confined space safety qualifying welders a question of...
Post on 10-Oct-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
www.aws.org
July 2012 / Vol. 15 / No. 3
THE MAGAZINE FOR MATERIALS INSPECTION AND TESTING PERSONNEL
Confined Space Safety
Qualifying Welders
A Question of Ethics
IT
BLI
ND
PE
RF
Vol. 15 / No. 3
Features
1714
Understanding Welder Performance Qualificationby Jeff J. Fluckiger / Questions related to welder qualificationare answered / 11
Performing Inspections in Confined Spacesby Peter C. Amin / These tips will remind you of what you need to do tosafely perform inspections in confined spaces / 14
Qualifying Welders on Fillet Weldsby Albert J. Moore Jr. / A change is proposed as to how welders arequalified for fillet welds / 17
Ethics Alert: Recent Casesby Joseph P. Kane / Several recent cases in which ethics violations werecharged are discussed / 20
Departments
Editor’s Note................................6
News Bulletin ..............................8
Print and Product Showcase ......10
The Answer Is ............................22
Mark Your Calendar...................24
Just the Facts ..............................28
Technology Notes.......................30
Certification Schedule................31
Advertiser Index.........................32
Special care must be given to ensurethe inspector’s safety when working ina confined space such as this finnedheat exchanger. (Photo courtesy ofPeter C. Amin)
INSPECTION TRENDS (ISSN 1523-7168) is
published quarterly by the American Welding Society.
Editorial and advertising offices are located at 550 NW
LeJeune Rd., Miami, FL 33126; telephone (305) 443-
9353. Printed by R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co.,
Senatobia, Miss. Subscriptions $30.00 per year for
noncertified, nonmembers in the United States and its
possessions; $50.00 per year in foreign countries;
$20.00 per year for noncertified members and students;
$10.00 single issue for nonmembers and $7.00 single
issue for members. American Welding Society is located
at 550 NW LeJeune Rd., Miami, FL 33126-5671;
telephone (305) 443-9353, Periodicals postage paid in
Miami, Fla., and additional mailing offices.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to
Inspection Trends c/o American Welding Society, 550
NW LeJeune Rd., Miami, FL 33126-5671.
Readers of Inspection Trends may make copies of arti-
cles for personal, archival, educational, or
research purposes, and which are not for sale or
resale. Permission is granted to quote from articles, pro-
vided customary acknowledgment of authors
and sources is made. Starred (*) items excluded from copy-
right.
AWS MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the American Welding Society is to advance the science, technology, and application of welding and allied processes, including joining, brazing, soldering, cutting, and thermal spray.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 5
Editor’s NoteBy Mary Ruth Johnsen
Dear Readers,
In speaking with CWIs, I have
come under the opinion that welder
performance qualification is one of
those subjects that’s not as simple as
it might seem at first. While it’s
certainly something that many of
you do as a regular part of your job,
it’s also something you have
questions about and want some
verification that you’re doing correctly.
This issue provides the answers to some of those questions, but may
also spark some additional discussion. In the article beginning on page
11, Jeff Fluckiger covers the topic from a variety of viewpoints. First of
all, through the eyes of a person who had to take those performance tests
early on in his welding career, secondly as a person who has
administered those tests, and thirdly from his position as a longtime
member and now chair of the AWS B2 Committee on Procedure and
Performance Qualification. Fluckiger answers questions such as why
passing the qualification test for a groove weld means the welder is also
qualified for fillet welds and why qualifying for gas metal arc welding
also qualifies a welder for flux cored arc welding.
In The Answer Is (page 22), Al Moore explains why AWS codes,
standards, and specifications are truly consensus documents and why
there are occasional discrepancies between the requirements of one
dcoument and those of another. It all boils down to the fact that the
members of each committee have different backgrounds, different
professional interests, and different points of view. They make
compromises to get the committees’ work done. This process is
somewhat played out in the pages of this issue of Inspection Trends by
reading both Fluckiger’s and Moore’s articles on welder qualification.
In answering the question of why a groove weld qualifies for a fillet
weld, Fluckiger said, “This is an interesting question that I know
firsthand garnered hour after hour of debate for years during AWS B2
Committee meetings. Bottom line is this: It has been judged that it
requires more skill to weld a groove than a fillet.”
Moore, in his article that starts on page 17, says the debate needs to
be continued and gives his reasons for why qualification for groove and
fillet welds should be separated. According to Moore, “A simple code
revision would allow the welder to be qualified for both fillet and
groove welds with a single test.”
I’d like to know what you think about the subject. Contact me at
mjohnsen@aws.org.
PublisherAndrew Cullisoncullison@aws.org
EditorMary Ruth Johnsenmjohnsen@aws.org
Associate EditorsHoward Woodwardwoodward@aws.org
Kristin Campbellkcampbell@aws.org
Production EditorZaida Chavezzaida@aws.org
Senior Production CoordinatorBrenda Floresbflores@aws.org
National Sales DirectorRob Saltzsteinsalty@aws.org
Advertising Sales RepresentativeLea Panecalea@aws.org
Senior Advertising Production ManagerFrank Wilsonfwilson@aws.org
Subscriptions RepresentativeSylvia Ferreirasferreira@aws.org
American Welding Society550 NW LeJeune Rd.Miami, FL 33126(800/305) 443-9353
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by American Welding Society in bothprinted and electronic formats. The Society is not responsible for any statement made or opinion expressedherein. Data and information developed by the authors ofspecific articles are for informational purposes only andare not intended for use without independent, substantiating investigation on the part of potential users.
Inspection Trends / July 20126
www.AmericanWeldingOnline.com
Online Welding Safety Certificate Course
Earn PDHs and increase your ability to improve safety and health of your welding operations.Three-hour self-paced course covers electric shock, vision and skin protection,
ventilation, fire protection, handling of gases, and much more.
Sample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safety
OSHA estimates that4 out of every 1,000welders willexperience a fatalinjury or accident overtheir working lifetime
Online W g Safety Certificate CourseeldinOnline W g Safety Certificate Course
injury or accident overexperience a fatalwelders will4 out of every 1,000
estimates thatOSHA
g Safety Certificate Courseg Safety Certificate Course
Three-hour self-paced course covers electric shock, vision and skin protection, Earn PDHs and increase your ability to improve safety and health of your welding operations.
their working lifetime
Three-hour self-paced course covers electric shock, vision and skin protection, Earn PDHs and increase your ability to improve safety and health of your welding operations.
their working lifetime
Three-hour self-paced course covers electric shock, vision and skin protection, Earn PDHs and increase your ability to improve safety and health of your welding operations.
their working lifetimeinjury or accident overtheir working lifetime
Three-hour self-paced course covers electric shock, vision and skin protection, Earn PDHs and increase your ability to improve safety and health of your welding operations.
Three-hour self-paced course covers electric shock, vision and skin protection, Earn PDHs and increase your ability to improve safety and health of your welding operations.
Sample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safetySample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safetySample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safety
News Bulletins
Inspection Trends / July 20118
SGS Performed NDE for Eurovision SongContest Facilities
SGS recentlyperformed NDEservices for thesteel structures forthe press centerand Baku CrystalHall built for theEurovision SongContest 2012. Thecontractencompassedtesting of weldjoints, concretestrength, and bolttorque inspection.
The Eurovision Song Contest took place in May at the newdevelopment built in Baku, Azerbaijan.
Obermayer, part of the Obermayer Corporate Groupfounded in Munich in 1958, began construction of BakuCrystal Hall last year. SGS inspectors worked on site todetermine problem areas and ensure speedy feedback to theclient in order to facilitate rapid repair of weld joints and theproper tightening of bolts.
TÜV Rheinland Celebrates 140th Anniversary
TÜV Rheinland recently celebrated its 140thanniversary. The company, which began in 1872 as anendeavor to inspect steam boilers in the districts ofElberfeld and Barmen in Germany, has grown to a networkof laboratories and test and training centers with 500locations in more than 60 countries. The companyemploys 16,000 people, and has an annual revenue of $1.9billion.
The company inspects technical equipment, products,and services; oversees projects; and helps to shapeprocesses for a wide variety of companies through itsworldwide network of approved labs, testing facilities, andeducation centers.
“For 140 years, people and companies around theglobe have placed their trust in TÜV Rheinland because ofour history, reliability, and long-standing reputation in theindustry,” said Gerhard Luebken, chief regional officerand president and CEO of TÜV Rheinland North AmericaHolding, Inc., TÜV Rheinland of North America, Inc. “Wekeep our focus on serving customers, achieving success,and developing safe and sustainable solutions for thechallenges of today’s ever-changing markets.” Additionalinformation is available at www.tuv.com/us.
An SGS inspector at work. The companyrecently performed NDE of weld jointsfor Baku Crystal Hall and the new presscenter at a facility in Azerbaijan.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 9
Monroe County Community College NowOffering NDE Program
To tap into the state’s need for high-tech skills in high-techapplications, Monroe County Community College, Monroe,Mich., recently developed a nondestructive testing program,one of the first at a community college in the state.
The NDT Certificate Program consists of seven newcourses: introduction to NDT; liquid penetrant and magneticparticle testing; visual testing; radiographic testing Levels 1 and2; and ultrasonic testing Levels 1 and 2. The courses arederivative of the existing Nuclear Engineering Technologyassociate degree program and have direct relevance to thecollege’s existing Welding Technology associate degreeprogram within the Industrial Tech Division. Students will take24 credit hours to receive the certificate.
According to the school, “Through course progression, thestudent will gain a general knowledge of how to apply NDTmethods and develop a deeper understanding of hownondestructive testing impacts the world in which we live.”
Stork Technical Services Invests in New Dive Craft
Stork Technical Services Subsea, Aberdeen, UK, recentlyinvested more than $3.2 million in a new specialized diveintervention craft and full diving spread. The 49-ft vessel isequipped with a custom-made diver recovery system andsoftware-based dive management system. It is expected to bedelivered this summer.
The new air and nitrox diving spread will allow StorkSubsea to deliver subsea inspection, repair and maintenance,survey, and wet welding services from dive support vessels
around the world.In February, the company won a $15.8-million contract to
provide subsea inspection services off the coast of West Africa.To service the contract, Stork Subsea chartered DSV Adam’sVision for 15 months.
X-R-I Testing Opens Facility in South Carolina
X-R-I Testing, Troy, Mich., recently opened a new testingfacility in Duncan, S.C. The new facility is Nadcap accreditedto perform radiographic and liquid penetrant testing. Nadcapaccreditation for magnetic particle testing is expected sometimethis year. The facility will also provide consulting services tocompanies with internal NDE operations.
A privately held company, X-R-I Testing provides NDEservices to the aerospace, automotive, and power-generationindustries nationwide. More information is available atwww.xritesting.com.
See that the bolting’s done right.
TR
AI
NI
NG
•F
IE
LD
SU
PP
OR
T•
TE
CH
NI
CA
LE
XP
ER
TI
SE
info@appliedbolting.com
Scan for installation/inspection video link
or go to our website appliedbolting.com
1 800 552 1999
the best way to bolt!Squirter DTIs*®
You have questions, we can help.
Drive a Squirter® at:Booth # 327
*USA's only manufacturer of Quenched &Tempered DTIs per ASTM, RCSC and FQA.
Stork Technical Services Subsea’s new dive intervention craftis equipped with a custom-made diver recovery system andsoftware-based dive management system.
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
— continued on page 32
Print and Product Showcase
Inspection Trends / July 201210
Phased Array Flaw DetectorImproves Inspection Speed
The veo 16:128 phased arrayultrasonic flaw detector addresses 128probe elements for inspection andenables operators to connect largersingle probes or multiple probes to theinstrument. This increase in power andcapability is important for weldinspection, where a linear scan fromboth sides of the weld is needed. Theinstrument can address a pair of 64-element probes, allowing inspection tobe carried out in a single pass,improving speed of inspection andpositional accuracy since the twoprobes are linked together. Theinstrument features the capability forpitch-catch inspection techniques,merged C-scan inspections, and topviews. It offers a simple-to-useinterface, rugged housing design, andincludes UT Studio viewing andanalysis software.
Sonatest
www.sonatestinc.com
(210) 697-0335
Video Camera Easily Attachesto Most Borescopes
The Luxxor® portable videocamera can be easily attached to anyHawkeye® rigid or flexible borescopeand to most other major borescope
brands. The borescope attaches to thevideo coupler on the camera. Thecamera allows users to view internalinspection images on benchtop orportable video monitors or on acomputer. Video footage and stillphotos can be viewed live and thensaved, documented, and e-mailed. Thecamera has a 1⁄4-in. color CCD, built-in25-mm borescope coupler, and 768 ×494 pixel resolution.
Gradient Lens Corp.
www.gradientlens.com/lpc
(585) 235-2620
LED Flashlight Available inFour Models
The OPTI-LUX 365 Series UV-A(365 nm) LED flashlights are useful fora variety of NDE inspectionapplications. Four models areavailable: high-intensity and standard-intensity versions, each with or withoutan internal black light filter. The blacklight filter reduces the output ofwavelengths longer than 400 nm. High-intensity models produce a nominalsteady-state UV-A intensity of 10,000μW/cm2 at 15 in. Standard-intensitymodels produce a maximum UV-Aintensity of 4500 μW/cm2. Theflashlights come with a lanyard, beltholster, two rechargeable batteries,two-position smart charging cradlewith AC power cord, and UV-absorbing spectacles.
Spectronics Corp.
www.spectroline.com
(800) 274-8888
System Offers Wireless,Hand-held Weld Inspection
The WiKi-SCAN hand-held laser-
based systemcan be used toinspect weldjointpreparations,joint fitup,weld beadprofiles, andweld defects.It measures
critical parameters such as face androot openings, mismatch, and bevelangle. Results can be automaticallycompared to the tolerances set andprovide go/no-go feedback. Apermanent record of the weldmeasurements, voice and writtencomments, and photos of the weld arestored in the instrument and can besent to a computer. To inspect a part,the operator holds the unit up to thejoint and presses the trigger to takemeasurements and determine whetherany defects are present.
Servo-Robot, Inc.
www.servorobot.com
(450) 653-7868
Software Analyzes Data fromPhased Array Flaw Detector
The company developed itsOmniPC software specifically for theOlympus OmniScan phased array flawdetector. The computer-based softwareprogram provides comprehensiveanalysis of inspection data acquiredwith the flaw detector. The softwareallows the flaw detector to beemployed as a dedicated acquisitionunit when scanning for hidden cracks,voids, and other internal discontinuitiesin metals, composites, plastics, andceramics. This allows data acquisitionand data analysis to be conductedconcurrently, which increasesproductivity and decreases inspectiontime. The user interface is similar toOmniScan’s onboard data analysisprogram, making it easier forinspectors to learn the program.
Olympus NDT
www.olympus-ims.com
(800) 225-8330
Feature
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 11
By Jeff J. Fluckiger
Understanding Welder PerformanceQualification
This guide stresses the importance of the welding procedure specification and answersquestions related to welder qualification
One of the most difficult things Ihave ever had to do was tell anexperienced, seasoned welder that hewas no longer qualified to weld. I wasinspecting production work onelectrical conduit hangars deepunderground, and the weld quality wasvery poor. The welder had cheaters onhis cheaters, and he simply could nolonger see well enough to successfullyproduce an acceptable weld. Over theyears, he had repeatedly completedrequalification tests and hadmaintained qualification throughrecorded continued use, but he finallymet the day that officially became theend of his welding career. Of course,this was news he did not want to hearand did not accept well.
As inspectors, we have a greatresponsibility to know what we aredoing and to accurately call the shots. Ialways love when challenges that comefrom welders, foremen, engineers, andhigher-level managers are quicklyrebuffed and set right throughknowledge of the applicable code orspecification requirement. It is alwaysimportant to know what you are doingand why you are doing it.
The purpose of welderqualification testing is to determine theability of welders to produce a soundweld in the welding test positions.While many people — both welderstaking the tests and inspectorsconducting them — find performancequalification to be difficult, I knowsome, if not many, of you reading thisare saying to yourself, “What is sodifficult about a performance test?” Asyou gain experience, they do get easier,but just remember your first test.Personally, I was young and very
nervous. I knew I could weld, butcould I do it right on a test? As I lookedat the welding procedure, I wonderedwhat F4 and 3G and P1 were all aboutand what did it mean that the procedurewas qualified to ASME. All I wantedwas to pass the test and earn apaycheck.
Fortunately, there are manyeducational institutions across thecountry teaching not only theapplication of welding but also thetechnical theory behind welding.Welders need to know base metal andfiller metal designations. They shouldhave a basic understanding of materialgroupings, and they specifically needto know the limitations of theprocedures they use.
In addressing performancequalification, here are some of thequestions you might ask. Why does agroove weld qualify for fillet welding?Why does F4 qualify for the lower Fnumbers? Why does gas metal arcwelding (GMAW) qualify for fluxcored arc welding (FCAW)? Why?Why? Why?
For more than 25 years, I haveserved on the committee responsiblefor producing AWS B2.1, Standard forWelding Procedure and PerformanceQualification. I will offer answers tothese questions based on my opinionsand the experience gained throughworking with this committee.
The Basics of WelderQualification
I think it is worth taking the timeto review the basics. Thesefundamentals are critical in order toclearly understand the basis for
performance qualification. First, apreliminary welding procedurespecification (WPS) needs to bedeveloped, establishing the weldingrecipe to be followed to complete awelding procedure qualification record(PQR). The PQR is the actual record ofthe qualification variables used toproduce the test weldment whilefollowing the recipe of the preliminaryWPS and, when successfully tested,proves the mechanical compatibility ofthe filler/base metal combination. ThePQR is then used as the basis forwriting a WPS within the limitation ofthe variables established by theappropriate code or standard. Thisprocess can be simplified by using aStandard Welding ProcedureSpecification (SWPS) published byAWS. The SWPS is supported by asummary of applicable PQRs. Anappropriately qualified WPS is criticalto the performance test since thewelder is required to follow therequirements of the WPS.
The purpose of welderperformance testing is simple: It is atest for a welder to demonstrate theability to successfully complete a testweldment following the instruction of awelding procedure that has beenappropriately qualified or isprequalified as allowed by theapplication code. Most people tend tofocus on the arc part of this test morethan they do following therequirements of the WPS. Once awelder is qualified, there are limitationsestablished that restrict use, includingbut not limited to, change of process,position, filler metal, base metal,progression, mode of metal transfer,thickness, and diameter.
Inspection Trends / July 201212
Key to any welder performance testis the welding procedure specification(WPS) that provides instruction to thewelder. Without this instruction, thewelder simply cannot take the test. TheWPS provides base and filler metalrequirements, as well as spells out theposition, electrical characteristics,preheat and postheat requirements, etc.I’m sure you have caught on by now thatI am uncompromising on the use andpurpose of the WPS. As a qualifiedinspector in the welding industry, youmust understand WPSs. Unfortunately,at most of the job sites and shops that Ivisit, the welders are not veryknowledgeable nor sometimes evenaware of the WPS. They followinstructions provided by a foreman orsupervisor, and do their best to “make itlook good.”
To aid in understanding, let’sdiscuss the “why” questions mentionedpreviously. Keep in mind thatperformance requirements are written toadequately test the welders’ abilities butare also generalized to a certain extent sothat individual tests are not required foreach unique application. Throughout thisdiscussion, references made toqualification variables or requirementsare to AWS B2.1/B2.1M: 2009,Specification for Welding Procedure andPerformance Qualification.
Why does a groove weld qualify
for a fillet weld?
This is an interesting question that Iknow firsthand garnered hour after hourof debate for years during AWS B2Committee meetings. Bottom line is this:It has been judged that it requires moreskill to weld a groove than a fillet. Agroove test weldment requires tie in atthe root and sidewall when made withbacking or tie in on the prepared back
side of the joint. It requires a certainamount of bead profile control to allowmultiple-pass welds along with thecontrol of undercut, slag inclusions, andother inherent defects. A fillet weld maybe multiple pass and require some of thesame but not to the extent or degree asfor a groove weld.
The reason for so much debate onthis subject in the committee meetingswas that if a fillet weld is made withoutproper tie in at the root, it will fail. Someof the reasons for incomplete rootpenetration and tie in are electrode angle,electrode diameter, amperage, and arclength. This being true, it is alsoconsidered a training aspect: If a weldercan successfully weld a groove he or shecan weld a fillet, even if a little trainingis necessary.
Why does qualification using an
F4 electrode qualify for use with the
lower F numbers?
In general terms, F4 is a low-hydrogen electrode producing a thick,fluid, atmosphere-protecting, slow-freezing flux, whereas the lowerF-numbered electrodes consisting ofcellulose, rutile, and iron powdercoatings provide a less fluid, faster-freezing flux. Considering again thepurpose of the performance test and theability of the welder, it is consideredmore difficult to manipulate andmanage a molten weld pool with an F4electrode than with lower-F-numberedelectrodes. While you may think this isidiotic, most of us do recognize thatthere is a significant difference in thetechniques used with these variouselectrodes such as whipping, weaving,stringing, and long and short arcing.However, if a welder can succeed withan F4 electrode, he or she can usuallysucceed with the lower-F numbers even
if a little training on technique isnecessary.
Why does performance
qualification with the GMAW process
also qualify a welder for the FCAW
process and vice versa?
The principle here is historicallybased on the ability to use asemiautomatic process and theequipment associated with it ratherthan being based on the arc. There is asignificant difference at the arc whenyou have flux compared to when youdon’t.
You may be interested to knowthat this qualification variable is anactive action item within the B2committee. Serious consideration isbeing given to not allow this variableto stand and to require separatequalifications based on process.
There are a lot of whys to be askedthroughout the performancequalification process, and they are alllegitimate. I can tell you that theestablished requirements are based onmany years of experience from a wideindustrial application base and on thetechnical merit that all voluntarycontributors provide.
Conclusion
As you oversee welder qualificationtests, you’ll be in for lots of surprises.Figure 1 is a trophy from one of myexperiences. Normally, a trophy isawarded for something a person is proudof and is given for a specificaccomplishment such as in a sport oractivity such as hunting or fishing.Occasionally, however, a trophy is keptas a memento or souvenir based on theshock or surprise value that it offers. Awelder came into the weld lab to take thestandard 3⁄8-in. plate with backing,shielded metal arc welding, low-hydrogen test. This fine specimen was tobe welded in the 2G test position. Thewelder was turned loose after a fitupinspection. I heard the power supplysurging from the abruptly changing arclength and wondered what in the worldwas going on. I looked around thecurtain and saw the “welder” hadrepositioned the test plate to the 1G testposition. He was working his elbow andwaving his electrode-holding arm fromside to side trying to complete the weldbefore he got caught. Busted! As youcan tell by the picture, this guy was not awelder, and I am surprised he knew howto put the electrode in the electrode
Fig. 1 — An example from a poor attempt at a welder qualification test.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 13
holder. By the way, he was provided acopy of the WPS.
If you have questions and/or concerns
you would like the B2 Committee on
Procedure and Performance Qualification
to consider and evaluate, please submit
them to committee secretary Alex Diaz at
adiaz@aws.org. Also, we can always use
your help, and we welcome you to attend a
meeting and to apply to become a
committee member. It is the committee’s
desire to provide a comprehensive
standard to the industry that is both
technically correct and useful.
JEFF J. FLUCKIGER(jeffery.fluckiger@inl.gov) is QA man-ager, Idaho National Laboratory, IdahoFalls, Idaho. He is chair of the AWS B2Committee on Procedure and Perform-
ance Qualification.
Practical Knowledge, Worldly Wisdom & Extraordinary Ingenuity
Mark Your Calendar! For more conference details visit www.asnt.org/events/events.htm
ASNT Fall Conference The 2012 NDT ExperienceOrlando, Florida, USA
29 October-1 November 2012Rosen Shingle Creek Resort
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
Feature
Inspection Trends / July 201214
By Peter C. Amin
Inspectors in many industries haveto enter a confined space from time totime, if not on a regular basis. A con-fined space may be defined as a spacethat has any or all of the followingcharacteristics:• Limited openings for entry and exit;• Unfavorable natural ventilation;• Not designed for continuous worker
occupancy.Confined spaces include, but are
not limited to, boilers, pressure ves-sels, cargo tanks, fuel oil tanks, lubeoil tanks, service tunnels, pump rooms,compressor rooms, and enginecrankcases.
Some of the risks are as follows:• Serious risk of fire or explosion;• Loss of consciousness from asphyxi-
ation arising from gas, fumes, vapor,or lack of oxygen;
• Drowning arising from increasedwater level;
• Loss of consciousness arising froman increase in body temperature;
• Asphyxiation/suffocation arisingfrom free-flowing solid (engulfment)or the inability to reach a breathableatmosphere due to entrapment.
Working in confined spaces isdangerous not only because of the rea-sons stated above but also because res-cue from the confined space, in thecase of an accident, is a difficult taskin and of itself.
There are some precautions thatcan be taken to minimize the risk toproperty and human life. Beforeentering the confined space, it isalwasy helpful to meet with the safetypersonnel and others in charge at thesite. Getting to know the details of theconfined space is very important tohelp you deal with unexpected situa-
tions that may arise during the inspection.
Organizational Procedure
Every organization must have asafety procedure for entering andworking in a confined space — Fig. 1.Before starting inspection work, get toknow those procedures thoroughly.Spare the time to take training, if avail-able. Familiarize yourself with thespace, hazards related to the space,entry and exit procedures, rescue pro-cedure, and Emergency Action Plan(EAP).
Emergency and evacuation proce-dures should be agreed upon and under-stood by all parties involved in a poten-tial rescue operation. Steps for safe res-cue should be included in all confinedspace entry procedures. Rescue shouldbe well planned and evidence should bemade available that indicates drills havebeen frequently conducted on emer-gency procedures.
Entry Certification
In many situations, certification by aqualified person is required before per-sonnel may enter a confined space.Whenever there is a requirement forcertification, anyone who is not certi-fied, no matter how much experiencethey might have in similar situations,must not enter and commence work.
The Permit
Entry into permit-required con-fined spaces must comply with regu-
Performing Inspections in Confined SpacesThe hazards of confined spaces and the processes necessary to work in them safely are outlined
Inspections in confined spaces such as theinside of this cooling tower must beplanned carefully before the inspector en-ters the space and precautions must betaken to minimize the risks.
Fig. 1 — Signs such as this warn ofa confined space area and should be
part of the organization’s safetyprocedures.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 15
Fig. 2 — Warning sign for a valve leadingin or out of a confined space.
Fig. 3 — Example of a meter for measuring avariety of gases.
Fig. 4 — Ensure proper arrangement ofventilation or blowers.
lations promulgated by theOccupational Safety and HealthAdministration. These regulationsinclude developing a written program,issuing entry permits, assigning atten-dant(s), designating entrants, andensuring a means of rescue.
In other words, the permit should• Identify the nature of work to be
done, exact location, and precautionstaken or to be taken;
• State safe working procedure;• Provide written authority for the con-
fined space to be entered and thework to start, and the time when thework must cease;
• State the time slot allocated for thedesignated work;
• Identify the personnel entering thespace and verify they have receivedthe required training.
Entry into a confined spaceshould only be allowed when a sepa-rate permit has been issued verifyingtests have been taken to ensure theatmosphere is safe to breathe.
All valves leading in or out of theconfined space should be clearlymarked “do not operate” — Fig. 2.
Testing the Atmosphere
Never trust your own senses todetermine whether the air in a confinedspace is safe! Many toxic gases andvapors can neither be seen nor smelled,nor can the level of oxygen present bedetermined without instrumentation.Proper procedures must be establishedto verify that the atmosphere is safe towork in or if some special respiratoryequipment is needed.
Effect of Work Performed
The type of work performed isalso important because toxic atmos-pheres are generated in variousprocesses. For example, solvents areused in many industries forcleaning/degreasing. The vapors fromthese solvents are very toxic in a con-fined space. Operations such as weld-ing, cutting, and brazing produce highheat that consumes oxygen. Painting,scraping, sandblasting, and degreasinggenerate dangerous gases and/orvapors. As you can see, the atmos-phere in a confined space, which maybe safe at the time of enty, canbecome toxic after the work hasbegun.
Inspection Trends / July 201216
Personal ProtectionEquipment
Use of proper personal protection
equipment (PPE) is very important.
You should not only have the proper
PPE, but also know how to use it.
Some common types of PPE are as fol-
lows:
• Body protection (hard-wearing over-
alls with suitable pockets for note-
book, etc.);
• Foot protection (steel toe caps, steel
midsoles, good grip, oil resistant);
• Head protection (hard hat with chin
straps);
• Hand protection (hard-wearing
gloves);
• Eye protection (protective glasses,
goggles);
• Ear protection (earmuffs or ear plugs,
which may need to be worn with a
communication system);
• Gas meter (a multigas meter for
measuring HC, H2S, CO, O2 is rec-
ommended) — Fig. 3;
• Lighting (hand-held with lanyard and
appropriate beam width);
• Special equipment as needed, i.e.,
explosion-proof lighting, special
breathing apparatus.
Care also must be taken to not
carry too much material such as extra
drawings, notebooks, unnecessary
PPE, etc., because these may cause a
problem if a rescue is necessary as
well as they could restrict your move-
ment in a confined space. Carry only
what you need, nothing more.
Lighting and Ventilation
A dark confined space is even
more dangerous to work in, so ensure a
proper level of lighting in the work
area. Ensure the electrical connections
provided to the lights are properly
insulated so as not to cause explosion
or fire. The type of light should be
suitable for the type of work being
done. A 60-W bulb cannot be provided
for painting work being carried out in
a confined space, an explosion proof
light is required.
Ventilation is also a major factor
in this case — Fig. 4. Ensure proper
arrangement of ventilation or blowers.
Table 1 shows the health effects creat-
ed by varying levels of oxygen. Lack
of oxygen can lead quickly to uncon-
sciousness and death.
Standby/Rescue
A person should never enter a con-
fined space without a rescue person
standing by — Fig. 5. A standby per-
son should always be available at the
entry of the confined space to ensure
the worker’s wellbeing.
The standby person
• Should not have any duties other
than to serve as standby and know
who to notify in case of emergency;
• Should never leave his or her post
even after help has arrived. The
standby person is also a key commu-
nication link to others onboard;
Rescuers must be trained to fol-
low established emergency procedures
and how to use appropriate equipment
and techniques (such as lifelines, res-
piratory protection, and serve as
standby persons).
Summary
Whenever the need arises to enter
a confined space, ensure the space is
secured. Otherwise, you are putting
your life in danger. Always remember
that no inspection is worth risking your
life or health.
Fig. 5 — Diagram showing the positioning of the standbyperson when work is being done in a confined space.
PETER C. AMIN(PeterC.Amin@lr.org) is with Lloyd’s
Register Asia and is stationed at Surat,Gujarat, India. He is an AWS CertifiedWelding Inspector and an ASNT NDTLevel III in RT, UT, MP, and PT. He isalso secretary of the AWS West Zone —
India Section.
Table 1 — Health Effects from Lack of
Oxygen
O2 level Effects
22% Oxygen-enriched atmosphere
20.8% Normal level. Safe for
entry (± 0.2%)
19.5% Oxygen-deficient atmosphere
16% Impaired judgment and
breathing
14% Rapid fatigue and faulty
judgment
11% Difficulty breathing and
death in a few minutes
FeatureBy Albert J. Moore Jr.
I consider myself to be one of the
many ground pounders of the
inspection industry. Much of my
practice involves inspecting welds: big
welds, little welds, fillet welds, groove
welds, plug welds. If it is welded, I
have been asked to inspect it.
Part of the inspector’s job entails
checking the welder’s qualifications
and the employer’s certification.
Following are several questions that
must be answered: Did the welder’s
employer sign the test record attesting
to the welder’s abilities and that the
information contained in the
performance test record is correct? Is
the welder qualified for the type of
welds being inspected? What test did
the welder take? That final question is
important because many welding codes
state that a welder qualified with a
groove weld is qualified to weld both
grooves and fillet welds, but a welder
who qualifies by taking the fillet weld
test is only qualified for fillet welds. I
believe there is a disconnect between
the test the welder takes and the type of
welds the welder is permitted to make.
Manufacturers must meet the
code requirements when a code is
referenced in the contract documents,
i.e., the purchase order, design
drawing, project specification, etc.
The intention is to ensure the structure
— whether it is a machine, building,
or a widget — that has been fabricated
or constructed is safe and will
function as intended. The code
requirements, limitations, restrictions,
prohibitions, etc., have evolved over
time to address issues and concerns
common to the industry. Changes in
the codes reflect lessons learned from
research and through analysis of
accidents.
Qualification Requirements
Let us get back to the problem
stated in the last sentence of the
opening paragraph. There appears to be
a disconnect between the requirements
contained in the welding codes and
how the welder is qualified to weld. Is
it reasonable for a welder to be
qualified to weld both fillet and groove
welds if the welder passes a
qualification test consisting of a groove
welded joint? Is it reasonable to limit
the welder’s qualifications to fillet
welds if the welder passes a typical
fillet test? My position is that the
current code requirements do not
properly assess the welder’s abilities to
produce sound welds.
My experience has been that the
success rate for a seasoned welder
taking the fillet break test on a T-joint
is very low. Overall, the success rate is
only about 15% when the welder is
evaluated by the fillet break test and
the fillet weld is deposited along the T-
joint as a single-pass weld. If the
discussion is limited to the test results
on gas metal arc welding (GMAW) and
flux cored arc welding (FCAW) using
electrode diameters of 0.052 in. or less,
the pass rate drops to about 5% on the
welder’s first attempt.
What is the problem with large
single-pass fillet welds? Why is the
failure rate so high? To answer those
questions, we have to look at weld
designs and consider what has
happened on the production floor in
recent years.
While taking a structural steel
design course many years ago, I asked
my professor the following question:
“Why do all the designers typically
specify 1⁄4-in. or 5⁄16-in. fillet welds?”
His response was short and simple:
“Quarter-inch and 5⁄16-in. fillet welds are
common because they are the largest
fillet welds that can be easily deposited
in a single pass.”
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 17
Qualifying Welders on Fillet WeldsA veteran inspector proposes a change to how welders are qualified to better reflectcurrent production practices
Fig. 1 — Proposed welder performance test for combination fillet and groove weld.
That made sense to me. I had
worked as a welder in the shop and was
currently welding in the field as a
structural ironworker. At the time, the
predominant welding process was
shielded metal arc welding, and we
used relatively large-diameter
electrodes. In the shop, we used E7024
and E7028 where the welds were in the
flat and horizontal positions. The same
was true in the field unless we were
welding in the vertical or overhead
positions. Still, we used the largest-
diameter electrodes we could handle
without wearing the molten metal. The
single-pass fillet welds were typically1⁄4 or 5⁄16 in., and they were not that
difficult to make.
The same cannot be said now that
fabricators use FCAW and GMAW
with smaller-diameter electrodes. The
small-diameter electrodes, 0.052 in.
and smaller, require specific techniques
to deposit a 5⁄16-in. weld successfully in
a single pass. Many welders simply do
not have the skills to deposit the
required weld size in a single pass, yet
they are expected to do so in
production. The root cause is the
absence of training and proper
assessment of the welder’s skills.
Some inspectors hold the position
that there is nothing in the code that
requires the weld to be deposited as a
single-pass fillet when taking the fillet
break test. I agree, but I am of the
opinion that the welder performance
test should reflect production needs
and requirements. When management
insists on single-pass fillet welds in
production, the welder should
demonstrate the ability to deposit the
single pass weld size required for
production work. The stated purpose of
the welder performance test is to allow
the welder to demonstrate proficiency
and the ability to deposit sound welds.
If the welder cannot demonstrate the
ability to deposit a single-pass fillet
weld of the required size in the test
booth, why should the employer or the
inspector be surprised when he or she
cannot do it in production?
Why Welders Fail
The primary reason welders fail
the fillet break test is they do not
secure fusion to the root of the joint.
The problem is not limited to one
position. I have seen welders struggle
in all the test positions. Another
common discontinuity observed is
undercut when welding in the vertical
position. Both undercut along the
upper toe and overlap along the lower
toe of large single-pass fillet welds are
common when testing in the
horizontal position.
These same welders can usually
pass the grooved plate test once all
hope of passing the fillet break test has
faded. Yes, you read the sentence
correctly. On many occasions, the
client has asked the welder be tested on
a grooved test coupon in the same test
position they just failed (using the fillet
break test), and they nearly always
pass. The pass rate for a grooved
coupon is approximately 85%. The
welder has demonstrated an inability to
deposit a sound fillet weld, and yet by
virtue of passing the groove test, is
qualified to make both fillet and
groove welds. This is the disconnect
between the welding codes and
production requirements mentioned in
the introduction.
A Modified Test
Is there a solution? I believe there
is. I do a considerable amount of work
that does not require compliance to
either the AWS Structural WeldingCodes or ASME Boiler and PressureVessel Code. When those jobs come up,
I incorporate AWS D1 structural
welding requirements in the project
specification when practical, but with a
slight modification. The welder is
required to qualify using a standard
fillet break test using a T-joint when
fillet welds are the only production
requirement — Fig. 1. The welders are
tested using a square groove with
backing and a 15⁄16-in. root opening
when both groove welds and fillet
welds are required. This test is similar
to the fillet weld option depicted in the
AWS Structural Welding Codes. The
rationale is that the modified test
requires the welder to deposit two fillet
welds that are subject to visual
examination. If the fillet welds are
acceptable, the remaining V-groove is
welded in the same test position. The
welder is essentially tested for fillets
and grooves on the same test coupon.
When the coupon is cut and the guided
bend testing completed, any
incomplete fusion in the roots of the
fillet welds is obvious. The visual
examination, detects any surface
discontinuities such as undercut and
overlap associated with the fillet welds.
Inspection Trends / July 201218
The welder prepares and welds a fabricated miter joint that will be subjected to aburst test. This test piece survived the burst test by remaining intact as the testpressure reached 1200 lb/in.2
The groove weld is subjected to visual
examination, and the guided bend tests
provide a means of assessing the weld
soundness. A crack initiating in the root
of the fillet weld due to incomplete
fusion is sufficient to reject the weld.
Evolution of Welding Codes
Welding codes evolve as
production methods and needs change.
The next edition of D1.1, StructuralWelding Code — Steel, is due for
publication in 2015. I believe this is an
opportune time for the code committee
to consider my proposal. The change
proposed in this article is a simple
extension of the tests already contained
in the existing Structural WeldingCodes. It is one more evolutional step
to make the Structural Welding Code
more relevant to current manufacturing
methods. Shielded metal arc welding is
no longer the dominant welding
process used for fabrication. The use of
large-diameter electrodes is no longer
the norm. Gas metal arc and flux cored
arc welding have largely replaced
SMAW, and the use of small-diameter
electrodes predominates.
This evolution in the production
methods necessitates a change in how
welders are qualified. Welders should
be required to demonstrate their ability
to deposit sound single-pass fillet
welds that are the same size required
for production. They should also be
required to demonstrate their ability to
deposit sound groove welds. A simple
code revision will allow the welder to
be qualified for both fillet and groove
welds with a single test. The revision
would involve requiring the welder to
pass a single test consisting of a square
groove with backing and a 15⁄16-in. root
opening (similar to the fillet weld
option depicted in AWS D1.1). The
current fillet break test would still
qualify the welder for fillet welds. The
current grooved plate test would
qualify the welder for grooves only. A
simple change in the current
methodology and language would
reaffirm the correlation between
production requirements and
performance qualification.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 19
ALBERT J. MOORE JR.(AMoore999@comcast.net) is vice presi-
dent, Marion Testing & Inspection, Canton,Conn. He is an AWS Senior Certified Weld-
ing Inspector and an ASNT ACCP NDTLevel III. He is also a member of the AWS
Certification Committee and the Committeeon Methods of Inspection of Welds.
This welder tests the T-joint he just welded. The testweld is a single-pass, 5⁄16-in. fillet weld. The fracturedweld must display fusion to the root with no excessiveporosity, slag inclusion, incomplete fusion, undercut,overlap, and excessive convexity.
The welder fabricates and welds a mitered joint that will be sub-jected to a burst test. This mitered joint withstood the test pressureof 1200 lb/in.2 without bursting, squirting water, or leaking.
FeatureBy
Inspection Trends / July 201220
By Joseph P. Kane
This article is the third in a four-part series related to the Code ofEthics found in AWS QC-1: 2007,Standard for AWS Certification of
Welding Inspectors.
The most severe sanctions issued
for a violation of the Code of Ethics are
revocation, suspension, or refusal of
renewal of an AWS certification. These
sanctions are commonly referred to as
the “death penalty.”
The most recent ethics violation
that went before a Hearing Panel has
run through the administrative hearing
and the administrative appeal
processes. The Respondent was a self-
employed AWS Certified Welding
Inspector (CWI). He is also an ASNT
SNTC-TC-1a Level 2 technician in
Ultrasonic Testing and Magnetic
Particle Testing.
Late last year, the Respondent,
who has been an AWS CWI since
2005, was charged with a violation of
several articles of Section 8 of AWS
QC-1-96 (specifically 8.1, 8.2, 8.2.4,
8.4.5, and 8.2.6). These articles are
related to integrity and responsibility to
the public. Apparently, the
Complainant who brought the charges
did not know there is a 2007 edition of
AWS QC-1, and that the Code of
Ethics, Rules of Conduct, and Practice
is now in Section 11. It is likely that
the following provisions now apply to
the complaint: 11.1, 11.2, 11.2.4,
11.2.5, 11.2.6, and 11.6.
QC-1: 2007, Standard for AWSCertification of Welding Inspectors,
can be downloaded free of charge from
the AWS Web site at www.aws.org.
The Basis for the Complaint
The Respondent was hired by an
engineering and inspections firm (the
Complainant) in a southeastern state to
perform visual welding inspection and
nondestructive examination in a
fabricating facility in New England. He
was to work as a third-party quality
assurance inspector for steel fabrication
for a prominent public sports venue.
The facility in New England was just
one of the fabrication facilities
involved in this project, at which the
Respondent performed the third-party
inspections, but it was reportedly the
only facility where the alleged
violations occurred.
To facilitate this third-party
inspection activity, the engineering and
inspections firm provided its own
company credit card to pay for the
inspector’s travel, hotel, and meal
expenses. The CWI was required to
travel to the fabricating facility at
certain times and perform the specified
surveillance and required testing. He
was required to file narrative and
nondestructive examination reports for
each activity and each visit, along with
time, travel, and expense reports
accompanied by appropriate receipts.
The CWI (Respondent) initially
traveled at the required intervals,
visited the fabrication shop, and
reportedly actually performed the
mandated inspection and
nondestructive testing activities.
However, for reasons not explained,
starting in June, he did not visit the
facility, but he did submit fully detailed
visual inspection and NDE reports,
along with payroll time and expense
reports, as well as receipts for several
visits to the facility. On its face, all
appeared to be normal.
The fabrication facility also
received a copy of the inspection
reports; however, personnel there
reportedly knew the inspector was
never at the facility during the five
dates the reports covered. The
engineering and inspections firm asked
the fabricator how it was shipping steel
with no inspection. The fabricator
reportedly said it had received the
reports via e-mail. The fabricator did
not report anything amiss or make an
actual complaint until September.
As things began to unravel, the
engineering and inspections firm asked
the CWI to explain the fabricator’s
allegation, as well as other
inconsistencies. At first, the inspector
denied the allegation, saying he had
gone there, and did conduct the
inspections. Later, he changed his story
and said he had gone there, but no one
saw him because he had visited during
the night shift. The engineering and
inspections firm reportedly conducted
its own internal investigation. It visited
the New England fabrication facility
and questioned key personnel.
The hotel’s records showed the
Respondent as a “no show, not
cancelled,” so their charge on the credit
card bill was still valid. The airline
showed him as a “no show,” and
eventually refunded the ticket charges.
Finally, the engineering and
inspections firm confronted the
Respondent, who reportedly admitted
he had not traveled to the site and did
Ethics Alert: Recent Cases
Each year, the Ethics Subcommittee handles a variety of complaints regarding the Code ofEthics, ranging from minor violations to those requiring the most stringent sanctions
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 21
not inspect the steel pieces on the dates
concerned. He also reportedly admitted
he had falsified the reports, and owed
the firm money for payroll, expenses,
and per diem.
In the evidence presented with the
complaint, there was a copy of an e-
mail message sent from the
Respondent to the client (the sports
facility contractor), in which he
admitted the fraud. The Respondent
also said the engineering and
inspections firm had no knowledge of
the fraud, and that the reports for the
dates mentioned in the complaint were
the only inspections that were
fraudulent. At the rest of the fabrication
facilities where he was supposed to
perform inspections for this project
during the previous seven months, he
said, “Every other inspection was
recorded correctly to the applicable
code and to the best of my ability.”
The Complainant reported that the
steel in question was subsequently
reinspected by a third party. All was
rejected.
The Hearing Panel
The AWS Hearing Panel convened
in a teleconference on February 1,
2012, and the AWS attorney swore-in a
representative from the Complainant,
the engineering and inspections firm.
The Complainant stated her case, then
was required to leave the call. She was
not party to the Hearing Panel’s
deliberations. The Respondent did not
participate despite notifications
inviting him to do so. The Respondent
did not even have to travel anywhere to
participate; he only had to attend a
teleconference.
The Hearing Panel deliberated and
“…further determined that a sanction
should be imposed, consisting of
revocation of the Respondent’s
Certified Welding Inspector status and
permanent ineligibility for CWI status
at any time in the future. This sanction
is to take effect at the earliest date
possible, subject to the Appeals
process.” (The date was February 2,
2012.)
Through his attorney, the
Respondent then appealed in
accordance with AWS QC-9,
Administrative Procedures for AllegedViolations of AWS CertificationPrograms, Section 8. On March 6, the
AWS Executive Committee met and
one of the items of business was the
Respondent’s appeal. The Hearing
Panel president was invited to present a
summary of the violation case, and the
Hearing Panel’s deliberations. The
appeal letter from the Respondent’s
attorney was also read and considered.
A motion was introduced and
seconded, to affirm the final ruling of
the Hearing Panel in all respects. The
motion carried 6 to 1.
For my part in this drama, I was
concerned that the e-mail submitted
with the complaint was not signed, and
was really untraceable without true
forensic investigation. The rest of the
evidence (inspection and NDE reports)
were not signed either. However, I also
knew the Respondent would get the
opportunity to have his say during the
hearing.
Most importantly, I was concerned
about all those steel tension welds
getting installed without proper
ultrasonic testing, and about the
fabricator’s possible complicity in the
whole affair. To this day, I would like
to know if the engineering and
inspections firm had the proper amount
of third-party surveillance on the
project at each of the fabrication
facilities, or if they cut corners with
intermittent inspection. (If there is
more to this case, perhaps the death
penalty might not have been
appropriate.)
However, with regard to the prima
facie case against the Respondent, I
didn’t even need a second reading of
the complaint to vote for convening a
Hearing Panel. The e-mail trail shows
that the other Ethics Subcommittee
members all voted very quickly for the
AWS Executive Director to convene a
Hearing Panel per the provisions of
AWS QC-9, Administrative Proceduresfor Alleged Violations of AWSCertification Programs. All generally
agreed that this was an easily verifiable
allegation that cried out for the harshest
sanction, the CWI “death penalty.”
I commend the engineering and
inspections firm for a concise, detailed,
properly documented, and properly
filled out complaint. The American
Welding Society could easily use this
complaint packet to pursue the
complaint through the administrative
hearing process. Assembling the
complaint packet took a lot of time and
effort on the company’s part. It is
seldom that the Ethics Subcommittee
gets a properly filled out and
documented complaint.
Other Recent Cases
There were some other complaints
of alleged violations last year though
none as dramatic or potentially harmful
to the public safety as the one outlined
here. However, they were still serious.
Some of these would be amusing if
they weren’t such serious violations.
There was an allegation that an
inspector did not want to wait for the
welders to come back from lunch to
complete their welder qualification
coupons, so he welded them to
completion himself. Can you imagine
that? Another allegation claimed an
inspector took some old welded
coupons out of a scrap bin and used
them as the welder’s coupons. These
cases did not go before a hearing panel
for various reasons.
The Ethics Subcommittee also
received complaints about phony CWIs
as well as former Certified Associate
Welding Inspectors (CAWIs) acting as,
and pretending to be, real AWS CWIs.
These cases do not go very far because
the phony CWIs have no actual
relationship to the American Welding
Society. The most that happens to them
is they receive a threatening letter from
the AWS attorney telling them to
desist.
These are just a few examples of
the types of cases presented to the
Ethics Subcommittee.
JOSEPH P. KANE(joseph.kane11@verizon.net) is with
Pennoni Associates, King of Prussia, Pa.He is an advisor to the AWS CertificationCommittee, a member of the Subcommit-
tee on the Code of Ethics, and chair of theStructural Inspection Subcommittee. He is
also an AWS Senior Certified WeldingInspector.
The Answer IsBy
Inspection Trends / July 201222
The Society is not responsible for any statements made or opinion expressed herein. Data and information developed by the authors are for specificinformational purposes only and are not intended for use without independent, substantiating investigation on the part of potential users.
By K. Erickson and A. Moore
Q: I am a relatively new CWI, and I
have a question about why there is a
difference between AWS D1.1,
Structural Welding Code — Steel, and
AWS B2.1, Specification for WeldingProcedure and PerformanceQualification. In D1.1, the test
coupon to attain an unlimited
thickness qualification for plate is
required to be 1 in. thick. In B2.1, it
is only required to be 3⁄4 in. I’m
curious because both publications
originate from the American
Welding Society. (Question
submitted by Brian Gerkin, CWI.)
A (from A. Moore): AWS committees
are populated by volunteers who serve
without compensation from AWS. I
assume most volunteers have similar
circumstances to mine. I have a
regular job. My employer demands
much of my time if I expect to collect
a paycheck with which I can pay my
mortgage, feed my family, pay my
taxes, etc. That limits the time I can
serve on AWS committees. The
specific committees I elect to serve on
are largely influenced by my interests
or those of my employers. I cannot
afford to serve on all the committees I
would like, and I assume that is the
situation many other committee
members find themselves in.
Considering all the committees,
subcommittees, and task groups
working under the auspices of AWS,
there are hundreds, if not thousands,
of individuals volunteering their time
to develop AWS welding codes and
standards. While the system permits a
large number of people to participate,
that also means there are just as many
philosophies regarding what is the
best way to meet the needs of our
industry.
The D1 Structural Welding Code
committees and subcommittees have
developed a particular philosophy of
how structures are to be welded and
they have adopted the requirement that
the welders must pass a 1-in.-thick
grooved plate (or ½-in.- or 0.203-in.-
thick wall for pipe) test if they are to be
qualified for unlimited thickness. It is
simply what the committee members
agreed to, and it has served industry
rather well for many years.
In contrast, a different group of
individuals populate ASME’s Section
IX Committee. Those people are of
the opinion that any welder who can
weld a ½-in.-thick plate (or pipe) is
qualified to weld with no thickness
limitations. It should come as no
surprise that a different organization
composed of individuals with
different philosophies working on
similar problems as AWS committee
members would resolve problems
differently.
AWS B2.1 was once considerably
different from how it is now. If you
compare an earlier edition such as the
1984 revision to the current edition, you
will note there are many differences. I
attribute many of the changes to an
attempt to harmonize AWS B2.1 with
ASME Section IX. Since all of AWS’s
standards are consensus documents,
majority rules and compromise is the
way things get through the system. I am
certain there are members of the B2.1
Committee who have an affiliation with
AWS D1.1. I would not find it surprising
if they pushed for 1-in.-thick plate to be
the basis for unlimited qualification.
Likewise, I know there are members on
the B2.1 Committee who have a strong
affiliation with ASME Section IX. I am
sure those members pushed for ½-in.-
thick plate as the basis for unlimited
qualification. I would not find it
surprising if the B2.1 Committee
eventually settles on ¾ in. as a
compromise to which the majority of the
membership could agree.
Membership on any committee
forces each member to make certain
compromises to develop a document
that satisfies the needs of industry. It
is rare that any one member gets
exactly what he or she thinks is best.
Q: On some large construction jobs,
the CWI might be responsible for
numerous welders in different
locations. Is there a maximum
number, and if so, which codes
apply? (Question submitted by Alan
Johnson, CWI, Seal Beach, Calif.)
A (from K. Erickson): To my
knowledge, there are no codes that
provide direct reference to this
question although this particular
subject matter has been a topic of
discussion relative to a variety of
industries and CWIs.
Different locations can apply to
numerous welders on a single
construction project or could also
apply to a number of welders involved
in separate construction projects. In
either application, the CWI’s
involvement is a direct relationship
between his or her contract
specification duties and the actual
time to carry out these duties. The
CWI’s involvement may be as simple
as performing final visual inspections
to actual 100% participation to
monitor in-process welding
parameters on more critical welded
joints with a hands-on turnover
approach.
The proper diagnosis of how many
welders a CWI can satisfactorily be
responsible for should be determined by
supervision to ensure that not only is the
contract specification being satisfied but
the governing standard is also being
The Society is not responsible for any statements made or opinion expressed herein. Data and information developed by the authors are for specificinformational purposes only and are not intended for use without independent, substantiating investigation on the part of potential users.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 23
adhered to along with the CWI’s
involvement for scheduling and possibly
performing any NDE required.
In the past, on larger-scale
construction projects, it was generally
viewed that a CWI should be able to
cover the activities of from 4 to 8
welders involving welding/NDE
inspection and from 6 to 12 welders
when lighter activities are required. I
have also heard of projects for which
the CWI was responsible for 12–20
welders. That, in my opinion, is very
demanding on the CWI and would
lead to a greater opportunity for error
and possible added repairs, reworks,
and nonconformances. In addition,
CWIs vary in both knowledge and
experience, so what may be a suitable
number of welders to cover for one
CWI may be too demanding for
another.
The bottom line is that if your
employer is extending you beyond
your capabilities, then your ability to
carry out your responsibilities are
being affected. This then needs to be
brought to the attention of your
supervisor(s) and/or company
management for resolution
immediately.
Inspection Trends encouragesquestion and answer submissions. Pleasemail to the editor (mjohnsen@aws.org).
KENNETH ERICKSON is manager of qual-ity at National Inspection & Consultants,Inc., Ft. Myers, Fla. He is an AWS SeniorCertified Welding Inspector, an ASNT Na-
tional NDT Level III Inspector in four meth-ods, and provides expert witness reviewand analysis for legal considerations.
ALBERT J. MOORE JR. is vice president,Marion Testing & Inspection, Canton,Conn. He is an AWS Senior Certified
Welding Inspector and an ASNT ACCPNDT Level III. He is also a member of the
AWS Certification Committee and theCommittee on Methods of Inspection of
Welds.
The all new S1 TITAN
hhsales@Bruker-Elemental.net
Positive Material Identification Fast alloy ID and chemistry Completely non-destructive Prevents material mix-up Lightweight – only 1.44kg / 3.17 lbs,
including battery
fie all new S1
ight and ex
nition of Pr
ceptionally accurTIT
recision
ceptionally accurate TATAN
Innovation with Integrity
or
hhsales@Brukuker.com/s1titan
y of virtually any alloy.y analyzer which provides grade ID and element
Handheld XRF
uk r-er-Elemental.net
vides grade ID and elemental
Handheld XRF
An Important Eventon Its Way?
Send information on upcoming events to InspectionTrends, 550 NW LeJeune Rd., Miami, FL 33126. Itemscan also be sent via FAX to (305) 443-7404 or bye-mail to mjohnsen@aws.org.
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
Inspection Trends / July 201224
Mark Your Calendar65th Annual Assembly of the International Institute ofWelding. July 8–13, Hyatt Regency Hotel Denver andColorado Convention Center. Sponsored by the AmericanWelding Society, Edison Welding Institute, and WeldingResearch Council. Visit www.iiw2012.com.
Review of Progress in Quantitative NondestructiveEvaluation (QNDE). July 15–20, Hyatt Regency TechCenter, Denver, Colo. Contact heidil@iastate.edu orwww.qndeprograms.org.
ASNT Digital Imaging XV Conference. July 16–18,Foxwoods Resort, Mashantucket, Conn. Contact AmericanSociety for Nondestructive Testing, (800) 222-2768 orwww.asnt.org.
12th EPRI Balance-of-Plant Heat Exchanger NDESymposium. Aug. 6–8, Park Hyatt Beaver Creek Resort,Avon, Colo. Contact Kenji Krzywosz, (704) 595-2596,kkrzywos@epri.com, or www.epri.com.
AWS/GSI Conference on U.S. and European WeldingStandards: Structural, Pressure Piping, Pipelines,Railroad, NDT. Oct. 22, 23, Munich, Germany. Visitwww.gsi-slv.de/en/conferences/conferences-in-2012/.
ASNT Fall Conference and Quality Testing Show. Oct.29–Nov. 2, Rosen Shingle Creek Resort, Orlando, Fla.Contact American Society for Nondestructive Testing, (800)222-2768 or www.asnt.org.
20th National Quality Education Conference. Nov. 11, 12,Hyatt Regency Louisville, Louisville, Ky. Contact AmericanSociety for Quality (ASQ), (800) 248-1946 or www.asq.org.
FABTECH 2012. Nov. 12–14, Las Vegas ConventionCenter, Las Vegas, Nev. Sponsored by the American WeldingSociety, Society of Manufacturing Engineers, and Fabricators& Manufacturers Association, Int’l. Visitwww.fabtechexpo.com.
Educational Opportunities
NDE Classes. Moraine Valley Community College, Palos
Hills, Ill., offers NDE classes in PT, MT, UT, RT, Radiation
Safety, and Eddy Current, as well as API 510 exam prep and
weld inspection. For more information, contact (708) 974-
5735; wdcs@morainevalley.edu; morainevalley.edu/NDE.
CWI Prep Course and AWS CWI Seminar and Exam.The Prep Course prepares candidates for the AWS Certified
AWS agreement with ASNT offers ACCP toqualified CWIs & SCWIs.
Do you need visual testing certification which meets the guidelines for Recommended Practice No. SNT-TC-1A as required by somesections of the ASME Code? Through this agreement, qualified SCWIs and CWIs can obtain ACCP Level II VT certification without examination.
Enhance your credentials and satisfy work requirements with the addition of an ACCP credential.
To apply and for more details visitwww.asnt.org or call 614.274.6003 or 800.222.2768 US/Canada.
Opportunity Knocks.
Image © Longview InspectionFor info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 25
Welding Inspector (CWI) seminar and examination. OfferedJuly 16–20 and October 15–19. The CWI seminar covershow to reference AWS codes, examine welds, and prepare forthe CWI exam on that following Saturday (proctored byAWS). Offered July 22–28 and October 21–27. ContactLincoln Electric’s Welding School at (216) 383-8325 or visitwww.lincolnelectric.com.
EPRI NDE Training Seminars. EPRI offers NDE technicalskills training in visual examination, ultrasonic examination,ASME Section XI, UT operator training, etc. Contact SherrylStogner, (704) 547-6174, e-mail: sstogner@epri.com.
Nondestructive Examination Courses. A course schedule isavailable from Hellier, 277 W. Main St., Ste. 2, Niantic, CT06357, (860) 739-8950, FAX (860) 739-6732.
NDE Training Courses. GE Inspection Technologies offerstraining on topics such as eddy current, digital radiography,and remote visual inspection. For the complete schedule,contact (866) 243-2638; www.geit-info@ge.com;www.ge.com/inspectiontechnologies.
Preparatory and Visual Weld Inspection Courses. One- andtwo-week courses presented in Pascagoula, Miss., Houston,Tex., and Houma and Sulphur, La. Contact Real EducationalServices, Inc., (800) 489-2890; info@realeducational.com.
CWI/CWE Course and Exam. A ten-day program presentedin Troy, Ohio. Contact Hobart Institute of Welding Technology(800) 332-9448; www.welding.org; hiwt@welding.org.
T.E.S.T. NDT, Inc., Courses. CWI preparation, NDEcourses, including ultrasonic thickness testing and advancedphased array. On-site training available. T.E.S.T. NDT, Inc.,193 Viking Ave., Brea, CA 92821; (714) 255-1500; FAX(714) 255-1580; ndtguru@aol.com; www.testndt.com.
NDE Training. NDE training at the company’s St. Louis-area facility or on-site. Level III services available. For aschedule of upcoming courses, contact Quality TestingServices, Inc., 2305 Millpark Dr., Maryland Heights, MO63043; (888) 770-0103; training@qualitytesting.net;www.qualitytesting.net.
CWI/CWE Prep Course and Exam and NDT InspectorTraining Courses. An AWS Accredited Testing Facility.Courses held year-round in Allentown, Pa., and at customers’facilities. Contact: Welder Training & Testing Institute (WTTI).Call (800) 223-9884, info@wtti.edu, or visit www.wtti.edu.
Welding Inspection, INTEG, Welding Health and Safety,and Welding Supervisor Courses. Contact the CanadianWelding Bureau for schedule at (800) 844-6790, or visitwww.cwbgroup.org.
In hydrotesting, time is money.We save you both.
The GripTight® high pressure test plug uses proven self gripping features to safely, quickly, and effectively test pipe — whether it’s pipe spools, pipe rack modules or process modules. The greater the test pressure, the greater the grip. Available to ANSI N45.2 and 10CFR50 Appendix B quality requirements. EST Group is ISO-9001 certified. When time equals money, add GripTight to the equation.
We invite you to see all that we can do for you at http://estgroup.cwfc.com
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-indexFor info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
November 12-14, 2012 | Las Vegas Convention CenterREGISTER NOW at fabtechexpo.com
Scan this code to watch an exciting preview of FABTECH.
North America’s Largest Metal Forming,Fabricating, Welding and Finishing Event
Follow us: Cosponsors:
CONNECT.
LEARN.
COLLABORATE.
Experience the dynamic learning environment of FABTECH 2012 – a place where you can exchange best practices and discover new ideas and trends to take your business to the next level. Network with peers, learn from top industry experts and be inspired by the 100+ targeted educational sessions. Th ere’s nothing else like it!
THE ONE EVENT TO GAIN CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE AND ENHANCE YOUR TECHNICAL EXPERTISE.FABTECH 2012.
®
Just the FactsBy Lyndsey Deckard
Inspection Trends / July 201228
The American Welding Societyrecognizes welder qualification andcertification in two ways. An employermay qualify a welder in accordance toAWS codes and standards, or theAmerican Welding Society itself maycertify a welder.
An AWS Certified Welder has beentested by a test supervisor (who must bean AWS CWI) at an AWS AccreditedTest Facility (ATF). If the welder’swelding tests are successful, the ATFwill forward the required records toAWS headquarters. The welder will thenbe placed on the AWS National Registryof Certified Welders. The registercontains all significant informationrelating to the welder’s certification andlimitations. It identifies the processes,materials, positions, thickness ranges,and currency of certification. In order tomaintain AWS certification, a weldermust not go for a period of more than sixmonths between welding in eachcertified process and position. There is
also a small certification/recertificationfee to be paid every six months. (Note:Because payment of the maintenance feeand submittal of the documentation ofwelding continuity every six months hasbeen viewed by some as cumbersomeand is often forgotten by the CertifiedWelder, AWS is currently looking into asystem that would reduce the frequencyof sending this information toheadquarters. If this change is made tothe requirements, it would greatlyincrease the convenience to the welderfor maintaining certification.)
A welder certified and current onthe AWS registry may work anywherein the world, and the AWS certificationwill go with that person. Acceptance ofthe certification by a foreign country is,of course, the decision of that country.
Welder qualification by theemployer, in accordance with AWScodes and standards, is entirely legal andmay be used on any projects thatcompany undertakes unless contract
documents specifically require the use ofAWS Certified Welders. Employercertification is not transferrable. If thewelder chooses to change employers, theperson’s new employer would requirehim or her to be retested and recertified.
Following is an excerpt from AWSQC7-93, Standard for AWS CertifiedWelders, Sections 1 and 3.
1. Scope1.1 Program. The rules for the
American Welding Society (AWS)Certified Welder Program and therequirements for maintenance ofcertification are provided in thisstandard. This standard requires the useof accredited test facilities forqualification testing.
1.2 Exclusion. This standard doesnot prevent a manufacturer, fabricator,or contractor from continuing to qualifywelders according to other standards.Employers may impose requirements inaddition to this standard, as deemednecessary.
How Welders Are Qualified and Certified
PublisherAndrew Cullison cullison@aws.org, Extension 249General Management,Reprint Permission,Copyright Issues
EditorMary Ruth Johnsenmjohnsen@aws.org, Extension 238Feature Articles
Production Editor Zaida Chavezzaida@aws.org, Extension 265Design and Production
Production Senior CoordinatorBrenda Floresbflores@aws.org, Extension 330Design and Production
Advertising Sales Director Rob Saltzstein salty@aws.org, Extension 243Advertising Sales
Advertising Production ManagerFrank Wilsonfwilson@aws.org; Extension 465Advertising Production
Advertising Sales & Promotion Coordinator
Lea Garrigan Panecalea@aws.org, Extension 220Production and Promotion
Welding Journal Dept. 550 N.W. LeJeune Rd. Miami, FL 33126 (800) 443-9353; FAX (305) 443-7404
CAN WE TALK?The Inspection Trends staff encourages an exchange of ideas with you, our readers. If you’d like to ask a question, share an idea or
voice an opinion, you can call, write, e-mail or fax. Staff e-mail addresses are listed below, along with a guide to help you interact withthe right person.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 29
1.3 Limitation. Certification underthe American Welding Society CertifiedWelder Program shall be limited to thosewelding performance variables providedin the applicable supplements to thisstandard.
3. Employers and AWSResponsibility
3.1 Employer’s Responsibility. Theemployers of AWS Certified Welders areresponsible for the work performed bytheir employees. The employers mayaccept the AWS certification withoutadditional testing or may addrequirements as deemed necessary tomeet a specific need. Some standards orcontract documents may require theowner, engineer, or other individuals toapprove the use of AWS CertifiedWelders (without requalification) ontheir work.
3.2 Employers’ Obligation.Companies who employ AWS CertifiedWelders shall be fully aware of theprovisions of this standard. Theemployers shall specifically note theextent of qualification as stated on theAWS welder identification/qualificationlimits card. The employers areresponsible for all work performed bytheir employees; and therefore, should
verify the employee’s prior work history,or otherwise determine that thequalification(s) apply to the employer’swork. The welder’s current status shouldbe verified with the Q&C Department(call (800) 443-9353, ext. 273).
3.3 AWS Responsibility3.3.1 The AWS Q&C Department
shall be responsible to maintain thefollowing:
1) Application for AWS CertifiedWelder
2) Welder Qualification Test Record3) Decertification action reports4) Maintenance of certification
records5) National Registry of Welders6) List of Accredited Test Facilities3.3.2 The Q&C Department will
provide, upon request, individual welderverification of maintenance ofcertification.
3.3.3 The Q&C Department willprovide database searches upon request.These searches will include only thoseauthorizing public disclosure on theapplication form.
3.4 Test Facility Responsibility. TheTest Facility is responsible for safety andhealth matters during testing at thatlocation in addition to other
requirements stated herein.It is extremely important that
Certified Welder candidates, SCWIs,CWIs, and ATF training andmanagement personnel, read andbecome familiar with the followingdocuments:• QC7-93, Standard for AWS Certified
Welders• QC7-93, Supplement C, Welder
Performance Qualification SheetMetal Test Requirements
• QC7-93, Supplement F, ChemicalPlant and Petroleum Refinery Piping
• QC7-93, Supplement G, AWSPerformance Qualification Test.
All four of the above-mentioneddocuments are available as freedownloads atwww.aws.org/w/a/certification/docs/.
LYNDSEY DECKARD(Deckard@pbworld.com) is quality man-ager of the Vehicle Division of Parsons
Brinckerhoff Transit & Rail Systems, Inc.He is an AWS Senior Certified Welding In-spector, an ASQ Certified Quality Auditor,
and a member of the AWS CertificationCommittee, Examination Question BankSubcommittee, and Ethics Subcommittee.
Inspection Trends / July 201230
Technology NotesErrata
B2.1/B2.1M:2009-ADD1
Specification for Welding Procedureand Performance Qualification
The following errata, in addition topreviously announced corrections (seewww.aws.org), have been identified andwill be incorporated into the nextreprint.
Page 63. Figures B.5B, Guided BendFixture-BottomType-Noteb — Correct“For M-26, M-81, and M-83 materials,two macroetch specimens shall be usedin lieu of guided bend testing (see alsoFigures B.5B and B.5C).” To: “For M-26, M-81, and M-83 materials, twomacroetch specimens shall be used inlieu of guided bend testing (see also Fig-ures B.5A and B.5C).”
Page 64. Figures B.5C, Guided BendFixture-Wrap-Around-Noteb — Correct“For M-26, M-81, and M-83 materials,two macroetch specimens shall be usedin lieu of guided bend testing. See alsoFigures B.5B and B.5C.” To: “For M-26,M-81, and M-83 materials, twomacroetch specimens shall be used inlieu of guided bend testing (see also Fig-ures B.5A and B.5B).”
ErrataD17.1/D17.1M:2010
Specification for Fusion Welding forAerospace Applications
The following errata have been iden-tified and will be incorporated into thenext reprinting of this document.
Page 35. Table 7.1, Acceptance Cri-teria in (mm), Discolorationb — Tita-nium, Green, Class B. Correct “Accep-tancea” to Acceptancec”
Page 35. Table 7.1, Acceptance Cri-teria in (mm), Discolorationb — Tita-nium, Green, Class C. Correct “Accep-tancea” to Acceptancec”
ErrataAWS D1.1/D1.1M:2010
Structural Welding Code — SteelThe following errata, in addition to
previously announced corrections (seewww.aws.org), have been identified andwill be incorporated into the next reprint.
Page 150, note h — Correct “See 4.25and 4.28” to “See 4.26 and 4.29”.
Page 193, 5.1 — Correct “4.15” refer-ence to “4.16.”
ErrataAWS D14.3/D14.3M:2010
Specification for Welding Earthmoving, Construction, and AgriculturalEquipment
The following errata, in addition to previously announced corrections (seewww.aws.org), have been identified and will be incorporated into the next reprintingof this document.
Page 15, Table 5 — Incorrect Yield Strength Range — Change Yield Strengthrange for Class III from “40–45” to “40–55”.
Official InterpretationsD1.6/D1.6M:2007
Structural Welding Code — Stainless Steel Subject: Electrode and Shielding MediumCode Edition: D1.6:2007Code Provisions: 4.8.3, Tables 4.1 and 4.5AWS Log: D1.6-07-I03Inquiry 1: In accordance with Table 4.1, does changing the percentage compositionof shielding gas mixture require requalification of the welding procedure?
Response: Yes.Inquiry 2: In accordance with paragraph 4.8.3 and Table 4.5, does changing the per-centage composition of shielding gas mixture require requalification of the welder?
Response: No.
Addenda B2.1/B2.1M:2009The following Addenda have been identified and will be incorporated into the next
reprinting of this document.AWS Standard: B2.1/B2.1M:2009, Specification for Welding Procedure and Per-formance QualificationAddenda No.: ADD1Subject: Annex D, Normative, Base Metal Grouping
Page 73, D1 Base Metal Specifications: Remove “AISI”Page 73, D1 Base Metal Specifications. Add “Table D.3 List base metal specifi-
cations for iron castings in accordance with AWS D11.2 groups”Page 74–135, Table D.1, List of Base Metal Specifications. New base metals have
been added and corrections have been made to Table D.1.Page 136–258, Table D.2, M-Number Listing of Base Metals. New base metals
have been added and corrections have been made to Table D.2.
Do You Have Some News to Tell Us?If you have a news item that might interest the readers of the Inspection Trends,
send it to the following address:Welding Journal Dept.Attn: Mary Ruth Johnsen550 NW LeJeune Rd.Miami, FL 33126.Items can also be sent via FAX to (305) 443-7404 or by e-mail to
mjohnsen@aws.org.
Certification Schedule
Certified Welding Inspector (CWI)LOCATION SEMINAR DATES EXAM DATE
Orlando, FL July 15–20 July 21Milwaukee, WI July 15–20 July 21Los Angeles, CA July 15–20 July 21Sacramento, CA July 15–20 July 21Louisville, KY July 15–20 July 21Kansas City, MO July 22–27 July 28Cleveland, OH July 22–27 July 28Denver, CO July 29–Aug. 3 Aug. 4Philadelphia, PA July 29–Aug. 3 Aug. 4San Diego, CA Aug. 5–10 Aug. 11Chicago, IL Aug. 5–10 Aug. 11Miami, FL Aug. 5–10 Aug. 11Baton Rouge, LA Aug. 5–10 Aug. 11Bakersfield, CA Aug. 12–17 Aug. 18Charlotte, NC Aug. 12–17 Aug. 18Rochester, NY Exam only Aug. 18San Antonio, TX Aug. 12–17 Aug. 18Miami, FL Exam only Aug. 18Portland, ME Aug. 19–24 Aug. 25Minneapolis, MN Aug. 19–24 Aug. 25Salt Lake City, UT Aug. 19–24 Aug. 25Pittsburgh, PA Aug. 19–24 Aug. 25Seattle, WA Aug. 19–24 Aug. 25Corpus Christi, TX Exam only Sept. 8Houston, TX Sept. 9–14 Sept. 15St. Louis, MO Sept. 9–14 Sept. 15New Orleans, LA Sept. 9–14 Sept. 15Miami, FL Sept. 9–14 Sept. 15Anchorage, AK Exam only Sept. 22
Miami, FL Exam only Oct. 18
Tulsa, OK Oct. 14–19 Oct. 20
Long Beach, CA Oct. 14–19 Oct. 20
Newark, NJ Oct. 14–19 Oct. 20
Nashville, TN Oct. 14–19 Oct. 20
Portland, OR Oct. 21–26 Oct. 27
Roanoke, VA Oct. 21–26 Oct. 27
Detroit, MI Oct. 21–26 Oct. 27
Cleveland, OH Oct. 21–26 Oct. 27
Atlanta, GA Oct. 28–Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Corpus Christi, TX Exam only Nov. 3
Dallas, TX Oct. 28–Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Sacramento, CA Oct. 28–Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Spokane, WA Oct. 28–Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Las Vegas, NV Exam only Nov. 14
Syracuse, NY Dec. 2–7 Dec. 8
Houston, TX Dec. 2–7 Dec. 8
Reno, NV Dec. 2–7 Dec. 8
Los Angeles, CA Dec. 2–7 Dec. 8
Miami, FL Dec. 2–7 Dec. 8
9–Year Recertification Seminar for CWI/SCWIFor current CWIs and SCWIs needing to meet education require-ments without taking the exam. The exam can be taken at any sitelisted under Certified Welding Inspector.LOCATION SEMINAR DATES EXAM DATE
Miami, FL July 16–21 No examOrlando, FL Aug. 20–25 No examDenver, CO Sept. 10–15 No examDallas, TX Oct. 15–20 No examNew Orleans, LA Oct. 29–Nov. 3 No examMiami, FL Nov. 26–Dec. 1 No exam
Certified Welding Supervisor (CWS)LOCATION SEMINAR DATES EXAM DATE
Minneapolis, MN July 16–20 July 21Miami, FL Sept. 10–14 Sept. 15Norfolk, VA Oct. 15–19 Oct. 20CWS exams are also given at all CWI exam sites.
Certified Radiographic Interpreter (CRI)LOCATION SEMINAR DATES EXAM DATE
Dallas, TX July 16–20 July 21Chicago, IL Sept. 10–14 Sept. 15Pittsburgh, PA Oct. 15–19 Oct. 20The CRI certification can be a stand-alone credential or can exemptyou from your next 9-Year Recertification.
Certified Welding Sales Representative (CWSR)CWSR exams will be given at CWI exam sites.
Certified Welding Educator (CWE)Seminar and exam are given at all sites listed under Certified Weld-ing Inspector. Seminar attendees will not attend the Code Clinic por-tion of the seminar (usually the first two days).
Certified Robotic Arc Welding (CRAW)WEEKS OF, FOLLOWED BY LOCATION AND PHONE NUMBER
Aug. 10, Nov. 9 atABB, Inc., Auburn Hills, MI; (248) 391–8421
Aug. 20, Dec. 3 atGenesis-Systems Group, Davenport, IA; (563) 445-5688
Oct. 22, Oct. 26 at Lincoln Electric Co., Cleveland, OH; (216) 383-8542
Oct. 15 atOTC Daihen, Inc., Tipp City, OH; (937) 667-0800
Sept. 10, Nov. 5 atWolf Robotics, Fort Collins, CO; (970) 225-7736
On request at: MATC, Milwaukee, WI; (414) 297-6996
Certified Welding Engineer (CWEng) and Senior CertifiedWelding Inspector (SCWI)Exams can be taken at any site listed under Certified Welding In-spector. No preparatory seminar is offered.
International CWI Courses and Exams SchedulesPlease visit www.aws.org/certification/inter_contact.html.
Inspection Trends / Summer 2012 31
IMPORTANT: This schedule is subject to change without notice. Applications are to be received at least six weeks prior to the
seminar/exam or exam. Applications received after that time will be assessed a $250 Fast Track fee. Please verify application deadline
dates by visiting our website www.aws.org/certification/docs/schedules.html. Verify your event dates with the Certification Dept. to con-
firm your course status before making travel plans. For information on AWS seminars and certification programs, or to register online,
visit www.aws.org/certification or call (800/305) 443-9353, ext. 273, for Certification; or ext. 455 for Seminars. Apply early to avoid pay-
ing the $250 Fast Track fee.
American Society for Nondestructive Testing . . . . . . . . . .13, 24www.asnt.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 222-2768
Applied Bolting Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9www.appliedbolting.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 552-1999
AWS Education Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7, IBCwww.aws.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 443-9353
AWS Member Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IFC, 8, 29www.aws.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 443-9353
Bruker AXS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23www.bruker.com/s1titan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 234-9729
EST Group/Curtis Wright Flow Control Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25www.estgroup.cwfc.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 355-7044
FABTECH 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26-27www.fabtechexpo.com/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 443-9353
G.A.L. Gage Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13www.galgage.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(269) 465-5750
NDT Seals, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25www.ndtseals.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 261-6261
Olympus NDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OBCwww.olympusNDT.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(781) 419-3900
IFC = Inside Front CoverIBC = Inside Back CoverOBC = Outside Back Cover
Visit Our Interactive Ad Index: www.aws.org/ad-index
Results of Annual NDE and Quality SalarySurvey Released
Compensation levels for NDE and quality professionalscontinued to climb over the past year, but at a slower pace thanin previous time periods, according to the results of the annualsalary and benefits survey from PQNDT, Inc. The company isan NDE personnel recruitment and placement organizationbased in Arlington, Mass. Complete results of the survey areavailable at www.pqndt.com/resources.html.
Besides the rise in compensation levels, results showed anuptick in the number of full-time benefits available, whichcould be a sign of more competition for experienced workers.
Although reported unemployment is down to 5%, there isa still a sense of caution among many NDE professionals.
Some 61% of full-time workers and 69% of contract workersfeel the economy is still in a recession or getting worse.
While only 44% of full-time workers feel that job
prospects are better than last year, 81% feel their own job is
secure. Similarly, only 36% of contractors are optimistic about
job prospects, but 62% are “very confident” about finding
contracts for themselves.As far as the remainder of this year, PQNDT President
Michael Serabian said, “Indications during the first fewmonths of the year are positive. The number of full-time jobopenings is up across all levels of certification and in all areasof the country. This contrasts with a year ago, when employerswere more interested in hiring contractors on a temporarybasis. Full-time openings are an indicator of more confidencein a consistent volume of work ahead.”
Business Cards
Business Products
Advertiser Index
Inspection Trends / July 201232
— continued from page 9
IT
BLI
ND
PE
RF
Welding Fundamentals
AWS’s American Welding Online is introducing a self-paced online seminar designed to provide technical knowledge and insight to non-welders who work in the welding and fabricating industry.
Welding Fundamentals is an approximately 14-hour course that can be taken at your own speed and convenience. The course provides a fundamental overview of welding, focusing on the most widely used welding processes. Fundamental instruction is presented onwelding theory, equipment, safety, weld design, metallurgy, welding inspection, and qualitycontrol.
Professional Development Hours and a certificate of completion will be provided uponcompletion.
For more information, visit American Welding Online at
www.aws.org
New online course
Op
www.olympus-ims.com
OmniPCPC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis SoftwareThis new software is the most efficient and affordable option available for OmniScan data analysis.
Now you can use a PC to perform powerful data analysis using the same tools provided on board
the OmniScan.
Improve productivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer.
Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
automatically qualified to use the OmniPC.
Take full advantage of extra large monitors
and resolutions for increased precision during
analysis.
Intuitive keyboard shortcuts have been added
to boost productivity levels during file analysis.
Parameters used for inspection can be
validated during analysis.
OmniPC is the perfect analysis software for all applications and markets, including power generation.
OmniPCPC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis SoftwarThis new softwar
Now you can use a PC to perform powerful data analysis using the same tools pr
the OmniScan.
ff
OmniPCPC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis Softwar
ere is the most efficient and
Now you can use a PC to perform powerful data analysis using the same tools pr
ff
PC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis Softward affordable option available for OmniScan data analysis.
Now you can use a PC to perform powerful data analysis using the same tools pr
PC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis Softwardable option available for OmniScan data analysis.
Now you can use a PC to perform powerful data analysis using the same tools provided on boar
PC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis Softwaredable option available for OmniScan data analysis.
ovided on board
Improve productivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer
Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
automatically qualified to use the OmniPC.
TaTake full advanta
and resolutions for incr
analysis.
Intuitive keyboar
to boost productivity levels during file analysis.
oductivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer
Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
automatically qualified to use the OmniPC.
ake full advantage of extra large monitors
esolutions for increased precision during
Intuitive keyboard shortcuts have been added
oductivity levels during file analysis.
oductivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer.
Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
ecision during
d shortcuts have been added
oductivity levels during file analysis.
oductivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
Opp
Parameters used for inspection can be
validated during analysis.
OmniPC is the perfect analysis softwarall applications and markets, including power generation.
Parameters used for inspection can be
validated during analysis.
OmniPC is the perfect analysis softwarall applications and markets, including power generation.
OmniPC is the perfect analysis software for all applications and markets, including power generation.
w.www.olym
.olympus-ims.comFor Info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
top related