Aws It 201207

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
B
L
I
N
D

P
E
R
F
Vol. 15 / No. 3
Features
17 14
Understanding Welder Performance Qualification
by Jeff J. Fluckiger / Questions related to welder qualification
are answered / 11
Performing Inspections in Confined Spaces
by Peter C. Amin / These tips will remind you of what you need to do to
safely perform inspections in confined spaces / 14
Qualifying Welders on Fillet Welds
by Albert J. Moore Jr. / A change is proposed as to how welders are
qualified for fillet welds / 17
Ethics Alert: Recent Cases
by Joseph P. Kane / Several recent cases in which ethics violations were
charged are discussed / 20
Departments
Editors 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 ensure
the inspectors safety when working in
a confined space such as this finned
heat exchanger. (Photo courtesy of
Peter 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
Editors Note
By Mary Ruth Johnsen
Dear Readers,
In speaking with CWIs, I have
come under the opinion that welder
performance qualification is one of
those subjects thats not as simple as
it might seem at first. While its
certainly something that many of
you do as a regular part of your job,
its also something you have
questions about and want some
verification that youre 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 Fluckigers and Moores 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.
Id like to know what you think about the subject. Contact me at
mjohnsen@aws.org.
Publisher
Andrew Cullison
cullison@aws.org
Editor
Mary Ruth Johnsen
mjohnsen@aws.org
Associate Editors
Howard Woodward
woodward@aws.org
Kristin Campbell
kcampbell@aws.org
Production Editor
Zaida Chavez
zaida@aws.org
Senior Production Coordinator
Brenda Flores
bflores@aws.org
National Sales Director
Rob Saltzstein
salty@aws.org
Advertising Sales Representative
Lea Paneca
lea@aws.org
Senior Advertising Production Manager
Frank Wilson
fwilson@aws.org
Subscriptions Representative
Sylvia Ferreira
sferreira@aws.org
American Welding Society
550 NW LeJeune Rd.
Miami, FL 33126
(800/305) 443-9353
Copyright
Copyright 2012 by American Welding Society in both
printed and electronic formats. The Society is not
responsible for any statement made or opinion expressed
herein. Data and information developed by the authors of
specific articles are for informational purposes only and
are not intended for use without independent,
substantiating investigation on the part of potential users.
Inspection Trends / July 2012 6
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
OSHAestimates that
4 out of every 1,000
welders will
experience a fatal
injury or accident over
their working lifetime
Online W g Safety Certificate Course eldin Online W g Safety Certificate Course
experience a fatal
welders will
4 out of every 1,000
estimates that OSHA
g Safety Certificate Course g Safety Certificate Course
Sample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safety Sample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safety Sample seminar at awo.aws.org/seminars/safety
News Bulletins
SGS Performed NDE for Eurovision Song
Contest Facilities
SGS recently
performed NDE
services for the
steel structures for
the press center
and Baku Crystal
Hall built for the
Eurovision Song
Contest 2012. The
contract
encompassed
testing of weld
joints, concrete
strength, and bolt
torque inspection.
The Eurovision Song Contest took place in May at the new
development built in Baku, Azerbaijan.
Obermayer, part of the Obermayer Corporate Group
founded in Munich in 1958, began construction of Baku
Crystal Hall last year. SGS inspectors worked on site to
determine problem areas and ensure speedy feedback to the
client in order to facilitate rapid repair of weld joints and the
proper tightening of bolts.
TV Rheinland Celebrates 140th Anniversary
TV Rheinland recently celebrated its 140th
anniversary. The company, which began in 1872 as an
endeavor to inspect steam boilers in the districts of
Elberfeld and Barmen in Germany, has grown to a network
of laboratories and test and training centers with 500
locations in more than 60 countries. The company
employs 16,000 people, and has an annual revenue of $1.9
billion.
The company inspects technical equipment, products,
and services; oversees projects; and helps to shape
processes for a wide variety of companies through its
worldwide network of approved labs, testing facilities, and
education centers.
For 140 years, people and companies around the
globe have placed their trust in TV Rheinland because of
our history, reliability, and long-standing reputation in the
industry, said Gerhard Luebken, chief regional officer
and president and CEO of TV Rheinland North America
Holding, Inc., TV Rheinland of North America, Inc. We
keep our focus on serving customers, achieving success,
and developing safe and sustainable solutions for the
challenges of todays ever-changing markets. Additional
information is available at www.tuv.com/us.
An SGS inspector at work. The company
recently performed NDE of weld joints
for Baku Crystal Hall and the new press
center at a facility in Azerbaijan.
Monroe County Community College Now
Offering NDE Program
To tap into the states need for high-tech skills in high-tech
applications, 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 new
courses: introduction to NDT; liquid penetrant and magnetic
particle testing; visual testing; radiographic testing Levels 1 and
2; and ultrasonic testing Levels 1 and 2. The courses are
derivative of the existing Nuclear Engineering Technology
associate degree program and have direct relevance to the
colleges existing Welding Technology associate degree
program within the Industrial Tech Division. Students will take
24 credit hours to receive the certificate.
According to the school, Through course progression, the
student will gain a general knowledge of how to apply NDT
methods and develop a deeper understanding of how
nondestructive testing impacts the world in which we live.
Stork Technical Services Invests in New Dive Craft
Stork Technical Services Subsea, Aberdeen, UK, recently
invested more than $3.2 million in a new specialized dive
intervention craft and full diving spread. The 49-ft vessel is
equipped with a custom-made diver recovery system and
software-based dive management system. It is expected to be
delivered this summer.
The new air and nitrox diving spread will allow Stork
Subsea 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 Adams
Vision for 15 months.
X-R-I Testing Opens Facility in South Carolina
X-R-I Testing, Troy, Mich., recently opened a new testing
facility in Duncan, S.C. The new facility is Nadcap accredited
to perform radiographic and liquid penetrant testing. Nadcap
accreditation for magnetic particle testing is expected sometime
this year. The facility will also provide consulting services to
companies with internal NDE operations.
A privately held company, X-R-I Testing provides NDE
services to the aerospace, automotive, and power-generation
industries nationwide. More information is available at
www.xritesting.com.
See that the boltings done right.
T
R
A
I
N
I
N
G
F
I
E
L
D
S
U
P
P
O
R
T
T
E
C
H
N
I
C
A
L
E
X
P
E
R
T
I
S
E
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 Subseas new dive intervention craft
is equipped with a custom-made diver recovery system and
software-based dive management system.
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
continued on page 32
Print and Product Showcase
Phased Array Flaw Detector
Improves Inspection Speed
The veo 16:128 phased array
ultrasonic flaw detector addresses 128
probe elements for inspection and
enables operators to connect larger
single probes or multiple probes to the
instrument. This increase in power and
capability is important for weld
inspection, where a linear scan from
both sides of the weld is needed. The
instrument can address a pair of 64-
element probes, allowing inspection to
be carried out in a single pass,
improving speed of inspection and
positional accuracy since the two
probes are linked together. The
instrument features the capability for
pitch-catch inspection techniques,
merged C-scan inspections, and top
views. It offers a simple-to-use
interface, rugged housing design, and
includes UT Studio viewing and
analysis software.
Sonatest
www.sonatestinc.com
(210) 697-0335
Video Camera Easily Attaches
to Most Borescopes
The Luxxor portable video
camera can be easily attached to any
Hawkeye rigid or flexible borescope
and to most other major borescope
brands. The borescope attaches to the
video coupler on the camera. The
camera allows users to view internal
inspection images on benchtop or
portable video monitors or on a
computer. Video footage and still
photos can be viewed live and then
saved, documented, and e-mailed. The
camera has a
1
4-in. color CCD, built-in
25-mm borescope coupler, and 768
494 pixel resolution.
Gradient Lens Corp.
www.gradientlens.com/lpc
(585) 235-2620
LED Flashlight Available in
Four Models
The OPTI-LUX 365 Series UV-A
(365 nm) LED flashlights are useful for
a variety of NDE inspection
applications. Four models are
available: high-intensity and standard-
intensity versions, each with or without
an internal black light filter. The black
light filter reduces the output of
wavelengths longer than 400 nm. High-
intensity models produce a nominal
steady-state UV-A intensity of 10,000
W/cm
2
at 15 in. Standard-intensity
models produce a maximum UV-A
intensity of 4500 W/cm
2
. The
flashlights come with a lanyard, belt
holster, two rechargeable batteries,
two-position smart charging cradle
with 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 system
can be used to
inspect weld
joint
preparations,
joint fitup,
weld bead
profiles, and
weld defects.
It measures
critical parameters such as face and
root openings, mismatch, and bevel
angle. Results can be automatically
compared to the tolerances set and
provide go/no-go feedback. A
permanent record of the weld
measurements, voice and written
comments, and photos of the weld are
stored in the instrument and can be
sent to a computer. To inspect a part,
the operator holds the unit up to the
joint and presses the trigger to take
measurements and determine whether
any defects are present.
Servo-Robot, Inc.
www.servorobot.com
(450) 653-7868
Software Analyzes Data from
Phased Array Flaw Detector
The company developed its
OmniPC software specifically for the
Olympus OmniScan phased array flaw
detector. The computer-based software
program provides comprehensive
analysis of inspection data acquired
with the flaw detector. The software
allows the flaw detector to be
employed as a dedicated acquisition
unit when scanning for hidden cracks,
voids, and other internal discontinuities
in metals, composites, plastics, and
ceramics. This allows data acquisition
and data analysis to be conducted
concurrently, which increases
productivity and decreases inspection
time. The user interface is similar to
OmniScans onboard data analysis
program, making it easier for
inspectors to learn the program.
Olympus NDT
www.olympus-ims.com
(800) 225-8330
Feature
By Jeff J. Fluckiger
Understanding Welder Performance
Qualification
This guide stresses the importance of the welding procedure specification and answers
questions related to welder qualification
One of the most difficult things I
have ever had to do was tell an
experienced, seasoned welder that he
was no longer qualified to weld. I was
inspecting production work on
electrical conduit hangars deep
underground, and the weld quality was
very poor. The welder had cheaters on
his cheaters, and he simply could no
longer see well enough to successfully
produce an acceptable weld. Over the
years, he had repeatedly completed
requalification tests and had
maintained qualification through
recorded continued use, but he finally
met the day that officially became the
end of his welding career. Of course,
this was news he did not want to hear
and did not accept well.
As inspectors, we have a great
responsibility to know what we are
doing and to accurately call the shots. I
always love when challenges that come
from welders, foremen, engineers, and
higher-level managers are quickly
rebuffed and set right through
knowledge of the applicable code or
specification requirement. It is always
important to know what you are doing
and why you are doing it.
The purpose of welder
qualification testing is to determine the
ability of welders to produce a sound
weld in the welding test positions.
While many people both welders
taking the tests and inspectors
conducting them find performance
qualification to be difficult, I know
some, if not many, of you reading this
are saying to yourself, What is so
difficult about a performance test? As
you gain experience, they do get easier,
but just remember your first test.
Personally, I was young and very
nervous. I knew I could weld, but
could I do it right on a test? As I looked
at the welding procedure, I wondered
what F4 and 3G and P1 were all about
and what did it mean that the procedure
was qualified to ASME. All I wanted
was to pass the test and earn a
paycheck.
Fortunately, there are many
educational institutions across the
country teaching not only the
application of welding but also the
technical theory behind welding.
Welders need to know base metal and
filler metal designations. They should
have a basic understanding of material
groupings, and they specifically need
to know the limitations of the
procedures they use.
In addressing performance
qualification, here are some of the
questions you might ask. Why does a
groove weld qualify for fillet welding?
Why does F4 qualify for the lower F
numbers? Why does gas metal arc
welding (GMAW) qualify for flux
cored arc welding (FCAW)? Why?
Why? Why?
For more than 25 years, I have
served on the committee responsible
for producing AWS B2.1, Standard for
Welding Procedure and Performance
Qualification. I will offer answers to
these questions based on my opinions
and the experience gained through
working with this committee.
The Basics of Welder
Qualification
I think it is worth taking the time
to review the basics. These
fundamentals are critical in order to
clearly understand the basis for
performance qualification. First, a
preliminary welding procedure
specification (WPS) needs to be
developed, establishing the welding
recipe to be followed to complete a
welding procedure qualification record
(PQR). The PQR is the actual record of
the qualification variables used to
produce the test weldment while
following the recipe of the preliminary
WPS and, when successfully tested,
proves the mechanical compatibility of
the filler/base metal combination. The
PQR is then used as the basis for
writing a WPS within the limitation of
the variables established by the
appropriate code or standard. This
process can be simplified by using a
Standard Welding Procedure
Specification (SWPS) published by
AWS. The SWPS is supported by a
summary of applicable PQRs. An
appropriately qualified WPS is critical
to the performance test since the
welder is required to follow the
requirements of the WPS.
The purpose of welder
performance testing is simple: It is a
test for a welder to demonstrate the
ability to successfully complete a test
weldment following the instruction of a
welding procedure that has been
appropriately qualified or is
prequalified as allowed by the
application code. Most people tend to
focus on the arc part of this test more
than they do following the
requirements of the WPS. Once a
welder is qualified, there are limitations
established that restrict use, including
but not limited to, change of process,
position, filler metal, base metal,
progression, mode of metal transfer,
thickness, and diameter.
Key to any welder performance test
is the welding procedure specification
(WPS) that provides instruction to the
welder. Without this instruction, the
welder simply cannot take the test. The
WPS provides base and filler metal
requirements, as well as spells out the
position, electrical characteristics,
preheat and postheat requirements, etc.
Im sure you have caught on by now that
I am uncompromising on the use and
purpose of the WPS. As a qualified
inspector in the welding industry, you
must understand WPSs. Unfortunately,
at most of the job sites and shops that I
visit, the welders are not very
knowledgeable nor sometimes even
aware of the WPS. They follow
instructions provided by a foreman or
supervisor, and do their best to make it
look good.
To aid in understanding, lets
discuss the why questions mentioned
previously. Keep in mind that
performance requirements are written to
adequately test the welders abilities but
are also generalized to a certain extent so
that individual tests are not required for
each unique application. Throughout this
discussion, references made to
qualification variables or requirements
are to AWS B2.1/B2.1M: 2009,
Specification for Welding Procedure and
Performance Qualification.
Why does a groove weld qualify
for a fillet weld?
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. A
groove test weldment requires tie in at
the root and sidewall when made with
backing or tie in on the prepared back
side of the joint. It requires a certain
amount of bead profile control to allow
multiple-pass welds along with the
control of undercut, slag inclusions, and
other inherent defects. A fillet weld may
be multiple pass and require some of the
same but not to the extent or degree as
for a groove weld.
The reason for so much debate on
this subject in the committee meetings
was that if a fillet weld is made without
proper tie in at the root, it will fail. Some
of the reasons for incomplete root
penetration and tie in are electrode angle,
electrode diameter, amperage, and arc
length. This being true, it is also
considered a training aspect: If a welder
can successfully weld a groove he or she
can weld a fillet, even if a little training
is 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 lower
F-numbered electrodes consisting of
cellulose, rutile, and iron powder
coatings provide a less fluid, faster-
freezing flux. Considering again the
purpose of the performance test and the
ability of the welder, it is considered
more difficult to manipulate and
manage a molten weld pool with an F4
electrode than with lower-F-numbered
electrodes. While you may think this is
idiotic, most of us do recognize that
there is a significant difference in the
techniques used with these various
electrodes such as whipping, weaving,
stringing, and long and short arcing.
However, if a welder can succeed with
an F4 electrode, he or she can usually
succeed with the lower-F numbers even
if a little training on technique is
necessary.
Why does performance
qualification with the GMAW process
also qualify a welder for the FCAW
process and vice versa?
The principle here is historically
based on the ability to use a
semiautomatic process and the
equipment associated with it rather
than being based on the arc. There is a
significant difference at the arc when
you have flux compared to when you
dont.
You may be interested to know
that this qualification variable is an
active action item within the B2
committee. Serious consideration is
being given to not allow this variable
to stand and to require separate
qualifications based on process.
There are a lot of whys to be asked
throughout the performance
qualification process, and they are all
legitimate. I can tell you that the
established requirements are based on
many years of experience from a wide
industrial application base and on the
technical merit that all voluntary
contributors provide.
Conclusion
As you oversee welder qualification
tests, youll be in for lots of surprises.
Figure 1 is a trophy from one of my
experiences. Normally, a trophy is
awarded for something a person is proud
of and is given for a specific
accomplishment such as in a sport or
activity such as hunting or fishing.
Occasionally, however, a trophy is kept
as a memento or souvenir based on the
shock or surprise value that it offers. A
welder came into the weld lab to take the
standard
3
8-in. plate with backing,
shielded metal arc welding, low-
hydrogen test. This fine specimen was to
be welded in the 2G test position. The
welder was turned loose after a fitup
inspection. I heard the power supply
surging from the abruptly changing arc
length and wondered what in the world
was going on. I looked around the
curtain and saw the welder had
repositioned the test plate to the 1G test
position. He was working his elbow and
waving his electrode-holding arm from
side to side trying to complete the weld
before he got caught. Busted! As you
can tell by the picture, this guy was not a
welder, and I am surprised he knew how
to put the electrode in the electrode
Fig. 1 An example from a poor attempt at a welder qualification test.
holder. By the way, he was provided a
copy 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 committees
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, Idaho
Falls, Idaho. He is chair of the AWS B2
Committee 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 Experience
Orlando, Florida, USA
29 October-1 November 2012
Rosen Shingle Creek Resort
Feature
By Peter C. Amin
Inspectors in many industries have
to enter a confined space from time to
time, if not on a regular basis. A con-
fined space may be defined as a space
that has any or all of the following
characteristics:
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, lube
oil tanks, service tunnels, pump rooms,
compressor rooms, and engine
crankcases.
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 increased
water level;
Loss of consciousness arising from
an increase in body temperature;
Asphyxiation/suffocation arising
from free-flowing solid (engulfment)
or the inability to reach a breathable
atmosphere due to entrapment.
Working in confined spaces is
dangerous not only because of the rea-
sons stated above but also because res-
cue from the confined space, in the
case of an accident, is a difficult task
in and of itself.
There are some precautions that
can be taken to minimize the risk to
property and human life. Before
entering the confined space, it is
alwasy helpful to meet with the safety
personnel and others in charge at the
site. Getting to know the details of the
confined space is very important to
help you deal with unexpected situa-
tions that may arise during the
inspection.
Organizational Procedure
Every organization must have a
safety procedure for entering and
working in a confined space Fig. 1.
Before starting inspection work, get to
know those procedures thoroughly.
Spare the time to take training, if avail-
able. Familiarize yourself with the
space, 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 confined
space entry procedures. Rescue should
be well planned and evidence should be
made available that indicates drills have
been frequently conducted on emer-
gency procedures.
Entry Certification
In many situations, certification by a
qualified person is required before per-
sonnel may enter a confined space.
Whenever there is a requirement for
certification, anyone who is not certi-
fied, no matter how much experience
they 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 Spaces
The hazards of confined spaces and the processes necessary to work in them safely are outlined
Inspections in confined spaces such as the
inside of this cooling tower must be
planned carefully before the inspector en-
ters the space and precautions must be
taken to minimize the risks.
Fig. 1 Signs such as this warn of
a confined space area and should be
part of the organizations safety
procedures.
Fig. 2 Warning sign for a valve leading
in or out of a confined space.
Fig. 3 Example of a meter for measuring a
variety of gases.
Fig. 4 Ensure proper arrangement of
ventilation or blowers.
lations promulgated by the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration. These regulations
include developing a written program,
issuing entry permits, assigning atten-
dant(s), designating entrants, and
ensuring a means of rescue.
In other words, the permit should
Identify the nature of work to be
done, exact location, and precautions
taken or to be taken;
State safe working procedure;
Provide written authority for the con-
fined space to be entered and the
work to start, and the time when the
work must cease;
State the time slot allocated for the
designated work;
Identify the personnel entering the
space and verify they have received
the required training.
Entry into a confined space
should only be allowed when a sepa-
rate permit has been issued verifying
tests have been taken to ensure the
atmosphere is safe to breathe.
All valves leading in or out of the
confined space should be clearly
marked do not operate Fig. 2.
Testing the Atmosphere
Never trust your own senses to
determine whether the air in a confined
space is safe! Many toxic gases and
vapors can neither be seen nor smelled,
nor can the level of oxygen present be
determined without instrumentation.
Proper procedures must be established
to verify that the atmosphere is safe to
work in or if some special respiratory
equipment is needed.
Effect of Work Performed
The type of work performed is
also important because toxic atmos-
pheres are generated in various
processes. For example, solvents are
used in many industries for
cleaning/degreasing. The vapors from
these solvents are very toxic in a con-
fined space. Operations such as weld-
ing, cutting, and brazing produce high
heat that consumes oxygen. Painting,
scraping, sandblasting, and degreasing
generate dangerous gases and/or
vapors. As you can see, the atmos-
phere in a confined space, which may
be safe at the time of enty, can
become toxic after the work has
begun.
Personal Protection
Equipment
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 workers 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 standby
person when work is being done in a confined space.
PETER C. AMIN
(PeterC.Amin@lr.org) is with Lloyds
Register Asia and is stationed at Surat,
Gujarat, India. He is an AWS Certified
Welding Inspector and an ASNT NDT
Level III in RT, UT, MP, and PT. He is
also secretary of the AWS West Zone
India Section.
Table 1 Health Effects from Lack of
Oxygen
O
2
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
Feature
By 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 inspectors job entails
checking the welders qualifications
and the employers certification.
Following are several questions that
must be answered: Did the welders
employer sign the test record attesting
to the welders 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 welders 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 welders 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
welders 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.
Qualifying Welders on Fillet Welds
A veteran inspector proposes a change to how welders are qualified to better reflect
current 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 typically
1
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 welders 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 Welding
Codes or ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel 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.
The welder prepares and welds a fabricated miter joint that will be subjected to a
burst test. This test piece survived the burst test by remaining intact as the test
pressure 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, Structural
Welding 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 Welding
Codes. 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.
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 NDT
Level III. He is also a member of the AWS
Certification Committee and the Committee
on Methods of Inspection of Welds.
This welder tests the T-joint he just welded. The test
weld is a single-pass,
5
16-in. fillet weld. The fractured
weld must display fusion to the root with no excessive
porosity, 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 pressure
of 1200 lb/in.
2
without bursting, squirting water, or leaking.
Feature
By
By Joseph P. Kane
This article is the third in a four-
part series related to the Code of
Ethics 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 AWS
Certification 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
inspectors 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 fabricators
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 hotels 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 of
Ethics, ranging from minor violations to those requiring the most stringent sanctions
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 Panels
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 Respondents
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 Alleged
Violations of AWS Certification
Programs, Section 8. On March 6, the
AWS Executive Committee met and
one of the items of business was the
Respondents appeal. The Hearing
Panel president was invited to present a
summary of the violation case, and the
Hearing Panels deliberations. The
appeal letter from the Respondents
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
fabricators 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
didnt 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 Procedures
for Alleged Violations of AWS
Certification 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 companys 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 werent 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 welders 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 Certification
Committee, a member of the Subcommit-
tee on the Code of Ethics, and chair of the
Structural Inspection Subcommittee. He is
also an AWS Senior Certified Welding
Inspector.
The Answer Is
By
The Society is not responsible for any statements made or opinion expressed herein. Data and information developed by the authors are for specific
informational 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 Welding
Procedure and Performance
Qualification. 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. Im
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 -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 ASMEs Section
IX Committee. Those people are of
the opinion that any welder who can
weld a -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 AWSs
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 -in.-
thick plate as the basis for unlimited
qualification. I would not find it
surprising if the B2.1 Committee
eventually settles on 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 CWIs
involvement is a direct relationship
between his or her contract
specification duties and the actual
time to carry out these duties. The
CWIs 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 specific
informational purposes only and are not intended for use without independent, substantiating investigation on the part of potential users.
adhered to along with the CWIs
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 1220
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 encourages
question and answer submissions. Please
mail to the editor (mjohnsen@aws.org).
KENNETH ERICKSONis manager of qual-
ity at National Inspection & Consultants,
Inc., Ft. Myers, Fla. He is an AWS Senior
Certified Welding Inspector, an ASNT Na-
tional NDT Level III Inspector in four meth-
ods, and provides expert witness review
and 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 ACCP
NDT Level III. He is also a member of the
AWS Certification Committee and the
Committee on Methods of Inspection of
Welds.

The all new S1 TITAN

hhsales@Bruker-Elemental.net
s Positive Material Identication
s Fast alloy ID and chemistry
s Completely non-destructive
s Prevents material mix-up
s Lightweight only 1.44kg / 3.17 lbs,
including battery

e all new S1
ight and ex
nition of Pr
ceptionally accur
TIT

recision
ceptionally accurate
TA TAN

Innovation with Integrity

o
r
hhsales@Bruk uker.com/s1titan
y of virtually any alloy.
y analyzer which provides grade ID and element
Handhel d XRF

uk r- er-Elemental.net
vides grade ID and elemental
Handhel d XRF
An Important Event
on Its Way?
Send information on upcoming events to Inspection
Trends, 550 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.
Mark Your Calendar
65th Annual Assembly of the International Institute of
Welding. July 813, Hyatt Regency Hotel Denver and
Colorado Convention Center. Sponsored by the American
Welding Society, Edison Welding Institute, and Welding
Research Council. Visit www.iiw2012.com.
Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive
Evaluation (QNDE). July 1520, Hyatt Regency Tech
Center, Denver, Colo. Contact heidil@iastate.edu or
www.qndeprograms.org.
ASNT Digital Imaging XV Conference. July 1618,
Foxwoods Resort, Mashantucket, Conn. Contact American
Society for Nondestructive Testing, (800) 222-2768 or
www.asnt.org.
12th EPRI Balance-of-Plant Heat Exchanger NDE
Symposium. Aug. 68, 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 Welding
Standards: Structural, Pressure Piping, Pipelines,
Railroad, NDT. Oct. 22, 23, Munich, Germany. Visit
www.gsi-slv.de/en/conferences/conferences-in-2012/.
ASNT Fall Conference and Quality Testing Show. Oct.
29Nov. 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 American
Society for Quality (ASQ), (800) 248-1946 or www.asq.org.
FABTECH 2012. Nov. 1214, Las Vegas Convention
Center, Las Vegas, Nev. Sponsored by the American Welding
Society, Society of Manufacturing Engineers, and Fabricators
& Manufacturers Association, Intl. Visit
www.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 to
qualified CWIs & SCWIs.
Do you need visual testing certification
which meets the guidelines for Recommended
Practice No. SNT-TC-1A as required by some
sections 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 visit
www.asnt.org or call 614.274.6003
or 800.222.2768 US/Canada.
Opportunity Knocks.
Image Longview Inspection For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
Welding Inspector (CWI) seminar and examination. Offered
July 1620 and October 1519. The CWI seminar covers
how to reference AWS codes, examine welds, and prepare for
the CWI exam on that following Saturday (proctored by
AWS). Offered July 2228 and October 2127. Contact
Lincoln Electrics Welding School at (216) 383-8325 or visit
www.lincolnelectric.com.
EPRI NDE Training Seminars. EPRI offers NDE technical
skills training in visual examination, ultrasonic examination,
ASME Section XI, UT operator training, etc. Contact Sherryl
Stogner, (704) 547-6174, e-mail: sstogner@epri.com.
Nondestructive Examination Courses. A course schedule is
available from Hellier, 277 W. Main St., Ste. 2, Niantic, CT
06357, (860) 739-8950, FAX (860) 739-6732.
NDE Training Courses. GE Inspection Technologies offers
training 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- and
two-week courses presented in Pascagoula, Miss., Houston,
Tex., and Houma and Sulphur, La. Contact Real Educational
Services, Inc., (800) 489-2890; info@realeducational.com.
CWI/CWE Course and Exam. A ten-day program presented
in 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, NDE
courses, including ultrasonic thickness testing and advanced
phased 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 companys St. Louis-
area facility or on-site. Level III services available. For a
schedule of upcoming courses, contact Quality Testing
Services, Inc., 2305 Millpark Dr., Maryland Heights, MO
63043; (888) 770-0103; training@qualitytesting.net;
www.qualitytesting.net.
CWI/CWE Prep Course and Exam and NDT Inspector
Training 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 Canadian
Welding Bureau for schedule at (800) 844-6790, or visit
www.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 its
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
certied. 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
November 12-14, 2012 | Las Vegas Convention Center
REGISTER NOW at fabtechexpo.com
Scan this code to watch
an exciting preview of
FABTECH.
North Americas 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. Teres nothing else like it!
THE ONE EVENT TO GAIN CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE
AND ENHANCE YOUR TECHNICAL EXPERTISE.
FABTECH 2012.
PREVIEW OF AWS EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AT FABTECH
Conferences and Symposium
Underwater Welding and Cutting (Nov. 12)
Thermal Spray Basics: Putting Coatings to Work (Nov. 12)
Brazing Symposium (Nov. 12)
Health and Safety in the Welding Environment (Nov. 13)
Thermal Spray Technology: High-Performance Surfaces (Nov. 13)
Trends in Nondestructive Examination (Nov. 14)
Resistance WeIding SchooI
RWMA Emmet A. Craig Resistance Welding School (Nov. 13-14)
Seminars
Metallurgy Applied to Everyday Welding (Nov. 12)
Advanced Visual Inspection Workshop (Nov. 12)
API 1104 Code Clinic (Spanish) (Nov. 12)
ASME Section IX, B31.1 & B31.3 Code Clinic (Nov. 12-13)
D1.1 - Code Clinic (Spanish) (Nov. 13)
The Why and How of Welding Procedure Specifications (Nov. 13)
Understanding Welding Symbols (Nov. 13)
Welding of Stainless Steel (Basics) (Nov. 13)
D1.5 Bridge Code Clinic (Nov. 14)
Welding of Stainless Steel (Avoiding Weld Defects) (Nov. 14)
Corrosion of Welds: Causes and Cures (Nov. 14)
Free for Educators
AWS Educational Sessions (including Plummer Lecture) (Nov. 13-14)
ProfessionaI Program
Session 1: Welding Metallurgy (CIMJSEA) (Nov. 12)
Session 2: Arc Welding Studies (Nov. 12)
Session 3: Weld Microstructure and Properties (Nov. 12)
Session 4: Keynote Address: Dr. Peter Mayr (Nov. 13)
Session 5: Modeling (CIMJSEA) (Nov. 13)
Session 6: Friction Stir Welding & Solid State Processes (Nov. 13)
Session 7: Welding Metallurgy (Nov. 13)
Session 8: Sensing Applications (Nov. 13)
Session 9: Weldability (CIMJSEA) (Nov. 13)
Session 10: Applied Technology (Nov. 13)
Session 11: Keynote Address: Prof. Philip Withers (Nov. 14)
Session 12: Applications of Weld Modeling (Nov. 14)
Session 13: Weldability (Nov. 14)
Register at fabtechexpo.com
Just the Facts By Lyndsey Deckard

The American Welding Society
recognizes welder qualification and
certification in two ways. An employer
may qualify a welder in accordance to
AWS codes and standards, or the
American Welding Society itself may
certify a welder.
An AWS Certified Welder has been
tested by a test supervisor (who must be
an AWS CWI) at an AWS Accredited
Test Facility (ATF). If the welders
welding tests are successful, the ATF
will forward the required records to
AWS headquarters. The welder will then
be placed on the AWS National Registry
of Certified Welders. The register
contains all significant information
relating to the welders certification and
limitations. It identifies the processes,
materials, positions, thickness ranges,
and currency of certification. In order to
maintain AWS certification, a welder
must not go for a period of more than six
months between welding in each
certified process and position. There is
also a small certification/recertification
fee to be paid every six months. (Note:
Because payment of the maintenance fee
and submittal of the documentation of
welding continuity every six months has
been viewed by some as cumbersome
and is often forgotten by the Certified
Welder, AWS is currently looking into a
system that would reduce the frequency
of sending this information to
headquarters. If this change is made to
the requirements, it would greatly
increase the convenience to the welder
for maintaining certification.)
A welder certified and current on
the AWS registry may work anywhere
in the world, and the AWS certification
will go with that person. Acceptance of
the certification by a foreign country is,
of course, the decision of that country.
Welder qualification by the
employer, in accordance with AWS
codes and standards, is entirely legal and
may be used on any projects that
company undertakes unless contract
documents specifically require the use of
AWS Certified Welders. Employer
certification is not transferrable. If the
welder chooses to change employers, the
persons new employer would require
him or her to be retested and recertified.
Following is an excerpt from AWS
QC7-93, Standard for AWS Certified
Welders, Sections 1 and 3.
1. Scope
1.1 Program. The rules for the
American Welding Society (AWS)
Certified Welder Program and the
requirements for maintenance of
certification are provided in this
standard. This standard requires the use
of accredited test facilities for
qualification testing.
1.2 Exclusion. This standard does
not prevent a manufacturer, fabricator,
or contractor from continuing to qualify
welders according to other standards.
Employers may impose requirements in
addition to this standard, as deemed
necessary.
How Welders Are Qualified and Certified
Publisher
Andrew Cullison
cullison@aws.org, Extension 249
General Management,
Reprint Permission,
Copyright Issues
Editor
Mary Ruth Johnsen
mjohnsen@aws.org, Extension 238
Feature Articles
Production Editor
Zaida Chavez
zaida@aws.org, Extension 265
Design and Production
Production Senior Coordinator
Brenda Flores
bores@aws.org, Extension 330
Design and Production
Advertising Sales Director
Rob Saltzstein
salty@aws.org, Extension 243
Advertising Sales
Advertising Production Manager
Frank Wilson
fwilson@aws.org; Extension 465
Advertising Production
Advertising Sales &
Promotion Coordinator
Lea Garrigan Paneca
lea@aws.org, Extension 220
Production 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 youd 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 with
the right person.
1.3 Limitation. Certification under
the American Welding Society Certified
Welder Program shall be limited to those
welding performance variables provided
in the applicable supplements to this
standard.
3. Employers and AWS
Responsibility
3.1 Employers Responsibility. The
employers of AWS Certified Welders are
responsible for the work performed by
their employees. The employers may
accept the AWS certification without
additional testing or may add
requirements as deemed necessary to
meet a specific need. Some standards or
contract documents may require the
owner, engineer, or other individuals to
approve the use of AWS Certified
Welders (without requalification) on
their work.
3.2 Employers Obligation.
Companies who employ AWS Certified
Welders shall be fully aware of the
provisions of this standard. The
employers shall specifically note the
extent of qualification as stated on the
AWS welder identification/qualification
limits card. The employers are
responsible for all work performed by
their employees; and therefore, should
verify the employees prior work history,
or otherwise determine that the
qualification(s) apply to the employers
work. The welders current status should
be verified with the Q&C Department
(call (800) 443-9353, ext. 273).
3.3 AWS Responsibility
3.3.1 The AWS Q&C Department
shall be responsible to maintain the
following:
1) Application for AWS Certified
Welder
2) Welder Qualification Test Record
3) Decertification action reports
4) Maintenance of certification
records
5) National Registry of Welders
6) List of Accredited Test Facilities
3.3.2 The Q&C Department will
provide, upon request, individual welder
verification of maintenance of
certification.
3.3.3 The Q&C Department will
provide database searches upon request.
These searches will include only those
authorizing public disclosure on the
application form.
3.4 Test Facility Responsibility. The
Test Facility is responsible for safety and
health matters during testing at that
location in addition to other
requirements stated herein.
It is extremely important that
Certified Welder candidates, SCWIs,
CWIs, and ATF training and
management personnel, read and
become familiar with the following
documents:
QC7-93, Standard for AWS Certified
Welders
QC7-93, Supplement C, Welder
Performance Qualification Sheet
Metal Test Requirements
QC7-93, Supplement F, Chemical
Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping
QC7-93, Supplement G, AWS
Performance Qualification Test.
All four of the above-mentioned
documents are available as free
downloads at
www.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 Certification
Committee, Examination Question Bank
Subcommittee, and Ethics Subcommittee.
Technology Notes
Errata
B2.1/B2.1M:2009-ADD1
Specification for Welding Procedure
and Performance Qualification
The following errata, in addition to
previously announced corrections (see
www.aws.org), have been identified and
will be incorporated into the next
reprint.
Page 63. Figures B.5B, Guided Bend
Fixture-BottomType-Note
b
Correct
For M-26, M-81, and M-83 materials,
two macroetch specimens shall be used
in lieu of guided bend testing (see also
Figures B.5B and B.5C). To: For M-
26, M-81, and M-83 materials, two
macroetch specimens shall be used in
lieu of guided bend testing (see also Fig-
ures B.5Aand B.5C).
Page 64. Figures B.5C, Guided Bend
Fixture-Wrap-Around-Note
b
Correct
For M-26, M-81, and M-83 materials,
two macroetch specimens shall be used
in lieu of guided bend testing. See also
Figures B.5B and B.5C. To: For M-26,
M-81, and M-83 materials, two
macroetch specimens shall be used in
lieu of guided bend testing (see also Fig-
ures B.5Aand B.5B).
Errata
D17.1/D17.1M:2010
Specification for Fusion Welding for
Aerospace Applications
The following errata have been iden-
tified and will be incorporated into the
next reprinting of this document.
Page 35. Table 7.1, Acceptance Cri-
teria in (mm), Discoloration
b
Tita-
nium, Green, Class B. Correct Accep-
tance
a
to Acceptance
c
Page 35. Table 7.1, Acceptance Cri-

teria in (mm), Discoloration
b
Tita-
nium, Green, Class C. Correct Accep-
tance
a
to Acceptance
c
Errata
AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2010
Structural Welding Code Steel
The following errata, in addition to
previously announced corrections (see
www.aws.org), have been identified and
will be incorporated into the next reprint.
Page 150, note h Correct See 4.25
and 4.28 to See 4.26 and 4.29.
Page 193, 5.1 Correct 4.15 refer-
ence to 4.16.
Errata
AWS D14.3/D14.3M:2010
Specification for Welding Earthmoving, Construction, and Agricultural
Equipment
The following errata, in addition to previously announced corrections (see
www.aws.org), have been identified and will be incorporated into the next reprinting
of this document.
Page 15, Table 5 Incorrect Yield Strength Range Change Yield Strength
range for Class III from 4045 to 4055.
Official Interpretations
D1.6/D1.6M:2007
Structural Welding Code Stainless Steel
Subject: Electrode and Shielding Medium
Code Edition: D1.6:2007
Code Provisions: 4.8.3, Tables 4.1 and 4.5
AWS Log: D1.6-07-I03
Inquiry 1: In accordance with Table 4.1, does changing the percentage composition
of 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:2009
The 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 Qualification
Addenda No.: ADD1
Subject: 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 74135, Table D.1, List of Base Metal Specifications. New base metals have
been added and corrections have been made to Table D.1.
Page 136258, 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 Johnsen
550 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 1520 July 21
Milwaukee, WI July 1520 July 21
Los Angeles, CA July 1520 July 21
Sacramento, CA July 1520 July 21
Louisville, KY July 1520 July 21
Kansas City, MO July 2227 July 28
Cleveland, OH July 2227 July 28
Denver, CO July 29Aug. 3 Aug. 4
Philadelphia, PA July 29Aug. 3 Aug. 4
San Diego, CA Aug. 510 Aug. 11
Chicago, IL Aug. 510 Aug. 11
Miami, FL Aug. 510 Aug. 11
Baton Rouge, LA Aug. 510 Aug. 11
Bakersfield, CA Aug. 1217 Aug. 18
Charlotte, NC Aug. 1217 Aug. 18
Rochester, NY Exam only Aug. 18
San Antonio, TX Aug. 1217 Aug. 18
Miami, FL Exam only Aug. 18
Portland, ME Aug. 1924 Aug. 25
Minneapolis, MN Aug. 1924 Aug. 25
Salt Lake City, UT Aug. 1924 Aug. 25
Pittsburgh, PA Aug. 1924 Aug. 25
Seattle, WA Aug. 1924 Aug. 25
Corpus Christi, TX Exam only Sept. 8
Houston, TX Sept. 914 Sept. 15
St. Louis, MO Sept. 914 Sept. 15
New Orleans, LA Sept. 914 Sept. 15
Miami, FL Sept. 914 Sept. 15
Anchorage, AK Exam only Sept. 22
Miami, FL Exam only Oct. 18
Tulsa, OK Oct. 1419 Oct. 20
Long Beach, CA Oct. 1419 Oct. 20
Newark, NJ Oct. 1419 Oct. 20
Nashville, TN Oct. 1419 Oct. 20
Portland, OR Oct. 2126 Oct. 27
Roanoke, VA Oct. 2126 Oct. 27
Detroit, MI Oct. 2126 Oct. 27
Cleveland, OH Oct. 2126 Oct. 27
Atlanta, GA Oct. 28Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Corpus Christi, TX Exam only Nov. 3
Dallas, TX Oct. 28Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Sacramento, CA Oct. 28Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Spokane, WA Oct. 28Nov. 2 Nov. 3
Las Vegas, NV Exam only Nov. 14
Syracuse, NY Dec. 27 Dec. 8
Houston, TX Dec. 27 Dec. 8
Reno, NV Dec. 27 Dec. 8
Los Angeles, CA Dec. 27 Dec. 8
Miami, FL Dec. 27 Dec. 8
9Year Recertification Seminar for CWI/SCWI
For current CWIs and SCWIs needing to meet education require-
ments without taking the exam. The exam can be taken at any site
listed under Certified Welding Inspector.
Miami, FL July 1621 No exam
Orlando, FL Aug. 2025 No exam
Denver, CO Sept. 1015 No exam
Dallas, TX Oct. 1520 No exam
New Orleans, LA Oct. 29Nov. 3 No exam
Miami, FL Nov. 26Dec. 1 No exam
Certified Welding Supervisor (CWS)
Minneapolis, MN July 1620 July 21
Miami, FL Sept. 1014 Sept. 15
Norfolk, VA Oct. 1519 Oct. 20
CWS exams are also given at all CWI exam sites.
Certified Radiographic Interpreter (CRI)
Dallas, TX July 1620 July 21
Chicago, IL Sept. 1014 Sept. 15
Pittsburgh, PA Oct. 1519 Oct. 20
The CRI certification can be a stand-alone credential or can exempt
you 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 at
ABB, Inc., Auburn Hills, MI; (248) 3918421
Aug. 20, Dec. 3 at
Genesis-Systems Group, Davenport, IA; (563) 445-5688
Oct. 22, Oct. 26 at
Lincoln Electric Co., Cleveland, OH; (216) 383-8542
Oct. 15 at
OTC Daihen, Inc., Tipp City, OH; (937) 667-0800
Sept. 10, Nov. 5 at
Wolf Robotics, Fort Collins, CO; (970) 225-7736
On request at:
MATC, Milwaukee, WI; (414) 297-6996
Certified Welding Engineer (CWEng) and Senior Certified
Welding 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 Schedules
Please visit www.aws.org/certification/inter_contact.html.
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, 24
www.asnt.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 222-2768
Applied Bolting Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
www.appliedbolting.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 552-1999
AWS Education Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7, IBC
www.aws.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 443-9353
AWS Member Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IFC, 8, 29
www.aws.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 443-9353
Bruker AXS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
www.bruker.com/s1titan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 234-9729
EST Group/Curtis Wright Flow Control Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
www.estgroup.cwfc.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 355-7044
FABTECH 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26-27
www.fabtechexpo.com/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 443-9353
G.A.L. Gage Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
www.galgage.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(269) 465-5750
NDT Seals, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
www.ndtseals.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(800) 261-6261
Olympus NDT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .OBC
www.olympusNDT.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(781) 419-3900
IFC = Inside Front Cover
IBC = Inside Back Cover
OBC = Outside Back Cover
Visit Our Interactive Ad Index: www.aws.org/ad-index
Results of Annual NDE and Quality Salary
Survey Released
Compensation levels for NDE and quality professionals
continued to climb over the past year, but at a slower pace than
in previous time periods, according to the results of the annual
salary and benefits survey from PQNDT, Inc. The company is
an NDE personnel recruitment and placement organization
based in Arlington, Mass. Complete results of the survey are
available at www.pqndt.com/resources.html.
Besides the rise in compensation levels, results showed an
uptick in the number of full-time benefits available, which
could be a sign of more competition for experienced workers.
Although reported unemployment is down to 5%, there is
a still a sense of caution among many NDE professionals.
Some 61% of full-time workers and 69% of contract workers
feel 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 few
months of the year are positive. The number of full-time job
openings is up across all levels of certification and in all areas
of the country. This contrasts with a year ago, when employers
were more interested in hiring contractors on a temporary
basis. Full-time openings are an indicator of more confidence
in a consistent volume of work ahead.
Business Cards
Business Products
Advertiser Index
continued from page 9
IT
B
L
I
N
D

P
E
R
F
Welding Fundamentals
AWSs 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 on
welding theory, equipment, safety, weld design, metallurgy, welding inspection, and quality
control.
Professional Development Hours and a certificate of completion will be provided upon
completion.
For more information, visit American Welding Online at
www.aws.org
New online course

Op
www.olympus-ims.com
OmniPC
PC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis Software
This 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.
t Improve productivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer.
t Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
automatically qualied to use the OmniPC.
t Take full advantage of extra large monitors
and resolutions for increased precision during
analysis.
t Intuitive keyboard shortcuts have been added
to boost productivity levels during le analysis.
t Parameters used for inspection can be
validated during analysis.
OmniPC is the perfect analysis software for
all applications and markets, including power generation.

OmniPC
PC-Based OmniScan Data Analysis Softwar
This new softwar
Now you can use a PC to perform powerful data analysis using the same tools pr
the OmniScan.

ff
OmniPC
e re is the most efficient and

ff
d affordable option available for OmniScan data analysis.

dable 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 Software
dable option available for OmniScan data analysis.
ovided on board

t Improve productivity: The OmniScan unit can now be used strictly for scanning while
analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer
t Same user interface as the OmniScan: An inspector with training on the OmniScan is
t Ta Take full advanta
and resolutions for incr
analysis.
t Intuitive keyboar
to boost productivity levels during le 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
ake full advantage of extra large monitors
esolutions for increased precision during
Intuitive keyboard shortcuts have been added
oductivity levels during le analysis.

analysis is performed simultaneously on a personal computer.
ecision during
d shortcuts have been added
oductivity levels during le analysis.

Opp

t Parameters used for inspection can be
OmniPC is the perfect analysis softwar

Parameters used for inspection can be
OmniPC is the perfect analysis softwar
OmniPC is the perfect analysis software for


w. www.olym

.olympus-ims.com
For Info go to www.aws.org/ad-index

Aws It 201207

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Aws It 201207

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

www.aws.

You have questions, we can help.

high pressure test plug uses proven self gripping

Just the Facts By Lyndsey Deckard

Page 35. Table 7.1, Acceptance Cri-

OmniPC is the perfect analysis software for

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen