cwi stamp on wps and pqr

By Bill M

Date 09-01-2009 15:53

The PQR & welder qualification docs state at the bottom, "We the indersigned certify that..."

But the WPS doesn't.

By 803056

Date 09-01-2009 20:09

Some do.

Al

By kipman

Date 09-01-2009 22:13

NAVSEA 248 requires this on the WPS also, if memory serves.
Mankenberg

By 803056

Date 09-01-2009 22:31

That's what I had in mind.

They tend to be very fussy about the exact wording of the certifying statement. No CWI or SCWI stamp is necessary, but I stamp them anyway.

Best regards - Al

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 09-01-2009 23:32

Some DOTs require stamping.

By bert lee (**)

Date 09-02-2009 12:10

Bill

i understand... that would be for manufacturer statement, it can be signed by manufacturer's welding supervisor or engineer.

what about if you're engaged as independent party and they hired you merely to review the documents and
need your cwi stamp to be there?

will you stamp the documents and provide your comments separately (like make a report)?

bert

By Arctic 510 (**)

Date 09-01-2009 21:26

I personally don't stamp paperwork unless it is acceptable. If it is a reject and a stamp is required, I make sure it is clearly marked.

By bert lee (**)

Date 09-02-2009 12:15

Justin

but your boss said, you can stamp the paper work and give me your comments in a separate report.
will that be okayed?

bert

By Arctic 510 (**)

Date 09-02-2009 16:43

I'm not familiar with the particulars of your situation, but in general, I try to avoid situations where my stamp/signature could be used to imply my approval on work that was rejected. Maybe a "Rejected-see attached report" statement in your signature/stamp block would be acceptable in your case. To be honest, in my specific situation, when I reject a weld, fabrication, or piping spool, I point out the deficiencies, and they are repaired. I usually am not put in a situation to issue a report with "rejected" as a final result. I hope this helps.

By 803056

Date 09-03-2009 02:09

Most of my reports include long listings of rejected work with my SCWI stamp and signature.

In the case of welder performance qualifications, I stopped issuing them unless the welder passed. I do not issue a WPTR for failed welders tests. A WPS is signed and stamped if I write it, otherwise a signature and comments are all that they get.

Best regards - Al

By Joey

Date 09-03-2009 02:33

You signed and stamped a WPS for Project A. However, the contractor submit the same WPS you stamped to Project B, which is not suitable.
Project B accepted it because they see your SCWI stamp.

So what is the big deal :)

Regards
Joey

By 803056

Date 09-04-2009 02:07

That's why the customer has the contractor submit the WPSs for review, to verify they are appropriate for the work involved.

Some WPSs are general and some are job specific. Those that are job specific usually have the name of the project in the title block. In either case, the contractor (doing the work) and the customer (buying the work) have a responsibility to verify the procedures are appropriate for the application. This is true for welding procedures, inspection procedures, painting, or what ever.

Best regards - Al

By Joey

Date 09-04-2009 04:27

In reality, many customers are not competent to verify whether the procedures are appropriate. That’s the reason why customer will request for procedures that have CWI stamp. So contractor will avoid trouble of creating new procedure by submitting those old WPS having CWI stamp, even though not appropriate :)

Regards
Joey

By 803056

Date 09-04-2009 05:06 Edited 09-04-2009 12:22

The only hole in that canoe is that many CWI are not competent to properly develop WPSs. In fact, a good number of CWIs are not qualified to review a WPS or a PQR properly. That's one of the main reasons B5.1 doesn't list those functions as responsibilities the CWI is expected to perform in Table 1.

That isn't to say there are no CWIs with that capability. Without being disrespectful, it is a simple fact that there are few CWIs with the training, background, and experience necessary to do that type of work. The CWI examination does not go into great depth or numbers of questions relating to WPSs, PQRs, or for that matter, welder qualification. The CWI's primary function is to perform visual inspections and to ensure the welding is being performed in accordance with an approved WPS.

The customer is expected to have someone on staff or on call that can provide the expertise needed. Few companies would sign a major contract without some legal advice, nor should they accept documentation provided by contractors without some form of review by people capable of performing those functions. This isn't limited to welding; it also includes nondestructive testing, painting, materials selection, etc.

What I'm saying is whether or not the documentation is signed by a CWI, a Level III, etc.; the customer still has an obligation to perform a thorough review of any procedures applicable to the work being performed. Many companies don't perform the requisite review and they typical get burned in the process, finding out too late in the project that something wasn't done properly.

I currently have a project underway where a client asked me to review the proposed WPS. The manufacturing process includes stress relief after the welding is complete. While I feel comfortable reviewing the WPS, I don't feel comfortable with the PWHT because of the materials being welded. There is more involved than simply heating it up, cooking it for a while and then turning off the furnace. This weldment weights over 100 ton. This is when I call in the Big Guns, i.e., a metallurgist with the appropriate background working with these materials. It might cost a little money up front, but it is money well spent considering the material for the welder qualifications and procedure qualifications cost on the order of $40,000 and that's before any machining or welding has been performed.

