Welding defects in structural steel welding (Overhead Crane) 5

[metboss]

Hi All,

We have supplied Overhead Crane to our customer directly from our OEM/manufacturer facility(manufacturer origin- Europe) and during in-receipt inspection by Client QC, it's been found with weld defects (porosity, spatter,incomplete penetration) on some areas of fillet weld joint(Cantilever/Girder weld joint). At the outset, client rejected our Crane and asking for corrective actions. We have contacted our OEM and obtained all documents. It's noted that they used EN standard for welding and used only 10% NDE (MPI & UT).
Now as a corrective action, we need to repair the fillet weld joints; but, OEM is not ready to send their welder to our facility (cost impact: Europe to Middle East).

Now I have below concerns:

1) Can I use local sub-contractor welders with OEM's WPS/PQR to repair the defective welds ?
2) Or do we need to qualify these local sub-contractor welders to OEM's WPS ? OEM's WPS is based on EN standard and not as per AWSD1.1
3) Or can we utilize any AWS D1.1 qualified sub-contractor welders ?

Please advise.

 

[DekDee]

Al,
Method statement is basically a repair procedure or repair plan (as you noted).
It has to be reviewed and approved by the client prior to any repairs being undertaken.

metboss,
If your OEM has released this crane (presumably inspected by their QC department) what is the point in having them re-inspect it ?
Would it not be more prudent (as Al noted) to have a third party involved ?
What is going to happen if your OEMs QC inspector says all welds are acceptable when the Clients QC inspector has previously rejected some of them ?

 

[krishh07]

In my view,

1) Can I use local sub-contractor welders with OEM's WPS/PQR to repair the defective welds ?
- Repair can be done with subcontractor developed WPS/PQR(if available).
2) Or do we need to qualify these local sub-contractor welders to OEM's WPS ? OEM's WPS is based on EN standard and not as per AWSD1.1?
- You can quaify your subcontractors
3) Or can we utilize any AWS D1.1 qualified sub-contractor welders ?
- No,qualification required

katrina07

 

[ll23]

"I just love the smell of napalm in the morning", I really enjoy/learn a lot from this type of trending questions, thank´s all of you for kindly share your expertice.

 

[kingnero]

Depending onn the location where it is sold to, it is subject to CE marking.
If a third party alters the product (by welding, ...), it voids the original CE marking. Thus causing all kind of related problems in the future (like periodic controls, ...).

---

http://be.linkedin.com/in/fusionpoint

 

[chicopee]

"...we need to repair the fillet weld joints; but, OEM is not ready to send their welder to our facility..." that's one reason to buy "made in the USA" which would have had that issue would have been settled quickly.

 

[Ron]

uh..chicopee...product was fabricated in Europe and delivered to Middle East....nothing to do with USA.

Agree with graw that third party inspection should be done before developing repair scheme. Fox guarding the henhouse didn't work the first time....probably wouldn't work the second time either.

In any case, hold the manufacturer responsible for the efficacy of the repairs as well as the original.

10 percent inspection is reasonable for initial inspection if done properly by independent inspection agency. If you get more than 10 percent failure of the inspected welds, then the overall inspection should be increased appropriately, even up to 100 percent inspection.

 

[chicopee]

Regardless Ron, US manufacturers would have acted on this case immediately instead of "stroking" the customer.

 

[dik]

that's one reason to buy "made in the USA"

US manufacturers would have acted on this case immediately

...is not always a panacea...

Dik

 

[chicopee]

A strong potential liability case is a motive for any US manufacturer to act whereas overseas manufacturers may not blink an eye.

 

[Ron]

chicopee...true!