Can WPSs and PQRs be applied retrospectively

[mkaminski100]

Welding of no pressure pipework was completed to a set of WPSs / PQRs. After the work is completed, we were asked for additional weld tests. Vendor does not have the original test piece, therefore is suggesting two options:
1. Weld new coupon to supplied WPS and send it for testing which will be then added as an addendum.
2. Use new WPSs/PQRs, which they are preparing for similar job. These qualify to the same material and range, with number of additional tests. These would be used retrospectively, with the Record Book updated to reflect this.

I would highly appreciate if you could advise if any (or both) option is acceptable.

 

[birken]

Though I haven't come across such a situation but in my opinion, there shouldn't be any harm in going with any of the options.
You just need to be sure that the welds made with the welding procedures pass additional tests also and update the record.

Birken

 

[stanweld]

Assuming that the WPS was appropriately qualified for the work and that the request does not entail additional testing for hardness, impact toughness, corrosion testing, either of the proposals can be used. What additional testing is wanted by the Owner and why?

 

[mkaminski100]

Thanks guys. Client specification for manufacture of pressure vessels calls for additional testing on PQR. This is understandable, but our equipment is a no pressure retaining internal equipment, not welded to the pressure envelope. It is bolted to internal cleats.
Latest comments from the client request corrosion testing and ferrite count. Ferrite was done, but to different specification, however no corrosion test were carried for original PQR.
Original PQR is for the correct thickness and material.

 

[stanweld]

It may be somewhat difficult to match the actual welding parameters used in production to provide a relevant, successful corrosion test. If corrosion testing was not an original contract requirement, I'm not sure what the Client will accomplish with his request. You don't indicate whether the contract originally mandated corrosion testing.

 

[gtaw]

Did the original contract specify the additional tests?

The reason I am asking is this, the contractor should be able to charge the "Owner" for any additional tests not specified in the original contract or code.

Based on the information provided, it sounds as if the contractor did have WPSs applicable to the work performed, but it was an afterthought to requests the additional tests. As such, the additional tests should be at the "Owner's" expense.

There is another issue that may not have been considered, what if the new tests fail to meet the "Owner's" expectation? What are the ramifications? If the results of the tests are unacceptable to the "Owner" does that mean the product is also unacceptable and if so, is the "Owner" still obligated to pay the original purchase price?

I guess the bottom line is what "can of worms" is being breached by imposing additional requirements after the contract has been awarded? The "Owner" may be surprised by the consequences.

On the other hand, if the tests were included in the original contract, why didn't the "Owner" enforce the requirements? Was there any oversight provided by the "Owner?"

Best regards - Al