Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / ASME Codes / GMAW/FCAW Separate Process ASME?
- - By zinnan (*) Date 01-12-2012 01:52
I consider these two separate processes. Nothing alike. However, page 27 of the code has them together on the chart concerning essential variables for WPS creation and also for performance qualification (page 58). Does ASME consider these two the same process?

I am currently re-qualifying welders that I THOUGHT were improperly certified (the same test plate for solid wire qualification being used for FCAW qualification). ASME is the code we recognize as a company so if they recognize those as the same process, I'm going to save a bunch dollars not having to re-qualify.

Information?
Z
Parent - - By kilgoretrout (*) Date 01-12-2012 12:54 Edited 01-12-2012 12:58
In most cases if your welders are qualified for GMAW they will also be qualified for FCAW but only if the essential variables are the same.
As an example, if he is welding with FCAW with a certain F number, his WPQ will have to meet that F number.

Transfer mode is also an essential. FCAW is a globular transfer.
Parent - By zinnan (*) Date 01-16-2012 12:15
There is my answer...the transfer mode we use daily (and the procedures) are spray which makes the two separate processes.
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 01-16-2012 13:25
Are you sure about that whole FCAW is globular thing?

There are several manufacturers who claim their E71T-1 electrodes spray.   It may be a fine point... But there it is..

The Hobart institute says that E71T-1 C/CM electrodes for example,  Spray with 75/25 but may run globular with 100% C02
Parent - - By zinnan (*) Date 01-16-2012 16:36
Nope, not sure 100%, which is becoming a popular trend with the ASME IX. We use 100 CO2 which corresponds with the additional info you gave me about the Hobart Institute. Thanks.
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 01-16-2012 17:01 Edited 01-16-2012 17:03
Right,

It's one of those technical points that may never be made clear by the various committees involved.

I run about 1200 lbs of ESAB 710X E71T-1 in my shop every semester and it "appears" to me to spray with 100% CO2 when operated within the manufacturers suggested parameters.

If we define "spray transfer" as; an open arc with droplet transfer being smaller than the wire diameter and "Globular transfer" also as open arc with droplet transfer larger than the wire diameter.

Lots of improvements in FCAW technology in the last few years, as it relates consistancy of electrode wire quality and the ability to run out of position at wire feed rates that were unheard of not so long ago...

Edit:  I'm not trying to argue any point in particular on this thread... It's just a topic I think is worth discussing.
Parent - - By zinnan (*) Date 01-16-2012 17:29
I agree. I personally would advocate for separating the two processes as they are very different and take a different set of skills to be able to accomplish. Erroring on the side of caution I have been retesting senior welders and finding there skills with FCAW are in need of work due to their solid wire welding over the past few years. One doesn't help the other if used exclusively.
Parent - By Lawrence (*****) Date 01-16-2012 22:26
You said a mouthful..  And I agree.

Al Moore, who is known on this board as "803056"  Is a big advocate of specific testing on for FCAW and especially fillets.

If you have the time, you might find it interesting/helpful to do a forum search using "803056" and "FCAW Fillet Break" in the search engine.. 

Here is just one thread where Al speaks at some length on the subject  http://www.aws.org/cgi-bin/mwf/forum_search.pl?words=fillet+break+test+FCAW&user=803056&board=0&field=body&min=&max=&order=desc

GMAW spray and FCAW have some very different techniques when it comes to getting acceptable results, especially in fillets.
Parent - By js55 (*****) Date 01-12-2012 13:04
If you look at QW-404.23 you will find that for procedures the product form is an essential variable. For performance qualification, though I do not speak for ASME, just my own experience, the thinking is that the usability of the processes is close enough to consider together.
Parent - - By JustinT (*) Date 02-14-2012 19:18
GMAW/FCAW are considered the same process by ASME. If you think about it, they are pretty close: both use the same equipment, wire feed mechanisms, etc. The other posters are correct, if you qualify one you qualify another within the same range of essential variables. So if I give a guy a test using E71T-1 (F-6 material), he can weld GMAW with ER70S-3 (also F-6 material), keeping all other variables the same. Someone mentioned transfer mode and there is a lot of talk about that. The essential variable involved, QW-409.2 states that you only need to requalify if you change from Spray, Globular or Pulsed to Short Arc and Vise Versa. This is true in any code, short arc is always an additional qualification. So as long as you are still using globular, spray or pulsed, you're ok.
Parent - - By zinnan (*) Date 02-15-2012 13:37
I understand what ASME says but strongly disagree with their assumption the two processes are similar. We have 32 welders on staff and I train 500+ a year...one definetely doesn't qualify another or I/we would be out of business. Glad it is a minimum standard and I can go above and beyond.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 02-27-2012 18:38
Good point  Zinnan.

Al
Up Topic Welding Industry / ASME Codes / GMAW/FCAW Separate Process ASME?

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill