To fillet or not to fillet

Date 09-17-2004 20:48

I am not well versed with ASME but I wonder if an ASME pipe WPS is even appropriate for a hanger to column weld. I would think D1.1 would apply. As you indicated, a prequalified D1.1 WPS would normally be OK.

Realistically speaking, if a contractor can comply with pipe requirements, he certainly should be able to handle a 3/16" fillet.

Fillets do have roots, but a 3/16" fillet would only need one pass, so fill and cap passes are not needed. I would recommend that 7018 be used on the structural instead of 6010. Not that 6010 won't work but 7018 is widely accepted for structural steel, while 6010 might require some justification.

Chet Guilford

By dlmann

Date 09-17-2004 21:28

I've never thought of, or had anybody refer to the fillet root. I guess the boss is right on that one. Just because I have'nt heard of it don't mean that it ain't so. Throat and leg is just about what I've been exposed to. I agree that E7018 is the norm and E6010 would need justification. I may have gave you the impression that the hangers would be welded to building columns. They are to be welded to equipment support beams.

What has me going is this WPS says "Fillet weld application for the fabrication codes listed on this WPS is limited to .500 maximum throat thickness with the exception of B31.3 which permits .625 maximum fillet throat". To me that is compliant and they should be able to proceed with one WPS. ASME or AWS WPS, they'll weld with one pass of E7018. We want the contractor to be compliant but do not want to put needless burdens on them.

Regards, Donnie Mann

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 09-20-2004 12:43

I still think from your description that D1.1 would be the governing code. Any part of the building structure would be covered by D1.1. (beams, columns, etc...)
Using the 70 series rods (and most likely the low-hy variety) is pretty common when dealing with welding on or to the structural steel.
John Wright

By M-Squared (**)

Date 09-21-2004 12:00

Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t D1.1 recognize WPS qualified to ASME Section IX for use on structures within the limits of D1.1 essential variables. I agree with dlmann. The WPS can be used to fillet weld the pipe hangers supporting B31.3 piping using E7018 electrode as long as they are within the limits of the WPS. This was common practice when I was working in the power industry.

Mark

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 09-21-2004 15:11

D1.1:2004 4.1.1.2 WPS Qualification to Other Standards.
"The acceptability of qualification to other standards is the Engineer's responsiblity, to be exercised based upon the specific structure, or service conditions, or both. AWS B2.1.XXX-XX Series on Standard Welding Procedure Specifications may, in this manner, be accepted for use in this code."

D1.1:2004 4.1.2.1 Previous Performance Qualification.
"Previous performance qualification tests of welders, welding operators, and tack welders that are properly documented are acceptable with the approval of the Engineer. The acceptability of performance qualification to other standards is the Engineer's responsibility, to be exercised based upon the specific structure, or service conditions, or both. Welders and welding operators qualified by standard test to AWS B2.1, Standard for Welding Procedure and Performance Qualification, may, in this manner, be accepted for use in this code."

By dlmann

Date 09-23-2004 00:31

Thats where I got the idea that it would be OK because of what I've seen in paper mills and refinerys. They would weld new piping in and weld the hangers as they went and never miss a beat.

By MBSims

Date 09-23-2004 03:51

Getting back to the original question about not using the E6010 portion of a ASME IX WPS for combination of E6010 root and E7018 fill/cap, I believe QW-200.4(a) contains the statement "One or more processes or procedures may be deleted from a qualified combination procedure. Each such process or procedure may be used separately provided:
(1) the remaining essential, nonessential, and supplementary essential variables are applied;
(2) the base metal and deposited weld metal thickness limits of QW-451 are applied."

To me, that means the E6010 portion of the WPS may be omitted without requalification. However, unless the WPS contains some sort of guidance or note about omitting the E6010 root on fillet welds, it sounds like your boss is right. The WPS would need to be revised to address the situation before it could be used without the E6010 root. I haven't checked the Code Interpretations, but I bet there is one that addresses this or a similar situation.

As far as using an ASME WPS for pipe supports and attachments to building structure, I've seen it done both ways and it's basically up to the designer to specify which code applies. I've seen a number of construction specs that permit either D1.1 or ASME IX WPS's for pipe supports.