Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / WPS
- - By APM (*) Date 04-20-2011 15:28
This is a general question that has come up. Do you do a WPS first then a PQR or should a PQR come first. I always was under the impression the WPS always came first and a PQR followed to verify the WPS?
Parent - By Mikeqc1 (****) Date 04-20-2011 15:51
Thats what i thought.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 04-20-2011 15:54
Well it isn't officially a WPS until it's qualified...so the PQR is first. But the welder needs something to go by, so I call the first draft a pre-WPS....LOL
Parent - By waccobird (****) Date 04-20-2011 16:08
APM
In Inspection Trends you can find a good article on WPS's
http://www.aws.org/itrends/2011/01/InspectionTrends_201101/
Good Luck
Marshal
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-20-2011 16:38
I know this subject has a long and contentious history (note John's LOL in recognition), this was all so simple before some unknown shythead engineer/consultant, probably affiliated with AWS, but maybe not, decided to impose the idea, or at least offered the idea, or opened the discussion of the idea, of a pre-WPS. God help us. Whats next a pre PQR to establish some testing justification for the pre WPS?
Some sort of pre-WPS, for a sincere lack of a better term to use, is certainly a good idea and has long been used by welding engineers, even if it was just a magic marker on the back of a hand, or scribbly notes handed to the welder.
But by utilizing the term WPS for anything other than post PQR application we have created this mess of communication and understanding by the uninitiated. Often, even the initiated.
Its good for consultants though.
And we need more consultants like we need more lawyers. Who, by the way work the same way. Making things more complicated so that we have to pay them to sort it out for us.
Parent - - By HgTX (***) Date 04-20-2011 17:24
It's not a pre-WPS.  It's "the WPS".  Which usually doesn't exist.  Get the difference?

The codes are written with the idea that first you decide what you want to do (the WPS), then you decide whether you need to qualify it (prequal vs. qual), and then you run any necessary tests.  Which makes a certain sense, except that in reality hardly anyone gets as formal as a fully specified WPS before the "do I need to qualify it?" decision is made, which is why we end up with "pre-WPS" or "qualification WPS". 

Another reason for the non-production WPS used for qualification purposes is the asymmetrical nature of the qualification ranges.  You don't want to run your ideal production procedure for the test because the qualified ranges go mostly downward from the test, not equally up and down, so instead you run your test high, with your ideal procedure in the middle of the qualified range.  This is another thing not really acknowledged by the codes, that the nature of qualification actively discourages using a "real" WPS for the PQR.

Hg
Parent - - By RonG (****) Date 04-20-2011 18:18
From out in left field.... It’s a PQR from conception and when it is completed (QUALIFIED) and only when, you may generate as many WPS’s as you see fit with out changing essential variables. Why would you call it any thing else?

This kind of like wanting to know if Adam & Eve had a belly button.
Parent - By 99205 (***) Date 04-20-2011 19:08
Belly Button?   Now you've really stirred the pot, lol.
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 04-20-2011 19:21
I don't find 'belly button' in the list of essential variables.  Am I looking at the same Table?  Maybe a different Code?  :lol:

Even though there seems to be some disagreement, I really appreciate the discussion here.  And in previous threads on this. 

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - By RonG (****) Date 04-20-2011 20:18
I agree, it is interesting...how ever.... until this there was never any doubt in my mind as to how to call it. I believe there is less disagreement here than "Devils Advocates".:cool::grin:
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-20-2011 20:33
ASME QW-200.1
(a) A WPS is a written "qualified" welding procedure prepared to provide direction for the making of production welds to Code requirements. (quotes mine)
(b) The WPS shall reference the supporting Procedure Qualification Records described in QW-200.2.

So, if the WPS is prior to the PQR just exactly how does the WPS reference a PQR that doesn't yet exist, and exactly how is it qualified?

Also, under AWS if a WPS is prequalified the very idea of priority is nonsense.
Parent - - By Cactusthewelder (*****) Date 04-20-2011 21:58
Now I am as confused as a Baby in a Topless Bar !
Parent - - By Milton Gravitt (***) Date 04-21-2011 01:06
I thought the PQR came first then the WPS and the the welder that did the welding and it past all the testing he would be qualified. The the other welders would have to qualify to the WPS that came from the PQR. This is the way I see it but I might be wrong.

                     M.G.
Parent - By js55 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 11:31
That is essentially correct.
Parent - By tnhnt (***) Date 04-21-2011 02:30
I wanna be that baby!
Parent - By 99205 (***) Date 04-21-2011 06:10
I was confused last night, ;-)
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 11:43
In a metaphorical sense you have captured the irony of this whole discussion. And why we are still contentiously having this discussion. Proponents of the idea who sincerely intend on generating clarity in the end, IMO, only deepen the confusion. And I believe it is because even though this is insisted upon in some circles (and is not without some merit as I stated before-though informally)the code bodies are not moving on it that I can see. And rightly so IMO. Do we really need another codified official document that serves only an internal purpose adding nothing to the quality of the product being produced. In other words the proof is in the puddin (PQR). It doesn't matter if you ran the qual at 50 amps or 500 amps if the thing passed. It does however matter if you ran it at 50 amps passed and then try to run it at 500 amps.
Put it in your quality program if you wish, but not in the code.
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 11:50
And by the way, the confusion only begins if you go beyond the PQR/WPS relationship as clearly defined in the codes, and try and read into it an intent that isn't there. It may not always be the case but in this case the codes are clear, concise, and simple.
Parent - - By jpill (**) Date 04-21-2011 13:06 Edited 04-21-2011 13:30
I can't resist this as I've seen it before in companies and industry, and in this case it is the same thing. What it all boils down to is salary justification at some point in that it creates documentation, filing, paperwork, busy work for someone. No matter what the "quality" justification is. A good example would be a company that makes a $1.50 widget, they have made the said widget for 30 some odd years, this widget is absolutely the best widget on the market, all procedures and processes for making the widget have been explored and a set schedule of widget making steps have been set in place years ago with a minimum of returned widgets for warranty work. There was no previous problems with the widgets, but someone in QA hired the close relative of someone in management. Due to lack of work because of the low return of widgets with problems this person is hard to justify, so a "new" widget QA plan is devised, to reach a broader widget market.....ISO9001 is implemented in all aspects of widget making at the manufacturing level. Reams of documentation on the production steps of a widget are written, NDT testing "which hasn't been used before on widgets" is implemented, a widget certification sheet is generated on each widget that leaves the widget assembly line, and the company has to keep all documentation of widget production for 10 years since all widgets being made now are certified. The ISO9001 certifiing agency has to get paid, the new "QA specialist" position has to get paid, a new fire rated document storage room has to be built, widget production drops 40% because of all the new record keeping and quality based procedures, the cost of the widget is raised 2000%, and the company files bankruptcy since the quality of the widget didn't really go up except on paper and the dedicated users of the widget find that the new improved quality assured american made widget is no better than the new to the market imported widget that sells for .25 cents.
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 04-21-2011 13:55 Edited 04-21-2011 14:05
Great analogy!

Maybe a little off the track of the original post... But I'm gonna pile on too   :)

If everybody made quality widgets ISO would have no purpose.

I don't have an issue with the *NOTION* of ISO..  But it has grown into a horrible scam.  Thanks for the most part to its roots in the university driven European Norms  "EN's".  Nobody can more elloquently BS their reason for existance than a university administrator.

Proving that you actually you do what you say you do, in a way that is commonly recognized worldwide is a pretty valuable thing in my opinion. <which is what ISO is really supposed to do>   But the implementation aspects have been corrupted in ways I've experienced first hand that are too many to count.. They are Legion.

The fact of our current world today is that if you want to sell your product beyond a local region, manufacturers of just about anything are finding that they need to prove their welds/widgets/work is being done to a competency level that is recognized... A code, a specification or an accountability program like ISO. More and more manufacturers in the midwest where I work are discovering this and scrambling to learn how to comply.

There are lots of players still around that have no clue about real process control.. If they swallow hard and do the work to train themselves in a code or quality program they will thrive and profit.  If not they die.. I see this every day in my region.

