Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
http://www.millerwelds.com/products/multiprocess/product.php?model=M00361Does anybody have one of these in their arsenal? In your experience how does it weld? Mig? Stick? Running a 1/8" 7018 how many rods before your waiting on the duty cycle? What about Mig and a .045 flux wire?
I'm thinking about this for longer welds, 12" to 18" and pulling the trigger and just going but at 20% duty cycle I don't know how it would handle it. Looking at lap joints, 1/4" or better base with the other member being 1/4" or better. Using a .045 flux core wire. Just thinking that it's not going to have enough buttocks to do it faster than a stick rod off my SA. We've also got 1" flanges and stiffeners that range from 3/8" to 1/2" so going by the specs this would not do the trick using the mig option. Reading about the smaw side it would be multiple passes but still with the duty cycle seems to be lacking.
What kind of drop would there be in the machines capacity over say a 200 foot 10 gauge cord? Also would be a concern and weaken the output of the machine I know.
Just looking and wanted to see if anybody had experience with it. Thanks!
Shawn
Shawn, I don't know much about this machine but for what you are wanting to do the 20% duty cycle will be a problem. It will cost more but I would look at a Lincoln Powermig 350 or V-350 Pro. both of these machines are multiprocess with enough duty cycle to handle what ever you throw at them. I have a V-350 I run .045 solid wire , fluxcore and hardfacing with it. 5/32 7018 and 1/4" air arc.
Shawn,
Honestly I don't think you will be happy at all with that machine. A little 110/220 mig would be just as good and a lot cheaper.
I don't know if your area has many machines on Craigslist? In my area, Southern AZ machines pop up often. I have bought a few over the years. I use an xmt304cccv in the shop and with my diesel machine. It gives me great flexibility off the truck and in the shop as well. Lincoln and miller both have great multiprocess inverters. Problem is powering them off your machine. I think yours has 3500w auxiliary power? If that's the case any of the inverters won't offer you much help off the truck.
If your just after portable mig or fluxcore get a ln25, there is one on Phoenix Craigslist for $800. There are several wires that work well on cc if you don't have a cv module for non critical work.
I was checking on it for a guy actually. He had mentioned it, told him I had never used one and looked at duty cycle, amp, volts and started the frown and head shaking. Told him probably better off sticking with the suitcase. Probably a good machine for field hand rail jobs due to being light weight, 110 but what this fella is thinking about he'd be throwing away money.
Thanks for the replies guys!!
Shawn
Calling it a "200" with only 150 amps at 20-30% duty cycle is misleading, but that is where You end up when You call Your 135A @ 30% machine a "180".
Yeah, for a brief moment with gold wire, perfect circuit breaker and plugging the machine in directly at your service and you can get 200 amps for 1 minute! Seems like the older machines, my SA250 for example is 300 amp capable but only called a 250. I think in todays world they would call it a SA350! LOL!
Seems to me that NEMA #1 rating is at 60% duty cycle, NEMA #2 rating is at 40% duty cycle, and hobby machines could be called anything they want,
as they are not NEMA rated 1 or 2.
Your Ranger 8 is rated at 100% duty cycle, but at much lower voltage than Your SA 250.
I have a Syncrowave 300 and a Syncrowave 351. The 300 is rated at 60% and the 351 at 40%, but they are nearly identical at the same duty cycle.
The 351 does have a little more amperage on the top end, but the duty cycle would be pretty small there.
One must read the ratings, and understand what they mean.
"There are several wires that work well on cc if you don't have a cv module for non critical work."
I am not meaning to derail the thread....well I am anyway. There are countless buildings, bridges etc. put up with CC flux core, it was fine then and now its not? Not picking on you Wade I just have heard it said before. I asked a CWI that does my certs about this and he told me I could come do certs using x wire and a suitcase and qualify it to D1 and he could provide a wps to make it all kosher. I am on a structural job right now laying lbs and lbs of weld which is fine because it is by the hour.....next time I do one on a bid I would love to pull out the wire feeder to nail it all down and get done quick. All the prints always say is 70xx filler they do not specify process. Is this CWI blowing smoke up my bum or can I just do my bend tests and its all good? I have a feeling I will get opposing answers to this.
D1.1 2004
C3.2.4 CV power sources have volt-ampere relationships that yield large current changes from small arc voltage changes. Constant current (CC) power sources have a volt-ampere relationship that yield small current changes from large arc voltage changes. Best welding results for FCAW and GMAW are normally achieved using CV output. CC may be used for FCAW or GMAW, pro- viding WPSs are qualified by test in accordance with Section 4.
So there it is.
Tommy
The CWI may have tested you with a WPS that had a proper PQR....
However, That performance qualification test, if done by *anybody* other than the engineering representative of the current project, means jack squat.
If CC power is done on a D1.1 GMAW/FCAW project.. The WPS "For that project" must be qualified by testing...
In other words ... A welder cannot himself pass a single test (qualified CC PQR) and just go weld anyplace.
So the WPS for your test.. and the WPS for the project must be generated from the same PQR.... And that qualified by section 4~~~~~~~~~~~~ NO... Strike that! Just the WPS for the project must be qualified... Your test could be on GAS shielded FCAW for all that matters.
Have a zillion buildings and bridges been done that way? (with CC FCAW) Yes...
But it just flat out is not as consistant and repeatable as CV GMAW/FCAW....... Of course there are a million golden-arms out there to *testify* that they can do it better with an SA and a suitcase...
So if the authority over the project gives blessings according to test results we may proceed.....however because it is no longer a pre qualified procedure I would have to do it everytime on each job? Sounds like somebody is getting checks from power supply manufacturers to me....I just got through doing some practice with FCAW CC and it ran fantastic and it was super easy in any position or joint configuration...welds looked great over a huge heat and speed range....Unless there is something inherently wrong with the wire or process with integrity I do not see a problem. Just because the welds laid in proper and looked great does not mean they are metallurgicaly sound...I understand that....but dang....if I got to write paper for every single job....well that's just utter BS. EITHER the stuff is good or its not.
SO why not just take the verbage out of the code all together....if it is going to be treated as a red headed stepchild then don't muck around and just BAN IT altogether. Too much $$$$$$$ floating around///we don't want to stir the pot too bad too quickly eh? ANSWER THAT ONE AWS.
I sincerely appreciate your fellas candor in your replies. Thank you.
The Authority can give blessings if the FCAW with CC power WPS used for production is qualified per clause 4... That alone makes it kosher.,,,,, Sorry if I was not clear about that in the first place
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
CC power is banned... Altogether.
Unless you can prove it works,,,,, every single time..
That's what the code is for in essence Tommy...
CC power is different than CV power... When Contact tip to work distance "CTWD" changes, different things happen with the two types of power supplies...
Edit to explain:::::
1. With CV power... When CTWD increases... Current decreases at the arc, due to resistence built into the electrode wire, but voltage (which dictates arc length, hence transfer mode) remains constant. Within the CTWD range this actually allows the operator slight ability to control the heat at the puddle in order to deal with differences in fitup.
2. With CC power... When CTWD increases,....Current remanins constant.. however Voltage increases, with dramatic effects on the transfer mode and arc length.......... Even slight changes in CTWD result in changes in transfer mode, penetration, fusion and spatter.
FCAW is "less" consistant with CC power.. FACT... Therefore it is not prequalified.
Tommy.... You could go out there... I am very confident and do short circuit GMAW *GMAW-S* on most of the work you do and the welds would be quality... You are better than average at your trade... But the FACT is that GMAW-S is as a process, less likely to have good sidewall and root fusion on materials thicker than 11 ga (code minimum) That is no reason to have a cow because GMAW-S is not prequalified... It's the same thing with FCAW and CC power.
It's not about power supply builders making bux..... I can't believe I even said this... But for once it's true.
Good explanation Lawrence. I knew there was something different, cause and effect for the arc length that most likely had something to do with it. I've thought about that for sometime now, CC and FCAW and what happens when your arc length changes as the wire is designed for CV.
I have not played around much with my machine and FCAW. Last time I did I was running filet welds on some 3/4" plate in the shop for "play time". Some would come out real good and others would have worm tracks. Was using an NR-211 I think, not even sure anymore been so long. It could be just me, don't mess around much with the flux core stuff as I don't have much call for it. SMAW in the field usually, solid wire and gas in the shop or GTAW. Would like to get my machine squared away though for CV, need to check on the kit again.
Thank you for saying so Law. And as always you said it with grace.
I agree with you Tommy and don't worry about it I damn sure don't know it all!!!
Personally I have never seen or welded to a wps that allowed cc with fluxcore or mig. Not saying they are not out there because I am sure they are. If you qualify a wpq through all the proper channels I don't see why it wouldn't be just fine. I'd like to see one for nr-232! I have not run much of it but personally but I think it runs better on cc... Or I need someone to show me how to use it correctly!!!!
I've done a bunch of Farm Code work with a sa200 ln25 and nr211. Worked just fine for what I was using it on.
Wade I sure as heck don't know enough....that is why we ask pointed ? on here so the world class guys who are writing the code can dissimulate it down to us right? That is the point of this section of the forum and the technical section. Like I said I was not picking on you dude, you just brought it up and because the stinking code wants to be ambiguous about it the question keeps getting repeated. IF the AWS does not want CC flux core being done just MAN UP and eliminate it from the code.
Most of the time on these AISC jobs they refer to D1 as a standard.....maybe there is a loophole for other standards I dunno, but I am gonna find out.
I agree completely! I truly enjoy learning on this forum and feel that information here is invaluable. So many people here that freely share their knowledge and experience.
Looks handy and very compact but dont know if I myself could get 1600 dollars worth of handy out of it. But I can think of many times it would have been a lot easier to string out a extension cord versus 200 ft of lead.
Shawn
I skimmed through this but my question to you is why not just get a LN-25 and run off your leads. I mean you still have to pull leads and power cords of the such no matter what. I am no expert in D 1.1 but it would not take much to qualify a procedure for CC. And if the company you work for sees the savings then they should be all in. If there not that smart then get all the hours you can and run 3/32 low highs. lol
I've got an LN25, bought it a few years ago for $400! Well, stole it at that price. The original question came from some real world research for a guy and thought this would be a good place to get some good real world feedback.
![grin :grin:](/f2/epx.png)
Now the age old question about CC vs CV. Think I need to either spend he $1800 on a converter kit or buy an larger output air cooled machine.
Nice machine for home use, but I don't think it is a machine for the professional.
The voltage and current range are on the low side. It is fine for short circuiting transfer on sheet metal. As for 1/4 inch material it is a little under powered for the big time.
Running long leads will compound the voltage problem. There is a voltage drop associated with the length of the cables and the number of connectors. The higher the current, the greater the voltage drops per foot of cable. Don't forget you have a cable going out to the work and another coming back to the welding machine.
As for the use of CC for GMAW and FCAW, you are correct, tons and tons of steel have been welded with CC, but there have been enough problems identified that the code committee has decided to throw up a red flag. If you want to use FCAW with CC, you are fine provided it is worth your while to qualify the WPS. Once you qualify the WPS the Engineer has the final say whether he is satisfied the results are repeatable. The same is true with prequalified WPSs as well as SWPSs; the Engineer has the last word regarding their use on his job.
It’s back to my 10%-80%-10% rule. 10% of the welders I work with are true tradesmen. They know their craft inside and out. Their rework rate is next to nothing. 80% of the welders make a living, but their skills are less than perfect. They need to be lead, they aren't the leaders. 10% should be doing anything but welding. Their hearts are not in for it, they would rather be doing something else, and they produce the majority of the rejects on the project.
The same rule applies to engineers, inspectors, dentists, and medical doctors.
Any welder that is earning a living welding to code as a contractor should have a copy they can refer to when a question arises. The 10% will spend the money because they are the upper 10%. The 80% cannot see why they need to buy a copy, that's why they work for someone else. They depend on someone else telling them what to do. The lower 10%, what can I say; they probably couldn't make sense of the pictures, never mind trying to make sense of all those big words.
The upper 10% are smart enough to ask questions when the code isn't clear. They develop a network of experts the can trust and they use their resources wisely.
Best regards -Al
Right where I started but I understand that.....coming from you AL at least I know where I stand. No offense to any one else but this is a subject that requires a consensus of opinion because of how the code is written. WOW maybe I need to work with these contractors on having some NDT done to prove out the results eh? I doubt it would change a thing no matter how much $ I spent on my paltry miles of weld. Lets live safe and just do it by an indestructible process of lo-hy SMAW...I can certainly live with that but I dunno how the contractors will...I feel I may become a dinosaur in thier view. Geez that $200 an hour rate from the steel detailer is looking attractive compared to field welding all this crap...lets just call him in for moments and screw the rest. I cannot blame them.
Maybe those problems the code committee is seeing is poorly qualified individuals under a piss poor testing processes and the results suck.
How many lbs of this has Brown AND Root laid in the day....sorry I can see a ton of that coming back to bite someone on the buttocks.
CMON folks lets get down to nitty gritty and talk some real world welding, any process is going to fail if not done correctly....why the hell do we not have a FIELD fcaw process that is acceptable with CC.
Ol Tom and I agree....if you're not welder enough to see what you're putting in, then just pack it in and be an inspector. If you call yourself a welder, yet find the need to argue about methods that you had a different argument about 10 years ago....do everyone a favor and retire. If you are in fact a welder, and actually watch the bead go in...then you are excluded from my tremulous attitude toward the folks that hire a fleet of dolts and teenagers to run their welding shops, and field operations.. ...
If you can't understand how your bead is going in, nor do you have the faith in your welder employees, then you may possibly be the very demise of our profession....
Use your heads.
People who ignore code are the demise of our profession..
No matter how crunchy their SourDough is.
If you can't obey code... You are not using your head...
If you are ignoring code because you think you are experienced enough to do what you please.... It's not time to retire... It's time to be run off.
I love you Sourdough... But if you can't obey instructions... I want you gone with the wind. Cause your not a welder.
If You aren't doing code work? Or the code your working to is silent on CC or CV... Then blast away... Your skills are all you need.
Lawrence....to me, code means the minimum that you can get by with. When I work, code doesn't much matter to me....simply because men like me innovate. Um not concerned about the wind which blows, as much as the wind that I create.
The most dangerous guy is the one that thinks he knows something.
When welders work under code it should matter.... I wouldn't want something I paid for welded by a man who's opinion is that "code doesn't much matter"
I get what your saying... I just think your paradigm is terribly wrong.
The good news is Sully... That the world is big enough for both of us .
By rgu14
Date 07-31-2017 13:37
As a young welder I figured everyone knew how to put in a good bead. What constituted a good weld? One that had a good appearance and was consistent with no undercut, no porosity, the proper size etc.
Then I had an engineer make a comment that always stayed in my mind. He said, "Al, I can always tell a welder, but I can't tell him much."
Yes, it was an insult because I did things my way and I wasn't always receptive of other people's ideas about welding. He challenged me and I took him up on the challenge. He said, "Al, you have a pretty high opinion of yourself and your abilities as a welder, but you have no credentials that support your abilities. You are one of the best I've worked with, but there's more to welding than laying in a good looking bead. What is your opinion of welding inspectors?”
I told him in no uncertain terms that most of them were clueless. None of the inspectors I knew could strike an arc, never mind make a decent weld.
He didn’t argue the point, instead he agreed with me. He said it was a problem because there were not enough good inspectors that were skilled as welders and knew inspection. He told me about the new program the AWS had started called the CWI. He asked me if I had ever worked with a CWI.
