EN 10204 type 3.1 requirement

[Sadique Sheikh]

Dear Members,

Is it mandatory to be written as EN10204 type 3.1 on MTC if it is required by client?

Thanks & Regards,

Mohd. Sadique Sheikh

[george....@gr.bureauveritas.com]

Yes

best regards

Dr. Georgios Dilintas

Authorized Nuclear Inspector
Authorized Inspector Supervisor


I&F REGIONAL TECHNICAL MANAGER
BUREAU VERITAS HELLAS

Tel: +30 210 40 63 113/4
Fax: +30 210 40 63 118
Cell: +30 69 44 64 62 04
(See attached file: Dilintas_George.vcf)

This message contains confidential information. To know more, please click on the following link: http://disclaimer.bureauveritas.com

[Vairamuthu Ramar]

Definitely Yes.
 

 

---

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 11:33:25 +0530
Subject: [MW:21260] EN 10204 type 3.1 requirement
From: sadiq...@gmail.com
To: material...@googlegroups.com

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/MaterialsWelding-122787?home=&gid=122787&trk=anet_ug_hm
 
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Mohammed Yassar]

Of course, A, B or C as well. Based on requirements..

--

To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/MaterialsWelding-122787?home=&gid=122787&trk=anet_ug_hm
 
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Materials & Welding" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

B Rgds,

     Yassar.

[Tarek Yehia]

Yes, sure it is Must.

-- 

Best regards,
 
Tarek Yehia

E-mail: t.yeh...@gmail.com

Cell#: 00966 56 772 6160
Skype ID: eng....@skype.com

--

[Muthusrinivasan Muthuselvam]

Yes if it is requirement of your purchase request type of certification as per EN10204 to be declared in manufacturer t.c

br,

msms

--

[c.no...@vipco-thai.com]

Dear Sirs,

 

I have a different opinion :

 

When reading EN10204 in detail , I understand that this document is to describe how to classify type of CMTR ( mill certificate ) and specify criteria / condition of each type.

 There is no clause be stated that CMTR shall have the wording “ according to EN10204 type xxxx “ be shown in CMTR.   So if a specific CMTR is showing the required contains which fully comply with the requirements of EN10204 ( such as properties per standard’s requirement and signature of QA/QC manager which is not under production , etc. ) , such CMTR should be able to be classified as a certain type of CMTR per EN10204 for example type 3.1 or type 2.2.

 

This can be a problem many times when the work must be executed under the contract which state that CMTR of steel shall be type 3.1 per EN10204 and then fabricators face a lot of difficulties to find material available in the stock of the market or even from the local steel mill to get CMTR which show wording “ According to EN10204 type 3.1 “ even though all of test result and chemical compositions and signature of authorized person are fully conform to requirement of type 3.1 criteria per EN10204.    The point is in some markets / countries or some makers do not care or not willing to put such wording on their CMTR and cause difficulties to a fabricator to get the required material in such constrain. 

 

I believe that under such situation , there should be some relaxation and CMTR should be allowed to be used on case by case basis after verify contains in CMTR.

 

Regards,

C.Nopadon

[veera raghava kommisetti]

In my opinion, writing 3.1 is not mandatory. what matters is

1. Document content

2. Document validated by..

 

--

[Vairamuthu Ramar]

Though the CMTR meets all the requirements of the project  or code specification, if required by the client the CMTR must contain as EN10204 type 3.1/3.2/2.1/2.2 whichever is applicable for the product indented for use.
 
 

---

From: c.no...@vipco-thai.com
To: material...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [MW:21273] EN 10204 type 3.1 requirement
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 06:09:11 +0700

[gprak...@gmail.com]

Writing 3.1 is mandatory bcs it indicates type of cert issued. It is important for certification bodies.

Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

---

From: veera raghava kommisetti <kommi...@gmail.com>

Sender: material...@googlegroups.com

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 06:59:59 +0400

To: <material...@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: material...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [MW:21276] EN 10204 type 3.1 requirement

[Nandesh Kumar]

Even though it is 'required' by the Client, the 'requirement' shall be in written form and documented!

ವಂದನೆಗಳೊಂದಿಗೆ / Best regards,

Nandesh Kumar Arasappa

P.S. : Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 26/6/14, Vairamuthu Ramar <vairam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Subject: RE: [MW:21265] EN 10204 type 3.1 requirement
To: "material...@googlegroups.com" <material...@googlegroups.com>
Date: Thursday, 26 June, 2014, 8:25 PM




Definitely Yes.

[Kashif Syed]

This type of requirement is generally raised by the client when they require minimum certification of the material from the manufacturer. Further, this requirement is generally mentioned when providing the Purchase order to the manufacturer and it is clearly state to mention EN10204 TYPE 3.1 on the MTC. 

If your PO to the manufacturer has included this requirement then definitely they should provide with MTC mentioning EN10204 TYPE 3.1 on it along with the manufacturer seal/stamp & signature to you.

Regards,

Kashif Syed,

QA/QC Engineer

Bahrain

Thanks & Regards,

Syed Kashif Farhan

QA/QC Engineer,

Ramsis Engineering,

Bahrain