We all have our limitations. As a professional we have to recognize what those limitations are and do what is best for our clients or employers. There are training programs available that provide training that goes beyond what is covered in those courses designed to prepare an individual for the CWI examination. If the employer wants to expand the CWI's responsibility into other functions, training should be arranged to expand the CWI's competency to include those responsibilities. Examples abound; high strength bolting, magnetic particle and penetrant testing, painting, steel inspection, and yes, writing WPSs and qualifying procedures and welders. This is where the AWS endorsements can be very helpful to the CWI that wants to expand his core competencies.

By the way, I am not being compensated to be an AWS salesperson for the endorsements offered by the AWS.

Best regards – Al

By bert lee (**)

Date 09-04-2009 16:21

Al,

meaning...cwi or scwi stamp is not supposed to approve the wps...the stamp is for endorsement which is meant for review and acknowlegement only?

is there a conflict of interest if you will develop a WPS and then will approve it later as inspector?

i'm a bit confused on your 5th para.... client asked you to review the proposed WPS which you are not comportable. you should reject the request in the first place and instead advise the client to engage a qualified welding engineer...am i right?

respectfully,
bert

By 803056

Date 09-04-2009 17:11

Sorry Bert, your reading words that aren't written.

Al

By bert lee (**)

Date 09-06-2009 14:22

okay, sorry i've no intention to mislead...it could be too complex for me to understand.

thanks
bert

By Arctic 510 (**)

Date 09-04-2009 16:42

Al-

Your statement:

"Examples abound; high strength bolting, magnetic particle and penetrant testing, painting, steel inspection, and yes, writing WPSs and qualifying procedures and welders. This is where the AWS endorsements can be very helpful to the CWI that wants to expand his core competencies."

I also wouldn't mind seeing AWS come out with some endorsements that are above and beyond what a CWI is already able to do. ASNT and NACE might take issue with some of those endorsements! (MT/PT, painting, etc.) :-) This is still a somewhat free market economy, and maybe competition for market share in the certification market would help bring prices down!! :-)

By joxer Date 09-04-2009 18:15

all,
I'm not sure i understand why a CWI would be stamping/signing a WPS or PQR anyway. As stated earlier in this thread, the CWI does visual inspection and makes sure the welding is following the WPS. a CWI wouldn't write or approve these documents unless he was an engineer and then it would be done as the engineer,not a CWI. Even a pre-qual wouldn't need a CWI stamp would it? What am i missing?
joxer

By 803056

Date 09-05-2009 14:28 Edited 09-05-2009 18:22

Anyone can qualify a welder or write a WPS with the lone exception of the CAWI.

The point I was trying to make is that a CWI is not automatically qualified or has the ability to write a WPS by virtue of being a CWI. That function, if I recollect, is not a responsibility assigned or expected of a CWI per table 1 of B5.1. That is not to say there are no CWIs with the where-with-all to do so. It is simple not a given and it is not a function assessed/evaluated when taking the CWI examinations. The questions (on the CWI examination) relating to welder qualification, procedure qualification, and welding procedure specifications do not determine if the examinee can develop a procedure from "scratch".

Different codes have different requirements. As per D1.1, the Engineer is tasked with approving WPSs and welder qualifications. Once approved, it is one of the CWI's responsibilities to ensure the welders are qualified, i.e., they are amongst those welders approved by the Engineer, and that the welders are working within the parameters of the approved WPS. That isn't to say the Engineer cannot assign or ask the CWI to perform the review if the CWI has the background and training to do so. Again, it is simply not a given that every CWI has the qualifications by virtue of the CWI credential to perform that task.

If my recollection serves me, the CWI representing the owner, i.e., the verification inspector, has little if any responsibility for ensuring the WPSs meet D1.1. Other welding standards do not recognize the CWI nor require CWI involvement in any aspect of the qualification of welder or welding procedures, nor do they require a CWI credential to perform visual inspections.

Many CWIs have earned the respect and recognition of their peers and employers as having the expertise required to perform other functions in addition to those typically assigned to CWIs. Among those responsibilities are reviewing welding documentation to ensure WPSs and welder qualifications comply with the appropriate welding standard, developing WPS for use with welding codes such as D1.1 or ASME Section IX, and other functions such as checking high strength bolts, structural fabrication and erection per AISC, NDT, etc. It is by working with other "more experienced" CWIs or by completing additional training programs that provide the back ground needed to perform those functions or by working one's way through the "School of Hard Knocks" that a CWI gains sufficient proficiency to perform additional tasks. I often tell those attending my classes that the CWI is but a stepping stone to a challenging career. The CWI credential may be sufficient to become a valued addition to any company, but expanding one’s capability into areas such as NDT is well worth the effort.

On the other hand, table 1 of B5.1 does expand the scope of responsibility for the SCWI. The SCWI is expected to know how to develop a PQR and WPSs in addition to those functions performed by the CWI.

As for when should the CWI use the stamp? This has been discussed in earlier threads. The response I gave then is still appropriate: “As a new CWI you will have the urge to use it on everything. So go ahead, knock yourself out. You earned it, so use it with gusto. It will soon pass.

It's like a new wife that you want to show off to everyone, but even that passes and you find yourself saying, "Oh yea, she's with me!"

Best regards - Al