Welcome to UKWelder Welding Caps Welding Helmets Pioner Overalls Welding Gloves
UKWelder Shop
Welding Hoods Welding Leathers Welding Helmet Spares Welding Boots

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Join the Forum )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
post Feb 25 2019, 05:44 PM
Joined: 24-May 13

Have a bit of a stand off with the client and the welding contractor, and would be grateful of some quick advise.
The clients engineer (He's not a welding engineer) is insisting on the WPS as having the same batch number for the consumables as what was used on the PQR.
Filler metal series G for an onshore project.
This will no doubt mean that when the batch of consumables is exhausted, that a new PQR is ran and WPS raised.
Working to ASME B31.8 & API 1104

Anyone ever ran into this before and any guidance on the way to a solution.

Technic Al
post Mar 3 2019, 03:31 PM
Joined: 14-Oct 03

Yes we (Lincoln Electric) used to produce batches destined for one customer. Depending on the batch definition I think I remember it could be as much as 45 tonnes of consumable. We would do full suite of tests on that batch but that was before the WPS was tested....its a bit late after the event......AWS / ASME publish a set of different batch definitions in one of their documents (I think its 5.01 but one of the QA men on here will probably know better.

PS that was about 10 years ago before I left Lincoln.....but I expect its still the same

This post has been edited by Technic Al: Mar 3 2019, 03:32 PM
post Mar 5 2019, 10:57 PM
Joined: 9-Dec 07

Is impact testing of the PQR required as per B31.8 or API 1104 ?
If so this is applicable

QW-404.12 A change in the filler metal classification
within an SFA specification, or for a filler metal not covered
by an SFA specification or a filler metal with a “G”
suffix within an SFA specification, a change in the trade
designation of the filler metal.

This is a non-essential variable:

QW-404.33 A change in the filler metal classification
within an SFA specification, or, if not conforming to a filler
metal classification within an SFA specification, a change
in the manufacturer’s trade name for the filler metal.

IMHO a change in batch numbers of the same type of electrode does not require requalification of the PQR,
post Mar 6 2019, 11:47 AM
Joined: 9-Dec 07

It is always better to just ask the engineer to quote where the requirement is ?
You jump on an internet forum without the relevant information and it is very hard for anyone to assist.
As an example - the requirement for a change in electrode batch may well be in your project specifications (or some other contract document you may not have access to).
So, you have wasted your time posting and I have wasted my time responding.
post Mar 11 2019, 11:38 AM
Joined: 9-Dec 07

If someone takes the time to try and assist you it is polite to respond.
Otherwise they will not bother next time you have a question / query !!!
post Apr 5 2019, 09:23 AM
Joined: 24-May 13

Ballbearing / Technical Al,

Sorry for the delay in responding, was not intentional and your reply's are much appreciated.

Again, thanks for the reply's guy's.
Far Canal
post Apr 5 2019, 06:31 PM
Joined: 19-Jun 07

It is quite common in the oil & gas industry for welding consumables to be batch specific.
If that is the case for your project that does not mean you have to run a new PQR and raise a new WPS when your consumables have been exhausted.
You only need to do a batch test which is usually just an all weld tensile test, a set of weld metal impacts and hardness test.
You can keep using the same WPS with a new batch after a successful batch test provided the batch test has been run in accordance with the qualified WPS

This post has been edited by Far Canal: Apr 5 2019, 06:32 PM
Go to the top of the page
Start new topicGo to the top of the page
Click on the Lion to return to the homepage Click on the Lion to return to the homepage