Fillet Welds

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-23-2005 12:58

AWS D1.1:2004 Section 3 paragraph 3.9
Your case in particular see 3.9.1
John Wright

By gkcwi

Date 06-23-2005 13:14

John,
I guess my problem is the fact that the inspector is saying that Fig 2.1 and 2.4 are for lap joints, not a true "T" joint as is normally used in a fillet joint. But by the same idea, why are Fig. 3.11- Skewed T-Joints Details (NONTUBULAR) PREQUALIFIED ?

By swnorris (****)

Date 06-23-2005 13:32

Greg,

Assuming you're using either FCAW or GMAW, It's prequalified by D1.1 unless you're using short circuit transfer. If you're looking at shear tabs, you need to look at the single plate shear connection design criteria in the AISC's ASD manual, which begins on page 4-54. A 3/16" fillet weld is used when the shear tab is 1/4" thick. Fillet weld size increases with the shear tab thickness. For example, 1/4" fillet for a 5/16" thick tab, 5/16" fillet for a 3/8" tab. The fillets and plate thicknesses are the same regardless of the bolt diameter, the number of bolts, or whether A325's orA490's are being used. Also, when welding these shear tabs, it is good practice not to wrap the ends. Within the criteria of D1.1, we begin and terminate our welds away from the ends of the shear tabs, unless of course the job is galvanized. Both of these practices will eliminate any notching potential at the edges.

By gkcwi

Date 06-23-2005 14:58

Scott,
I guess I'm looking for a exact section that states "ALL" fillet welds are prequalified to show the inspector. As I said earlier, he is maintaining that only lap joint fillets and skewed fillets are considered as prequalified. We are using 1/16" FCAW, 100% CO2, and I used a Prequalified Welding Procedure Specification form, he said it's no good.

By swnorris (****)

Date 06-23-2005 18:23

Greg,

I was looking back in older editions, and found it in the 92 code. It states in 2.7.1 "the details of fillet welds made by shielded metal arc, submerged arc, gas metal arc (except short circuiting transfer), or flux cored arc welding to be used without joint welding procedure qualifications are listed in 2.7.1.1 through 2.7.1.5 and detailed in Figures 2.3, 2.6 and 10.14". I can't find any such statement in the current D1.1, so I'm guessing that it got lost somewhere in translations between the later editions after it was broken down into tubular and nontubular. In the 92 code in Section 2 Design of Welded Connections, there are only three parts. Part A is General Requirements, Part B is Structural Details, and Part C is Details of Welded Joints, and there are no references to tubular and nontubular. In the current edition, Part A is Common Requirements for Design of Welded Connections (Nontubular and Tubular), Part B is Specific Requirements for Design of Nontubular Connections (Statically or Cyclically Loaded), and Part C is Specific Requirements for Design of Nontubular Connections (Cyclically Loaded), and Part D .Specific Requirements for Design of Tubular Structures (Statically and Cyclically Loaded). If your inspector says what you're doing is no good, rather than you trying to prove it is good, make him show you in the code where it states that all fillets are not prequalified. Here's another thought. For anyone who was working with the code back in 92, and maybe beyond that, the prequalified fillets were as I said, addressed in 2.7.1. I can only assume that those statements were "grandfathered" into later editions, with the exceptions of how they apply to specific tubular, nontubular, static and cyclic criteria. If your inspector came into the business at the times the later editions were issued, he can't find anything that suggests that all fillets are prequalified. Not much help in your situation, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

By gkcwi

Date 06-23-2005 19:56

Thanks for all the help, I think he was mad at us because all the other paperwork was ok, he even said it was the best he'd seen in a long time. I guess he just wanted to make a stink about something. I did ask him to show a "page and line" but he was unable to do so. I can't wait to see how the actual job goes on after this little problem.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-23-2005 20:21

D1.4:98 6.1.2.1 spells it out that fillet welds are prequalified, but I couldn't find it in D1.1(although it was a very breif search).
John Wright

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 06-23-2005 20:34

I'm not sure of your situation, but for most of the work that we do, the inspector is here to verify that we are following approved drawings and procedures. They do not act as engineers unless that has been spelled out (although many engineers will consult the inspectors for their opinions).
I believe you did the right thing in asking him to show you where the code prohibits the welds. Too often, I run into inspectors who may remember something from other jobs or codes and think there is an application to our work. If it is not written in the contract, it's only an opinion.
So what I try to do is to quickly review my notes and the codes. If I don't find anything then I feel it is up to the inspector to show me where his information comes from. If he is going to reject the work then he should be able to give a written explanation with references to the applicable specs.

Chet Guilford

By waynekoe (**)

Date 06-24-2005 06:04

In the 02 edition of D1.1, sec 3.9.1 gives you the limitations for "prequalified" fillet welds (lap joints). Sec 4.11.2 gives the requirements for the qualification of fillet welded T-joints in tubular and non tubular connections.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-28-2005 14:50

I wish it was spelled out clearer than it is, but after talking with Chet and others, I feel better about the position on prequalified T joints welded with a fillet.

AWS D1.1:2004

Table 3.7 shows prequal fillet requirements.

3.7 refers to Figure 3.1, which clearly is illustrating a fillet along with the groove.

3.1 Scope says pre-qual status requires full compliance with Section 3.

3.7.3.2 covers single pass fillets and does not exclude T joints or say that it only applies to lap joints.

The previously listed items are from Section 3(read 3.1 Scope again).

Fig 2.4 references 2.8.1.1 which is clearly delineated from 2.8.3 and implies some apples to oranges assumptions about the lap joints.

3.9.1 does not automatically apply to all fillets; it applies when appropriate for the conditions. (Obviously fillets are used for more than lap joints)

3.9 refers to Table 5.8, which leads to 5.14 which states that Table 5.8 shall apply in "all cases"(I read that as all fillet welds, except for reinforcing fillets, and not just for lap joints).

Although the words "T joints welded with a fillet are prequalified" do not appear in D1.1, I don't think that "ALL" fillet welds other than lap joints need to be qualified by Section 4 as long as they still meet all of the requirements of Section 3.

Any thoughts?

By gkcwi

Date 06-28-2005 15:40

John,
Thank you for excellent research on my problem. The inspector has since "Backed Off" on his position. Actullay I'm kind on surprised that this issue isn't a cause of more should we say discussions, between all parties effected.

By waynekoe (**)

Date 06-28-2005 16:58

Until this posting, I myself never really gave the subject about the difference between prequalification/qualification of lap and T joint fillets much thought. And given the level of chest thumping over cleaning puddle welds I,m a little hesitant to admit that. But, judging by the reply from John and yourself, I'm not the only one. Since a T joint fillet WPS has (mostly)always been included in the submittals I have to evaluate, it was never much of cause to question. Was more concerned about the weld quality. Thank you for enlightening me (seriously)

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-28-2005 18:45

Wayne,
I have to tell you that I rely heavily on the collective knowledge, experience, diversity and talents of the forum users here. It's nice to know we have a tool like that at our disposal:)
John Wright

By MBSims

Date 06-29-2005 03:29

I always thought Fig. 3.11 clearly addressed fillet welds in a tee joint where the angle between members is 90 degrees. Fig. 3.11(a) and (b) show the range for angle 1 as 135 deg. maximum and angle 2 as 60 deg. minimum, which covers 90 degrees on both sides.

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 06-29-2005 10:46

Hi Marty,
You're right, but I was getting hung up on that section being titled "Skewed T joints", because I didn't consider something being perfectly 90* perpendicular to be skewed, but by their definition(Fig 3.11), I suppose it is.
John Wright

By gkcwi

Date 06-29-2005 13:44

I guess I too was overlooking the true meaning behind Fig. 3.11. Sure am glad to be able to show the inspector here the information, if he brings it up again. Bad day sofar, AISC audit, 2 outside inspection firms, and no time to think.

Greg