Hi Al!

I don't think the folks I worked with really knew the definition of the term "weld size'" and that's why I confronted them with their own interpretation of the term "weld size" and also why I listed in my previous post what was recognized by the folks I worked with as their definition of the term: "weld size which was this: "from root of weld to weld reinforcement."

This prompted this company to revise the notes in the drawing to include their own interpretation of the term; "Overall Groove Weld Size" by writing this: "Note; The term "overall groove weld size" is to be recognized as the dimension which starts from the highest point of the weld face reinforcement to the furthest depth of the root of weld - meaning root reinforcement." It took two weeks to get this revision included into the drawing because it first had to be approved by the EOR and then passed down to the appropriate channels which caused a stir because no one before had pointed out to them that any of their interpretations of terminology found in any of their drawings were incorrect and they started to ask me about many other terms and definitions they had also used regarding other aspects that were included as part of the overall fabrication process of these precision instruments we were making.

Now according to AWS A3.0, "Groove weld size"(Found on page 19, left column, 10th definition down from the top of page) is defined as: "The joint penetration of a groove weld. See figure 26." So then if you look at(Found on page 88, first illustration (F) - towards top left corner of page.) one will then see that this illustration is applicable to this thread and your understanding which in this case means the "groove weld size" is equivalent to the thickness of the joint itself being that in this case, both members of the joint are indeed of the same thickness... Offhand, I don't remember what ASME, or DIN has as their own interpretation of the term: "Weld Size" so if you can, then please do post it because my memory isn't anywhere near what it used to be before all these chemicals I take as "medicine' basically made it almost irrelevant!!! :) :) ;)

So we understand that the true definition of weld size according to most standards I've also worked with as well basically means the thickness of the joint, or the thickness of the thinner member of the joint if both members of the joint are not of the same thickness, but as you also know from your own experience Al, that their are a slew of companies that use their own interpretations of welding terminology to suit their own purposes, and/or because they're just not properly "edumacated" in proper welding terminology used in a code or standard to which they're working from and this is why I wrote in bold letters in my previous reply post to the OP to: "check which standard is applicable first and Check the applicable standard first before listing anything on the drawing - CAPECHE??? ;-)"

With respect to the use of a bevel to result in the use of a "V" groove to ensure CJP for a manually deposited weld, Germany basically told us to do just that Al! ;) it was nothing more than "an exaggerated deburring process" in which a file was use to form the groove as opposed to actually machining the groove angle with some degree of accuracy, so when I wrote: "40 - 45 degree included angle", the actual included angle was more than likely less and yet, practically ensured CJP consistently.. So in effect, the label: "Precision Instruments" was sometimes used rather loosely realistically speaking and yet, the end result with respect to the final product was indeed really precise -except for some of the terminology being applied during the fabrication process of course! ;) ;)

I had a funny feeling you were going to "chime in" because of my explanation of what the company I worked for used to determine the "Weld Size" on the groove joints we were welding... in fact, I was kind of hoping you would based on some of the earlier posts you made on the topic of misuse of definitions and terminology which quite common in industries across the board!!! ;) ;) ;)

Respectfully,
Henry