Test piece thickness for side bends.

By Bill M

Date 06-17-2008 18:34

D1.1 see fig 4.13
The side bend test coupon should be 3/8" thick x 1/2" (the pipe wall thickness) tall

By Kix

Date 06-17-2008 20:19 Edited 06-17-2008 20:24

Wouldn't that be 1/2" thick (pipe thickness) X 3/8" wide... I'm assuming that from this dudes other threads that he is still working to D1.2 (Structural aluminum) and yes you can machine the straps down to .125 thick for root and face bends or you can do the pipe thickness (1/2" (pipe thickness) x 3/8" wide) side bend specimens.

By 803056

Date 06-18-2008 01:34

Clarification; If the material is carbon steel (because the post is under D1.1) there is no need to machine anything down to 1/8 inch. The side bends would be 1/2 (thick) X 3/8 inch wide, with the 3/8 inch being the thickness subjected to the bend. If face and root bends are performed (again, assuming the material is carbon steel) the face bend would be reduced to 3/8 inch thick by removing material from the root surface and the root bend would be reduced to 3/8 inch by removing material from the face surface.

If the material is aluminum, and M23 base metal or F23 filler metal is used, the face and root bends would be reduced to 1/8 inch thick in a manner similar to the carbon steel (just more material is removed).

Kix isn't wrong, I just thought the explanation could be more explicit.

Best regards - Al

By Kix

Date 06-18-2008 12:44 Edited 06-19-2008 12:07

Al, you say the post is under D1.1, but the forum just says D1. So can't you post questions about all the D1 codes in here. I assumed he was asking about D1.2 because he has been asking D1.2 questions about 6G pipe in other threads and when he said the lab sent back 1/8" thick specimens that used to be 1/2" pipe that sounded like D1.2. Hopefully he'll come back in here and hook us up with some more details.;-)

By 803056

Date 06-18-2008 20:19

Again, you are correct and I stubbed my fat toe and now it's in my mouth. The "o'l foot in mouth" problem I have with some degree of regularity.

You've been putting in more time on the forum than I have lately, so you are most likely correct with your assessment.

At least the lab knew enough to machine the samples down to 1/8 inch. I'm shooting from the hip because I'm still on the road so I can't refer back to the appropriate code. That's always a dangerous move on my part.

From experience I know that too many labs use one standard bending fixture for everything regardless of the thickness or the base metal or filler metal used. I've had to reject more than one PQR because the wrong diameter bend mandrel was used. Once the PQR collapses, so does the WPS and sometimes even the welder performance tests.

Best regards - Al