Down Hill Welding

Date 07-25-2008 02:21

It's fast and in general the wall of the pipe being welded is relatively thin (compared to structural applications using shapes and plates) so low heat input (high travel speed) reduces the tendency to burn through the pipe wall.

Best regards - Al

By Sourdough (****)

Date 07-27-2008 21:56

Yessir - SPEED!

When you are contracted to lay a mile of pipe per week, it's all about "git er done"!

A good down hill pass is sufficient to hold x amount of pressure. AND pipelines are most always underground, which eliminates any movement......no low hy needed.

By CWI555

Date 07-28-2008 15:41

Hate to be a stickler here sourdough, but being underground does not preclude the line from "any movement" when the ground it'self moves via siesmic or other vibrations. In some cases, drastic shifts have happened that open up the pipeline. Qaulity is quality, when you sacrifice it at the altar of "get er done" it has a real nasty habit of coming back to haunt in later years.

My opinion for what it's worth,
Gerald

By swsweld (****)

Date 07-29-2008 01:21

The underground preinsulated pipe that I often install are chill water (virtually no movement) and hot or medium temperature water pipes.
The hot/medium temp pipe is designed for thermal expansion. When the boilers are running the temperature will be 240F and expansion loops are placed in long straight runs.

In addition to the ex. loops on almost every elbow(90's and 45's) we put bolster pads so that the pipes will have room to move underground. We put 1-3 layers of the bolster pads sometimes for a 30' distance from the elbow outward. The material is basically foam, similar to the type that you might put on top of your mattress.

If we were to compact the soil around the pipes without the bolster pads the pipes could crack especially if left out on a long straight run.

By Sourdough (****)

Date 07-29-2008 19:13

Gerald,

For what it's worth, My welds are code. We are talking about pressure, not an act of God. By movement I meant that the lines would not ever jump or vibrate from pressure.

Unless of course God Almighty deemed it necessary......................in that situation, my code welds really wouldn't stand a chance.

Who said anything about sacrificing quality, anyway? Just cause I can git er done and make xray welds day in and day out doesn't mean that the welds are inferior to a hand that spends half a day on one weld..........just saying.

By CWI555

Date 07-29-2008 20:55

The hand that spends half a day on a weld is probably screwing it up more than the one that gets 4 in a day, but not as much as the one getting numbers in excess of the physical restraints of travel speed and inherent movement time.

Making "xray" does not always = a good weld. NDE examines for the lack of or the presence of a discontinuity, in regards to radiography, an addition or deletion of a specific volume of metal, or the insertion of non metallics into the weld (slag) or a seperation of or lack of bonding of the material.

In regards to radiography, orientation of any potential flaw is critical to the probability of detection.

Withstanding the limitations of the method, the method is not meant to detect brittleness, low tensile strength, and other metallurgical factors.
A similar material could be melted into the groove and provide a clean radiograph, but it doesn't mean that weld if it can be called a weld is a good one.

I cringe when I hear or read "git er done". I could in fact be taking your usage of it wrong, but the words still cause the same reaction to me. "Git er done", "good enough", "its not the space shuttle", and other words of their ilk speak to me of expedience at the price of quality.

It's not the thousands you put in that hold that matter, it's the one put in that doesn't hold. You may in fact be following the wps, they may in fact be metallurgically sound, it was not the intention to question that, but to comment on the "git er done" statement.

As for acts of God, if your tornado shelter collapses due to poor workmanship of the shelter with you in it, was it an act of God responsible or was it the lack of workmanship when it would have held had it been built right?

Again, I am not saying you do bad work, it was a comment on the git er done statement. Getting it done fast, does not always mean getting it done right.

Regards,
Gerald

By jrw159

Date 07-29-2008 21:18 Edited 07-29-2008 21:25

Gerald,
It is funny you should mention the metallurgical aspect. I do not want to start another heated discussion, but this thread was a prime example of the "git-r-done" attitude you describe.

http://www.aws.org/cgi-bin/mwf/topic_show.pl?pid=79758;hl=

As for Sourdough's comments, While I admire his "git-r-done" attitude, it must always be kept in check by QA/QC when working on code jobs. This is in no means a bash against him, it is just a fact of human nature that when given the room to run, we as humans will run as far and as fast as we see fit. As you have stated, this can at times turn bad in the long run. :-) JMHO

jrw159

EDIT: I do not personnaly know Sourdough insomuch as working around him, but I get the impression that he is the type that will "git-r-done" the right way, without trying to pull the wool over an inspectors eyes. I say this because he is obviously a PROUD welder, and I do not think he would be able to hold his head high and look himself in the mirror knowing that he had to cheat or cut quality corners to "git-r-done" again, JMHO.

By Stephan (***)

Date 07-29-2008 23:08

Gerald,

if you don't mind, your responses are always an enjoyment to read due to their clear, deeply considered and reasonable arguments and structures.

But please let me address this as follows to you, as you are surely one of the most appreciable experts in NDT I had ever the pleasure to "know".

As everything nowadays is based upon the strategy Sourdough has explained - not only the pipelayers do actually stand under the constraint to "git er done", but everyone is looking for means to "git er done yet faster today" as it were "git it done" yesterday.

So in my eyes first of all, Sourdough is absolutely right when he says "My welds are code..." and then refers to X-Ray examination and the "sound" results it yielded.

I for myself can remember quite well the times I have been working as a (proud) pipewelder.

Each time the joints were x-rayed and the results were determined as being "o.k." this fact truly made my day. And at that time - I am honest - it didn't matter to me what kind of "...brittleness, low tensile strength, and other metallurgical factors..." my weld has imposed to the material. At that time a passed X-rayed joint meant simply "Quality" to me, or translated: "Git er done as fast as you can as good as even required or "A good X-Ray = a good weld".

But to be honest as well. As the years passed by and I have tried to find out - at least theoretically - what the coherences are behind matters like "...brittleness, low tensile strength, and other metallurgical factors..." to be recognized partially after the joint has been welded, yes, then I have seen there might be much more to consider than a "simple" X-Ray to evaluate the "quality" of a welded joint. Or to quote Albert Einstein who should have said: "You can only see what you know!"

And here is my problem...

How can you - and I mean you as representing all the approved NDT experts - ever be really sure that the joint you have investigated today may not fail? How can you be really sure, that the material been welded and NDT-examined by you did have the exact "same" composition as the joint two joints before and thus having the "same" mechanical properties to let the joint withstand even all those impacts possible under daily operation?

I mean everything the almighty codes are based on are - from a very special viewpoint - results basing again on nothing less than likelihood.

And - at least in my humble understanding - everything based upon likelihood is based upon arbitrary acts of God.

You know, I had the pleasure to listen to Martin Prager, Chairman of the IIW Commission IX "Pressure vessels, boilers and pipelines" just a few days ago. He held a Keynote Speech where he has dealt with his own occupational history. He said (I hope I can remind correctly): "I am dealing with fatigue since 45 years now. And if I would have known 45 years ago what I know today, believe me, I would have done some things in a different way!".

And there was something he said as well. He said: "As we are slowly getting to understand but have not even yet fully understood how the materials we know since long times react on impacts they are subjected to, we are developing complete new materials of which we have no idea of how they might react only by having the vague hope that these materials would avoid any failure due to future impacts."

45 years is a long time and he hasn't yet reached the target line.

What I want to say is just that I mean to understand both Sourdough's - as he is an experienced and proud welder who is apparently blessed to "git er done" faster than the most of us without sacrificing the "quality" required in even the field he is working in, and your arguments, coming from one of my most appreciated fellows in NDT, who is taking - at least in my interpretation - his responsibility very serious and thus being a true asset for his trade.

I am sure Sourdough's welds are excellent, your NDT examinations are excellent as well, but at the end of the day none of them would help us if the Almighty deemed the material necessary to fail. Or as Sourdough has stated it so fine: "...in that situation, my code welds really wouldn't stand a chance...".

As always my best regards to you,
Stephan

By Sourdough (****)

Date 07-30-2008 00:51

Very well put......very well, indeed!

Git er done, wow. As much complaining as I do about hacks infiltrating my field, you should know, (Gerald), that I appreciate fashion as much as function! Hell I'm wearing boots that are worth every rediculous penny I paid for them. I'm sitting here in the office waiting for folks to contact me on the "crazy" price I quoted them on their derrick rebuild, (that's half done), so I can continue work.

Crazy = you get what you pay for? Yes, I "get er done", because I can. To code, to xray specs, to uv specs, to bend/shear specs, but most importantly to my own specs..............

Last year I built parts on my water-jet for a nuclear reactor. Within .2/1000's of an inch accuracy.

Git er done!

By CWI555

Date 07-30-2008 13:12

I will address the following quoted comments as they apply.

quote 1"Each time the joints were x-rayed and the results were determined as being "o.k." this fact truly made my day. And at that time - I am honest - it didn't matter to me what kind of "...brittleness, low tensile strength, and other metallurgical factors..." my weld has imposed to the material. At that time a passed X-rayed joint meant simply "Quality" to me, or translated: "Git er done as fast as you can as good as even required or "A good X-Ray = a good weld".

quote 2"How can you - and I mean you as representing all the approved NDT experts - ever be really sure that the joint you have investigated today may not fail? How can you be really sure, that the material been welded and NDT-examined by you did have the exact "same" composition as the joint two joints before and thus having the "same" mechanical properties to let the joint withstand even all those impacts possible under daily operation?"

quote 3"As we are slowly getting to understand but have not even yet fully understood how the materials we know since long times react on impacts they are subjected to, we are developing complete new materials of which we have no idea of how they might react only by having the vague hope that these materials would avoid any failure due to future impacts."

I will go with quote 2/3 first.
It is the prime limitation of NDE as a whole, that in the vast majority of cases, metallurgical data cannot usually be gathered by NDE. The inverse argument applies to NDE technicians, as applies to welders. They are restricted to their procedures, assertions one way or another are not allowed usually, and in most cases should not rightfully be allowed. Neither the welder nor the NDE technician examining the weld can know for sure there are no metallurgical impacts. However; what they do know is their procedures. If they are welding to, and examining to written procedures based on the code of record they have performed due diligence. As quoted in 3, no one knows it all, and what we did think we knew is being questioned by modern advances in materials, welding, and NDE. There are advances in NDE for special cases and techniques that can gather some metallurgical data. That my friend is around the corner but not yet refined to what I would class as reliable.

As for quote 1, clean radiograph (RT with an isotope vs x-ray RT with a tube) does not nor will ever = metallurgically sound, nor was it ever intended to.
ALL NDE methods for welds are based on the assumption that the metallurgical factors have been addressed in the PQR and WPS. If the welder follows those documents, there is an assumption of metallurgical quality. With NDE, if the technician follows the written procedures and the weld passes the acceptance criteria, it is assumed that nothing significant was missed. Again an assumption. NDE is a process monitoring tool, as in regards to a weld, the PQR passed (or should have passed) and when the actual work is initiated, the welders are assumed to have been qualified and certified to the relevant standard and or code, and therefore the weld is good. ALL of these assumptions are based on following written documentation. If at any point, that documentation is not followed, (travel speed, heat, filler material, source type, GU, coverage etc) then you really have no idea, nor any basis for assumption of quality as a singular break in the chain weakens all. Not every welder or NDE technician is the same. Some are simply faster than others while still producing a quality product/exam. On the other hand, there are those out there trying to "git er done" who skip several steps of the procedure, and it's to those people I addressed in regards to the comments for that statement. They have absolutely no clue nor anyway to assure due diligence in working to the aforementioned assumptions.
Basing an assumption of a good weld simply by it passing NDE when steps and requirements of the WPS have been overlooked intentionally or unintentionally, does not and will never = a good weld.

If God decided to split the world it would happen, and nothing we can do about it. Contrary to popular corporate propaganda, there are accidences that are no ones fault and simply an act of God. They are rare, but they do occur.

It's not acts of God that are question here. The lines in question are designed for the area in which they are laid. Some areas are siesmically active, or have the potential for being so, neither the welder nor the NDE technician are going to know all the factors that went into the calcs for design. In many cases there are required procedure steps that don't make any sense to either of them as their previous experience with a given part is very similar to current experience, the "git er done" mentality does not take this into account when the "It worked before" mentality comes to play in the effort to "git er done".
Welding a 36" water line in a shop, is not going to have the same engineering analysis as a 36" line of the same material that is meant to carry off Hazzardous chemicals. They are the same materials, but the spec is tighter for welding for the later.

There is getting it done, and giten er done. It's been my personal experience that the git er done crowd makes field engineering decisions to skip, overlook, or ignore steps in the procedure for expediance of getting high production. Those people are the ones that are the problem.

By jrw159

Date 07-30-2008 13:19

Gerald,

"There is getting it done, and giten er done. It's been my personal experience that the git er done crowd makes field engineering decisions to skip, overlook, or ignore steps in the procedure for expediance of getting high production. Those people are the ones that are the problem."

This has been my experiance as well. I admire and respect the worker who is getting it done, but the "git-r-done by cutting corners" guy is a ROMF in my book. :-)

jrw159

By Sourdough (****)

Date 07-30-2008 13:39

Maybe I ought to just spell it different.........gee whiz, man!

By Stephan (***)

Date 07-30-2008 14:55 Edited 07-30-2008 15:11

Gerald,

first off, thanks a lot for your - as usual - fine reply!

As always it's great to talking and discussing with you...

Hmmm, can it be that I am having a problem to distinguish "... 'getting it done', and 'giten er done'..."?^2

May be, yes, may be! I guess this is most likely a foreign member's fate.

Nonetheless, my intention was an entirely different one and please let me try to describe what I mean.

I have my greatest respect for all those ones in the field who are able to get their job done day by day, according to the codes, standards, PQR's, WPS's,..., and last but by no means the least under the pressure to work faster day by day, eventually fearing that the "global market competition" might reach him as well by the job he is doing right now might be accomplished by somebody else and somewhere else in this world.

And of course, I have the greatest confidence in all those fellows who are giving their best at this. Sourdough is even one of them.

So I would say, we are close in judging what has to be performed for that a "git er done weld" is likewise a "good weld". Sourdough has expressed this fine by having said: "... most importantly to my own specs..." and hereby he has fairly distinguished himself from all those who were summed by you as you said: "... there are those out there trying to "git er done" who skip several steps of the procedure...".

He has proved hereby the most crucial point in welding. He himself must very first of all believe in, and be convinced of the quality he's performing day by day and this quality he has to achieve "fast" to remain competetively or to say it in other words, "git er done" or "getting the job done". This is - from my humble standpoint - the Alpha and the Omega at all. Welding - in particular manually welding - is finally a question of confidence! As long as this basis is established everything else is nothing more than "dotting the i's and crossing the t's" (to quote js55).

That was the reason for me to say: "Each time the joints were x-rayed and the results were determined as being "o.k." this fact truly made my day." What else should I have believed in at that time if not in the "o.k.-results" been presented to me by the NDT-fellow (can remember him very well since he had a huge tooth gap) who did the X-Ray examination. On what, I ask you, may a welder working according to the codes may trust in, if not even in these facts being an indicator for the quality of his work - in this case the X-Ray results?

But my actual intention was - besides the wish to talk to you all - to express my "confusion" about some very present statements and investigations coming from the NDE or NDT field.

And this confusion has not dissappeared yet, although you have worked out a brilliant response.

You know, I am simply asking myself "What are the present NDE/NDT insights really worth, when nowadays some of the most excellent and outstanding researchers are asking the question: «What actually is metal ductility?» in the course of discussing the question whether it is reasonable to "overmatching" welding joints?"

I am asking myself, who - if not even the Almighty - does really know to interprete correctly what a very peculiar result of an NDT-examination really means? Everything is based upon experiences and these again are based upon "probabilities" collected over generations and generations of technologists, researchers, experts, welders. The extracts again are the codes which are very often nothing more than a compromise between different groups of interest. I honestly know that, since I am involved in some technical working groups, and there is truly no offense intended in this statement.

So what resides is the hope that nothing will happen under operation (with nuclear power plants, aircrafts, pipelines, pressure vessels,...) by having the hope to have given the best when preparing the "right" measures within the "right" code by having considered long enough and hereby hopefully decided the "right" means to say finally: "Yes, this is 'quality'."

I truly know that this is becoming a more "philosophical" subject and most likely the most of you will not follow me on this path and may say "Huuh, look at this crazy German, has he also seen Obama in Berlin?" :-) but however, we are working in the field of welding and - at least for me - there is so much unclarified by now that it's getting me scared...

Or has anyone of you already seen an "electron"?

However, I guess, we are speaking the same language Gerald, even though I have to admit to apparently having problems with the translation of some very peculiar terms as e.g. "git er done" or get it done". :-)

Best regards,
Stephan

P.S. Excellent thread!

Edit: Had forgotten an "s"...

By CWI555

Date 07-30-2008 15:19

"Huuh, look at this crazy German, has he also seen Obama in Berlin?" LOL

By jeff parker (**)

Date 07-31-2008 02:44

omg Im glad I dont say get r done I would never hear the end of it LOL

By DaveBoyer (*****)

Date 07-31-2008 04:45

Stephan, 10 years ago there might not have been much difference between "Get It Done" and "Git Er Dun", but in that time a comedian "Larry the Cable Guy" has adopted the phrase "Git Er Dun". He portrays a regular simpleton good 'ol boy. He toured with Jeff Foxworthy ["You could be a rednick if..."] and was on Blue Collar TV". So for the next decade or two "Git Er Dun" will be associated with the character Cable Guy portrays, and the approach We expect a guy like that would use.

I don't know where to find it, but perhaps somebody could post a link to some of this guy's material so You would understand the difference.

By Stephan (***)

Date 07-31-2008 14:59

Dave,

as usual I have to send you a great "Cheers!" for taking your precious time to pointing me once again in the right direction!

Hereby as well a big "Thanks!" to John the "Diamond King" Wright!! :-):-):-)

I have enjoyed the Cable Guy + Jeff Foxworthy*... I swear!

And once again I must see I have to learn a lot, but by having you great fellas aside it's a piece of cake to look behind the curtain covering all these fine fine "peculiarities"! :-)

O.k. ... git er done** :-)

My best regards to all of you and thanks again,
Stephan

* As far as I could understand their excellent brooooad American English! ;-)
** Believe me I am really one of a million of true fans of the United States of America! :-)

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 07-31-2008 10:49

Stephan, regarding Dave's mention of Git-R-Done....you have a PM

By tnhnt

Date 08-05-2008 03:31

Maybe Larry The Cable Guy should have patend that fraze!!!

By ritz

Date 08-12-2008 06:31

To all

I want to thank all of you for being cooperative and helpful for the needy.
My short question give long discussions and exchanging of opinions and ideas, whoaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!! Amazing!!

This remind me of Enstein Quotation, as I quoted, "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them".

I believed most of discoveries today could be credited to Welding, how could you imagine, a large volume of metals go on outer space, a large volume of steel can travel on the sea, sank or float etc.etc.etcccccc this is because of welding technology today we inherited to those previous scientist.

May our discussions continue, providing us more, knowledge in any standpoints of welding technology!

By Tommyjoking (****)

Date 08-15-2008 14:09

FABULOUS!!!!!!
ALL You guys make for one great read! And yes I mean you too SD! I got to throw in if you folks don't mind.

NDT/NDE has its limitations and they are well known. ANYTHING we are doing as a welder, inspector or engineer doing the course of our work is going to be done via a set of guidelines by some authority or reference. Why .....because someone has done our homework for us and given us a best case scenario of rules to work with given what tools, time, and money we have to accomplish it. There will be compromises inherent in these rules, in order too (wait for it folks)............Git R Done. Time, money, technology, resources of whatever type will NEVER be unlimited on what we are doing....and thank goodness because it might take 20 people and 10 years for me to get a 20" pipe joint welded up!! But sometimes these rules WILL fail us and it will not work....during those instances the best we can hope for is learning why and applying it to future work.

I appreciate SD's comments because all he is referring to is the fact that he does not waste time. He does what his customers are asking for in the most expedient manner he can....therefore he is getting all the work he can stand at his price, and his customers are getting what they asked for. If you do any job and are meeting the criteria imposed upon it, its not wrong to be faster or more efficient. If you are skimping on preheat/interpass requirements or anything else for that matter you are cheating the system and you have no character or worth. Some people have "work ethic" and "character" and some don't. The flip side of GIT R DONE is the idiots that just want to worry about time alone no matter what the consequences.....its a false path the leads to a silent phone that never rings (or maybe litigation).

Bottom line for the business and all the people involved is: do it like you were hired to do it the best you can. The most efficient win in the end.

My little $.02
Tommy

By Sourdough (****)

Date 08-15-2008 17:09

You got it Tommy. My standards are above par, so I really don't have many worries about any failures or complaints other than the price, (it is what it is).

I'm big on pre and post heat, unless we have a record breaking heat wave like we did here on the western slope this summer. So that is never a problem.

As far as running down hill: to me that is more or less a pipe application where you are dealing with pressure, not load. On structural applications, I never ever run anything down hill unless the process allows for running wire.

On other pipe welds where there is a potential for enormous pressure, * blow out prevention on rigs*, I have been known to run root with 5p, and a hot/fill with 70+ and then fill and cap the rest with lh.

P.S. I'm proud to say that I only had 3 minor repairs on this derrick rebuild. I had to spend 10 minutes with a flapper disk smoothing out surface porosity on 3 restarts. It was only on the surface because I make sure and scratch at least a quarter inch back on my stop.