Appendix E- Mandatory Permitted SWPS

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 02-06-2013 23:45 Edited 02-06-2013 23:50

SWPS are purchased directly from the American Welding Society

Here is the link

http://pubs.aws.org/swps.php

If this is to much money?

Prolly ought to find other work to do that has fewer requirements.

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-07-2013 16:39

Well things are tight but not destitute. Too expensive for current consideration was the former course of SWPS acquisition which was joining the Mechanical Contractor Association and National Bureau for $1800 and becoming signatory to the UA with a minimum $360 a month contribution, which really isn't a bad price for health insurance and a 401 retirement investment, but still justified exploring alternative options. No idea what examination, audit, approval of facilities would have been involved. So yes, the AWS SWPS certainly seems the most reasonable course of action but still leaves some questions unanswered, specifically: in another thread, a contributor whom I tend to pay attention to, has expressed considerable resistance to the usability and restrictive parameters of certain SWPSs such as impractical groove size that resulted in failed demonstration welds. The opinion expressed in that thread leads me to speculate there may be other impracticalities. There are online vendors plying the AWS standards for the same price, but they too restrict an examination of the document to determine usability prior to purchase. IMHO, an unreproducable/undownloadable view of the SWPS prior to purchase doesn't represent an extraordinary expectation of purchase. I wouldn't buy a car without a test drive either, but maybe I'm just a cheap welder. On the other hand, I've walked out of more than one test booth without striking an arc after being presented with a WPS, or weld test without a WPS that was the result of some dog and pony show's idea of a good weldment design. Ahdunno, maybe if I was a salaried employee just spending company budget I wouldn't give a care, but that's not the case.

More to the point, can anyone explain how documenting welder qualification with an AWS standard is justified for welding performed to ASME Sec. IX? Assuming any SWPS documents will likely cite AWS on the forms [not having seen one I can only speculate] does one simply refer any inspection to Appendix E as justification of ASME acceptance? Or is this overlap of code acceptance a widely understood standard?

I appreciate the link Lawrence, having joined AWS last year I haven't explored it's many benefits beyond studying the 2010 D1.1 code book.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 02-08-2013 12:09

Regarding Performance Qualification
Per QW 301.2, sentence 2

" The performance qualification test shall be welded in accordance with qualified Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) or Standard Welding Procedure Qualifications (SWPS) listed in Appendix E, except that when performance qualification is done in accordance with a WPS or SWPS that requires a preheat or postwled heat treatment, these may be omitted."

As far as joint designs go, GENERALLY, you get a number of possible joints in a single SWPS. I looked at one of the CrMo pipe SWPS's and you get a 60deg included angle open root, (+10 deg, -0deg) with a root face of 1/16" (+/- 1/32") and a root opening of 1/8" (+/- 1/16")

You also get a U-prep that looks pretty good, a combo U/Bevel, all prequalified CJP in D1.1, all joints resulting from end preparations conforming to ASME B16.25 (Buttwelding ends), all fillets, 2 socket welds, a branch connection, a face and bore, and a face and back (these last 2 for slip on's). I don't know if all of the "primarily pipe" SWPS's have this

For things like current, etc, the ranges allowed seem more than generous to me, but YMMV

All that being said, I can totally see you point about making sure the SWPS will do what you want.

By qcrobert (***)

Date 02-08-2013 19:35

I believe the price of the SWPS is approx $270 which is inexpensive when considering the cost of properly generating a WPS and qualification costs (machining of coupons for pulls, tensile pulls, bend testing, etc).

Be forewarned though that the SWPS must be followed (demonstrated) exactly and all the information entered as required under QW-510. Remember that all variables and welding conditions are considered essential unlike a standard WPS's nonessential variables.

I understand your concern as to whether the SWPS will meet your needs. If you would care to post the exact details (base metal, filler metal, joint design, position, etc) of your production welding needs you may get an answer or opinion as to whether the B-1-1-026-94 would fulfill your needs.

QCRobert

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-10-2013 21:16

Fred,
Thanks for the reply. I am surprised there is such an array of joint design within one SWPS. You say you looked at one, I assume it's either part of the company's QA/QC or you have a special dispensation given only to the chosen few among engineers? Your help last year with the D1.1 PQR was invaluable. Can you imagine I have yet to strike an arc on that job? 35,000# of steel pipe sitting in a container [which got paid through an MOH payment so it ain't my nickel] waiting to be turned into handrail, one re-design on the work increasing post spacing density by 60% after first review of shop drawings which were to contract document specs [but don't even think about altering one iota of detail because these things are engineered! so how did they miss that?] and the resultant change order [making 2] and the project looks more profitable by the day. Forgive my cynicism. Bless the beuracracy. If nothing else I've learned exasperation has limited survival value in these circumstances. Have used the time to streamline the fabrication plan to it's most efficient process given my facilities capabilities. Can't wait to get started sometime later this year.

QC Robert,
I would be looking for an SPWS that covered carbon pipe, schedule 40 [better if multiple wall schedules allowed] SMAW process, and 2nd SWPS for GTAW/SMAW. From Appendix E, I see designations: B2.1-1-202-96 and B2.1-1-209-96 for a downhand 6010 root with uphill 7018 and an ER70S2 root with balance of 7018. Both of these would be the most common and usable welding procedures needed. I am assuming a standard 60 degree included angle, V bevel joint for sched. 40 work and 75degree V bevel for heavier wall schedule. All tested positions would be 6G.

Further questions: I am the contractor and need to certify the welders qualification. The lab I send the coupons to just shoot them and give me the results- pass/fail. Does the demonstration weld need to be witnessed be a CWI? Does the SWPS need to be stamped by a CWI? My reading indicates the answer is no, but I am asking for complete transparancy. I seem to remember something about the witnessing not being allowed to be contracted to a second party, just the testing [radiography or mechanical], although I am unsure if there is a clause requiring a CWI witnessing that must be part of the contractors staff. I may be completely off the mark on this, excuse my ignorance.

Secondly: Appendix E is part of the ASME Code but the SWPSs are from AWS? How are the SWPSs accepted for ASME work? Does the SWPS reference ASME Sec. IX? Is the ASME Sec. IX Welder Qualification document per applicable SWPS available and from whom?

Thank you in advance.

By qcrobert (***)

Date 02-11-2013 14:29

Further questions: I am the contractor and need to certify the welders qualification. The lab I send the coupons to just shoot them and give me the results- pass/fail. Does the demonstration weld need to be witnessed be a CWI? No

Does the SWPS need to be stamped by a CWI?No

My reading indicates the answer is no, but I am asking for complete transparancy. I seem to remember something about the witnessing not being allowed to be contracted to a second party, just the testing [radiography or mechanical], although I am unsure if there is a clause requiring a CWI witnessing that must be part of the contractors staff.No, you as the Contractor may perform your own (Demonstration Test of the SWSP (no RT req) and Performance Qualification Tests (bend tests) of your welders.

I may be completely off the mark on this, excuse my ignorance. Secondly: Appendix E is part of the ASME Code but the SWPSs are from AWS?Yes, the data to support a Standard Welding Procedure Specification are derived from Procedure Qualification Records (PQRs) generated by the Welding Procedures Committee of the WRC and PQRs received from industry and government agencies. For all committee generated PQRs, the welding, testing, and evaluation are performed under the direct supervision of the WRC Welding Procedures Committee.

How are the SWPSs accepted for ASME work? You have a welder perform the Demonstration Tests (following the SWPS), fill out the Demonstration Form QW-485 then fill out Welder Performance Qualification Test Results Form QW-484-A. All future welders will test to the Demonstration Test (SWPS) and results recorded on the QW-484-A Form.

Does the SWPS reference ASME Sec. IX?Yes, see Mandatory Appendix E Permitted SWPSs that states "The following AWS Standard Welding Procedure Specifications may be used under the requirements given in Article V."

Is the ASME Sec. IX Welder Qualification document per applicable SWPS available and from whom? Google ASME forms on the internet

If you are still uncertain about how to read, follow and fill out the above forms I suggest you hire a knowlegable CWI to guide & witness the testing (with you there as a witness).

Hope this helps,
QCRobert

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-11-2013 16:02

QC Robert,
Thank you for the comprehensive clarification. In qualifying a procedure for an AWS D1.1 WPS last year I worked with a CWI to insure things were done correctly. Even after a lot of reading of the code and disscussion I wasn't unconditionally secure that I understood the required steps which need to be extrapolated from the various clauses of the code. The end result followed my understanding of the protocol but nowhere did I find a straightforward checklist of steps that needed to be followed which would simplify a proccess that in the end is not that complicated. The presentation of the information for the required steps, if summarized in a similarly comprehendable format as what you have described here, would go a long way to ensuring code requirements were met. I just checked Clause 4 to confirm the absence of a checklist, if it's there, I don't find it. Thanks.

By 46.00

Date 02-12-2013 06:26

http://www.onetb.com/download/Welding%20Table.pdf

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-12-2013 16:45

46.00,

Where is that checklist from?

By waccobird (****)

Date 02-12-2013 16:58

yojimbo

ONE/TÜV/BV

http://www.onetb.com/

Marshall

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-12-2013 17:10

Al,

Of course it could not have been that easy or simple and there would be another twist to unknot. Good heads up, thanks. It really helps understanding the details of a problem when they are disscussed with people who grasp the bigger picture. Looked into the purchase of the code to expand my library and education. Wow. D1.1 is the mot expensive book I'd ever bought. ASME? It's damn near a lower end house deposit. Seems like most of the CWIs I have talked to about an ASME welder qualification are not very fluent in the subject, certainly not as familiar as those contributing here. Am I correct in assuming the course of study and testing for CWI doesn't cover ASME subject matter and the whole area is an additional course of study and seperate endorsement/credential? I have a trip to the engineering library at UW to schedule, not sure their ASME code edition is current but will at least let me look through the construction code for possible answers. The job that spurred this exploration into an ASME welder qualification was based on a local city call that called out that all work [in this case, low psi heating gas service] subject to city inspection "be done to ASME Sec. IX" with no further mention of either B.31.1 or B31.3 which are the only ASME distinctions I am familiar with as a welder. I should probably start by reading just what the two distinctions really mean and refer to. How about this: You said B31.3 impose guided bend tests to qualify a welder. If an SWPS demonstration weld was tested to both RT and guided bends would it be acceptable for B31.3 work, or does the B31.3 WPS need to be established independantly from the SWPSs with a PQR? Thanks in advance.

By 803056

Date 02-12-2013 17:51 Edited 02-12-2013 17:57

B31.1, B31.3, and other pressure piping codes, as well as the applicable sections of the B&PV code, are infamous for modifying the basic requirements of Section IX.

A good example is the need to do charpy impact testing. Section IX does not tell the user whether impact testing is required. The user must review the applicable construction code to determine whether they are using materials that require impact testing for the thickness and temperature range specified.

None of the SWPSs are qualified for impact testing. Any instance where the construction code imposes impact testing, the SWPSs cannot be used.

The contractor must find out from the Owner which construction code applies to the project. The Owner is responsible for determining which construction code is applicable.

I don't know if this is helpful or confusing to you. It depends on your perspective, i.e., are you operating as a contractor or an employee. If you are an employee, that is you get a W-2 at the end of the year, the employer must qualify the welder (with certain excptions). If you are the contractor, then you better know what you are getting yourself into.

The fundamentals portion of CWI program/seminar cover the basics of what a WPS is and how both welding procedures and welders are qualified. The specifics of qualifying the WPS and welder are dependent on the welding/construction codes being used. The Code book section of the CWI seminar covers the requirements in greater detail, but not to the depth required by a contractor. AWS only offers D1.1 and API 1104 as regular seminar offerings. They have offered a seminar on D1.5 and selected ASME code sections at FABTECH, but I have not attended one, so I cannot tell you what they cover.

ASME offers seminars on Section IX and the various construction codes. I have taken most of them. It is safe to say the construction code offerings are targeted more to the engineer rather than the inspector. There are two welding related ASME offerings. Walter Sperko teaches the Section IX course and I teach the course titled "Practical Welding Technology." If you have taken e CWI seminar then I suggest you take Walter's course. If you have not taken th CWI seminar, I suggest you take my course first and then take Walter's course.

The CWI and endorsements are good for individuals performing QC functions for a contractor or manufacturer or as a third party inspector acting in the capacity of QA representing an Owner. Many people are under the false impression that an AI overseeing a project ensures the Owner the fabricated item meets the project specifications. That isn't the case. The AI is usually employed by the insurance carrier and he's there to protect the insurance carrier's interest.

Best regards -Al

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-12-2013 18:26 Edited 02-12-2013 18:30

Al-

Your reply clarifies the issue, doesn't confuse it. I am a contractor and yes understand the obligation of that responsibility. Oddly, or maybe not, it often seems I take it more seriously than the owners, for example, when exploring this ASME welder qualification for a specific job I spoke with a city engineer in the relevant plumbing inspection division and asked what welder quals would cover the work. He said he "supposed WABO welder certs would be ok". I thanked him and ended the call. The standard he referenced is a local juristiction "code" that I have a long standing disrespect for. They are a private agency in the NW whose essential function is to collect money for their own personal gain. They do not establish standards, all the welder qualifications are based on AWS pre-qualified WPSs, and to add insult to injury not a few of the projects I do in public works will require welders be WABO certified and actually have rejected my AWS welder qualification and accompaning pre-qualified WPS requiring a re-certification to local jusristiction using the same pre-qualified WPS. The point is, the engineer answering my call could not even distinguish between a structural and non-structural application or welder qualification. Good to know he has a steady job, he'd be lost if he had to make a living in the real world. All that said, as a contractor, my ultimate obligation is meet specification. If that specification is wrongly or even ambiguously written that's outside my responsibility to some degree. At the least, a poorly written specification permits a larger degree of contractual negotiation. That sounds cynical I know, but the fact is I am not writing the specifications and the people who are very often don't want the headaches that come with really understanding their venue and responsibilities. I don't know how this phenomena effects other trades but in the welding trade I've found a vast lack of understanding of code requirements that relate to our work. I can only spend so much time/resources directing the attention of my contractual superiors/owners toward the sources they need to understand. With all that said, the work I do would not be considered heavy industry or truly critical fabrication. Low psi commerical heating gas lines that I have done are never going to be a warranty concern for anyone and I never lose a minutes sleep in concern. Too many years behind the hood with an inspector over my shoulder and the unemployment wagon idling keeping the x-ray techs warm waiting to make the shot doing "real" work to let the picayune stuff I do get out of control. Really, my major intention is to increase my business's legitimacy, protect the General Contracotrs I sub to, and open new markets. Your input, as always, is insightful clear and helpfull. Thanks. I will investigate the construction code further for pplicable welder qualification requirements. BTW, I did run across some articles by Mr. Sperko during this investigation and they were clearly written and helpfull guideslines.

By qcrobert (***)

Date 02-12-2013 18:23

Yojimbo,
May I ask where (jurisdiction) this piping is being installed?

In the case of low psig heating gas service for a municipality I find it difficult the believe that the only requirements for the job is that welders be qualified to ASME Sec IX.

It is the Owner's resposibility to determine what code or standard the construction shall be performed. Many times the Owner does not have the expertise to make this determination and relies on a PE to assign the code based on sound engineering practices. As a contractor it is your responsibility to obtain the proper AFC dwgs and possess (purchase) the appropriate codes, standards and reference materials to perform the job which may include the assistance of an AWS CWI.

To CYA I suggest you delve deeper into this project by first contacting the EOR and city inspector. The inspector may be inspecting to yet another standard or referenced document such a API.

Also in addition to B31.1 and 31.3 here are [url=]some[/url] of the other ones;

B31.1, Power Piping
B31.2, Fuel Gas Piping
B31.3, Process Piping
B31.4, Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons,
Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols
B31.5, Refrigeration Piping
B31.6, Chemical Plant Piping (never published because so close to B31.3)
B31.7, Nuclear Piping (moved to BPVC Section III)
B31.8, Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
B31.9, Building Services Piping
B31.10, Cryogenic Piping (never published also because so close to B31.3)
B31.11, Slurry Piping

QCRobert

By yojimbo (***)

Date 02-12-2013 18:57

QC Robert,

Thank you for that list. My trip to the UW engineering library will include those reading requirements. I admit, I could be mistaken regarding municipality code requirements and will need to confirm it, but this is what I learned/saw initially: The plumbing contractor doing the gas piping, when asked, said he thought the work fell under "ASME Sec. IX". He didn't seem to have any knowledge of API 1104 when I suggested it might cover the work and I would look into it. Visiting the City website and looking up commerical heating gas piping code requirments for welding and inspection I read "All work to conform to ASME Sec IX" although I am going by memory and need to confirm the exact language at this point. I specifically do not remember any mention of B.31.3 or B.31.1 or any further distinctions being made. Perhaps they are by reference and that misunderstanding would be my ignorance that needs to be addresed. You are right, a conversation with the city engineer or inspector would be appropriate however in the circumstances under which I have been looking into this it was a practical imperative no red flags were raised that might jeapordize or endanger the plumbing contractor I was dealing with. It would be unfair for my lack of understanding compliance requirements to effect his business, so I put the question to a neighboring city engineer in the same department. His response is elaborated in the post above. This is obviously not going to be an easy slam dunk addition to my QA/QC manual or area of operation and will take further preparation. There is enough of this work around [low psi commercial heating gas piping] to justify persuing the requirements for ASME Sec I welder qualifications in my company's name. ASME Sec. IX pipe welding is what I did [along with API 1104 work, Kinder Morgan qualifications] for a living many years as a rig welder but the rules are different performing as a contractor obviously, hence my current examination of compliance. Thanks you for your input. After I get myself a bit more up to speed and familiar with the terrain I will broach the subject with the CWI who helped prepare the AWS PQR and welder quals for my current project. If he is not interested or able to navigate the requirements for ASME SWPS/Welder Qualification I will need to look elsewhere for professional consultation.