Discontinuities beyond the effective throat of PJP welds

By TPrince2011 Date 05-10-2011 18:32

Recently while performing my inspection I ran accross a problem. What I've got is a box column wtih a 4" plate welded to the flanges of a 14X730 column using a BTC-P4-GF joint detail with a 1/2" bevel with a 3/8" weld. The welds were made with a flux core root followed by SAW. When the run-off tabs were removed I started noticing "cracks" or possibly incomplete fusion in the melt through of the weld. My problem is the indications im seeing are beyond my 3/8" weld depth and I can't find any information for this particular situation in my code book. We have done some investigation in to the depth of the indications with the results being a maximum of 1/16" deep. Seeing as how they are beyond my weld depth should we continue removing them? If not, then are the indications detrimental to the weld?? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 05-10-2011 18:52

Hey Tim are you inspecting to D1.1?
If so, Table 6.1 (1) has pretty strong language concerning cracks.
...if it is incomplete fusion, Table 6.1(2) has specific language dealing with that also.
How are you determining the extent of the "indications of concern"? exploratory grinding? followed by MT?

By TPrince2011 Date 05-10-2011 19:26

Yes it is to D1.1. We are currently gouging 2" deep followed by MT, just to alleviate any concerns. There is some speculation, however, as to what exactly the indications are though. The idea is that maybe they're the result of weld tabs not being completly removed. I would just like to know if there is any criteria for indications beyond the effective throat of PJP welds, and if so where i could find it?

By TimGary (****)

Date 05-12-2011 13:42

Looking at Table 6.1 - Visual Acceptance Criteria, in the 2006 D1.1, the first item on the page states "Any crack shall be unacceptable, regardless of size or location". That's pretty clear...
When you consider the logics behind the strict criteria, and see that cracks are not allowed because they grow with each fatigue cycle until they cause complete failure, it's easy to understand the restriction.

Tim

By TPrince2011 Date 05-12-2011 17:13

Thanks for the help everyone.

By Joseph P. Kane (****)

Date 05-13-2011 00:30

Is this at BANKER?