Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


ASME Sec 1 & IX

ASME Sec 1 & IX

ASME Sec 1 & IX

Setting up welder testing (Orbital P1 to P1 2.5" x 0.203") Root pass is showing smooth internal concavity (IC) ASME Sec IX does not reference (IC) is it relevant in evaluating the test coupon. Construction code to be used is ASME Sec 1 which allows (IC) as-per (PW-41.2.2). NDE is Phased Array we have been working with he NDE Contractor to come up with an acceptance criteria before the work starts. NDE Tech is stating (IC) should be as-per ASME Sec 1 (PW-52.3.3 (Other). Please adavise.

RE: ASME Sec 1 & IX


How do you justify using UT to test this coupon?

QW-191.2.1 of ASME Section IX only permits use of UT to test coupons on material 1/4" and greater. According to your post the tube is less than 1/4". Unless I am missing something, this coupon should be bend tested or radiographed in order to meet ASME Section IX testing requirements.

Regarding the acceptance criteria, I think Section I can be used to address the internal concavity.

RE: ASME Sec 1 & IX

Not using PAUT for welder testing (Bend Test). PAUT is being used for construction.

RE: ASME Sec 1 & IX

If coupon meets ASME IX visual acceptance and passes root and face bend requirements, it is acceptable. Concave root surface is not that uncommon with automatic orbital GTAW welding systems. Section I requires full fusion and that has been demonstrated. The production welds are not subject to RT or UT under PW-11.

RE: ASME Sec 1 & IX

This may be an owner's requirement which goes above and beyond the Code minimum. With that said, the NDT technician is correct in using the concavity requirement in Section I for circumferential butt welds, if required by the owner.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close