Maybe a someone can explain this to me. I recentley re-qualified for my 3,4G certification, and to my surprise was failed. I have taken this test numerous time with no problem. Upon my arrival I was informed that both plates had tears and was shown the bent specimen. They were not torn but almost broke 1 inch outside of the root on one side of each position. Were the plates were fractured there was not so much as a grinder mark from removing the backing plate. I guess I just got a bad piece of steel. I re-took the test the same way I always do today and am awaiting my results, but what bothers me is it was listed on D.O.T records as a fail. They keep records on all welders and do not like to see failures. Even though this is my first failed test it still concerns me. So my question is, Is there any provisions for the failure of the test material in the inspection process? Or does it all depend on the CWI.
Hello Robert C, if I understand this correctly your test specimens had the breaks outside of the weld groove fill area, in other words the parent material is where the fractures occured and not in the weld metal or at the point where the weld fused to the parent metal. If that is the case I would believe there is a problem with the interpretation of these test results. Generally when this type of problem occurs it is due to incorrect grain orientation of the parent metal used for the test specimens, or possibly an incorrect grade of test material. I do believe you may have some recourse here. Was this a 1" unlimited test according to AWS D1.1 standards? I'll be curious to see what others might have to say with regards to this. Generally when I run into something like this the standards that I am governed by call for additional coupons to be cut and tested and I personally would accept them if I could see that this was a parent material problem. My $.02. Good luck on this Robert I can understand your concern here. aevald
It was unlimited AWS d1.1.
I agree absolutely with what aevald has said. I has this happen top me once as a novice QC... plates were supplied by others... I failed a few welders before we finally figured out what the heck had gone wrong.
The person over the test may need to bend a coupon (from the same run)that hasn't even been welded on to check for laminations or do an ultrasound for the same.
i'm kinda wondering why someone who cannot distinguish parent metal from weld deposit has the ability to mess with your career, if you do get a re test or are able to correct their problem, maybe ask his superiors what kinda testing he went through and ask why he failed and whether this will go on his permanent record.
darren
another welder who does not take his job lightly
By CWI555 
Date 02-04-2007 04:34
Edited 02-04-2007 04:36
It does seem a bit odd that it was failed a full inch outside the weld area. I would think that to be an obvious sign that something else is wrong other than the welder. If this material came from stock I suggest it be looked into before your company manufacture anything with it as well.
If it fractured outside of the weld metal you should be able to retest. This would alarm me that something about the base metal isn't right. As stated it could have been cut against the grain causing it to fail or could have other mill defects. It would seem to me that this would be a circumstance where they could retest you and not document the first failure. Or if the do they should include the results of the investigation into the base metal.
Was the test bent with the correct radius for the grade of material being test on? You may not know the answer to this, but some lower grades of materials are now physically stronger than the nominal strengths should be...therefore the tests could fail due to the improper radius being inadvertantly used. There is a table in D1.1 showing which radius to use for which grade of material.
I agree with a couple of replies.
First, the groove should be perpendicular to the direction of rolling. That's why I cut my test plates from a flat bar that is the width of the test coupon. Then you know the direction of roll is correct. I've had the problem described in the post when clients insist they are going to supply the plates and cut them from a large plate. The direction of roll is more difficult to determine or may not have been checked by the person cutting the coupons.
I also agree with John's comments on checking the diameter of the bending mandrel. It amazes me how many laboratories believe one size mandrel is appropriate for all materials and all thicknesses. It may be true for API, but not for testing performed for the military, ASME, or AWS. I use a wrap-around bending machine of my own design and have about six different mandrels for different materials and thicknesses. If I don't have the proper mandrel for a particular project, it only takes me a short time to maching one of the proper diameter.
I also agree that if the fractures were not in the weld or HAZ, the results should be recorded as a base material failure and should not be considered to be a "welder" failure. I would require a retest, but as a laboratory that supplied the "bad" test coupons, would not charge the welder for the retest. Because the test was for the DOT, the initial test results would be reported, but it would be reported as a base metal failure.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it.
Best regards - Al
robert , e-mail me and i will foward you a page that is very interesting on understanding bend test . good luck . willie
R u able to opt. for x-ray vs. bend?
I'll through my 2 cents in to but I agree with the majority of the posts. It sound like a material problem. I have ran into this several times through the years. Especially on 1" unlimited. About a year and a half ago I was qualifying welders on SMAW 1" unlimited and the first two failed. The failures were far enough outside of the weld and even the haz to make me question the material. I supervised the cutting of the coupons from the plate and the grain direction was correct. It only took about 30 seconds once I put the UT on the plate to see it was laminated. When I looked closer on some of the cuts taken from the plate there was delamination in several places. So needless to say I didn't hold the failures against the welders. I recommended flat bar 1"x8" and didn't have any more problems. I would contest the failure with the CWI and if he is reasonable he will UT the plate and find the problem. I can't say with certianty that material defects was your problem but I would talk to the CWI or your supervisor to investigate. On certian materials the HAZ can affect the steel to the degree of failure 1" from the weld or even further. Under these material circumstances you would have had preheat, interpass and postheat treatment procedures in the WPS. If these were not followed and the failure was linked to this it would be the welders fault. If you followed procedure and still had a failure in or outside the heat affected zone then the material or the procedure if probably at fault. Just my 2 cents.
I once worked for a metal stamping company that specialized in light gage material. We had laminations in material that was only .004" thick. Nothing was visible from either side, but there was a dark colored cold seam where an inclusion got rolled out inside the steel. The parts tore wide open when formed. It is hard to believe that such a problem in this thin material wouldn't show somehow on the surface.
EVERYTIME!!! EVERYTIME YOU ATTEMPT TO TAKE A WELD TEST FOR ANYONE USING A PLATE MATERIAL, INSIST THE THE PLATE BE, AT THE MINIMUM, ULTRASONICALLY TESTED FOR LAMELLAR DEFECTS OR OTHER "STRANGE" AND 'INEXPLICABLE" DISCONTINUTIES PRIOR TO PREPARING PLATES FOR WELD COUPONS. THE UT COSTS LITTLE OR NOTHING IF YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF ACCESS TO AN NDT TECH. EVEN IF NO TECH IS WILLING OR AVALIBLE TO DO THIS FOR YOU; SOME EFFORT MUST BE MADE AND RECORDED OF YOUR REQUEST OF THIS TESTING OF PARENT MATERIAL PRIOR TO TEST. WHILE THE APPLICABLE CODE BOOKS SPEAK IN SMALL VOICES OF THIS AS A REQUIREMENT BEFORE TESTING, LABOR RELATIONS CODES DO SPEAK MUCH LOUDER!! IN A MANNER THAT A PERSON (WELDER) COULD HAVE THEIR RIGHT TO WORK NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME OF PERFORMANCE TESTING (WELD CERTIFICATION) GONE WRONG. I AM CURRENTLY EXPERT WITNESS FOR A GROUP OF WELDERS WHOM WERE DISMISSED FORM THIER JOBS DUE TO FAULTY TESTING MATERIALS PROVIDED FOR CERTIFICATION RENEWAL TESTING SAME SORT OF THING AS HAPPENED TO YOU RESULTED IN THEIR TERMINATION. AS THIS AFFECTED THEIR LIVELIHOOD, SOME BIG SETTLEMENT NUMBERS ($$$$) ARE BEING NOW BEING DISCUSSED. RIGHTFULLY SO!!! THEIR SAVING GRACE WAS THAT A RETIRED LABOR RELATIONS ATTORNEY WAS WILLING TO TAKE THEIR CASE PRO BONO.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, WELDER CERTIFICATION TESTING IS A PERSONAL MEASURE BY WHICH YOU PROVE YOU HAVE THE TALENT AND SKILLS TO PERFORM AT A PARTICULAR LEVEL ON A PASS OR FAIL BASIS. THAT PASSING RESULT IS A VERY VALUABLE ASSET TO YOU AND SHOULD NEVER BE TREATED WITHOUT CONTINUAL DUE CONSIDERATION OF IT'S VALUE. ALL REASONABLE EFFORTS SHOULD BE TAKEN BY THE TESTING PERSONNEL TO INSURE THAT NO "VARIABLE" ENTERS THE TESTING ENVIROMENT WHICH COULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE OUTCOME. WHENEVER I PERFORM WELDER CERTIFICATION TESTING AS THE INSPECTOR, I DAMN SURE UT THOSE PLATES PRIOR TO WELDING! EVEN IF THOSE COUPONS WERE PREPARED BY SOMEONE ELSE.
RECENTLY I HAD A WELDER COME TO ME FOR THE D-1.1 4G 1" UNLIMTED TEST. HE CLAIMED HIS COUPONS WERE CERTIFIED AS HE PURCHASED THEM FOM SOMEONE ON EBAY WHO ALLEDGEDLY OFFERED WELDING CERTIFICATIONS. A QUICK UT SCAN SHOWED HIM THT HIS CERTIFIED COUPONS HAD MULTIPLE LAMINATIONS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO GROOVE FACE. A LITTLE POLISH ACTION ALONG WITH A MACROETCH AND VOILA, THERE THEY ARE!! HE WAS SURE GLAD HE DID NOT SPEND ALL THE TIME TO WELD OUT THE COUPON AND LATTER FIND THIS OUT. NO ID NOT CHARGE ADDITIONALLY FOR THIS PORTION OF THE TEST.
