I had the opportunity last month to have dinner with David McQuaid, AWS President and former D1.1 Chair. Of course I "took one for the team" and used the opportunity to ask him directly about Clause 5 changes. His answer did not clarify things much in my mind, although I now understand what the "intent" of the committee was.
For example, it seems in California (and other humid locations) when you go to weld on a bridge, the State Inspectors, Engineers, etc... take a white rag and wipe down the joint. If they get any red or orange on the white rag, welding cannot proceed and everything must be cleaned again...and of course rust bloom is immediate. At issue is the definition of "residual". The committee felt that if they relaxed things a tad, "common sense" would prevail. "As long as the quality of the weld is not affected" was his answer. They did not anticipate that anyone with a sound mind would be advocating welding on piles of rust, steel dripping with oil or a few layers of paint. I, for one have difficulty with "residual" and err on the safe side. If I see any oil, paint or rust, I consider it being more than residual. What worries me is what is welded over that I cannot see at the time of visual inspection.
He did tell me that he was unaware of any significant displeasure over the changes and he would take a look at the situation to see if a "clarification" was in order. I gather he does not review this forum.
My suggestion would be for every AWS Member and CWI to email Mr McQuaid directly at davidlmcquaid@comcast.net and Allen Sindel, D1 Chair (I think) with a request for clarification, keeping in mind that effective points of disagreement and polite language go a lot further than sarcasm and harsh wording. Just my two cents...
My thought is that if "common sense would prevail" there would be no need for a change in the first place because, common sense would prevail.
Griff
Any time a non-measurable requirement is put in a code or specification, common sense winds up going right out the window, to be replaced with - "My interpretation is...."
Tim
White glove inspectors, in my opinion, fall into one of three categories.
1) Stupid
2) Azzhole
3) Inexperienced (i.e., scared)
Actually, looking at your list, I'm leaning towards a combination of any 2 or ALL 3.
All inspectors start out with some degree of #3.
Those who are also #1's usually end up as #2's.
However, there are some intelligent #2's.
The intelligent #2's mostly end up as QA/QC Managers.
Hmmmm...
Very interesting and a quite logical evolution
Not all QC/QA Managers are #1's or #2's. Some started as welders, fabricators and machinists and climb their way to that position, going to college at night and dragging their tired butt into work the next day.... and even come into work (unpaid) on their own time to help the second shift welder/fabricators with problems. Not that on occasion and with an abundance of negative stimulation, I can't be an Azz....