Aluminum Q and A June 2010:Layout 1 5/7/10 6:10 PM Page 24

ALUMINUM
BY TONY ANDERSON
Q&A
Q: I am about to start welding procedure
specification development in preparation
for manufacturing a welded aluminum
structure. I have only developed welding
procedures to the requirements of the
American Welding Society (AWS) D1.1,
Structural Welding Code Steel, with
which I am very familiar. Can you please
provide me with any information on the
differences I will need to consider when
working with the AWS D1.2, Structural
Welding Code Aluminum? Any informa-
tion about areas that may cause me prob-
lems during welding procedure develop-
ment would be greatly appreciated.

A: You have asked a very good question.

While the process of welding procedure
development for aluminum is in many
ways the same as that for steel, there are
some very significant differences between
the requirements of the two codes. Also,
there are some details associated with the
qualification testing of aluminum that
most certainly can cause problems if not
fully understood.
Fig. 1 The mechanism for the wraparound bend test fixture, the preferred method for
bend testing aluminum weldments.
Range of Material
Thickness
One fundamental difference between
these two codes, which is not normally a
problem, but which I will mention anyway,
is that the AWS D1.1 steel code has a spe-
cific limitation on thickness for which it is
intended to be used. Steel less than 18 in.
in thickness is not intended to be used with
this code but rather with the AWS D1.3,
Structural Welding Code Sheet Steel. The
AWS D1.2 aluminum code has no such
restriction.

Prequalification of Welding
Procedure Specifications
The AWS D1.1 steel code has, for many
years, made use of prequalified welding
procedures. The code provides the appli-
cable requirements, which if conformed
to, will allow the user to produce docu-
mented welding procedure specifications
without the formal process of producing
welding procedure qualification records
and associated mechanical testing.
The AWS D1.2 aluminum code, on the
other hand, does not have the provision
for the prequalification of welding proce-
dure specifications. All procedures devel-
oped with the AWS D1.2 aluminum code
must be tested to be qualified in accor-
dance with the code requirements. (Dis-
cussion within the AWS D1G Subcommit-
tee on Aluminum Structures would sug-
gest that prequalified welding procedure
specifications may be something we see
in the future.)

Guided Bend Testing

There are some significant differences
between the procedures used within these
codes for guided bend testing. The partic-
ular differences that I would like to point
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index

24 JUNE 2010
Aluminum Q and A June 2010:Layout 1 5/7/10
out are those related to the special bend-
ing conditions that are required when
qualifying procedures in accordance with
the AWS D1.2 aluminum code. Because
of the physical characteristics of some alu-
minum alloys, there are some very specific
differences between how some alloys are
bend tested.
The M23 base alloys (6xxx series)
may be bend tested under either of two
conditions, as-welded or annealed. In the
as-welded condition, if the test sample is
over 18 in. (3 mm), its thickness shall be re-
duced to 18 in. (3 mm) thickness before
bending and then bent over a diameter of
2116 in. (52 mm). Specimens of less than 18
in. (3 mm) thickness shall be bent over a
diameter of 1612 thickness. Annealed spec-
imens of M23 material of 38 in. (10 mm)
thickness shall be bent over a 623 thickness
diameter. The annealing practice that is
conducted to the sample before bending
is as follows: Hold for 2 to 3 h at 775F
(410C) then cool at 50F/h (28C/h) to
500F (260C). The rate of cooling below
500F (260C) is unimportant.
Welds made with M24 (2xxx series)
material shall be annealed and bent over
an 8 thickness diameter.
Welds made with M27 (7xxx series)
material shall be bend tested within two
weeks of welding. (This requirement is as-
sociated with the 7005 materials ability
to substantially improve mechanical prop-
erties through natural aging, precipitation
hardening at room temperature.)
Welds made with F23 (4xxx series)
filler metal on any M21, M22, or M23
(1xxx, 3xxx, 5xxx, or 6xxx series) material
shall be bent in the same manner as M23
material.
One other suggestion with regard to
bend testing is to pay particular attention
to the note provided within the AWS D1.2
aluminum code that states that the wrap-
around guided bend fixture is the pre-
ferred method of bend testing aluminum
weldments Fig. 1. Although the plunger
type guided bend test fixture is an option
for use within the code, I suggest that you
use the wraparound fixture, particularly
for the higher-strength materials.
As can be seen above, the special bend
testing requirements for aluminum are
rather extensive. I can assure you that if
these requirements are not followed,
there is a high probability that problems
will be encountered during procedure
qualification testing.
Reduced Section
Tension Tests
One other item to consider is related
to obtaining the minimum tensile strength
requirements when conducting reduced
section tension tests. Minimum tensile
strength requirements for aluminum are
6:11 PM Page 25
based on the annealed or overaged con-
dition of the weld heat-affected zone
(HAZ) dependent on whether welding the
nonheat treatable or the heat-treatable
aluminum alloys. Be aware that when
welding the heat-treatable aluminum al-
loys, particularly the 6xxx series, care
should be exercised to prevent the over-
heating of the base alloy during the weld-
ing process. Careful adherence to inter-
pass temperature should be maintained,
and preheating limits should be observed
to prevent excessive welding tempera-
tures. Consideration should be given to
welding parameters, amps, volts, and
travel speeds that govern heat input dur-
ing the welding process. These parame-
ters may need to be adjusted in order to
- 9948
lower the overall heat input during weld-
ing. The tensile strength of the HAZ of
the heat-treatable alloys can be substan-
tially lowered (to levels lower than that
acceptable to the code) if welded with ex-
cessive heat input.
Conclusion
Yes, there are some differences be-
tween the AWS D1.1 and AWS D1.2 codes
in terms of welding procedure qualifica- ORBITAL AND
tion requirements. These differences are
to be expected as they address the proce- MECHANIZED WELDING
dure qualification of two substantially dif-
ferent materials. It has been my experi-
MASTERS OF
ence that the two most common areas of NARROW- GAP
difficulty experienced during the welding WELDING
procedure development process for alu-
minum are associated with bend testing Polysoude, setting todays standards
and tension tests, which I have listed for weld quality and productivity.
above. Worldwide, 1 out of 2 end users is
There are also other issues such as equipped with Polysoude welding
porosity and incomplete fusion, which technology.
tend to be more prevalent in aluminum Your perfect partner for narrow-gap
than in steel. However, these are more re- welding, Polysoude.
lated to specific preweld preparation
methods and welding techniques, and not
directly associated with differences in
code requirements.o
50 Years of Excellence in
Providing Innovative Weld
Technology and Expertise.
TONY ANDERSON is corporate technical
training manager for ESAB North America. Worldwide Organization
He is a Fellow of the British Welding Institute Provides Support Next to You.
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
(TWI), a Registered Chartered Engineer with
the British Engineering Council, and holds International Sales and
Service, On-Site Training and
numerous positions on AWS technical com- Maintenance with Rental
mittees. He is chairman of the Aluminum As- Options.
sociation Technical Advisory Committee for
Welding and author of the book Welding ASTRO ARC POLYSOUDE INC
24856 Avenue Rockefeller
Aluminum Questions and Answers currently VALENCIA, CA 91355
available from AWS. Questions may be sent to sales@astroarc.com
T. 661-702-0141 - F. 661-702-0632
Anderson c/o Welding Journal, 550 NW
LeJeune Rd., Miami, FL 33126, or via e-mail www.astroarc.com
at tanderson@esab.com.
WELDING JOURNAL 25