I think what the enquirer means to ask is: can P355QH1 be considered P-No. 1 too, like P355NH, seeing that both are P355? The answer is no. First, their chemical composition is not same, not even similar. Two, they are classified under different specifications, one under EN 10028-3, another...
Hello stanweld99. I believe you are using gtaw process. Per QW-256/QW-404.14 of Sec IX, deletion of filler is an essential variable. If you do your PQR without a filler, the production weld must be done without filler too.
If you would like to show fusion passes on your WPS for tack welding...
Hello r6155. A word of caution here. Only 16Mo3 classified under EN 10216-2 can be called as P-No. 3. Not all 16Mo3 metals can be called as P-No. 3. For example, 16Mo3 classified under EN 10028-2 is NOT P-No. 3 material (interpretation IX-23-26 confirms this). I too wrongly thought for a long...
If you are working with Section III NB, you might want to look up Table NB-4622.1-1 regarding PWHT. Another Table NB-4622.7(b)-1 indicates the situations in which you must do preheat if you want to exempt PWHT.
Section IX does not recommend any preheat and PWHT parameters. It only tells some...
May i add another thing here. Strictly speaking, Section IX does not even require any NDE of the weld(s) being cited to extend the validity of the welder. Interpretation IX-17-01 establishes this beyond any doubt. Mere engagement with that welding process within the six months of validity is...
Hello, i am new here. This is my first post. This is a 1.5 months old thread, so i wonder if someone will read what i have to offer. Here is my two cents on this: Section IX does not require a CWI to sign off on a WPS/PQR/WPQR. Anyone who is designated to do this in the organization's quality...
