Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Certifications / 6G acceptable visual root and cap criteria (?)'s
- - By jacanfora (*) Date 12-04-2010 21:10
I'm looking for a CWI that might be willing to look at my welds and maybe give me a quick tip or two. The closest CWI lab/consultant I could find is an AWS vice chair and quoted me $900 for 12 hours provided I have material. Material I have, a little patience, and if my proof of claim comes through after the ole' erection co. collects assests after they filed chapter 7 on us, i may be able to make one investment at this price.

Community College said I can get Hobart 6" uphill smaw dvd and workbooks for $1,000.

I'm $200 into it with materials, not including gas for my trailblazer 302 (g). Then test will be in $300 range. No big, we'll make it back someday.

I took some descent pictures of yesterdays welds. If anyones interested...    but I just got to make my own adjustments and try stringers after hot pass

A professional opion is good, but its not just weld bead face appeareance... I'm trying to find out about root pass... on the inside of the pipe what defects are/aren't acceptable (I need to find something (document) or someone to tell me, what the acceptable criteria is for 6G pipe). Would be a HUGE help....

undercut no more than 32nd?    no underfill?...        no reinforcement over 1/16" an 1/8" ?    I'm going about it like a cover pass I guess. Is that acceptable criteria??  Searched web amse, api, catsi or casti.  Oh test will be to conform to ASME sec. lX pressure vessel.

You guys got it, thanks fellas... Jeff
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 12-05-2010 18:00
ASME is easy. A little harder than API 1104, but not much.

Visual Criteria:
Undercut - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Underfill - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Porosity - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Weld reinforcement - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Root reinforcement -no problem - no limit per Section IX (pipe does not even have to pass gas after welding)
Concave root surface - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Slag inclusion - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Tungsten inclusion - no problem - no limit per Section IX
Complete fusion - must have
Complete penetration - must have

My point is that ASME Section IX has little in the way of visual acceptance criteria. That being the case, any criteria imposed by the inspector has little to do with ASME Section IX and more to do with the inspector's personal opinion.

I do not perform my visual examination based on Section IX. I ask the client what construction code he is working with, i.e., B31.1, B31.3, Section VIII, etc. and apply the appropriate visual criteria as imposed by the construction code. My justification: I do not want a welder in the field or on the production floor that cannot meet the job requirements, especially if my name is on the paperwork. Most of my clients agree with my philosophy. It is too expensive to have to grind every completed weld to improve the weld profile or to go back and make cosmetic repairs.
I believe the welder has a right to know what the visual acceptance criteria is and what results are required to pass the destructive tests. The welder also has a right to know what he can and cannot do on the performance test. He needs to know if there are any limitations on what tools can be used (Bridge Code, no power tools), whether the tack welds have to be feathered (faired in some circles) per the applicable code (B31.3 High Pressure – Yes), etc. The welder is also required to follow a written WPS defining the range for the welding parameters, joint details, etc. There should be no surprises while the welder is taking the test nor should there be any once the test is completed. I provide the welder with copies of the visual acceptance criteria and everything I have mentioned. We review the requirements together before the test and then he is on his own. 

Good luck on your test.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By dbigkahunna (****) Date 12-05-2010 18:50
Post the pictures.
- By jacanfora (*) Date 12-05-2010 19:57 Edited 12-05-2010 20:26
Thanks Al, I definitely agree with your right to know and other philosophies. Can't keep anyone on the phone long enough. Feel like I have to keep my questions summed up in one sentence, in hopes of getting necessary information.

Today I will run all 4 positions on 1/2" plate, to fine tune. In hopes of finding a possible happy medium of 1/8-1/32" of exposed groove before cover passes. Also looking forward to horizontal position on 3/8" plate, to equal sch. 80 wall. See if I can't make friends with gravity, ...good times!

Tried to post pictures but I get an error message saying: Input exceeds maximum allowed size or is corrupted. They were taken with iPhone. Will take pictures of next mock-up with digital camera. See if those will upload.
- By joe pirie (***) Date 12-05-2010 20:40
any decent welder should be able to guide you in the right direction. you really don't need a cwi to critique
your welds ,  another welder could give you a hands on lesson as opposed to watching a video 1,000 dollars for a video
whew. 1200 to inspect your welds hell ive been inspecting for the wrong people. don't waste your money . Just because
someone has a cwi doesn't  mean they can weld or tell you how to improve your welding. post some pictures and im sure
the good people on here will give you an honest opinion and offer advice  Joe
- - By jacanfora (*) Date 12-06-2010 02:47 Edited 12-06-2010 02:51
went through photobucket for first time. the album got put together a little backwards. last picture should be first... so forth.

as you can see my hot pass looks like a "cold pass"... 7018 1/8" rod @125 ...too ropey

http://s1084.photobucket.com/albums/j413/jeffacanfora/6G%20Pipe%20welds%201/
Parent - - By Blaster (***) Date 12-06-2010 04:31
Maybe I missed it, but what is the pipe size, schedule, and joint geometry?

What diameter rods can you use?
Parent - - By jacanfora (*) Date 12-06-2010 07:30
I am using 5 1/2" schedule 80. 1/8" root opening with 1/8" land. I didn't get included angle information. Lab I was talking to had secretary out of office with phone ringing. So i went with a 70*... 35* per section of pipe. Using 1/8" 6010 root and 1/8" 7018 out.
Parent - - By dbigkahunna (****) Date 12-07-2010 01:22
5p bead and hp with 7018 fill and cap?
Section IX
Have a hard time passing visual on the cap. Bead only fair. Not uniform.
You need to to increase the heat and travel speed on the bead.
Increase the heat a little on the cap and slow down. Cap needs to be a little flatter. Let the rod do the work. Minimum weave on a two pass. Have the heat set where the puddle is about the size of the filled bevel.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 12-09-2010 16:56
Hey dbigkahunna;

I'm playing the devil's advocate here, but what part of the visual criteria of Section IX are you using as the basis of rejecting the weld?

Not that I disagree with some of your comments, but Section IX is rather sparce on VT criteria.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By ssbn727 (*****) Date 12-14-2010 15:02
Good point Al - as usual. ;)

The construction code(s) you're working from would be better suited for that info... There are other references also, but the only ones I can remember are Sections 3, 5, and 8 and then again, I may be just a bit rusty on those these days as well. ;) Although if I'm wrong, or I left any out - I'm sure Al will point that out to us also. ;)

Respectfully,
Henry
Parent - By Pickupman (***) Date 12-18-2010 15:04
I know this post is getting kind of old and I'm no expert on 6g uphill, but it seems like 1/8" 7018 might be trying to put a little to much metal in to a groove that wide. Maybe try some 3/32. 3/32 7018 fills like an 1/8" 6010 5p+, and 1/8" 7018 fills like 5/32 6010 5p+ in my experience. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Tom
Parent - By Cumminsguy71 (*****) Date 12-21-2010 12:57
Why don't you close up your gap, thin your land. Try a 3/32 land and gap. You get that gap set right and you can just stick the rod in and run it uphill the same way you would run downhill with a 6010. Looking at the pic it looks like you were fighting the root in there the way it is hanging down and full of muscles. Another thing you might try on the 7018 fill passes is crank her up a notch. When I did structural uphill I was comfortable and passed all day long running verts on 120. Got on 6g pipe and did not work out that way, ended up running in the 135-140 range. Don't know why but it just worked for me. Set at the 120 range seemed like I really had to work the puddle to get it to lay out in the groove, turned up the heat and it layed out nicely. On your cap you have to figure the pipe is already smoldering azz hot, so you may have to back it off a bit. I've found that when your doing the cap and your using a weave. It's about the technique, amperage....you and what works best for you. I had a young welder to be out on the job and when I was welding he was watching thru his hood. He said, "you do xxx type of motion on your cap?" Told him it depends on the situation, whatever seems to work best at the moment, zig zag, weave, upside down V or whatever else that works to get the puddle to lay and do what I want it to. Said he's never seen anybody run a cap like I do, said he was gonna try it. I've used a ton of 3/32 or "sissy rod" for the cap pass but most of the stuff I've been welding on has been 2", 3", 4" with a 1/4" wall so I don't see the need to throw all that heat to it running a 1/8" rod.

I'm thinking on the ASME pipe your bevel should be 37.5 degrees? Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. There is a plus/minus though, can't remember what that is, maybe 5*'s? When I'm running stringer caps I like to start with the root obviously. Then run single passes as long as I can contact both sides and get penetration. When I have to start stacking them I like to start on the lower side pipe, then work my stringers up. Once I have the groove filled to the height I like the my stringer cap will start on the lower pipe with my rod angle more towards the lower pipe and previous weld. I like leaving a bit of a shelf there, helps with gravity. I'll run that first lower stringer, then come back and do the same thing on the 2nd, then the 3rd. The first stringer pass is almost like doing a filet weld the way my rod angle is. Maybe this is weird as heck for other guys out there reading this, but it's my way, what works for me.

Hopefully this gives you something you can try, hope some of my mindless babbling helps out. I know the difficulty in learning when you don't have somebody there to ask questions. I first started out doing practice in my shop and could weld 3g verts like nobody's business, just could not get a good cap. Ended checking with a tech center, was poor enough to get free money, graduated and now I'm their first choice when it comes to a substitute teacher. It's good to have somebody there to physically look at your weld, point out stuff, watch what your doing and offer hints and tips. I would NOT give $1000 to a cwi for a couple hours. Check around for local community colleges, state operated tech schools. $1000 around here would get you a 4 month trimester here with an actual teacher who has most likely served his time in the welding trenches. You can gain tons from this website, I did and still do but when it came down to me and my shop and looking at welds you have nothing to compare to, or if you did something wrong your analyzing what you did to try and figure out did I move? Why is that there? You know what I mean......

Good luck keep busting out rod, that's 95% of the "training" anyhow.
- By bosruten (*) Date 12-07-2010 22:18
Try switching to sissy rod for fill & cap.
- - By pipe hand (*) Date 01-01-2011 14:56
for me it is 3/32 gap and 1/8 land use 3/32 7018 to fill and cap. the 5p+ should go in like a stringer maybe a wiggle here and there.for the  i use the same amperage for the 5p ad 7018 around 90. for the fill and cap bend the rods to shorten them up they will be more stable and you wont use a hole rod anyway.set the test up so it is easy for you to get around the more comfortable you are the easier it is to weld it
Parent - By Tommyjoking (****) Date 01-02-2011 04:05 Edited 01-02-2011 04:07
Just as an aside....be more careful with your chipping hammer,  I have seen guys bust (including me) because of a simple dimple from the chipping hammer outside the cover pass.   In one of your passes it looked like you cleaned it but left flux in your wagon track...you will never pass xray like that.  Your root pics inside looked ok...(except for underfill at at the toe in a spot).  I keep a drill bit shank sharpened to a fine point, welded to a t handle just for digging that out.  I agree with what was said...hotter and faster....inconsistent deposit...looks like if you just burn a few more rods and get more comfortable you will get down.  As far as the height (+ width) of your cap....I have never been busted on that (save aerospace work) unless it was grossly under/over....as long as the toes look good and it is uniform.  If you are testing out to an ASME code the visual criteria means little, it will be shot anyhow...long as the shot is clean your good.
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Certifications / 6G acceptable visual root and cap criteria (?)'s

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill