You are on page 1of 51

1/51

GO TO ASME.ORG HOME >

Interpretation Detail Print to PDF


Please limit your selection on the search results screen to 10 interpretations.
Standard Designation: BPV Section IX
Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-462.1
Date Issued: 01/04/1977
Record Number: BC-76-428
Interpretation Number : IX-77-01
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it permissible to machine a tension sample below the original
surface of the base metal in order to obtain parallel faces over the reduced
section?

Reply: No definite limits are set with respect to metal that may be machined
off the original thickness. The test plate should be of substantially the same
thickness as originally welded, but if a little of the thickness is machined off
to obtain parallel rectangular surfaces, the specimen may be accepted. If
your procedure wishes to set definite limits, you may do so. Section IX is a
minimum safety requirement.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-303.6
Date Issued: 01/07/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-02
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Will welder qualification in the 3G and 4G positions for single
groove welds with backing on plate also cover welder qualification for the
2G, 1F, 2F, 3F, and 4F positions per the thickness limits of QW-452?

Reply: (1) Qualification in 3G and 4G plate with backing does not qualify a
2G position. (2) Qualification in the 3G and 4G positions does qualify the
1F and 2F positions. (3) Qualification in 3G also qualifies for 3F, within the
limits of applicable essential variables. (4) Qualification in the 4G position
qualifies for the 4F position within the limits of the applicable essential
variables.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-461.7
Date Issued: 01/12/1977
Record Number: NA

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
2/51

Interpretation Number : IX-77-03


Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Are fillet welds in the 1F, 2F, and 3F positions qualified by 3G
groove welds?

Reply: Revisions to Section IX have been made to clarify what positions are
qualified by specific test positions. Table QW-461.7, which was published
in the Winter 1976 Addenda to Section IX, summarizes the position
limitations for performance qualifications.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Tack Welder Qualification
Date Issued: 01/31/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-04
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a welder be qualified as a tack welder if his tack welds were
a part of another welder's qualification test coupon or part of another
welding procedure qualification test which met the intent of the Code?

Reply: The Code requires that all welders, (including tack welders), must be
qualified per Section IX.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Use of Base Metals and Filler Metals
Date Issued: 02/01/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-05
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question 1: Is it acceptable to substitute identical base materials for ASME
or ASTM specification materials?

Reply 1: For Code boilers or vessels, base materials must conform to an


ASME specification accepted by the particular book section, or to a Code
Case permitting a specific material.

Question 2: Is it acceptable to substitute identical filler materials for ASME


or AWS specification filler materials?

Reply 2: For Code boilers or vessels, filler material need not conform to a
particular specification. Procedures utilizing such filler material must be
qualified per Section IX.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-484
Date Issued: 02/10/1977

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
3/51

Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-06
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is a welder qualified as of the day he makes his test welds?

Reply: A welder is qualified as of the day he makes his test welds, if he


passes the test.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-180
Date Issued: 02/16/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-07
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What type of tests are required to qualify a welding procedure
and a welder or welding operator for fillet welds only?

Reply: Macro-examination is required for procedure qualification as per


QW-181.1, and macro and fracture tests are required for performance
qualification, as per QW-181.2.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-202.2(2)(a)
Date Issued: 02/22/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-08
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent of QW-202.2(2)(a) that groove weld procedure
qualification made in base metal 3 in. or more in thickness qualifies repair
welds for any thickness of base metal with no limit on minimum depth of
deposited weld metal?

Reply: It is the intent of QW-202.2(2)(a) that groove weld procedure


qualification made in base metal 3 in. or more in thickness qualifies repair
welds for any thickness of base metal with no limit on minimum depth of
deposited weld metal. Maximum limits are fixed per QW-451.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-310.4(d)
Date Issued: 03/09/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-10
Question(s) and Reply(ies):

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
4/51

Question: Does a welder, using a total alloy content F-4 electrode, also
qualify to use a higher total alloy F-4 electrode, within the nominal 6% total
alloy content, under the provisions of QW-310?

Reply: QW-310.4(d) permits welders, who qualify on carbon steel test


plates or pipe, to use all electrodes of the particular F-number qualified and
all lower F-number electrodes, up to and including F-4 electrodes, of total
alloy content less than or equal to 6%. Therefore, an F-4 electrode may
qualify a welder to use another F-4 electrode of higher alloy content, on
carbon steel, as long as the total alloy content does not exceed 6%.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-407.4
Date Issued: 03/09/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-11
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Do the provisions of QW-407.4 apply when heat treatment is
performed, although the heat treatment is not mandatory? Also, you asked
for the lower critical temperature of P-No. 8 materials.

Reply: QW-407.4 does not apply to P-No. 8 material because it has no


lower critical temperature (that is, the temperature at which steel starts its
phase transformation on heating which allows hardening upon cooling to
occur). QW-407.3 is the variable that applies to P-No. 8 material.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Calibration of Welding Machine Meters
Date Issued: 03/10/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-12
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What are the Code requirements concerning the calibration of
meters on welding machines?

Reply: Meters recording volts and amps or any acceptable method of


measuring volts and amps (such as measuring burnoff rate), must be
employed when QW-409.1 or QW-409.8 is required. QW-409.1 is a
supplementary essential variable, and QW-409.8 is a nonessential variable
for most welding processes. Because QW-409.8 requires the recording on
the WPS of changes in voltage and amperage range, an accurate method of
recording such must be employed. When meters are used to record amps
and volts, they must be calibrated. Provisions for calibration of equipment,
including welding machines, are covered by the quality control system.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
5/51

Subject Description: Section IX, Interpass Temperature QW-492


Date Issued: 03/11/1977
Record Number: BC-77-9a
Interpretation Number : IX-77-13
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May interpass temperature be measured either on the base metal
adjacent to the weld, or on the deposited weld metal? The method of
measurement is specified in the qualified welding procedure.

Reply: Interpass temperature may be measured either in weld groove or


adjacent to the weld groove.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, More Than One Welder on a Single Process Joint
Date Issued: 03/31/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-14
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May more than one welder perform welding on a joint made by a
single process provided each welds only that portion of the thickness for
which he is qualified, and provided the procedure is qualified?

Reply: More than one welder may perform welding on a joint made by a
single process provided each welds only that portion of the thickness for
which he is qualified, and provided the procedure is qualified.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Supporting Mill Test Reports and Typicals for Base and Filler
Metals Used in a Procedure Qualifying Test
Date Issued: 03/29/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-15
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Must supporting mill test reports and typicals for base and filler
metals used in qualifying procedures for Section III, Class 1, 2, 3, and metal
containment weldments be saved? You also asked for committee approval
of a specific procedure.

Reply: The mill test reports and typicals for procedures tests need not be
saved. QW-201.1 and QW-201.2 of Section IX provide for necessary
documentation of welding procedures and tests. Also, procedures and
qualifying tests are reviewed by the survey team, authorized inspectors, or
jurisdiction authorities, not our office.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
6/51

Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404.4


Date Issued: 04/15/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-16
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a welding procedure were tested with a root pass using an
E6010 (F3) electrode and filler passes using an E7018 (F4) electrode, and it
was later decided to change the root pass electrode to E7018 (F4), would
this change constitute an essential variable and require a separate
qualification test?

Reply: QW-404.4 is an essential variable under QW-252 through QW-259.


Therefore, your procedure must be requalified.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Flux-Cored Arc Welding
Date Issued: 07/18/1977
Record Number: NA
Interpretation Number : IX-77-17
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Under what welding process category shall flux-cored arc
welding be qualified under Section IX?

Answer: Flux-cored arc welding is considered to come under the more


general method of welding known as gas-metal-arc welding. The rules now
in Section IX covering inert gas-metal-arc welding apply to flux-cored arc
welding.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX; 1971 Edition of Q-11(b)(5)
Date Issued: 08/09/1977
Record Number: W-76-59
Interpretation Number : IX-77-18
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: With respect to the 1971 Edition of Section IX, Q-11(b)(5), is it
intended that the ranges for amperage, voltage, and speed of travel may be
different in the Welding Procedure Specifications from that recorded in the
PQR test?

Reply: It is the intent of Section IX (1971 Edition), Q-11(b)(5) that the


procedure qualifications record shall record the ranges actually used with
the filler metal used in the procedure qualification test, but that the Welding
Procedure Specification may specify ranges in amperage, voltage, and
speed of travel that will produce acceptable welds and yet might be quite
different than the actual values used in the procedure qualification record.
For example, the procedure qualification record may have recorded data on
a 5/32 in. electrode actually used, whereas the Welding Procedure
Specification written as supported by the welding procedure record, gives
the ranges to be used for 1/8 in. through 1/4 in. diameter electrodes. The

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
7/51

electrode manufacturers ranges when available are an acceptable guide. In


the case of shielded metal-arc welding and gas tungsten-arc welding even
wider ranges are possible. The size of the electrode or filler metal is not an
essential variable.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-351
Date Issued: 09/26/1977
Record Number: BC-77-469
Interpretation Number : IX-77-19
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a welder qualified in a given procedure, and for a given
maximum thickness of deposit, weld on pipe of greater wall thickness,
provided the thickness deposited by this welder does not exceed his
qualification?

Reply: A welder qualified in a given procedure and for a given maximum


thickness may weld on a pipe of greater wall thickness provided the
thickness deposited does not exceed his qualification. However, the welder
must follow a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) that has a PQR
qualification necessary to weld the full pipe thickness in production.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-351
Date Issued: 09/26/1977
Record Number: BC-77-469
Interpretation Number : IX-77-19
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a welder qualified in a given procedure, and for a given
maximum thickness of deposit, weld on pipe of greater wall thickness,
provided the thickness deposited by this welder does not exceed his
qualification?

Reply: A welder qualified in a given procedure and for a given maximum


thickness may weld on a pipe of greater wall thickness provided the
thickness deposited does not exceed his qualification. However, the welder
must follow a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) that has a PQR
qualification necessary to weld the full pipe thickness in production.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX; Welder Performance Qualification Tests
Date Issued: 12/27/1977
Record Number: BC-77-609 (W77-52)
Interpretation Number : IX-77-20

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
8/51

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it permissible for a Manufacturer to have the Welder
Performance Qualification test of his welders in accordance with Section IX
conducted on the premises of an organization other than the Manufacturer
without direct supervision from the Manufacturer as a subcontracted service
by an approved vendor as permitted in Section III?

Reply: QW-103.1 states that each Manufacturer is responsible for his


welding and he shall conduct the tests to qualify the performance of welders
and welding operators, and QW-301.2 states that each Manufacturer shall
qualify each welder or welding operator for each welding process to be used
in production welding, but is silent relative to full supervision of the welder
or welding operator during the welding of the test coupons. It is the intent of
the above listed paragraphs that the welders and welding operators be
qualified under the full supervision and control of the Manufacturer during
the production of the test weldment coupons. It is proposed to revise
Section IX to clarify this intent.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Use of Filler Metals not in Section II, Part C
Date Issued: 03/07/1977
Record Number: BC-76-430
Interpretation Number : IX-77-09
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question 1: Is it the intent of Sections I, III, IV, VIII, and IX of the Code
that weld material be ordered to an SFA Specification (Section II, Part C)?

Reply 1: No. Weld material is ordered in different manners by various


users. It is generally advantageous, however, to order to an SFA
Specification where available and suitable for the intended use.

Question 2: If not, how may it be ordered?

Reply 2: Where the weld material is defined in an SFA Specification of


Section II, Part C in sufficient degree for the users purpose he may so order
to the appropriate paragraphs. He may also add his own requirements to
this. He may also order welding materials to his requirements "in toto" -
particularly where an appropriate SFA Specification is not available. The
procedure of ordering varies, but in any event all the requirements of
Section IX and applicable requirements of the book Sections of the Code
must be met for specific usages.

Question 3: Can a weld material that is not SFA/AWS be used for Sections
I, III, IV, and VIII work provided it meets the required chemical and
physicals only, of an SFA/AWS Specification?

Reply 3: Yes. Sections I, III, IV, and VIII use several welding materials for
which an SFA Specification is not available. Section IX allows this and
specifically delineates qualification requirements for this situation as well as
for the situations for which an SFA Specification is available. Section III
additionally specifies requirements for chemical analyses and lot and batch
testing including mechanical property testing.

Question 4: Is the weld material for use in Sections I, III, IV, and VIII work
locked into SFA/AWS or equivalent or may it meet another criteria as

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
9/51

appears to be the intent of Section IX, QW-404.4. "A change from one F
Number in QW-432 to any other F Number or to any other filler metal not
listed in QW-432"?

Reply 4: No. The weld material is not "locked" into SFA/AWS, but - yes - it
may meet other criteria as allows in Section IX, but must meet all Section
IX criteria and other criteria specifically delineated in Book Sections.
Section III particularly includes additional criteria as described in Reply 3
above.

Question 5: Must all welding procedures to be used for Sections I, III, IV


and VIII Code work be qualified by using ASME welding material?

Reply 5: No. However, the welding materials must meet the requirements
delineated in Section IX and in the applicable book sections. When this is
done, they become ASME welding material whether or not an SFA
Specification for the specific welding material exists.

Question 6: The Foreword to the various Code Sections, last paragraph,


addresses itself to base material and welding material. We all more or less
have understood over the years the bench mark base material for Sections I,
III, IV, and VIII work to be SA or SB and the provisions for acceptance of
an identical ASTM. Should one consider this same intent to apply to
welding material, namely, the bench mark for welding material for Sections
I, III, IV, and VIII work to be SFA with provisions for acceptance of an
identical AWS? If so, it would appear that one is locked into the one SFA or
SFA/AWS combination only for welding material the same as we are now
to the SA or SA/ASTM combination only for base material. Is this so?

Reply 6: No. As described above, there are conditions for which an SFA
Specification does not exist or completely cover the condition. For such
situations, the welding materials are to be specifically qualified as part of
the Welding Procedure Qualification. Where an SFA Specification suitable
for the purpose does exist, the description of the welding materials is
simplified through reference to the specification. Also the number of
qualifications may be reduced. In addition to QW-404.4 which contains the
statement "or to any other filler metal not listed in QW-432," QW-404.12
contains the statement "or to a weld metal or filler metal composition not
covered by these specifications." Also other QW-404 items cover situations
for which SFA Specifications may not be available or fully cover the
situation. Some of these are QW-404.8, QW-404.9, QW-404.10, QW-
404.17, QW-404.18, QW-404.20, QW-404.24, QW-404.25, QW-404.26,
and QW-404.27.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404.9 and Section II Part C, SFA-5.17, Table 4, Note C
Date Issued: 01/19/1978
Record Number: W77-7
Interpretation Number : IX-78-01
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-404.9 of Section IX is an essential variable for submerged
arc welding which requires requalification if a change is made from one
flux classification listed in SFA-5.17 to any other flux classification.
Section II, Part C, SFA-5.17, Table 4, Note C states that an F76-Exxx flux-

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
10/51

electrode combination also meets the requirements of all lower numbered


classifications in the F7X-xxx series. Is it correct to interpret Note C to
mean a procedure qualification performed utilizing a F74-EM12K would
qualify that particular welding procedure specification for the use of F72-
EM12K or E70-EL12 as well without additional individual procedure
qualifications?

Reply: AWS A 5.17 and the corresponding SFA-5.17 tests are for
classification purposes only and are designed to minimize the number of
tests required. The Section IX requirement (QW-404.9) governs the
qualification requirements and the limits of qualification for Code
applications. Therefore, it is incorrect to interpret SFA-5.17, Table 4, Note
C as governing Section IX qualification requirements. Appendix A in
SFA-5.17 supplies additional information on the effects of different
electrode-flux combinations effects on strength, ductility, and notch
toughness.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-406.1
Date Issued: 01/19/1978
Record Number: BC-77-118
Interpretation Number : IX-78-02
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-406.1 reads "A decrease of 100F or more in the minimum
specified preheating or interpass temperature." Does the word "specified"
refer to the preheating temperature on the WPS or as recorded on the PQR?

Reply: The word "specified" in QW-406.1 refers to the temperature


specified on the WPS. However, the minimum specified temperature cannot
be more than 100F lower than that stated on the PQR.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-403.6
Date Issued: 01/19/1978
Record Number: BC-77-635
Interpretation Number : IX-78-04
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What is the intent of QW-403.6 when applied to the minimum
thickness limitation of material qualified by test plate when qualifying a
welding procedure?

Reply: It is the intent of the Code that QW-403.6 applies only to thickness
less than 5/8 in. where the thickness of the test coupon is the minimum
thickness qualified. For thicknesses over 5/8 in., the minimum thickness
qualified is as stated in QW-451.

ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected reply sent to the inquirer.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
11/51

Correction Issued: July 31, 1979

Reply: The intent of QW-403.6 was further clarified in the Summer 1979
Addenda. For thickness less than 5/8 in., the thickness of the test coupon is
the minimum thickness qualified for production welds. For thicknesses 5/8
in. or greater, the minimum thickness qualified is 5/8 in.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-305 and QW-452
Date Issued: 01/19/1978
Record Number: BC-77-670
Interpretation Number : IX-78-05
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Will one operator performance qualification for a wall thickness
within the range of a qualified WPS be sufficient to qualify the welding
operator for the full range of thickness of the WPS?

Reply: One operator performance qualification for a wall thickness within


the range of a qualified WPS is not sufficient to qualify the welding
operator for the full range of thickness of the WPS. The welding operator is
qualified only in accordance with the test coupon he welded in accordance
with QW-452.

ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation sent to the inquirer.

Correction Issued: April 11, 1978

Reply: Performance qualification of welding operators is as listed in QW-


305. The thickness of the test coupon or the weld examined for performance
qualification is not a variable for welding operators. An operator who has
satisfactorily passed the performance qualification test is qualified to weld
in accordance with all other qualified welding procedure specifications
using the same welding process as that in the welding procedure
specification to which he qualified. A welding operator is required to
requalify only when changing from one welding process to any other
welding process.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-452.3 Qualification of Welders; Section VIII, Division 1
Date Issued: 01/19/1978
Record Number: BC-77-303 (W-77-30)
Interpretation Number : IX-78-03
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Clarification of the welder qualification requirements for welding
of nozzles into the shell, identified as "T-Joint UW-16.1(c) Section VIII,
Division 1" is requested. The shell in question is made of ASME
specification pipe 3 in. diameter through 14 in. diameter. The nozzles may

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
12/51

be the same material pipe in diameters of 3/4 in. through 8 in. Welders are
qualified using 5 in. Schedule 80 pipe in 2G position. The joint design is a
single vee. In accordance with Performance Qualification, Section IX, QW-
452.3 and QW-461.7, this qualifies welders for groove weld in 2 in.
nominal pipe, minimum and fillet weld in all sizes of pipe in 2G and 2F
positions. Our interpretation of the Code is that the above qualifies welders
to weld nozzles of 3/4 in. through 8 in. into shells providing the minimum
diameter of the shell is not less than the qualified 2 in. Since the joint
design does not require full penetration on the nozzle pipe but only in the
shell, we interpret this as a fillet weld and not a groove weld on the nozzle
pipe. Does the welder have to requalify for 1 in. to 2 in. pipe and under 1
in. as outlined in QW-452.3?

Reply: Performance qualification using 5 in. diameter pipe does not qualify
a welder to perform work on groove welds having a diameter size less than
2-7/8 in. The example you have shown is not considered a fillet weld
application and is a groove weld application subject to the 2 in. nominal
pipe size (2-7/8 in. O.D.) minimum limitation. Therefore, for this
application, qualification of welders would be required on 3/4 in. (1 in.
O.D.) through 2 in. nominal pipe size groove weld test coupons.
Performance qualification using 2 in. Schedule 2X pipe in the 2G position
will qualify the welder to perform work on the following fabrication:

Performance qualification using SMAW, GTAW, and GMAW (except


short circuit mode) or a combination of these processes may be made using
radiographic examination.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Welding Procedure Qualifications - Welding Positions
Date Issued: 01/19/1978
Record Number: BC-77-784
Interpretation Number : IX-78-06
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May welding qualification procedures, limited to a specific
position and qualified prior to the 1974 Edition of Section IX, be used for
all positions of welding after the effective date of the 1974 Edition of
Section IX?

Reply: Welding qualification procedures, qualified prior to the 1974 Edition


of Section IX, and limited to a specific position, may be used for any
position of welding after the effective date of the 1974 Edition of Section
IX.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-410.16, Welder Performance Qualifications
Date Issued: 01/24/1978
Record Number: BC-78-18
Interpretation Number : IX-78-07

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
13/51

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Was it the intent of QW-410.16, as it pertains to the welder
performance qualifications, to exclude a welder qualified on a double-
welded vertical position joint (where only the root was placed using one
direction of progression and then removed to sound metal prior to welding
the second side) from production welding a single-welded backing strap
joint using the other direction of progression?

Reply: Under the conditions expressed in your inquiry where the root was
removed to sound metal in the qualification coupon, it was not the intent of
QW-410.16 to exclude a welder from production welding a single-welded
backing strap joint using the other direction of progression.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-410.16 Welder Performance Qualifications
Date Issued: 01/24/1978
Record Number: BC-78-27
Interpretation Number : IX-78-08
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May welders be qualified on a double welded plate in vertical
upward progression where the root pass has been welded in vertical
downward progression and subsequently removed to sound metal in the
preparation for welding the second side, for a production weld which is a
single welded plate with a backing bar? All welding including the root pass
for production weld is done in vertical upward progression. Reference is
made to QW-410.16.

Reply: Under the conditions of your inquiry, the welders are qualified for
vertical up welding. It is the opinion of the Committee that as stated in the
second sentence of QW-410.16, the root pass may be welded upward or
downward when the root pass is removed to sound metal. It should be
pointed out that it is not critical that the root pass be completely removed.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-410.24, Grain Refining Austenitizing Heat Treatment
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-78-486
Interpretation Number : IX-78-09
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: It is our interpretation that QW-410.24 only concerns material
that would have no postweld heat treatment or a postweld heat treatment
below the austenitizing temperature. Any material being hot formed from a
temperature above the AC3 after welding and/or normalized after welding
and hot forming would not be governed by QW-410.24. Is this
interpretation correct?

Reply: QW-410.24 does not apply when the welding procedure


specification is qualified with a grain refining heat treatment after welding.
QW-410.24 has been revised to clarify this in the 1977 Edition of Section
IX.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
14/51

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-202.2, Fillet Weld Procedure Qualification Test
Requirements
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: W-77-6
Interpretation Number : IX-78-10
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) Does a fillet weld procedure qualification test conducted in
accordance with QW-462.4(a) on in. plate qualify fillets of all sizes in
plates of all thicknesses? (2) Is it a Code requirement that a WPS showing a
sketch of a groove weld be revised to show a fillet weld when that WPS is
to be used to make a fillet?

Replies: (1) The present Code rules allow a fillet weld qualification test
made in accordance with QW-462.4(a) on in. plate to qualify for all fillet
weld sizes and all plate thicknesses. (2) A WPS showing a sketch of a
groove weld does not have to be revised to show a fillet weld when that
WPS is to be used to make a fillet weld. The variable QW-402.1 refers to a
change in groove weld joint design and therefore does not apply to fillet
welds.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Range of Postweld Heat Treatment Temperatures
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-259
Interpretation Number : IX-78-11
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent of Section IX to have WPS's written specifically to
meet the requirements of a fabricating Code (ASME Section I, ANSI B31.1,
etc.) with respect to preheat, PWHT, and other specific fabrication
requirements?

Reply: A given qualified procedure may be used for Section I and/or III
and/or IV, and/or VIII. Other procedures written to various Codes which
reference Section IX may also utilize this procedure, if acceptable to their
inspection and quality control system. Alternatively, anyone may use
Section IX to suit their needs. The various Sections of the Code stipulate
ranges of temperature for PWHT. A procedure must be qualified within this
range. QW-407.1, an essential variable, requires a requalification when
PWHT temperature range is changed.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-409.1 and QW-410.24, Notch Toughness Requirements
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-405

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
15/51

Interpretation Number : IX-78-12


Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: For the processes of SMAW, SAW, GMAW, and GTAW when
notch toughness requirements apply, QW-409.1 and QW-410.24 are
essential variables. We believe that the intent of these paragraphs are met by
specifying that the maximum heat input per unit length of weld shall not
exceed that of the qualification test. Thus, although the voltage and
amperage may increase beyond that used during qualification, the travel
speed may be adjusted accordingly to assure that the heat input per unit
length is controlled. This effectively controls the unit volume of weld metal
deposited per unit length of weld. Therefore, for processes of SMAW,
SAW, GMAW, and GTAW when notch toughness requirements apply, may
the following replace QW-409.1 and QW-410.24 as an essential variable?
An increase in the heat input per unit length of weld over that used in the
qualification tests. Heat input per unit length shall be defined as:

Volts X Amps X 60 / Travel Speed (ipm) = Heat Input (J/in.)

This requirement does not apply when the WPS is qualified with a grain
refining austen-itizing heat treatment after welding.

Reply: QW-409.1 presently does not allow heat inputs to be controlled by


adjusting amperage or voltage upward with an increase in speed. However,
as a result of your inquiry, the Subcommittee on Welding has begun action
to revise the Code.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Application of SFA-5.18 to the GTAW Method
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-447
Interpretation Number : IX-78-13
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does SFA-5.18 apply to the GTAW method?

Reply: SFA-5.18 does apply to the GTAW method.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-410.17, Type or Model of Welding Equipment
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-449
Interpretation Number : IX-78-14
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it permissible to utilize an acceptable PQR covering one type
of process to substantiate a new WPS of the same process but of a different
type without requalification?

Reply: It is permissible to utilize an acceptable PQR covering one type of


process to substantiate a new WPS of the same process if QW-410.17 is not
listed as an Essential Variable for that specific process. This has been
clarified in the Summer 1977 Addenda.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
16/51

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-351, Multiple Process Thicknesses Qualified for a
Performance Qualification
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-468
Interpretation Number : IX-78-15
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) For production welds made using a combination of processes
(GTAW initial passes, SMAW completion), must the welder performing the
GTAW portion of the weld (3/16 in. depth) qualify on 3/4 in. thick test pipe
in order to qualify for unlimited pipe thickness of production welds where
the combination GTAW/SMAW processes are used? (2) If a welder
completes a 3/8 in. depth of weld in a 3/4 in. thick pipe specimen using the
SMAW process, is the welder qualified to deposit a 3/4 in. depth
(maximum) of weld metal in all thicknesses of production pipe welds? (3) If
a welder qualifies on 3/8 in. thickness pipe wall test specimen using the
SMAW process, is that welder qualified to deposit a 3/4 in. depth
(maximum) of weld metal in all thicknesses of production pipe welds?

Replies: (1) No. (2) Yes. (3) Yes.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-255, Flux Cored Arc Welding
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-502
Interpretation Number : IX-78-16
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does gas metal-arc welding (GMAW) in the procedure
qualification and performance qualification refer also to flux cored arc
welding (FCAW)? If so, should welders be qualified separately under both
processes?

Reply: Flux cored arc welding (FCAW) is permissible under the Code and
is considered to come under the more general method of welding known as
gas metal-arc welding (GMAW). Welders do not have to be qualified
separately unless there is a change in any of the Essential Variables.
However, there is an Essential Variable for procedure qualification, QW-
404.23, that requires separate qualification for solid wire and for flux cored
wire for the GMAW process.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-310, Change in A-Number for Performance Qualification
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-594

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
17/51

Interpretation Number : IX-78-17


Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is a welder who satisfactorily accomplishes a welder performance
qualification test using the gas tungsten arc welding process on P-No. 1
material with an F-No. 6 (A-No. 8) filler metal also qualified by virtue of
the above test to use the gas tungsten arc welding process with an F-No. 6
(A-No. 1) filler metal, all other essential variables being the same?

Reply: A welder qualified by the GTAW process with an F-No. 6 (A-No. 8)


filler metal is also qualified to use an F-No. 6 (A-No. 1) filler metal. The
manufacturer must have a procedure qualified for both the (A-No. 8) and
the (A-No. 1) filler metal.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-303.3, QW-452.3, and QW-461.7
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-595
Interpretation Number : IX-78-18
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What is the intent of Section IX with regard to required weld
testing as specified by QW-303.3, QW-452.3, and QW-461.7? A strict
interpretation of QW-303.3 would indicate that pipes or couplings of 2-7/8
in. O.D. or less would require a performance test for each individual size
rather than a general qualification test. However, it would seem logical to
assume that welds made on pipes and couplings of 2-7/8 in. O.D. or less
onto a shell would more normally fall into the category of 1G welds.

Reply: The 2-7/8 in. O.D. pipe or coupling is considered a fitting such as a
nozzle and is attached by a groove or fillet weld and the diameter
limitations do not apply. If two pipes of 2-7/8 in. O.D. are butt welded
together, the diameter limits of the tables apply.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-251.2 and QW-403.5
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-608
Interpretation Number : IX-78-19
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: When a change is made in a Supplementary Essential Variable
for work done according to a Section which specifies notch toughness tests,
are tension, bend, and impact tests required or only weld deposit and heat
affected zone impacts?

Reply: When a change is made in a Supplementary Essential Variable for


work done according to a Section which specifies notch toughness tests, all
tests are not required to requalify the procedure. The second paragraph of
QW-403.5 states: When a procedure has been previously qualified to satisfy
all requirements other than notch toughness, it is then necessary only to
prepare an additional test coupon using the same procedure with the plates
only long enough to provide the necessary notch toughness specimens. If a

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
18/51

previously qualified weld procedure has satisfactory notch toughness values


in the weld metal then it is necessary only to test notch toughness specimens
from the heat affected zone.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201, Effective Operational Control of Welding Procedure
Qualifications
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-633
Interpretation Number : IX-78-20
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-201 permits welding procedures which are properly
qualified by one Division of a Company to be used by another Division of
the Company within the same organization if in an organization effective
operational control of welding procedure qualifications for two or more
companies of different names exists. What constitutes "effective operational
control of welding procedure qualification" within a corporation?

Reply: WPS's and PQR's may be used by all Divisions of a Corporation the
same as provided in QW-201 for two companies of different names. The
QC Manual must describe the effective operational control of the
production of weldments, and if two or more divisions are involved, which
division is responsible for qualification of procedures and/or the
performance of welders and welding operators. The controlling division
must have the authority to control and the other divisions cannot overrule or
ignore direction from the one controlling. It is the responsibility of the
Authorized Inspector to determine that the described control is being
maintained.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-322, Renewal of Qualification
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-743
Interpretation Number : IX-78-22
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A welder, who was qualified in SMAW for all positions with F4,
F5, F42, F43, and F44 electrodes, for all material thicknesses, returns to
work after a one year absence. If he passes a requalification test on a 3/8 in.
thick carbon steel plate, using an F4 electrode, in flat position, is he then
qualified to weld with F4, F5, F42, F43, and F44 electrodes in all positions
for all thicknesses of materials?

Reply: Yes, the welder would be qualified by making a single test joint on
any thickness, position, or material to reestablish the welder's or welding
operator's qualification for any thickness, position, or material for which he
was previously qualified. This has been clarified in the Winter 1977
Addenda of Section IX.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
19/51

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-202.2, Base Metals - Groove and Fillet Weld
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-78-101
Interpretation Number : IX-78-24
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) We have a WPS (SMAW) qualified with tube 10.97 mm
thickness. The nominal pipe size of the tube used for the welding procedure
qualification was 6 in. Schedule 80, thickness 10.97 mm. Can this
procedure be used with groove welds in plates and pipes under 3/8 in.
(9.525 mm) thickness? (2) Can this procedure be used with fillet welds in
plates under 3/8 in. thickness? (3) Can this procedure be used with socket
welds in pipes under 3/8 in. thickness?

Replies: (1) The procedure may be used down to 1.5 mm (approximate),


1/16 in. within the range of essential variables. (2) This procedure can be
used with fillet welds on all thicknesses within the range of essential
variables. (3) This procedure can be used with socket welds on all
thicknesses within the range of essential variables.

ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation sent to the inquirer.

Correction Issued: June 6, 1978

Question: We have a WPS (SMAW) qualified with tube 10.97 mm


thickness. The nominal pipe size of the tube used for the welding procedure
qualification was 6 in. Schedule 80, thickness 10.97 mm. Can this
procedure be used with groove welds in plates and pipes under 3/8 in.
(9.525 mm) thickness?

Reply: The WPS may be used down to 4.76 mm (approximate), 3/16 in.
within the range of essential variables of the WPS.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201.3, Combination of Welding Processes or Procedures
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-77-636
Interpretation Number : IX-78-21
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does the PQR-1 (sketched below) which has two processes
qualified on a single test plate support the WPS-1 (sketched below)? The
maximum plate thickness for WPS-1 is two times the test plate and the weld
deposit of each process for WPS-1 is not more than two times the actual
weld deposit of each process in the test plate. If the PQR-1 does not support
the WPS-1, what should be the thickness of weld deposit in each process in
the test plate to satisfy QW-201.3 requirements?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
20/51

Also, do the following PQRs together support the WPS-1? What changes in
thickness of weld deposit in each process would satisfy QW-201.3 to
support the WPS-1?

Reply: PQR-1 as sketched does support WPS-1. The maximum thickness of


the production joint qualified by PQR-1 is 20 mm which is two times the
thickness of the metal deposited by the SMAW and TIG process. PQR-2
and PQR-3 taken together do not support WPS-1. PQR-3 would currently
have to be on 10 mm plate to permit WPS-1 to be qualified to satisfy the
base material requirements.Question: Does the PQR-1 (sketched below)
which has two processes qualified on a single test plate support the WPS-1
(sketched below)? The maximum plate thickness for WPS-1 is two times
the test plate and the weld deposit of each process for WPS-1 is not more
than two times the actual weld deposit of each process in the test plate. If
the PQR-1 does not support the WPS-1, what should be the thickness of
weld deposit in each process in the test plate to satisfy QW-201.3
requirements?

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX and Section I, Par. PW-28.5 Welding Qualification
Date Issued: 02/27/1978
Record Number: BC-78-99
Interpretation Number : IX-78-23
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Under what circumstances is it acceptable to modify the
requirements of QW-103.1 of Section IX which reads as follows: QW-
103.1 Welding. Each Manufacturer or Contractor is responsible for the
welding done by his organization and shall conduct the tests required in this
Section to qualify the welding procedures he uses in the construction of the
weldments built under this Code, and the performance of welders and
welding operators who apply these procedures.

