Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Forum
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Previous Next  
Search
Topic D17.1 - Define this condition, please. By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-22-2016 19:16
I have seen this same (or very similar) image and question in the past. Since this seems to be a sample (maybe for qualification)  and not a production part, some investigation is required. I have seen cases of this on Welder Qualifications for test welds however without the thickness being reduced below the base metal thickness.

D17.1 may not have the "support" you need for rejection however if you don't wanna put your name on it and can explain why, just go for it with the understanding that you are of course accountable for your actions. The other option is to place a hold on the item and request guidance from the engineering authority based on the fact that this condition has reduced the effective thickness of the base metal/weld metal below the as supplied thickness.

As an inspector, for all I know, the design "minimum" thickness is 75% of the nominal thickness. Thus the joint MAY be OK however I would request guidance from the engineering authority 1st.

Codes do not always cover all the bases but if all you have is the code and you wanna stick with the code, stick with it.

I probably wasn't much help. Some of these things are best answered internally. Hate to have to back up a questionable decision with "...well the guy I talked to on the internet said .........."

Have a great day

Gerald
Topic Section IX WPS qualification required? By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-22-2016 18:51
Look at the applicable table for the process and note the requirements for group number. In all the typical processes, group number is a "Supplementary Essential" variable. If the process you are using indicates that, and you know the requirements for notch toughness, you have your answer.
Topic Flare Bevel Groove - Underfill? By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-22-2016 18:46
Based upon the fabrication requirements of AWS D1.1 as indicated in Para 5.24.3 the profiles for groove welds and reinforcement must meet the requirements shown 5.9 and 5.10 which refer to profile sketches in fig 5.4. In all cases, underfill is noted as unacceptable regardless of measurements.

However if the designer/engineer specified the joint to meet a specific profile other than that indicated within D1.1 I would expect them to provide the acceptance criteria.

With the variation in radius (unless root opening dimensions based upon radius are provided) being the deciding factor in the effective throat, allowing variations in which the effective throat varies can compound the variations that you get in production.

As an inspector, I would typically be interested in the fabrication requirements and acceptance criteria quoted within the code. If the designer/engineer has decided that a condition as you have shown above is acceptable, thats fine. He/She should specify somewhere that the groove weld does not need to be filled all the way. he has an entire chapter designated to him/her in D1.1.

There is no "Acceptance Criteria" for what you show above since what you show above could not be verified by inspection of completed welds and I am pretty sure D1.1 does not address macro on samples other than for qualification. Of course what you show would be detected visually as far as the underfill goes. In no case I am aware of is there a statement that says, "..if ya got enough penetration sometimes, its ok to not fill the joint all the way as long as you think the penetration is deeper than needed. " 

Another thing I would consider is the joint. If prequalified, the effective weld size is based upon the weld being flush. If it were qualiifed by testing, the testing should reflect the abilty for the procedure to obtain the required weld size with a given amount of underfill based upon some given fitup dimensions (Root Opening, Radius etc)

Of course all the above is an opinion and subject to being changed if the info is correct. If there were questions, I would consult the engineer. That's why they learn all that smart stuff!

Have a good day. I myself am on my 3rd SNOW DAY and do NOT feel bad about it!

Gerald
Topic i am a student have some questions By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-18-2016 22:21
You may be better off checking with your instructor on those.
Topic question By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-18-2016 22:19
Are you speaking of angular distortion after welding ?

Not aware of one in D1.1 or Sec IX (Which doesn't mean it doesn't exist)
5 degrees in S9074-AQ-GIB-010/248 (Figure 14)

Not sure about any other codes.

Have a great day.

Gerald Austin
Topic Semi Auto GMAW Issues By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-16-2016 01:55
Have you suggested trying the tacks only, inspecting (maybe MT), and welding with progressive inspection. Transverse cracking that occurs at the tacks only could be a type of crater cracking or cracks that are occurring as the joint is welded.

Gerald
Topic Weld Tracking Database Demo for informational purposes By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-09-2016 04:26
Just reposting this for those who are interested in what you can do with MS Access or other database management systems for tracking welding information. This is a demo and not intended for production. It will expire after a period of time.

http://weldingdata.com/FtpPublic/WeldTracking2015NRT.zip
Attachment: WeldTracking2015NRT.zip - NOTE: This require MS Access 2010 or later to run or the MS Access Runtime (609k)
Topic ASME IX Welder Qualification By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-07-2016 13:15
It's easy to teach a person to pass a test but throwing a little something out to them that is closer to "real world" can give a company some valuable info.

When I do testing as a 3rd party I'm all for just the code or whatever written requirements are provided by the company paying for the test. When I am in charge of quality on a project and have been provided permission to do what I think is best you can be pretty sure a 2.75 x 5/8 wall tig coupon is not all that's gonna be done if your doing 3/4 nps butt welds.

Have a great day.
Topic ASME IX Welder Qualification By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-07-2016 11:23
I assuming GMAW, FCAW or GTAW as the process.

This is a very common practice. One thing you can do to add to your confidence regarding the very minor differences when welding thinner stainless is to have an individual perform a workmanship test on what you would consider a typical weld they would encounter in the field.
Code wise you are good to go and the rules and exceptions for P no substitution are easy to find.
However code compliance is only a small part of a quality system.
Topic Thoughts on the CWI 9 year renewal course. By pipewelder_1999 Date 01-07-2016 11:14
I like the test option but went with credit for teaching hours due to sheduling and $..

I have always enjoyed the tests.
Topic CWI By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-15-2015 18:19
How long was your Navy exp. I would expect 6 years but maybe not.

Your active duty time from C school to discharge would count towards work related experience.
Topic Is there? By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-14-2015 23:27
I did have a student come in awhile back that had "22 certifications" but needed to brush up on his skills. he is probably in the top 10.
Topic MIL-DTL-12560 - UNS or ASTM? By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-14-2015 23:23
Henry,

Many of the manufacturers suggest E70 Electrodes for their wear plate material and armor plate. The lower strength filler metal is much more forgiving of the lack of ductility in the base metal and also possible base metal/weld metal dilution.

As the weld metal tensile strength goes up, the need for preheat increases with AR plate.

If a product were being designed based upon the mechanical properties and actual thicknesses of the base metal, then the filler metal would need to match the stress levels to be encountered at the joint. I just don't think thats what is done with AR plate that much but when it is, then the weld metal should be matched accordingly.

Hope all is well.

Gerald
Topic MIL-DTL-12560 - UNS or ASTM? By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-14-2015 23:17
If you are using it for armor protection, there is often no need to match base metal strength since with material of that hardness, its pretty difficult.

If you are using it and basing design criteria on the properties listed for the base metal, be VERY careful.

M11 may be close if there is a clause referring to unlisted materials with near matching properties but I dont have that info off the top of my head.

Much of the wear resistant plate is HSLA Q&T (A514/A517) with modified or minimum tempering.

Gerald
Topic CWI By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-14-2015 23:11
I think they add additional time if your a bubblehead! :)

The educational requirements are based upon years completed and not credits. However the "Work Related Experience" should be fulfilled depending on your time as a AI since the NBIC is closely related to Welded Repairs.

[http://www.aws.org/certification/detail/certified-welding-inspector]

Gerald Austin
Topic MIL-DTL-12560 - UNS or ASTM? By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-13-2015 13:19
If you notice in the references section of the specification there are no references to ASTM specs for materials nor references to UNS numbers. Anyone manufacturing this material would probably advertise it as such.

Mechanical properties seem similar to AR400 . Wear materials even in the civilian sector used to be difficult to match to a specification.

Are you looking for a source?
Topic Is there? By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-09-2015 20:28
Seems to be a pretty common issue among welders.
Topic CWI Capabilities By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-06-2015 18:06
However there is nothing that prohibits you from "certifiying" the welder. The role is not defined by D1.1 and in many cases is assumed by an individual who is much less qualified to certify anything was done in accordance with a code.

Thus, an overall quality system that clearly defines the roles and responsibilities within your organization would be the place to start.

Just my opinion.
Topic CWI Capabilities By pipewelder_1999 Date 12-06-2015 17:16
Congratulations on passing the test. Your capabilities are neither enhanced nor reduced by your passing of the the test by most codes.

They are strictly driven by your knowledge and skills (or lack thereof).

Their are a couple of things to think about regarding "certification".

1) Compliance- If you have been building a product in accordance with a code, a quality system that addresses the overall fabrication process could be something worth considering. Having a welder who has passed a test that has no procedure qualified for production joints is no more "Compliant" than welding without being tested. If you build custom projects and have no procedures in place for contract review, document control, non-conformances, inspection and testing, materials etc then you have some other issues to consider.

2) Quality- If the welders you have been using for production are just "certified" there will be no change in what they have been doing in the past by just becoming "certified". There is no difference in the ability or work ethic of a welder who has been certified vs one who has not, only a piece of paper. If you are looking to improve real quality, consider some training that incorporates the requirements of your organization and any referenced codes or specifications.

Have a great day.

My biggest point is too make sure that you dont assume your company is any more compliant if all you do is test your welders until you verify the requirements for your product(s).

Gerald Austin
Attachment: WelderCertificationGA2_17_15.pdf - Something About "Certification" (642k)
Topic Continuity Records for Construction Manager Submissions By pipewelder_1999 Date 10-23-2015 20:48
I would do a couple of things if I had this requirement and I am sure there is probably some more detailed "specifications referenced somewhere (hopefully).

1 Establish what specific "Standard" is being referenced.
2 Verify that the applicable standard does not have a more restrictive time limit (6 Mos vs 12 Mos)
3 Review the joints to be used in production  to establish the ranges of qualification needed for both procedures and welders.
4 Review all documentation provided (Welder Qualification Records and WPS's to be used in production) for content based upon whatever the applicable code or standard is regardless of WHO has stamped it or blessed it.
5 Review the "Manufacturer or Contractor" signature block to assure that the part responsible for the welding is also the one who qualified the welder and procedure.

Just an opinion though. Some great information already provided but figured I would throw something out there.

Have a great Day

Gerald Austin
Greeneville Tn
Topic Plasma Arc Gouging of 304 SS By pipewelder_1999 Date 10-10-2015 13:31
My primary concern would be airborne  Hex Chrome. The process will generate significant amounts . maybe enough to warrant protection for those in the shop besides the ones doing the gouging.

As already mentioned, an alternative such as GTAW on the root or a process/joint design that minimizes the amount of metal to be removed would be ideal.

Have agreat day.

Gerald Austin
Topic Quick Question: F-No & A-No, where are they? By pipewelder_1999 Date 10-07-2015 14:35
For ASME P and F 3s

http://pnumbers.com/
http://fnumbers.com/
Topic AWS Accredited Test Facility Audit By pipewelder_1999 Date 10-03-2015 02:09
The audit went very well. Tim Gary was able to come administer a test to one of my students while I reviewed the audit checklist with the auditor.

The checklist in my opinion could stand some revision. A reference to the applicable documented requirements within  the QC4 standard would be good. There are a few redundant items.

The auditor was thorough and experienced with the testing and certification of welders.  I have a few editorial changes to make to a couple of forms and quality control procedures, submit them, and we are gonna just be waiting on AWS to send us our notification. There were no discrepancies noted .

All in all, very little changes about how I test welders in the lab other than the additional AWS paperwork and their poorly designed WPQR form.

Tim tested one of my students on a GMAW 1G plate IAW D1.1 and he passed so that was really the high point for my day.

Have a good day.

Gerald Austin
Topic AWS Accredited Test Facility Audit By pipewelder_1999 Date 09-29-2015 19:17
We have already had the wallet dented:). I will let all know how it goes. I do love audits.

I have a pretty lengthy quality manual that I prepared that I think is more than was needed based upon a conversation with the auditor so I will see how that goes.

Gonna let one of my current students do a flat GMAW Groove weld test as a demo. He will have 40 hours of training and be an "AWS Certified Welder". Something to think about :).

Doughnuts, Hmmmm.
Attachment: WelderCertificationGA2_17_15.zip - A copy of a ppt presentation I made regarding "CERTIFICATION". message me if you want the .ppt (592k)
Topic AWS Accredited Test Facility Audit By pipewelder_1999 Date 09-29-2015 12:33
Has anyone gone through the ATF audit and have some experiences they want to share regarding situations that they maybe were not expecting ?

