Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / NCR I got for joint prep.
- - By eekpod (****) Date 07-27-2012 18:28
OK, I need to vent a little here and also get your opinions.

We got an NCR written against us by the outside third party inspector, who in my opinion doesn't know what he is talking about.

Actual parts are a 2" XX pipe welded to the side wall of a 6" X pipe at 90 degrees coming off the side.  The 2" pipe is bevelled at 45 degrees for a PGP weld prep to the 6" pipe. Because the 2" pipe is XX I have a landing becasue the depth of bevel calls for only 1/4".  Joint designation on shop drawings is BTC-P4-GF.

When he borrowed my code book and looked up pre-qualified joints in section 3.3/3.4 he says that the code shows "plates" fit up in the illustration, and that becasue we are using pipe it is not pre-qualified.

I tried to explain to him that that is just a drawing of the actual preperation of the end of the material; no matter what type of material it was-W-shape, angle,channel, pipe, plate whatever.  His response was he didn't think so and that it was for plate only and will NCR this condition.

My head almost exploded in my attempt to understand this nonsense.  The code allows all kinds of shapes to be welded with those joint designations.

Am I missing something?
Thanks in advance
Parent - - By pipewelder_1999 (****) Date 07-28-2012 03:16
If you look in the remainder of chapter 3 you will see reference to prequalified tubular connections. In the 2008 you can look in Table 3.6. Sorry I don't know what it is in 2010 code. Haven't made that purchase yet.

Anyway, some pipe joints are prequalified unless it changed in the 2010 code. I'm sure someone with the current code can give you the paragraphs. Anyway, you maay need to discuss it and look through some of the paragraphs in Clause 3. Because the NCR is written, you should be able to answer it using the code.

Gerald Austin
Parent - By S. WINAI (**) Date 07-28-2012 07:06
if i not misunderstand tubular can be pipe,box or plates bend or roll to shape like pipe or box.Figure 3.3 show prequalified PJP Groove welded joint details. u need to check back to section 3.12 PJP Requirements.sub 3.12.4 Details(Tubular).  my opinion no NCR.

WINAI
Parent - By PWCameron (**) Date 08-01-2012 21:50
Maybe I'm a little late to the game...

You're saying the BTC-P4-GF is just the joint dimentions.  I get that.  Do you have a written qualified/prequalified procedure for the welding of the joint?  Do those same shop drawings say something like "All Welding per AWS D1.1"?

I can see a shop drawing that states a joint designation to help clarify joint tolurances, but if that same drawing makes a statement about D1.1 then all clauses of the code must be adheared to.

I don't think we have enough info to help answer your question.

Good lesson here though...
Never loan your exicusioner your gun.
PWC
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 08-03-2012 12:11
Chris...show the 3rd party inspector AWS D1.1:2010 Clause 3.12.4(1) and ask him to explain his position calling the pre-qualified details in Figure 3.3 to be used only with plate material. It spells it out pretty plainly in my opinion that you can write a PJP pre-qualified WPS on tubular materials without qualifying the WPS.
- - By 803056 (*****) Date 07-30-2012 01:17 Edited 07-30-2012 01:20
Hello Eekpod;

Based on D1.1:2010, check clause 2, Design, Part A which covers both nontubular and tubular connections. Clause 2.3.5.4 references clause 3.12 for PJP joints. It in turn references Figure 3.3 which is the prequalified PJP joint details. Also referenced in clause 2.3.5.4 is a reference to clause 3.13 which references Figure 3.4 for CJP joint details. As such, the joint details depicted are applicable for both PJP and CJP nontubular and tubular connections. The rub is defined in Clauses 3.12.4 and 3.13.4.

Clauses 2.3.5.4 seems to be inconsistent with the requirements of clause 3.12.4 which states prequalified joints for T-, Y-, and K- must conform to the details of Figure 3.5. Consider however that the joint geometry changes continuously as one traverse the circumference of the tubular T-, Y-, and K-joint. Figures 3.3 are ill equipped to accommodate the changes required as one works around the circumference unless the joint is a butt joint where the geometry does not change.  Clause 3.12.4 is specifically directed toward the needs of tubular joints of the T-, Y-, and K- type.  Specifically clause 3.12.4 (1) states that the details depicted in Figures 3.3 are not applicable to T-, Y-, or K- type joints, leaving butt joints to use the details shown in Figure 3.3. Further clause 3.12.4(2) directs the reader to Figure 3.5 for T-, Y-, and K- joints in tubular connections. Figure 3.5 states the details are for PJP tubular T-, Y-, and K-joints.   

Clause 3.13.4 addresses the requirements for tubular CJP joints. It states that any butt joint that is welded from one side that use backing or is welded from both sides and is back gouged are prequalified if the detail conforms with Clause 3 (Figure 3.4). CJP butt joints that are made without backing or not back gouged are not prequalified. Prequalified T-Y-and K- joints must conform to Figures 3.6 and 3.6 and Table 3.5. 

It isn't the easiest reading and it should not be done before going to bed unless you are seeking a cure for insomnia.

Best regards – Al
Parent - - By 46.00 (****) Date 07-30-2012 01:35
Hi!

Basically Eekpod, your not conforming to AWS D1.1 and your third party inspector is right!
Parent - - By eekpod (****) Date 08-01-2012 10:25
46.00
Sorry but I disagree.

Everyone, else, thanks for the info.
Parent - - By 46.00 (****) Date 08-01-2012 14:34
OK no problem:grin:
Parent - - By Shane Feder (****) Date 08-02-2012 00:55
eekpod,
You state your drawings list BTC-P4-GF for a PJP Tubular T joint.
This is listed in Figure 3.3.
Is your WPS for this joint pre-qualified ?
If so the joint details must comply with Figure 3.5 (see below)

3.12.4 Details (Tubular). Details for PJP tubular
groove welds that are accorded prequalified status shall
conform to the following provisions:

(2) PJP T-, Y-, and K-tubular connections, welded
only by the SMAW, GMAW, or FCAW process, may be
used without performing the WPS qualification tests,
when they may be applied and shall meet all of the joint
dimension limitations as described in Figure 3.5.
These
details may also be used for GMA W-S qualified in conformance
with 4.13.4.3.

Regards,
Shane
Parent - By eekpod (****) Date 08-02-2012 10:24
PWCameron, I like that saying " don't loan your gun to the exucutioner" very true.

Shane-
Yes my WPS clearly says pre-qualified per D1.1.

Others-
thanks for your input, especially Al, I know that had to take a good amount of time to look up and figure that out.
Parent - - By 46.00 (****) Date 08-02-2012 10:24 Edited 08-02-2012 10:28
I take it, I don't get any thanks?:cry:
You have four people telling you to review your decision and you thank them, but when told outright your wrong, you disagree?
I must be missing something!
Parent - By Shane Feder (****) Date 08-02-2012 10:45
eekpod,
I actually agree with 46.00, it does not comply with AWS D1.1 - whether it warranted an NCR is a different story,
Cheers,
Shane
Parent - - By FarmCode (*) Date 08-03-2012 00:27
He already had somebody tell him he was out of compliance,   remember the NCR

Everybody else attempted to help him see and understand the code..  Which everybody also admitted could be complicated in this case.

Your input increased the dialogue, learning and project by zero.

So he diddn't say thanks, but he diddn't call you a non-helpful jackwagon either.

Guess we can call it a draw.

Nothin wrong with being a straight shooter..  But if you want to be helpful you struck out.

What are you missing?  .... Friends is my bet.
Parent - - By 46.00 (****) Date 08-03-2012 07:18
Yeah, I seem pretty short in that department.........
Parent - By 46.00 (****) Date 08-03-2012 10:07
Guess you are in the same department............It sucks don't it?
But I guess we don't need telling five times we are wrong? Looking at your past posts. I see you have the same problem:grin:
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 08-03-2012 12:15
Al, the geometry may not change as much since he has a 2" T'ing a 6".....If the T was using the same sized pipe, then the geometry really gets more complicated as you prep the joint all the way around to maintain a consistant 45° groove angle.
Parent - - By eekpod (****) Date 08-03-2012 17:58
There is very little change in the geometry in the fit up.

For a bigger picture that I didn't explain very well in my o.p was the fact that the report also says that figure 3.3 was intended for plates only; becasue that's how it is illustrated in the code( his words not mine). The line drawings look like plates as on the printed page(again his words not mine), and he thought ONLY plates were allowed to be bevelled and prepped like fig. 3.3.

When I explained what about a W- shape, where it is bevelled and coped for a CJP weld, that's not a plate but is covered under D1.1.  He didn't have a responce, he just said he wasn't sure.

Apparently I didn't break out the two different but similar issues going on with my situation.  My bad.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 08-03-2012 21:27
The only people that never make mistakes or never loose or break tools are people that never do anything.

Al
Parent - By rodofgod (**) Date 08-04-2012 18:21
Hi All!
Al I wish I had a pound (Dollar) for every time I have stated that!

Regards
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Technical Standards & Publications / NCR I got for joint prep.

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill