Material evidence · Clause 5 versus Clause 6
What if the steel is unlisted or cannot be identified?
First distinguish a missing material record from a known steel that is absent from the relevant code table. Both block a simple Table 5.6 lookup, but they call for different next evidence. Similar chemistry, a trade name or the same stated yield strength does not establish a Table 5.6 entry.
Three different cases need different actions
| What is known | Immediate result | Evidence to obtain |
|---|---|---|
| Material is unidentified: no reliable specification or grade | Material coverage is unknown; do not label it “unlisted” or qualified yet. | Traceable mill certificate, drawing/procurement identification and any needed verification of the actual member. |
| Identity is verified, but its exact grade/product/thickness is absent from Table 5.6 | Do not use the ordinary Clause 5 prequalified material route for that member. | Check whether a properly documented existing Clause 6 PQR covers the actual steel combination and target conditions; otherwise identify the qualification or Engineer decision needed. |
| Steel appears in a Clause 6 list such as Table 6.10, but not the applicable Table 5.6 row | The Clause 6 listing does not convert it into a Clause 5 prequalified material. | Use the applicable Clause 6 material-combination and qualification provisions, the real PQR and its tests. |
Example: an incoming plate described only as “mild steel” has no verified ASTM grade. The next step is to identify the plate, not to choose A36 or issue a WPS. If subsequent documents establish a particular unlisted grade, the question changes to whether a valid qualification path supports that exact grade and combination.
The auxiliary-attachment condition is narrow
Clause 5.3.1 provides an Engineer-approved condition for certain unlisted auxiliary attachments with matching chemistry limits. It is not a general permission to treat every unlisted primary member as prequalified. Record the attachment's role, chemistry evidence and the actual Engineer decision before relying on that provision. This service does not issue that approval.
For an existing PQR, inspect the tested combination
Clause 6 has its own material grouping and combination rules. A PQR for another steel, or two PQRs testing each material separately, should not be combined by analogy into proof of an untested dissimilar pair. Identify the coupon's two materials, test type, thickness, process, filler, position, tests and actual acceptance, then derive the supported production range under the applicable Clause 6 provisions.
The PQR coverage matrix keeps recorded facts, code-supported coverage and the selected WPS range separate. The existing-PQR service route requires the genuine qualification records; a missing record remains a missing input, not proof that a new test is necessarily required.
Code basis and limits
This page uses AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2025 base edition and the registered July 28, 2026 base-edition errata; AMD1 is excluded. Check Clause 5.3 and Table 5.6 for the Clause 5 material path, and Clauses 6.2, 6.8.3 and Tables 6.9–6.10 for the applicable qualification path. The project contract edition governs. A material decision alone does not establish process, filler, joint or temperature eligibility.
Provide traceable material identification and any genuine PQR and test reports so the supportable route can be assessed.