Your first PQR covers GTAW + SMAW + SAW (with Impact + PWHT), your second PQR covers GMAW + FCAW with no indication of impact or
PWHT. None of the PQRs individually or jointly cover the specific combination of GTAW + FCAW with impact + PWHT.
You cannot take GTAW (from a PQR qualified with SMAW/SAW) and FCAW (from a PQR qualified with GMAW), unless both cover impact/PWHT
and are qualified for the intended sequence as in production.
ASME Section IX does not permit combining processes from unrelated PQRs to make a new process combination (e.g., GTAW from one PQR and
FCAW from another, unless the conditions of QW-200.4 or QW-200.4(b) are strictly met—typically for root/fill passes.
QW-200.4 enables the use of multiple PQRs for one WPS but strictly constrains the qualified ranges and mandates that all code requirements be
satisfied with the intended production.
You need to qualify a new PQR with GTAW + FCAW (Impact + PWHT) as performed for production.
The code does not use language that "explicitly prohibits" such combinations. Instead, it imposes conditions; the resulting WPS must not exceed the
qualified ranges of thickness, essential variables, base materials, and other requirements demonstrated in the PQRs.
C Sridhar
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 at 08:03, Saurabh Jain <ensaurabh@gmail.com> wrote:Dear Welding Experts,I'm currently preparing a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) and have encountered a request to qualify a GTAW + FCAW(IMPACT+PWHT) process combination by referencing two different Procedure Qualification Records (PQRs). The first PQR on hand covers GTAW + SMAW + SAW(Impact+PWHT) while the second covers GMAW + FCAW.
My concern is that combining these PQRs in this manner for a GTAW + FCAW WPS might not align with the requirements of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section IX.I would appreciate clarification: Is it permissible under ASME Section IX to qualify a GTAW + FCAW WPS using these two separate PQRs? If not, which specific clause(s) in ASME Section IX address this limitation?RegardsSaurabh Jain----
https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CADr-LL9K%2B_fuWrPQQwajEpfBoYJmtvctid0VQ3SraZssRy%2BVdw%40mail.gmail.com.
https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CAHo%3DYihY8cRrp-KomgECA99%3DJa9x87Csp1zkDkVZz7AkMF1A%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.
https://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/122787
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-welding+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/materials-welding/CADr-LL_-gfmOMeaHOE%2Bopy7u8WrsnTb2mCrX1xUpMhcfS8JQ-g%40mail.gmail.com.
Comments