Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / WPQR and welder qualification testing.
- - By Kix (****) Date 10-10-2007 18:42
If the welding procedure was qualified in the 2g position can you test your welders and certify them in the 3g position?  Code that this applies to is AWS D1.1  .
Parent - - By pax23 (**) Date 10-10-2007 19:57
No, if I understand your question correctly.

Actually, I think you are asking the following, "If a welding procedure is qualified by a 2g test can I use that procedure to test my welders and certify them in the 3g test?  Code that this applies to is AWS D1.1."

Again, the answer is no. You must use a procedure applicable to the welder performance test you are doing. A PQR run using a 2G setup does not qualify for vertical welding; therefore it cannot be used for a 3G welder test or any vertical welding in production.
Parent - - By Kix (****) Date 10-10-2007 20:29
Thats what i thought.  Thanks for the quick reply!!
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-11-2007 13:09
Be careful here, it could be a little trickier than it is at first glance.

Why was the procedure qualified? Can it be considered prequalified if some parameter such as a change on the base metal being used for the welder qualification test?

Welder qualification is to verify the welder can make a sound weld. The parameters can be different than those used to establish the mechanical properties of the weldment.

If we are talking about GMAW(S), then the situation is different than if we are using SMAW.

Bottom line, we have to know all the information that is applicable, not a bit of this and a bit of that.

Good luck - Al
Parent - - By Kix (****) Date 10-11-2007 13:32
We'll just use the 2g GMAW-S 3/8" plate on A572 gr50 material procedure i qualified.  The kicker that throws me out of prequalified is that we are useing an ER80S-D2 wire.  I really want to get rid of that wire and go to a 70 series wire because i don't think we need to be useing and 80 series wire on A572 gr50.  If i could accomplish this i would be in prequalified status.  Anyway, i was wondering if i could test my guys and certify them in 3g just because i want the best welders.  We still roll everything out so it can be welded in the flat and horizantal, but i just thought it would just be an added bonus to have them be able to say they are certified in 3g.
     About the paremetes being different then what you qualified the procedure in i have a question about now also.  WHat about the essential variables and the percentage + or - on voltage and amps?  Don't the welders have to stay within the essential variables while they are taking the test?
Parent - By rickc (**) Date 10-11-2007 16:47
Don't the welders have to stay within the essential variables while they are taking the test?
...Unless you're trying to prove in your test that the a different set of essential variables will work. I've been looking at it like this: You proved your parameters by testing it. You made a coupon and tested it using a given set of parameters. Table 4.5 and 4.6 if CVN's are required gives you an allowable range for your WPS based on your test.

Running a 3G test only qualifies the WPS for Vertical welding and Not Flat or Horizontal by Table 4.1 on Page 134 / Table 4.5 #27 on Page 139. The welder qualifies for F, H, V (Except CJP T-, K-,Y- Grooves) by Table 4.10 on Page 145.
Parent - - By pax23 (**) Date 10-11-2007 17:11
I think Al is suggesting that you may use one welding procedure for the welder performance test, and then the welder can use other welding procedures in production that may have several parameter different than the welding procedure used for the performance test. No arguments there. Too often people think that a welder must run a qualification test on every procedure that he will use in production. D1.1 is not that restrictive.

In your situation it looks like the welder will be using GMAW-S in production. That screws you up some. You cannot simply write up a prequalified GMAW-S procedure for a 3G test since GMAW-S is not a prequalified process. You would have to qualify a GMAW-S procedure for the vertical position, run the tests, then use that procedure to qualify your welder. Sounds like you are simply trying to expand the positions they are qualified for, so all that trouble doesn't sound like its worth it in my opinion. I suggest just qualifying your welders using the 2G procedure you already have and staying within all of its parameters.
Parent - - By Kix (****) Date 10-11-2007 19:53
I totally agree with you, and i new better about GMAW-S not being prequalified i don't know what i was thinking.  Thanks for all the input!!  So your also telling me they don't have to stick to the essential variables of the 2g plate parameters i qualified?  So i could change wire sizes whenever i wanted or gasses etc etc or are just the voltage and amp variables tossed out?
Parent - - By pax23 (**) Date 10-11-2007 20:43
No, I don't think I said that.

OK, whenever you weld whether in production or in a performance qualification test you must follow a qualified or prequalified WPS. Follow means follow, or in other words you must stay within all of the parameters of that WPS, always. If you do not follow the parameters of a WPS in production, theoretically, you are laying weld that does not having the backing of a WPS and therefore you are no longer code compliant. If you do not follow the parameters of a WPS in a performance qualification test and the test fails, then why did the test fail? Did it fail (a) because the welder did not preform to the necessary level to pass or (b) were the welding parameters he used flawed. If he didn't follow a WPS that has been proven to provide reliably results then you don't know if it was a or b.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-12-2007 14:52
Pax, I agree with you in general, but if the applicable code isn't AWS D1.1, the ranges qualified by the PQR may be less restrictive than they are in D1.1.

AWS D1.1, Table 4.5 lists the ranges for the electrical parameters qualified based on the values recorded when the test sample was welded. Thus someone has to witness the welding so the voltage, amperage, wire feed speed, travel speed, etc. can be recorded.

That isn't the case with ASME Section IX. Many of the essential variables listed by AWS D1.1 are not essential variables per ASME Section IX. With ASME, the ranges for voltage, amperage, etc. are values pulled from someone's butt and are often beyond the ranges necessary to produce acceptable welds. That's not a problem if you are writing a procedure for ASME, many of the procedures written to ASME are figments of someone's active imagination. It is not uncommon to see the voltage listed as 0 to 80, amperage listed as 0 to 300, travel speed listed "as required". Ranges that are totally useless to the welder, but "code compliant" to ASME. Unfortunately, AWS B2.1 seems to be headed in the same direction.

For those individuals new to welding and working to ASME, I often suggest they record the actual welding parameters (voltage, amperage, travel speed, wire feed speed, etc.) used by the welders when they qualify to develop a data base of rational ranges for the welding parameters. Those parameters that produce acceptable test plates then form a rational basis of the values entered on the WPS used for production.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By pax23 (**) Date 10-12-2007 15:18
You can put what I know about ASME into a thimble. You can put what I know about B2.1 into a slightly larger thimble.

I generally keep my comments limited to the D1 codes and a few others.
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / WPQR and welder qualification testing.

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill