Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / Technical Discussions / D1.5 and weld bead method of identification restrictions
- - By Quality0537 (*) Date 05-25-2021 22:07
Does anyone have any knowledge or information that could help me identify if there is any language in D1.5:2015 or 2020 to restrict, prohibit or guide a fabricator from using a weld bead method to identify a Tub girder, bridge girder, beam or any other part?

We have welded a 3.00" tall "X" on the side of Press Brake Formed Tub Girders as an assembly match mark or assembly aid to identify the appropriate installation orientation. This has been shown on the project drawings.  A third party Inspector has expressed some concern over the practice and is requesting that the Marks be removed. He has not yet been asked to show any language to support that we cannot use this method to mark or identify the parts, and the Engineer hasn't been approached about the question yet. I am looking for any supporting information or guidance in either direction to be prepared for the discussion.
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 05-28-2021 14:27 Edited 05-28-2021 14:31
I've seen this before on buildings as a way to identify piece marks. I don't know of any language that prohibits this in D1.1 or in D1.5, however on a cyclically loaded structure, I would refrain from this practice just as a precaution. I know from experience in bending flatbar with a bead on plate that it tends to fracture at the toes of the weld.

Edit: Well.....I do see something that could possibly be used against this if the welds are not shown with complete information regarding location, type, size and extent of all welds shall be clearly shown on the drawings. See AWS D1.5:2015, Clause 2.1.1.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 05-28-2021 22:09
Well, in rereading the post and John response, I better understand the question.

The post does indicate that "X" is indicated on the drawing. I assume the drawings were reviewed and approved by the engineers that represent the state that will own the bridge.

While the third-party inspector may not like the practice, I would venture to say it isn't up to him to direct the fabricator to stop the practice. The inspector should bring it to the engineer's attention and it should be the engineer that makes the decision as to whether the practice should stop or it should be continued.

Depending on the location of the weld, it may be innocuous, but then again, if it is located in an area of high tensile stress it could be a problem. The engineer responsible for the job is in a better position to make that determination. 

Up Topic Welding Industry / Technical Discussions / D1.5 and weld bead method of identification restrictions

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill