CWE Test

Date 05-06-2014 18:45

CWE= Certified Welding Educator
CWEng = Certifed Welding Engineer
The difference in the abbreviation has caused me many headaches.
I have not taken the exam, but it is something that I have considered many times. It could be a prestigious accomplishment. I heard that at one time the powers that be were considering it to be equivalent to PE since PE does not cover welding.
If you take it and pass both parts I would be interested in hearing your story.

By vagabond (***)

Date 05-06-2014 18:50

I think PE requirement would vary by state? I thought that there were Welding Engineers with a Materials Engineering degree. I could be wrong about that one. Some states will allow people to challenge their tests for PE disciplines. I think WA is like that. Met a guy who said that's what he had done.

By js55

Date 05-06-2014 19:38

The CWEng regime is not even close to the PE regime.
The CWEng regime is essentially a CWI with some math.
Of course, if jon were here he would take me to task for saying such.

By vagabond (***)

Date 05-07-2014 01:12

The sad reality is that the term engineer is so bastardized anymore I usually assume it's a title rather than a degree or certification because it usually is in the oil business.

By 803056

Date 05-07-2014 03:12

Sorry JS, you are way wrong regarding the CWEng examination.

If my memory serves me correctly, one must have passed the Engineering Fundamentals Examination before sitting for the Part B AWS CWEng examination. If the applicant has not passed the fundamentals examination elsewhere, they have to take the Part A of the AWS examination which is the fundamentals examination.

It is my understanding that the Welding Engineering PE is no longer offered by the State of Ohio. That test is now administered by AWS, but since the term PE is copyrighted, AWS can not use it.

Best regards - Al

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 12:18 Edited 05-07-2014 12:41

Al,
My experience with it is that I gathered the materials pertaining to the CWEng when I was considering taking the test. And though the math was daunting since I had been out of school for a long time, I was not generally impressed and saw little use for the effort. This may be AWS's problem.
IMO much of the CWI course study should actually be a part of CWEng (metallurgy, CC diagrams, process physics, etc.)since it pertains to what the great majority of welding engineers actually do and actually very little of what CWI's actually do. And welding engineers are not mechanical engineers, and vice versa, though many high level welding engineers have mechanical engineering degrees.
I think the basic idea that the CWEng can replace the PE is at best severely misguided and at worst could end you up in jail. I mean, is a CWEng going to put a stamp on a pressure vessel calculation or a structural design? If not then they are not interchangeable. If so what grounds would there be to do so?
Its best that the program carves out its own space, though this admittedly has not worked well for AWS. The skill and knowledge set of which no amount of study for a CWEng test will prepare you is required for PE activities.
If AWS is thinking of moving in on this terf my response would be, "are you kidding?".
And I would hope that even though AWS may be administering the test it is still a PE test and not a CWEng test. That to me would be the epitome of stupidity.
My original motivation for CWEng consideration was to lend credibility to my autodidactic efforts of the last 20 years since I am not a degreed engineer. But credibility in the industry has not been successful. I think the idea of CWEng is a good one. I just don't think AWS has done it right. And thinking of competing with PE is not it. They need to go the other way and horn in on the CWI curriculum.
To put it succinctly, the great majority of welding engineers ARE NOT Omer Blodgett's. They are WPS designers and filler metal specifiers. That is where CWEng should concentrate. Who actually are the welding engineers.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 05-07-2014 12:44 Edited 05-07-2014 12:58

Education and Experience Requirements for Access to the Examinations
Each individual for qualification as an AWS CWEng shall possess one of the following combinations of education and relevant experience to be eligible for the AWS CWEng examination. You must meet one of the conditions below in order to gain entrance to the examination.

1.Individuals with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) degree in engineering and a minimum of one (1) year of related experience.
2.Individuals with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) degree in engineering technology and a minimum of two (2) years of related experience.
3.Individuals with other related Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) degrees and a minimum of five (5) years of related experience.
4.Individuals with an Associate in Applied Science (A.A.S.) degree and a minimum of ten (10) years of related experience.
5.Individuals who have successfully completed high school or an equivalent program and a minimum fifteen (15) years of related experience

This just gets you in the door. you will still have to go through the application to see just what parts of the CWEng exam you must take.

If you have passed your EIT,or have previously passed parts 1 & 2, you get to skip part 1 and 2 of the CWEng exam and just take the last 2 parts, otherwise, take all 4 parts.

As far as PE status, AFAIK, Ohio was the last state to offer the PE exam for welding engineering, and they stopped a few years back. Seems like I heard the ABET would not authorize a new exam unless something like 10 states decided to offer it. Never gonna happen, so it looks like no more welding PE's ever.

Here in TX, you are not supposed to put the word engineer in your title, unless you are a PE or EIT. They have sent a legal notice in the past to this effect.

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 13:03

And what would be 'related experience'?
My approach was that I have 15 years of 'related experience'. And then some.
But in no way am I capable, or desirous, of passing a PE test.
Its important to have this particular avenue of access since this addresses a great number people functioning as welding engineers out there. Such as myself.
However, this is also the avenue which most conflicts with PE capability. And that is the contradiction.
If you eliminate this avenue and concentrate more on PE type access you eliminate a majority of welding engineers from the possibility of certification.
Besides, it just stinks of self defeating matriculated elitism if you ask me.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 05-07-2014 13:17

I suppose AWS will tell you if your experience is good enough, I dont know.

I would qualify to take the test under 1 (or more) of the criteria, but I would have to study for a year or 2 to have a chance in hell of passing the math and physics stuff

I personally dont feel the need to have a PE license or the CWEng either, at least in my current role.

Given the lack of an ABET accredited exam, we probably need some sort of professionally recognized PE-like certified individual. Currently, the AWS exam is probably the best bet, but I am not sure that it is working in a way that generates CWEng's.

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 13:16

Fred,
That's an interesting sidebar on the legal notification.
IMO its an overreach. It assumes the term engineering is used for mechanical equivalence. There are many many 'engineers' outside of those wherein 'mechanical calculation' is a requirement of their responsibilities. This smacks of lobbying and protectionism.
Engineer is a generic term. The mechanical industries do not have a monopoly on the language, no matter how much the quasi-fascisti try and lock it up.
For example if someone called themselves a 'lawn care engineer' it may be bit enthusiastic a marketing scheme but even so, exactly where would they get their degree and what certification test would they take to satisfy an over regulating government?

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 05-07-2014 13:20

§ 1001.004. Legislative Purpose and Intent; Liberal Construction of Chapter
(a) The legislature recognizes the vital impact that the rapid advance of knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences as applied in the practice of engineering has on the lives, property, economy, and security of state residents and the national defense.
(b) The purpose of this chapter is to:
(1) protect the public health, safety, and welfare;
(2) enable the state and the public to identify persons authorized to practice engineering in this state; and
(3) fix responsibility for work done or services or acts performed in the practice of engineering.
(c) The legislature intends that:
(1)the privilege of practicing engineering be entrusted only to a person licensed and practicing under this chapter;
(2) only a person licensed under this chapter may:
(A) engage in the practice of engineering;
(B) be represented in any way as any kind of “engineer”; or
(C) make any professional use of the term “engineer”; and
(3) this chapter will be strictly complied with and enforced.
(d) This chapter shall be liberally construed to carry out the intent of the legislature.
(e) This chapter does not:
(1) prevent a person from identifying the person in the name and trade of any engineers’ labor organization with which the person is affiliated;
(2) prohibit or otherwise restrict a person from giving testimony or preparing an exhibit or document for the sole purpose of being placed in evidence before an administrative or judicial tribunal, subject to the board’s disciplinary powers under Subchapter J regarding negligence, incompetency, or misconduct in the practice of engineering;
(3) repeal or amend a law affecting or regulating a licensed state land surveyor; or
(4) affect or prevent the practice of any other legally recognized profession by a member of the profession who is licensed by the state or under the state’s authority.

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 13:37

Fred,
I see no definition of engineer.
In fact, they clearly state, "any kind of engineer". Really? Any kind??? What does this mean???
They make the assumption that the 'public' is smart enough to agree with 'them' in what engineer means, and yet too stupid to distinguish a person using the term engineer generically, as in lawn care, or say, personnel training, from a person with a mechanical certification.
Typical government jibber jabber and incompetence.
Unintended consequences. They focus on one thing and are too stupid and arrogant to realize they effect so much more.
Er, job security.
You can tell I am not a fan of big government.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 05-07-2014 13:42

Its a 72 page document, I am sure they define what an engineer is.

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 13:47

Fred,
Ah. Therein might be the loophole.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 05-07-2014 13:57

CWEng's.... do they have an engineer's belt buckle too?

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 14:25 Edited 05-07-2014 14:44

You made my day john.
thanks
In Texas they call them waste transport and disposal technicians, though the Texas state legislature is considering regulating the term technician as well.
Wouldn't want the uninitiated hoi polloi, the elites find it necessary to take care of, thinking these 'technicians' have a skill and knowledge set they don't have. That was a poorly structured sentence.
Of course, the real difference between Fred and myself is that even though neither of us were born in Texas, I got out as soon as I could.
:grin:

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 05-07-2014 15:11

I was just poking the bear...but I have heard/seen the word "engineer" added to several job titles in an attempt to add some flavor to make the job description more palatable.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 05-07-2014 16:35

Good one John! :lol:

In NYC, they call the garbage collectors "Sanitary Engineers" :eek:

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 05-07-2014 16:31

LIKE!!!

By vagabond (***)

Date 05-07-2014 16:58

"A whole room full of engineers and nobody knows anything about trains!!" If I heard that once I heard it a thousand times from a guy who I spent a large portion of my apprenticeship under. One of the best damn welders I ever met. :cool:

API code does not "define" what an "engineer" is to my knowledge either. Hehehe.

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 17:14

Perhaps API engineer is an oxymoron.

By vagabond (***)

Date 05-07-2014 17:28

I don't see nuthin' bout no degree. . . . :twisted:

en·gi·neer
[en-juh-neer] Show IPA

noun
1.
a person trained and skilled in the design, construction, and use of engines or machines, or in any of various branches of engineering: a mechanical engineer; a civil engineer.

2.
a person who operates or is in charge of an engine.

3.
Also called locomotive engineer. Railroads. a person who operates or is in charge of a locomotive.

4.
a member of an army, navy, or air force specially trained in engineering work.

5.
a skillful manager: a political engineer

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 20:30

I personally think perhaps that AWS should not be quite so ambitious. Target the CWEng to a level that the bulk of the industry is practicing. More than a CWI but less than a PE. More than looking at stuff, but less than running design calculations (I mean really. How many welding engineers are actually doing this?). Share a little from CWI. Share a little from PE. And fill in the gap. That is the niche IMO.

By 803056

Date 05-07-2014 20:35

Your position is difficult to challenge.

Al

By js55

Date 05-07-2014 20:46

Al,
As I stated above, though I have been critical of the CWEng program, I think it could have great value.

By 803056

Date 05-07-2014 22:46

For the most part, I think we are on the same wavelength.

Al

By js55

Date 05-08-2014 13:19

How often does that happen? :smile:

This might call for a couple of beers the next time we run into each other.

By 803056

Date 05-08-2014 21:03

Twist my arm a little harder and I'll be more agreeable with each turn.

Al :smile:

By 803056

Date 05-20-2014 13:04

CSWIP, what's that?

I understand it is a CWI wanna be program.
Al

By 99205

Date 05-20-2014 16:17

Just another outfit trying to steal AWS's thunder.

By Superflux (****)

Date 05-20-2014 17:05

Yeah,
But out here 'cross the Ponds,
Them CSWIP dudes often resume themselves up and are (self!) referred to as ........ "WELDING QUALITY CONTROL ENGINEERS".
I fall prostrate before their greatness.....

By 46.00

Date 05-23-2014 11:21

You seem very threatened by the CSWIP qualification? Are you not confident that your qualifications are equal to CSWIP?

By 46.00

Date 05-23-2014 11:18

Steady Al, I'm fully behind CSWIP as a Brit and it's a pretty good equivalent and is gaining recognition against AWS CWI qualification, worldwide. It still has it's faults, but so does most other inspection qualifications!

By 803056

Date 05-23-2014 11:50 Edited 05-23-2014 12:04

I'm familiar with the CSWIP, but couldn't resist the urge to toss a jib in their direction.

I was tasked with researching the differences between CSWIP and QC1 a couple of years ago for the purpose of considering reciprocity.

People seem to overlook the SCWI when considering the credentials needed to perform various inspection/quality control functions. In that regard I believe CSWIP has done a better job of differentiating the levels of certification. It is perhaps the reason there are so few SCWIs. AWS' marketing people and the AWS code committees have done a very poor job in that respect.

AWS welding codes generally refuse to invoke mandatory requirements for the qualification and certification of inspection personnel. Our codes are infested with weasel words that provide the contractor with a way out of having to retain the services of certified welding inspectors at any level. It is the Owner that must invoke "certification" requirements. Owners typically resist any action or activity that increases "cost." It's the American way and provides a steady cash stream to the lawyers.

Best regards - Al

By js55

Date 05-23-2014 12:33 Edited 05-23-2014 12:35

Al,
IMO for AWS to be the generating body for the structural Codes and to impose the requirement for CWI certification in that Code is to me a conflict of interest. They would be using the Code requirement to boost their own revenue stream.
As for ASME (which in my IMO is also rife with conflict of interest though on a lesser scale) they couldn't care less about an AWS CWI certification tending to prefer SNT. Now, of course TC-1A has its own issues of which ASME is moving in the direction of finding a remedy, as well as a possible conflict of their own.
Personally I think the CWI is already way oversold. In general I see at least as much competence in the often called sloppiness of TC-1A's as I do CWI's. And without the consistent arrogance.
I understand all of these organizations are in to make money. But when you control the rules by which you can increase your income it begs for corruption.
In other words, if the CWI became a Code requirement the price of poker would soon go up. The temptation would be too much.
That's how congress works.

By 803056

Date 05-23-2014 18:50

That's a valid point. It would be self serving.

Al

By Superflux (****)

Date 05-24-2014 15:27

As for the OP...
A friend of mine with a BS in Mech. Eng. took his CWEng and Texas State PE exams a week apart. He was awarded both prestigious credentials and I consider that quite an accomplishment considering that time frame. He is also in possession of a CWI, a couple of API certs (510 and 570) if memory serves me correctly, and is working on his Master's in Mech. engineering. Obviously a very intelligent man. He advised me in no uncertain terms (having worked together on a couple of jobs) that I was probably not yet a candidate for the CWEng exam. His thoughts were that the CWEng test was every bit as tough as the PE exam. And that there are only about 1500 CWEngs worldwide??? So yes it would be a highlight on any resume to have in my opinion.
He is running a job now that is so big, they are making the hand railing out of 10".................

By 803056

Date 05-24-2014 15:58

Is it a big job or is it being built for very large critters?

Al :wink:

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 05-24-2014 19:55

Probably them dinosaurs that were discovered in a cave, and they're corralling them so they could interrogate them to find out whether or not they are survivors of the huge boulder that came down from the heavens and killed everyone else back in the day... They have stayed in the cave all this time because when they came out after the cataclysm, they noticed how bad things had become shortly thereafter, so they opted to stay in the caves and cannot wait to be able to run around outside again after all these years!!!

They can communicate with us humans via mental telepathy, and I suspect that they're ahead of the design team that's spitting out the specs for the job and if you believe that then I got a historic bridge for sale really cheap! :eek:

Respectfully (For the most part :wink:

),
Henry

2010-08-23-dinosaurs-and-meteors1.jpg (106k)

dinosaurs_and_asteroids_760325.jpg (97k)

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 05-25-2014 23:24

As to the OP and also some of the sidebar discussions, AWS and others need to do a little self examination and learn from one another.

Having recently taken the ICC exams for Bolting and Welding and the LA City Deputy Inspector exam and previously taken the AWS CWI and also the AWS Bolting Endorsement and now taking courses to add some ASNT certs, I think I have the beginnings of an understanding of several organizations and their methods of touting their own cause.

The AWS needs to look into changes in their system that would encourage more use with even more respect. Part of that would be to offer courses that would enhance knowledge prior to testing for the CWEng, SCWI, and some others. At the very least, the AWS Website needs much more info in order for self study and enhanced skills and knowledge. There are many things each one could learn from the others that would assist all inspectors in doing their jobs more efficiently.

I do understand the growing criticism about arrogance. Many have attributed that to myself and others here. So be it. If knowing where to find answers and being available to share that is arrogance then I'm guilty. Where I have problems is when the very young and inexperienced get 'Certified' and are suddenly unerring experts who have extreme god complexes that try to force 'their' opinion on every situation they are involved in. When challenged to back up the opinion from codes, the standard answer is 'I said so and I'm the CWI' or something to that effect. At the same time, not backing down from good interpretation of proper procedures from code derived sources with research to back it up is not arrogance.

Bottom line is that non of us is perfect and no one system is perfect. Each has it's place and usefulness. Each of us then needs to determine what will best fit our needs and goals for the job resume we want to have in order to provide for our family's needs financially. And while you will always run into detractors and nay sayers, always do your best and try to be constructive and not destructive.

Every state, county, city will have different standards of acceptance for qualifications to be met for work performed. That needs to be the starting place, What do I need for the Local Building Authorities with Jurisdiction to be satisfied with my credentials? Second would be, What do I need to be comfortable with the knowledge and skills at my disposal to know I am doing my due diligence to provide safe, secure, properly completed inspections?

If the CWEng endorsement will do that for you, then go for it. Some people just like to have certs to add to their resume. If you have the money, time and inclination, go for it.

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day, Brent

By js55

Date 05-27-2014 12:26

I think the bottom line is that the CWEng certification has no value or use at this time except perhaps to look pretty on a resume'.
But to who?
Again, it is not a PE, and it is not related to what the great majority of welding engineers actually do.
So for it to have meaning it needs to find its place. Other than as another revenue stream for AWS.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 05-28-2014 00:03

Not that you need this JS, but for any others including the OP I thought they might get a better picture of the program.

" The welding engineer is a person who determines weld requirements which may be governed under a specific code, contract,
drawing, specification, purchase order, or other documents. The welding engineer either prepares or reviews written
instructions for the production of welded joints. The welding engineer must be thoroughly familiar with various
codes, specifications, other standards, base materials, filler materials, heat treatment, mechanical properties, welding and
joining processes, procedures, weld joint design, welding equipment, thermal cutting, inspection methods, acceptance
criteria, tests, welding qualification requirements, fabrication tolerances, and other aspects of fabrication and assembly.
The welding engineer shall also prepare and produce reports which accurately reflect professional judgment. For the
welding engineer to be effective, the activities they perform must be consistent with specified requirements, technical
and ethical principles. The welding engineer must be able to work with management representatives, inspection personnel,
welders and support crafts, and should be able to understand the role of each in the development of weldments.
It is recommended that an individual pursue certification as a Welding Engineer by a recognized authorized body. Certification
is defined as the act of determining, verifying, and attesting in writing to the qualification of personnel in accordance
with specified requirements." From B5.16-2006

For myself, I understand it to be an enhancer to ones credentials if in a position of setting up job parameters. Things like materials to be used and generate the PO properly for their delivery. WPS's and/or PQR's for the work including choosing the process(s) to be used, consumables, etc.

The CWEng cert would provide an employer with added verification on ones abilities to accomplish these kinds of tasks in addition to knowledge of applicable AWS Codes. As Al mentioned, in many ways the SCWI will document the same abilities but not all.

It is not a PE and it also is not a CWI and especially not an SCWI. But, just as the CWS and other programs, it can have it's usefulness beyond just another certification on your resume. Especially if there were a seminar that would assist with information geared toward the work expected of the position.

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day, Brent

By electrode (***)

Date 05-28-2014 08:11

Quote: "Most employers don't want to pay the price to hire a person with the proper credentials. Why do employers hire welders or engineers with little training or experience? Money, the bottom line is the answer, plain and simple. They scream and holler there are no welders or (fill in the blank), when in reality, they simply are not willing to pay the wages the skilled engineer or welder, or machinist, or (fill in the blank) demands. It is easier to moan to congress and bring in cheap foreign labor."

I need to say.
Rarely I could read something which has put it more straightly.
That ... as simple as it sounds, is the bitter (man-made) truth and it seems to be a global one.

Speaking for myself.
I could find welding often and widely considered derogative, even among those (industries) still making profit.
The "funny" thing is, they simply could not without deploying welding, or employing welders, as a bedrock for their success.
Hard to comprehend; twice even for someone joyfully devoting his life to welding.

Regards.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 05-28-2014 21:56

Hi Electrode,
I wholeheartedly agree with your comments

"Rarely I could read something which has put it more straightly.
That ... as simple as it sounds, is the bitter (man-made) truth and it seems to be a global one.

Speaking for myself.
I could find welding often and widely considered derogative, even among those (industries) still making profit.
The "funny" thing is, they simply could not without deploying welding, or employing welders, as a bedrock for their success.
Hard to comprehend; twice even for someone joyfully devoting his life to welding."

Al certainly has a way with describing the truth. :surprised:

Iron Workers Local 40 & 356 RULE!!! Al knows what I'm saying here. :twisted:

Respectfully,
Henry

By electrode (***)

Date 05-29-2014 09:51

Thank you, Sir.

As usual the whole story is certainly more complex, but in regards to Al's quote: "Most employers don't want to pay the price to hire a person with the proper credentials."

... unions might have a reasonable right to exist.

By js55

Date 05-28-2014 12:09

Al/Brent,
A couple things. The list of responsibilities that brent posted is revealing. This is indeed the brunt of what a welding engineer will do. And these responsibilities do not require a PE nor an education of which, as I remember when I reviewed it, is the curriculum of the CWEng. It actually is more in line with the CWI curriculum (or at least as it was taught to me in the seminar I took, metallurgy, physics, power source basics, flux and coating characteristics, CCT diagrams, and such). Which is probably why so many employers turn to them. Employers are not going to pay for a PE to do these things because they would be overpaid/overpriced for these activities. And the PE would be wasting himself here.
Don't get me wrong, I think there is a great need for a CWEng type cert but that is not what is happening here. The CWEng seems to be trying move in on PE turf and that is a mistake. It is over reach. There is no need for it. Which is really why there are so few. There is however a need for a 'lesser' application but as yet AWS seems little interested in this.

And Al, I am not sure what you mean by true welding engineers. OSU churns em out like widgets. And though inexperienced, they have the foundation. A good one. Smart kids. Degreed kids. But again, so few seem to actually end up doing the things on brents list.
I don't actually know where they all go. Most of them I see end up with filler metal or power source manufacturers. Or back in academia. Some I suppose end up with the big OEM's and EPC's and such, either pigeonholed or forced to move a different direction.