Go to the next paragraph. ...the welder shall be allowed reasonable time to adjust the welding equipment to be used. The welder shall use the same welding technique and proceed with the same speed he will be using if he passes the test and is permitted to do production welds. (Opinion:There goes the guy who uses 10 welding rods to run his bead, grinds and re-runs the bead, and takes 30 minutes to get it in.)
6.4 Visual Inspection ...weld shall be free of cracks, inadequate penetration, and burn through, and must present a neat workmanlike appearance. (Opinion: Code defines cracks, Ip and BT, who defines neat workmanlike appearance. That comes from skill,training and experience.Section 8.3)
Section 9.2 "The company may therefore reject any weld that appears to meet these acceptance standards if, "IN ITS OPINION", the depth of the imperfection may be detrimental to the weld." (Opinion: Who defines opinion on a test?)
Every x-country pipeline I have been on the company specification does not allow arc burns or grinder marks outside the weld grove. Some will allow repair, but it is at the inspectors decression. And after extensive NDT. Most companies allow the inspector, as the company's representative, the final right of acceptance or rejection. As long if the company specification exceed the code requirement, then the company specification is the governing document.
When it comes to testing the welders, I have had tricks played on me over the years by welders testing trying for a break. I have NEVER given a welder a break testing which did not come back to bite me. When I see a welder struggling with his bead on the test, you can bet he will struggle with it in the field. If his cap looks like crap on test day, it will look like crap in the field. If there are grinder marks on the test coupon, there will be grinder marks in the field. Once a welder leaves the test site, a lot of times all you will hear is from the field inspector about that "Queen" you sent out. Or how the guy you knew was having problems with his bead winds up on tie-in's and has a 50% repair rate, all on the bead. Or the guy who was running at the edge of travel speed on the bead winds up on the front end with a 10% repair rate. These and others are mistakes I have made. My undeveloped skills, experience and overconfidence cost $$$. I was fortunate I was allowed to learn my craft and while taking some grand A$$ eatings, I learned from my mistakes. But my mistakes are what has gotten me where I am.
I broke into this craft, taught by people who thought inspectors were GOD's. I have learned over the years, we are not. When I test welders, I expect perfection. The welder has every break and benefit to pass the test. The coupons are just right, the bevel is just so, the conditions are controled. I can expect perfection. I do not demand from the welder what will not be demanded from him in the field. Letting a welder pass a test that looks like crap but it meets code does not do him any good and you can bet he will wind up costing the contractor $$, the company time and in the end he gets run off. So I demand perfection when testing.
In the field, I expect excellence. When a welder is standing on his head in a left handed bell hole, making a hard tie-in, its raining and they are holding a tarp over his head, I want to know that welder has the ability to make a perfect weld. I know if the weld is only 75% because of conditions then it will still be a better weld than the one made by a welder whose test just met code and it is only 75%. If as the company representative I have to make the call on accepting a weld when it is out of code, (Oh yea, sometimes this has to be done!) I want to be sure when I make that call, and document the reasoning behind it, if it ever comes to a deposition, the welder who made the weld was capable of making a perfect weld. OR if I have to recommend to the Project manager or Project Engineer a weld should be accepted, I know the welder who made the weld was capable of making a perfect weld.
I still believe and practice you are up front with the welders on what you will expect from the test. Have a hand out sheet if you need to, but most of them will not look at it anyway. If the welders you test know you are firm, but fair they will respect you. If they know you know your business and will not settle for half ass, then they will give that to you. They will start being your inspectors. Which lowers your load in the field. When it comes to testing, allowing average will result in below average field results. Demanding perfection will result in above average field results.
If having this mindset and attitude defines one as a cowboy or pirate,
RRRRRRR Yippie ki ya
I understand what your saying. However; it still needs to be in writing. Inserting opinion and conjecture is wrong. I don't see anything in 8.3 that gives the inspector the right to insert opinion, nor a definition for workmanlike appearance.
8.3 QUALIFICATION OF INSPECTION
PERSONNEL
Welding inspection personnel shall be qualified by experience
and training for the specified inspection task they perform.
Their qualifications shall be acceptable to the company.
Documentation of these qualifications shall be retained
by the company and shall include but is not limited to the
following:
a. Education and experience.
b. Training.
c. Results of any qualification examinations.
Maybe I've forgotten how to read, but I don't see it anywhere in there.
As for 9.2 the company defines that opinion, and it should be in writing again, if it's not, then it's an error to assume.
Those sentences of "in the companies opinion" "workmanlike appearance" are for the company to define.
If the company has not addressed these matters and creates the situation that you describe here
"Letting a welder pass a test that looks like crap but it meets code does not do him any good and you can bet he will wind up costing the contractor $$, the company time and in the end he gets run off."
"looks like crap but meets the code". Last time I checked it's not a beauty contest. If there is some other criteria other than "meeting the code" then it had better be in writing.
In saying all that, my """personal opinion""" is that to many welders use the grinder as a crutch. My opinion is these people don't need to be in the field until they can do the work without buying stock in the disk supply chain. That however; is only my opinion, not to be enforced without it being in black and white.
I see a hell of a lot of things I don't like, things I've seen the beginning, the middle and the after affects of. Things experience tells me is wrong, but only the company/owner can do anything about it. Making that call on my own is stepping into the shoes of the engineer/owner, and that is the absolute worst thing any inspector can do.
I tested for a power plant last week and saw something I didn't agree with. These guys would slide the coupon holder up about 7 feet in the air and stand up to weld the bottom, then slide it back down to weld the top. Didn't seem right to me, that scaffold ain't gonna slide up and down.
and the subject was 6G
(not you, ZCat)