ADDITIONALLY, I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT ANY WELDER ,WHO IS REQUIRED TO TAKE CERTIFICATION TESTS AS A REQUIREMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, SPEND SOME TIME AND SCHOOL THEMSELVES AS TO THE EXACT PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED WHEN PERFORMING WELDER CERTIFICATION TESTING. START TO FINISH, EVERY PART! INCLUDING THE PARTICULARS OF THE EQUIPMENT USED IN THE TESTING. THEN WHEN YOU ARE GETTING READY TO TAKE THE TEST, SPEND A COUPLE OF MOMENTS AND TEST THE INSPECTORSOME TO SEE IF THEY KNOW THEIR STUFF. DON'T WORRY ABOUT OFFENDING THEM! AS A WHOLE, INSPECTORS RATHER LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THEIR TALENT. WHEN I AM INSPECTING FOR A COMPETENT WELDER AND HE/SHE TESTS ME, I FEEL IT IS A COMPLEMENT. SORT OF AN ESTABLISHMENT OF MUTUAL RESPECT. BESIDES WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU HEARD SOME SAY AFTER LOOKING A REALLY GOOD BIT OF WELDING, "NICE INSPECTION JOB!' ...... HOW ABOUT NEVER!! tHE INSPECTOR'S JOB IS NOT IMMEDIATELY APPARENTHERE. THE WELDER HAS THE TOUGH END OF THE WORK FOR SURE, AND AS SUCH HE/SHE DESERVES MY BEST AS AN INSPECTOR ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO CRITICAL TESTING THAT AFFECTS THEIR WALLET. IT DOES NOT TAKE TOO MUCH INSPECTOR SMARTS TO FIGURE OUT THAT INSPECTORS MAKE THEIR MONEY FROM THE WORK OF WELDERS. SOME RESPECT FOR THE WORK OF COMPETENT WELDERS PLEASE!!!
no offence, but if a welder demanded i ut his test plates, after a good laugh i'd ask him to weld it or get out of my shop. thinking to myself this guy is going to be nothing but problems and a waste of my time
I think I would second that Hogan!
I ran across a problem like this about 9 yrs ago. on a job at a power house. We had bought 6" by 1/2" flat bar to test the structural welders, we would just cut them off at 3" to have 3"x6" plates. That was a good idea, but the one doing the test decided to split the flat bar instead. An engineer on site told us what had happened being it was rolled flat bar, when welding the peices that were split, the heat affected zone was running parallel with the grain in the flat bar. That what was causing the plate to break at the edge of the heat affected zone. It must have been the problem because when we stopped using the split flat bar the problem stopped, but not until the tester had already busted 18 welders. Always check where your plates come off of.
I have a mess of 1/4" x5" hot rolled laying around the shop, so I use it for any non critcal job where I can. I can bend a nice sharp 90 Deg. bend in it with the press brake in My ironworker across the grain only. If I try to bend along the grain the material will get splits in the outside of the bend. Grain direction is important. Fortunatly in KAJUN1's case there was teltale mill finished edges [or lack of] to show the problem.
hogan how could that be not taken as offensive, the welder is just doing his or her best to insure that they have all the right conditions to pass the test and after getting burnt by circumstance, inspectors or q.c. people a few times a welder gets pretty interested in limiting the factors that could end up in a bad judgment call.
As for laughing at a perspective employee for doing their due diligence, I think this speaks to the problems that we as welders have with the inspecting process, that being its subjectivity. Hence the concern for making sure that every variable that is able to be controlled is considered, so as to bring about the most accurate test results possible.
Conversely to your statement; if a weld inspector laughed at my concerns they would not have to tell me to get out of "their shop" because I would not work for such a personality type, as from my experience they would be nothing but problems and a waste of my time. Please try to remember that very good welders with a great work ethic are getting fewer and fewer. We also know who and what we are, also lets not forget that the best are very finicky about their work, and thats what makes them the best.
This forum should be used to close the gap between the two sometimes diametrically opposed forces in the industry, people doing the welding and those that are trying to ensure quality. I have found that some inspectors if they cannot find something legit to complain about will start to pick at things that are beyond the controls that are stipulated in a contract, so it seems to make themselves relevant. I myself would like to hear how we can work together on how to produce higher and higher standards of quality and quantity while respecting all the people within the process.
I myself enjoy working with the Q.C. dept. so as to be able to satisfy them as to the quality of the weld , the reason being that the customer has the right to expect the best they can get for their money. When we work together as opposed to the us vs. them mentality we can get jobs out ahead of time under budget and expect to have more contracts from the customer because they received the respect that comes only from a cohesive working dynamic. Its up to all of us to strive for excellence in our respective parts of the job. This also includes excellence in interpersonal skills.
darren
