Symbol for fillet weld with no filler? 3

[BigBunny]

I have a question on how to properly call out a weld that our manufacturing team has been doing for decades. The symbol does not seem to be correct to me, so I am looking to update the drawings if it makes sense.

This is a flange welded to the end of a tube using TIG with no filler - a fusion weld. There is a small step between the ID of the tube, and the ID of the flange bore. It is currently called out as a fillet weld with 50% penetration, as they have trouble controlling distortion if they penetrate all the way through the tube wall.

A fillet weld does not seem correct since there is no filler to add material and actually form a fillet, but I am having trouble finding guidance on this one. Is this a variation on a tee weld or another type?

Pictures attached.

Thanks in advance for any help!

E

 

[azcats]

Interesting question. I'm no expert.

Fillet symbol seems most correct here. Indicate 'autogenous' in tail?

What's the other option? Some sort of 90° groove weld w/ no root? (this seems like it would be more confusing)

 

Sometimes the standard weld symbols cannot capture the intent of the weld.
In such cases just add sufficient notes in the tail to fully describe it, adding a sketch if necessary.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

 

[DVWE]

Indicate 'autogenous' in tail?

Agree. this is the proper term for a weld without filler metal - autogenous; don't call this type of weld a fusion weld.

Agree with the above posts to describe the weld as best as practicable in the tail of the welding symbol.

 

[DekDee]

Would leave fillet weld symbol as shown (due to joint configuration)
Add depth of penetration required (mm or ")to left of symbol.
Add "Autogenous" in tail as noted previously

 

[MintJulep]

It is not a fillet, but I'm not sure what it is.

I'd like to see a photo of the end product.

I'd even more like to see a section of the end product.

 

What you are making can be characterized as a partial penetration groove weld.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

 

[BigBunny]

Thanks to all for the help on this! I think this will let us call this out clearly going forward. I makes sense to leave the fillet symbol alone w/o a size control, and add the "autogenous" text to the tail along with the GTAW text (is that correct to include both?). I will also update the penetration to a number vs. a percent.

I think the welders/engineers who documented previously did not call out the penetration properly (with a dimension vs. a %) to make it easier to apply in any situation. Maybe a little lazy in my opinion.

I won't be able to send photos unfortunately.

After my initial research, I had considered that a groove weld was the right symbol, but got hung up on the lack of a prep feature. I suppose a square weld is technically a groove weld also, but that also did not seem right.

 

[DVWE]

I makes sense to leave the fillet symbol alone w/o a size control, and add the "autogenous" text to the tail along with the GTAW text (is that correct to include both?). I will also update the penetration to a number vs. a percent.

That sounds like the best route to me. Alternatively, you could add the depth of penetration next to the weld symbol as DekDee suggested, although you will probably have to explain that one to anyone reading the drawing (many people don't know how to interpret it). I believe (going off of memory here) that depth of penetration is noted in parentheses. It may just be easier to note it in the tail.

The devil is in the details; she also wears prada.

 

[MintJulep]

I had considered that a groove weld was the right symbol, but got hung up on the lack of a prep feature.

Yes, that is exactly where my thinking leads me. I agree with ironic metallurgist that the (imagined) end result likely looks like a partial penetration groove weld.

Also, I think that "autogenous" is incomplete, because that allows for filler that is identical to the base material, where you want to explicitly state no filler.

 

[DVWE]

Also, I think that "autogenous" is incomplete, because that allows for filler that is identical to the base material, where you want to explicitly state no filler.

MintJulep, the term autogenous in regards to welding means no filler metal used.

An autogenous weld made on this "corner joint" (at least defined that way in ASME) will result in the look of a fillet weld, even if filler metal is not used. I would leave the fillet symbol.

The devil is in the details; she also wears prada.

 

[MintJulep]

From AWS A2.4-98. Unsure if this figure still exists in the current version.

Edit: This is figure 21 in the AWS A2.4-2007. I don't have access to later versions.

 

[DVWE]

That figure is now Figure 7.8 in the 2020 version, it has not changed.

So with this information, and as shown in (c), the correct way to detail the subject weld joint is without the fillet symbol, and the depth of penetration shown in parentheses. Additional information can be noted in the tail, such as GTAW and "autogenous".

The devil is in the details; she also wears prada.

 

[DVWE]

BigBunny,

The correct way to detail the subject weld joint may be confusing to people not familiar with welding symbols. Alternatively, you can always simply give a detailed sketch of what is required in the weld joint to eliminate any possible confusion.

The devil is in the details; she also wears prada.

 

[r6155]

And where is the WPS and the PQR?.

Regards

 

[EdStainless]

This weld is similar to what is commonly used for seal welds for tube to tubesheet joints.
On thin tube the entire wall thickness is consumed, while on thicker tube it is common to limit the width of wall consumed.
In either case there is nearly always a requirement for a plug gauge to be used to check to assure that there is no obstruction of the ID.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed

 

[gtaw]

I would consider it to be an autogenous partial penetration square groove weld. If you are concerned the square groove symbol might be misinterpreted, there is nothing wrong with providing a detail showing the cross section through the joint and weld that is required.

Best regards - Al

 

I would consider it to be an autogenous partial penetration square groove weld.

You have my vote.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

 

[r6155]

1,5 mm aproximate gap before welding is required, see ASME VIII Div 1 Figure UW-21 sketch(4).

Regards

 

[EdStainless]

6155, are you sure that that applies to an autogenous weld like this?
I see these done in Code equipment with <0.1mm gap frequently.
When it is just for fixing or sealing, I am not sure that those rules apply.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed