ANSI/AWS D1.1 - 04 welder qualification

By fbrieden (***)

Date 05-18-2004 17:40

Check the specified material thickness. Side bends for 1" t., and 3/8" t. for root and face bend.

By SJWH Date 05-18-2004 19:10

for 3/8" plate you can now substitute side bends for the face and root bends. any idea why this was changed? it seems to me that by the time you add the 1/8" max radius to the corners, you don't end up testing much of the weld.

or am i missing something?

thanks, swjh

By thcqci

Date 05-19-2004 11:36

No, he is correct. Note 3 on page 142 allows side bends instead of root and face bends. Can't imagine why. Underlined so this is new for this edition. Pages 171 and 172 show plate diagrams but do not show side bend specimens locations or dimensions. Good question for AWS D1.1 commitee.

By thcqci

Date 05-19-2004 19:11

I looked on the AWS website for someone listed on D1.1 committee. Only name I found to link to was a Mr. John Gaylor. Asked him to reference this thread and see if anyone could shed some light on verbiage. This is a copy of his response to me:

"The views expressed in this message are my own interpretation of the code and do not constitute an official position of the American Welding Society or the D1 Committee on Structural Welding. Official interpretations are made by the D1 Committee in accordance with the inquiry process specified in the annex of the code. Responses to official inquiries may take several months."
*************************
"Judging from the initial inquiry that resulting in this revision and the supporting committee meeting minutes, this change was done to make D1.1 consistent with ASME Section IX and AWS B2.1 requirements. This change would assist fabricators, who qualified and tested procedures and welders to ASME and D1.1, to minimize testing. There were no objections from any members on this revision indicating there was no technical justification not to allow this overlap/substitution.

Regards,

John Gayler
Senior Staff Engineer"

Have not worked with ASME IX in many years and do not have current copy. I looked up in AWS B2.1 and it says between T= 3/8" to 3/4", side bends are allowable instead of root or face bends. Never noticed that before and really don't understand why someone would do side bends instead of R&F bends.

By SJWH Date 05-19-2004 20:35

ASME section IX lists 3/8" as john had indicated. this just caught me off guard. we've been testing 1 1/2" length for each specimen and now we may substitue a 3/8" side bend with 1/8" radius on each corner.

thanks for all your help and effort..

also, thanks to mr. Gayler for his information!

-sjwh

By thcqci

Date 05-20-2004 11:40

This little blurb is newly noticed to me so I have a question. I have in the past performed countless welders quals. Granted, the vast majority were for structural and some for bridge and were on 1" material for unlimited qualifications. Side bends of 1" material only option. But some were on 3/8" plate for limited thickness qualification. I can understand a welder wanting to have only side bend so a minimal part of his weld is under scrutiny, but from my standpoint, I want to know if this welder is competent and want to scrutinize a larger section of his weld. Besides having less work to do to produce a side bend specimen, what other advantage would there be to doing side bends of thinner material? Less material, less to analyze.

By bmaas1

Date 05-20-2004 18:02

Something doesn't seem right with this picture. If you do side bends on 3/8" plate it seems like you might as well not test at all. There is not much weld surface area to look at.

Brian J. Maas

By thcqci

Date 05-20-2004 19:07

My point exactly!!!

By GRoberts (***)

Date 05-20-2004 19:44

One advantage I can think of is that when a 3/8" plate is used for face/root bend tests, due to the angular distortion of the plate, when you bend the root, it does not get the full elongation and the face gets more elongation than required. Since a side bend specimen will always be straight (if you cut it right), then it will always get 20% elongation on the outer fibers.

By SJWH Date 05-21-2004 14:56

with all the above in mind, which is more difficult to pass?

2 - 1 1/2" long (one face / one root) bends or
2 - 3/8" long/tall side bends... oh, and don't forget the max. 1/8" dia. radius added to each corner which leaves 1/8" inspection area.

what hat should we wear today?

all that aside, i looked closely at ASME sec. IX. 4 side bends may be subsituted for the 2 roots and 2 faces. now, with pressure vessels in mind, which one in more difficult to pass here?

By GRoberts (***)

Date 05-21-2004 17:30

Assuming that we are still talking welder qualification here, only 2 side bends, or 1 each face and root bends are required per QW-452.1(a). 4 bends are required for procedure qualificaiton.

By SJWH Date 05-21-2004 17:41

yes, sorry i was thinking pipe.

By Niekie3 (***)

Date 05-22-2004 09:01

Hi All

My experience has been that side bends are amore stringent test than root and face bends. This is so because you are effectively testing the entire weld cross section. Whether there is a weakness in the root, centre or the face, it will show up in the side bend. With root and face, you are only really testing for weaknesses on one side of the weld at a time. This makes it twice as likely to miss something on root and face bends than side bends. In addition, the weld re-inforcement on the root and face will tend to hide potential porosity and the like when performing root and face bends. When sectioning side bends, you will always see any defects wherever they sit in the weld.

Regards
Niekie Jooste
Fabristruct Solutions

By bmaas1

Date 05-22-2004 13:21

Face and root re-inforcement is removed on bend specimens.

Brian J. Maas

By Niekie3 (***)

Date 05-24-2004 13:57

Hi Brian

You are absolutely correct. That was a rather blond comment from my side. The re-inforcement needs to be removed! On side bends however, you do not have to remove the re-inforcement. This means that you get to test more of the weld, and it takes slightly less preparation. (According to ASME IX at any rate.)

Regards
Niekie Jooste