Wildturkey,
I can only relate what I’ve encountered and experienced in my locale while representing one specific company.
Any time an Owner enacts paragraph 6.1.2.2 (specifically the last sentence) of the D1.1-98, they’re asking for it! Instead, they need to understand what 6.1.3.2 is telling them and be proactive and diligent enough to do the whole job. In addition, most Owners don’t understand either quality control or quality assurance concepts let alone, who is responsibly for what! This is the first thing I would recommend explaining to an Owner while giving commonsensical reasons and examples along with it.
It’s been my experience that Owners don’t often grasp the concept that the QC process needs to leave the fab shop with the steel and become an integral part of the erection process at the site. Time and time again I find where the Contractor has bs’d the Owner into believing he’s in good hands and the old “trust me” venue takes center stage. I’ve had Owners actually swear that the steel erector/company is so good that they never have any re-work at an erection site, therefore no need for them to do any inspection! Apparently, these same project people never seem to wonder why the erection crew has 4-6 welding machines cables strung out as well as their cutting rigs?
Being of a somewhat pessimistic nature with this subject, here’s my condensed view-
1. Engineers may write a comprehensive specification initially but tend to waffle considerably with most nonconformances during erection. It’s easy for them and certainly cheaper for the Erector to declare them “deviations” and move on.
2. Neither the Owner nor Contractor/Erector have an understanding of QC or QA principles, let alone Sec. 6, specifically the Erector, who usually has even less then the others.
3. Most Owners don’t comprehend the difference between the fab shop’s work process and the erection crew’s.
4. If you’re lucky to have one onsite, walk up to Erector’s QC designee (see 6.1.4.1[3]) and ask to see his copy of the D1.1 or his AISC manual. You’ll usually get either a blank look or a disgusted one. They all have the drawings but never have the spec documents available. Section 6 you say, what’s that!
5. The presence of an Owners QA (Verification Inspector) at the erection site has proven to help ensure not only the minimum requirements of the specs were met but that the Contractor/Erector’s responsibilities are met as well.
6. Regardless of whether it’s steel erection, piping installation, or some pressure vessel/tank field erectors, many Contractors that tout having a great QC process in their fab shops, hedge at applying the same process in the field.
WildT,
Check out the last post about the CWI in the certification board.
I did not respond because most inspection personnel with any integrity encounter this problem regularly. I myself quit my first job as a CWI because the fabricator I was working for wanted to "spin" the 6GR's so that any discontinuities would not be in the test coupon area. I rejected these regardless of the location of the IJP. I promptly pushed my toolbox out the door whem they wanted to "discuss" the visual results. They found someone who was not as "tough" as I was. I was following the provisions of the code.
I also have lost a number of clients in the field for the same reason. I've had my drawings tossed into the trash, tools walk off (from inside my office toolbox), clothing burned (not by accident), access to the work was denied, etc. You have to determine what the best course of action is on a case by case basis.
Most of my clients (about 90% of them) now use my services where there has already been an inspector(s). The guys who buy off anything for a check make my business thrive. I welcome more of these types of inspectors, there are lot's of them out there. This includes many of the "big" labs as well. I get many of their hand-me-downs. I don't mind taking care of business others could or would not. Many engineering firms use me just for this reason.
All you have to do to be a good inspector is just do your job, follow the rules of the codes, and be honest. That's it.
I am glad to see that other CWI's have seen the same thing but I'm not happy that it is going on. South Carolina adopted the 2000 IBC in July 2001 but it is not even coming close to being followed. I have put together presentations for engineers informing them a little about D1.1. I think a lot of it is just ignorance on the engineers part. I have had to explain to some engineers what low-hydrogen electrodes are and why it is important to properly store them. Maybe I need to inform the county inspectors what all is involved with AWS D1.1 and IBC 2000.
WildT,
What code was in place prior to the adoption of the 2000 IBC, the 1997 UBC? These are for the most part the same as far as sections 17 and 22 go. I imagine there would be a transition period if the 97 was not in place previously.
With respects to the engineering crowd, it is important to note they are just that, structural or civil engineers. They do not have the training or experience you have with welding. I've given seminars to the local engineering associations, the subject of welding puts most of these people to sleep. But not all of them, many are interested and rely on experts like yourself to guide them along with welding related problems or questions. Additionally they are not as familiar with the sections of the D1.1 that we use on a daily basis either, and vice versa.
You'll just have to learn to deal with the system, it's not perfect, but it is one of the best. I've worked projects all over the US and the world, while our system does have it's flaws, we actually have it pretty good here. Inform the engineers you interface with more about the welding codes, I'm sure they appreciate the input.
DGXL,
South Carolina was under SBCCI (Southern Building Code) until July 2001. Since they have adopted the 2000 IBC they chose to omit Section 1704 (Special Inspections). The county inspector said it would have caused too much money to build the buildings to these standards. Section 1704 would have solved many of the problems I encounter. I am not talking about the small stuff. When i go out to a school for the first time and 80% of the steel is erected, over half of the welds are unaceptable, the erector has no qualifications for the welders, E7018 rods are not properly stored, no WPS, they do not even know what one is, something needs to be changed.
WildT,
Something has changed. As of 1-1-02, BOCA, SBCCI and ICBO have become one, the International Code Council or ICC. ICBO will be the lead organization and the other two are supposed to model their special inspection programs after ICBO's which is more stringent than the other two. There will be a one year transition period for the ICC. Next January, I think it will be a rude awakening for anyone who have previously contructed in these areas, the omitted sections of the code will be omitted no longer.
I would like to reprint your posts on this subject and present it to the committees that I participate in and ICBO ES as well. You have addressed some very valid issues with your post. Don't give up, change is always slow.
DGXL,
yes you are more than welcome to use any of these posts. And if I can help in anyway please let me know
Forum
