AWS Certifed vs. AWS Qualified

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 09-27-2009 06:16 Edited 09-27-2009 06:19

My opinion is that AWS does not own the word "certified"

A welder performance qualification test report has a signature or stamp of authority,, That makes that paper a certificate.

As you noted there are several types of certificates...

If an employer demands that welders are to be qualified at an AWS accredited test facility.. They darned well better know how to interpret the certs that come with the resume. All they need to do is check the registry to see if they are in fact QC7 certified.

I personally don't have a problem with a welder saying they have certified to AWS standards when they have in fact done so.

Why waste the energy telling people they are or aren't something?

The engineer of record for a particular contract will instruct supervision about what or what not is acceptable whe it comes to certifications.

If it were up to me and new welders were comming off the street... Both the QC7 welder and the guy who was signed off to the same code by Joe the CWI would both get retested before they started production anyhow. And in the real world it mostly works out that way anyhow.

But thats just my opinion.

By 803056

Date 09-27-2009 17:19

The certification paper simply says the welder had a good day when he tested.

Whether the welder is tested by the employer without third party oversight, tested and witnessed by an independent SCWI/CWI, or at an AWS test facility is worth about as much as the paper it is printed on.

What does the certificate issued by the employer administered test tell you: what process was used, what material was used, what electrode was used what position was used, etc. Was the test actually witnessed? Was a WPS actually followed? Was it actually "Joe the Welder" that took the test? Was the test coupon in the stated position at the time of the test? I have no way of knowing. Given that I have been welding for more than 40 years and I have taken too many tests to remember, I can say the answers to some of the questions are No, No, No, ...... for some of the employers and Yes, Yes, Yes, .... for the better ones I've worked with.

What does the certificate issued by a SCWI/CWI tell you? Just about the same things as the employer based certification does. In general, most independent SCWI/CWIs do a good job of testing welders because it is their name on the dotted line and it is their reputation that is at stake, more so than if the CWI works for a lab or manufacturer. If an when a SCWI/CWI signs for marginal welders and the welders produce unacceptable welds in the field, notice is taken and at some point paperwork issued by that individual is no longer recognized by contractors or inspection agencies in the area. Papers signed by the offending SCWI/CWI are worthless at that point.

The AWS Accredited Test Facility is will have procedures in place to ensure the base metal used was the right stuff (but people still make mistakes and suppliers can still ship the wrong material with the right mill cert.), the filler metal will be appropriate for the base metal being joined, a WPS will be followed (but the range of parameters, joint design, etc. are so wide they leave much to be desired), the welding machine will be in perfect working order, meters will be calibrated, etc. So, the end result is the welder passed under ideal conditions that may not come close to replicating what the welder is doing on the job.

The bottom line is well stated by Lawrence; it is best to test the welder upon arriving at the jobsite to ensure he is familiar with the job requirements, equipment that will be used, welding procedures and anything else that will ensure he can meet the employer's expectations and the code requirements.

In my humble opinion I don't believe the standard welder qualification test used by the majority of fabricators come close to doing an adequate job of ensuring the welder has the minimum skills needed to deposit a sound weld. I believe there is an elephant running amuck and most people close their eyes to the fact. Yes, my friends, the elephant is the most popular type of weld used by industry worldwide. The lowly fillet weld is the elephant.

Given my choice, I would administer the test AWS D1.1 lists as one of the options to qualify welders for fillet welds. The test is the 3/8 inch thick butt joint that employs the square groove with backing. I would drop the idea that a Vee groove butt joint qualifies a welder for both groove and fillet welds. I would use the square groove with backing to qualify the welder for fillets by having him deposit two fillets in either corner. What would be left to fill would be a "Vee groove". The remainder of the test, welded in the test position would then qualify the welder for groove welds. You would cover both fillet welds and groove welds with one test. This not my idea, no, I'm not that original. I saw the test administered in Canada. I was told it was a standard test for structural welders. I saw it and it made perfect sense.

A pipe welder, welding open root butt joints, is a separate matter. I'm still scratching my head on that one. My thoughts are to test the welder for fillets using a socket joint and a grooved butt joint (on pipe of course) to qualify him for groove welds. Contrary to AWS, ASME, and the rest, my experience doesn't support the practice of groove welds qualifying the welder for fillet welds.

Best regards - Al

By Ke1thk

Date 09-28-2009 12:30 Edited 09-28-2009 16:16

Both Lawrence and Al have great points.

Lawrence in that if a person declares himself or herself certified or qualified to weld, they deserve a look, if you’re looking for a welder. Even though a true welder could/should be obtaining several new certifications or qualifications every year as they weld different joint configurations. No AWS Certification qualifies a welder to weld every possible weld.

I like Al's comment that all a cert really says is that the welder had a good day. Just because I, the CWI, qualify somebody on a particular weld doesn’t mean that they'll weld every weld for the rest of their life to the standard.

Your grammar sounds correct with the differences between certified and qualified. Remember that a person doesn’t even need to read to pass the AWS CWI exam or any AWS weld test. It's not required.

Good Luck,
Keith

By HgTX

Date 10-06-2009 16:51

"AWS does not own the word 'certified'"

No, but they do have something to say about the phrase "AWS Certified". If AWS or some approved agent running an AWS-approved program didn't certify you, you're not AWS Certified. If you're qualified to the requirements of D1.1, then that's what you are--qualified to the requirements of D1.1. Your employer or whoever can certify all they want that you're qualified to the requirements of D1.1, but that doesn't make you "AWS Certified".

Hg

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 10-06-2009 17:20

HG... I think you said it as well as it can be said.

Good job of explaining the difference between:

AWS Certified to AWS D1.1

and Certified to AWS D1.1

A Welder Qualification test report with a signature on it is in fact a certification by virtue of the signature/stamp.

As mentioned above... The very few folks that have a requirement for testing @ an accredited facility really ought to know the difference in nomenclature.

By js55

Date 10-06-2009 17:47

Isn't the standardized term in AWS 3.0 AWS 'bonafied' welder or AWS 'genyoowine rectified' welder?
I think it also has a reference to the non standard term AWS 'extra primo good' welder. :)

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 10-06-2009 18:00

Right.....

Certified to weld the crack of dawn.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 10-06-2009 18:07

I see "all welding personnel to be AWS certified" quite regularly while scanning over our job specs...but when questioned via RFI, they always say that they really meant "qualified to AWS D1.1". Spec writers should know the difference, but they don't.

By js55

Date 10-06-2009 19:04

John,
Are there actually any spec writers out there any more?
All I ever see is spec copy and pasters. :)

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 10-06-2009 19:08

good point.

By Ke1thk

Date 10-09-2009 11:26

I ask myself, "What is an AWS Accredited Test Facility?" I envision a facility where individuals are tested to the letter of the Law (or Code). One spec (defect) out of tolerance and they're done. Two attempts and that's it. Forget it. Try again in six months.

I ask myself, "Who would invest their time and money only to fail?" I've judged my local Skills USA competition since I received my CWI. Some years the students are pretty good. I've hired a few. Some years they're not so good. We pick a winner from the current group, even if the group isn't so hot.

My local Community Collage is training people to our "No Worker Left Behind" state mandate. Most aren't very good. It could take years for them to pass an AWS test, if ever. The students and instructors are paid to attend no matter what the outcome.

I understand how an "official" test could be better than one administered by an independent CWI like myself to protect against "fraud" or "Christian Charity". Two or three CWI's judge each set of weldments at our Skills USA competition. The scores are averaged. How can two CWI's interpret the same weld identically?

I do see how "AWS Certified" could be viewed as being better than being certified to "AWS Standards." But really, if they wanted the welder certified at an AWS facility, shouldn’t it say so on the contract, No?

Good Luck,

Keith

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 10-09-2009 11:37

I think the "facility has certain criteria it has to meet in reguards to equipment, facilities, procedures and personnel to be able to apply for this title. Then the facility simply helps the welder by keeping his/her certifications and continuity logs up to date and on file in a data base for employers who require that all of the welding is to be done by AWS certified welders. This facility has earned the right given by AWS to give this "certification" to the welder by meeting all of the aforementioned criteria.

The welder then has a sort of universal certification that they can carry with them to other jobs rather than having an employer based welding cert which is considered void upon seperation from the certifying company of employment.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 10-09-2009 14:22 Edited 10-09-2009 15:34

Keith, I think John explained it very well but let me put it in slightly different words. I hope I don't mess it up trying to clear it up.

All that "AWS Accredited Test Facility" means is that the outfit doing the qualifying has gone through a documentation process that tells companies, individuals, etc that they know how to test welders to the applicable code desired by the customer and have the properly calibrated, properly operating, equipment to perform the required tests (the welding of plate, pipe, etc) and subsequent inspections (NDT & destructive) to insure that the results are as consistent as possible. They have all sorts of written procedures and policies as to how to handle each job and not get jobs mixed up. They have all the proper code books in hand and know how to use them. Several of their staff are certified to operate this equipment and keep it calibrated properly as well as having CWI's to perform some of the inspections.

