where expertise comes together - since 1996 -

The Largest Open Access Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)

Conference Proceedings, Articles, News, Exhibition, Forum, Network and more

where expertise comes together
- since 1996 -

Ultrasonic Sciences Ltd
We specialize in the design and manufacture of automated and semi-automated ultrasonic testing systems, including multi axis, multi channels systems and phased array electronics.
17403 views
Career Discussions
Onslow351
Onslow351
02:42 Feb-05-2015
CSWIP 3.1

Gday Everyone.
Need some advice. I've undertaken the CSWIP 3.1 Course and also the Exam and failed. I have completed both the initial exam and also the resit exam. Now I have passed the Macro, Pipe and also the Plate interpretation sections with ease but I am having dramas getting through the General and also the Technology.
I am a Boilermaker and also a 1st Class Welder tradesman (yes I completed both trades) not someone who isn't experienced on the tools. I do have problems getting my head around a lot of the EN and ISO parts as for over 20 years I've worked always to AWS AS ASME.
So who can help me? What is there out there for me to study up on? Parts of the exams are not contained in the course whatsoever. I have done the exam gone home looked at the books and they certainly are not there. I was also told by the instructor parts we need to know are not included in the training course. I nspect Weld Tests not days and also Train Coded Welders up so do have quite a broad knowledge. Thanks for any help people.

 
 Reply 
 
ESR
ESR
08:38 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Onslow351 at 02:42 Feb-05-2015 (Opening).

Onslow351

I have the same experience regarding parts of the exams not being in the book. Also, sheets provided do not fully agree with the book (e.g. different WT ranges for isotopes).

Especially the Technology paper has changed drastically somewhere end of last year as the teacher has told us.
Furthermore, there is a lack of example examintion questions compared to the years before. The examples in the book are not very representative if at all. All (older) examination examples I used for practice I passed with 80% or higher, but when it comes to the actual examination I fail (65%).

So far everybody I've met has been in classes of around 20 persons where between 0 and 2 persons passed per class.

There are people failing who have been working with a CSWIP 3.2 for more than 10 years. We're not talking about inexperienced people here that fail too!

To ALL

Has anyone who has recently gone for CSWIP 3.1 or 3.2 the same experience?

 
 Reply 
 
Nigel Armstrong
Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom, Joined Oct 2000, 1096

Nigel Armstrong

Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom,
Joined Oct 2000
1096
09:56 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to ESR at 08:38 Feb-11-2015 .

"...classes of around 20 persons where between 0 and 2 persons passed per class."

Are these figures correct (0 - 10% pass rate) - what was t5he size of the sample. If what you report is true its a scandal with major implications for where people spend their hard-earned cash.

 
 Reply 
 
Frank Lund
R & D,
United Kingdom, Joined Apr 2005, 220

Frank Lund

R & D,
United Kingdom,
Joined Apr 2005
220
11:02 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Nigel Armstrong at 09:56 Feb-11-2015 .

has this got any connection with the Tee Shirt that I saw a diver wearing many years ago on which was printed.

"
Complete
Swindle
Wildly
Inflated
Prices
"

 
 Reply 
 
ESR
ESR
11:26 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Nigel Armstrong at 09:56 Feb-11-2015 .

The sample is 4 classes only. As I do not know participants' experience and background I cannot draw any conclusions and more data and information is needed. I am a bit suspicious now especially as Onslow also mentions questions not mentioned in the book.

One fact is that a respected 3.2 Inspector now finds his job on the line after failing the renewal twice despite at least 10 years of continuous experience.

Any information and experience is welcome to shed light on these discouraging figures/anecdotes.

 
 Reply 
 
Steven Doc
Other, Quality Manager
Siemens Energy, Egypt, Joined Feb 2011, 187

Steven Doc

Other, Quality Manager
Siemens Energy,
Egypt,
Joined Feb 2011
187
13:06 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to ESR at 11:26 Feb-11-2015 .

Yeah let's all blame the exam and the training course for the failures. That makes real sense.

How many drivers would pass the driving test if forced to re qualify, I know I would struggle.

For the record, on my last SWI 10 year renewal I failed the multiple choice paper. My fault. I passed on the resit, as I prepared properly and have lots of experience to fall back on when a question appears that I was not prepared for.

 
 Reply 
 
ESR
ESR
14:49 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Steven Doc at 13:06 Feb-11-2015 .

Did I blame it all on the training and examinatio? I merely quesyion them and ask for more information, hence my remark that I CANNOT draw any conclusions. When did you do you renewal, in the last 3 months since the changes inexamination questions? So far there seems to be a significant drop in passing rates coinciding with changes in examination and thus suggesting a correlation. Did you read that based on older examinations I would pass easily? Did you read AND understand my post?

You really think you'll struggle doing a renewal for your drivers' license? I'm shocked and worried for the people along your way. Why does this comparison hold anyway? Did they recently change the examination and ask to do manouvres and/or read signs that are not explained anywhere?

 
 Reply 
 
Nigel Armstrong
Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom, Joined Oct 2000, 1096

Nigel Armstrong

Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom,
Joined Oct 2000
1096
15:46 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to ESR at 14:49 Feb-11-2015 .

Steve

In ANY professional training system that prepares people for an exam, a low pass rate is cause for concern especially if there is a connection between said training body and the examining authority.

People work hard to pay the fees, attend the training, sit the exam. If there is truth in the notion that the pass rate has dropped dramatically recently it is a serious cause for concern.

I dont agree with the parallel Steve describes. Lack of preparation for any exam deserves failure! Onslow351 and ESR certainly do not read as unprepatred, nor the trainees who sat the preparatory course.

 
 Reply 
 
Frank Lund
R & D,
United Kingdom, Joined Apr 2005, 220

Frank Lund

R & D,
United Kingdom,
Joined Apr 2005
220
17:24 Feb-11-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to ESR at 08:38 Feb-11-2015 .

Given such a seriously low pass rate, I'm driven to ask whether the CSWIP course instructors would pass the CSWIP exam.

 
 Reply 
 
Onslow351
Onslow351
08:32 Feb-12-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Onslow351 at 02:42 Feb-05-2015 (Opening).

Yes I will blame the exam or the course papers. Questions asked in the exam do not correlate with information given in the course. I studied and studied and studied. Cost over $3500.00 now and have to go through the course again. The Trainer even said in the course that not all of the information was given. I studied the mock exams, older Test Papers and was getting from 80% up to 100%. This same trainer also stated there would not be more than 1 or 2 people pass. Another thing that I'm not impressed with is a computer marking my exam papers. How come a trainer doesn't mark them? If I want a human to look at my papers I have to pay more MONEY to the tune of approx $140.00 Aust. Now I want this Qual. I'll work for it as I have done all my life but fairs fair hey. I need to know where it is I can find the information I need to study to successfully complete this qualification.

 
 Reply 
 
auzzyssv
auzzyssv
08:55 Aug-30-2015
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to ESR at 08:38 Feb-11-2015 .

Hi Guys..

I sat my CSWIP 3.2 exam in July 2015... not long ago and failed 3 out of 5 papers.

During the course I smashed the trial papers and questions out of the park... but failed the exam?!?.. im still baffled as to how this happed.. I had the same experience when I sat my 3.1 where I how I passed the pipe (because it just happened to be the one I done in the course) but still failed but passed the re-sit

 
 Reply 
 
Mike
Mike
08:54 Sep-27-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Onslow351 at 02:42 Feb-05-2015 (Opening).

My 3.1 and 3.2.2 both lapsed whilst overseas and I was not allowed to renew them as over a year had passed. I have just resat my 3.1 after completing a 2 day bridging course from BGas to CSWIP and passed my plate and macros but failed my tech and general paper. Whilst doing the papers I was confident that most of my answers were correct and do not understand where I have dipped. I have held AWS CWI / PCN level 2 WI, many NDT operator quals and have been in the business since the late 70's. I have to agree that something is not correct with the current level expected or the course preparation. I also have observed many errors contained within the course documentation, and in comparison with my course notes of previous years, I can say it was poorly compiled and presented.

 
 Reply 
 
Nigel Armstrong
Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom, Joined Oct 2000, 1096

Nigel Armstrong

Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom,
Joined Oct 2000
1096
13:06 Sep-27-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Mike at 08:54 Sep-27-2016 .

Mike

My sympathy for your loss of time and money (and pride) occasioned by your recent CSWIP exam trauma.

Have you asked them for specific feedback on where in the theory papers they failed you. A professional examining body should assşst you to ensure you understand why they failed you and to help you revise the knowledge.

Regards

Nigel

 
 Reply 
 
Gary Mcdonald
United Kingdom, Joined Sep 2016, 4

Gary Mcdonald

United Kingdom,
Joined Sep 2016
4
15:41 Sep-30-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Mike at 08:54 Sep-27-2016 .

I feel your pain regarding the fail of your CSWIP 3.1 ,the standard of the teaching now at CSWIP (TWI) for me has reached an all time low, its started dropping as soon as all the best tutors went off abroad, i too have just heard of countless mistakes in course notes and training exam papers and a lot of utterly useless 'nice to know' but not need to know questions in exams about metallurgy , i have a different perception of what is required from a welding inspector, i don't want a welding inspector purchasing de-sensitised steels for me or telling welders what size rods to use or learning about collumnar crystal growth, i want him to validate the WPS and check the consumables and welders quals etc, and finished weld, for me i have heard lots of people are dipping the tech paper because of questions that a welding inspecter does not need to know as above, deep into the metallurgy and weldability, nice to know, but should not be part of an exam and welding inspectors who are brilliant at there jobs wont have a clue about most asepcts of metallurgy, TWI also use mass produced plastic samples and 'marcos' that are just prints outs on a piece of paper, for me the CSWIP is no longer a desirable ticket and i would certainly opt for PCN due to the same course and the use of real metallic samples and real macros, liek any exam, i detest the idea as a paying customer they will not inform you of which aspect you have failed on, grossly unfair that as a paying customer, seems to be the only instance in society were you pay for something and when it goes wrong the person selling you it has no interest in letting you know why it failed

 
 Reply 
 
Shane Feder
, Quality Co-ordinator (SubSea)
Thailand, Joined Dec 2014, 89

Shane Feder

, Quality Co-ordinator (SubSea)
Thailand,
Joined Dec 2014
89
23:34 Sep-30-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Gary Mcdonald at 15:41 Sep-30-2016 .

I passed the 3.1 exam in Australia without attending the course (exempt based on prior qualifications).
That is not meant to be me being a smart ass.
It is meant to confirm that maybe the course is not delivering value for money and may actually be doing more harm than good.

 
 Reply 
 
Wolf Mankow
Wolf Mankow
09:20 Oct-01-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Shane Feder at 23:34 Sep-30-2016 .

I concur

Especially with plate and pipe samples, TWI are not marking weld plan drawings from candidates to determine how the candidate has come to a conclusion about an indication or defect, they are marked based on multi choice , for instance, if on the weld plan the candiate has noted a slag line and reported it, TWI answer may be slag line with underfill so the candidate fails that questions and loses 10%, if a candidate notes underfill and doesn't also classify it as undefill 'and' lof he loses 25%, if a candidate notes slag running along a fusion face and notes slag with associated LOF then he will fail as the multi choice question will only allow a certain lemngth of LOF all the way around the sample in the narrative of the question, you will also have question about how many sharp indications are present and depending on what sample you get they will all be different as some are older and will have chips and scratch marks (lose 10%) as you have noted more sharp plate indications than is on the master answer, you can have undercut and the answer will be under 1mm, 1mm or over 1mm and as the samples are used countless times these areas have been pushed deeper into the plastic sample so putting over 1mm and reject will lose you 10%

The whole thing is a joke, 20 set answers from a master mould, pratical samples and especially plastic samples that are prone to deformation over time and easily chip, mark should be asesed individually and not using one master copy for all

I think the idea of practical plastic samples assesment should always be done using weld plans and what the candidate has drawn out and mark thembased on the candiates reasoning, its patently absurd to use a multi choice system for a practical assesment, as if in reality you find a defect in a working envirnoment and you need 4 multi choice answer to determine what your findings are, TWI obviously just want to process as many people as fast as possible with this system as the classes are usually about 25 people in, plastic samples, a computer marking your practicals, TWI= disgrace

 
 Reply 
 
Ashley Forbes
Ashley Forbes
10:23 Oct-26-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Onslow351 at 02:42 Feb-05-2015 (Opening).

Good Morning to you all.
I am looking to apply for my CSWIP 3.1 welding Inspectors course in the near future and am wondering if I should go and complete the Rad Interp Course first?
as I believe it will help me with the rad section in the CSWIP 3.1 Course. if any one could shed some light on this and let me know if it would be advantageous for both career and for the CSWIP 3.1 EXAM... Thank you

I have MPI/DPI PCN lvl2 UT 3.8/3.9 and CSWIP 3.0

 
 Reply 
 
Steven Doc
Other, Quality Manager
Siemens Energy, Egypt, Joined Feb 2011, 187

Steven Doc

Other, Quality Manager
Siemens Energy,
Egypt,
Joined Feb 2011
187
10:33 Oct-26-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Ashley Forbes at 10:23 Oct-26-2016 .

Hi Ashley,
There is no Rad Interp part of 3.1.
There is a very brief understanding of NDT methods and techniques only.

 
 Reply 
 
Hamid Reza
,
Canada, Joined Oct 2016, 68

Hamid Reza

,
Canada,
Joined Oct 2016
68
11:39 Oct-29-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Ashley Forbes at 10:23 Oct-26-2016 .

I have heard from people involved in Welding Inspection that having a Radiographic Interpretation certificate is a valuable asset. It is also very easy to see this fact in job ads. When attending a CSWIP 3.2 class you have an option to receive the certification in these formats:

CSWIP 3.2.1: Senior Welding Inspector without radiographic interpretation
CSWIP 3.2.2: Senior Welding Inspector with radiographic interpretation

DOCUMENT No. CSWIP-WI-6-92 says:

>>
2.4 Supplementary Radiographic Interpretation
Candidates who hold a valid Senior Welding Inspector 3.2.1 may at any time during the life cycle of this qualification take the radiographic interpreter supplementary examination to gain the 3.2.2 Senior Welding Inspector.
>>

>>
Senior Welding Inspector) certificates will contain no reference to any NDT certification unless the radiographic interpreter supplementary is taken.
>>

>>
4.7.3 Radiographic Interpretation
The supplementary Radiographic Interpretation may be taken as an option at the same time as the Senior Welding Inspector examination or at any time later during the life of the certificate. Success in this supplementary examination does not extend the life of the certificate to which it is added.
>>

IMHO whether to go for an RTi Certificate of not depends solely on your duties. Are you actively involved in welding inspections? If yes, I suggest you take the course. Even if you want to remain on CSWIP 3.1, I believe it is going to be a valuable addition to your certificates. If you are more or less involved in QC realted duties I suggest you get CSWIP QC Co-ordinator certificate as it is more rewarding for people in QC. I passed the CSWIP 3.0 exam this September and the first thing I did was to register for the RTi course. Five out of the six students in the class had the CSWIP certificates. I had CSWIP 3.0 and the other four had CSWIP 3.1 .

I have already attended the RTi course and it is almost only related to interpretation. Highest level awarded is Level ii. Only RT (Radiographic Inspector) has level iii.

After passing the examination you are awarded a certificate in this format:

Group A: Ferritic steels including clad steels
Group B: Austenitic steels and high nickel alloys (excluding Monel)
Group C: Aluminium and its alloys: MIG and TIG welding. Magnesium and its alloys
Group D: Copper and its alloys and Monel

To successfully pass the examination you have to interpret 12 radiographic films and pass all of them with at lest %70. (individually)! I saw a transcript with %76 percent mark for Copper group with the word "failed" in front of the mark. You have 15 minutes for each film. If your exam is a paper exam you have to write a report which is not very easy. It is time consuming and it makes you very tired! Some examination centers offer computerized tests. You have to answer seven multiple choice questions. It is much easier to pass the multiple choice examination.

12 films can be chosen like this:

You HAVE to answer 6 films from group A.
You HAVE to answer 3 films from group B.
You HAVE to answer 3 films from group C.
You may want to choose films from group D. It is optional. So you can answer maximum of 15 films.

You have another options:

You HAVE to answer 6 films from group A.
You can choose additional 3 films from group B. In other words 6 from group B.
This way you can skip C and D.

Oh by the way. I asked the certification section and they were not sure. They said in order to receive the certification you have to pass group A and at least another group from B, C, D. This could be wrong as the people in the certification section was not sure about the minimum number of groups needed to pass.

For more information please refer to " Radiographic Interpreter 5th Edition. (Document No. CSWIP-ISO-NDT-11/93-R) " and "DOCUMENT No. CSWIP-WI-6-92" for CSWIP Welding Inspection.

Please read these documents carefully, research as much as you can, discuss this with successful people in Welding Inspection related fields and read job ads to preclude the possibility of wrong preconception about this.

 
 Reply 
 
Gary McDonald
United Kingdom, Joined Sep 2016, 4

Gary McDonald

United Kingdom,
Joined Sep 2016
4
18:19 Nov-02-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Hamid Reza at 11:39 Oct-29-2016 .

Do PCN level 2 Rad Interp at somewhere other than TWI if possible, and just sit the 3.2.1

Trust me, it's much better and you end up with the same qualification, in my experience TWI are pretty clueless when it comes to anything NDT related and you would likely fail the interp side off it due to crap training and crap samples

 
 Reply 
 
Ashley Forbes
Ashley Forbes
20:12 Nov-02-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Hamid Reza at 11:39 Oct-29-2016 .

That is beyond amazing. Thankyou for your reply.
Im going to do the rad interp course as soon as my work can allow. Thanks again though. Plenty to consider with that. Cheers ash

 
 Reply 
 
Hamid Reza
,
Canada, Joined Oct 2016, 68

Hamid Reza

,
Canada,
Joined Oct 2016
68
12:14 Nov-03-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Ashley Forbes at 20:12 Nov-02-2016 .

Dear Ashley,

I forgot to say this. PCN training and examinations are not available in my country. So I had to choose CSWIP. If you have the option to choose between CSWIP and PCN I suggest you choose the PCN as the gentleman above also suggested.

IMHO CSWIP is more famous for its visual inspection certificates (CSWIP 3.0, 3.1 and 3.2). But PCN is more famous for its NDT certificates. At the same time "PCN welding inspection certificate", almost the same as CSWIP 3.1, doesn't worth the paper it is printed on!! Because most employers know the CSWIP 3.1.

By the way on the side note, CSWIP RTi course was 5 days long and has recently increased to 6 day. I do not know about the PCN Rti. I have seen both 5 days and 6 days ads. I was not at all pleased with the practical sessions. I suggest to try to interpret and study as much as film you can. I strongly suggest you to study IWI sets of 36 films available on the internet. Also there is an android app for that. Also there are some old TWI interpretation films available as a powerpoint presentation on the Scribd website.

Please contact me by my email address and I can share with you my depository.

Sincerely,
EB

 
 Reply 
 
neil cox
United Kingdom, Joined Sep 2016, 8

neil cox

United Kingdom,
Joined Sep 2016
8
19:23 Nov-06-2016
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Hamid Reza at 12:14 Nov-03-2016 .

Newsflash

CSwip 3.1 isn't worth much either as it's basically just a very expensive paid membership, assesing pieces of plastic and paper macros will never even begin to approach the duties of a welding inspector, i compare it to testing plastic welds with in UT and MPI exams, TWI get away with inferior courses and inferior certification purely due to reputation

 
 Reply 
 
Michael
Michael
08:45 Oct-14-2019
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Nigel Armstrong at 13:06 Sep-27-2016 .

I had a terrible experience, completed 3.1 end of2018, passed all papers except for the general, 67.5%. Asked for feedback, but was denied. Repeated the general exam and receive the same fail result of 67.2% without even the basic feedback. Only told that question papers were confidential and no feedback could be supplied and which questions i missed. Felt the repeat paper was easy and i was sure i passed. Very disappointed with the secrecy aspect of how they manage thire results and feedback. I already work as a welding coordinator/supervisor for a major oil & gas company, im also coded. Agree with the course material does not match the exam papers. Extremely high failure percentage rate in my class too with 4 out of the 18 in class repeating. What also amazed and confused me is the high number of indivduals who were in the course who never actually welded, only engineering diplomas. No way a non welder with an inspector certificate could survive or contribute to building structures, it needs that practical eye experience.
Decided not to try again as i don't trust their methods or system structure, luckily my employer also is not interested in sponsoring it again as they place no valve in CSIP to my position. Their methods need to change and students deserve positive feedback to their question paper results. I personally los5 complete confidence and zero trust based on my personal experiences with them. Teacher was actually great but their administration setup is suspect. Hope nobody experiences what i endured, especially with the cost they charge. Also dont like the fact its a profit based company first over providing a quality education.

 
 Reply 
 
Michael
Michael
13:41 Oct-14-2019
Re: CSWIP 3.1
In Reply to Onslow351 at 02:42 Feb-05-2015 (Opening).

I concur with your comments. I too have had resits over the years. And having to reapply for certifications is just a money spinner for TWI. I started NDT inspection in 1975 with B Gas. I am a SWI and I have worked overseas for many years but the opportunities for expats now is greatly diminished not just because of the downturn in work but the multinational training centers set up by TWI. I wonder what the resit %'s are in India etc?
I have had to pay for my own certs all my working life, and have always questioned why we have to resit at all. A lot of my long time work colleagues are disillusioned with the whole set up. We feel ripped off.

 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

TESTD-PT SYSTEM

Pulse thermography is a non-contact test method that is ideal for the characterization of thin fil
...
ms and coatings or the detection of defects. With a remarquable short test time and a high detection sensitivity, the Telops TESTD-PT is the perfect tool for non- destructive testing. With such high frame rates, it is even possible to investigate highly conductive or diffusive materials.
>

MUSE Mobile Ultrasonic Equipment

The MUSE, a portable ultrasonic imaging system, was developed for in-field inspections of light-weig
...
ht structures. The MUSE consists of a motor-driven manipulator, a water circulation system for the acoustic coupling and a portable ultrasonic flaw detector (USPC 3010). The MUSE provides images of internal defects (A-, B-,C- and D-scan).
>

NEW Wheel Type Phased Array Probe

DOPPLER NEW Wheel Type Phased Array Probe, more stable, new tyre makes lesser acoustic attenuation
...
, much lighter makes easier to handle, more slim size, magnetic and mechanical encoder optional etc...more
>

SITEX CPSERIES

Teledyne ICM’s CPSERIES has been designed with a view to revolutionizing the handling and perfor
...
mances of portable X-Ray sets. Despite having managed to halve the weight of similar portable X-Ray generators available on the market (while continuing to provide the same power output), the SITEX CPSERIES generators feature a shutter, a laser pointer, a beryllium window, an aluminum filter and two integrated diaphragms (customized sizes are available upon request). Without compromising the robustness and reliability for which ICM products are renowned, the small size and light weight of the SITEX CPSERIES will radically change the way that you perform your RT inspections. And you will see a positive impact in terms of both quality and return on investment (ROI).
>

Share...
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Accept
top
this is debug window