Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Certifications / D1.1 Pipe HR Prequalified Procedures ?
- - By TSFweld Date 03-22-2006 22:59
I am having a hard time figuring what or if I can use D1.1 prequalified FCAW procedures for 1 1/2" pipe handrail. Butt joint w backing, coped pipe to pipe post, channel toe plate to pipe post, etc. Can someone point me in right direction. Surely I don't have to qualify by testing what I think is a very common application.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 03-23-2006 02:24
It would seem that if you are following the prequalification requirements of D1.1, including the qualification of the welder, you should be fine.

Al
Parent - - By swnorris (****) Date 03-23-2006 14:43
Even though you're fabricating what is called miscellaneous steel, most contract documents specify that all welding shall be performed in accordance with AWS D1.1. We have a miscellaneous plant and we follow the prequalifications of D1.1, as Al said.
Parent - - By magodley (**) Date 03-28-2006 21:05
I agree that many times the statement "all welds must be in accordance with D1.1" is very common. Sometimes I think they don't look at the "scope" of D1.1. I'm not arguing either way, but have seen many different opinions, and wondering if anyone can give us a reference that ties HR directly to the Structural Code. Most of the hand rail in buildings is being done by the Ironworkers. Thanks guys,
Andy
Parent - By hogan (****) Date 03-28-2006 21:25
on the west coast in is refrenced in icc
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 03-29-2006 01:40
I also agree that handrail materials may not always fit the scope of D1.1 in that D1.1 covers materials 1/8" in thickness and up. In that case I suppose, D1.1 points to D1.3 for those materials.
John Wright
Parent - - By TSFweld Date 03-23-2006 23:29
I think that means that BU2A-GF would work for the butt joint. What about the coped pipe to post and channel to post. Do you have a suggestion as to what prequalified procedure you use for those?
Parent - By Sean (**) Date 03-24-2006 15:45
For the coped pipe to channel we use a flare groove weld and fillet weld combination. In some cases the fillet weld is done vertical down so we have qualified it accordingly.

As for Magodley's question... here in Canada the structural code is quite specific that a handrail is considered structural and must meet the structural welding code's requirements.

Sean
Parent - - By magodley (**) Date 03-24-2006 14:21
question for all...do you consider hand rail a "code weld"? Lots of different opinions among the people I have talked with about this.
Andy
Parent - - By hogan (****) Date 03-24-2006 16:37
i do belive it is designed to resist loads and forces
Parent - By swnorris (****) Date 03-24-2006 17:20
I think it's designed for a minimum 200#/ft load resistance, at least here in N.C. As for hand rail welds being "code welds" as I said in my initial post, even though you're fabricating what's called miscellaneous steel, most contract documents include a generic statement that ALL welding shall be performed in accordance with AWS D1.1.
Parent - By NEQA (**) Date 04-14-2006 15:22
Our contracts call for conformance to OSHA Part 1910.23, including the 200-pound loading requirement. The 200-pound load and uniform force conditions shall not be applied simultaneously.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 03-25-2006 18:51
Most handrails fall into the "Life-Safety" category and my experience has been that they have to meet AWS D1.1.

Al
Parent - - By TSFweld Date 03-28-2006 18:05
I agree that I need to follow D1.1 for the handrail. What I am looking for in D1.1 is the prequalified procedure for welding my mid-rail to post. We cope the mid-rail and butt to post and weld. Is this considered a fillet weld, partial penetration or what (1 1/2" pipe handrail). Every time I think I understand D1.1 I get a question that on the surface seems easy but can be easily made difficult. Thanks!
Parent - By waynekoe (**) Date 03-29-2006 22:07
I personally feel that as long as the fit up is good, you could go ahead with just calling them fillets for the mid-section rail. Most of it will most likely be ground off and blended anyhow. But, if your just looking for a blanket statement to cover your butt, then you could state that the welds are in compliance with "AWS D1.1 Visual Requirements of TBL. 6.1". And , I would think that your procedures and welder certs have already been reviewed and accepted. Your only about .020" away from being out of scope of D1.1 for material thickness and I don't think pipe for handrail would or could be considered sheet steel.
Your WPS (if you really had to have one for handrail) should be for a fillet welded T joint (Tubular), max. single pass fillet of 3/16", all positions w/low/hy; verts up & dwn. But, I don't see where anything other than someone who is unaware or a completely anal retentive inspector would make an issue of this. But, you just never know, do you.
Parent - - By TimGary (****) Date 03-30-2006 13:22
While you're getting a lot of good common sense opinions here, I think what you're looking for is a technical response that can't be disputed by some customer's inspector who is a real stickler for details.
If you want to get real technical about it, D1.1 does not have a pre-qualified procedure for this joint because it is actually a TKY connection that has to be qualified by a PQR and your welders would have to qualify with a 6GR WPS.
This is one of the reasons why it is good to go ahead and complete these PQR and WPS requirements from the start, that way you're covered no matter what type of joint comes up.
A way around that, if you so choose, is to take exception to handrails being constructed according to D1.1 in the initial contract. You can state that the handrails are instead constructed according to OSHA Standard CFR, 1926.1052 (c). They meat of this is part (5) which states
"Handrails and the toprails of stairrail systems shall be capable of withstanding, without failure, a force of at least 200 lbs applied within 2 inches of the top edge, in any downward or outward direction, at any point along the top edge."
This way, you can have your engineer design the joints and the weld sizes accordingly to fit your existing or prequalified welding procedures.

Tim
Parent - By swnorris (****) Date 03-30-2006 14:48
Good points Tim! On a midrail, although the weld varies from a fillet to a butt weld, it is generally accepted in the industry to designate it as a fillet weld. That statement comes from the National Institute of Steel Detailing.
Parent - - By Andy senaweldi Date 01-10-2007 03:57
Hi If you refer to page 433 of AWS D1.1/2006 section C-4.12 CJP groove welds section 2 it clarifies the 6gR issues as far as the AWS for complete penitration CJP joints

But this will depend on the design of the joint with regards to the loading/weld capacity  and as such if the design can perform with a PJP joint the it seems that 6G covers the criteria. chec with the designer for his weld requirements otherwise assume its CJP and bite the bullet and comply with 6GR

andy
Parent - - By hogan (****) Date 01-10-2007 17:58
we have all rail jobs detailed with fillet welds, it make it much easier
Parent - By vonash (**) Date 01-15-2007 22:37
I agree with TimGary; TKY connections.
Up Topic American Welding Society Services / Certifications / D1.1 Pipe HR Prequalified Procedures ?

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill