Like I've said before, the WPS is useless to the average welder unless the writer keeps in mind that the welder most likely has never read the code, doesn't know what a P, S, or M number is and is looking for information about how to initially set the machine for the electrodes being used, what electrode is called for and what joint details (with tolerances) are appropriate. Don't forget all the other information that is useful to the welder such as the shielding gas and the flow rates for the shielding gas if one is used. All too often the individual developing the documentation is an individual that has little welding experience, little direct contact with welders, and writes the WPS to meet "code" requirements only. That is a wasted effort and a waste of natural resources.
You can keep the minimalist philosophy in mind if you are writing a welding specification for contract work if you don't care how the work is accomplished. If you need to control the process and if consistency and predictable results are your goals, a well written welding procedure specification or welding specification (for inclusion in the contract) will go a long way in helping you to meet your objectives. The is a fine line between too little information and information overload. I like the analogy of a cooking recipe, if the recipe only lists the ingredients of the cookies (the minimalist approach would be the list of ingredients listed outside the box) the results are not predictable. If the recipe includes the ingredients, the amount of each ingredient, when to blend the wet and dry ingredients together, what temperature to cook them at, and how to test them to see that they are cooked long enough, you will have control over the process and predictable results, i.e., good tasting cookies.
The two schools of thought often collide, do I write a WPS for each specific joint detail (as is often required by state departments of transportation) or a general WPS that covers a multitude of joint details. There is no one good answer. I understand the need for both and when it is appropriate. Most projects and companies have (at least informally) settled on a few typical joint types and groove details. In those situations a general WPS that addresses a limited number of base metal specifications and joint details is adequate. A DOT project where low alloy high strength steels with impact requirements justifies the more detail oriented WPS. An experienced welding engineer or someone with the technical expertise, be they a CWI or SCWI, knows which type of WPS is appropriate for the situation at hand and the type of information that is useful to the welder.
As for whether the welder uses the WPS or not is a kin to your owner's manual tucked away in you car (or truck's) glove compartment. You don't read it until something goes wrong or you are looking for information about the operation of something (like the radio or what type of automatic transmission fluid to add). Once you've read it, it gets put back into the glove compartment until it is needed again. I don't expect the welder to read the WPS every morning before striking the first arc, but it is appropriate to review the applicable WPS before a new project gets underway so everyone is singing from the same sheet of music. Maybe the solution is to place the WPSs in a binder and hang them in the Men's/Lady's rest rooms where they can be reviewed because there's is nothing else to read while they are sitting there contemplating the day's events. Like owner's manuals, the WPS can be well written, well organized and contain useful information that is referred to often or it can be poorly written, contain no useful information (and still meet code), and it will be ignored by everyone on the shop floor except the one individual that wrote it.
One thing that is often overlooked is to include a training session that covers the WPS and to read it and use the information. I have a subcontractor on a project that paid a consulting firm "big" money to develop a QC manual and welding documentation so they could get their U and R stamp. The consulting firm never visited the facility, never witnessed any of the welding of the PQRs, and simply sent the "bundle" of paperwork to the client. They had a bundle of welding documents that they don't understand, but it looked good for the audit and they were awarded the appropriate stamps. To this day the WPSs sit in the QC managers office collecting dust. They are a waste of paper, but they meet the minimalist philosophy of ASME. It was a rude awakening when they got on my project and I started asking questions about electrode storage, groove details, and the like. They pulled out their paperwork and said there is nothing in their paperwork that addressed my concerns and were amazed that anyone would ask for them or expect them to know what they contained. It has been a long painful education for them. So much so that their QC manager recently attended an AWS seminar and was able to pass the examination after spending some additional time with the books. The music to my ears was when the QC manager said, "Now I understand why you asked so many questions and the importance of the good welding documentation." They are rewriting their WPSs and their QC manual to make them useful to their work force as well as meet ASME requirements. They have only recently required the welders to sit down and read the WPSs and review the information contained in them. Even the welders have commented that things have changed since being involved with me on this project and the changes have been for the better.
I hear the wife stirring, so she must be getting up. Time to step down from the "bully pulpit" and open up some presents.
Merry Christmas everyone!
Best regards - Al Moore and Family
Shane, 
Forum
