I neglected to add, my Blodgett’s
cost me 6 bucks brand new………a long, long time ago.
From: Neil Moore
Sent: January 11, 2006 6:26 PM
Subject: RE: 5/16 Fillet Weld
Dave's comment is good. What he might of meant was that more weld passes
would be required. We weren't interested in a particular job but the
overall economy of any project where welds larger than really required will
increase the costs.
It might be of value to read Section 7.5 in Blodgett's "Design of
Welded Structures", one of the structural engineers bibles.
Neil Moore, SE, SECB
neil moore and associates
consulting structural engineers
shingle springs, ca
distressed structures investigations
At 02:04 PM 1/11/2006, you wrote:
Yep, that was me.
I understand your point about the difference in the quantity of weld metal
deposed. I’m not a welder, and I’m not sure the deposition rate is
The bottom line: The welder on this job says this about the proposed change:
T. William (Bill) Allen, S.E.
Consulting Structural Engineers
From: dave lowen [ mailto:jatech(--nospam--at)kwic.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Subject: 5/16 Fillet Weld
I think it was Bill Allen who
posted a message this morning (I deleted it already) regarding changing a
fillet weld size from 3/16 to 5/16 because it only amounted to a little more
In fact, a 5/16 fillet requires approximately 3 times the electrode as a 3/16
One could assume that if the deposition rate in pounds per hour were the same
for both welds then the larger weld would take 3 times as long, a substantial
V 519 587 5797
F 519 587 5138