Oversized Fillet Welds Not Weld Profile

By pipewelder_1999 (****)

Date 08-17-2003 02:41

I've never found it myself. There could be restrictions on maximum single pass weld size as in Table 3.7 but that would appliy if using a prequalified WPS.

Sorry I couldn't be more help. I'm pretty sure there is NOT a maximum other than what is limited by the WPS.

Have a nice day

Gerald Austin
Iuka, Mississippi

By bulldog5585 Date 08-17-2003 16:42

Good question, let me tell you this though. A 1/2" weld is twice the size of a 1/4" weld, and if you double the weld size of a fillet weld, you've actually added four times the filler material required. I think on most weldments your pretty safe going with a +/- 1/16" unless otherwise specified.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 08-17-2003 18:34

Jay, Welcome to the forum,
I will say that if the print calls for a single pass 1/4" fillet and your welders are putting 3 passes to get a 1/2" fillet, your welders are costing you money.

I'm not certain that you could get a single pass 1/2" fillet (except with SAW in the 1F position) and still be able to adhere to the acceptable weld profiles in Figure 5.4 of the D1.1:2002.

If you find a statement that does not allow what you are asking about, please post it so we'll know about it and can share with others.
John Wright

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 08-18-2003 13:15

D1.1 does not address oversized fillet welds, only undersized fillets.

Perhaps the reasoning is that undersized welds are definitely not at full strength, but oversized welds are? And perhaps because there is more of a tendency to make small welds than oversized welds? At any rate, oversized fillets could be production and/or engineering issues but are not contrary to D1.1 as long as other applicable criteria are met.

Chet Guilford

By lewie15689 (*)

Date 08-21-2003 12:03

Jay,
AWS D1.1-2002 Section 2.4.5 addresses max fillet weld sizes in lap joints for design.
In a T joint the fillet weld size need not exceed the thickness of the thinnest member. Nothing is gained by making the fillet weld larger then the thinnest member.
I would not exceed the tolerances list on the drawing for oversized welds.
If the drawing calls out a 1/4" weld and 1/16" is the tolerance, 5/16" weld would be the max. This last paragraph is my opinion, not AWS.

Lew

By H.Dibben (*)

Date 08-25-2003 16:37

Lew,
In a T joint D1.1 gives the minimum weld size only, but does not address the issue of whether that size is adequate for design purposes. A single fillet weld needs to be 1.4 times the material thickness to provide a full stength joint. It is up to the designer to decide what size weld is required within these limits.

Harold

By lewie15689 (*)

Date 08-29-2003 17:15

Harrold,
This is true.

By billvanderhoof (****)

Date 08-22-2003 05:48

Correct me if I'm wrong here but I'm guessing that these welds allready exist and that somebody is trying to reject them and that you are trying to find justification to resist that.

The lack of a definitive response here seems to indicate that the code does not speak on this. Some of these guys would have known if it did.

You probably need to find an engineer who will support your position.

Good luck
Bill

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 08-22-2003 18:20

Exactly! (on the latter part of your post)
D1.1 does not address oversized fillets. So, provided all applicable parts of the code are complied with, larger is OK unless there are engineering concerns otherwise.
Chet Guilford

By quality101 (*)

Date 08-29-2003 20:47

If I may be allowed to chime in...while most codes that I am familiar do not address oversized welds to the extent that "if you're x dim. oversized the weld is rejectable" it is quite important to address the extra costs associated. Besides the cost in terms of time there are the costs of rods (or wire), the cost of shielding gas, and the extra costs in energy. Also, I can't help but think that overwelding your parts to be joined may also have an efffect on the residual stresses thus affecting distortion control? What of the chemical properties of the materials, would overwelding have an effect on those too?

Another thing to consider, if the overwelding condition also affects the visual appearance of the weld to such an extent that it creates steeper angles between the base material and the weld face one could very well find cause for rejection based on the 30 degree theta rule. Stress risers are not a good thing, nor is the old saying, "more is better"!

Just a humble opinion and rambling thoughts.

Steve

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 09-01-2003 02:16

Steve
You bring up very valid concerns about the problems associated with oversizing welds. I believe most of those were also mentioned by others in their posts as well. My point is that D1.1 doesn't address those problems, only welds that are undersized. I'm not trying to defend oversized welds; quite the contrary. The problem has always been that unless contract documents state otherwise, or a qualified person with the authority can veto the weld acceptance, D1.1 doesn't address it.

Chet Guilford