ASME IX seems to clearly consider GMAW and FCAW to be the same process (i.e. QW-355, essential variables)). I do not find any clear indication in AWS D1.1 that differentiates the 2 as same or different "processes".
Crux of the matter is whether a welder qualified using AWS D1.1 with FCAW is qualified for GMAW (hard wire, spray-not short arc) and vice-versa.
I can see where FCA and GMA have many similarities, but given FCA might be self shielded, or gas shielded, and there generally is the presence of slag - I feel FCA may require additional skills and abilities not required for GMA spray. Also - FCA can, dependent on wire type used, be all-position - while GMAW spray is not.
Any Thoughts or remarks to clarify this matter ?
Hi Jerry,
I don't know about ASME, but according to D1.1, Table 4.11, "Welding Personnel Performance Essential Variable Changes Requiring Requalification", item (1) states "To a process not qualified". So, the answer is no. A welder qualified per AWS D1.1 with FCAW is not qualified for GMAW, nor is it reversable. Welder qualifications between processes are not interchangeable. Each process must be a separate qualification.
Although they got their start as the same process, the FCAW was broken off into its own process because of the differences stated. AWS considers it a separate process. D1.1 does also.
But AWS 2.1:2000 Specification for Welding Procedure and Performance Qualification, 3.6 Performance Qualification Variables recognizes the similarities enough that is says:
"3.6.1 Qualification on one WPS will also qualify for welding any other WPS within the limits given in 3.4 and the following performance qualification variables.
3.6.1.1 A change in any variable listed below from that which a welder's qualification test will require requalification of that welder:
(1) A change in welding process except that welders qualified with GMAW spray, pulsed spray, or globular transfer are also qualified to weld with gas-shielded FCAW and visa versa." ...
Further, D1.1 uses the terms FCAW-S, FCAW-G, GMAW-S as well as other more common process designations so that indicates to me that they are all considered separate and distinct processes and would under D1.1 require separate qualifications.
I'm not sure FCAW-S and FCAW-G count as separate processes for D1.1 welder qualfication. Table 4.11 says "GMAW-S is considered a separate process" but doesn't say anything about FCAW-S vs. FCAW-G. There is a note below that I don't understand at all that says, "Welders qualified for SAW, GMAW, FCAW or GTAW shall be considered as qualified welding operators in the same process(es) and subject to the welder essential variable limitations."
I can't find anything in D1.5 either to suggest that FCAW-S and FCAW-G are considered separate process for welder qualification. For procedure qualification, the electrodes fall under separate classifications so the process question is irrelevant.
Hg
I'll stand corrected as related to welder qualification. It is an essential variable for the PQR but not welder qualification.
I interpret the note in question this way. An SAW welder is qualified to operate a handheld or track guided process. A GMAW or FCAW semiautomatic qualified welder is also qualified to operate a track guided process. So a welder qualified to operate a hand held process is also qualified to operate a more automated process within the same essential variables.
I have same question about the FCAW and GMAW,For our country they are same,and in the ASME IX,according to QW-361.1(b) QW-361.2(a) they are not.
QW-361 and 362 are for welding operators, not welders, but albeit;
After further thought and consideration, and other feedback, I am
convinced that FCAW and GMAW are different processes, and will treat them that way. What probably got me started was the fact that QW-255 shows all the variables to be the same for both - but I suppose now that this is simply to avoid the need for duplicate or identical pages for each. QW-404.23 also helps throw a monkey wrench into them being the same, as the filler metal product form is an essential variable.
adios and thanks
Hello all,
this is an old post but faced the issue recently and I founf out the final answer (from ASME interpretations)
Subject Description: QW-304 and QW-355 - FCAW
Date Issued: 08/18/2009
Record Number: 09-1012
Interpretation Number: IX-10-03
Question(s) and Reply(ies): Question (1): May radiographic examination meeting the requirements of QW-304 be
used to qualify a welder using the flux-cored arc welding (FCAW) process, provided the
transfer mode is not the short circuiting mode?
Reply (1): Yes.
Question (2): When qualifying a welder in accordance with the essential variables listed
in QW-355 for the gas metal-arc welding (GMAW) process and the requirements of
QW-304 are met, is the welder also qualified for the flux-cored arc welding (FCAW)
process if the essential variables are unchanged?
Reply (2): Yes.
Actually the explanation seems to be that the sec. IX consider the FCAW a variant of the GMAW process (both in QW-255 and QW-355) BUT in process (PQR) qualification the QW404.23 (filler metal product form) forbid to change from solid wire to cored, actually making a clear distinction from GMAW to FCAW. In QW-355 this essential variable is not recalled, only F-Number is . Having Solid and Cored wire the same F-Number.... a welder is qualified for both welding processes, as per official interpretation above.
Regards
Forum
