Old WPQR as per EN 15614-1-2004

[Dane Rot]

Hi dear all,

I´m revising a welding book on which there are some WPS that have been released from some WPQR data, following the instruction of the previous edition of EN 15614-1 of 2004.

Considering that this edition is out of date, is mandatory for our subcontractor change the WPQR´s main data and WPS data, following the newest data info of the last EN 15614-1_2017 edition?

For data I mean thickness, diameter and other range of qualification.

If yes, where is written this?

Many thanks for your help and feedback.
Best regards.

 

[kingnero]

No, it is not mandatory.
Either you use the WPQR as is (with the original range of validity), but updated according to the changes in the range of validity as imposed by the amendments A1 (2008) and A2 (2012), or you use the pWPS, the NDT reports, the destructive testing, the mill test reports from the base material(s) and from the filler material(s) to create a new WPQR according to the 2017 version (again, including the changes from A1:2019) if you have all the annexes (which is often a stretch to ask).

BTW, 15614 is an ISO standard.

 

[DekDee]

A WPQR can be 50 years old and it does not require change based on code / standard editions.
It is purely and simply a record of everything that occurred during the welding of the test coupon.
MTC for materials
MTC for consumables
All essential and non-essential variables recorded
All non destructive test reports
All destructive test reports
PWHT reports (if any)
What most definitely needs revision is the WPS.
This notes parameters that are given in ranges and if these ranges have changed in later editions of the code then the WPS must be revised.

 

[Dane Rot]

Hi Kingnero and Dekdee,

Many thanks for yours helpful and really quick answers.

 

[kingnero]

A WPQR can be 50 years old and it does not require change based on code / standard editions.

Unless there are amendments that changes things (e.g. the range of qualification). In that case, the amendment takes priority over the original WPQR.

 

[DekDee]

Kingnero,
You are correct, my comments were based on ASME IX.
I was actually very surprised once I had a look at ISO 15614-1.
You have a pWPS and WPQR but no WPS.
With ASME there should never be any qualification ranges on the PQR - it is purely a record of actual measurements / readings / recordings taken during the procedure qualification test.
Hence, there should never be any changes in a PQR except in specific cases, usually editorial (eg. A change from Russian language to English)
All qualification ranges are noted on the WPS so when the code makes a change it is the WPS that is revised not the PQR.
You learn something new every day,
Cheers,
Shane

 

[kingnero]

Don't worry, even within the plethora of ISO PQR standards, there are lots of differences. Got to admit, the 15614-1 is one of the exceptions that require the range of qualification to be noted in the PQR document. For most of the others, you're absolutely right: it's a merely a written statement of the welding parameters.