"All Welding Shall Comply with AWS-D1.1"

Paul,
I am a welding instructor/inspector. I have a business client that builds control panels and a potential client of theirs is requesting that they conform to AWS D1.1 standards on a control panel. Seems odd to me what the customer is wanting? Does or can a company become AWS D1.1 certified? Is there a certain process they have to go through to become a D1.1 facility? I tested some of their welders over a year ago to the sheet metal code. Looks like they would want them to conform to D1.6-Structural welding Code - Stainless Steel? Thanks for any help. I got your name from practical welding.
John

Hi John,
Let’s dispel a few myths: Companies are not AWS-D1.1 “Certified” or “AWS-D1.1 facilities”. They simply comply, or they do not, and they call on folks like you and I to insure that. It’s not uncommon for contract documents to call for compliance to AWS D1.1 when the work being requested falls outside the limitations of AWS D1.1. The code is so accepted throughout industry that often those calling it out are unaware of its requirements. It has become some-what of a “Boiler Plate”.
The D1.1 committee recognizes this. If you look to the Limitations of D1.1 noted in Cause 1 at 1.2 it states, “The code may be suitable to govern structural fabrications outside the scope of the intended purpose.” It then goes on to state that the user may be better off looking into the requirements of other D1 documents that are more practical for your application (I used a little creative liberty in that last line).
In your case, AWS D1.3 and AWS D1.6 are far more applicable. Focusing your procedure and welder qualification on these codes will (a.) comply with AWS D1.1 and (b.) save your company, or the company you are working with, boat loads of money.
You could certainly review the job requirements and develop the requirements to AWS D1.1, but you would find yourself doing PQR’s and Welder Qualifications that may not have been required if you had used the Pre-Qualified procedures laid out in AWS-D1.3 and AWS-D1.6.
Using documents like AWS-D1.2, D1.3, D1.4, D1.5 and D1.6 when your welding doesn’t quite fit in a D1.1 box is certainly considered acceptable when your contract documents read, “All welding shall comply with AWS-D1.1”.
PWC

Exfoliation and Bed Sheets

Preparing for a trip to Oregon for my little brothers wedding my wife Dianne bought me an Esquire magazine. “You just need to read this.” It sits around the house, showing up everyplace I find to relax for a moment. Finally, I pick it up. In amongst the men’s fragrances, schwanky alcoholic beverages and Mini Cooper ads is a section titled, “Grooming – Man at His Best”, sub-title “Summer Feet”. After reading about pumice stones, exfoliation and lotions it hits me, “This is why they bought this.”

Being one far too advanced to fall for simple trickery, I asked, “Is this why you got me this magazine?” Her response, “Well, you’re not going to find this stuff in your damn welding magazines.”

She’s right, so let’s change that. Let’s talk PPE & hygiene…

Starting at the top – Your hard hat has a service life that few folks monitor. It is designed to protect you once. When it does, we say thank you and replace both the shell and head band.

Days can get long and hot. I put hard hats, welding helmets and jock straps in the same category… I don’t share them, you shouldn’t either. Would it kill you to wash or replace the head band in both from time to time? Maybe you have helmets or face shields that are stored at equipment and used by others. Keep a disinfectant (wipe or spray) available for everyone to use.

You spend your whole shift singing into that Welding Hood. Break it down and clean it out with a little soap and water. It also wouldn’t hurt to wear a disposable respirator. It won’t do much for your singing, it tends to muffle the sound (your co-workers will appreciate that) but it should keep your lungs and helmet clean. Keep in mind that Positive Air Flow hoods have their own replaceable components. Change them regularly. And I don’t care how many generations have passed down your Huntsman, when it’s cracked we don’t duct tape it, we replace it.

Ear protection, whether muffs or molded or disposable, need cleaning or replacing regularly. For muffs or molded hearing protection, always follow the manufacturers’ recommendations for maintenance. For disposable hearing protection, replace them with a new set every time you remove them.

Protect your hands with gloves that are appropriate for the Weld Process you are using. Gloves for GTAW (Tig) can be significantly different than the gloves used for FCAW. Insure heat and light can not penetrate them. Replace gloves with any holes. Replace leather gloves that shrink up so bad you can’t get your trigger finger in them. Don’t get them wet and don’t get them oily. You hands are counting on you to protect them. Choosing a glove because it’s light could be a bad decision. Choose a glove because it’s right.

Leathers, flame retardant jackets, chaps need to be free from holes and frays. Unless they can be repaired by a Leathersmith, they should be replaced. Insure they cover any cotton clothing from ultraviolet rays. A day of exposure to the welding arc can be hell on your neck, wrists or crotch (ouch). Insure your PPE protects you completely.

Finally your boots, insure they are appropriate for your welding environment. Snow and rain can be hard on leather. Waterproofing can do wonders for your feet over a 10hr day. Keep your socks dry. Keeping a fresh pair can be great around lunch time. Gravity will insure all spatter and sparks land directly on top of your boots, make sure your laces are ready for that.

And as noted in Esquire; a pumice stone to the foot and a little lotion may just keep your significant other happy and lengthen the life of your bed sheets.

PWC

GMAW-S & Pre-Qualified Weld Procedures

The company I work for welds with GMAW-S and all of the Weld Procedure Specifications (WPS) that we have are from pre-qualified AWS-D1.1 welds. When I look in D1.1 I find that GMAW-S is not a pre-qualified transfer mode. Are all of our WPS's therefore null? If I understand D1.1 correctly we would need to have a PQR for all of our WPS's because they are GMAW-S, is this correct?

 It seems like GMAW-S is the most common, or at least a very

common, GMAW transfer mode why in the world is it not pre-qualified?

Thank you for your insight, Martin

Martin, Love the question(s). The short answer is... Yes, but just to clarify…

When you mention GMAW-S the transfer mode referred to is Short Circuit Transfer (See AWS-D1.1 Annex K, “GMAW-S”). You are right to note that GMAW-S’s use is wide spread. You are also correct that GMAW-S is not a pre-qualified process, per AWS-D1.1.

So what’s up with that?

AWS-D1.1 is the Structural Welding Code for Steel. Its intent is to be used with materials 1/8 inch thick and greater. The concern by those who determine the requirements for pre-qualified procedures is, welding using the Short Circuit Transfer mode has the potential to generate a lack of fusion. It has been my experience, after running hundreds of PQR’s, that this lack of fusion becomes consistent on material thicknesses over 3/16 of an inch in certain positions and progressions.

That’s not to say GMAW-S can not be used with a pre-qualified procedure. AWS-D1.3 is the Structural Welding Code for Sheet Steel. Its intent is to be used with material 3/16 inch thick and less. Clause 3 of AWS-D1.3 lays out the requirements for developing pre-qualified weld procedures using Short Circuit Transfer.

AWS D1.1 in Clause 1.2, “Limitations”, encourages the use of D1.3 on materials 3/16 inch thick and less. So using pre-qualified procedures for Short Circuit Transfer is do-able, it simply has to be done to a different Structural Welding Code.

PWC

Color Coding of Tungsten Electrodes

Paul,

IS THERE ANYONE ON YOUR STAFF THAT CAN TELL ME HOW TO IDENTIFY TUNGSTEN AFTER THE PAINT IS WORN OFF?

Signed Reader

There are 2 common weld processes that use a non-consumable, tungsten electrode, Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW/Tig/HeliArc) and Plasma Arc Welding (PAW). These electrodes come in a variety of compositions or alloys. Each composition serves a specific purpose.

Pure tungsten electrodes (AWS classification EWP) contain 99.50% tungsten. These electrodes provide good arc stability for AC welding on aluminum and magnesium. Their color designation is GREEN.

2% thoriated tungsten electrodes (AWS classification EWTh-2) contain 1.70 to 2.20% thorium. They are the most commonly used. Unlike pure tungsten, these electrodes are exceptional for DC electrode negative or straight polarity on carbon and stainless steels. Their color designation is RED.

2% ceriated tungsten electrodes (AWS classification EWCe-2) contain 1.80 to 2.20% cerium. These electrodes perform best in DC welding at low current settings but can be used in AC or DC processes. Their color designation is ORANGE.

1.5% lanthanated tungsten electrodes (AWS classification EWLa-1.5) contain 1.30 to 1.70% lanthanum, or lanthana. These electrodes have many of the same advantages as ceriated electrodes. They also closely resemble the conductivity characteristics of 2% thoriated tungsten. Their color designation is GOLD

Zirconiated tungsten electrodes (AWS classification EWZr-1) contain 0.15 to 0.40% zirconium. It is ideal for AC welding and under no circumstance is zirconiated recommended for DC welding. Their color designation is BROWN.

Each of these electrodes placed side-by-side look identical. For that reason a color code system has been developed to designate each. Short of sending them to a lab for analysis ($$$) once the color designation is gone, there is no way to tell what type of tungsten you're holding.

As the hack Tig (GTAW) welder I am, I keep short, unmarked tungstens in old military stick match containers. Each container is clearly marked as to the type of tungsten inside. Along with that, I always-always-always break down my torch when I'm done and store the tungsten in its designated container.

This works for me in my garage. This would not be a good practice in a manufacturing or code environment.

Once the marking is removed the tungsten is not traceable and you just lost control of your weld process.

PWC

Cracks or Laminations, they can't be both

Paul,

In evaluating a FCAW weld cross section to AWS D1.1:2010, the weld engineer has asked that the CJP groove weld be evaluated by 4.9.4.1 for PJP. This is a requirement that the weld engineer has asked for.

The Macro weld cross section as evaluated, revealed anomalies in the base material (A36), see photo. In the cross section the base material shows laminations. Under higher magnification the laminations (or tearing/crack) in base material are confirmed.
The laminations have to be considered a Crack and rejectable per 4.9.4.1(a) and the weld engineer’s requirement, correct?

Dale,
Leave it to me to be the dude that disagrees with the engineer.
Breaking my first "cardinal rule" of weld inspection (CR-1: Never evaluate a weld from a photo), the anomalies you've noted are not in the weld. Nor are they (with the exception of one) in the H.A.Z. (heat affected zone). Nor do they run in a direction which would suggest a welding related problem.
If you have concluded that these are laminations (Dye-Pen [PT] would confirm) they would not be included in 4.9.4.1
These laminations should be evaluated per the material specification of the base material (ASTM A36). That should be the criteria used to determine acceptance.
On the other hand, the beauty of being the "Engineer" is that your word is final. So if you're asking me, I say this weld is acceptable and the laminations should be evaluated per ASTM A36, but you go with whatever the Engineer determines.

Why do good Welders fail weld tests?

Some time around 1981 I completed technical school and was given the opportunity to take my first Welder Qualification test. Cyde Iron Works in Duluth, MN was hiring. Passing meant a $12hr opportunity to join the USWA Local 1424. At that time, unemployment hovered just over 9%. The 4 tests consisted of unlimited thickness, 3G and 4G tests with both Flux-Core (FCAW) and Stick (SMAW). This was the opportunity I had spent the last year training for.

I was at the dinner table when the 3rd shift Foreman called to let me know I had failed the 3G SMAW test. I was devastated. Three days later my instructor called to say they were allowing me a retest.

Over the past 30 years I’ve administered 100’s of (probably closer to 1000) Welder Qualification and Procedure Qualification (PQR) tests. There is little more frustrating then when good Welder, fail. So why do they? I’ve come up with a few ideas…

• Nerves – There is a lot on the line when a Welder enters the test booth. Maybe they’ve been out for a while and finances are tight. Maybe there are 20 Welders competing for 2 positions. Maybe passing gets them that much needed raise.
What ever it is, chill-out. A welder qual test is no different then the work you’ll do every day. You wouldn’t be in that booth if you weren’t ready for it.

• Prep – There is a lot riding on a Welder Qual test, so make it count.
Remove any flame or plasma cut surface from the groove face.
Remove any mill scale from the plate surface for at least a ¼ inch from the joint.
If the bevel does not require a land (root face), insure you grind it to a knife’s edge. If the bevel requires a land, make it consistent.
Remove any mill scale from the backing plate. That joint should shine.

• Technique – Use ALL your best practices.
If given a Weld Procedure (WPS), read it! What should your wire feed speed be? Set It! What should your current or voltage be? Set It! What should your flow rate be? Set it! You do that, and you’re dang near there.
When given run-off tabs, use them! Backing bars should be 2 inches longer than the joint. That’s 1 inch at the start end and 1 inch at the finish end. Use them. Starting a weld on a run-off tab allows your eyes to focus and the arc to settle down. Ending on a run-off tab insures you will fill the joint for its entire length.
Don’t “break” the arc if you don’t have to. If you have to, break it in the center of the joint (I’ve said too much already).
Bring a wire cutter and ALWAYS cut the wire (filler or electrode) before striking the next arc.
Clean the Mig (GMAW) or Flux-Core (FCAW) shielding nozzle after every pass.
When Tig (GTAW) welding, don’t allow the filler wire outside the shielding gas.
When pipe welding, keep your tacks small. Grind them if they’ll let you.
Maintain your purge. Remember, as you finish your root that purge gas needs someplace to go. Give it that opening.

• Ask questions – Lots of them.
Can I make adjustments to the machine?
Can I use some practice material to adjust to this equipment?
If I make a mistake, can I remove it with a grinder?
What is the finish weld visual expectation?
Why are you looking at me like that?

My Uncle Bud was a welding god (at least in my and my families’ eyes). He once took me aside, after a failed Welder Qualification test and said, “The only Welder who’s never failed a weld test is the one who’s not been welding very long.”
There’s a special place in my heart for good Welders that fail a weld test. But for your sake, don’t be that guy.

PWC

Using "Bond-o" Fillers on Acceptable Discontinuities

Question:

The company that I work for makes a single pass circumferential weld , on which at the tie-in on the weld completion, there is a minor tendency for a open pore in the weld crater.

Investigation into this reveals terms such as a pinhole, blowhole, fisheye, or crater pipe are used to describe this condition.

Historically, we have filled the crater and pore with weld metal and sent the product on for a paint application.  More recently , the practice of filling the pore area with a non-metallic high temperature sealant  has occurred.

Our Engineering department deems this weld discontinuity as a cosmetic issue only, and thereby has authorized the usage of the sealant.

We use the principles of the AWS D1.1 code. In the 2010 version , the Commentary Paragraph C-5.28 states that if all inspections of weld  and base metal have been completed and accepted prior to application,

a nonmetallic filler or mastic may be used for cosmetic reasons.  Is the above application consistent with the intent of this paragraph in the commentary, or is it referring to something different?

Hi (Name removed as promised),

I can’t tell you how good it makes me feel that you would explore the Commentary to learn more about the codes intent.  That’s what the Commentaries all about.

Your interpretation is correct on the use of fillers in this situation.  If your Engineers have deemed this discontinuity to be considered acceptable, then the use of fillers is a good way enhance the look of this surface, and Yes, you are still within the guidelines of AWS-D1.1

I recently implemented this same repair at a local manufacturer.  Their “old way” of doing business was to take a Mig gun to these pinholes and “Zap” weld into them.  Their repair was taking a perfectly acceptable discontinuity and turning it into an Arc Strike.  A big no-no in the wonderful world of welding.

I’m glad you opted for the “Bond-O” over the “Arc Strike”.  Good call and good luck.

PWC