Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / Applicable Structural Welding Code
- - By 803056 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 12:59
Hello Ladies and Gentlemen;

We have spoken on the subject which welding code is to be applied to a project, i.e., do we use the most recent AWS revision or do we apply some earlier version?

My position has always been that the correct revision to use was the one referenced by the building code that is in effect in your local area. The specific code is dependent on the building code your state or municipality has adopted. In any event, the correct code is not necessarily the most recent code revision published by AWS.

A few inspectors have simply applied the requirements of the most recent AWS welding code, i.e., AWS D1.1,  as soon as the newest revision was released for sale to the public.

In light of the cost of the most recent release of AWS D1.1 (2008), I urge all of you to review what edition of the Structural Welding Code  is required by your building code. The building codes do not typically require the inspector to blindly apply the requirements of the most recent version of AWS D1.1. Likewise, AISC, as referenced by the International Building Code, does not require the use of the most recent version of D1.1. Rarely does the Engineer of Record or the Design Professional require the use of the "most recent edition" of the welding code.

I am not going to purchase a copy of the 2008 Structural Welding Code unless it is mandated by a specific project requirement. The cost of the 2008 revision is $412.00, for a soft cover book that will fall apart after a few uses. Like everything in life, things change with time, I used to purchase the latest revision to make sure I stayed abreast of changes in the code, but guess what! The latest AWS code isn't applicable until your building code adopts it, you are wasting your hard earned cash.

Call this a protest if you will, but $412.00 for a soft cover book that isn't required by the building code or by the EOR is a waste of money. Even the AWS membership discounted price of $309.00 is too much.

Unlike the ASME B&PV codes, there is no requirement to use the 2008 edition of AWS D1.1. My position is, "Let them collect dust."

Best regards - Al
Parent - By Lawrence (*****) Date 06-24-2008 13:10
Right you are Al.

I could not have said that without it sounding like a rant.  Well done.

That much money for a book authored by unpaid volunteers really gives me heartburn!

See;  I'm ranting
Parent - - By CWI555 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 13:24
I agree. Unless a specific contract doc calls out 2008, I'll not be buying one. Given that I've jumped back into the nuclear world, I don't see me buying one at all. The cost of these code books, API, ASME etc included have been getting just plan greed based from what I can see. While the industry changes, it doesn't change as fast as AWS pumps out new code revisions. 02, 04, 06, 08.. THen that book they put out a little while back.. That was the one that did it for me. "secrets of the code revealed", all packaged on the website with matrix style graphics etc. That was over the top. I take exception to any code written in such a manner as to require a book called "secrets of the code revealed". The very name and manner of advertising for that implied a conscience and deliberate muddying of the waters. Then there are the fees for CWI. They are going to keep it up till it gets cheaper to take a plane flight and certify CSWIP. ASNT is headed the same way. More and more money for less and less service. API and others are following suit as well.

They are on the verge of killing their golden goose. What are they going to do when no company wants central certs due to cost, and few if any individuals can afford the cost of central certs and the inherent maintainance thereof?

Between the cost of books and certifications, that golden goose is getting to the point it can't breath. They need to remember the people and the industries they serve are the reason for their existense to begin with. that goose stops laying eggs, no more AWS.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 13:43
A simple statement of the facts is hardly a rant.

The sad part is that those individuals that volunteer their time continually take the position that the cost of the publications they work on should be affordable, but it isn't the committees that set the cost of the publications.

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By sbcmweb (****) Date 06-24-2008 18:02
"They are going to keep it up till it gets cheaper to take a plane flight and certify CSWIP."

Gerald, Just uneducatedly curious, what does CWISP mean? Don't know too much about technical stuff like this. Pretty obvious, huh? :-) S.W.
Parent - - By CWI555 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 18:30
cswip = certification scheme for weld inspection personnel.
Parent - By sbcmweb (****) Date 06-24-2008 19:02
Thanks. I looked it up. Should have to begin with. :-) So this is an equivalent to AWS? I see they're based in the UK. Didn't read a whole lot, but I will say, as with anything else that is a "monopoly" per se, that other firms offering the same services to the same standards without trying to fleece it's members are going to create very serious competition for the current one that's the first & biggest. Look at ebay. They are a monopoly & they know it. A lot of people are getting to be well aware of that & will (AND ALREADY HAVE) eventually leave as other viable internet sites become available. They have already begun to price themselves right out of the market.

Sounds like the same thing here. AWS should realize this. The Big three did much the same 30 years ago when they were the only major source for vehicles in the USA. Poor quality, poor management, as well as higher prices to the end user, passed along to them to cover increases in benefits & wages to their employees put them in a very vulnerable position when Toyota & the other Japanese auto Manufacturers began to come on the scene very strongly in the late '70's. They ate the Big Three alive. Their ignorance has brought them to where they are today, frantically trying to save money & cap benefits & wages. Sounds like the AWS is starting to price themselves right out of the market THEY created. Too bad. S.W.

"We got the beat.." (We Got The Beat, The Go Go's, Beauty and the Beat LP)
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 15:00
Al, the holders of an AISC certification will come under fire if they don't have the current edition in their library during audits...that stinks, because like you and others have stated, many times the latest edition isn't necessary because the contract docs often are written and agreed upon during the bidding of the project when an earlier edition was still in effect.
I agree that the new hike in price is a bit much...I thought when the 2006 came out that the price was waaaay too much, but now they have raised it yet again for the 2008.
Parent - - By jrw159 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 15:12
  IAS is pretty much the same as well. Most of the stuff I deal with calls for current revision. But there are times when it is referanced as AWS D1.1 2006. So to stay on th level with the auditors I must have 2006 for now and when 2008 is released I will need both. :-)

Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 17:27
I wonder why they insist on the most recent edition of AWS. It isn't referenced in the latest AISC Steel Construction Manual and it isn't required by any building code that I am aware of.

I would chalk it up to an other auditor that doesn't know what is required by the building code or the AISC SCM. We see the same thing occur with some inexperienced inspectors.

I haven't sat in on an AISC audit in a couple years, but the last few I did sit in on didn't impress me. The auditors seemed to add a few of their own personal preferences that were not based on code requirements or on the fabricator's QC manual.

One case in point that has always been a sore point with me is the issue of "calibration". The auditors wanted everything to be calibrated, but they couldn't point to anything in the applicable codes or standards that required "everything" to be calibrated. For instance, what purpose does it serve to "calibrate" a set of fillet gages to the nearest 0.001 inch when they come in 1/16th and 1/8th inch increments? Likewise, it makes no sense to "calibrate" a 10, 16, 20, or 25 foot tape used to layout fittings when there is no adjustment involved. The tape is either in good working order or it isn't. In my humble opinion if the markings are worn to the point where they can't be read, the tape should be replaced. I have never seen a case where the tape measure has been permanently stretched to the point where it was not "accurate" enough for the purpose for which it is intended.

Every time I hear, "ISO requires it", I want to puke.  Big deal, I'm not working to ISO and all that does is ensure you will build some widget the same way every time, even if it is wrong, it will be wrong every time. ISO registration is just one more example of another "business buzz word de jour" like TQM, S6, etc. Next year someone will pontificate some other BS business plan and everyone with jump on as if it will save the world. What is needed is a common sense approach to business. Unfortunately, common sense isn't all that common.

Too many auditors that I've encountered don't have the common sense to use a handkerchief to blow their nose on. I heard one auditor make the statement that he told a lab they had to requalify every welder they tested in the last year because a secretary typed "ER705-6" instead of "ER70S-6" on the welder's test reports. I would have run him out of my facility so fast his pants would be smoldering if he told me something like that.  They would've had to use a bearing puller to extract my boot from his butt. Oh well, as long as we buckle under and don't tell the auditors to take a flying leap, we'll be burdened with BS that doesn't improve productivity, but adds to the cost burden of fabrication.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By CWI555 (*****) Date 06-24-2008 18:36
"They would've had to use a bearing puller to extract my boot from his butt"
Parent - - By Richard Cook (**) Date 06-24-2008 20:39
Your contract and building code will dictate the code year to use, that's why I archive later editions to keep on file. But as an AISC Approved Fabricator I am also mandated to have the latest edition in my posession. This is because they do not not know which edition you might have to work to in the future, but they do have provisions that you go by contract and jurisidictional requirements.

You can get the manual at membership price of $294, In our local section, that's what we sell it for to anyone in our area who contacts us. The binding problem was an issue for 2006 but AWS replaced all mine for free when I approached them about it (three of them). The good thing about buying through your local section is the money earned goes to local scholarships. I hope your section provides this opportunity to your organizations.

If any inspector uses the wrong edition take them to task, If they are real inspectors they will see the error of their ways. Most of the time I find they just didn't know and it was easier to use what was in hand.

Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 06-25-2008 14:37
Excellent points.

Best regards - Al
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / Applicable Structural Welding Code

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill