test coupon in the applicable edition and addenda of Section IX.


Subject: QW-407.1(b), Postweld Heat Treatment (2004 Edition)


File No: 06-285

Background: A manufacturer has fabricated multi-convolution bellows of SB-409 UNS

N08800, N08810 or N08811 (P-No. 45), in accordance with ASME Section VIII Div. 1, and

Mandatory Appendix 26, Pressure Vessel and Heat Exchanger Expansion Joints. Although the

Code does not require it, the manufacturer performs heat treatment (at 1750 deg. F) subsequent to

completing all welding and forming.

Question: Is the heat treatment described above considered Postweld Heat Treatment

for the purpose of welding procedure qualification in accordance with Section IX, para.

QW-407.1(b)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-201, Manufacturer’s or Contractor’s Responsibility (2004 Edition)


File No: 06-912

Background: Three construction companies have participated in a nuclear power plant

construction project as a consortium contractor. They have a unified Quality Assurance Program

but the consortium does not hold a Certificate of Authorization. Each of the construction

companies holds their own Certificate of Authorization.

Question: Does “two or more companies of different names in an organization” in QW-201

apply

to the consortium described in the background?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-409.2, FCAW Mode of Transfer (2004 Edition)

Date Issued: August 17,2007

File No: 07-1041

Question: Does QW-409.2, the transfer mode variable, apply to the flux cored arc welding

process?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-07-04 Subject: QW-404.23, Filler Metal Product Form (2007 Edition)


File No: 07-1343

Question (1): Is the requirement to document essential variable QW-404.23 satisfied when the

AWS filler metal classification is specified in the WPS and recorded on the supporting PQR?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does QW-404.23 require the words “solid wire”, “bare wire” or “flux cored” be

specified in addition to the AWS filler metal classification in the WPS and supporting PQR?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, Change of P-No. as an Essential Variable with

Respect to Reassignment of P-No.5 into P-No. 5A, 5B, and 5C (2004 Edition)


File No: 04-600

Background: A welding procedure was qualified in 1975 (without impact testing) for joining P-

No.5 materials, using SA-213-T9 in the PQR test coupon. P-No.5 has since been deleted, and

CrMo materials have been reassigned to P-Nos.5A, 5B, and 5C, with SA-213-T9 being assigned

to P-No.5B. It can be demonstrated that SA-213-T9 is now designated as a P-No.5B material.

Question (1): QW-100.3 allows the continued use of welding procedures qualified under previous

Editions and Addenda of the Code without revision to include any variables required by later

Editions and Addenda. Is it the intent of QW-100.3 to allow the use of this WPS to join P-No.5A,

.P-No.5B or P-No.5C materials without requalification when toughness is not a consideration?

Reply (1): No. QW-100.3 applies when later Code Editions and Addenda have added new

variables for a given welding process. While this WPS can be shown to be qualified for welding

P-No.5B materials to each other, it is intended that the WPS be editorially revised to show

applicability of the WPS to the originally qualified materials under the material grouping

assignment found in the applicable Edition and Addenda of Section IX. See QW-420.1 and QW-

200.2(c).

Question (2): Is it the intent of Section IX that the WPS described above is acceptable for joining

all materials previously assigned P-No.5?

Reply (2): No. Based upon the original PQR, the WPS is qualified only for joining materials

assigned to P-No.5B under the current Section IX rules. See QW-403.13.


Subject: QW-407.1 and QW-407.2, Postweld Heat Treatment (2007 Edition)


File No: 07-1708

Background: A weld test coupon for a PQR was welded using P-No. 1, Group 2 plate material

to itself and postweld heat treated at 1110°F - 1130°F (600°C - 610°C) for ten hours. The

PQR documents all supplementary essential variable notch-toughness requirements. Notch-

toughness is required and all qualification ranges are supported by the PQR for production

welds.

Question: Will this PQR support a WPS that specifies a PWHT temperature range below the

lower transformation temperature provided the time at temperature does not exceed 12.5

hours?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 59


Subject: QW-404.22, Use of Consumable Inserts (2007 Edition)


File No: 08-40

Background: QW-356 lists the essential variables for Welder Performance Qualification for

manual GTAW. QW-404.22, the use of consumable inserts, is an essential variable for

Welder Performance Qualification within QW-356.

An individual performs the following two qualification tests:

(a) Groove weld using the GTAW-machine process on a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40

pipe coupon with a consumable insert.

(b) Groove weld using the GTAW-manual process on a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40

pipe coupon with an open root.

Each qualification test is performed independently and welded full thickness by the process used

to make the root weld

Question (1): Is this individual qualified to weld a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe groove

weld by making the root weld with the GTAW-machine process with a consumable insert and

then completing the weld using the GTAW-manual process?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is this individual qualified to make non-through wall weld repairs using the

GTAW-manual process to a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe groove weld that was

originally performed using the GTAW-machine process with a consumable insert?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Is this individual qualified to make through-wall repairs using the GTAW-

manual process to the root of a NPS 6 (DN 150) Schedule 40 pipe groove weld that was

originally performed using the GTAW-machine process with a consumable insert if the defect

removal results in a repair cavity with an open root?

Reply (3): Yes.


Subject: QW-200.2(c), Changes to PQR (2007 Edition)


File No: 08-209

Question (1): Can additional tests and data that are not required by Section IX (i.e., hardness

ferrite, corrosion, etc.) be added to a PQR at a later date when the testing was not performed as

part of the original PQR, but followed the conditions of the original qualification?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If the tests and data noted in Question 1 are added to the PQR, would

recertification, including date, be required?

Reply (2): Yes. All changes to a PQR require recertification (including date) by the

manufacturer or contractor per QW-200.2(c).


Subject: QW-401.3 and QW-403.6, Thickness Range Qualified for Impact Testing (2007

Edition)


File No: 08-576

Background: A welding procedure qualification was performed on a 1 in. (25 mm) thick test

coupon. Tension and bend tests were performed on the 1 in. (25 mm) plate. A second welding

procedure qualification was performed on a 0.24 in. (6 mm) plate and only impact testing was

performed. All of the essential and supplementary essential variables remained the same except

for the coupon thickness.

Question: May the above PQRs be used to support a WPS for materials requiring notch

toughness with a qualified thickness range of 0.1875 in. (5 mm) to 2 in. (50 mm)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-201.1


File No: 08-1002

Question: Does QW-201.1 allow maintaining effective operational control of PQRs and WPSs

under different ownership than existed during the original procedure qualification when the

ownership of one company has been transferred more than once?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-301.2, Qualification Tests


File No: 08-1607

Question: Does QW-301.2 require that a person making adjustments to the welding equipment

settings, under the supervision and control of the welder or welding operator performing the weld,

also be a qualified welder or welding operator?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-466.1


File No: 08-1161

Question: In Table QW-466.1, when the material P-No. is assigned as “All Others” and the

material specification of the ASME Code Section II does not have any requirements for reporting

elongation, is the manufacturer limited to performing a base metal tension test to determine the

proper test jig dimensions A, B, C, and D of Table QW-466.1?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-483 and QW-484


File No: 08-1464

Question (1): May the manufacturer or contractor, subcontract the certification of procedure or

performance qualification records?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Does Section IX specify the qualifications for the individuals who certify

procedure or performance qualification records?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 60


Subject: QW/QB-422


File No: 09-486

Question: Does the assignment of P-No. 8, Group No. 3 to SA-479, Type XM-19, UNS S20910

include all three (3) of the heat treatment conditions (annealed, hot-rolled and strain-hardened)

specified by SA-479?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Article III - QW-302.1 & QW-302.2


File No: 09-567

Question (1): If radiographic examination per QW-302.2 is done for qualification of 2 welders on

a single pipe coupon welded in the 6G position, must each welder complete the entire

circumference of the pipe coupon?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question 2: If mechanical testing per QW-302.1 is done for qualification of 2 welders on a single

pipe coupon welded in the 6G position, must each welder complete the entire circumference of

the pipe coupon in order to remove the required bend specimens in accordance with QW-463.2(d)

or QW-463.2(e)?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-300.2(b)


File No: 09-747

Question: Is the manufacturer or contractor required to provide full supervision during the

performance qualification testing, so that issues such as the essential variables and inspections

during the test can be verified and satisfied for each welder or welding operator qualified?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-304 & QW-355 - FCAW


File No: 09-1012

Question (1): May radiographic examination meeting the requirements of QW-304 be used to

qualify a welder using the Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) process, provided the transfer mode

is not the short circuiting mode?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): When qualifying a welder in accordance with the essential variables listed in QW-

355 for the Gas Metal-Arc Welding (GMAW) process and the requirements of QW-304 are met,

is the welder also qualified for the Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) process if the essential

variables are unchanged?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: QW-100.3 and QW-420.1


File No: 09-490

Background: A later Edition /Addenda of Section IX assigns a P-number different from that

assigned by the Edition/Addenda of Section IX that was in effect at the time of qualification.

Question (1): Is it required that the WPS be revised or a new WPS be written to identify the new

P-number when the applicable code edition/addenda lists the material under the new P-number?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is it required that the WPS be revised or a new WPS be written to identify the new

P-number when the applicable code edition/addenda lists the material under the old P-number?

Reply (2): No

Question (3): Is it required that a supporting PQR be amended to show the new P-number

assignment?

Reply (3): No.

Question 4: May a supporting PQR be amended to show the new P-number assignment?

Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): May a supporting PQR be amended to show both the old and the new P-number

assignments?

Reply (5): Yes.

Background: A later Edition/Addenda of Section IX assigns a F-number different from that

assigned by the Edition/Addenda of Section IX that was in effect at the time of qualification.

Question (6): Is it required that the WPS or PQR be amended to reflect the new filler metal F-No.

assignment?

Reply (6): No.

Question (7): May the WPS or PQR be amended to reflect the new filler metal F-No.

assignment?

Reply (7): Yes.


Subject: QW-452.5 & QW-181.2.1


File No: 09-1596

Background: A fillet weld performance qualification test is performed using a production

assembly mockup.

Question: Must a welder or a welding operator using a production mockup assembly be qualified

for a change in fillet size, base material thickness, or configuration of the mockup?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-452.5


File No: 08-210

Question: Is it the intent of QW-452.5 to permit welder or welding operator fillet weld

performance qualification testing to be conducted using test coupon thicknesses greater than 3/8”

thick?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-250


File No: 09-588

Question (1): Is it the intent of the Code that Variables QW-403.6, QW-406.3, QW-409.1, QW-

410.9, and QW-410.10 apply when specified in QW-250 for P-No. 10H materials?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Is it the intent of the Code that Variable QW-407.4 applies when specified in QW-

250 for P-No. 10H materials?

Reply (2): Yes.

VOLUME 61


Subject: QW-407.2


File No: 09-513

Question: May a procedure qualification subject to the variable QW-407.2, for P-No.8 material

with solution annealing PWHT at 1060ºC (1940ºF) for 1 hour and impact tested, support a WPS

for production with both solution annealing at 1060ºC (1940ºF) and stabilization heat treatment at

950ºC (1742ºF) for 2 hours?

Reply: No.


Subject: QB-451.3 and QB-451.5, Workmanship Coupons


File No: 09-883

Question: For components such as valve bodies and seats in which materials of suitable geometry

and thickness are not normally available to make up lap joint test coupons as required by QB-

451.3, is it the intent of the Committee that the materials to be brazed shall be qualified using any

convenient thickness and geometry suitable for performing the tension and section testes required

by QB-451.3, and that a greater range of base metal thickness may be qualified using

workmanship test coupons in accordance with QB-451.5?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-163 and QW-466.1 – Guided Bend Test Specimen Dimensions


File No: 09-2140

Background: A welding procedure was qualified for welding on thick base metals. Due to the

thickness of the test coupon required, the width of the face of the weld is 5 inches. Per QW-163,

the weld and heat-affected zone shall be completely within the bent portion of the bend specimen.

For a material with 20% or greater elongation, the standard 3/8” thick bend specimen provides a

bent portion that is 3.53 inches long on the OD of the specimen.

Question (1): Does it meet the requirements of ASME Section IX, if the bend radius and bend

test specimen thickness are increased, such that 20% outer fiber elongation is achieved, and the

OD of the specimen contains the entire width of the weld and HAZ?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does it meet the requirements of ASME Section IX, if a set of multiple

specimens having the standard 3/8” thickness and representing the entire width of the

weld and both HAZs are removed and tested to meet the requirements for testing the

entire width of the weld?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Assuming that both of the base metals in the test coupon are of the

same P-No., does it meet the requirements of ASME Section IX, to use standard 3/8”

thick bend specimens representing at least one HAZ and as much weld metal as

possible, when performing the required bend test?

Reply (3): No.


Subject: QW-453 – Minimum Qualified Thickness for Corrosion Overlay


File No: 09-2141

Question: For corrosion resistant overlay welding procedure qualifications, where a chemical

analysis is not required, is there a minimum qualified deposit thickness?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-181.1 & QW-424.1 – Procedure Qualification Using Production Assembly

Mockup


File No: 10-13

Question: Does ASME Section IX allow the use of materials having the same P-No. as the actual

production materials, to produce a test specimen for fillet welding procedure qualification, using

a production assembly mockup?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-404.5(b), Change in trade designation of filler metal


File No: 09-1368

Background: A PQR using GTAW process was qualified using filler metal classified in

accordance with ASME Section II Part C, SFA 5.28, ER80S-G classification, with chemistry

meeting A-Number 2. A footnote was used in the PQR to document the filler metal Trade Name

used in the qualification.

Question: A WPS supported by the above PQR using the same filler metal classification ER80S-

G and A-No. 2, but with a different Trade Name was specified. When notch toughness (QW-

404.12) does not apply, does a change in the filler Trade Name specified on the WPS require

requalification?

Reply: No


Subject: QW-200.4


File No: 09-2144

Background: A production weld joint was made using a qualified welding procedure, welding P3

to P8 using an unassigned filler metal. In order perform a repair to this joint, a 2nd

welding

procedure was qualified using an assigned filler metal.

Question (1): If the 2nd

procedure is qualified by welding P3 to P8, is this procedure qualified to

repair the production weld between the P3 & P8 material made with an unassigned filler metal?

Reply (1): Yes. However, see QW-431.

Question (2): For the same situation as question 1, is this procedure qualified to repair the

production weld between the P3 & P8 material if the repair is entirely within the previously

deposited weld metal?


Question (3): If the 2nd

procedure is made by welding P-number material that nominally matches

the composition of the unassigned filler metal similar to QW-293.4, is the 2nd

procedure qualified

to make a repair to the production weld between the P3 & P8 material provided that the repair is

entirely within the previously deposited weld metal?



Subject: QW-202.3, Weld Repair and Buildup


File No: 10-359

Question: May a WPS be used to perform a weld repair per QW-202.3 on a groove weld

previously welded using the same WPS, without revising the WPS to include the groove design

of the repair cavity?

Reply: Yes. Also see interpretation IX-79-72.


Subject: QW-200.1(b), Contents of the WPS; QW-200.2(b), Contents of the PQR;

QW-404.24 and QW-404.27, Supplemental Filler Metal


File No: 10-1159

Background: QW-404.24 and QW-404.27 are essential variables for the SAW process. A

procedure qualification test was conducted using the SAW process without the use of

supplemental filler metal.

Question: Is it required that the PQR indicate that supplemental filler metal was not used and

must the WPS specify it is not to be used?

Reply: Yes. However, Section IX does not specify the manner in which this is documented on

the PQR or specified on the WPS. The method of recording information on the PQR and WPS

may be by statement, sketch or other means as long as the essential variables are addressed.


Subject: QW-322.1(a)


File No: 10-1161

Background: A welder successfully completes a performance qualification test. During the next

six months, the welder used the welding process multiple times during the first four months, but

did not use the welding process in the fifth or sixth month.

Question: When maintaining the welder's qualification, is the welder continuity based on the last

date the welder used the welding process?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-256.1; Joining of Clad Materials


File No: 09-994

Background: A composite (clad) material having a carbon steel base and alloy 825 cladding is to

be joined by welding. The alloy 825 cladding is not included in the design calculations. The

contractor has a PQR for joining the base metal whose qualified ranges are appropriate for

welding conditions. The contractor also has a PQR for overlaying carbon steel with alloy 625

filler metal using GTAW, whose qualified ranges of essential special process variables for

corrosion resistant overlay welding are applicable to the welding conditions.

Question (1): When joining the clad layer of a composite (clad) material using GTAW

where the clad thickness is not considered in the design calculations, are the essential special

process variables or QW-256.1 applicable to the clad portion of the weld?

Reply (1): Yes. See QW-217 and QW-251.4.

Question (2): When completing the clad portion of a weld using the GTAW process, is a WPS

qualified to deposit corrosion resistant weld metal using alloy 625 (UNS N06625) filler metal,

also qualified for depositing a corrosion resistant weld metal overlay using alloy 825 (UNS

N08065) filler metal, when the carbon steel base metal has the same P-No. as the base metal

qualified by the WPS?

Reply (2): No. See QW-256.1 and QW-404.37.


Subject: QW-2004. - Procedure Qualification, Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay


File No: 09-2143

Background: A corrosion resistant weld metal overlay was applied to P-No.3 base metal with

WPS qualified for the SAW process using an unassigned strip filler metal, with resulting deposit

chemistry nominally matching F-No.43 filler metal. It is later determined a greater thickness of

corrosion resistant weld metal overlay or a repair to the overlay is needed. An alternate WPS is

proposed for depositing the weld metal overlay to increase the overlay thickness or perform the

repairs. The alternate WPS was qualified using a different welding process, applying SFA-5.11

ENiCrFe-7 filler metal to produce a corrosion resistant weld metal overlay with a deposit

chemistry nominally matching F-No.43 on P-No.3 base metals.

Question: Is any WPS qualified for depositing a corrosion resistant weld metal

overlay with a known chemistry, also qualified for applying additional layers or repairs

to an existing corrosion resistant overlay surface having a nominally matching

chemistry?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-405.3


File No: 10-1489

Question: When a welder qualifies with the vertical up progression on weld coupons in the 3G,

5G, or 6G test positions, is that welder qualified to weld with the vertical down progression when

QW-405.3 is a performance qualification essential variable?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 62


Subject: QW-402 and QW-404 Through QW-410


File No: 10-496

Question: When impacts are waived by a book section for the base metal (HAZ notch toughness

is not required), but are required for the weld metal, do the supplementary essential variables of

QW-402 and QW-404 through QW-410 apply per the applicable tables QW-252 through QW-

265?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-200.2, Use of Preliminary WPS


File No: 10-1158

Question: Does ASME Section IX require a preliminary WPS be used during procedure

qualification testing, or that a WPS number be recorded on the PQR?

Reply: No.


Subject: QW-433 and QW-452.1(b)


File No: 10-1918

Background: A welder tests on an NPS 6 Sch. 80 (0.432 in. wall) coupon, depositing 0.100 in. of

E6010 and the balance of 0.332 in. using E7018.

Question (1): Using E6010, is the welder qualified to deposit 0.864 in. maximum of weld metal?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Using E7018, is the welder qualified to deposit 0.664 in. maximum of weld metal?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Is the welder qualified to deposit 0.864 in. of weld metal using E6010 plus 0.664 in.

of E7018 weld metal deposit thickness for a total of 1.528 in. in the same groove?

Reply (3): No. See QW-452.1(b).


Subject: QW-409.2, Combination of Processes


File No: 11-216

Background: A welder was tested on an SA-516 Gr. 70 plate, using the GMAW process. Short

arc mode was used for depositing the root, and spray arc mode was used for depositing the

balance of the weld in a single coupon.

Question: Is it permissible, according to ASME Section IX, QW-409.2, to use two modes of

metal transfer in a single test coupon?

Reply: Yes; the deposit thickness for each transfer mode shall be recorded as required by QW-

306.




File No: 11-44

Question: May an organization with more than one ASME Certificate of Authorization, under

different names and in different locations, describe in its quality assurance programs the

operational control of procedure qualifications and the use of welding procedures properly

qualified under one certificate holder, under another certificate holder within the organization, but

without separate qualification, as permitted by Section IX, QW-201?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: QW-304, Volumetric Examination


File No: 09-744

Question: Does Section IX require a welder to qualify for small diameter butt welds by preparing

more than one small diameter pipe coupon to provide a minimum circumferential weld length

when qualified by volumetric examination under the provisions of QW-304?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Section IX, QW-452.5


File No: 08-210

Question: Is it the intent of QW-452.5 to permit welder or welding operator fillet weld

performance qualification testing to be conducted using test coupon thicknesses greater than

⅜” thick?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Section IX, QW-250


File No: 09-558

Question (1): Is it the intent of the Code that Variables QW-403.6, QW-406.3, QW-409.1,

QW-410.9 and QW-410.10 apply when specified in QW-250 for P-No. 10H materials?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Is it the intent of the Code that Variable QW-407.4 apply when specified in

QW-250 for P-No. 10H materials?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: Section IX, QW-300.3 - Simultaneous Performance Qualifications


File No: 10-339

Question: Is it the intent of Section IX, paragraph QW-300.3 to permit an AWS Standard

Welding Procedure Specification adopted by a contractor to be used in lieu of a PQR to support

the range of variables for a single WPS proposed for use in conducting simultaneous welder

performance qualification testing?

Reply: Yes


Subject: Section IX, QW-420 - ASTM Materials' P-No. Assignment


File No: 10-1189

Question: Is it the intent that material produced under an ASTM specification shall be considered

to have the same P-Number or P-Number plus Group Number as that of the P-Number or P-

Number plus Group Number assigned to the same grade or type material in the corresponding

ASME specification (e.g., SA-240 Type 304 is assigned P-No. 8, Group No.1; therefore, A 240

Type 304 is considered P-No. 8, Group No.1)?

Reply: Yes.


Subject: Section IX, QW-404.5 - A-Number


File No: 11-918

Background: A procedure qualification test coupon was prepared and tested, which included a

chemical analysis of the weld metal. The chemical analysis results were as follows, C: 0.08%,

Cr: 0.044%, Mo: 0.14%, Ni: 1.48%, Mn: 1.45%, Si: 0.19%

Question (1): Does this chemistry meet an A-1 Classification?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Does this chemistry meet an A-10 Classification?

Reply (2): Yes.


Subject: Section IX, QW-182 - Fracture Tests


File No: 11-939

Question (1): Is it required by QW-182 that the sum of all rounded indications (regardless of

diameter) be considered in addition to the sum of the lengths of inclusions in determining the 3/8”

in. (10 mm) maximum allowed for acceptance?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is it permissible to apply the porosity size limitation of 1/32” or greater as specified

in QW-191.1.2.2 (b)(3) to a ½” in. (12 mm) welded coupon to the fracture test acceptance criteria

of QW-182?

Reply (2): No.


Subject: Section IX, QW-404.5, A-No. Essential Variable for GMAW Weld Metal


File No: 11-1339

Question (1): According to QW-404.5, may the A-No. of GMAW weld metal be established

from the chemical analysis of a weld deposit prepared according to the filler metal specification

when the shielding gas used for the chemical analysis was different from that used in the

procedure qualification?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): According to QW-404.5, may the A-No. of GMAW weld metal be established

from the chemical analysis of a weld deposit prepared according to the filler metal specification

provided the shielding gas used for the chemical analysis was the same as that used in the

procedure qualification?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Are the GMAW rules in QW-404.5 for establishing A-Numbers also applicable to

FCAW?

Reply (3): Yes.


Subject: Section IX, QW-200.4(b)


File No: 10-1966

Background: PQR A is welded with SMAW to join 5/8 in. (16 mm) thick plates with 5/8 in. (16

mm) of SMAW deposit. PQR B is welded with GTAW and SMAW to join 5/16 in. (8 mm) thick

plates with 1/8 in. (3 mm) of GTAW and 3/16 in. (5 mm) of SMAW deposit. PQR C is welded

with GTAW to join 3/16 in. (5 mm) thick plates with 3/16 in. (5 mm) of GTAW deposit.

Question (1): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range of

1/16 in. (1.5 mm) to 1¼ in. (32 mm) when impact testing is not required?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range

of 1/16 in. (5 mm) to 1½ (38 mm) when impact testing in not required?

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Do PQRs A and B qualify the combination WPS for a maximum deposit weld

metal thickness range of 1/4 in. (6 mm) for the GTAW process and 1¼ in. (32 mm) for the

SMAW process?

Reply (3): No.

Question (4): Do PQRs A and C qualify the combination WPS for a maximum deposit weld

metal thickness range of 3/8 in. (10 mm) for the GTAW process and 1¼ in. (32 mm) for the

SMAW process?

Reply (4): No.

Question (5): Do PQRs A and C qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range

of 1/16 in. (1.5 mm) to 1¼ in. (32 mm) when impact testing is not required?

Reply (5): No.

Question (6): Do PQRs A and C qualify the combination WPS for a base metal thickness range

of 1/16 in. (1.5 mm) to 1½ in. (38 mm) when impact testing is not required?

Reply (6): No.

Question (7): Do the provisions in QW-200.4(b) affect the responses to the above questions?

Reply (7): No.


Subject: Section IX, QW-452.1(b)


File No: 11-2030

Question: Regarding QW-452.1(b) for performance qualification, is “Max to be Welded”

equivalent to “Unlimited”?

Reply: Yes.

211823898 asme section ix interpretations

Documents

tensile requirements

smaw process

gtaw process

actual interpretation

gas date

goto file

graw process

electrodes date