Skip to main content

[MW:12819] RE: 12807] Re: BS EN 287-1 WPS vs. ASME IX WPS

Dear Sir,

You only can qualify your ASME section IX qualifications if they also met
the requirements of the EN ISO specifications. In my opinion this will never
be the case because you have to execute all the Non Destructive and
Destructive test on your original qualification as well. This means that you
have to execute Radiographic examination according to ASME as well as to EN
specifications, similar counts for tensile tests. The specimens are not
similar so we always have to test two sets of specimens, one according to
ASME and on according to EN ISO.
When you have to build pressure vessels according to the European pressure
directive you also need a notified body to witness welding and testing, for
ASME this is not a requirement.
So in my opinion you will need to qualify new test plates / pipes.

Met vriendelijke groeten / Best Regards

Herman Pieper

Pieper Quality Support & Inspection
Phone: +31 (0)521 380083
Fax: +31 (0)84 7539225
Cell: +31 (0)6 51691215
www.pieper-qsi.nl

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
[mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] Namens ken waterhouse
Verzonden: dinsdag 1 november 2011 7:23
Aan: Materials & Welding
Onderwerp: [MW:12807] Re: BS EN 287-1 WPS vs. ASME IX WPS

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the replies.

Thank you for pointing out that the EN 288 is used for WPS as apposed to the
EN 287. I never thought about that and I'm glad you brought it to my
attention.

However, the WPS's that we have, (ASME IX) still need to be matched to a
list of BS EN /ISO WPS's if you see what I mean. So that we can start
printing the new WPS numbers on drawings and following them in shop, to
satisfy the customer. I know it would be possible to re- qualify all of the
same variables under the new code, but it would save a lot of time to be
able to just find the equivalent by means of cross referencing between the
two codes and their range of approvals.

Please let me know if this makes more sense.

I'm not sure it's the best way to do it, but the boss has asked...

Thanks again for the help.

Ken

On Nov 1, 1:14 am, "Pieper QSI" <i...@pieper-qsi.nl> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> The mentioned EN 288-1, 2, 3 and 4 are withdrawn and replaced by EN
> ISO
> 15609 up to EN ISO 15614 which are similar to the mentioned ISO versions.
>
> Please be aware that there is a new version of the EN 287-1 valid
> since July
> 2011 in which the validity range is changed compared to the previous
> addition.
>
> For example: fillet welds are no longer qualified when performing a
> welder qualification on butt welds.
>
> All qualifications should met the requirements of the latest edition
> regarding the validity range.
>
> Met vriendelijke groeten / Best Regards
>
> Herman Pieper
>
> Pieper Quality Support & Inspection
>
> Phone: +31 (0)521 380083
>
> Fax:     +31 (0)84 7539225
>
> Cell:     +31 (0)6 51691215
>
> www.pieper-qsi.nl
>
> Van: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] Namens alireza samimi
> Verzonden: maandag 31 oktober 2011 16:39
> Aan: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> Onderwerp: Re: [MW:12802] BS EN 287-1 WPS vs. ASME IX WPS
>
> hi dear
>
> according to your explanation i think you do not know exactly any
> information  aboutBS  EN
>
> I would like to inform you BS EN 287-1 is not usefull for WPS AND PQR
> .and oly use for welder qualification.
>
> according to EN standard you should see EN 288-1,2,3,4 for WPS and PQR
> and according to ISO you must see ISO 15609 for wps and ISO 5614 for
> PQR
>
> WITH BEST REGARDS
>
> --- On Mon, 10/31/11, ken waterhouse <waterhouse....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: ken waterhouse <waterhouse....@gmail.com>
> Subject: [MW:12801] BS EN 287-1 WPS vs. ASME IX WPS
> To: "Materials & Welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 4:42 PM
>
> Hi,
>
> Just started a new job as welding supervisor. Aside from lots and lots
> of other crap that is wrong with the way the company is doing things
> at the moment, they have such a scattered array of WPS's in both ASME
> IX and BS EN 287-1 that it is almost impossible to collate and use all
> the information.
>
> Our biggest client (national electricity supplier) is shifting to an
> entirely BS EN 287-1 controlled system, from a mix of ASME and BS EN,
> which means that we as a subcontractor of theirs must do the same.
>
> I'm busy working through the WPS's available to me so far and trying
> to relate them to one another, to see where we need to formulate
> completely new WPS's and where we can trans-code them to their
> equivalents. Also just to get the list of all of them in one place.
>
> What I'm hoping is that someone out there has done something similar
> to this before and how you approached it.
>
> If it helps at all, our BSEN WPS #'s look like this S B 3 03. 8 (20) S
> (SMAW, Butt, material 3, Sequence number 03, filler 8, Preheat 20
> deg., Stress relieving)
>
> and our ASME IX ones are as follows M B x 1. 8 (20) S (SMAW, Butt,
> Symbol [on drawing], material group 1, filler group 8, 20deg. preheat
> and stress relieving)
>
> Any help would be appreciated,
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ken
>
> --
> To post to this group, send email to
> materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=materials-welding@googl...
> s.com>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=unsubscribe@googlegroup
> ...>
>
> For more options, visit this group's bolg
> athttp://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views
> and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own
> decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
>
> --
> To post to this group, send email to
> materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group's bolg
> athttp://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views
> and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own
> decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at
http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and
meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions
w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Re: [MW:34105] SA266 GR4N 4 Cycle SPWHT

Hi,  You are correct, Minimum refers to the one cycle for which this part will expose until final work shop PWHT. hence mill test certificate shall include this.  Max. SPWHT, refers to additional cycles of heat treatment that are reserved for future repairs during equipment lifetime.  Again, these simulated no. Of cycles shall be specified in MTC.  The idea is we need to make sure that steel mechanical properties are not compromised upon exposure to multiple repairs (i e 4 cycles in your case).  One could say, if steel is subjected to 4 cycles and is ok, then it should by defacto be good for one cycle, yet, this is wrong assumption cause mechanical problems and microstructure of materials varies accordingly based on no. Of cycles for which material will expose. This is apparent in alloy steel and especially for impact test values as an example.  In your case, this forged CS with properties before PWHT can be understood to be " as forged" condition (i.e. Wit...

Materails FAQs

Q: What are equivalents for standard Q 235 B (and Q 235 A) for U-channels? (asked by: boris.vielhaber@vait.com) A: DIN Nr. = 2393 T.2, 2394 T.2, EN 10025 W. Nr. DIN 17007 = 1.0038 Design DIN 17006 = RSt 37-2, S235JRG2 (Fe 360 B) Q: What is St DIN 2391 BK material? (asked by: dmcandrews@automaticstamp.com) A: Precision steel tubes, cold-finished/hard. Q: What is C.D.W. Boiler Tube? (asked by: montydude123@yahoo.com) A: Cold Drawn Welded Boiler Tube. Q: WHAT IS W.Nr. 1.4301? PLS TELL US IN EASY LANGUAGUE (asked...

Heat tint (temper) colours on stainless steel surfaces heated in air // Heat tint

Introduction The colour formed when stainless steel is heated, either in a furnace application or in the heat affected zone of welds, is dependent on several factors that are related to the oxidation resistance of the steel. The heat tint or temper colour formed is caused by the progressive thickening of the surface oxide layer and so, as temperature is increased, the colours change.   Oxidation resistance of stainless steels However, there are several factors that affect the degree of colour change and so there is no a single table of colour and temperature that represents all cases. The colours formed can only be used as an indication of the temperature to which the steel has been heated. Factors affecting the heat tint colours formed Steel composition The chromium content is the most important single factor affecting oxidation resistance. The higher the chromium, the more heat resistant the steel and so the development of the heat tint colou...