This is the beauy of this forum that we as an individual don't have enough time to read all the codes and keep tracking of the changes happening with new editions, then forums like this keep updating everybody associated with idustry.
Now coming back to original question regarding fillet weld qualification (WPQ) in accordance with API 1104, It is generally accepted that welder qualification on groove weld qualifies fillet weld as well, however for procedure qualification (PQR), API 1104 does ask for a separate qualification (Refer 5.7 & 5.8) and procedure is qualified by visual examination, NDT and mechanical testing.
Your query seems to be more contractual than technical, if Welder qualification specifically on fillet welds is clearly mentioned in the Client spec then it would not be wise to even discuss with Client, if there is no clear description in the spec or spec only dictate to follow API 1104 then you have all the rights to claim for extra expenditure for qualifying welders specifically for fillet welds as it's a universal practice for people following API 1104 to weld fillet welds in production welding using welder qualification on groove welds.
Approval of claim will entirely depend on how well do you protray this to Client.
We remain available for further guidance upon request.
Regards,
Manpreet Singh
Cell:- +61 0434674601
On Wed, 30 May 2012 20:46:29 +0530 wrote
> You don't specify the Code or standard you are working to. The case for specific fillet weld qualification is becoming more contentious, particularly with the change in the latest edition (-11) of BS EN 287 which now requires separate fillet weld performance qualification. Note that ASME Section IX does not. To be honest, it is not unusual for a customer to impose their own set of personal peculiarities on top of the applicable Code or make recommended practices (applicable or not) mandatory. This application of singular proclivities has become common practice and unfortunately it is often more productive to simply try and comply than to apply reason. One tack you might try is that if this is the inspection agency acting alone, you can inform your customer that you will be happy to comply with the inspection agencies request but that it will add X hours to the scope and result in an additional charge of Y dollars/euros/pounds/pesos/ dracmas . . . as it is not a part of the contract.Good luck – you have my sympathy.John A. HenningWelding & MaterialsFrom: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sam Malemela
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:20 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:14374] Range of approval for WELDER qualified to weld grove welds according to API 1104Hi Colleagues,I am working on a pipeline construction project in Mpumalanga –South Africa. The client is a reputable water utility company in South Africa who has appointed a contractor to construct 37 km of 610mm Diameter pipeline. The joint design is Partial Joint Penetration ( by means of fillet weld). The pipe fit up is spigot and socket joint.The appointed inspection authority is refusing to accept welder qualification for 'v' grove joint design allegedly because the client specification has asked for fillet weld and NOT butt weld. Requalification of welders is not an issue apart from the time it will take to set up and get the qualification test done. I also know from training that range of approval for grove includes fillet welds as well.Should I simply re-qualify the welders although their qualification covers fillet welds if range of approval is considered or should I insist on the inspection authority consulting for proper information on this matter?The integrity of the profession is under threat if people without proper knowledge are allowed to rewrite the specifications for the industry and go unchallenged.Your urgent response will be greatly appreciated. MALEMELA N. S.SITE MANAGERSOUTHERN PIPELINE CONTRACTORS6 Main Reef Road DUNSWART1508TEL:0119148519FAX:0119144524CELL:0823892592www.spc.co.za--
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.
______________________________________________________________________
>
The information in this email is confidential, and is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this email please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. HAMON (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified.
>
______________________________________________________________________
>
--
>
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.
>
 |
| Follow Rediff Deal ho jaye! to get exciting offers in your city everyday. |
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment