AWS D1.1 SAW WPS

Date 04-23-2012 20:30

I posted this on eng-tips, but thought I'd give it a go here too.

A customer is rejecting our SAW procedure based on the fact that we do not list whether the flux is active or neutral. We are using an EM12K electrode (wire feed) with an F7A2 flux. Thus the electrode flux classification is F7A2-EM12K-H8 in accordance with AWS A5.17.

The person who reviewed the WPS is just referring me to table 4.5 in AWS D1.1 part 3 which states requalification of a WPS is required if the electrode-flux combination changes, and part 4 which references AWS A5.17.

I do not have A5.17 handy. Could anyone tell me whether the AWS A5.17 standard differentiates using an active or neutral flux as a different electrode flux classification? From what I can tell, all I need on the WPS is the F7A2-EM12K-H8 designation.

Thanks for the help.

Drew

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 04-24-2012 00:14

Drew,
There is no mention of active or neutral fluxes in AWS D1.1 2004 or 2010 and if it is not mentioned in the code it cannot be an essential variable.
You state an electrode - flux combination change / the code actually states an electrode-flux classification change.
As long as you are using the same electrode/flux classifications used on the PQR then you are fine,
Regards,
Shane

By eekpod

Date 04-24-2012 10:19

Ive had people reject WPS's once in awhile for information that I felt wasn't required by the code.
I polietly asked them what page and line this requirement was from in the code because in my opinion it was required.

try it and see what happens.
Good Luck

By drewp29 (**)

Date 04-24-2012 14:25

That's actually exactly what I started out with . . . I stated I was not aware of the requirement in D1.1 so if they could point me in the right direction I would comply. The reviewer stated Table 4.5 part 3 says a SAW WPS must be requalified if the electrode flux classification (sorry Shane, that's what I meant) changes. And then he stated A5.17 or A5.23 should be referenced for SAW consumables.

I am not in the habit of changing WPS just because a reviewer says certain info should be listed. If the code calls for it, then by all means I'll change it, otherwise I research it and politely say no.

By 803056

Date 04-24-2012 15:43 Edited 04-24-2012 15:45

Active fluxes are generally used for single pass welds and neutral fluxes are often used for multiple pass welds. However, I'm not aware of that as an essential variable in D1.1.

You didn't mention what edition of D1.1 you are using. That may make a difference, but I do not believe it will.

Is this a prequalified WPS? If it is, why is the reviewer looking at Table 4.5 (I'm looking at D1.1-2008)? Clause 4 only comes into play if you are qualifying the WPS because it doesn't meet the requirements for prequalification and it is used as a reference to determine what variables are to be addressed (and their respective ranges) in the WPS. Whether the flux is active or neutral isn't one of the variables listed. If you change to a different F/E combination, a revised prequalified WPS is all that is needed.

The phrase "Pound Sand" comes to mind, but the need to be political correct probably wouldn't allow for such a response.

Best regards - Al

By drewp29 (**)

Date 04-24-2012 17:17

Thanks Al, I didn't even consider that the WPS is prequalified thus Clause 4 is not applicable. The WPS was written a number of years ago and is qualified to D1.1:2006. The particular flux we are using is an active flux, and we use it for mainly single pass 1/4" thick CS square groove welds. We have used it on multi-pass square groove welds up to 1/2" thick plate as we have written the WPS with a range of thicknesses of 1/4"-1/2" per D1.1 Joint B-L1a-S. We limit the number of passes on thicker material due to the active flux.

By PWCameron (**)

Date 04-24-2012 20:36

What are the origins of the phrase, "Pound Sand"?
:lol:

PWC

By 803056

Date 04-24-2012 21:05

Good question. Let us know what you find.

Al :grin:

By drewp29 (**)

Date 04-25-2012 14:34

I would wager a guess at that, but it may be a topic more suitable for the OTB&G area of these forums :grin: