I am devloping a PQR for temper beading per ASME requirements. This method is allowed by the 2007 version of Section IX. Has anyone been through a PQR yet? We understand the practice and theory of temper bead as we have used it before but I am having difficulty with understanding what tests are required.
My need for this method is mostly related to crack repair of very heavy (2-inch thick and sometimes thicker) castings and forgings (typically by GTAW unless excavation is enormous), so can I still qualify based on a V-groove plate test on wrought material?
QW-290.5 for required tests is not very clear. I know we need bend tests and I will do Charpy's. Why is there no mention of tensile tests?
This paragraph (QW-290.5) talks about various hardness determinations but I cannot understand what is wanted - do we grind off layers and record hardness at various depths? If so, how many?
Help wanted!!!!Thankyou.
By 803056 
Date 11-15-2007 19:14
Edited 11-15-2007 19:17
Hello Tom;
What is the base metal you are welding?
Based on my recollection, the temper bead technique can be used (when qualified) if it is permitted by your construction code in place of a full post weld heat treatment. If the completed weldment is not required to be PWHT, the temper bead technique isn't an issue.
I don't have 2007 edition of Section IX, so I'll leave the rest to someone more knowledgeable than me, but my experience is the test regiment isn't affected, you have simply changed the PWHT (an essential variable), thus you have to qualify the procedure to demonstrate the mechanical properties (including impact testing if required) meet the code requirements.
As for the reason to perform hardness testing, it would stand to reason that you are trying to determine the microstructure of the weld and associated HAZ. High hardness would indicate a martensitic or bainetic microstructure.
Best regards - Al
You're right Tom, the language in QW-290.5 is an absolute mess, specifically for me, QW290.5 (c) (1) and (2). Which I believe is the source of your confusion. I'm sure it seems quite clear to those on the committee but to someone not involved in the voluminous debates that have taken place over the introduction of this technique to Section IX its almost Greek.
A Figure demonstrating this would go a long way towards clarification in my opinion. But I bet this was proposed and for whatever reason was rejected. Probably due to a huge diversity of applicaitons and a concern that a figure might make it even worse. Not sure thats possible. I think a Figure would at least orient the language. And the definitions section is little help.
However, in answer to your first question QW290.1 is actually pretty clear and refers you to QW 202. Thats where your tensile reference is.
Also, it sounds to me like standard hardness traverses and with 0.010" spreads on indent locations. I'm just not clear on the orientation and exact location of the traverses.
Hope this helps a little. I like Al, will admit to having to defer to more understanding authorities.
This hardness test section really seems to be the only difficult section. Unfortunately it is also one of the most critical.
QW-462.12 provides an illustration of the terminology of fill layers and temper bead layers. Variable QW-410.58 references the figure, but it sounds like some additional words in QW-290.5 referencing the figure would help. I just sent a note to the sponsor of the temper bead changes to let him know of the issue.
Marty,
Good idea to refer to QW-462.12 Figures in QW-290.5. I'll send it in.
Walt
Tom,
Take a look at QW-290.1. The assumption at the beginning of QW-290 is that you start with a WPS is that is already qualified, altough you can do the full qualification on the TB coupon if you want/need to. When an existing WPS is upgraded by welding an addtiional test coupon, you have to use the same essential and supplementary essential variables as on the original test coupon when you weld the new coupon for TB qualification. On that coupon, you need to do bend tests plus either impacts or hardness testing.
Walt Sperko
It's about time you signed up for the forum to share your sage wisdom!!! Good to see ya here Walt!
Let me put my two cents here in on Walts input. I know Walt is an extremely busy individual but his input here would be a tremendous assett to the forum, and I am thrilled to see his name here.
Hello Walter;
Its good to see you jump in and lend your expertise to the forum. It increases our body of knowledge by an order of magnitude (or two). Now those asking questions can really get the answers they are looking for.
You are held in the highest regard by me and everyone that knows you or has heard of you. Welcome aboard.
Best regards - Al
Thanks Folks- Reference to the QW-462.12 does answer most of my confusion;
Walter-
Thanks for your take on the "assumption" of QW-290, all of a sudden I can now read things differently. By the way, I have been to your site several times and appreciate your paper on "Exploring Temper Bead", which is where I learned most about the subject.
Regards.
