Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / Notch and Gouge Questions
- - By FabsForLife (*) Date 10-26-2011 16:28
Quick Notch/gouge question. D1.1 Clause 5.15.4.4 also Spec. for structural steel buildings chapter M are only commenting on thermal cut sufaces as far as repair requirements go. Correct? or can/should this be applied to all notch/gouge situations?

Situation: Temporary braces tacked to a beam flange after removal left a 1/16" deep x 1/16" long what I would call "nick" in the base metal. A TPI insisted it be removed by grinding.

Would this really be necessesary.
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 10-26-2011 16:40
My welders know to fill those spots in and grind it back smooth....but to answer your question, I would call it underfill or undercut because it was left due to a welding process....rather than an edge that was thermally cut(torch).

My experience with TPIs have been to just fix it because the TPI has requested it and thank him for pointing that out to you. IOW, It's easier to fix than trying to justify leaving it "as is"....and the TPI gets the feeling that you are trying to run a quality oriented shop vs trying to get something past him. <---(unless it is something really unreasonable that he's asking)
Parent - - By FabsForLife (*) Date 10-26-2011 17:18
I agree with the undercut consideration. In this particular situation it was a grinding wheel that left the mark. I also agree finding it eaiser to fix and thank rather than argue. But i was just wondering if these codes I referenced apply to this senerio if not what would? With all the economic penny pinching my shop forman needs actual code violations to repair/touch up what he believes is cosmetic rather than structural. I agree to a certain degree but I want to do whats right. Thanks for the reply.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 10-26-2011 17:33
There is a certain degree of workmanship that is expected by the customer. Since the TPI represents the customer, reasonable requests should be honored. When it reaches a point where the TPI is being unreasonable, and then request a code reference. That being said, remember the adage, "He who holds the gold makes the rules."

Any business that expects to stay in business must meet customer expectation. Every company must depend on their reputation even when bidding public sector projects. Any company that earns the reputation of being difficult to work with or provides marginal workmanship will suffer the financial consequences eventually. Today's economy has weeded out a lot of the marginal performers. Darwin’s theory that the top performers survive appears to apply in the business world as well as in the animal kingdom.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 10-26-2011 17:37
If these places are adding up and the cost (man hours) is piling up...maybe take the offending welders/fitters to the side and ask them to be very careful not to stand the grinder on edge and leave those areas and explain that the TPI is asking you to fix them. Talk it up as saving the company money if we take an extra minute to grind correctly and not produce these marks that will need fixing.
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 10-26-2011 17:42
I bet the cost "in time" of you and your shop forman doing research and making a determination of the TPI's righteousness on his call, came to a far greater cost than if you had just sent a man out to comply with the request...

Just sayin   :)

Economic penny pinching is good business... But needs to be viewed from all angles  :)
Parent - - By FabsForLife (*) Date 10-26-2011 17:56
the issue at hand did get repaired as per the request but now I'm struggling with trying to maintaining the same quality with out hard core codes to reference, now that the tpi is no longer on site. I personally believe the referenced codes should apply to all notches/gouges no matter the cause just from a quality and integrity stand point alone.
Parent - By Richard Cook (**) Date 10-27-2011 19:11
This is an ongoing issue throughout our industry. For us, we like to seperate repair from "restore", with fabrication you will not get away from certain conditions using fit up aids and other practices. I loosely apply ASTM A6 to restore base metal conditions from fabrication. AWS D1.1 does not touch on such conditions except for Clause 5.26.3 where Eng. Approval is required for repaired base metal. I think this is all to inclusive a statement made, and the intent was for major repairs. AWS D1.5 actually gives "major and minor" consideration and requires a repair procedure be provided with the standard submittals for the minor. AISC recognizes for erection that "moderate means of reaming, grinding and welding" to make corrections is normal to the process. This subject is left to the whims of those with final authority.
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / Notch and Gouge Questions

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill