As R6155 stated if the test plate has defects what do you do about the vessel weld ?
Seems a very weird scenario.
If you were doing test plates as run off plates it is common sense that the whole plate must be code compliant (NDT) before performing mechanical tests.
Not ignoring the defective...
RistEcho,
Cannot comment on whether it falls within the scope of ASME VIII but if it does:
Whether or not it requires U stamp will be based on the Owner and the jurisdiction.
Hope that helps,
Cheers,
Shane
May or may not be relevant - see last sentence.
Through thickness properties
Background
As mentioned previously, the properties of steel perpendicular to the plane of the element (often termed through-thickness) are different from those in plane.
The nature of the production process is such...
mrmalcolm,
The purpose of destructive testing is to ascertain the mechanical properties of the weld.
If you do 2 x tensile tests on the same weld - one sound and one with lack of fusion you will have different results.
That is why you NDT first to find sound areas to test.
A welder induced...
Firstly check your MTR for what code and what quality grading the UT was performed to.
Just because it was 100% tested and passed does not mean it is 100% free fom discontinuities.
Quality grading will give size of allowable discontinuities.
"........discontinuities caused by steel plate...
Karik87,
As Ed Stainless has noted there are too many unknowns with the state of the weld metallurgically.
First - raise an NCR to capture the unauthorised repair work.
Second - if you do not already have then you should initiate Repair Request forms so any repair is approved and documented...
Karabau,
Do not confuse base metal qualified with weld deposit qualified
As per Table 451.1 your base metal qualified is 5 mm - 21.94 mm
Maximum GTAW deposit is 6 mm.
Unless I have misinterpreted that 10.97 mm is greater than 10 mm (Interpretation ?)
dooki - there are some very experienced vessel engineers on here so maybe better cancel this post and post on Boiler & Pressure Vessel Engineering.
My only comment is if it is classed as an "Angle Joint" then see Table UW-12 - no RT/UT required.
Ramin,
Did you just make a database of WPS/PQRs or did you actually comply with QG 106.4 - regarding supervision of preparation and testing ?
Big difference between the two.
Does your caustic concentration and metal temperature show the welds to be in Area A, B or C of Figure 1 of NACE SP-0403 ?
As stated - Engineering are responsible for providing this information, not Quality.
Who signed off the TQ approving the reduction in time ?
Our role in Quality is to identify issues and communicate these to the relevant engineers.
It is the Engineering department who ultimately decide if the request is acceptable.
IMHO this should not have been a TQ but a Deviation and...
I realise this in an old post but maybe the OP can learn something if he / she sees it.
QW 406.7 is not listed as an Essential or Supplementary Essential variable for SMAW, GTAW, SAW, GMAW or FCAW so the following is incorrect.
After cross-referencing between ASME IX and B31.1 I found the...
Only have the 2007 edition of API 650 but this is pretty clear.
" After completion of the hydro-test, only non-structural small attachments may be welded to the tank in
accordance with 7.2.1.11."
Agree with Steve Jones.
Never heard of corrosion testing being done on welder qualification - it is normally associated with weld procedure qualification.
If you have code compliant welder qualification and the client requires requalification then they must stipulate exactly what they require.
Just remember the code stipulates minimum requirements (eg. bevel requirements are deemed non-essential).
If your project documents require CJP for that joint it is up to you to provide CJP - however you see fit.
The diagram you have posted is not condusive with CJP - definitely not recommended
