AWS A5.01 Procurement guidelines for consumables question

Date 01-17-2012 17:30 Edited 01-17-2012 20:20

I think the 5.2.1 clause reference is to NAVSEA 278, not 5.01. 5.2.1 (NAVSEA) explains how you should submit the Schedule 5/J data. You, as the contractor would be responsible for setting which class within Schedule 5/J you want, except that Schedule 5/J calls for testing per 5.9 for each lot SHIPPED. I take this to mean that any of the S1-4 Classes could work, as long as you have data for each lot you recieve The classes really only define lot size/conditions. Then you integrate this wire ordering/documentation/verification procedure into an addendum in you QC manual, submit to whoever, and wait for approval.

Minimum requirements for 5.9:2006 would be Schedule F, which won't be good enough.

It looks like the 1987 edition of 5.01 was in effect at the time the NAVSEA doc was released, so that might impact some of the above.

Metrode is really good at documentation, and they might be able to help with the paperwork

By Kix

Date 01-18-2012 18:47

Thanks for the reply! The way I read it is that I would reference 5.2.1 if there is a military equivalent whcih there is not. The it reads that if there is no military specification filler material type, conformance testing of each lot of electrode shall be accomplished in accordance with AWS A5.01. As a minimum, schedule J shall be employed. Lot classification shall be in accordance with AWS A5.01 class S2 for bare solid electrodes and rods. That's word for word out of 278 Table 2 note 6. All in all I'm really just wondering if I need typical certs or actual certs that I will need to document.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 01-18-2012 19:20

My downloaded version of NAVSEA 278 does not seem to have the S2 lot classification requirements in Table 2-note6. I am using the 26JAN87 version. My Note 6 does indicate that the requirements (results?) of the test(s) shall be submitted for approval IAW NAVSEA 278 5.2.1. Are we getting mixed up between A5.01 5.2.1 and NAVSEA 278 5.2.1? 5.2.1 in A5.01 does cover S2 solid filler lot classification

By 803056

Date 01-19-2012 04:27

If you cannot procure filler metal to a MIL-E specification you can order your filler metals directly from the manufacturer. Use AWS A5.01 for your purchasing requirement, all testing has to be per Schedule J with appropriate lot classification, and require certified test reports for each lot delivered. A Typical or C of C ain't going to cut it.

Your purchase order should list every piece of information specified by A5.01 as far as the specification, classification, diameter, length, weight, testing requirements, etc. The testing schedule specified determines or lists the extent of testing and the supporting documentation that is part of the manufacturer's deliverables. If there is no certified test report for each lot, don't accept the filler metal plain and simple. This is not your everyday off the shelf filler metal.

You will have to pay for the testing and most likely the filler metal will be passed through a local distributer. Do not allow the distributer to repackage or break the manufacturer's seal packaging.

Your customer (upper tier) should be auditing your operations, reviewing and approving your procedures for welding, welder training, NDT, and other supporting documentation (such as your purchase orders), how materials are recieved and inventoried, etc., before you go into production. I know, you've been doing it this way or that for thirty years and no one has had a problem yet.

Trust me, do it in accordance with the fabrication documents (TP278, 1688, etc.). You do not want to fail an audit. It is a long road to get reapproved for fabrication once you get shut down. A good part of my business is getting companies back on track after they've had a run in with Uncle Sam. It is never pretty, it is never painless, and it is very expensive!

Best regards - Al

By Kix

Date 01-19-2012 11:53

Thanks Al, that's what I needed to hear. Sounds like It would be cheaper and less painful to use the MIL-309 under group A8B in table 2.

By Kix

Date 01-19-2012 12:01

Don't think so, but I could be wrong. :smile:

AWS A5.01 Clause 5.2.1 is for CLass 1 Tubular cored wires. If I mentioned 5.2.1 it was referencing Tech Pub 278. Sorry if I got us confused.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 01-19-2012 13:37

I guess if your 278 says s2, then all you have to do is find a mfg that can do it. I would look for CMTR paperwork, also called actuals, there is some commentary on this subject in 5.01

By Kix

Date 01-19-2012 16:52

Interesting. I've always been under the impression that the CMTR's that you can get off the wire manufactures websites and from the manufacture itself are called typical certs. I thought actual certs were when you had to recieve wire in and send samples to the lab for testing to see what that actual lot or heat number was producing. Looks like I need to do some more reading.

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 01-19-2012 17:23

If you look in Annex D of 5.01, they explain the differences (as seen by the committee) between MTR, CMTR, Cert of Conformance, Cert of Compliance, and "Typical". You will possibly have to discuss these terms in detail with your filler supplier/manufacturer so you get exactly what you want. I would shoot for the CMTR, which should include a statement of compliance with 5.9, as well as the results of actual tests on the material supplied

By Kix

Date 01-19-2012 19:14 Edited 01-19-2012 19:20

Nice, that was a very good read. Sounds like schedule J in AWS A5.01 requires chemical tracibility which would fall into a CMTR category if I'm interpriting it right. I know we can get CMTR's fairly easily from the maufacture we use for all our Tig wire. I looked at a CMTR frm some filler we are using on an ASME U stamp coil and it reads actual chemical analysis with the readings and it also has says typical yield strength and tensile strength. It shouldn't be a problem that the destructive testing is reported as typical would it. The way I read schedule J we really only need the chemical I think. Would it cost us more to ask our supplier to send a CMTR along with the wire we are allready purchasing?

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 01-19-2012 19:44

I would actually use 3 different books for ordering filler metal if I had to get real serious.
A5.01, Procurement;
A5.02 sizes, packaging, etc.
A5.09, which gives the actual tests required on solid filler metal

Sched J says the tests required are the ones in 5.9, which is pretty easy, 7.1 of 5.9 says: chemical analysis of the filler is all that is required.

Still not sure on the lot classification, if you use S2, the size will be 100K lbs or 24hrs of consecutive production, whichever is smaller. This amount shall be produced from 1 heat or controlled chemical composition (see 4.2 or 4.3 respectively)

I would require conformance to 5.02 jsut for the sake of completeness

A CMTR for S2 classification shold be pretty easy to get, depending on the mfg's lot sizing and sampling schedule. Need to work closely with the vendor/mfg, so they understand the Schedule/Lot classification concerns. For instance, if they have a single CMTR for lots larger than 100K lbs, it is not an S2 classification. Not unusual for vendors to need some education on that.

I would tell the vendor that they can have the business if they can provide the correct paperwork

Destructive testing/tensiles is not part of 5.01 or 5.09, so it is just an extra goodie for you.

yojimbo is pretty sure I am an idiot, so take it all with a grain of salt