certification
certification
(OP)
we mfg self actuated pressure control valve.can we certify our final valve certificate with EN 10204 3.1. Or is it the case that fimal assemble unit does not come under EN10204 3.1?
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS Come Join Us!Are you an
Engineering professional? Join Eng-Tips Forums!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Posting GuidelinesJobs |
|
RE: certification
If you are the manufacturer of the material, you will be allowed to issue a 3.1 certificate. You can not issue a certificate for the cpl. valve acc. to EN 10204, no 3.1, no 2.2 and no 2.1 certificate. EN 10204 is clearly related to materials. There are other standards you can use to issue a test certificate. I can check when I'll be back in the office.
RE: certification
RE: certification
RE: certification
RE: certification
A 3.1 certificate is issued by the manufacturer and is validated by the manufacturer's authorised inspection representative. It is equivalent to the "old" 3.1.B certificate. The certificate must declare that the products are in compliance with the order requirements and supply test results.
I can not understan why I (like valves Manufacturer) can not issue 3.1 certificate. we issue 3.1 certificate of valves, including test results and chemical and mechanical properties. If our clients want check the 3.1 certificate of raw material we show them but i understand that we can issue 3.1. certificates with our internal test and the chemical and mechanical properties of the 3.1 certificate of the foundry or forged supplier.
RE: certification
RE: certification
I will support micalbrch's answer and add following:
The difference in requirements between issuing material certificates class 3.1 and 2.2 has for years been about the same, regardless if EN or other worldwide organizations.
Material certificates are issued by material producers and are traceable back to original material and lot. Even if a valve producer normally check all incoming materials, and always buy materials with 3.1 b certificate, it is in itself not sufficient for the valve producer to issue 3.1 b certificates from parts produced from this material.
A valve producer can however issue a function and performance and pressure test certificate grade 3.1 b (or witnessed 3.1 C), but only if he has a working and certified recognized QA system and procedures, enabling him to do this.
With a 3.1 b performance test, material certification will normally follow as a 2.2 certificate of materials (valve producer confirming that materials are correct and of such and such metallurgical quality).
If the end users wishes a 3.1 b material certificate for the valve (say for pressure containing parts) certain procedures must be followed.
Normally this will consist of original material producer issuing a 3.1 b certificate for the relevant parts and with a marking from material producer with traceable marking for each single part through the valve producers production, and a copy of the original parts analysis and test certificates following the parts through production. It might also be necessary with further tests or additional documentation if a component is treated during production, making changes possible in material quality for instance heat treatment.
A typical example is welding, wich will require typically for instance certified welders, welding procedures (doucumented), and sometimes x-ray or other tests confirming end quality.
In all this is not then the valve producers material certification, but copy of traceable original certification with necessary additions.
PS - This is a resume from memory, but all procedures are, as michalbrch
states, clarly described in the relevant EN or other documents, 3.1b and 2.2 not precises descriptions as such but typical 'branch abbreviations'.
If in doubt, a qualified experienced end user will always be able to give details at what the exact requirements are for each project or company or application.
Hope this will help.
RE: certification
And once again: EN 10204 is only applicable for metallic products. A metallic product is not a valve but - as written in EN 10204 - metal sheets, bars, forgings and castings. EN 10204 can also be used for non-metallic products but it is in any case related to raw materials only.
RE: certification
micalbrch: Thank you for correction! Noted!
RE: certification
First thank you for the clarification that EN 10204 only applies to metallic products.
gerhardl said about 3.1 b or c certificates for hydrostatic or performance tests in his points but you have mentioned that these are not included in EN 10204-2005.
I've received an ITP (Inspection and Test Plan)from a valve manufacturer that has expressed "certificate 3.1 EN 10204" for machining, NDE, surface preparation, coating and valve examinations. He has also mentioned "certificate 3.2 EN 10204" for witness inspections and tests such as dimensional check, pressure test and functional tests.
Could you please help to figure out what this means? After reading your post I decided to ask the mfg, but then thought it is better to get some advice before turning to mfg since I am not that familiar with EN 10204.
Thanks in advance for any help and a swift reply is appreciated.
RE: certification
As I wrote it is popular to refer to EN 10204 for test certificates in general and I have seen test certificates from well known and big companies with this wrong reference. At the end of the day it is only a wrong certificate designation. The test results are not affected by this. So, it is a formal mistake - but a mistake. But if you must submit the certificates to your client, make sure that he will not be a nitpicker and refuse them.
2.3, 3.1A, 3.1B, 3.1C and 3.2 certficates were described in the old EN 10204 standard (as of 1995 if I'm not wrong). The 2.3 certificate does no longer exist. 3.1B was replaced by 3.1. 3.1A, 3.1C and 3.2 of the old version were all replaced by 3.2 of the new version.
RE: certification
Thanks for your swift and clear reply. I'm the end user's engineer, the mfg company is a well-known name and I'm going to remind them about this EN 10204 issue very soon. As you said, it doesn't change the test result but it will bring a good "anchor" for some other discussions that we have! Thank you again.
RE: certification
RE: certification
I fully agree with you but under certification requirements in Shell MESC SPE77/302;2008 (Valves-General requirements), they want certificates from valve manufacturers as follows.
3. All testing and examination shall have an inspection certificate in accordance with ISO 10474 Type 3.1 b or EN 10204 type 3.1
4. Finished valve shall have an inspection certificate in accordance with ISO 10474 Type 3.1 b or EN 10204 type 3.1, demonstrating that it complies with all requirements.
I think this is a misinterpretation of EN 10204 by Shell by which they are forcing valve manufacturers to use incorrect certificate designation.
RE: certification
Can anyone offer any clarification on this?
RE: certification
RE: certification
Industrial valves—Testing of valves —
Part 1: Pressure tests, test procedures
and acceptance criteria — Mandatory
requirements.