Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum
You will need the code books to do the work. If you intend to just do boiler proper repairs, you will need Sec. I , If pressure vessels then Sec VIII Div I and Maybe Div 2. If boiler external piping, you will need B31.1 and probably also Sec I.
Supporting codes will also be required such as Sec II All parts, Sec V, and Sec IX
You cannot 'refer" to them and must have them in your possession for the audit.
You may also do a joint review which would allow you to not only repair but mfg components.
You must have the codes. Thats your reference to assure that you are compliant with the applicable codes. You are doing code work and would need the codes.
My point I really wanted to get across is that the code is needed too. I was pretty sure you had a good grasp on the topic too:) .
Have a great day.
Gerald
The requirement for a WPS for welder qualification is pretty common among all codes. The item you really need is a copy of the code which will be followed for qualification. Then within that code, you would find the information you need.
What code will be used?
I think the opportunities that are opened up are highly dependent upon the experiences you already have and how you can apply any subsequent "credentials". When I 1st certified, I was not aware of any advantage to be gained other than me thinking it would be cool to have a piece of paper that confirmed what I already knew about a trade that I really enjoyed.
If your experiences were in structural steel erection, then look towards geotechnical firms that are often on the "ground floor" of steel construction. I imagine there is plenty in your area however I imagine there are plenty of CWI's also.
Focus on the industries you are in as far as researching the opportunities.
Keep your eye on jobs using jobs searches such as Indeed.com. Maybe contact companies you have worked for in the past. A "New" certification for a proven employee can be something that attracts a company to you.
Understand that sometimes a certification is just a piece of paper. Sometimes it helps, sometimes its just paper. Moving forward in your knowledge and abilities is ALWAYS a good thing.
As we all know, the experience of many "seasoned" hands often results in a knowledge greater than that of the "book smart" welding inspector :)
Are you asking? The production weld you speak of is not 6G. 6G is a test position.
A 3G and 4G test qualifies for All positions. Which would include any position on the referenced pipe joint within the other limits imposed by the code.
There are some advantages and disadvantages to joining a union. I cannot speak for the Ironworkers. I was a member of the Boilermakers and USW.
Advantages
1) Representation by an organization that was originally designed to protect workers from unfair labor practices.
2) In the boilermakers, there was a greater number of people with training and experience in the trade. In non union situations, the training and experience level sometimes varied widely depending on "kinority". Friends or relatives hired with nothing more than a tool bucket.
3) A livable wage and then some was negotiated for us. This included a great base wage and then benefits on top of that.
4) A business agent that worked towards getting us on the job.
5) Better adhearance to safety awareness.
Disadvantages
1) Union Dues that contributed to a president with a wage and benefit package of over $700k per year.
2) No advantages for individuals with higher skill levels.
3) You are at the mercy of the projects being worked with organized labor. Boilermakers work is very profitable during certain times of the year. Other times but so much. Not sure about other organizations.
4) Noticed some preference given to individuals that were members of another organization as far as placement in supervisory positions. Or they almost all bought the same rings to wear.
5) Locals with large numbers may take awhile to get to you depending upon the "call list". I myself never reviewed the list however based upon some experience, it was a "fluid document".
6) A wide variation in work ethics of individuals, some excellent, some were slugs..Both stay on the job.
Please understand that the observations above are only those one of soooooo many people in organized labor. I think workers should be organized at any opportunity. The majority of the brothers and sisters I worked with both as a Boilermaker and USW member were excellent at their craft.
Remember..... Opinion!
If you are working within the scope of ASME Sec IX and most of the B31 codes, using two different WPS's on a single joint is allowed. Even if they are two different processes.
Though it's allowed does not mean it's a good idea. Welding over a ground exx10 root pass with GTAW might not be advised.
These types of questions are best answered by project requirements.
Is there any corresponding change on the ID machine at all ? I would suspect input power fluctuation if its not occurring in a manner where it progressively gets worse.
1) Take all of the books that were supplied or referenced during your training to achieve an AS Degree and read them to understand all of the content.
2) Obtain the the AWS Body of Knowledge for the CWI and buy an AWS Welding Handbook Volume 1, 9th edition. Read the sections in the book...a few times.
3) Purchase a "Welding Inspection Technology" book and workbook and go through it. Answer the questions, closed book and check your scores. Go through it a few more times until you feel your understand the content.
4) Obtain a code book, any year, any code such as D1.1, ANSIi B31.1/3, API 1104 and read through it not really cover to cover but more learning where certain subjects are addressed.
Then after you have done some learning, decide if you need a course or just want to spend the money trying a test.
The above is an opinion only and based on only my experiences.
Keep in mind we all learn differently. I feel you should learn all you can about welding,inspection, codes etc... before attending a "prep class".
Weldability of Steels, RD Stout Welding Research Council
AWS Welding Handbook All volumes
Sad to hear. He seemed very passionate about sharing his knowledge.
I am not a fan of 17.1 as far as how a code is written.
I have looked through it and there is NOT an general statement as in other codes stating what you have mentioned.
So therefore, you must look at the variables for qualification of the operators. 5.2.2.2 refers you to only the 1st 3 variables above. No reference is made to any variable that is "operator specific" such as manual controls of joint tracking, speed, etc....
The AWS 3.0 definitions are referred to for operator and welder but have no purpose as far as defining qualification requirements.
So ask yourself what variables must apply to operator qualification? Not very many!
Then on the other side of things, look at the variables required for a welder. Nothing there that distinguishes a welder from an operator either. A person could follow all of the requirements for a welder on a mchine weld, does that make them qualified as a welder???
The only distiguishing thing left is the definitions. I'm safe testing each type on each type.
Sorry I wasn't much help. I do not see anything that allows an operator to be qualified by virtue of manual or semi-auto welding. If it does, then the opposite works too based upon my logic.
I only glanced through my .pdf version of the code using the search term "Operator" and "Machine" independently an nothing jumped out at me. I did not re-read the code from cover to cover.
QW-423.1 I believe refers to the range of Pnumbers for performance.
As the paragraph you quoted states, Preheat or PWHT may be omitted.
Since for performance qualification, plain carbon steel base metals can be used to qualify for many other base metals, this should seldom be an issue.
In the case where an organization has the desire to use crack sensitive materials, then preheat would be an issue and regardless of the allowance, should be applied.
the WQT does NOT require preheat/pwht in accordance with the WPS.
He could qualify to make those welds provided all of the filler metals you refer to are for GTAW (F-6)
He would of course need a qualified procedure to make the production welds.
If you follow all of the P-number requirements, you will find out that for performance, substitutions are allowed. P1 qualifies P1 hrough P11, P3x, P4x base metals.
Turn it up for the overhead.
Its just like flat but harder on your neck and of course when the slag peels off in one big piece, it may fall on you :)
I think there are a couple of things contributing to your difficulties.
1) In real life, the joint design you describe is a challenge for anyone with the method you describe. Not impossible, but difficult. A typical open root prep for a 6010 root pass would almost always have an included angle of 60 Degrees Minimum. A change in weld prep could help but I understand this may be a fixed setup that is always used...WHY who knows.
2) The issue with slag on the pass placed over the root which in many circles is referred to as the hot pass is probably NOT because of slag but more the result of convexity on the bead. In many "real life" operations, the 2nd pass would be deposited with an XX10 electrode and NOT a 7018. The 2nd pass would have a much flatter profile AND the width of the face of the weld would be wider and therefore better facilitate getting the big ole 1/8" 7018 in the joint with a nice tight arc and also room for manipulation.
If all of the slag were removed from the toes of the 2nd pass bead, defects would probably still occur if the profile were still convex.
Reducing the convexity would result in reducing the discontinuities along the toes. Because of the difficulties associated with the joint you describe, a wider 2nd bead with more pause on the sides and less time in the middle may help. An adjustment of amperage can sometimes help and I have found a sweet spot for 7018 to be in the 110 range and anything much below 105 gives me issues unless welding on lighter material
3) 1/8" E7018 can be a challenge for many when the conditions are ideal. The settings, arc length, and manipulation all play a key part in what happens. I am assuming you have already welded a plate on backing. If it were fitup like typical joints of that type, then there is plenty of room to manipulate the electrode as shown in the image attached. Because of the conditions, all of the things that work to correct convexity as you learned to weld with 7018 are now more critical.
I have not walked in your shoes or those of your instructor so what you are doing may have a purpose. All variables in a given weld work together. Amperage, Voltage(Arc Length), Travel Speed, Manipulation, Groove Angle, Root Opening, Root Face, Preheat, etc.. Changing one will always change the results unless something else is changed along with it.
For those that say the exam is easier, ask them if they have taken it with both. I have tested and passed with D1.1 and B31.1/Sec IX but never tried 1104.
Everyone has different experiences. Its my suggestion to use the code you have been using.
Temporary or any other weld must be performed by an organization authorized to weld on pressure vessels. The WPS and Welder qualifications mean nothing without being the authorized organization.
This is assuming an ASME pressure vessel.
If you are the design authority, you may select whatever you like based upon the intended use of t he product unless there is some jurisdictional law requiring parts be designed, manufactured(built), inspected and tested in accordance with a specific standard..
AWS Has numerous codes and standards that may be applied to your product. Obviously using one for structural steel for stainless sheet metal will lead to eventual problems. Not with the product per se but with the documentation that supports it and may be passed on to customers or subcontractors.
Take a LOOK AT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_welding_codes AND JUST PICK YA ONE OUT :)
One thing to understand regarding heat input is that it is controlled during welding and the value is listed on the WPS. Because ranges for Amps/Volts/Travel speed may allow for settings that exceed the max heat input.
However your formula should be
Heat Input (Joules per minute) = (Volts x Amps x 60) / Travel Speed (IPM)
You are using the Wire Feed Speed which has nothing to do with calculating heat input.
Regardless, I may very well have a WPS in which heat input is required to be controlled yet the right "mix" of variables within the ranges allowed could result in not meeting the requirements. As the welder and inspector, I would need to verify that the ranges used DURING PRODUCTION are within the heat input requirements of the WPS.
I am not familiar with the specifications related to the new part B so their may be some other limiting factor to consider but your travel speed value is outta whack regardless.
Hope this helps.
Have a great day.
Gerald Austin
Weldingdata.com
Greeneville, Tn
423-914-1481
Can you provide a joint design?
Was the crack along HAZ or Centerline?
Was the crack detected right after welding the root or after completion of the entire weld?
Was preheat dropped prior to PWHT ?
What was the cooling rate after Welding and PWHT.?
Was the item attached to any operating machinery ?
Was any in-process inspection performed on the root pass or intermediate passes.?
If it was a saddle on connection, was the run pipe prepared to allow the hole to line up precisely with the ID of the branch?
With a tight groove angle, concave root contour, and a deep depth to width things can be difficult. I imagine this is a saddled on nozzle and not through the shell.
QG-108 QUALIFICATIONS MADE TO PREVIOUS EDITIONS
Joining procedures, procedure qualifications, and performance qualifications that were made in accordance with Editions and Addenda of this Section as far back as the 1962 Edition may be used in any construction for which the current Edition has been specified. Joining procedures, procedure qualifications, and performance qualifications that were made in accordance with Editions and Addenda of this Section prior to the 1962 Edition may be used in any construction for which the current Edition has been specified provided the
requirements of the 1962 Edition or any later edition have been met.
Procedure specifications, PQRs, and performance qualification records meeting the above requirements do not require amendment to include any variables required by later Editions and Addenda, except as specified in QW-420. Qualification of new procedure specifications for joining processes, and performance qualifications for persons applying them, shall be in accordance with the current Edition of Section IX
In most codes, there is no expiration on a PQR. A company could qualify a procedure and record the data on the PQR and at a later date, prepare a new WPS within the qualified ranges of the applicable code.
In many cases, a single PQR may support various WPS's as is the case with ASME Sec IX.
You must evaluate the reasons for rejects. Identify the possible causes, and review what can be done to control the possible causes.
Is the acceptance criteria being exceeded. Are defects related to a specific welder, material, WPS, crew, etc...
Have great day and some more information could be useful.
Gerald Austin
I'll play the dumb donkey, Is "Wash" ever referred to as a part of the weld ??
Wash Pass, yes is defined but in the context of the question it doesn't appear to apply.
Are you asking how many joints to cut out if a weld fails ??
You would only cut out the ones in which RT showed them unacceptable unless specifications dictated something else.
The good ones....100%. The faceshield is not for eye protection only.
The impact requirements are dictated by the AASHTO zone. We are in Zone II
No Seismic stuff, they stink if they ever have to be welded over with another process, and the thickness limitations.
Some of the mgfgs limit the deposit thickness based upon wire diameter.
But for what its good for, its good for it. Reminds me of a never ending 6010. 5/64" is my diameter of choice.
Hate the smell of the smoke. Im sure there is some bad stuff in there.
E71T-11 works well downhill. There are some not so good things about it, but not being able to weld downhill isn't one of them.
I am not sure what you are saying about the illustration. My point in the illustration is that the leg is NOT measured. Only the effective throat that equals that of a corresponding leg size.
Are you too familiar with the term "Wash". I must have been sheltered.
Tables for Tubular Qualifications in 2015 are in clause 9 however regardless, you should find a statement within the code that allows WPS's qualified to previous versions to be acceptable. So I would start there. However if you have to have 2015 compliant WPS's think about the below info.
Often errors in newly released codes that are addressed by errata sheets. Take a look at this and make sure your table you are viewing is not included.
http://www.aws.org/library/doclib/errata-D1.1-D1.1M-2015.pdf Below is the Text from the 2015 code about the reorginization of the Tubular requirements. Almost always there is an error in the tables in D1.1....Why ? Who knows.
The 2015 edition of the code has been reorganized. The tubular provisions, tables, and figures previously located throughout the code are now within Clause 9 entitled “Tubular Structures.” The reorganization required numerous reference changes and renumbering of the subclauses, tables, and figures. Many of the tables in Clause 4 contained provisions for Plate as well as Pipe or Tubing. The tables have been divided to only include Plate if contained in Clause 4 and Pipe or Tubing if contained in Clause 9. This separation of the information contained in the tables also resulted in many changes to the footnotes delineated in the tables.Hope t his helps you in what you need.
Gerald Austin
Welding Inspection and Testing Services
Greeneville Tn.
423-914-1481
No Idea what the wash is however if the profile in concave, the toe may interfere with the gage AND that method of measurement cannot be used. If only one leg is interfering, you could modify the bottom part of the gage and still maintain the throat measurement using the concave gauge.
If you are using the wrong side of the gauge, use the one for concave welds.
http://www.weldingdata.com/FilletWeldgage.htmGerald Austin
I am sorry but I do not understand what you were asking in the 1st post nor your response. What I indicated in my previous post seems to be what you repeated in your 2nd post.
Hopefully you will get your question answered .
I do not have a current SEC VIII however in the past, TTS specific qualifications were required only when invoked by the code of construction.
I do not fully understand the wording of your question.
I have called a few companies and not had much luck. Even the mention of general liability and welding has stopped a few quotes.
Do you have any companies you suggest that underwrite this type of insurance?
You mention professional liability insurance. Is it required on all of the projects you work on?
I understand the importance of having it as far as protecting yourself and your business but is it a "requirement" ?
The term "Certified Welder" is the most abused and misunderstood term there is. One thing about welding is that there is a tremendous amount of variations in the skills and experiences of welder based upon industry and materials welded. A person may be "certified" for almost any type of weld from the easiest that can be trained for in hours to those requiring years of training and experience to get proficient.
The issue probably lies with the person who chose the welder without any understanding of the processes involved. A welder is "certified" when someone signs a document indicating a person has completed some type of task on a material, process, joint type, position, and other variables.
I would LOVE to see the project specifications written for this.
The inspector inspected the welds, did he verify the WPS (Welding Procedure Specification) ? Did he look at the fitup prior to the welding? Was he a "certified" welding inspector?
On the welds themselves some questions.
1) What was the acceptance criteria (Something that is ABSOLUTELY needed for someone to inspect)
2) Did the drawings show joint details in accordance with any code?
3) What was specified to the welder as to his/her qualification requirements ?
4) What if the "ART" looked bad, is there someone I can report it to ?
5) Is the structure itself designed as a structurally sound structure? Are the joints of sufficient design to properly handle the service conditions? Did an engineer verify that it was sound?
Just a few of the many thoughts that this stirred up.
The term "Certified Welder" is the most abused and misunderstood term there is. One thing about welding is that there is a tremendous amount of variations in the skills and experiences of welder based upon industry and materials welded. A person may be "certified" for almost any type of weld from the easiest that can be trained for in hours to those requiring years of training and experience to get proficient.
The issue probably lies with the person who chose the welder without any understanding of the processes involved. A welder is "certified" when someone signs a document indicating a person has completed some type of task on a material, process, joint type, position, and other variables.
I would LOVE to see the project specifications written for this.
The inspector inspected the welds, did he verify the WPS (Welding Procedure Specification) ? Did he look at the fitup prior to the welding? Was he a "certified" welding inspector?
On the welds themselves some questions.
1) What was the acceptance criteria (Something that is ABSOLUTELY needed for someone to inspect)
2) Did the drawings show joint details in accordance with any code?
3) What was specified to the welder as to his/her qualification requirements ?
4) What if the "ART" looked bad, is there someone I can report it to ?
5) Is the structure itself designed as a structurally sound structure? Are the joints of sufficient design to properly handle the service conditions? Did an engineer verify that it was sound?
Just a few of the many thoughts that this stirred up.
If the WPS was given to the welder and wasn't followed , make him a NO HIRE!
If the test supervisor had one and didn't give it to the welder on paper or verbally, make him a no hire!
Of course just one man's opinion.
You must have a qualified WPS for testing. If the WPS allowed for any XX10 electrode, then life Its good.
Wish I knew of something. Hope it all works out.
Talk with the companies you have been working with as a welder. You will have more contacts that may be familiar with you.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill
