Kip,
I agree, but I don't think we were discussing static vs. dynamic loading. The question was how to tell if a weld is under tension, compression, shear or a combination of forces. In a simple weld, such as a padeye welded to an overhead beam, the direction of tensile stress is fairly easy to determine. In a complex structure with wind loads, seismic load considerations, cross bracing, floor loading, etc. the direction of forces and determination of whether the load is tensile is difficult to determine and not readily apparent to an inspector. How many drawings have you seen that show the direction of tensile stress for each weld joint?
By -
Date 03-19-2006 02:13
Marty,
I've never seen that and I would doubt that anyone has. Economic decisions are made at all levels, and it would be very expensive and cumbersome indeed to indicate that for every weld on every drawing. What I have seen are drawings in which a very complex weldment is divided up into zones, and each of the component drawings will specify static or cyclic (based on the zone into which will go the component). Sometimes on the cyclic drawings, there would be an indication of direction of tensile stress, but most of the time worst case was assumed.
I'm sure you'd agree that it is no one's job but that of the designer to make the determination of static vs cyclic or parallel vs transverse. In the D1.6 example, if not specifically stated on the drawing (or by some other means) I would have to assume that there is no tensile stress on the weld. However, I would likely ask the designer about it just to make sure that they have not overlooked that particular part of their job. That is also why I identify it in my procedures, so that the question comes up only once (i.e. at the beginning of the project when the procedures are being written) as opposed to every time an inspector goes to do an inspection.
Mankenberg
Sounds like we agree. I just don't see why D1 has to make the code so user UNfriendly to inspectors with criteria such as this.