We are having ours this coming Friday and am looking forward to it. My audit "experiences" in the past sometimes showed great variations between both individual auditors for the same company (Different Projects requiring new audits but with the same audit plan), and with different companies using the same project specifications (building products for the same end user but through different companies).

Anyway, any feed back is appreciated.

Gerald Austin
Topic Single Pass vs Multi pass By pipewelder_1999 Date 09-29-2015 10:14
I strongly suggest you attempt the 1/2" fillet as both a single pass and multipass and let the "proof" be in the finished weld.

So many variables can affect the quality of a weld that size so record exactly what you are doing for each attempt.

Love to see your results.
Gerald
Topic I think we need more pictures. So here goes...my first try.. By pipewelder_1999 Date 09-08-2015 02:15
Just a polarizing filter and manual settings on the camera if I remember right. The bright light sometimes causes problems in auto modes. It was edited in Lightroom to get the look I wanted.
Topic I think we need more pictures. So here goes...my first try.. By pipewelder_1999 Date 09-07-2015 22:29
And one of my students.
[http://weldingdata.com/images/DSC_6622-43.jpg]
Topic I think we need more pictures. So here goes...my first try.. By pipewelder_1999 Date 09-07-2015 22:26
Here is one I did for a friend. Broke out the old Chinese inverter. One of the funnest welds I have done in awhile (been teaching quite a bit).

[http://weldingdata.com/images/trailerweld.jpg]
Topic I think we need more pictures. So here goes...my first try.. By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-28-2015 18:22
Nie! Thanks for sharing.
Topic How is this rejected in D17.1 PHOTOS included! By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-19-2015 19:59
Well, That appears to be a groove weld. Though maybe not by design, however the portion exhibiting penetration through the  edges of one member is a fillet reinforced groove weld in a tee joint.

Some of the pictures exhibit undercut/underfill on the vertical member that I am pretty sure exceeds the limits of table 7.1.

If the weld is only specified as a fillet weld but exhibits the properties of a groove weld then it is difficult to pin that down however I think the engineering authority would be the person entity to cosult if you are unsure how to proceed.

"Suck Back: as you  mention would be classified under Face or root underfill as listed in table 7.1 pg 34 which refers to groove welds only. (Not just butt joints!)

Of course I am by no means the authority on this code however the above thoughts would be on my mind should I be presented with a weld as shown in the pictures.

Have a great day.

Gerald Austin
Greeneville Tn
Topic share By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-19-2015 18:12
Page loaded and looks interesting. Much neater than the VB program I made for doing some of those calculations.
Topic looking for a tutor/mentor By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-19-2015 10:37
I am about 3 hours away in Greeneville Tn and may be able to help. You can call or text me on my cell at 6626600162 .

Another option is to post questions about the topics you may have questions or doubts about here in the forum.

We are going to have the section (Holston Valley) meeting here and I am going to speak about welder certification, may be a good time to come up meer some people. Not exactly in your area, but close.

Have a great day

Gerald Austin
Topic Combine Process GTAW+SMAW repair by GTAW(SAME WPS) on SMAW By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-07-2015 19:18
I think the majority of your questions can be answered by reviewing the applicable code of construction.

ASME Sec IX does not address repairs. The applicability of a procedure to a specific joint is dependent upon the variables listed within the WPS wether it be for repair or an original joint.

There are no restrictions within the ASME codes related to the applicability of GTAW over SMAW provided the WPS is qualified for the ranges to be used. 

The ranges within the WPS would dictate where they can be used however some applications may require more detailed controls to be enforced during repair welding.

A repair procedure is always a good idea even if not required by the specific code.

AWS D1.1 addresses qualifcation differently and a review of clause 3 and clause 4 should get you up to speed.

Gerald
Topic Effect of resistance in a welding ground circuit By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-07-2015 18:44
[http://www.sengpielaudio.com/ohms-law-illustrated.gif]
Topic Effect of resistance in a welding ground circuit By pipewelder_1999 Date 08-07-2015 18:18
If you have any old welding journals this article MAY have some info.

Power Characteristics GMAW: Experimental and Numerical Investigation -Welding Journal; Journal Volume: 74; Journal Issue: 3; Mar 1995.

I have not read the paper but it may be worth a look. I am looking through some other databases for something that may help.  have you looked in the welding handbooks?

https://app.aws.org/wj/article_results?mv_action=search&st=text&sp=wj%2Farticle_results&fi=articles.txt&sf=name%2Cauthor%2Cdate&rl=year&tf=year%2Cmonth&to=nr&rf=*&se=Experimental+and+numerical+investigation&mv_range_min=0&mv_range_max=0&mv_matchlimit=50&su=1 $10.00 but I am sure someone has this WJ or free at

https://app.aws.org/wj/supplement/WJ_1995_03_s93.pdf Glanced through it though, probably no help.
Have a good one Tim

Also, an article from Bernard http://www.bernardwelds.com/are-conductivity-problems--p152391#.VcT-RflVhBc

Gerald
Topic Is GMAW Pulsed Spray prequalified for D1.1? By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-28-2015 21:45
I have not looked through all of  the previous posts however.

If all of the provisions of clause 3 are met, pulsed spray transfer is prequalified.

However I STRONGLY suggest you verify by testing that the parameters you would like to use are suitable for the application. Though Spray Pulsed does not Short Circuit, it is possible to adjust the parameters where heat input is very low and may not be suitable for all conditions.

The commentary is D1.1 mentions a "....long record of proven satisfactory performance ." Which is something worth considerationn. Because of the wide range of variables that can affect pulsed transfer mode, I would suggest a few tests to make sure welders are clearly provided parameters that are suitable for the applications.

This is of course an opinion based upon limited experience. GMAW Pulsed is not the magic process that always works well. I am pretty sure with the right conditions, I can weld with parameters that achieve the same fusion related discontinuities associated to short circuit and be fully "legal".

Have a great day

Gerald
Topic What would you do? By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-20-2015 19:55
I would probably ask for clarification as to why they have this displayed and does not match seem to be a valid certification as listed by the AWS website.

I would then contact AWS with the information related to the organization displaying the information and let them know the situation..

I would also inform whatever organization I was representing and give them all the facts.

I would do this regardless of the equirements of the contract/project I was there on.

I would have no problems doing this as a 3rd party individual contractor.

If I were employed by another organization, I would have to address it with them and let them know my wishes before doing anything.

Of course all of this is easy to say without being there.

Gerald
Topic welding certs By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-18-2015 16:06
The length that the ATF holds the records should be addressed withing their quality system.

Regardless of industry organization affiliation, any organization or individual that tests and certifies welders should have a documented system that identifies how they control records. Even if it just says the person tested shall maintain all copies of records.

I think "video records" would be the way to go. I have some ideas for a booth that records all activity and streams real time if needed. THAT would be a welder qualification record.

Have a great day Al. Thanks again for your time the other day too.

Gerald Austin
Topic WPS Help By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-18-2015 03:01
I suggest that you use the ranges within those suggested by the electrode manufacturers.  As already indicated, voltage for SMAW is not a variable controlled.

As you write the procedure, take note of each of the variables listed in the table in clause 3  make sure it is addressed. If you are using an older code (not suggested), then the variables are referenced in clause/section 4-Table 4.5.

If you want to go over the requirements for a prequalified WPS, you can give me a call sometime. I am by no means an expert on the matter but may be able to help you through some spots. I do have some experience making mistakes on D1.1 WPS's. :)

I would suggest depending upon the code, listening to what others (CWI's, Labs etc...) have to say, and making sure it matches up (code vs opinions).

Gerald Austin
6626600162 Call or Text if you need any help. Usually up by 5:00 AM EST
Topic welding certs By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-18-2015 02:27
If you tested at an AWS Accredited test facility, there are policies and procedures in place within the quality system that maintain your records in a manner that can receive your test. You would have been issued a unique ID number that links you to your records.

Any other system may use any number of methods to maintain control of your your information.

The best place to look is with the person/organization that tested you.

If you did not test as an AWS Certified Welder, then there is no centralized location for your records other than the organization that tested you.

Good thing about it, most companies worth working for will test you anyway. Thats half the fun of being a welder!

Gerald Austin
Topic Recommendations for Welding Database Software. By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-17-2015 14:05
I had forgotten about this but was extremely impressed with how it worked.

I suggest checking it out. I think they can set you up with a demo account.
Topic Code Tolerances - Bends, tensiles and such By pipewelder_1999 Date 07-15-2015 15:51
Page xvi in AWS D1.1-2010 refer to AWS B4.0 by stating ... "AWS B4.0, Standard Methods for Mechanical Testing of Welds, provides additional details of test specimen preparation and details of test fixture construction.

Have a great day.

Gerald Austin
Topic AWS D1.1 By pipewelder_1999 Date 06-30-2015 09:46
There is no provision for utilizing the ASME procedures and compying with the requirements of D1.1.

There are also.some differences in requirements for qualification to be considered should you decide to qualify a procedure for both codes at the same time. NDE requirements and Guided Bend acceptance criteria differ between the two codes as may other requirements.

A good option would be to prepare prequalified procedures where possible.

Also, you may do better with questions on the forum that you place in their own post as opposed to another thread.

Gerald Austin-Not an Expert.
Topic Temper bead By pipewelder_1999 Date 06-25-2015 09:21
Normally a repair of this type would be performed utilizing a WPS that has been qualified and tested to assure the desired results are obtained.

My experience is limited to reapairs of cracked steam drum ligaments. I performed the PQR and also.performed the repair  welds. Heat input was maintained at a fairly consistent level by close monitoring of preheat/interpass and energy input.

This does NOT mean what you speak of is not worth looking into. The repairs I performed were "half bead" temper techniques in which the every layer that was deposited on the bevels was partially removed by grinding prior to depositing the next layer.

I strongly suggest reviewing the WPS and if one does not exist, qualifying one using the parameters you are to use and obtaining suitible mechanical test results (Tensile, Hardness,impacts, and bends).

Understand that I am by no means an expert and I strongly suggest you contact a welding engineer.

These repaies are not to be taken lightly.

Gerald Austin
Topic CWI Study GUIDES/BOOKS By pipewelder_1999 Date 06-22-2015 22:45
The search function can be useful finding old threads. Here is a recent one that may help. https://app.aws.org/forum/topic_show.pl?pid=262185;hl=CWI%20Books

Gerald
Topic Recommendations for Welding Database Software. By pipewelder_1999 Date 06-22-2015 22:41
If you are managing more than a dozen documents of any type, I strongly suggest a commercial application.

I have used full versions of the software from both Cspec and TWI. Both are very similar in user interface. There are some differences with some form content and database back end.

I strongly suggest you contact both companies and request a demo. I have worked for Cspec before and currently use TWI's software so my opinion may be skewed one way or another.

Also check out http://www.weldassistant.com/ .

Here is a video showing the creation of a prequalified WPS using the software from Cspec. http://weldoffice.com/video/pwps/index.html

There are also other options using other database applications and building your own (Not for the faint of heart), and some online services.

http://www.thinkcei.com/cei-products/prowrite is another. I have used there demo years ago and didn't care for it however some of these programs change rapidly and some do not. Check it out for yourself.

Gerald Austin
Greeneville Tn
Topic Quality Assurance Manual By pipewelder_1999 Date 06-22-2015 22:26
A quality manual is not needed for "compliance" with D1.1 however in any organization, it can be either a useful tool for quality or a burden that is hated every time there is an audit.

Having just spent quite a few hours preparing one for the sole purpose of testing welders and now struggling with evreyone else in the organization "approving" it, I strongly suggest you do notg do this without input from purchasing, HR, production, shipping/receiving, subcontractor management etc....

Clearly define what your policies are 1st and get management to buy into them. Then develop procedures and instructions that support the policies. Implement the system and review it continuously.

If you are just looking for a "canned" manual that you can put on show during a contract review, I am not much help. I usually enjoy those when performing 3rd party inspections.

Gerald
Topic Acredited Test Facility By pipewelder_1999 Date 05-30-2015 01:31
Mooooooo.
http://awo.aws.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/escconference/17-ATF-NewPassportRegistrySystembyLindaHenderson.pdf
Topic Acredited Test Facility By pipewelder_1999 Date 05-28-2015 20:19
"But the notion of saying what you will do, how you will do it, and then following it up with proof?  That is a great idea."

That's it!

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill