Receiving Inspection/ A500 Tube bad Seam Welds

Date 03-06-2008 21:11 Edited 03-07-2008 04:21

If you know there is a concern, i.e., you've read the advisory, then it is prudent to check every piece until you are satisfied the problem has been corrected.

If the sign says "bridge out", it is in your best interest to assume the bridge is "missing" until you check to see if there is a bridge and if it is safe to drive over. Then again, contractors are by nature gamblers, so go ahead, drive down the road at ninety miles and hour with your head lamps turned off and assume the sign is wrong. Imagine if you had to believe every road sign you encountered while driving, stop signs, speed limits signs, sharp curves ahead, .............

I love contractors. Without them I would have to find an honest to goodness job.

Damn those customers that learned to read!

Good luck - Al

By James Corbin (**)

Date 03-06-2008 23:02

I also find A500 & A847 tubing that is defective from time to time but it is a very small percentage. Train your personal to look it over when the material comes into their area and report anything they see wrong or questionable. (Mainly the saw & drill line operators but all who touch it even the painters) Weld seams, tight radius corners, bends, dings & laminations. NO I do not have every bundle taken apart upon arrival. The more you touch it the more it costs.

By eekpod

Date 03-07-2008 11:36

Geltlemen, Thanks for your reply's. I agree with what you both said. My concern is that ironically I will be re-writing our QA manual and I wanted to address this issue if needeed while it was fresh in my mind.

After I posted my question, I realized I missed going through the AISC black manual and found what I was looking for in the AISC Code of Standard Practise for Steel Buildings and Bridges. Section 8.2 "Inspection of Mill Material. The Fabricator shall make a visual inspection of material that is received from the mill, but need not perform any material tests unless the Owner's Designated Rep. for Design speciefies that additional testing is to be performed." So there it is in black and white, which matches what our manual says, I just wanted to see it for myself.

I feel confident that between our receiving personnel, saw guy, fitters and welders, the QC inspector and the material handlers that if something were there, it would get caught. Again I like to see things in B/W for myself so know where it comes from.

Thanks Chris

By 803056

Date 03-07-2008 14:04 Edited 03-07-2008 14:12

I've got some HSS that I would like to sell. It's located in a swamp in Florida. Maybe I can interest you in that prime piece of property as well.

QC has a responsibility to provide the client with materials that meet the requirements of the contract documents. QC has a responsibility to the employer to ensure they stay in business by checking incoming materials and product that is shipped meets the standards specified by the customer. If something goes wrong and someone is injured as a result, the employer (including the QA/QC personnel) will face the judge and jury. I understand that it's difficult to examine every piece of suspect steel and still have time to read the sports section of the newspaper, but it is QC's job, it is their responsibility.

My last experience as an expert witness cost the fabricator 42 million awarded to the husband that was injured and the wife of the injured was awarded another 6 million after the appeals were over. I was very happy to one of the witnesses that helped the plaintiff win that award. The fabricator could have performed the requisite inspections for a fraction of the award and they might still be in business if QC had perform the job they were being paid to do. I never feel sorry for the fabricator that has the attitude that it is someone else's problem because the paperwork says it meets the specification.

I agree that it is a good idea to have everyone in the production cycle aware of a potential problem, but in this case QC knows the problem has been identified and there are written warnings that the material is problematic. QC has a responsibility to step up surveillance of the material. QC/QA is the entity responsible to ensure the materials being fabricated do in fact meet the specification. It is clear that the manufacturers in China are not doing their job. The company is basing their purchasing decision on the price of the commodity, that price should include the cost of proper inspection and in this case additional inspection because they have been warned of the problem.

Let's hope for everyone's sake that the one time we meet face to face isn't in a courtroom. The decision not to examine every piece of questionable material is indefensible and not in the company's long term interest. The plaintiff, if he or she is still alive, will walk away with the money and the fabricator will be listed with the rest of the companies that used to be located in your town and the employees will be looking for new employment.

It will be interesting to read the resume of someone from the QC department to see how they list their achievements with their last employer and how they respond when the interviewer asks, "Were you working in the QC department for XYZ when they were fabricating the HSS that failed?"

Yup, that is the one person I want on my QC staff to ensure I stay in business for the next fifty years.

The question is, "What can I do to ensure no compromised raw material gets into the product stream." Not, "How little can I get away with so I don't get caught with my pants down."

I love my job!

Good luck - Al

By hogan

Date 03-07-2008 14:59

well put

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-07-2008 15:25 Edited 03-07-2008 15:28

We all should be aware by now of the issue with the China tubing, engineers included. That being said, I say that the engineer should specify "domestic steel only" when HSS is required on a project. That would be the simplest solution.

By 803056

Date 03-07-2008 15:41

Add this to the ever growing list of substandard materials (including medicine) being exported by China.

Al

By bozaktwo1 (***)

Date 03-07-2008 17:56

We run through a lot of this type of material, and in my time here I have seen only one length come in with a blown seam. I have trained my two guys pretty extensively over the last several months to catch this sort of problem. Before I arrived here, receipt inspection was some sort of alien language spoken only in the lesser-known regions of work instructions and the QA manual. I have first hand experiences that make it well worth my time, thank you.

By Bob Garner (***)

Date 03-07-2008 20:54

The latest release from AISC was that AISC didn't consider this a problem as long as purchasers of HSS made "prudent" receiving inspections. So it seems we better look out for ourselves.

By hogan

Date 03-07-2008 21:18

i think it only listed 3 heats as having this issue.

By Kix

Date 03-07-2008 21:18

What kind of problem are we talking about here? We use a lot of A500 tubing, but I'm not sure what country it is made in. What should a guy be looking for? Bad ERW roots or stressed corners or what?

By hogan

Date 03-07-2008 21:26

longseams from china

By CWI555

Date 03-08-2008 00:14

and anything else from china

By Kix

Date 03-08-2008 16:40

Whats wrong with the seams if you don't mind me asking?

By PSS1 Date 03-08-2008 21:41

The tubes I had looked at were maybe 8" x 16" x 1/4" wall from china. My yard guys had noticed it and called me out after they had unloaded a truck. The seam was welded intermittently down the length. You could see fusion for a few feet then see a line both inside and out where there was nothing, like someone turned the power off to the seam welder as they went through the line. Called the front office out and had the VP's look for themselves and rejected the whole works, didn't even try to unbundle to pick thru. We've trained our guys well, anything suspected from china and they bring it to my attention. Funny writting on a MTR, instant questions are brought up.

By James Corbin (**)

Date 03-09-2008 05:59

If you are only worried about China, Just because its made in the USA does not mean it is defect free. These pictures are from a A847 3/8" Wall 10x10. From Visual inspection NO defects were found. The corner radius was tight but within the specification allowed by ASTM. (The heat was in process followed due to the corner radius) When the tube was cut corner cracks from the inside out were found. It was found in several hundred feet all in the same heat. The manufacture was called, pictures sent, a rep came, we had new tube trucked in ASAP.
The manufacture said OOPS.
About where the tube was made, Don't you get the MTRs with your purchase? Tubes usually have the manufacture and heat imprinted on the side some even stamped.

Attachment: MVC-373F.JPG (47k)

Attachment: MVC-382F.JPG (108k)

Attachment: MVC-385F.JPG (135k)

Attachment: Mvc-391f.jpg (108k)

By 803056

Date 03-09-2008 15:41

Great photographs, but the cracks appear to be in an area subject to compression when the tubes are manufactured. The inside radius is the last place I would suspect cracks to be located. You learn or see something new everyday at the Forum!

Best regards - AL

By CWI555

Date 03-09-2008 19:46

The area shown in those pictures would be an easy kill for UT to pick up. Realitively fast as well. It is interesting that it was the ID corner.

By HgTX

Date 03-10-2008 20:36

I agree; it's a very strange place for the cracks. Any thoughts as to why they're there?

Hg

By James Corbin (**)

Date 03-13-2008 02:33

The manufacturer said their records showed that heat had some tube run through with the die set for 3/16" wall tube. The 3/16" 10x10 was the tube size ran just before the 3/8" 10x10 ran through the mill. Al was correct the tube was stressed in the corners from over forming when the stress was released, the tube then cracked from the inside out.

Yes it is rare but now when I check from the bundle ends to see fit & welds I also look closer to corner radius, then when in production personal are instructed to "LOOK" at anything strange with a "would you buy this" attitude.

Its funny that this thread happened now, yesterday I just had 8 of the companies best weldors go through my lecture on the first 2 chapters of the "Visual inspection Workshop" (VIW-M:2006) It took 3.5 hours, its part of documented training the company does. I gave them the test in the back of the book, first, just to show them what you don't know will hurt you, at the end of the class we went through the questions again and showed them were to look for the answers and when you don't find it "ASK".

By BLAZER

Date 03-09-2008 04:49

Interesting info for everyone, DSA (Division of the State Architect) here in California issued a special bulletin on this issue. The following link will direct you to that bulletin: http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dsa/bulletins/BU_07-03_9-26-07.pdf

By NDTIII

Date 03-09-2008 10:47

I lived and worked in China and Taiwan and can tell you. The quality that comes out of China for the most part is terrible. Razors that dont shave you. Batteries that dont work. Fittings that break when they fall off a truck. I mean fracture.

By Joey

Date 03-09-2008 15:47

will their rockets fly?

By Plasma-Brain (**)

Date 03-09-2008 20:53

If they do, Duck!

By Ariel D C (**)

Date 03-10-2008 10:08 Edited 03-10-2008 10:13

you'll see this amazing project in your TV this coming August Bird's Nest Olympic Stadium
said to be around 42thousand tons of steels made in China.

By hogan

Date 03-10-2008 14:16

i found a few tubes with poor fit-up at the longseam last year
http://www.aws.org/mwf/attachments//28/56628/tube3.jpg

By eekpod

Date 03-10-2008 14:27

If you are a structural steel fabricator, there is a requirment that states that you will inspect the material. This was the reason for me originally posting this issue because I couldn't find it in writing. But it's stated in the AISC Code of Standard Practise for buildings.
Additionally, and ironically, it also states in the specification for A-500;

Section 16
16.1 Inspection-All tubing SHALL be inspected at the place of manufacture to ensure conformance to the requirements of this specification.

16.2 All tubing shall be free from defects and shall have a workmanlike finish.

I guesss those last two statements didn't get translated into chinese. Chris

By ctacker (****)

Date 03-11-2008 04:50

I believe 16.1 means at the tubing manufacture not the fabricator. Most if not all tubing mfg's.(at least the ones in the U.S.) MT the tubing after its formed and welded as part of their QC program.

By 803056

Date 03-10-2008 15:33

Nice photo Hogan!

Al

By eekpod

Date 03-11-2008 10:24

ctacker, yes your'e right, section 16 inspection requirements I posted pertain to the manufacturer of the tube in this case, Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
But it does state in the code of standard paractise for the fabricator to inspect any material they use to fab parts from.
Thanks Chris

I like the appearance of that staduim, I think it's called a "birds nest", but you gotta think of the shortcuts they take in the mills and factories, what happens out in the field? We all know if something gonna get skipped/ missed it's in the field. I can't imagine what those welds look like up close, hopefully there good.

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-11-2008 11:05

Chris,

I'm going to go out on a limb here and play devil's advocate, but EXACTLY where in the COSP does it state for "the fabricator to inspect any material they use to fab parts from"?

By eekpod

Date 03-12-2008 10:56

snorris, not a problem. It took me awhile to find it, but now I know where it came from, and it does match what our company procedure says that we will inspect every piece that comes into our facility. My problem was originally I didn't know where they came up with that, I thought they just decided it was a good idea(which it is).

Code of Standard Practise for Steel Buildings and Bridges (March 18, 2005)

Section 8 Quality Assurance

8.2 Inspection of Mill Material;
Certified mill test reports shall constitute sufficient evidence that the mill product satifies material order requirements. "The Fabricator Shall make a visual inspection of material that is received from the mill, but need not perform any material tests unless the owner's designated representative for design specifies in the contract documents that additional testing is to be performed at the owner's expense."

Notice it says fabricator shall make a visual inspection of material that is received from the mill, but it doesn't say it shall be documented. Basically it means you will look at the material but you don't have to fill out any forms or record that you did the visual inspection.
Thanks Chris

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-12-2008 14:00

Chris,

Maybe your company procedure requires inspection of every piece, but the COSP does not state that. It only states that the fabricator make visual inspection of material that is recieved from the mill. It does not state "for the fabricator to inspect any material they use to fab parts from", as you said in your post. That's why I asked you where that is stated in the COSP. It can be taken as implied, but it is not clearly stated as to the degree/frequency of visual inspection, (i.e. inspecting every single piece that is received). That was the point I wanted to make. Furthermore, if taken literally, 8.2 only addresses materials received from the mill, which could be taken to exclude materials received from a service center or warehouse. In one way or another any material received is received from the mill, whether it's received direct or via service center, it was produced by a mill. That's just me playing devils advocate, as I said in my post.
However, I totally agree with you that it's a good idea to check every piece. We do that too, at one point or another. We don't make a special effort to roll over every piece of material we recieve at any point during the receiving and fabrication process in order to verify that all surfaces are in compliance. It's not practical and I don't think anyone else actually does that either. We look at only what is visible when material is received, what is visible at the saws, shears, ironworkers, pressbrake, plasma, camber machine, etc., We may see more/other areas on the fabrication bucks, because many times the material is turned over for additional fitting, welding, etc., and QC is always walking around monitoring all areas, as well as the area supervisors monitoring the processes they are responsible for. I think we've got it covered pretty well, but we won't catch everything unless we take extra time to look at every inch of every piece received. I don't know about other fabricators, but I can't justify that. The mills and service centers have responsibilities too, but ultimately it all comes back to the fabricator if there's an issue later on.

By 803056

Date 03-12-2008 20:24

It's been a while since I ran into any problems with raw materials, but when it last happened, the supplier told us that had the probelm been identified before we cut it, drilled it, or machined it, they would have replaced the material. However, because the lamination was discovered after the plate was cut, we owned it.

Just my past experience.

Best regards - Al

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-12-2008 20:40

Al,

A couple of our suppliers tried that with me over the years, but they replaced the material anyway. On a couple other occasions, I took pictures of laminations, repaired them, and turned in the repair time to the supplier, who issued us a credit.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 03-12-2008 20:46

We had some custom size... 20 something by large rectangular tubing one time that came in with a backing strip down two sides(on the inside).....terrible fitup and welding of that seam on both sides. There were places where the backing had drooped down and the weld didn't even touch it. We were able to get replacements from the supplier. Also had several laminations like Scott stated and got compensated for our time repairing them.

By 803056

Date 03-12-2008 21:45

I guess if you are a "good" customer the supplier will be more accommodating.

Best regards - Al

By eekpod

Date 03-13-2008 10:29

snorris, you bring up an interesting angle to look at this issue from. I see what your referring to because eventually all material came from a mill at some point or another. Additionally, when I spoke with one of our suppliers, they mentioned that they look at the material as well before they sell it.
I guess I automatically intrepeted the COSP and jumped ahead and figured at some point all material needs to be checked, which it is.
It seemed clear to me, but your take on it could add a twist, but I'm still sticking to how I intrepret it.
Thanks for the enlightening though, good job, There's two side to every story. Chris

By HgTX

Date 03-13-2008 15:18

" at some point all material needs to be checked, which it is."

Except when it isn't, and hence this thread.

Hg

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-13-2008 10:30

Al,

You're exactly right. Good customers have more leverage on an issue like this as compared to the occasional customer. Good observation.

By pax23

Date 05-21-2008 20:17

I wanted to get the current links to the DSA bulletin updates attached to this thread.

This is DSA's 2nd update to their initial bulletin which came out a couple months ago.
http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dsa/bulletins/BU_07-03_UPDATE2_3-7-08.pdf

Pictures for those interested:
http://www.dsa.dgs.ca.gov/labs/hss_pictures.htm