×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

CJP alternatives - FW+PJP

CJP alternatives - FW+PJP

CJP alternatives - FW+PJP

(OP)
It is common knowledge that maximum practical fillet weld size is ½” (13mm) – common practice to employ another type of weld, such as groove weld, when the calculated weld is greater than ½”(13 mm).
Typically CJP welds are the most expensive weld and I feel the same should be reserved for situations in which they are the only viable option.
Coming to the original problem – this is the weld between shear lugs and base plate. In the current case, type of shear plate employed is Cross Plate Shear Lug - owing to the existence of pretty high magnitude of forces, plate thickness is worked out as 1-1/2”(40 mm) – first pass shear plate dimensions 6”(150 mm)longx8”(200 mm) deepx1-1/2” (40mm) thick.
Consideration of Fillet weld (FW) alone requires a fillet leg size of approximately 1-1/8” (28 mm) – what would be the probable combination of FW+PJP instead of a CJP one.
I am planning to employ a FW(1/2”or13 mm) + PJP(1/2” or 13 mm).

How to arrive at a calculation which possibly demonstrates design strength (fRn) of FW+PJP is more than the required strength (Ru)? I am planning to carry on as mentioned below
***********
Equate the kips/in (N/mm) of a 1-1/8” (28 mm) FW = kips/in (N/mm) of FW(1/2”or 13 mm) + PJP(1/2” or 13 mm) – more precisely setting the FW leg size to ½”(13mm) – we’d only be left with the finalization of PJP size.

Does anyone have similar experience earlier – please let me have your opinion.

Thanks & Regards.

RE: CJP alternatives - FW+PJP

If you don't need a CJP for the joint preparation or QC (or maybe fatigue properties) that come along with those welds, great! I absolutely agree -- don't overspecify.

But I'd tend to just call out a PJP of the appropriate size. If a fabricator feels that a PJP backed with a fillet is more economical, they can offer that alternative.

Depending on the scale of fabrication and where your fabricator is located, my experience is that PJP alone may be cheaper. Let them decide.

----
The name is a long story -- just call me Lo.

RE: CJP alternatives - FW+PJP

(OP)
Lomarandil & ManoloGalarraga - thanks to both of you for quick response.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

White Paper - Reshoring Prototyping and Production
In this whitepaper, we'll provide insight into why and when it makes sense for U.S. manufacturers to reshore prototyping and production, and how companies can leverage the benefits of working with local design, prototype, and manufacturing partners during the pandemic and beyond. Download Now
Engineering Report - Top 10 Defect Types in Production
This 22-page report from Instrumental identifies the most common production defect types discovered in 2020, showcases trends from 2019 to 2020, and provides insights on how to prevent potential downtime in 2021. Unlike other methods, Instrumental drives correlations between a variety of data sources to help engineers find and fix root causes. Download Now
White Paper - Addressing Tooling and Casting Requirements at the Design Stage
Several of the tooling and casting requirements of a part can be addressed at the design stage. If these requirements are not addressed at the design stage, lot of time is spent in design iteration when the design reaches the die caster. These design issues lead to increase in time and cost of production leading to delay in time to market and reduced profits for the organization. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close