Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / Inspection & Qualification / Undersized weld
- - By jwright650 (*****) Date 06-17-2013 12:22 Edited 06-17-2013 12:36
Senerio:
Outside inspector comes in and rejects several columns due to undersized welds at the toes of a column on an all around 5/16" fillet weld at the base plate to column shaft weld.

To me these welds were acceptable according to Table 6.1(6) in that they were within acceptable amounts according to this Table.
Full 5/16" all round except the welder didn't quite get 5/16" at the very corners of the toes of the flanges(barely see some daylight under the 5/16" fillet weld gage). All added up, this dimension was much less than the 10% stated in Table 6.1. so I had I let them go when performing my inspection, but an outside inspector turned them all down and wanted a full 5/16" all round the toes of these columns. We pulled thes columns back off the trucks and cooked the paint off, brushed to clean material and held the columns on a 45° with the crane to build up the very corner to 5/16" on all four sides.

Just wondering what you guys in the forum think of my approach for the next time I run into this of pulling out Table 6.1 Item (6) and making a point to not redo all of this work for what I felt was acceptable to start with.
Parent - - By Shane Feder (****) Date 06-17-2013 13:41
John,
Something doesn't seem right.
You talk about cooking the paint off - when did the TPI inspect and measure, before or after the paint was applied ?
According to 5.30.2 welds cannot be painted until they are accepted (whether that is accepted by you or the clients rep is probably in the contract documents).

If he has rejected prior to painting why were they painted ?
If he has rejected after painting that opens up even more questions.
How many microns was the paint DFT ?
Table 6.1 (6) - 5/16" (8mm) fillet allows a reduction of 1/8" (3 mm") down to 3/16" (5mm) which is a major allowance.
If the TPI measured the fillets with a possibility of 500 - 1000 microns of paint (I have no idea of actual DFT) and they were still undersize then there is a big problem.

However, if the welds at the corners of the toes were greater than 3/16" (5 mm) and they were less than 10% of the total weld length how could he reject them ?

Sorry I can't give a positive response on this - too many questions.
Cheers,
Shane
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 06-17-2013 14:14
The TPI was reviewing steel at the jobsite, and when the problems seemed to go on forever in the first few sequences, so we requested that they send the guy here to our shop to review what we have already done (but haven't shipped yet). The guy arrived and most of the job was already painted(1.5-2.0mils)(welds were shop inspected by me at the time of welding, not after painting). The TPI was turning down these welds on the toes of the columns for being undersized....all this work has now been corrected and TPI is offsite and back home.

I was sitting around this weekend thinking back over all of what had transpired and thinking ahead to the next job where I may stand my ground and challenge on this issue vs unloading entire loads of steel just to make somebody happy.
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 06-17-2013 19:23
I agree with Al on this John.

It would have been different if he had found some missing welds, arc strikes, and other indications that easily caught the eye and brought up some gross negligence items.  Then I could see reviewing items already on site. 

I do TPI work for CA engineers for jobs being prefabbed in AZ shops.  Occassionally they get a little snippy.  The guys I work with and I stress that we will not go after anything outside of the codes.  We have to really watch because of Demand Critical, Seismic, and other considerations.  But we even stand our ground with inspectors on site who think we are not doing our job as TPI's properly.  Some of these guys go way overboard.  Especially those working directly for engineers.

Sounds like you should have just shipped them.  I don't have all the facts, but I think someone wanted to push his weight around.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 06-17-2013 20:27
I'm not so sure that the TPI was trying to stand strong or push his weight around. I really think it may be something that his company has pushed him to look for and maybe they expect him to write things like this to show that he is in fact looking at this steel. His original reports look neat and professional in the layout and the way it was documented. I actually found this young fellow very likeable and whatnot. I think it's a case of just needing more experience in welding inspection and understanding what is really important and what isn't. There were other issues, some legit and some that I would have had to had more reason to make somebody go through the trouble to pull back off of a truck clean paint off, repair, and re-paint, reload....but that isn't where I wanted to go with this thread.
I'm just thinking that I will look at this closer with the next TPI and see if we can agree to use Table 6.1 when it comes to some of this in my original posting #1 of this thread. I appreciate the replies and will file this one away for the future. To be fair there were 13 pieces in all that were written up to be corrected out of 200 tons of steel.
Parent - By jdrmmr (*) Date 06-17-2013 19:49
I think you did the right thing THIS TIME.

If there were not many corrections and it was no great big deal I would give in this time but I would dig in and defend the next time.  By giving the benefit of the doubt to this guy you may have made an ally for the future. Maybe he didn’t know the tolerances and would have been embarrassed to ask in front of all that were present. But now that it is over, the next time it happens take him behind the “wood shed” and proceed to teach.

Another suggestion would be, if he comes back suggest to him (before he makes a call) the two of you review the tolerances prior to starting the inspection.  Let him know you know the rules and that you are prepared to get the flashlight, machinist rule and magnifier out to defend your welders.

Stand strong

Don
- - By 803056 (*****) Date 06-17-2013 14:43
Let me play the devil's advocate and side with the contractor.

The Verification Inspector represents the Owner. His responsibilities are defined by the Engineer. The extent of the verification inspection is supposed to be defined and delineated by the Engineer in the Statement of Special Inspections. Usually the extent of the verification inspection is specified by the applicable building code. The building code may require all fillet welds larger than 5/16 inch and complete joint penetration groove welds be inspected by the Verification Inspector. The Engineer may supplement those requirements or he may override the building code and impose a less rigorous inspection regime.

Assuming the Verification Inspector's responsibilities required 100% inspection, he still has an obligation to provide timely inspection. If the shop welds are to be inspected by the verification inspector, they should have been inspected at the shop prior to being painted. If the Verification Inspector is inspecting t weld in the field, I would want a good explanation as to why the inspections were performed in the field and not in the shop. The Verification Inspector better be able to show the welds were grossly inadequate, not marginally undersized.

If there are only a few welds involved it was probably a smart move to correct the welds and allow the Verification Inspector to strut and feel he's done a bang up job. However, if more than a few welds were involved and if correcting the situation would cause a delay in shipping or cost a reasonable amount, it is time to dig in the spurs and actually measure the weld sizes and the length of undersized welds to determine if the 10% length was violated. If the Verification Inspector was wrong, then I would not hesitate in pulling him up short. If he insisted on the undersized welds being corrected, I would send his employer the invoice for handling, reinspection, rework, and reloading. Of course it goes without saying, proper and complete documentation would be in order to substantiate the claim for compensation.

There are times when there is an honest disagreement as to the actual weld size and length of undersized welds. However we have all encountered inspectors that suffer the "God Complex." Sometimes it is necessary to put them in their place when their demands are unreasonable. On the other hand, when they are right, swallow the feathers and correct the deficiencies. It isn’t hard to overlook an undersized weld when inspecting hundreds of welds on a large project.

Best regards - Al
Parent - By eekpod (****) Date 06-18-2013 10:51
John,
I would have argued the tolerance your allowed to be under in additional to the fact he shouldn't be doing a final inspection after the parts were painted.
- - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 09-13-2013 15:02
I just use a gage that is a size bigger when I am the welder, so then I know for sure I am in the clear.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 09-13-2013 15:29
I tell my welders to check behind themselves with a gage before calling me over to look at everything. These particular columns were fairly small and there wasn't much realestate to even place a 5/16" fillet weld on due to the flange thickness...but we held the columns up on a 45° angle with the overhead crane and spit some extra filler material on there and made it stick so that the fillet weld out on the toes of these thin flanged columns measured a full 5/16" all around.
- - By Boon (**) Date 09-15-2013 16:24
When we talk about weld size is it correct that most codes (if not all) would have tolerance with positive value rather than negative value?

Came across a weld failure whereby client claimed the cause was due to undersize fillet weld.
My question is why should there negative tolerance value for weld size? If yes, there is a possibility that above claim is not valid?

Boon
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 09-15-2013 18:59
Not sure I understand what you are asking or trying to say. Sorry.

Al
Parent - By welderbrent (*****) Date 09-15-2013 20:13
Boon,

Part of your answer will depend upon rather you had an engineer design the part in the first place.  Then, size is calculated per the use loads, forces, etc.  From that view, it is then also allowable to go slightly undersized and still meet the requirements.  Oversize is only a factor for economy, stresses, and if it gets in the way of something else.

If you only guessed at the weld size then there is a strong chance the customer is right and the weld was undersized for the load it was subjected to. 

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Up Topic Welding Industry / Inspection & Qualification / Undersized weld

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill