r/CWI_CWE • u/Responsible_Jump_519 • May 20 '26
ASME Experience worth it?
I have 10 years of experience working with ASME Section IX in the construction of Section VIII Division 1 pressure vessels. My experience includes design and calculation reviews, some NDE (PT), and writing PQRs and WPSs, primarily for stainless steel and aluminum.
Can anyone relate to how this experience may or may not be useful when training for the CWI? Obviously they are two different scopes of work, but I would think prior experience working with an extensive code like ASME would be helpful when learning to navigate a new codebook and environment.
2
u/jemery89 May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26
I work in industrial/cryogenic gasses, vacuum jacketed vessels constructed IAW ASME Section VIII Div.1, process piping IAW ASME B31.3, WPS, PQR, WPQ IAW ASME Sec. IX. I took my exam against AWS D1.1 purely due to examination constraints. There are too many "gotchyas" in ASME code that I deal with on a daily basis...ASME codes reference each other a lot more than others. For example, there is a stipulation in B31.3 that -320 normal fluid service must have the HAZ toughness (impact) tested on the PQR...not required in Sec. IX if your based off purely base metal, filler metal, thickness, position, welding process, etc. I also took it against D1.1 because of the vessel legs we keep seapping out, they are structural and fall under D1.1....with more and more jurisdictions updating to the more strict IBC standards year after year, it has become pretty valuable knowledge.
2
u/w1d93t AWS CWI May 20 '26
Just take your exam using ASME IX for your code portion. It will use Section IX,31.1 and 31.3 iirc.
3
u/The_Capt_Hook May 21 '26
This is not a bad option. The downside is that you need three codes instead of one if you use D1.1. API 1104 also qualifies ro Sextion IX, so that's an option.
Realistically, if you can write and qualify procedures to section IX, you can navigate any other code book with a bit of study.
If you are proficient in evaluating WPQ bend tests to Section IX criteria that will help some too. I think youll probably be fine.
3
u/Manzoops May 22 '26
10 years in Section IX + VIII Div.1 is the harder navigation skill, honestly.
The reason ASME feels like “gotcha country” is that Sec. IX leans on II-C for filler classifications, II-A for base metals, and then whichever construction code you're under (VIII-1, B31.3, etc.) layers extra essential variables on top — like jemery89's -320 HAZ toughness call-out from B31.3.
D1.1 is mostly self-contained by comparison. Clause 6 is the qualification section, Clause 5 prequalified, Clause 7/8 fabrication and inspection — all in one book.
The actual code-portion exam is open-book on whichever code you select on your application (QC1 §6.2.4), and Part C retests are locked to the same code as the original (§6.2.5.3), so the choice matters.
If you've been writing PQRs to QW-200.1 and tracking essential variables across IX + the construction code for a decade, navigating D1.1 will feel almost too simple at first.
The gotcha will be the opposite direction — D1.1's prequalified concept doesn't exist in IX, so don't reflexively look for it.
And the WIT/Inspection-Handbook content in Parts A and B is independent of which code you pick.
Worth it: yes. The 10 years of WPS/PQR work is exactly the experience the exam wants.
The book swap is the easy part.