Weld bead size

By bmaas1

Date 02-17-2004 23:07

Check out your WPS under technique. It should tell you there.

Brian J. Maas

By DGXL

Date 02-18-2004 04:29

Check out Table 3.7 of the code if your WPS is prequalified. There is a bead width limitation for prequalified procedures.

If your WPS is accompanied by a PQR, then check your procedure qualified by testing.

By RMayerich Date 02-20-2004 13:25

Table 3.7 has SMAW shaded out for groove welds. It is up to me to write a WPS. We are using joint B-U2. I need the code to back me up.

Thanks
Rick

By DGXL

Date 02-20-2004 16:20

Good reply Rick, I should have looked before I posted. I looked in a couple of other references and did not find a limitation. Guess I'm getting brainwashed from previous projects.

Here in CA, the design community has adopted some of the FCAW/GMAW recommendations and requirements. Many RDP's limit weave-widths for SMAW, typically this number is based upon electrode diameter. The 3x and 5x numbers are the most common. There are several sets of drawings here with SMAW bead width limitations. These are for school and hospital projects (DSA and OSHPD respectively).

Limiting bead widths is all too common in these parts in an effort to reduce heat input. Personally, I prefer stringers, but some welders can really weave-well and pass tests w/o problems. I gotta follow my last order first for the client and hold them back from weaving.

By bmaas1

Date 02-21-2004 02:33

I don't know your particular application but you would be better off with stringers especially if there is any NDT on the welds. Also less heat input to cause distortion or worse if it is on Q&T materials.

Brian J. Maas

By RMayerich Date 02-23-2004 14:35

I know the benefits of stringers and the downsides of weaving, but I need proof from the code book. Some of the people that I am testing don't believe me.
Rick

By bmaas1

Date 02-23-2004 16:14

I don't think you'll find anything definitive in the code one way or the other. What kind of test are you giving(process, thickness, etc.)

Brian J. Maas

By RMayerich Date 02-24-2004 17:52

3/8 " plate, 3G and 4G with a backing strip. 1/8" E7018 and 2F and 3F also with 3/8 plate & 1/8 7018

By bmaas1

Date 02-24-2004 19:47

You can call out either or both on the WPS. You should be ok.
Unless there is a particular reason for stringers only, like heat input, warpage, etc. it's almost up to the welder.

Hope this helps,

Brian J. Maas

By testweldguy (**)

Date 02-25-2004 13:39

I really really think that you can weave 2 and 1/2 times the core wire width.Just saying
you know the belly button thing.
everyone has one.

By D Smith Date 02-25-2004 14:43

Rick,
I believe that the shaded area your referencing in Table 3.7 means not recommended. Otherwise it would read 'unlimited". I say this because the shaded area's for SAW are all in the vertical and overhead positions. Which is not done. Plus, with a weave the cross section of the weld will be greater than the weld face when you take into consideration the penetration into the base metal on either side of the weld layer. Just a couple things to think about.

Dave Smith

By bmaas1

Date 02-25-2004 14:54

Actually the shaded are means that it does not apply.

Brian J. Maas

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 02-25-2004 15:15

I agree with Brian, "shaded" means does not apply or N/A.
John Wright

By D Smith Date 02-25-2004 15:40

Exactly. It's not applicable because it is not appropriateto use

D.Smith

By vonash

Date 02-25-2004 18:36

As I read the code... Table 3.7, Maximum fill pass Thickness is 3/16"; Maximum Root Pass Thickness(see note 4) is 1/2" However, because of paragraph 3.7.2(you can't exceed the width/depth of the last pass) & Figure 3.1(illustration of width/depth limitation), the max size is 3/16". This is to control heat input.
Hope this helps,
Vonash