The concern with throat dimensions were not the original concern but the use of how to size them with various gauges. Now a new concern with sizing weld throat has been brought to my attention.
I'm not familiar with ASME, so if there are calculations I'm not to concerned with that but I am concerned with the fact a welding symbol doesn't state a specific throat dimension so I will size it the same as the leg.
AWS 3.0 has some great figures and are very good to show examples of fillet welds, but AWS 3.0 doesn't show you how to size them with specific gauges and what is the proper way. AWS 3.0 also doesn't state weld size includes the leg and throat but does clearly the differences on the definitions of each part of fillet welds.
You are correct in the fact that as long as you know what end to use it is quite obvious how to size with standard fillet gauges.
You're asking me why I am using "the right tool for the job"? Why would you use a "trimmed" gauge for a skewed T-Joint? Why wouldn't you use a proper tool, such as a skewed filled gauge? Why would someone use a modified gauge? In the nuclear world I would be in a lot of trouble for altering a calibrated gauge when I could use a proper tool for the job.
AWS gauge doesn't mean it is used strictly on American Welding Society standards such as D1.1. The instructions and this link also shows that it is recommended for sizing fillet welds:
http://www.galgage.com/AutomaticWeldSize.pdfLike I said twice now, I would rather use a standard leaf type fillet gauge but there are man times I cannot use them. I assume that since we are on a AWS forum that you have had experience with inspecting oversized welds and how 90% of the time there are no restrictions on making a weld that is oversized. I would quote the requirement of oversized welds but I don't want to misrepresent the code. When the weld symbol doesn't have a throat dimension, which is very common in structural welding applications, you will be assuming you are required to size the throat. Example of when I can't use a standard leaf fillet gauge:
1. Weld symbol says 1/2"
2. An oversized weld was deposited and was considerably concave.
3. The actual weld legs are 1"
4. I cannot use a standard leaf 1/2" fillet gauge due to the fact that the legs are oversized to 1" and in order to perform a proper weld inspection I should use another option to size the throat now that I know the leg sizes are met.
5. I choose to use either a AWS or bridge cam to size the throat.
6. By choosing a bridge cam with what I can assume is the correct side to size with the "actual throat" I come up with 1/4" to 3/8" in various locations along a 24" weld.
7. By this I find that the throat is under run and is rejectable due the fact here are no specific throat size requirements but do not meet the weld size of 1/2" according to the weld symbol.
8. By what some of you are saying that this is acceptable due the fact there are no specific throat size or contour requirements.
I'm throughly disappointed in what I'm reading, maybe because I'm held to higher standard in the nuclear industry, which has so much oversight and auditing including, the NRC, customer source inspectors, and our own internal people. I've been stuck in the structural world for the majority of my inspection career since 2006 and I guess things are different in other industries. I realize that other industries have different standards and practices and maybe those are the facts as I'm just trying to learn and be the best I can with proper references and standards to back me up instead of making guesses based on what people have told me in the past.