3G + 4G ?

Date 08-04-2009 16:28

In D1.1 table 4.9 for welder qualifications, the positions listed for groove welds are 1G, 2G, 3G, 4g, and 3G + 4G. So what exactly is 3G + 4G? Does D1.1 define a specific weld procedure on a single test coupon or do you need to run (2), (1) for 3G and (1) for 4G? We already ran the tests for the welder qualification as follows:

Position: 3G - (1) CJP Groove test per D1.1 with 3/8" thk. coupons to qualify 1/8" - 1/2" (E71T-11 electrode, per Table 3.1, -11 suffix shall be excluded for thicknesses greater than 1/2") in the F,H, V positions
4G - (1) CJP Groove test per D1.1 to qualify same thickness in F, OH positions

Since there were two tests, and I did not know the guidelines for the 3G + 4G qualification test, I wrote (2) WQRs, (1) for the 3G and (1) for the 4G to qualify all positions between the two. Should I have written (1) WQR for the 3G + 4G instead? There was some confusion when the on-site weld inspector looked at the WQRs because he looked at the 4G WQR and the welder was currently welding in the 3G (up) position. He halted the welder and stated that according to our WQRs the welder could not perform that weld. Instead of flipping one page back and seeing that the 3G position had been qualified he raised a big stink.

Should I have written the WQR differently to avoid this? Let me know your thoughts . . . thanks!

Drew

By eekpod

Date 08-04-2009 20:48

I look at it as two different tests in two different positions. But per the code if you take both tests and pass it qualifies him for all positions.
I have each position each welder takes on a different cert/ page.
But we all know that if he has taken two tests, he is qualified for all positions.

By drewp29 (**)

Date 08-04-2009 22:04

Alright, thanks for confirming that someone else also writes individual WQRs for each test performed. I was told that the standard practice is to have the WQR qualified to all positions and state that the weld performed was the 3G + 4G positions. This may be the general way people have done it, but I don't think its the way everyone does it, nor is it wrong to write individual WQRs and assume the welding inspector will look at all the qualification records before halting production and consequently wasting time an money. It didn't turn out to be a big deal, but my boss was pretty bent out of shape when he came into my office and asked me why I hadn't qualified the welder to all positions.

Thanks eekpod!

Drew

By swsweld (****)

Date 08-06-2009 02:59

I agree with eekpod. I put each position on its own page.

Sounds like the inspector was a little gun-ho on stopping production. If he had all the documents in his hand and stopped work before reviewing the next page then bad on him.

By bmaas1

Date 08-06-2009 17:19

Having two certs is probably the cleanest way of recording it.

Brian

By HgTX

Date 08-07-2009 19:37

As a client reviewing the qualifications, I also prefer each test on its own page.

Hg

By drewp29 (**)

Date 08-07-2009 19:46

Dang, the more people post, the more it confirms that I am not crazy . . . well at least not in this situation! Thanks!

Drew

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 08-07-2009 22:19

Any1 use prowrite? i think thats what its called

By drewp29 (**)

Date 08-11-2009 15:26

Prowrite? Is like a template program for WPS, PQR, and WQRs? If it is, that sounds really useful if you are a new shop looking at creating WPS (etc.) sets for the first time.

Drew

By bmaas1

Date 08-08-2009 00:57

I prefer it that way because the WPS can become congested with info thatt you have to sort through.

Brian

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 08-08-2009 10:23

drewp29,
There is nothing wrong with what you have done.
I spend a lot of my time reviewing certs on behalf of the client and I prefer to see them on one cert.
However, that comes with a rider. If they are both done on the same day I like one cert but if they are done on different dates then two.
If the quals are done as per AWS D1.1 requirements then all the essential variables will be exactly the same apart from the position.
Do you have two certs written exactly the same except one is stating Qualified with - 3G / Qualified for F, H, V and the other is stating Qualified with - 4G / Qualified for F, OH or do you just have one cert stating Qualified with - 3G/4G - Qualified for All.
Regards,
Shane

By drewp29 (**)

Date 08-11-2009 15:24

Shane,

I have two certs written exactly the same - same electrode, same filler range qualified, same material welded, same material range qualified, etc. - everything the same except the position welded and the qualified positions are as you stated.

I can understand from the point of view of the reviewer that having the range qualified as 'all' and both positions welded on one cert makes it more preferable, and will likely do just that in the future, I just wanted some confirmation that it was perfectly fine to write two certs and qualify all positions between the two.

Thanks!

Drew