By 3.1 Inspector
Date 07-18-2008 19:43
I will do my best....
I suppose when you say "bursting off" you mean scratch the tungsten when you start the arc - if so its correct that some tungsten can break of and thus be in the completed weld.
IMO is it not the preferred technique for starting the arc, but actually in some places you are not allowed to start by "high frequency" due to electrical valves reacting etc...
Running him off the job seems a little out of proportion, and unless its written somewhere that he cant start the arc like that, then the inspector should be kicked to "a warm place"
I dont think you need to call the inspector a book worm, he most likely has some experience and knowledge which justify him being on the job.
Ask the inspector if some tungsten in the weld is cause for rejection :) (ofc depending on the size)
The term ' busting off ' the arc consists of holding your tungsten close and dragging your filler wire across touching the tungsten and base material with the filler causing the arc to start. The tungsten does not contact the base material.
By 3.1 Inspector
Date 07-18-2008 20:06
whohohohoho.
First time I hear that!
Why do you start the arc like that? why not just high frequency?
I have never seen a SA-200 with high- freq. My buddy isn't in a shop...he is in the field. High- freq is for aluminum and in-shop welding. I will be first in line when they start building 200's with high-freq. I didn't mean any disrespect using the term book worm... I myself am a inspector. And I am a certified welder with many accomplisments including working abroad all over the world. This technique is widely used to minimize arc marks on the base material, which IS a NO-NO. I just meant that usually a manager in the office comes up with these rules and do's and don'ts ... not having any welding application knowledge what so ever. This technique IS used to keep the tungsten from becoming contaminated or leaving a trace of it in the base metal.
By 3.1 Inspector
Date 07-18-2008 20:32
hmmmmmm....
In Denmark all our machines has high freq, also the small portable machines.
I know you do things a little different in the states ;)
About your question, I really cant imagine welding like that and I dont know what can happen during ignition of the arc......so I cant give any advise, support or anything.
I thank you for your input and reading this post, 3.1 .
Hello 3.1 Inspector, in the earlier years of field type GTAW welding either a scratch start type method was done by contacting the tungsten to the work to initiate the arc or the use of the filler wire to initiate the arc between the tungsten and the work was used or possibly the use of a copper scratch block off to the side of the joint to initiate the arc and once started the arc was brought into position in the groove and then filler was added or the arc was brought to the filler as it may have already been positioned in the groove. Many machines used today in a lot of indoor applications now either utilize a lift-arc arc starting process or a high-frequency type start. There are however, many applications for the old-school type of method and it is still widely used in many industries. I would venture to say that the applicable codes would dictate how much tolerance of tungsten transfer inclusions would be allowed. Just a few cents to consider for this conversation. As to the high-frequency portion of this, many situations prohibit the use of high-frequency due to damage to sensitive electrical equipment or other considerations where the high-frequency could cause issues. In many of these cases either the lift-arc form of arc ignition(my understanding of this option on some machines is that it allows the arc to fire after the tungsten is lifted due to being able to isolate the zero voltage crossover point in the supply current, thus it doesn't use high-frequency) the scratch-start form of arc ignition would be the only reasonable choices. Best regards, aevald
We used scratch start exclusively when I learned to weld pipe in the field. No high frequency was required for welding anything but aluminum with AC.
Best regards - Al
Unless I'm deep down in a groove or the machine has a lift arc, this is how I fire off a torch. I hadn't ever had any problems from QC when striking an arc this way. I think it keeps your tungsten sharp longer and prevents leaving tungsten inclusions. I'd love to hear that inspectors reasoning for running someone off over that.
Hello spgtti, I can only guess that this particular inspector felt that by striking the tungsten and starting the arc between the base metal and the end of the tungsten with the rod that there would be transfer of the rod to the tungsten point or visa versa. So possibly in his eyes he felt that there would be an inclusion of the tungsten into the weld metal. Certainly plenty of room for interpretation and verification. When one is considering the arc starting methods that are available, high-frequency start will provide the best possibility of no tungsten transfer, lift-arc start will provide none or minimal inclusion due to the lower amperage start feature and operator ability, and finally the scratch-start method could possibly yield the most inclusion if "improperly done". Here again, I believe operator ability, code requirements, and possibly verification through testing should be the determining factors to judge this by. I wonder what this inspector expected in the way of starting the arc? or if this question was asked of him? My $.02 additional cents. Best regards, aevald
Guys, I am damn proud to be able to call myself a welder and you guys my collegues in the great welding industry. I figured that the QC was misinformed on the procedure or off his rocker. See, my buddy passed his test and was already on the job. The QC was wacthing him from afar and saw his technique. He then went to him and began to give him the what-for . He has been contacted by the project superintendent and his position has been offered back to him. But he doesn' t want to be on the same job as that QC. Fearing another problem, he's working elsewhere.
And good on'em for that cause thats eactly what I would of done and to bad for them they most likely lost a good had on a bad call but who needs the grief I say. haveing run across this type of QC myself in the past it always leaves a bad taste in your mouth when I hear about it happening to someone else. Also confirms my belief that if you have no ideal about how the job is done or have never picked up a stinger yourself you have no right to judge those that doand the sad fact that it goes on every day boils my blood. But I guess thats just my narrow minded opinion. How does that old saying go " those that can weld, weld. those that can't inspect"
Generally when striking an arc off the wire you hit the side of the tungsten which in turn preserves the sharpened end. In any case the only time the QC should have become involved was after the shots had come back with inclusions unless there was something written in the procedure regarding arc initiation. Technique should be up to the welder if not written into procedure.
Like all professions, there are a few individuals that have their own ideas and they are firmly convinced they are the only knowledgeable people on the face of the earth. We, being lesser of God's creations, have to suffer our fates when they are on the project.
I still carry the image of one AI's compute screen saver, "The AI is God", and a few truly believe it.
I had an engineer that once told me, "Al, I can always tell a welders, but I can't tell him much."
So it would appear that we all suffer this personality trait to one degree or another. I guess it is part of being a human.
Best regards - and humbled - Al
A couple questions(rhetorical). Though I've never used this technique myself how is it any worse than a standard scratch start?
Contaminate the tungsten? With what? Filler metal? And then I suppose the problem is that with further starts you risk contaminating the weld deposit with filler metal? How is this any worse than contaminating the tungsten with base metal? As, for example with a scratch start. Or for that matter breaking off a piece of freshly ground W in the deposit upon scratch start.
My guess is that if the filler metal actually attaches to the tungsten that a grind would obviously be in order.
I think you are misunderstanding the process... you drag your filler wire quickly across the path where you are holding the tungsten ABOVE the base metal; there by just nicking the edge to get the arc started. No contamination has taken place in this method; the contamination comes from scratch starting to the actual base metal , leaving a small amount of tungsten that breaks off inbedded ; thus, showing up in the x-ray. The arc mark left on the filler wire is non exsistent once you burn your filler. This arc start leaves no tungsten deposit in the filler wire.
I understood what you meant. I was arguing facetiously in agreement. It was your original post that mentioned contamination of which I was opposing.
OOHH, O.K. ... See that is what I said-contamination? - where? It don't make any sense...does it?
We're in a fab shop and all of us start this way except some of the boys that have a high freq start option on there machines, I don't get it sounds like a nip **** inspector.
SPGTTI is EXACTLY Right!!!! No more no less!!!!
Why not touch off your grinder to start your idle?
Sounds like another butthead inspector to me. . . . . I don't know, I'm by no means a pushover I looked out 2 kids yesterday and I'll probably send one home today. But I will never attempt to "re-write" the code(s) I used to test at nukes, refineries and everything in between (except pipelines) and I always start my arc that way. That one is probably in MOC (My Opinion Code) 2008. I got into it the other day with an inspector who didn't like the way a TIG root looked. He said it wasn't heavy enough, well that's kind of ambiguous now isn't it???? If it's in there according to this spec. (flush is acceptable) then it's good enough. I've never seen starting your arc addressed in the code, except where it refers to arc strikes on start-up etc.
Thank you vagabond for your words and your insight. That is exactly how I feel ... another 'green inspector' trying to throw his weight around and get it HIS way. I would have loved for that to have been me he told that to... I prabably would still be there chewin' on him and settin' him straight! That technique is how I learned.
Devil's advocate...just for arguments sake! Can you guys handle that and not call me a pencil pushing, book smart, never welded a lick IDIOT!
Might the reality of the situation be he was run off for how he handled the situation when it was brought to his attention vs. the actual practice. Seems to me, from the information provided in this post, it would NOT have been too tough to invalidate the inspectors critiques given an understanding of codes and procedures. As far as that is concerned, it sounds like invalidation is exactly what happened with the offer of his job back. Did the welder have enough knowledge to call the CWI's BS?
Where was the welder's supervisor, union rep, or company man to come to his defense with a knowledge of CWI work?
There are a lot of welders out there who want to leave the "book stuff" to others so they can just weld. In the end, who is really losing with that viewpoint? We have been led to believe this guy got run off his job for his technique, when in reality, it MAY have been for his lack of knowledge when it comes to procedures and codes. Had he had the knowledge to begin questioning the CWI for proof of his claims of tungsten inclusions, he might not have had to go anywhere. It sounds like some of you guys in this post have this knowledge that maybe this other guy did not. From the way you speak, I have a case of beer that says you wouldn't have had to go anywhere (of course most welders are bastards that would walk just to get the case of beer!) You wouldn't have had to go anywhere because you knew to ask for documentation of tungsten inclusions or code specifics outlawing the busting off technique. Has anybody taught welders how to handle these situations in a professional, documentable manner?
Duh, maybe we autta stay in tha house ... 'er stay on tha porch, boys. We be a bunch of uneducated 'bastards' by tha sound of it. Anybody want a beer? -- M'am , I do resent your previous post in this particular thread pertaining to how " international metal fusion technicians" handle situations like this one. I personally taught this individual how to earn a good living welding. And I did state before, he was offered his job back. Apparently , you are an inspector , from the tone you messaged with, who prabably never dealt with the reprocussions of challenging the CWI and being given the sh*t detail or being rode harder than a hells' angels' harley. I would suggest you take up the trade for a while and earn a living doing it ... get into a situation like this one and use your method of correction to solve the issue. I promise you will see things differently... maybe with out rose colored glasses. I'm not saying your method is wrong, just that every situation is on a individual basis and in this late stage of the game, I guess everybody is a armchair CWI with their own opinion. The gentleman this happened to is doing wonderful now and from the last report , the CWI is still looking for a project to work. In the end , the good prevailed over evil ... in a round a bout way.
Well since we're gonna go there. . . . . I didn't start this for the record, INMO 99.9999999999% of the "shake n bake" inspectors out there ain't worth a flip. I've run across one who really understood the process of welding and the realities encountered in the field. I'm sure I'll get it from all sides on this . . . . .but if you can't weld you've got no business telling people how to. It is unfortunate that certain organizations have turned the certification process into such a cash cow that almost anyone who can pass a test regardless of experience. Because that isn't checked enough either, can be an "inspector". That's one of the reasons I'm out there, I saw a need for some common sense once in a while. If you aren't a welder you will never have my respect out there and most welders I know feel the same way and rightfully so. Not anyone can do what we do and we are entitled to be proud of that fact. Would you want your medical inspector (hypothetically speaking) to be a doctor or just to have read some books on it??? Food for thought people. . . . .but hey look at the bright side when I'm your QA manager I've got someone to do my paperwork. It keeps ya'll happy and that way my welders won't call ya names n stuff. LOL
You misinterpreted the previous post and I wasn't questioning how well you trained your friend. The term bastard was meant in a joking manner because many of the old timers I know would walk off that job, win that case of beer, grab some ice and lawn chairs and sit in my driveway drinking it until I got home so they could rub it in. Sitting next to them would be the job-site supervisor who would give them their job back at the end of the night. They'd have the CWI running back and forth getting the beers out of the cooler and serving them pretzels laughing about how the scammed me the whole night. I read a very prideful tone in many of the responses to your original post and am assuming they are of the same breed.
Seriously though, am I to understand there is no way possible for the situation you presented to have two sides? I'll play the devil's advocate again...
What is worse...
1. Getting run off a job by a power tripping CWI because you didn't properly and in a politically correct manner challenge his assertions that you weren't doing your job properly,
or
2. Challenging that CWI to the point you got stuck with a broom at the far end of the site for a week knowing full well you were in the right.
Either way, you're run off the job aren't you? At least when you get stuck sweeping the floors or rode hard it is your decision to walk off the job and not the decision of a pencil pushing idiot. I contend that would be some of the most prideful sweeping I have done in my life. I've slept much better at night knowing I chose to walk off that job rather than bend over my Pipeliner and have that CWI stick my stinger up my rear because he is an idiot and I was scared of what woud happen if I challenged him.
Prideful, hell yeah we're prideful. . . . . .and proud of it. I keep threatening to get out of this line of work knowing full well I probably never will. I doubt retirement will suit me, I've been breathing steel smoke since I was 16 and I've packed around certs. since shortly after that. I love what I do . . . . .I love welding and I truly love inspecting. Collectively we do demanding work day in, day out. Welders, fitters, supervisors, QC all of us. Some more physical, some more mental but all contribute to the end result. Be it power plants for lights and hospitals or pipelines for industry or petro/chem. We make it go guys and gals. . . .theres nothing better than being around on a start-up of a big co-gen. I don't know it's just amazing, steam in and of itself never ceases to make me awestruck with it's power. I sometimes wonder how my life would have been different. But I make real good money, and I work with real good people. So I wouldn't change much other that being home more, and I should be. . . . . .but I know it wouldn't last. I guess I'm selfish that way. My little girl will probably resent the fact I've spent so much time out here on the road. But she'll have the benefit of the best education money can buy when she's ready for college.
if dc machines without hi freq were allowed to test out and run on the job......the inspector is nothing but an ass for making issue out of your friends technique. There is only a few ways to do this and your method would be preferable to me on a 100% shot job!!! Guys an ass, simple.
Hello guys,
I spent my whole career as a Tig welder using scratch start, never got the chance to try out HF.
I have never seen this technique used so cannot comment on it but found a bit of info that may help explain the inspectors call.
A paper from the AWS Welding Journal dated Jan 1995, "A Guide to the Use of Tungsten Electrodes for GTA Welding".
".....Metal contamination of the tungsten electrode is most likely to occur when a welder accidently dips the tungsten into the molten pool, touches the tungsten with the filler metal or when metal spatters onto the tungsten electrode.......The contamination will adversely affect the arc characteristics, shorten the life of the electrode and affect weld quality."
I am not trying to defend this guy because he seems to have a poor attitude but if I was a young inspector and I read that I would think the technique was not a recommended way of starting the arc.
Regards,
Shane
Shane, I see Your point, the AWS paper does not recognize a difference between touching a hot tungsten with a hot filler rod and very briefly touching a cold tungsten with a cold filler rod to initiate the arc.
Tommy,
Your statement is gold my friend. This post was started for the sole purpose to inform others and to gain good precise feedback on this issue. The responses , for the most part , have been wonderful and most everybody seems to think the same about the QC. I have since located the e-mail for that QC and I have forwarded the info for this web site and this post to him so he can learn from his mistakes.My buddy this happened to told me I was crazy but I think the guy should know that a panel of his peers from abroad seem to feel the same on this issue. That he was wrong and the ' professional' was RIGHT. Just because he has a CWI stamp doesn't make him 'Barney Fife'. Procedures need to be followed ,yes, but to make a call like that without 'for sure' knowledge on the procedure was out of line. I have learned alot from this site and will continue to learn from you guys. I just felt that others can learn too. Please , QC's , LIVE your career... don't just draw a check. Welding is more than just a job for us welders, its our career. And we would not perform a halfa$$ed technique that wasn't proven in the field and/or used internationally for many many years. I'm steppin' down from my soap box now. Thank you again for you all responding to this thread.
What method did he want your buddy to use? If you don't have Hi Freq or Lift Arc that's the best way to start your arc if you want your tungsten to stay sharp. Probably the least contaminating method there is short of Hi Freq and Lift Arc.
I don't see why 'contaminating your tungsten' should be cause for termination in the first place.
Cruising this forum, I've noticed a lot of people claiming to be "run off" by QC... Whom ever these inspectors are working for must have the ultimate Dental Plan with 100% E.R. coverage. And where do CWIs have such authority? The only time I've ever been directly involved with "gettin someone's money" was when they failed the test. Their stencil can show up for the 3 strikes (failed X-rays) and your out (of a job) but to just walk up and fire a welder...that's always been the Foreman and other supervisor types to do that dirty work.
An interesting twist on the Tonguestone inclusion issue though. Current project, hydrogen peroxide system has a zero tolerance for tungsten inclusions. Strange how a metal with, like 6,000F melting point can be eaten up by something Grandma made us gargle our throats with before beddy-bye time.
ive known of some inspectors that get a power trip and start pushing the hands more than the foremans and GF's. then they want to tell you how to weld when they cant even put a bead in. most of them are just welders and fitters that couldn't cut it.
See, now here's where the clever welders can get their revenge...Is to do it EXACTLY as the inspector said. 1st off, it is not the inspector's job (nor is it even ethical) to instruct and dictate orders to the welders...only the final results! Then, when it is all FUBAR'ed, it is the "holier than thou" inspectors problem. When you follow the directions of a superior's orders, then it becomes admissible in an unemployment contested hearing ie. legally binding. Just as foremen are Personally liable in a lawsuit for any injuries sustained by their crewmembers following their explicet orders. Which is why I'll never be a foreman ever!
hey there pyplynr have a question for u. i have just busted out, and im having heck finding work on the pipeline. i have a 62 red face just itching to get back on the road. about a month ago i got on a 9 mile job man i loved it and i loved the money. just wondering if u know where i could find some work.
No , sure don't man . I'm workin' single hand right now , myself.
I'm thinking that this post has somewhat regressed, but this was probably the best summation of the post. It takes a Team effort to get thru a project. (It will never be outdated)
Back to the original post though, I too, have always leaned toward the Tig wire/match strike method of my GTAW arc starting and after I started training younger welders, I passed that on as well. I have never had a weld fail due to that technique nor had a welder removed from a job for that purpose. ( I don't recall it being addressed in the Code Books either.)
The key is this, there will always be CWI's with opinions and welders with big egos. Communication can't be overstressed in the world of construction or welding in general.
Learn to make suggestions as well as take them. (You will eventually know when your leg is being pulled and how to avoid the pit-falls). Lastly, I have to admit that when I started construction, the older gents were more than willing to share their info to bring the younger generation along. That seems to have diminished and its reversal would substantially improve present as well as future relationships.
I can say I've used it in the boiler welding tubes, never having had a tungsten inclusion in an x-ray...I've even taken a tube test for nuclear work, with the inspector watching me put the hot pass in and starting the arc like you mentioned. Never heard it being called "busting off" though. It will help keep tungsten cleaner!
WOW, what a thread.
Sure learned a lot from this one and I don't even TIG weld.
Hello everyone. I just wanted to say I'm a QC Inspector and would prefer this method when a high frequency start isn't available. As far as contaminating the tungsten elctrode.... that would be the welders problem, not mine. As far as contamination goes I would prefer the welder to keep his tungsten out of the base metal to prevent breaking off pieces into the weld.
Anyway those are my thoughts.
