Just the Facts - From Your CWI

Somebody expects you home tonight

2012-01-12T16:52:00.000-08:00

Stephanie V.

Which is more dangerous, Nuclear Welding or Underwater Welding?

Often, when we use the term Nuclear in welding we are talking about high weld quality. Nuclear welding can be carried out in a fab shop miles from a Nuclear Power Plant, or right there on site during construction.

In these cases, Nuclear implies highly skilled workers doing welding that will be Radiographically (RT) or Ultrasonically (UT) tested to a very strict code. Welds need to be free from defects; fit-ups need to be accurate and free from added stress. Pipe and fittings need to be manufactured in such a way as to be traceable as do welding consumables such as electrodes and welding rods.

To be a Welder on a Nuclear job site requires high skill. A failed X-Ray can cost big money and probably your job.

Underwater welding brings images of a diver striking a shielded metal arc weld (SMAW/Stick) on some moss covered oil platform deep in the Gulf with Scuttle hovering over head and Flounder swimming by. Like Nuclear, underwater welding also requires a high degree of skill. The cost of getting a skilled worker to that repair is high and everybody involved has a “fix it once, fix it right” attitude. I once watched as a welder had to submerse himself in to a 24 in. diameter bridge footing form to re-weld a damaged piece of re-bar.

That was a spendy repair.

In addition to being a skilled Welder, the underwater Welder needs to be a skilled diver. They need to be able to manipulate the welding electrode while dressed in an outfit reminiscant of Neil Armstrong. He/She may work directly in the water “wet welding” or do “hyperbaric welding” (dry welding) where a positive pressure enclosure is attached to the hull of a ship. The water is removed from the chamber and the Welder is in a dry environment deep below the surface.

So the Underwater Welder sounds as though he would have the more dangerous job, but did you know there is such thing as an Underwater Nuclear Welder.

WHAT?

This dude has to suit up, climb into the cooling pool that is filled with 100 degree, radioactively contaminated water, and complete a weld repair.

Now that’s crazy!

All these Welders require a high degree of skill. Not just in welding, but in several other categories, diving, working in confined space, working with restrictions on your hands, your legs your sight, working with an oxygen supply, and climbing, climbing, climbing.

Which brings me to the Welder who has the highest chance of a fatality on the job; five or fifty stories up, walking an I- beam, attached to a 6 ft. tether, dragging a “beamer” close behind. I believe statistics show, the Iron Worker is the Welder who is most likely to suffer a fatality on the job.

It’s good work if you can get it, but pay attention to your Trainer and be careful. Somebody expects you home tonight.

PWC

Understanding Intent

2011-12-16T10:35:00.000-08:00

Paul,

I work for a large U.S. Corporation that is made up of 15 manufacturers, each with well known brands throughout their markets. It seems like since we all work for "X-Corp", we could share weld procedures (WPS) and procedure qualification reports (PQR) across the company and save on testing and qualification expenses. Could a case be made for each division, to use centralized "X-Corp" WPS’s that are supported by the PQR’s run at the 15 different manufactures?

Mike I.

Welding Engineer - CWI

Mike,

That's a good thought. Let’s take a look at a couple of code provisions...

AWS-D1.1, 4.2.1.1 states, "Each manufacturer or contractor shall conduct the tests required by this code to qualify the WPS". That same provision goes on to talk about "consolidation with parent company(s)".

For some, that may create a "gray area", but we as CWI’s, in addition to being able to reference code previsions, also have to understand code intent. The best way I know to better understand codes intent is found in the Annex’s and the Commentary of the code.

You remember those sections. They are the ones your CWI instructor suggested you steer clear of during your exam. Well, they have a purpose. Located in the back of your code book, the Commentary shares the same Clause and Provision numbering with the exception of a "C" at the beginning.

In D1.1 Annex K, "Contractor" is defined as "Any company, or individual representing a company, responsible for the fabrication, erection manufacturing or welding, in conformance with the provisions of this code". The Commentary notes, "C-4.2.1.1 All contractors shall be responsible for their final product." X-Corp would have no interest in taking on that responsibility when they have little control over "fabrication, erection manufacturing or welding..." That is the reason each "contractor" (or division of X-Corp) hires guys like us.

We can share the information gathered from the testing, but we can not share the PQR. The PQR will only apply to the individual manufacturer (contractor), not to the group. Having the information is certainly helpful but it would only be to aid you in the processing of your own testing.

PWC

Integrity doesn’t get a mulligan

2011-12-13T15:41:00.000-08:00

Paul,
The Company I work for regularly gets into more than we can handle. The more we take on jobs at the last minute, the harder it is for me to do my job at the level that is required by the customer. I do 100% visual, weld mapping, pressure testing, setting up NDE... The one area that seems to gradually get worse is providing Material Test Reports (MTR). I can not provide all MTR's our customer requires. Often we don't get them from our vendor, or parts have sat for so long that they can't be traced.
I've tried to convince my employer that this paperwork needs to be received and verified before fabrication, but that hasn't gotten me anywhere. I am not even given the authority to stop fabrication when we have exceeded our own qualified procedures.
It can be a tough spot to be in, so I have a couple serious questions to ask…
• How much trouble can a CWI get into if something like MTR's can not be provided to the customer, when it is required?
• Do I have to walk off the job to protect myself from losing my certification when I know that things aren't being done right?
• Do I have a legal obligation because of the code, or does the company?
Thanks,
T.C. - CWI

T.C.
In the words of Ulysses Everett McGill, you’re “…in a tight spot.” The reason certification programs exist is this very reason.

Section 11 of AWS-QC1 “Standard for AWS Certification of Welding Inspectors” states:
• The… CWI …shall act to preserve the health and well being of the public by performing duties required of welding inspection in a conscientious and impartial manner to the full extent of the inspector(s) moral and civic responsibility and qualification. Accordingly, the… CWI …shall:
     o …Be completely objective, thorough, and factual in any written report, statement, or testimony of the work and include all relevant or pertinent testimony in such communiqués or testimonials.
     o …Sign only for work that the inspector has inspected, or for work over which the inspector has personal knowledge through direct supervision.
     o …Neither associate with nor knowingly participate in a fraudulent or dishonest venture or activity…
It sounds like you have come to a fork in the road and there are tough decisions to be made. I’ve always believed that the reason we inspectors are hired is to save our bosses from themselves. You can create the change that is needed, or, you can “drag up” and move on. I’d love to have a dime for every time went home and told my wife Dianne, “It’s over. They’re gonna fire me.” Strangely, I’m still around. But situations like yours are all too common for the CWI.
You can not place your stamp or signature on a document you know to be false. That said, I’m going to assume that you are moving forward with creating the change.
My advice to you:
• Be able to “Put your finger on it”. Know your code/standard/customer requirements and do not back down from them. When you make the call and refuse to “by-off” on something, know where it is in the documents and be able to reference it.
• Don’t wait until the entire weldment or piping system is complete before you stand your ground. Keep Welders, Foremen & Plant Managers in the loop from the beginning.
• Don’t over reach. Know what the acceptance criteria are and don’t require a smidge more.
• If you are treading in unfamiliar waters, get out of the pool. Those decisions are not yours to make. Stay within your field of expertise.
• Finally, (and toughest of all for a “hard head” like me) accept if you are proven wrong. Don’t build a wall of resistance. Learn where you went wrong and come out of it a better inspector.
This situation can teach you a lot about yourself. One way or another, this will be a career changer. Make it a good one.

Remember: Integrity doesn’t get a mulligan.
PWC

Questions on B31.3

2011-10-07T11:42:00.000-07:00

Paul,

I would really appreciate some of your time and expertise. I have some B31.3 questions.

1. Is the % of RT that is required generally understood as a quantity of welds (verses linear)? 341.4.1(a)(1)

PWC: This paragraph:

“341.4.1, b) Other Examination (1) Not less than 5% of circumferential butt and miter groove welds shall be examined fully by random radiography…”
The words, “shall be examined fully”, would indicate to me that the percentage is of complete welds, not linear inches/feet of weld.

2. If I RT 5% of fabrication (150 welds in this case) with each welder being represented and I have 10 welders, do I exceed the minimum?

PWC: I’m trying to better understand your question…

If 150 welds are equal to 5% of your fabrication, and 9 of those Welders each welded one of those joints and 1 of your Welders welded the remaining 141 joints, you’ve met your minimum.

-or-

If 150 welds is the total number of welds in this fabrication then 8 of those welds require RT, but if 10 Welders worked the project you will need to RT an additional 2 welds (one for each Welder).

3. For “Normal Fluid Service”, am I required to have 5% of fabrication RT if I have 100% visual (by CWI)? 341.4.1(a)(1) last sentence

PWC: Under Qualifications of the inspector is this line…

“340.4 (b) The owner’s Inspector shall have not less than 10 years experience…”

I can be a CWI with 5 years experience and I would not meet the requirements of 340.4 (b).

4. In “Cat M” I am required to have “all fabrication” visually examined M341.4(a)(1). Does that exclude the 20% random RT M341.4(b)(1), or is that required regardless of the 100% visual? M341.4(b)(2) refers to 341.4.1(b)(1)

PWC: The first requirement of any NDE is that the weld meet the visual acceptance requirement, so yes, it would include the RT’d joints.

Tim C: I am a CWI in the field for a construction / fabrication company. The reason for asking these specific questions is that, per another CWI in the company, we have been doing 100% visual, and 5% RT of *each* welder. This (5% of each) is getting expensive, especially when we hire more welders to get the job done quicker. I am satisfying the 100% visual examination and hydro or pneumatic testing (as another suitable NDT method). Plus, providing weld mapping and MTR’s. I think we have our bases covered. I would like to help cut costs. But more importantly, I want to make sure I am interpreting the code correctly.

Thank you,
Tim Crowder, CWI
Lafayette, IN

PWC: Tim, if I read your question correctly it would appear to me that you could cut cost by RT’ing 5% of the welds, not 5% of each Welders welds and still meet your minimum requirement.

PWC

Welder Qualification using Partial Joint Penetration (PJP) Grooves

2011-09-03T19:06:00.000-07:00

How would you evaluate a flare V-groove joint for welder qualification to AWS D1.1? D1.1 is not clear on how to test the prequalified joint (B-P11-GF) for welder qualification.
Thank you,
Dale

Hi Dale,

Thanks for writing.

If you take a look at AWS D1.1 Clauses 4.25 and 4.28 you’ll see that D1.1, for Personnel Qualification states that a Complete Joint Penetration (CJP) qualifies a Partial Joint Penetration (PJP) groove.

A Flare V- (and Flare Bevel) is a PJP. Typically you would use the V- and Bevel Groove, CJP configurations laid out in Clause 4 for Groove Welding Personnel Qualification.

That’s not to say I would never use a Flare V- Groove for Personnel Qualification. If Flare V- Grooves were a concern of mine, I would design a Workmanship Sample requiring the welder to complete the Flare V- Groove to my Weld Procedure Specification (WPS). Then I would cut and etch it (usually at 3 locations) to evaluate size [(E)=3/4r, see B-P11-GF].

So I guess, long story short, you would always use a CJP Bevel or V- Groove for Personnel Qualification of Grooves (CJP or PJP) and you would only use a PJP as supplemental to verify size.

PWC

Paul,

Thank you for answering my question, your input clears up some of my confusion.
I have a customer that is doing welder performance qualification to prequalified material and prequalified weld joint B-U4a-GF. Looks as though weld joint B-U4a-GF will also qualify PJP flare bevel tubular according to Clause 4.25 and 4.28.
Regards,
Dale L.

Dale,

You are right on the money.
Don't hesitate to write again.
PWC

Weld Stops & Starts

2011-08-14T11:55:00.000-07:00

My question is… Where can I go to find out about tie-ins being done all in line with each other and not staggered / spaced out as they should be. I am having trouble with my Mig welders making their welds all the same length and not staggering / spacing there stops and starts out.

I need physical evidence in black in white to show them in a meeting I am having on Tuesday.

Thanks,

Allen T.

Allen,

It is understood throughout the industry that most weld defects are attributed to weld stops and starts. We automate (or change from manual to semi-automatic) for the purpose of improving cycle time and quality. Most of that quality improvement comes from the elimination of starts and stops. Starts in welding can lead to overlap, incomplete fusion and slag inclusions. Stops typically lead to cracks and undercut.

Some of these discontinuities may be considered acceptable but stacking them on top of one another in a multi-pass weld is just “flurtin’ with disaster”.

Stops and starts are a necessary evil in welding. We can minimize their negative effects through techniques during manual welding, and through weld data settings for semi automatic and automated welding.

In GMA (Mig) welding those weld setting that can be added to many wire feeders include:

Adding a burn-back to keep the wire stick-out as short as possible to help with your next arc start.
Adding a post-flow (3.0 sec) to insure the tip of the wire is kept protected and clean.
Adding a pre-flow (0.2 sec). This insures shielding gas covers the area before an arc is struck.
Adding a slow run-in speed (-100 to -200). This will reduce the “Snap” that often occurs when initially striking an arc.
Increased start voltage (1-2 volts). This will also reduce the “Snap”.

As for your Welders techniques:

When striking an arc, start out ahead of the desired start point (1-1/2 x the weld size). When the arc is struck, backup quickly to the desired start point then begin your weld. This will almost eliminate any overlap (cold lap) that is common with weld starts.
When extinguishing the arc, weld to the desired stop point then back up (1-1/2 x the weld size). This will fill the weld crater, slow the cooling rate, fill the undercut and reduce the chances of a crater crack.

You could probably search the internet for an article on weld stops and starts and get plenty of horror stories. In that same search you will find oodles of “pixie dust” salesmen with a simple wire/shield-gas/power source that can take all those troubles away.

Stick with common sense. Set up your feeders with the settings that help improve weld starts and stops, and teach good welding techniques.

PWC

Welder Continuity Logs

2011-08-08T16:18:00.000-07:00

Paul

I have a question on welder qualifications. Where I work we have had
guys certified for D1.1 for 15 years. But in the D1.1 book it says that
they need to weld in every 6 month period to keep it current. What type
of documentation do we need to keep on file to show that they have been
welding? I can not find this in the book so I want to make sure that we
are covered at this point.

Thanks Pat G. - CAWI

Good question Pat,

What you are talking about is called a Continuity Report or Continuity Log.

AWS D1.1 Clause 4.2.3.1 - Tells us that a Welders qualification is effective indefinitely as long as that Welder does not go more than 6 months without using that process. ASME Section IX and most Welding Codes make similar statements.

We are required to provide documentation showing that the welder worked with all the processes (GMAW, GTAW, FCAW, SAW…) he/she held qualifications in, from the time qualification testing was complete to today with no gaps in service greater than 6 months. I did a word search of "continuity" in D1.1 and got about a million hits for “discontinuity”, but zero for “continuity”, so it looks as though you are on your own as to how you maintain that documentation.

I've worked for several organizations and each has had different ways of doing this.

I've maintained a simple Access Database where every 5 months I would go out on the shop floor and verify that each Welder is welding with the process they are qualified in. I would then log the employee ID, the process and the date.
I've worked with local unions (http://www.pf597.org/) who would maintain these records for their members and provide me, the contractor, copies with a clear trail and no lapses greater than 6 months.
Today I have a software program that will generate a list of Welders by Plant Location, Department & Supervisor. I forward those lists to the Supervisor every 5 months and they return them with the updates. I update my database and I also sign and keep their hard copy.

There are many ways that the 6 month requirement can be broken:

A welder enters active military service and then returns to his/her civilian job 9 months later.
An employee gets laid off and called back. (Fabricators typically monitor the 6 month time frame to save the cost of re-qualifying.)
A Welder takes a Supervisor job, but a year later decides to go back to welding.
A GMAW (Mig) qualified Welder takes a job running a Submerged Arc Welder (SAW) for 7 months, then returns to Mig welding.
A Welder in a job shop may seldom uses one or more of the processes he/she has qualified for due to the shops work load.

All of these are common scenarios that have snuck up on me at different times in my career. It's a pain in the neck, but a Welder Qualification is of no value without an unbroken Continuity Report. That is the thing that will sting you in an audit.

Showing a clear line from the date of qualification testing to today with no break greater than 6 months is required per most welding codes.

Is Weld Inspector Certification Beneficial?

2011-07-29T10:51:00.000-07:00

Mr. Cameron,

Thank you for writing the monthly column Arc Welding 101 in the Practical Welding magazine. Your articles are very informative. I have a question concerning CWI Certification. I am trying to decide whether obtaining a CWI Certification through AWS would be beneficial to my career. I am presently unemployed and would like to increase my marketability to potential employers. I have a BS degree in Metallurgical Engineering plus over 20 years experience as a materials engineer primarily in the power generation industry. I would appreciate any insight that you could provide me. The course is being offered locally during the first week of August so your prompt response would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
David P., P.E.

David,

Thanks for reading, I appreciate your writing and I’m sorry you find yourself in this position.

In the interest of “Full Disclosure” one of my many hats includes Adjunct Instructor for the AWS-Certified Welding Inspector (CWI) Seminars. That said…

One common career path for Welders is to Inspector. Dan Davis from thefabricator.com wrote an excellent article last year on just that subject (http://www.thefabricator.com/article/weldinginspection/so-you-want-to-be-a-certified-welding-inspectorr). By now we’ve all seen the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) numbers and read the many articles on the shortage of Welders in our industry. I believe those numbers transfer over to other welding related careers as well. With this shortage comes a lack of knowledge of subject matter throughout our field.

The welding world is made up of Inspectors, Welders, Engineers, Salesmen, Programmers, Purchasers, Managers and Metallurgists like yourself. All of whom make decisions impacting welding every day. So where does the CWI designation fit in to this conversation?

Achieving the designation of CWI does not, in and of itself, make you a better Metallurgist or me a better Inspector. What it does do is lets those we come in contact with know that we have a fairly good understanding of welding processes, weld quality and welding code requirements. Those are important attributes for any weld decision maker. That’s not to say all CWI’s have the same level of knowledge, but you certainly know a CWI’s base.

Although CWI positions are out there, it is not common that employers are looking for only a CWI. The designation is often coupled with some other requirement such as; a Bolting Inspector, a Certified Welding Inspector w/UT Level II, a Welding Engineer w/CWI or a Materials Engineer w/BS & CWI. Five years ago, these job designations may have come with a qualifier like, “Must be able to attain CWI designation within one year.” But that statement is becoming less and less common.

So where do you find the training necessary to determine if you are ready for certification? I may be a little biased, but the American Welding Society (www.aws.org) holds regular seminars all across this country. The AWS is one option, but it is not the only option. The Hobart Institute (www.welding.org) offers an extended (80hr) class, The Lincoln Electric Company (www.lincolnelectric.com) offers a “pre” class (40hrs) prior to the AWS seminar and there are several schools, AWS Chapters and businesses that offer CWI training.

More and more employers are requiring certification as a condition of employment, because they can. Adding the designation of CWI to your resume certainly would be considered a feather in your cap.

Freestylin'

2011-05-20T11:08:00.000-07:00

Dear PWC,

I know of welding manufacturing companies that do not use WPSs, their welders are not qualified and their welders inspect their own welds! How can these companies get away with this type of practice?

Nelson M., CWI H.I.W.T.

Ah Freestylin’! I find it’s best left to Rappers, Swimmers and Motocross and it doesn’t belong in the welding industry. I too have been in many Freestylin’ fab shops, they lack documentation on their Welding Process and their Welding & Inspection Personnel. That said, manufacturers are not required to weld to a code. The requirement for code compliance is something a customer/governing agency places on them.

Typically, if I’m walking in the door, it is not to give awards for excellence in welding. It is usually to determine, Are they in compliance? and if not, How do we get them there? and What steps do they need to take to maintain compliance?

Consider this scenario:

Company A has built decorative fabricated metal products for years. There was never a code requirement. Their products had nothing to do with public safety, their Welders were skilled and business was good. Enter the economic down turn

Company B, just down the street, builds off-road construction equipment. They too have skilled welders. In fact, Company A and B share the same Welder training program. Company B’s people and process’s are backed and guided by all the right documents.

Stimulus Funds are granted for a highway project and Company B receives a contract. Because of a tight time schedule Company B requests help from Company A. Now what?

A down economy gets a lot of Fab Shops exploring other options and thinking outside-the-box. If they are Freestylin’, doing so can quickly have them in hot water.

Company A now has their work cut out for them, but this is not impossible. Where should they start?

1.) Purchase and review a copy of the code. I’m surprised how many shops I go into that do not own a copy of the code they claim to comply with. Often, if they do, it is several revisions old.
2.) Qualify the Inspector(s). Someone’s got to be prepared to make the call as to whether welding is acceptable or not. Codes require that the qualification of the inspector be documented. This can be a Technician or Welder with the required background and knowledge, or a Certified Welding Inspector.

3.) Develop the required weld procedures (WPS). A skilled Welder working with a qualified Inspector should be able to quickly produce the Procedure Qualifications (PQR) needed for the products to be welded.

4.) Qualify the Welders. Keep it simple. I’ve been in shops that require their welders to be qualified in all positions for all thicknesses, but they never weld in the overhead position and never weld groove depths greater than 3/8 inch. You can loose a lot of good welders to an all position, all thicknesses test.

5.) Maintain the Welders and Inspectors qualifications. This is done by documenting their involvement in any 6 month period and monitoring their quality.

Freestylin’ I suspect companies just evolve that way. Maybe they started out small and grew faster than they could keep up. Perhaps they were in compliance at one time but the employee that managed compliance moved on and no one picked up the ball. However they got there, it’s a risky way to run a business.

Weave or Stringer?

2011-04-19T14:47:00.000-07:00

Hi Paul,
I'm a big fan of "Practical Welding Today" and have recognized your input for quite some time. I have a very generalized and basic question for you about a weld situation we have, and I feel that you are more than qualified to give an opinion.

We build steel tanks mainly for containing hydraulic oil. The material is A36 picked and oiled and the gauge will range from 10 GA up to around 3/8". We are using Lincoln 355M power sources, GMAW process, ER70-.035 wire and 90/10 gas. Almost all of the tanks are made with an overlap design vs. a corner to corner weld. This creates almost all fillet welds, mostly in the horizontal position, and a few in vertical. The question I have is, given this design and end product, do you feel it's appropriate to do a weave or a stringer bead when welding these? This is a big argument here right now. We used to allow weaving and we had great looking welds on our product with minimum leaks. Recently we have put a stop to all weaving and are demanding that all welders use straight stringer beads. Now we have welds that look very inconsistent and overall "poor". We also have a great number of leaks which take a long time to repair and re-test. I know that weaving is NOT allowed in certain weldments, mainly when high strength steel like T1 is used, (Greater HAZ, slag inclusions, etc.). Do you think that on a simple product such as this when high strength is not an issue the weave method is acceptable? I don't believe the WPS for this weld states anything about weave vs. straight.

Please give me your opinion.
Thanks! Steve R.
Manufacturing Engineering Dept.

Hey Steve, Sorry for the delayed response. That 355m, do you use it in the Pulse or CV mode? Also, your shielding gas and wire combination is going to tend to give you minimal sidewall fusion dependent on the mode of transfer used. An increase in Co2 will tend to improve sidewall fusion. It will also lead to increased penetration which could lead to burn through on thinner material. That being said... Your joint design (Lap/Fillet) should lend itself, just fine, to Horizontal (2F) fillets using a stringer bead. When weld size is increased (t>5/16) a multi-pass stringer technique should be utilized. This is an application where I would never suggest a weave when manually welding. In the Vertical (3F) position the progression should be Up (vertical down with a process that minimizes sidewall fusion to begin with, is flertin' with disaster). This position lends itself to a weave technique. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about a "Whip" motion that constantly moves forward, then back. We are talking about a side to side movement. As for the look of the weld... Don't let your personal opinion of what looks good cloud good judgement. The welds should be acceptable, as determined by the code you use. Liking the look of a weave better, as opposed to stringers, is a personal opinion. I would suspect that if tomorrow I walked on to the shop floor where everybody used a weave and proclaimed, "Beginning this day and all future days the weave technique will no longer be an acceptable practice!", it would take some time before Welders got use to the new technique (could be months) and I would expect the welding to look inconsistent.
PWC

With DC Welders, CV or CC, What’s the difference?

2011-03-28T20:19:00.000-07:00

Teaching seminars across the country, that is a question I’m often called on to explain. The best way I’m able to describe the difference between CV & CC is this:

Electric arc welding has 2 main variables, Current and Voltage. Welding machines will supply both, but are only capable of consistently maintaining one of those variables. The other is maintained by some other means. Direct Current (DC) power supplies can be Constant Voltage (CV) or Constant Current (CC).

A Constant Voltage machine will provide a consistent, preset voltage. CV equipment is typically semi-automatic and wire fed. Presetting the weld voltage, a CV power supply will maintain a constant arc length (because arc length is directly related to weld voltage).

So what determines the current draw? On CV equipment the wire feed rate, wire diameter and electrode stick-out are what draw current from the machine. Set at 28 Volts, your GMAW/FCAW equipment will set an arc length that that will remain constant. As you increase wire feed speed or increase wire diameter you will increase your welding current. By increasing current you will, in-turn, increase penetration. On the other hand, maintaining that wire feed speed and increasing electrical stick-out will introduce resistance into the electrode and reduce current, thereby reducing penetration.

When a Welder fears burning through, he/she will increase stick-out, which will reduce current and penetration, reducing the chance of burning through. A Welder can easily reduce weld current 25-50 amps by simply increasing that stick-out.

A Constant Current machine will provide a consistent, preset current. CC equipment is typically considered manual. Presetting the current, a CC power supply will maintain that amperage setting.

So what determines the voltage? Remember what I said above about voltage being directly related to arc length? Voltage will be maintained manually by the SMAW or GTAW Welder. He/She will regulate voltage by moving that stick or tungsten electrode closer to, or further from, the work (and typically, less is best).

That’s why I can’t Stick or Tig weld with a CV machine, and I can’t Mig weld with a CC machine.

IGTBM

AWS-D1.3 Weld Procedures

2011-01-24T18:15:00.000-08:00

We weld Sheet Metal to AWS-D1.3. Our current WPS is outdated and needs to be updated. Our customers are asking for a separate WPS/ PQR for Fillet and Groove Welds. Until now, I believe we had both Fillets and Grooves covered by One WPS/PQR.

I have more questions than answers, so I may need outside help in dealing with these mega companies.

Best regards,

Sheldon M, Sr. Mfrg. Engineer, CWI

Sheldon,

Communicating welding requirements can be challenging company to company regardless of size. Sticking to the requirements of the code is one way to make that communication easier. I learned from a mentor a while back that when answering code questions the CWI needs to open the book and, “put your finger on it.”

Your question as I understand it is; does a WPS/PQR for Groove Welding qualify Fillet Welding and does a single WPS qualify all Grooves?

There are 2 ways you can qualify a WPS per AWS D1.3. You can use information in Clause 3 and develop prequalified procedures or you can perform actual qualification testing per Clause 4. Either is perfectly acceptable.

If you can use prequalified procedures you will need to write separate documents for each configuration (3.1A, 3.1B, 3.2A, 3.2B, 3.2C…) that you use in production. And some of those configurations will require you to write more than one WPS.

If you had written weld procedures for all the prequalified joints in AWS D1.3 you would have a minimum of 16 different documents. They may all contain the same welding parameters, but each will need to be written separately.

As for qualified WPS’s, Clause 4.1 keeps it simple, “A Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) shall be written for each type of weld as shown in Table 4.1…” and as for the PQR, “A Procedure Qualification Record (PQR) that records the actual values used to qualify a WPS shall be written.”

Here at McNeilus Truck we have a total of 133 WPS’s and 58 PQR’s in our records. Each was required because some variable was off just enough to require another document. We have a lot of Customers inquire about our welding documentation and we’ve not let them down yet.

Good Luck

Maintaining Welder Qualification

2010-11-23T17:18:00.000-08:00

Jeff P. a Welding & Robotic Engineering Mgr. MN asks...

"A Welder is no longer welding but wants to maintain his qualifications “period of effectiveness”. We allow them to weld 4 hours in production to maintain that qualification. Of course they could always retest, yet 4 hours seems like a short time to stay “in the groove”. What say you?"

PWC:
As with any skill, ones ability to perform welding will very person to person. Most Welders can pick up a stinger after a 25-week layoff and start in right where they left off. Others need time to get back “in the groove”.

As a good friend, Jeff knows me as a “literalist” when it comes to code speak. His question made me do a little digging, of which I enjoy and from which I always learn. I reviewed several AWS, ASME and API documents and found one commonality. All required requalification testing when there is reason to question the Welders ability. Beyond that, they varied.
API-1104 makes no mention of a 6-month time frame. ASME Sec IX and AWS D1.1, D1.3, D1.5 and D14.3 all have similar statements; “The Welders qualification shall remain in effect indefinitely unless the Welder has not engaged in the process for a period exceeding 6 months.” None of the codes/standards I reviewed mentioned a “hands-on” minimum number of hours to maintain qualification, nor did their commentaries suggest one.
Imagine in a production environment such as Jeff's, a Welder with 2 years experience decides to mix it up a little and takes a job in the Paint Department. After 6-months can they still be considered a Welder? Possibly. How about after the next 6-months? Then the next? Four years after taking that Painter position this Welder has accumulated only 32 hours of welding experience, 4 hours at a time. Now I’m beginning to develop a reason to question his/her ability.
As welding decision makers we need to pass judgments’ based on code requirements and code intent. I’ve always fell back on, “Is there reason to question the Welders ability?” If there is not, then allow him/her to practice their craft. If there is, re-test them and evaluate their ability to make sound welds.

What are the reasons to oscillate a weld process

2010-09-09T14:43:00.000-07:00

Vince H. from Oshkosh Truck asks,

"What are the reasons to oscillate a weld process?"

There are a number of ways and reasons a weld process would be oscillated. Oscillation is the side to side manipulation of a weld in progress. It is measured in amplitude (how far), frequency (how often) and dwell time (for how long).

Spend any time around GMAW (Mig) robots and you'll notice the torch is in a constant side-to-side motion. Typically referred to as a weave, this form of oscillation helps that robot find its way along the joint by monitoring changes in the arc. Another good example of oscillation would be a Pipefitter using the GTAW (Tig) process and a "Walkin' the Cup" technique. He or She will do this to minimize fatigue on their body, increase bead width and improve tie-in at the welds toe. A real craftsman will rock that Tig cup along the joint and make a beautiful finish weld, with a consistent face, completely around that pipe joint. It can be a real work of art (or a real cobbled mess for that matter).

Other types of oscillation may be manipulating the molten weld pool by using a magnetic force. Common with (but not limited to) mechanized GMAW and GTAW processes, this magnetic force will move the molten puddle (not the torch) from side to side. I've used this technique to increase bead width for customer appeal, but it can equally be used to improve sidewall fusion or tie-in at the weld toe. Some wire fed processes (SAW or ESW) will actually twist the electrode as it is fed as a form of oscillation.

Oscillation helped a Steel Worker using Electroslag to fabricate components for San Francisco's Bank of America building. It aided the arm fatigue of a Pipefitter as he built Louisiana's River Bend nuclear power plant. It will also assist the Iron Worker that will build the One World Trade Center, to achieve better weld toe fusion, allowing his or her welds to transfer stress smoothly between support beams.

Want to know more about “Walkin’ the Cup”? Follow this link:

(http://www.millerwelds.com/resources/articles/TIG-gtaw-cup-walking-pipe-welding/)

4.2.1 Qualification to Earlier Editions

2010-07-21T16:09:00.000-07:00

Dan C. AWS Certified Welder and CWI

Mr. Cameron,

I currently have the AWS D1.1-2006 Edition and was wondering if I should indeed get the 2010 Edition.

Response:

Using your D1.1-06, take a look at Section 4.2.1 (referred to as "Clause" in later editions):

4.2.1 Qualification to Earlier Editions. “…The use of earlier editions shall be prohibited for new qualifications…."

A lot of us have old revisions of welding references we use from time to time to answer welding questions. If you're using your D1.1-06 as a reference, that should be fine. I use a 2004 edition often for reference because it’s a searchable pdf. It gets me where I need to be quickly. Once there, I’ll backup what I’ve found with the current revision. That works for me, but only with D1.1

If you’re making welding decisions for someone under a contract you most likely need to upgrade. Somewhere in the contract documents, often right on the design prints, the code of record will be mentioned. All your answers need to come out of this code. If you are developing new weld procedures and/or qualifying welders, doing so requires you to use the latest revision.

I just did a quick scan of my Codes & Standards library and count 60+ documents. That can be pricey. Some are the latest revision, others are old, well used and being held for sentimental reasons (Sigh: Remember that Beloit project? Shimmyin’ along 20” Sch. 80 pipe, 30 ft. up, in 24ºf and rain. Those were the days. Dream Over!). I've been able to build that library by asking those I contract with to supply me a non-pirated copy of the referenced code. Having the correct revision is critical to insuring you’ve made the right call. Today, all my most referenced codes and standards are stored on a 2g memory stick. Having what is needed to make the decision at the job site is as close as my car keys.

Codes are reviewed on a regular basis. Teams of folks from our industries come together to form technical committees. These teams typically include members who: 1) apply the code in their workplace, 2) regulate the industry and 3) supply that industry. At regular intervals these groups come together to address suggested changes, sharing their experiences and knowledge and hammering out that next revision.

In the past D1.1 was revised every 2 years. Beginning with 2010 they will make revisions on a 5 year cycle (pocket books rejoice). So this is a good time to be replacing that old code.

Many of us keep an old code revision around that we use as a reference from time to time, but if your customers understand that "Welding shall comply with the latest revision of AWS D1.1 - Structural Welding Code - Steel" -or- If you are currently qualifying welders and/or procedures to D1.1, then you're going to need an upgrade.

Good luck

“What key skills make for the best Certified Welding Inspectors?”

2010-05-18T18:17:00.000-07:00

I was recently interviewed by a writer who was researching Welders making the transition to Inspectors (CWI). One of the questions asked trip a trigger unleashing one of my pet peeves… “What key skills make for the best Certified Welding Inspectors?”

The answer came easy. Communication!

I had a report sent to me the other day evaluating a set of bend coupons for a welder qualification test. The document stated, "All his welds looked very good except he failed the bend test in a few spots." This allowed for one of my “PWC Teachable Moments”.

Words mean nothing if they are not intelligible. A CWI needs to be able to speak and write clear, accurate reports that state (in the words of Joe Friday) "Just the Facts, Ma'am". No opinions or spin, no half truths or sugar coatings. Just clear and accurate accounts of; what I saw, what I measured, what I found to be acceptable or what was unacceptable and why. I would also include in my reports what I couldn’t see, what was not measured and why.

Here's how that report should have read: (AWS D1.1, Fillet Option 2)

· Fillet welds were visually acceptable.

· Completed test plate was visually acceptable.

· Coupon 1 (C1), Root Bend, One discontinuity less than 1/32; Acceptable.

· Coupon 2 (C2), Root Bend, One discontinuity greater than 1/32but less than 1/8. One defect greater than 1/8. No corner cracks; Unacceptable.

50 years from now we could look at that documentation and draw the same conclusion. When a CWI is called on to review his past records, those records need to be clear. You may not recall the conditions that lead to your report, but you will be thankful that you developed a clear accurate report and that you filed it with copies of the marked up prints, inspection requirements, relevant WPS and WPQR’s.

Pictures are an excellent means of communication. They can quicky clarify a condition to those not on-site. The thing missing in most photographed weld issues I’ve been involved in has been size perspective. I rarely photograph a weld that doesn’t show my 5 inch Starrett scale in clear focus. I also never “make the call” from a photo. There are far too many unknowns for my comfort level.

Verbal communications can, at times, be emotionally elevated. Verbal communication needs to be clear and respectful. It is often the CWI who has to tell the Emperor “he has no cloths”. Statements need to be founded on adequate knowledge of the facts and the inspector needs to posses a background of technical competence pertinent to the issue. The CWI needs to get feed-back from those in the conversation to insure the message is being received correctly and as intended.

By far, communication, written, photographed or verbal, is thee key skill of today’s CWI.

Weld Penetration Problems

2010-03-30T17:23:00.000-07:00

Ken P...

Our problem, we get linear porosity at the furthest point of penetration (heavy plate). The size of porosity is 0.3mm dia. but occurs regularly in every weld sectioned so far. Please suggest any steps, which should be checked.
Weld Info: Semi-Automatic process, Spray Transfer, Blasted Material, Electrode: 0.045" ER70S-6, Gas: 91Ar / 5Co2 / 4O2 @ 35cfh, WFS: 485ipm, Travel Speed: 13ipm, Amps: 335A, Voltage: 29.3, Finished weld size is 12mm

Ken,
I would suspect that your weld penetration profile is showing “finger penetration” (Not sure if that is a real term but), a real deep area of penetration at the weld root. The profile is much deeper (at this location) than it is wide. This will cause this area to open up during solidification.
Grab your copy of AWS D1.1 and check out the Commentary section at C3.7.2 “Width/Depth Pass Limitations” also, Figure C-3.2 “Examples of Centerline Cracking”.
I was asked to troubleshoot a similar condition during a job interview for a former employer. To save money, they had changed a process from an 0.045 dia. electrode to an 0.052 dia. When they made the change they did not change any other parameters. The high wire feed with the larger diameter electrode created a considerable increase in current which equates to a considerable increase in root penetration. Like you, everywhere they sectioned, they had this pore, which I believe was more of a linear void. A reduction in WFS, although not popular, eliminated the problem. P.S. I got the job!
Typically, a reduction in current (WFS) will reduce this finger penetration and this should remedy your issue. One other thing; yours is a weird shielding gas mixture. Not sure why you would go with so much Oxygen but I don’t know your whole story. If you can, replace the Oxygen with more Co2. Perhaps that will change your weld profile as well.

Good Luck! PWC

"It's Good to be Me!"

Careers In Welding

2010-02-25T16:17:00.000-08:00

Careers In Welding

That's the way we've always done it.

2010-01-21T19:38:00.000-08:00

If someone tells me that one more time I may puke.

This story was from a fellow inspector...

One Christmas, a young girl was watching her mother prepare the ham for cooking. The mother took a sharp knife, cut off both ends of the ham,added all her other 'special' items for flavoring, put the ham in the pan and into the oven.

The girl asks, "Mother, why did you cut the ends off of the ham?" "Why, I don't know, that's the way my mother always did it."

Later, when all the family was together for the meal the mother asks "Mom,why did you cut the ends off the ham?" She says, "I can't recall, oh, Mom always did it that way." They look over to the Great Grandmother who is sitting in her seat smiling. Great Grandma says, "I had to cut the ends off because my pan was to short to fit the ham in whole."

By pure observation, a habit, a procedure, a course in history may be set for generations that has nothing to do with the finished product, science,or fact.

It's Good to be Me!
PWC

Which welds are required to be visually inspected and by who?

2010-01-05T09:59:00.000-08:00

Ed called: “We work on Off-Road and Lifting Equipment and our welders are qualified per AWS D1.1. Which welds are required to be visually inspected and by who?”

Ed, A few documents you should consider adding to your welding library are:
• AWS D14.1- Specification for Welding Industrial & Mill Cranes & Other Material Handling Equipment,
• AWS D14.3- Specification for Welding Earthmoving, Construction & Agricultural Equipment -and-
• AWS D14.4- Specification for Welded Joints in Machinery & Equipment
These welding specifications are a little more applicable to the industry <> services.

You asked which welds are required to be visually inspected and I had to snicker… There was a time in my life when on one side of my Hard Hat was printed “AWS D1.1 Sec 6.9” I would get this question, smile, point to my Hard Hat and say, “Look it up!”

AWS D1.1 keeps it simple, Clause 6.9 – Visual Inspection, “All welds shall be visually inspected…” Section 10.6 of D14.1 is similar, “All welds shall be visually examined.” That doesn’t leave a lot of “wiggle room”. A qualified inspector needs to visually inspect all welds.

As to who the qualified inspector is, I told you over the phone that a Certified Welding Inspector (CWI) isn’t required. Welding codes and standards typically accept the qualifications of a CWI but they don’t require certification. AWS D1.1 and D14.1 require inspectors to be qualified and that the bases for qualification are documented. In addition, D1.1 requires a regular eye exam.

As long as <> writes a qualification procedure for your inspectors, the inspectors conform to Para: (1), (2) or (3) [see D1.1 Para: 6.1.4.1 or D14.1 Para: 10.1.3] and <> maintains documentation that those inspectors meet the qualification requirements, visual weld inspection can be handled internally.

A great document to use as a guide for developing your Weld Inspector Qualification Procedure is AWS B5.1 – Specification for the Qualification of Welding Inspectors (http://files.aws.org/certification/docs/b5.1-2003-errata.pdf). This is a free download made available by the American Welding Society at www.aws.org

As for what I had printed on the other side of my Hard Hat… “AWS D1.1 Sec 3.1, 2nd Sentence”. Look it up! But that’s a whole other column.

"It's Good to be Me."

PWC

Pulsed Welding Equipment

2009-11-21T09:24:00.000-08:00

Cory G. from Norther Iowa asks:

"We use the Pulsed GMAW process with Lincoln equipment. When setting weld voltage the Trim can be adjusted between 0.5 and 1.5
What do those numbers mean and how to they relate to weld voltage?"

Pulsed welding equipment can challenge the conventional wisdom we’ve picked up over the years using a good ol’ constant voltage (CV) GMAW (Mig) welder. With typical CV equipment, the Welder will select a voltage and wire feed speed (WFS) combination, possibly a percentage of slope and/or inductance and then be ready to weld. Today’s pulsed Mig equipment changes most of that.

Most pulsed Mig welders run on pre-set programs. The Welder will select the type of wire, the wires diameter, possibly a base material and the shielding gas used. From this information the equipment will look at the WFS selected and do a calculation as to what the optimum weld voltage should be.

Of course, this optimum voltage may need some type of adjustment depending on the needs of the Welder. Example: The optimum weld voltage to weld a flat position, 3/8 inch fillet (1F) at 475 ipm may not be optimum to weld a root pass in a horizontal groove (2G) at the same WFS. Understanding that, each manufacturer of this equipment has built-in, an adjustment for voltage. Think of it as a percentage of optimum voltage.

Manufacturers may give you a 0.50 to 1.50 range, or a 0 to 50 range, or something similar. All will call this “Trim”. Using the 0.50 to 1.50 range as an example, 1.00 would be considered the optimum setting. When you reduce your Trim from 1.00 to 0.85, you have reduced arc length and, in doing so, reduced weld voltage. Similarly, when you increased Trim to, say 1.15, you’ve increased arc length and, in doing so, increased weld voltage.

This is very similar to what you were doing all along on that old CV Mig equipment. When you reduced voltage, you were reducing arc length. Even with this new fancy equipment the age-old understanding that “Weld voltage has a direct relationship to arc length” doesn’t change.
What’s different is that a Trim of 1.00 for a given electrode (type/dia.) will give you a completely different weld voltage when you change electrode, shielding gas or WFS.

Most of today’s pulsed equipment will display average weld voltage as the equipment is welding, and some will continue to display it for a short period (seconds) after welding has stopped. This feature helps the welder monitor compliance to the weld procedure (WPS).

PWC

"It's Good to be Me."

B31.3 Processes

2009-10-02T21:45:00.000-07:00

Question: Paul, I enjoyed reading your article printed in Practical Welding this
month, thank you!
I have a question relative to ASME B31.3 the code for chemical plant piping.
The area of this code referring to the type of welding process that is
acceptable is un-clear to me. I am referring to section 328.2.2,
..."welding procedures qualified by others may be used, provided that the
following conditions are met:( f ) The welding process is SMAW or GTAW or a
combination thereof"

Does this mean that the only acceptable process for welding has to be either
SMAW or GTAW, or is GMAW acceptable as long as it follows a written and
acceptable WPS?
And if GMAW is acceptable, must it be performed by a certified welder who
has been qualified in that WPS?

With your article being written about WPS's and referencing the same code I
have questions about, I thought it wise to seek your council.

I truly appreciate any enlightenment you can provide.
Thank you and regards,
Randi Kremer
Engineer

Answer: The section you are referring to (328.2.2) is specific to the use of weld procedures qualified by others (not qualified by you). When a fabricator wishes to utilize these procedures, they face many limitations. One of those, as you’ve discovered, is the process used.
There are many other allowable processes available but all would require you to produce a qualified Weld Procedure Specification (WPS).
ASME B31.3 section 328.2.1 mentions, “Qualification of the welding procedures to be used… shall conform to the requirements of… Section IX…” So ASME Section IX will layout your requirements for qualification.
The process that you are wishing to use, Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW), is included in Section IX as an allowable process. So, yes, you can use the GMAW process but you will need to qualify a WPS to do so.
As for your Welder being qualified to the new WPS, that is a bit of a “Chicken or the Egg” scenario.
A Welder typically wouldn’t be qualifie

d to a WPS before the WPS has been tested and developed and a WPS won’t be qualified until a competent welder completes it.
Code writers recognize this. ASME notes that a procedure qualification has a distinctly different purpose than a welder qualification.
ASME Section IX QW-100.1 makes the statement, “…the welding procedure qualification test establishes the properties of the weldment, not the skill of the welder…” Prior to that statement you’ll read, “It is presupposed that the welder… performing the welding procedure qualification test is a skilled workman.”
As for Welder Qualification, QW-100.2 notes that, “the basic criterion established for welder qualification is to determine the welder’s ability to deposit sound weld metal”.

So how does this apply to Campbell Fittings and their desire to utilize the GMAW process?
It sounds like you need to qualify the GMAW process. This can be done by any of your competent Welders. Once your Welder has successfully completed the Process Qualification testing he/she will be considered qualified. The limiting factor will be that the process will be qualified within a given range of essential variables and the performance (welder qualification) will be qualified within a different given range of essential variables.
Once the WPS is completed the welder who qualified it may need additional testing to utilize it in your specific application.

Example: Your Welder completed the Procedure Qualification test (PQR) in the Vertical (3G) position, on a Single V-Groove, with a backing strip and the progression was up. You would like to apply this same Procedure Qualification Report (PQR) to a similar joint but you intend to change the groove by eliminating the backing and weld vertical down. A new WPS could be written to reflect these changes and would not require testing, but your Welder would not be qualified to this new WPS.

Confusing? I know. When talking “Code Talk” always make sure you separate Procedure Qualification from Performance Qualification. I often see where these two consistently trip people up when talking weld qualifications. Consider contacting a competent Certified Welding Inspector who understands the ASME Codes to review your specific needs and advise you on additional testing requirements.

PWC

It's Good to be Me!

Vertical-up or -down in robotic welding?

2009-08-07T03:30:00.000-07:00

Vertical-up or -down in robotic welding?

We have a weldment that incorporates 0.375-in.-diameter steel rods and a 0.060-in.-thick sheet metal stamping of 1018 CR material. Each weld is the same, 0.75 in. long with a 0.25- in. fillet, perhaps including weaving. The assembly is fixtured and welded robotically using GMAW with CO2 gas and repeated 100 to 300 times.

We utilize vertical welding, but which is a better progression, down or up?

Richard P.

Vertical-up and vertical-down welding are significantly different from one another in the technique used and the resulting finish weld. This is the reason welding codes consider this change in progression an essential variable and require additional testing when changing from one to the other.

From your description, I would have to conclude that of all the possible positions (flat, horizontal, vertical, and overhead), this is an ideal candidate for welding vertical-down. Your greatest concern in this application is going to be burn-through on the 0.060-in. sheet metal. Welding vertical-up will be difficult, if not impossible, in this configuration because of the low travel speed and high heat input. Welding vertical-up with GMAW typically requires a weave technique to carry the puddle and give you the proper bead profile. GMAW vertical-up is a deep-penetrating technique, and this characteristic is going to lead to consistent burn-through.

GMAW vertical-down, on the other hand, tends to lack penetration and side-wall fusion. These characteristics are undesirable in most applications, but given that you are using a fully automated system, tight control of wire feed speed (WFS), voltage, travel speed, and bead placement should allow you to counteract these characteristics and control your finish weld quality.

I’ve had a lot of success setting up similar applications in what I call the 45-degree vertical-down position. The key is using a slight drag angle (10-15 degrees) and keeping the arc on the leading edge of the puddle at all times. This is a little easier to do at a 45-degree incline than at straight 90 degrees.

If possible, consider a mix shielding gas (minimum 85 percent argon/maximum15 percent CO2) as opposed to the straight CO2 you are using today. This should reduce chances of burn-through and reduce weld spatter considerably. A 0.035-diameter solid electrode should work well in this application.
You stated the weld size was 0.25 in. Talk to the engineering team and your customer about reducing the weld size to 0.19 or even 0.125, which will help increase travel speed, ensure penetration into the root, and reduce cost. Large welds with no root penetration or side-wall fusion are of little benefit to your customers.

Do I need a welding procedure specification?

2009-05-16T17:12:00.000-07:00

Question
Do I need a welding procedure specification (WPS) for my company when it is just me and all I do is on-site portable welding of a wide range of items?

Steven B-

Answer

Whether your company requires a WPS depends on the customers you serve. For example, if your company is hired to fabricate your neighborhood association’s new flagpole, using your skills and best judgment would most likely be acceptable. On the other hand, if you are contracted to fabricate steel supports for a new government facility in your hometown, a little more paperwork probably is involved.

Review all the documentation from your clients in detail. Ask questions if you are unsure. A common statement found in contract documents is "All welding shall meet the requirements of the latest revision of AWS D1.1, D1.2, D1.5, ASME B31.1, B31.3, API 1104 ..." This statement indicates written weld procedures and documentation are required that show your welders and welding process meet the code requirements. You need to know, before you strike an arc ... before you bid the job, if there are specific code requirements.

Does your company need (as opposed to require) written WPSs? Yes!
Without a clearly documented and followed process, it is difficult to communicate details of your welding to your customers. With a clearly defined WPS, everyone involved knows what is to take place. Should something go wrong, say that new flagpole drops on top of the neighborhood association president’s new MINI Cooper, you'll be able to show the insurance investigators that you are a professional and the failure was clearly not caused by an uncontrolled weld process.

In your company name you use the term Certified. To be a certified welder requires testing, typically to a nationally recognized standard. This is monitored by a third party, often a professional organization such as the American Welding Society (AWS) or a governing agency like the state department of transportation, and administered at an accredited test facility. These organizations would most likely require your work be completed per a qualified WPS to maintain your welder qualifications.

PWC
It's Good to be Me!

2009-05-14T19:08:00.000-07:00

May/June 2009

Good Call!

2009-04-22T16:10:00.000-07:00

We have is a stiffener bar (continuity connection) in a column that calls for (AWS D1.1) BTC-P4 for the flanges and fillet welds both sides in the web. The stiffeners were field welded. After assembling 35 connections we discovered no fillet weld on the bottom side in the web. Problem is we can't weld the bottom side of the stiffener now because of clearance. What are our options? Could we add more than the required 1/4” fillet on top of stiffener to satisfy the inspector? He is not offering any solutions. He just wants the requirements to be met, fillet weld both sides. If you can help, it will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Brian N.

Brian,
Thank goodness for “on-the-ball” inspectors. The inspectors’ part in this construction project is to monitor the fabrication and erection. Should issues arise, he is to bring them to the attention of those who need to know. Speaking from past experience that can be a thankless job.
The inspector on your site is insisting the welding completed meets the requirements of the jobs documentation. When things go wrong and an inspector raises the “red flag”, it is often the case that those on the ground will look to him and ask, “What should we do?”
The inspectors’ first response should be “Contact the Engineer and come up with a documented solution”.
Often, when we start to brain-storm solutions on the job site, we don’t have all the facts or we may not understand all the requirements, to make the call. Example: Your suggestion for missing weld on one side of the joint was to increase weld size on the opposite side. There may be times when this is an acceptable solution, but if the engineers concern is the stress riser created from the missing fillet (which is often the case in today’s building construction) that oversized fillet would be of little benefit. And better to bring the issue into the light for engineering analysis now, than to find out after the concrete has set, that the fix was unacceptable.
Inspectors may or may not have the engineering back ground to make this call, but it is the engineer responsible for the project that should come up with an acceptable solution.
Brian contacted me by email to let me know that the solution to his welding issue was to backup, disassemble each connection, and add the original required ¼” fillet weld. Good call!

