×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

(OP)


I would like to use a AWSD1.1 qualified full penetration joint , where the root is done by TIG and fill/cap with FCAW , to perform a partial penetration weld using a FCAW GS only. Is this is allowed under the AWS D1.1 noms. If so please also advise ether section in AWS which support this .

RE: AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

That makes little sense.

Why do you feel a weld procedure qualified and intended for full penetration joint can be used "as-is" for a partial penetration weld?

Different processes can be used as you indicate for root and cover passes. But the basic requirements for using a standard, pre-approved welding procedure is that you do in fact follow the entire procedure!

RE: AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

hsemus,
Unlike ASME IX a CJP doesn't automatically qualify a PJP or Fillet.
Additional tests are required as noted below.

4.10.3 Verification of CJP Groove WPS by Macroetch.
When a WPS has been qualified for a CJP groove
weld and is applied to the welding conditions of a PJP
groove weld, three macroetch cross-section tests specimens
shall be required to demonstrate that the specified
weld size shall be equalled or exceeded.

Cheers,
DD

RE: AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

See the essential variable Table 4.5, and you can figure out what your WPS is qualified for. You can weld any prequalified PJP joint with a WPS qualified by welding a CJP joint.

RE: AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

CWEng - Not without a macroetch for weld size, as indicated by DekDee, even for a prequalified joint detail.

As for "eliminating" a process from a dual-process qualified WPS, the answer is no. See AWS interp I-9/91-10-03.

RE: AWS D1.1 - CPJ to PPJ

MR168- I would agree with you if the question was about qualifying a WPS using a PJP joint detail. Based on the title, I assumed the original qualification was CJP, in which case Table 4.5 variable 31 (in the 2006 edition I'm looking at right now) should govern, which says "qualification of any CJP groove weld qualifies for any groove detail conforming to the requirements of 3.12 or 3.13" 3.12 is for PJP joint details. That would be my opinion anyway, but I'll give you that AWS D1.1 is not definitive in many areas for requirements that seem to conflict, including deletion of one process from the qualified CJP weld, as the original poster inquired about. It seems to be entirely silent on that matter, so would probably need referred to the engineer of record.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources