Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / Inspection & Qualification / Pipe to plate qualification
- - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 08-26-2019 20:18
I am having trouble interpreting whether or not i need to requalify my guys for an upcoming project. Everyone in the shop is certified 2G-1/8" to unlimited under D1.1 and also D1.8 certified. For this upcoming project we have round HSS members ranging from 5" diameter .375" thickness all the way up to 16" diameter .625" thickness. There will be no tube to tube connections in production,we are only welding demand critical, CJP tube to plate T-Joint connections with backing in 1G&2G position using pipe positioners to rotate. Now being that this is HSSR(round hss) and not rectangular HSS, will we be required to reqaulify all the welders since the diameter falls under 24"? The only thing making me question requalification is everything i'm seeing is for T,K,Y connections without backing. The weld we are going to perform is merely a CJP t-joint with backing. see attachment.
I am looking in D1.1 2015 Clause 9.
Thank you in advance for any help
Attachment: pipeCJP.PNG (33k)
Parent - - By Steelslinger (**) Date 08-26-2019 21:05
If its called out as a CJP with Backer, then I would treat it as a T-Joint Connection CJP. Which would require testing on pipe in the 6GR position per Table 9.13. Use Table 9.14 for diameter and thickness sizing of your tests and Fig. 9.25 for the test joint configuration.
Parent - - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 08-26-2019 21:14
Thank you steelslinger, i am leaning this direction. This would only work if the omission of backing qaulifies you for the same weld but woth backing. Also, Fig. 9.25 is for a butt joint, i am faced with a T-joint.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 08-26-2019 21:49
See my reply in your other duplicate post.

Parent - - By Shane Feder (****) Date 08-27-2019 11:12
Sorry mate but there is no requirement for 6GR - they are intending to weld in the flat position.
As Al noted in the duplicate post - test the welders in the 1GR position (which is what the production welds will be) on a butt/groove weld (which will cover the single-bevel/ T-joint configuration) that will be used in production.
Parent - - By Steelslinger (**) Date 08-27-2019 15:51
My mistake, I did not see the joint diagram he provided and was envisioning a larger than pipe diameter plate, which would have made it closer to a T- Connection than a butt joint, which would require a 6GR test, instead of the 1G Rotated.
Parent - - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 08-29-2019 00:09
ok well here's another point to scratch your head over....... table 4.10 note c is where it tells you to reqaulify if the pipe is under 24"... scoot over and look under "production pipe welding" column.... the only spot that sends you to note c is CJP Butt welds.... see the joint detail in my attachment in my post.... It is not a butt weld, it is a T-joint. So technically since it is not a butt joint then i do not have to reqaulify. The way i read code is very black and white.. if it does not say i need to reqaulify for a T-joint then i do not need to reqaulify.
Parent - - By Steelslinger (**) Date 08-29-2019 13:08 Edited 08-29-2019 13:21
But then you also  see that Plate qualification using Table 4.10, does not qualify you for CJPs on T- Y- K- Connections on pipe. You have to go to Table 9.13 and there it states you have to do a 6GR test in order to qualify for CJPs on T- Y- K- Connections on pipe.

Although Table 9.13 doesn't fully line up with that 9.19 says, T-9.13 says to nothing qualifies T, K, Y Connections except 6GR using figure 9.25/9.27, whereas 9.19 (3 & 4) say to use figure 9.22(b). I'm not sure how that would be reconciled. Would using Fig. 9.22(b) in the 6GR position be appropriate? That would probably be a question for the Engineer/Person in charge of the project on the client/end user side.
Parent - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 09-03-2019 21:11
but then again, it is not a T, K or Y connection... T, K, and Y connections are pipe to pipe, tube to tube or tube to pipe, not tube/pipe to plate. So IMHO it's a very gray area.
Parent - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 08-27-2019 22:14
thank you Adam
Parent - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 08-27-2019 22:14
Thank you Shane
Parent - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 08-27-2019 22:14
thank you AL
- - By LToca85 (**) Date 08-29-2019 14:20
I'm just curious as to why that joint design was used instead of a pipe to pipe V-groove with a backing bar? Wouldn't it make more sense to only have to make 1 CJP weld instead of 2?
Parent - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 09-03-2019 21:18
they spliced them with a plate because it is a field moment connection. So rather than cope the end of a wide flange to match the radius of the pipe, they insert a square plate for the flanges to CJP weld to. i would need to upload another section view for you to see what im talking about.
Attachment: Capture7.PNG (13k)
Parent - - By CWI-BRI (*) Date 09-03-2019 21:25
see my reply, i uploaded a top view so you can see the need for the plate in the splice
Parent - By LToca85 (**) Date 09-06-2019 21:20
Ahh okay that makes sense. This was really bugging me as to why this design lol thank you
Up Topic Welding Industry / Inspection & Qualification / Pipe to plate qualification

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill