Weld Procedure Qualification

[humbug]

I have a requirement for a project forthcoming in which our company would like to use the FCAW process.

We have in Stock a piece of 16" Cr Pipe, S100 (1.031"w), SA335-P22
The coupon would be welded in the 1G (Rotated) position.
We would like to run one coupon and split it half so that one piece would be PWHT'd and the second piece would be in the As-Welded condition.

In looking at ASME Section IX, QW-463.1(d) and 463.1(e) the referenced locations for specimen removal are based on the coupon being in the 5G or 6G position.
My thought process is that since the coupon is welded in the 1G position that the specimen removal requirements would come from QW-463.1(a) or 463.1(b).

Our Lab that performs our testing is refuting our thought process on the basis that we are welding a pipe coupon not plate.

I have not bee able to find an Interpretation on this subject.

Comments, thoughts and rationale would be greatly appreciated.

 

[racookpe1978]

if you are going to the expense of qualifying a new WPS, I would STRONGLY recommend qualifying it (the procedure at least) in 6G.

 

[gtaw]

Why make life so difficult? ASME permits one to qualify the WPS in the 1G. The WPS can then be applied to plate, structural shapes, or pipe and tubing. Things get dicey when notch toughness comes into play due to requirements imposed by the construction code.

I think you need to use a different laboratory for consulting services. Their expertise is not in welding engineering.

Best regards - Al

 

[metengr]

The lab is incorrect. You can qualify the procedure in the 1G with and without PWHT, as you suggested. Review Section IX - QW-255.

 

[humbug]

Thanks for the input.
I knew in the back of my head I was correct, just needed some reassurance.

Thanks again!

 

[weldstan]

Be aware that you may well not pass the bend tests for the qualification without PWHT.

 

[pandithan]

Since u r going to use FCAW in pipe, it is better to do in pipe. Ur Lab is not correct. u can do it