Manufacturer's Design Report / WPS-PQR's

[gr2vessels]

G'day gents,
Could someone please advise if the WPS / PQR's are included in the list of documents under the review of PE (Manufacturer's Design Report), for a vessel designed to Div. 2?
Regards,
gr2vessels

 

[ukinam]

The PE, who would be certifying the Manufacturer's Design Report for compliance, is responsible for reviewing WPS/PQR's. The PE must make sure that the WPS/PQR's are qualified with Section IX and that they are in compliance with the requirements of Division 2. Although WPS/PQR's are not specifically mentioned in AG-302.2 (only calcs & drawings are mentioned), references to WPS/PQR's also appears in drawings. Data (such as joints, material, PWHT, etc) on the WPS/PQR themselves should meet the requirements of Div. 2.

 

[gr2vessels]

Many thanks ukinam,

gr2vessels

 

[pvesseleng]

No, there is no need. AI must review welding documents thats all.

 

[gr2vessels]

Thanks guys,
A bit confused with the replies, but the conclusion is that the AI or similar authority will review and approve the WPS / PQR documents prior to the "buyer's" review and approval.
gr2vessels

 

[AIAIAANI]

I am an AI. The answer of "pvesseleng" is the correct one. But your conclusion is a little bit inaccurate: Not the AI or similar authority, just the AI, reviews (not approve) these documents which are full responsibility of the Manufacturer.

 

[gr2vessels]

Sorry gents, late reply, I just got back in the job.
I have received some WPS / PQR's from the fabricator, not in accordance with the project specification and apparently the AI would only check the "existance" of the weld specs / qualifications, not the content. How does this work, what is then the meaning of "AI review, but not approval?" Why is the fabricator sending them for my approval? Who will benefit from the AI's review of the WPS / PQR's.
Thanks for the replies, but I need further clarifications, how to get the fabricator back in line...
Cheers,
gr2vessels

 

[doct9960]

gr2vessels,

The review/approval of WPS/PQR's is part of the Manufacturer's QA/QC system (QC system is also reviewed by the Buyer & AIA). The Manufacturer is responsible for preparing and qualifying his own WPS, and is also responsible for the review of his sub-supplier's WPS/PQR. The Manufacturer submits his WPS/PQR to the Buyer for review prior to the start of fabrication. When the WPS/PQR is acceptable to the Buyer, the WPS/PQR's are returned to the Manufacturer with the authorization to proceed.

The Buyer reviews and approves the Manufacturer's WPS/PQR for compliance with the requirements of ASME Section IX and his own (corporate) welding specifications. There is usually a clause in the Buyer's welding spec. that says...Buyer's approval of WPS/PQR does not relieve the Manufacturer of his responsibility of providing sound welds that are suited for the intended service...or something in the words like that. The clause is for covering the ass of the Buyer and giving the Manufacturer full responsibility.

Depending on your jurisdiction, the Manufacturer registers the WPS with the AIA before he performs welding. For the AI's responsibility on those WPS/PQR's, you probably would find them in the National Board website. I think it's partially mentioned in here...

http://www.nationalboard.org/NationalBoard/CommissionedInspectors/Documentation/NB_334.aspx

 

[gr2vessels]

Thanks doc and guys,

In simple words, I am the buyer and is my assessment of the suitability of the WPS/PQR submitted by the fabricator. Once I approve the welding documentation, then the PE will happily file the approved documentation. The vessel is for Div. 2, hence the fabricator was already reminded that is his responsibility, blah, blah,.. However, even reputed fabricators would not be deterred from trying to sneak in half backed WPS/PQR's and talking down to you "the ignorant". I am paying heftily a PE who's job is still a bit unclear to me (is only compliance to Div.2!!). I am probably more experienced in this business of pressure vesel design and fabrication then the PE (even if my experience is gained outside US), but still naive to expect some help from the PE.
Sorry, a bit bitter and dissapointed, but as I heard, some good news for "foreigners" are coming in the new ASME VIII Div.2.

Best regards,
gr2vessels

 

[stanweld]

gr2vessels
In the US, the Owner has primary liability should the vessel fail and injury or loss of life occur. As such it is incumbent on the Owner to assure itself that the vessel design, materials, welding practices and heat treating practice will produce a vessel that will be fit for service. The Owner often uses Engineering firms or consultants to accomplish this but the Owner is not relieved of its primary liability.

Recently I reviewed the welding procedure provided by a consultant for a Div 2 vessel to one of our Refinery Customers. If used, catastrophic failure would have occurred withi a year of operation. Fortunately I was provided the WPS by the Owner for review and was able to provide the proper methodology.

What was most surprising, is that the Owner's Welding Engineer/Metallurgist would have readily seen the problem with the WPS 25 years ago but with the downsizing of engineering (overhead) personnel in the 80's and 90's much of that talent base seems to have been lost. Note that the Owner's representative was a young ChemE not versed in vessel manufacture or welding.

 

[AIAIAANI]

The Manufacturer prpares under his responsibility, the Design Report(consisting in design drawing and design calculations, based upon the UDS(User's Design Specification). RPE (Registered Professional Engineer) certifies the design report at Manufacturer's responsibility, to be in accordance with the requirements of the UDS the Code of construction (Sect.VIII Div.2 in our case) and good engineering practice. He will not certify the WPS/PQR. The UDS as well shall be certified by an RPE, at User's responsibility, the minimum content of the UDS is specified in AG-301. WPS's are prepared by the Manufacturer who shall also provide to certify supporting PQR's. In ASME design process there is no other responsibility for the Owner than to provide UDS and have it certified by the RPE.
The AI has the responsibility to verify all process i.e.
He shall verify: UDS, Design Report, WPS/PQR are in accordance with the Code. As a matter of liability the AI does not approve or certify these documents, but when signing the MDR issued by the Manufacturer he signs the certificate of Shop Inspection with the wording..."that at the best of my knowledge and belief, the Manuffacturer has constructed this pressure vessel in accorddance with ASME Code Sect.VIII Div.1". The AI has the duty to ensure that all construction (As per Note 1 of the Foreword, construction is an all inclusive term comprising materials, design, fabrication, examination, inspections, testing,certification, and pressure relief) is in accordance with the Code. Among all he shall verify WPS are duly qualified in accordance with the Code, but he is not required to be a design engineer, not a NDE specialist nor a welding engineer. However he is required to know the Code requirements for all these fields.
Mutual responsibilities are clearly established in Art. G-3 of Sect.VIII Div.2. Mauro

 

[gr2vessels]

Thanks again gents for the clarifications given. Obviously I'm lackig the every day rubbing shoulders with AI's, since I'm operating outside USA. Rarely had to follow the ASME THIS CLOSE, in order to keep the ... vendor honest (he's got an in-house PE agency also!), who's closer to him than me.
Cheers,
gr2vessels