TIP TIG Welding is always better quality than TIG and 100 to 500% faster with superior quality than TIG - MIG - FCAW.

Nov. 2008: The following will tell you something about the general management and engineering apathy and lack of weld process ownership too often found in throughout the global weld industry.

[] In the majority of global plants that use robots, which weld you will find a lack of Best Weld Practices and Process Controls..

[] It's difficult in many plants, to find a manager who will accept full ownership, accountability
and responsibility for the daily weld quality and productivity attained

[] In many plants, the QA person responsible for finding weld defects, often gets more
respect and more pay than the technician who can prevent those costly weld defects.

[] In most plants the weld decision maker's job descriptions are poorly defined.

[] The ratio of weld engineers to global welding facilities is extremely low, yet when weld engineers or qualified technicians are hired, perhaps 1 in 10 are given the full responsibility and made accountable for the weld personnel that daily impact their weld quality and productivity.

The lack of "weld managers" in North America is staggering. If someone wants to hire me, I refuse to look at any job as the plant weld engineer. I inform the company or employment agency, that I cannot control what I don't own, therefore I am only interested in a weld management position in which I have the full management responsibility for the weld quality and productivity attained.

If you want to know how few global companies are looking for weld managers, go to the world's largest job site www.monster.com, and in the keyword box, type in two words, "weld manager".

As you cannot separate people from welds, the individual responsible for the primary weld processes utilized on the shop floor must also be responsible for the supervisors that impact the weld processes. Plants that are interested in attaining consistent , optimum weld quality and productivity need first and foremost a "Weld Manager".

2008. In industries which daily immerse themselves in common, costly unnecessary welding issues, a frequent management crutch approach to solving weld problems, is call a supplier or salesman.
This leads to a to discussion on the possible purchase of of costly weld equipment loaded with useless, electronic bells and whistles,
an ineffective three part gas mix or an unnecessary metal cored wire.

As optimum MIG welds have been made for five decades with traditional, low cost CV equipment, simple two component gas mixes and MIG wires that have not changed in decades, surely management has a responsibility to recognize, that too frequently their weld issues are simply a result of lack of process expertise in their organizations.

The global MIG and flux cored welding industry is in general a self taught industry which evolved from two simple manual weld processes, stick and TIG. With these two processes there is only a single primary weld current control, so minimal focus was necessary for the TIG and stick weld "process control" requirements, while focus was placed on the weld personnel
"skill levels". In contrast to stick and TIG welding, MIG equipment offers a variety of weld transfer modes and all types of process challenges to optimize those short circuit, globular, spray, pulsed, STT, RMD and CMT processes and don't forget that wide range of flux cored weld wires that utilizes the same MIG equipment.

My question is a simple one. Why would any company want it's weld personnel to utilize their MIG and flux cored weld processes, when that same company has not provided their weld personnel with the weld and process control
training necessary to attain consistent, optimum weld quality and productivity? For those that work in a weld shop and are thinking, "our welders are experienced, most have been welding for 20 years", please, always remember while at this site, that weld skills have nothing to do with weld process control expertise.

If you believe your key weld personnel have process control expertise, take a look at the following weld tests and then ask your self, how well would my weld personnel do with this test and would this type of type process expertise benefit our organization?

[] Fundamental MIG Process Control Weld Test.

[] Fundamental Flux Cored Process Control Weld Test.

Process control solutions for any manual or robot MIG and flux cored welds, available here.

This is the only web site in North America that promotes the management / engineering ownership message. I encourage managers and engineers to use the resources available at this site to implement robot / manual / MIG / flux cored, best weld practices and process controls.

Weld Education or the Lack of Weld Education: American colleges and Universities may offer "weld degrees" however few weld education facilities place emphasis on teaching the potential weld engineers and technicians, the ability to establish effective Best Weld Practices / Weld Process Controls with the common weld processes such as MIG and flux cored.



CLASS ROOM TEXT BOOK PROCESSES: With many colleges and university weld programs, extensive time is often spent on classroom, "text book weld processes" such as Lasers or Electron-Beam welds, yet these two processes account for less than one thousand of one percent of the welds produced daily.

If all weld students and engineers spent more practical and classroom time on the common weld processes such as MIG, Pulsed MIG, Flux Cored and Resistance Welding, the weld industry has the potential to generate hundreds of millions of dollars daily through improved manual and robot weld productivity and quality.

WELD EDUCATION TIME WARP: Many global, community colleges that provide weld programs are stuck in a 1960's time warp. Each year these colleges spend thousands of training hours on their students providing stick welding and oxy-fuel welding or focussing on MIG and flux cored skills. As there is rarely any focus on weld process control education, the
majority of students who graduate, typically end up as a MIG or flux cored welders that "play around" with the weld controls.


Note: MIG and flux cored account for approx. 90% of the welds produced each day, yet if the MIG and flux cored weld tests provided at this web site was given to the weld educators and professors, few would pass the tests.


Unfortunately in my life time, the global weld process education is not likely to see dramatic improvement. As any one in a weld shop knows, you have to have the ability to address a root cause of a welding issue before you can recognize it and fix it. As few universities or colleges hire engineering department heads, with the ability to recognize what the welding industry needs, it's not likely they will hire educators with the process qualifications necessary to resolve the welding industries needs.

A DECADE AGO IN THE GLOBES MOST SUCCESSFUL AUTO / TRUCK FRAME MANUFACTURER WAS A COMPANY LOCATED IN WISCONSIN CALLED A.O. SMITH.

