Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Certifications / Ideas for alternative WPS forms for prequalified WPS's
- - By pipewelder_1999 (****) Date 09-05-2008 13:28
I am in the process of making some alternative form layouts for prequalified WPS's for D1.1 use. I think the form as it is now could be revised to more clearly represent the data required for a prequalified WPS. I feel that a form specifically designed for prequalified WPS's and a specific process could better aid the user in (1) Complying with the requirements of the code and (2) Conveying the information more clearly to the end user of the form (welder, inspector, engineer etc).

I have a page with a webform with some yes/no type questions and sample forms . The page is  at http://weldingdata.com/WPSFormChanges.htm if you would like to use that (it is confidential and will make it easy for me to compile the data into a database). However posting here works well as it will give rise to discussion. The forms are here http://weldingdata.com/pwpsgMAW.jpg and http://weldingdata.com/pwpsSMAW.JPG . Use both if you like. All information is appreciated.

What changes if any would you suggest for the current WPS form to better address prequalified WPS's ? Or any changes in general to make the form more useful?

Here are some of my thoughts (and these are by no means of any weight, they are there for discussion and criticism if anyone likes)

I think sample forms that are built around processes would give the ability to reduce confusion regarding what variables are needed and also reduce the time it takes to write and review a WPS. It would add pages to the code however it could possibly reduce the pages as process specific requirements could be moved to the sample form with notes explaining any process specific restrictions. This could apply to WPS's qualified by testing. In this age of computers I doubt that many are dependent upon the paper copy in the code book to xerox, whiteout, and print. Seeing the format is not as much about a common layout as it is about common data being spread in a similar manner.

I think the current form does not allow well for flexibility regarding the many joint designs that can be used. Did you know a prequalified WPS can be written for an open butt groove weld made from one side without backing ? Only on TKY connections yet it would be difficult to address in the current form.  (or so it seems to me). Removing the un needed information from the form allows for more space for notes, sketches etc.

Currently the use of prequalified WPS's requires that I look into 3 chapters (maybe 4 if you consider design info) to make sure the welder gets the information needed to make the weld in accordance with the code. This is time consuming and I am sure I miss some things. I am sure there are many welders who HAVE never seen a WPS. It is that secret "company confidential" document that is for QC eyes only. Only to be brought out before  the audit.  And then there are companies that make sure the welders have the information available. Id love to here from anybody on this.

Also, if anyone wants the .xls file of the two forms (I made up, they are welcome to them. Let me know and I can send them or place them on my website for download.

Thanks for any information you may have.

Gerald Austin
Iuka Miss.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-05-2008 14:55
Gerald the current form is N-1 and shows the (front)....what do you think about placing Annex Q on the (back) of form N-1?
...just a thought..possibly perforate the form so that it can be taken out and copied(squarely on the copy machine or scanner bed).
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-05-2008 15:14
BTW, you have mail....I sent the information that we discussed the other day.
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 09-05-2008 15:25
Gerald,

I like!

Much cleaner than the multi-process forms that I have created using the annex as guide.  I incorporated a bunch of drop down boxes which are sorta slick... But they also make the page very busy.

For the GMAW/FCAW WPS you could make it even cleaner by removing the check box for Power Source type; as CV is the only type power supply prequalified for GMAW/FCAW.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-05-2008 15:31
L,
I've seen your form and like it....

I also like Gerald's proposal forms.
Parent - By pipewelder_1999 (****) Date 09-05-2008 16:02
Good catch. I had put that on there while thinking about the same concept for a wps qualified by testing.
Parent - - By hogan (****) Date 09-05-2008 15:26
I didn't see any listing for volts on the smaw form. Also, on my wps' I list the optimum amp/volt and then the applicable range, not just a range.
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-05-2008 15:29
The voltage is a function of the welder's arc length, I believe, so it might be hard to nail that figure down on a CC machine. I am also curious how you would check that, I have to admit that I have never thought to check the voltage on a my stick procedures.
Parent - By hogan (****) Date 09-05-2008 15:43
I have not prepared any wps' for smaw. It is not my strongest process. I was wondering if there was an obvious reason. thanks
Parent - By Lawrence (*****) Date 09-05-2008 21:33
Just a techy footnote.

makeing note of arc voltage on Semi automatic and some orbital GTAW (Also CC) can be important in the WPS/Schedule because the Z axis (arc length) is often controlled by an adaptive feedback system that monitors arc voltage in order to keep the axis in proper position.
Parent - By Ringo (***) Date 09-05-2008 15:35
Looks pretty slick to me.
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Certifications / Ideas for alternative WPS forms for prequalified WPS's

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill