ASME General 100 Questions

8/22/2019 ASME General 100 Questions

1/54

This data fromhttp://blog.daum.net/kc445/4094009

The HSB CT Engineering Services Division Manual par. 4541 (4)(a)&(b) requires the

Authorized Inspector Supervisor to conduct "Periodic inspector meetings to discuss all

aspects of ASME Code Inspection", and to have "technical discussions annually". So, everyonce in a while I send out questions with answers and paste them into an email. Keep in

mind these are just opinions and if you have specific questions please direct them to one of

the Supervisors.1. VIII Div 1: U-1(c)(2)(j) 3,000 psi Limit:

2. VIII-1, UG-99(g) No Leakage during Hydro Inspection

3. VIII Div 1, UHA -51 High Alloy steel impacts?

4. P-3A Data Report

5. VIII-1, UG-44 and B16.9 and B16.11 Fittings

6. Power Boiler field hydro

7. Section IV Test Pressure requirements8. Changing bolts after hydrotest - UG-99(g)

9. Section I, PG-109.3 - PP Stamping Scope

10. VIII-1, PWHT Requirements for P-No. 4

11. Lamination in Plates

12. VIII Div 1 - Marking of non-pressure parts

13. Subcontracted welding?

14. Use of separate WPS in combination

15. Laminations in plate materials

16. VIII DIV 1 - Code applicability for a vessel

17. Accreditation, ASME Codes - CD Rom vs Books?

18. Pin hole leaks not detected

19. Required # of specimens for production impact tests

20. WPS/PQR vs WPQ variables and Limits of Qualification

21. ASME Section VIII Div 1 - UW-12(d)

22. Stamping of "U" Parts ?, MTRs Section I and B31.1?

23. Material Test Reports Section I

24. ASTM vs ASME materials for Code use

25. SMAW Welder qualification with F-3 and F-4 Welder Performance Qualification

Limits

26. Conditioning of electrodes

27. Acceptable Code Edition and Addenda

28. Certification of Data Reports and R Forms sequence

29. Weld joint prep requirements

30. Socket Welded connections in boiler proper

31. Boiler field erection of piping

32. Submerged Arc Welding Questions:

33. Section IX Welder "t" thickness range multiple process

34. Material marking - VIII Div 1

35. Small Nozzle attachments - Section VIII Div1

36. Welding Qualification Ranges

37. Welding Questions

38. "Coded markings" (Material) - UG-77(a), PG-77.239. Section I double block valves & free blow drains
http://blog.daum.net/kc445/4094009http://blog.daum.net/kc445/4094009http://blog.daum.net/kc445/4094009


2/54

40. Pressure Relief Requirements - VIII Div 1

41. VIII Div 1 - seamless head "Quality Factor - E" Seamless Head "Quality Factor",

UW-11(a)(b)

42. Welding Position Section IX, QW-461.9

43. VIII Div 1 - UW-13 head to shell alignment

44. QW-202.4 Combination Welding45. Material Certification

46. Welder Continuity and Qualification

47. Section VIII Div 1 - "Low Temperature Vessel"

48. Calibration of pressure gauges

49. Tube hole deburring - Section IV

50. Calculated Test Pressure - VIII Div1

51. VIII Div 1 - Vacuum, RT- nameplate

52. SAW welding procedure Changes, PQR requirements for Corrosion Resistant Overlay

53. Inspection Openings - VIII Div 1

54. Root pass WPS - QW-200.4(b)

55. Use of SA 36 - VIII Div 156.Nozzle replacement - VIII Div 1

57. DA Tank - small nozzle welds

58.NCRs - Section I and VIII Div 1

59. WPS qualification with impacts

60. Section I - connection off water column, & B31.1 valve

61. PWHT - placement of thermocouples VIII Div 1

62. In process inspection by the AI? - VIII Div 1

63. WPS for Dissimilar Thickness Joint

64. RT designator Section VIII Div1?

65. Lifting Lug calculations VIII Div 1

66. VIII Div 1 - Opening Reinforcement Calculations

67. VIII Div 1 - production impact test?

68. Impact Test Exemptions for ERW Pipe

69. Section IX Welder Qualification using S numbers

70. VIII Div 1 - production impact test?

71. Impact Test Exemptions for ERW Pipe

72. Section IX Welder Qualification using S numbers

73. Internal Inspection

74. Application of UCS-68(c) to UG-20(f)

75. VIII-1 material marking and "piggy back welding"

76. Calculating the MDMT - VIII Div1

77. Material Test Reports - EDI (Electronic Data Interchange)

78. PWHT Question - ASME I

79. VIII Div 1 - UG-93 material marking

80. Boiler Parts and BEP

81. Section I - Use of SA-36 material

82.NDE Level III qualification

83. VIII Div 1 - UCS-66 - "GOVERNING" thickness for establishing MDMT?

84. Rods and Bars used as nozzles in VIII Div 1 vessels?

85. VIII Div 1 vessel hydrostatically tested in the vertical position

86. VIII Div 1 vessel Code boundary87. VIII Div 1 UW-11(a)(5)(b)88. Section I, PG-99, Application of Insulation Prior to Hydrostatic Test


3/54

89. VIII Div 1 purpose of final pressure test90. VIII Div 1 impact test requirements for UG-11 manway assemblies.91. B31 Socket Weld Fitting Fit-Up Gap92. Where in the ASME Code are international materials listed?93. VIII Div 1, UG-10 and identical ASTM material94: VIII Div 1 - UW-16(c) - Nozzle attachment welds, full penetration?95: Titanium not reported as an unspecified element as required by SA-20 par. 7.1.1.196: ASME Section I - difference between tube and pipe97: UG-99 - Hydrostatic test pressure - VIII Div 198: Section I power boiler hydrostatic test water temperature

1. VIII Div 1: U-1(c)(2)(j) 3,000 psi Limit:The 3,000 psi number is a conservative limit which is intended to alert the designer to the fact

that the design principles upon which the Code is based may not be satisfactory (from a

manufacturing or economic point of view) for the design of high pressure vessels. The

design rules of Section VIII, Division 1 are based on elastic behavior of thin shells in which

failure is assumed to occur when the yield point is reached. According to a survey that was

made, pressure vessels up to 10,000 psi can be constructed to Section VIII, Division 1

without suffering a manufacturing or economic hardship. The service conditions of the vessel

may require special engineering considerations which the Code does not address. For

example, for vessels intended for very high pressure (>> 10,000 psi) it becomes necessary to

base the design on plastic analysis, and to prestress (autofrettage) the vessel to meet the

service conditions.These design deviations are necessary to satisfy the service conditions. It is recommended

that for a high pressure vessel the designer shall design for a particular service and after the

service conditions have been satisfied, the design can be reviewed for Code compliance. If

the pressure vessel construction meets all Code requirements the "U" stamp can be

applied. However, when deviations from Code rules are necessary to satisfy service

conditions, and the vessel is to be operated in a state with a pressure vessel law, then the

owner/user and/or his designated agent must petition the jurisdictional authority for a State

Special Stamping.In most cases for pressures under 5,000 psi, special design considerations would probably not

be necessary. As a minimum you should check that the thin shell equations of UG-27 are

valid (See UG-27(c)(1)), and check if fatigue loads need to be considered per UG-22.To summarize, U-1(d) places no limit on the pressure for which a vessel may be designed and

stamped according to Section VIII, Division 1. The paragraph alerts designers that for

pressures greater than 3000 psi, design procedures unique to the design of high pressure

equipment may be needed to meet the service requirements of the vessel. However, the Code

symbol stamp may only be placed on the completed vessel if all of the requirements of the

Code have been met.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. VIII-1, UG-99(g) No Leakage during Hydro Inspection

Question: The new A97 requires that there be no leakage during the time of the hydro

inspection. Does this applied to flanges on nozzles intended for flanged connections topiping?


4/54

Answer: The mention of leakage at temporary seals only applied to plugs etc. used on

nozzles intended for welded connections. Thus if the flange is included within the scope of

the vessel, and the shop uses a blind flange to close off the opening, this flanged joint cannot

leak at 2/3 the test pressure.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. - VIII Div 1, UHA -51 High Alloy steel impacts?Question:* The base material is 304L 0.77" in thickness.* The desired MDMT is -320 F. ' Per UHA-51(d) the base material and HAZ are exempted

from impact tests based on thickness.* Per UHA-51(e)(1) the weld metal is required to be impact tested, since MDMT < -150F.* Per UHA-51(b) the WPS must be qualified with impacts.* Per QW-451 the shop can prepare a coupon which is 1/16" thick and qualify for actual base

metal thickness of 0.077".* Then Per UG-84(c)(3) impact tests would not be required since a Charpy specimen with a

width along the notch greater than or equal to 0.099" cannot be obtained. In my opinion thiswould always take precedence over any other Code requirements that would require impact

tests. Production impact tests would not be required again per UG-84(c)(3). If the shop

instead qualifies their procedure with a coupon equal to or greater in thickness than 0.099",

then they would have to qualify the procedure with impacts. However production impact

tests would still not be required per UG-84(c)(3).

4. - P-3A Data ReportQuestion: There is no place on The P-3A Data Reports for an Engineering Contractor to

document Partial Data Reports such as is on the P-3. Can this be done by attaching a P-6 to

the P-3A?Answer: No. PG-112.2.2 requires a P-3 Data Report to be used to record all items on a water

tube boiler. If an Engineering contractor is going to accept overall responsibility, then the P-3

is checked as not being the Master. The P-3A then becomes the Master and the Engineering

Contractor will certify it to accept responsibility for the design certification. All boiler

components are certified on the appropriate Manufacturer's Data Reports. All Partial Data

Reports would be referenced on the P-3. (see PG-112.2.4), or P-6 attached to the P-3. If the

engineering contractor has fabricating facilities (see PG-104, Note 1), fabrication activitieswould be documented on the appropriate Manufacturer's Data Report. The P-3A is used only

to certify design. Note: Because of the multiple use of the P-3, the P-3 used to document all

boiler components may also have attached (and referenced) P-3's.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. - VIII-1, UG-44 and B16.9 and B16.11 FittingsQuestion: What is the Code's true intentions for the rating of ASME B16.9 and B16.11

fittings. UG-44 states, Pressure-temperature ratings shall be in accordance with the

appropriate standard except that the pressure-temperature ratings for ASME B16.9 and

B16.11 fittings shall be calculated as for straight seamless pipe in accordance with the rules

of this Division including the maximum allowable stress for the material. "From thisstatement and ASME Interpretation VIII-1-83-217, one could logically conclude that the


5/54

Code's intentions were to exclude ASME B16.9 and B16.11 fittings from UG-45. Also, one

could argue that UG-44 states that the fitting shall be rated as a straight seamless pipe to all

rules of the division which includes UG-45. Is it the intention of the Code to exclude ASME

B16.9 and B16.11 fittings from UG-45?Answer: There have been numerous Code interpretations on this subject. However, as youdiscovered, VIII-1-83-217 essentially states that UG-45 does not apply to B16.11 couplings

since no nozzle neck applies. I have given that opinion in the past, and would extend it to

B16.9 fittings as well. I published a short explanation of establishing a pressure/temperature

rating for a B16.11 fitting in one of my previous newsletters (I will be mailing the complete

set to you today). I've clipped in Word format this portion of the newsletter, plus the set of

interpretations dealing with the subject. So in conclusion, I believe that ASME B16.9 and

B16.11 do not require UG-45 consideration.Question 1: I need to use ASME B16.11 fittings in a pressure vessel that I am constructing to

Section VIII, Division 1. How do I figure out the allowable pressure/temperature rating for

the fitting?Answer: ASME B16.11 is listed as an acceptable reference standard in both Table U-3 and

paragraph UG-44 of Section VIII-1. Normally if you are purchasing B16.11 fittings from a

manufacturer's catalog per UG-11(a) of Section VIII, it will provide the pressure/temperature

rating for the fittings based on either B31 piping applications or Section VIII. If a

manufacturers' pressure/temperature rating is unavailable, you can use the following method

to establish an MAWP. Per UG-44, the pressure/temperature rating for a B16.11 fitting is

calculated for straight seamless pipe in accordance with rules of Section VIII including the

maximum allowable stress for the material. Let's look at an example. Assume that we need

to use an NPS 1 B16.11 threaded coupling for a vessel designed for 400 psi and 800oF. We

need to select a class designation for the fitting, so as a first cut let's select a Class 3000

fitting. Per 5.1 the material for the fitting shall consist of forgings, bars, seamless pipe, or

tubular products listed in Table 1 of ASME/ANSI B16.34. From Table 1 select a carbon

forging SA-105. Per B16.11 2.1.1 and Table 2, the pipe schedule corresponding to a Class

3000 fitting is Sch 160. The nominal wall thickness for NPS 1 Sch 160 from B36.10 is 0.25

in. The allowable stress for SA-105 at 800oF is 12.0 ksi. Using the minimum thickness of the

Sch 160 pipe by accounting for the manufacturer's undertolerance ( tmin = 0.875 x 0.25 =

0.219 in), the calculated ressure is:P = SEt/Ro + 0.6t = 12000(1)(.219)/.658 +0.56(0.219) = 3,329 psiQuestion: Is impact testing required for the welds in SA-53 Type E ERW pipe under thefollowing conditions?(a) When the thickness at the weld exceeds in. for all minimum design metal temperatures?(b) When the thickness at the weld exceeds 5/16 in. and the minimum design metal

temperature is lower than 50oF?Reply: Yes to (a) and (b).However, the only time one would apply UCS-67(b) to ERW pipe, is if the pipe were

fabricated in the Code Manufacturer's shop. Otherwise, ERW pipe is treated as material and

the weld is ignored.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. - Power Boiler field hydro


6/54

Determination of Hydrostatic test pressureDetail: Inquirer is getting conflicting information on how to determine the correct test

pressure for a field erected boiler. It seems the designer is stating the correct test pressure for

the boiler, and the erector does not think it is correct. The erector is wanting to consider the

pressure ratings for the piping support systems to determine the test pressure. It appears thatthe problem is they want to test everything at once at one pressure, but do not know what

MAWP to use as the basis for calculating the test pressure. A simultaneous test is

permissible per the requirements of paragraph 137.3.1 of B31.1 for boiler external piping

only. When a simultaneous test of the boiler and the boiler external piping is conducted, test

pressure shall be based on the MAWP of the boiler proper as required by PG-99.1. Applying

the requirements of PG-99.3 is inappropriate for a drum type boiler. These requirements only

apply to forced flow steam generators which different pressure ratings within the boiler

proper. Separate tests are to be conducted for nonboiler external piping per paragraph

137.3.2; for each of the boiler support piping systems at their required test pressures per

paragraph 137.4 of B31.1. This will require some disassembly and isolation blanking to

preclude over pressurizing limiting components, if not performed as a bench hydro at thefabrication point. If the piping systems are disassembled, when reassembled they should be

retested at the normal operating pressure for a final mechanical joint integrity verification.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. Section IV Test Pressure requirementsDetail: Paragraphs HG-510(a) and (b) tend to be confusing when taken together. How do

these limits work together?Response: It is the intent of Section IV that all boilers built to their Section be tested at a

pressure of at least 60 PSI, but not greater than 1.5 times Design pressure. For example, a 15

psi steam boiler is tested at 60 psi which is the greater of 60 psi vs 1.5 times MAWP (37.5

psi). The greatest pressure it may be tested at is 1.5 times design or 60 psi, whichever is

greater. If this boiler is designed for an MAWP of 15 psi steam, but the design is based on a

design rating of 50 psi, it could be potentially be tested at 75 psi maximum vice 60 psi. This

would give you an acceptable test pressure range of 60-75 psi; with the lower limit based on

MAWP, and the upper limit based on Design pressure. Keep in mind that design pressure and

MAWP do not have to be the same number. The maximum overpressure is limited to 10 psi

over the maximum limit, so if the test pressure of 60 psi is selected, then the maximum

pressure should be 70 psi, but could theoretically be allowed to reach 85 psi applying these

guidelines.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. - Changing bolts after hydrotest - UG-99(g)

Question: Is it acceptable to change the bolts on the vessel after final hydro? The vessel is

100' long and is comprised of 15' shell sections that are bolted together. The hydro is

performed on the entire vessel using SA-193 B7 bolts then dismantled for shipping. The

vessel is then reassembled on-site using different bolts (SA-193 B7 - Teflon coated). The AI

had told the shop that if they are ultimately going to use Teflon coated bolts then they have to

use Teflon coated bolts at the hydro.Answer: Regarding the vessel that is being hydrostatically tested, dismantled and

reassembled using different bolts. These are mechanical joints and therefore the Code does

not specifically address the use of different bolting materials during hydro and final


7/54

assembly. Therefore it would be acceptable to use SA-193 B7 bolts for the hydrostatic test at

the shop and SA-193 B7 Teflon coated bolts for the final assembly.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. - Section I, PG-109.3 - PP Stamping ScopeQuestion: Under PG-109.3 the PP stamp holder can fabricate boiler parts, such as headers orother parts, involving only welding as covered by PW-41. PW-41 are requirements only for

welding of circumferential joints in pipes, tubes and headers. Can PP stamp holder fabricate

headers, involving also nozzles to header shell welding which is not covered by PW-41?Response: The intent of this requirement is that components within the scope of the PW-41

limitations may be fabricated by PP stamp holders. This change was made fairly recently (97

Addenda if I remember correctly), to recognize that since we already allow PP holders to

assemble piping within the limits of BEP by welding, and since the components referenced in

PW-41 are within the limits of BEP but outside the boiler proper, it only makes sense to

allow the PP holder to fabricate those items as well. The statement within PG-109.3 was

intended to prohibit the use of a PP stamp to assemble drums and shells, or other majorpressure components of boilers, while allowing PP holders to fabricate smaller piping related

components. This change was part of the general movement to shift technical requirements

for those things which are outside the boiler proper to the Power Piping Code, B31.1.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. : VIII-1, PWHT Requirements for P-No. 4Question: Client is welding an 8" thick tubesheet made from SA-182 F12 Cl2 material (P-

No. 4 Gr. 1) to a 1 3/8" shell made from P-No. 1 material. Is PWHT required?Answer: UCS-56(c) addresses the PWHT requirements for welded joints involving different

P-Number groups. It states that the more restrictive PWHT requirement shall apply to the

joint. The P-No.1 material is exempt from PWHT, however the P-No. 4 will require PWHT,

since there are no applicable exemptions for your application. Per UW-40(f)(5)(c) the

governing nominal thickness for determining the holding time will be the thickness of the

shell.-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11. Lamination in PlatesQuestion: Is lamination in general a cause for rejection of a plate?Background: The specific application is a bolted cover with a coupling in the center attached

with a single external fillet weld as a penetration. When pressurized with air, it bubblesthrough the lamination and out the periphery of the plate.Question: Is this acceptable?Response: Obviously the leakage is unacceptable, but the lamination is not a problem. Since

the full thickness of the plate is present to resist the load due to pressure, the lamination is not

of itself a cause for rejection. To stop the leakage, back weld the coupling penetration to seal

the lamination from having a leak path. A minimum fillet weld to act as a seal weld is

sufficient. Laminations are not desirable where plates are joined to form a corner joint,

because of the potential for the load to be borne by a section thickness that is less than the

nominal plate thickness. This is why VIII Div 1, UG-93 requires that edge preps for cornerjoints be examined by PT or MT to check for laminations. Another potential problem area is


8/54

when the plate is a heat transfer surface, and such a lamination may develop into a blister or

bulge and affect performance of the part, as well as allowing localized overheating of the

metal to the point of failure. In a pure pressure loading application such as a shell or head,

the full section thickness is carrying the load, so the lamination is not detrimental. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12. - VIII Div 1 - Marking of non-pressure partsQuestion: What are the marking requirements for non-pressure parts welded to pressure

vessels in Section VIII Div 1?Answer: Marking requirements for non-pressure parts UG-4(b) requires that non-pressure

parts attached to pressure retaining parts be of "weldable quality". UW-5(b) gives

requirements for proving "weldable quality", which means that a WPS has been qualified

with this material.Material identification requirements for non-pressure parts welded to pressure retaining parts

are found in UW-5(b)(1) and (2). Both reference the requirements of UG-10, UG-11, UG-15,

and UG-93. UG-10 requires identification per the specification. UG-11 permits reducedmarkings for pressure parts. UG-15 provides recertification and redesignation of a material in

the same fashion as UG-10, with markings per specification. UG-93 requires all product

forms other than plate to be marked with the specification , grade, type, and class; trace

ability to a specific heat and lot is not required. When the Manufacturer begins subdividing

the material, UG-94 allows the use of a coded marking, referencing UG-77. UG-77 requires

control of transferred markings to be addressed in the quality control system. Additionally,

UG-93(a)(3)(b) makes a similar statement. Consequently, if the required markings are used,

no QC Manual description of the system is required.If a coded marking system is used, it's description is required in the QC Manual. This is

consistent with the issued interpretations on this subject.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13. - Subcontracted welding?Question: Is it possible to subcontract welding and other fabrication operations to other

organizations?Answer: There are two scenarios. One involves one Certificate Holder subcontracting

fabrication to another Certificate Holder, having the subcontractor report the work performed

on a U-2 form (Partial Data Report), and then incorporating this component into a completed

vessel with stamping and certification by the original Certificate Holder. The responsibility

for design may be assumed by either party. Responsibility for component fabrication isassumed by the subcontractor. The subcontractor would have his own Code certificate, his

own welding procedures and welder qualifications, his own inspection and certification. The

work performed by him would be reported to the final Manufacturer, who accepts

responsibility for it when incorporating the component into the final vessel. This type of

approach works well with either a full time or a part time fabrication operation. It is a good

way to outsource some work due to cost considerations, manage cyclic production demands,

or compensate for equipment limitations. The second scenario involves what is referred to as

a "welding by others" program. This requires a modification of the Certificate Holder's QC

Program to incorporate the requirements of UW-26(d). This provides details of how such a

program is implemented and controlled, and includes the designation of individuals

responsible for the various actions and oversight required. In this situation, the CertificateHolder (using his own welding procedures) conducts welder qualification testing of the


9/54

subcontractors welders. He then employs the subcontractors welders to weld products of his

design, using his welding procedures, under his direct control and supervision. This is usually

accomplished by assigning a specific individual to the subcontractors shop to oversee

operations. The Authorized Inspector is involved in the implementation of this program to the

extent he feels necessary. Usually the Inspector will rotate between the Certificate holder's

facility and the subcontractor's facility. I have only seen this applied to a full time inspectionlocation. It would be difficult to coordinate with a part time location. This offers some

advantages for cost reduction and cyclic production demands as well.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14. Use of separate WPS in combinationDetail: Inquirer called to ask if it is possible to apply two separately qualified WPS to the

same joint in combination without qualification of a combined PQR.Response: Per QW-200.4, it is acceptable to apply both WPS to the same joint without

further qualification. The deposited weld metal qualification ranges may be "stacked",allowing the application of the maximum qualified thickness of deposited weld metal for

each WPS/process in a single joint. However, the user is cautioned that the maximum base

metal thickness qualified for the most limiting WPS must be applied. The base metal

thickness ranges cannot be "stacked" to qualify for a greater thickness in combination.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15. - Laminations in plate materialsQuestion: What is the acceptability of laminations in plate materials in pressure vessels.Answer: Since the full thickness of the plate is present to resist the load due to pressure, the

lamination is not a cause for rejection. Laminations are not desirable where plates are joined

to form a corner joint, because of the potential for the load to peel the laminations and reduce

the strength of the material section. This is why UG-93(d) of Section VIII, Division 1

requires that edge preps for corner joints be examined by PT or MT to check for

laminations. Another potential problem area is when the plate is a heat transfer surface, and

such a lamination may develop into a blister or bulge and affect heat transfer performance of

the part, as well as allowing localized overheating of the metal to the point of failure. In a

pure pressure loading application such as a shell or head, the full section thickness is carrying

the load, so the lamination is acceptable and not detrimental. Some specific customers may

have objections to laminations in shell or head plates. But, this is a matter of agreementbetween the client and the Manufacturer. The ASME Code has no prohibitions against plate

laminations other than as described above for corner joints.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16. - VIII DIV 1 - Code applicability for a vesselQuestion: About Code applicability for a specific vessel design. It is a shell and tube heat

exchanger used as a waste heat recovery heater, using flue gases to heat water. The intended

application is for 15 psi or less on the water side, the gas side is vented to atmosphere as the

gasses escape.


10/54

Response: The heat exchanger design presented may be considered outside the scope of the

ASME Code, Section VIII, Division 1 for Unfired Pressure Vessels by the following

reasoning:(a). Paragraph U-1(c)(2)(h) excludes vessels of unlimited size from the scope of the Code

when rated for internal or external pressures of less than 15 psi.(b). Paragraph U-1(c)(2)(f) excludes vessels containing only water under pressure, providedthe pressure does not exceed 300 psi and the temperature does not exceed 210F. Code

Interpretations have been issued which confer applicability of this paragraph to heat

exchanger applications. (c). Paragraph U-1(c)(2)(g) excludes hot water storage tanks

heated by steam or other indirect means when the heat input is limited to 200, 000 BTU/hr,

temperature is limited to 210F, and volume is 120 gals or less. While it is difficult to

conclusively determine that these parameters are not exceeded with the information provided,

it appears that they are not. Paragraph U-1(c)(2) permits the application of the Code symbol

to objects which are normally outside the Scope of the Code when constructed to meet all the

applicable requirements. So, even if the object is determined to be outside the scope, it may

be built to meet the Code and stamped as being in compliance with it.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17. Accreditation, ASME Codes - CD Rom vs Books?Company called to ask if it is required to have hard copies of the ASME Code available for

the ASME joint review. They currently have them on CD ROM, and was told they needed

hard copies as well.Response: Yes, hardcopies are required. It is not clearly indicated in the ASME application

package sent to applicants, because it says in the cover letter that the applicant must have a

"published copy" of the Code. The ASME considers the definition of a published copy to be a

hard copy as purchased from ASME. Not a photocopy or CD ROM. Since the ASME only

has direct control of what is published in the hard copies, it does not recognize any other

form. The CD ROM version is produced under license, and not by ASME, so they cannot be

certain of content.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18. - Pin hole leaks not detectedA manufacturer of ASME pressure vessels and a distributor of vessels that are made by

others has a situation with their major supplier. They make a 20" diameter horizontal air

receiver for us. A particular end user has consistently returned vessels for pin hole

leaks. These vessels have been made in different production runs over the past year. Thisend user tests with n itrogen gas at 75 psi. The fabricator hydrotests at 300 psi.Question: Is it conceivable that these leaks that are detectable by the end user, could go

unnoticed during the fabricators' hydrotest? The most recent leaking vessel was returned to

the fabricator with the leaks marked, and the fabricator said that it took 1.5 and 3 hours to

detect the two leaks.Response: It is definitely possible. Think of it this way, which molecule is larger, N2 or

H2O? Depending on the aspect the molecule presents, the N2 is definitely more likely to slip

out of a tight opening, especially if it is monataomic Nitrogen. Pneumatic testing or other

tests using a gas instead of a fluid more readily leak when a pin hole exists for this reason. Ithas always been harder to detect very small leaks with hydrostatic tests. If the vessel will see


11/54

gaseous service, or this type of leak test is a potential acceptance criteria, then I suggest that

the vessel be pneumatically tested; either in addition to, or in place of, the hydrostatic test.

Even at that, the leaks may be small enough that they could be missed if the tester is not

thoroughly inspecting the vessel. This type of tight pinhole is characteristic of Subarc welds

made with a heavily recycled flux. After breaking down in the heat of the welding process,

the flux fragments into a fine powder, called "flux flour". This "flux flour" more readilyabsorbs moisture and clings to dirt, oil, grease. grinding debris, and other contaminants which

cause the formation of very fine pinhole porosity. Fabricators which are aggressively

recycling flux are suggested to dump the batch about once a month, or sift out the "flux flour"

with a screen.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19. - Required # of specimens for production impact testsQuestion: "For production impact test plates of a Section VIII Div 1 vessel which the base

metal is over 1.5 inch in thickness, how many sets of test specimens be tested?" Specifically

UG-84(i)(1), which tells the user to perform production impact tests per UG-84(g). Are threesets of specimens were required [2 in the weld deposit, 1 in the HAZ; per UG-84(h)(3)] due

to the material thickness, or only two sets of specimens were required [1 in the weld deposit,

and 1 in the HAZ; per UG-84(g)] for production impact tests?Answer: The three sets of specimens in the question refer to are impact tests of Welding

Procedure Qualifications on base metal thick nesses greater than 1-1/2 inches, as set forth in

UG-84(h)(3). This requires the weld to be tested in the weld metal within 1/16 in.of the

surface, in the weld metal near the center, and in the HAZ of the base metal. This requirement

exists for Welding Procedure Qualification Tests only. The regular weld impact test

requirements of UG-84(g) only mandate two sets of specimens; one of the weld metal within

1/16 in. of the surface, and the HAZ of the base metal. Production impact tests are mandated

as a check of the fabricating process to ensure the qualified properties are being obtained in

the production component. The tests are invoked when extremes of service onditions warrant

additional verification. Since the production impact test is only a verification of previously

qualified properties during fabrication, it is not intended to invoke the full qualification test

regimen, but merely a check regimen. Production testing only requires two sets of specimens

to be taken from the locations called for in UG-84(g).-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20. - WPS/PQR vs WPQ variables and Limits of QualificationDetail: I am confused about the Welding Performance Qualification. For instance, a welder

used SA53 pipe test material which is P1 material, I want to know what kind of material he

will be qualified for? Is he qualified to weld production material SA-240-304(P8) by using

SA53 as testing coupon? I know there is a paragraph regarding welding qualification in QW-

423.1. On the other hand, the base material in the WPS is a essential variable.Response: This is a very common problem. It is very easy to confuse procedure and

performance requirements and try to apply them inappropriately. The welder you described

who qualifies on a SA-53 pipe coupon becomes qualified for that base metal and the

following additional weld metals: P-No.1 thru P-No. 11, P-No. 34, and P-No. 4X (where X is

a placeholder, indicating the 40 series P-Nos. which are nickel alloys). This sounds great,huh? However, there are some traps here. The welder must use the same process, with the


12/54

same essential variables as qualified, such as the F-No., position, thickness limits, etc.; unless

he has other WPQs that support the extension of the limits of qualification for the essential

variables. The actual essential variables change with the process, as shown in QW-416 and

QW-350. At the same time, the welder may be qualified to weld the other base metals, but

unless he has a WPS that has been qualified for those base metals (and all processes have

base metal as an essential variable) he cannot weld it in compliance with Coderequirements. There are one or two minor exceptions found in QW-424, but this is generally

true. One example that I have seen is where the welder welded stainless with a WPS

qualified for carbon steel. When I pointed this out, the client stated that the process was

covered by QW-423, since the welder is qualified for the various base metals as stated above.

Sure the welder is qualified, I said, but the process was not qualified for these base metals so

the weld is not acceptable. Once he realized that I was right, we looked through his extensive

book of WPSs and found one that was identical to the carbon steel WPS, but was qualified

for stainless. Everything else was identical except the base metal. I have also seen people try

to use the welder's qualified deposited weld metal thickness range to try to weld using a

procedure that was qualified for lesser thickness' than the production base metal using the

same reasoning as above. Remember that Code welding is a two by two matrix. Across thetop are: "Welder Not Qualified" and "Welder Qualified". Down the left hand side are:

"Procedure Not Qualified" and "Procedure Qualified". Unless you are in the box where the

coordinates "Procedure Qualified" and "Welder Qualified" intersect, it's not a Code compliant

weld. Procedure qualification and Welder qualification are achieved and verified

independently, unless the welder in question was the welder who made the test coupons for

the PQR. Then the test is documented on separate PQR and WPQ forms using the same data.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21. - ASME Section VIII Div 1 - UW-12(d)Question: UW-12(d) requires a spot radiograph [per UW-11(a)(5)(b)] be taken on each 50

feet of circumferential seams attaching elliptical or torispherical heads to a seamless shell to

apply a joint efficiency of 1.0 in the calculation of the shell or head thickness, even if they are

seamless. If this RT requirement is not applied, 85% is the highest permitted joint

efficiency. In the application to ERW pipe shells, it appears to be a "double penalty"; since

ERW stress values already have an 85% efficiency applied to them, and this requirement

reduces the efficiency even further.Response: This requirement is the result of a compromise worked out when Section VIII

revised it's design philosophy to become a "design by joint" Code. It became apparent that

designing a vessel with a seamless shell and seamless dished heads would rate the same jointefficiency in shell and head thickness calculations as a totally seamless vessel, since the

circumferential seams need only be half as strong as the seamless shell. The fact that a

welded vessel could be designed for the same thickness as a seamless one was a distasteful

possibility for the Code committee, so this provision was put in place to gain acceptance for

the Code revision.If a seamless hemispherical head is attached to the shell, the head is calculated with an

efficiency determined from Table UW-12. The shell is calculated under the provisions of

UW-12(d).However, if a flat head (tube sheet, or flange also) is attached at both ends of a shell, you may

ignore the radiography requirements of UW-12(d) and apply the appropriate joint efficiency

for the shell (based upon joint type and degree of examination) from Table UW-12 to theshell thickness calculation. This is permitted because of the difficulty in shooting and


13/54

properly interpreting a radiograph for a corner joint (or fillet welds attaching flanges). The

Code committees decided that in this scenario, the rules of UW-12(d) would be waived. If

there is a flat head at one end and a dished head at the other end, the rules of UW-12(d) still

apply to the shell and dished head calculations.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22. - Stamping of "U" Parts ?, MTRs Section I and B31.1?Question: What is the the proper stamping of "parts", and does the Code require such things

as RT2, W, or the other things addressed in UG-116(a) through (f).Response: The only required information to be stamped or included in the nameplate of a

"Part" under Section VIII, Division 1 rules is as set forth in UG-116(h). The information in

UG-116(a) thru (f) is for stamping or nameplates of the completed vessel. Information

concerning any of the aspects addressed by these markings (PWHT, RT, etc) is addressed on

the U-2 or U-2A, and not the stamping. The Manufacturer of the final vessel is obligated to

address these areas on the final U-1 or U-1A and stamping or nameplate upon finalcertification of the completed vessel.23. Material Test Reports Section IQuestion: What are the MTR requirements are for piping when fabricated under Section I

and B31.1.Response: The following references and requirements apply:(a). B31.1 explicitly requires MTRs for materials used in pressure retaining service in

paragraph 123.2.2(A).(power piping)(b). Section I makes no direct explicit requirement for MTRs in the main text of the book, but

alludes to it in the Appendix, in paragraph A-302.4. It is widely understood that MTRs are

required for Section I construction (boiler proper piping).-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24. - ASTM vs ASME materials for Code useQuestion: Under what conditions, may ASTM Specification materials be used for ASME

pressure items?Answer: The following would apply:

(1). If the ASTM Material has an identical corresponding ASME Specification with the same

number (i.e.: A-106B corresponds to SA-106B); and the date code For the ASTM Material is

one of the acceptable dates listed in Appendix A of Section II, Part A; and the corresponding

ASME Specification is acceptable for the construction Code which applies. If this is the case,

the material can be accepted as is, and used as ASME Specification material. No

recertification or remarking is necessary.(2). If the ASTM Material does not have an identical corresponding ASME Specification

with the same number (i.e.: A-106B corresponds to SA-106B), it may be compared to a

known ASME Specification acceptable for the construction Code which applies. If

comparison of the chemical composition and mechanical properties show the material to meetthe requirements for the ASME Specification, it may be accepted for use as the ASME


14/54

Specification material. The procedure for recertification and remarking of the material is

found in the construction Code. For example for Section VIII, Division 1, it is found in UG-

10. Slip-on-flanges - limitations B31.1 and I. The boiler external piping limitations are

"except slip-on flanges shall be limited in application to no higher than Class 300

primary service rating" - B31.1 par. 104.5.1 . Also boiler proper Section I par. PG-42.4.7

states "slip=on flanges shall not exceed NPS 4".-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25. - SMAW Welder qualification with F-3 and F-4 Welder Performance Qualification

LimitsDetail: Inquirer called to ask for assistance in verifying the limits of qualification applicable

to a given WPQ scenario. The welder deposited a 1/8 " weld root pass using SMAW with an

F-3 Electrode without backing. He then filled the rest of the 0.412" thick coupon using

SMAW with an F-4 Electrode, now with the root pass as a backing. Since F-4 or F-3

electrodes qualify the welder to apply all lower F-Nos. with backing, how should the limits of

qualification be listed on the WPQ?Response: Weld Deposit Thickness- Range Qualified is: F-1 thru F-4 qualified for 0.824"

deposited weld metal with backing, F-3 qualified for 0.25" without backing. Reference:

ASME Section IX - QW-353, 404.15, 433, 306-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26. - Conditioning of electrodesQuestion: What about the proper conditioning of coated SMAW electrodes. The specific

electrodes in question are E-7018.Response: ASME Section II C, Table A-1 in the Annex for SFA-5.5 gives specific guidance

for the conditioning of SMAW electrodes. The text of A6.11 has some information of

significance as well. In general, low hydrogen electrodes have to be kept in a controlled and

usually heated environment. Other electrodes may be kept at ambient temperature. In fact, it

states in A6.11.4 that some electrodes may be damaged if kept in heated storage, as it will dry

them out too much, and they do not function as intended without some amount of moisture in

the coatings. If the manufacturer does not provide recommendations for conditioning, follow

the guidelines of Table A-1. Many manufacturers of low hydrogen electrodes have simply

recommended storage at 50F above ambient to preclude absorption of moisture.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27. - Acceptable Code Edition and AddendaQuestion: Is it possible to for a Manufacturer to accept a contract to fabricate a pressure

vessel to a previous Edition and Addenda of the Code. If not, where is this prohibited?Response: In the Forward of of Section VIII, Division 1 the Code it states: "After Code

revisions are approved by Council they may be used beginning with the date of issuance

shown on the Addenda. Revisions become mandatory as minimum requirements six months

after such date of issuance, except for boilers or pressure vessels contracted for prior to the

end of the six-month period." This means that the vessel may only be contracted for the CodeEdition and Addenda in effect at the time of the contract. During this six month "window" of


15/54

voluntary implementation of the Addenda, either Addenda (or Edition) may be applied as a

matter of agreement between the Manufacturer and the customer. Once the vessel is

contracted for, that Edition and Addenda may be followed until the vessel is completed, even

if the construction covers a prolonged period.28. Welder limitsQuestion: Welder qualification thickness limits are based on both the deposit weld metal and

the F number. If a welder qualifies using both F3 and F4, the qualified deposited weld metal

thickness for F4 will only be twice the actual deposited thickness of the F4 weld metal. F3

would be the combined F3 & F4. is this correct?Response: Don't forget the important role that backing plays in this application. QW-433

spells this out very clearly. Since F-4 also qualifies F-3 and the lower F Numbers with

backing, the qualified thickness range for depositing weld metal with backing using the F-3

and lower F Number electrodes is equal to twice the total deposited weld metal thickness (F-3

and F-4 combined). If depositing weld metal without backing, the qualified thickness rangefor deposited weld metal would only be twice the actual deposited thickness for each F

Number, and then only if each was deposited without backing during the qualification test.

Chances are only one F Number was deposited without backing, and the other F Number was

deposited over the top of it (essentially with backing).Follow-up to the above question:QW-306 clearly identifies that the thickness qualification parameters are a function of all

other variables. This does not simply effect F# and thickness. The words encompass

thickness qualification being dependant upon ANY essential variable.Question: If a welder is qualified on a 3" sch 5 (.083) coupon in the 6G and qualified on a 1"

sch 80 (.179t) pipe coupon in the 1G, all other variables being the same, he is only qualified

to weld on a 2" pipe up to .166t in any position. After attaining that thickness he must change

to 1G. If the 3" coupon was F4 with backing and the 1" coupon was F3 without backing, then

the welder is not qualified on 2" pipe with F4 over .166t even in the 1G.response: If the 3" coupon was F4 with backing and the 1" coupon was F3 without backing,

then the welder is not qualified on 2" pipe with F4 over 166t even in the 1G. The F-4

qualification is no good for welding the 2" pipe at all if it is intended to be welded without

backing. F-4 may be used to deposit 0.166" of weld metal only if welding with backing.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

28. - Certification of Data Reports and R FormssequenceIt has been brought to our attention that some Inspectors have been signing Data Reports and

R Forms prior to the Manufacturer's representative. In order to clarify HSB and ASME/NB

requirements please review the following:The HSB Engineering Services Manual paragraph 4552.9(a) states "All Data Reports (and R

Forms per par (b)) shall be properly completed and certified by the manufacturer prior to

being signed by the Inspector".


