By -
Date 08-19-2005 12:19
Andy,
I think we need to try to decipher the intent of the Code Book for a moment. Speaking strictly of PQR's for a moment, we all agree that the Code does not specifically say that the PQR has to be signed. It does, however, state in QW-103.2 that "each manufacturer or contractor shall maintain a record of the results obtained in welding procedure and welder and welding operator performance qualification. These records "shall be certified" by the manufacturer or contractor and shall be accessible to the Authorized Inspector." Does the intent of the Code mean that you can certify this document with a handshake or a nod of the head? Since all PQR's I've ever been associated with have a line for a signature and a statement of certification, I think the intent is to have a signature, or a name, handwritten, typed, scanned, or whatever, to signify acceptability of the document as true and accurate.
At Avesta, we are one of the world largest manufacturers of stainless steel. I concede that our Material Certs, probably all of them, do not have a personal handwritten signature, but it does have an authorized name entry. I think, in this case, that is quite satisfactory. I believe that a PQR is a different scenario. A PQR has an individual actually recording all of the variables encountered during the welding of the test coupon. Whether he is recording these variables on a piece of notebook paper and transferring it to the official PQR form, or if he's using the actual PQR to list these variables, he is recording them. Someone has to be witnessing the welding in order to accurately list the variables. I don't see how it can be the welder, since he has his hood down and can't see exactly what each volt and amp is registering. So, some authorized person has to be taking this info down. Just in my personal opinion, that is the person who should be required to sign the certification statement as true and accurate. From talking to a personal friend of mine who is the Quality Control Manager of a very large and world wide corporation for the last 27 years, and the Metallurgist/Manager of a very large testing Laboratory, I was told that there has to be a signature from the manufacturer and the lab that did the testing. They both told me, and even sent me a fax showing that typed, handwritten, scanned, etc. signatures are acceptable. But they both pointed out that it is up to the manufacturer or contractor as to what is acceptable to them. The point they were making is that an authorized, or designated person has to acknowledge the accuracy of the PQR by providing a name. I think that is the "intent" of the Code.
Chuck