My response was no, I had never worked with an inspector that knew his butt from a hole in the ground.
He laughed and challenged me to take the CWI examination. He cautioned me that it was a very difficult test, but if I passed, I would receive a credential that people would recognize. The credential told the person reading it that I was not just a welder, it meant I actually knew what I was taking about.
I took him up on his challenge. I passed the test in 1981. I continued to weld, but I became the “go to person” when there was a welding problem on the job site. I was shipped from one project to the next when the welders were experiencing problems and the inspectors started raising hell. Most of the inspectors had well founded reasons to raise the red flag. It was my task to fix the problems so the contractor’s pain was eased.
I didn’t attend any seminars before the examination, but the examination tweaked my interest in learning more about welding. I have attended many CWI seminars since the test and I have learned something new or was reminded of something that I had forgotten. Every instructor had a different back ground and each presented the subject matter slightly differently than the last. Some instructors were more interesting than others, but each bought something of value to the party.
I admit that engineer that first challenged me had a valid point when he said, “You can always tell a welder, but you can’t tell him much.” He opened my eyes to the fact that I didn’t know as much as I thought I knew. I listened to what he had to say, because he took the time to explain things and explained why the code required the welders to do things a certain way. He explained that the welding codes were not written with the expert welder in mind, they were developed with the average welder in mind. Put another way, the code is a cook book, if the designer, fabricator, and welder follows the code’s recipe, acceptable, predictable, and consistent results can be expected.
In the vast majority of cases where there were problems on the job site with weld quality, weld failures, etc., there were numerous code violations that once corrected resulted in successful welding.
Over the years I have discovered that most welders have a very poor understanding of the science behind their profession. How many welders know the difference between carbon steel and austenitic stainless steel? How many welders understand why they need to preheat carbon steel, but not austenitic stainless steel? How many welders know what the classification numbers and letters on an electrode actually tell the welder? How many welders understand why a highly deoxidized single pass flux cored electrode should not be used for multipass groove welds or large multipass fillet welds? I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point.
To reinforce my position that many welders are weak in the theory of welding technology, I offer this example: a couple of years ago when I hosted the Welder’s Rendezvous I included a ten question quiz. Of the contestants that participated, the welder that won the competition in the hands-on welding also was the only person to pass the written quiz. It was interesting to note the individual that won the competition was a CWI.
By the way, the engineer that proposed the challenge those many years ago became one of my many mentors. I frequently work with him on his projects. What amazes me about my friend is that as he approaches his 80th birthday, he still loves his profession and still works at it five or six days a week.
As I said before in a different post, we need to develop a network of experts and mentors we can call on when the level of expertise required is beyond our capability. Our world is too complex for most of us mortals to conquer without help. Anyone that believes they can do it alone is only kidding themselves.
Over the years I’ve had welding mentors that taught me what they knew. I’ve got mentors I can call upon for issues relating to NDT. And I have mentors I can call upon when engineering issues arise. I have no problem asking for opinions on issues that are in contention.
Regarding D1.1 structural welding code, it isn’t perfect. Few things developed by man are. There are parts that can confuse the person using the code. I’ve made several official inquiries regarding different code requirements because I didn’t understand what the intent was. A couple of the inquiries resulted in changes to the code. The changes involved clarifications to the code requirements to make it easier to understand. Even when my inquiry didn’t result in a change, I got a better understanding of what the code expected and what it required.
I don't want to be that person my friend encountered. When people think of me, I don't want them to think: "You can always tell a (fill in the blank), but you can't tell him much."
It is up to each of us to decide whether we want to be recognized a being one of the upper 10%, one of the middling 80%, or one of the lower 10%. I would like to be one of the upper 10%. I might not be there yet, but that is my goal. To that end I try to read, attend seminars, and direct questions to people I believe are already members of the exclusive 10% club.
End of rant. I’m on vacation this week. I have to go make a scrapbook with my grandson.
Best regards - Al
I need, what, 24 volts just to spray arc .035? This machine is not going to produce in a D1.1 environment. Home shop? Maybe pretty handy. Unfortunately, that's not what I want Miller and Lincoln working on. I would like to see signs of them talking to welders in the field to improve their products. If they start selling to housewives in Home Depot we're sunk for pro equipment.
The market drives most manufacturers. If most of their sales are coming from the DIYs, they will concentrate their efforts there. Considering the lack of activity in the construction industry, it isn't surprising manufacturers have looked for business elsewhere.
Al
Lincoln, Miller, Esab. and other large companies are belatedly responding to what is affecting their sales, with these "multi-process" machines, and Lincoln, in particular, has been producing "Home Depot" products for many years, with little complaint from professionals.
Al....you are correct. If a man is laying a bead and it looks beautiful, that's the way it looks. To an average cwi, especially. If I wanted to, I could lay down 2 feet of garbage, then make it look like Jesus did it, (given that Jesus was a welder, instead of a carpenter), on the cap. You're right, in that there is a massive lack of education in our profession. The lack of state and federal regulation in the welding trade has built a degraded wage, and in my opinion, a public that is scared to hire a welder. Our profession is a joke. Anyone that wakes up, loads a fat bowl and smokes it up, can go to work as a "welder"...that's what we are worth now. Get on craigslist and tell me I'm wrong...
BUT, if I am a career man, intelligent, experienced, and obsessive about putting down beads, ( in all kinds if horrific physical positions), that exceed aws code ....then who in their right mind has the right to tell me I'm doing something wrong?
I see your point, but you will never see mine...because you haven't seen a real welders perspective in many moons.
In my opinion, your creed has bred the wannabe welders we are afflicted with in the year 2013. Who woulda figured the guys who lead the industry would create such a blatantly mediocre class of industrial workers. If we would have had better leaders, guys like me would be looking down at guys like you, and you would beg me for a job at 14 an hour. You're too far gone to change.
Capitalism is great for people like you and all above you. You see mediocre employees come and go. And they all make less than 24 bucks an hour. They make the company no less than 85 an hour. Your company is a pimp, and it hides behind the American welding society, who also makes money hand over fist to opress the welders who have gone far and above "code".
Pimps....just like the government of our union. If you can keep welders down....well hell, you can make a terrific amount of money!
So, weldors are now an oppressed leaderless class, and the Code and those that require it are responsible.... who knew?
Northweldor,
"So, weldors are now an oppressed leaderless class, and the Code and those that require it are responsible."
I'm beginning to think we might have some democrats infiltrating our ranks.
Sourdoe ... Dude... U R my friggin hero!
Preach it!
I'm just like U man... Everthin I do is beyond the code!
I've never actually read it..... Just a bunch of pointy headed poindexters who wrote it anyhow... To opress us real AmericaBuilders!
Code guys and inspectors... Worthless... Always tellin me to do stuff...
All I need to do is be able to watch that weld burn in... I know it's good...
Sheet,,,, Just da other day... I wus makin some FuxCore welds wit dat NR211......... That idiot inspector said that the metal was too thick for that kinda wire... I called BS... I can see it burn in perfect like, every pass....... He kept goin on and on about dilution and D1 code... Metal was too thick.......
I call BS... Aint no metal made thats too thick for me to weld up with some NR211! Inspectors...... Just tryin to make me spend more money on T8 wire dat is subbosidly "rated:" to do metal thicker than 3/4"........ What idiots... They just want me to spend more money on filler metal and new equipment to make it work "to code"......
No worries.... When the inspector aint lookin... My welds are cookin... Just like you Brother!
I'm so glad I'm not alone on this forum........ Glad you got out of jail to start posting again! Building prisons are part of buildig America too... Right on!
Hang in there Fellas! I'm with ya all the way on this.
With out men like Ya'll I'd have to take a cut in pay AND have to WORK for a living again.
You're my HEROS...
KEEP ON KEEPING ON WITH ALL THE NON CODE WORK
Since I sold my hood and all the welding tools I spent some of it to buy TWO brand new wallets.
One for all them hundy dollah bills and another for the uncashed paychecks....
Wait a minute...
"a bunch of pointy headed poindexters"????
Then how come welders are the ones wearing the ConeHead hats??????
NR211 does not meet the Charpy requirements of any well engineered D1.1 AISC governed project. Lincoln has since developed NR 212 to fill this niche and compete with Hobart's 31B that we used to have to buy. Unfortunately, the NR212 welds and stinks just as crappy as the 31B...
Now the issue on dilution is dependent on the wire diameter not the chemistry. I've welded 4" thick A514 (T1) with 5/64 NR 211. It was all we used for general fabrication in the Coal Mine I worked in years ago.
FWIW, NR 211 is the GREATEST Farm Code innershield wire ever made. Thank you PeckerHead Coal Co. for introducing me to it. It is what I use around the ranch. I have literally welded through ice with it and it barely pin-holed plus held on tighter than King Kong did to Ann Darrow.
Whatever dude.......... the 211 was just a zample
Everythin I do is above code
Dat ice thing reminds me of last week when my no good helper was hung over and diddn't chip the ice off the well head.... ..... Nothin a lil 5p can't burn thru right? If it will go thru 3/8" of grease whats a little ice?
And I don't need no Sharpy....... I can look in even the worst Bastage angles....... With all my years? I don't need no marker,, jus weave it wide enought cover that rebar slug and to fill the gap
Guys lik u Superfunk? Always tryin to run us real America builders off...............
I try to stay clear
Just to keep it real...
I've never run anyone off in 40 years.
A lot of folks do get themselves run down the road for trying to cheat and not doing the job they were hired to do!
SuperFunk... hmmmmm.... I kinda like that. Might have to change my handle.
Oh and don't be jealous because I'm a better welder than you and now don't have to get burned up for a BIGGER paycheck than yours.
I think of it as working smarter not harder.
Oh, and thanks for the foto.
All three women of the Kong movies were HOT!!!
Superfunk.....I mean flux,
I read that and that song started to play in my head with a slight word change, "he's a freak, YYOoooWWWW!!!"
![lol :lol:](/f2/epx.png)
I'm onto you man, you're on here seeing what tha average guys will say...who are you really.....? Lol
I believe my point of my post has been well reinforced by a few people that have responded. I may have side tracked the thread, but the truth has come out.
We have welders that know how to lay in a pretty bead or how to cover poor welds to make them appear to be acceptable quality weld. Fortunately most welders know that the latter is not the proper way to conduct one’s self. The truth of the matter is there are always a few contractors that cannot be trusted to do the job they were hired to do without someone looking over their shoulder to ensure basic code requirements and good welding practices are followed. What is surprising is these same individuals cannot fathom why the general public and engineers don't trust them. They cannot understand why they get no respect from other professionals. It does not take an Einstein to see why so many engineers and owners in the construction industry have lost faith in welding as a viable joining process. I consider it to be fortunate that the majority of welders take pride in doing the job correctly. It is unfortunate that we tend to remember the one or two screw-ups on the job-site as representative of the typical contractor.
I have attended numerous engineering functions where I have asked designers why they prefer bolted connections to welded connections. Their usual response is that there are not enough qualified welders to meet the production schedules and they cannot trust the contractors will do it properly when they do weld the joints. As much as I would like to take the position that welding is still the best method of joint two members together, I cannot defend my chosen professions by making excuses for the few that simply refuse to follow the engineer’s requirements.
During my time as a welder it was not unusual to see a welder apply insufficient preheat or fail to maintain the required interpass temperature. It was common to see welders ignore the requirement that exposure time for low hydrogen electrodes be limited and ignore proper electrode storage requirements. All too often the contractor didn’t supply electrode ovens and all too often the site foreman would scream and holler if the welders didn’t use all the electrodes regardless of the exposure time. That being said, I can tell you I never once got fired for “using too much gas” to maintain interpass temperature or to preheat the steel. And I never got fired when I tossed a half can of low hydrogen electrodes in the river because the exposure time had been exceeded. Did I get my butt chewed? Yup, sure did. There’s no doubt about that, but the next day there was a rod holding oven on-site. The problem can be summed up in one word, “IGNORANCE.”
A point made by a few respondents is that we have a cadre of people entering the profession that are inadequately trained and inadequately prepared to take on the tasks they are assigned to do is well taken. I do agree to a point. There are different ways to gain knowledge. Welding is one profession where the majority of practitioners appear to have learned their trade at the “School of Hard Knocks.” On-the-job training, i.e., TSHK, is not very efficient in terms of time or money, never mind the cost of the corrective work necessitated by the field experiments gone awry. An alternative to TSHK are the schools that teach the subject matter needed to be proficient in one’s chosen professions. They typically offer certificate courses for a nominal fee and offer more advanced courses at additional cost. Most people opt for the basic courses that provide basic entry level skills; just enough to get a job.
Few employers have in-house training programs or offer advanced training to their workers. I applaud those employers that offer financial support to those employees that do try to further their education, but there are few workers that take full advantage of the opportunities unless they fear they are about to lose their job.
Apprenticeship programs have been largely phased out because of the costs associated with them. It appears to be more cost effective for an employer to “steal” a trained worked from a competitor by offering a slightly better working wage. We are currently reaping the rewards of the demise of apprenticeship programs.
We are reaping the rewards of publicly funded school systems that have stripped vocational training from their junior and high school programs. There is no one to blame other than ourselves. How many “working class” people, i.e., tradesmen, sit on their local school boards where decisions are made as to what types of courses are offered in our public schools? How many of us would rather leave the decision making process to someone else because we are too busy when in fact the truth is we don’t want to give up our television time?
Our state legislatures have gutted technical training from our post high school and two year colleges. They have responded to market forces that demand lower taxes and the move to a service based economy. The professionals in the pinstriped suits are the ones running the school boards, not the tradespeople. It is no secret that people protect their self-interest. Office workers are going to promote programs that favor their interests. If we want to see changes made, we will have to take active rolls on our school boards. We are also going to have to apply pressure on the politicians and show we support vocational training in our school systems once again. There are no quick fixes in our political system. It is a slow drawn out process that takes long term commitment. Last but not least, there is no free lunch. Someone has to pay for the changes we would like to see.
I applaud those individuals that mentor younger welders. I applaud those people that are willing to teach others a new profession. I always appreciated my mentors because they taught me how to be more proficient and how to do my job properly. They were usually the quiet ones on the job. They didn’t spend their lunch tell everyone how great they were, but they would tell stories of the different projects they worked on and the solutions they devised for a particular problem. One of my mentors was especially knowledgeable when it came to welding metallurgy. He usually started his stories with, “Well, if I understood what my brother told me, we have to …….” His brother was a metallurgy professor at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. He was a resource we called upon frequently. You see, it wasn't enough to get the job done, it was and still is important to get the job done properly.
Just to clear the record, I do still weld on occasion. I weld when there are no qualified welders to do the work. Much of my work involves developing procedures to repair machines and equipment that are difficult to weld. I often work with the welders to tweak their skills so they can achieve the desired results. By that I mean I pick up the stinger and show them how to weld the way I want them to weld. It doesn’t matter if they are using SMAW, SAW, GTAW, GMAW, or FCAW; I can show my welders how to do it the proper way so they meet the code when it is applicable and how to do it properly even when a code does not apply.
Sorry Sourdough, you are way off the point with your remark that I have been away from burning wire too long to understand the current state of our industry. I understand you and the current state of our industry all too well. And it is because of the state of our industry that CWIs and SCWIs are needed now more than ever.
I would like to close this post with a couple of questions to all that participate in the Forum; "What have you done to improve our profession and what have you recently done to improve the opportunities for those entering our profession?"
Best regards - Al
I give my experience every minute of every day to anybody within eyesight if I see I might have knowledge that will help them. That said, I've got a helper in the shop who will do anything without gloves, sleeves, or glasses despite my cajoling. I actively promote AWS philosophy, as it were, but it's just a cry in the wilderness here. Even the boss doesn't care.
"This is going to be tight."
"Wouldn't be tight if you hadn't welded the flange on."
"How would I get to the back side?"
"You don't need to weld the back side."
"Slip on flanges get welded on both sides."
"You only need to weld it on the inside."
I'm a CWI. The boss is not an engineer, but is our acting engineer and designer.
Oh, and give me Faye Wray anyday. Hottest EVER.
Good posts Al!! I guess I might as well jump on the goober headed poindexter thing as I believe code is there for a reason. Pre heat, clean weld surface etc. Ran into a young guy who was going to weld with me on some galvy. Pouring down rain, this dude was going to go start welding on it...with no cover, water running down the area where he was going to be welding. His philosophy, turn it up hot and go. Think I asked how he was going to keep his rods from getting soaking wet and a little education on a LOW HYDROGEN rod and simple chemistry of water and he was singing a different tune. Guess if I was a real welder I would have grabbed some of those special E7018-14-WC rods and got her done.
I'm no engineer but simply thinking about the metallurgical aspects, structure and I get an idea on how important it is. Besides, I have been on several jobs where I was questioned by a pretty knowledgeable project manager and it's nice to have the answers or when I'm talking to my guys at the lab and they start talking technical I can hang in there with them and understand. We are not just welders, slight bit of chemist, metallurgist, little bit of an engineer sprinkled in there and who knows what else. Yeah, seeing a weld pool and knowing it is penetrating enough, catching the toes so you don't have undercut, no slag entrapment and so on is pretty basic and if I dare say elementary. I welded a job and they DID NOT want us to grind the galvy off. I said ok, made it happen. Welds looked good on the outside, found out they were going to have it inspected and the inspector knew what we were doing. I could not help but wonder what the galvy mixing with the filler and steel was doing to the structure, strength of the weld. They told me to do it, I followed orders and put in some great looking welds.
I guess I can understand where Sully is coming from in a way, over complicated, drawn out but then again a lot has been learned since this industry was started. A lot of things have fallen down, blown up and killed a bunch of people along the way. I've been working with a helper a little lately and showing him the ropes. He's asked some good questions and I try to explain everything as detailed as possible. It's more than just setting the machine and plowing a rod in there. My Uncle, boilermaker for years and welder for 30+, I love talking to this guy. You talk about steel, welding and it's like having a talking encyclopedia. Guess he's a poindexter too but he manages to clear six figures every year and has been doing so for as long as I can remember and he's working single hand. Guess he's like several guys on here that I talk to and engage in the forum. I guess I am a poindexter, I like an engaging conversation, something that makes my brain work.
Well, guess there are a few more people in the world that hate me, grab a number boys.
My experience has been that knowledgeable people will mentor those individuals that are receptive and ignore those individuals that already know everything.
I tend to be that way. My inspection report lists the non-conformances I find. If asked, I will tell the contractor or the welder why I didn’t accept the work and I will show them where the specific requirements can be found in the code.
None of us are born knowing everything there is to know about our work. It takes a lifetime to learn how things work if we don’t take advantage of other people’s experiences. A mentor passes along what they have learned so the less experienced welder doesn’t have to learn by making one mistake after another.
The codes incorporate the accumulated lessons learned so we don’t make the same mistakes time after time after time again. The AWS D1.X structural welding codes are cook books of how to weld structures. They are the accumulated knowledge of lessons learned over many years. They are not text books so they do not provide reasons why the requirements are in place. Commentaries will offer some explanations, but it is not the primary function of the code to be a text book. Not all codes take the same approach as AWS’ codes, but still, they are based on lessons learned.
Codes change because we learn more about how structures and materials respond to different situations. The North Ridge Earthquake is a good example of what drives changes to the codes we use. The Seismic Supplement to D1.1 was developed to incorporate the lessons learned from researching how structures failed as a result of the earthquake. To ignore a code is to ignore the lessons learned at the expense of life and property. To ignore those lessons is simply stupid. I can’t say it any more clearly than that.
Wow, this thread has covered a lot of territory. It started with the pros and cons of a particular multi-process welding power supply, to how ridiculous it is for the code to require prequalified semi-automatic welding processes to use CV power supplies, to the demise of the welding industry, to code compliance. It is quite a quilt we wove from a single thread.
Best regards - Al
Al as usual I have enjoyed your posts here greatly. Yea don't apologize for derailing the thread, I think I can take that honor.
Well.....I tend to cause issue at times.
![evil :evil:](/f2/epx.png)
![evil :evil:](/f2/epx.png)
![evil :evil:](/f2/epx.png)
![evil :evil:](/f2/epx.png)
![evil :evil:](/f2/epx.png)
SOrry but I gotta know, I cannot live with its ok today and bad tommorow. I turned down 5 (only 5) jobs last year because they refused to let me do the work properly. If the integrity of CC innershield is just bad...well I can live with that part.....just because it may be hard well, that's another story.
There are plenty of cowboy/goldenarm welders out there...they always know more then the any code they are working to. There are others that KNOW the code requirements and EXCEED them constantly as a matter of personal pride or character. All I can say is rigid inspection always tells the tale and levies the balance on the scale on who is what. Anybody can pass a cert test on a good day, not everyone lays in test quality welds day in day out.
You can always tell a really good welder....he will be the one locked up in ***** sessions with the contractor. hahaha. Ignorance is rampant. There are so many jobs being done to this or that spec...without any inspection whatsoever OR totally unqualified inspection. I.E. The only guy who MIGHT look at my welds on this current job is a local building inspector.......This job requires AISC standards and a few others ....WTF? That is ok ...I am sure the local code enforcement guy is a fully qualified CWI!! Thing of it is, when it all falls down and it is in the courtroom it is my ASS, the engineer, contractor and architect that will be sitting there reckoning why. Can I demand inspection of the Fitup, the cleanliness of the steel, the proper procedures. HELL NO....I would lose the job. I just got to do it myself. AM I technically qualified to do so...nope not on paper. BUT then again It is MY NECK.
IT is too difficult to perform this process consistently without defect because of inherent flaws with the process...ok great...lets just not dumb welding down to flipping burgers skill please....I don't plan on dying that soon.
We are Welding Professionals. An admirable seriously mentally and physically skilled trade that crosses paths with almost every other trade in the world. Therefore as Welding Professionals we probably know more then we should about machining, fabrication, sheet metal work, building erection, Ironwork, plumbing, electrical, and earth moving. BUT we are the ONE TRADE that has no regulation per se.....we are self regulated and do our work to standards created by private industry entities. That is both a blessing and a terrible curse. Some places other then the United States have managed to regulate welding with success...but this is the US, when they dive in they will screw it all up if it is done federally.
So what do we do.....we are left right where we are....some are examples, some are adequate performers....lots are chaff in the wind. So if you ARE a WELDOR or an INSPECTOR it is ENTIRELY up to us to keep our trade intact. Don't be bashful about saying NO, or explaining to that customer, strawboss or guy welding beside you why you should do it a little different. Cross our fingers, hope for the best I reckon. I will stand behind anything I touched and I pay the Insurance premiums to prove it!!!!!!!
Best regards all you folks
(I got my ? about CC wire answered anyway in all this mess)
AL, you could never know the advantageous situation aws is in by having me a member since 91. You are way too busy patting yourself on the back, because someone has told you for many years how important you are. I don't have that. I only have loyal customers, other family members who also weld, and fellow coworkers where I have been, who tell me what I already know: that I am gifted in what I do, (almost everything I do).
You are one of those guys. A man who got locked into upper mgmt, a fat raise, and a lack of need for hands on, nitty gritty action throughout the work day. You are a sellout, a company man, and a capitalist, (only 3rd party). You are a yes sir, I'm ready to compliment my boss, do whatever it takes to make the production condusive to a maximum quota for my massas type of freak.
You are no longer a welder, and should stay on the d1.1 section of this forum. Most of us see right through you. Go to work, sir.
Thanks for explaining the situation so clearly Clay. Now I understand why my arm is so sore.
As for being locked into upper management, you are on the mark. I am the owner’s right hand man and I am the chief bottle washer of my operation. I've been so since I went into business for myself in 1989. So, you are correct again on another point, I think my boss is the best there is.
My views of the welding industry are not as jaded as some. I have faith that there will always be the top 10% that will perfect their skills and do the job they are assigned to the best of their ability. They will listen to their mentors, learn from the hard earned lessons of their contemporaries, and they will avoid repeating mistakes made by others that have come before them. Unfortunately there will always be the other 10%er’s that have to repeat the mistakes others have made because they are not willing to listen to anyone’s council. They live the hard life that is the result of their own making. They should be doing something other than welding, but they struggle at every task they undertake.
Most of us are well aware there are applications and situations where a code or standard may not apply. In such cases we have to rely on our experience and education to do what is best for the customer. In doing so, it is also important that we recognize the risks and liabilities we assume. Hopefully we do nothing that will endanger our customer or the public. Many of the large machines I repair fall into that category. I typically engage the services of a registered professional engineer to review te repair being proposed. In some cases the engineer performs FEA to verify the assumptions are correct and the repair will perform as expected. It does no one any good to let one's ego get in the way of doing what is right for the customer and to protect their long term well being.
Tommy, you are the entity that is responsible for quality control functions, including inspection, if you are the contractor. You are absolutely correct in saying that it is your butt that is on the line should something go horribly wrong. As for inspection by the Owner, if you are working in accordance with AWS D1.1 the Owner is not obligated to provide any inspection. A general principle of business law is there is the expectation the contractor will comply with the code (if it is applicable), drawings, speciications, or use good engineering judgement. When the local building code applies, it may require that some level of oversight be provided by the Owner. The Engineer is often tasked with defining what level of oversight required.
Clay, I hope you enjoy the jousting as much as I do. Don’t take my comments too seriously. After all, they are meant to be nothing more than a gentle jab to get a laugh or two. I do get a chuckle reading your posts. I hope it is your intention that we find your posts amusing as well as entertaining. Keep up the good work my friend. There is no reason to hide your light under a basket. Let it shine!
Best regards - Al
Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill