What to do about a completed unqualified weld

Date 04-09-2018 20:07

Which code are we talking about?

Most state, in some form or fashion, that non-conforming welds be brought into compliance. That may mean repair, or, in this case most likely, removal and reweld.

As a QC, I would not allow bad welds to remain, period.

As a QA, I would document everything with pictures and objective descriptions, then turn the reports into the contractor and contractors' QC, and see if they are going to correct the work. If they are not willing to, then send it to the Engineer of Record as a Non-Conformance Report (NCR). The EOR would be the one to make the call then at that point if they are willing to accept non-conforming work or require it to be brought into compliance.

By SeeJeepGo (*)

Date 04-10-2018 11:30

guess i neglected to mention D1.1

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 04-10-2018 14:32

Good Day,

As Short Arc parameters are not prequalified per D1.1, this should have been caught before it got to the point where there were completed welds. Now, if there are only periodic inspections being performed, one of them should have been done prior to the start of fabrication to verify material, welder qualifications, WPS's approved by Engineer, and welder operating parameters at the least. And, this still would have been caught before work had anything completed. Same goes for the vertical down progression on the welds.

Adam and Al both have offered good courses of action.

The fabricator/erector has the option of changing and repairing all non-compliant work upon first notice. After that, it goes to the Engineer. Depending upon some conditions and previous notices, the Engineer will get a report of Fabricator actions even if they decide to replace the welds with conforming welds.

One of the first things along with this that comes to mind, were the welders qualified to perform vertical down GMAW welds? To get there the Contractor should have a PQR and then a WPS from it and welder performance qualification reports stating they passed the tests. If they have that, did they submit them and get them approved for the job. I am presuming this is all negative based upon your added info stating there was to qualified WPS and some <after the fact??> additional tests attempting to get a PQR failed.

That should be a pretty clear indication to the Contractor that the welds need replacing. Are they willing to just get in there and do it or are they giving you a hard time about it? They really are not going to have much wiggle room here. They tried to prove they could do it and failed. Thus, the product is non compliant, unsafe, and sooner or later will be repaired or replaced.

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day, Brent

By SeeJeepGo (*)

Date 04-12-2018 12:19 Edited 04-12-2018 12:24

I should mention that while this job is under D1.1 the fabricator regularly does work under D1.3 with gauge tubing and so GMAW and vert down is common; there are WPS' in place and welders are qualified for it.... with material thickness limitations. so while the welders should have thought oh this prob isn't ok, cant blame them for lack of info on a drawing or guidance from mgmt. It was a combination of oversights and lack of communication from a few points that ultimately led to the error.
Some additional testing requested by the engineer on the completed parts (PT and cut&macro) gave some clear proof of the incomplete fusion and ultimately the parts were deemed NFG, unsalvageable and are being cut up. (luckily they were smallish laser cut brackets and not huge members or connected to a structure)
In the end its a good example to show the welding uneducated how important following WPS's are as well as how at first glace good looking weld can be so bad underneath. Also it was a great reinforcement to QC, even tho in a perfect world it should have been prevented all together, we know that things sometimes do slip through the cracks but it was caught and the system worked. New laser cut parts are ordered and will be welded with a qualified FCAW process.
Thanks
Chris

By 803056

Date 04-10-2018 04:34

Under the auspices of AWS structural welding codes the inspector simply reports his observations to the Engineer. The welds conform to the drawings and code or they are declared as nonconforming. Whether the weld is acceptable "as is" or whether it must be repaired or replaced is actually the Engineer's call.

The Engineer can make the determination that while the welds are nonconforming, they are fit for service and can be utilized "as is". If the engineer determines they are unacceptable he can require them to be repaired or devise a "work around", i.e., redesign the connection so the connection is capable of transferring the load from one member to the next. It may entail adding stiffeners, gussets, additional plates, weld, etc. The redesign isn't something the Engineer is going to do as a "freebe", someone, usually the fabricator/erector, is going to pay for the additional work.

In some cases the contractor responsible for the nonconforming work will have to hire a designer to come up with an alternate design to compensate for the deficient work. I had that situation occur early in my inspection career. After having read my 22 page report of the deficient work the general contractor asked the Engineer what he wanted the erector to do. The Engineer looked out the window and said, "Let them dismantle it and try again."

The erector about gagged and asked if they could hire a different structural engineer to redesign the connections. The Engineers said, "I get paid to design it once, I don't get paid to redesign it because you can't read a drawing. If you want to hire someone else, you have my blessing, but I still have to buy off on the redesign."

That's what was done. A different engineer reviewed the field conditions, designed a fix, the Engineer reviewed the modifications, and the erector executed the work. The defective welds stayed, but were not considered to be functional welds.

As the inspector I don't accept or reject work, I only report whether it meets the requirements of the drawings or is deficient. As the inspector, I don't have the authority to say "It's good enough."

Best regards - Al