IN THE MID 1990's, A.O.SMITH HAD MORE THAN A 1200 ABB ROBOTS USING MAINLY TRADITIONAL CV. SCR MILLER DELTA WELD 450 MIG EQUIPMENT, 0.045 WIRES AND AN ARGON CO2 MIX. THE AUTO / TRUCK FRAMES WERE WELDED WITH THE SPRAY TRANSFER MODE AT DEPOSITION RATES THAT AVERAGED OF 13 - 15 LB/HR.

A.O.SMITH STARTED OUT MAKING FRAMES FOR CADILAC IN 1904. IN 1995 A.O.SMITH WAS THE ONLY GLOBAL CORPORATION TO ESTABLISH ROBOT MULTI-PLANT WELD BEST PRACTICES AND EFFECTIVE ROBOT PROCESS CONTROLS. THEIR DAILY ROBOT WELD REWORK WAS BY TODAY'S STANDARDS MINUSCULE AND THE ROBOT MIG PRODUCTION WAS BOTH OPTIMUM AND CONSISTENT.

MARCH 2005: THERE IS NOT ONE AUTO / TRUCK FRAME OR PART MANUFACTURER IN NORTH AMERICA THAT HAS COME CLOSE TO ATTAINING THE THE SAME OPTIMUM DAILY ROBOT WELD PRODUCTION AND QUALITY ACHIEVED BY A.O.SMITH IN THE NINETEEN NINETIES.

AFTER WELDING AUTO / TRUCK FRAMES FOR 93 YEARS, IN 1997, A.O.SMITH WAS PURCHASED BY TOWER AUTOMOTIVE. I HAVE BEEN IN MANY TOWER PLANTS AND I SINCERELY BELIEVE THE TOWER CORPORATE AND PLANT ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT HAVE NEVER FULLY COMPREHENDED OR APPRECIATED THE TECHNICAL AND PROCESS EXPERTISE THAT A.O. SMITH KNEW WAS NECESSITY TO ATTAIN OPTIMUM, CONSISTENT ROBOT WELD RESULTS.


AS EACH DAY PASSES, THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, AMERICAN WORKERS AND THEIR CHILDREN LOOSE THEIR FUTURE ABILITY TO EARN A DECENT WEEKLY PAY CHECK. IT'S SAD IN THIS SHRINKING MANUFACTURING ENVIRONMENT THAT AN AMERICAN MANUFACTURING GIANT LIKE TOWER AUTOMOTIVE,
WITH IT'S HANDS OFF, INEFFECTIVE ENGINEERS AND MANAGERS HAS ADDED TO THE EMPLOYMENT MISERY IN THE USA. TOWER TOOK A PROUD 90 YEAR OLD COMPANY LIKE A.O.SMITH AND IN LESS THAN A DECADE THE MANAGEMENT DELIVERED THEM IN 2005 TO A CHAPTER 11.

It's April 2005. Bob Lutz the Vice Chairman of GM finally speaks out on the expertise of some of his engineers. During a speech to the at the Society of Automotive Engineers, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz states, that US. auto manufacturers could streamline there design process if American design engineers were trained more like their Asian or European counterparts. Bob continues, "we are actually training our North American engineers to be "managers" while the rest of the world trains them to be doers".

CAN YOU RELATE TO THIS MANAGEMENT ISSUE? JOE, WE ARE HAVING SO MANY MIG WELDING ISSUES AT THIS PLANT, YOU TELL ME, WHO THE HELL IS IN CONTROL OF THOSE ROBOTS?

Who is in charge of those robots, a simple question, yet a question that would cause
controversy for many global managers, engineers and supervisors.

The MIG process has been around for more than five decades and the flux cored process for more than three decades. When the MIG or flux cored welding was carried out by manual welders, management involvement was typically none existent. Why get involved? The managers would typically let their welders "play around" with their MIG controls, and make sure they made sparks and smoke. Controlling weld costs for many managers and supervisors, well that's a simple function, you simply keep your eyes on the prices you pay for the MIG wire and gas mixes.

He was a manual MIG welder, the shop is bringing in robots
so we have to cut out his "play around" organ.

2000. In today's robot welding world, where few welding supervisors, engineers or mangers are hired for their "weld process control knowledge", the responsibility for the robot weld quality and productivity is often laid on the back of a very frustrated, over worked robot technician who also never received weld process control training. In other plants the management and engineers placed the weld process control responsibility on the shoulders of those highly qualified weld process experts, the electricians and millwrights in the maintenance department.

When management does not know what it's doing
it frequently place responsibility on the wrong shoulders.

Ed likes a welding challenge.

WELD SHOPS, RISE ABOVE THE PLAY AROUND MENTALITY.

WHEN IT COMES TO RESOLVING ROBOT WELD PROCESS ISSUES, MANY AUTOMOTIVE PLANTS HAVE FOUND OUT THAT PICKING
FIVE GUYS FROM THE WELD OR ROBOT SHOP DOES NOT ALWAYS MAKE AN EFFECTIVE TEAM. TO GET TO THE ROOT CAUSE OF ROBOT WELD ISSUES, GIVE CONSIDERATION TO THE PROCESS DEPTH, APPLICATION DIVERSITY, HANDS ON INVOLVEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MEMBERS OF YOUR ROBOT WELD TEAM.


The ratio of engineers to shop floor workers is usually the highest in companies that each day produce high production volumes. In auto / truck corporations and tier one suppliers, engineers are typically in abundance and the majority of the manufacturing issues they are typically struggle with daily are usually found in three process areas;

[1] The weld shop.
[2] The paint shop.
[3] The press shop.

The manufacturing process issues that result daily with the common manufacturing processes in most manufacturing plants, is usually a reflection of the lack of management understanding of the fundamental process / equipment requirements for the implementation of process controls.

THE FRUSTRATED BIG THREE VICE PRESIDENT OF MANUFACTURING SPELLS IT OUT TO JOE THE TIER ONE PLANT MANUFACTURING MANAGER:

DAM IT JOE. IF YOU CANNOT CONTROL THE ROBOT WELDS WITH THE MILLIONS WE SPENT AND ALL OUR ENGINEERING EXPERTISE, OUT SOURCE THE BLOODY PARTS OR BETTER STILL SHIP THE ROBOTS AND PARTS DOWN TO MEXICO WHERE WE CAN BURY THE BLOODY ISSUES WITH CHEAP LABOR.

Management Awareness.

CORRECTLY DEFINED JOB DESCRIPTIONS ARE A RARITY
IN MOST GLOBAL ROBOT WELDING SHOPS.

A COMMON DENOMINATOR OF
THE GLOBAL MIG WELDING INDUSTRY


Come on CHICKLETS MIGLETS, we have to
rely on him, after all he is the "salesman".

When a robot technician or supervisor requires weld process advice for a robot issue, the advice will rarely come from the manufacturing manager's or engineers office, it usually comes through the door from the local welding distributor sales rep.

Too many weld shops rely on the advice of the local, weld distributor salesmen, an individual who typically has never worked in a weld shop or set a MIG welding robot, an individual that has to be biased to the product lines he sells.

When the sales based weld advice or the costly pulsed weld equipment bells and whistles do not attain the desired robot weld results, the next step for management is seek advice from the companies who make the weld equipment or consumables that are not working the way they should be.

Once the bovine fecal matter from the power source manufacturers has been spooned out and the results again found to be disappointing, it's not surprising to find the engineers and managers withdrawing from the shop floors to their offices where they start to build a glass wall that will protect themselves from the weld shop. You may know a few of these managers or engineers as they rarely show enthusiasm for process ownership. You may have seen those glass walls as they can be found in the majority of manufacturing facilities throughout the industrial world.

2008: WITH MANY OF TODAY'S MANUFACTURING MANAGERS,
THE FAULT IS ALWAYS WITH SOMEONE ELSE.

DAM IT JOE WE HAVE OVER TWO MILLION DOLLARS INVESTED IN THAT ROBOT LINE. WE HAVE SPENT TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND ON TRAINING AND YET THE ROBOT WELD REWORK RATE IS OVER FORTY PERCENT AND OUR PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY STINKS. NOW LOOK ME IN THE EYE AND KEEP TELLING ME THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE PEOPLE ON THE SHOP FLOOR.

With the introduction of robots into a traditional manual manufacturing facility, it's logical to assume the robots would influence the management, engineers and manual work force, or perhaps at least create changes to the existing weld shop culture and environment. It's also logical to assume that the manual weld shop environment, it's culture and practices could negatively influence and contaminate the performance potential of the robots. In this common manufacturing environment, management and engineers will require a unique approach to establish best practices and process controls. Dramatic changes will often have to be implemented and with this in mind, it's not difficult to understand why many managers, engineers and shop floor workers would strive to retain their traditional status quo.

A ship will go round in circles without the leadership of the captain and qualified, "hands on" engineers. Robot optimization requires weld process expertise. If you are a manager or engineer involved in robot weld decisions and have not acquired this process expertise which only requires
an eight hour class room training program. I hope you now realize you are the prime cause of the robot of the quality and productivity issues in your plant.

JOE, IT'S TIME FOR A
WELD CHANGE:

2008 The last two decade has radically changed the weld shop engineering and "management" requirements yet few managers and engineers have risen to the challenge. In many weld departments, "change" is the most difficult thing to implement. However when robots are moved into the traditional "manual weld shop culture", the weld process control changes required to optimize robot weld production may be radical and will require managers who don't hide behind glass walls.

WHEN YOU ARE AWARE OF THE WELDING PAST,
YOU CAN LEARN FROM IT.

To make meaningful, weld process control changes, one can benefit by examining why the typical past manufacturing weld practices are in most instances simply not effective for robot weld lines. Managers when you walk through your weld shop please remember the following.

SALES INFLUENCE. Managers and engineers responsible for welding need to be aware that the MIG welding industry has been influenced by decades of inappropriate, inaccurate, weld process and product sales advice.

MANAGEMENT PROCESS APATHY. A prime reason that extensive weld process confusion exists in plants that utilize MIG robots is managers often avoid dealing with the root causes of MIG weld process issues.

ENGINEERING PROCESS APATHY. Most engineers including weld engineers responsible for welding robots have minimal "weld process control expertise", these guys too often leave the robot cells to the less qualified robot technicians.

DOUBLE STANDARDS PEOPLE. It's a weld fact that in the MIG welding industry, there is a double standard when it comes to judging welding expertise. Decades of focus on weld skills with minimal focus on weld process expertise, has created a unique industry. After all which other 100 year old industry would allows it's workers to play with it's primary equipment controls?

DOUBLE STANDARDS TOLERANCES. Few mangers have shown concern for the 3 and 6 mm gaps and poor fit that is often part of the manual weld world. Blind robots are less forgiving, yet thanks to common apathetic manufacturing management and engineering standards, the majority of parts that end up in a robot cell, do not meet the design dimensional tolerances.

The Unique, Traditional Weld Shop Culture. As a manager, engineer or primary weld decision maker, you are aware that every manufacturing plant has it's "traditional way of doing things".

Each manufacturing department in the plant will have it's unique pecking order and personnel cliques, after all these department are just a combination of human nature and slow welding evolution. This is the weld department untouched by management for decades. This is the weld department entrenched in manufacturing practices that have changed little since the 1960s. Combine all the above mentioned elements in a copper pot along with self taught, shop floor individuals who are usually strong willed, thick skinned, highly opinionated. In the same pot, combine stuck in a time warp union mentality with two hands of apathetic management. Then slowly mix in a batch of weld process myths and take a big wooden spoon and stir in an overdose of bovine fecal biased, weld sales hype. Finally mix all these together for more than five decades and out pops the unique, MIG weld shop culture that in the twenty first century will keep many managers in a state of exhausted frustration.

Have you been in an exhaust manufacturing plant in which the Management allowed the whole plant to use the MIG Welding process with the wrong welding polarity?

Management controlling weld costs, is worrying less about the cost of the weld wires and gas mixes, and being more concerned and aware about weld process controls and the daily weld deposition rates that should be attained. Ed simplifies weld costs in all his training resources.

For weld shops considering the purchase of a robot,
remember at the end of the day it's not about the robots, its about the


"DAILY WELD QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY PRODUCED"

Considering a robot purchase? For those job shops that want to do low to medium volume, ever changing steel / stainless robot weld applications, give serious consideration to the following;

[] When you examine each robot manufacture's product don't get caught up with the bells and whistles and fancy electronic pulsed MIG power source with it's 1 billion wave forms. Stay focussed on the practical weld capability of the robot cell.

[] When an integrator advises you to use pulsed for that steel application remember the information at this site.

[] Examine the length of time required to both program a common part and especially the time required to make weld changes to different welds.

[] Examine the ease in which weld data wire feed, voltage or pulsed parameter changes are made.

[] Examine the logic layout of the welding program,

[] Examine the calibration accuracy between pendant and power source weld data.

[] Examine the automated TCP capability and repeatability.

[] Examine the ease of making touch sense and through the arc tracking changes. Also carefully examine how effective and consistent these valuable features are.

[] Examine the weld weave program especially the logic of the program.

[] Examine the accuracy and repeatability of the robot with the positioner utilized.

[] Examine the complexity of programming the robot to work with secondary equipment such as the positioner and torch cleaning stations.

[] Don't even consider buying a robot unless it can show that it will attain "100 weld success" with the applications intended.

[] Examine the robot instruction literature, the technical support and service capability, and most important, figure out during your initial discussions with the integrator or equipment reps, who's' supplying the most bovine fecal matter.

REMEMBER THE ROBOT YOU ARE CONSIDERING MAY APPEAR TO WORK WELL IN AN AUTO PLANT WHERE THEY RARELY CHANGE THE WELD PROGRAMS AND THE POOR INCONSISTENT ROBOT WELD QUALITY IS ADDRESSED BY ADDING WORKERS TO THE END OF THE ROBOT LINE TO FIX THE DAILY WELD REWORK. HOWEVER WILL THIS SAME ROBOT MAKE THE GRADE IN A WELD SHOP THAT'S SERIOUS ABOUT WELD QUALITY REPEATABILITY, ROBOT PROGRAMMING EASE OF USE, AND FAST PROGRAMING CAPABILITY.

IF YOU WANT A GREAT COMPARISON OF CONFUSION VERSUS WELD LOGIC, COMPARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A JAPANESE PANASONIC ROBOT AND A SWEDISH ABB ROBOT ARC WELD PROGRAM WITH IT'S PRACTICAL REAL WORLD FEATURES.

MANAGEMENT AND THOSE HIGH TECH WORKERS: Instead of managing manual skilled or semiskilled workers, today weld managers, supervisors and engineers may have to manage robots and lasers along with the high tech individuals that support and set up the equipment. With this in mind it's therefore logical that both managers and engineers should give extensive consideration to the engineering requirements for optimizing the robot weld quality and productivity.

MANAGERS, consider the "technical expertise" necessary for those shop floor individuals responsible for setting and operating arc welding robots, consider the benefits of effective robot or manual "weld process control training",.

MANAGERS, evaluate your robot engineers, technicians and robot operators "job descriptions". Fill in the missing links for process controls and provide the necessary training.

MANAGERS, consider your corporate "product liability consequences" The consequences that will arise from the inconsistent practices and the daily unqualified robot weld changes that take place with your customer's parts.

A walk through many automotive plant's robot resistance welding department, would likely reveal that the resistance spot weld data monitors and electronic process controls that have been available since the seventies, are typically none existent, none functional or simply turned off.

Some of the resistance welding robots when striking the cars and truck steel bodies will give of great showers of weld sparks, others resistance welders will clamp their jaws together with barely an electrical whimper. The bottom line, the resistant spot weld quality in many plants is typically so inconsistent that for every spot weld required on a car or truck, engineers are now in the habit of requesting three or four extra welds be applied.

Implementing effective robot weld process control changes is typically doomed for disaster if it commences in the maintenance department. The following data will hopefully assist management and engineers in the task of achieving MIG weld process optimization.

2004. Pulsed MIG welds made with a Lincoln Power Wave.

This weld is made by a Lincoln power source that can cost up to $12,000.00. I believe it's overpriced by at least $10.000.00, however the welds you see are not the fault of the infamous Lincoln pulsed PowerWave. This Ford frame weld simply points to the manufacturing management ignorance at one of North America's leading frame manufactures. This weld points out that optimum welds don't come from the most expensive welding equipment.

Robot welds like these are common in the auto / truck industry. It's easy to fix weld problems like this, that is if you can find manufacturing managers who are sincere about finding out the real root causes of their daily robot weld process issues.

If you are a manager or engineer looking for a no nonsense approach to your welding issues, consider Ed's process control CD power point training resources.

FEW ENGINEERING MANAGERS IN THE AUTO INDUSTRY SEEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT ATTAINING OPTIMUM ROBOT WELD QUALITY DOES NOT REQUIRE A BLACK BELT, OR AN UNDERSTANDING OF JAPANESE MANUFACTURING PRACTICES:



Today, there is a common theme in many manufacturing plants that "if you can control the plant's paper work you can control the manufacturing processes". While there may be a positive, manufacturing attribute attained from ISO, (I have yet to find a practical one) the cost, implementation, complexity, scope and the compliance of ISO conformance, from my perspective robs an organization of valuable engineering resources that could be better utilized. Unfortunately this European driven bureaucratic nightmare in American plants often masks the work of "inexperienced inefficient decision makers" who simply don't have the manufacturing process expertise necessary to implement effective process controls, yet justify their pay through their ability to churn out paperwork.

When it comes to weld process controls, it's the fundamentals such as:

[1] The management capability and involvement in "manufacturing process ownership".

[2] The management's "recognition of an employee's required weld process expertise" and the necessary training required.

[3] The day to day management of weld process controls, that are fundamental tools for attaining consistent, optimum quality robot welds.

HAVE YOU BEEN IN A WELD SHOP LIKE THIS?:

As you looked around the weld shop you saw no uniformity. There was MIG equipment from Miller, Lincoln, Hobart, Linde and Airco. In the daily quest to find a crutch or magic weld solution to the numerous "manual" weld shop issues, the weld shop manager purchased MIG weld equipment from just about every company that ever made it. When the new MIG welding equipment did not resolve the numerous weld shop issues, these same shops would turn their attention to trying the latest MIG gas or new welding wire.


THE BIGGEST CON GAME IN THE WELD BUSINESS HAS ALWAYS BEEN MIG WELD GAS MARKETING & SALES.

I should know about MIG gases as I helped write the AWS shielding MIG gas specifications. For several years I attended the AWS gas committee meetings. I always took a king sized shovel which helped me to scrape up the very product biased bovine fecal matter that spewed out of some of the committee, gas marketing managers mouths.

There are now over 40 MIG gas mixes available for welding carbon steels. From my perspective only two MIG gas mixes are required to provide optimum welds for all carbon or low alloy steel applications. The frequent, erroneous MIG gas mix marketing statements that for decades spewed forth from the major, industrial gas manufacturers always provided a ray of hope for the inexperienced, frustrated weld department manager, who struggles daily to get his employees to control the 50 year, old two control MIG process.

With the advice of their local gas supplier, many shops will try any new gas mix that comes along. After all the major gas companies must know what they are doing, right? and who can refute the gas weld data presented by the salesman with his glossy new brochures. The weld shops that has a wide variety of useless gas mixes sitting on the weld shop floor will also have a variety of unnecessary MIG and flux cored welding consumables sitting on the shelves. Its not just welding that causes issues, for the shop, when it comes to cutting the steels, few shops understand the real difference between propane, propylene, natural gas or acetylene, and for gods sake don't ask anyone in the for a cost analysis of a 6 mm fillet weld or an oxy fuel cut versus a plasma cut.

MANAGEMENT AND GLOBAL WELD MANUFACTURING STANDARDS?

For the big three or tier one executives that like to discuss global manufacturing stradegy and the implementation of "Global Manufacturing Standards" the following weld reality is likely to exist in their plants.
If a US auto / truck manufacturing company has three sister plants in the same city or state, and these plants make similar, steel welded parts, lets say shocks, exhausts or steering products. You can typically guarantee that each plant will weld the same parts using different weld equipment, different weld consumables along with different welding procedures. Of course these manufacturing differences will result in obvious inconsistencies in the welding productivity and quality attained at each plant.

A UNIVERSAL MANAGEMENT NEED FOR UNNECESSARY BELLS / WHISTLES.

I have provided weld consulting services in ten different countries and it did not matter if the country was, Canada, Japan, Sweden, Germany, Italy, or the UK, I found MIG weld process confusion to be universal. The one thing all the countries listed have in common, is most of the large manufacturing companies in these countries like to "purchase weld equipment with useless, costly bells and whistles".

In general the management in many large manufacturing companies believe that the purchase of the bells and whistles will compensate for the so called "people weld process issues". It's ironic that the big three corporate executives who do not have the expertise to control the processes in their own plants, talk of their desire for "Uniform Global Manufacturing Standards".

2000: For almost forty years, life in the welding shop was simple. Fitters and machinist used their expertise for forming and assembling the parts to be welded. Welders played with the controls and used their manual skills to join the parts, and the maintenance department used their skills to repair and maintain the equipment used. From a manufacturing / engineering perspective, the front office engineers working in the weld shop environment were typically involved in part design, establishing weld procedures, purchasing weld equipment, and when solving a weld issue, they may pick up the phone and ask the local sales rep to call at their facility.

Robot weld application ownership has to be a management, design engineering and worker partnership. Today's robot weld reality is that weld ownership is typically controlled by shop floor workers who frequently lack the required process expertise to implement effective, automated weld process controls.

2008: "WE DID OUR JOB": The management and engineering team are under the impression they had carried out their weld shop responsibility. After all they approved the budgets for the robot capital expenditures. They then brought the robots into the weld department. Now all the "weld team" had to do, was ensure that each shift produced the desired robot weld productivity and parts that required no weld rework.


To achieve partially acceptable robot welds, many companies would place a "mechanical or electrical engineer in charge of the welding robot weld line and make him this unqualified engineer the "weld team leader". They would then place a skilled welder in the cell to operate a robot that provides the skills. Also to ensure consistent weld quality the highly weld process qualified, maintenance electrician, millwright or robot operator is daily allowed to make the robot welding changes to so called
pre-qualified welds. Of course welding responsibility in many automotive plants is affected by unions and their often "out dated seniority clauses" that put the wrong man on the job. It's common in manufacturing facilities to find that the robot operators are allowed to make welding changes which can effect the part integrity and the daily weld production.

In many manufacturing plants the unions and management would benefit by reviewing the union agreements from a "weld automation perspective". Unions at one time believed robots to be a key cause of job loss, eventually the unions found out that manufacturing companies that adopted robots were the ones that retained the work.

IT SHOULD BE A NORMAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTION TO CORRECTLY DEFINE, THE ROBOT JOB DESCRIPTIONS OF THE PLANT EMPLOYEES.

I could ask ten plant managers in ten different automotive plants to define the job description of a MIG welding robot operator or a robot programmer and I believe that I would get ten very different job descriptions.

Robot Weld Process Expertise:
[1] Weld process expertise & the required controls to optimize a robot has never required a person with a university or college degree, it does however require a combination of in-depth robot programming and extensive weld process expertise. This fundamental message will come as a shock to many Japanese plant managers and HR directors who simply do understand what's required for robot process controls.

Weld Fact: They don't teach what you need to know about robot weld process controls at any college or university in North America". If any technical college or university disagrees with this point, invite me to your facility and in less than one hour with your fourth year weld engineering students and instructors and I will prove otherwise.

[2] Weld process expertise & the required controls to optimize a robot does not require biased, inexperienced weld advice from MIG weld equipment and consumable manufacturers.

[3] Weld process expertise & the required controls to optimize a robot is rarely influenced by the QA department welding personnel. Too frequently the inspectors who are critical of weld quality have never bothered to learn the practical weld process knowledge necessary to provide the welding solutions to their criticism.

Weld Process Controls Starts With
"Weld Management Controls".

Unfortunately today, in many manufacturing companies, the management and engineers involved in welding are too frequently insulated from,

[a] the weld shop floor issues and,
[b] the developing shop floor manufacturing technology.

Maybe I am old fashioned, but on a ship, if the captain and officers show little interest in the ships operating equipment, you know the ships crew is going to run the ship their way.

In many instances experienced robot programmers can always use more advanced robot program training and all experienced robot programmers would benefit from more weld process expertise.

A CLEAR JOB DESCRIPTION AND BASIC PROCESS TRAINING. For robot weld process controls, robot "operators" require a clearly defined job description and "basic weld process training". Operators should be able to understand the weld "arc sounds" and weld changes that can occur in the robot cells. Operators must also understand what an acceptable weld looks like and what they have responsibility in the cell for. Operators must also be trained on what they "must not do" to those pre-qualified welds.


TRAINING SHOULD START WITH DESIGNERS. Most designers of robot welded parts would benefit from weld process theory training. Its likely that the designers in your organization do not know the minimum thickness that MIG short circuit transfer can be used on, what an acceptable weld gap dimension is, or why that single pass, MIG fillet weld maximum size is restricted. The designers of automotive / truck parts are rarely aware of their negative influence on weld productivity and quality. All designers would benefit from weld process expertise that allows them to design for welding.

COMMUNICATION and ROBOT WELDED FIXTURES. Many fixture makers need to improve communication with the individuals responsible for the part design, the person who provides the robot programming, the maintenance manager and the key robot operator. The group weld discussion would be beneficial in ensuring that fixtures are designed to meet the ergonomic requirements of the robot operators, that the fixtures will not impede optimum robot technique and programming, that the fixtures will be durable and easy to maintain.

A "KNOWLEDGEABLE" WELD TEAM HELPS. For effective robot weld process controls, robots should be managed by an "automation weld team". In contrast to many of the weld teams we now see in manufacturing facilities, this would be a team, comprised of an operator rep, the maintenance supervisor, the programer, and a rep from the quality, engineering and design departments. This team would have members who have received process training and understand how to optimize a robot program and implement an effective "robot weld process control program"

Ineffective Weld Management.

While employed as a senior weld process engineer with ABB, one of the worlds largest suppliers of arc welding robots, I provided "robot weld process training" for many of the top North American, fortune 50 manufacturing companies.

I found it amusing, that frequently automotive managers from the big three and tier companies would send robot personnel to the robot programming school, yet many of these individuals could barely read. You would think that innovative manufacturing management, would be aware that few engineers in the auto and truck industry have mastered robot programming requirements, and there is a logical reason for this.

Sending poorly qualified individuals to robot training school may be logical for big three management, however it's is not the management solution for optimizing robot welding production.

Perhaps future managers could be a little more innovative and create for the robot weld production crew a job description that requires the applicants selected to control the welding robots, to at least have the ability to read.

Another Traditional Management Perception:

There is a common perception from some managers that when it comes to MIG welding, the requirements are nothing more than a body, a head, two eyes, two legs and two arms.


Another common management perception, if a costly robot is going to do production welds that were initially produced by hourly paid welders, then the already simple, semiskilled task of MIG welding should be further simplified by the large investment in the sophisticated costly equipment.

Perhaps the most ironic point about the common lack of MIG process expertise that prevails in many manufacturing plants, is that the "MIG process" attached to the robot arm has been around for almost five decades.

The following is an important point which will be repeated many times. The majority of manufacturing managers responsible for welding are unaware that their highly skilled welders and weld supervisors have rarely mastered the "MIG weld process theory fundamentals", its the same theory goes into the robot program. Yes its a fact that most weld personnel in the weld department have developed their "MIG skills" to produce a weld, however its also a fact that the majority of weld personnel use their weld skills to compensate for their lack of weld process expertise.

If you are an individual that does not believe the above statement, ask the most skilled MIG individuals in your plant the following simple weld question.

A Manufacturing Reality. As few weld personnel have the necessary MIG weld process expertise essential for "robot weld optimization, the bottom line is employees need weld process training. Managers should provide a process training program that's focused on the utilized wire diameters, and the weld transfer mode parameter requirements". My self teaching process training books can be used in conjunction with my process training video.

The million dollar per-month robot weld fiasco.
The following weld disaster was caused by two corporate engineers who worked for a major auto company. As is common in the auto / truck industry, the corporate engineers who were given weld process responsibility by their organization did not have weld process expertise.

A few years ago, a brand new, multi million dollar robot weld line was installed at a stamping plant located in the Midwest. The robot line was built to weld crossmembers. The weld engineers had selected from Lincoln Electric, a large diameter, ) self shielded flux cored electrode to be utilized with robots for welding very thin, galvanealed, crossmember parts of only 2 to 2.5 mm thick.

The 5/64 diameter, flux cored wires selected by the engineers required 320 to 380 amps for arc and weld stability. As any high school welder should have known, the weld current required by these large electrodes was simply too much for the 2 mm, thin gage crossmember parts. Typically parts this thin are welded with small diameter MIG wires using 180 to 240 amps. As a result of the excess weld current used with the flux cored wires, there were so many weld holes in the crossmember parts that 13 manual welders were required for the weld rework on the robot parts each shift. The weld smoke from the consumables was so bad that even with exhaust units and compressed air masks, the welders could only weld four hours before they had to be relieved.

The cross member weld holes were so numerous that the manual welders simply welded over "all the welds" on the parts. As it was impossible to remove the slag from the robot welds you can imagine the finished weld quality. This robot welding fiasco went on for more than a year, costing the plant approx. $750,000.00 per month for more than 12 months.

AN ENGINEERING MANAGER WOULD ASK, HOW COULD ONE OF MY ENGINEERS JUSTIFY A WELD CONSUMABLE THAT REQUIRES WELD CURRENT GREATER THAN A PART CAN HANDLE?

HOW CAN ANY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER ALLOW WELD CONSUMABLES IN A PLANT THAT CREATE DANGEROUS FUMES?

HOW CAN ANY ENGINEER ALLOW WELD CONSUMABLES WHICH PROVIDE A TENACIOUS WELD SLAG MAKING QUALITY WELD REPAIRS IMPOSSIBLE?

HOW CAN ANY ENGINEER INSIST THAT FOR GALVANIZED OR GALVANEALED YOU MUST USE SELF SHIELDED FLUX CORED WIRES WHEN FOR DECADES EVERY OTHER MAJOR AUTO PART MANUFACTURER HAS SUCCESSFULLY USED MIG CONSUMABLES?

HOW COULD AN ENGINEER ALLOW SINGLE PASS ELECTRODES TO BE USED FOR TWO WELDS (INCLUDE THE REPAIRS). THE EXCESS ALLOYS AND EXCESS WELD HEAT COULD NOT BE BENEFICIAL ON THE HIGH STRENGTH LOW ALLOY STEELS.

I was requested by the very frustrated plant manager to visit his plant and find the solution. We were given a contract to solve the weld issues. I welded the parts with a robot using an 035 E70S-3 MIG wire. I was able to produce consistent welding results that would have required minimum weld rework. The galvanealed, MIG welded parts were then tested at a major test facility in Detroit. All the welds met the destructive test mechanical requirements.

In my report which was presented to the corporate weld engineers and their peers, I informed the engineers that apart from the unacceptable weld gaps on the parts, the primary root cause of the weld issues was the "consumable type and size selected".

After extensive discussions with the corporate engineering team, the two corporate weld engineers would not change their minds on the welding consumables used. I suppose if they had approved the weld consumable change, it would have indicated where the real root cause and responsibility was for the multi- million dollar fiasco.

Shortly after the meeting, due to the extensive weld rework costs, the less than two year old, multi-million robot line was shut down. The robots, the application, and the oversized weld wires were moved to Mexico.

By the way at the start of the cross member project, as the US corporate automotive engineers knew little about "MIG or flux cored welding" they did seek weld consumable advice. They went to Lincoln Electric. Of course this company had to be a little biased about the weld consumable they would recommend. The weld consumable was one of their own unique self shielded flux cored wires. The big three auto company still makes its primary suppliers use these ridiculous wires.

Its a sad reflection of the technical competence of a company, when an engineer in that company will utilize welding wires unsuited for an application, especially weld wires that create human discomfort and dramatic weld cost consequences.

SALESMANSHIP AGAIN. It's a common welding sales tactic by some consumable manufacturers and suppliers to try and promote a weld wire "unique to their company". This consumable when targeted at a plant that buys large amounts of weld wires, ensures no one else can bid on the future plant's consumable business. Lets face it once a consumable gets into an auto / truck plant, its there till chapter 11.

Its now 2004 and guess which welding wire consumable the big three corporate weld engineers tells it's part suppliers they should use for welding thin gage galvanealed?

E-mail: From England.

Ed.

I have just read your Chrysler Neon article regarding the crossmemebers and self shielded flux cored wire issues. I fully endorse your views and comments. It's a shame that many "welding engineers" in the automotive industry lack the actual knowledge and skills to fulfill this critical role. I myself am a welding engineer for a tier one supplier to the auto industry and see this too often. As a time served boilermaker in the UK, I feel that there is extensive lack of process knowledge and experience with the welding and engineering personnel in the auto industry. I must also thank you for your books 'A Management & Engineering Guide to MIG & the Training' materials both of which we as a company refer to regularly.

Cheers. PL - England

In the traditional metal manufacturing environment, which group of skilled trade personnel will play with their equipment controls? Hopefully it does not happen in your machine or press shop. How often do you here the following in a welding shop. "Setting up that new robot application will take a little time, we will have to "play around" with the weld controls for awhile before we find the optimum welding conditions.

For the last five decades, millions of global welding shops, have used MIG to weld carbon steel applications from 20 gage to thick steels. How many more decades have to pass before welders will stop playing with the MIG controls and instantly set the correct welding parameters for the application?

A Management Step Towards Robot
Weld Process Controls.

AS A MANAGER OR ENGINEER, BE AN ACTIVE PARTNER IN PROCESS OWNERSHIP:
Manufacturing shops will benefit when the managers and engineers decide that they should be a partner in the ownership of the core processes and equipment that plays a key role in meeting their daily production needs.

Being an active partner in weld process and equipment ownership, means management recognizes the required process or equipment expertise and ensures the persons responsible for this equipment has the training that provides that expertise.

Note: The individual responsible for the welding decisions should have ability to make rational welding process decisions without the aid or the advice of a salesmen.

With an established 50 year old manufacturing process, you should not require team discussions to resolve manual or robots welding production issues. The person who provides the robot weld data should have the required weld process expertise. If they do not have the necessary process control expertise, the solution is simple.

The majority of welding issues that can occur with a robot MIG weld are discussed on this site, or in my books and training CD's . With process control training comes instant weld process solutions. So rather than have your employees sitting around a conference table chewing the fat, provide them with process training and let the most experienced individual get on with providing the robot or weld resolutions.

Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means the weld decision makers listens to the workers on the shop floor. However the weld decision maker should have more weld process expertise and therefore should make the final process decisions based on;
[a] the requirements necessary to attain optimum productivity and quality,
[b] decisions that protect the company from a product liability situation.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means the management and engineers establish Best Weld Practices that reduce weld equipment and consumable costs.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means the management and engineers are focused on placing "weld process controls" on the shop floor.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means the managers and engineers will not allow manufacturing double standards in which weld part tolerance discrepancies are not given the same priority as brake press part dimensions.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means that when a PM program is recommended for the robot cells, it's put in place and strictly adhered to.

* Being an active partner in process and robot ownership means the management will attain for it's employees effective robot programming and MIG process control training. Before you allow a consultant or trainer into your plant, ensure the welding quality and productivity expectations are clearly spelled out. Keep in mind, in most cases your workers already have the necessary skills, yet it's this area of expertise which many trainers or consultants will focus on. Ensure the process training is provided to all personnel involved with the welded parts.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means the management is aware that for robot programming, that the 5 day training program at a robot companies training facility should be seen only as the introductory training course. Ensure robot training follow up. Provide the training till the programmer believes they have the ability to completely control the robots.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means the management will not put up with individuals who make weld process changes outside the pre-qualified weld data.

* Being an active partner in process and equipment ownership means, that for the equipment or processes which are critical for an organization, the management will encourage engineers to captain the shop and encourage these individuals to attain equipment and process expertise that is at least compatible with your technicians.

KIS. Management & Engineers: The yearly review and job descriptions of engineers who work with robots should clearly encourage engineers to take a pre 1980s approach to manufacturing. Some of you may remember the good old days when engineers dedicated to Keep It Simple (KIS) manufacturing, could be seen "shirt sleeves rolled up" working with the equipment and processes on the shop floor.

Question: What does a ship yard and automotive plant have in common?

In these union dominated industries, the unions frequently discourage engineers from hands on participation with the manufacturing processes used on the shop floor. This was fine in the good old days when manual welding skills meant everything and process expertise meant little. As the complexity of the manufacturing equipment and environment changes and plants strive to increase their automation efficiency, engineers have to be encouraged to do what they are supposedly hired for.
There is only one logical approach to manufacturing, there has to be a working partnership between the skilled workers, technicians and engineers.

Management can benefit by careful evaluation of the qualifications of the personnel responsible for production robot welding. Ensure all personnel that either set up, or operate the high volume production equipment have the capability and aptitude to meet a clearly defined job description for that specific operation.



MANAGEMENT AND EXPERTISE AWARENESS. Management and engineers will benefit once they are aware that there are very different expertise levels between:

The cost of MIG Weld Process Control training,
the price of a good dinner

How many companies are prepared to invest a few dollars per supervisor, robot personnel or welder, for a training program designed to optimize both the manual or robot welding quality and productivity in their organization?

I had my MIG process training book translated to Spanish, believing it would be a great tool for the Mexican workers who are paid a few dollars a a day to control the costly European and Japanese robots welding the North American auto / truck parts. What I did not figure on was the management apathy in these plants. Managers who have no problem spending millions on robots lines have to think twice before they spend a few dollars purchasing books for their workers.

Remember Keep Smiling, it's all good...

Much more robot / management weld process control
data available in "part two of Robot MIG Welding ".