The person is still not "AWS Certified"; only certified to AWS codes and standards by an AWS Accredited Facility. Many organizations Accredit Facilities just as many certify shops for pre-approved fabrication shop status. AWS is only one. In my state, last I checked, we do not have one AWS Accredited Test Facility in the whole state. But we have several full service test centers certified to other organizations standards. All still qualify welders to AWS D1.1, API 1104, ASME, etc. etc.

You can get some of the info that they use to Accredit the test facilities off line or in hard back form from the AWS bookstore. Gives you an idea what they must go through to be an Accredited Test Facility.

In many ways, it does mean that you are 'judged' to the letter of the law. But the results 'could' be more consistent to the intent of the codes when judged in this way by a test facility that has certain procedures in writing as to how each step is to be carried out.

Hope that helps. Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 10-09-2009 15:46

Lawrence posted a link in another thread that is a pdf and shows all of this criteria and the AWS standard concerning this certification for the facility.

By Tommyjoking (****)

Date 10-10-2009 08:42

I like what Law had to say....

"John,
Are there actually any spec writers out there any more?
All I ever see is spec copy and pasters. " jeez if that ain't golden on a LOT of levels especially before it gets down to us.

It's simple for me, if I don't "own" the papers and cannot carry them with me, I don't give a rat's butt what they say. AND in 99% of the cases (for me anyway) the certs are so expensive that I never would have paid for them anyway...my customer sure as hell would tho. I have been "certified" and "qualified" and for me there has never been a difference. I had to have that to do my task at hand. I read the documented requirements and thats what I do...no problem. I do see real issues with people writing up weld specs without the background or at the very least the research effort required to do so properly. I would much rather see a general AWS specification called upon as a guideline then some concocted BS by some engineer that has not even taken the time to understand basic weld symbology or made sure its current. That is something I deal with on a daily basis. I am sorry folks I started ranting on a subject that is above my pay grade and or ability to contribute to in any significant way...sorry please forgive me
Tommy

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 10-10-2009 13:13

Hi Tommy!

I for one am glad to see you posting again because like myself, you are not afraid to ask those types of questions, make those types of observations and basically let loose your opinion that really does cut through the BS that most of us have to contend with on both sides of the fence so to speak!!!

So pleas do not apologize for speaking your mind because it's refreshing and it reminds us all that we do live in an imperfect world and need to be reminded of that from time to time!!!

I for one know you mean no disrespect towards anyone so as far as I'm concerned, what in the heck took you so long to speak out??? :) :) :)

Respectfully,
Henry

By Tommyjoking (****)

Date 10-11-2009 03:39

Well thank you Henry!

I have been uber busy and tied up for the last few months....but I lot of times I really need to do more reading and a lot less commentary. Your right in the fact that I do not hesitate to just speak my mind....makes me sort of course to deal with I rekon. I just get very frustrated with engineers and QA sometimes, much more of the former then the latter. I cannot tell you how many times in the last few years I had to march up on the carpet and basically explain how to design pr redesign a joint, which weld symbol was proper to use, why the design could not be a welded part etc. Its incredible to me how far out there some of these guys can get....its almost like they draw up stuff simply to impress each other more so then to achieve a specific function. More onto the subject of this thread....they write up there own weld specs instead of SIMPLY using proven existing ones.... I have a general spec callout on a lot of stuff that was written by a couple of welders.....its about 40 pages long and makes the FARM code 2002 look state of the art!!!!! No body with any real qualifications had anything to do with it...these old school welders wrote it up and the engineers took it to bank and set it in stone. Oh jeez here I go a ranting again.........I shall shut it up drink my black rum and go back to reading. thanks again Henry..cheered me up a bit

Tommy

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 10-12-2009 15:36

Welderbrent

I disagree with your contention that you cannot be AWS Certified. When you take a welder qualification test through an AWS Accredited Test Facility (QC-7 qualified welding procedure), you are certified by the AWS through their Accredited Test Facility.

That is why the AWS requires that you take their exam through an Accredited Test Facility (ATF). The ATF is their Agent.

Joe Kane

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 10-12-2009 17:14

Joe, because of your committee standing, I would most gladly defer to that definition and application of the qualification process. I believe you would know if that were a proper term usage.

My position was based on personal opinion that just because the testing facility was AWS Accredited to test people, you still were only qualified to AWS and other codes by that testing agency. Then, AWS only records that qualification based upon the standing of the Accredited Test Facility. If your test is not through an AWS Accredited Test Facility then the AWS does not record your results as a currently qualified welder. Is this previous sentence a valid interpretation?

In some ways it still comes back to some of the earlier posters contentions that the words are very interchangeable and can be applied in a rather broad variety of ways.

But, I greatly appreciate your comment and have no problem with that application coming from one on the committees you are on. I was mainly attempting, with my feable communications skills, to clarify the responsibilities of the test facility to Keith. He may not have needed my explanation, but that was what I was doing.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By Bill M

Date 10-13-2009 15:16

I like these definitions from SNT-TC-1A

Qualification:
"Demonstrated skill, demonstrated knowledge, documented training, and documented experience required for personnel to properly perform the duties of a specific job"

Certification:
"Written tesimony of qualification"

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 10-13-2009 23:20

Brent

I didn't mean to skewer you on the Forum. I appreciate that you were trying to help out! I just couldn't let what I considered to be incorrect information to stand unchallenged.

YOUR STATEMENT... "My position was based on personal opinion that just because the testing facility was AWS Accredited to test people, you still were only qualified to AWS and other codes by that testing agency. Then, AWS only records that qualification based upon the standing of the Accredited Test Facility. If your test is not through an AWS Accredited Test Facility then the AWS does not record your results as a currently qualified welder. Is this previous sentence a valid interpretation?"...

MY ANSWER... Not necessarily correct. If you want to be certified by the AWS, you have to take the examination at an Accredited Test Facility. The Test Facility would then give you a test based on one of the standard procedures in the repertory (QC-7), and if you passed, they would issue you an AWS Certification.This certification comes with a credit card style wallet card. and is clearly an AWS Certification/Qualification record. Other qualification tests, such as those qualified under QC-4 may also generate an AWS Certification.

That same test facility may also perform testing to many other standards, even home blown and proprietary standards, but no AWS Certification card will be issued.

It is more complicated to try and explain than to understand. It is easy to loose track of the intent of the original question and give a partially incorrect answer. In fact I hope I am interpreting your reply correctly, and not misinterpreting anything with my answer and clarification!!!

Of course, as in all qualification and certification records, the holder has only proved that he/she demonstrated ability on that day, when he was in a good mood, the coupon was in the easy position, the coffee wasn't too strong, the weather was good, and everything else was right with the world. It does not necessarily reflect or guarantee any future performance.

Thanks for not taking offense.

Joe Kane

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 10-14-2009 19:46

Joe, Without dragging this on unnecesarrily,

Did not take it to be a "skewer". I try to take any correction, clarification, or comment as constructive. Generally I try to learn more from what anyone says, even if I learn the info they gave is error. At least I know the truth the next time.

I believe you have helped my understanding of where this issue had gone in the last few posts. And I definitely agree, pass today, fail tomorrow; same test, different results. Only shows that the welder has the ability to pass on occassion. From the time he starts work as a Qualified/Certified Welder it is in his hands to continue to do quality work that proves he is worthy of the title (if you will) of 'Certified Welder'. Then the employer and inspectors have to look at percentages to see if a requal is justified.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By Ke1thk

Date 10-15-2009 18:49

Thanks to all. We have a very insightful group. I understand why a welder would want the third party certification.

It sounds like I'm close to being an accredited test facility. I work with many different codes, processes, and metals. I weld and braze by hand, semi-automatic and robotic. Several different customers audit me each year. I write welding documents and qualify welders for my employer as well as others, which are then evaluated by their "experts." I send my NDT and destructive samples to accredited labs. I've been a CWI for over ten years and have judged Skills USA competitions each of those years. I'll check out the requirements.

I have to ask myself, "Why? What would I do with it?” It sounds expensive. I’ve never seen it required. “What types of organizations would require it?”

When I give a weld test I try to make the welder feel at ease. I explain the test and what results are expected. I walk away and drink some coffee for a half an hour or so. I return and we begin the test. I'll actually weld or braze a test while the welder watches me if the person is having trouble. I'm not going to weld their test, but I will offer advice. My thinking being that their employer hired me to bring this person up to AWS standards. I offer no advise during the test (certainly none at Skills USA).

I guess the accredited test facility seems more formal and official.

Thanks for all the advice.
Good Luck,
Keith