D1.1 Par 4.12.4.1- "Prequalified Status"

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-23-2008 14:34

I am having some interpretation difficulties with this.

If I have a prequalified WPS for welding TKY connection CJP from on side without backing using joint tolerances as allowed by table 3.6 . And change some other variable unrelated to joint design (progression for instance) and perform a PQR using figure 4.27 or 4.28 and test the PQR with side bends, RT and tensiles do the conditions of "4.12.4.1" indicate the need to do macros even though NO joint designs have changed ? By the way I read it, it does but I may be missing something. That seems like a great deal of testing for changing progression or base metal/filler metal comb or using non-low hydrogen etc. Especiallly when GMAW-S can be tested using the abovge conditions and not require macros.

4.12.4.1 WPSs without Prequalified Status. For a
WPS whose essential variables are outside the prequalified
range, qualification for CJP tubular groove welds
shall require the following:

I think wording like WPS's fo joint designs without prequalified status is what has always been in my mid when I read it however that is NOT what it says.

I guess as I am getting older my ability to interpret these things is failing. I sure to like that ASME code . It seems much easier for the "Logic challenged".

For instance in D1.1 it says

2.17.1 One-Sided Groove Welds. Groove welds, made
from one side only without backing or made with backing,
other than steel, that has not been qualified in conformance
with Section 4 shall be prohibited except that
these prohibitions for groove welds made from one side
shall not apply to the following:
(1) Secondary or nonstress carrying members.
(2) Corner joints parallel to the direction of calculated
stress between components of built-up members

Yet
2.23.2.2 Prequalified CJP Groove Weld Details
Welded from One Side without Backing in T-, Y-, and
K-Connections. See 3.13.4 for the detail options. If
fatigue behavior improvement is required, the details selected
shall be based on the profile requirements of
2.20.6.6 and Table 2.7.

Thanks for the guidance.

Gerald Austin

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-25-2008 16:22

Yall don't have me set to "ignore posts" do you ?

By ctacker (****)

Date 08-25-2008 16:34

I kinda wonder the same thing sometimes.
at least I dont :)

By jrw159

Date 08-25-2008 20:06

FWIW I don't. LOL

I always find your posts informative to say the least. :-)

jrw159

By swsweld (****)

Date 08-26-2008 02:13

You are not set on "ignore posts"
"But for me to answer that question with any specificity, is well, above my pay grade." BHO Saddleback Church :)

By hogan

Date 08-25-2008 18:04

pipewelder,

2.17.1 One-Sided Groove Welds. Groove welds, made
from one side only without backing or made with backing,
other than steel, that has not been qualified in conformance
with Section 4 shall be prohibited except that
these prohibitions for groove welds made from one side
shall not apply to the following:
(1) Secondary or nonstress carrying members.
(2) Corner joints parallel to the direction of calculated
stress between components of built-up members

this is for nontubular

2.23.2.2 Prequalified CJP Groove Weld Details
Welded from One Side without Backing in T-, Y-, and
K-Connections. See 3.13.4 for the detail options. If
fatigue behavior improvement is required, the details selected
shall be based on the profile requirements of
2.20.6.6 and Table 2.7.

this is for tubular

And I also read it as requiring macros

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-25-2008 18:12

Yup. I realize that now. I was in that numbered sub-paragraph mode and reading through the code as a .PDF (Pages turn much faster) and never thought about part C and part D.

That clears that one up.

Any idea on the other so I can slap myself on the other side of my head !

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-25-2008 18:19

A condensed version of my question is this.

If I have to change a variable on a WPS that causes it to NOT be prequalified such as progression. And am using prequaliifed CJP welded from one side joints as allowed by Figure 3.8 or 3.9 I have to test the PQR. When I test the PQR do I have to perform ANY macros.

By ctacker (****)

Date 08-25-2008 18:34

I would have to say yes, but you're more an expert than myself!

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-25-2008 18:52

Thats kinda the way I read it too. That just seems like alot since the tests (macros) are all related to joint designs and the text for the paragraph heading says "4.12.4.1 WPSs without Prequalified Status. " However it also seems odd that in t he chapter that entirely applies to WPS's without prequalified status, the need was there to qualify that paragraph with the heading "...without prequalified status" is a bit much.

I am looking for something to convince me otherwise. Table 4.2 has no notes under it referring to TKYs except for See Table 4.1 for the groove details required for qualification of tubular butt and T-, Y-, K-connection joints.

and then Table 4.1 has these notes which seems to relieve the requirement for the macros. But the text in the paragraph seems to conflict.

(e) For production joints of CJP T-, Y-, and K-connections that conform to either Figure 3.8, 3.9, or 3.10 and Table 3.6, use Figure 4.27 detail for testing. For other production joints, see 4.12.4.1.
(f) For production joints of CJP T-, Y-, and K-connections that conform to Figure 3.6, and Table 3.6, use Figures 4.27 and 4.29 detail for testing, or, alternatively, test the Figure 4.27 joint and cut macroetch
specimens from the corner locations shown in Figure 4.29. For other production joints, see 4.12.4.1.

By ctacker (****)

Date 08-25-2008 19:08

I seen the same thing(about the joint configs and macro's) but changing the weld progression would also effect penetration,would it not?

btw, go ahead and slap the other side to even out the pain. :)

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-25-2008 20:17

The progression could affect penetration as could amperage. But if the downhill progression checked out OK on the bends/tensiles then why bother with the macros if the joint designs are all "standard".

By hogan

Date 08-25-2008 20:24

have you looked over the comentary on 4.12.4 ?

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-25-2008 21:00

I did. I also read others

Here is one statement

From Commentary on Para 4.12. it says

Under carefully described
conditions (see Figures 3.6 and Figures 3.8-3.10), the
code allows CJP groove welds in tubular T-, Y-, and Kconnections
to be made from one side without backing.

Where groove details in T-, Y-, and K-connections
differ from the prequalified details of 3.13.4, or there is
some question as to the suitability of the joint details for
WPS, then a mock-up or sample joint in conformance
with 4.12.4.1 is required, in order to validate the WPS.

Additional WPS qualification tests may be required
on account of some essential variable other than joint

design. These circumstances include (but are not limited
to) the following:
(a) The use of a process outside the prequalified
range (e.g., GMAW-S).
(b) The use of base metal or welding materials
outside the prequalified range (e.g., the use of proprietary
steels or a nonlow hydrogen root pass on thick material).
(c) The use of welding conditions outside the
prequalified range (e.g., amps, volts, preheat, speed, and
direction of travel).

The statements seems to reinforce the fact that testing(macro) is required.