Alex
1) Yes, P1 and P8 qualify for each other for performance. Qualification with any material from P1-P15F, P34, and P41-P49 will qualify for any P1-P15F, P34, and P41-P49 material. A welder qualified on P1 is good for P1-P15F, P34, and P41-P49 material.
2) Plate will also qualify them for...
This is old but I don't think it was answered.
Forget about Table 5.3, it is irrelevant for performance quals. Qualification with any base metal listed in AWS D1.6 or any Group I or Group II material from AWS D1.1, qualifies you to weld any base metal permitted in D1.6 (see 6.13.5)...
I have a HFO scenario where P1 base metal may need to have weld buildup with either E7018, ER70S-6 (GTAW), or ER70S-6 (GMAW). After the buildup it would have a butter layer with either ER309 (GTAW) or ER309-16. Then to finish it would have either ECoCr-E or ERCoCr-E (GTAW) for the hard facing...
Maybe someone can help me with this one. It is regarding valve hard seat facing as it pertains to procedure qualification to Section IX.
The valves in question are 1-1/4 Cr (P4) and 2-1/4 Cr (P5A).
The valves get hard faced with ER410. That part is straightforward when it comes to the...
Ed
There is an existing P5A boss that had been previously buttered with Inco 82 by another company. Now we are attaching a P8 nozzle to that butter with Inco 82. This is the reason for QW-283.4(b) being invoked. So I cannot run a PQR with P8 to Inco 82 base metal as Inco 82 base metal is not...
Need to run a weld buttering procedure qual to Section IX in accordance with QW-283.4(b). This section states that I may use "any P-number material that nominally matches the chemical analysis of the buttering weld metal". The buttering weld metal is Inco 82 (ERNiCr-3). Has anyone done this...
Is anyone aware of a P1 material of any form (pipe/tube or plate preferred), that has a minimum Carbon content of .35% and a minimum CE of .65?
Before I go through the list of P1 materials in ASME Section IX Table QW/QB-422 and check them against ASME Section II Part A, I thought I would try...
The question was related to the code, which my QCM is not going to answer. I am trying to finish the procedure with out re-running all the impacts, if that is possible.
Visual, tensiles & bends (all full thickness) were performed on this 1-1/2" thick procedure qualification joint per ASME Section IX-17. Impact testing was performed per ASME Section VIII-15 Division 1 UG84. When the impact testing was performed it was inadvertently tested as a single process...
If you want a formula to determine the actual die post diameter you need for materials with 3% to less than 20% elongation, use the following. It's just the formula from note 1 of QW-466.1 reworked to solve for die post diameter.
DP = 100x(t/e)-t.
DP = die post diameter
t = bend thickness
e =...
Is it really the intention of D1.1 to use a 1-1/2" diameter die post for plate PQR's less than 3/8" thick? Am I missing a commentary on this? Figure 4.11 (4.12 & 4.13) makes no provisions for testing on 50ksi and under material that is less than 3/8" thick. Most codes would have you use a 4t...
Performance qualification to AWS D1.2. Testing on 6" sch 40 (.280" wall) 6061 groove weld, for a cyclically loaded application. Table 3.8 number 3 (cyclically loaded tubular structures) calls out 4 different pipe sizes for this test, of which 6" sch 40 is not listed. So I then go to Table 3.8...
Sorry I hit submit unintentionally, I meant to expand on that.
What about when you have 3 PQR's to cover a certain thickness range. Should your max heat for an individual process be an average heat of all 3 PQR's? Or should it be the highest (or lowest?) heat PQR?
Or would you assign a maximum...
Thanks, that's what I thought. While I have you here maybe you could answer another one associated with this.
Maximum heat input is another supplementary essential variable. When you have a multi process PQR (GTAW/SMAW for example),should the WPS have separate limits for each process?
