Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / D1.6 Box tube....HELP!
- By pipes (**) Date 10-10-2012 15:03
So I had a customer call me with a qualification need. He has a maintenece worker/welder who is about to construct catwalks/platforms in their factory. Before he does the welding the owner wants to qualify the welder to D1.6 using box tube. He wants box tube as this is 99% of what his man welds. This is the first stainless box tube request I've ever had so I did some digging. D1.6 allows prequalified tubular connections so I thought great, this should be easy! Whoa, was I wrong.

Here's the problem. I can't find ANY reference to box tubing, anywhere! Even if I was going to qualify a procedure there are no qualification range tables or diagrams to pull specimens. Everything is either pipe or plate. I suppose we could call pipe, tube....but it's not. And it's certainly not box tube.

Then I thought, forget it, I'll just have him weld pipe or plate. But there is no language about whether pipe or plate qualifies for box tube. I am lost. So, even if you couldn't test on box tube I don't see what test qualifies a welder to weld to box tube.

Do I use pipe ranges and specimen pulls? Do I reference D1.1's box tube ranges and specimens? Am I just overlooking somthing simple? I really hope sombody has dealt with this and can help me out, thanks a ton!
- - By TAC (*) Date 10-10-2012 16:13 Edited 10-10-2012 16:54
Figure 3.5 and table 3.6 in AWS B2.1.  :wink:
Parent - - By pipes (**) Date 10-10-2012 17:44 Edited 10-10-2012 17:47
Please explain what your thinking. Are you saying I should substitute stainless for carbon and qualifiy to D1.1? Sorry, if I'm misunderstanding but I don't see any figures in B2.1...or did you mean 3.5 and 3.6 in D1.6? Sorry again but I'm a little confused.
Parent - - By TAC (*) Date 10-10-2012 17:48
No, that is not what I'm saying.  If you crack B2.1 open and flip to Figure 3.5 you will see location of bend specimens for box tube.  The general notes of that figure will send you to table 3.6 for diameter and thickness limitations.

AWS B2.1:2000 - Specification for Welding Procedure and Performance Qualification <- Good stuff in here!
Parent - By pipes (**) Date 10-10-2012 17:56
Oooooh...I'm so dumb! I was looking at the wrong spec. Sorry!  I was looking at Base Metal Groupings! I didn't have the whole spec! That makes WAY more sense, HA! Thanks a lot!
Parent - - By pipes (**) Date 10-10-2012 18:05
Beautiful!!!! Thank you so much! Sorry for the ignorance!
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 10-10-2012 18:35
Glad you got an answer that looks like it might work.

Now, I'm curious...I don't have a copy of D1.6 with me (out of town on a D1.1 job) but I thought there was usually language in the various codes to explain the use of square and/or rectangular tubings as well as pipe.  In D1.1 it all comes under the heading of 'Tubular' while Clause 4 gives specifics for Pipe or Box (4.26).  So are you saying you could not find such in D1.6? 

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - By pipes (**) Date 10-10-2012 18:49
Nope....and I tore that book apart for the last 2 weeks! I placed 4 calls in three different states to no avail! There is a refernce to tubular connections in 3.21. And even a joint detail for tubular connections with no backing but that is it. Every other table and figure shows pipe or plate. I have seen it many times in D1.1 and that's why I figured it HAD to be there somewhere. Well, if it is they hid it pretty well!

B2.1 is the answer though! What a great document, I can't believe I never had it before.
Parent - - By TAC (*) Date 10-10-2012 18:56
Brent,

Annex L of D1.6 defines tubular as "a generic term for a family of hollow section products of various cross-sectional configuration. ..."

"Tubular" is addressed in D1.6, but offers no guidance for location of bend specimens and such in box tubing.
Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 10-11-2012 14:33
I was wondering how much of it would come down to 'Definitions' of terms.  Even A3.0 doesn't define the various terms.  Annex K in D1.1 does and it is pretty good, especially the one under 'Tubular'. 

Thanks for the replies.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
- - By LToca85 (**) Date 01-22-2019 17:58
So I would have to write a procedure using B2.1 in order to weld a stainless steel rail made out of 1.5x1.5 stainless steel square tubing?
Attachment: CCF_000248.pdf - this is what i am working with (364k)
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 01-22-2019 18:46
You can write a prequalified WPS per AWS  D1.6.

Al
Parent - By LToca85 (**) Date 01-22-2019 19:30
Good afternoon Al, I am looking at AWS D1.6 2017 and I don't see a detail that will work for me based on that 45 degree cut, or am i overthinking it?
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 01-22-2019 19:15
Nice wall...err, I mean....fence :twisted:

What welding process are you planning on using? I don't have D1.6 handy but was thinking that SMAW was a prequalified process in D1.6.....I don't remember if GMAW or FCAW were prequalified processes.

Al can you verify?
Parent - - By LToca85 (**) Date 01-22-2019 19:32
LMAO

FCAW is a prequalified process for D1.6
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 01-22-2019 19:45
You should be fine as long as you consider all the welds either PJP or fillets.

Things get complicated when you go crazy and call the groove welds CJP and in reality, there is rarely a need for CJP.

Al
Parent - - By LToca85 (**) Date 01-22-2019 19:53
Thank you Al, I guess I am overthinking it. On that 45 degree connection of the frame I can write the WPS to have 3 sides with a PJP connection and the inside of the corner joint be a fillet weld?
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 01-22-2019 20:00 Edited 01-22-2019 20:03
If you are talking about the mitered joints...I would call them PJP square grooves(because they are welded from one side) just butted together on the flat sides and the outside corner, and a fillet weld on the inside corner. If the flats sides are to be ground flush, add the contour symbol to those square groove welds.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 01-22-2019 20:03 Edited 01-22-2019 20:06
That sounds about right.

I might steer clear of square grooves and used a V-groove, especially if the welds are ground flush. However, if the tube wall is thin, square grooves might suffice if you are using GTAW. I don't know if I would opt for FCAW on something like a railing.

Al
Parent - - By LToca85 (**) Date 01-22-2019 20:18
Yes a miter connection, sorry as i stated in your class Al, its hard to translate what I see and know into the English language and visa-versa.

We don't have the option to do GTAW but we have FCAW and GMAW. I am thinking of going with the GMAW
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 01-22-2019 20:32
Hello Luis;

Well, you have to use what'w available. Just make sure you use sufficient heat input to get enough penetration to avoid grinding all the weld off when you grind the welds flush.

There are no dimensions on the sketch, so I have no idea what the wall thickness, but I've seen more than one instance where the welds were nearly removed when the welds were ground flush. I saw a couple of railings fall apart when they were hoisted to load on the truck. The point is, some penetration is needed. Penetration is harder to control with GMAW or FCAW because welders tend to reduce the parameters to prevent burn through.

Good to hear from you my friend.

Al
Parent - By LToca85 (**) Date 01-23-2019 12:20
Hello Al, its great to hear from you too its been a busy new year here.

It looks like it will have to be GMAW the wall thickness is going to be 1/8" and 3/16" and will need to use GMAW to use detail BC-P2, I could use Johns idea and go with B-P1c but I too worry about getting enough weld on there.
- By ttdtketoanleanh Date 12-06-2019 04:28
I was looking at Base Metal Groupings! I didn't have the whole spec!
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / D1.6 Box tube....HELP!

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill