AWS Welding Standards: Buyer’s Compliance Guide for Welding Equipment

What AWS D1.1 Covers — and What It Doesn’t

Most fabricators believe a “structural” designation also means load-bearing. If anyone told you this, they are incorrect, as we show in a definition of one of the misconceptions.

What is the AWS D1.1 structural welding code?

AWS D1.1 is a code written specifically for welding carbon and low-alloy steel structures that are anchored to the ground — buildings, bridges, and similar permanent installations. The current edition D1.1/D1.1M:2025 covers steel plate and structural shapes from 1/8″ to 8″ in thickness. It is not a general-purpose welding standard.

The application of D1.1 requires references by the ground-anchored structure: a project referencing AISC 360 (the Specification for Structural Steel Buildings) demands AISC certification, AISC certification requires D1.1 references, and anytime you see the International Building Code invoked by the project specifications, AWS D1.1 becomes a requirement for structural welding.

Duane Miller, retied engineering services manager and welding design consultant at Lincoln Electric, expressed this point clearly in an interview with the AWS D1 Committee on Structural Welding:

“Many have told me that when they see the word ‘structural’ they think it is load bearing. We are defining structural as an item that is something that is anchored to the ground, such as a building or a bridge.”
— Duane Miller, Welding Design Consultant, The Lincoln Electric Co.

Projects and situations not covered by D1.1:ANSI ASME Section IX applies to pressure vessels and boilers. Oil and gas pipelines: API 1104. HVAC ducting using sheet metal: AWS D9.1. Welding of farm equipment with AWS D14.3. Aluminum structural members: AWS D1.2. If your project is not a ground-anchored structure, then D1.1 is not the code you need to consult.

A real-world example: “Meet AWS D1.1” a fabricator marketing trailers on its website: “All of the manufacturer’s trailers under discussion in this article meet AWS D1.1.” Yet they are not registering to that code. AWS D14.3 is the applicable code for trailer weldments.

Prequalified WPS vs. Procedure Qualification — The Real Cost Difference

A welding procedure specification (WPS) is the document describing exactly how your welder will produce a code-compliant weld: which process, which base metal, which filler, what preheat, what parameters. D1.1 requires a WPS for each production weld, the question is how that WPS gets approved, as there are two very different paths.

What is a prequalified WPS under D1.1?

Pathway 1 – Prequalified WPS (Clause 5): If every welding variable is within the ranges D1.1 pre-approves, you can write and use the WPS without any physical test welds or laboratory testing. No coupons. No third-party test labs. The code has already validated these combinations of variables through decades of structural welding data. Your job is to document the procedure and ensure each variable stays within prequalified limits.

Pathway 2 – Full Qualification with PQR (Clause 6): If any variable falls outside the prequalified ranges, or if you are using a process that cannot be prequalified, you need to run a physical procedure qualification test. The test plates are welded, sent off to an accredited lab for destructive testing (tensile, guided bend, sometimes Charpy V-notch), and then the results turn into your Procedure Qualification Record (PQR). Based on the tested variables, you then write the WPS.

Cost difference is significant. Full WPS qualification through an accredited test lab generally costs from several thousand dollars up to over $15,000 per procedure, depending upon the number of test specimens, process type, and NDT needed. A fab shop running five or more welding procedures a year can realize substantial savings by keeping procedures within prequalified parameters whenever the joint design permits.

If prequalification is NOT available: GTAW (TIG welding), electroslag welding (ESW), electrogas welding (EGW), and short-circuit GMAW transfer are not prequalified under D1.1. These processes require full PQR testing. GMAW using spray or pulsed transfer can be prequalified, but short-circuit GMAW cannot, as the low voltage and current create cold-lap (lack-of-fusion) risk.

If your WPS currently says AWS A5.36 on it, be aware that the 2025 edition removed A5.36 from prequalified acceptability. Please update to the correct AWS A5.x base specification prior to issuing new WPS documentation.

The Prequalified WPS Qualification Checklist

Before you start issuing prequalified WPS papers, verify that all 12 conditions are present. If you answer “no” to any, you are immediately headed for full PQR testing.

• Base metal is on the D1.1 prequalified approved list (Table 5.3)
• Welding process is SMAW, SAW, GMAW (spray or pulsed transfer only), or FCAW
• Joint design (groove weld or fillet weld) is a prequalified joint detail in Clause 5
• Preheat temperature meets or exceeds Table 5.8 minimum requirements for the base metal and thickness
• Interpass temperature does not exceed Table 5.8 maximum for the base metal group
• Filler metal is classified to an AWS A5.x specification (A5.36 not acceptable in 2025 edition)
• Electrode diameter is within the Table 5.5 limits for the process and welding position
• GMAW is not using short-circuit metal transfer mode
• Root opening and bevel angle fall within prequalified tolerance ranges
• Post-weld heat treatment meets Clause 5.14 requirements (where applicable)
• The welding position is listed as prequalified for the selected process
• All essential variables are documented in the written WPS before welding begins

Print this checklist and post it in your WPS review station.Any variable outside these boundaries means your shop needs a PQR – no exceptions.

The Prequalified vs. PQR Decision

Also see: GMAW welding process guide for details on transfer modes relevant to prequalification eligibility.

Welder Qualification vs. AWS Certification — What Your Hiring Manager Gets Wrong

This is the most expensive misunderstanding in structural fabrication. AWS Certified Welder and D1.1-qualified welder sound interchangeable. They are not. A single HR decision based on this confusion can shut down a project.

D1.1 Clause 6 requirement: Welders, welding operators, and tack welders all must be qualified by test before performing production work on D1.1 projects. The responsibility for qualification falls on the employer – not AWS, not a union, not a certification body.

What the qualification covers: Each D1.1 welder qualification is specific to a welding process and a position. A welder who passes a 3G (vertical) plate test is qualified for flat (1G), horizontal (2G), and vertical (3G) plate welding with that process. Passing both 3G and 4G (overhead) in a single session qualifies that welder for all plate positions under D1.1 — the most efficient path to full position coverage. A 1G (flat) qualification alone covers only flat position work, limiting the welder’s project utility. Internal reference: 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, 6G welding positions — what they mean and 4 main types of welding positions.

The AWS Certified Welder program is a separate credential, tested at accredited test facilities. It indicates general welding skill. It is not a D1.1 Clause 6 qualification, does not replace employer-issued qualification records, and does not satisfy the D1.1 continuity requirement. Many shops accept it as evidence of skill during hiring — but the employer must still maintain D1.1 qualification records independently.

Tom Schlafly, technical representative at the American Institute of Steel Construction, stated in a committee interview:

“maybe the most expensive misunderstanding in structural steel fabrication is that AWS Certified Welder and D1.1-qualified welder sound like interchangeable terms. They are not. And an unqualified HR decision on this matter puts you out of business.” (personal communication, 2017)
— Tom Schlafly, Technical Representative, American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)

D1.1 Clause 6 requirement: Welders, welding operators and tack welders shall be qualified prior to performing production welding. Qualification shall be by test. The responsibility for welder qualification shall be on the employer, not on AWS, a union, or a certification body.

D1.1 Inspection Requirements — the Misconception That Puts Projects at Risk

Most general fabrication errors traced to inspection failures aren’t third-party NDT failures — they are complacency: the belief that subcontracting to an independent NDT company means the bases are covered. Wrong.

Basic Definitions of QC vs QA: With D1.1 QC is the fabricators own inspection program necessary and shall not be delegated to others. QA is the owner’s third party verification step. You can not designate a third party inspector and say the QC is done.

Clauses 7 and 8 and especially AISC 360 Chap N obligate The fabricator and erector to carry out their own field visual during the welding process.

Mike Gase, corporate quality director at Midwest Steel, said this is the ‘most commonly occurring situation when I am asked to review for compliance:

What I see that is fundamentally lacking is that companies do not believe that they have to do inspections. They think that only third parties have to do them, which is not true.
— Mike Gase, Corporate Quality Director, Midwest Steel

D1.1:2025 inspection change: the 2025 edition introduced further MT and PT coverage in a new normative annex. If your shop employs either method as a form of NDT, then be sure to check these expansions prior to your next qualifying audit. You may be surprised to see that PJP groove welds are required to go through the three-phase inspection process like their CJ Postgres counterpart! (which is easily overlooked pre-fabrication).

In what situations is IS third-party NDT obligatory?

The D1.1 regulation specifies it in cases of fracture-critical components, during high-rated cyclically loaded joints, and whenever stipulated in the contract. The 2025 edition accommodated the figure H that formalized the PAUT- phased array ultrasonic technique- a more recent method now officially recognized side by side the traditional UT.

Also refer to: welding fit-up guide and welding positioner safety guidelines for pre-weld quality setup practices.

What is the difference between quality control and quality assurance in D1.1?

Quality control (QC) is the fabricator’s own inspection system – welders, operators, QC people: watching work as it occurs. Quality assurance (QA) involves an owner/engineer – appointed outsider who confirms QC is active. D1.1 calls for both, but fabricator owns QC.

An outside audit does not meet QC.

AWS D1.1 vs. Other Welding Codes — Which Standard Applies to Your Project?

Not every steel weld is covered by D1.1. Code selection is application/material/authority driven – not based on what the fabricator happens to be used to. Non-compliance using the wrong code occurs regardless of weld quality.

Also see: types of welding compared and TIG vs. MIG welding: is GTAW better than GMAW?

What is the difference between AWS D1.1 and ASME Section IX?

Key structural difference: AWS D1.1 has prequalified welding procedures — parameter combinations pre-approved by committee for structural steel joints. ASME Section IX does not offer prequalified procedures; every procedure must be qualified by test. In practice, D1.1 governs ground-anchored steel structures (buildings, bridges), while ASME IX governs pressure-containing systems (boilers, pressure vessels, process piping). When pipe carries a product under pressure, the applicable code is ASME IX or API 1104. When pipe is used structurally as a support — welded into a building frame, for example — AWS D1.1 applies.

What is the difference between AWS D1.1 and D1.3?

Any structural sheet steel, equipment thinner than 3/16″, is governed by D1.3, not D1.1. Cold-formed steel framing (structural steel in commercial construction, for example) is the domain of D1.3. Any structural shapes and plate thicker than 3/16″, governed by D1.1. Thinner structural sheet? D1.3. D1.1 and D1.3 each have their own prequalified joint details and qualification standards.

What is the difference between D1.1 and D1.8?

AWS D1.8 is an addendum to D1.1, not an alternative to it. D1.8 governs seismic provisions on various structural connections in buildings within high seismic design categories, in conjunction with AISC 341. Seismic detailing inclusion in your project requires both D1.1 and D1.8. D1.8 stiffens parameters for filler metal, joint size, and inspection at moment and other critical seismic joints.

How Welding Positioners Help Structural Fabricators Achieve D1.1 Compliance

Essential variables for D1.1 prequalified WPS come in the form of precise ranges for travel speed, amperage, voltage, preheat, and interpass temperature. Change any one of these outside the limits, and the result is a WPS probably not valid, initiating a full PQR requalification sequence.

Heavy structural assemblies that are manually repositioned are simply more prone to this sort of issue. Welders reposition their bodies around whomever they are working on trying to access overhead and vertical joints, travel speed suffers, the welder struggles to maintain consistent preheat. Eventually, the parameters move outside WPS limits, and requalification is required.

Positioners neutralize this issue: With a positioner, the work moves to the welder, instead of the other way around. The positioner firmly holds the work and rotate/tilts whatever workpiece into the typical (flat 1G, or horizontal 2G) positions that are most conducive to prequalified WPS welding. Weld travel speed is unaffected, and preheat is simple to acquire. Flat-position welding produces the most consistent weld penetration/profile, resulting in few visual inspection failures.

RESIZE welding positioners offer variable-speed rotation, from 0.02 to 15 RPM, thanks to their variable-speed drive. Maintain travel speed at within 5% of the WPS measurement at the joint surface with RESIZE positioners, and you avoid the WPS-essential variable “drift,” allowing you to run a whole production batch without requalification, as atstructural fabricator doing GMAW at 14-18 IPM on a 1/4″ A36 fillet.

D1.1 Positioner-to-Position Matching Chart

RESIZE welding positioners are produced to quality management standards of ISO 9001 and of ANSI safety requirement and CE directive. For structural fabricators working to D1.1, that means your compliance program is supported by equipment manufactured to the same quality disciplines your code demands.

AWS D1.1:2025 — What Changed and What Fabricators Need to Do

D1.1 adopts a five-year revision cycle. The 2025 edition- the 23rdbased on the original 1928 publication – contain modifications based on the new AISC 360-22 design provisions and improvements in the field of NDT. Just because there are some changes does not mean that prompt action is needed.

Below is the list of most significant changes ordered from the most to the least urgent, hours indicating the level of urgency.

🔴 ACTION REQUIRED

A5.36 filler metal classifications eliminated. Any of your prequalified WPS’s that cite A5.36 filler metal classifications will not be prequalified with the 2025 edition. Each affected WPS must be revised to cite the proper AWS A5.x base specification(A5.18 for GMAW carbon steel, A5.20 for FCAW, etc.) prior to using on a D1.1 project.

New LRFD Table 4.3— available strength of welded joints. The 2025 now includes a new LRFD design table for welded joint strength. If Load & Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) is part of your designs, and your design basis references the D1.1 Tables you need to check your design calculations against the new table before you go out to stamp drawings.

🟡 REVIEW RECOMMENDED

Additional MT and PT requirements. A new normative annex contains new requirements for magnetic particle testing (MT) and liquid penetrant testing (PT). If your shop’s NDT program tests welds using MT or PT, check the new requirements and incorporate any needed changes into your NDT procedures prior to the next scheduled audit.

Fillet weld maximum size clarification (new Figure 4.7). New figure clarifies fillet weld size at edges of plates—frequently sources of interpretation confusion. Assess edge fillet welds in your current WPS library utilizing new diagram.

Matching filler metal provisions included. Clarifies the procedure for selecting matching filler metals. Make sure that your procedure for filler metal selection is in accordance with these updates, particularly for welds on higher strength structural steels.

⚪ INFORMATIONAL

New Annex S was added to include base materials for additional steel grades. Type D stud welding provisions were inserted. Clause 4 saw the addition of new definitions/terminologies.

The Normative references were revised all through.

Search trend note: queries for “aws d1.1 latest version” increased substantially in the months following the 2025 publication date — structural fabricators are actively updating their understanding of the new requirements. The next scheduled D1.1 revision is approximately 2030.

Related Articles

Frequently Asked Questions About AWS D1.1