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!
  • Students Click Here

*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


Weldolet Welding Symbol

Weldolet Welding Symbol

Weldolet Welding Symbol

Does anyone know how to call out the weld symbol on a fabrication drawing for a weldolet when the run pipe size does not allow for a full fillet leg? (i.e.: 3/4" weldolet on a 1" NPS pipe)

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

That's a good example of when to use a reducing tee instead of a weldolet...

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

I agree with DVWE. Whoever put that WOL on the drawing did not understand weldolets and their use.

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

It is permissible to draw and detail or describe in notes the geometry involved if not adequately described by standard weld symbols.

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

It is not normal to have welding symbols on the piping drawings. The weld preparation is described the fabricators WPS. The piping drawing says what the two parts are and then the fabrication and welding code will have all the other requirements.

There will be some non standard details that will require a fully detailed drawing of the weld prep and weld size, more than a welding symbol would show.

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

If welders only had access to the construction codes, i.e., Section I, Section VIII, B31.1, etc., then they would have the information they need at their finger tips.

Way too many WPSs lists "All fillets and grooves" under the heading of joint details and then management scratches their head and wonders why the components are not welded properly.

I had a client that was beside himself because he said his welders' welds "sucked." I asked him what he meant. He said they didn't know a good weld from a bad weld. I asked him what welding code he was working to. He responded, "We weld to several different codes; ASME, AWS, structural, piping, it changes from one job to the next."

I asked him whether the welders were provided with the acceptance criteria for each project? He said, "No. of course not. They are expected to know a good weld from a bad weld and they are expected to know the code requirements."

I asked if the acceptance criteria was the same for all the codes they welded to. "Of course not. Each has different requirements." was his response.

I asked him how were the welders to know what was acceptable or not if all the codes are different? He responded, "They are welders, they're expected to know."

I pushed a little harder, "Have you provided them with any additional training to teach them the differences between the acceptance criteria of each of the different codes."

"Hell no, I don't provide training to welders. I told you, they're expected to know." he said sounding less sure of himself.

"How long has the average welder worked for you?" I asked.

"About 7-years." was the response.

"You're unhappy because the welders don't know what is required, but you've done nothing to correct the problem in 7-years and you wonder why their quality sucks?" I asked.

It is difficult to get management to understand that welding and knowledge of codes and standards is not genetic. But, the less they know, the more money I make. I am referring to management by the way.

If you don't put the welding requirements on the drawings, you have no one to blame but yourself if the welds are not made as expected. There is no reason not to use welding symbols or sketches to define the extent of welding. Anything less is .... I think you know what I would like to say.

Best regards - Al

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

I agree 100% with Al.
The more information given to the welders increases the chance that they will produce what the designer actually intended.

Many people who write WPS's are either lazy or ignorant.
They will add a page with pictures of all the different groove and fillet preparations that are acceptable with that WPS.
If there is no detail on the drawing then how does the welder know which detail to use to complete the weld ?

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

Drawing is not only for welders, also is for inspections during fabrication and in service.


RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

I agree that the drawings provide information to many people other than welders; all the more important to include all the information needed to ensure the correct weld call-out is included on the drawings.

A picture or a sketch is worth a thousand word is an understatement. Considering many engineers, designers, welders, and inspectors do not know the proper terminology, i.e., weld-o-let versus integrally reinforced branch fitting, how can one expect them to locate the welding requirements in the code? Ah yes, a sketch will do nicely. One doesn't even have to know how to read with a sketch in hand. And after all, those codes are so heavy to carry around from job site to job site.

Best regards - Al

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

If the full fillet leg can't be welded because of the space limit, then it won't be accepted no matter the symbol of the weld it was. Consider to use a different branch connection type.

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

I found that per ASME B31.1 Fig. 127.4.8(E) it is acceptable to not have the full fillet weld leg in the transverse view as long as it is a full penetration weld to the weld line and the angle between the groove weld face and run pipe surface is greater than 135 deg.

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

Indeed, but note 3 introduces a provision for that


Cover weld shall provide a smooth transition to the run pipe.
I imagine that any properly instructed and decent welder can make a smooth transition in his last welding pass and then leave out the fillet.

RE: Weldolet Welding Symbol

A word of caution when using size on size, or near size on size (such as your example above) weldolets.

A relatively large hole is getting cut in the run pipe, which is not the best idea. Additionally, a large amount of weld is being put on one side of the run pipe, which is also not a good idea. This combination begs for distortion of the run pipe, especially when two or more olets are used in the same line, and will usually require some type of bracing and welding technique. Now, you're asking the welder to make a smooth transition as he/she progresses to the transverse view.

That's a lot of unnecessary work when compared to the two full pen groove welds required by putting in a reducing tee.

Obviously, there are always extenuating circumstances where this cannot be avoided, but if it can, then why do it? Talk to your designer if you are not the designer, ask the question, and save your welders the headache.

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!


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