As the OP has not mentioned or referenced any particular construction code, I guess we will all have to partake in a certain amount of guess work about what weld/workmanship standards were required. The fact that an inadequate visual Weld/Root profile cost him his job could lead some to speculate that it was more than a 'Farm Code' standard. However, the real question I see, is not about the fact that Mr Hacksaw feels hard done by the Inspection team, more the fact he was allowed to progress as far as he did. Al's questions are quite telling and pertinent. The fact the Hacksaw was welding an Olet, which costs money and implies some sort of engineering design and that QC were present, would imply that some sort of procedural controls should have been in place. If this was indeed the case, Mr Hacksaw should have been made aware of these and not allowed to proceed out side of the set parameters for either set up or welding. Note, this is not a variable! So, yes I can have some sympathy with Mr Hacksaw. He was a victim of a poor QC system.

Too many lazy or uninformed people in this industry anymore, with far more stringent quality requirements. Hacksaw is right to some extent, its almost impossible to get an answer out of QC or management that will point a welder in the right direction when you hit a wall.
The only good thing about pipe construction is the opportunity to move on to the next one, and remember if your a welder who can't weld- inspect : )

I'd urge any of you to read the Pipe Fitting Institute (PFI) standard ES-49.  I have posted it here before (or sent it to individuals, can't remember) but I'll just say in 99% of the cases where O'lets don't fit properly its because someone didn't order them properly.... the do come in all sizes and bevels, etc., change based on wall thickness, and a whole host of other variables... haven't seen anyone mention this but its pretty damned basic stuff.

My previous post:

I was on a job (inside a plant) welding critical chlorine piping, x-rayed to sever cycle. I was advised by the foreman that this is low temp, so I needed to use a low temp wire. He gave me ER80Sb6. I advised him that I didn't believe that this was the correct wire. He said it was. I then went and asked the plant QC. I advised him that I didn't believe this was the correct wire. I was always told that ER80NI1 was for low temp pipe. He then looked at me stupid, and told me to just use whatever the foreman gave me to use. I asked him if it needed a preheat or purge (because I believed ER80b6 to be chrome),and he said no. As I continued to pester him to re-check these things, I got the same drivel that I'm seeing on this forum. He had a lack of concern, leadership, responsibility, or knowledge. Many of the welds didn't pass X-ray because of what I believe to be cracks in the welds, and I got layed off for having to many repairs. I don't know if he was right or wrong, because its hard to get any credible information from people in this industry. But I'm glad I got layed off before that started pumping chlorine through that line.

In the last post I made: I didn't have a written welding procedure, but I had a verbal welding procedure. The verbal welding procedure was to weld it or your fired. And use the TIG wire that the foreman gave you. A welding procedure doesn't get anymore clear than this.

The QC/QA's on this forum still haven't answered my question, anymore than the one on this job did. Can ER80SB6 be used on low temperature piping, and can it produce an X-ray quality weld, without a preheat or purge on it?

The reason I don't trust QC's or WPS's is because if I follow some incompetent directions on the WPS, I still have to put my stencil on it. And if it don't pass X-ray, I have to take the firing. Not the QC.

We've heard several versions of what happen, several different jobs, seems like he has been run off more than one project. Conclusion: Some people really don't want help.

Did he bother following the link? Don't know, he didn't say.

Work for a crap outfit and you get crap jobs. Build a crap reputation and crap jobs with crap outfits are what you get.

As I tell welders, "Foremen don't get fired, welders do. It is better to walk off a job than to do something you know isn't correct then to get fired for making bad welds."

Al

In other words, "it was just pipe.”

Hacksaw, I don't want to appear condescending or to appear to be ridiculing you. There is a lesson to be learned.

Any piping system, whether it is categorized as High Pressure, Normal, D, or M, requires the Owner to take on certain responsibilities defined by the code. In this case, let’s assume B31.3 is applicable. The Owner is responsible to determine which ASME/AWS/API code is applicable. The Owner must define the fluid service class which defines the design, materials, installation, and inspection requirements.

The contractor also has defined responsibilities. Those responsibilities include installing the system as designed, providing the materials as specified, installing the system in accordance with the applicable fluid service class, and quality control.

The Owner’s inspector performs quality assurance functions, i.e., the inspector representing the Owner verifies the contractor met all his assigned responsibilities, including any required NDT (including VT).

All ASME B&PC construction codes and pressure piping codes (in general) require the contractor to qualify the WPSs used as well as the welders employed on the project. The code states the WPS must be available to those authorized to use or review them. Please recognize I’m paraphrasing the requirements. The contractor, i.e., your employer, should have submitted the WPS and supporting documents to the Engineer/Inspector (Owner’s representative) for review and approval. The contractor should have made the WPS available to the welders as well as to the contractor’s QC.

If the contractor didn’t have a WPS, if the contractor didn’t have a QC program in place, if the contractor didn’t implement the QC program, shame on him and shame on the Owner for allowing work to be done without it.

I go back to my original response to your post. Had the Contractor met his responsibilities and had you received proper instruction we would not be having this discussion.

I just wrapped up a court case where the situation was very similar to what you have described. The difference was the project I was involved with was a structural steel job and I didn’t get involved until after a collapse had occurred.  The lawyers that hired me were all too happy to see that the parties involved did not fulfill their responsibilities in accordance with the applicable code. The contractor blamed his supervisor, his foreman, and the workers. The court saw it differently. The contractor is ultimately responsible for the work done by the employees. The contractor also has the ability to hire and fire workers at will in most states. Where the contractor used to be able to beat or whip the negligent worker, the ability to terminate a worker is now the big stick the contractor wields to bend the worker to his will.

Hacksaw was thrown under the bus because he didn’t ask the question, “How do you want this fitted and welded?” before doing the work. Whether he thought he knew how to weld the integrally reinforced fitting or not, he should have had specific written or verbal instruction defining how it was to be welded. The fact that it was an integrally reinforced fitting is immaterial, the welder could have been directed to do “x y and z,” if the worker does not know how to do it according to a code and doesn’t ask, he is at fault. If he asked and was given specific instruction (written or otherwise) and the instruction given was wrong, the situation is changed dramatically in favor of the worker involved. If the worker followed the foreman’s specific instruction and was then terminated, a case of wrongful discharge could be argued. Real world or not, the perspective often changes once the lawyers get involved.

Al

"I've NEVER seen an inspector walk off a job."

Hacksaw, my friend, I venture to say you have no CWIs on the jobs you work.

I know of several inspectors, including me, that have walked off jobs where the Engineer or Owner did not support the inspector when things were not code compliant. And yes, it does mean walking away from a paycheck, but a CWI without integrity is in for a short career.

"Again I quote you.."never seen inspectors punished for their screw-ups ".."

Tell that to the welding inspector from Newport News that is doing a three year stretch in federal prison for falsifying inspection reports. I'm happy to say he isn't and never was a CWI.

Buck up little fella and find a company that knows how to meet code. Next step, get some training that is relevant to you chosen trade. Learn something about the codes you work with and then, just maybe, these incompetent inspectors will not ******** you. Rather than stopping for a few cold brews on the way home or watching the game on television, sit down with the code you work with. Yes, be prepared to spend several hundred dollars to buy your own copy. If you visit a college or university in your area they may have a copy of the code you can read and study.

You have filled two tumblers with tears since you started this post. It's time for you to do something constructive. Buy some books and start reading.

Next time when you have a disagreement with an inspector you will know what you are talking about rather than spouting from the sphincter.

Real world? You have no idea. Real world does not mean working ignorant of how to do it right. Real world doesn't mean working with idiots. You can get away with it for a while, but it will catch up with the perpetrators sooner or later.

"I was looking for a job when I found this one." Just because you need a paycheck to pay bills isn't justification to take a job if you are not qualified or to take a job that requires you to do something illegal or immoral. I'm sure there are a number of people serving time that justify their activities because they needed the money.

Al