TENSILE PULL MACHINES

By webbcity (***)

Date 03-08-2007 10:14

hittman , e-mail me and i'll foward a page . willie

By thcqci

Date 03-08-2007 13:55

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=universal+testing+machines&btnG=Google+Search

I used to service and calibrate these machine as well as use them for tensile testing. New units may be prohibitive expensive so used market will probably be your answer (for example: http://www.surplusrecord.com/srg/017532.htm) . Baldwin, Tinius Olsen, Satec, Instron, ATS are names to consider. Probably want at least a 60K, but preferably a 120K machine will be less limiting overall. Baldwins probably the heaviest duty machine, especially the older ones. Electronic displays are nice, smaller and much more precise, but do not be afraid of large needles and dials as have been the standard for many years. Make sure you get all the grips, shims and handles and accesories that go with machine because they are not cheap. Contact me if you wish.

By js55

Date 03-08-2007 14:33

Tensile testing is cheap. Tensile machines aren't.

By 803056

Date 03-08-2007 16:25

I agree. Unless you have a steady stream of work for the testing machine, you may want to consider using a third party laboratory. The cost of calibrating the machine may be more than what you bring in doing tensile tests.

Best regards - Al

By js55

Date 03-08-2007 16:37

Al,
Yeah, that's a good point. Not just the cost of the machine but the cost of maintenance.
And lets not forget the machining of the bars. The labs do the machining for you as well.
So if you're gonna do the pulling, you're gonna have to do the machining.

By thcqci

Date 03-08-2007 16:57

Ditto what these guys just said.

By hittman375 (*)

Date 03-08-2007 20:19

I would like to thank everyone for the information and advice. If it is that expensive to maintain these machines then I probably will just send the coupons out when the need arises for tensile pulls.

By eekpod

Date 03-08-2007 22:35

Which leads me to a complaint I have w/ the CWI test.

Why do they have the tensile bars in the practical portion of the test, when I bet only about maybe 10% of CWI's actaully see them in the real world. Everyone I know sends them out for machining and pulling, then they send us back the results. It seems like it's not practical to test people on somethey they don't do. Granted it does make one a better person to know how it's done, but still I don't think it should be part of the certification test.

By js55

Date 03-09-2007 14:58

Much of the CWI test, seems to me, infringes upon what really is Welding Engineering (this to me may be one instance). This leaves the CWEng test rather hollow, in my opinion. But the CWI test is AWS's shining star and cash cow, they have struggled long and hard to get it accepted, and they aren't likely to change it.

By jon20013 (*****)

Date 03-09-2007 15:14

js55, I find it hard to imagine me disagreeing with you, but your statement about the CWEng caught me off guard. While I am NOT a CWEng, I was part of the Subcommittee that developed the qualification standard for the CWEng and I know the original Chair of that S/C fairly well (a brilliant guy). It was my opinion, admitting I have never taken the test, that the required qualifications and body of knowledge for the CWEng were very, very comprehensive. Input in the development of the qualification standard came from Ohio State, Lehigh, Ferris and a host of other well known schools, not to mention some of the best minds in our industry. May I ask why you feel the CWI test leaves the CWEng test rather hollow?

By js55

Date 03-09-2007 18:37

Sorry Jon,
I don't believe I phrased myself well. While I do think the CWEng standard is very intelligently designed, thorough, and comprehensive, I still feel that the CWI standard usurps much of what should actualy have been part of your responsibility. and that the standard oyu guys put together reflects a very minute portion of what welding engineers actually do on a daily basis inthe industry.
My diatribe was in no way an insult to you and your colleagues who I am sure worked very hard and conscientiously to arrive at your result. I just think that AWS's primary cash cow limited the type a subject matter avaialbe to you

By js55

Date 03-09-2007 18:49

Sorry bout that. Hit the wrong key. Didn't even have a chance to correct my lousy spelling.
Anyway, I think the CWEng standard is facing an uphill battle in acceptance because of the CWI stranglehold. 'I' means inspection, and yet so much of the test is more engineering than inspection. It certainly doesn't hurt for inspectors to have this knowledge but its more your area than it is inspection.
And trust me, being an unedumicated individual as I am I would love nothing more than to have some Eng verification available. But it seems that it just isn't critical since so few recognize it as meaningful. And until the CWI lets go, I fear it will not change.

By js55

Date 03-09-2007 19:09

Never one to hesitate to admit when I'm wrong. I went back a took another look at the CWEng standard. I also recognize an inconsistency in my own statement i.e. comprehensieve yet a minute part of the industry.
So, I suppose to refine my position I could simply put it that as a self contained standard the CWEng is more comprehensive than I remembered. Although, as long as the CWI standard maintains a grip on certain subject matter the CWEng standard will face extreme difficulty in being recognized. And guys like myself seeking some 'Certified" recognition as a practicing welding engineer will be left empty handed.
I suppose that clarifies my emotional involvment as well.

By jon20013 (*****)

Date 03-09-2007 19:18

Hey Old Buddy! No problems. I understand what you're saying and, if I may, my feelings are that the CWI is a giant... a great program even if becoming a bit saturated. The change is adding the "Senior" status to the CWI was far from addressing some of it's shortcomings.

The CWI Program has been in place since 1976 and blessed art thou who developed it! ;-) All joking aside, it has added immensely to the professionalism of our trade. That said, I tried very very hard, at all levels of AWS Senior Leadership and Committee levels to add an "International" CWI. This was done in part because of communications I was having with the now current Chairman of IIW and CEO of the Welding Institute of Australia (WTIA). He concurred with me running the concept past AWS to take the ball, AWS refused, IIW developed and now Australia is one of the ONLY countries in the world that has an International CWI Program... go figure.

The AWS CWEng Program is a great program but is suffering from lack of recognition... maybe time will heal, maybe not. It will certainly never be a CWI...

Your comments are understood! Thanks for letting me blather from my soap box for a while!

Happy Friday!!!

By js55

Date 03-09-2007 19:32

No problem. Same here.
Anywho, I think you may be right about the CWEng never being a CWI. I think it has to do with Graduate status. Inspectors are generally non graduates (at least n my experience), and therefore a CWI is a ligitimate way of verification. As for the CWEng, it would just be, (except for fellas like myself, although there are many), a supplement to a sheepskin already on the wall, and therefore not seen as being as critical tothe industry.