athomas236
Mechanical
- Jul 1, 2002
- 607
We are involved in a power project in south east Asia and the contractor is proposing that the boilers should not be stamped with the ASME stamp but should be designed and manufactured with QA systems certified in accordance with ISO9001.
I understand that for the boiler to be stamped certain aspects of the design and manufacture have to be verified as being in accordance with the ASME code by an authorised inspector(AI) and that the AI has to be qualified by examination in the USA or Canada.
As I understand ISO9001, it requires the manufacturer to have a QA system that does things like ensuring that the approved weld procedures are used, that the welders are properly qualified etc with records maintained that this has been done. In other words, the manufacturer "self-certifies" the boiler without the involvement of any other except when the ISO9001 approval is renewed. To me this means that the day to day working of the QA system may be less than perfect.
The boiler manufacturer is authorised to use the ASME stamp and I suspect that his reluctance to stamp the boiler is n issue of cost.
As an alternative to ASME stamping versus ISO9001 I have thought of having an independent 3rd party inspector (such as Lloyds or TUV) that would carry out the same role as the ASME AI but would not be an ASME AI. This would provide independent certification without the cost of an AI but would mean that we would still not be able to stamp the boiler.
Any comments on any of the above would be appreciated.
athomas236
I understand that for the boiler to be stamped certain aspects of the design and manufacture have to be verified as being in accordance with the ASME code by an authorised inspector(AI) and that the AI has to be qualified by examination in the USA or Canada.
As I understand ISO9001, it requires the manufacturer to have a QA system that does things like ensuring that the approved weld procedures are used, that the welders are properly qualified etc with records maintained that this has been done. In other words, the manufacturer "self-certifies" the boiler without the involvement of any other except when the ISO9001 approval is renewed. To me this means that the day to day working of the QA system may be less than perfect.
The boiler manufacturer is authorised to use the ASME stamp and I suspect that his reluctance to stamp the boiler is n issue of cost.
As an alternative to ASME stamping versus ISO9001 I have thought of having an independent 3rd party inspector (such as Lloyds or TUV) that would carry out the same role as the ASME AI but would not be an ASME AI. This would provide independent certification without the cost of an AI but would mean that we would still not be able to stamp the boiler.
Any comments on any of the above would be appreciated.
athomas236