Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / What is implied?
- - By newinsp (**) Date 10-01-2012 16:27
4.19 General
The performance qualification tests required by this code
are specifically devised tests to determine a welder’s,
welding operator’s, or tack welder’s ability to produce
sound welds. The qualification tests are not intended to
be used as guides for welding or tack welding during actual
construction. The latter shall be performed in conformance
with a WPS. 

Does this imply that, for example, a welding school student could be qualified w/o a written WPS?

:confused:
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 10-01-2012 16:32
May want to read a bit further, 4.22.:wink:
Parent - By newinsp (**) Date 10-02-2012 14:03
Thanks jwright650.
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 10-01-2012 17:17
Welcome to the Forum !

Good question,

Answer... No

My opinion is that the statement you posted inferrs that the WPS used for testing may not necessarily be apropriate for production welding.

And now a question.... Why would a welding student be qualified without a WPS?    If the instructor is not competent to prepare a prequalified WPS or obtain one from an external sourse, they are not quite ready to start testing welders for performance qualifications with an accompanying test report.

Not trying to be harsh... But preparing a prequalified WPS for a performance qualification test in accordence with D1.1 is a very good thing for an instructor/inspector to begin their journey to bigger and better things.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-01-2012 17:33
It is a typical mistake; cherry-picking sub clauses rather than reading and understanding the entire clause. Doing so can be very costly in terms of time, money, and consequences.

Working with a code, whether it is AWS, ASME, or others, requires a little instruction and some practice to learn how to use and apply the information contained within the particular standard.

No one is born with that knowledge, it is something that is learned and acquired over time. It helps if you have an opportunity to attend a seminar that leads one through the standard to better understand what is required and where it is stated.

Being smart enough to ask questions about the code is the intelligent thing to do.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By newinsp (**) Date 10-02-2012 13:59
Thanks Al,

I've already requested PDH training through my AWS section here.  Can't make it to the WPS seminar at Fabtech this year, but it sure would be nice to have been able to go. 
Been reading comments on here for a while, but just joined.  I really appreciate the comments. 

Thanks again
Parent - - By newinsp (**) Date 10-02-2012 13:50
Thanks Lawrence,

I agree, but I think that the wording should be changed.  Just my opinion.  I was on my umpteenth time reading through the whole code when I got to this part, and it really stood out.  I'm newly minted, so I will be researching, reading posts and asking lots of questions (some may make ones hair stand on end :eek:) :)

:grin:
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 10-02-2012 14:31
\
NewInsp

Bring all the questions!

Don't worry about any of them....  The guys here may tease you a bit once we get to know you... But they really do respect when "newly minted" professionals come and ask questions..

In fact..  Most of the old timers/experts come here only for that reason..  They get enjoyment from helping the people who ask for it.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 10-02-2012 14:41
I agree with Lawrence....I relied heavily on the forum when I was thrown into a QC position as a new CWI in Jan of 2000. Lots of sage advice helped this new inspector get through some really trying times.
Parent - - By newinsp (**) Date 10-03-2012 14:26
Great!  I'm going to post one about "develop welding procedures" that B5.1 says only a SCWI can do.  I'm really unclear about the limit of what a CWI can do.   Isn't 'witnessing a procedure qualification' for the purpose of developing welding procedures?  Maybe I'm picking again? 

I'm going to post one of those scary questions too!  :)
Parent - By waccobird (****) Date 10-03-2012 15:11
newinsp

No witnessing and developing is two different things.

Again not enough information.

AWS D1.1 gives the manufacturer or contractor the responsibility of preparing a written WPS, the same are responsible for qualification Testing also.

Where in AWS B5.1 does it limit this to SCWI only?

1.3 Responsibility. It shall be the responsibility of the
employer to determine that the AWI/WI/SWI is capable
of performing the duties involved in his/her particular
welding inspection assignment.

Marshall
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 10-03-2012 15:32
That language in B5.1 is not perfectly clear;   in my opinion the meaning is that an SCWI should be expected to do this kind of work rather than excluding others.

There are plenty of companies who have engineers, supervisors and welders write D1.1 code compliant procedures without any AWS certification at all.

My opinion is that the only limitations apply to the CAWI "associate" designation.

The testing is the procedure to make sure it works is the reason for a procedure qualification PQR... But I'm pretty sure our conversation is centering around "prequalified procedures" and performance qualification...

Sometimes it's hard not to mix up clauses and text... it's important to understand when they are referring to "procedure qualification" and when they are referring to "performace qualification"....
Parent - By newinsp (**) Date 10-03-2012 15:41 Edited 10-03-2012 15:45
Up until now, I had assumed that it meant that a CWI could qualify a procedure at the direction of a company/employer, but a SCWI could qualify (develop) one on his own.  Not prequalified.
Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 10-03-2012 17:53
I'm going to go ahead and chime in here with maybe some different wording that MAY clarify your query:

It is not that ONLY an SCWI can do/develop welding procedures, ONLY the SCWI is expected/required to have that knowledge, experience, ability as part of his qualifications. 

There is nothing that PROHIBITS the CWI from developing WPS's if asked and they feel knowledgable enough to do so.  Many people, company employees, engineers, CWI's, etc find themselves without adequate training and knowledge when they actually start looking at D1.1, B2.1, and other reference material with all the essential and non-essential variables listed, types/grades of steel, welding processes and all their variables, manufacturer's specifications for electrodes, gases, etc, etc, etc.  There are many beginners at engineering firms who are tasked with evaluating the submitted WPS's who haven't a clue and can really mess things up or at least complicate a contractors job. 

To further Marshall's comment:  there is a difference between developing, witnessing, testing to, and/or reviewing for compliance to the job at hand. 

Welding procedures are developed BEFORE the procedure qualification.  Then they are witnessed as the welder attempts to qualify both the procedure and himself.  The testing confirms rather all worked well or not and if all passed then you develop your WPS's from the Procedure Qualification Record (PQR). 

Anyone can develop that procedure, anyone can write the WPS from the PQR of that procedure, But only an SCWI is expected to be able to accomplish all that.

The items you are expected to be able to accomplish are listed in the B5.1 Specification.  It doesn't limit the top end of how much you can do.  It lists the Minimum that you should be able to do. 

Hope I made things clearer and was helpful.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
- - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-02-2012 14:50
Just a quick question Newbie; when you took your CWI examination, did you use API or D1.1 for your open book examination?

As you can see, I am assuming you are a CWI, so there is a further assumption you passed an open code book examination.

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By eekpod (****) Date 10-02-2012 22:58
I can  only wonder how people/ cwi's/ inspectors intrepreted and "discussed' these issues and questions before the internet.
No wonder there were so many different interpretations of sections of code: until we could analize and discuss and see other peoples points of view.
This forum does help us all.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-03-2012 03:39
Hello Chris;

The internet is very helpful in many regards. I use it to find information on a host of subjects. Usually the manufacturer's websites provide much of the information I need.

With regards to applications of the code, we must remember that we are simply stating our opinions on code issues; we don't have the authority to "interpret" the code. We can try to use logic and common sense, but we soon discover common sense is not that common.

It is useful to discuss the issues and listen to other points of view. When there is an impasse, it is incumbent on us to make an official inquiry. I have done that on a couple of occasions and both resulted in changes in the next edition of the code. In each case a revision provided more clarity or removed ambiguity. The systems work when everyone does their part.

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By newinsp (**) Date 10-03-2012 13:58
D1.1.  A story too.  Last year I bragged to my family and friends about how easy the seminar and exam was going to be......you cannot imagine how much crow there was to eat after having failed it.  I only achieved CWI this past July.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-03-2012 14:09
They say crow tastes a lot like chicken if it is prepared properly.:grin:

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 10-03-2012 14:15
Al, LOL....I heard that too. :cool:

newinsp, don't feel too bad about not passing on the first trip. I know several people who has taken that exam multiple times without success. I'm still the only person from my company that has passed it(and somehow on the first try), although many have sat through the seminar and exam several times.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-03-2012 14:34
I have a friend that is a structural engineer that made the comment, "If you passed, how hard can it be?" He failed three times and has not attempted it a fourth time. After failing the third time he asked, "How the heck did you pass that damn test?"

He isn’t alone; another friend, a mechanical engineer, tried three times and finally gave up with the comment, “I don’t really need it anyway.”

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By newinsp (**) Date 10-03-2012 14:38
It is quite spendy  too.
Parent - - By 99205 (***) Date 10-03-2012 23:36
Many, many, very intelligent people have underestimated that test.  It was, by far the hardest test I have ever taken.  It's the damn clock ticking, in the back of your head, that screws with you.
Parent - By newinsp (**) Date 10-04-2012 11:15
Oh, yes.  That time thing sure did cause some stress.
Parent - - By newinsp (**) Date 10-03-2012 14:42
There was a guy that had taken the whole seminar and exam three times when I was there last year.  He was a QA/supervisor guy, but the company was paying for it.
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 10-03-2012 14:54
I can also echo this with regards to the NACE CIP level I exam. I just about freaked out when they handed out a 5" binder on the first day and said that every page will be touched by the end of the week...again, I'm the only individual out of several from my company who has passed this paint inspector's exam and did so on the first try. I will admit that both of these exams were tough and when I exited the exam, I wasn't sure if I had passed or not until I received my certificates. So far, our company has paid for all of these exams. I'm sending two more individuals to the NACE CIP seminar and exam in April/13...I have my fingers crossed that I will get another paint inspector who will be successful and certified this time through.
Parent - By eekpod (****) Date 10-09-2012 10:54
My SSPC level 1 paint week long seminar and test was quite intimidating.  ALOT of new info in the beginning. I hear ya John
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / What is implied?

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill