ASME SECTION IX INTERPRETATIONS

SASME SECTION IX INTERPRETATIONS

NOTE: THESE INTERPRETATIONS ARE FOR ASME COMMITTEE USE ONLY. THEY ARE NOT TO BE DUPLICATED OR USED FOR OTHER THAN ASME COMMITTEE BUSINESS.

WARNING: THERE MAY BE SOME TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN THIS DOCUMENT. PLEASE REVIEW THE ACTUAL INTERPRETATION FOR THE EXACT WORDING.

TO GET A PRINTED COPY OF AN INTERPRETATION, FIRST HIGHLIGHT THE PORTION DESIRED, THEN GOTO File ON THE TOOLBAR, THEN Print... , THEN HIGHLIGHT THE DOT AT THE (Selection BUTTON, FINALLY PRESS THE OK BUTTON. BE CAREFUL NOT TO PRINT THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT (1 Page).

VOLUME 33Interpretation: IX-92-59Subject:QW-306, Combination of Welding Processes; QW-452.1 and QW-452.3, Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-206

Background: The combination of welding processes and pipe diameters listed below were used for performance qualification:

(1) 2 in. Sch. 80 (.218) pipe with open butt using GTAW process.(2) 2 in. Sch. 160 (.343) pipe with consumable insert and fill pass using the GRAW process and the remainder welded with SMAW process.(3) 6 in. XXS (.864) using SMAW process with backing.

Question: Using the combinations listed in the Background, in accordance with QW-306, Note 2 of QW-452.1 to determine maximum thickness qualified, and QW-452.3 for minimum diameter qualification, is the welder qualified to weld on unlimited thickness and diameters above 1 in., using either an open butt joint or a consumable insert with the root layer deposited with the GTAW process and the remainder deposited with the SMAW process?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-60Subject:QW-214, Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-421

Question: When corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay is deposited in a base material groove to a depth that is not included in the design calculations, must the deposit be tested as a groove weld?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-61Subject:Section II, Part C; SFA-5.13, Specification for Solid Surfacing Welding Rods and Electrodes Date Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-422

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

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-62Subject:QW-408.2, Shielding Gas Date Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-425

Question (1): When changing shielding gases of a specific mixture, is it permissible to adjust the nominal percentage(s) of the minor component(s) by +/- 20% without requalifying the procedure?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): In addition, when the absolute value of +/- 20% times the nominal percentage of a minor component is less than 1%, would it be permissible to make a +/- 1% adjustment to the gas mixture?

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-92-63Subject:QW-153.1, Tensile StrengthDate Issued:February 22, 1993File No:92-452

Question: A welding procedure qualification test coupon is welded using P-No. 23, SB-209, alloy 6061 aluminum base material in the (o) temper. After welding the test coupon, it is subjected to a T-6 heat treatment. To establish acceptability of tensile tests per QW-153.1, may the tensile requirements of QW-422 for SB-209, alloy 6061 (T4 and T6 tempers in the welded condition) be used?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-64Subject:QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of Qualification Date Issued:May 26, 1993File No:93-148

Background: A welding operator is in the process of renewing his/her qualification using machine GTAW welding equipment. During the process the machine malfunctions and burns through the root pass of the test coupon. No operator error is noted. Following the malfunction, the test coupon is repaired using a manual GTAW process. After the repair, the machine welding equipment is used to complete the rest of the test coupon.

Question: May a welding operator performance test coupon being welded for qualification or renewal, be repaired prior to testing, using a manual welding procedure?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-65Subject:QW-423.1, Alternate Base Metals for Welder Qualification Date Issued:May 26, 1993File No:93-148

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

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-66Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:May 26, 1993File No:93-377

Background: Company A and Company B merge divisions to form new Company C.

Question (1): May the new Company, C, use PQRs and WPSs developed previously by Company A and Company B?

Reply (1): Yes, provided operational control is in accordance with QW-201.

Question (2): May the new Company, C, use the central materials laboratory of Company A to develop WPSs and PQRs?

Reply (2): Yes, provided operational control is in accordance with QW-201.

Interpretation: IX-92-67Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:May 26, 1993File No:93-391

Question: In a contract involving piping construction work, our company subcontracted the piping prefabrication work to a subcontractor. This subcontractor is managed by our company but has a different name. The subcontractor proceeded to qualify welding procedures which were conducted in the presence and with the approval of our companys welding engineer, who monitored the welding of the test coupons and signed approval on the PQRs. The Quality Control System of the subcontractor and our company fully describe the operational control of procedure qualifications. Was our client right in rejecting the use by our company of the subcontractor qualified welding procedures for the erection work of the prefabricated piping?

Reply: This is a contractual issue, which ASME does not address.

Interpretation: IX-92-68Subject:QW-306, Combination of Welding Processes; and QW-451, Groove Weld Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test SpecimensDate Issued:June 30, 1993File No:92-011A

Question: In using a single set of test specimens to qualify two or more processes or procedures, does Section IX specify a minimum weld deposit thickness to be included in each test specimen from each of the processes or procedures?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-69Subject:QW-409.1, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued:June 30, 1993File No:92-011B, 92-228, 92-353

Question: Is it the intent of QW-409.1 that the heat input, to be recorded on the PQR, be calculated based on the parameters used at the location where the impact specimens were removed?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 34

Interpretation: IX-92-70RSubject:QW-403.5, Base MetalsDate Issued:June 4, 2001File No:00-470

Question (1): When a procedure qualification with supplemental notch toughness requirement is conducted with one P-Number material having multiple certifications in different Group Numbers, are WPSs qualified for all combinations of the Group Numbers?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): In the above question, does one set of HAZ impact specimens, when required, satisfy the requirements of Section IX?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): When a procedure qualification with supplemental notch toughness requirement is conducted with two materials of different P-Number each having multiple certifications in different Group Numbers, are WPSs qualified for all combinations of the multiple certified Group Number of the first P-Number material to the multiple certified Group Number of the second P-Number material?

Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): In the above question, does one set of HAZ impact specimens from each P-Number material, when required, satisfy the requirement of Section IX?

Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): In Question (3), are materials from the multiple certified Group Numbers qualified for welding a P-Number material to itself?

Reply (5): No.

Note: The term multiple certifications as used means any material for which a material test report indicates that the material meets all the requirements of two or more specifications, grades, types, or classes.

Interpretation: IX-92-71Subject:QW-302.4, Visual Examination Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-365

Question: Are welders or welding operators qualified in accordance with Section IX, prior to the 1992 Addenda, for which the results of visual examination required by QW-302.4 were not documented on the WPQ, required to requalify in order that visual examination results may be documented?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-72Subject:QW-381(c), Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay; QW-453 and QW-461.9, Performance QualificationDate Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-392

Question (1): May welder qualifications for corrosion-resistant overlays per QW-381 and QW-453 be made on plate, when qualifying for welding on pipe/tubes parallel to the axis of the pipe/tubes?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2a): Should the side bends required in QW-453 consist of the base metal plus overlay thickness, after surface conditioning per Note 4 of QW-453?

Question (2b): When the overlay test specimens are less than in. thick, may the side bend specimen width be the test specimen thickness?

Question (2c): May the edges of the overlay be outside of the bent area as long as at least a 1 in. width of overlay and HAZ are completely within the bend?

Reply (2a): Yes.

Reply (2b): Yes.

Reply (2c): Yes.

Question (3): may QW-461.9 Groove-Pipe be used for the position essential variable rules for welder qualifications on corrosion-resistant overlap?

Reply (3): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-73Subject:QW-321.3, Welder Qualification After Further Training or Practice Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-468

Background: A welder performance qualification test plate fails to meet the radiographic requirements for qualification. After further training a new performance qualification test plate is welded.

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

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-74Subject:QB-402.1, Base Metals Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-474

Question: When brazing material used for a procedure qualification test is not listed in QB-422 or Appendix C, but is similar to P-No. 107 or S-No. 107 materials listed in QB-422 or Appendix C, may this material be considered P-No. 107 or S-No. 107 material in accordance with QB-402.1?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-75Subject:QW-200.4(b), Combination of Welding Procedures Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-490

Question: When writing multi-process welding procedures per QW-200.4(a), where the tube wall thickness is less than 1 in., using a separate qualification for the root deposit only, must the root deposit qualification coupon be in. minimum thickness as stated in QW-200.4(b)?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-76Subject:QW-462, Test Specimens Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-515

Question: QW-462 defines W as specimen width, in.. Is in. a minimum or maximum dimension requirement for preparing a reduced section tensile specimen?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-77Subject:QW-200.4, Combination of Welding Procedures; and QW-451.4, Fillet Welds Qualified by Groove Weld TestsDate Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-518

Background: A butt welding procedure qualification was completed on a pipe with E6010 electrode (F-No. 3) for the root pass and E7018 electrode (F-No. 4) for the remaining process.

Question (1): Will the above procedure qualification alone support a WPS to make a fillet weld with E7018 electrodes (F-No. 4) for all the passes for all fillet sizes on all base metal thicknesses when all the other essential variables under QW-253, SMAW process, are the same?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Will the above procedure qualification alone support a WPS to make a butt weld with E7018 electrodes (F-No. 4) for all the passes including the root pass within the limits of qualification of QW-451.1 and within the limits of the essential variables under QW-253, SMAW process?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-78Subject:QW-200.2(b), Welding Procedure QualificationsDate Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-561

Question (1): May a company subcontract weld procedure development and qualification, including certification of the PQR, without a company representative present to witness the welding, testing and certification?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): May a company subcontract weld procedure development and qualification, including certification of the PQR, with a company representative present to witness the welding, testing and certification?

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-92-79Subject:QW-151.1, Tension Tests, Reduced Section-Plate; and QW-462.1(a), Test Specimens Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-583

Question (1): Is it permissible to reduce a plate test coupon thickness beyond removing the reinforcement to allow for parallel surfaces?

Reply (1): Yes.

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

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

Interpretation: IX-92-80Subject:QW-103, Responsibility; and QW-210, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-584

Question: When a company changes names during the course of time must all the historical documents, such as PQRs and WPQs, be revised to show this new name?

Reply: No, provided there is documented traceability from the new company name to the WPSs and PQRs qualified under the old company name.

Interpretation: IX-92-81Subject:QW-103.1 and QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:October 18, 1993File No:92-306

Question (1): According to Section IX, para. QW-201, is it permissible for a manufacturer or contractor to have the welding of the test weldments performed by another organization?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): According to para. QW-201, is it permissible to subcontract the work preparation of test metal for welding and subsequent work on preparation of test specimens from the completed weldment, performance of nondestructive examination, and mechanical test, provided that the manufacturer or contractor accepts the responsibility for any such work?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): If the manufacturer or contractor writes the WPS and the welder used to produce weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures are under full supervision and control of a representative of the manufacturer or contractor during the production of these test weldments, may the welder be an employee of another organization?

Reply (3): No.

Interpretation: IX-92-82Subject:Code Case 2141, Electrodes and Fluxes for Submerged Arc Welding, SFA 5.17 and SFA 5.23 Date Issued:November 22, 1993File No:93-434

Question (1): Does the Manufacturers Date Report in the Section IX Code Case 2141 mean the following: (a) Manufacturers Data Report required in PG-112 of Section I; (b) Data Report required in NCA-3770 of Section III; (c) Data Report required in UG-120 of Section VIII, Division 1; or (d) Manufacturers Data Report required in AS-300 of Section VIII, Division 2?

Reply (1): A Manufacturers Data Report form is any data report from that is required in an ASME Code Book.

Question (2): Is it required to describe this Code Case number on procurement and/or manufacturers specifications and certified material test report of welding consumables?

Reply (2): Section IX does not address procurement and manufacturers specifications.

Interpretation: IX-92-83Subject:QB-415, Brazing Variables Date Issued:September 22, 1993File No:93-527

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

Reply (1): Yes.

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

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-92-84Subject:QW-407.2, Postweld Heat Treatment Date Issued:November 22, 1993File No:93-586

Background: A PQR was welded on a 2 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material and post weld heat treated at 1150F for six hours (3 hrs/in.) with supplementary essential variable requirements.

Question: Will this PQR support a WPS for a production weld in 2 in. thick P-No. 1, Gr. 2 material that is PWHT at 1150F for 2 hours (1 hr/in.)?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-85Subject:QB-121 and AB-123, Brazing Test Positions Date Issued:November 22, 1993File No:93-655

Question: If the test material is oriented at 15 deg. above horizontal (i.e., 75 deg. down from vertical) and the brazing filler metal flows upward by capillary action through the joint, would the brazer then be qualified for both the flat-flow and vertical-upflow positions?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-86Subject:QW-100.3, Welding General RequirementsDate Issued:November 22, 1993File No:93-658

Question: May a hard-facing procedure qualification test that was performed in 1990 on a 1 in. thick test coupon and is used to support a welding procedure specification written in 1993, be used to deposit a hard-facing overlay on a base material 1 in. to unlimited thickness?

Reply: Yes. QW-100.3 allows welding procedure specifications (WPSs) to be supported by procedure qualifications accomplished subsequent to 1962 without amending the WPS to include any variables required by later Editions and Addenda.

VOLUME 35

Interpretation: IX-92-87Subject:QW-403.6, Base Metals; and QW-409.1, Electrical CharacteristicsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File No:93-151

Background: Two PQRs have been qualified to support a WPS with notch toughness requirements and having a qualified base metal thickness range from 5/16 in. to 2 in. inclusive. One PQR was qualified on 1 in. thick material with a maximum heat input of 85,000 J/in. The second was qualified on 5/16 in. thick material with a maximum heat input of 45,000 J/in. All other essential and supplementary essential variables are the same.

Question (1): Is this WPS qualified for using 85,000 J/in. max. heat input on thicknesses 5/16 in. to 2 in.?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Is the heat input value of 85,000 J/in. applicable to base metal thicknesses between in. to 2 in. and the heat input value of 45,000 J/in. applicable to base metal thicknesses between 5/16 in. and in.?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-88Subject:QW-409.1 and QW-409.8, Electrical CharacteristicsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File No:93-593

Question: Section IX, QW-409.8 and QW-409.1, require that the volts and amps be specified in the WPS. Does Section IX require voltage to be measured at a specific location in the welding circuit or the current to be measured using a specific type of meter (RMS, averaging or other type)?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-89Subject:QW-452.1, Groove Weld Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens; and QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter LimitsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File No:93-653

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

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-90Subject:QW-461.9, Performance Qualification Position and Diameter LimitationsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File No:93-753

Question: A welder has passed two separate tests; one on in. O.D. by 0.049 in. thick pipe welded in the 6G position using GTAW process, and another on in. thick plate welded in the 1G position using GTAW process. Do these two tests in combination qualify the welder to weld pipe of unlimited diameter in all positions up to 1 in. thick using GTAW?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-91Subject:QW-300, General Welding Performance QualificationsDate Issued:February 14, 1994File No:93-755

Question: Does Section IX prohibit making editorial corrections to welder and welding operator performance qualification records?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-92Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility, Clarification Request to Interpretation IX-92-07, Date Issued: Oct. 7, 1991, File 91-156Date Issued:May 20, 1994File No:93-678

Question (1): Is the term Organization as stated in QW-201 and Company A in Interpretation IX-92-07 one and the same?

Reply (1): No.

Background: Two companies are contracted by a client company to undertake pipe work installation on its facility. All stages of the Welding Procedure Qualification Process for the two contracted companies are witnessed by the client companies representative and the documentation duly stamped and signed as accepted by the client.

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

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Does the client company have to requalify these procedures in order to perform in-house maintenance at a later date using all the same essential and nonessential variables with its own qualified welders?

Reply (3): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-93Subject:QB-402.1, Brazing Data and Appendix C Nonmandatory S-NumbersDate Issued:May 20, 1994File No:93-752

Question (1): Does the brazing procedure qualification test with a base metal assigned one S-Number, or S-Number plus Group-Number, qualify for all other base metals in the same S-Number grouping?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does the brazing procedure qualification test with dissimilar metals using one metal listed in one S-Number to one specific metal not listed in one S or P-Number qualify for the brazing of all other base metals in the same S-Number to themselves and to the specific base metal without S or P-Number?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-94Subject:Section II, Part C SFA-5.8Date Issued:May 20, 1994File No:93-754

Question: May AWS Classification Bag-34 be considered SFA-5.8 filler metal even though it does not appear in the 1992 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II, Part C (including the 1992 Addenda)?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-95Subject:QW-200, General Welding Procedure QualificationsDate Issued:May 20, 1994File No:94-008

Question: May a single WPS be qualified both with PWHT and without PWHT (two PQRs), thereby allowing the WPS to be used with or without PWHT?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-96Subject:QW-300, General Welding Procedure QualificationsDate Issued:May 20, 1994File No:94-102

Background: A welder is qualified on a NPS 2 Sch. 40 pipe test coupon using GTAW 1.6 mm deposited weld metal and SMAW 2.4 mm deposited weld metal.

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

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is the welder qualified to weld NPS 4 single welded groove weld without backing using the SMAW process only?

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-92-97Subject:QW-200.4(a), Combination of Welding Procedures Date Issued:May 20, 1994File No:94-167

Question: According to QW-200.4(a), when a qualified WPS for a combination process is available, must a new WPS be generated in only one of the processes is to be used in production, provided all requirements of Section IX for the process used are met?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-92-98Subject:Appendix C, Nonmandatory S-Numbers Date Issued:May 20, 1994File No:94-236

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

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-92-99Subject:QW-432.6, F-Numbers; and Section II, Part C SFA-5.92Date Issued:June 10, 1994File No:93-762 and 93-769

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

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 36

Interpretation: IX-95-01Subject:QW-200.1(b), General Welding Procedure Qualifications; and QW-402.4, Joints Date Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-104

Question: If a WPS states that the GTAW process shall be used on root and second pass of open root or metal backed groove joints and the SMAW process shall be used on the remainder of the groove joint, is it necessary to state that the SMAW portion of the WPS must be performed with backing (i.e., the GTAW process)?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-02Subject:QW-462, Test Specimens Date Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-181

Question: What are the minimum and maximum tolerances for specimens shown in QW-462, where the figures show approximate dimensions?

Reply: As stated in the Foreword, The Code does not fully address tolerances. When dimensions, sizes, or other parameters are not specified with tolerances, the values of these parameters are considered nominal and allowable tolerance or local variances may be considered acceptable when based on engineering judgment and standard practices as determined by the designer.

Interpretation: IX-95-03Subject:QW-202.2(b), Groove and Fillet Weld Tests; and QW-202.3(b), Weld Repair and Buildup TestsDate Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-235

Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a full penetration weld on 1 in. thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.2(b) states that qualification on 1 in. or thicker base metal qualifies for making partial penetration welds on base metals with no upper limit of base metal thickness. No minimum thickness of base metal is addressed.

Question (1): Does qualification of a 1 in. thick base metal qualify for making partial penetration groove welds on base metals which are less than 3/16 in. thick?

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

Background: Procedure qualification was performed by making a full penetration weld on 1 in. thick plate. Paragraph QW-202.3(b) states that qualification on 1 in. thick or thicker base metal qualifies for making weld repairs or weld build-ups on base metals of unlimited thickness.

Question (2): Does qualification on 1 in. base metal qualify for making weld repairs or weld build-ups on base metals which are less than 3/16 in. thick?

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

Interpretation: IX-95-04Subject:QW-452.3, Groove Weld Diameter Limits and Submerged Arc Wire Flux CombinationDate Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-296

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

Reply (1): No.

Background: A WPS for SAW process was qualified with a wire flux combination classified as F6P0-EL8, using one trade name for flux. This WPS was in use for several years. Now the flux manufacturer has changed the classification to F7P2-EL8 without changing the trade name of flux. The flux trade name is mentioned on the WPS and PQR along with the former AWS classification.

Question (2): Is it required to requalify this WPS due to the change in the AWS class of the wire flux combination by the flux manufacturer without changing its Trade Name?

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

Interpretation: IX-95-05Subject:QW-422, P-Numbers Date Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-365

Question: May SB-564 UNS N08825 be considered as P-No. 45, since it has identical properties to SB-425 UNS N08825 that is assigned P-No. 45 in QW-422?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-06Subject:QW-153.1, Tension TestsDate Issued:September 21, 1994File No:94-542

Question: If a tensile specimen breaks in the weld metal, below the weld metals minimum specified tensile requirement, but not below the minimum tensile strength specified for the base metal, is the PQR considered acceptable?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 37

Interpretation: IX-95-07Subject:QW-420.2, S-NumbersDate Issued:March 17, 1995File No:94-522

Question: When qualifying a welding procedure using S1 group 2 for API 5LX60 pipe joining to MSS SP-75 or ASTM A860 WPHY-65 fittings, or when joining WPHY-60 fittings to each other, is it permissible to use the corresponding S-Number for the fitting as the same grade of high strength pipe when the physical properties are similar?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-08Subject:QW-462.4(a), Fillet Weld Procedure Date Issued:March 17, 1995File No:94-543

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

Reply (1): in.

Question (2): In QW-462.4(a), what does size of fillet = thickness T2 mean?

Reply (2): The length of each fillet leg(s) shall be nominally equal to the thickness of T2.

Question (3): Is there a tolerance for the fillet leg size?

Reply (3): No. As stated in the 1992 Addenda to the Foreword, when tolerances are not specified, dimensions are considered nominal and allowable tolerances or local variances may be considered acceptable when based on engineering judgment and standard practices as determined by the designer.

Interpretation: IX-95-09Subject:QW-153, Acceptance Criteria Tension TestsDate Issued:March 17, 1995File No:94-570

Question: When welds between base metals of different minimum specified tensile strengths are being tested and tensile failure occurs in either of the base metals, does the reference to base metal within QW-153.1(d) mean the base metal with the lower minimum specified tensile strength?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-10Subject:QW-200.4, Combination of Welding ProceduresDate Issued:March 17, 1995File No:94-662

Question: May a single process WPS be qualified by a combination process PQR where no essential variables for the process are changed?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-11Subject:QW-408, GasDate Issued:March 17, 1995File No:95-002

Question: Is it required to indicate the purity level by percent composition or descriptive terms of a single shielding gas on the WPS and on the PQR?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-12Subject:QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal Thicknesses Date Issued:March 17, 1995File No:95-027

Question: Does QW-202.4 include butt joints and corner joints when joining dissimilar base metal thicknesses when prepared with a groove?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-13Subject:QW-203, Limits of Qualified Positions for Procedures; and Section II, Part C, SFA-5.1 and 5.5 Date Issued:June 15, 1995File No:94-035

Question: Do the requirements for classification of filler metals in accordance with ASME Section II, Part C apply to the qualification of welding and brazing procedures in accordance with Section IX?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-14Subject:QW-300.3, Welding Performance QualificationsDate Issued:June 15, 1995File No:95-040

Question: Are there any circumstances under which a non-employee person or organization can represent one or more participating organizations during welding of the test coupon in accordance with the requirements of QW-300.3?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-15Subject:QW-160, Guided-Bend Tests; and QW-466 Note (b) Test JigsDate Issued:June 15, 1995File No:95-094

Question: Is it acceptable to measure the percent elongation of the tensile specimens in lieu of bend specimens to measure the ductility for welding procedure qualification acceptance?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-16Subject:QW-255, Welding Variables Procedure Specifications for FCAW; and QW-408.2, GasDate Issued:June 15, 1995File No:95-095

Question: May a FCAW welding procedure, qualified without shielding gas, be used with a shielding gas without requalification?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 38

Interpretation: IX-95-17Subject:QW-302.4, Visual Examination Date Issued:October 19, 1995File No:95-035

Question (1): For the fillet weld coupon in welder performance qualification, does the macro examination required per QW-452.5 exempt the visual examination required per QW-302.4?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Does the visual examination of the fillet weld test coupon required per QW-302.4 refer to the final weld face side only?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-18Subject:QW-409.8, Electrical Characteristics Date Issued:October 19, 1995File No:95-220

Question: Does Section IX require that a separate amperage range be specified for each filler metal size listed in the WPS?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-19Subject:QW-300.3, Welding Performance Qualifications; and QW-322.1(b), Expiration of Welder Qualification Date Issued:October 19, 1995File No:95-221

Background: A welder simultaneously qualifies for ten different contractors in accordance with QW-300.3. QW-300.3 requires the contractor that rejects a welder to notify the other contractors who participated in the simultaneous test that the welders qualification has been revoked. One of the contractors subsequently revokes the welders qualification for specific reason in accordance with QW-322.1(b).

Question (1): Are the other nine contractors who qualified the welder simultaneously, required to revoke the welders qualification per QW-322.1(b)?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): When a participating contractor revokes a welders qualification for a specific reason, does QW-300.3 require the other participating contractors to retest the welder or welding operator?

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-95-20Subject:QW-300, Welding Performance QualificationDate Issued:October 19, 1995File No:95-302

Question: If the manufacturer or contractor writes the WPS, and the welder used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures is under the full supervision and control of the manufacturer or contractor during the production of these test weldments, may the welder be a contracted employee, provided the Quality Control system or Quality Assurance Program of the manufacturer or contractor describes the control of contracted welders?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-21Subject:QW-403.5, Base MetalsDate Issued:October 19, 1995File No:95-318

Background: A PQR is qualified in accordance with Section IX, with supplementary essential variables, using a material from British Standard 1501-224-490A-LT50

Question: May this PQR be used to support a WPS utilizing a P-Number 1, Group Number 2 material with supplementary essential variables?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-22Subject:QW-424, Base Metals Used for Procedure QualificationDate Issued:December 28, 1995File No:95-251

Question: Does a procedure qualification using an unassigned metal to an assigned P-Numbered metal qualify for welding the base metals to themselves using all the nonessential, essential and supplementary essential variables qualified?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-23Subject:QW-453, Notes (3) and (10), Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hard-Facing and Corrosion-Resistant OverlaysDate Issued:December 28, 1995File No:95-428

Question (1): Notes (3) and (10) of QW-453 require a liquid penetrant examination of the surface of the test coupon for hard-facing procedure and performance qualifications, respectively. May the acceptance standards of QW-195.2 or other standards deemed appropriate by the qualifying organization be used as acceptance criteria?

Reply (1): Yes.

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

Reply (2): Yes.

VOLUME 39

Interpretation: IX-95-24Subject:QW-403.1, Base Metals Date Issued:March 19, 1996File No:95-194

Question: Does a WPS qualified using P-No. 1, Group No. 1 material, qualify welding for P-No. 1, Group No. 2 material, when notch toughness tests are not required?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-25Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:March 19, 1996File No:95-252

Question: If company A purchases company B, is it permissible for company A to write Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) in their name, supported by Procedure Qualification Records (PQR) qualified by company B?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-26Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:March 19, 1996File No:95-303

Background: Company A owns company B and changes its name to C. The new company C continues to use the WPSs and PQRs initially developed by B. After some time, company A (the parent company) splits C back to B and C. Both B and C now operate independently, but under company A.

Question: May company B use the WPSs and PQRs initially developed by B and also use WPSs and PQRs qualified by company C before the last reorganization?

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

Interpretation: IX-95-27Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:March 19, 1996File No:95-482

Question: May a subcontractor use a WPS supported by a PQR which was qualified by the contracting company and subsequently supplied to the subcontractor?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-28Subject:QW-403.10, Short Circuiting ModeDate Issued:March 19, 1996File No:96-002

Question: Are the base metal thickness restrictions for the GMAW process short circuiting mode stated in QW-403.10 and QW-404.32 also applicable to fillet weld tests, either in procedure qualifications (QW-451.3, QW-451.4) or in performance qualifications (QW-452.4, QW-452.5 and QW-452.6)?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-29Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:May 30, 1996File No:95-302

Question: If more than one manufacturer or contractor agrees upon the use of one WPS, which is to be followed during production of test weldments for qualification testing, may the welder used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification procedures, be under the full supervision and control of each manufacturer or contractor during the welding, provided the Quality Control System or Quality Assurance Program of each manufacturer or contractor describes the control of welders?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-30Subject:QW-350, Welding Variables for WeldersDate Issued:May 30, 1996File No:96-073

Question (1): Do the essential variables of QW-350 apply to welding operators carrying out corrosion resistant overlay?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Are welding operators qualified for submerged arc welding, also qualified for Electroslag welding and vice versa?

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Is a welding operator qualified to QW-360 and QW-381 of Section IX in submerged arc weld overlay using wire electrode, also qualified to use strip electrodes with the same process?

Reply (3): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-31Subject:QW-361.2, Essential Variables Machine WeldingDate Issued:May 30, 1996File No:96-141

Background: A welding operator has direct visual contact with a pipe weldment that is being welded utilizing machine orbital pipe welding equipment. This welding operator is giving verbal commands to a second welding operator, who does not have eye contact with the weldment, and who is positioning the weld head and wire aimers located on the head remotely, during the welding of the joint in accordance with the verbal commands of the first operator. Each welding operator has been qualified to perform both remote and direct visual control welding.

Question: Are these welders qualified to make the subject weld in accordance with QW-361.2, even though the welding operator having direct visual control is directing the positioning of the orbital pipe welding equipment verbally and does not have hands-on control of the welding head?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 40

Interpretation: IX-95-32Subject:QW-300.2, Welding Performance QualificationsDate Issued:July 1, 1996File No:95-302

Question: If more than one manufacturer or contractor agrees upon the use of one WPS, which is to be followed during the production of test weldments for qualification testing, may the welder used to produce the weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures, be under the full supervision and control of each manufacturer or contractor during the welding, provided the Quality Control System or Quality Assurance Program of each manufacturer or contractor describes the control of welders?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-33Subject:QW-403.10, Short-Circuiting ModeDate Issued:September 24, 1996File No:96-001

Question: Does QW-403.10 limit the base metal thickness qualified to 1.1T for a combination GMAW-S/SMAW PQR test coupon thickness T less than in., when used to support a combination GMAW-S/SMAW WPS?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-34Subject:QW-202.3, Weld Repair and BuildupDate Issued:September 24, 1996File No:96-060

Background: Assurance of defect-free hardfacing deposits on cast surfaces is often improved if a layer of weld metal is first deposited on the casting, acting as a substrate for the subsequent hardfacing weld metal overlay.

Question (1): Does Section IX require qualification of the substrate (e.g., in accordance with QW-202.3 or when the substrate is not included in the design minimum wall thickness in accordance with QW-214) which will be subsequently covered by a hardfacing weld metal overlay?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If the deposit of the substrate is included in a hardfacing weld metal overlay procedure qualified to QW-216, is evaluation of the substrate to QW-202.3 or QW-214, as applicable, required?

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

Interpretation: IX-95-35Subject:QW-300.1, Welding Performance QualificationsDate Issued:September 24, 1996File No:96-287

Question: Is it permissible to use ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography to qualify welders and welding operators in accordance with QW-300.1?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-36Subject:QW-300, Welding Performance QualificationsDate Issued:September 24, 1996File No:96-314

Question (1): Would the successful qualification of a welder in a manual or semi-automatic method qualify him to weld in production using a machine or automatic method in the same process?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Since the essential variables are the same for both methods, would successful qualification with testing in manual GTAW allow the same welder to weld in production using semi-automatic GTAW without testing?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-37Subject:QW-404.9, Filler MetalsDate Issued:September 24, 1996File No:96-315

Question: In accordance with QW-404.9(c), does a change in the wire classification shown in SFA-5.9, with no change in the flux composition, F-Number, or A-Number, require procedure requalification?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 41

Interpretation: IX-95-38Subject:QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of QualificationDate Issued:January 6, 1997File No:96-132

Question: Is it a requirement of QW-322 for a manufacturer to maintain records to demonstrate a welders or welding operators continuing qualification for a process from the date of the original qualification test?

Reply: Section IX does not address how conformance to QW-322 is demonstrated. Other book sections my address the maintenance of records.

Interpretation: IX-95-39Subject:QW-304, Performance Qualification Welders Date Issued:January 6, 1997File No:96-331

Question (1): Would the successful performance qualification of a welder in a manual or semi-automatic type (e.g., GMAW, GTAW, SAW) per QW-304 qualify the same welder to operate as welding operator in machine or automatic type welding?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): If a welder used GMAW (short-circuiting mode) for the root pass and SAW for the hot and fill passes of test coupon, may the test coupon be testing using radiography for the SAW portion of the weld, in accordance with QW-304 and QW-306?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-95-40Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:January 21, 1997File No:93-431 and 95-222

Background: Company A was a subsidiary of Company B. Company B sold Company A to Company C, and Company A became a division of Company C.

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

Reply: It is the intent of the Coe that when a manufacturer or contractor, or part of a manufacturer or contractor, is acquired by a new owner(s), the PQRs and WPSs may be used by the new owner(s) without requalification, provided all of the following are met:(a) the new owner(s) takes responsibility for the WPSs and PQRs;(b) the WPSs reflect the name of the new owner(s); and(c) the Quality Control System/Quality Assurance Program reflects the source of the PQRs as being from the former manufacturer or contractor.

Interpretation: IX-95-41Subject:QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hardfacing (Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant OverlaysDate Issued:March 6, 1997File No:97-028

Background: Corrosion-resistant weld overlay on P-No. 1 material needs to be carried out with Nickel-Aluminum Bronze using E CuNiAl SMAW electrode (F-No. 37) and ER CuNiAl GMAW filler wire (F-No. 37).

Question: For procedure qualification of the above to QW-453, can side bend test specimens of in. thickness be used, bent to inner diameter of 2 1/16 in., as given for P-No. XX with F-No. 36 under QW-466.1?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-95-42Subject:QW-284, Seam Welding Equipment QualificationDate Issued:May 20, 1997File No:97-044

Background: When qualifying resistance seam welding equipment for QW-284, testing and acceptance criteria shall be in accordance with QW-196. QW-196.2.1 addresses shear test specimens, but only deals with spot welding.

Question (1): When qualifying seam welding equipment, do the requirements for spot shear test per QW-196.2.1 apply?

Reply (1): No.

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

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 42

Interpretation: IX-98-01Subject:QB-141.4, Sectioning TestsDate Issued:December 15, 1997File No:97-304

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

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-98-02Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:December 15, 1997File No:97-309

Question: May a manufacturer use another organizations Welding Procedure Specifications in fabrication of pressure vessels contracted to that organization, if the manufacturer works to specifications controlling all fabrication processes from material procurement to final delivery, including QC examination provided by the contracting organization?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-98-03Subject:QW-451, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test SpecimensDate Issued:December 15, 1997File No:97-479

Question: Does a partial penetration groove weld procedure qualification test assembly qualify for full penetration production groove welds within the ranges indicated in QW-451?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-98-04Subject:QW-200.2, Welding Procedure QualificationsDate Issued:December 15, 1997File No:97-481

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

Reply: No.

VOLUME 43

Interpretation: IX-98-05Subject:QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hardfacing (Wear-Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant OverlaysDate Issued:April 28, 1998File No:98-009

Question: In making repairs to hardfacing weld metal overlays, does the existing hardfacing weld metal overlay deposit to be repaired, constitute a change in the original essential variable(s) (e.g., base material, thickness, etc.) thus requiring a new qualification?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-98-06Subject:QW-402.12(a) and (c) and QW-402.12, Joints Date Issued:April 28, 1998File No:98-009

Question: Do the words any change exceeding 10%, changegreater than 10%, a changegreater than 10%, and an increase or decrease of more than 10%, respectively, all indicate a qualified range of 10% above and 10% below the value recorded in the PQR?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-98-07Subject:QW-410.42, TechniqueDate Issued:April 28, 1998File No:97-302

Question (1): For PAW hardfacing and corrosion resistant weld metal overlay qualifications, may the full range of oscillation qualified (including the change of more than 10%) also apply to the combined minimum and maximum oscillation range qualified? (e.g., would the range qualified for a 1 in. oscillation combined with a 1.5 in. oscillation be 0.9 in 1.65 in.)

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May the minimum and maximum oscillation values be combined and qualified on a single hardfacing weld metal overlay test coupon, assuming all other essential variables are the same?

Reply (2): Section IX does not prohibit the qualification of more than one set of essential variables on a single test coupon, provided each set of essential variables is tested in accordance with the requirements of Section IX.

Interpretation: IX-98-08Subject:QW-432, F-Numbers Date Issued:April 28, 1998File No:98-131

Question: A WPS is qualified with an SMA electrode that is not certified by the manufacturer as conforming to an AWS classification. Are welders who were previously qualified with an electrode classified as F-4, also qualified to use this unclassified electrode that conforms to the deposit chemistry of EXXXX-G, in Table 2 of SFA-5.5 (within the other limitations of QW-350)?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 44

Interpretation: IX-98-09Subject:QW-150 and QW-462.1, Tension Test Specimens for Pipe and Plate Date Issued:October 9, 1998File No:97-302

Question: Would tensile tests performed in accordance with SA-370 be acceptable for meeting ASME Section IX, QW-462.1(a) and (b)?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-98-10Subject:QW-407.1, Post Weld Heat TreatmentDate Issued:October 9, 1998File No:97-306/97-308

Question: Is it the intent of Section IX in QW-407.1 to permit reporting the results of more than one PWHT condition on a single report, with a single PQR number, provided all the other applicable essential and supplementary essential variables are identical and all required tests are conducted and reported for both conditions?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-98-11Subject:QW-300, Welding Performance QualificationsDate Issued:October 9, 1998File No:98-133

Question: May Company A retain the Company B employee responsible for welder performance qualification, to review the welder qualification documents of both companies and qualify the welders of Company B to the welding program of Company A without further testing of the welders?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-98-12Subject:QW-451, Procedure Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens Date Issued:October 9, 1998File No:98-237/98-238

Question: May longitudinal bend specimens be used in lieu of transverse bend specimens when the base metals or the base metal and the weld metal do not differ markedly in bending properties?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-98-13Subject:QW-200.1, Welding Procedure Qualifications Date Issued:December 22, 1998File No:98-239

Question: Are all-encompassing terms acceptable when addressing nonessential variables in a WPS (e.g, for backing, with or without, for root spacing, unlimited)?

Reply: Section IX does not specify how nonessential variables are to be addressed; however, the terms must provide direction to the welder/welding operator for making production welds to Code requirements.

Interpretation: IX-98-14Subject:QW-361.2, Machine Welding Variables for Welding Operators; and QW-381, Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued:December 22, 1998File No:98-447

Background: A multiple layer corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay performance qualification (machine welding) is made with the first layer under Direct Visual control and the second layer Remote Visual control.

Question (1): Is the welding operator qualified for both Direct and Remote Visual control techniques applied either in single or multiple layers?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For the qualification described in the background, may two welding operators qualify on one coupon, provided the requirements of QW-453 and QW-361.2 (which delineate the welding operators limits of qualification as per QW-306) are addressed?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-98-15Subject:QW-405.3, Positions Date Issued:December 22, 1998File No:98-448

Question: May a single-pass seal weld as defined in QW-492, used to seal boiler tubes to a boiler tube sheet, be considered a cover pass or a wash pass for purposes of exemption form QW-405.3?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-98-16Subject:QW-462.5(a), Chemical Analysis and Hardness Specimen Corrosion-Resistant and Hard-Facing Weld Metal Overlay Date Issued:December 22, 1998File No:99-453

Question: Is it permissible to use the surface of the test coupon as the approximate fusion line when determining the minimum finished thickness for corrosion-resistant and hard-facing overlays in accordance with QW-462.5(a)?

Reply: Yes.

VOLUME 45

Interpretation: IX-98-17Subject:QW-453, Procedure/Performance Qualification Thickness Limits and Test Specimens for Hard-Facing (Wear Resistant) and Corrosion-Resistant Overlays Date Issued:March 23, 1999File No:98-055

Question: When performing corrosion-resistant weld metal overlay welding operator qualification using a machine GTAW process, are the limitations on thickness qualified per QW-453 applicable?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-98-18Subject:QW-201.1, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility Date Issued:March 23, 1999File No:99-025

Background: When one of a companys plants is sold, it is not clear if the new owner can use the Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) and Procedure Qualification Records (PQR) qualified by the original company, when the original company wishes to continue using those WPSs/PQRs.

Question: Company A sells one of its plants to Company B. May both Company A and Company B use the WPSs/PQRs previously qualified by Company A?

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

VOLUME 46

Interpretation: IX-98-19Subject:QW-404, Filler Metals Date Issued:September 24, 1999File No:99-409

Question: Is requalification required when the filler metal specified in the WPS and supporting PQR is moved from one SFA specification to another SFA specification, or the AWS classification is changed, or when a previously unclassified filler is classified by the filler metal manufacturer as conforming to an SFA specification?

Reply: No.

VOLUME 47

Interpretation: IX-98-20RSubject:QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base Metal ThicknessDate Issued:June 8, 2000File No:99-539

Question: When welding a corner joint with dissimilar base metal thickness, the thickness of both members must be within the qualified thickness range of the WPS(s) being used. How is the thickness for the thicker member defined in sketches (a), (b) and (c) below?

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

VOLUME 48

Interpretation: IX-01-01Subject:QW-403, Base Metal Requirement; QW-404, Filler Metal Requirement Date Issued:October 11, 2000File No:00-514

Question (1): If a WPS is written using the GMAW-S process alone, is T limited to 1.1T per QW-403.10 and t limited to 1.1t per QW-404.32?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If a WPS is written using FCAW process alone, is T limited to 2T per QW-403.8 and t limited to 2t per QW-404.30?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-02Subject:QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:October 11, 2000File No:00-553

Background: A large majority of fabrication, contracted by a design Company A, is performed by Manufacturers B and C. Each company is independent in ownership from the other two. Companies A, B and C have developed a Welding Coalition. The top management of all three companies has executed an Agreement and Commitment protocol, consenting to the establishment of the Welding Coalition. The Welding Coalition controls all weld procedures developed for use on Company A contracts by Companies B and C, under one designated program. The Coalition does not control production welding at either of the manufacturing companies. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company C are controlled by Company As Quality Program. Weld procedure qualifications performed by Company B are controlled by Company Bs Quality Program that has been approved by Company A. Company C is on Company Bs Approved Vendors List.

Question: Is it permissible to consider the Welding Coalition as the organization which has responsible operational control of production of the weldments to be made in accordance with this Code, such that Company B may use weld procedures qualified by Company C and vice versa?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-01-03Subject:QW-194, Visual Examinations Date Issued:January 3, 2001File No:00-519

Question: Is a welders performance qualification test coupon, in which undercut is present, acceptable, provided that the rest of the examinations and tests are acceptable?

Reply: Yes. However, manufacturers may disqualify welders based on QW-301.2 when discontinuities, such as undercut and porosity, do not comply with the quality requirement of the manufacturer.

Interpretation: IX-01-04Subject:QW-304.1, Welders Test Coupon Examination Date Issued:January 3, 2001File No:00-653

Question: Does QW-304.1 require that when radiography is used for examination of welder test coupons for performance qualification, the visual examination per QW-302.4 be performed and documented on the Welder/Welding Operator Performance Qualification record?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-01-05Subject:QW-200.2, Welding Procedure Qualification Date Issued:January 3, 2001File No:00-654

Question: When a nonessential variable is recorded on a PQR, may a new or revised WPS supported by the PQR specify a different range for that nonessential variable from that recorded on the PQR?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-06RSubject:QW-410.51, Addition/Deletion of Oscillation (1998 and Earlier Editions)Date Issued:February 9, 2001File No:98-240

Background: QW-410.51, addition or deletion of oscillation is an essential variable for GTAW hard-facing. QW-410.1, addition or deletion of weave bead is not a variable for the GTAW hard-facing process.

Question: Is it the intent of Section IX that a PQR developed with a machine or automatic GTAW hard-facing process, with or without oscillation, may be used to qualify a WPS for a manual, or a semiautomatic GTAW hard-facing process, with or without weave?

Reply: Yes. Note that recent actions by Section IX have defined oscillation as applicable to machine and automatic processes and weave as applicable to manual and semiautomatic processes.

VOLUME 49

Interpretation: IX-01-07Subject:QW-420.2, Material GroupingDate Issued:June 4, 2001File No:01-029

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

Question (1): Does this PQR support a WPS for welding P-Number X to S-Number Y without changes to any other essential variables?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Does this PQR support a WPS for welding S-Number X to S-Number Y without changes to any other essential variables?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-08Subject:QW-300.2, Transfer of Record of Performance QualificationDate Issued:February 26, 2001File No:01-030

Question: When a new owner acquires a company, or part of a company, does QW-300.2 prohibit continued use of existing welder performance qualifications?

Reply: No. Section IX does not address rules applicable to performance qualification continuity when a new owner acquires a manufacturer or contractor. If welder performance qualification continuity is to be maintained by the new owner, the Quality Control System/Quality Assurance Program should reflect to the source of the welder performance qualification records as being from the former manufacturer or contractor.

Interpretation: IX-01-09Subject:QW-356, Welding VariablesDate Issued:February 26, 2001File No:01-032

Question: A welder was qualified to P-No. 1 material using the GTAW process without gas backing using F-No. 6 filler material. Is he qualified to weld P-No. 8 material using the GTAW process with gas backing using F-No. 6 filler material, provided all other essential variables remain the same?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-10Subject:QW-144 and QW-194, Visual ExaminationsDate Issued:February 26, 2001File No:01-073

Question: Are the requirements of QW-144 and QW-194 for visual examination of the test coupon required for the qualifications of a welding procedure?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-01-11Subject:QW-510 and QW-540 in Article V, Standard Welding Procedure SpecificationsDate Issued:June 4, 2001File No:01-089

Question (1): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only GTAW if the SWPS is for combination GTAW root and SMAW E7018 fill?

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

Question (2): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only SMAW E7018 if the SWPS is for combination GTAW root and SMAW E7018 fill?

Reply (2): No. All variables of the SWPSs are considered to be essential variables.

Question (3): Under QW-510(d), is it acceptable to weld the demonstration test coupon with only SMAW E7018 if the SWPS specifies both E6010 and E7018?

Reply (3): No. All variables of the SWPSs are considered to be essential variables.

Question (4): Does Section IX, Article II apply when the fabricator chooses to use SWPSs?

Reply (4): No. Ref. para. QW-100.1.

Question (5): When using SWPSs under Article V of Section IX, may a single welding process of a multiple SWPSs be used to complete a weld?

Reply (5): No. Ref. paras. QW-540(a) and (c).

Question (6): When using SWPSs under Article V of Section IX, may a single process SWPS for E7018 and a single process SWPS for GTAW be used to complete a weld, assuming all other variables are within the SWPS parameters?

Reply (6): No. Ref. paras. QW-540(a) and (c).

Question (7): When using SWPSs under Article V of Section IX, may a single process SWPS for E7018 and a single process SWPS for E6010 be used to complete a weld, assuming all other variables are within the SWPS parameters?

Reply (7): No. Ref. paras. QW-540(a) and (c).

Interpretation: IX-01-12Subject:QW-322.2(a) and QW-452.1, Rule Change Affecting Welder QualificationDate Issued:June 4, 2001File No:01-201

Background: ASME Section IX, 2000 Addenda, revised Table QW-452.1 reducing the coupon size from in. to in. to qualify the welder for Maximum to be welded when welding a minimum of three layers.

Question (1): A welder qualified prior to the 2000 Addenda, and has remained qualified since his original test. His original test coupon consisted of at least three weld layers and greater than in. but less than in. deposited weld metal. May the qualification recorded be revised from 2t to Max. to be welded subsequent to the 2000 Addenda?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): A welder was qualified prior to the 2000 Addenda. His qualification has lapsed due to not welding with the original weld process for greater than 6 months. His original test coupon consisted of at least three layers and greater than in. but less than in. deposited weld metal. His renewal restores his original qualifications in accordance with QW-322.2(a). May the original qualification record be revised from 2t to Max. to be welded subsequent to the 2000 Addenda?

Reply (2): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-13Subject:References to Edition and AddendaDate Issued:June 26, 2001File No:01-570

Question (1): The 1998 Code Edition, as published, incorporates the 1998 Addenda. When providing reference to this Code Edition and Addenda within a Code-required document, may only the Edition be listed (i.e, 1998 Edition)?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): For the 1998 Edition only, is it necessary to revise Code-required documentation where the term 1998 Edition was used as meaning the 1995 Edition through the 1997 Addenda?

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 50

Interpretation: IX-01-14Subject:QW-500, The Use of SWPSsDate Issued:September 25, 2001File No:01-332

Question: May a manufacturer or contractor adopt and use SWPSs in accordance with the rules of Article V for work on Code items built to an edition or addenda prior to the 1998 edition with the 2000 Addenda, provided the construction code does not prohibit the use of SWPSs?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-15Subject:QW-300.2, Employers ResponsibilityDate Issued:September 15, 2001File No:01-641

Background: Section IX requires that the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer be responsible for conducting tests to qualify the performance of welders which his organization employs in construction of weldments built in accordance with the Code. It also requires that the manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer provide supervision and control over welders while they are welding test coupons for performance qualification.

Question (1): An employee of a contractor provides supervision and control over a welder during welding of a test coupon, but that welder is not an employee of the contractor at the time of the test. Is it required that the welder be an employee of that contractor at the time of qualification testing?

Reply (1): No.

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

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-01-16Subject:Code Case 2142-1 and 2143-1Date Issued:December 18, 2001File No:01-641

Background: The submerged are welding process is being used to deposit corrosion-resistant weld overlay for Section III, Subsection NB fabrication using a NI-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal and flux combination. The strip filler metal does not meet the chemical requirements of Code Case 2142-1 (bare electrode and rod), but both filler metal and weld deposit meet the chemical composition limits of Code Case 2143-1 (covered electrodes).

Question (1): Must the Ni-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal used for the SAW process meet the chemical composition requirements of Code Case 2142-1 to be classified as F-43 for procedure and performance qualifications?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May Ni-Cr-Fe alloy filler metal that is not designated as F-43 per Code Case 2142-1 be used for welding if the welding procedure is qualified separately per QW-404.37?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): If the Ni-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal meets the chemical composition requirements of Code Case 2143-1 and was produced to the requirements of SFA-5.14, except for the chemical analysis, may the filler metal be classified as F-43 for procedure and performance qualification?

Reply (3): No.

Question (4): If the Ni-Cr-Fe alloy strip filler metal is not classified in an SFA specification, and is not covered in Code Case 2142-1 or 2143-1, is it permissible to identify the filler metal and flux on the WPS, PQR and WPQ by the manufacturers brand names?

Reply (4): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-17Subject:QW-202.2(b), QW-202.3(b) and QW-407.4Date Issued:December 18, 2001File No:01-615

Background: A groove weld procedure qualification test coupon 1.5 in. thick was welded with the SMAW process using multiple passes of in. max. thickness. The test coupon was given a subsequent post weld heat treatment exceeding the upper transformation temperature prior to the completion of mechanical testing.

Question: May this PQR be used to support the weld of partial penetration groove welds per QW-202.2(b) or weld repair and buildup welds per QW-202.3(b) on base material thickness exceeding 1.65 in.?

Reply: No. Per QW-407.4, a procedure qualification test coupon receiving a post weld heat treatment in which the upper transformation is exceeded, the maximum qualified thickness for production welds is 1.1 times the thickness of the test coupon.

Interpretation: IX-01-18Subject:QW-153.1, Acceptance Criteria for Tensile StrengthDate Issued:December 18, 2001File No:01-772

Question: Does the minimum specified tensile strength in QW/QB-422 supersede the AS/SB material tensile strength for procedure qualification?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-19Subject:QW-202.4(b), Dissimilar Base Metal ThicknessDate Issued:December 18, 2001File No:01-811

Question: Does QW-202.4(b) permit the maximum weld deposit thickness limit to be extended beyond the limit specified in QW-451.1?

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

Interpretation: IX-01-20Subject:QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number ReassignmentDate Issued:December 18, 2001File No:01-813

Question (1): May a procedure qualification record subject to variable QW-407.1(a) that included only a PWHT below the lower transformation temperature be used to support a WPS with PWHT above the upper transformation temperature and a subsequent PWHT below the lower transformation temperature?

Reply (1): No.

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

Reply (2): No.

VOLUME 51

Interpretation: IX-01-21Subject:QW-151.1(d), Reduced Section Plate; QW-200.4(b), Combination of Processes; QW-322, Expiration and Renewal of QualificationsDate Issued:January 19, 2002File No:01-035

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

Question (1): Do welders maintain their qualifications for manual SMAW and GTAW by welding with either semiautomatic GMAW or FCAW?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Do welders maintain their qualifications for both SMAW and GTAW by welding with only one of the processes during the six-month period?

Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Do welders maintain their qualifications for semiautomatic GMAW and FCAW by welding with either GMAW or FCAW during the six-month period?

Reply (3): Yes.

Background [(4)]: A WPS was qualified using a Trade Name wire-flux combination that conforms to a classification in ASME Section II, Part C.

Question (4): Does the substitution in the qualified WPS of a different Trade Name wire-flux combination that conforms to the same SFA Specification and classification in ASME Section II, Part C require requalification?

Reply (4): No.

Background [(5)]: The tensile specimens of a 60 mm PQR test plate was divided into three pieces. The sum of the thickness of the three specimens was less than 60 mm.

Question (5): What is the allowable percentage thickness reduction from the original base metal thickness?

Reply (5): Section IX does not address this issue.

Interpretation: IX-01-22Subject:QW-100.3 and QW-420.1, P-Number ReassignmentDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-679

Question: May a previous qualified WPS, written to permit the welding of P-No. 5, Group 1 material to P-No. 5, Group 4 material prior to the establishment of P-Nos. 5A, 5B and 5C be used to weld SA-213 T22 to SA-213 T91 materials?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-23Subject:QW-202.4, Dissimilar Base Metal ThicknessesDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-789

Question: A WPS is qualified to weld base material from 1.6 mm to 20 mm. May that WPS be used for welding a part 30 mm thick that has been tapered to 15 mm thick to another 15 mm part?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-24Subject:QW-200.4, Impact Test Qualification of Multi-process WeldsDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-814

Question: A welding procedure qualification is made using multiple welding processes on a single test plate for an application where notch-toughness testing is required. The weld coupon was welded with two passes, each of GTAW and FCAW, and the remainder with SAW process. Is it required to take multiple sets of weld metal impact test specimens to include all welding processes, when all welding could not be included in a single set of specimens?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-25Subject:Section II, Part CDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-815

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

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-01-26Subject:QW-100.3, The Use of the Referenced Edition of the CodeDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:01-826

Background: A designer specifies a specific year of the ASME Code to be complied with for the fabrication of a component, i.e., including 96 Addenda, and this component is installed in 2003.

Question (1): What year of Section IX does the installer use for qualifying welders/welding operators?

Reply (1): Welders are qualified in accordance with the current edition and addenda of Section IX in effect at the time of the qualification. See QW-100.3.

Question (2): What year of Section II does the installer use for purchasing welding materials?

Reply (2): Section IX does not address this issue. The question should be addressed to the applicable construction code.

Interpretation: IX-01-27Subject:QW-452.1, Nominal Coupon ThicknessDate Issued:March 11, 2002File No:02-111

Question: A welder welds a NPS 6 Schedule 80 test coupon that is 0.432 in. thick. He uses one welding process, one set of essential variables, and deposits at least three layers of weld metal in that test coupon. Is that welder qualified to weld maximum to be welded?

Reply: No. The nominal coupon thickness must be at least in. thick in order for a welder to be qualified for maximum to be welded.

VOLUME 52

Interpretation: IX-01-28Subject:QW-409.4, Electrical CharacteristicsDate Issued:May 22, 2002File No:02-2691

Question: Does QW-409.4 apply to the current type used to preheat the filler metal wire when welding GTAW Hot-Wire Automatic or machine corrosion-resistant overlay?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-01-29Subject:Section II, Part C, SFA Specifications, Marking of PackagesDate Issued:October 3, 2002File No:02-2692

Background: ASME Section II, Part C, SFA Specifications state in the Marking of Packages paragraphs that the AWS specification and classification designations must be marked on the outside of each unit package.

Question (1): Must filler metal procured to an ASME SFA specification be marked with the ASME SFA specification, such as ASME SFA-5.XX?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Is marking the package with the AWS specification and classification, such as AWS A5.XX EXXXX required?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): May the material manufacturer add the ASME specification (e.g., SFA-5.XX) to the required AWS markings on the unit container?

Reply (3): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-30Subject:QW-403.5, Base Metal RequirementsDate Issued:December 30, 2002File No:02-2693

Question: When impact testing of a heat-affected zone is required for nonferrous base materials of the same P-Number, does a PQR with a UNS number designation (e.g., SB-619, UNS N06022) qualify a WPS that specifies a different UNS number designation (e.g., SB-619 UNS N10276) within the same P-Number?

Reply: No.

Interpretation: IX-01-31Subject:QW-423, Alternate Base Materials for Welder QualificationDate Issued:December 30, 2002File No:02-2694

Question (1): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left column of QW-423, weld any combination of P-Number base metals in the corresponding row of the right column, within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left column of QW-423, weld one of the P-Number base metals in the corresponding row of the right column to any other (dissimilar) P-Number in the corresponding row of the right column,within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): May a welder who has qualified on a P-Number base metal within the left column of QW-423 welded to an unassigned base metal, weld any combination of P-Number base metals in the corresponding row of the right column to the unassigned metal, within the limits of the other essential variable limits qualified?

Reply (3): Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-32Subject:QW-200.4(b), Root Pass Procedure QualificationDate Issued:December 30, 2002File No:02-3449

Question: Do the provisions of QW-200.4(b) permit a GTAW procedure qualification test weldment performed on a 13 mm thick coupon to support depositing a root pass in a production joint of the qualified base metal having a thickness of 8 mm when impact testing is required?

Reply: No. See QW-403.6.

Interpretation: IX-01-33Subject:QW-283, Welds with ButteringDate Issued:December 30, 2002File No:02-3896

Background: In all cases described below, the manufacturers develop and follow WPSs and PQRs based on the test coupons welded. The minimum buttering thickness in all cases will be greater than 3/16 in.

Question (1): Manufacturer A qualifies a WPS by buttering the ends of the test coupons, which are the same material. The buttered ends are heat treated, then the weld is completed using the same filler metal as was used for the buttering. Manufacturer B welds a groove weld test coupon of the same best metal using the same process, filler metal and other essential variables as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated in the same manner as the heat treatment used for the buttering by manufacturer A. May manufacturer A weld parts that were buttered by manufacturer B?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Manufacturer C welds a groove weld test coupon using the same base metal, process, filler metal, and other essential variables as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated in the same manner as the heat treatment used for buttering by manufacturer A. May manufacturer A weld parts that were buttered by manufacturer C?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Manufacturer A receives parts that have been buttered by both manufacturers B and C. May the parts buttered by manufacturer B be welded by manufacturer A to parts buttered by manufacturer C?

Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): Manufacturer D receives parts that have been buttered by manufacturers A, B and C. May manufacturer D weld the buttered parts together using a buttered groove weld test coupon qualified using the same base metal, process, filler metal, and other essential variables as manufacturer A?

Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): Manufacturer D receives parts that have been buttered by manufacturers A, B and C. May manufacturer D weld the buttered parts together using a groove weld test coupon qualified in accordance with QW-283.4(b) using the same process, filler metal, and other essential variables that manufacturer A used to join the buttered parts (i.e., the as-welded portion of the test) using a base metal that nominally matches the chemical analysis of the buttering used by manufacturer A, B, or C?

Reply (5): Yes.

Question (6): Manufacturer E welds a groove weld test coupon of another base metal using the same filler metal as manufacturer A. That test coupon is heat treated and tested in accordance with QW-202.2(a). May manufacturer F, who has welded a test coupon in accordance with QW-283.4(b), join parts buttered by manufacturer E?

Reply (6): Yes.

VOLUME 53

Interpretation: IX-01-34Subject:QB-203.1, Limits of Qualified Flow Positions for Procedures, and QB-408.4, Joint Design; QB-303.3, Limits of Qualified Positions, and QB-408.1, Joint DesignDate Issued:March 13, 2003File No:02-3541

Background (1): QB-203.1 states: Qualification in pipe shall qualify for plate, but not vice versa. Horizontal-flow in pipe shall qualify for flat-flow in plate. QB-408.4 states: A change in the joint type, e.g., from a butt to a lap or socket, from that qualified. For lap or socket joints, a decrease in overlap length from that qualified.Question (1): Do procedure qualifications in plate lap joints qualify for tube-to-tube socket joints for brazing procedure qualifications?

Reply (1): No.

Background (2): QB-303.3 states: Qualifications in pipe shall qualify for plate, but not vice versa. Horizontal-flow in pipe shall qualify for flat-flow in plate. QB-408.1 states: A change in the joint type, i.e., from a butt to a lap or socket, from that qualified. For lap or socket joints, an increase in lap length of more than 25% from the overlap used on brazer performance qualification test coupon.

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

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-01-35Subject:QW-451.1, Procedure Qualification Thickness LimitsDate Issued:March 13, 2003File No:02-4075

Question (1): A test coupon is prepared as follows: A 1.75 in. plate is welded to 1.75 in. plate with 1 in. thick weld. Per QW-451.1, is 8 in. the maximum thickness range of base metal qualified?

Reply (1): Yes, except that further limits or exceptions may apply as stated in Notes (1) and (5) of QW-451.1.Question (2): Using the same test coupon as Question (1), where a single process was used to deposit the entire weld thickness, is 8 in. the maximum thickness of the weld metal permitted per QW-451.1?

Reply (2): Yes, except that further limits or exceptions may apply as stated in Notes (1) and (5) of QW-451.1.

Interpretation: IX-01-36Subject:QW-301.4, Record of Welder Performance QualificationDate Issued:March 13, 2003File No:02-4198

Background: For welders performance qualification, a multiple layer groove weld is made on a single test coupon using one welder for first layer and another welder for the second.

Question: QW-301.4 requires a record of welder performance qualification. May a single form be used to record the essential variables, the type of test and test results, and the ranges qualified in accordance with QW-452 for each welder and welding operator?

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

Interpretation: IX-01-37Subject:QW-404.33, Change in SFA Specifications for Filler Metal ClassificationDate Issued:May 19, 2003File No:03-263

Question: Does the expression a change in the SFA specification filler metal classification refer to a change in the AWS classification?

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-38Subject:Section II, Part C, SFA 5.1, Table 1Date Issued:May 19, 2003File No:03-274

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

Reply: Yes.

Interpretation: IX-01-39Subject:QW-401.3, Supplemental Essential Variable (Procedure)Date Issued:May 19, 2003File No:03-469

Background: A company has qualified a PQR to satisfy all testing requirements other than notch toughness for welding P1 Group 2 to P1 Group 2 by the SAW process. Another test coupon is subsequently prepared using the WPS written on the original PQR and an additional PQR is then qualified with only testing for notch toughness, as allowed by the Code, to supplement the original PQR for welding with impact requirements. However, the preheat value (an essential variable) used to qualify the original PQR was 150F. The preheat temperature was less than 150F.

Question: May the supplemental PQR with reduced preheat be used with the original PQR to support a WPS for notch toughness application?

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

Interpretation: IX-01-40Subject:QW-201/QW-201.1, Manufacturers or Contractors ResponsibilityDate Issued:May 19, 2003File No:03-740

Background: Several manufacturing organizations within the same company perform welding procedure qualifications in accordance with Section IX. Each manufacturing organizationperforms these activities in accordance with specific Quality Assurance Program(s)/Quality Control System(s) that comply with their ASME Construction Code Certificate(s) of Authorization and describe operational control of qualifications.

Question: Is it permitted for any of the manufacturing organizations within the company to use WPSs and PQRs qualified by any of the other manufacturing organizations?

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

VOLUME 54

Interpretation: IX-04-01Subject:QW-151.3, Tension Test Turned SpecimenDate Issued:September 15, 2003File No:02-3586Background: ASME Section IX, Paragraph QW-151.3(b) states, " For thicknesses over 1" (25 mm), multiple specimens shall be cut through the full thickness of the weld with their centers parallel to the metal surface and not over 1" (25 mm) apart. The centers of the specimens adjacent to the metal surface shall not exceed 5/8" (16 mm) from the surface."

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

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): How many tension tests would be required for a 2-1/2" thick groove welding procedure qualification test coupon welded full thickness?

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

Question (3): When reduced section turned tension test specimens are used in accordance with QW-462.1(d) for a 2-1/2" thick groove welding procedure qualification test coupon welded full thickness, what is the minimum number of specimens that must be removed for each tension test set?

Reply (3): Three.

Interpretation: IX-04-02Subject:QW-258.1 and QW-410.38Date Issued:September 15, 2003File No:03-1029

Background: The elctroslag welding process is used to apply a corrosion-resistant overlay. The essential variables in QW-258.1 apply. QW-410.38 is listed as an essential variable for corrosion-resistant overlay.

Question (1): When a single layer is recorded in the PQR, is a WPS qualified for application of multiple layers?

Reply (1): No.

Question (2): When multiple layers are recorded in the PQR, is a WPS qualified for application of single layer?

Reply (2): No.

Interpretation: IX-04-03Subject:QW-407.1 , Postweld Heat TreatmentDate Issued:September 15, 2003File No:03-1212

Question (1): May a procedure qualification record subject to the variable QW-407.1(a) which qualified P-No. 8 to P-No. 8 with no PWHT support a WPS with PWHT?

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

Question (2): Would application of controlled and monitored heat to the weld and surrounding area for the correction of distortion in P-No. 8 material be considered a PWHT operation?

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

Note: This interpretation originally appeared in Volume 54. The P8 has been corrected by Errata to read P-No. 8.

Interpretation: IX-04-04Subject:QW-401.3 Supplemental Essential VariableDate Issued:September 15, 2003File No:03-1246

Background: A WPS is supported by three PQRs. Two PQRs are recorded on 12 mm and 28.5 mm thick coupons using tensile, bend, and impact test