AWS D17.1 1

[kingnero]

Des anyone have practical experience with the AWS D17.1/D17.1M:2010? This one strikes me as very particular, however that's perhaps because I lack experience with this standard.

Some questions:
(1) What is the range of qualification for procedure qualifications (PQR's) ?
I'm talking about all variables, as there are none indicated in the standard. I also cannot find a reference to another stnadard where these ranges should be taken from.

(2) Are fillet welds considered with or without backing (when considering welder performance qualifications) ?

(3) Are fillet welds considered partial penetration (where there is no complete fusion of one leg, like in most thick-walled configurations), or should this be left open/unchecked in the WPQ form (again, when considering welder performance qualifications)?


I'll probably come back with more questions, however these are for the time being the most important ones.
Thanks for your input...

 

[gtaw]

Fillet welds are required to have fusion to the root, but not necessarily beyond the root. There is an exception for fillet welds joining thin sheet metal. Fillet welds are considered welded with backing, but experienced people understand that fillet welds don't have to penetrate the joint, so with or without backing simply doesn't apply. Some aerospace companies, they will not be named, consider partial joint penetration groove welds and fillet welds to be "hidden" because there is no practical way to determine the extent of joint penetration, thus no way to visually check the fusion or joint penetration without sectioning the weld. Hidden welds have additional qualification requirements imposed by those particular aerospace companies. the customer man not be right, but they are never wrong, so just recognize the additional testing required and incorporate it into the pricing.

D17.1 is founded on military welding standards applicable to aerospace welding. MIL-STD-2219 combined several military welding standards. When Ronald became president, he cancelled all the military standards, so MIL-STD-2219 was handed off to SAE. They in turn handed it off to AWS who managed to, well let's be kind and say they didn't shine in their efforts with the early editions of D17.1. The military reactivated MIL-STD-2219 shortly after AWS published D17.1. AWS has cleaned their document up considerably, but it still isn't a shining example of an AWS welding standard. Just my opinion you understand.

Since D17.1 recognizes several alternate welding standards, primarily for nonflight hardware, I opt to qualify the WPSs to the various alternatives listed by D17.1. I use D1.1 for carbon steels, D1.2 for aluminum, etc. I use the thickness ranges qualified by the alternate welding standards when writing the WPSs. The exception is when it comes to qualifying welders. The test regiment for performance qualification and the thickness ranges qualified are very different than those listed by most welding standards. For that reason, I qualify the welders using D17.1's requirements.

Best regards - Al

 

[kingnero]

Thanks for your insights! Learned something new here.
Much appreciated.

Additional question: how do you treat wall thickness of a solid cilindrical part?
Range of qualification of a tube with diameter D is >= D
For wall thickness of a tube to plate connection, only the wall thickness of the tube is considered.
Would it be correct to assume a solid bar with diameter D to have a wall thickness of D/2 ? So the range of plate thickness for fillet welds will be 0.67 to 4 times D/2 ?