Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Material, PQR/WPS

Material, PQR/WPS

Material, PQR/WPS

Please I need your professional advice.

1) I reviewed a material certificate and I observed the carbon content and the CE is higher than Specified. (material grade: S355J2, material thickness 130mm round bar )

- specified: C = 0.16 & CE = 0.43
- on material certificate: C = 0.18 & CE = 0.44

Will it have much effect on the weld? Please advise.

2) A PQR was qualified using SMAW (3G position) for the root and hot pass while SAW (1G position) for filling and capping. Range qualify on WPS; SAW=1G and SMAW=all positions. Please note, impact and harness test was performed. During review, I stated that SMAW on WPS was only qualified for 3G position and not all positions, please advise.

3) can a WPS qualified to AWS D1. 1 be reviewed to ISO 15614-1 (the adopted code for the project is ISO 15614-1 but the PQR was formally qualified to AWS D1. 1) please advise.

Many thanks.


RE: Material, PQR/WPS

1) There will be no practical difference between CE 0.43 and CE 0.44.

2) I'll pass

3) If you have all testing done that is required by EN ISO 15614-1; and you have applied the correct acceptance criteria (there is a difference between AWS and EN/ISO standards), I see no reason to not write a qualification according to EN ISO 15614-1. Then, you can review the WPS. However, both above conditions need to be fulfilled in order to do this. Dual-process WPQR's have some peculiarities under EN ISO, especially regarding to the testing (location of specimen, ...). I don't have enough experience with AWS standards to be able to easily compare the two.

EDIT: typo, see "not" in bold above. Meaning: if both conditions (regarding testing) are fulfilled, write a WPQR according to EN ISO 15614-1 and check the WPS against this document.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close