CE Marking / BS EN 1090

[Kent]

So its a 6mm fillet, nothing under and nothing over 7.5mm. Show me the man who can look at 6 and 7.5mm separately and call them apart without a measuring device. Now show me the man who can judge 1/2 tolerance 6.75mm (which is were you should aim for through a welding visor while actually putting that run in without a refference, if it has to be like that and I do remember having a load of stuff sent back on a BNFL job years back were stich welds were up and down on length by similar amounts- the only sure way is mark them, I should ask to see the spec were it says you cannot do this

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

Just helped another company getting certified in EXC3 + EN 3834-2. this was done by a German NoBo who pretty much checked every single line of each single procedure. Made me adjust several, but minor things. Gained a whole lot of experience here.
Meanwhile, I also turned down a request from another company that wanted an EXC2 certification, because it was obvious from the beginning that they only wanted the certification on paper but were not interested in improving their (rather sloppy) fab work. There is no way this will work if you are not at least a bit concerned about quality.

 

[Kent]

Just helped another company getting certified in EXC3 + EN 3834-2. this was done by a German NoBo who pretty much checked every single line of each single procedure. Made me adjust several, but minor things. Gained a whole lot of experience here.
Meanwhile, I also turned down a request from another company that wanted an EXC2 certification, because it was obvious from the beginning that they only wanted the certification on paper but were not interested in improving their (rather sloppy) fab work. There is no way this will work if you are not at least a bit concerned about quality.

Honestly? a company that didn't care about their quality? Yet wanted the cert? Seems a bit contradictory. Now I should suspect that a red herring and personally I should want to delve much deeper in your position as the seller as it sounds very much more like they were actually worried about the added value and cost of such a thing to their business sloppy or otherwise.
A lot is happening at present the Greeks could start a landslide of can't pay wont pay nations and the French seem close to voting in the right wing that wants out of the EU. Meanwhile we have lots of companies ignoring EN1090, if it has to be requested by the buyer at point of tender and a lack of clarity as to what is and what is not covered anyway.
How do you explain as regards what should be a "one std for all" getting all those other clients through it correctly if the NoBo made changes to your procedures please?

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

Don't have a lot of time now,but I can say each and every EN1090 client regularly wants me to come back after they have been certified, for a wide variety of things. The changes that made my procedures better, more waterproof or more logical will get updated everywhere they're being used when I'll pass by in the next few months.

As for one standard fits all, apparently my old procedures were good enough as reviewed by several NoBos, this time they've been thoroughly checked and some were even improved.

 

[AdrianH]

I guess it is like any of the ISO standards there is always continual improvement, you can go along doing a set procedure and get the standard and then figure there is a better way or wording that benefits the process so things change. What fits one company will not always fit another. Anyway, question from a non professional welder, did that list of items not covered by EN 1090 ever get formalized?

Adrian

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

Last CEN meeting in Lisboa, the workgroup did not come to a uniform opinion. Next meeting is 2 and 3 march, I believe in Germany this time. There were several points of discussion, balustrades being one, pallet racking being another, ... We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Kent]

Last CEN meeting in Lisboa, the workgroup did not come to a uniform opinion. Next meeting is 2 and 3 march, I believe in Germany this time. There were several points of discussion, balustrades being one, pallet racking being another, ... We'll have to wait and see.

Good isn't it make what amounts to a law then write it afterwards Sooner we are out of this failed European experiment the better IMO- nightmare!

 

[AdrianH]

Even if the EU breaks down, the concept of having uniform standards across countries does make sense if the UK is to export to other countries, similar if we import good to the UK we would like them to be to a standard that we accept. The idea of a common market is still a good one. All IMHO!

Adrian

 

[Kent]

Even if the EU breaks down, the concept of having uniform standards across countries does make sense if the UK is to export to other countries, similar if we import good to the UK we would like them to be to a standard that we accept. The idea of a common market is still a good one. All IMHO!

Adrian

Yes, it is but British stds were and are still excepted globally, first set out for defence manufacture in our British common wealth I believe. The big thing for the UK in all of this is we cannot now negotiate with our own common wealth directly (a big export market to us ) and far bigger than the EU as a market with massively higher future growth potential. We must go though to a foreign national EU go between. The UK imports far more into itself from the rest of Europe (actually being the biggest customer) yet it exports at a far lesser rate, any fool can do the maths to work out how that effects us and when you consider what happens to a lot of the money paid to foreign nationals who come over here to work with family still living in far poorer nations..............

CE is regularly used to prevent non EU manufacture and to force EU sourcing (some USA welding plant and consumables etc for instance) Smaller the manufacturer or the less in demand that item is the less likely we will get it in legally, its also meant to open more business here to open bidding. Now if you have a contract worth over a certain amount the tender HAS to go out to the rest of the EU nations. This effectively means the next football stadium and certainly any government funded or part funded project is more and more likely to go to another EU country. 1090 makes it a level playing field in all but labour costs! Once the money goes outside the UK we have to have equal value goods bought from us in order to return it into our economy.

Common market is a very good idea for the UK heightening the now out of spec BSI is a brilliant one. Likewise all the stuff that goes with that, higher training stds etc. The US navy still likes the Harrier for instance but now its made in their country alone and we have abandoned it , Australia and India and other fast growing economies like China we cannot talk directly to.

I don't know but if anyone can point me to were BSI changed their minds so much as CE has and made the stds favour the German systems of manufacture so greatly I should be glad to hear of it. Just don't tell me its better because it severely hampered their last attempt at a single federal Europe.

Its not a case of IF but of WHEN and CE will not hold the weight that BSI did in my opinion and will not favour the UK out hunting for work in the common wealth and the USA, Russia, China etc.

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

Honestly? a company that didn't care about their quality? Yet wanted the cert? Seems a bit contradictory.

just re-read your post, and saw I didn't replied to this part.
Many fabricators here are missing out on jobs because part of the description of the bidding job says that it has to be according the CPR, or the EN1090, or similar. This is more and more to be seen in larger tenders.
When EN1090 certified, these fabricators can actually bid on these jobs.

Now I should suspect that a red herring and personally I should want to delve much deeper in your position as the seller as it sounds very much more like they were actually worried about the added value and cost of such a thing to their business sloppy or otherwise.

Now this part, I really don't understand. As I said, I turned down a request, it's not like I was trying to sell them something. But I'm probably understanding you incorrectly.

 

[Kent]

just re-read your post, and saw I didn't replied to this part.
Many fabricators here are missing out on jobs because part of the description of the bidding job says that it has to be according the CPR, or the EN1090, or similar. This is more and more to be seen in larger tenders.
When EN1090 certified, these fabricators can actually bid on these jobs.

THEY COULD BEFORE IT WAS DREAMED UP BUT YOU SEE SO CAN THE REST OF THE EU- THIS MAKES AND WILL MAKE THINGS A LOT LESS PROFITABLE LONG TERM. THE UK IS DOING OK WITH AN ONGOING BUILDING BOOM THANKS, WHILE OTHER NATIONS STRUGGLE


Now this part, I really don't understand. As I said, I turned down a request, it's not like I was trying to sell them something. But I'm probably understanding you incorrectly.

ITS HARD TO EXPLAIN TO YOU IF YOU DONT GET IT BUT I WILL TRY RED HERRING MEANS A SORT OF INTENTIONAL DISTRACTION FROM THE REAL ISSUE THAT WAS HIDDEN.


sorry for the caps just making my answers more prominent not shouting

 

[Mid Wales welder]

Well, we finally finished our weldor codings and PQR's. Hadn't done anything on it for a while because of being so busy, but we did the butt welds a few weeks ago which were pretty easy and went through the lab fine. It was five runs in the end, 18 volts for the root with a 2mm gap and 60 degree inclusive bevel, then 29volts 250ish amps for the last four runs and cleaning back to bright metal between runs.
Then today did the pipe to plate, no marking out needed just welded it up, first go got good weld sizes just a little under on the stop/start from not covering the fish eyes enough, then second go got it bang on!
The next thing once we have our procedures is for me to write our WPS's and get them initial type tested which should b fun. After that it's just sorting out the factory and then get our audit, simples! Lol, but I'm sure it's not going to be simple.

 

[Jim Davey]

If you used EWM Force Arc you could do a 30 degree included angle and have that done in about 3 runs. Less starts and stops to fail on and a smaller heat affected zone. Oh and a handy 40-50% saving in time to boot, as Charlie Sheen would say, Winning!

Well done on getting through it, it's stressfull having someone turn up and tell you how to do the job you've done for years so I can empathise with all the structural boys and what they are going through.

 

[Mid Wales welder]

If you used EWM Force Arc you could do a 30 degree included angle and have that done in about 3 runs. Less starts and stops to fail on and a smaller heat affected zone. Oh and a handy 40-50% saving in time to boot, as Charlie Sheen would say, Winning!

Well done on getting through it, it's stressfull having someone turn up and tell you how to do the job you've done for years so I can empathise with all the structural boys and what they are going through.

I hadn't come across that EWM Force Arc before but after a quick google, looks interesting! Would love a nice new welder like that but I think the boss is paying out enough as it is at the moment lol. I was using a Kemppi 400amp machine that's probably about 20years old, still does the job nicely though, can't beat an old transformer for reliability.
Cheers anyway, I don't mind getting tested at all and the bloke that was doing it was really tidy and very helpful.

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

The next thing once we have our procedures is for me to write our WPS's and get them initial type tested which should b fun.

Who told you this?
ITT (initial type testing) has barely got anything to do with the WPS's, as you do ITT on the final products but not on the weldments (you also don't ITT the bevelling, the cuts, the drilled holes, the galvanising coating, the reaming, ...)
ITT covers the whole product, not just one part/process of it.
And, to be honest, ITT is barely ever used as it's not an easy procedure to follow and you must have mass production, as ITT is a test until failure, so for one off's, this really isn't the best idea
Almost every company that works with the EN1090, uses ITC (initial type calculation).

 

[Mid Wales welder]

Who told you this?
ITT (initial type testing) has barely got anything to do with the WPS's, as you do ITT on the final products but not on the weldments (you also don't ITT the bevelling, the cuts, the drilled holes, the galvanising coating, the reaming, ...)
ITT covers the whole product, not just one part/process of it.
And, to be honest, ITT is barely ever used as it's not an easy procedure to follow and you must have mass production, as ITT is a test until failure, so for one off's, this really isn't the best idea
Almost every company that works with the EN1090, uses ITC (initial type calculation).

Sorry, I should have elaborated there. Once I have written the WPS's from the procedures we then have have to do some test pieces to those WPS's and then the test pieces will be initial type tested to check the WPS's are correct. At least this is what I have been told by the welding engineer who taught the RWC course and the guy who came to do our PQRs.
I may be being dumb here but what's the difference between ITT and ITC?

 

[Tigman]

C

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

I see, you're qualifying your WPS's . The result of these qualifications are WPQR's (welding procedure qualification records). With these, you have proof that your WPS's are correct.
WPS's are worth nothing, as long as they're not qualified. each WPS should also have the reference to their respective WPQR on the WPS itself.
So your thinking/actions are correct, it was just expressed a bit different (read: wrongly ).

This qualification has nothing to do with ITT.
ITT is the calculation before you start building something, to ensure it's strong enough for its application (and is done mostly following the eurocodes), ITT is the testing afterwards that whatever you've build, is good enough for its purposes. But again, you calc or test the entire product, not just a part or process of it.

 

[Derry93]

Hi, just a quick question for anyone that has been through their CE Audit. We had a minor non-conformance that our RWC (one of our welders who did the RWC course) didn't have a CSWIP visual inspection qualification. We have been told he has to do the course. We are based in Northern Ireland and apparently it is not run here, he would have to go to Scotland. The course itself is about £800.00 plus travel and accommodation. Is this a requirement of the 1090 standard? We honestly thought the visual inspection was covered by the RWC course as our RWC was conducting visual weld inspections and ticking off a quality sheet. Many thanks for any help,

 

[Dimitri De Spiegeleer]

No requirements whatsoever for VT. This means that anyone can do this, doesn't even have to be a RWC. ALmost everywhere, the weldors themselves perform the VT on their own welds.
If they wrote you up for a non-conformity, they also have to make reference on the NCR to the § in the standard to which you don't comply. I wonder what they wrote there.