American Welding Society Forum
A CWI has written a WPS for the GMAW process. This procedure specifies .062 wire, but the wire that is being used is .052
When I questioned him about it, assuming that it was simply a typo, he said that it is within D1.1 parameters.
From my understanding, any increase or decrease in wire diameter for the GMAW process requires WPS requalification. This is per item (10) in Table 6.5 PQR Essential Variable Changes Requiring WPS Requalification for SMAW, SAW, GMAW, FCAW, and GTAW. He says that this only applies if the WPS was created from the PQR.
I’ll reserve my additional thoughts until after any responses.
Thanks for your help.
Just out of curiosity if not created from the PQR where was it created from?
It was supposed to be prequalified.
If the WPS was not qualified by testing then it must be a prequalified WPS if we are talking about AWS D1.1 eh?
For a prequalified WPS see Table 5.2 (7)
This table lists Variables that "must" be included in prequalified WPS's
Here it states that the nominal electrode diameter must be listed on the WPS.
The difference in this instance between .052 and .062 is not nominal.
Meaning the WPS should be revised to make the correction whether it is a typo or this guy found the elusive .062 electrode wire.
Since the nominal diameter is the essential variable, this indicates that any increase or decrease in electrode diameter must be noted on the WPS or a revision made to address the change.
The moral of the story is this: Whether the WPS is qualified or prequalified, a change in electrode diameter must be addressed.
1) A qualified WPS must be requalified
2) A prequalified WPS must be revised to note the change and also any electrical parameter changes that the filler metal change would drive. For example: An .052 filler wire run at 300 IPM WFS will deliver much lower current than an .062 diameter filler at the same feed speed with GMAW, MCAW, or FCAW.
Thank you Lawrence. This was my understanding as well, but with him being a CW1, and I’m not, I wanted to hear from others. It was no “typo”. He insisted that it is “within parameters”. I didn’t think he knew what he was talking about, so I didn’t bother asking “which parameters?, Though, his answer would have been interesting.
I will say this.
He could be perfectly compliant with a prequalified WPS and list several different wire diameters along with the relevant WFS, Voltages and other variables for each.
He can have is .062 and .052 fillers on the same WPS... But you can't go willy nilly and change wire diameters without revising the prequalified WPS.
He had .035, .045, and .060 on the same procedure, which I didn't see a problem with, except he had .060 listed and we were using .052
Just to expand what Lawrence said, in addition to including the electrode diameters, the ranges suitable for each diameter need to be listed.
Just because the lad passed the CWI doesn't mean he has the where with all to develop WPSs that are correct. You can do him a favor and tell him it isn't too late to sign up for "The Atlas of Welding Procedure Specifications" scheduled for this June.
"this guy found the elusive .062 electrode wire"- L
Lincoln makes a 1/16" (.062" - .063" - however you want to round it) diameter E70S6 solid wire in a 500# and 1000# drum.
You make good points about addressing the diameter change.
Thanks Lawrence, Al, and John. Now he’s asked me to write a PQR and WPS for Cast Connex. They sent us the UPC’s (UPC-8.625) and a cast steel plate for the PQR.
Have y’all had any experience with this? The only experience I’ve had was with Stein Steel in Atlanta, where the supervisor said “just weld it”. I have all the literature from Cast Connex that has a table with recommendations for the PQR and WPS.
Sorry Scott... That one is out of my wheel house.
But Al is so old that he has experience with everything going back to iron meteorites picked up off of the sand in the Sumerian out back.
There's a lot going on in the back ground that we aren't privy to. So, exactly what are you doing? What is the governing welding standard? Are you being asked to qualify the WPS to a specific standard?
D1.1,. we were not using .062, we were using .052
He wrote the wrong wire diameter on the WPS, and when I questioned him about it, he said the wire diameter was within the prequalified range... and it was not a typo :)
Exactly what is this Cast Connex? I like to know the chemistry of the base metal before jumping in with recommendations.
I took a look at their website. The end connection appears to be carbon steel that is compatible with steel pipe, but I didn't have access to their data sheets, so I'm still in the dark as to the composition.
Assuming the end fittings are cast low carbon steel, you could weld it the same as hot rolled low carbon steel. Use 70ksi filler metal and base the preheat on the thicker section (I assume the cast fitting will be the governing element for preheat). I hope this is not an application involving cyclic loading.
Cast ConneX are high strength connectors produced from cast steel that complies with ASTM A958 Grade SC 8620 Class 80/50, and include the supplementary requirements in AISC 358. In my situation, the CC part being used is UPC 8.625, which attaches to the open end of a HSS 8.625 A500B round tube using a CJP weld. The base material is not a D 1.1 prequalified base metal, so a PQR and WPS need to be written. Also, the CJP will be welded from one side only.
I found a six page document (link listed below) that has a lot of information about these steel castings, including on page 4, a table for suggested test recommendations for the PQR and the WPS that I plan to use. Cast Connex sent a cast steel plate when they sent the castings, for the qualification test(s).
I have two previous CC encounters with two different companies over the years, and they both simply welded them, without testing, and were never asked for the documentation.
It's too bad the design didn't include a "stub" that would fit the ID of the pipe to act as backing.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill