Horizontal CJP??

Date 06-10-2013 15:12 Edited 06-10-2013 15:37

Added: Trying to find my answer from Figure 4.1 Positions of Groove Welds.

The 'face' of the finished weld is horizontal in both locations. But how about how the bevel face is oriented? If the 90° side of the groove is on top, overhead, and the 45° bevel face is sloped out and down at a 45° angle on the bottom of the weld joint does it become an overhead weld?

They are stacking weld passes on the sloped surface and building up to the 'overhead' square cut face. Oriented opposite they are stacking on the 90° flat and going up the slope of the bevel as they come out. These plates are from 1" to 2" thick depending upon the application.

Thinking out loud, kinda: so, because of the thickness these are multi-pass groove welds. most passes would be considered horizontal in either orientation. But when it is inverted as would be considered the normal position to weld this joint configuration, do the passes up against the non beveled face of the groove become overhead passes? Even if the finished weld, which would have about half a dozen face exposed passes, was considered horizontal?

To their credit, it was the contractor who brought this to my attention and asked the question about how one of their guys was welding out the joint. Stopped him at his first pass to come get my opinion.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By waccobird (****)

Date 06-10-2013 15:45

welderbrent

Brent

If the column top is flush with T1 it would still be horizontal.

The Location of the bevel does not determine the joint position.

Just My ¢¢'s

Marshall

I know I am not one of the ones you were buttering up but I will throw them out there.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 16:30

Marshall,

Your comments and advice have always been good. None of us in here agree 100% of the time. You and I have never had a conflict of personality, character, spirit. I do most certainly consider you to be one of the 'gentlemen' of this forum.

Anyway, thank you for the comment. That has been my overall opinion. But I was just trying to make sure I was looking at the Figure correctly. Have also been trying to document from a text even if it isn't code text. Do you know of any reference material that would support that position (all pun intended)?

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 16:37

I agree with Marshall...still 2G (horizontal)...just tougher to perform when the bevel is on the bottom vs on top. Why don't they turn the bevel in favor of the welder?

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 16:42

Actually, the welder is being lazy and doesn't want to roll this moderately sized column any more than he absolutely has to on his skids. So, he welded the bottom one in the normally used position and then started to weld the other one in the inverted position when they stopped him. Since then, the question has gone viral through the company management plus they came to me even though the member in question is not on my job. They just wanted an opinion. But, if I am going to state an opinion, I want it to be as accurate as possible. Thus, I posed the question to the forum.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 17:10

He wasn't doing himself any favors with an E70 wire in that awkward position...gravity will work against him all the way out to the cap. That E70 is very fluid....If I had to weld it, I would have rolled that sucker. I'm not talented enough with that E70 wire, the E71 is a bit more forgiving in that situation.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 17:23

Everyone here agrees with that. Their problem is they are trying to look at it from the aspect of each individual weld pass and calling part of them overhead welds. No matter what I have shown them they want to classify it as such. So, DO I CARE?? It isn't being done on my job. They are pushing weld positions to a TPI's and the customers advantage. They are increasing the likelihood of successfully completing the weld.

BUT, every time I show them how to properly identify the weld according to D1.1 they want to argue with me. What a bother. :lol:

What can I say?

Have a Great Day, Brent

By JTMcC

Date 06-10-2013 17:32 Edited 06-10-2013 17:36

"Actually, the welder is being lazy and doesn't want to roll this moderately sized column any more than he absolutely has to"

One mans "lazy" is another mans "more efficient". May not apply here in any way, but basically true.

Material handling is a significant cost on larger work, less is better of course. Like I said, maybe not relevant here but efficiency in material handling and all other phases from raw material in to finished product out are where money is made and the kids get fed.

J

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 18:04

Oh, I absolutely agree JT.

Hope things are going well with you.

Anyway, the main thing is, he is going to have to roll it to do other welding later anyway, so why not leave the welds in question until it comes around to the second roll which will put the top at the bottom.

It just brought up an item that I thought I would investigate to make sure of my own understanding and try to help them understand the weld positions as described in D1.1 Figure 4.1. (since they asked for my opinion)

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 18:11

Brent, We typically roll the columns 4 times....weld each turn as it sits(full pen and fillets). That way the welder isn't waiting on an overhead crane or whatnot...just weld everything that he can get in the position that it sits, and then flip it 90° and ditto until finished.
The baseplates and stiffeners and outriggers usually require 4 flips anyway.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 18:33

I understand John, so do they. I'm not sure what he was trying to accomplish since this would be in a better position shortly anyway.

I know that on some of them the tacks have broken on one side where the plate is be welded to the flange because the tacks were not adequate and they welded all the way out on one CJP without making sure the other side was strong enough. Weld shrinkage won and the tacks broke. So, I think he is trying to put in at least a root and a couple more just to hold it while he does the normally positioned one. But, they stopped him and said he couldn't do that. I told them he was fine.

Like I said, not my job anyway. But they asked. Actually, somehow they don't have any TPI on that job. But, even when they do they come to me. Joy, Joy.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By JTMcC

Date 06-10-2013 21:23

Brent says: "
I know that on some of them the tacks have broken on one side where the plate is be welded to the flange because the tacks were not adequate and they welded all the way out on one CJP without making sure the other side was strong enough. Weld shrinkage won and the tacks broke. So, I think he is trying to put in at least a root and a couple more just to hold it while he does the normally positioned one. But, they stopped him and said he couldn't do that".

Well that puts a different spin on things, huh? At least to me.
Maybe this is a sharp, thinking ahead welder trying to put out a better end product (or reduce his personal work load which is the same thing to me).
You can only put so much on one side be it pipe or structural, Duh, before you have larger problems. I must of missed that part the first time. Why would they stop a guy from fixing a known problem (broke tacks) ???
I don't see how broke tacks help anybody. Looks to me from afar that he's actually saving the company money and putting out a better product, and it's still horiz. in my feeble structural mind : ) I'd be interested to see the end result of it.

John

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 02:48

Standard practice was to weld a couple of passes on the first one and do so on all, sometimes quite a few per column, from the first side. Roll it 180 and then weld those out all the way. Then start the normal roll 90, weld, roll 90, weld, etc all the way around till all connections are complete.

Yes, you are right JT except that it was not their company procedure. When companies have procedures established in their documents that were audited to get them their AISC Pre-Approved Fabricator Shop certs then they need to follow that procedure.

I have no problem with his idea. I even stood up for him when they said it was an overhead weld. But, procedures are difficult to alter without a great deal of paperwork.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By JTMcC

Date 06-11-2013 23:43

Brent said:

"Standard practice was to weld a couple of passes on the first one and do so on all, sometimes quite a few per column, from the first side. Roll it 180 and then weld those out all the way. Then start the normal roll 90, weld, roll 90, weld, etc all the way around till all connections are complete.

Yes, you are right JT except that it was not their company procedure. When companies have procedures established in their documents that were audited to get them their AISC Pre-Approved Fabricator Shop certs then they need to follow that procedure.

I have no problem with his idea. I even stood up for him when they said it was an overhead weld. But, procedures are difficult to alter without a great deal of paperwork.

Have a Great Day, Brent"

I say:

Well that makes perfect sense Brent.
I have no AISC guruism/knowledge.
Funny little grey area that seems to pop up in the real world. I don't really like paperwork, except invoices, I do love the invoices : )

John

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-12-2013 04:53

I only like the invoices... I LOVE the checks that come because of the invoices. :lol:

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 18:07

Labor is labor...I agree JT. As long as the welder passes his Visual and UT(if required)...then who is to question his motive, if it gets the job done and is quicker in the long run. However, if he messes up and has to go back into that joint or make repairs simply because he didn't bother turning the silly thing over where he could easily weld it out successfully, then that would be a different story.

By JTMcC

Date 06-10-2013 18:29 Edited 06-10-2013 18:37

Right.
I don't work in a fab shop environment so my take is pretty stinkin poor here.
But we do look long and hard at material handling times (as well as ever thin else) and make the fewest moves possible with the skill levels on site.
That makes the profit margin grow. We like the profit margin. Really I'm intruding in territory I'm not familiar with so I beg forgiveness : ), but the basics still apply.
If the welders are messin up, then scrutiny is appropriate of course. Or maybe different welders on the payroll. I understand not everbody has that option available.
But every minute material is being handled, it's not being welded and billed out as finished product. My world differs quite a bit from the structural fabrication shops so feel free to disregard.

J

I should add that I'm willing to move, turn, rotate and levitate any chunk of iron as many times as needed to keep the weld in front of the welder, the stopwatch doesn't lie, time=$ of course, again specifics on site tell the tale, not my take from afar.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 18:34

Your point is well taken JT. I appreciate your input. Notice other posts regarding that aspect. Nothing to disregard.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-10-2013 19:01

>I don't work in a fab shop environment so my take is pretty stinkin poor here.

Nah, I think you're thinking about it correctly. Time is money whether it's in the field or the shop. :wink:

Most of our work is figured on man hours per ton.....so, anytime we can save shop hours vs what the estimator figured on his take-off, we make money.

By waccobird (****)

Date 06-10-2013 17:09

welderbrent

Brent

You're more than welcome to ¢¢'s anytime I got them. LoL

I don't have a real reference for my Statement.

But AWS 3.0 gives a horizontal welding position (groove weld) as The welding position in which the weld face lies in an approximately vertical plane and the weld axis at the point of welding is approximately horizontal.

Marshall

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 02:54 Edited 06-11-2013 16:11

Indeed a good question Al. I believe John hit it when he made a comparison between 70 & 71. His assumption, because of the size of the wire, was E70T? Forget what the last designator is. I'll look it up and get back to you.

But it is not rated for anything besides flat and horizontal. But, as you asked about that, does it qualify for doing the horizontal weld in question? I 'assumed' so. But cannot say for certain.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By 803056

Date 06-11-2013 03:48

That is the point, if the electrode is an E70T-XX, it should be used for flat grooves, flat and horizontal fillets. If the groove is any other position other than flat, the weld is not permitted.

If the electrode classification is E71T-XX, then we have to consider the positions other than flat.

At this point, we do not know what electrode classification is being used, so we’re wearing out the keys on our keyboards for naught. :grin:

Best regards - Al

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 03:53

No, not for naught. It has definitely been a learning experience and lots of fun. It's getting a little slow around here of late. Need more brain exercise.

But your point is well taken. I did not include that and it is only an assumption based upon the size of the electrode. I will get a definite when I get to the shop in the morning.

Thanks Al.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By Superflux (****)

Date 06-11-2013 06:24

I am not the D1.xx guru, but if I were TPI and witnessed this, I'd recommend in my report to the Engineer.... CUT-OUT if the Welder was not certified in the overhead position.
They have taken the joint configuration and rotated it 180° from what would be the "assumed" orientation. Code does not specify and say that the joints BU-4x as depicted on pages 96 and 97 are in the 2G position (same as all the other figures in this section do not specify a particular position as drawn), so it could be argued both ways.
I've had them say that if horizontal stringers were run, then a 3G or 3F weld could be made as a #2 position (sorry, that's a vertical weave!), and I see this as being a similar case...
Many times, owners, foremen and craftsmen can come up with some doozies, and this is one of them! I applaud them on their ingenuity.

I'll share one of my patented philosophies here and you are all free to use it as long as I get recognition for it.
Laziness is the Mother of Invention
I would not call the Welder lazy in a derogatory way. I see a clever solution to a unique problem. Wrong in my opinion, but very innovative none the less.
We as human beings are by nature explorers and inventors.
Constantly seeking out new and easier ways (efficiency???), and shorter paths to our destination is in our genetic makeup.

In similar gray area situations, I've had the Engineer respond; "Does it look good (better than minimal code required VT criteria)? Has it passed required NDT? You make the call John and I'll accept it..."

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 06-11-2013 10:54

Superflux,
Sorry mate - have to disagree.
A horizontal groove weld is a horizontal groove weld whether it is Single U , Single J, Single Vee or Single Bevel (with the 45 degree top or bottom).
IMHO it has nothing whatsoever to do with an overhead weld.
AWS 3.0 Figure 17 clearly shows what is a horizontal weld and what is an overhead weld.
Take the single vee shown in the picture 17(B) and change it to single bevel with a 45 degree prep on the top plate - still horizontal weld.
Take the single vee shown in the picture 17(B) and change it to single bevel with a 45 degree prep on the bottom plate - still a horizontal weld.

Al has made the most valid comment (as bloody usual. LOL !) - if it is E70T-1 wire then there is a problem.

As a matter of interest if you performed a PQR in the 2G position with E70T-1 wire and it passed all the required mechanical tests would it be acceptable even though it doesn't comply with manufacturers recommendations ?
Cheers,
Shane

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 16:10

Help me out here Al.

You state "if the electrode is an E70T-XX, it should be used for flat grooves, flat and horizontal fillets. If the groove is any other position other than flat, the weld is not permitted."

All I can find is that it is approved for Flat AND Horizontal. I find no destinction between Grooves and Fillets though I think I know where you are headed, especially in regards to the original question I asked. And, I can understand the why's of that application. But, where does one document that restriction?

That concept would completely change many things around here. They use a horizontal fillet weld test AND a horizontal groove weld test to qualify welders. I am looking to see if that is due to a PQR or not. And, many CJP's are welded in the horizontal position in production.

I'm going to keep looking but I could use some more help here. And not just Al. Anybody?

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 16:40 Edited 06-11-2013 18:34

Brent I just peeked at the pds for one the wires you mentioned(Ultracore70C)....positions Flat & Horz....nothing mentioned about 1F, 2F and 1G.
http://www.lincolnelectric.com/assets/global/Products/Consumable_Flux-CoredWires-Gas-Shielded-UltraCore-UltraCore70C/c3122.pdf

Al are you thinking about Table 4.10 in D1.1 for qualified welder postions where testing on 1G qualifies the welder for 1F, 2F and 1G?

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 16:52 Edited 06-11-2013 20:17

Okay, they do test the welders to a 2G with that wire. Also, they have a PQR on that position with that wire.

So, are we correct that even though it may be restricted to 1G and 1 & 2F, everything should be good anyway because of the PQR? It isn't a far stretch to approve an electrode for a horizontal groove weld that is approved for flat and horizontal by the manufacturer.

But, I would still like to know where and how a person would stand that ground in case it ever comes up.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 11:13

>he made a comparison between 70 & 71

Brent stated that they were using a 3/32" FCAW wire so I knew it had to be a E70T-1, as I have never seen a E71T-1 in anything larger than 1/16". The E70 is so fluid(obvious reason for limited welding positions) and you can really pour the filler in, but gravity does it's thing and it just rolls so bad when you carry alot of filler....now that E71 generally freezes alot faster and and you can stack beads on that sloping bevel without too much trouble.

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-11-2013 14:37

Okay Al,

Here it is: FCAW-G, 3/32" electrode, E70T-1C H8 AND E70T-9C H8 with gas shielding. Lincoln Ultracore 70C. 100% CO2. All perameters right in the middle of manufacturer's recommendations. It is rated for flat and Horizontal according to Lincoln specs. P.134 in their Welding Consumables Catalog and on the website.

But now, even though this is technically a horizontal weld and the wire is rated for Horizontal, is this an acceptable joint configuration/orientation for this electrode? They have had no problems with UT on the CJP's in the Horizontal position. But, this would be the first time that I am aware of that one has gotten tried like this.

Now, guys, I didn't include all info in the OP because much of it really is not pertinent. Such as, this is informational only. Theses guys have known me for 5 years. They trust me. This isn't a job I am doing the TPI on, mine is wrapping up- I have been here a year on this job. This company does have many PQR's, all the needed WPS's, Welders' Certs, decent in house QC, uses pre-heat dependably, etc. This is a seismic job, demand critical welds (as is mine) and welders qualified to the additional restrictions of D1.8, etc. The shop crew has a good productivity rate with profit sharing being awarded to them because of a combination of Quality and Production. Even if the welder could be termed 'lazy' or 'efficient' or whatever, their procedures work.

Not being my job, I am only interested in my own knowledge base and answering their question for a continued professional relationship.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jdrmmr

Date 06-11-2013 19:22

I was agreeing with Al until Brent said they used the E70 wire in the PQR. I was taught E70 means flat welds and flat and horizontal fillets. We used to run E-7024 on fillets (F&H) but could not use them on horizontal grooves.

Now, I’m going to agree with Shane. It the PQR was run with E70 wire it is a legit horizontal weld. To me the position of the 45° plate on top or bottom is of no concern. If the axis of the weld is horizontal the configuration/orientation of beveled plate is of no concern………………. IMO

Good discussion, as usual.

Don

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-12-2013 04:56 Edited 06-12-2013 13:37

That's okay Al. I just wanted to know how I could stand on that if it were fact.

Besides, in this case it is all cleared up because they do have a PQR for that exact application. I know it was run at their Phoenix location, I'm wondering if a TPI somewhere in time memorial told them the same thing so they did the PQR to cover themselves.

Anyway, thanks to all of you for your time and input.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-12-2013 13:30

>I screwed up. Plain and simple. I made my comment without checking my references first and I ended up with my foot in my mouth.

>E70T-X can be used in flat and horizontal positions. I do not see where it differentiates between grooves or fillets.

>Damn, these feathers are hard to swallow!

Al don't be too hard on yourself, there are electrode mfgs that do differentiate and recommend "1F, 2F and 1G only" with their electrode....but this one wasn't one of those :wink:

. I was pretty sure about this because we have used those same electrodes before, we are currently using Hobart's equivalent in the E70T-1 variety for 3/32" electrodes. We still use the Lincoln Ultracore 71 but that is the 1/16" diameter stuff.

By Superflux (****)

Date 06-12-2013 23:18

"Damn, these feathers are hard to swallow!"
Easy on yourself...
Feathers taste good chased with sufficient quantities of beer... and sauteed in garlic...

By Superflux (****)

Date 06-12-2013 23:27

Oh and by the way, I'll still stand my ground that a weld deposited on the 90° face of the bevel (inverted 180° from the diagram on page 97) is an overhead weld being made and not prequalified...
Sorry, but I'm still not convinced and think this would be a GREAT submission for the commentaries and committee to address.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-13-2013 11:17

>a weld deposited on the 90° face of the bevel (inverted 180° from the diagram on page 97) is an overhead weld being made and not prequalified...

Let's look at Fig 4.3:
Note the Single V groove shown in Fig 4.3(B)...
If weld material is deposited on that lower sloping bevel is that considered overhead?

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 06-13-2013 12:00

Superflux,
Pipes as per Figure 4.4 only have three positions - 2G, 5G and 6G (I am not including 1G Rotated).
Now have a look at Figures 4.27 and 4.28 with the square edge on the top of the bevel prep.
That is shown in the 6G position.
Rotate it upwards 45 degrees and what do you have ? - a 2G Horizontal Weld.
Regards,
Shane

By Superflux (****)

Date 06-13-2013 15:35

I'm back in the field/overseas again and only have a copy of 2004 on hand, which is copied below in brackets.
[4.26.1 Other Joint Details or WPSs. For joint details, WPSs, or assumed depth of sound welds that are more difficult than those described herein, a test described in 4.12.4.2 shall be performed by each welder in addition to the 6GR tests (see Figure 4.27 or 4.28)...]

So, my assumption was that this figure is a 6G and is all positions inclusive...
I am not quite ready to eat the crow on this and still see it as a gray area (of dubious importance) and I certainly would not go off on a vendetta with an NCR if it were on my project.
Fillet weld positions are far better (easily?) defined.

I have no formal education in code interpretation and rely heavily on all my friends and colleagues in this forum to assist me in my continuing quest to be as competent and professional as possible. I truly appreciate all of you that responded to me directly on this (and other) issues.

What a great time I've had researching and reviewing all the questions and answers pertaining to this issue!
Do I need to "Get a Life" if this is my idea of fun????? Maybe so. My girl friend dumped me a few months ago and I'm still reviewing applicants to fill the position...........

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-13-2013 17:06

Superflux....I enjoy these types of questions also, as it keeps us digging in the ole' code for clarity. Especially questions like this one as it isn't actually Brent's job, someone just asked him to verify something and he brought in here for discussion...nobody got hurt or NCR written, just a question. But it sure got us digging....LOL

By Superflux (****)

Date 06-13-2013 21:11

jwright650

Aint it cool?!!!!

And FWIW, I've submitted a couple of NCR's in my day... and have never been severely berated...
It's all about presenting a timely, viable, well researched and intelligent response.
I love it!!!!

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-13-2013 13:10

Besides, Fig 4.1 does not take any of the weld passes into consideration, only the weld face and the weld axis for determining the weld position. And this weld is horizontal no matter what our opinion might be.

(sitting at Phoenix Skyharbor waiting for flight that has been delayed. May make it to England sometime today)

Have a Great Day, Brent

By MRWeldSoCal (***)

Date 06-13-2013 22:25

This was all a good read haha.. Teaching you to pay attention to the details

By 46.00

Date 06-13-2013 22:31

Just a quick mention that 2G,3G,2F,3F,6G etc. etc. are test positions not production positions....................................

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 06-14-2013 09:15

That is correct. That is why I refer to Fig 4.1 which does lay out the axis and rotation of the weld to determine it's position.

Update: Flight out of Phoenix was 1 hr plus some late. Ran through Miami and made connection on time but then it left about 45 min late. Too close in London/Heathrow to make a connection. Had to get new reservations and now are sitting in London for another 2 hr before proceding to Leeds and then drive to Harrogate. This has been one long trip. Need to break it up more next time. Lay over in Miami or other eastern airport and then fly overseas.

Have a Great Day, Brent

By ctacker (****)

Date 06-16-2013 02:42

Sounds like you had a couple of stops anyway, my last trip to Frankfurt was 11 hours nonstop. talk about a long haul in cattle class.