API Standard 1104 - Welding of Pipeline and Related Facilities

API
Stand
Stand Edition
ard
ard
1104
- 18th - May
1104
Weldi 1994
ng of
Pipeli
ne
and
Relate
d 1104 18th - May
Faciliti 1994
es+A3

Section

Inquiry #

Question

Reply

1104-I-01- The section on essential variables for Weld Procedure Qualifications, Section The groups are not specified in API-1104, they are to be selected by the user. See Para.
96
2.4.2.5, states a change from one group to another. However, this section
2.3.2.3.
does not specify which group. Is the first group specified in Table 2 which is <
12.7 mm and > 12.7 mm? Or is it the group specified under Welder
Qualification Tests which is < 4.8 mm, 4.8 mm - 19 mm, and > 19 mm?
1104-I-01- The essential variable list in Section 2.4 for Weld Procedure Qualification does Yes.
96
not cover diameter groupings although Welder Qualification Tests do have
groupings. Is it correct in saying that qualifying a procedure on 2" diameter
would qualify, say, a 40" diameter butt weld provided all other essential
variables were met?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-01- Welder Qualification Tests for Automatic Welding Section 9.7 does not specify Welder Qualification Tests for Automatic Welding - Since Para. 9.6 provides that both the
96
any essential variables for Welder Qualification Tests. Is this correct?
equipment and the operator are qualified at the same time, the Essential Variables specified in
Para. 9.5 apply.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-01- Weld Procedure Qualification - Automatic Welding Under Section 9, this

96
appears to be leaving the groupings of diameters and wall thickness to the
Contractor as it states this will be stated in the WPS. Should these groupings
be per API 1104 and/or Company requirements?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-02- Clarification of the requirements of paragraph 6.3.8.2.c with respect to cluster If the cluster porosity cannot be proven to be in the finish pass, the criteria of Para. 6.3.8.2
96
porosity is required since the collective aggregate size of porosity is being
applies. If Para. 6.3.8.2c applies, then figures 18 and 19 must be used even if the indication on
interpreted differently by different inspectors.
the radiograph has been defined as cluster porosity.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-02- With similar size porosity all falling into the medium category, the density
If the size of the porosity is the size shown in the "medium" charts of Figures 18 and 19, then
96
which is in the assorted chart cannot be defined. When a cluster of 5 to 7
that is the chart which must be used as the acceptability standard.
pores cannot fit into an inscribed circle on the fine chart, the client is rejecting
it even though there is no other porosity within the entire radiograph. An
attached sketch illustrates the condition.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-04- If the Company has not required the use of a line-up clamp in its project
96
specific specification, does API 1104 require the use of a clamp?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-04- As paragraph 4.3 is concerning butt welds, is this indicating that a clamp must Para. 4.3 requires that the use of line-up clamps must be in accordance with the procedure
96
be used for butt welds and that the weld procedure specification (as discussed specification. If the procedure specification does not require a line-up clamp, then none needs
in 2.3.2.11) for butt welds must reflect this?
to be used when making the production weld. See Para. 2.3.2.11.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-04- Why is a clamp required for a weld procedure qualification, when the pipe
96
nipples for the WPS will have been cut from the same length of pipe and
hence the dimension fit up will be very good; whereas, the field fit ups are
from pipes that will vary in dimension, ovality, etc.?

A line-up clamp is not required for the weld procedure qualification. See Para. 2.3.2.11.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-04- Regardless of what the form of words that API 1104 uses, what was the intention of the
committee in regard to the use of clamp for butt weld joints?
96

We cannot comment on the intention of the committee, only what is written.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-04- API 1104 only discusses the clamp as a method of weld alignment. If API 1104 API 1104 does not discuss specific types of line-up clamps, only the method, i.e. internal,
96
permits the use of other methods of alignment, why are they not discussed
external or no clamp.
and parameters given for their use, removal, etc.? If other methods are
permitted, what are they and what other parameters govern their use?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I-05- If a tensile strength is conducted for welder qualification, what information should be
recorded regarding the test? Currently, (a) I measure the specimen before testing, document that, (b) calculate the specimens
96
area, document that, (c) test the specimen documenting the load, and (d) calculate the tensile strength of the specimen,
documenting the computed tensile strength. If it meets the required specified minimum tensile strength of the material, it is
accepted. But this is not a requirement of welder qualification is it? It appears to me, that all that is required for welder qualification
is for the tensile specimen to break outside the weld zone or meet nick-break requirements if it does break in the weld zone, and
the documentation is accepted or rejected and nothing else. Is this correct?

Weld Procedure Qualification for Automatic Welding - The groupings are left to the writer of the
procedure specification.

No. See Para. 2.3.2.11

Paragraph 3.5.3 requires that the soundness requirements of Paragraph 2.6.3.3 be met. The
tensile strength need not be calculated. It is therefore not necessary to measure the tensile
specimen or to record the breaking load. Only the results of the examination per Paragraph
2.6.3.3 need to be recorded. Paragraph 3.5.3 requires that the soundness requirements of
Paragraph 2.6.3.3 be met. The tensile strength need not be calculated. It is therefore not
necessary to measure the tensile specimen or to record the breaking load. Only the results of
the examination per Paragraph 2.6.3.3 need to be recorded.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0810-96

1) Do a procedure and welder qualification on a butt weld, according to API

1104, qualify for unlimited fillet welds as it does with other codes such as
ASME XI.

1) PROCEDURE QUALIFICATION One of the essential variables listed in Paragraph 2.4 is

2.4.2.3 "Joint Design." Here it states that a major change in joint design constitutes an essential
variable. A change from a butt to a fillet weld is a major change in joint design, thus requiring
that a new procedure be qualified. WELDER QUALIFICATION If a welder qualifies by making a
butt weld per Paragraph 3.2 "Single Qualification," that welder is subject to the essential
variables listed in 3.3.2. Here in subparagraph "g," it states that a change in joint design
constitutes an essential variable. A change from a butt to a fillet weld is a major change in joint
design. That welder would therefore, not be qualified to make fillet welds. (2) Paragraph 4.3
requires that the use of line-up clamps must be in accordance with the procedure specification.
If the procedure specification does not require a line-up clamp then none needs to be used
when making the production weld. See Paragraph 2.3.2.11.(3) A line-up clamp is not required
for the weld procedure qualification.
See Paragraph 2.3.2.11. (4) We cannot give advice on the use of clamps, only interpret
what is written. (5) API 1104 does not discuss specific types of line-up clamps, only the
method, i.e., internal, external, or no clamp. This covers every possible method.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0913-96

On samples extracted such that their length is parallel to the pipe axis, are
shear values required from testing? Is pipe mill roll direction relevant to the
testing of site-produced vertical butt welds?

The API-1104 Standard does not require charpy testing. Therefore, we cannot respond to your
question.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1015-96

Four examples of repair situations that could arise are attached. They are
Example 1 Yes. Example 2 Yes, assuming that "Clause 6.3.2.a" in the first sentence was
labeled Examples 1, 2, 3, and 4 and are only scenarios and are not actual
intended to be 6.3.8.2. Example 3 Yes. Example 4 Depends upon the diameter of the pipe.
cases that have occurred on any project. Please review the four examples. In See paragraphs 6.3.4.c and 6.3.7.2.g.
each example, is the repair acceptable in accordance with sections 6 and 7 of
API Standard 1104?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1015-96

What is the definition of the words "injurious Defect" as they are used in
paragraph 7.1.2, Removal and Preparation For Repair, API Standard 1104,
18th - May 1994?

Any defect that exceeds the standards of acceptability.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1015-96

What is the definition of the words "Sound Metal" as they are used in
paragraph 7.1.2, Removal and Preparation For Repair, API Standard 1104,
18th - May 1994?

Sound metal, as used in Paragraph 7.1.2, is the metal that remains after the injurious defect
has been removed.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1019-96

Paragraph 2.6.3.2 states that nick-break samples shall be broken by: ) pulling Paragraph 2.6.3.2 provides only three methods of breaking a nick break coupon so that it is all
in a tensile machine
that can be used . However, your point is very understandable so we are sending your letter to
b) supporting at each end and striking the middle;
the Welding Procedures and Welder Qualifications subcommittee for review and possible
c) supporting one end and striking the other end. Is it the intent of the code to revision to the standard.
specifically rule out other methods of causing fracturing through the
weldment?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1122-96

Can I use a fillet weld procedure qualified using a non-bevel lap fillet to
complete a 45 degree single bevel fillet weld? And, vice versa.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1122-96

When qualifying welding procedures for fillet welds, one must note the range Both.
of wall thickness and diameters over which the procedure is applicable. Is API
1104 referring to the wall thickness and diameter of the branch or header
piping?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0130-97

Under Section 3.2.2 and 3.3.2 for multiple qualification of welders, is it correct Yes. Paragraph 3.3.2.b requires requalification. if the direction of welding changes from vertical
in understanding that a welder who has successfully completed the multiple
uphill to vertical downhill or vice versa. Also, paragraph 3.3.2.c requires requalification. if the
qualification tests using filler metal from the group 1, (example E-6010& Efiller metal classification is changed from Group 1 or 2 to Group 3 or from Group 3 to Group 1 or
7010), in the downhill travel progression would also be required to
2.
successfully complete those same two tests using filler metal from the group
3, (E-7018), in the uphill travel technique to install attachment fittings on
pipelines such as thread-o-lets, requiring the use of E-7018, since the weld
joint for fittings is a full penetration single bevel?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0130-97

After completion of the multiple qualification tests prescribed in section 3.3.2

using E-6010 and/or E-7010 electrodes in the downhill progression, and
electing not to certify on a full size branch test again, is the only other option
for a welder to be qualified for welding fittings on a pipeline using E-6010 for
the root and E-7018 for the fill and cover passes are those outlined in ASME
Section Ix, Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, QW 452?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0130-97

Question 3 refers to API RP 1107, Third Edition April 1991. Section 3.1 allows We assume that by "---on a butt and branch---" you mean the butt weld and branch described in
for a welder to perform maintenance welding after successfully completing the paragraph 3.3.1 of API 1104 and to the branch described in paragraph 3.2 of API 1107. With
requirements of API Std 1104 3.1 to 3.6 or API RP 1107 3.2 to 3.5. Is a welder this assumption the answer to your question is yes. However, to install sleeves the welder does
qualified to install sleeves using E-7018 if the welder test on a Butt and
not need to make a butt weld qualification test. The welder can make a single qualification test
Branch using E-7018?
as described in the second paragraph of 3.2.1 of ASPI 1104.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0130-97

Questions 4 & 5 refer to API 1104, 18th - May 1994 and API RP 1107, Third
Yes but the welder would only be qualified to weld using Group 1 or 2 electrodes downhill on
Edition, April 1991.Provided a procedure was qualified and a welder was
the root pass and Group 3 electrodes uphill on the fill and cap passes.
tested on the 12-3/4" dia. butt weld and a 12-3/4 dia. full size branch test, per
API Std. 1104 Sec. 3.3, using E-6010 downhill for the root passes and E-7018
uphill for the fill and cover passes, wouldnt this welder meet the criteria as
outlined in API Std. 1104, Sec. 3.3.2 for qualifications to weld in all positions,
all wall thickness', joint designs, and fittings on all pipe diameters, including
the installation of full encirclement sleeves as outlined in API RP 1107, Sec.
3.1?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0130-97

DOT CFR 192, Sec. 192.229(C) states that welders are required to re-certify The subject of a time limit for the qualification of welders has always been left to the codes and
after 6 months unless proof of welding using the process for which they are
user companies. However, this subject will be presented to the API 1104 Subcommittee On
certified under is produced. DOT 195, Sec. 195.222 does not address a
Welder Qualification for review.
specific qualification term limit. Both DOT sections 192-Transportation of
Natural Gas and DOT Section 195-The Transportation of Hazardous Liquids
by Pipeline, reference API Std. 1104 and ASME Sec. IX for welder qualification
testing. ASME B31.3 (1990 Edition), Sec. 434.8.3 references API Std 1104
and/or ASME Sec. IX for welder certification. ASME B31.4 (1992 Edition), Sec.
328.2 references only ASME Sec. IX for certification testing. ASME Boiler &
Pressure Vessel Code Sec. IX, QW-322 does address six months without
welding requiring a new qualification. With the Federal Regulations and
required codes referencing API, why doesnt the API Std. 1104, Sec. 3.7 and
API RP 1107, Sec. 3.6 stipulate a time limit for qualification of welders?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0507-97

Does a specific procedure for the branch weld in a multiple qualification test of Yes, a welder must use a qualified welding procedure when qualifying. See the first paragraph
welders need to be in place when doing the multiple qualification?
of Paragraph 3.3.1, "For multiple qualification, a welder shall successfully complete the two test
welds described below, using qualified procedures." We point out that the welder who
successfully makes the procedure test weld is also qualified.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0910-97

Is branch connection diameter considered an essential variable when

qualifying welding procedures for fillet welds on branch connections? Is it
correct to assume that header diameter in a branch connection weld is NOT
an essential variable?

1104-I0106-00
1104-I0106-00

Does the standard intend that any elongated porosity indication in the root
Yes.
pass should be considered to be hollow bead?
If so, does the standard intend that the definition of linear indication (length
No.
more than 3 times the width as in MT and PT) be applied to porosity
indications in radiographic applications? At the moment, we have a project
(.250" wall pipe) in which a proe of porosity 1/16" wide and 5/32" long is
deemed rejectable because it does not meet the linear indication criteria, and
is considered a single pore rather than hollow bead. If the same indication
was over 3/16" long, it is considered hollow bead and is acceptable. In other
words, the shorter indication is rejectable and the longer indication is
acceptable. This interpretation is causing some confusion.

1104 19th -DATE

9.3.9

1104 19th -DATE

9.3.9

1104 19th -DATE

1104 19th -DATE

6.1 1104-I0121-00
6.1 1104-I0121-00

Is the entire procedure qualification test rejected and thus the welding
procedure not qualified?
Is the welders test for the A side also rejected and thus the welder not
qualified?

Paragraph 2.4.2.3 "Joint Design" specifies that a major change in joint design constitutes an
essential variable thus requiring requalification. A change from a non-bevel lap fillet weld to a
bevel fillet weld is a major change as it involves a bevel in addition to the fillet. However, if the
same procedure is qualified on a bevel fillet weld, the same procedure can be used to weld a
lap fillet because in the qualified procedure, once the bevel is filled, the joint design remaining is
essentially the same as that of a lap joint.

No. The welder could be qualified under 3.2 "Single Qualification."

Diameter is not an essential variable in the qualification of a welding procedure as it is not listed
in Paragraph 2.4.2. However, Paragraph 2.3.2.3 requires that the company establish its own
diameter range for which the procedure is applicable. This range must then be recorded in the
procedure specification. Having done this, pipe with diameters that were outside the selected
range can be welded without requalifying the welding procedure. However, the procedure
specification covering that weld must be changed to include the new diameter range for which
the procedure is applicable.

The welding procedure is not qualified because all of the test specimens shown in Table 2 and
figure 3 have not been successfully tested.
Both welders have failed because their qualification weld must have been made using a
previously qualified procedure. See the first sentence of 6.1 General. However, had the
procedure been qualified, i.e. both the A and B side tests passed, then the procedure and both
of the welders would have been qualified provided the proper number of test specimens were
successfully tested as discussed in the third sentence of 6.1 General.

API Standard 1104 - Welding of Pipeline and Related Facilities

1104 18th - May

1994

3.8 1104-I0301-00

"A record shall be made of the tests given to each welder and of the detailed
results of each test. A form similar to that shown in Figure 2 should be used.
(This form should be developed to suit the needs of the individual company
but must be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate that the qualification test met
the requirements of this standard.) A list of qualified welders and the
procedures for which they are qualified shall be maintained. ..."
Some people presume that Section 3.8 of the Standard requires that written
documentation must be made to verify that each welder welded within the
established parameters of the qualified welding procedure(s). This would
include written notations of the electrodes used, amperages, voltages, and
travel speeds of each pass, preheat temperature(s) and interpass
temperatures.
However, others contend that the Standard does not require written details of
the welder qualification tests other than a pass/fail designation and a
reference to the qualifying radiograph when welder qualification by
radiography is utilized. (Para. 3.6) They contend that as long as the welder
tests were "monitored", no other documentation is required.
Please provide clarification as to the meaning of API 1104 Section 3.8
requirements,
Clarification
is requested regarding the utilization of multiple welders whose
qualifications are in a lesser wall thickness grouping than the full thickness of
a production weld. For example, welders on the job are qualified to weld
thicknesses between 4.78 mm (3/16") and 19.05 mm (3/4") but the production
weld has a thickness of 25.4 mm (1").
Is it permissible to utilize two welders wherein each welder would only deposit
up to 19.05 mm weld deposit thickness in order to fill up the weld groove?
Basically, the first welder would weld the Root, Hot Pass, and Part of Fill
passes; and the second welder would complete the balance of the weld
thickness, i.e. part of the fill passes and the Cap.

API 1104 Standard does not specifically specify information regarding the parameters of
welding that is to be recorded, i.e. electrodes used, amperage, etc. This is left to the discretion
of the individual companies. However, a record must be made of the tests given and the
detailed results of each test (see Paragraph 3.8).

1104 18th - May

1994

Para. 3.2.1 1104-I0302-00

1104 19th
-September
1999

Figure 12, 1104-INote 1

0224-00

There was a mistake in the printing of the 19th Edition of API 1104. While the title of Figure 12
When two welders are being qualified using 20 diameter pipe and each
is correct, the drawing is incorrect. The drawing should be identical to Figure 12 of the 18th
person is welding one-half of the weld, do you have to weld tow sets of nipples Edition, which shows 12 total weld specimens instead of 16.
in order to get the sixteen test samples required per welder?
The response to your question is no. You do need to test 12 weld specimens from each
welder's half (see Table 13). The weld specimens should be equally spaced around the
segments welded by each welder being qualified (see Figure 12, Note 1).

1104 19th
-September
1999

Figure 12, 1104-INote 1

0224-00

If you have a welding procedure that was qualified with the MIG process using You must requalify the procedure. AWS ER70S-3 is not listed in Table 1. The note to Table 1
AWS ER 70S-3 and you are going to use AWS ER 70S-do you have a
therefore requires requalification.
requalify the procedure using the new filler metal or can you just make the
substitution?

1104 18th - May

1994

Fig. 10 pg. 1104-I15

0221-00

In reference to Figure 10 on Page 15 (the non-branch connection sketches), is Not necessarily. The larger pipe can be split and fitted to the smaller pipe.
the weld
specimen for fillet-weld procedure qualification one piece of pipe (smaller
diameter) slipped into another piece of pipe (larger diameter)?

1104 18th - May

1994

Fig. 10 pg. 1104-I15

0221-00

Is there a standard procedure and welder qualification report templatethat is

offered pre-printed from API?

No.

1104 18th - May

1994

Fig. 10 pg. 1104-I15

0221-00

Is radiography acceptable to qualify a welding procedure or

only a welder?

Only a welder, not a procedure. However, please note that in Sections 9 and 10 "Automatic
Welding" and "Automatic Welding Without Filler-Metal Additions nondestructive testing is
required in addition to destructive testing when qualifying a procedure. (See Par. 9.2 and Par.
10.2.1)

1104 18th - May

1994

Fig. 10 pg. 1104-I15

0221-00

Is destructive testing the only way to qualify a welding procedure?

See 3 above.

1104 18th - May

1994

Fig. 10 pg. 1104-I15

0221-00

If a welder is qualified using a standard type MIG welder, does

a change to the use of a pulse type MIG welder require requalification;
assuming that all other variables remain the same?

Requalification is not necessary.

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0327-00

states "For in-service fillet welds, pipe wall thickness is not an essential
variable." Does that also apply to the thickness of a hot tap fitting (e.g. the fillet weld joining the fitting to an in-service pipe)? I
understand that the wall thickness of the in-service pipe is not an essential variable but what about the sleeve wall thickness?

Paragraph 2.2.1.3 of Appendix B

Yes, the reference to wall thickness applies to both the thickness of the sleeve and to the
thickness of the service pipe. Neither are essential variables.

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0327-00

Can I use butt welding and fillet welding procedures qualified under Section 5 You must re-qualify because Appendix B has requirements for procedure qualification that are
of API 1104 to make in-service welds or must I requalify?
not required in Section 5.

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0327-00

In a previous technical inquiry (TI 1104-081096), it is stated that a change

Yes. See the last paragraph under Par. B.1 and the sentence under B.2.
from a butt weld to a fillet weld is considered a major change in joint design
and thus requires a new procedure to be qualified. In branch connection
welding, if I change the weld prep on the branch pipe from a square edge to a
single bevel edge, must I consider that a major change too?

1104 18th - May

1994

Par. 6.3.8.c 1104-I0419-00

1104 18th - May

1994

Sec. 8.1

1104 18th - May

1994

No. Each welder must weld the entire wall thickness when he/she is qualifying. See Paragraph
3.2.1.

Clarification of the requirements of API 1104 Eighteenth Edition, May 1994 is

requested for Paragraph 6.3.8 with respect to "Aligned Porosity as shown in
Figure 18. The inquirer is welding an 18" diameter pipeline with a wall
thickness of 6.35mm (0.250"). In radiographs of the girth welds, we are able
to see images of aligned porosity similar to that shown in Figure 18. Figure 18
shows the distribution matrix, but the note at the bottom of the Figure states ?

Acceptance or rejection of porosity is based on two factors, size of the individual pores (Par.
6.3.8.2 a and b) and amount (Par. 6.3.8.2 c). In judging the amount, the reader is directed to
Figures 18 and 19, in your case Figure 18. Figures 18 and 19 are not intended to show size,
only amount or distribution (see the note). All pores shown in Figure 18 and 19 would be
smaller than 1/8" or 25 percent of the thinner wall thickness. Otherwise, they would be rejected
under Par. 6.3.8.2 a or b. Therefore, the reader must use judgement as to which of the four
examples shown under "aligned" meets his case. Please refer to Par. 6.2 "Rights of Rejection."

1104-I0427-00

With reference to Section 8.1 Radiographic Test Methods, is it permissible to

radiograph welds joining API 5LX-60 pipe with wall thickness of 0.312" and
0.375" using gamma radiography?

Yes as API Standard 1104 does not specify the conditions under which gamma radiography is
used. It is the imaging results that determine acceptability of the method. See Par. 8.1.1.

Sec. 2

1104-I0519-00

With reference to Section 2 of API 1104, is it permissible to list more than one Yes.
filler metal rod size for each welding pass in a welding procedure specification
when the procedure was qualified using only one rod size? The rod size used
in the procedure qualification is not necessarily the size or sizes listed in the
procedure specification.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Fig. B-2

1104-I0728-00

Figure B-2 Suggested Procedure and Welder Qualification Test Assembly

No.
does not have specific information such as dimensions for the assembly nor
flow rates for the cooling fluid into and out of the assembly. Is there a
relationship between what the length of the assembly should be compared to
the pipe diameter?

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-I2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817-00

Paragraph 2.2 states that forms similar to those shown in Figures 1 and 2
No. Paragraph 2.2 does not make Figure 1 mandatory as it states Forms similar to those
should be used. Figure 1 contains a sketch showing the sequence of beads. shown in Figure 1 and 2 should be used. However somehow the user must designate the
Paragraph 2.3.2.5 requires that the "sequence of beads shall be designated". sequence of beads as required in Paragraph 2.3.2.5.
Is the welding procedure required to contain a sketch of the sequence of
beads?

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-I2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817-00

Paragraph 2.3.2.5: Can a welding procedure specify more than one size of
electrode, for example, 5/32" or 3/16" diameter electrodes for the fill pass?
Or are two separate welding procedures required?

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-I2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817-00

Paragraph 2.3.2.13: For the materials being welded, the welding procedure
No.
requires preheat. The welding inspector is checking that the proper preheat is
achieved. Is the welding procedure required to specify how the inspector
measures the preheat?

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-I2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817-00

This question concerns the information to be recorded during the welding

a. Number of passes The minimum number must be recorded but not the actual number.
procedure qualification. The allowable values/ranges are put in the welding
See Paragraph 2.3.2.5
procedure specification. Do the actual values used during the test weld have b. Electrode size- The sizes for which the procedure covers shall be listed but it is not required
to be recorded for number of passes, size and type of electrodes, speed of
to list the actual sizes used to qualify the procedure. (see Paragraph 2.3.2.5)
travel, voltage, and amperage?
c. Type of electrode- The type (classification number) of the filler metal must be listed (see
paragraph 2.3.2.5)
d. Speed of travel The range, not the actual speed must be listed. (see Paragraph 2.3.2.16)
e. Voltage and Amperage- The range for each electrode, not the actual, must be listed. (see
Paragraph 2.3.2.6)

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-IQuestion 2 asked if the procedure can show more than one rod size for the fill Par. 2.4.1 does not specify how the revision is to be shown only that it be made.
2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817A-00 pass. If that is done how do you show the revision to comply with Part 2.4.1 to
show the changes from one rod to another.

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-IOn your reply to question 4 does the person conducting the test give
No.
2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817A-00 testamony by signing and stamping that the ranges specified in the procedure
were followed.

1104 18th - May

1994

2.2,
1104-IAlso is the letter an official interpretation or opinion.
2.3.2.5, 2.4 0817A-00

The size of the gas pockets is not drawn to scale; for dimension, refer to 6.3.8.@ In the case of paragraphs 6.3.8.2 (a) and (b),
there is a specific dimension for rejection, but for Figure 18 - Aligned Porosity (three or more) no specific dimension has been
identified. Hence, NDT interpretation by Inspector and Client is done as per Figure 18 dimensions only. Please identify the size of
the pore for each type shown in Figure 18, that is, with spacing 4T, 2T and 1T between the aligned pores.

Yes, the welding precedure can so state without requiring the qualification of two separate
welding procedures. Electrode diameter is not an essential variable (see Paragraph 2.4)

Yes, the letter to Mr. Holk is an official API interpretation.

1104 18th - May

1994

2 1104-I0908-00

If a procedure specification qualified under API 1104 Section 2 lists only one The procedure can be used for any diameter without requalification because diameter is not an
diameter and one wall thickness (.250"), is it only qualified for the specified
essential variable. However the welding prcedure specification must be revised to include the
wall thickness and diameter or can it be used outside the ranges listed as long the diameter to be welded. If the range for wall thickness has not been established before the
as the WPS is revised to show the change?
start of any production welding, the procedure can be used for other wall thicknesses without
requalification provided the welding procedure specification is revised to include the wall
thicknesses to be welded.

1104 18th - May

1994

2 1104-I0908-00

If a fillet weld procedure specification only lists one wall thickness (.250") and See 1 above.
one diameter, can it be used for material over 1/2" thick.

1104 18th - May

1994

2 1104-I0908-00

To qualify a welder under Section 3.3 - Multiple Qualification, must the weld
test specimens be over 1/2" thick? Must the procedure specification specify
thicknesses over 1/2"?

The wall thickness need not be over thick but it must be at least . (see the second
sentence of the second paragraph of Paragraph 3.3.1 and the second sentence of the third
paragraph of Paragraph 3.3.1). The procedure specification need not specify thicknesses over
.

1104 18th - May

1994

2 1104-I0908-00

Under Section 2.2, what is meant by complete results?

This refers to the results of the tests performed as specified in Paragraphs 2.6 and/or 2.8.

1104 18th - May

1994

2 1104-I0908-00

Under Section 2, if a company takes the procedure specification, has a welder Yes, provided the test results are attached.
make welds that are destructively tested and pass can they just date the
specification and use it for the permanent qualification record?
This assumes that they welded within all of the essential variables of the
specification but did not record the ACTUAL variables as they were used?
An example would be an amperage range of 80-120 on the specification. They
actually welded at 100 amps but didn't record this information anywhere. Can
the specification now be used as the permanent record of qualification?

1104 18th - May

1994

2 1104-I0908-00

If a procedure is qualified and the wall thickness range is specified as 3/16"

through 3/4", does the procedure have to be tested differently accordingly to
the thickness groupings listed in Table 2 under Section 2?

Your question is not clear. Table 2 prescribes the number and type of test specimens that must
be tested depending upon the diameter and wall thickness of the test weld. For example, if the
test weld was made on 16 diameter x .375 wall pipe 16 total test specimens would be rquired
(4 tensile, 4 nick-breaks, 4 root bends and 4 face bends).

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 6.2.2 f 1104-I0925-00

Does this allow a welder who successfully passes a single qualification butt
weld test at 45 degrees to do butt welds and weld on sleeves, saddles, and
similar encirclement fittings in all positions?

Yes.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 6.2.2 f 1104-I0925-00

What is the definition of a lap fillet weld?

The definitions of terms used in the API 1104 Standard, unless defined otherwise in the
Standard, are contained in AWS A3.0 (See Paragraph 2). There you will find a lap joint
defined as a joint between two overlapping members in parallel planes. A lap fillet weld is
shown in the center and lower test assemblies in Figure 10 and in the upper right corner of
Figure 11.

1104 18th - May

1994

Sec.
2.4.2.2

1104-I1102-00

Considering these groupings the materials we use are listed below and
grouped accordingly.
Group( A) SA-106 Gr.B, API 5L Gr.B, API 5L-X42
Group (B) API 5L-X52, API 5L-X60
Group(C) API 5L-X65

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 6.4

1104-I0404-01

A. Regarding the question asked in A of your request for interpretation, we call your attention to
Par.
2.3.2.2. There you will note that the qualification test must be made on the highest specified
minimum
yield strength in the group. Therefore, the answers to your questions are:
A1 Yes.
Also considering compatibility of the base materials and filler materials within
A2 No.
the
A3 It will qualify x65 to x65 but not other materials that you might include in Group C,
groups, I would like to know if I understand API correctly:
because each
1. If I Qualify for group (A) X-42 (TO) X42, will it qualify all our materials in
grade must receive a separate qualification test.
group (A)?
2. If I Qualify for group (B) X-52 (TO) X52 will it qualify all our materials in
Also we call your attention to the warning in the note at the end of Par. 2.4.2.2.
group (B)?
3. If I Qualify for group (C) X65 (TO) X65 will it qualify our material for group B. And C. Regarding the question asked in C, we assume that by above combinations you
(C)?
mean those
listed in your Question B. Procedures qualified for combinations of materials only qualify a
B. We also weld the Base Material groups in combination. For example it is procedure for
necessary to weld:
using that combination of materials. Further note in Par. 2.3.2.2 that when welding materials
1. recent
Group
(A) X42 TO
X52,18 and 19 Editions revealed a notable change to the visual
of two is no tolerance for cracks, inadequate penetration or burn-through on a welder
A
comparison
of Group(B)
the API-1104
There
examination criteria utilized for welder qualifications, i.e. Section 3.4 of the 18 Edition and Section 6.4 of the 19 Edition.
References to defect tolerances (of the NDT acceptance standards section) shown in the 18 Edition have been deleted in the 19 qualification test.
Edition. When read verbatim, there is no tolerance for cracks, inadequate penetration, burn-through or other defects when
The references to the NDT sections in the 18 Edition were there to provide the definition of the defect,
th

th

th

th

th

th

TH

performing visual examinations during welder qualifications under the 19 th Edition. These are very onerous conditions to place on
welder qualifications. Following this discovery, I contacted Mr. George Hickox on 02/21/01 to inquire as to the intention of this
section. He agreed that these were very strenuous conditions and that this was not the intent of the API-1104 Committee. As Mr.
Hickox explained, there must be a set of conditions by which to judge defects and that the proper conditions for use during welder
qualification visual examinations were those listed in the NDT acceptance standards section, as was shown in the 18th Edition.
Following our conversation, Mr. Hickox suggested that I submit this formal request for clarification. Please provide written
clarification
that the welder qualification visual examination criteria of the 18 th Edition of API-1104 continue to a
to apply under the 19 th Edition.

not the defect tolerance. In the first sentence of both Par. 3.4 (18 th Edition) and 6.4 (19 th Edition) it says, ----shall be free from---. The NDT references were
removed from the 19 th Edition to eliminate any confusion.

API Standard 1104 - Welding of Pipeline and Related Facilities

1104 19th
-September
1999

11.4.6

1104-I0517-01

We are currently considering the use of automated ultrasonic inspection for a Yes. Paragraph 11.4.6 requires that requires that the compression wave test be made
range of pipelines (6 thru 18" OD and 0.25 thru 1.25" wall thickness) and are after completion of the circumferential butt weld.
unsure as to the intent of this paragraph.
As part of the pipe manufacturing process (i.e., before the linepipe is delivered
to the fabrication site) all linepipe is ultrasonically scanned using compression
wave testing. This testing takes the form of automated UT and the 'dead zone'
(i.e., approx a 4" band at the end of each pipe) is cut off after scanning or the
end zone is manually ultrasonic scanned to ensure freedom from
unacceptable defects.
Provided the factory ends of the pipe are in the same condition as they were
manufactured (i.e., they have not been cut back) is it necessary to repeat this
scanning as part of the girth weld assessment. If so, why?

1104 18th - May

1994

2.3.2.2

1104-I0614-01

Caltex Pacific Indonesia (CPI) are intending to run new welding procedures in
accordance with API 1104. My interpretation of Section 2.3.2.2 is that if we run
a weld qualification test on a higher grade pipe material, i.e (API5L) X 52, this
higher grade will qualify CPI to weld to lower grades, i.e. (API 5L) Grade B.
The qualification in X 52 material will eliminate the need to run weld
qualification tests on Grade B material.
Is my interpretation of Section 2.3.2.2 correct? Please clarify and advise
accordingly.

Your interpretation is not correct.

Par. 2.3.2.2 states what information you are required to include in your procedure specification
regarding pipe and fitting materials. However, par. 2.4, Essential Variables, identifies those
changes to the welding procedure that require re-qualification of the procedure. Par. 2.4.2.2
addresses base materials, and there you will see the groupings of base materials. A change
from one group to another requires qualification of a new procedure. In your case you would
need one procedure for the Grade B material and another procedure for the X-52 material as
they are in different groups. Also, note the last sentence in Par. 2.3.2.2.

1104 19th
-September
1999

5.6.4.1 &
7.2

1104-I0711-01

API 1104 clearly mentions that misalignment permissible as up to 3 mm. While The Standard does not specifically address this question. However it does state in the third
machining the samples for bend tests, the code says that we should flush the sentence of Par. 5.6.4.1 that the -----reinforcements shall be removed flush-----. It does not
weld to the Parent Metal. If there is a misalignment in the two plates being
permit the removal of base material other than that incidental to the removal of the
welded, should the flushing be done up to the lower plate level or should it be reinforcement. This will result in a tapered bend test specimen at the misalignment.
done in a tapered manner?

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0713-01

Concerning the application of a qualified weld procedure incorporating a

No but the Procedure Specification (see Figure 1) must be changed to show the revised
temper bead sequence, with no change in joint design, heat input, bead size, number of beads (see the second sentence of Par. 5.4.1). Also the minimum number and
or other essential variables but only a change in the number of deposited weld sequence of beads shall be designated as per Par. 5.3.2.5.
passes from 6 to 9; does this type of change constitute a need for
requalification of the entire procedure?

1104 18th - May

1994

Sec. 3.2.2 1104-I0818-01

1104 18th - May

1994

Sec. 3.3

1104-I0905-01

If the single qualification option is chosen to qualify a welder for a V bevel

It is my interpretation the welder is qualified to weld the butt weld fitting to the pipe, provided
groove weld joint design in the pipe diameter grouping over 12 3/4", and within none of the essential variables of paragraphs A - G of section 3.2.2 are changed, the
the 3/16" to 3/4" wall thickness range, will that welder also be qualified to weld requirements of 3.4 and either 3.5 or 3.6 are satisfied, and the welder is following all the
a butt weld fitting to the pipe. The butt weld fitting will have the same V bevel requirements of a qualified welding procedure.
groove weld joint design, be in the same over 12 3/4" diameter group, and the
same 3/16" to 3/4" wall thickness group as the pipe.
In the API 1104 18th Edition, Section 3.3 Multiple Qualification it states that for The decision as to the method of layout is left to the company.
the second test, the welder shall lay out, cut, fit, and weld a full size branchon-pipe connection.
Question: For a first time welder qualification, does layout mean:
1. The welder shall layout the branch connection from scratch (using
wraparounds, steel squares, or any tools necessary)?
2. The welder can layout the branch connection utilizing a precut template?
This question has come up often and it can be interpreted differently. What is
API's meaning of the word layout?

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 6

1104-I1022-01

Does the production of a singular qualification coupon employing different

welding processes approved in Paragraph 12.1 in which part of the weld is
deposited by a welder using one process and the remainder by another
welder using a second process, tested in accordance with and conforming to
the requirements of Paragraph 12.6, satisfy the Standard in qualification of
both welders for the duration of the job."

No. Each welder must weld the entire wall thickness when he/she is qualifying.
See Paragraph 6.2.1

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 5

1104-I1023-01

Are you required to qualify a full penetration branch connection PQR to weld
full penetration weld-o-lets and fillet socket welds. If not what is required.

Yes, both are to be treated as fillet welds.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 5

1104-I1023-01

Are full penetration weld-o-lets considered fillet welds by API 1104.

Yes.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Sec. 5

1104-I1023-01

When you qualify a full penetration branch connection PQR are you qualified
for fillet welds too.

Yes.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Para.
9.3.12

1104-I0822-01

The paragraph 9.3.12 said: excluding incomplete penetration due to high-low Paragraph 9.3.12 means that when you add up the length of imperfections in a 12 length of
and undercutting, any accumulation of imperfections (AI) shall be considered weld, you do not count the undercutting or the incomplete penetration due to high low. These
a defect should any of the following conditions exist:
are considered separately in Paragraphs 9.3.2 and 9.3.11.
a) The aggregate length of indications in any continuous 12 in. (300 mm)
length of weld
exceeds 2 in. (50 mm).
The last means that if I have 12 in. (300 mm) length of weld, imperfections of
2 in (50mm) in that weld length plus, eg 1/2 in. (13 mm) of incomplete
penetration due to high-low or undercutting, in this case is not considered
defect. Now if I have 12 in. (300 mm) length of weld, imperfections of 2 in (50
mm) in that weld length plus, eg individual incomplete penetration due to highlow indication that exceeds 2 in. (50 mm), because Paragraph 9.3.2 ?.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Para.
9.3.9.2

1104-I1109-01

I read on the API 1104's Code on the Paragraph 9.3.9.2 that an "Individual or This appears to be a statement and not a question.
scattered porosity (P) shall be considered a defect should any of the following
conditions exist":
a) The size of an individual pore exceeds 1/8 inch. (3mm)
b) The size of an individual pore exceeds 25% of the thinner of the nominal
wall thickness joined
If I've a welding between two pipe of 5/32 inch (4 mm) and 1/4" (6 mm) of wall
thickness and I found a pore which size is 1/8 inch (3 mm).

1104 19th
-September
1999

Para.
9.3.9.2

1104-I1109-01

What's is the criteria for acceptance that situation: a) or b), before?, because if Par. 9.3.9.2 states Individual------a defect should ANY of the following conditions exist.
I considered the criteria a) before, the welding is acceptable, but if I
Therefore the weld would be rejected by b.
considered the criteria b) before, the welding shall be considered a defect.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Para.
B.4.1.2

1104-I1130-01

We have a project, where we have to do a longitudinal welds in a split-tee in a Appendix B is a recommended practice and therefore is not required by API 1104 (see Par.
in service pipeline, so the situation is if the paragraph b.4.1.2 (API 1104-99)
B.1). If you choose to use it, Par. B.4.1.2 does include split tees. The second sentence of
B.4.1.2 states These joints should be fitted------. Therefore it is your decision to use or not to
applies in order to do longitudinal weld in the split-tee, besides we want to
know if we can weld this longitudinal joint with or without mild steelback-up
use a back-up but please read the precautionary note at the end of the paragraph.
strip or copper back -up strip and if is necessary to remove this back-up strip.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Clause
5.6.4.1

1104-I0218-02

If an undercut (accepted visually as per Page 29, Table4) is observed on a

bend specimen, is a thickness reduction permissible to grind that region to
make it smooth and scratch free?

No. The third sentence of Paragraph 5.6.4.1 states The cover and root-bead---- removed flush
----. This does not permit grinding of the parent metal.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Clause
5.6.4.1

1104-I0218-02

If not, should the bend specimen be tested with undercut as it appears?

Yes.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Clause
5.6.4.1

1104-I0218-02

If so tested, should openings in bent specimen resulting from undercut be

cause for rejection if they exceed the dimensions specified in Clause 5. 6. 4.
3?

Yes.

1104 19th
-September
1999

2.6.2.1

1104-I0305-02

Is there a tolerance plus/minus to the approximately 1 inch wide?

No.

1104 19th
-September
1999

2.6.2.1

1104-I0305-02

Is it permissible to notch the sides to a dimension less than approximately 1

No.
inch to facilitate the tensile-strength test (so the base material will break in a
designated area out of the weld zone) especially in thick base metals and still
meet all the requirements for the tensile strength by dividing the maximum
load by the smallest cross-sectional area of the specimen?

1104 19th
-September
1999

Par. 6.2.2

1104-I0312-02

Must a welder be qualified for each WPS or is it that being qualified for one
WPS allows him to weld in any material type or group?

Please see Par. 6.2.2, which describes the essential variables that require requalification. The
type of material is not an essential variable.

For instance, is a qualified welder for API 5L X65 allowed to weld on API 5L
X70, 60, 56, 42, B and so on, or does he need to be qualified for each WPS
group?
1104 19th
-September
1999

Table 1

1104-I0321-02

Table 1 lists filler metals into groups through ASTM/AWS specifications and
classification. Does it mean that filler metal classifications not listed can not
be considered within those groups?

If the filler metal is not listed in one of the groups of Table 1 it requires separate qualification.
See the note under the table.

For instance, SFA 5.28 ER 80S-G belongs or not to one group?

1104 19th
-September
1999

5.6.4.3

1104-I0401-02

Does API 1104 prohibit machining/grinding the entire bend specimen to a

Yes. The third sentence of Par. 5.6.4.1 states The cover and root bead ------ removed
uniform thickness equal to the minimum thickness available i.e., 6.4 mm in the flush-----. This does not permit machining/grinding of the parent metal of the test specimens. If
present case (Please see enclosed sketch)?
you must use a flange for the qualification weld then you must machine it to the correct
thickness prior to welding. However, please note Par. 5.5 where two pipe nipples are required
to make a procedure qualification weld.

1104 19th
-September
1999

5.6.4.3

1104-I0401-02

Does API 1104 prohibit machining/grinding the root-bend specimen surface

until an acceptable undercut just disappears?

Yes. See the third sentence of Par. 5.6.4.1.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Par.
5.3.2.16

1104-I0626-02

Paragraph 5.4.2.12 states that "A change in the range for speed of travel
constitutes an essential variable." and requires that the procedure be
requalified if this range is changed.

The Company establishes the range that they feel is appropriate and one way is as you have
suggested in B.

How is the range of travel speed for each pass established?

A) By measuring the travel speed of each pass during procedure
qualification and listing the exact speeds employed by the welder for each
pass.
If this is the correct method then what is an acceptable margin for measuring
error for qualification vs. production welding? It is unlikely that the travel speed
will remain exactly constant even under ideal conditions.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Par.
5.3.2.16

1104-I0626-02

B) By establishing a reasonable range of travel speeds based on experience

and/or experimentation at the filler metal manufacturers recommended
amperage and voltage ranges and welding the procedure qualification coupon
within that specified range.
Is the speed of travel specified as an essential variable in order to control the There are other factors that make speed of travel an essential variable such as penetration,
heat input (joules per inch)? If so, why are the amperage and voltage ranges bead profile, ability to weld in various positions etc.
(or joules per inch) not listed as essential variables? If not, why is the speed of
travel listed as an essential variable?

API Standard 1104 - Welding of Pipeline and Related Facilities

1104 19th
-September
1999

1104-I0703-02

5.4.2.2

Does this mean that a WPB (35,000 psi yield) fitting can be welded to X-52
Grade pipe as long as a qualified procedure for welding X-52 pipe is being
used (Please answer assuming all pressure, wall thickness and all other
design requirements are met)?

It means that fittings and/or pipe from different groups(as defined in 5.4.2.2) can be welded
together, provided that the welding procedure specification to be used has been qualified for
welding the higher of the two yield strengths involved in the specific pipeline design, regardless
of the number of grades that a specific pipe may have been qualified to by the pipe mill.

Or, does it mean that when welding pipe, which has been double or triple
stenciled, such as a double stencil of X-42/X-52, that a procedure qualified to
weld X-52 or the higher yield rating must be used.
We are trying to understand whether fittings and/or pipe from different groups
in section 5.4.2.2 can be welded together utilizing the procedure for the higher
yield material of the two or if this statement is trying to cover the procedure by
which the pipe mills will stencil pipe to qualify for several grades.

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I0709-02

Sec. 3

Section 3. Welder Qualification

There is no duration on the qualification of a welder. However, a welder may be required to requalify if a question arises regarding his competence. See par. 3.8

Is there any duration on the validity of a welder qualification? (eg. a welder

conducts a manual welder qualification test in Dec 2001 and conducts
production welding using that process/procedure with the same employer until
Mar 2002. Will this welder still be qualified to conduct production welding in
Sept 2002 provided no other conditions have changed)?
1104 18th - May
1994

Sec. 3

1104-I0709-02

1104 19th
-September
1999

9.3.8.2 &
9.3.8.3

1104-I0716-02

Section 4.2 Alignment

1104 18th - May

1994

Par. 3.3.1

1104-I0725-02

1104 19th
-September
1999

Clause 5.3 1104-I0804-02

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0923-02

If a welder can inspect his own welds, should he be required to take a test to
prove this, in addition to the welder qual test.

If a welder---
Inspection personal are not required to take a test but they must be qualified as per Par. 8.3.

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0923-02

Under API-1104 Appendix B, If a procedure was qualified with and without a

heating blanket, but the procedure that was chosen was without, are both
welders qualified to weld on in-service piping to this procedure? Both test
pieces were mechanically tested and passed. This test was given in the 5G
position. How does this effect us in the field.

Under API-1104----
Yes, both welders would be qualified. Please note in the qualification of in-service welders (Par.
B.3), preheat is not an essential variable.

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. B

1104-I0923-02

The biggest issue is welding on in-service piping using 7018. One side
currently uses 6010/7010 SMAW on all in-service gas piping operating at or
below 60 psi. Does the code allow this. I do realize that 7018LH is the
preferred method, but this would greatly increase our costs.

The biggest issue---

API 1104 does not address design i.e. the type of filler metal you must use. However a change
in filler metal does effect the qualification of the procedure. (See Par. B.2 which refers you to
Section 5. In Section 5 please note Par. 5.4.2.6. )

1104 19th
-September
1999

Par. 5.1

1104-I1015-02

API 1104, Paragraph 5.1 includes the following statement:

"BEFORE production welding is started, a detailed procedure specification
shall be established and QUALIFIED to demonstrate that welds with suitable
mechanical properties (such as strength, ductility and hardness) and
soundness can be made by the procedure."

To be qualified in accordance with API 1104 the welding procedure must be qualified before the
start of production welding. See Par. 5.1. Please be advised however that 49 CFR Parts 192
and 195 do not require weld procedures to be qualified in accordance with API Std. 1104.

API 1104 does not address the separation of longitudinal seams on adjacent pipes.

This section does not address minimum separation (or location) for longseam
welds in seam welded pipe. Is there a recommended minimum (eg. 4" or six
times the wall thickness, whichever is least).
As a user of API Standard 1104 19

You are correct. There was a typo in the 19

th
edition Sept. 1999, I would respectfully request a technical
interpretation of Part 9 "Acceptance Standards for Nondestructive Testing".
and other typos.
In paragraph 9.4.2.c (Magnetic Particle Testing, Acceptance Standards) and 9.5.2.c (Liquid Penetrant Testing, Acceptance
Standards) it is stated that "Rounded indications shall be evaluated according to the criteria of 9.3.8.2 and 9.3.8.3, as applicable."
This requires you to evaluate all "Rounded" indications to the "Linear" indication acceptance criteria of Slag Inclusions?
A "Rounded" indication is where the maximum dimension of the indication is considered its size for evaluation. A "Linear" indication
is where the maximum dimension of the indication is considered its length for evaluation. See paragraphs 9.4.1.3 and 9.5.1.3 for
the definitions of rounded and linear indications for evaluation.
The evaluation of rounded indications would be better suited to and relate more closely the type of imperfection being evaluated if
when the evaluation is made it is made to the acceptance criteria of 9.3.9.2 and 9.3.9.3 (Rounded) instead of that contained in
9.3.8.2 and 9.3.8.3 (Linear).
How do you make the correct evaluation and interpretation of relevant rounded indications to
linear acceptance criteria as required in the current acceptance standards that are referenced?
May this reference to 9.3.8.2 and 9.3.8.3 be a typo that requires a correction to 9.3.9.2 and
9.3.9.3 in the next review and revision cycle of the Standard or is the current reference to
9.3.8.2 and 9.3.8.3 correct as written or is this a matter that is already under your consideration?

th

Edition, dated Sept. 1999. An errata dated Oct. 31, 2001 was issued to correct this

Paragraph 3.3.1 of API 1104 18th edition, Multiple Qualification General,

The first sentence of the third paragraph of 3.3.1 states For the second test, the welder shall
states that a welder shell lay out, cut, fit and weld a full-size branch-on-pipe
lay out, cut, fit, and weld a full-size branch-on-pipe connection. Since lay out is but one part of
connection. If a welder successfully performs the lay out portion of this test on the overall test it must be repeated on the retest.
his first Qualification test, is he required to lay out the branch when he requalifies, or is he allowed to use a template or shape cutter to cut out the
branch connection.
1) Under Clause 5.3, API 1104 stated that Diameter Group shall be specified Regarding your question about requalifing a welding procedure, it need not be requalified
in the Welding Procedure Specification (WPS)
because diameter is not an essential variable. However the welding procedure specification
2) But, under clause 5.4 (Essential Variables), Diameter group is not included must be revised to include the diameters to be welded.
in the essential variables list.
3) If we have qualified a WPS with NPS 8 pipe, do we need to re-qualify a
For welder qualification, diameter is an essential variable. (See Par.6.2.2.d)
WPS for NPS 16 pipe welding (within same material group and wall thickness
group)?
4) Or we have to only qualify welder instead of re-qualify the WPS to the
diameter group above NPS 12?

Regarding the 5G position, position does not effect you in the field so long as the requirements
of Par. 6.2.2f are met.

In our case, since we are verifying adherence to the requirements of DOT &
API 1104 after fabrication, the procedures can't qualified BEFORE welding.
However, we have had these same procedures qualified to API 1104 by an
independent testing laboratory. Our question is whether you feel that in this
instance we've met the intent of API 1104 by performing these weld procedure
qualifications after welding?

1104 18th - May

1994

1104-I1022-02

2.4.2.2

Since base materials are separated into 3 yield strength categories can
Yes, it is permitted to weld materials from separate groups together provided the welding
category a (equal to or less than 42,000) and category b (greater than 42,000 procedure for the higher group is used. See the last sentence of Paragraph 2.3.2.2.
but less than 65,000) be welded together with a procedure qualified on X46
(46,000) pipe?
Specifically this operator is welding together X46 and grade B (35,000) pipe
and their procedure was qualified on X46.

1104 19th
-September
1999

5.1 1104-I1104-02

Does the final Procedure Specification have to state only the values recorded Your question relates to what needs to be recorded on the Procedure Specification Form i.e.
during the qualification test such as volt, amp and travel speed ranges or can Figure 1. You do not need to record the actual values as Par. 5.3.2.6 and 5.3.2.16 only requires
the company use the welding rod vendor's recommended range even though that you record the ranges. However we point out that the actual values of voltage and
the entire range was not experienced during the test?
amperage should be recorded on Figure 2 Sample Coupon Test Report. The same is true
regarding travel speed.

1104 19th
-September
1999

5.1 1104-I1104-02

Can the welding procedure include a different weld rod size for a specific pass Yes, because electrode size is not an essential variable.
even though that rod size was not used for the procedure test? Again, one
would use the manufacturer's specified volt and amp range. For example, this
inclusion could allow a welder to use a 1/8" rod for a root pass instead of the
3/32" rod used in the procedure test because the test was done with a 6" pipe
even though the qualified range extends up to 12" diameter.

1104 19th
-September
1999

5.4.2.6

1104-I0102-03

Can Welding Procedure Specifications which have been established and

Yes.
Qualified in accordance with API Standard 1104 specifying SMAW electrodes
Of the E7010-G classification also be considered qualified with SMAW
Electrodes of the E7010-P1 classification? Likewise, for E8010-G and E8010P1?

1104 19th
-September
1999

App. A

1104-I0120-03

In Appendix A, Paragraph A.1, it is stated that "Welds subjected to applied

axial strain of more than 0.5% are not covered by this appendix." Is there a
maximum applied axial strain or stress limit when not using Appendix A, i.e.
workmanship criteria? If yes, can you cite the paragraph with this maximum
limit?

The standard does not specify a limit for stress or axial strain for welds inspected to the
workmanship acceptance criteria given in Section 9. It is up to the company to decide whether
such criteria are appropriate for the specific design strain involved.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Par. 6.2.1
& 6.2.2

1104-I0212-03

My first question is Paragraph 6.2.1 does not state a particular pipe diameter
or wall thickness for a single qualification test, so if a welder qualification test
on a 12.750 in. pipe diameter and a 0.322 in. wall thickness, in the fixed
position at the 45 degree angle, what pipe diameters and wall thickness range
is this test good for? My assumption is that in Paragraph 6.3.2 the welder
qualification test on a 12.750 in pipe diameter qualifies the welder for all
diameters and wall thickness ranges, can I assume the welder qualification on
a 12.750 in. pipe diameter 0.322 in. wall thickness, in the fixed 45 position,
for the single welder qualification, would qualify that welder for all pipe
diameters, wall thickness ranges, and all positions?

For single qualification, 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 apply. For your example, under single qualification, the
welder would be qualified to do butt welds and lap fillet welds in all positions for the outside
diameter group from 2.375 in. through 12.750 in. and the wall thickness group from 0.188 in.
through 0.750 in., subject to the other essential variables in 6.2.2. You made an incorrect
assumption because 6.3.2 only pertains to multiple qualifications, and is based upon the welder
successfully completing both of the tests (a butt weld test and a branch connection weld test)
specified in 6.3.1.

1104 19th
-September
1999

Par. 6.2.1
& 6.2.2

1104-I0212-03

My second question is about Paragraph 6.2.2, Part f, which states a welder

Correct. A welder qualifying under 6.2.1 (single qualification), with the pipe in the fixed 45
qualification test in the fixed 45 position, qualifies a welder for butt welds and position would be qualified to do butt welds and lap fillet welds in all positions, subject to the
lap fillet welds in all positions, is this correct?
other essential variables in 6.2.2. (The bottom two sketches in Figure 10 provide examples of
lap fillet welds.)

1104 18th - May

1994

Par. 1.2.2.9 1104-I0131-03

My question is in reference to Paragraph 1.2.2.9 "Roll Welding." It reads, Roll Yes

welding is welding in which the pipe or assembly is rotated while the weld
metal is deposited at or near the top center.
My question is what if the welder starts welding on the top of the pipe (welding
downhill); he welds one quadrant, STOPS, rolls the pipe where he needs to
weld, to the top, and begins welding again; and he does this till he finished
welding. Is this considered position welding (Paragraph 1.2.2.8) or rolled
welding? I guess the key word is "while the weld metal is deposited" because
in reference to Paragraph 2.4.2.4 "Position," a change from rolled to fixed
constitutes an essential variable.
To sum all this up, if we have a procedure in the fixed position, can we roll the
pipe, as long as if we do not roll it while welding, without reestablishing a new
procedure?

1104 19th September

1999

Section
B.4.1.2

1104-I0227-03

Question 1: When performing a procedure qualification for in-service welding,

does it recommend the branch be taken with the sleeve? Question 2: Does
API recommend this in-service procedure qualification be incorporated in
another already qualified procedure? Question 3: Does the sleeve part of
the procedure qualification test also require flowing media? Question 4:
Should the sleeve portion of the procedure qualification test have a backing
strip? Question 5: Is the use of a backing strip considered an essential
variable? (joint design)

Response 1: No. The user has the option to qualify a procedure for either a sleeve or a branch.
Response 2: No. Response 3: No. The use of flowing media is recommended for either a
sleeve or a branch to simulate the ability of the flowing contents to remove heat from the pipe
wall.
Response 4: If so required by the welding procedure specification. The use of a backing strip
is recommended in Section B.4.1.2. Response 5: No, for the welding procedure (Ref. Section
B.4.1.2). Yes, for the welder qualification if a backing strip required by the welding procedure
specification is eliminated.

1104 19th September

1999

B.1

1104-I0303-03

In B.1, it is stated that "This appendix does not cover pipelines and piping
No
systems that have been fully isolated and decommissioned, or have not been
commissioned." At Keyspan, we isolate our lines by shutting 2 valves on either
side of the section we will be working on and we take the line out of service
and bleed the pressure down below 15 pounds before we weld. The line has
no flow and the temperature of the main is usually ambient.
Question: Would this be considered "fully isolated and decommissioned?"

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0310-03

Question 1: Is it necessary for the WPS to have been qualified with materials
having 65 ksi yield (the highest in the group B)? Question 2: Is it possible to
use a WPS qualified with materials API 5L X60 x API 5L X60?

1104 19th September

1999

5.4.2.2

1104-I0313-03

Does the wire ER70S-3 (ASME SFA-5.18) fit in Table 1? Does this welding
Wire ER70S-3 is covered by the note to Table 1, and requires a separate procedure
consumable belong to Group 5 of said table, or should it be considered as
qualification.
unlisted and have a separate qualification for itself according to the note of the
table?

Response 1: No; however, your assumption is incorrect. Group B does not include material that
has a specified minimum yield strength of 65 ksi; such material is covered by Group C.
Response 2: Yes; however, it should be noted that it would also be possible to use a WPS that
has been qualified with API 5L Grade X56 pipes.

1104 19th September

1999

Appendix A 1104-I0315-03

Question 1: Can Appendix A be used to determine whether these rejected

Response 1: Yes. As long as all the requirements in Appendix A are met. (For example, refer
indications could be accepted? Question 2: If, using a calibrated reliable
to A.2.2.2) Response 2: No. API 1104 doesn't reference ASTM E 1079. Response 3: This is
densitometer, the measured density of a BT image is 2.83 and the measured not an appropriate matter for interpretation.
density of the parent metal image is 2.78, can the 0.05 tolerance referenced
in ASTM E 1079 be used to make the two measured values equal? Question
3: Does the storage time of radiographed films (for example, Agfa D7 stored
for 1 year) have an influence on density variations?

1104 19th September

1999

Sec.
5.4.2.2

1104-I0325-03

If we test a welder using 66,000 psi tensile material, is he qualified to weld

60,000 psi and/or 75,000 psi material? Note we are not mixing material; just
using different materials in different locations.

1104 18th - May

1994

Section 3

1104-I0410-03

If the welder is qualified under ASME Section IX, can he also weld API 1104
No. For a welder to be qualified to weld to API 1104 welding procedures, all of the qualification
procedures assuming that none of the welder essential variables stated in API requirements stated in API 1104 for both welding procedures and welders must be met,
1104 are violated?
irrespective of ASME Section IX requirements.

Material grade is not an essential variable for the qualification of welders; therefore, a qualified
welder may weld any grade, subject to the welder qualification essential variables in Section 6.

API Standard 1104 - Welding of Pipeline and Related Facilities

1104 18th - May

1994

Section
3.5.1

1104-I0420-03

If a pipe, for example 32 inch OD by 19.05 mm wall thickness, is to be welded No. As stated in the title of Table 3, the total numbers of specimens (12 for your example) are
by two welders (each half of pipe), can we remove and test half of the test
required for each welder. If two welders are being qualified, each welding half of the pipe, the
specimens for each welder? That is, total number of specimens completed for location of the specimens shown in Figure 12 are rotated in accordance with Note 1 to that
pipe and not for each welder (in this example, 6 of 12 specimens per welder). figure, such that 12 specimens are obtained from each welder's half of the pipe, for a total of 24
specimens.

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0509-03

Question 1: If accessible, can we use double side welding for API 1104
Response 1: Yes. Response 2: No.
Pipeline Welding, ensuring reinforcement requirements are met as per the
standard? Question 2: Does API 1104 prohibit root side repairs from inside of
the pipeline, if accessible?

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0527-03

Question 1: Is there any applicable clause / table in API 1104: 1999 that
Response 1: Yes. Sec. 5.3.2.4 refers to joint design, and a sketch of the full penetration weld
covers the welding procedure qualification test requirements of full penetration is to be shown in the procedure. All procedure test requirements are noted in Sec. 5.8 Testing
T-butt (branch connection) for new pipe fabrication? {Ref. 8 weldolet (branch) of Welded Joints Fillet Welds. The joint design described is a combination of a bevel and fillet
to 28 pipe.} Question 2: What are the types of mechanical tests to comply
welds. Response 2: Sections 5.7 and 5.8 refer to the test requirements. Response 3: No
with, in order to qualify the welding based on API 1104: 1999 requirements?
Question 3: Is there any provision for re-test should any of the coupons for
mechanical test failed?

1104 19th September

1999

Section
9.3.5.b

1104-I0604-03

Am I reading this wrong; what is the correct meaning of 9.3.5 b and c?

1104 19th September

1999

Section
9.3.8.2

1104-I0606-3

Background: 9.3.8.2 states "For pipe with an outside diameter greater than or Yes Provided the other requirements of 9.3.8.2 are met.
equal to 2.375 in. (60.3 mm), slag inclusions shall be considered a defect
should any of the following conditions exist:" Item f states "More than 4 ISI
indications with the maximum width of 1/8 in. (3 mm) are present in any
continuous 12-in. (300-mm) length of weld." Question: Is this to say that
more than 4 ISI indications, each having less than the maximum width of 1/8"
are acceptable, provided they do not exceed the maximum length?

1104 18th - May

1994

Section 9.6 1104-I0717-03

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0723-03

Question 1a: Whether an established welding procedure for X56 to X56 pipe Responses: 1a: Yes; 1b: Yes; 1c: Yes; 2a: Yes; 2b: Yes. The scope of the multiple welder
can be used to support a butt weld for X46 to X46 pipe, if there are no other
qualification is defined in Sec. 3.3.2 in the 18th Edition and 6.3.2 in the 19th Edition.
essential variable changes. Question 1b: Whether an established welding
procedure for X56 to X56 pipe can be used to support a butt weld for X56 to
Grade B pipe, if there are no other essential variable changes. Question 1c:
Whether an established welding procedure for X56 to Grade B pipe can be
used to support a butt weld for X46 to Grade B pipe, if there are no other
essential variable changes. Question 2a: Whether it is permissible to weld
different pipe diameters in the butt weld test (14), and the branch connection
test (20). Question 2b: Whether it is permissible to weld with different filler
metal groupings and weld progression in the butt weld test and the branch
connection test (e.g. Group 1 or 2, downhill progression in the butt weld and
Group 1 and 3 uphill progression in the branch connection.)

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0223-04

Is the weld for attaching sock-o-lets, weld-o-lets and thread-o-lets to a header API considers the sock-o-let, weld-o-let and thread-o-let welds to a header branch welds and
a fillet weld or should these welds be considered branch welds and the welder the welder must be qualified with a branch test.
only be qualified by an overhead branch test?

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0608-04

Does a welding procedure qualified for branch connection also qualify for
welding full-encirclement sleeves?

1104 19th September

1999

Sec. 6.2.2 f 1104-I072204

1104 19th September

1999

As stated in 9.3.5, IFD shall be considered a defect should any of the conditions exist. (a, b & c
must each be considered separately.)

Can 9.6 be interpreted where as far as the welding process is not changed,
9.6 require that each welding unit be qualified. Therefore, each welding unit must be qualified
the welding equipment is qualified by making an acceptable weld using the
separately, even though they may be identical. Note 9.6 states weld testing can be either
qualified welding procedure and there should be no requirement on requalifing destructive or nondestructive.
the procedure because of the difference in model number of the welding
machine used during weld procedure qualification being different from the one
used during production?

Yes, but only if the longitudinal welds on the sleeve are fillet welds, and not full penetration, Vgroove welds. For in-service procedure qualification, Appendix B refers to Section 5, (See
Section B.2). Section 5.4.2.3 states a major change in joint design constitutes an essential
variable. A change from a branch connection to a full penetration, V-groove weld is considered
a major change in joint design, and thus requires a new procedure to be qualified.

Question 1. Your first question deals with the definition of a lap weld fillet, as Response 1. Welding terms in this Standard are defined in AWS A3.0, as noted in Sec. 3.1
noted in Sec. 6.2.2.f. Question 2. Your next question to deals with the
General. Response 2. The requirement for time between weld beads is contained in Sec.
welding procedure essential variable, time between passes, as noted in Sec. 5.3.2.10, and requires the time between beads to be designated. There is no specific time
5.4.2.8, and whether that time may be one hundred years, if desired.
required by the Standard, but as noted in Sec. 5.4.2.8, an increase in the maximum time
between the completion of the root bead and the start of the second bead constitutes an
essential variable.

1104-I0723-04

Ref. the following list of pipe materials, (grades, wall thickness & diameter)
Grd. X70 to Grd. X70, wall thickness .188 to .750, 2 thru 42
Grd. X70 to Grd. X52, wall thickness .188 to .750, 2 thru 42
Grd. X70 to Grd. X42, wall thickness .188 to .750, 2 thru 42
Grd. X52 to Grd. X52, wall thickness .188 to .750, 2 thru 42
Grd. X52 to Grd. X42, wall thickness .188 to .750, 2 thru 42
Grd. X42 to Grd. X42, wall thickness .188 to .750, 2 thru 42
Question 1. Your first question to deals with the minimum number of
configurations of butt weld procedures required when welding on all pipe
grades, diameters, and wall thicknesses shown above. Question 2. What is
the true meaning of the first paragraph of Section 5.4.2.2?

Response 1. Three (3) procedures; X42 X42, X52 X52 & X70 X70, are required.
Response 2. When welding pipe of different base materials, the procedure for the higher
strength base material group shall be used for the qualification of welding procedure

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0810-04

If a welder performs a welder qualification test using an E6010+ on the root

pass and an E7018 on all remaining weld passes, is the welder qualified to
weld on a full low hydrogen weld w/ all passes being of the E7018 group?

No. Refer to Sec. 6.2.1 and Sec. 6.2.2, which state, changes in essential variables described in
6.2.2.c, require requalification of the welder.

1104 19th September

1999

Section 6.7 1104-I1008-04

My question is on Section 6.7(retesting). If a company chooses to allow a

second
attempt at a test when a welder failed a test (due to poor skills /
technique and NOT due to unavoidable conditions), is there an obligation to
provide additional training prior to the second welding test? Also, is
there anything in 1104 that prohibits a company from offering a re-test?

Proof of subsequent welder training is required as noted in 6.7. API 1104 does not prohibit a
company from offering a re-test.

Are "wrap-around" and "roller" jigs permissible within API 1104?

Yes

1104 19th September

1999
1104 19th September
1999

1104-I1026-04

Appendix B 1104-1108- What Sections of Appendix B apply to the testing and coupon locations for a
04
welder qualification sleeve test? Table 3?

No, Table 3 applies only to butt weld test specimens for welder qualification. For in-service
welder qualification, Appendix B refers to Section 6.2, Single Qualification. Fillet weld test
sample acceptance criteria are contained in Sections 6.4 and 6.5. Sample location information
for fillet weld testing is referenced in Section 6.5.6 and Figure 10.

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I1115-04

Question 1. Welding contractor has stated that he can qualify two welders on Response 1. Two welders can be qualified on a single pipe nipple as long as the total number
one coupon, each welding one side. They are not using different processes. of test specimens is taken for each welder in accordance w/ 6.1 and Table 3. Response 2. API
My contention is one welder, one coupon; correct? Question 2. Section 5.4.2 1104 does not list amperage values or parameters for the WPS. Re-qualification is required
(19th Ed) does not list welding amperage as an essential variable. What
only if the essential variables are changed, as referenced in 5.4.1.
parameters are applicable for amperage values outside of the WPS/PQR
limits? Is re-qualification required?

1104 18th - May

1994

Sec. 3.5.4 1104-I1206-04

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I1214-04

Question 1. What is the outcome if the contractor actually DELETES PWHT? Response: In accordance w/ 5.4.2.14, any change to the values of PWHT constitutes an
According to the above clause, the Contractor is permitted to delete PWHT
essential variable and would require re-qualification. Response 2A: There are no defined wall
without affecting the Procedure or API 1104 essential variables. Question 2A: thickness groups referenced for the procedure specification in 5.4.2.5, however, the ranges of
What is the defined thickness group - there isn't one referenced? Question
diameters and wall thicknesses must be identified in the specification, as noted in 5.3.2.3.
2B: Is it API 1104 intention, to permit wall thickness groups to be contractually Response 2B: API 1104 does not address contractual issues. See answer for 2.A. Response
agreed between Contractor and Client for weld procedure groupings?
2C: API 1104 does not address contractual issues. See answer for 2.A.
Question 2C: Is it API 1104 intent to permit the Client to specify the wall
thickness groups for weld procedure groupings prior to award of contract?
Question 1: The section on essential variables for welding procedures section Response 1: Yes. The wall thickness range must be identified in the WPS, as required in
5.4.2.5
5.3.2.3. Any change from that range constitutes an essential variable. Response 2: There are
states a change in grouping from one group to another is an essential variable no essential variables for welding operators. Welding operators must be qualified in
however this section does not give a group. Can you clarify which group is
accordance w/ 12.6.
applicable or can these be specified by the writer of the WPS because the
grouping referenced in 5.3.2.3 relates to
Section 6.2.2 d and e and these are only suggested groupings and not
mandatory.There is no diameter shown in essential variables so is the
diameter also to be stated in other words would a procedure qualified on
10"be applicable for 40' provided all other stated essential variables were
adhered to? Question 2: Welding operator and equipment Qualification for
Automatic Welding
Section 12.7 has no essential variables specified and the essential variables in
12.5 are applicable for welding procedures and not welder qualifications. If this
is correct what essential variables are applicable

In reference to Nick-breaks Section 3.5.4, 18

th
Edition; If the nick breaks in the base metal, not the weld,
does it pass or do you need to make additional specimens and nick it further to assure it will break in the weld are? (The situation arises because
of 2 different thicknesses of pipe. One (1) side is thicker, and we have fracture in the base material.

The nick-break must break in the weld metal for the evaluation of the weld.

1104 19th September

1999

Sec.
5.4.2.5

1104-I0103-5

1104 19th September

1999

Sec. 6.6

1104I have a question related to Welder Qualifications section 6.6

No. API 1104 Section 6.6.1 does not allow for the substitution of AUT for RT
0103-5
Radiography-Butt Welds only. "At the company's option, the qualification butt
2nd Inquiry may be examined by radiography in lieu of the tests specified in 6.5". As we
only use AUT we are not set up for radiography so my question is can
API clarify that AUT may be utilized instead of the stated radiography for
welder quals. I know this may not be the route to go through but if you could
forward this to the appropriate person or give me the name of who I should
send such queries to I would appreciate it as we are being put in a position we
have
to carry out radiography as is stated in API 1104 on welder quals.
There are also more clarifications I would like to get in writing from API.

1104 19thSeptember
1999

Section 5

1104-I0104-5

1104 19th
-September
1999

Section
B3.2

1104-0112- When qualifying a welder on the in-service sleeve groove weld, there is no
This is an oversight in the 19th Edition. It has been addressed in the 20th Edition
05
Type and Number of Specimens table for welder qualification only a table (B1) for procedures qualification. Section B.3.2 Testing of Weld refers to
requirements of 6.4 and 6.5. If Table 3 is used, what diameter of pipe should
be used for number of specimens and type of test, i.e. root bent, nick, break,
or face bend? Or was the diagram of the sleeve weld in Figure B-3 meant to
indicate one coupon each of the root bend, face, bend, tensile, and nick break
were required?

1. Sec. 5.3.2.3: Is it correct to assume the diameter range of 2-3/8 and

1. Yes. 2.Yes. Electrode size is not an essential variable, and, therefore, a change in electrode
larger, as currently outlined in the contractors procedures, is acceptable?
size, alone, would not constitute a requirement for qualifying a new procedure. As specified in
Sec. 5.3.2.5: 2. When a procedure has been established for a SMAW weld, Sec. 5.4.1, changes other than essential variables may be made in the procedure without reand the electrode size has been recorded for .188 WT pipe, is it acceptable to qualification, provided the procedure specification is revised to show the changes. 3. No.
change the electrode size to weld a .625 WT pipe without qualifying a new
Voltage and amperage are not essential variables for the welding procedure; however, the
procedure? 3. Sec. 5.3.2.6: Is there an acceptable voltage & amperage
ranges of electrical characteristic must be identified in the welding procedure, and can not be
range/percentage that can be used outside the range recorded in the qualified used outside the ranges listed in the procedure.
procedure?

It is my interpretation that the fillet welds on the end of the sleeve are nick
break tested according to the diagram on Figure 10 and Figure 11. We would
nick break test 4 coupons from each end. Is this correct?

1104 19th
-September
1999

B-2

1104-I0118-05

If a test piece welded as indicated in figure B-2 is used for in-service welders This is an oversight in the 19th Edition. It has been addressed in the 20th Edition
qualification test, only the circular welds are submitted to testing (YES/NO)? If
the answer is NO, then which is the testing to be performed to the longitudinal
butt welds (with backing) according to clause B.3.2-> clause 6.5?

API Standard 1104 - Welding of Pipeline and Related Facilities

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I1012-05

1104 19th September

1999

Sec 9.3.3, 1104-I9.3.3, and 1019-05

9.3.12

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I1220-5

1104 19th September

1999

Para 8.4.1 1104-I0123-06

1104 19th September

1999

1104-I0522-06

1104 20th - January

2003

1104-I0522-06

1104 20th - January

2003
1104 20th - January Section
2003
11.4.7.3

When qualifying welders, must a company measure and record the welder
speed of travel?

No. Speed of travel is not an essential variable for the qualification of welders; therefore,
measuring and recording speed of travel during the welder qualification process is not required.
Welders, however, must follow qualified procedures in which the range for speed of travel is
specified for each weld pass, therefore, companies may elect to measure and/or record the
speed of travel during welder qualification.

Question 1: Sec. 9.3.3: Your first question deals with inadequate cross
Response 1: The criteria for ICP for weld lengths less than 12 in length is necessary, since
penetration and why there is no specific mention of aggregate length of ICP in ICP only occurs with a two-sided weld configuration; i.e. ID and OD welding. Response 2:
welds less than 300 mm in length. Question 2: Sec. 9.3.5: Your second
The requirement in Section 9.3.5c applies to welds of any length. Response 3: All listed
question deals with incomplete fusion due to cold lap and why there is no
criterion applies to the accumulation of imperfections, and both apply to all weld sizes.
specific mention of aggregate length of IFD in welds less than 300 mm in
length. Question 3: Sec. 9.3.12: Your third question deals with the
accumulation of imperfections and why one defect criterion is over 16% of the
weld length (exceeds 2 in continuous 12 of weld length), and the other
criterion listed is greater than 8% of the weld length.

Comment: The suggestion was made to add a SAW filler metal classification Response: As verbally noted to the individual who suggested the addition of this particular filler
for SAW welding; namely: A5.23, used for low alloy double joint welding
metal classification during the annual meeting of the API-AGA Joint Committee on Oil and Gas
Pipeline Field Welding Practices on January 20, 2006, the 20th edition of the Standard, as
published, does not exclude the use of A5.23. As noted in 4.2.2.1.i, filler metals that do not
conform to the specifications listed in the standard may be used, provided the welding
procedures involving their use are qualified. The Subcommittee will consider adding the A5.23,
provided it is also addressed in Table 1- Filler Metal Groups, of the Standard.
Question 1: Paragraph 8.4.1 - Procedures states Nondestructive testing
Response 1: The 19th Edition of API Std. 1104 Section 8.4 does not specify the minimum
personnel shall be certified to Level I, II or III in accordance with the
qualifications or experience level of user company personnel; however, we refer you to Section
recommendations of American Society for Nondestructive testing,
8.3 for guidance. It also it should be noted that company personnel may be subject to
Recommendation Practice No. SNT-TC-1A, ACCP or any other recognized
regulatory or user company requirements. Response 2: The 19th Edition of API Standard 1104
national certification Program that shall be acceptable to the company for the does not address the qualifications of the individual(s) authorized by the Company as their
test method used. Only Level II or III Personnel shall interpret test results. I representative(s).
would like an interpretation as to the minimum qualification and/or experience
necessary for the Individual who the COMPANY will employ to verify the
NDE results submitted by the Level II or III? Question 2: Can this individual
also be used to enforce API 1104 - section 9.2?

Question 1: My question is whether or not temporary welds performed for

purposes of holding steel plate end plates on the end of pipeline components
being hydrotested in a shop must be welded in accord with API standard 1104
if the permanent welds in the same spool are being welded in accord with API
1104. Please assume that the purpose of the hydrotest is to pressure-test two
circumferential permanent butt welds made to hold an anode connector into a
pipeline. Two temporary caps consisting of 15 inch diameter 2 inch thick plate
were welded on the free ends of the pipeline segments permanently welded
to the anode connector. The entire spool piece being hydrotested tested
consists of the anode connector and its two permanent welds, but also
includes the welds being used to hold the temporary end caps on the open
ends. Put another way, the hydrotest not only tests the two permanent welds
used to connect the anode connector to the pipeline spool but also tests the
two temporary welds used to hold the two end plates on the ends of the
spool. Must those temporary welds also be made to the standards of API
1104? Question 2: If API 1104 does not contain the appropriate standard for
making these temporary welds, what API standard does include the
appropriate requirements for a temporary weld done for purposes of allowing
a hydrotest
madeprocedure
of components
required
to be
hydrotested?
Question
1: toA be
welding
is qualified
as per
API
1104 with a
combination of
processes (example root and hotpass with manual GTAW process and filler
and cap passes with manual SMAW). Can we engage two welders (one for
GTAW process and other welder for SMAW) on a single test weld coupon for
welder qualification to qualify these welders for the respective processes?
Question 2: A welding procedure is qualified as per API 1104 with a
combination of processes (example root and hotpass with manual GTAW
process and filler and cap passes with manual SMAW). If we intend to
engage two welders for different processes, is it mandatory that these welders
must independently weld separate test weld coupons with combination of
GTAW and SMAW as per the PQR to qualify the welders?

Response 1: If the temporary welds are removed, they are not governed by the standards of
API 1104, unless specified by the user company. Response 2: The use of API 1104 or another
pipe welding standard may be used by the
user company to make these temporary welds for hydrostatic testing pipeline
components.

1104-I0123-06

One of our subcontractors has run a weld procedure on a 45axis 6G, does
this allow them to use the same procedure to weld in the 5G position?

Yes

1104-I0124-06

Question 1: In the sentence of the item 11.4.7.3, the recommended practice Response 1: Section 11.4.7.3 was written without regard to beam width. Response 2: Adding
(should) of additional 4 dB for evaluation was made considering AUT systems 4dB has the same effect on both focused and non-focused beams.
using conventional probes (wide beam)? Question 2: The more precise AUT
systems designed according to the ASTM 1961 standard, (zonal
discrimination with focused search units) had been considered to do the
recommendation of +4 dB for evaluation?

1104 20th - January Section

2003
6.6.2

1104-I0418-06

1104 20th - January Clause

2003
10.2

1104-I0530-06

Question 1: In reference to API 1104 19th edition

Response 1: Automated UT cannot be substituted for RT in Welder Qualification. Response 2:
The requirement of RT in lieu of mechanicals, Sect 6.6.2. I refer you to pg. 54 There is no provision for partial qualification.
within the Appendix of API. Sect A4 where it states "For automatic welding, the
welding unit and each operator shall be qualified in accordance with 12.6"
Section 12.6 then refers you back to 6.4 thru 6.7 but it needs to be pointed out
that 12.6 refers to "non destructive methods" where as 6.6 only calls for RT.
Pluralization would imply that alternate NDT methods are acceptable. Also
Section 8.2 states that" Nondestructive testing may consist of radiographic
inspection or method specified by company..." once again offering multiple
NDT methods are available to the Company, although this section is for
production welding inspection. Funny how Section 12.2 allows for multiple
NDT methods to be used for Automatic welding procedure qualification!
My question pertains to the substitution of alternate NDE methods, specifically
Automated UT in lieu of RT as required for Welder Qualification program to a
qualified welding procedure. Please note that our project will be using AUT as
the primary NDE method for production weld inspection. Question 2:
Assuming that AUT is allowable in lieu of RT, is it possible to run Welder
Qualification such that a welder may be qualified and be restricted to Root, Fill
and/or
passes. We
arestandard
in a production
environment
utilizing
8 welding
Is
it theCap
requirement
of the
that only
the welder(s)
who perform
No.
welding of test joint for a repair welding procedure, in accordance with clause
10.2, be allowed to perform repair welding on job?

1104 20th - January

2003

1104-I0605-06

Question 1: In which conditions is necessary or recommended to realize

Response 1: API 1104 does not address the requirements for Charpys. Response 2: We are
impact tests with notches in V for Charpys tests? Question 2: In the
unable to understand your question
procedure requirement of welding separation, its necessary to qualify again a
new procedure of welding or the original qualify is applicable (apply)?

1104 19th September

1999

Section
11.4.7.2

Response 1: The 20th Edition API Standard 1104 Section 6.2 requires each welder to complete
(weld) the entire wall thickness when qualifying. Response 2: The 20th Edition of API Standard
1104 Section 6.2.2(a) (2) allows 2 alternatives for qualifying welders to weld with a combination
of processes. A welder may complete the entire weld in accordance with the PQR or the welder
may qualify by making separate and complete welds utilizing each of the separate processes
involved in the PQR.

1104-I0713-06

Is it the intent of the API standard that only those ultrasonic indications that
exceed the evaluation level given in 11.4.7.2 be considered as a possible
defect?

Yes, please note that all procedures are to be qualified prior to use.

1104 20th - January Sec. 6.2.

2003

1104-I0514-07

If a welder makes a test weld in the 6G position (inclined from the horizontal
plane at an angle of not more than 45 degrees), on pipe with a diameter of
12.750", wall thickness of .375" thick. Is this welder qualified to weld on 24"
diameter pipe? If so why and if not why.

Section 6.2.2(d) lists the essential diameter groups for single qualification. A single qualification
test on 12.750" pipe qualifies the welder from 2.375" to 12.750" diameter pipe. 24" diameter
pipe is in a separate group than 12.750" diameter pipe and so will require a different single
qualification test.

1104 19thSeptember
1999

1104-I0121-09

1104 19thSeptember
1999

1104-I0122-09

Question 1: For qualification of welding procedure specifications (WPS)

Response 1: Yes. Response 2: No. Response 3: Yes. Response 4: Yes.
according to API Std 1104 19th Edition Appendix A for use of a mechanized
welding system to produce 5G joints in a pipeline segment from API Spec 5L
line pipe supplied from two different pipe manufacturers designated as
manufacturers A and B, with no other changes in essential variables, is
preparing and destructively testing a set of two test joints described as A B,
the set including a test joint with high heat input (HHI) and a test joint with low
heat input (LHI), sufficient to meet the requirements of the standard and allow
for welding of all possible pipe manufacturer combinations? Question 2: For
qualification of welding procedure specifications (WPS) according to API Std
1104 19th Edition Appendix A for use of a mechanized welding system to
produce 5G joints in a pipeline segment from API Spec 5L line pipe supplied
from two different pipe manufacturers designated as manufacturers A and B,
with no other changes in essential variables, is preparing and destructively
testing three sets of test joints, described as A A, A B, or B B with each of the
three sets including a test joint with high heat input (HHI) and a test joint with
low heat input (LHI), specifically required by the standard to allow for welding
of all pipe manufacturer combinations? Question 3: For qualification of
welding procedure
specifications
(WPS) procedure
according specifications
to API Std 1104
19th
Question
1: For qualification
of welding
(WPS)
Response 1: Yes. Response 2: No.
according to API Std 1104 19th Edition Appendix A for use of a mechanized
welding system to produce 5G joints in a pipeline segment from API Spec 5L
line pipe supplied from a single pipe manufacturer designated as
manufacturers A, that procured plate to the same specification from two plate
manufacturers, designated as 1 and 2 so that each pipe could be classified as
either A1 or A2, with no other changes in essential variables, is preparing and
destructively testing one set of test joints described as A1 A2, the set including
a test joint with high heat input (HHI) and a test joint with low heat input (LHI),
sufficient to meet the requirements of the standard and allow for welding of all
plate manufacturer combinations? Question 2: For qualification of welding
procedure specifications (WPS) according to API Std 1104 19th Edition
Appendix A for use of a mechanized welding system to produce 5G joints in a
pipeline segment from API Spec 5L line pipe supplied from a single pipe
manufacturer designated as manufacturer A, that procured plate to the same
specification from two plate manufacturers, designated as 1 and 2 so that
each pipe could be classified as either A1 or A2, with no other changes in
essential variables, is preparing and destructively testing three sets of test
joints described
A1value
A1, A1
A2, or A2FA2,
with each set including a test joint No.
Question
1: Canas
the
parameter
be zero?

1104 20th - October

2005

11040210-09

1104 20th

7.2 1104-I0619-09

Please can you clarify section 7.2 in API 1104 Welding of Pipelines and
Related Facilities. The standard states :
" The alignment of abutting ends shall minimize the offset between surfaces.
For pipe ends of the same nominal thickness, the offset shall not exceed 3
mm. Larger variations are permissable provided the variation is caused by
variations of the pipe end dimensions....."
Our interpretation of this is that if you have more than 1.5 offset on one side of
the pipe you will have more than 1.5 on the other side thus exceeding the 3
mm. Others are interpreting the 3mm in any single location which could lead
to hi-lo in well in excess of 3mm.

1104 20th

5.3.2.3

1104 19th

5.3.2.9

Question 1:

Since API 1104 only suggests and does not state that the categories above shall be used, is it acceptable to
combine category 2 and 3 into a single category (2.375 and larger), especially since diameter is not an essential variable?
Question 2: When installing a split sleeve fitting using an in-service procedure, please confirm that a 6010 filler material is
acceptable on the root pass of the longitudinal joint since this is not being welded directly to the carrier pipe.

1104-I1125-09

Answer 1:

Yes. Since diameter is not an essential variable for welding procedure qualification, the welding procedure can be written to cover any
diameter range regardless of the diameter used for the qualification test. Answer 2: The 1104 committee cannot comment on the suitability of specific filler
metals such as 6010. However, note that in the specific case mentioned, where the root pass of the longitudinal joint is not being welded directly to the carrier
pipe, this weld is not considered to be an in-service weld.

Question: In accordance with API 1104 Section 5.3.2.9, the specification must No. Explanation: A procedure can be written to include either direction or both directions. The
designate the welding direction. If the WPS designates both uphill and
issue is how to qualify the welding procedure. API 1104, Section 5.4.2.9 makes the direction of
downhill for the welding direction, does API 1104 allow each half of the WPS travel, uphill or downhill, for vertical welding an essential variable. API 1104, Section 5.5 states
qualification weld to be welded in a different direction?
To weld the test joint for butt welds, two pipe nipples shall be joined, following all of the details
of the procedure specification. Section 5.7 uses similar wording for qualifying fillet weld
procedures. There is no provision to qualify a welding procedure with only half of the pipe.
A test weld with each half welded in a different uphill-downhill direction will only qualify for
production welds with that same uphill-downhill combination of welding. To be able to make
complete welds in the uphill direction and complete welds in the downhill direction will require
two qualification welds.

1104 20th

5.4.2.2

Background: It is increasingly common for pipe to be certified to multiple pipe Answer 1: Yes
2: No
grades. The multiple grade certifications often span multiple material groups Answer
Answer 3: Yes
Answer 4: Yes
described in 5.4.2.2 a., b., and c. Examples include pipe certified to and
stenciled as grade B, X42 and X52, or grade X60 and X65. As a result there is
often confusion regarding which welding procedure specification should be
selected for use on multiple grade pipe.
Question 1) For the purpose of selecting welding procedures for use on
multiple grade pipe, may a user designate the grade of the pipe to be any one
of the grades to which the pipe is certified, assuming the designated grade
complies with all applicable pipe design criteria for the intended application?
(For example, may pipe certified to grade B, X42, and X52 be welded using
procedures applicable to either grade B, or X42, or X52?)
Question 2) For multiple grade pipe, is a user required to use a welding
procedure that is qualified for use on the highest grade to which the pipe is
certified?
Question 3) Assume a welding procedure has been qualified using multiple
grade pipe and that the results meet the strength requirements for each of the
grades to which the pipe is certified. May the data from the procedure
qualification test be used to support welding procedure specifications for each