16/54

ASME Section VIII Div 1 requires the Manufacturer to "prepare the Manufacturer's Data

Report and have it certified by the Inspector". UG-90(b)(18). Paragraph UG-90(c)(1)(n)

discusses the Inspector signing the Data Report when the "vessel, to the best of his

knowledge and belief, is in compliance with all provisions of the Code". This includes the

certification signature of the Manufacturer's representative.The NBIC paragraph RA-2151(p) discusses the responsibility of the Manufacture for

preparing, signing, and presenting the R Form to the Inspector. Paragraphs RC-2071(b) and

3051 goes on to state "the Inspector shall indicate acceptance by signing the R Form".-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29. - Wed joint prep requirementsQuestion: How about minimum requirements for weld joint preparation, and where a hole is

flame cut into a shell, and a coupling is welded to the shell with a single fillet weld from the

outside only? No preparation is made to the flame cut edge prior to welding.Answer: UW-31(a) states "When plates are shaped by oxygen or arc cutting, the edges to be

welded shall be uniform and smooth and freed of all loose scale and slag accumulation before

welding.(See UG-76 and UCS-5)". UG-76(a) states "After oxygen or arc cutting, all slag or

detrimental discoloration of material which has been molten shall be removed by mechanical

means prior to further fabrication or use." UCS-5 prohibits flame cutting and welded

construction using materials with a carbon content greater than 0.35%Section I PW-29.1 states "The preparation of joints prior to welding may involve any of the

conventional methods in use such as machining, thermal cutting, chipping, grinding, or

combinations of these."PW-29.2 states "Where thermal cutting is used, the effect on the mechanical and

metallurgical properties of the base metal shall be taken into consideration." PW-29.3 states "The method of base metal preparation used shall leave the welding groove

with reasonably smooth surfaces and free from deep notches, striations, or irregularities. The

surfaces for welding shall be free of all scale, rust, oil, grease, or other foreign materials."Section IVHW-801(a), (b), and (c) are identical to PW-29.1, .2, and .3 respectively. Edges left behind

by plasma cutting machines are the only arc cuts that might be acceptable for further welding

without preparation. These edges are almost always uniform in thickness, smooth edged, and

contain virtually no slag. The heat input is so highly localized that virtually no detrimental

effects on the properties of the remaining base materials are observed. Edges cut by flame or

oxygen cutting generally have slag, and irregular edge, and often an irregular thickness. Thisis not conducive to ensuring adequate penetration and fusion throughout the full thickness of

the joint without inclusions. A Manufacturer wanting to flame cut a hole into a shell, and

attach a coupling to the shell with a single fillet weld from the outside only with no joint

preparation prior to welding, should be required to demonstrate that he is able to complete an

acceptable quality weld under such conditions. Satisfactory completion of such a

demonstration, with appropriate testing of the finished weld joint, satisfies the Manufacturer's

burden of proof to the Inspector the he has achieved compliance with the requirements of the

Code paragraphs cited above without joint preparation. HW-810(c) requires that tack welds

"be removed completely when they have served their purpose, or their stopping and starting

ends shall be properly prepared by grinding or other suitable means so that they may be

satisfactorily incorporated in the final weld." Are these requirements satisfied when the tackweld is made in such a manner that the starting and stopping ends are blended into the base


17/54

metal and therefore suitable for incorporation into the final weld without modification, or

when the tack welds are completely re-melted and consumed into the root of the weld? Reply: Yes, with concurrence of the Authorized Inspector.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30. - Socket Welded connections in boiler properQuestion: What about the acceptability for a socket welded joint within the boiler setting.

The intention is to weld a NPS 4 socket welded fitting into the shell with double full fillet

welds, and then socket weld piping to the fitting for attachment of the safety relief valve. Is

this an acceptable arrangement?Answer: Use of a socket welded fitting within the boiler setting is acceptable under PG-42,

provided it complies with ASME B16.11. Attachment of the fitting to the boiler shell with

double full fillet welds is permitted per Figure PW-16.1, Sketch (d). Socket welded joints of

this size within the boiler setting are not permitted per PW-41.5.1, however this particularjoint is not within the boiler setting. This joint is the point of termination of the Scope of the

Section I technical jurisdiction as shown in Figure PG-58.3.1. This weld joint and the

attached piping come under ASME B31.1 Power Piping. Socket welded fittings are

permitted in this size for this service, but socket welded flanges are restricted in size.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31. - Boiler field erection of pipingQuestion: What is the required documentation for valves, flanges, and other components of

piping being welded together in a boiler field erection. The components themselves do not

require documentation as they are acceptable as standard pressure parts under PG-11, and

meet the referenced specifications under PG-42, including markings. The issue is whether or

not the components need to be included on a P-4A, P-4B, P-6 or other documentation for the

piping.Answer: In researching this issue, the following ASME interpretation applies:Question: May an Authorized Inspector accept valves, fittings, and flanges meeting the

requirements of PG-42 without such valves, fittings, and flanges being identified on a

Manufacturer's Data Report?Reply (4): Yes.

The interpretation addresses this issue quite nicely. In addition, the guides for preparing the

P-4A and P-4B data reports tell the reader only to document the piping itself, and not the

components. We have to assume that the reason for this is because the valves, flanges and

other components are adequately marked to identify them as being in compliance with the

Code without further documentation. This is not true of the piping, as the material markings

will often be covered by paint, or otherwise lost. In conclusion we believe that it is

appropriate to accept the valves and other non-pipe components based upon their own

markings, and that they do not need to be included on the P-4A, P-4B, or P-6 forms used to

document piping assemblies.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


18/54

32. Submerged Arc Welding Questions:Question(1): What requirements exist regarding the recycling of subarc flux that was not

incorporated into the weld or the slag layer?Question (2): Why is there a supplementary essential variable for procedure qualification

when changing from multiple pass welds to single pass welds in SAW?Response: 1. No specific requirements exist for recycling unincorporated flux for reuse in

Section IX or the Construction Codes. This is a widely accepted practice, because failure to

recycle the flux can result in very high production costs. Some important things to keep in

mind when recycling the flux:(a). Flux contamination with grease, oil, dirt, grinding dust, and excessive moisture

absorption are all problems for subarc welds. These are all known to cause excessive

porosity, often very characteristic for the specific type of contamination involved. Keeping

excess flux in closed and airtight containers to control such contamination is a good start.

Minimizing grinding in the vicinity of the welding is another. Keeping the area clean is

another. Having a mechanism that "catches" the flux instead of letting it fall intouncontrolled areas is also good. Finally, be careful not to allow slag fragments to fall into the

flux system.(b). Flux breaks down after repeated exposure to welding heat to a very fine dust referred to

as "flux flour". This dust has a very high affinity for absorption of moisture, and

consequently can affect weld quality. Occasionally dumping the recycling system or

mechanically separating the dust from the flux is the best way to control this effect. ( c). Some shops use recrushed slag as flux because it is cheaper. This is acceptable, provided

that the welding procedure has been qualified for this electrode-flux combination. Special

testing requirements need to be met for recrushed slag fluxes prior to their use. Response (2): When welding a joint with the subarc process, a significant heat affected zone

is created. In a single pass the effect is very pronounced. In a multiple pass procedure, the

subsequent passes serve to partial stress relieve the previous passes heat affected zones

(HAZ). Since the greatest area of vulnerability for brittle fracture is the HAZ of a weld, this is

why changing from multiple passes to single passes is an essential variable for impact tested

applications. A significant difference in the fracture toughness properties results from the

change, which obviously affects the impact properties of the HAZ.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 33. - Section IX Welder "t" thickness range multiple processQuestion: regarding the application of QW-452.1 performance qualification ranges for the

following WPQ conditions: Pipe Coupon with 0.864" wall thickness, Welded with 0.187

GTAW root, and 0.670 SMAW fill.Response: (Note: 0.187 + 0.670 = 0.857") Applying QW-452.1, for a coupon thickness of

3/4 inch and over, the qualified deposited weld metal thickness is "max to be welded". This

assumes only a single welder applying a single process is being considered. Note 1 points out

that multiple welders for the same coupon are only qualified to the extent of 2t for the weld

metal deposited by each welder with each process, and that these deposited weld metal thick

nesses need to be considered separately in the thickness column. I would also call your

attention to QW-351. It clearly states that a welder is qualified based upon the thickness ofweld metal deposited with each process.


19/54

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34. - Material marking - VIII Div 1Question: (1) Is UG-77 only applicable to plates ?Question: (2) Is Marking and traceability of materials (UG-94) for all other productforms than plates, is governed by the rules of UG-93(a)(2)?Answer:1. Only product form plate must be supplied with the complete marking per the material

specification. [UG-93(a)(1)]2. For all other product forms, Section VIII-1 would accept reduced marking containing

specification designation, including the grade/type/class as applicable. [UG-93(a)(2)].3. UG-77 applies to all material in the pressure vessel, independent of product form.

However, when employing a coded marking system to maintain trace ability of the material,

one only needs to be able to trace back to the original marking required by VIII-1; this means

the marking required by UG-93(a). This is stated in the 2nd sentence of UG-77(a).4. While UG-93 addresses receiving inspection, UG-77 only deals with material

identification and trace ability during fabrication. Why would we need trace ability to more

marking information during fabrication than what was needed at the time of receiving? I

recognize that UG-77 uses the phrase .original identification markings required in the

specifications, but I believe we have to apply the test of common sense when dictating what

amount of information we need to have trace ability to. Therefore, it is my opinion that for all

product forms other than plate, the Manufacturer need only retain trace ability of the material

to the original marking information required at the time of receipt inspection per UG-93.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35. - Small Nozzle attachments - Section VIII Div1Question: What about the legality of applying the attachment requirements of UW-16

(f)(3)(a) when attaching a nozzle made of pipe materials with a single fillet weld from the

outside only. Is this permitted by the Code?Response: This is not an appropriate paragraph to apply to a pipe nozzle. It is only intended

to apply to forged fittings with single fillet welds. The text of the paragraph refers only to

fittings, which is rather vague. Paragraph UW-16(e)(2) is a good fit for attaching such a

nozzle to the shell with fillet welding from the outside only. The following Interpretation

supports this application. This makes the weld sizing requirements a bit different, and

requires a pretty tight fitup.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36. - Welding Qualification RangesQuestion: What about the qualification ranges of QW-451.1 and QW-452.1? How do you

evaluate the qualified thickness range of a welder whose performance coupon was conducted

using a groove procedure for the full thickness of 3/4 inch base metal? The QW-452.1 table

seems to indicate that there is no maximum thickness limit on welder performance, but QW-

451.1 limits such a coupon to 2T (twice the coupon base metal thickness). What is correct? Response: Welder performance limitations and procedure performance limitations are not thesame. Qualfied welding occurs when the welding is conducted with the qualified range limits


20/54

of welder performance and the procedure qualification. When both are satisfied, everyone is

happy. While successfully welding a 3/4 inch test coupon qualifies the welder for a "maxium

to be welded" or "unlimited" base metal thickness, unless he has a procedure qualified for the

thickness of base metal he intends to weld, he cannot weld it and be in compliance with the

Code. Mixing the procedure and performance qualification limits unintentionally is the most

common problem associated with using Section IX.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37. - Welding Questions1: Question: Is it a necessity of qualifying a WPS for PWHT if the PWHT is applied as a

non-mandatory requirement (not Code required) to improve machine ability of the vessel?

Only a PWHT type heat application is intended, and not an annealing heat treatment.Answer: Application of PWHT is an essential variable for all welding processes per Section

IX of the Code. Since all the construction Codes require welding to be qualified per Section

IX (except where specified otherwise), this mandates the WPS to be qualified for thecondition of heat treatment applied to the production vessel to comply with the requirements.2: Question: What about welding operator's qualified welding position in the following

example? The issue is, a welding operator for SAW process was qualified on a 1G position.

The production weld in question was a groove weld with a cover fillet weld on a tubesheet-

to-shell weld welded on a rotated flat positioner. According to QW-461.9 and QW-461.2 of

Section IX, the cover fillet weld was deposited in a horizontal position, for which the welding

operator lacks qualification.Answer: To qualify for the production weld in question the welding operator, as minimum,

needs to pass a 2F or 2G position qualification test, or use the alternative rule in QW-305 by

examining the first 3ft of his production weld by radiography.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38. - "Coded markings" (Material) - UG-77(a), PG-77.2Question 1: Can one unique No. be assigned to steel plates of same specification but with

different heat Nos. ?Question 2: How about if the "plates" is substituted by "pipe or tube" in question one?Response:

1. No. When traceability to the original markings or to a material test report is required, a

coded marking must be unique for a given specification and heat number of a material. If the

plates are of different thickness but of the same specification and heat, a common code

marking may be applied. If two plates have the same specification but different heat numbers,

they must have separate coded markings.2. When material test reports are required, trace ability to the original markings is required.

When trace ability to the original markings or material test reports are not required. generic

marking identifying the material to a given specification is acceptable. For Section I

construction, it is generally understood that all pressure retaining materials require test

reports. For Section VIII, Division 1 test reports are only required for plate.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


21/54

39. - Section I double block valves & free blow drainsQuestion: What are the actual requirements for a double block and free blow arrangement on

the steam isolation valves for a multiple boiler arrangement. The situation is a building with

two boilers installed, and connected to a common header. One is a 300 horsepower unit thatis large enough to have a manway installed. The second is a 40 horse unit that does not have a

manway. The larger boiler has a double block and free blow arrangement on it's steam outlet.

The smaller only has double block valves, without the free blow. Is this acceptable per the

Code? What are the references for the requirements?Answer: Per Section I (PG-58.3.2) and B31.1 [122.1.7(A.3)]:"When two or more boilers are

connected to a common steam header, or when a single boiler is connected to a header having

another steam source (e.g., a turbine extraction line),the connection from each boiler having a

manhole opening shall be fitted with two stop valves having an ample free blow drain

between them." Double block valves with free blow drains are not specifically required for

boilers that do not have a manhole. The intent of this arrangement is for personnel safety. Asingle stop valve has never been considered an adequate safety barrier for OSHA lock out

and tag out requirements. If it were to leak, a person inside a boiler could be subjected to

steam intrusion. Double block valves help to prevent such an intrusion. Since both valves

may have some leakage, the free blow drain is required to be open so that if the first valve

leaks, it leaks to atmosphere and does not put pressure on the upstream side of the second

valve. There is no provision for such an arrangement when installing boilers without

manholes. The common practice of interpreting the Code is to consider it to be permissive

when silent, so long as such an interpretation follows good engineering judgment. Therefore

the smaller of the two boilers does not require a free blow drain. By the same reasoning, it

could not even require a second stop valve. However, the Code doesn't prohibit the described

arrangement. It is common for plant arrangements for the piping to have double valve

isolation capability for maintenance of equipment.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40. - Pressure Relief Requirements - VIII Div 1Question: What about the need to include something about the users' responsibility for relief

valves in the remarks section of Section VIII Data Reports? Answer: It is not required for the Manufacturer to supply the pressure relief devices as stated

in UG-125(a) and as supported by the Interpretation below:

Interpretation: VIII-78-129Subject: Section VIII, Division 1, UG-134, Pressure Relief ValvesDate Issued: October 4, 1978File: BC-78-583Question (1): What are the requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 pertaining to set pressure

of pressure relief devices on vessels storing liquefied compressed gases and which satisfy the

conditions of UG-125(c)(3)?Reply (1): Such relief devices may be set in accordance with UG-125(c)(3)(b) and UG-134including the special provisions of UG-134(e)(2).


22/54

Question (2): Is it required that the vessel Manufacturer furnish the pressure relieving

device(s) prescribed by UG-125(a)?Reply (2): No. Footnote 31 indicates that safety devices need not be provided by the vessel

Manufacturer, but overpressure protection shall be provided prior to placing the vessel inservice. Applicable urisdictional requirements should be reviewed to determine limitations

which may be different or more restrictive than the Code rules referenced in Question (1). There are no requirements for the Manufacturer to provide any specific information regarding

the incorporation of pressure relief devices (PRD) on the data report other than to identify the

PRD opening provided on the vessel if an opening is so designated [see note 41 in Table W-3

of Appendix W]. If the purchaser has not designated any opening as being specifically

provided for the attachment of a PRD, then sometimes the Manufacturer will put a statement

in the remarks something like "Pressure relief protection external to the vessel". This

indicates that the vessel is intended to be protected from overpressure by devices installed

within the piping or other system connections to which the vessel is attached. Theresponsibility for the correct installation of the PRDs is the responsibility of the vessel user as

stated in UG-125(a). Since users do not always have Code books, it is a good idea for the

Manufacturer to alert the user to this requirement in any installation and operating

instructions he may provide. The Jurisdiction will sometimes provide this information, but in

states which do not have a Pressure Vessel law, this may not be the case.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 41. -Section VIII Div 1 - seamless head "Quality Factor - E" Seamless Head "Quality Factor",

UW-11(a)(b)Question: Customer inquired about the subject quality factor. He has a vessel with a single

course shell with a Category A double butt weld seam and a seamless head on both ends. The

head-to-shell joints are double butt Category B welds. The shell Category A weld was spot

RT'd per UW-11(b) and UW-52, hence he used E=0.85 for the shell (circumferential stress)

thickness calculation (UG-27). The question was, what is the examination required in order to

use an E=1.0 (in the UG-32 head formula) for the seamless head thickness calculation?Answer: The reference is UW-11(a)(5)(b) which requires a spot RT per UW-52 on the

Category B head-to-shell joint and also the flow charts in Appendix L, p 525.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42. - Welding Position Section IX, QW-461.9Question: A welding operator for SAW process was qualified on a 1G position. The

production weld was a groove weld with a cover fillet weld on tubesheet-to-shell weld

welded on a rotated flat position. Is the welding operator qualified for the production weld

positions?Answer: According to QW-461.9 and QW-461.2 of Section IX and the sketch supplied by the

contractor, the cover fillet weld was deposited in a horizontal position, for which the welding

operator lacks the qualification. To qualify for the production weld in question the welding

operator, as minimum, needs to pass a 2F or 2G position qualification test, or use thealternative rule in QW-305 by examining the first 3ft of his production weld by radiography.


