I want to qualify WPS under Third Party Inspection. Only problem is that I don't have supplier's certificate for Base metal & Filler metal. Is it enough to carry out lab testing for Chemical Analysis and Tensile Test for Base Metal to confirm that it is conforming to required ASTM grade, & Chemical Analysis for Filler Metal to confirm that it is confirming to required SFA grade.

Will it satisfy Third Party Inspector ? If not then what is the alternate ?

Dear yash,

In your place, I would spend some time to research the Code requirements. Here are some hints.

UW-28(b): WPS shall be qualified per Section IX.
QW-211: The base metals may consist of either plate, pipe, or other product form.
UG-93(a)(1): for plates you need to have the material test report (MTR) of certificate of compliance. In your case you may re-certify the plate material per UG-10. It may be more expensive than to by a new material.
UG-93(a)(2): for pipes Section VIII-1 does not require MTR. So, you may use a pipe material without MTR on condition it is identified per Sect. IIA or IIB.
UG-9: For welding materials, Sect. VIII-1 does not require MTR when marked in compliance with Sect. IIC. If you have a complete marking on your welding materials containers or spools you are in compliance with Sect. VIII-1.

It is all about time and money. If you can not receive MTR from your material supplier (which is pretty unusual) I would recommend buying a new material.

Thanks,

Yash,

Before the reply of AI-or-us can be applied, let me ask:

- what is the Construction Code?
- Is ASME Section IX applied?
- Why a 3rd party inspector?
- What is the COMPLETE material marking
- what is the Filler material marking?


When we are talking only Section IX, the test coupon material or the filler material does not require a MTR or CMTR.

The material marking by the Material Manufacturer is the certification of compliance to the material specification, which is sufficient to select the assigned P and Group no. from QW-422.
Plate marked with the mill stamp and the spec, e.g. SA-516Gr70 MT Heat1234 test987 does not need an MTR.
The same applies to a piece of pipe with Mfr's stamp and SA-106M GrB heat no 12345 pipe no66 Test Pressure 17MPA, 4NPS SCH 80 length 6m. Perfectly right, no certificate needed.

The welding material is certified by the marking of the package and the material itself.
When an electrode is marked E7018 and the package is carrying all the information required in SFA-5.1 (Mfr name, trademark, SFA-5.1 E7018, lot no, heat no, net weight, diameter, length, warning label) why need a certificate?

If your electrode is not marked, or your material carries only suspicious marking, like "warehouse stamp, A-106 Heat 1234" the material is not worth to be used, or paid for, it is just uncontrolled.

DK

@ AI-or-us,

I understand that Yash only wants to qualify the WPS. His third party inspector sounds like it is not an AI.

Your stated Code paragraphs on plate and pipe material apply to materials used in the vessel fabrication.
In my opinion they do not apply to the test coupons for the PQR, right?

In my life as an Inspector I did not even look at the MTRs for the PQR coupons. But I checked traceability to the original mill marking.

DK

Thank Dr. Koelbi / AI-OR-US for your interest,

I am giving specific details. The process is brazing. BPS is to be qualified as per section IX, for butt braze joint of copper tubes. The tubes will be ussed in Air cooled chiller.

Base material is copper seamless pipe (ASTM B 68). It does not carry marking, but the bundle was having sticker of manufacturer with material grade ASTM B 68, Alloy 12200, Heat No., Mfg. Date, Mfg. Company name etc. I have no certificate from supplier, since they are genuine and big supplier, but only give this much information. I have successfully got it tested in independent lab for confirming chemical and mechanical properties of ASTM B68.

Filler material is rectangular BCuP-2 brazing rod, not having marking on itself. I don't have its certificate, since it has been purchased from a trader. I have successfully got it tested in independent lab for confirming chemical properties of BCuP-2.

Third party inspection is only required to prove its authenticity, as generally required by many clients.

Please send your suggestions.

Yash,

What you are writing sounds cool and well-documented. I would not hesitate to present this to an Inspector.

Being an Inspector myself, I would accept it. The bundle-tag of the pipe is as good as a MTR.

Have fun.
DK

Many Many Thaks, Dr. Koelbi