Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / Fillet weld question
- - By Robert48 (**) Date 03-09-2011 01:33
I am taking my anual DOT weld test tomorrow. I usually take a 3,4, and 6G. I just looked at the weather and it is going to start raining about mid morning and these 3 test will take most of the day. At the DOT yard they have a shed over the test area but not much of one. So I put some material on my truck to take a 3,4F test to get me by on my current project. I have never had any problem with any of my test but haven't taken a fillet in a while. My question is for a 5/16 bead how many passes do you others use 1,2,or 3. I use 3 on the overhead, and 2 on the vert. I have done three on the vert but as the metal heats it is hard to keep consistant size beads. For 2 passes I have always used a 3/32 for a tiny flat "root" pass, and cap it with a 1/8. The reason I am asking is I am thinking of doing one pass on the vert. I can make a 5/16 match the gauge perfect with one pass but am worried about penetration and trapping slag in the center. Just wanted some others opinions.

P.S I know some inspectors don't want a 5/16 single pass. But they don't care in this case as long as it will pass a bend test.
Parent - By texasrigwelder (**) Date 03-09-2011 02:05
I wouldn't think Ud trap slag I'n center wat u using 7018?
Parent - - By strother (***) Date 03-09-2011 02:42
I think on I would run a quick root pass like you where talking about, let it cool then run small weave over it . That way you won't have to pause in center to tie the plates together. You can move quick across the middle and concentrate on the sides. If they will let you use 3/32 and 1/8 thats what I would do . I asked if I could do that on 6g test. They told me I had to run the same size rod all the way out.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 03-09-2011 05:39
A fillet weld test for DOT? I've never heard of any DOT accepting a fillet break test, not that I don't believe it to be an excelent idea. I require a fillet break test on any project where I have an opportunity to add it to the project specification.

That being said, I do not allow the welder to qualify for a structural test to use 3/32 inch diameter electrode for any thing other than the root bead of an open root pipe test. Stringers are acceptable for the overheat position, but a single pass 5/16 inch weld is required (by me) for all other test positions when welding the fillet break test. My reasoning is philosophical, not code driven. The welder will be employed in a production setting where he is expected to produce a 5/16 inch single pass fillet weld. If he cannot pass the fillet break test under what are considered to be ideal conditions, how will he ever produce an acceptable 5/16 inch fillet weld under shop conditions?

Good luck on your test.

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 03-09-2011 10:13
Al
What is the recipe for this "overheat position" you mention. :razz:
I am with you on everything else tho :wink:
Marshall
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 03-10-2011 04:35
That's when the welder get to big for his britches. ;)

Al
Parent - By Johnny Walker (***) Date 03-10-2011 00:28
The one I took was a T test fillet weld uphill they cut a inch off each end and put acid on it to test penetration I'd use 3/32 all the way run the first one almost too hot to handle then clean it up with a slick 3/32 cap a lot cooler to make it pretty
Parent - - By Joseph P. Kane (****) Date 03-09-2011 13:01
Dot tests require a 5/16" fillet weld to be made in a single pass.
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 03-09-2011 14:26 Edited 03-09-2011 14:31
Are you referring to NYDOT?

I just looked at my 95 edition of D1.5 and there is no mention that the welds are single pass fillets. I could be overlooking something.

Al
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 03-09-2011 14:42
D1.5:2008 Clause 5.23.1(3) just says test shall be in conformance with 5.23.1.4 and gives two options t joint Fig 5.21 and soundness test in fig 5.22.
D1.5:2008 Figure 5.21 shows a t-joint fillet weld break test with a 5/16" fillet weld with one start/stop near the center. Doesn't say that it has to be placed in one pass, although the picture appears to show a single pass. The Commentary seems to be silent on this(unless I'm missing it).
Parent - - By mraschis (*) Date 03-10-2011 00:06
Al, and John you both missed it. Look up 4.6.6 (Max. size of single-pass fillet welds) 5/16" in the horizontal and overhead positions.
Parent - - By ctacker (****) Date 03-10-2011 02:24
That says Max. size, Does'nt say anything about Minimum size!
Parent - By mraschis (*) Date 03-10-2011 02:48
Ctacker look up 2.8.1.1 and Table 2.1.
Parent - By 803056 (*****) Date 03-10-2011 04:45
Well color me plain stupid mrasichis!

However, looking at the 2008 edition of 1.5, the clause you reference is addressing technique, not qualification requirements, and the weld sizes listed are the maximum size for single pass fillet welds for various production positions.

Help me here just a tad, but there appears to be a disconnect between my comments and your references. I fail to see how my statements are in violation of the requirements listed in the 2008 edition of D1.5. Not that I haven't be wrong before and I surely don't want to be accused of being closed minded or unwilling to listen to a good case presented by the opposition. 

Present your case lad. ;)

Best regards - Al
Parent - - By Robert48 (**) Date 03-10-2011 01:55
No, GA DOT
Parent - - By Robert48 (**) Date 03-10-2011 02:23
I took some picks of both ways today. I will post them tommorow.
Parent - - By mraschis (*) Date 03-10-2011 03:07
Robert here in NY DOT requires: The maximum size of single pass fillet welds and root passes of multiple pass fillet welds shall be:

a) ⅜ inch in the flat position.
b) 5/16 inch in the horizontal or overhead positions.
c) ½ inch in the vertical position.
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 03-10-2011 12:23
Ok mraschis, I understand what you are saying and D1.1 also has similar wording giving limitation on the maximum size single pass weld to be placed, but where in the Qualification of a Welder does it say or imply that the 5/16" called out in Fig 5.21 says that the 5/16" fillet weld has to be placed in one pass? Why can't the welder use several small stringers to get his 5/16" (what I'm saying and/or asking is that the welding symbol shown in the Fig 5.21 only says 5/16", and nothing in the tail to say it has to be done in one pass)...

I think the confusion is that you're getting the WPS and Welder Qualification testing requirements mixed up.
For Fillet weld WPS qualification:
D1.5:2008 Clause 5.10.2.2 Fillet Weld Qualification Soundness Test. <snipped first para> (1)"A fillet weld macroetch test shall be made for each WPS and position to be used in construction. One test weld shall be the maximum size single-pass fillet weld and one test shall be the minimum size multiple pass fillet weld to be used in construction. The two fillet weld tests may be combined in a single test weldment or assembly."

Does this make sense or am I all wet?
Parent - - By Joseph P. Kane (****) Date 03-10-2011 13:53
John

This is the correct paragraph.  Since the MINIMUM size structural fillet weld in bridges is 5/16" (Per the controlling  AASHTO specification, and the AISC, and the NYSSCM, and the PENDOT manual, and MASSHWY,) and those welds must be made in a single pass, the  5/16" fillet weld test must be done in a single pass on the single pass side.

Joe Kane
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 03-10-2011 14:34
Thanks Joe.:cool:
Parent - - By Lawrence (*****) Date 03-10-2011 14:53 Edited 03-10-2011 14:57
I submit to your greater understanding Joe. You earned it.

I've been watching this thread and thinking along the lines of John Wright as well.

In my opinion, the code would be more effective if the word "shall" were applied to single pass fillet weld in the text of the welder performance qualification language.

What Joe and Al said make sense..  I just think the code would work more easily if important data related to Clause 4 were not held in Clause 5

Edit:
Although I may be mixing apples and oranges between D1.1 and D1.5 ... I thought the code language was pretty much a mirror of one another.   Please set me straight if this is the case.
Parent - - By welderbrent (*****) Date 03-10-2011 15:22
I don't have or work to D1.5 so had remained totally silent.

But along the lines of Lawrence's comment, I have wondered if some of the language could be improved and put in the Clause that made it fit.  Otherwise we end up in Clause 6 to check something from Clause 5 that sets how we test to Clause 3 or 4 and the fabricator says 'that doesn't apply, it's in the wrong section' , etc, etc.

I was thinking the same as John, and I believe even the way Al was directing. 

Anyway, thanks for the info.

Have a Great Day,  Brent
Parent - By Joseph P. Kane (****) Date 03-10-2011 18:44
Even if you work to D 1.1, a 5/16 inch fillet weld is required to be deposited in a single pass.  AISC specifications also require that a 5/16 inch fillet weld be deposited in a single pass in most cases..
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 03-10-2011 23:59
Lawrence
I have been :cool: the thread also.
I have also been wondering, (especially from a production perspective) why would anyone want to waste the time and monies to not produce the maximum single pass weld called for as allowed within the applicable code.
Just my ¢¢'s
Marshall
Parent - - By jrw159 (*****) Date 03-11-2011 01:02
Marshall,
  The time and monies lost by not producing an adequate sized weld can often be rivaled by the time and monies wasted on too large of a weld. Quality issues aside, just time and consumables.

There are more and more people looking for that happy medium between "Thats big enough (small)" and "Thats big enough (XXX-large)".

Your pennies and my pennies are not much, but when all of the pennies are added up, it is a few dollars. :wink:

jrw159
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 03-11-2011 16:05
John
When we hire a weldor they are capable of consistently producing sound weld described by the print and the corresponding WPS.
If they are not capable of consistently doing this they are not employed here in the weld dept.
It is all about production we are not a school or nursery.
There are no good days and bad, either you are, or you are not a Weldor.
I will and have always been available to employees interested in learning and advancement.
But that is on our time not the Company I work for.
When they have proven to produce consistent welds they may be offered a welding position.
But again this is my ¢¢'s

Marshall
Parent - By jrw159 (*****) Date 03-11-2011 16:11
Marshall,
  I could not agree more. I was just throwing out the fact that one can go to the other extreme as well (bigger is not always better), as I am sure you know.

jrw159
Parent - - By Joseph P. Kane (****) Date 03-11-2011 04:39
Lawrence

I agree with you that many of the codes could be made clearer with just a few more words.  To those on the outside, it would seem simple and elementary.  (Why not just say it this way? ETC.)

HOWEVER---  All you need to do is to analyze some the questions about the codes in this forum, and you will realize that the job would never be done, and there would always be questions about what the wording meant, or "quibbling" about what it could mean.

The volunteers who write the codes use the "minimum consensus" process.  The absolute maximum amount if regulation and wording must agreed to by the required number minimum number in the voting members of the committee., 

The editorial work-up by the committee secretary after the vote is tallied does not allow any substantive changes to be made.  Just Syntax, Spelling and Punctuation changes can be made without a new round of approval votes by the committee.

IN the case of the D1.1, some sixty or more members get to have their say as to the wording and they each have a vote. Some want the work to be done with gold bricks and to the strictest standards of workmanship.  Others want to be paid without even doing the work. 

What finally gets voted on is the absolute minimum and maximum amount of regulation that all the voting members of the committee could agree to.

It may seem to the outsiders, that this is rather an unprofessional way to do things, but it works.   All the "National Standards" are made this way.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 03-11-2011 12:24
Joe,
I like these types of questions, it makes a person get in between the covers of that ole code book and dig a little bit and it challenges you to find the answer. Just like the question that was posed in this thread....I just never had stopped to think about it because it is hard not to place a 5/16" fillet in one pass with the 3/32" FCAW we use here.
Parent - By Johnny Walker (***) Date 03-11-2011 00:22
I must have cheated then but it ain't fell apart yet !! Lol
Parent - - By mraschis (*) Date 03-11-2011 03:25
It does make sense John..Since one welder must follow a qualified WPS (to assure repeatability for a specific application), that is why the 5/16 fillet weld has to be placed in one pass. Let's say you qualified your WPS with 5/32" electrode diameter , the welder can not use several small stringers to get his 5/16" fillet weld unless he uses a 3/32" welding rod diameter, and since a decrease in electrode diameter by more than one standard size is a PQR essential variable that requires WPS requalification. Heat input imposed it is a essential variable as well.
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 03-11-2011 12:11
To be honest, I've never thought about placing a 5/16" fillet in more than one pass due to the size of electrodes we use here...LOL

...but then when the question was posed earlier in this thread, it had me digging to find where it said that it had to be placed in one pass or not.
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / Fillet weld question

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill