Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 45

1/45

GO TO ASME.ORG HOME >

Interpretation Detail Print to PDF


Please limit your selection on the search results screen to 10 interpretations.
Standard Designation:
BPV Section IX
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-462.2(a) Removal of Backing Ring for Side Bend Tests

Record Number:

BC-79-315

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/27/1979
IX-79-50

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it acceptable to remove weld reinforcement, backing strip or
backing ring flush with the undisturbed surface of the base material before
performing a side bend test?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, SMAW Procedure Qualifications

Record Number:

BC-78-113

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/13/1978
IX-78-100

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is DC straight (electrode negative) polarity permitted by Section
IX for procedure qualifications using E7018 (SFA 5.1) electrodes?

Reply: Yes, straight polarity is permitted. Section IX places no limits upon


polarity for SMAW procedure qualifications other than those imposed by
QW-409.1 (Supplementary Essential Variables) and QW-409.8
(Nonessential Variables).

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Semi-Automatic and Automatic Welding

Record Number:

BC-78-662

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/14/1978
IX-78-101

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Are separate performance qualifications required for one person,
acting as both welder and welding operator, using the same process within
the same essential variables?
Reply: Yes.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

2/45

Question: Must the performance qualifications for welders and welding


operators be maintained and renewed separately?
Reply: Yes.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-407.1, PWHT of Weld Procedure

Record Number:

BC-78-488

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/15/1978
IX-78-102

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): What is meant by the term "range" as it appears in the
wording for PWHT in QW-407.1?

Reply (1): The Code does not address itself to specifying a postweld heat
treatment temperature range. It would be the responsibility of the
manufacturer or fabricator to develop a temperature range suitable for the
material used and designated in the Welding Procedure Specification. It is
hoped that a postweld heat treatment temperature would be selected to fall
midway in the range developed.
Question (2): How much may the temperature of PWHT of WPS
qualification coupons differ from the PWHT temperature of the vessel?
Reply (2): There is no connection between the PWHT of welded test
coupons and the PWHT requirements of a vessel. The values may be
similar, but are not required to be so by Code requirements.
ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected interpretation to Question (2) sent to the inquirer.
Corrected Issued: September 25, 1979

Question (2): How much may the temperature of PWHT of WPS


qualification coupons differ from the PWHT temperature of the vessel?

Reply (2): The PWHT of the welded test coupons and the PWHT of the
vessel must be of the same type of PWHT as designated for the various
conditions outlined in QW-407.1
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

Question(s) and Reply(ies):

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Performance Qualification for Small Diameter Tubing, QW452.3
12/18/1978
BC-78-634
IX-78-103

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

3/45

Question: "1 in. diameter" tubing may vary (per SA-450) between 0.968
and 1.016 in. in diameter. Under the diameter limitations in QW-452.3, is a
welder qualified on a "2 in." (nominal) pipe qualified to weld the "1 in.
diameter" tube described above?
Reply: No. QW-452.3 is based on nominal pipe sizes for specimen sizes
and qualification limits, the "over 1" minimum qualified outside diameter
keyed to in. pipe size. SA-53 gives the following O.D. tolerances for
in. pipe:

O.D.: 1.050 in. O.D. min : 1.050 - 1/32 in. (i.e. 1.019 in.) O.D. max : 1.050
+ 1/64 in. (i.e. 1.066 in.)

The 1 in. tube in question, varying between 0.968 and 1.016 in. O.D., would
not be weldable under the conditions in question.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-403.16, Diameter Restrictions

Record Number:

BC-78-778

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/21/1978
IX-78-104

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Do the diameter restrictions of Section IX, QW-403.16 mandate
requalification of welders for fillet and socket welds in pipe 2f in. nominal
diameter and less when the welders have been qualified in large diameter
groove welds in pipe?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, 1974 Edition, QW-403.6

Record Number:

BC-78-263

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/23/1978
IX-78-83

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If the thickness of the test plate or pipe is more than 5/8 in. and
QW-403.6 is specified as a Supplementary Essential Variable, what is the
minimum thickness qualified?

Reply: When QW-403.6 is required as a Supplementary Essential Variable


for notch toughness, the minimum thickness qualified when the test plate or
pipe is greater than 5/8 in. is 5/8 in. The minimum thickness specified in
QW-451 is the minimum thickness qualified, except when QW-403.6 is
listed as a Supplementary Essential Variable.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

4/45

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-422, A-Numbers vs. AWS Requirements

Record Number:

BC-78-266

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/23/1978
IX-78-84

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Prior to the Winter 1976 Addenda of Section IX, the E8018-C3
electrodes met the A-No. 12 category of QW-442. What is the A-Number
category for this electrode in the revised QW-442 A-Numbers?

Reply: All E8018-C3 electrodes now meet the requirements for A-No. 10 in
QW-442. This was also true in 1976.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-201.1 and QW-201.2

Record Number:

BC-78-404

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/05/1978
IX-78-85

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Is it the intent of QW-201.1 to list on the Welding Procedure
Specification each essential and nonessential variable required for each
process whether the variable is applicable for that particular process or not?
Reply (1): It is the intent of QW-201.1 as stated: "The WPS information
may be presented in any form, written or tabular, to fit the needs of each
manufacturer or contractor as long as every essential and nonessential
variable required of the appropriate welding process or processes (QW-252
through QW-281) is included."
Question (2): Do the requirements of QW-201.2 on the Procedure
Qualification Record require a similar enumeration?

Reply (2): The requirements of QW-201.2 call for the Procedure


Qualification Record to document the essential variables of the applicable
process or processes required by QW-252 through QW-281.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-305

Record Number:

BC-78-408

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/11/1978
IX-78-86

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent of the Code, QW-305, that if a man qualifies using
a semi-automatic process (submerged arc), is he also qualified using
automatic submerged arc where the arc is positioned via a fully motorized
manipulator?

Reply: It is the intent of the Code that welding operators would be governed
by the requirements of QW-305 which would cover all automatic processes.
Semi-automatic submerged arc process, which would be performed by a

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

5/45

welder, would need to comply with the requirements of QW-304 and QW354.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Summer Addenda, QW-202.2

Record Number:

BC-78-132

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/31/1978
IX-78-87

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Is there a limit on the minimum depth of deposited metal for
repair or build-up welding? Does this override the minimum limits listed in
Table QW-451.1?

Reply (1): If you limit the weld layers to in. or less in thickness, then the
minimum limits of QW-451.1 are overridden as far as weld metal thickness
is concerned. New work has been done on QW-451.1 which will help
clarify this item.
Question (2): Does qualification on test plates/material less than 3 in. thick
allow repair and build-up welding on base material of thickness up to 2t,
with a depth of deposited metal being limited to a maximum of 2t?
Reply (2): Yes.

Question (3): Does qualification on test plates/material 3 in. thick or greater


allow repair and build-up welding on base material of any thickness, the
depth of the deposited metal is limited to a maximum of 2t?
Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): Is it permissible to perform repairs deeper than 6 in. using for
qualification plate with a thickness of at least one-half the depth of the
repair?
Reply (4): Yes.

Question (5): Is it correct to assume that the thickness of the material being
repaired refers to the location where the repair is being made?
Reply (5): Yes.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QB-402.1 and QB-402.2 Material Qualification

Record Number:

BC-78-471

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/02/1978
IX-78-88

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QB-402.1 and QB-402.2 are Essential Variables for procedure
and performance qualification, respectively, which indicate that a change
from a base metal listed under one P-Number in QB-422 to a base metal

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

6/45

listed under another P-Number or to any other base metal require


requalification. Can a procedure which is qualified using ASME SB-12
Alloy 122 be used for the brazing of ASME SB-42 Alloy 122 (P-No. 107)
material? Can a procedure which is qualified with ASME SB-466 Alloy 706
(similar to P-No. 107 material, SB-111 Alloy 706) be used to qualify a
brazing procedure for joining SB-12 Alloy 122 (similar to P-No. 107
material, SB-42 Alloy 122)?
Reply: The answer to both questions presented is in the affirmative that
qualification with Alloy 122 or Alloy 706, both included in P-No. 107, will
qualify all other product forms of that same alloy. The Committee
recognizes that the P-Number tables of the Brazing Section of Section IX
need revision and updating to cover the other product forms for alloys now
listed. The precedent of permitting other product forms of similar chemistry
materials has been well established in all the book sections of the Code in
their General Requirements paragraphs on materials.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-201.3

Record Number:

BC-78-466

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/03/1978
IX-78-89

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it acceptable to delete a GMAW root pass (using E70T-1 wire)
which was initially in a qualified combination procedure with SAW
remainder using a F 72-EM12K flux/filler (base material is P-No. 1, Group
2), and add an SMAW root pass using E7018 electrode, without
requalification, provided that the SMAW procedure is qualified within the
thickness range for that process?

Reply: It is the intent of QW-201.3 to allow the deletion of a GMAW


process which was previously qualified in combination with one or more
other processes and to add an SMAW process without requalification
providing the SMAW process has been qualified within the thickness limits
specified in QW-202.2, QW-403, and QW-451.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-462.1(a)

Record Number:

BC-78-438

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/11/1978
IX-78-90

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Referring to QW-462.1(a), may the specified widths of the
reduced section tensile specimens be reduced as follows?
Plate Thickness Present Widths Proposed Width

1 in. or less 1-1/2 in. approx., 1 in. min. 1/2 in. min. Over 1 in. 1 in. min.
3/8 in. min.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

7/45

The reason for this inquiry is that the present minimum sizes impose a very
high load requirement on tensile testing equipment. The proposed reduction
would still test significantly more weld cross-sectional area than that tested
by the turned 0.505 in. diameter specimens [QW-461.2(d)], which are also
permitted for procedure qualification tensile testing, and which are more
expensive to prepare.
Reply (1): The widths of the reduced section tensile specimens shall be as
specified in QW-462.1(a). However, your attention is called to QW-141.1,
which permits the mechanical cutting of a single specimen into a number of
approximately equal pieces to accommodate the available testing
equipment. If this provision will not permit specimens which can be tested
within the capabilities of the testing equipment, the specimen of QW-461.2
(d) is to be employed in accordance with the instructions of QW-151.3. The
speci-mens contained in QW-462 are standard specimens used throughout
the welding industry in the various specifications controlling qualification
in which tensile testing is required.
Question (2): Referring to QW-462.1(a), may the specified thickness of
reduced specimens be reduced by a maximum of 10% of the plate
thickness? (This is in addition to grinding the reinforcement flush.)

Reply (2): The Code does not specify any maximum reduction in the
thickness. The minimum amount of material needed to produce parallel
surfaces shall be removed from the test specimen. Figure QW-462.1(a) was
revised in the Summer 1978 Addenda to Section IX recognizing that a test
specimen will distort during welding. Cold straining is permitted prior to
the removal of the weld reinforcement. These revisions were made to
clarify the intent of the Committee.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-302.3 and QW-452.3

Record Number:

BC-78-487

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/14/1978
IX-78-91

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): QW-302.1 requires that the type and number of specimens for
performance qualification to be in accordance with QW-452. QW-452.3
specifies two bend tests for each performance qualification. However, QW302.3 requires four specimens from pipe in positions 5G or 6G of QW461.3 removed in accordance with the sequence of QW-463.2(d) or (e).
What are the proper requirements: the two bend tests of QW-452.3 or the
four bend tests required by QW-302.3?
Reply (1): The four bend tests required by QW-302.3 are correct. The
Summer 1978 Addenda of Section IX has revised QW-452.3 to correct this
inconsistency.
Question (2): QW-452.3 of Section IX specifies that a welder must weld a
performance qualification coupon with a thickness of 3/4 in. and over to
have an unlimited maximum thickness qualification. SA-106 has a
minimum thickness of 0.656 in. for a nominal thickness of 0.75 in. Can a
performance qualification specimen that is greater than 0.656 in. but less

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

8/45

than 0.75 in. thick be used to qualify a welder for an unlimited maximum
thickness?

Reply (2): No. The thickness of the performance qualification must be 3/4
in. (0.750 in.) or over for an unlimited qualification.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Performance Qualification on Combination Welding

Record Number:

BC-78-547

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

09/25/1978
IX-78-92

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): If a welder makes a combination performance qualification
test weld using GTAW and SMAW on 0.75 wall pipe, can he make
production welds in combination to unlimited thickness?

Reply (1): The welder does not have unlimited thickness qualification. He is
limited to the sum of the thickness qualified by each welding process in the
performance qualification test weld as listed in QW-452.
Question (2): If a welder makes a combination test weld with GTAW and
SMAW on 0.500 wall pipe, what is the maximum wall thickness he can
weld in combination if we assume 3/16 in. of GTAW is deposited in both
the test weld and the production weld while the remaining 5/16 in. is
deposited with SMAW?

Reply (2): Since the inquiry has restricted the GTAW to 3/16 in. for both
the test weld and the production weld, the only variable shall be the amount
deposited by the SMAW. The maximum amount that can be deposited by
the SMAW process in addition to the 3/16 in. of the GTAW is 5/8 in. by the
SMAW process.
Question (3): When a welder is tested in combination, is it required to
measure the actual thickness of the GTAW weld deposit with a depth gage?
Reply (3): The method of measurement of the actual thickness of the
GTAW weld deposit is left to the stamp holder. The Code does not specify
the actual method of measurement.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-214.1

Record Number:

BC-78-558

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

10/04/1978
IX-78-95

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Under the requirements of QW-214.1, is the test plate
thickness for production base metal greater than 1 in. required to be at least
1 in. thickness?
Reply (1): Yes.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

9/45

Question (2): Under the requirements of QW-214.1, is the test plate


thickness for production base metal less than 1 in. required to be a thickness
that is as thick as the production base metal (with the understanding that a
thickness less than the production base metal is also acceptable)?
Reply (2): The intent of QW-214.1 is that qualification for production base
metal less than 1 in. thick must be done on test metal which is equal to or
less than the thickness of the production base metal.

Question (3): May Corrosion Resistant Overlay Clad procedures (WPS) that
have been qualified in accordance with Section VIII, UCL-43 (1977
Edition) on in. or thicker plate be used for all production base metal
thickness providing the existing WPS meets all of the essential variables of
QW-281.2 through QW-281.4?
Reply (3): The production base metal thickness shall be qualified as listed
in QW-214.1.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Electrodes and Flash Butt Welding

Record Number:

BC-78-553

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

10/02/1978
IX-78-93

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): In applying the requirements of QW-404.4 and QW-404.5 to
electrodes which are not produced in accordance with AWS/SFA
requirements, must requalification be made for each lot or heat item number
of a particular proprietary type of electrode?
Reply (1): Qualification with a proprietary type of electrode which is not in
accordance with an AWS/SFA specification shall qualify those electrodes
as long as the electrodes continue to meet the proprietary requirements for
that particular electrode; that is, proprietary specifications covering
chemistry and strength of the electrode. It is not necessary to requalify new
heats of such new electrodes when they meet the requirements of
proprietary specification. The chemistry and strength of that specification
should be identified in the Welding Procedure Specification by actual
values or references to the appropriate proprietary specification.

Question (2): Since flash butt welding is permitted under the rules of ASME
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section I, why does Section IX not cover
qualification of procedures and operators even though referenced in Section
I for such requirements?
Reply (2): Section IX has not covered some of the automatic welding
processes such as flash butt welding, but the Code has accepted the use of
this welding method when the procedure has been tested to meet the
requirements of QW-451 for a number of specimens and the requirements
of QW-305 for qualification of the operators.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

10/45

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-403.5, QW-406.3, QW-409.1, and QW-410.24

Record Number:

BC-78-531

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

10/03/1978
IX-78-94

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): In interpreting QW-403.5, must the Welding Procedure
Specification state the group number or the type and grade of material when
the base metals have specified impact test requirements for the flux cored
arc welding process?
Reply (1): QW-403.5 is a Supplementary Essential Variable for the flux
cored arc welding process and becomes an Essential Variable when notch
toughness testing of the base metals is required by the Section of the Code
to which the vessel is being fabricated. If the Welding Procedure
Specification is to be employed under these conditions, it must state the
P-Number and group number of materials to which the welding procedure
can be applied and which procedure qualification records of the procedure
qualification test will substantiate. QW-403.5 and its other applicable
paragraphs under QW-403 must all be considered as applied to the welding
process. QW-403.5 does not conflict with the other specified QW-403
paragraphs but supplements them when notch toughness is a factor.
Question (2): QW-406.3 indicates that an increase in the specified
maximum interpass temperature is cause for requalification of the
procedure. Must the Welding Procedure Specification and the procedure
qualification record list the maximum interpass temperatures, and who
specifies the maximum interpass temperature?

Reply (2): QW-406.3 is a Supplementary Essential Variable where notch


toughness is required by the Section of the Code to which the vessel is
being fabricated. The maximum interpass temperature shall be specified by
the stamp holder and shall be included in both the Welding Procedure
Specification and the procedure qualification record. This shall be the
temperature observed and attained as maximum interpass temperature
during the welding of the welding procedure qualification test coupons.

Question (3): In QW-409.1, are voltage ranges required in the WPS for
Shield Metal Arc welding when using a constant current welding machine,
and what are the maximum amperages and voltages qualified for the WPS?

Reply (3): QW-409.1 has been revised by committee action and will appear
in the Winter 1978 Addenda to Section IX. The essence of the change will
require that the stamp holder shall account for the heat input as measured by
either voltage, amperage, or an increase in weld metal deposited per unit
length beyond that qualified will require requalification. If the stamp holder
chooses to use amperage, voltage, and travel speed for the control of his
heat input, it will be necessary that the Welding Procedure Specification
include nominal ranges of the amperage, voltage, and travel speed to be
observed for all diameter electrodes to be employed in production welding.
These amperage and voltage ranges shall be those observed during the
welding of the welding procedure qualification test assemblies. Even
though the welding machine is a constant potential power source, the
voltage would be included in the WPS so that the Authorized Inspector
could assure himself that the intent of QW-409.1 is being met.
Question (4): In QW-410.24, does the travel speed recorded during the
welding of the welding procedure test coupons become the travel speed for
which the WPS is qualified, regardless of process or electrode size?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

11/45

Reply (4): With the revision of QW-409.1 to be published in the Winter


1978 Addenda, QW-410.24 will be deleted as the subject of travel speed is
an essential of heat input. The travel speed recorded during the welding of
the welding procedure test coupon shall be recorded on the procedure
qualification record and should be within the travel speed range for the
applicable electrode size listed within the Welding Procedure Specification.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Welding and Brazing Qualifications

Record Number:

BC-78-662

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/05/1978
IX-78-96

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Are separate performance qualifications required for one
person, acting as both welder and welding operator, using the same process
within the same essential variables?
Reply (1): Yes. Section IX considers welders and welding operators to be
distinct from one another for performance qualification purposes.

Question (2): Must the performance qualifications for welders and welding
operators be maintained and renewed separately?
Reply (2): Yes.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-403.6, Thicknesses Qualified

Record Number:

BC-78-664

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/05/1978
IX-78-97

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1 ): Does QW-403.6, which states "For thicknesses less than 5/8
in. (16 mm) the thickness of the test coupon is the minimum thickness
qualified," have any applicability when the test coupon is 5/8 in. and above
in thickness?
Reply (1): QW-403.6 has no effect where the test coupon is 5/8 in. or over
in thickness.

Question (2): When QW-403.6 is listed as an essential variable, what is the


minimum thickness qualified when the test coupon is 5/8 in. or over in
thickness?

Reply (2): As stated above QW-403.6 does not apply to test coupons 5/8 in.
thick and over. The thickness range qualified here would be found in QW451 in general and may be limited by other applicable essential variables. If
QW-403.6 is an essential variable, if no other thickness limitation factors
come into play, the minimum thickness qualified by a test coupon in.
thick would be in. For a test coupon, 5/8 in. thick on from there up to but

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

12/45

not including 3/4 in., the minimum thickness qualified would be 3/16 in.,
per QW-451.
ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
corrected replies sent to the inquirer.
Correction Issued: August 3, 1979

Replies (1) and (2); For thickness less than 5/8 in., the thickness of the test
coupon is the minimum thickness qualified for production welds. For
thicknesses 5/8 in. or greater, the minimum thickness qualified is 5/8 in.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Lap Dimension Requirements for Reduced-Section Tension
Test Specimens, QB-463.3
12/06/1978
BC-78-393
IX-78-98

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is the X=4t min ratio shown in QB-463.3 binding, or may the test
specimen use a shorter lap?
Reply: The X=4t min ratio is not binding; it is included in QB-463.3 as a
typical lap-to-thickness ratio, but it is not in the scope of Section IX to
prescribe joint design. As QB-408.1, which states "A change in the joint
design details; such as, from a butt to a lap or socket, or a change in lap of
plus or minus 25%," applies to all brazing procedure qualifications, a
mandatory X=4t min would indeed place a restriction on joint design.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Tension Tests and Material Classifications

Record Number:

BC-78-663

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

12/07/1978
IX-78-99

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): If a tension test specimen breaks in the weld metal at a
strength not less than that specified for the base metal, is it acceptable?
Reply (1): Yes. QW-153.1 provides for this.

Question (2): If a bend test specimen shows an open defect exceeding 1/8
in. in length on the convex side, is the test coupon acceptable?
Reply (2): Not generally. Your attention is directed to QW-163 for exact
bend test specimen acceptance criteria.

Question (3): What is the A-Number for electrodes having a nickel content
above 4%?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

13/45

Reply (3): It is important to state that the A-Numbers apply specifically to


the weld deposit and not to the electrode. A-Numbers 8 and 9 apply to weld
deposits with nickel contents ranging from 7.50% to 15.00% and from
15.00% to 37%, respectively, but these A-Number classifications also
require specified concentration ranges of carbon, chromium, molybdenum,
manganese, and silicon. For a weld deposit of, e.g., 4.5% nickel, there is no
A-Number classification, and depending on the applicable essential
variables, a separate qualification may be required for such a deposit.
Question (4): What P- and A-Numbers are applicable to materials not listed
in Section IX?
Reply (4): Occasionally a material to an SA Specification that is usable
under the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code has not received a
P-Number. If this be the case, the Subcommittee on Welding should be so
informed that the weldability of material may be considered. Concerning
non-Code listed materials, it is the policy of the Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Committee to assign P-Numbers only to those materials listed in Section II
of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. A-Number classifications
have been developed as a convenience for the grouping of weld metal
deposits of general usage in Code construction. It is not intended that all
weld metals will be included within the A-Numbers of QW-442 and
provisions of Section IX permit qualification of other weld metals.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Retention of Qualification Specimens and Radiographs

Record Number:

BC-78-780

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

01/02/1979
IX-79-01

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): What are the retention requirements for welder qualification
test coupons that have been accepted by radiography or welder qualification
test specimens that have been accepted by bend test?
Reply (1): There are no retention requirements in the Code for either the
bend tests nor the radiographs employed in welder qualification. QW-103
states the responsibility and the record that each manufacturer or contractor
shall maintain of the results obtained and shall certify those records. These
records shall be accessible to the Authorized Inspector with recommended
form, as shown in QW-480. Any requirements beyond certification of
records are local options between the stamp holder and his Authorized
Inspector.
Question (2): What are the retention requirements for accepted radiographs
for welder qualification coupons and of welding procedure qualification?
Reply (2): The reply to the previous question covers the retention
requirements for accepted radiographs of welder qualification coupons.
Radiography of a welding procedure qualification is not a requirement nor
is it permitted as an acceptance standard for a welding procedure
qualification. Welding procedure qualifications must meet the test required
by QW-451.
ATTENTION

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

14/45

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
was added as a clarification and sent to the inquirer.
Clarification of Reply (1) Issued: October 5, 1979

Reply (1): There are no retention requirements in the Code for either the
bend tests nor the radiographs employed in welder qualification. However
QW-103.2 states, "Each manufacturer, or contractor, shall maintain a record
of the results obtained in welding procedure and welder and welding
operator performance qualifications." These records shall be accessible to
the Authorized Inspector with recom-mended form, as shown in QW-480.
Any requirements beyond certification of records are local options between
the stamp holder and his Authorized Inspector.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-304 and QW-305

Record Number:

BC-78-785

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

01/03/1979
IX-79-02

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Are there provisions in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code to permit performance qualification of a welder after the production
welding has been completed?

Reply: There are no provisions in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code which recognize qualifi-cation of welders or welding operators after
completion of the production welding. There are provisions which permit
concurrent qualifications of welders or welding operators as provided in
Section IX, QW-304 and QW-305.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Performance Qualification for Small Tubing, QW-452.3

Record Number:

BC-78-634

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

01/02/1979
IX-79-03

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: "1-in. diameter" tubing may vary (per SA-450) between 0.968
and 1.016 in. in diameter. Under the diameter limitations in QW-452.3 is a
welder qualified on a "2-in." (nominal) pipe qualified to weld the "1-in.
diameter" tube described above?
Reply: No. QW-452.3 is based on nominal pipe sizes for specimen sizes
and for qualification limits. The "over 1" minimum qualified by the 2 in.
nominal pipe size would exclude the 1 in. diameter tubing.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

15/45

Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

Section IX, Use of ASTM A296 Grade CA6NM as P-No. 6 Group 4 for
Procedure and Performance Qualification
01/09/1979
BC-78-357
IX-79-04

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it permissible to use ASTM A-296, Grade CA6NM, in lieu of
SA-487, Class CA6NM, for welding procedure qualification testing and
performance qualification testing to be qualified per Section IX to weld
both ASTM A-296, Grade. CA6NM, and SA-487, Class CA6NM?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Voltage and Amperage Ranges for a Welding Procedure
Specification
01/17/1979
BC-78-635
IX-79-05

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: For Shielded Metal Arc and Gas Tungsten Arc Welding of a base
material without requirements for notch toughness, is the amperage and
voltage used for the particular diameter of electrode in procedure
qualification required to be within the range specified in the Welding
Procedure Specification?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Welder Performance Qualification Materials QW-432 and QW442
01/23/1979
BC-78-765
IX-79-06

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: On a performance qualification test does a welder who qualifies
with an E-7018 rod also qualify for using E-8018-B2 or E-9018-B3L rods?
Reply: Yes. They are all listed as having an F-Number classification of 4.
Since there are no A-Number essential variables, i.e., since no restrictions
are placed on weld-metal-deposit analysis for performance in Section IX
extends throughout a single F Number. You are encouraged to review the
F-Number essential variables for performance qualifications for further
material usability.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

16/45

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:

Section IX, Slag Inclusions; Section VIII, Division 1, UW-13.2

Record Number:

BC-78-279

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

01/29/1979
IX-79-07

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: When using partial penetration welds for the joining of materials
of dissimilar thicknesses, such as shown in Fig. UW-13.2 of Section VIII,
Division 1, what are the procedure qualification test plate thickness
requirements for the production welds?

Reply: The thicknesses qualified are subject to the requirements of QW-451


as further governed by the requirements of QW-202.2(b). Where dissimilar
thicknesses are being joined, the thickness of the thinner member shall
govern the required thickness of the procedure qualification test plate, as
given in QW-451.
ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
was added as a clarification and sent to the inquirer.
Clarification of Reply Issued: June 4, 1979

Reply: The thicknesses qualified are subject to the requirements of QW-451


as further governed by the requirements of QW-202.2. You must qualify the
thickness range for both the base metal and the deposited weld metal
thickness ranges to be used in production. In addition, there are two rules in
QW-202.2 covering dissimilar thicknesses. Both rules are in the third
paragraph in Exception (1). For groove welding qualifications made on test
coupons of any thickness, there is no limit on the minimum depth of
deposited weld metal nor on the thickness of the thinner of the base metals
being joined where they are of dissimilar thickness. Groove welding
qualifications made on test coupons 3 in. thick or more shall be applicable
for production use for base metal and deposited weld metal thickness up to
the maximum given in QW-451 except welds joining dissimilar thicknesses
of base metals in which the base metal on one side is equal to or less than
the maximum thickness qualified in the PQR, the base metal on the other
side may be of any greater thickness.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-403.6 Diameter Restrictions

Record Number:

BC-78-778

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

02/06/1979
IX-79-08

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Do the diameter restrictions of Section IX, QW-403.16 mandate
requalification of welders for fillet and socket welds in pipe 2-7/8 in.
nominal diameter and less when the welders have been qualified in large
diameter groove welds in pipe?
Reply: No.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

17/45

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Travel Speed As An Essential Variable for Hardfacing, QW282.4
02/21/1979
BC-79-31
IX-79-09

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: For manually-controlled hardfacing procedure qualification, QW282.4(h) reads "A variation of more than 10% beyond the travel speed range
specified." Does this mean that the travel speed range must be specified on
the WPS?
Reply: Yes. The travel speed range must be specified and any change 10%
below the lowest speed specified and 10% above the highest speed specified
requires requalification.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Peel Tests

Record Number:

BC-78-840

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

02/20/1979
IX-79-10

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: When qualifying a lap joint by brazing to Section IX with brazing
filler metal of equal or greater strength than the base metals being joined,
does failure in the base metal constitute passage of the peel test?

Reply: When qualifying a lap joint with a brazing filler metal of equal or
greater strength than the base metals being joined, the sectioning test of QB181 is used in place of the peel test of QB-170. Sectioning of the specimens
shall be as shown in QB-463.9 and acceptance standards of QB-181 shall be
met.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-303

Record Number:

BC-79-22

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

02/15/1979
IX-79-11

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent of QW-303.4 that qualification in the 6G position
shall qualify for all positions for double welds as described in that
paragraph?
Reply: Yes.

ATTENTION

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

18/45

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
was added as a clarification and sent to the inquirer.
Clarification of Reply Issued: October 5, 1979

Reply: No. QW-303.4 covers 1G and 2G positions only. Refer to QW-303.1


and QW-461.7 for rules governing 6G.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Changes in Supplementary Essential Variables, QW-403.5

Record Number:

BC-78-782; W78-185

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

02/26/1979
IX-79-12

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Under QW-403.5 is it permissible to change other supplementary
essential variables, i.e., position, temperature, or electrical characteristics by
welding a new test plate from which only impacts are taken?
Reply: No. The opening sentence of the second paragraph of QW-403.5
provides that all requirements be met. This means supplementary essential
as well as essential variables.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-407.1(b)

Record Number:

BC-78-636

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

02/26/1979
IX-79-13

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent of QW-407.1(b) to require the requalification of a
welding procedure when changing from one postweld heat treatment
temperature range to another postweld heat treatment temperature range
when both are below the critical range?

Reply: No. It is the intent of Section IX that the postweld heat treatment
temperature range, below the critical range, employed in the qualification of
a welding procedure specification for fabrication in accordance with a
Section of the Code shall also qualify for the required postweld heat
treatment below the critical range specified by other Sections of the Code.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Variables for Welder Performance Qualification for Hard
Facing Weld Metal Overlay, QW-312
02/26/1979
BC-78-798

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

19/45

Interpretation Number :

IX-79-14

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Do the variables in QW-350 apply for the qualification of welders
for hard facing weld metal overlay application?
Reply: No. A welder who meets the requirements of QW-312 is qualified to
do all hard facing weld metal overlay applications using the same process.
ATTENTION

The foregoing interpretation has been further considered and the following
was added as a clarification and sent to the inquirer.
Clarification of Reply Issued: October 5, 1979

Reply: No. QW-312 covers qualification requirements for a welder for hard
facing weld metal overlay.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Revision of the Procedure Qualification Record, QW-201.2

Record Number:

BC-79-33

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

02/27/1979
IX-79-15

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a nonessential variable on a Welding Procedure Specification is


changed, must the Procedure Qualification Record supporting that Welding
Procedure Specification be changed to reflect the nonessential variable
change?
Reply: Since the Procedure Qualification Record is used to record the actual
data used in qualifying a Welding Procedure Specification, such data shall
not be revised when a nonessential variable is changed. QW-201.1 does
require, however, that a Welding Procedure Specification having undergone
a nonessential variable change must be revised or rewritten to reflect such a
change.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Deletion of a Part of a Shielded Metal-Arc Procedure, QW-253

Record Number:

BC-78-674

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

03/01/1979
IX-79-16

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May a welder, qualified using a combination welding procedure
for shielded metal-arc welding on a single test coupon, specifically E6010
root and E7018 fill, weld on Code construction using the E7018 electrode
only, if the production joint employs a backing, and all other essential
variables are the same, and the welder deposits weld metal only within the
range qualified by his E7018 portion of his performance qualifications?
Reply: Yes. The thickness limit is that of the test coupon, including both
E6010 and E7018 deposited weld metals.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

20/45

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Pipe Welding Qualification Test Coupon Thickness Definition,
QW-451, QW-452
03/12/1979
BC-79-69
IX-79-17

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: In QW-451 and QW-452 how are "Thickness T of Test Coupon
Welded" and "Nominal Pipe Size of Sample Weld," respectively, defined?

Reply: In both cases when standard-size pipe is used for qualification test
specimens, T is defined as the nominal wall thickness of the pipe as listed in
the applicable SA pipe specification in Section II.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Additional Test Specimens Required for Notch Toughness
Condition, QW-403.5
03/19/1979
BC-79-68
IX-79-18

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a welding procedure has already been qualified to satisfy all
requirements other than notch toughness and a new procedure is to be
qualified without changing essential variables but incorporating additional
supplementary essential variables, will it be necessary to prepare an
additional test coupon using the new procedure, only to provide necessary
notch toughness specimens?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Welding Material "F" Numbers

Record Number:

NC-79-62

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

03/19/1979
IX-79-19

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May welding rods, electrodes, and filler metals not meeting an
American Welding Society (AWS) Specification be assigned F-Numbers
provided they meet another specification, such as a Japan Institute of Steel
one?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:

BPV Section IX

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

21/45

Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

Section IX, Welding Procedures When Essential Variables are Revised in


Subsequent Editions of Section IX
03/19/1979
BC-79-73
IX-79-20

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-311(a) of the 1977 Edition with Winter 1977 Addenda, now
requires that at least three weld beads of overlay be used for qualification
for weld overlay cladding. Is it the intent of the Code that weld overlay
procedures qualified before the Winter 1977 Addenda which became
mandatory now must be revised in order to clad components with Code
effective dates earlier than December 31, 1977?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Sections IX and III, Weld Thickness Qualified and Postweld Heat
Treatment Requirements
03/19/1979
BC-79-101
IX-79-21

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): A shielded metal arc welding procedure is qualified using a 1
in. thick test coupon. What are the maximum plate thickness and weld depth
qualified thereby?
Reply (1): The maximum plate thickness and weld depth qualified are each
2 in., as indicated by QW-451.

Question (2): Does Section IX limit the SMAW weld repair depth qualified
when no postweld heat treatment is used?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): For a repair weld procedure qualified as described above,


what is the maximum repair, partial penetration, or fillet weld thickness or
depth that can be made without postweld heat treatment under Section III,
Subsection NE, Table NE-4622.3-1?

Reply (3): Repair, partial penetration, and fillet welds up to in. thick or
deep may be made under the conditions described above provided the base
metal is over 1 in. thick and provided a 200F minimum preheat is
applied.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Brazing Qualification Peel-Test Acceptance Criteria, QB-172
04/25/1979

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

22/45

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BC-78-221; W-78-147
IX-79-22

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it the intent of Section IX, QB-172 that brazing qualification
peel test specimens must meet all of the acceptance criteria of QB-172
[namely, in the paragraph itself and subparagraphs (1), (2), and (3)]?

Reply: Yes. A specimen failing to meet any of the criteria is unacceptable.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Welding of Split Backing Rings, QW-402.2, QW-402.4

Record Number:

BC-79-187

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

04/30/1979
IX-79-23

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a welder is qualified to weld using a split backing ring, must he
be additionally qualified to weld a joint without backing to weld the gap of
a split backing ring?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Code Edition Applicable to Assigning Essential Variables to
Old Welding Procedures, Preamble
04/30/1979
BC-79-64
IX-79-24

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: When position was an essential variable for welding procedure
specification test, may the welding procedure specification now be revised
to include other positions without requalification?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-302.2

Record Number:

BC-79-185

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/11/1979
IX-79-25

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: To qualify a welder under QW-304 or a welder operator under
QW-305 by radiographic examination, must a 6 in. test coupon be
evaluated?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

23/45

Reply: For plate, a test coupon of a minimum of 6 in. long must be


evaluated by radiographic examination to qualify a welder under QW-304
or a welder operator under QW-305. For pipe, the entire weld
circumference shall be examined. When this circumference is less than 6
in., additional coupons shall be welded to obtain 6 in. of weld length, but
not more than four samples are required. That is, four small diameter
samples may not equal the 6 in. length.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Thickness Qualified for Procedure Qualification

Record Number:

BC-79-65

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/10/1979
IX-79-26

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Does the thickness of the base metal in a production groove weld
or the thickness of the groove weld metal govern the thickness range to
which a Welding Procedure Specification shall be qualified?
Reply: For groove weld procedure qualification, QW-202.2 states that
qualification shall encompass both the base metal and the weld-metal
thickness. This also applies to partial penetration groove welds.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Thickness Qualified in Partial Penetration Weld Procedure
Qualification, QW-45l
05/10/1979
BC-79-50
IX-79-27

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: For procedure qualification of partial penetration welds, what
dimension is used in determining the maximum thickness qualified: the
base metal thickness, or the thickness of the weld metal (i.e., the weld
groove depth)?
Reply: For groove weld procedure qualification, QW-202.2 states that
qualification shall encompass both the base metal and the weld-metal
thickness. This also applies to partial penetration groove welds.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Welding Procedure Qualification Requirements for Clad Plate,
for Use in Section VIII, Division 1 Construction
05/14/1979
BC-79-30
IX-79-28

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

24/45

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: An integrally clad plate consists of a base plate of SA-515 Grade
70 which is 22 mm thick and cladded with SA-240 Type 304L which is 2
mm thick. The base plates are joined with E 7016 weld metal and the
cladding plates are joined with E 309 and E 308L weld metal. What tests
are required on this integrally clad plate to meet the requirements of Section
IX plus additional requirements of Section VIII, Division 1, UCL-40 and
-41?
Reply: 1st Condition: Thickness of cladding is included in design per UCL23(c). (1) Weld an integrally clad plate with the base plate being at least 11
mm thick and the clad being at least 1.6 mm thick using F-No. 4 and F-No.
5 electrodes on the respective materials. (2) Weld test plate of P-No. 1
material equal to or less than 22 mm thick by overlaying in accordance with
QW-214 and QW-281 with the appropriate desired electrodes. 2nd
Condition: Thickness of cladding is not included in design per UCL-23(c).
(3) Make (1) and (2) above or (4) and (5) below and (2) above. (4) Weld
P-No. 1 material (over 11 mm) separately with F-No. 4 electrode. (5) Weld
P-No. 8 material 1.6-9.6 mm (separately) with F-No. 5 electrode.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-410.24

Record Number:

BC-79-215

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/29/1979
IX-79-29

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Do austenitic base metals fall under the category of ferritic base
metals, when notch toughness is required for the weld metal?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Interpretation of the Preamble and QW-100.3

Record Number:

BC-79-219

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/30/1979
IX-79-30

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): In the case where the mandatory qualification requirements
have been made more restrictive in Editions later than the 1962 Edition, are
Welding Procedure and Performance Qualifications that were made
according to the 1962 Edition still acceptable as a qualified Welding
Procedure Specification?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is it mandatory that the WPS be updated to document all


essential variables required by the current edition of Section IX?
Reply (2): No.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

25/45

Question (3): In 1968 a procedure was qualified using an A-No. 4


classification of weld metal analysis. Subsequently the A-Number Table
was revised and the composition of the weld metal now place it in the
A-No. 5 classification. Since QW-404.5 indicates a change in weld metal
composition as an essential variable, is it necessary to requalify this updated
Welding Procedure Specification?
Reply (3): No.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Nominal Electrode Diameter, QW-281.3 and QW-282.3

Record Number:

BC-79-181

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/16/1979
IX-79-31

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: What is the meaning of the word "nominal" as used in QW-281.3
and QW-282.3?

Reply: The word "nominal" in QW-281.3 and QW-282.3 refers to the listed
size of electrodes and electrode tolerances as a consideration; that is, 5/32
in. would be the nominal size, and tolerances permitted are not a
consideration. Another size electrode, such as 1/8 in. is not considered to be
within the tolerances of the 5/32 in. nominal size electrode under the
definition of the word "nominal."

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-403.5

Record Number:

BC-79-225

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/30/1979
IX-79-32

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A welding procedure specification was written to weld base
metals listed under one P-Number but having different Group Numbers.
Does QW-403.5 require requalification, if the welding procedure
specification has been qualified with each of the base metals welded to
itself, using the same electrode or filler metal and the same essential
variables?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Temperature Ranges for PWHT, QW-200.1 and QW-200.2

Record Number:

BC-79-252

Date Issued:

06/12/1979

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

26/45

Interpretation Number :

IX-79-33

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): For materials where UCS-56(e)(3) of Section VIII, Division 1
permits a maximum difference of 150F between the various parts of a
vessel being postweld heat treated, is a PWHT temperature range of 150F a
reasonable range to be specified in the WPS?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is it necessary that the PWHT temperature range specified in


the WPS be the same as the actual temperature range recorded for the
PWHT carried out on the test coupon of the supporting PQR?
Reply (2). No.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-452, Performance Qualification Specimens

Record Number:

BC-79-224

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/01/1979
IX-79-34

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): What are the requirements for performance qualification when
using a transverse bend test and the thickness of the material is less than
1/16 in.?
Reply (1): QW-310.1 of Section IX provides for qualifications where the
thicknesses are less than 1/16 in.

Question (2): What is the minimum thickness qualified for a groove weld
when the nominal pipe size of the sample weld is over 2 in. and t= in.?
Reply (2): The minimum thickness qualified would be 3/16 in.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-304 and QW-305

Record Number:

BC-79-228

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/30/1979
IX-79-35

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: The SAW process under consideration consists of a wire and flux
feed in a fixed position with the work being rotated on rollers by a
positioner. The wire is fed at a rate based on voltage and current
adjustments made by a worker as the weld progresses. Is a worker welding
with this equipment considered to be a welder or a welder operator?
Reply: A worker using this equipment would be a welding operator.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

27/45

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:

Section IX, Slag Inclusions

Record Number:

BC-78-279

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/04/1979
IX-79-36

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: When using partial penetration welds for the joining of materials
of dissimilar thicknesses, such as shown in Fig. UW-13.2 of Section VIII,
Division 1, what are the procedure qualification test plate thickness
requirements for the production welds?

Reply: The thicknesses qualified are subject to the requirements of QW-451


as further governed by the requirements of QW-202.2. You must qualify the
thickness range for both the base metal and the deposited weld metal
thickness ranges to be used in production. In addition, there are two rules in
QW-202.2 covering dissimilar thicknesses. Both rules are in the third
paragraph in Exception (1). For groove welding qualifications made on test
coupons of any thickness, there is no limit on the minimum depth of
deposited weld metal nor on the thickness of the thinner of the base metals
being joined where they are of dissimilar thickness. Groove welding
qualifications made on test coupons 3 in. thick or more shall be applicable
for production use for base metal and deposited weld metal thickness up to
the maximum given in QW-451 except welds joining dissimilar thicknesses
of base metals in which the base metal on one side is equal to or less than
the maximum thickness qualified in the PQR, the base metal on the other
side may be of any greater thickness.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Performance Qualification on Split Backing Rings
06/05/1979
IX-79-37

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a welder is qualified to weld using a split backing ring, must he
be additionally qualified to weld a joint without backing to weld the gap of
a split backing ring?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-304 and QW-305

Record Number:

BC-79-183

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/05/1979
IX-79-38

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Please classify submerged-arc welding performed under the
control and observation of an individual as either semi-automatic or
machine welding.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

28/45

Reply: Semi-automatic Arc Welding is arc welding with equipment which


controls only the filler metal feed. The advance of the welding is manually
controlled. The person welding with these conditions is classified with
manual welding as welders. This normally includes GMAW, FCAW, and
SAW (hand held). Machine Welding is welding with equipment which
performs the welding operation under the constant observation and control
of a welding operator. The welding operator may adjust the height and
location of the arc but the machine advances the welding head. The person
welding with these conditions is classified with automatic welding as a
welding operator. This normally includes SAW.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-200

Record Number:

BC-79-242

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/07/1979
IX-79-39

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A material was purchased to an ASTM Specification that was not
included in the P-Number table at that time, and a PQR was then
documented using this material. In subsequent Addenda this material was
issued a P-Number. Is it permissible to qualify a procedure using the PQR
that was documented before this Addenda was issued?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Positions Qualified When QW-405.2 is an Essential Variable

Record Number:

BC-79-63

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

03/27/1979
IX-79-40

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If QW-405.2 is an essential variable for procedure qualification,
does qualification in the vertical (3G) position with uphill qualification
qualify the procedure for all other positions?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

Question(s) and Reply(ies):

BPV Section IX
Section IX and Section III, P-Numbers for ASTM A-572, A-588, and
A-633 as Used Under Case N-71 (1644), QW-422
04/11/1979
BC-78-661
IX-79-41

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

29/45

Question (1): Is it permissible for an Owner to assign P-Numbers to


materials in Code Cases for Section III, Division 1 construction when
considering either welding or postweld heat treatment?

Reply (1): No, only the Boiler and Pressure Vessel Committee may assign
P-Numbers to materials.

Question (2): Are ASTM materials A-588, A-572 and A-633 considered as
P-No. 1 materials in Section IX?

Reply (2): No, the above materials have not been submitted for approval as
SA specifications and assignment of P-Numbers by the Committee. Upon
proper notification that these materials will be adopted as SA
Specifications, the Committee will then review these materials for the
proper assignment of P-Numbers. P-Numbers cannot be assigned in any
other manner either for welding procedures or postweld heat treatment
exemptions.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-303.6

Record Number:

BC-78-788

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/18/1979
IX-79-44

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Welders have been qualified in 10 in. Schedule 80 and 120 pipe
in the 6G position. Are these welders then permitted to make fillet welds in
all sizes, diameters, including, for instance, 1 in. O.D., and thicknesses
within the qualified process?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Performance Qualification, QW-300

Record Number:

BC-79-263

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/18/1979
IX-79-45

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Can an organization use its welding supervisors to qualify
welders to procedures, using the tests required in Section IX "Welding and
Brazing Qualification," without utilizing the services of an outside testing
organization?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:

BPV Section IX
Section IX, QW-462.1(c) Applicability of Notes

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

30/45

Date Issued:

06/19/1979

Interpretation Number :

IX-79-46

Record Number:

BC-78-784

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Do the notes immediately beneath QW-462.1(c) relate only to
that figure or are they also applicable to QW-462.1(a) and QW-462.1(b)?
Reply: These notes are also applicable to QW-462.1(a) and (b).

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, P-Number Classification, QW-422

Record Number:

BC-79-281

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/20/1979
IX-79-48

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a material does not have a P-Number classification, is it still
suitable for welding in accordance with Section IX?

Reply: Section IX addresses only those materials listed in QW-422; the use
of other materials is dependent upon the discretion of the manufacturer or
contractor.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, QW-452, Performance Qualifications of Joints Using Split
Backing Rings
06/26/1979
BC-79-308
IX-79-49

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: If a welder is to be qualified on a joint with a split backing ring, is
it necessary to remove a specimen from the gap of the ring to perform the
required bend tests?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Preamble Introduction QW-201.3

Record Number:

BC-79-191

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

05/27/1979
IX-79-42

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): The Preamble acknowledges that procedure and performance
qualifications made in accordance with recommendations of the 1962 or
later Editions of the Code are acceptable, providing they were made in
accordance with the Edition of the Code in effect at that time. May a

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

31/45

procedure qualified in 1971 be rewritten to remove information which is not


listed as Essential, Supplementary Essential, or Non-essential Variables?
Reply (1): Changes may be made to Nonessential Variables of a welding
procedure specification, provided such changes are documented with
respect to both Essential and Nonessential Variables of the specified
welding process or processes, either in an amendment to the original WPS
or a new WPS without requalification.
Question (2). Must a procedure qualified after 1962 be revised to reflect
new or deleted Essential or Nonessential Variables?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): The introduction under Article II, page xx, discusses the
elimination of diameter requirements up to 24 in. diameter pipe for
procedure qualification. Where is the 24 in. diameter required for procedure
qualification discussed in the body of Section IX?
Reply (3): The introduction is an aid to the user of Section IX. The
particular paragraphs cited relate to items which were changed from
previous Editions of the Code. Since the 24 in. diameter is no longer a
requirement for procedure qualification, there is no cause to discuss it
within the body of Section IX.

Question (4): Where a procedure qualification test coupon with a total base
metal thickness of 1 in. is to be welded using GTAW for 3/8 in., SMAW for
in., and SAW for 3/8 in., in that sequence, what are the answers to the
following questions?
(4a): What is the qualification range for the GTAW process?
Reply (4a): 1/16 in. to 3/4 in.

(4b): What is the qualification range for the SMAW process?


Reply (4b): 1/16 in. to in.

(4c): What is the qualification range for the SAW process?


Reply (4c). 1/16 in. to 3/4 in.

(4d): What is the qualification range for the combined process weld?

Reply (4d): 1/16 in. to 2 in., providing the individual limits for each process
are observed and taken to their maximums.
(4e): Must the WPS list the qualification range for each process?
Reply (4e): Yes.

Question (5): If a welding procedure for SMAW is qualified for 1/16 in. to
1/2 in. without a backing ring and another SMAW welding procedure
specification for 3/16 in. to 2 in. with a backing ring, may the two
procedures be used to weld a 1 in. thick base material with no backing ring?
Reply (5): Yes.

Question (6): Qualification A is for the GTAW process from 0.062 in. to
0.166 in. and Qualification B is for the GTAW welding process from 0.187

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

32/45

in. to 1.5 in. May a plate 0.180 in. thick be welded using one or both of
these qualifications?
Reply (6): No.

Question (7): Where a welding procedure specification is qualified using


the GTAW process for 3/16 in. of the qualification plate and the SMAW
process for 1/16 in. of the plate, may you use this welding procedure
specification to weld a 0.180 in. thick plate by the GTAW process?

Reply (7): The qualification in the question will permit the welding of a
0.180 in. thick plate by the gas tungsten arc process qualification which
covers this thickness range. Processes may be deleted from the production
joint qualified by a combination of processes or procedures.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Welding Performance Qualification, QW-300

Record Number:

BC-79-272

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

06/19/1979
IX-79-47

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Can a welder be qualified to a process without a qualified
procedure?

Reply: No, a performance qualification test must be welded in accordance


with a Welding Procedure Specification that has been qualified by the
Manufacturer or contractor having the responsibility for conducting the test.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, QW-407.2

Record Number:

BC-79-337

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/09/1979
IX-79-51

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): QW-407.2 is a supplementary essential variable for all
welding processes except EBW, OFW, and stud welding. This variable
requires that the procedure qualification test be subjected to heat treatment
essentially equivalent to that encountered in the heat treatment of base
metals and in the fabrication of the vessel or vessel parts, including at least
the aggregate times at temperature(s). Does this variable apply only to
vessels for which notch toughness is a requirement?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is a procedure qualification heat treatment time of at least


80% of the heat treatment time actually applied to the vessel considered to
be essentially equivalent to the heat treatment time of the vessel?
Reply (2): Yes.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

33/45

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Performance Qualification Using SMAW

Record Number:

BC-79-237

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/19/1979
IX-79-64

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: There appears to be a conflict on base metal essential variables
for SMAW welder qualification between the requirements of QW-310.4
and QW-353. QW-403.16, listed under QW-353, states that a change
outside of the qualified thickness range is the only base metal essential
variable. QW-310.4 states the base metals under which the welder must be
qualified for the production weld, with some exceptions. What is to be
followed for the qualification or extending of a previous qualification on a
welder in the SMAW process?

Reply: Both paragraphs cited in the inquiry are compatible. The purpose of
the essential variable under QW-353 is to state the limits of the qualification
as based upon thickness range. The purpose of QW-310.4 is to state the
permissible base metals which can be employed in accordance with the
electrode which is being qualified for the welder qualification.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Regarding Thickness Limitation for Performance Qualification
of Combined Processes Using a Backing Ring, QW-452.3
07/26/1979
BC-79-240
IX-79-65

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A welder who satisfactorily passes a performance qualification
test using two passes with GTAW and the balance with SMAW on a 6 in.
Schedule XXH (0.864 wall) pipe is qualified for what thickness in the
combined processes per QW-452.3?

Reply: QW-452.3 was revised as published in the Summer 1979 Addenda.


This clarification states that the thickness qualified for each process is
dependent on the thickness of the weld metal deposited in the performance
qualification test by that process. Where the weld metal deposited by each
process in the performance qualification test is less than 3/4 in., the
qualification limit with that process shall be twice the thickness qualified. If
the thickness of weld metal deposited with a welding process is in excess of
3/4 in., there will be an unlimited qualification in thickness.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Welding Qualification Mechanical Properties
06/13/1979

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

34/45

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BC-78-832
IX-79-43

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): A procedure is being written to weld 3 in. thick SA-515-70
P-No. 1 base metal in production. The base metal used for procedure
qualification is 3 in. thick SA-515-55 P-No. 1, welded with an E-7018
F-No. 4, A-No. 1 electrode. The test coupon was stress relieved for 3 hr at
1125F. Charpy impact tests were not required. The tensile tests failed at
54,800 psi in the base metal. Is this procedure acceptable per Section IX to
weld 70,000 psi min. tensile P-No. 1 material even though the tensile
specimen failed at 54,800 psi?
Reply (1) Yes, per QW-153(d), provided a proper Welding Procedure
Specification is written as described in the following questions.

Question (2): What is the intent of Section IX QW-153, QW-421, and QW422 with respect to mechanical properties (tensile strength) of materials
substituted for the base metal used in procedure qualification within the
same P-Number grouping?

Reply (2): The intent of QW-421 is to "reduce the number of welding


procedure qualifications required" with considerations being given as stated
in the remainder of the paragraph. In addition, QW-201 describes the
documents of "Welding Procedure Specification" (WPS) and "Procedure
Qualification Record" (PQR) both of which are required. Also, in addition,
the Welding Variables of QW-250 need be considered and documented, as
required, in both the WPS and the PQR.
Question (3): Can the tensile test acceptance criteria of QW-153 for the
base metal used in procedure qualification be applied to other base metals
within the same P-Number grouping that may be substituted for the
procedure qualification base metal in actual production?

Reply (3): Yes, provided that a WPS is written as described in QW-201.1.

Question (4): Do the words "where this can logically be done" and "does
not imply that base metals may be indiscriminately substituted for a base
metal which was used in the procedure qualification test," as stated in the
second paragraph of QW-421, mean that the procedure cited in Question (1)
qualifies for welding any and all of the base metals listed in the same
P-Number grouping of QW-422 regardless of tensile strength?
Reply (4): Yes, again provided that a proper WPS is written to cover the
usage.

Question (5): Does the purpose of the WPS and PQR as stated in the fourth
paragraph of the Introduction to Section IX mean that the tensile strength of
the procedure qualification test must be at least equal to the minimum
tensile strength of the base metal for its intended application per the
requirements of QW-153?
Reply (5): No. As stated in the fourth paragraph of the Introduction to
Section IX, the purpose of the WPS and the PQR (combined), is "to
determine that the weldment proposed for construction is capable of having
the required properties for its intended application." It should also be noted
that QW-103 states that "Each Manufacturer or contractor is responsible for
the welding done by his organization and shall conduct the tests" etc. It is
allowed that the Manufacturer use judgment in meeting his responsibilities
for the intended application. There are, of course, design conditions where

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

35/45

deposited metal of strengths lower than that of the base metal, or higher, are
satisfactory. In addition, properties other than tensile strength can be of
importance to the intended application.
Question (6): Is the intent of QW-403.11 that a procedure qualification
using one base metal within a P-Number grouping is also qualified to weld
any other metal within the same P-Number grouping regardless of tensile
strength?

Reply (6): Yes, again provided that a proper WPS is written to cover the
usage, and if the use is compatible with the design of the intended
application. For instance, for the procedure cited in Question (1), if the
design is based on the base metal and weld metal both meeting 70,000 psi
minimum tensile strength, the electrode specified in the WPS should
generally be E-7018-A1 (of SFA-5.5), F-No. 4, A-No. 2, as this electrode is
capable of meeting the 70,000 psi minimum tensile strength after stress
relieving, whereas the E7018, F-No. 4, A-No. 1 (of SFA-5.1) may not be.
Similarly, the other welding variables may also be of importance, such that
the Manufacturer must select and define in his WPS the conditions to be
used, and these be supported by one or more PQR's within the limits of the
essential variables. The Manufacturer is responsible for these, and they shall
be available for reference by the Authorized Inspector.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Weld Metal Deposit Analysis as a Variable for Welder
Performance Qualification for Gas Tungsten-Arc Welding, QW-356
07/10/1979
BC-79-46
IX-79-52

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: In QW-356 (GTAW) of Section IX, no reference is made to weld
metal analysis (as classified by A-Numbers) as being an essential variable.
Does this mean that a welder may qualify with one F-No. 6 electrode and
automatically be qualified for the use of all other F-No. 6 electrodes
(regardless of A-Number designation) provided all the other essential
variables of QW-356 are satisfied and provided the initial test conditions
conform to the requirements set forth in QW-310.4 (for carbon steel bare
wire) or QW-310.5 (for stainless steel bare wire)?
Reply: The reference to QW-310.4 for carbon steel bare wire is not correct.
QW-310.4 permits substitution for plate or pipe materials under various
conditions for other base materials being joined in the usual Welding
Procedure Specification. QW-310.5 states that a performance qualification
test must be made (whose weld deposit conforms to A-No. 8 or A-No. 9) to
use these filler metals in production welding. This qualification will also
qualify for all other F-No. 6 electrodes but not vice versa.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Revision of Qualification Forms When Related Forms are
Changed. QW-482 and QW-484

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

36/45

Date Issued:

07/11/1979

Interpretation Number :

IX-79-53

Record Number:

BC-78-673

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): A welder is qualified using a qualified Welding Procedure
Specification (WPS), and a Welding Performance Qualification (WPQ)
Form QW-484 is filled out with the required data including the weld
variables, test data, and the WPS used. At a later date, the WPS referenced
on the WPQ Form is revised for a variable change which is not an essential
or nonessential variable for performance qualification. Must the revised
WPS number be added to the WPQ Form QW-484?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Using the same conditions as Question (1), except, at a later
date, the WPS referenced on the WPQ Form QW-484, is revised for a
variable change which is an essential variable for performance qualification.
Is it required to add the revised WPS number on the WPQ Form QW-484?
Reply (2): The variables affecting the qualification of welders and welding
operators are contained in Article III. While a WPS contains variables
which are required for performance qualification, the welder or welding
operator may weld only within the limits of the variables to which previous
qualifications have been accepted. That is, a WPS may list other positions
beyond those in which a welder is qualified. The welder is limited to those
positions previously qualified unless new performance qualifications are
performed for additional positions.
Question (3): A welder is qualified using an already-qualified WPS, and a
WPQ Form is completed with the required data including the welding
variables, test data, and the WPS used. The welder's qualification range
happens to cover several additional qualified WPS's that will be used in
Code construction. Is it required to fill out a WPQ Form for each WPS the
welder will be using, even though no performance qualification variables
have been changed?
Reply (3): No.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Brazing Procedure Qualification Temperature Requirements,
QB-404.1
07/12/1979
BC-78-789
IX-79-54

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it acceptable to write a Brazing Procedure Specification with a
brazing temperature range outside of the range listed in QB-432?

Reply: Yes, as long as this Brazing Procedure Specification is supported by


an appropriate Brazing Procedure Qualification Record.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

37/45

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:

Section IX, Clarification of Welder Variables, QW-350

Record Number:

BC-79-231

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/12/1979
IX-79-55

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A welder has been qualified using GTAW to weld base metals
with a consumable insert and a filler metal having a specific A-Number and
F-Number. Is this welder also qualified to weld, using GTAW, these same
base metals with the same consumable insert and a filler metal having a
different A-Number but the same F-Number?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Regarding Performance Qualification Specimens, QW-452

Record Number:

BC-79-297

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/12/1979
IX-79-56

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: In order to fulfill the requirements of QW-452 for an unlimited
maximum thickness qualification for pipe, a welder must weld a test
specimen of 3/4 in. or over. Is this reference to a thickness of 3/4 in. the
actual measured minimum thickness required at the weld joint?

Reply: No, a standard size pipe with a nominal pipe wall thickness of 3/4 in.
or over, as listed in the applicable SA pipe specification in Section II, may
be used.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Qualification of Welding Operators by Radiographic
Examination, QW-305.1
07/12/1979
BC-79-304
IX-79-57

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Two welding operators are required to weld pipe due to the
inaccessibility of the joint. QW-305.1 requires that the first production weld
examined by radiography be at least 3 ft long. If each welding operator
welds only half the joint, can this 3 ft length be obtained by more than one
weld?
Reply: Yes.

Question: Do the qualified thickness ranges of QW-452 apply to QW-302.2


as well as QW-302.1?
Reply: Yes.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

38/45

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Postweld Heat Treatment of a Combination of Welding
Processes
07/13/1979
BC-79-226
IX-79-58

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Can postweld heat treatment be performed without requalification
on a weld partially completed in accordance with a WPS qualified without
postweld heat treatment and a second WPS completing the weld which has
been qualified with postweld heat treatment?
Reply: No.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Usage of Silicon Spray for Joint Preparation

Record Number:

BC-79-286

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/13/1979
IX-79-59

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: May surface preparations to prevent oxidation of the base metal
prior to welding or to prevent adherence of unwanted weld droplets to the
base metal surface be employed under the rules of Section IX?
Reply: QW-410.5 covers initial and interpass cleaning as a nonessential
variable to be listed in the Welding Procedure Specification.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Clarification of QW-404.6 as Relating to Metric Size Electrodes

Record Number:

BC-79-357

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/13/1979
IX-79-60

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: SFA-5.1, 5.5, and 5.4 list nominal electrode diameters in metric
sizes that have been converted from English units. However, these
converted nominal diameters are not considered standard sizes in some
other countries. Does any difference between the sizes listed in Section II
Part C and other sizes constitute deviation from Section IX?

Reply: No. The Committee recognizes that in transposing from standard


English units to metric units that the diameters will not fall in identical
conversions. Where requirements are established on electrode sizes, the
next higher English unit conversion of the metric shall be that employed in
establishing the acceptance criteria.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

39/45

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Clarification of QW-310.4

Record Number:

BC-79-358

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/13/1979
IX-79-61

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: The welding variables, for both procedure and performance
qualification, covering GMAW also apply to FCAW. QW-310.4 makes
reference to GMAW but does not mention FCAW. Can it be assumed that
the reference to GMAW in QW-310.4 also applies to FCAW?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Clarification of the Use of P-Numbers

Record Number:

BC-79-232

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/18/1979
IX-79-63

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A procedure has been qualified using P-No. 1 Group 1 material
welded to itself. Will this qualification also cover P-No.1 Group 1 material
welded to P-No. 1 Group 2 material?

Reply: A separate qualification test need not be made unless electron beam
welding is used to join the base metals. However, where notch toughness
tests are to be performed, supplementary essential vari-ables QW-403.4 and
QW-403.5 may require requalification depending upon the process used to
join the base metals.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Interpretation of QW-201.3

Record Number:

BC-79-268

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/27/1979
IX-79-66

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: A welding procedure has been qualified using GMAW on 10 in. x
0.593 in. thick pipe. Another welding procedure using GTAW root and
second pass and the balance of SAW on 12 in. x 0.687 in. pipe has been
qualified. The thickness of the weld deposits are GMAW 0.56 in., GTAW
0.187 in., and SAW 0.5 in. In reference to QW-201.3 and the above two
qualified welding procedures, may a production weld be made using the
GMAW process for root pass and the SAW process for completion and
what would the thickness limits be?
Reply: A production weld may be made using the two qualified welding
qualifications with a GMAW process for the root pass and SAW process for

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

40/45

completion. It is assumed in this reply that the only variables to be


considered are the thickness limitations with all other requirements of
essential variables being the same as those recorded in the PQR. The
GMAW process may be used for the root pass providing it is a minimum of
3/16 in. thick with a maximum of 2T, where T is the thickness of the
deposit weld metal. This also applies to the thickness limits in the SAW
process.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Definition of the Word "Electrode" as Used in QW-282.4

Record Number:

BC-79-282

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/27/1979
IX-79-67

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: When employing the PAW process, what is the interpretation of
the word electrode in QW-282.4?
Reply: The term electrode in QW-282.4 when applied to PAW process
refers to the tungsten electrode used in that process.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Regarding Semi-Automatic Welding

Record Number:

BC-78-662

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

07/30/1979
IX-79-68

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Are separate performance qualifications required for one
person, acting as both welder and welding operator, using the same process
within the same essential variables?
Reply (1): Yes. Section IX considers welders and welding operators to be
distinct from one another for performance qualification purposes.

Question (2): Must the performance qualifications for welders and welding
operators be maintained and renewed separately?
Reply (2): Yes.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Clarification of QW-322

Record Number:

BC-79-370

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

Question(s) and Reply(ies):

07/30/1979
IX-79-69

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

41/45

Question: During the last month of each calendar quarter (i.e. March, June,
September, and December), a check is made to determine if each of the
welders employed used each process for which they are qualified during
that three month quarter. Is the intent of QW-322 of Section IX served if we
thereby establish those welders, who have used a particular process, as
qualified to continue welding for the next calendar quarter with that
process?
Reply: Yes.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Regarding Procedure Qualification Record Information
Recording Requirements
08/02/1979
BC-78-783
IX-79-71

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): QW-201.2 states that a PQR must record the "specific facts"
used in qualifying a WPS. What defines to what detail "specific facts" must
be recorded?
Reply (1): QW-200.2 states "The PQR form shall list the actual variables
used within the limits of a narrow range, rather than the full range of
variables allowed. A manufacturer may include all additional information
he may consider helpful, such as the nonessential variables, but is only
required to record the essential variables used."

Question (2): What rules apply to the use of PQR's from an earlier WPS to
support a new WPS?

Reply (2): A new WPS may be written and may be supported by an already
qualified PQR, without any change or revision to the PQR.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX. Clarification Regarding QW-201.1

Record Number:

BC-79-285

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/02/1979
IX-79-72

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: QW-402.1, Groove Design, is a nonessential variable for all
processes except EBW and Stud welding processes. When making repairs
to a weld, is it necessary to describe in the WPS the cavity developed in
preparation for such repairs?

Reply: No. The intent of QW-402.1 is to include or reference in the WPS


the groove design employed in preparing the base materials for joining into
a weldment. Repairs are considered a part of the welding operations.

Standard Designation:

BPV Section IX

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

42/45

Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

Section IX, Regarding the Preparation of a Procedure Qualification Record,


QW-100 and QW-200
08/02/1979
BC-79-374
IX-79-73

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Does QW-100.1 require the PQR to identify the actual
amperage and voltage used and prohibit the PQR from showing voltage and
amperage ranges when voltage and amperage are nonessential variables?
Reply (1): No. Voltage and amperage ranges may be recorded within the
limits of a narrow-range, rather than the full range of the variables allowed.
Question (2): QW-200.2 states, "The PQR form shall list the actual
variables used within the limits of a narrow range rather than the full range
of variables allowed. A manufacturer may include all additional variables
he may consider helpful, such as the nonessential variables, but is only
required to record the essential variable used." Does this permit the
manufacturer to leave the PQR blank where nonessential variables are
concerned or to fill in the nonessential variables in any manner considered
to be helpful at the manufacturer's option?
Reply (2): A manufacturer is only required to list the essential variables on
the PQR; any further information may be included at his option.
Question (3): Must every WPS supported by a given PQR be listed on that
PQR?
Reply (3): No.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Regarding Thicknesses Qualified, QW-403.6

Record Number:

BC-78-664

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/03/1979
IX-79-74

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Does QW-403.6, which states "For thicknesses less than 5/8
in. (16mm) the thickness of the test coupon is the minimum thickness
qualified", have any applicability when the test coupon is 5/8 in. and above
in thickness?
Reply (1): Where the test coupon is 5/8 in. or over in thickness, the
minimum thickness qualified is 5/8 in.

Question (2): When QW-403.6 is listed as an essential variable, what is the


minimum thickness qualified when the test coupon is 5/8 in. or over in
thickness?
Reply (2): The minimum thickness qualified is 5/8 in.

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

43/45

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Regarding Clarification of QW-200.1

Record Number:

BC-79-376

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/03/1979
IX-79-75

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is any further information, other than that which appears on Form
QW-482, required for a welding procedure specification (WPS)?

Reply: The Form shown in QW-482 is a suggested format for the required
information; a WPS may be presented in any form as long as every essential
and nonessential variable covered by QW-252 through QW-282 is
presented. Any additional information is not required, but may be attached
to the WPS at the option of the manufacturer.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:
Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

BPV Section IX
Section IX, Regarding the Use of Material for Performance Qualification,
QW-310.4
08/08/1979
BC-79-373
IX-79-76

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Welders must be qualified for the deposit of and joining of
several different types of material as described in QW-310.4. Would it be
acceptable, for the qualification of welders or operators, to substitute for
P-No. 1 any carbon steel material with not more than 70,000 psi specified
tensile strength and the following chemistry limits:
C Mn P S Si Other 0.30% 1.35% 0.05% 0.05% 0.15%/0.50% 0.75%
(Single values are maximum)

Reply: No, the material must be to a specification listed under P-No. 1 (see
QW-310.4).
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Clarification of QW-403.10

Record Number:

BC-79-439

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/08/1979
IX-79-77

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): The short circuiting transfer mode of GMAW is used to
deposit the first two weld passes in a weld that is subsequently filled with
the FCAW. For thickness qualification purposes, should the thickness
deposited by each mode be specified on the PQR?

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

44/45

Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): If the weld joint were on 1 in. material thickness and in.
deposited with GMAW-S mode, would this require definitive limits similar
to multiprocess joints (e.g., would GMAW-S mode be limited to its specific
range, 1.1 times its deposited thickness per QW-403.10; in this case, 0.275
in.)?
Reply (2):Yes.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Regarding Qualification of Fillet Weld Procedures, QW-202.2

Record Number:

BC-79-440

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/08/1979
IX-79-78

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question: Is it permissible to conduct a fillet weld procedure qualification
test as shown in QW-462.4(a) on in. plate and be qualified for all fillet
sizes and all plate thicknesses, providing the remaining essential variables
are the same?
Reply: Yes.

Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

Para./Fig./Table No:

BPV Section IX

Subject Description:

Section IX, Regarding the Preparation of a WPS, QW-200

Record Number:

BC-79-442

Date Issued:

Interpretation Number :

08/09/1979
IX-79-79

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Is it permissible to write a WPS listing options for essential
variables (e.g., PWHT/ non-PWHT, a range of F-Numbers, etc.) if each of
these options is supported by an appropriate PQR?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Is it permissible to specify changes in nonessential variables


as long as they are also used on separate supporting PQR's?
Reply (2): Section IX permits changes in nonessential variables without
requalification; therefore no supporting PQR's are required.

Question (3): To allow changes in nonessential variables and to document


their use, should they be listed on the PQR also?
Reply (3): No.
Standard Designation:
Edition/Addenda:

BPV Section IX

Para./Fig./Table No:

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4

45/45

Subject Description:
Date Issued:

Record Number:

Interpretation Number :

Section IX, Regarding Clarification of Quantity Ranges in Essential


Variables
08/22/1979
None

IX-79-80

Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): Phrases similar to "a change in the specified.... "appear in
several sections of QW-281, specifically QW-281.2(e), QW-281.2(f), QW281.4(f), QW-281.4(g), and QW-281.4(i). In these cases, does the use of the
word "specified" mean a range or parameter stipulated on the WPS which
must be met during qualification and the actual value found during
qualification (which may be different from the quantity stated on the WPS
reported on the PQR, or does it mean the actual value qualified and reported
on the PQR which in turn determines the limit of a range or parameter on
the WPS?
Reply (1): The above mentioned phrases refer to changes made to the WPS.
Any WPS written and supported by a particular PQR must remain within
the parameters established in that PQR or be requalified.
Question (2): Is the statement, "A change in the specified postweld heat
treatment temperature" in QW-281.2(f), intended to imply a range of
temperature? If a range is implied, is it permissible to use ranges specified
in other sections of the Code or applicable specifications where such
specified ranges exist?
Reply (2): It is permissible to use ranges specified in other Book Sections
(e.g., UHT-56 of Section VIII, Division 1, and PW-39 of Section I).

Copyright 2016 by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. No reproduction may be made of this material without
written consent of ASME

https://cstools.asme.org/Interpretation/InterpretationDetail.cfm

2016/5/4