ASME DIV 2 - UDS (User Design Specification)

[shuhaimi]

Hi I'm from Engineering Consultant Oil & Gas.
I would like to know since we are on feed stage to provide pressure vessel Div.2 specification and provide together UDS(User Design Specification) to our client (oil company).
The question is under RPE signiture of the form, what is my understanding should be sign by RPE engineer from client or fabricator side and not from our consultant side.
We are as a consultant not suppose to sign the form because we just give the design parameter but not involve in detail in design to manufacture the equipment/vessel.
I hope to who had same case can share this similar problem and what is the conclusion of this isue.

 

[mechanical2014]

Hi!

PRE (Package responsible engineer). As you mention it's in FEED stage and at this stage,signing any form is not making any sense. But in later stage (Execution) , it's the PRE responsibility for the package/Equipment. To safeguard yourself,first you can take in writing(In Offer or Technical Query) from the manufacturer regarding the performance guarantee.

 

[mechanical2014]

In addition to above, it's the manufacturer responsibility to prepare and inspector to review the UDS.

 

[TGS4]

No no no mechanical2014 - your last post is completely wrong. It is the responsibility of the USER to prepare and certify the User's Design Specification (hence the name...).

Ideally, this document would be prepared prior to the RFQ so that the manufacturers bidding the job know the scope.

The UDS is the responsibility of the User or their designated agent. I would suggest that if you don't understand this, then you are likely unqualified to be preparing or certifying that UDS. Please find an engineer experienced in pressure vessel design to Division 2 to assist you with this activity.

 

[mechanical2014]

Ooops!! Even after writing "In addition" i made mistake in writing clearly.
It shall be read as "it's the manufacturer's responsibility to present UDS to an inspector for review" and his approval. My intention was to tell Mr.Shuhaimi not to worry with any signature protocol, as authorized inspector will take care of this. However, correct information in UDS (or filled data sheet) in the requisition is of course his responsibility.

 

[TGS4]

mechanical2014 - I really don't know where you are getting your information. What you have written is, again, incorrect. Nowhere in Division 2, Part 2 does it state that it is the Inspector's responsibility to review the UDS, other than what is covered in 2.4.3.2. And it most certainly is NOT the Inspector's responsibility to have anything to do with stewarding signature protocols.

The UDS is the sole and singular responsibility of the User or the User's designated agent. I strongly recommend that you review all of Part 2, including the Annexes, in its entirety.

 

[mechanical2014]

May be my interpretation is wrong but this is what mentioned in Table 7-A.1 of SECTION VIII, DIVISION 2, 2013 edition.

 

[TGS4]

mechanical2014 - your interpretation is incorrect. See Part 2.

The Inspector's responsibility is to verify that the UDS exists and has been certified in accordance with the requirements detailed in Part 2. The Inspector has no responsibility otherwise with regards to the UDS.

 

[mechanical2014]

Noted! We have come full circle now.
As you mention regarding the certification of UDS. As per the code "Professional Engineers, registered in one or more of the states of the United States of America or the provinces of Canada and experienced in pressure vessel design, shall certify the User’s Design Specification meets the requirements in paragraph 2.2.2, and shall apply the Professional Engineer seal in accordance with the required procedures.".
In my opinion, Mr.Shuhaimi responsibility is to prepare the UDS but signature and hence certification is not his responsibility. But if he is PE (Professional Engineer), he can very well do that too.

 

[TGS4]

Correct. And that RPE certifying the UDS needs to be understood that they are working on behalf of the User or the User's Designated Agent, and not the Manufacturer.

There are situations (that I have been personally involved in) where the same engineering organization is involved in certifying both the UDS and the MDR. Following the rules in the Code, this is permitted, provided that there are specifically-different engineers doing the different certifications. One engineer works for the User and the other for the Manufacturer.

That said, I am also aware of situations where the User has designated the Manufacturer as the User's Designated Agent. Although this slightly complicates matters, it can be done. But in that situation, it is important to maintain the identity of the User's Designated Agent separate from the Manufacturer.