PDR - PARTIAL DATA RECORDS 1

[QuaEng123]

Hi,

I work at a code shop and we recently procured some SS WOL pipes- stainless steel weld overlayed pipes. Unfortunately however, these items did not come with PDR from the pipe manufacturer to us. Now, these items have already been installed on the PV and the lack of PDR is an issue with the AI as can be expected.

I really need a way to resolve this issue. One thought was to ask the manufacturer to get their AI to come and do an inspection and issue the PDR, however the distance between the continents is a constraint. Has anyone else ever faced this issue and please how do we resolve this as its become a major blocking point to the acceptance of the vessels by the ASME AI.

 

[DekDee]

QuaEng123,
Why would you want a "Partial" Data Report and not the actual Manufacturers Data Report ?
How can an AI issue a PDR ?
Is this specific terminology I am not aware of ?
Do you require specific information (eg. Material certs / WPS / PQR / Welder Qualification / Consumable Certs / Test Reports) or have you received this ?
A bit more information would be helpful,
Cheers,
DD

 

[bpv66]

If this is within the Code boundary (you did not mention which Code), you must obtain the partial data report (U-2 Form/P-4 Form) from the welded Part manufacturer. You cannot take responsibility for another manufacturer's welding. See UG-120(c) and UG-116(h) for ASME Section VIII, Div. 1. See PG-112.2.4 and PG-106.8 for ASME Section I parts.

If you can't get the PDR from the Part manufacturer then you will have to replace the applicable components, in my opinion.

 

[qaqceng]

Did you procure the pipe from an ASME certificate holder, and did you ask for it to be manufactured according to the appropriate ASME codes including part stamps, data reports, etc.?

The only parties that can certify the manufactured part and produce a manufacturer's partial data report are the company that did the weld overlay and their Authorized Inspection Agency.

You might be S.O.L. if they don't hold the appropriate certificate to do this. You should also check the code rules applicable to "stamping" to see if your pipe mandates a hard stamp on the part. The company that did the overlay is the only party that can apply a code stamp to the part.

DekDee,
A PDR supplements a master data report. One would be appropriate for a manufacturer who buys a "part" from one company to install in their completed vessel.

 

[QuaEng123]

Thanks for all your input guys.

qaqceng, Yes, We are actually ASME certified. The code in reference is ASME Sec VIII Div 1. The shop we procured from is also an ASME certificate holder. We specified that the materials will be used for an ASME code vessel, sent them PO and TDC with that information. Unfortunately, we did not mention/request a PDR or hard stamping since we expected the supplier to know about those requirements.

The materials were received by our material controller just like any normal material (he is not really grounded about code matters) and issued to the fabrication guys. The AI came for final visual inspection and identified that the materials required stamping and PDR. Somehow, almost everyone missed it.

We are manufactured the vessel in Africa and the parts came from the UK. The Clients want their vessel, the AI will not stamp otherwise, and I have been reading the code's stance on this issue and it seems not to still be clear to me....particularly the criteria for exemption as stated in UG-11.

Hence the request for more info from guys who have had more experience in ASME code jobs.

 

[bpv66]

UG-11 exemptions only apply to standard pressure parts manufactured to a standard referenced in UG-44, or a manufacturer's propriety standard.

Based on the information given, I don't think your Part falls under UG-11.

 

[DekDee]

qaqceng,
Thanks for the clarification.
I don't have much to do with ASME VIII so had not heard of a PDR.
We recently had some modified valves installed in some Sub-Sea manifolds (SDSS pup pieces welded on either side of the valve by the manufacturer).
The manufacturer supplied us with RT, UT, PT, FT, PMI and pressure test records at the fabrication yard which I suppose was a PDR by default - however the full MDR for the valves still had to be submitted for review and approval prior to formal acceptance of the manifolds.
Cheers,
DD

 

[qaqceng]

I still think your only option will be to have the "part" manufacturer stamp and provide a partial data, but you may want to see if Section VIII, Div I, UG-116(h)(2) fits your situation.

If the WOL Pipes are 5 in OD or under, the code stamping is not mandatory. You may be able to have your supplier provide only a PDR without traveling to your facility to apply a code stamp.

 

[GenB]

I think all the above will not work, ASME is a construction Code not after Construction code. You cannot stamp an item after construction. ... if the original Mfr AI is paid for and the new AI accept it, then all can fly. Code wise, you're going no where. Cut and get a new certified part so you do not waste more time. Genblr.

 

[metengr]

First off, was the weld overlay considered as part of the strength of the tube? If not, there is no need for a PDR because if the tubes are seamless, they are considered material by the Code because they have no pressure retaining welds. Look at pressure parts with no fabrication welds.

 

[QuaEng123]

Thank you so much all.

metengr, i have tried to find what part of the code provides for the assertion that the material does not need PDR, because, first-off, the weld overlay was not considered as part of the strength of the tube, secondly, the WOL did not form part of the weld.

Please help out as soon as you can.

 

[metengr]

Tubes are considered material unless they contain pressure retaining welds. There should be no data report when tubes are shipped from a supplier to an ASME Certificate holder other than a Certificate of Conformance or bill of material. Application of a weld overlay with no strength consideration is outside the scope of ASME B&PV Code. There are interpretations related to this.

 

[bpv66]

I've been in this business for 20 years and I find it hard to believe that there is no additional documentation required by the part manufacturer.

Interpretation VIII-1-92-105 requires partial data reports for seamless heads when temporary lugs are welded by a parts manufacturer and then provided to the vessel manufacturer. I'm not sure how a permanent weld overlay would not require partial data reports.

Even the NBIC requires a Certificate of Conformance that welding complied with Section IX when a material is provided with non-pressure attachment welds. An example would be boiler tube wall panels with welded membrane attached.

I'm not saying metengr is wrong I'm just having trouble finding justification in the Code that partial data reports are not required.

 

[metengr]

Look at pressure parts supplied with no pressure retaining welds in Section I or Section VIII. Where in the code are partial data reports required for seamless boiler tubes? If you have no fabrication welds (butt welds) you have no requirement for a data report. Plus, how would you purchase boiler tube material from a non-ASME stamp holder, which is done routinely because these are considered material and not parts?

 

[bpv66]

Metengr,

I agree with what you stated. Data reports are not required for seamless tubes or pipes if there are no butt welds. They can be received as material.

Regarding the original poster's question, I'm under the impression that weld overlay was performed on this seamless pipe by someone other than the vessel manufacturer.

All welding performed on pressure retaining material shall comply with UW-28 and UW-29 (assuming this is a Section VIII vessel). Manual welding of non-pressure bearing attachments require a qualified WPS and welder.

It is the AI and vessel manufacturer's duty to verify that all welding on pressure retaining material meets the Code. How does the AI and vessel manufacturer know if a qualified WPS and welder were used by the part manufacturer?

As the AI, I could not sign the U Form for this vessel without a partial data report from the part manufacturer, or at least some sort of certification stating the weld overlay complies with ASME Section VIII and Section IX.

 

[QuaEng123]

Metengr, bpv66,

The vessel is an ASME VIII Div 1 vessel. The WOL was also done by an ASME certified shop. From my understanding and bit of experience in code work, materials can be accepted without PDR from the supplier because;
1) The WOL was a requirement from the client only and requested as per their specification only.
2) The WOL thickness does not contribute to the Nozzle strength, the advantage of WOL thickness was also not taken in the calculations
3) The WOL was not going to be part of any joint (Pressure retaining or not)
4) The material was received with MTCs, Test reports, WPS and Welders qualification, as well as a certificate of conformity from the manufacturer.
5) Finally, the WPS used for the WOL was prepared and qualified in line with ASME IX.

All of these had been presented to the AI, but he has refused to accept the material if a MPDR (BPVC_VIII_I_Form U-2)

The client have insisted that they do not require the PDR since the WOL is not included in any pressure retaining joint, but the AI who is the final authority for code stamping is now the hold point. He is due back in the shop next week,and I just need as much information to prove our stance on this issue as per code and best practice to get the vessels stamped.

So guys, You have no idea how much i really appreciate your views so far, but I still need a little bit more. I believed earlier on, and still do, that these materials can be accepted with the test reports, CoC, MTCs and other docs provided without a PDR, I just have not found the section of the code that states this expressly or exempts the PDR.

 

[metengr]

bpv66;
Weld overlays for corrosion protection on boiler tubes where the strength is NOT considered part of the base material are no different than other surface engineering methods. Yes, a qualified WPS is needed however, beyond this no partial data report is necessary. It is up to the Certificate Holder to confirm tube material and any surface treatment that is done for corrosion protection. I look at any coating or barrier for protection is specified by the client and is beyond the scope of ASME B&PV Code.

 

[bpv66]

QuaEng123:

As stated in my previous post, I think the C of C may be acceptable in lieu of a PDR. It needs to state compliance to UW-28 and UW-29 of ASME Section VIII, Div. 1.

I would request your AI contact his supervisor or technical support personnel for an official interpretation.

 

[GenB]

Note that supervisors and techs can only suggest or help an AI understand what is not known and only an ASME committee can give an official interpretation.

 

[GenB]

Uw28. Check this. May be of help.Welding of pressure parts and of joining loadcarrying, nonpressure-bearing parts to pressure parts shall be qualified in accordance with ASME Section IX Welding of nonpressure-bearing attachments with no load-carrying function to pressure parts welded manually, semi-automatically or machine, shall be qualified to sect IX of the ASME B&PV Code...genblr.Welding of pressure parts and of joining loadcarrying, nonpressure-bearing parts to pressure parts shall be qualified in accordance with ASME Section IX Welding of nonpressure-bearing attachments with no load-carrying function to pressure parts welded manually, semi-automatically or machine..shall be qualified to Sect IX of....