The company I work for has had their WPS/PQRs since 2003 and has fabricated+erected over 120,000 Metric Tons of steel.
In an on-going project, the inspector rejected our WPS/PQR because of format, wether the Logo in the cert did not match our company (it was outsourced but we have the invoice) and other format issues. We would like to note that this original procedures were stamped by a CWI.
To please the customer, we made again the whole procedures following his format indications, this new WPS/PQR were also certified by a CWI.
Now, the customer puts into question all work prior to the date of this new procedures (around 1000 metric tons of steel).... Is this correct? we do not feel so.
Any help will be appreciated.
thank you
You seem to have fallen into this trap,the client must have accepted your WPS/PQR at some point? Change of company logo is acceptable on a WPS!
The suggested format given in the Code like ASME IX or D1.1 is a non mandatory, it allows the variation of the forms to suit the user needs.
The concern could be on whether the contractor really owned the WPS/PQR because of the doubt on company logo. If the company is of different names (sub-contractor), the company involved must be decribed in the QC System or QC Program of the contractor which is responsible for operational control of the production of weldment.
Another concern is the Code edition, whether your WPS/PQR since 2003 complied with the project specification of your on-going project.
You should ask the customer on what welding variables your company violated in accordance with the Code.
~Joey~
If all of the variables were addressed correctly in the original WPS's and PQR's I'd tell them diplomatically to go pound sand. Sounds remarkably similar to a backcharge scam. Somebody there knows better.
Segr78,
Welcome to the forum.
Your language suggest you are using AWS D1.1 code not ASME IX, right?
D1.1 4.1.1.1 Qualification Responsibility. Each manufacturer
or Contractor shall conduct the tests required by
this code to qualisl the WPS. Properly documented WPSs qualified under the provisions of this code by a
company that later has a name change due to voluntary
action or consolidation with a parent company may utilize
the new name on its WPS documents.
4.1.1.2 Previous WPS Qualification. The Engineer
may accept properly documented evidence of previous
qualification of the WPSs that are to be employed. The
acceptability of qualification to other standards is the Engineer’s
responsibility, to be exercised based upon the
specific structure, or service conditions, or both. AWS
B2.1 .XXX-XX Series on Standard Welding Procedure
Specifications may, in this manner, be accepted for use in
this code.
If you have resolved the format issues that you mentioned and the (EOR) has previously accepted the WPS/PQR then the inspector cannot over ride the engineer.
If you are working to ASME Sect IX, that's another story and not as favorable to outsourcing the welding of the PQR.
Forum