2009-03-16T19:15:00.000-07:00

March/April 2009

What are the negative effects of whipping or weaving?

2009-03-02T03:38:00.000-08:00

“We Mig weld carbon steel materials 1/8” thick and greater. Our Welders use a whipping technique that you have described as a bad work habit. What are the negative effects of whipping or weaving?

Whipping and Weaving.
As with many welding techniques, there is a time and place for everything. Watch most robotic applications and you’ll see a constant weaving motion (side to side). Observe as a Fitter puts a 6010 root pass in a pipe and you’ll notice a distinct whipping action (fore and aft). This movement is perfectly acceptable for these applications. The robot uses the motion to find its way. The Pipe Fitter uses the “fast freeze” characteristic to burn away the land and place the root perfectly at each whip.

In production GMA (Mig) welding those same techniques can have negative affects on your finished product. Weaving with the Mig process is a common technique when welding vertical up. It can be difficult to carry the puddle up without the weave technique. A slight weave is common when Mig welding in other positions, but slight should be defined as 2-1/2 x the electrode (wire) diameter. With an 0.035 diameter wire that is about 1/8” of movement. Exceeding that can lead to overlap, undercut and other undesired conditions. Multiple stringer passes should be considered when additional bead width is needed.

As for whipping when Mig welding… There are times when whipping is used to bridge a gap, but often the Welder would be far better off turning the welder down to a short circuit transfer and applying that root. Again, a slight whip is common but slight in this case should be defined as 1-1/2 x the wire diameter. If the key to quality Mig welding is keeping the arc on the leading edge of the puddle, then the whip technique goes against that.

When a whip is excessive weld throats can be undersized and weld spatter is increased. Each time the Welder backs the arc up away from the leading edge the wire is driven into the molten metal and spatter increases. This will require removal and increases the cost of your product.
Good technique is important to improving weld quality. The internet is loaded with great resources for improving our welding skills. Check out this Mig Handbook for additional information. (http://www.esabna.com/EUWeb/MIG_handbook/592mig1_1.htm)

Certified Welders

2009-02-24T04:11:00.000-08:00

My younger brother is the Service Manager for a “High-End” import car dealership on the west coast. He received a recall notice concerning Receiver Hitches on Cross-Over SUVs. Welds on the hitch could not be verified as being completed correctly therefore they would need to be removed and re-welded. The Recall Notice stated, “All welding shall be completed by an AWS Certified Welder.”
Joe’s question to me, “What does that mean? Where do I find an AWS Certified Welder?”
Not all welders are AWS Certified Welders. Certified welders are tested at an accredited test facility and their records need to be strictly maintained within AWS QC7-93 guide lines. QC7 is the AWS “Standard for AWS Certified Welders”.
So where does Joe go to find a certified welder? My first suggestion was to contact the nearest “Accredited Test Facility”. The AWS maintains a list, online, at http://files.aws.org/certification/docs/auto/atf_listing.pdf The closest facility for Joe was in Tacoma, WA.
With a little help knowing where to look and the right questions to ask, Joe was able to get the 40 SUV’s on his lot repaired so his sales team could feel confident and start moving them.
If you want to know how you can become “Certified” log on to http://www.aws.org/w/a/certification/index.html There are AWS certification programs for Welders, Inspectors, Supervisors and more. Certification can open doors, present opportunities (like Joe’s) and put you out front in a tough job market.

2009-02-15T19:01:00.000-08:00

Arc Welding 101
May/June PWT 2008
Title: A WPS lesson for beginners

Question
Recently I was given a weld procedure specification (WPS) from a contractor to review. It’s still lying on my desk. Do you have any tips for a beginner like myself on how to review a WPS?
Habeeb Rahman
TPI Welding Inspector

Answer

It's time to pick up that WPS off your desk and give it a good, hard look. The first thing you need to arm yourself with is the correct code or standard. The WPS is going to state which code or standard it complies with. You most likely need to get familiar with ASME Section IX or AWS D1.1 Sections 3 and 4, or both.

Does it reference a procedure qualification report (PQR), or is it considered prequalified? It is important to make sure that the WPS states how it was qualified.

Review the joint design. Does the joint on the WPS match the joint referenced? Is backing required? Is the joint within the stated tolerances?
Ensure the base metal of the joint matches the base metals listed on the WPS, which may require a little homework. Your code should list materials by group or P-numbers. Also review the filler metal/flux/shielding listed and witness which is used.

Are there preheat or postweld heat-treat requirements? How will you measure them? Are the welding parameters such as current, voltage, travel speed, and number of passes being used within the range of the ones that are listed? How will you measure them?

A WPS is really a recipe for how a particular weld is going to be made. All the ingredients need to match, and when they don't, even beginners need to stand up and get the attention of someone who will get your welding back on track. Don't be intimidated by a WPS. Break it down section by section, and simply ensure that what is noted matches what is being done on your project.

Workin' for the Man -vs- Workin' for Yourself

2008-12-31T06:45:00.000-08:00

One of the best pieces of advice I didn't follow before going into business for myself was "Before your leave your regular job, save up $10k and put it in an account you can access immediately." Right! My first thought was, "I'm going into business for myself because I couldn't save $10k while workin' for the man". "If I could safe $10k at the drop of a hat I wouldn't bother workin' for myself".

Looking back, it was the best advice I'd received and should have followed.

Stepping off the dock of "the Man" employment and into the boat of "self-employment" was certainly exciting.

While standing on the dock and looking out at the calm water, life was sure to be full of good times and adventure. I didn't realized that once I untied the boat from the dock and "pushed off", my footing would be incredibly unstable. I wasn't alone in the boat. With me was my wife and kids, our home, our dreams, college educations, dreams after high school, retirement.

When the waves would pickup and crash against the boat there was no way to secure it and it was difficult to guide. The boat may crash against the rocks. It may take on water and sink. It was me against whatever the waters could through at us. Enough with the boat analogy...

In the 3 years that I worked for myself we almost lost our home 3 times. Summer vacations were less about relaxing and more about creative financing to get through the week without income (Thank God for my family, who always knew how to divert my attention and make me laugh). Always being attached to the phone. Dealing with frustrated clients while out of town.

During the winter business was slow. This meant finding contract work to "get through". New Orleans, Wilminton NC, Beloit WI... Contract work was Never close to home. Work was every day as long as there was sunlight (and often when there was not). Money was good, but we were one more missed payment away from loosing the house. So the money was designated. Keeping expenses low meant living in $30-a-night hotels and living with the "riff-raff" they attract. Trying to help out with Teens at home but knowing that giving that help over the phone was a big part of the problem. In 2007 I lived over 6 months out of the state.

Living the dream wasn't supposed to look like this.

Getting the opportunity to go back to working-for-the-man was the lifeline I needed. The phone call to workout the details was like a big Coast Guard spot light hitting me in the face as I clung to the boats remains, cold, tired, scared. (Alright, no more boat analogies... I promise)

A deposit in the checking account, religiously, every other Friday... paid time off... vacations without a cell phone... I admire those who build their business on their own. There is also a lot to be said for Workin'-for-The-Man.

Now when I stand on the edge of the dock and stare out at the water things look different.

It's Good to be Me!

PWC