What cert for wellheads?

Date 03-28-2011 04:52

I do not work in the oil patch, but I was under the impression that API 1104 could be applicable to most of the piping, tanks, and machinery associated with the production of crude petroleum products. Then again, based on some of the discussions we've had here in the forum, many people appear to be quite proud to say they don't work to a particular welding standard. Their position is that working to a recognized industry welding standard isn't "real world" and only impedes production and profits.

“We don’t need no stinkin certification! Only sissy welders are certified!” :wink:

What’s your take Cactus? You have plenty of experience in the oil patch. You are in a better position than some of us regarding such matters. What welding standard does apply?

Best regards - Al

By jarcher (**)

Date 03-28-2011 12:37

I do work in the patch. FYI wellheads are governed by API 6A. What 6A will tell you is that welding on wellheads is according to ASME. API 1104 pertains primarily to transmission pipeline and associated compression stations. As a general rule of thumb, any pressure containing structure (subsea equipment, wellheads, various other valves and manifolds) are usually considered to most appropriately fall under ASME.

By 803056

Date 03-28-2011 14:23

Good to know.

Does API 6A reference a specific ASME construction code, i.e., Section VIII, B31.3, etc.?

I've always said there is something new to learn everyday if you keep your eyes and ears open.

Forgive my insolence with regards to not needing a "certification"; it is my way of getting the mud stirred up and the ball rolling. There are more than a few people with a working knowledge of the subject being discussed that are happy to sit back without sharing the information they have until their sensibilities have been tickled by a few words of sarcasm. Nothing gets folks to participate like a few words that succeed in getting their blood pressure up a notch or two.

Anyone that has participated in the forum for a while can recollect some of the comments made by a few folks that regularly work the oil patch. Their comments served as the basis for my remarks regarding the failure to observe, or compliance with, any particular welding code or standard in the oil patch.

It is good to know that there are some enlightened people that at least question whether there is a need to be qualified to weld in the oil patch. However, the tone of the question can easily lead one to suspect these lads have welded in the oil patch without the benefit of being certified or at the very least, those individuals asking the question have been “certified” to different welding standards.

Even now, we don’t have a definitive answer to what welding standard the welders are supposed to be qualified to. I can well imagine the design and fabrication of the wellhead components may have to comply with an ASME construction code, but that does not address the field welding of the wellhead or maintenance of the equipment once it is in the field. I mention this because my recollection is that the API supersedes most of the ASME construction codes once the equipment is in the field. Details, details, details.

Once again, I do not work in the oil patch, so I freely admit I am not the person to be responding to such questions. I just thought that asking a few more questions might provide us with a little more enlightenment about this subject. The information may be useful to a number of forum members that may have an interest in working in the oil (and gas) patch considering the recent upsurge in activity in that industrial sector.

Best regards - Al

By jarcher (**)

Date 03-29-2011 02:22

AFAIK, Al nothing in API points towards a specific construction code, which makes some sense when you think about it. API specs (specs not RP's) are construction codes in themselves. Usually they will give very detailed instructions about all the various operations in construction of whatever the specification covers as, for example, choke and kill connectors (a type of valve) in API 16C. Like section VIII, 16C lays out acceptable and prohibited aspects of building a choke and kill connection just as Section VIII does for unfired pressure vessels. LOL, Al, I grew up in household where Don Rickles and Jackie Leonard were the favorite comedians, no offense taken.

By 803056

Date 03-29-2011 03:32

Now I'm confused. I thought you said API 6A references ASME. Did I miss something? I thought API 6A would reference Section VIII for design and Section IX for qualification of the welding procedures and welders. If that iswn't the case, how does ASME come into play.

See, the initial simple question leads us down a winding path. Where does it take us? Let's see what happens when we pull on this little thread.

Best regards - Al

By jarcher (**)

Date 03-29-2011 23:56

"Now I'm confused. I thought you said API 6A references ASME. Did I miss something? I thought API 6A would reference Section VIII for design and Section IX for qualification of the welding procedures and welders. If that iswn't the case, how does ASME come into play."

Welding is governed according to ASME Section IX, the construction of a wellhead is according to API 6A. IOW the API code is the construction code when building a wellhead to API standards.

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 13:17 Edited 03-29-2011 13:21

Al, Most of us doing this work, Have a stack of certs. One of many will cover this area. However, It is the ENERGY COMPANIES responsibility to set up and enforce their proceedure. Thing is, They don't do it, nor do they care. I have set heads in many States. Not one energy Company has ask for papers or required a Test. The only "TEST" you will see on a Wellhead is a Nitrogen Test when you are finished Welding it. Pressure up to 1500 PSI and hold it for 10 minutes. If it doesn't Leak. You get a check Sorry I didn't respond as fast as some would have liked, But Myself, Ronnie Taylor and Johnnie Walker are runnig 7-days a week, 12=16 hrs a day right now. I hope this shed a little light. I am not an Inspector, so I will not get into a argument over Chapter and Verse. Reminds me of a discussion on Religion. Bottm line Question is this (For The Inspectors) If any Energy Company ask you to do a Job, And you do it, Without Papers, Who's fault is it if something goes wrong ?

By 803056

Date 03-29-2011 14:38 Edited 03-29-2011 14:40

Fault and responsibility are like water, they both run downhill.

The law suits start with the owner, then general contractor, and onward down the line until the subcontractor that did the work is involved.

I've said it before and I'll repeat it again, "no one cares until someone gets hurt." Then all hell breaks loose.

As they say, "ignorance is no defense when the crap hits the fan." Even when you have all your documentation in order, you are still responsible for the work performed, but with the proper documentation you are guilty of "poor workmanship." Poor workmanship isn't a criminal offence. The criminal offence, i.e., no documentation, can mean jail time for the offender. In either case, it is going to be very expensive by the time the dust settles.

I am currently an expert witness in a case where the contractor supplied substitute components without the approval of the Engineer. The suit is now up to something like $700K. The contractor saved himself a couple of days on delivery time for the raw material and maybe $1500 for the total job. Now his business is at risk because he got greedy and provided inferior materials. It is fortunate that no one was injured by the failure.

This leads me to another subject. I often though one component of the CWI's training should include a mock trial where everything the CWI did is called into question and the individual has to justify what was done to ensure the requirements of the project specification and the applicable code were met. Everything the CWI does on a project can have serious consequences. Some CWIs do not understand the consequences of "bending" the requirements of the code to be a "nice" guy or in an effort to make the "customer" happy. A mock trial can be the tool to alert the prospective inspector of the importance of the inspector's job.

Best regards - Al

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 15:14 Edited 03-29-2011 15:33

Well, Let me re-word the Question. If I have the Proper Certs, And they don't ask for them, When something goes wrong, I am covered. Right ? All a Energy Company wants to know is, Do you have enough Insurance and "Over The Hole" Can you list them as addtional Insured ? The Insurance Companies RARELY ask for Certs. All they want to know is, When will you send a Check. I recently had a Energy Companiy ask me to do ALL the Work for thier "Nipple up" This included Conductor Pipe TinHorn, Bell Nipple, Primary and Secondary Head. Cutting the LongString and setting Slips. This is the Rig I posted Ronnie Welding the Head On. Now with all this said. I have the Proper Certs, Whatever they may be. I have a Stack of them. Big Deal. All the Papers says, AT 1 Point in your Life, You were good enough to pass a Test. Can you do it day after day ? I also have a National AWS Cert that the were all required to get in Austin. All it is, is a Cert thart has your Picture like a Drivers Liscense. This thing Cost about 800 bucks and w Weld Test, Either Pipe or Plate, and all that it takes to renew it is a Statement From ANY Employer saying that you have welded in the Lest 6 Months. Send in you 15 dollars and BAM ! National AWS Cert for another 6 Months ! Back to the Rig. I did all this work Scattered over about 5 Days with other Jobs in Between. I invoiced them for a Little over $12,000.00 The Insurance they ask for cost about $6,500.00 Per year for a 5 Million Umbrella. I had the Job done before the Insurance made it to their office. How does that work ?

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 15:33 Edited 03-29-2011 15:43

Great question Cactus.. But only answerable in court when the rubber meets the road.

Certs. a welder may carry are valueless in most codes unless/until the contractors representative approves them for production. Even parties who are technically "right" suffer when they must defend themselves. But some welders are employees and others are private contractors, obligations/responsibilities for the same work.. I suspect you have served as both.

It may or may not be apples and oranges but in my aerospace experience as well as experience as an expert wittness for catistrophic failures and personal injury, everybody involved is going to have to defend themselves at great expense.

I guess my question to you Cactus.. Why in your opinion do the gas companies "not care" about qualifying welders to do the well head work, when at other operations they take great care to dot the I's and cross the T's.. Not asking you to speak for them.. But you do know alot of folks and I bet you have an opinion.

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 15:45 Edited 03-30-2011 00:01

That is a Good Question as well. You would have to spend some time on a Location to Understand it. When a Welder is called out to the Rig, HE IS GOD ! NOTHING matters exept " Help The Welder and Get him out of here. When they call you, You are ALREADY late and you will NEVER catch up. They loose time and BIG money when not turning to the Right.Same as Setting a Head. Where else in Lifecan you run a 7018, 1 Flat pass and 1 Overhead pass, and get paid $125.00 per inch and $70-$80 dollars an hr Wait time? All a Rig cares About is HURRY UP. The Key issue is......... We dont care how you do it, Just get it done fast. If you take to long, Your Done. If you were to stop and Ask for Procedures and Test and an Inspector ans all the othere things that go with it, Your done in the Oilfield. That is they main Reason Energy Companies will hire you by a Referral or Previous Work with them only. I know this sounds a bit far fetched, But MANY here who work in the Patch will tell you the same. When ever I have a Liability to Expose me, I have an Engineer with a Few PHD'S in the Oilfield as well as Welding and CWI' that work for him. If I need them, I call, Even His Office will tell you that Weld Prcedures in the Feild are unheard of, Unless it is a Derrick or Sub like I am doing now. We are ALL certified to weld Derricks. Take Patterson UTI for Example in their Yard in Tyler Texas. They run as high as 225 Rig Welders. I think, right now, They have about 75. The only Test ANY of them took is a Drug Test. And Many Cheated at that !

By 803056

Date 03-29-2011 15:51

When you say proper paperwork, I assume you mean you have qualified welding procedure specifications as well as welder performance qualifications (certifications) in accordance with the appropriate welding standards.

However, that is the question. What is the appropriate welding standard? Is ASME Section IX or API 1104 applicable to the welding of the wellhead?

I assumed that the applicable standard would be API 1104. John's response indicated I am in error (not my first mistake by the way) and indicated API 6A applies. Whether API 6A references ASME or API is an open question. I do not have a copy of API 6A, so I don't know what it refers to for procedure or performance qualification.

The bottom line is that I don't know which or what welding standards apply. I was hoping you would chime in with the answer to the initial question since you do work in the oil patch and probably know more about API and the oil and gas sectors.

I would also volunteer the opinion that the welding contractor should ask the engineering/energy company what welding standard is applicable even if they do not ask for copies of your documentation. They could easily be playing dumb and state that you as the contractor should be familiar with industry practices should something go wrong. They could use the ploy of being the victim of an unqualified contractor if something goes bang in the middle of the night and try to pass off all the responsibility to the contractor.

I don't have to tell you that as the owner of the company, you shoulder a lot of responsibilities. You have a responsibility to protect yourself, your employees, and your company. You need to know what codes are applicable and your insurance carrier wants to know as well. Both you and the insurance company needs to know so they can provide the proper insurance coverage. Most insurance policies have provisions that exclude certain types of work and they are detailed as to what they do cover.

This has turned into a interesting conversation that started with a simple question; "What welder certifications are required to weld on a wellhead?"

I don't believe we have an answer yet.

Best regards - Al

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 15:58 Edited 03-29-2011 16:01

I see it like Lawrence presented it. A procedure is Worthless unless a Company Steps up to Qualify it to THEIR Job. I have Papers for Chesapeake. They dont cover me while welding a Head for XTO. XTO MUST supply a Procedure and the Applicable test if they Require it. So, the Question Remains ? IS there an Applicable Procedure if NO ONE qualifies it to a Particuler Weld ?

By 803056

Date 03-29-2011 16:28

I know of no welding code or standard that does not place the responsibility of developing the welding procedure (qualifying it if necessary) squarely on the shoulders of the contractor performing the welding.

API, ASME, and AWS require the contractor performing the welding to develop their own procedures. In most cases the codes do not allow one contractor to use the WPSs developed by a different contractor unless both contractors are part of the same organization. It boils down to a question of legal liability.

Even in the case of standard welding procedure specifications purchased from AWS, the contractor has to sign the procedure accepting all responsibility for the WPS and the work performed using it.

The question isn't about the WPSs; it is what welding code is applicable to the work performed. There can be no welding procedures or performance qualifications until it is established what welding standard is imposed by the project specification or some legal requirement established by a governmental body that has jurisdiction.

I would not be surprised to find out that there is a legal requirement established by federal law that has jurisdiction over such matters as the design and fabrication of components used in exploration and production wells. The question remains, what welding code or standard is applicable. Only after it has been established that a particular welding code or standard is required, can one address the requirements for the qualification of welding procedures and welders.

I would venture to say that it is unlikely that AWS would be applicable since for the most part AWS welding standards and codes do not apply to pressurized components. That leaves both API and ASME as contenders. I would not be surprised to find ASME referenced for the design and fabrication of the components, but the welding of such components once it leaves the manufacturing facility is still in question. ASME Section IX or API 1104 may still be viable welding standards for qualifying the procedures and welders.

The answer to the original question still eludes us.

Best regards - Al

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 16:55

I will call one of the Well Head Manufacturers and ask them

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 17:16

OK. I HAVE A DEFINITE ANSWER ! According to the Lead Welding Engineer at Cameron and Seaborne Well Heads, API USED To have a Recommended Practice that reffered back to ASME. there is nothing about it anymore according to the manufacturer. He says there are to many Varibles like, Materials used etc.... Like I thought, The Pressure test is all that is required

By 803056

Date 03-29-2011 19:21

If that is the case, whether or not a WPS or a qualified welder is required is still an open issue.

What I like is a definative conclusion and a water tight answer to a problem.

We have neither in this case.

I do like the idea of going back to the supplier for an answer though. Good job Cactus.

Best regards - Al

By 99205

Date 03-30-2011 06:59

Ok, now here is something that has bouncing around in my head about the Independent Contractor. If and Independent Contractor is hired to weld then is that Independent Contractor ultimately responsible for having proper procedures and paperwork squared away before that Independent strikes an arc? It seems that the lawyers could point at the Independent as the "Contractor" responsible for procedures and testing. Maybe I'm thinking too deep into this.

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-30-2011 08:55

I have NEVER seen a situation as to were a Welder or Welding Contractor was responsible for a Procedure. According to the Manufacturer, there are no procedures for field work,

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 03-30-2011 13:33 Edited 03-30-2011 14:32

Ok since Al is like a dog with a bone on this one, I'm gonna help him ganw on you ... Heh

Since when do Manufacturers determine what code is used (or not used) on petrolium pressure vessles and pipes?

You mentioned earlier that the nitrogen pressure test was all that was requred.... I guess the marrow of the issue is... Who actually is requiring that pressure test? And does *whoever* is governing this pressure testing requrement also have welding requirements that are just being ignored?

Like you said; and I believe you.... It's a different world out there in the oil patch and day to day things are done in the field as quickly as possible to get back into production.

I can totally see why a manufacturer would decline to mandate specific field procedures, knowing the conditions are so um.. variable?

But its just hard to get my brain around the notion that if the welder wanted to he could...Gas Weld, Mig, Tig, Laser, Stick or Subarc that Well Head on with any filler he felt like as long as the pressure test passed after the work was finished... I realize that this may be the "reality" But it's just difficult to think there isn't some governing code being bypassed in order to "get er done"....

Edit:: Cactus, your being a real good sport about this thread.. It's not like your a spokesman for Well Heads... But your taking the time to use your contacts and help those of us who don't have your kind of experience understand a whole different kind of world.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 03-30-2011 13:45

and to follow L's thought a bit further past the welder's certification and the welding procedures....who or what entity is responsible for the weld inspection of the production weld, and what code/specification or acceptance criteria are they supposed to use?

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-30-2011 23:22

The Pressure test is a "Suggested Practice" by the Manufacturer. It is usually done with either Nitrogen or a Port-O-Power and Hydraulic Fluid. The Energy Company will make sure it is checked and they Will document the Pressure Reading and time it was held. SOME Companies, Like the Head I just Set with Ronnie, Requested a Nitrogen Test. Refused a Hydraulic test (Which I don't use anyway) Fluid gets VERY messy if there is a leak. Some guys don't want to carry an extra bottle for the Nitrogen so a Port o power becomes easier. I called the Company Man today and ask him what procedure they preferred to use. He had NO idea, so he called the Drill Engineer. He didn't know so he called Haliburton. SAME ANSWER. There is no suggested Practice for Field Work on Wellheads due to the Variables. The IS an Excepted Practice, Which is what I have explained, However there seems to be No Code that covers it.

By rcwelding (***)

Date 03-31-2011 01:59

Hey Cactus just curious... Why the use of Nitrogen and not Oxygen, Argon, CO2 or some other gas..?? I don't know anything about Nitrogen I was just curious... I have never heard of any other gas used but Nitrogen..

RC

By Superflux (****)

Date 03-31-2011 03:33

Oxygen is not used due to it's instability with anything flammable (even more so under pressure), as in it could go boom with even small amounts of grease, oil, etc.
Nitrogen is probably used because it is CHEAP, readily available, and not very reactive.
Up until the mid 1980's, we routinely used Nitrogen for purge gas when GTAW on stainless pipe. Filling a large system with Argon back then was considered cost prohibitive for all the most critical of applications. I'm not referring to small cheap plants either. These were large scale facilities by the largest Oil& Gas companies in the world.

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-31-2011 08:09

Main reason here is stability

By Johnny Walker (***)

Date 03-31-2011 00:46

A 2 T restricted socket weld test while sitting naked on a bucket of racing fuel in a snow storm with 60 mph gusts out of the north in flip flops with one worn out glove and u gotta weld with a miller too !! Is that a test or what??

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-31-2011 00:49

Who wrote the procedure and qualified it ? Was he / she Qualified to do so ?

By Johnny Walker (***)

Date 03-31-2011 00:52

I did!!

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-31-2011 00:55

Well, WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY SO ! Yep, That's the new Head Test. Ronnie, on the other hand, did a different test ! Top Secret Procedure !

By Johnny Walker (***)

Date 03-31-2011 01:10

LoL

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 03-29-2011 23:55

Hi guys,
ANSI/API Spec 6A
Specification for Wellhead and Christmas Tree Equipment, Twentieth Edition (ISO 10423:2009 Modification), Includes Errata (Jan. 2011)
Edition: 20th
American Petroleum Institute / 01-Oct-2010 / 450 pages
AMENDED by ANSI/API Spec 6A Errata 1
This document specifies requirements and gives recommendations for the performance, dimensional and functional interchangeability, design, materials, testing, inspection, welding, marking, handling, storing, shipment, purchasing, repair and remanufacture of wellhead and christmas tree equipment for use in the petroleum and natural gas industries. This document does not apply to field use, field testing or field repair of wellhead and christmas tree equipment.

Not sure if this standard is applicable to the "patch" based on the last sentence.
Regards,
Shane

By jarcher (**)

Date 03-30-2011 00:30

"Patch" as routinely used by those in it is extremely broad, referring to just about anything upstream or downstream whether OEM or field work. The point that 6A might not apply to say the weld between casing and wellhead is well taken. API allows a lot of primitive stuff out in the field that it won't continence in an OEM setting. I've worked in both settings. I think a contractor would probably be in a better position using an appropriate ASME WPS were something to go wrong and he found himself on the defendant end of a lawsuit.

By 803056

Date 03-30-2011 03:07

The next question to be asked is, "does anyone have a copy of API 6A to see what it actually says about the welding of the equipment in question?"

Best regards - Al

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 03-30-2011 06:54

Hi Al,
Not the actual code / standard - rather a specification.

TITLE:
PROCEDURE QUALIFICATION & PRODUCTION WELDING
REQUIREMENTS FOR FUSION WELDING
PRESSURE CONTAINING AND LOAD BEARING WELDMENTS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH API 6A & API 16A SUPPLEMENT
t.
1. SCOPE:
1.1 This specification defines a) the minimum requirements for joining and repairing
pressure containing and load bearing weldments by fusion welding, b) the
minimum requirements for qualifying fusion-welding procedures, and c) the technical
reasons for each set of requirements. (Parenthetical references are listed in Appendix
C.)
1.2 The requirements of this specification apply to all facilities that manufacture, overhaul,
or repair products for Hydril, including Hydril authorized vendors and Hydril authorized
repair facilities.
2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Welding of all pressure containing and non-pressure containing weldments
exposed to well bore fluids shall be performed with procedures qualified in accordance
with this specification.
2.2 Welding of all pressure containing and load bearing weldments not exposed to well
bore fluids shall also be performed with procedures qualified in accordance with this
specification except that the material and hardness requirements need not conform to
NACE MR0175.
2.3 All welders and welding operators shall be qualified in accordance with the
requirements of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section IX.

Full text here
http://sections.asme.org/nwhss/PWHT/HEMPS_11.100_A1.pdf

Regards,
Shane

By 803056

Date 03-30-2011 14:56 Edited 03-30-2011 15:06

Hello Shane;

Excellent stuff my friend.

The information appears to be specific to the one manufacturer, i.e., Hydril, and the requirements they have imposed on the welding operations. The qualification process, while based on ASME Section IX, has been modified to meet their specific needs.

I sound like a broken record here, but I've said it before and I'll say it again, "No one cares until something goes boom in the middle of the night." Then all hell breaks loose and the legal eagles begin to swarm and encircle the project.

I have to imagine Hydril operates much like the other manufacturers in the industry. They are lawyered up to the hilt and the welding specifications are there to protect them should something go wrong. Ignorance offers no protection to the independent contractor. It is incumbent on any business to ask what requirements need to be satisfied before work begins.

The manufacturer is in a position to play dumb (as a Fox) by saying the requirements are published, if the independent contractor doesn't ask for them, they assume the contractor knows what those requirements are based on the fact they regularly work in the industry.

As an independent, saying "no one asked for my papers" is not going to protect the business in the event of a failure. Trust me, the manufacturer or engineering company is your best friend until something goes wrong.

The materials used by the manufacturers for various components are a serious unknown unless the welding contractor starts asking the right questions. What are the right questions? First and foremost; what welding standards/specifications apply to this job? The answer may depend on the manufacturer. Based on the information provided by our good friend Shane; I would say it varies from project to project, manufacturer to manufacturer.

The next question would be; what materials are being joined? Without that key bit of information the welding contractor cannot verify the proper qualified procedures are in place.

A quick review of Hydril's specification indicates the welding contractor's qualified welding procedures are to be reviewed and approved before any work is initiated. If that is not done, the manufacturer has the perfect "out" should anything go wrong. I can hear them on the witness stand now, "Judge, we had no idea Jimminie's Welding was even on the project, let alone welding on our equipment. They never submitted their welding procedures and they welded on our equipment without our explicit approval or knowledge."

Good bye "Jimminie's Welding", it was fun while it lasted.

As for the welder qualifications, since ASME Section IX is invoked (at least by Hydril), the welders cannot be qualified without following a qualified WPS. That qualified WPS has to be one that is applicable to the process, base metal, etc. and appropriate to the project.

I find it hard to fathom any independent contractor has invested the time and money needed to qualify WPSs and welders to meet the project requirements imposed by the different manufacturers and all the WPSs required to weld the multitude of base metals used by all the manufacturers providing equipment to the oil patch.

I have witnessed the qualification of a welding procedures using some of the casing used by the oil patch. It was fortunate that I was not providing expertise, I was simply witnessing the test. The pipe was equivalent to an AISI 4130 and highly hardenable when insufficient preheat was used and the Charpys, well it is best not to go there. The job had nothing to do with the oil field, but it was enlightening never the less to see what a contractor will attempt to do with absolutely no realization of what they are dealing with.

Best regards - Al

By RANDER

Date 03-30-2011 17:30

Here's some food for thought which I feel supports nearly every contributors thoughts on this subject

I will offer only pertinent excerpts and will leave out the scope which Shane has already provided.

Specification for Wellhead and
Christmas Tree Equipment
ANSI/API SPECIFICATION 6A
TWENTIETH EDITION, OCTOBER 2010
EFFECTIVE DATE: APRIL 1, 2011

6 Welding — General requirements

6.3 Pressure-containing fabrication weldments for bodies, bonnets, end and outlet
connections, bullplugs, valve-removal plugs and back-pressure valves

6.3.2.3 Welding procedure qualifications
The following apply:
a) written procedure:
Welding shall be performed in accordance with welding procedure specifications (WPS), written and qualified
in accordance with ASME, BPVC:2004, Section IX, Article II. The WPS shall describe all the essential,nonessential
and supplementary essential (if required; see ASME, BPVC:2004, Section IX) variables.

6.3.2.4 Welder performance qualification
The following apply:
a) testing requirements:
Welders and welding operators shall be qualified in accordance with ASME, BPVC:2004, Section IX,
Article III.

From our Northern neighbors. I thought it was appropriate for this thread. The full document is online and available free here
http://www.enform.ca/media/3675/irp5_final_2005.pdf

Minimum Wellhead Requirements
Industry Recommended Practice
(IRP)
Volume 5
Sanctioned
2002 - 06

5.4 Field Welding Installation Procedures
IRP 5.4.1
Field welding installations of casing bowls, casing extensions and bell nipples must be done by a welder qualified to undertake pressure welding.

ALERT
The failure of a weld connection on a casing bowl or bell nipple has potential serious consequences.
Correct field welding procedures, particularly the application of adequate pre-heat and cool-down requirements, are often not followed. This occurs for two reasons.
Firstly, in most cases the steel composition of the materials being welded is not known by the welder. This is due in part to the large variation in steel composition that exists in oil field casing products, even within a particular grade, and in various manufactured wellhead components such as casing bowls and bell nipples.

Secondly, many of the welders being used do not have a documented Quality Assurance Program to follow. ASME Section IX should be referenced for information on welding procedure specifications and welder performance qualification.

Operators are encouraged to address the concerns related to field welding practices by developing their own standards. The following options are provided for consideration:
Use threaded components where appropriate and eliminate the need for a weld.
Establish a controlled inventory of casing of known material composition for use as landing joints and develop a welding procedure specification (WPS) for each size of casing.
Use a qualified welder from a contractor that follows a documented Quality Assurance Program.
Establish a welding procedure specification (WPS) for the specific materials being welded in each instance.

API RP 5C1 18th ed. may 1999, reaffirmed Aug. 2010

Recommended Practice for care and use of casing and tubing

9 Field welding of attachments on casing

9.1.6
The responsibility for welding lies with the user, and results are largely governed by the welders skill. Weldability of the various types and grades of casing varies widely, thus placing added responsibility on the welder. Transporting a qualified welder to the job rather than using a less skilled man who may be at hand will in most cases prove economical. The responsible operating representative should ascertain the welder's qualifications and, if necessary, assure himself by instruction or demonstration that the welder is able to perform the work satisfactorily.

And Lastly,
A large oil and gas exploration co. in North America performs hardness testing, PMI, CE of the casing to determine which WPS they will use for the welding. VT,MT/PT, RT will be used on the completed weld. No mention is made as to the welders qualifications. Of course that document is controlled.

By 803056

Date 03-30-2011 19:21 Edited 03-30-2011 19:27

The deeper you dig, the more interesting it gets.

Thanks for the additional information.

Get it done, but getting it right is more important than getting it done quickly if quickly means placing people and property in harm’s way.

I find it interesting when individuals responsible for developing standards and specification put the responsibility for welding engineering on the shoulders of the welder. You have to ask yourself if there is any sanity involved when committees comprised of "experts" put the welder in a position of making the decisions needed to properly weld an unknown materials, with unknown design constraints, and with little if any knowledge of the welding requirements.

Please don’t misconstrue my intentions. I’m not knocking the welder’s ability to deposit a sound weld. However, it must be recognized that few welders have the training and experience necessary to perform the functions of a welding engineer. Yet, I encounter situations where it is assumed the welder has intimate knowledge of metallurgy, strength of materials, design, etc. The alarm should start ringing loud and clear when the welder breaks out the welding leads without asking, “Just what is this material I’m welding?”

Just because it is rusty doesn’t mean it is “just steel.”

"Be afraid, be very afraid."

I have to wonder if this post wasn't a set up. A simple question about welder qualifications has lead us down an interesting path.

Best regards - Al

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-30-2011 23:28 Edited 03-31-2011 00:10

Great Post and Point Made ! The head that has been in Question in this post IS NOT the Christmas Tree Head. It is the Primary Casing Head which is in Section 9 of your post. Here it is

9 Field welding of attachments on casing

9.1.6
The responsibility for welding lies with the user, and results are largely governed by the welders skill. Weldability of the various types and grades of casing varies widely, thus placing added responsibility on the welder. Transporting a qualified welder to the job rather than using a less skilled man who may be at hand will in most cases prove economical. The responsible operating representative should ascertain the welder's qualifications and, if necessary, assure himself by instruction or demonstration that the welder is able to perform the work satisfactorily

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 03-31-2011 08:56

Cactus,
I think that is the whole problem with this issue.
If you go out to a rig to perform a weld and nobody asks for your qualifications before you start welding then they have not performed their obligations (based on the API RP).
Does the companys "operating representative" have a clue what he is reading if he even asks for your welder quals ?
As there appears to be no legally binding document as to who is responsible for quality control (would a Recommended Practice stand up in a court of law ?) then when/if the sh.t hits the fan who is going to win the court battle ?.
He who has the deepest pockets, that is who.

As noted before, I am definitely not trying to criticize - just trying to understand how such potentially dangerous work can have so little quality control,
Regards,
Shane

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-31-2011 09:45 Edited 03-31-2011 09:47

Your Right. The Company Rep would have NO Clue what he was reading if you gave it to him nor would he care. As far as how such potentially dangerous work goes on like this, You have NO clue and that is only the tip of the Iceberg ! There are things that go on in the Oilfield that would make the normal Construction, Production and Manufacturing World, Tremble in dis-Belief. Not to mention John Q Public would be doing Back Flips ! The Oil Field is a Very Different World. I'm not saying it's Right or it's perfect or it couldn't be improved on. It's the Oilfield. It is the way it is. It has run this way for over 100 years and will continue to do so. No One Cares. Its the Power of the World and the Economy. Turn to the right and get to TD, is what matters. Nothing else ! Rig Down and go to the next one. When something happens, And it will, it always does, They will replace the Rig and carry on. Deaths in the Oilfield or fairly common. Rarely are they talked about more than 1 day. Within the last year, Chesapeake Energy had the Nickname "One A Week Chesapeake". It's kinda like the Old West, Only the Strong Survive. The Oilfield operates about 80% on the "Good Ole' Boy" mentality. You gotta know someone to get your foot in the door and stay there. But, The money is HUGE !

By Cactusthewelder (*****)

Date 03-29-2011 15:47

I can CERTAINLY understand replaceing with Cheaper Equipment. However, Energy Companies will supply EVERYTHING to you. All they want you to do is weld it

By hojopens3 (**)

Date 03-29-2011 21:47

i have been doing wellheads and rig work for alot of years both offshore and land and the only test i have ever taken for it was a simple 6G. on land all they care about is your gl policy.

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 03-28-2011 11:27 Edited 03-28-2011 11:29

I have developed a certification process that will allow you to say you are a "Certified" welder.
This comes with a real handsome wall certificate suitable for framing or copying for your resume, and a nifty wallet card that can be whipped out to show anyone that questions your welding abilities. It shows you are a "Certified" welder. This certification allows you to put on your business cards, yellow page ads even a web site where YOU can say you are a "Certified " welder. This certification covers well heads, pipelines, pressure vessels, storage tank, (BRT and LRT) handrails and cattle guards. If you are in the nuclear industry it can cover that too!

Be the envy of your friends! Never worry about taking a welding test ever again. If someone wants to know of you can weld, whip out the wallet card and show them your are a "Certified" welder.
All I need is a picture of a weld you have made and a notarized piece of paper that swears, or affirms, you made the weld. If you know the welding process used , that would be just spiffy and I can add that to your "Certification". If you know two or three other welding process put them down and that will be on your "Certification" papers.

I have developed a stamp that looks really impressive for the Certified Welders Certification Institute. You can stamp every weld you make so they are "Certified" welds. This stamp is your customers assurance they have welds that have been made by a "Certified" welder. This "Certified" weld stamp saves your customer the cost of xray, UT or any of those other useless inspection things that show bad things in welds. But "Certified" welders never make bad welds, so your customer does not have to worry about things like that in YOUR welds.

Cost of this is only $1500 dollars. That is steep, but hey integrity has its cost. And look at what you will save by never having to test again!
The "Certification" is good for 2 years then you need to send me another $15OO dollars and another picture of a weld you swear, or affirm, you have made.
Hurry and order as my printer is getting low on ink for the wall certificates.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 03-28-2011 11:38

LOL...never have to take another test. Except!...if you apply for a welder's position here where I work. We test everybody, even the folks with suitcases full of paper, wall hangers and laminated wallet cards.

By Superflux (****)

Date 03-28-2011 12:18

How's about $62.50 for a 1 month's issue. Just long enough for me to get another job????

By 803056

Date 03-28-2011 12:24 Edited 03-28-2011 14:48

It sounds like the CWCI uses the Farm Code as the basis of certification.

It sounds like a reasonable price, $1500 a pop, where do I send my Monopoly money and box tops?

Jarcher's response is helpful. It is some level of comfort that ASME governs some aspects of oil and gas field equipment. I still don't know if that means the welders must be qualified to ASME Section IX or not. Considering the performance qualification requirements of API 1104 are considerably less stringent than either ASME or AWS, I would sleep much better knowing the welders are qualified to ASME Section IX rather than API 1104.

For those of you that are wondering what I mean, consider the following; ASME and AWS requires the guided bend tests for low carbon and low alloy steels (with a YS of 50 ksi or less) to demonstrate an elongation of at least 20%. API 1104 only requires the elongation to be on the order of 10%. In other words, the guided bend test performed to API 1104 is easier to pass. The API welded sample can pass the guided bend test while containing larger discontinuities than a welded sample tested to ASME Section IX or AWS D1.1. Things get a little trickier when one considers API 1104 uses the same bending mandrel (3 1/2 inches) for all thicknesses and yield strengths. ASME and AWS use different diameter mandrels for different thicknesses and different yield strengths depending on the ductility and strength of the material being tested. This makes it even more difficult to compare apples to apples when comparing the tests results (requirements) of API 1104 and ASME Section IX or AWS D1.1. Another consideration is that API 1104 allows the performance test to be evaluated with a nick break test. Again, comparing the test results or the "value" of a performance qualification to API 1104 to ASME Section IX or AWS D1.1 is like comparing apples to lemons. There is little in the way of direct correlation.

Best regards - Al

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 03-28-2011 22:58

Dad gum it, I forgot all about FC. I will integrate the CWCI rigorous "Certified" welder certification to apply to all FC Standards. Now that is going to raise the price a skosh.
Say $2100 every two years?

By 803056

Date 03-29-2011 03:26

Hey, Buddy, you get what you pay for. Right?

Al

By dbigkahunna (****)

Date 03-30-2011 00:16

Nice to have a little fun! Should think of a update to FC. It has been a long time since it was published. I wish I had a copy.