23/54

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 43. - VIII Div 1 - UW-13 head to shell alignmentQuestion: What if the vessel head to shell joint offset differs by more than 1/4 the

thickness of the thinner section or by more than 1/8", then does the subject par. apply,otherwise, the joint shall be evaluated by UW-33? Is this correct? Response: If the situation is similar to that shown in UW-13(b)(3). This paragraph describes

the requirements for a joint depicted in Figure UW-13.1 Sketches (l),(m),(n), and (o).

Sketches (l) and (m) are when the shell is thicker than the head, Sketches (n) and (o) are

when the head is thicker than the shell. Here is what the essence of the requirements are. If

one element has a thickness that is greater the other element (regardless of which one is the

thicker element), by more than the lesser of 1/4t (where t is the thickness of the thinner

element) or 1/8 inch, a mandatory tapered transition between the different thicknesses is

required. This taper shall be at a 3:1 ratio. The reference point for the taper is the tangent

point of the head knuckle. The tangent point is where the head acts more like a shell than ahead under stress analysis. The shell shall have the minimum required thickness on it's side of

this point, and the head shall have it's minimum required thickness on it's side of this point.

Material may be added to either element to achieve the transition taper as needed. But,

material may not be removed from these elements reducing either below the minimum

required thickness on their respective sides of the tangent point.Example: A thick head is attached to a thinner shell. The head has a straight flange beyond

the tangent point. The required thickness of the straight flange in the area between the tangent

point and the attachment where it meets the shell is the required thickness for the shell. Since

it does not have the same required thickness as the head in this area, some of the excess

material may be removed to achieve the transition taper. Therefore, the straight flange may be

tapered to accomplish the required transition. If the difference in thickness is less than the

lesser of 1/4t (where t is the thickness of the thinner element) or 1/8 inch, no transition taper

is required. Centerline misalignment is controlled as well to limit a differential bending

moment across the joint around the circumference.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44. - QW-202.4 Combination WeldingQuestion: If welder welds a test coupon that is 1-1/2 inches thick, using two different welding

processes (GTAW and SMAW) for a deposited weld metal thickness of 3/4 inch for each,what are the limits of qualification for this coupon for procedure and performance? Is it

possible for the welder to weld the coupon in more than one position, say 2G and 3G, and get

benefit for both in qualification limits?Response: Question 1: Qualified Procedures may be used in combination, or a single

procedure with multiple processes may be qualified. If applying the situation as described,

the limits of qualification are:Procedure: Base metal thickness: 3/16 to 8 inches; Weld metal thickness: GTAW and

SMAW both qualified for 8" max (if 3/4" min. deposited)Performance: Weld metal thickness: GTAW and SMAW both qualified for "Max to be

welded"


24/54

Question 2: The coupon could be partially welded in one position and then another position,

with the qualified weld metal thickness limits for each position based on the actual weld

metal thickness deposited in each position. Example: Same coupon described as above. Weld

in 2G position with 3/8" GTAW and 3/8" SMAW, change the position to 3G and weld 3/8"

GTAW and 3/8" SMAW again. If the coupon successfully passes the required tests, the

welder would be qualified to weld in 1G, 2G, or 3G using GTAW and SMAW with aqualified deposited weld metal thickness of 3/4" maximum for each position. Only the first

process (GTAW) would be qualified without backing, and then only in 2G and 1G. SMAW

would be qualified with backing only in positions 1G, 2G, and 3G. GTAW is qualified in 3G

with backing only.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 45. Material CertificationQuestion about a material acceptability issue. The shop rolled and welded a shell out of

ASME Material, and documented their work on an ASME Partial Data Report. The shell was

received by the purchaser, who was sent a copy of the Material Test Report (MTR) alongwith the Partial Data Report. They were balking at accepting the part, because the MTR had a

different Edition and Addenda for the material specification than the Current Edition and

Addenda as listed on the Partial Data Report. Is this a problem? Response: Editions and Addenda's do not apply to Material Specifications. ASME Materials

are always acceptable as ASME Materials. If the newly published specification has more

restrictive requirements than the material was manufactured to, this needs to be evaluated. If

the material has an ASTM Specification date on it, this can be checked against Appendix A

of the Section II, Part A book for acceptability of the date code. If only designated with an

ASME Specification number, it is acceptable under that specification. This is addressed in the

Foreword of the Code books, where it discusses Addenda, and states "Revision, except for

revisions to material specifications in Section II, Parts A and B, become mandatory six

months after the date of issuance,". It is the intent of this statement to specifically exempt

the material specifications from the Addenda mandatory implementation date. New materials

shall always be ordered against the current Code requirements, but materials in inventory are

acceptable under their material designation if ASME Spec material.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 46. Welder Continuity and QualificationQuestion: A welder that was an employee before, left the company and went to weld foranother firm, and then came back. The period away from the company was greater than six

months. The first company (original qualifier) wanted to reinstate the welder as fully

qualified, based upon a phone conversion with the interim employer stating that the welder

had been continuously welding. Is this acceptable?Response: This is not in keeping with the letter or intent of the Code. Welder qualifications

are specific to an employer, unless a pooled qualification scheme has been applied as stated

in QW-300.2 of Section IX. A pooled qualification scheme does not appear to be the case

here. The welder's continuity gap with a specific employer exceeds six months, requiring re-

qualification under the provisions of QW-322.1. The re-qualification is very simple, requiring

the welder to weld only one coupon with a given process per QW-322.2(a). If the couponpasses the requirements of QW-301 and 302, the welder is fully reinstated in that process for


25/54

all of his previous qualification ranges. The test may be a simple as a spot RT on a production

weld, or two bend tests on a test coupon. This can be done for all processes previously

qualified. For those processes not previously qualified, or when the qualifications have been

revoked for cause per QW-322.1(b), full qualification tests are required.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 47. - Section VIII Div 1 - "Low Temperature Vessel"Question: What defines a "low temperature service" vessel? If a vessel is considered a low

temperature service vessel, what requirements are to be met?Response: All of the following are considered to be "low temperature service" vessels:1. Vessels made of Part UCS materials with an MDMT of colder than 55F and have a

coincident ratio of greater than 0.35, as set forth in UCS-68(a).2. Vessels made of Part UHA materials that require impact testing of the base metal or weld

metal per the rules of UHA-51.3. Vessels fabricated under the rules of Part ULT of Section VIII, Division 1. For vessels in categories (1) or (2) above, the provisions of UW-2(b) must be met. These

provisions limit weld joint of specific Categories to a specific joint type. Vessels in category

(3) above need to meet the requirements of Part ULT.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 48. - Calibration of pressure gaugesQuestion: What is ASME's policy is with respect to the calibration of pressure gauges for:* New construction pressure testing (non nuclear)* In-service pressure testing and testing and setting of safety valves. (NBIC) (Boilers, air

receivers, pressure equipment generally)Is it required that these pressure gauges to be traceably calibrated back to a national standard?Answer: The AI is required to verify that the Manufacturer follows their QC Manual, which

is in line with our role as an Authorized Inspection Agency. The QC Manual is written in

accordance with the applicable sections of the Code that the fabricator deals with. Each of

the ASME Non-nuclear Boiler & Pressure Vessel Codes has specific paragraphs regarding

calibration of test equipment. Essentially they say it has to be done and traceability

maintained but do not specify a standard. For example, Section VIII, Division 1, UG-102(c)

states "All pressure gages shall be calibrated against a standard dead weight tester or a

calibrated master gage. Gages shall be recalibrated at any time that there is reason to believethat they are in error." Except for Section VIII, Division 2 & 3, which require recalibration

every 6 months, there are no references to frequency or specific standards. Section III

(nuclear) requires recalibrating before each test or series of test (anything within 2 week

period). Although it is not specifically stated in any of the code books, it is commonly

understood and industry practice that the Manufacturers use some nationally recognized

standard for calibration and how the records/certifications can be traced back to the standard

and state so in the QC Manual. This national standard that is used may be one established by

the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or any other agency recognized

by a government as a standards organization (i.e., they may use NIST, DIN, JIS, etc.). I

believe the ASME changed this so that it was not nation specific (restraint of free trade and

all that). In-service testing would be the same. The requirement would be included in theowner's or repair organization's QC manual. As far as testing/setting of safety valves this


26/54

would fall under the Valve Repair organization's manual. Again this would reference a

specific national standard and some frequency for recalibration.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 49. Tube hole deburring - Section IVQuestion: What about requirements to deburring tube holes in Section IV boiler

construction. The tube to header attachme

ASME General 100 Questions

Documents

Transcript of ASME General 100 Questions