SECTION VIII-2

Subject Interpretation File No.

7.5.5.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII-2-07-13 09-13

Code Case 2235-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII-2-07-11 08-1260
Code Case 2235-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII-2-07-12 08-1259
Interpretation: VIII-2-07-11

Subject: Code Case 2235-9

Date Issued: January 5, 2009
File: 08-1260

Question (1): Does Code Case 2235-9 require an ultrasonic examination plan capable of detecting indications
transverse as well as parallel to the weld centerline?
Reply (1): Yes.

Question (2): Are the acceptance criteria specified in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of Code Case 2235-9 applicable
to indications oriented transverse as well as parallel to the weld centerline?
Reply (2): Yes. Per para. (c), the ultrasonic examination shall be performed in accordance with a written
procedure conforming to the requirements of Section V, Article 4.
T-472 of Section V, Article 4 identifies examination requirements when using the Distance Amplitude
Technique, such as Linear Phased Array ultrasonics, and T-474 covers Non-Distance Amplitude Techniques.
From T-472, weld joints shall be scanned with an angle beam search unit in both parallel and transverse
directions (four scans) to the weld axis.
Note: This interpretation also appears as VIII-1-07-68.

Interpretation: VIII-2-07-12

Subject: Code Case 2235-9

Date Issued: February 10, 2009
File: 08-1259

Question (1): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), may a side drilled hole be used to represent a flaw for
qualification purposes?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), may a notch that has been machined by conventional
methods on the end of a block and left open (i.e., not totally embedded so that the UT procedure cannot
demonstrate detection of both ends) be used to represent a flaw for qualification purposes?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), may electric discharged machined (EDM) notches be used
to represent embedded or surface flaws for qualification purposes?
Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): Per Code Case 2235-9, para. (c), for a production weld with a 60 deg included angle (e.g.,
30 deg bevel angle) joint detail, must the plane of the flaws in the qualification block be oriented at a 30 deg
angle to the block’s surface and parallel to the fusion line?
Reply (4): No.
Note: This interpretation also appears as VIII-1-07-72.
Interpretation: VIII-2-07-13

Subject: 7.5.5.1
Date Issued: February 10, 2009
File: 09-13

Question (1): Per Section VIII, Division 2, 7.5.5.1, may a side drilled hole be used to represent a flaw for
qualification purposes?
Reply (1): No.

Question (2): Per Section VIII, Division 2, 7.5.5.1, may a notch that has been machined by conventional
methods on the end of a block and left open (i.e., not totally embedded so that the UT procedure cannot
demonstrate detection of both ends) be used to represent a flaw for qualification purposes?
Reply (2): No.

Question (3): Per Section VIII, Division 2, 7.5.5.1, may electric discharged machined (EDM) notches be
used to represent embedded or surface flaws for qualification purposes?
Reply (3): Yes.

Question (4): Per Section VIII, Division 2, 7.5.5.1, for a production weld with a 60 deg included angle
(e.g., 30 deg bevel angle) joint detail, must the plane of the flaws in the qualification block be oriented at a
30 deg angle to the block’s surface and parallel to the fusion line?
Reply (4): No.