Reply: Section I, PW-28.5 provides that: 28.5 To avoid duplication of


qualification tests, it is recommended that procedures, welders. and welding
operators qualified as required above be acceptable for any similar welding
work on piping using the same procedure (see PW-1.2). It is the intent of
this paragraph to provide for the avoidance of duplication of qualification
tests of welding procedure specification, welders, and welding operators as
applied to piping within the Scope of Section I. Manufacturers or
Contractors are permitted to join together with other Manufacturers or
Contractors into an organization for the establishment of welding procedure
specifications and their qualification so that the individual Manufacturer or
Contractor does not have to duplicate this. This means that a welding
procedure specification adopted by the organization must be qualified in
accordance with Section IX of the Code by a member of the organization.
Other members of the organization may subsequently use the weld-ing
procedure specification without requalification. Welding procedure
qualification test records shall be available with each welding procedure
specification sent to the organization's membership. No member of the
organization may use the organization's qualified welding procedure
specifications on ASME Code work unless he holds the applicable ASME
Code stamp and Certificate of Authorization. Welders and welding
operators of a member Manufacturer or Contractor must pass their
performance test on each of the organization's welding procedure

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
21/51

specifications they are to weld under, except as otherwise permitted in


Section IX. The performance qualification test records are placed on file
with the organization. When such welders or welding operators are
employed by another member Manufacturer or Contractor, their
performance qualification records are made available to their new employer
by the organization and performance requalification is not required for
those welding procedure specifications under which they qualified
previously. It is incumbent upon the member Manufacturer or Contractor
using the organization's welding procedure specifications and performance
qualification records to assume responsibility for the qualifications by
maintaining records, certified by him, and available to the Authorized
Inspector.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Use of Unclassified Materials
Date Issued: 03/06/1978
Record Number: BC-77-211 (W77-19)
Interpretation Number : IX-78-25
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it necessary to requalify a WPS when a base metal of the same
nominal chemistry as that originally qualified is used, except that the
material was purchased to a specification not recognized by the ASME
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code or is simply another product form of a
previously qualified metal?

Reply: It is necessary to perform a separate procedure qualification of a


metal of the same nominal chemistry of a previously qualified metal that
was purchased to a specification not recognized by the ASME Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-303.6, Fillet Welds
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-78-104
Interpretation Number : IX-78-33
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is a welder who qualified on a 5 in. Schedule 80 groove weld in
the 6G position also qualified to weld fillet welds in all sizes, diameters, and
thicknesses?

Reply: In accordance with QW-303.6, a welder qualified on a 5 in.


Schedule 80 pipe with a groove weld in the 6G position is qualified to weld
fillet welds in all sizes, diameters, and thicknesses.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
22/51

Subject Description: Section IX, Definition of Current Edition


Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-78-105
Interpretation Number : IX-78-34
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: In an ASME response to an inquiry, a definition of "current
Edition" was presented as follows: "... the term 'current Edition' refers to the
latest Addenda of Section IX which has been issued long enough to become
mandatory." The last paragraph of the Section IX Preamble requires new
qualifications to be made in accordance with the requirements of the
"current Edition." The Section IX Foreword in paragraph eight allows
Addenda to be used beginning with the date of issuance shown on the
Addenda. The definition of "current Edition" as stated above appears to
prohibit using Addenda on the date of issuance as allowed in the Foreword.
Is it the intent of the Code to prohibit the use of the latest issued Addenda?

Reply: The Preamble reference to the use of the "current Edition" for
requalification or new qualification is to the latest Addenda of Section IX
that has been issued long enough to become mandatory and relates to
"normal" mandatory requirements. However, the Foreword overrides and
permits using the Addenda on the date of issuance so the Manufacturer has
the option of using it as the current Addenda. It is not the intent of the Code
to prohibit the use of the latest Addenda upon issuance.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX - Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) and Procedure
Qualification Record (PQR)
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-77-358
Interpretation Number : IX-78-26
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): May a WPS and PQR prepared to the "current Edition"
requirements of a 1962 or later Edition of Section IX be used to support
work being performed to contracts invoking the 1974 Edition. (Preamble,
1974 Edition of Section IX)?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): May a WPS and PQR that meet the requirements of the 1962
or later Editions of Section IX be used for work where the contract date is
any time prior to or after the qualification date?

Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): May a qualification be performed at some time after the


Section IX date invoked by the Contract and utilized to support a WPS
written to the requirements of the Code for the date invoked by the contract
or any subsequent date, regardless of the date of the "current Edition" as it
applies to the qualification, provided all essential variables for the Edition
of the Code used in the WPS have been documented on the PQR? For
example, a contract invokes Section IX, 1971. May qualifications be
performed today to the 1971 Edition of Section IX, or a later version, and
be utilized to support a WPS written to the 1971 Edition of Section IX?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
23/51

Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): May a qualification performed to a prior Edition of Section IX


(1962 or later) support a WPS written to a later version of ASME Section
IX provided all essential variables of the later version have been
documented on the PQR?

Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): May a PQR originally prepared to a particular version of the


Code be updated to reflect a later version of the Code provided all essential
variables of the later version are available from the qualification test records
for documentation on the PQR?

Reply (5): Yes.

In all cases, the PQR and WPS combination shall meet the requirements of
the same Section IX Edition and Addenda that is selected for use.

It is recommended that both the PQR and WPS designate which Edition and
Addenda of ASME Section IX the documents reflect.

Regarding the last two statements of the inquiry, it is the opinion of the
Committee that the date shown on the WPS and PQR will identify the
Edition of Section IX and Addenda.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-161.5, Longitudinal Bend Tests
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-77-374 (W-77-38)
Interpretation Number : IX-78-27
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) Does QW-161.5 apply to guided bend tests of 9% Nickel-
to-9% Nickel butt joint welded with an ENiCrFe-2 (or ENiCrFe-3)
electrode, (base metal SA-353 or SA-553; plate thickness under in.)? (2)
If the answer to Question (1) is affirmative, what is the relative value of
each type of bend test as a measure of the quality of the weld?

Replies: (1) QW-161.5 does apply to guided bend tests of 9% Ni Steel-


to-9% Ni steel butt welds made using ENiCrFe-2 (or ENiCrFe-3)
electrodes. (2) Transverse bends made using guided bend jigs illustrated in
QW-466.1 and QW-466.2 provide acceptable test methods for weldments
when base metals and weld metal have similar bending properties. When
transverse bend specimens of base metals and/or weld metal having
markedly different bending properties are tested in these guided bend jigs,
selective yielding may occur in the lowest yield strength area of the
weldment. The localized yielding may far exceed the elongation required by
Section IX, and may render the weldment rejectable when, in fact, the
deposited weld quality and weldment ductility are acceptable. However,
longitudinal guided bends made using guided bend jigs illustrated in QW-
466.1 and QW-466.2 or transverse guided bends made using the wrap-
around bend jig illustrated in QW-466.3 result in essentially uniform
bending of all areas across the weldment.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
24/51

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Preamble
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-77-450
Interpretation Number : IX-78-28
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) The Preamble to Section IX states that procedure and
performance qualifications made in accordance with the requirements of the
1962 or any later Edition of Section IX may be used for Code Work. Does
this dispensation also apply to Welding Procedure Specifications? (2) Do
WPS's have to be revised to the latest Edition of the Code or can they be
used today if properly written and qualified to the 1962 Code?

Replies: (1) It is the opinion of the Committee that "welding and brazing
procedures" specified in the Preamble of Section IX includes welding and
brazing procedure specifications. (2) It is the opinion of the Committee that
a WPS written to the 1962 Code may be used in Code construction today
without revision and does not require requalification, if the results of tests
meet the requirements of the 1962 Code or any later Edition. However, if a
revision to an essential variable is more restrictive than previous Editions,
the WPS should be revised and requalified. It is not the intent of the
Committee to cause extensive retesting of previously employed welding and
brazing procedures, welders, brazers, or welding and brazing operators.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-482, Reference to Other Documents on Welding Procedure
Specifications
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-77-801
Interpretation Number : IX-78-30
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a welding procedure specification (WPS) reference another
document in response to either an essential or nonessential variable in lieu
of having the applicable information contained directly on the WPS?

Reply: QW-482 is a suggested form which lists essential and nonessential


variables to be included in the welding procedure specification. The use of a
similar form, together with supplemental documents, is considered to be
acceptable, provided the essential and nonessential variables for each
specific welding process are included.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Preamble
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-78-25 (W78-2)

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
25/51

Interpretation Number : IX-78-32


Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Can a WPS be written to the present Section IX requirements
using a qualification conducted to a previous Edition of Section IX provided
the qualification and WPS meet the essential and nonessential variables of
the present Code?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Can a PQR or Q-1 be updated to reflect a later version of the
Code provided the required information of the later version is available?

Reply (2): Yes, provided that the original document is maintained and
available.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404.13 and QW-404.22, Consumable Inserts
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-77-710
Interpretation Number : IX-78-29
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: We currently have a qualified WPS for making single-welded
butt joints in stainless steel piping, using the gas tungsten-arc welding
process. As qualified, the procedure does not require the use of a
consumable insert. It is unclear if we are required to requalify our WPS
and/or our welders if we add a consumable insert (with an analysis meeting
the same A-Number as the filler rod used) to the procedure. The confusion
arises in the last sentence of QW-404.13 which reads "Qualification in a
single-welded butt joint, with or without consumable inserts, qualifies for
fillet welds and single-welded butt joints with backing or double-welded
butt joints." If consumable inserts are considered backing, then the
statement in effect says that qualification in a single-welded butt joint, with
or without consumable inserts, qualifies for a single-welded butt joint with
consumable inserts (backing). We feel that the current definition of backing
in QW-492 contains nothing which excludes consumable inserts. A more
specific definition is the one approved by the AWS Committee on
Definitions Symbols and Metric Practice in 1975: "Backing - A material
(base metal, weld metal carbon, or granular material) placed at the root of a
weld joint for the purpose of supporting molten weld metal." If consumable
inserts are not considered backing, but are considered joint material, two
other questions arise. First, does the addition of a consumable insert
constitute a change in the basic groove design and, hence, not require
requalification according to QW-402.1? Second, does a change in the shape
of a consumable insert constitute a change in basic groove design?

Reply: It is the opinion of the committee that a WPS and welders qualified
on a single-welded butt joint without the use of a consumable insert, will
require requalification when a consumable insert is to be used in the
fabrication of single-welded butt joints. This requirement is specified in
QW-404.13 for WPS qualification and QW-404.22 for performance
qualification. Regarding your inquiry of a consumable insert being
considered as a backing for single-welded butt joints, it is the opinion of the
Committee that a consumable insert is not to be considered backing.
Regarding your questions in the last paragraph, it is the opinion of the
committee that: (1) consumable inserts are considered to be filler metal; and

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
26/51

(2) joint geometry is a nonessential variable (QW-402.1). Therefore,


requalification of a WPS is not required when a change in joint geometry is
made. A change in the shape of the consumable insert is not considered an
essential variable, even though a change in joint geometry may be required.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201.3, Combination of Welding Processes or Procedures
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-77-372
Interpretation Number : IX-78-47
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: We interpret QW-201.3 to allow the use of portions of existing
qualifications to establish new welding procedure specifications as long as
none of the original essential variables are violated and such portions are
limited to the separation of processes or similar processes with differences
created by essential variables. Please advise us of your interpretation.

Reply: QW-201 permits one PQR to support more than one WPS. QW-
201.3 permits the deletion of one or more processes from production welds,
provided the processes used in production are qualified for the thickness
range specified in QW-202.2, QW-403, and QW-451. Requalification is not
required for a new WPS written to cover production welds made with the
process used in depositing the root layer of a multiprocess qualification test,
provided the WPS limits the thickness of production welds to 2t the
deposited thickness of the root layer.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-403.9, Single- or Multi-Pass Welding
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-77-467
Interpretation Number : IX-78-48
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does the in. dimension in QW-403.9 refer to bead thickness or
bead width?

Reply: The in. dimension refers to bead thickness for a groove weld and
the throat distance of a single-pass fillet weld. The in. measure has no
relationship to the width of a single bead or weave.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Definition of Thickness
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-77-227
Interpretation Number : IX-78-36

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
27/51

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Suppose a design is given that requires production of a laminated
joint (see sketch) where several 0.020 in. sheets of P-No. 8 material are
clamped together and the ends welded to effect a weld deposit that later
becomes part of a butt weld. For purposes of procedure qualification, can
the assembled thickness ("T" on sketch) of the production joint, rather than
the individual sheet thickness, be considered as the thickness that the
procedure must cover, since the sheets are assembled prior to arc initiation?

Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404.9, Flux Classification
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-77-253
Interpretation Number : IX-78-37
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a procedure qualified with one of the SFA-5.17 flux
classifications (such as, F73--XXXX) be used with a lower flux
classification (such as, F72-, F70-), assuming a "neutral" flux is used,
without requalification?

Reply: No. Under the essential variable QW-404.9, a procedure qualified


with one of the SFA-5.17 flux classifications does not qualify a lower flux
classification. Note (c) of Table 4 in SFA-5.17 does not apply to procedure
qualifications.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201.2, Procedure Qualification Record
Date Issued: 03/09/1978
Record Number: BC-78-21
Interpretation Number : IX-78-31
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): The revisions to QW-201.2 in the Summer 1977 Addenda to
Section IX include the statement, "The WPS identification (including date
and revision number) shall be listed on the PQR." Since, as noted in QW-
201, a PQR may support a number of WPSs, must each WPS (including
date and revision number) be listed?

Reply (1): The quoted statement intends the Manufacturer shall follow the
variables of a WPS when making the test coupons for procedure
qualification testing. The essential variables used, the test results, and the
WPS followed when welding the test coupons shall all be recorded on the
PQR form. The PQR therefore reflects the test results and the conditions
used when welding the test coupons. This PQR may now be used to support
several additional WPSs without any change, since all the conditions used
during the welding of the test coupons are recorded in the original PQR.
Each WPS supported by a PQR need not be listed on the supporting PQR.
Only the WPS used during the procedure qualification testing needs be
listed on the PQR.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
28/51

Question (2): If a new WPS, which uses an already written PQR, is written,
must the PQR be revised to include it?

Reply (2): A new WPS may be written and may be supported by an already
qualified PQR, without any change or revision to the PQR.

Question (3): Will a revision in a WPS, occasioned by the inclusion of an


additional PQR, require a revision to the other support PQRs to show the
newly revised WPS number?

Reply (3): A WPS may be revised, occasioned by the inclusion of an


additional PQR without revision to the other supporting PQRs. Each PQR
need only list the WPS (including date and revision number) used during
the procedure qualification testing. The WPS date and revision number used
must be listed on the PQR so the testing conditions of the WPS at the time
of the qualification testing will be known. The WPS may then be revised for
future needs because the conditions of the WPS used for the qualification
testing are traceable by the WPS date and revision number.

Question (4): Is it necessary to revise the present PQRs to include the WPSs
which they support?

Reply (4): It is not necessary to revise present PQRs to include the WPSs
which they support.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201, QW-403.9, and QW-201.3
Date Issued: 03/14/1978
Record Number: BC-78-70
Interpretation Number : IX-78-35
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) Is it required that three separate plants of a division of a
company develop their own welding procedures and qualify them or can
they be written and qualified by Division Welding Engineering in
conjunction with one plant and be used in the other two plants? (2) In QW-
403.9, does the statement "greater than in. (13 mm)," refer to width or
depth of the weld pass? (3) Can QW-201.3 be interpreted to mean that if a
joint is qualified for welding with a single pass manual weld produced by a
specified process on one side and an automatic weld with a different
process (or even the same process) on the other side, that at any time in the
future the same weld may be produced using either one of the processes or
procedures on both sides of the joint without a new WPS or PQR and no
revision to the existing WPS or PQR?

Replies: (1) WPSs and PQRs may be used by all divisions of a corporation
the same as provided in QW-201 for two companies of different names. The
QC Manual must describe the effective operational control of the
production of weldments, and if two or more divisions are involved, which
division is responsible for qualification of procedures and/or the
performance of welders and welding operators. The controlling division
must have the authority to control and the other divisions cannot overrule or
ignore direction from the controlling division. It is the responsibility of the
Authorized Inspector to determine that the described control is being
maintained. (2) In QW-403.9, the statement "greater than in. (13 mm)"

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
29/51

refers to depth of the weld pass. (3) In a production joint qualified by two
processes or procedures, one may be deleted providing the remaining
process or procedure has been, in the specific combination welding process
or procedure qualification, qualified (within the thickness limits specified in
QW-202.2, QW-403, and QW-451) for the deposited weld metal thickness
range for the remaining process or procedure used in the production joint.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404, Filler Metals
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-77-254
Interpretation Number : IX-78-38
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does the use of more than one of the electrodes in SFA 5.9
(although within the same F-Number and A-Number) for a submerged-arc
procedure with a "neutral" flux require a requalification?

Reply: Several electrodes in SFA 5.9 may be used under one qualified
procedure within the limits of all applicable essential variables. Please note
QW-404.9.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201, Effective Operational Control
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-75-447
Interpretation Number : IX-78-44
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: The third paragraph of QW-201 states: "the Code recognizes a
Manufacturer, contractor, assembler, or installer as the organization which
has responsible operational control of the production of the weldments to be
made in accordance with this Code. If in an organization effective
operational control of welding procedure qualification for two or more
companies of different names exists, the companies involved must establish
this to the satisfaction of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee, in
which case separate welding procedure qualifications are not required."
Please provide an interpretation of this paragraph regarding what constitutes
effective operational control.

Reply: WPSs and PQRs may be used by all divisions of a corporation the
same as provided in QW-201 for two companies of different names. The
QC Manual must describe the effective operational control of the
production of weldments, and if two or more divisions are involved, which
division is responsible for qualification of procedures and/or the
performance of welders and welding operators. The controlling division
must have the authority to control and the other divisions cannot overrule or
ignore direction from the controlling division. It is the responsibility of the
Authorized Inspector to determine that the described control is being
maintained.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
30/51

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-351 and Table QW-452, Welder Performance
Qualification
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-77-360
Interpretation Number : IX-78-39
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions : (1) The sketch presented below is meant to display a typical
cross section of our 6 in. test pipe in the as-welded condition; open root
GTA with SMA fill and coverbead reinforcement. In addition, it should be
pointed out that we use radiography exclusively for welder performance
qualifications.

Is a welder who successfully qualifies on our 6 in. pipe test following a


combination open root GTA/SMA procedure qualified for combination
open root GTA/SMA welding on production joint thicknesses from 3/16 in.
to maximum welded restricted only to a GTA deposit of 2 times the GTA
test weld?

(2) Is a welder who successfully qualifies on our 6 in. pipe test following a
combination open root GTA/SMA procedure using one pass GTA also
qualified for SMA welding on backing on production joint thicknesses from
3/16 in. to maximum welded? We contend that the welder has made his
SMA weld on 0.750 in. minimum thickness pipe (QW-452) and he has also
deposited 0.750 in. of weld metal including coverbead reinforcement (QW-
351).

Replies: (1) The welder who successfully qualifies on your 6 in. pipe test
following a combination open root GTA/SMA procedure is qualified for
combination open root GTA/SMA welding on production joint thicknesses
from 3/16 in. to maximum welded restricted only to a GTA deposit of 2
times the GTA deposit thickness of the test weld. (2) The welder who
successfully qualifies on your 6 in. pipe test following a combination open
root GTA/SMA procedure using one pass GTA is also qualified for SMA
welding on backing on production joint thicknesses from 3/16 in. to
maximum welded. The welder has made his SMA weld on 0.750 in.
minimum thickness pipe, but he has deposited 0.750 in. of SMA weld metal
only if the coverbead reinforcement is included. In this case, in order to take
advantage of the coverbead reinforcement to qualify the welder for
unlimited deposit weld metal thickness, the coverbead reinforcement should
not be removed for making the side bend tests. If the coverbead
reinforcement is removed for making the side bend tests (as is ordinarily
done to prepare the specimen for best assurance of passing the bend test),
the intent is that the 2t maximum qualified for the specific case would be 1
1/4 in.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-407.1, Postweld Heat Treatment
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-78-106

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
31/51

Interpretation Number : IX-78-42


Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A WPS was originally written and qualified with the use of a
postweld heat treatment. The vessel now up for fabrication requires no
postweld heat treatment. QW-407.1 is an essential variable for the process
being used. Does a revised WPS have to be written without the heat
treatment step in it?

Reply: The existing WPS must be revised to include the allowance of


welding with or without post-weld heat treatment, or a new WPS must be
written for welding without postweld heat treatment at the choice of the
Manufacturer.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, P- and A-Numbers
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-77-856
Interpretation Number : IX-78-41
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Questions: (1) A welding procedure is qualified as per Section IX. The base
metal welded is 14 Mo V 63 pipe. Its chemical composition is C, 0.1 to
0.18; Mn, 0.3 to 0.60; Si, 0.15 to 0.35; Cr, 0.3 to 0.6; Mo, 0.5 to 0.65; V,
0.25 to 0.35. Its ultimate tensile strength is 50 to 70 kg/mm2. The electrode
used is Cromotherme-2 conforming to AWS E-9018 B3. Its chemical
composition is C, 0.07 max; Mn, 0.8 to 1.0; Si 0.3 to 0.35; Cr, 2.1 to 2.3;
Mo, 0.9 to 1.0. Its ultimate tensile strength is 60 to 68 kg/mm2. The
resultant weld metal com-position is C, 0.08; Mn, 0.74; Cr, 1.67; Mo, 0.63;
V, 0.10. The base metal specification does not fit into any of the P-Number
groups of Section IX. Also the weld metal can not be classified under any
one of the A-Number groups. Hence, you are requested to clarify regarding
the P-Number grouping of the above material and the A-Number group of
the weld metal. (2) We are also interested in knowing why vanadium steels
in general are not mentioned in the ASME Code whereas other codes like
B.S. and DIN use them regularly.

Replies: (1) The Code has grouped the commonly used base materials and
filler materials deposit analysis into P-Numbers and A-Numbers. There are
many materials, however, that have not been grouped. The base materials
without P-Numbers and the filler materials without A-Numbers must have a
separate procedure qualification for Code use. (2) Materials may be added
to the Code at the request of the user and approval of the appropriate Code
Committee.

ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation sent to the inquirer.

Correction Issued: April 17, 1978

Replies: (1) Materials approved for welded construction under the rules of
the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee are grouped into
P-Numbers in relation to their effects upon the welding processes employed
in these constructions. Section IX lists only those materials which are
approved by other Sections of the Code for welded construction. New

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
32/51

materials are considered under the normal procedures of approval process


for materials of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee. Section
IX covers only the materials listed in the appropriate P-Number tables. (2)
The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code includes those materials which
a user or fabricator of vessels constructed in accordance with all the
requirements of a Section of the Code indicates a need to meet his
requirements. The user or fabricator of ASME pressure vessels may request
new materials, not presently included in the Code, by application to the
Secretary of the Committee. Your attention is invited to the "Guideline on
the Adoption of New Base Materials for the ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code" in Section II, Part A.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Certification of Accessory Welding Equipment
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-78-107
Interpretation Number : IX-78-43
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it a requirement to certify accessory equipment used to monitor
nonessential variables for the GTAW, GMAW, and PAW processes? We
currently monitor calibration of the following during the welding of the 300
series stainless steel: (1) speed indicators (2) gas mixers (3) flowmeters, and
(4) gas analyzers. Are these certifications required even though the
accessory equipment will be used for nonessential variables.

Reply: Yes. The requirement of the Code is that nonessential variable


ranges be specified on the Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) and
they must be followed when making Code welds. Changes may be made to
a nonessential range without requalifications to the WPS, but the changes
must be made and the WPS revised by the Manufacturer before the WPS
can be used in productions with the new ranges. The type and extent of the
certification or calibration of the necessary equipment shall be documented
in the QA/QC manual and the requirements of the Section of the Code
being used.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX and Section II, Welding Performance Qualification and Welding
Procedure Qualification
Date Issued: 03/22/1978
Record Number: BC-77-377
Interpretation Number : IX-78-40
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): QW-310 specified a P-Number of the base material for a test
coupon for welding performance qualification. Is it permissible in the
performance qualification test to use the JIS material (Japan Industrial
Standard) instead of the ASME material, provided that the JIS material has
the chemical composition equivalent to the P-Number material specified in
QW-310?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
33/51

Reply (1): Yes, it is permissible in the performance qualification test to use


the JIS material (Japan Industrial Standard) instead of the ASME material
provided that the JIS material has the chemical composition equivalent to
the P-Number material specified in QW-310.

Question (2): Is it permissible in the performance qualification to use the


JIS welding material and to classify this welding material as an F-Number
conforming to QW-430, provided that the JIS welding material has the
same mechanical properties and chemical composition as specified in an
SFA Specification of Section II, Part C?

Reply (2): Yes, it is permissible in the performance qualification to use the


JIS welding material and to classify this welding material as an F-Number
conforming to QW-430, provided that the JIS welding material has the
same mechanical properties and chemical composition as specified in the
SFA Specification (listed in QW-432) of Section II, Part C.

Question (3a): There is no specification for the mild and low-alloy steel
welding rods for gas tungsten arc welding in Section II, Part C. Is it
permissible to use SFA-5.18 for welding rods for gas tungsten arc welding
except that this welding rod is used for gas tungsten arc welding and the
type of package does not meet SFA-5.18.

Reply (3a): Yes, provided the rods conform to the requirements of the
specific AWS classification in SFA-5.18 with respect to chemistry and
mechanical properties.

Question (3b): Is it permissible in the procedure and performance


qualifications to classify the welding rod as F-No. 6 conforming to QW-
430?

Reply (3b): Yes, it is permissible in the procedure and performance


qualifications to classify the welding rod as F-No. 6 conforming to QW-
430.

Question (4): Is the renewal of performance qualification not required when


a welder or welding operator has used the specific process for a period of
three months, even if the Code was not applied to the production weld
which he made?

Reply (4): The intent of the Code is that the welder or welding operator be
welding with the specific process on either Code work or non-Code work,
and that documentation is required.

Question (5): Is it necessary to make any nondestructive examination on the


production welds which a welder or welding operator made to renew his
qualifications?

Reply (5): Nondestructive examinations of production welds are given in


the Sections other than Section IX. Section IX performance qualifications
by radiography are as given in QW-302, QW-304, and QW-305. These
paragraphs describe conditions for qualification by radiography of separate
test coupons, for welders and welding operators, and conditions for
qualification of welding operator by radiography of a production weld.

Question (6): When the welding procedure qualification test for repair or
built-up welding is performed by groove welding, is it permissible to use a
joint which is made between base metals of two different groups, provided

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
34/51

that one of the base metals is the same group as the other used for the
production?

Reply (6): For welding procedure qualification for repair or built-up


welding performed by groove welding it is not permissible to use a joint
which is made between base metals of two different groups in which only
one of the base metals is the same group as the other used for production.
QW-202.2 delineates the ranges qualified for specific conditions, but the
essential variables for the specific conditions must be met.

Question (7): The postweld heat treatment was not required for nonferrous
materials in the Edition of Section IX published before 1974. Can the
welding procedure qualified before 1974 be used in the construction of the
vessel to be subjected to the postweld heat treatment, even if the test coupon
was not subjected to the postweld heat treatment, or is the requalification
required?

Reply (7): The welding procedure qualified before 1974 cannot be used in
the construction of the vessel to be subjected to postweld heat treatment if
the test coupon was not subjected to the postweld heat treatment.
Requalification is required.

Question (8): There is no special requirement for welding procedure


qualification of tube-to-sheet welding in Section VIII, Division 1. Can the
welding procedures qualified by the groove or fillet conforming to Section
IX, welding processes tested conforming to Appendix A of Section VIII,
Division 1 or the welding procedures qualified in accordance with the
requirements of Section VIII, Division 2 or Section III be used for tube-to-
tubesheet welding for the vessel to be fabricated in accordance with Section
VIII, Division 1? Reply (8): Welding procedures qualified by the groove or
fillet conforming to Section IX, using welding processes tested conforming
to Appendix A of Section VIII, Division 1, can be used for tube-to-
tubesheet welding for the vessel to be fabricated in accordance with Section
VIII, Division 1. Since the requirements of Section VIII, Division 2 and of
Section III are more restrictive for qualification of tube-to-tubesheet welds,
these also would meet Section VIII, Division 1 requirements.

Question (9): Is it necessary to revise WPSs, PQRs, and Manufacturer's


records of welder or welding operator qualification tests which were already
recorded in the event that the recommended forms are revised under the
new Edition or Addenda?

Reply (9): It is not necessary to revise WPSs, PQRs, and Manufacturer's


records of welder or welding operator qualification tests which were already
recorded in the event that the recommended forms are revised under the
new Edition or Addenda.

ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected replies sent to the inquirer.

Corrected Issued: July 31, 1979

Reply (1): No, the material must be to a specification of P-No. 1; see QW-
310.4. The Code has provisions where a stamp holder may take a material
or electrode and reidentify it to an appropriate Code recognized
specification, providing the material meets the requirements of that
specification.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
35/51

Reply (2): No. F-Number assignment of QW-432 applies to SFA electrodes,


as included in QW-432. The Code has provisions where a stamp holder may
take a material or electrode and reidentify it to an appropriate Code
recognized specification, providing the material meets the requirements of
that specification.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201.1, Welding Procedure Specification
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-77-247
Interpretation Number : IX-78-45
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Must exact filler metal alloy (such as ER308) be stated on the
WPS, or is a general classification (such as ERXX) sufficient?

Reply: QW-201.1 states that the WPS shall list in detail the filler metals to
be used. The particular electrode classification, or trade name, must
therefore be listed on the WPS. QW-404.12 is a variable which also
requires the listing of the AWS classification.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201.3, Combination of Welding Processes or Procedures
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-77-271
Interpretation Number : IX-78-46
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it necessary to write a new WPS when combining two
previously qualified WPSs to do a third combination of welding?

Reply: When two WPSs are combined to provide direction for a third
combination of welding, a new WPS will usually be required. The support
PQRs from the original WPS should be listed on the new WPS.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-310.5, Combination with Austenitic Stainless Steel or
Nickel Alloy Filler Metals
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-78-77
Interpretation Number : IX-78-50
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does a performance qualification test made using "any" F41
through F45 filler metal with one or a combination of P-Numbers as
mentioned in QW-310.5, qualify the operator for all combinations of these
base metals, using "any one" F41 through F45 filler metal?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
36/51

Reply: Yes, provided you have a qualified Welding Procedure Specification


for each combination the welder will be using in production.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-409, Electrical Characteristics
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-78-108
Interpretation Number : IX-78-51
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: In QW-409.8 it states "... a change in the range of amperage or
voltage." QW-409.10 states "a change in amperage of more than + 10%."
QW-409.8 is a nonessential variable and QW-409.10 is an essential
variable. Please clarify this.

Reply: QW-409.8 is a general statement and is a nonessential variable. The


amperage is modified by QW-409.10 and a + 10% change in amperage only
is considered an essential variable.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Performance Qualifications
Date Issued: 03/31/1978
Record Number: BC-78-109
Interpretation Number : IX-78-52
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is a welder qualified in carbon steel material with AWS E7018
electrode allowed to weld 9 Chrome alloy steel with AWS E505 electrode?

Reply: Yes, provided that you have a WPS for 9 Chrome alloy steel with an
E505 electrode qualified in accordance with the requirements of the Code.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-421, Substitution of P-Number Materials
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-228
Interpretation Number : IX-78-53
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a P-No. 5 Group 1 base metal of tensile strength 70,000 psi
be used when a welder is qualified on P-No. 5, Group 2 base metal of
60,000 psi within the limits of all other remaining applicable essential
variables? Notch toughness is not a requirement.

Reply: A P-No. 5 Group 1 base metal of tensile strength 70,000 psi may be
used when a welder is qualified on P-No. 5 Group 2 base metal of 60,000
psi, within the limits of the other remaining applicable essential variables,
and when notch toughness is not required. You are cautioned that strength

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
37/51

of filler metal in production must be equal to the strength of stronger base


metal, unless this requirement is waived by the various Sections of the Code
for limited applications.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201, Manufacturers or Contractors Responsibility
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-316
Interpretation Number : IX-78-55
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Must the welder or welding operator performing the welding
procedure qualification test be an employee of the Manufacturer or
Contractor preparing or having the welding procedure specification
prepared? Is it acceptable for the Manufacturer or Contractor to enlist the
services of a testing laboratory for the preparation of welding procedure
specifications and for a welder in the employ of the testing laboratory to
perform the welding procedure qualification tests?

Reply: In QW-201, it is stated that "the welders or welding operators used


to produce weldments to be tested for qualification of procedures shall be
under the full supervision and control of the Manufacturer, Contractor,
assembler, or installer during the production of these test weldments. It is
not permissible for the Manufacturer, Contractor, assembler, or installer to
have the welding of the test weldments performed by another organization.
It is permissible, however, to subcontract any or all of the work of
preparation of test materials for welding and subsequent work on
preparation of test specimens from the completed weld-ment, performance
of nondestructive examination, and mechanical tests, provided the
Manufacturer, Contractor, assembler, or installer accepts the responsibility
for any such work."

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-403.6, Supplementary Essential Variable, WPS Thickness
Range Qualification
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-369
Interpretation Number : IX-78-56
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What is required to qualify a WPS to weld from 0.203 in. to
0.906 in. when impact testing is a requirement of the applicable Section of
the Code.

Reply: A 0.203 in. test coupon is required to meet the intent of QW-403.6.
This would qualify from 0.203 in. to 0.406 in. A second test coupon is
required to qualify welding up to 0.906 in. This coupon could be 0.453 in.
or greater. The 0.453 in. test coupon alone qualifies from 0.453 in. (per
QW-403.6) to 0.906 in. but when combined with the 0.203 in. test coupon,
would qualify for welding from 0.203 in. thru 0.906 in. There is no need to
weld a third test coupon to qualify the gap between 0.406 in. and 0.453 in.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
38/51

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404.3, QW-404.6 and QW-409.12, Filler Rods and
Tungsten Electrodes
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-370
Interpretation Number : IX-78-57
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does QW-404.3 deal with filler rod and QW-404.6 deal with the
tungsten electrode?

Reply: Yes. QW-404.3 deals with filler material and QW-404.6 deals with
the tungsten electrode. QW-409.12 also deals with the tungsten electrode.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-482, QW-483, and QW-484; Section VIII
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-308
Interpretation Number : IX-78-54
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): When a root pass using SMAW is used to prepare a weld joint
for welding by SAW, are these considered a combined process?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): When welding procedures are to be used for Section VIII
work, is it necessary to state in QW-410, Cleaning, on QW-482, that
surfaces must be dean for a distance of in. from the weld joint (UW-32)?

Reply (2): Cleaning required by Section VIII must be specified on the WPS.

Question (3): When multiple values are used on multi-pass or combined


process welding for current, voltage, and filler sizes, how do you fill in
QW-482? Often there is not enough room on the form to be specific. Should
the Manufacturer use separate page and reference this page on WPS?

Reply (3): Requirements of each pass must be specified on the WPS. This
can be done in any manner suitable to the Manufacturer.

Question (4): Is it necessary to specify the type of NDE for checking back
gouging or to specify any NDE at all on a WPS? Should a separate written
procedure be submitted for approval with the WPS to fill in areas not
covered by the WPS?

Reply (4): NDE is not required on the WPS. Separate written information
may be attached to the WPS to cover areas of welding not on the WPS.

Question (5): If no preheat is used to weld because the ambient temperature


is above the minimum preheat temperature, what is filled in for QW-406,
Preheat Temperature, on QW-483?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
39/51

Reply (5): The ambient temperature must be recorded.

Question (6): When multiple values for current, voltage and filler sizes are
used, how do you fill in Form QW-483?

Reply (6): All values used in qualifying the WPS shall be recorded on the
PQR in any manner acceptable to the Manufacturer.

Question (7): In QW-462.1(a) values are given for test specimen sizes. If a
in. thick specimen is 0.997 in. wide, is this reason to reject a procedure
qualification?

Reply (7): The values are approximate where stated but the 1 in. minimum
is required if t does not exceed 1 in.

Question (8): When a combined process is used, how are welders listed on
QW-483 and what is each welder qualified for?

Reply (8): It must be clearly shown what welding each welder has done on
the PQR. Each welder is qualified for the amount of welding he has done in
accordance with QW-300.

Question (9): When qualifying welders for combined processes, are both
welders listed on one QW-484?

Reply (9): This is at the option of the Manufacturer.

Question (10): If each welder has his own qualification, does the welder
who performed the other portion of the combined process have his name on
the qualification of the first?

Reply (10): This is not necessary.

Question (11): How is this combined process and qualifications documented


on QW-484 in regard to thicknesses qualified and qualifications of a
number of welders?

Reply (11): This is done in accordance with QW-452.

Question (12): How are multivalues for current, voltage, and filler size
listed in QW-484?

Reply (12): This is at the option of the Manufacturer.

Question (13): How are QW-482, QW-483, and QW-484 certified?

Reply (13): This is done by the authorized company representative's


signature.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-201.3
Date Issued: 04/21/1978
Record Number: BC-77-406
Interpretation Number : IX-78-58
Question(s) and Reply(ies):

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
40/51

Questions: (1) Can the GTAW process be deleted, as per QW-201.3 and a
WPS written for: (a) A single welded "Vee" groove joint, using SMAW
against a backing with a thickness limit of 0.187 in. to 0.489 in.? (b) Fillets
and socket welds using SMAW with a thickness weld deposit range of
0.1875 in. to 0.489 in. in all thicknesses of metal? (2) Can the SMAW
process be deleted, as per QW-201.3, and a WPS written for a single
welded "Vee" groove joint using GTAW with a consumable insert and a
thickness limit of 0.1875 in. to 0.375 in.? (3) The question in regards to
QW-403.13 is why is it that, when the consumable insert is deleted from the
PQR previously described, the procedure is not qualified to weld single
"Vee" groove joints with a backing, fillets, and socket welds using both
processes?

Replies: (1) and (2). In answer to Questions Nos. 1 and 2; you are permitted
to prepare Welding Procedure Specifications in accordance with the
provisions of QW-201.3 to meet the conditions of your inquiry. (3) In
answer to Question No. 3; QW-404.13 was revised in the 1977 Summer
Addenda to Section IX.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-150, Tension Test Specimens
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-426
Interpretation Number : IX-78-59
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is the requirement of a 0.505 in. diameter of the machined
specimens for the testing of tensile strength a rigid one?

Reply: No. The 0.505 in. diameter is a convenient diameter for calculation
of square area. It is not required that the 0.505 in. diameter be maintained.
Any diameter that covers the full weld may be used.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-407.4, Postweld Heat Treatment in Which the Lower
Critical Temperature Is Exceeded
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-565
Interpretation Number : IX-78-60
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A Procedure Qualification Report using a GTAW root and
SMAW balance has been made using A335 Grade P11 pipe (P-No. 4
material in QW-422) as the base material. The maximum which can be
welded is 2t. In accordance with QW-403.11, this PQR can be used to back
up a WPS using carbon steel (P-No. 1 material) if none of the essential
variables are changed including the postweld heat treatment temperature
range. If a WPS is written for a transition weld between P-No. 1 and P-No.
4 materials using the same PWHT temperature range, the lower critical
temperature of the P-No. 1 material will be exceeded. Is the maximum

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
41/51

thickness qualified 2t as in the P-No. 4 material or 1.1t as allowed by QW-


407.4?

Reply: The maximum thickness qualified is 1.1t as allowed by QW-407.4.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-461.7 Performance Qualification - Positions Limitations
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-599
Interpretation Number : IX-78-61
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-461.7 indicates that qualification on plate or pipe for the 1G
position also qualifies for the 1F position and not for the 2F and 2FR
position. Is this incorrect and does the 1G position also qualify for the 2F
and 2FR positions?

Reply: QW-461.7 is correct. Performance qualification on a 1G plate or


pipe does not qualify a welder for the 2F or 2FR positions.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-203, Limits of Qualified Positions for Procedures
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-634
Interpretation Number : IX-78-62
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): If a welder welds a test coupon for qualifying a WPS in the
1G position, may all the positions for welding in production be listed on one
WPS, or should each position be listed on separate WPSs?

Reply (1): It depends on how the WPS is intended to be used in production.


It may be used either way providing the welder gets the proper direction for
each position he will be using.

Question (2): If a welder is going to weld in the flat position only for a
particular job and if more than one position is allowed on each procedure,
may the welder use the multiple-position procedure for a job requiring only
one position?

Reply (2): A welder may use a multiple-position Welding Procedure


Specification for a job requiring only one position.

Question (3): Could a SMAW-SAW procedure be used only for SMAW


(within the limits that the SMAW was qualified)?

Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): Could a procedure that specifies grinding and air-arc use only
grinding (or vice-versa)?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
42/51

Reply (4): Yes, if the WPS specifies grinding or air-arc. If the WPS
specifies grinding and air-arc, then both must be used.

Question (5): Could a procedure that prescribes two types of electrodes use
only one type of electrode?

Reply (5): Yes, if directions are provided for each type electrode and the
WPS specifies one electrode or the other. If both are specified in a specific
sequence, then both must be used.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-403.6, Procedure Thickness Qualification
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-77-635A
Interpretation Number : IX-78-63
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Note (2) was added to QW-451.1 in the 1977 Edition of Section
IX. This note refers to QW-403 for further limits on range of thickness
qualified. As an example, to qualify a in. thick test specimen using the
SMAW process, QW-451.1 indicates the thickness range qualified to be
3/16 in. (minimum) to 1 in. (maximum). Please assume the WPS to be
PWHT. Now a contract under Section III, Division 1, Class MC, imposes
notch toughness testing of all welding procedures. Reviewing QW-403 per
Note (2) of QW-451.1, please refer to QW-403.6. Further checking for
welding variables under Section IX, a review of QW-253 (Shielded Metal-
Arc Welding) is made. Under 253.1(a) Supplementary Essential Variables -
Notch Toughness, QW-403.6 is applicable. This now tends to indicate that
the above in. test specimen qualifies a range of 5/8 in. (min) to 1 in.
(max). In a specific situation, if a in. thick pressure boundary category
"A" butt weld has to be made in fabricating a component, does this mean
that another WPS would have to be qualified using a in. thick test
specimen to comply with QW-403.6? This would qualify this WPS to a
thickness range of in. (min.) to in. (max.).

Reply: Note (2) was added to QW-451.1 because many people were
overlooking the additional restrictions of QW-403. The example given is
correct. The thickness range is 5/8 in. min. to 1 in. max. The answer to the
specific situation is affirmative. A WPS must be qualified using a in.
thick test coupon which would qualify for a thickness range of in. min. to
in. max. We are not in agreement with the other interpretations in your
letter which you have received from the industry.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-141 and QW-405.2
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-78-11
Interpretation Number : IX-78-64
Question(s) and Reply(ies):

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
43/51

Question (1): Does Section IX require radiographic examination of a


welded test coupon prepared for the qualification of a Welding Procedure
Specification.

Reply (1): Section IX does not require radiographic examination of a


welded test coupon prepared for the qualification of a Welding Procedure
Specification.

Question (2): May X-rays be used as an alternative for welders'


performance qualifications.

Reply (2): Radiographic examination may be substituted for mechanical


testing of QW-141 for groove-weld performance qualification as permitted
in QW-304 to prove the ability of welders to make sound welds.

Question (3): The last sentence of QW-405.2 indicates that vertical-uphill


qualifies for all positions. In QW-461.3(c), 5G, the weld groove is in the
vertical plane as noted in QW-122.3 and welding does progress vertical-up.
Would this welding eliminate the required 6G position on pipe to qualify
for all positions?

Reply (3): QW-405.2 is an essential variable for notch toughness


requirements when qualifying a Welding Procedure Specification. Groove-
weld test coupons for qualifying a WPS may be made in plate in the flat
position, except where notch toughness is required. When notch toughness
is required, the groove-weld test coupon must be welded in the vertical-up
to qualify for all positions. A groove-weld test coupon made in pipe in the
5G position to qualify a WPS is considered to be in accordance with the
requirement QW-405.2, provided the diameter size and thickness of the
pipe is adequate to obtain the required number of tensile, bend, and impact
test specimens. Test specimens from a 5G coupon meeting all the
requirements to qualify a WPS will permit welding in all positions.

Question (4): What positions do the 5G and 6G positions qualify for?

Reply (4): A performance qualification conducted in position 5G will


qualify for groove welding in flat (1G), vertical (3G), and overhead (4G)
but not for horizontal (2G). It will also qualify for all fillet weld positions.
Qualification in position 6G will qualify for all position groove welds and
fillet welds.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-303.6 Fillet Welds
Date Issued: 04/04/1978
Record Number: BC-78-69
Interpretation Number : IX-78-65
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is a welder qualified to a groove-weld test that permits him to
weld pipe/tube 2-7/8 in. 0.D. and larger (within the limits of QW-350),
qualified to weld fillet welds or socket welds on pipe/tube smaller than
2-7/8 in. O.D., i.e., 3/4 in. through 2 in. O.D., without testing in accordance
with QW-452.3 or QW-452.4 for this smaller pipe size?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
44/51

Reply: Yes. Groove-weld performance qualification on a pipe or tube 2-7/8


in. O.D. qualifies a welder to weld fillet welds or socket welds on any
diameter without further qualification.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-442, Weld Deposit Chemistry
Date Issued: 04/19/1978
Record Number: BC-78-197
Interpretation Number : IX-78-67
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it possible to classify as A-No. 2 of QW-442 weld deposits
which contain Ni up to 1.1 maximum and whose Mo values may be below
0.40 minimum?

Reply: The weld metal analysis described cannot be classified as any


particular A-Number of QW-442 of Section IX. The analysis will require
separate qualification with the nominal analysis listed in the Welding
Procedure Specification covering this weld metal analysis.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-469.2
Date Issued: 04/20/1978
Record Number: BC-78-133
Interpretation Number : IX-78-68
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: In welder performance qualification testing, does the term 1G, as
defined by Section IX, mean that welding shall be in a single butt joint
without backing as shown in QW-469.2?

Reply: The term 1G relates to position of the test assembly pipe in QW-
122.1 during the performance of the welding for the performance
qualification test and may be single or double welded, with or without
backing. The test joints, as shown in QW-469, may be used for welder
performance qualification in addition to weld joint configurations contained
in the qualified Welding Procedure Specification used in the performance
welding.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-404.4 and QW-201.2
Date Issued: 04/20/1978
Record Number: BC-78-180
Interpretation Number : IX-78-69
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): For procedure qualifications, considering that QW-404.5 is an
essential variable, may QW-404.28 be substituted as an essential variable in

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
45/51

place of QW-404.4 in QW-250? If not, could the phrase in QW-404.4 "any


other filler metal" be defined in more detail?

Reply (1): QW-404.28 may not be substituted as an essential variable in


place of QW-404.4 for procedure qualifications. Any other filler metal as
referred to in QW-404.4 will be that which cannot be classified in one of the
appropriate ASME specifications for filler metals and the appropriate
F-Number as shown in QW-432. There may be special electrodes within the
United States covered by this statement as well as many foreign produced
electrodes which are also covered in this statement.

Question (2): As an alternate to the requirement in QW-201.2 of issuing a


WPS prior to (and maintaining after) performing procedure qualification
tests, may instead a detailed PQR be used which documents all essential and
nonessential variables of the actual qualification welding?

Reply (2): The written form of the Welding Procedure Specification (WPS)
and the Procedure Qualification Record (PQR) can be varied to meet the
requirements of the Manufacturer or contractor. It is necessary that there be
some record of a proposed Welding Procedure Specification prior to the
actual test welding for the Procedure Qualification Record. This may be the
completion of that portion of a Manufacturer's or contractor's form prior to
welding and subsequent completion of the form with the test results when a
combined WPS and PQR are desired.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Welding Requirements
Date Issued: 05/10/1978
Record Number: BC-78-208
Interpretation Number : IX-78-71
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Where procedure qualification tests are performed by the
production of a butt weld such as Category A or B weld joint of UW-3 in
Section VIII, Division 1, does this also qualify for other welds such as C
and D in UW-3?

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): The thickness of weld in a procedure qualification test made


in the performance of a butt weld controls the thickness range of qualifying
for that particular procedure test. How does this apply in the consideration
of weld thickness for other than butt welds?

Reply (2): The thickness of the weld with respect to both procedure
qualification for welding and consideration of postweld heat treatment
requirements is confirmed by the appropriate Section of the Code; that is,
Sections I, III, IV, or VIII. The Sections have approached this requirement
by stating that the thickness of the weld shall be the depth of the weld
deposit; such as, in UW-16.1 of Section VIII, Division 1, design (a) is the
thickness through the nozzle neck and design (c) through the vessel shell
thickness.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
46/51

Question (3): Does a qualified Welding Procedure Specification in which


procedure qualification tests employing a single sided butt weld without
backing also qualify a double welded butt weld?

Reply (3): Yes, except for QW-260 and QW-261, joint design is not an
essential variable in the Weld-ing Procedure Specification.

Question (4): Does a welder performance qualification test in a single weld


without backing also qualify for a double welded joint?

Reply (4): Each welding process, as listed in QW-350, must be reviewed for
the appropriate essential variable under QW-402. The addition or deletion
of backing may be an essential variable, depending on the welding process.

Question (5): When a performance qualification test plate is produced by


welding a 3/4 in. thick carbon steel plate with a welder using GTAW for the
first pass with two additional passes of SMAW and completion by a
welding operator with SAW, what are the thickness limits of welder and
welding operator qualifications?

Reply (5): The welder who performed the GTAW welding is qualified to
twice the thickness of the weld metal deposited with the minimum of 1/16
in. using GTAW process. The welder using the SMAW process is qualified
to twice the thickness qualified with the minimum as specified in QW-452.1
with the SMAW process. Your attention is also invited to QW-351 when a
combination of processes are being employed. The welding operator is
qualified for all thicknesses with the SAW welding process. See QW-305.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-432; Section II, Part C
Date Issued: 05/29/1978
Record Number: None
Interpretation Number : IX-78-72
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: According to Section IX, QW-432 F-No. 4, ASME SFA-5.4,
nominal total alloy more than 6% EXX15, XX16; and Section II, Part C of
Material Specifications it says, "that on SFA 5.4 electrode weld metal
exceeds 4% chromium and does not exceed 50% nickel." If this is correct
then anyone qualifying with an F-No. 4 total alloy over 6% is also qualified
for all F-Numbers below F-No. 4 with above 6% total alloy?

Reply: The electrodes up to F-No. 4 are for the ferritic steels, as indicated in
QW-310.4(a). For the use of A-No. 8 or A-No. 9 composition filler metals,
QW-310.4(b) specifically mentions F-No. 5 electrodes for joining various
base metals (and allows use of carbon steel P-No. 1 plate or pipe to be used
for the performance qualification).

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-422.43; Section II, Part C, SFA-5.14 and SFA-5.11
Date Issued: 06/07/1978

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
47/51

Record Number: BC-78-219


Interpretation Number : IX-78-73
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Section IX lists two grades for SB-443 in QW-422.43 while
SB-443 in Section II, Part B does not. What is the correct listing?

Reply (1): The listing of SB-443 annealed, Grade 2, in Section IX is


incorrect as there is no such material in the SB-443 specification. Section
IX will be corrected to show SB-443 annealed with a 120,000 psi tensile
strength.

Question (2): SFA-5.14 and SFA-5.11 lists Class ERNiCrMo-3 filler metals
with an as-welded tensile strength of 110,000 psi while the tensile strength
in SB-443 is listed as 120,000. What is the correct minimum tensile strength
for this material?

Reply (2): The tensile strengths given in the specifications for both the filler
metals and the base metals are correct. The SB-443 material is one of those
rare cases in the Code where the tensile strength requirements for the base
materials specification are higher than for the filler metal used to join that
material. This fact is accounted for in the stress tables in which SB-443 is
listed. The allowable stresses are based upon the strength of the weld metal,
110,000 psi minimum.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Qualification of Seal Welds
Date Issued: 06/07/1978
Record Number: BC-78-220
Interpretation Number : IX-78-74
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a qualified Welding Procedure Specification which includes
postweld heat treatment be used for seal welds which are not postweld heat
treated?

Reply: A Welding Procedure Specification which has been qualified with


postweld heat treatment of the procedure qualification test may not be
employed for production welding where no postweld heat treatment will be
applied. QW-407.1, which is an essential variable for all welding processes,
requires requalification when postweld heat treatment is omitted.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-461, Position Qualification
Date Issued: 06/07/1978
Record Number: BC-78-222
Interpretation Number : IX-78-75
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): In QW-461.7, qualification for plate-groove process 2G
qualifies a welder for the pipe fillet weld position 1F, 2F, and 2FR.
Qualification for pipe-groove process 2G qualifies for plate-groove
processes 1G and 2G but for pipe fillet welds processes 1F and 2F only.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
48/51

Should not the pipe-groove process 2G also include the 2FR process under
the pipe fillet weld column?

Reply (1): QW-461.7 was included as a convenience for the interpretation


of QW-303. In the plate-groove test process 2G, the pipe fillet weld process
2FR is incorrectly included in accordance with the present Code rules.
However, when the Summer 1978 Addenda to Section IX, QW-303.6 is
being revised to include the pipe fillet weld 2FR process as a qualified
process when the test was either a plate-groove or pipe-groove in the 2G
position.

Question (2): QW-461.7 lists positions 2G and 5G in the pipe-groove test as


qualifying for all positions in both plate and pipe welding. Does this also
include position 6G?

Reply (2): Yes. Position 6G is included in this same table under pipe-groove
qualification test as qualifying for all positions in both plate and pipe
welding.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-153(d)
Date Issued: 06/07/1978
Record Number: BC-78-223
Interpretation Number : IX-78-76
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-153.1(d) permits acceptance of the tension test if the
specimen breaks in the base metal outside of the weld or fusion line where
the strength is not more than 5% below the specified minimum tensile
strength of the base metal. What are the requirements if the specimen breaks
in the weld or fusion line?

Reply: If the tension test specimen breaks in the weld or fusion line, it shall
have a tensile strength not less than that required in QW-153.1(a), (b), or
(c).

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-452.3, Welder Performance Qualification Test Size and
Thickness Limitations
Date Issued: 06/07/1978
Record Number: BC-78-225
Interpretation Number : IX-78-77
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): When welding in the 6G position, is the following the proper
interpretation of QW-452.3?

Sample Weld Coupon Qualifies for Minimum Maximum Nom. Size Nom.
Thickness O.D.1 Thickness O.D. Thickness 1/2 in. 0.188 in. 0.840 in.
0.0625 in. Any 0.376 in. 1-1/2 in. 0.145 in. Over 1 in. 0.0625 in. Any 0.290
in. 6 in. 0.280 in. 2.875 in. 0.0625 in. Any 0.560 in.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
49/51

1 Also please note comments on "job size" pipe in QW-310.1, last sentence.
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): QW-303.6 permits the qualifying for small diameter pipe fillet
welds when actually qualifying with a groove weld test. Is the man qualified
for all small diameter pipe fillet welds (no limitations on base metal
thickness or pipe diameter) or only for fillet welds on pipe where the pipe
thickness and diameter are within the limits of the qualified groove weld
test?

Reply (2): Qualifying with a groove weld test, whether it be a plate or weld
test, qualifies for all fillet welds with no limitations on base metal thickness
or pipe diameter, within the limits of the other welding variables in QW-350
for the applicable welding process.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-255 and QW-355, FCAW
Date Issued: 06/07/1978
Record Number: BC-78-267
Interpretation Number : IX-78-78
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: The Winter 1977 Addenda of Section IX has included flux cored
arc welding (FCAW) in the heading for QW-255 and QW-355. Previous
correspondence from ASME stated that when welding with flux cored
electrodes the provisions of QW-255 apply when the shielding gas is used
and QW-253 when the shielding gas was omitted. May we continue to use
the flux cored welding process in accordance with these previous
instructions?

Reply: The flux cored arc welding process shall meet the provisions of QW-
255 for procedure qualifications and QW-355 for performance
qualifications. The use of the provisions of QW-253 are not applicable to
flux cored arc welding.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-442; Section II, Part C; A-Numbers
Date Issued: 06/12/1978
Record Number: BC-77-598
Interpretation Number : IX-78-79
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent that E6010 and E6011 electrodes or E7015, E7016,
and E7018 electrodes, as specified in Section II, Part C, SFA-5.1, conform
to A-No.1, F-No. 3, and A-No.1, F-No. 4 classifications and groups,
respectively, or must each electrode be limited to the F-Number grouping of
QW-432 only and subsequently require individual electrode procedure
qualifications because it has no A-Number class validity?

Reply: It is the intent of the Code that electrodes of SFA-5.1 of Section II,
Part C shall conform to F-Numbers of QW-432 and A-Numbers of QW-442
of Section IX, as given below.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
50/51

AWS Class F-No. A-No. E6010 3 1 E6011 3 1 E7015 4 1 E7016 4 1 E7018


41

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-281.2(c), AISI Type of A-No. 8 or A-No. 9 Analysis
Date Issued: 06/12/1978
Record Number: BC-78-131
Interpretation Number : IX-78-80
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What are the qualification requirements with respect to weld
metal analysis for A-No. 8 or A-No. 9 analysis in QW-281.2(c)?

Reply: The intent of the Code is to require requalification for a change from
one (AISI) type of stainless steel filler metal to another. For example, a
change from 309 to 308 or 312 would require requalification. However, a
change from 308-15 to 308-16 or vice versa would not require
requalification.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, QW-462.2(a) and QW-463.2(a)
Date Issued: 06/23/1978
Record Number: BC-78-194
Interpretation Number : IX-78-81
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Is it permissible to remove weld reinforcements and backing
strips or rings in the preparation of side bend specimens of QW-462.2(a)?

Reply (1): Weld reinforcements and backing strips and backing rings shall
be removed flush with the undisturbed surface of the base material.

Question (2): Is there any maximum or minimum length required for the
performance qualification test plate in QW-463.2(a)?

Reply (2): The length of the qualification test plate shall be adequate to
permit removal of the bend tests specified in QW-452.1 or QW-452.2 and
to permit their preparation to meet the dimensional requirements in QW-
462 for the appropriate bend test being prepared.

Standard Designation: BPV Section IX


Edition/Addenda:
Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description: Section IX, Welding in Hot Formed Heads
Date Issued: 06/23/1978
Record Number: BC-78-200
Interpretation Number : IX-78-82
Question(s) and Reply(ies):

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4
51/51

Question: Where fabrication will require A-No.2 weld metal for the joining
of P-No.1 materials to meet the strength requirements as affected by
postweld heat treatments, is the A-No.2 weld metal considered a P-No.3
material in subsequent fabricating operations requiring both P-No.1 to
P-No.1 and P-No.1 to P-No.3 procedure qualifications?

Reply: A-No.2 weld metal is never considered as a P-No.3 material.


Furthermore QW-404.5 permits P-No.1 materials to be fabricated with
either A-No. 1 or A-No.2 weld metal analysis with a Welding Procedure
Specification that has been qualified with either an A-No.1 or A-No.2
analysis or vice versa.

Copyright 2016 by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. No reproduction may be made of this material without
written consent of ASME

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm 2016/5/4