Mandated Prequalified WPS

Date 04-01-2013 16:13

The engineer can mandate anything he wants. You on the other hand, can show the engineer that there is a faster way of doing the job. You just have to prove it.

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 04-01-2013 16:14

That's pretty much a perfect answer!

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 04-01-2013 18:04

Joey,
Look at the first part of this Technical Interpretation. If you use a detail that is pre-qualified and it calls for backgouging and backweld/fillet weld, the use of ceramic backing IS Pre-Qualified. This Interpretation is not that old. Still appears to be applicable.

BUT, if the steel backing is detailed to remain with or without fillet welds to the member then ceramic is not a pre-approved replacement for steel. But, you could get an RFI to change the original detail so that a WPS with ceramic would be pre-qualified and ready to go.

AWS D1.1 Interpretation
Subject: Ceramic Backing and Welder Qualification
Code Edition: D1.1:2006
Code Provision: Clause 4
AWS Log: D1.1-06-I10b
Inquiry: (1) If the WPS clearly states that the ceramic backing to be used will be removed, with back
gouging to follow and a back weld then could this WPS then be deemed as prequalified?
(2) Regarding welder qualifications, if a welder is qualified in FCAW-S process using a E70 series
electrode (example E71T-11), is he/she qualified to use other E70 (FCAW) series electrodes
(example E71T-8)?
(3) Is that same welder also qualified to use FCAW-G (example E71T-1)?
Response: (1) Yes, provided all conditions for a prequalified weld are met. Backing other than steel is not a
prequalified substitute where steel backing is required.
(2) Yes.
(3) Yes.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By gastonM (**)

Date 04-08-2013 12:51

Brent:

based in this interpretation, could i said that: "all processes that deposited weld metal, which will be removed with back gouging, not need to be qualified"?

I need to persuade an inspector, about no make PQR, for tack welds made in welded splices. (removed with arc-air gouging)
Do you have the oficial interpretation? I can´t download it from AWS webpage.
http://www.aws.org/technical/interps/inq-2-61.pdf, is it this, no?
thanks in advance.
Gastón

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 04-08-2013 14:05

Hi Gaston,
Can you use Clause 5.10 directly from AWS D1.1:2010?
This permits use of all sorts of nonfusible backing(several materials are spelled out) to prevent melt-thru while placing the root pass, then when the joint is filled on the one side, remove the ceramic backing and back gouge to sound metal(to remove any unmelted tacks, and unfused material), and fill second side.

By 46.00

Date 04-08-2013 20:34

gastonM, try this link:

http://www.aws.org/technical/interps/D1.1-06-I10b.pdf

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 04-08-2013 20:47

Add this interpretation:

AWS D1.1 Interpretation
Subject: Other than Steel Backing and Prequalified Joints
Code Edition: D1.1:2008
Code Provision: Subclauses 2.17 and 5.10
AWS Log: D1.1-08-I02
Inquiry: Can the use of backing “other than” steel be considered prequalified where back-gouging and
welding is performed on the second side?
Response: Yes, provided all conditions for a prequalified weld are met. Backing other than steel
is not a prequalified substitute where steel backing is required.

THEN, look at D1.1, Clause 5.18 on tack welds.

WHY would you have to remove a properly made tack weld and/or do a PQR? When using many of the Pre-Approved joints from Clause 3 you would need to place the tacks in the weld zone and they would then be incorporated into the finished weld.

Now, many joints will be made on heavy enough sections that they will get welded from one side, backgouged, and then welded from the other side. That being the case, it is still a Pre-Approved/Qualified joint procedure and the tacks would get removed in the course of getting the whole joint down to sound material and prepped for welding.

I hope I have understood your question correctly. Both interpretations I quoted are in the link area provided by 46.00

Have a Great Day, Brent