That would not be permitted because 60 have different F numbers. In the case cited above, the question was whether the WPS that included welding the root (assumed) with 6010 could permit the use of 7018 (I assume the post is looking to use 7018 for the open root). If I need to perform the production weld the overhead, I can revise the WPS to include E7018 for overhead and vertical, but I am still locked into using GTAW for the open root portion provided the PQR was welding in the required positions. I can then write a WPS that includes a supporting PQR to permit welding the open root joint with GTAW and fill the remaining groove with SMAW using E7024 as long as the production welding is performed in the flat position. For instance, I can qualify a WPS to weld an open root joint with GTAW. There are provisions for the production WPS to include supporting PQRs and a prequalified WPS to expand the applications. Therefore, it stands to reason, forgetting the philosophy of other welding standards, that only one filler metal F number or one welding process can be used to qualify the WPS. The thickness range of the WPS is based on the thickness of the base metal used for the PQR coupon.
There are no provisions to record the deposited thickness for each F number or welding process. The WPS thickness range is then qualified based on the thickness of the weld deposited with each welding process or F number. ASME has provisions where the PQR coupon weld deposited with different filler metal F numbers or different welding processes can be recorded.
0 kommentar(er)
