[cassgazz]

Could always shoot the client an email as to what they require, at least this way there is a permanent record. Even print the email off and compile it into the MDR if they say partial pen.

My thoughts though – having a 4mm root face +/“-” 1mm, full pen would be the better option.

[cassgazz]

FYI you can not take impacts from macro sample, I think you are getting mixed up with hardness testing

Yes, 3 months off and not thinking straight. Glad to see someone is on the ball. Sorry for the mis-information.

[cassgazz]

The clause 1.3 Innovation, can be used as a basis for the decision
I agreed it is not a perfect situation
But As1554.1 not prequalified consumable and joint – testing covers most requirements
R
Flash

I agree with you Flash. First run it past the client and inspector and make sure they are happy
with it.
AS1444-4140 steel would have a max carbon equivalent of 0.925%, which gives a weldability group
number of 12. Use test methods for procedure qualification as though joint and consumables are
not pre-qualified. You would also want tensile test to fracture outside the weld zone, and above the
minimum tensile strength of the material.

Here is what it says in clause 1.3 of AS1554.1

Any alternative materials, welding processes, consumables, methods of construction or
testing that give equivalent results to those specified, but do not comply with the specific
requirements of this Standard or are not mentioned in it, are not necessarily prohibited.
The Joint Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand Committee on welding of structures
can act in an advisory capacity concerning equivalent suitability, but specific approval
remains the prerogative of the inspecting authority.

Hope this helps,
Regards,
Gary

[cassgazz]

Just out of interest in this topic for procedure qulification you state that if a 1G weld is done and it requires impact testing then a fundamental change in welding position requires further qualification which is clearly stated in AS3992 table 5.1.4b.
So if a 6G pipe butt weld is done for a procedure qualification and impact testing is required does this cover the 5G and 2G position or does impact testing have to be carried out on two more seperate procedure qualifications to cover these fundamental change in welding postions.
Bearing in mind if there are no impacts required on a 6G procedure qulification then this covers you for all positions.

6G covers all positions, except vertical down – if a macro is taken from each position to be qualified. If impact testing is required, there is no requirement where they are taken from. 

To cover yourself, you could have impacts taken on each macro sample.

[cassgazz]

But if that “certified” welder has not welded for 6 months with a certain process, he/she needs to be “re-qualified”.

Using AS1554, The only advantage of using a certified welder is that one test piece in pipe – 6G position – is enough to qualify for all positions ( except vertical down ) and all weld procedures using one process, whareas an “uncertified” welder will need to a weld test with a macro taken for ALL weld procedures utilised on the job.

Hope that makes sense.

[cassgazz]

Chris,

If the carbon steel is less than 12mm, it automatically does not require heat treatment.
Carbon steel only requires heat treatment at 32mm and above.

[cassgazz]

This was going back about 4 years ago now. I’m pretty sure it was Argoshield heavy.  I remember the bottle being the same color as the argoshield universal, just with darker band on the top.

Stainshield also has the black band on top, which I can’t recall seeing.

Having said that though, I have used Argoshield universal for 309 wire. This was just general maintenance welding though.

Regards,
Gary

[cassgazz]

I don’t believe that there were any changes to this table in the 2011 revision.

Overhead butt in plate will qualify the welder for the following positions –

Flat, Horizontal, Overhead butt welds in plate (1G, 2G, 4G)
Flat, Horizontal Vertical, Overhead fillet welds in plate (1F, 2F, 4F)
Rotating Flat butt weld in pipe (1G)
Rotating Flat fillet weld in pipe at 45 degrees (1F)
Horizontal Vertical & Fixed overhead fillet weld in pipe (2F & 4F)

[cassgazz]

SiS,

Just had a look through 2004 edition of AS/NZS 1554.1.
The positions you have listed are correct to this edition, but these HAVE changed in the 2011 edition, to the positions in my last post.

To qualify all positions (except Vertical Down) to AS/NZS 1554.1, the best way would be to do a pipe coupon in the 6G position.
Instead of getting a macro done, have it radiographed, and if applicable, bend tests to AS/NZS 3992, which also qualifes the welder for pressure equipment standards.

[cassgazz]

I have come across this exemption before. Power station boiler tubes & piping – can’t remember exact thicknesses, but around 60mm OD x 5 – 6mm thick; Material 2.25%Cr, 1Mo.

P22 material has a maximum allowable carbon content of 0.15% IIRC.

A1 – Item C refers to parent metal composition. PWHT for carbon steel is not required below thicknesses of 32mm.

A2 – Yes, correct. Go off the thickness of the thinner material.

[cassgazz]

Hi Nik,

Welcome to the forum.

For what you want to use a MIG for, this welder will be fine. Lincoln machines widely used in industrial environments, and are a top, well known brand. Only thing I will add, is to make sure it will accept a 15kg wire spool. Those small rolls don’t last as long, and it works out cheaper buying the larger spools.

Regards,
Gary

[cassgazz]

Haven’t welded any S/S pipe that thin with 309 wire, however welding S/S plate to C/S plate we used 309L wire in a Fronius TPS 2700 machine. Gas used if I remember correctly was Argoshield Heavy.

I found that the Austalian Edition TPS2700 machine was far better than the normal TPS2700.  This is due to the Aust model having a specific setting for 309 wire. More noticeable in out of position welding. Can’t remember if pulse was used – don’t think it was – but for 0.9mm pipe, I would recommend it.

Regards,
Gary.

[cassgazz]

[cassgazz]

Might be referring to the welder qualification section – Table 4.12.2.3, where welding of a butt weld qualifies a fillet.

I cannot see how a butt weld procedure would qualify a fillet weld, as the range of qualification for fillets is either single or multi-pass.

[cassgazz]

Going back to the original question
– sub contractors > self employed > change from job to job > employed by themselves > therefore have not changed employer –

If they have evidence of complying to the relevant standard, with the process required, there is no need to re-qualify.

However, any “wise” company would make a weld test a condition of employment. It’s always good to have first hand proof that the welder in question can weld adequatley, and the quality of welding can be assessed before welds are completed on the job.

[Author]

Posts