Weld overlay position

Date 11-02-2009 16:58

Mikeqc1
position on a over lay?
Is this what AWS A3.0 gives for a nonstandard term for surfacing?
I am sorry I am not familiar with the term over lay.
But to me it would stand to reason that the PQR would be developed to accommodate all Weld positions that you might have to deal with, including the progressions for vertical position.

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 11-02-2009 17:55

i will repost with more info................................i see the Paper work has the pos as 1G-flat.
Any speculation or insight to overlays would be welcomed.
MDK

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-02-2009 20:35

Drum Roll................. And the correct answer is??? "1" for position since it is after all, the weld is NOT being deposited into a "G"roove - CAPECHE???
That's my take on it and I'm sticking to it LOL!!! :) :) :)

Respectfully,
Henry

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 11-02-2009 23:22

oh i do......
Its not my document, but i did happen to look it over.
when i had seen 1G i wondered if they knew somthing i didnt.

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 11-06-2009 15:19

hAS ANY1 WRITTEN A OVERLAY PQR, IM STILL NOT CLEAR ON POSITION

By waccobird (****)

Date 11-06-2009 16:07 Edited 11-06-2009 16:10

Again I ask is this surfacing, Cladding, Hardfacing, building up, buttering.
The applying of material to a surface to obtain desired properties or dimensions, as opposed to making a Joint.
As Henry stated the overlay as I have mentioned has no Joint configuration and the position is what ever the position the piece is in. According to you the paperwork (WPS?) said flat.
I am so confused, so I hope this helps more than hurts.
Marshall

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 11-06-2009 16:51

its a Stellite hardface
the WPS has 1g flat......

From what i heard the prowrite program inserts 1g-flat.

By waccobird (****)

Date 11-06-2009 17:00

Mikeqc1, flat is the position of the paperwok

By MBSims

Date 11-06-2009 17:22

If you look at the variables in ASME IX QW-250 for the various processes, they refer to QW-405.4 as an essential variable for positions for hard-facing overlay and corrosion-resistant overlay. QW-405.4 treats the positions as groove weld positions, referring to 3G, 5G, 6G, etc. So for qualification of overlays in the flat position on plate, I would call them "1G".

By 803056

Date 11-06-2009 17:40

I don't believe too many people with a basic knowleddge of welding would find fault with listing the position as 1G. Even 1F would be technically "not wrong". The position is relative to the axis of the throat of the weld or through the shortest failure path (since the term throat is usually reserved for use with the fillet weld).

I would personally list the position simply as "flat", "horizontal", "vertical", or "overhead" on the WPS using the throat or shortest failure path through the weld as my reference. I would not include a reference to the letters "F" or "G".

I would not reject the WPS because it did list the position as "1G", "2G", etc.

Best regards - Al

By Mikeqc1 (****)

Date 11-06-2009 18:00 Edited 11-06-2009 18:21

Thanks to all
Im reading the requirments now.
MDK

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-06-2009 18:00 Edited 11-06-2009 18:03

Fascinating to say the least!!!

Okay, I'll accept that, but is it an ASME governed PQR that the OP is referring to??? Not to argue with you Marty, and I understand how a computer program can rationalize it as being a 1G position with it being deposited as flat, but how can anyone who has been around welding who sits on a code committee (I'm not referring to you personally) for enough time to be able to distinguish the difference between a weld being deposited into a "G"roove ,whether it be a square, single bevel, "Vee", "J", "U", or even a flare groove, and weld being deposited on a FLAT surface with no groove whatsoever, call, or designate it as a "G"roove weld deposit??? I mean, there is really no logic behind designating it as a "1G" because of the obvious fact that the weld is not being deposited into a any type of grooved joint, or any type of joint for that matter - at all! ;)

This one is most definitely classified as a straight up FUBAR!!! :) :) :) I wonder how the AWS "D" number codes designate an overlay that is being deposited on a flat surface with no groove whatsoever as??? ;) It should be an interesting answer to say the least especially if they can come up with enough of a convincing reason as to why such an overlay can be designated as a groove weld deposit when there is no groove on the surface for the weld to coalesce into!!! Unless it's strictly an ASME response only which would then make sense if it's coming exclusively from them as they consistently remind us of their acronym's alternate definition!!! :) :) :) Hmmmmm..... Somebody really did FUBAR IMHO!!! ;) :) :)

Respectfully,
Henry

By MBSims

Date 11-08-2009 12:44

I don't know the history, but I believe most would have looked at the orientation of the weld face and recognized it is oriented the same for cladding or overlay as it is for groove welds. Since they are the same, the use of the groove weld test position designators would have provided a way to address cladding test positions without adding a separate system to the code. Adding a new set of test position designators would add more requirements to an already complex code. That's my theory anyway on why it never changed.

But I looked through AWS A3.0 Terms and Definitions standard and noticed they do not address cladding or overlay test positions. Then I checked AWS B2.1-2005 and found that they have added cladding "C" test positions, but all they did was take the groove weld test positions figure and add the "C" positions to the existing "G" positions. They also added the following paragraph:

Positions for surfacing applications are defined as 1C = Flat, 2C = Horizontal, 3C = Vertical, 4C = Overhead, 5C = Circumferential pipe horizontal position, 6C = Circumferential pipe joint with pipe inclined 45 deg.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-08-2009 23:18 Edited 11-08-2009 23:33

Hi Marty!

Okay! Now that has a logical explanation to it!!! ;) I didn't have B2.1 2005 available, but I also looked at AWS A3.0 and noticed what you wrote that it didn't address overlay or cladding test positions either... Well then, according to the last paragraph you mentioned, they're at the very least suggesting that the letter "C" be used for surfacing applications together with the designated position numbers preceding the letter "C"...

Well thank you for clarifying that with an explanation that is backed by written evidence when put together in it's overall context and constitutes a valid "interpretation"!!!

Are you reading this Al? ;) Once again, thanks Marty!!! :) ;) :)

Respectfully,
Henry