Edit:

Many professonal QC persons are involved in the forum.   When competent QC has real authority, quality and profit go up.  When QC is a collateral duty and those duties are simply supported by lipservice at the top of the food chain; trouble comes like rain.
Parent - By RonG (****) Date 04-21-2011 14:54
I'll drink to that..... and that...and that too.
Parent - - By jpill (**) Date 04-21-2011 15:04
"When competent QC has real authority, quality and profit go up.  When QC is a collateral duty and those duties are simply supported by lipservice at the top of the food chain; trouble comes like rain."

Never has such truer words been spoken!
Parent - By js55 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 16:01
"When QC is a collateral duty and those duties are simply supported by lipservice at the top of the food chain; trouble comes like rain."

And QC gets blamed for it.
Parent - - By Mikeqc1 (****) Date 04-21-2011 15:57
you write up a WPS ...... Then qualify it.
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 16:03
It qualify then..........WPS a up write you  :wink:
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 17:23 Edited 04-22-2011 02:38
Some people still work in a world where a design on the back of a napkin is the standard way of conducting business. Some businesses have reached a point where the complexity of business requires a little more formality. Few structures of importance are built using the drawings on the back of an envelope or a coffee stained napkin.

There are still plenty of things fabricated from one individual's mind, but even the better tinkerers take time to put pencil to paper before the first cut is made.

In all but the smallest of shoestring operations is the welder provided with no more instruction than "Weld these and bring them to me when you're done." It still happens, but with less frequency than in the past.

Most companies have learned "weld here" on the drawings is not sufficient to define the type and size of the weld required. Most companies have learned, often through the "school of hard knocks" that "weld the hell out of it" isn't adequate information for the welder. Don't misunderstand, it still happens. I used the quote because that was what I was told earlier this week on one of my projects.

Silly me, I asked the contractor what type of steel was used for the shaft that he was about to weld on. "How the hell do I know.” was his response.

"You might want to ask the manufacturer so you know what type of electrode to use." I said.

In a few minutes the contractor returned with a piece of paper with “1080” scrawled across it. "He told me it was this." as he thrust the paper in my direction.

"Do you have any idea what this number means?" I asked him.

"It's steel. The manufacturer's welder told me to weld the hell out of it with plenty of heat and to use 6011 rod." was the contractor’s response. 

"If this information is correct, and if the number is an AISI specification, this steel is the type used to make the coil springs in your car." I told him. "It isn't a weldable grade of steel unless you take extreme precautions."

Well, long story short, it hasn't been resolved yet. The manufacturer came back and said it's steel and they weld it all the time. I asked the manufacturer what specific type of steel do they use and he has yet to be able to actually tell me what he used. He apparently doesn't know.

So, fellas, there is hope for anyone. There are still shoestring operations that are in business. How long they will stay in business is a different story.

It isn't a big deal. The welding isn't that major an issue unless you are the person waiting to be transported to the hospital by helicopter. However, you may get upset when you discover there is a delay because they cannot open the hanger door because the welds on the shaft that drives the opening mechanism failed.

It is heartwarming to hear there are still some shoestring operations still in existence that still operate the same way they did in colonial times. It is a clear signal there is still opportunities for people with good ideas and a means of implementing those ideas to start a business. With a little though and a reasonable business sense, we all have an opportunity to begin a business and stand a chance of making a profit.

Welding offers a great opportunity to begin a business and a great opportunity to earn a good living. Those opportunities are enhanced if some time and effort are expended on organizing the business in a professional manner. Developing a welding procedure can be approached in several different ways. Some companies approach it in a very informal way and it works for them. However, there is a point where the approach used has to be more formalized to minimize the chance something will go wrong because of miscommunications. What type of base metal is to be used. Most of us can agree that just because the metal is rusted isn’t sufficient information to ensure the right “stuff.” Likewise, the welder might like to know what filler metal is to be used to the “rusty stuff.”

Back to my recent experience,  I asked the contractor why 6011 was selected as the appropriate electrode. The response from the contractor was, “Because it is an all purpose rod that can be used on anything.”

“Be afraid, be very afraid.”

The formal approach is to write the information needed by the welder on a piece of paper that the welder can refer to. If you have a small shoestring operation, the back of an envelope may provide adequate space to list all the information the welder needs. For that matter, there is nothing in the “code” that prohibits using soapstone on the top of the work table to write all the information for the welder to refer to.

In other case, it may be necessary to be more formal when developing the welding procedure. In large operations more than one individual may be involved in determining how the welding procedure is to be qualified. There may be an approval process. In that case, the back of the envelope isn’t going to serve the intended purpose.

Some people want to call the unqualified procedure a “preliminary WPS” as a means of indicating it hasn’t yet been qualified by testing, yet. At that point in time it is the “engineer’s” best guess of what will work. You can call it by a different name if you elect to do so, but “preliminary WPS” is a term that is recognized by industry.

If you have a burning desire to call the root face the “land”, no one is going to stop you. You want to refer to the preliminary WPS as the unqualified WPS, knock yourself out. No one is going to stop you, it is a free country.

The Procedure Qualification Record (PQR) is the term recognized by industry as the document that records what was done to qualify the welding procedure. Again, it is a term that has been accepted by the welding industry as an actual record of what was done to qualify the welding procedure and the actual test results of the test performed to qualify the welding procedure.  If you want to call it by another term that is your privilege.

Many people will agree that the WPS is what is used by the welder to describe how the production welds are to be made. There are several types of WPS. There isn’t one form that suits everyone’s needs. You want to call it by a different name, feel free to. Some people refer to them as a technique sheet. It is OK.

Use the terminology you feel is best suited for your purposes. The only trouble you may encounter is when you try to converse with the rest of the world. Using industry accepted terms makes communications easier and more effective.

Carry on gentlemen.

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 17:28
But...Al.....I thought the 1109 rod will weld almost everything.:confused:
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 18:15 Edited 04-22-2011 02:34
It has been our experience, that while the 1109 electrode is an excellent all purpose welding rod, its high cost (nearly twice that of 6011) provides little benefit relative to increased tensile strenght or improved ductility at low temperatures.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By Tommyjoking (****) Date 04-22-2011 02:14
“Be afraid, be very afraid.”   YEP!!!   I have to totally agree with several statements there Al   "I find myself doing more research and on the fly engineering work on a regular basis.....running in to a lot of this is how we did it all the time crap"   If I have to identify their materials, find out factory recommended repair procedures etc. etc.  I put it as billable hours....when they ask where in the world those hours came from....USUALLY the answer makes them feel better about calling me in the first place.   I was cutting out pounds of weld just today that could have been easily prevented with a little preheat the first time around by whoever attempted the repair.
Parent - By jpill (**) Date 04-21-2011 17:41
Maybe i'm looking at things bass ackwards, but if a pre WPS is to be done it should be at the R&D/Engineering stage before a part enters production. In my mind (or a perfect world) the actual WPS and PQR should be established before the first arc is struck on the manufacturing floor.
Parent - By RonG (****) Date 04-21-2011 18:07
Never had WPS on a Napkin but I did have one on some scrap paper once.

Most fun I'd had in a long time. All the free beer (Coors) I could drink between passes in a nice air conditioned break room. Went all week end long 12 hours day (1 1/2  time for Sat & 2X for Sun) knowing all along the poop would hit the fan come Monday and it sure did. I had a rain coat and nothing got on me.

I had informed the powers that be by word and in writing that they were way out of bounds. But who who listens to dumb welder trying to weld 4140 plugs into a Cast iron Case.
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-21-2011 18:30
AWS A3.0
Welding Procedure Specification
A document providing the required welding variables for a specific application to assure repeatability by properly trained welders and welding operators.

Welding Procedure Qualification Record
A record of welding variables used to produce an acceptable test weldment and the results of tests conducted on the weldment to "qualify a welding procedure specification". (quotes mine)

Sounds pretty cut and dried to me.

Now I would submit (without degrading into some Clintonian semantics) that if you are faced with the idea of repeatability on a 'pre WPS' you ain't doing it right. :wink:
I sorta think the idea to a PQR is actually avoiding repeatability(which would be the case with a pre WPS as well of course). If you get it right or wrong why would you want to repeat?

And try as I might I just don't see 'pre WPS' in 3.0 anywheres at all at all. :confused:

But of course given the great sophistication of many operations (I myself may be just too backwoods to understand-why heck we's still weldin with them thar wood rods and I haven't been able to git mah still outa the shop) I can see the use for a Pre WPS. Though I would submit that even more sophisticated operations (maybe the Japanese) would wish to base their pre WPS on some solid mechanical testing basis in which case Pre PQR would be in order and they cna then laugh at us for our fingers in our noses. But then doesn't this smack of ad infinitum?
Which comes first? Cluck, cluck, cluck.
Fortunately the codes have settled it for us.
Parent - - By Shane Feder (****) Date 04-22-2011 00:53
Jeff,
Have a great respect for your knowledge and experience but have to disagree with you on a couple of points.
Firstly, my company is Qualitest Consulting Services - I guess that makes me a consultant. Similar to a lawyer ? - I certainly hope not.

Secondly, I do not think making a pWPS mandatory is a good idea (it is actually mandatory in the British / European equivalent to ASME IX - BS/EN 288 Part 3) but I think the use of preliminary welding procedure specifications is very beneficial.

Here is a scenario I am regularly faced with.
I am the clients rep on an O&G construction project. All contractors WPS/PQRs must be approved by me (or equivalent) before an arc can be struck.
Contractor supplies me with appropriate WPS/PQRs for carbon and stainless piping but doesn't have any for duplex (or they are not suitable).
Contractor needs new WPS/PQRs qualified ASAP so they can start welding the duplex pipe. I need the contractor to start welding ASAP so the client / owner gets their plant up and running ASAP.
Contractor prepares 3 x different Duplex pWPSs and submits to me. I review, comment if necessary and send back as approved.
Contractor goes ahead and qualifies the PQRs, writes up his WPSs based on the original pWPS (with the variables from the PQR added), submits to me, I tick and flick (because I have already reviewed and approved the pWPS) and off they go - welding away merrily.
What would have happened if they had for example - welded with the wrong filler metal ?

By the time they had performed the PQR, sent if for testing, received results, written the WPS and submitted to me it would have been days, possibly weeks and I then reject the WPS.
They then have to do it all over again and everyone suffers losses both in time and money.
By submitting a pWPS before the PQR the contractor is informing me of their intentions and we can actually work together to get the procedures qualified ASAP.
Regards,
Shane
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 04-22-2011 03:24 Edited 04-22-2011 03:59
Proper planning is but one means of reducing the time it takes to go into production. The Preliminary WPS is simply a way to plan what and how the procedure is going to be qualified. It isn't a required document, but it is a useful tool to those that have to think about how to qualify a procedure in the least amount of time by mitigating the chance information is miscommunicated to the different parties involved. The welder and those tasked with the responsibility of qualifying the procedures need to be informed of the what, how’s and associated details defining how the production WPS is to be qualified.

Not all welding standards are as liberal as others. Little details such as the required groove angle, root face, root openings are considered to be nonessential by some welding standards, but they are considered to be essential variables by others. In some cases it is important to know the state of heat treatment if acceptable qualification results are to be expected. Materials such as PH stainless steels are best welded in the annealed condition. That is useful information to have when ordering the base metal for the purpose of qualifying the procedures. Likewise, when welding copper it is essential to ensure deoxidized copper base metal is ordered and used for both qualification and production purposes. Details such as those can be worked out well before the qualification process is initiated and a suitable "document" used to keep track of those nasty little details.

Call the document anything you want. I call it a preliminary WPS to indicate it hasn't been qualified yet. It is my best guess of what will work if the welder adheres to the information and details provided by the PWPS.

The PQR serves a different purpose. The procedure qualification record is used to record what was actually used, what was actually done, and what the actual test results were. It is independent verification that the PWPS was actually followed. How do you verify the right base metals were used? Check the certified material test reports. Oops! The purchasing agent bought tough pitch copper plate because it was $0.25/pound cheaper. The question is; did the procedure fail because the PWPS was incorrect or because the wrong materials were used? The completed aluminum weld didn't pass visual examination. Was it because the wrong groove angle was used or was it due to something else? The PWPS called for a 60 degree groove angle, but the machinist misinterpreted the drawing and provided a 120 degree angle. That would explain the excessive melt through. The PWPS specified E309-15, but it wasn't available off the shelf, so the supplier substituted E309-17 because it is “better” than E309-15. Did the fillet weld qualification fail because the welder lacked sufficient skill of was it because the wrong electrode was used? Did the Charpy Impact tests fail because the welder used wide weaves and high heat input or because the filler metal selected wasn't required to pass impact testing?

The PWPS provides a means of comparing what was specified by the “engineer” and what was actually use/used by the welder. It serves several useful purposes. The first purpose is to provide a formal way of organizing thoughts about how to best qualify the WPS. The second is it serves as a communication tool to those individuals directly or indirectly involved in the qualification process. It serves as a tool to specify what materials need to be procured. It serves as a communication tool to the person tasked with overseeing the welding of the test coupons, and finally, the welder that will be performing the actual welding.

I recently worked a project where the steel used for production and qualifying the WPS were not listed materials. The plate used for qualification had to be forged from an ingot specifically for qualifying the welding procedure. The cost of the 9 inch thick steel plate was over $40K. When the cost of qualifying the welding procedure is considered, the cost in terms of time and money expended to write the PWPS was well spent.

I am not saying that a PWPS is a requirement, all I'm saying is that it is a cost effective tool that can be used to reduce the probability of miscommunication and ultimately the cost of qualifying the welding procedures. You can be a backyard mechanic with a couple of adjustable wrenches and a couple of screwdrivers, but a well stocked toolbox makes life easier for the mechanic.

I suppose my methodologies can be blamed on my math teacher in high school. He always made us write down all the known information before attempting to solve the problem. Then he made us show all the steps used to solve the problems. Saying that you solved it in your head was a sure way to get an "F" in the class. However, his regimented method of solving problems has served me well all these years, so I have to give credit where credit is due. His methods required me to think in an orderly fashion and it provides a means of back tracking if I ran into a dead end. Where in the problem solving process did I take the wrong path? Just another tool in the tool box.

Best regards – Al
Parent - - By js55 (*****) Date 04-22-2011 12:35 Edited 04-22-2011 12:37
Shane,
The respect is mutual of course. And I believe as one earlier poster mentioned we are not as far apart as it appears. I certainly utilize preplanning when developing a PQR. I cringe however when an argument seems to imply the necessity of codifying the pre WPS. Or even suggests that the codes intend such an official document. They don't. This would move the code into controlling internal functions and beyond a concern for quality requirements.
The codes should not be in the business of requiring economies, efficiencies, or good ideas.
But another implied argument is that without a Pre-WPS the welder is just willy nilly welding as he pleases. This is ridiculous. If you don't have some form of preplanning you will not be successful at qualifications with alloys of which you have no experience.
But preplanning is not synonymous with preWPS. PreWPs can be a form of preplanning. But if Pre WPS is codified I can foresee a whole host of new requirements, misunderstandings, non compliances, and interpretations.
Oh, and by the way, I am also active in AWS, think it is an outstanding organization but not perfect, and have been a welding engineering consultant, so when I critique them, even sardonically, I speak from the inside.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 04-22-2011 18:05 Edited 04-22-2011 20:35
You are taking yourself too seriously if you can't laugh at yourself once in a while.

It is in the 1984 edition of B2.1 that the term "prequalified WPS" appears. To quote B2.1-1984, 2.2.1.2 "To qualify a welding procedure, a preliminary Welding Procedure Specification shall be used to make a test weldment."

The term preliminary WPS isn't one that I can claim as my own. It appeared in an industry recognized welding standard long before I adopted it for my applications. 

Happy Easter everyone. Now remember, the bunny isn’t supposed to be on the dinner menu!

Best regards - Al
Parent - By MMyers (**) Date 04-22-2011 18:26
I usually develop a procedure, document it as I'm working until I'm happy with it (pWPS...?), do some preliminary testing to make sure I can pass, make a real test coupon in full conformance to the code, test it (PQR), then write it down/formalize it/control it (WPS).  For what I do, I'm making it up as I go along until I'm happy, then I make the test piece that gets tested.  By the time I formally test the coupon I have the procedure I want, so sure, yea, you could call that a pWPS, but it seems to me the development part of the process is getting ignored and is where the "pWPS" is derived from.
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / WPS

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill