Coordinating a Welder Requalification After a Failed Visual Inspection Trend
A welding coordinator reviews three months of production data and finds that one welder's joints have failed visual inspection four times, each time for undercut exceeding the allowable limit on the cap. The welder is qualified for the process and position. The failures are spread across two different procedures and two different base metal thicknesses. Production wants the welder removed from the project, while the welder argues the procedures are at fault because other welders on the same procedures have no failures. The coordinator must decide whether to requalify, retrain, or remove the welder, and must document the decision.
1. Analyze the evidence to determine the most likely cause and the appropriate response.
Read the worked answer
The pattern points to a welder technique issue rather than a procedure defect. The same procedures are used by other welders without failures, and the failures are concentrated in one welder across two procedures and two thicknesses. That consistency across different procedures makes a procedure-specific cause unlikely.
Undercut on the cap is typically caused by travel speed, arc length, electrode angle, or current settings that are at the edge of the qualified range. The welder may be running at the top of the current range or using a travel speed that leaves the toes unfilled. The fact that the welder is qualified means the qualification test was passed at some point, but qualification does not guarantee continued performance.
The appropriate first response is a targeted review of the welder's technique and parameters, followed by retraining and a period of increased inspection. Removal should be considered only if retraining does not correct the problem. Requalification alone would not address the root cause.
2. What documentation and follow-up should the coordinator put in place?
Read the worked answer
The coordinator should document the trend analysis, including the four failures, the procedures and thicknesses involved, and the comparison with other welders. The record should note the suspected causes and the corrective action plan.
The plan should include retraining on cap technique and parameter control, a check that the welder is working within the qualified ranges, and increased inspection frequency for a defined period. The coordinator should set a review point, such as after a specified number of joints or a set time, to decide whether the corrective action worked.
If failures continue, the coordinator should escalate to removal or requalification as appropriate. All records, including retraining content, inspection results during the monitoring period, and the final decision, should be retained so the decision is traceable and defensible to the client.