Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / Robot related questions
- - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-26-2013 18:48
I am a fairly new CWI, a rookie... 

When writing a WPS for D1.1 and a robot is the welder, as well as the settings possibly changing per weld, does one make a WPS for each type of weld or can I do a range of weld joints according to the print being used? 

There are fillets, single v-groove, and a flaire bevel all on the same program. 

Now all of these are prequalified joints, they have already done the testing also.  travel speeds and some heat variables will change from weld to weld.

Also this is GMAW-S and there will be downhill welding, is that going to change things with being pre qualified?

Jordan-
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-26-2013 18:59 Edited 09-26-2013 19:44
You would qualify the operator who monitors the robot.See AWS D1.1:2010 Clause 4.19, 4.20 & 4.21
GMAW-S is not prequalified, so you will be testing the joints(fillet, and grooves).See AWS D1.1:2010 Clause 3.2.1 (first sentence)

I'm curious what the GMAW-S downhill is for...is it just a seal weld? Is it a tubular product? See AWS D1.1:2010 Clause 3.7.1(2)

edited spelling
Parent - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-26-2013 19:33
John, yea the Robot is all short circut.  They are build battery trays basically, and its notched channel that sanwhiches together.  The robot does two programs, one is one side of the part then its flipped for the other.  I know from my little bit of robot programming experience its a pain in the butt to try and teach a robot to go up hill cleanly. 

What comes with qualifying the operator?  I guess I am asking how or what test is conducted.  If I have to qualify the joints that means then writing a program just for those joints and then test them?  Also if the operator is just pushing the button what exactly am I testing him to do?

I read those Clauses and see what you are saying

Thanks Jordan
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-26-2013 19:40
First of all he never said this was to D1.1 though he did put it in the D1 section. 

So, battery trays, probably will be D1.3 not D1.1 anyway.  So GMAW-S would not be a problem.

Next, robotics, see D16.4 Specification for the Qualification of Robotic Arc Welding Personnel.  

Try that before you get too far along.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-26-2013 19:43

>First of all he never said this was to D1.1 though he did put it in the D1 section. -Brent


LOL, Brent, I know I read poorly sometimes, but VVVthis VVV was in his OP... :grin:

>When writing a WPS for D1.1 and a robot is the welder -Jordon

Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-26-2013 20:29
You are right John, I looked over it TWICE before I posted that and still missed it.  Can I borrow your glasses?  Maybe I should take mine off.

The comment about D1.3 may still be applicable as long as his material is not over 3/16".  D1.1 goes down to 1/8 and D1.3 goes up to 3/16 so there is overlapping territory.  But if possible I would use the D1.3 for the application of GMAW-S.

Now, I'm going to have to leave here for a minute,

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-26-2013 19:47
Brent,

Ok Ill have to buy that book, I dont own one.  These were "seismic" trays being made here.  Even though they didnt have a spicific code call out.  They left it to this sub contractor to choose a code that fits best for this.  He came to me, and I dont know what it applies to best.  I know that D1.8 is for buildings and not componets, I have a D1.3 but it is an old copy.  Ill keep reading into these and see what else I can find out.

Thanks
JordAn     with an A not an O hahaha
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-26-2013 19:54

>JordAn     with an A not an O hahaha


Whoops, sorry Jordan with an A

...see I do read poorly.
Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-26-2013 20:32
Just tell him it was your computer, I think your keys are sticking.  :lol:
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-26-2013 20:01
Brent,

Im looking through my old copy of D1.3 its the 98 version and max thickness is 7 gage.  These parts will go up to 1/4" thick.  2 of the 3 componets will work with this code though. 

Jordan
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-26-2013 20:39
So JordAn, two new bits of information:

some parts up to 1/4" thick, and 'seismic' battery trays.

First question, what is a 'seismic' battery tray? 

Second question, if a gas shield of 80/20 were used, could the machine be programmed to run those welds hotter to hit spray transfer parameters?

Third question, if they really need qualification on all of this, is it a large enough job to warrant doing a PQR so the short arc parameters have been proven for the application?

Just some thoughts.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-26-2013 20:47
Actually, you already said... "Now all of these are prequalified joints, they have already done the testing also."  What testing have they already done?  I'm not sure I understand this.

Brent (that's with an 'N'.  couldn't resist John :lol: )
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-26-2013 20:53
Brent,

These are basically trays that are a bit stronger than the originals.  Out here we have a lot of earthquakes and they are planning to upgrade a lot of communication system towers.  It is "seismic" for what the project is relating to, but they are still parts, not a function or welded to a fixed building or structure. They are bolt on components when its all said and done. 

Second question:  Yes and no, the robotics company doesn’t want to use a spray transfer because you run a greater risk of undercut.  because the robot cant make that judgment on certain motions, and the spray is so hot on the base metal surface, it will easily wash in undercut epically if you set it to weave.

Third question:  They have already ran basic tests on the short circuit wire, they did bend tests and tensile pulls.  The main requirement on the print was that the wire was able to withstand 70,000 psi or more.  The testing came back around 73,000.  But all that wasn’t formal and processed for a WPS, it was just a check from the contractor to see if their short circuit method was what they were looking for and it is.  Now for the second part of the question. They will be billing the contractor and advised me to do whatever I deem necessary to get this legit and have the proper paperwork.  They are prepared for a PQR and WPS's.

Just saying If i do a PQR for a robot what exactly am I testing to? 
Do I make a test joint and have the program run those joints and then test them myself?

Jordan
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-26-2013 22:48
Interesting.  Thanks for the added info.

Now, I'm not much of a robotics man and I haven't had time to go through the book I recommended.  I would think you are going to need a pqr but how...?  Only the book and some of our members who run robots can really answer that. 

Hopefully someone will jump in here soon who has the experience and knowledge you really need.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-27-2013 14:38
Do I qualify the welders to D16.4?  They have it as a free publication.  Its qulaification of robotic welding personnel
Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-27-2013 14:52
I would say so, it's been too long since I glanced through that one seeing as I don't have much of it going on in my area and have never been asked to do TPI on any of it. 

I have been too busy to pull it off the shelf and since we are moving the shop and I have been working 100 miles from home my days are really really short.  No, my free time is really short, the days are just as long as they have ever been (which is never long enough). 

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / Robot related questions

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill