New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
(OP)
Check the new Table J2.4 -- minimum size of fillet welds.
For as long as I've been around, the minimum size has been based on the thicker of the parts joined. This table uses the THINNER part. I checked with AISC for this and it is correct.
It would be interesting to know how many people read right over this and don't notice the change.
14159
For as long as I've been around, the minimum size has been based on the thicker of the parts joined. This table uses the THINNER part. I checked with AISC for this and it is correct.
It would be interesting to know how many people read right over this and don't notice the change.
14159





RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
I do think it's the single goofiest code change that I've ever seen.
14159
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
Have a good weekend (what's left of it).
14159
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
That's always been my understanding also, but apparently times change. The following is from the new Commentary:
"Table J2.4 provides the minimum size of a fillet weld for a given thickness of the thinner part joined. The requirements are not based on strength considerations, but on the quench effect of thick material on small welds. Very rapid cooling of weld metal may result in a loss of ductility. Further-more, the restraint to weld metal shrinkage provided by thick material may result in weld cracking. The use of the thinner part to determine the minimum size weld is based on the prevalence of the use of filler metal considered to be ‘low hydrogen’. Because a 5/16 in. (8 mm) fillet weld is the largest that can be deposited in a single pass by the SMAW process and still be considered prequalified under AWS D1.1, 5/16 in. (8mm) applies to all material ¾ in. (19 mm) and greater in thickness, but minimum preheat and interpass temperatures are required by AWS D1.1. Both the engineer of record and the shop welder must be governed by the requirements."
It's definitely intentional, but I still think it's the goofiest code change I've ever witnessed!!
14159
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
RE: New Table J2.3 Watch Out!
Dik