Welding representation

admin

Hello!How do I represent this welding in a fabrication drawing??Thanks for your help.PD: Neglect the spanish words.
Reply:forgot to post the picture?
Reply:Originally Posted by Metarinkaforgot to post the picture?
Reply:Originally Posted by jmtcHello!How do I represent this welding in a fabrication drawing??Thanks for your help.PD: Neglect the spanish words.
Reply:Originally Posted by dave powelson????The same way that joint is depicted on the drawing.That drawing doesn't require any symbol interpretation and resultingconfusing. That's an excellent drawing.
Reply:Originally Posted by jmtcOhhhh come on!!!I'm talking about this kind of welding symbols.That's is used in technical drawing!!!!
Reply:I am just waiting for some one to draw a welding symbol in text .The original posted drawing shows everything except what base metal is and filler to be used.David Real world weldin.  When I grow up I want to be a tig weldor.
Reply:If you want to write it in Greek, then go right ahead, but I think your Spanish and English speaking welders will prefer to see it the simplest way possible.MM350P/Python/Q300MM175/Q300DialarcHFHTP MIG200PowCon300SMHypertherm380ThermalArc185Purox oaF350CrewCab4x4LoadNGo utilitybedBobcat250XMT304/Optima/SpoolmaticSuitcase12RC/Q300Suitcase8RC/Q400Passport/Q300Smith op
Reply:Originally Posted by DesertRider33If you want to write it in Greek, then go right ahead, but I think your Spanish and English speaking welders will prefer to see it the simplest way possible.
Reply:Maybe something like this?  The tree could be avoided with more notation. Attached Images
Reply:Thanks a lot
Reply:jmtc,  I am pretty busy and I do not have access to a scanner right now but when I get off work I will provide you with the correct symbol. No offense whatsoever to lotechman but the symbol he provided does not depict what you are looking to achieve. The root opening is incorrect and the depth of bevel is not shown. He is close though. Now, as mentioned, you have posted the answer to your own question. Everything that you need is there to come up with the correct symbol to depict what you are wanting done. I do not want to come across as harsh but this is really basic stuff for any draftsman or engineer as well as inspectors. If you are none of the above then I can understand your lack of ability to come up with the correct symbol. I would suggest getting a hold of a current copy of AWS A2.4 Symbols for Welding and Nondestructive Testing. I do understand the need for a symbol as opposed to using the joint detail on a shop drawing. This could take up unnecessary space on the drawing where as a weld/welding symbol does not.jrw159
Reply:I figured I was not right but no one was helping...  depth is not given on left side as .200??  and I located the 1/16 in the wrong position?I see that it is 50 thou of the thickness while I read it as .050 land  should be a 12 thou land?? and I see it root is 1/8th not 1/16 as I notedLast edited by lotechman; 02-03-2010 at 12:34 PM.
Reply:jmtc,   I told this to jrw159 about three years ago. From my understanding of weld symbols I believe this might assist you. I tried to place it into an attachment I hope it works. Attached ImagesDoc1.pdf (40.7 KB, 151 views)Weldor/ Certified Inspector
Reply:Originally Posted by lotechmanI figured I was not right but no one was helping...  depth is not given on left side as .200??  and I located the 1/16 in the wrong position?I see that it is 50 thou of the thickness while I read it as .050 land  should be a 12 thou land?? and I see it root is 1/8th not 1/16 as I noted
Reply:Originally Posted by CWI_98jmtc,   I told this to jrw159 about three years ago. From my understanding of weld symbols I believe this might assist you. I tried to place it into an attachment I hope it works.
Reply:Originally Posted by jrw159jmtc,  I am pretty busy and I do not have access to a scanner right now but when I get off work I will provide you with the correct symbol. No offense whatsoever to lotechman but the symbol he provided does not depict what you are looking to achieve. The root opening is incorrect and the depth of bevel is not shown. He is close though. Now, as mentioned, you have posted the answer to your own question. Everything that you need is there to come up with the correct symbol to depict what you are wanting done. I do not want to come across as harsh but this is really basic stuff for any draftsman or engineer as well as inspectors. If you are none of the above then I can understand your lack of ability to come up with the correct symbol. I would suggest getting a hold of a current copy of AWS A2.4 Symbols for Welding and Nondestructive Testing. I do understand the need for a symbol as opposed to using the joint detail on a shop drawing. This could take up unnecessary space on the drawing where as a weld/welding symbol does not.jrw159
Reply:Try this,  It's close.  I think.  But I have to agree with Dave Powelson, you're probably better off posting the original drawing as an addendum to the print.  Unless your welders are good with symbols, you're likely to get something other than what you want.The root face of 0.05t is about 1/80", which might as well be zero.  You could use one of the multi-level symbols to cover each pass, but the symbol I have drawn implies it by saying the weld size is 1/8".  Since the plate is 1/4", you'd need 2 passes for CJP.  The only other thing not covered is the face reinforcement, which you should probably cover in some kind of blanket note that applies to every weld on the drawing if it's critical.Neat stuff, as I don't think I've had to try and draw one of these in at least 2 years.  For what it's worth, it took about 20 minutes for me to puzzle out what to put on the symbol, and I figure it'll take any average welder at least that long to decode it; once he finds his welding symbol reference. Attached ImagesBenson's Mobile Welding - Dayton, OH metro area - AWS Certified Welding Inspector
Reply:Originally Posted by A_DAB_will_doThe root face of 0.05t is about 1/80", which might as well be zero.
Reply:Here's an on-line tutorial for drawing these things...http://www.unified-eng.com/scitech/weld/groove.htmlBenson's Mobile Welding - Dayton, OH metro area - AWS Certified Welding Inspector
Reply:Oh, well if this is homework, then that was your one freebie.  Go figure the rest out for yourself. Originally Posted by jmtcI think that's a mistake... it's taken from the book, it must be 0.5t
Reply:I guess is this one, but i'm not sure.Image deleted because it came up as spamDavid R Originally Posted by A_DAB_will_doOh, well if this is homework, then that was your one freebie.  Go figure the rest out for yourself.
Reply:Originally Posted by jmtcI guess is this one, but i'm not sure.Image deleted because it came up as spamDavid RIs not homework, the picture is taken from an ASME Manual... in other similar pictures appears 0.5t... that's why I say it's a mistake.
Reply:Don't worry, i'm sure it's a mistake of the book (is not from the ASME code, it's a guidebook)...Plase... answer the question, bye.
Reply:It looks like A dab will do got it.  The original post is easier for me to understand.  I end up getting out the book.  "arrow side"  "other side" is the one that gets me.  For the top piece, a weld all around symbol would have been nice.    I thought it said weld the sides so I did.  They sent it back to do the ends.  Had I known I would have welded through the corners instead of having all my start stops there.No fillet size.David Real world weldin.  When I grow up I want to be a tig weldor.David R,  A DAB will do has good structure but the weld size and depth of penetration are reversed showing 1/4" inch depth of bevel and 1/8" inch groove weld size on 1/4" material. As to arrow side or other side just remember under the line is closest. Below the reference line is arrow side. If you will notice, CWI_98 has the weld symbol pointing to the top of the joint and the information is underneath the reference line and A DAB will do is pointing at the bottom of the joint with the information on top of the reference line. It sounds bass ackwards when looking at groove welds but makes sense when looking at fillets/t-joint and corner joints ect.Now both ways of showing the symbol (top and bottom) are correct as depicted and acceptable in either position. jrw159Last edited by jrw159; 02-03-2010 at 08:28 PM.
Reply:Hi JRW,Maybe my references are out of date, but I think I got it straight.  The plate is 1/4" thick, and I want the bevel to extent all the way, with effectively zero root face.  Whether or not the drawing is right about the root face is another matter.  Ahhh.  I just had a revelation.  The symbol should show 1/4" (1/4")  not 1/8" (1/4")....My mistake.  Of course, I can't figure out how to communicate that the weld should be made in 2 passes using the symbology....I suppose using multiple reference lines is the only way to do that.  But those just look silly and are even more of a pain to decode.This is why I like the detailed view that this posting started with....although the point about using symbols to conserve realestate on a drawing is a valid concern... Originally Posted by jrw159David R,  A DAB will do has good structure but the weld size and depth of penetration are reversed showing 1/4" inch depth of bevel and 1/8" inch groove weld size on 1/4" material. As to arrow side or other side just remember under the line is closest. Below the reference line is arrow side. If you will notice, CWI_98 has the weld symbol pointing to the top of the joint and the information is underneath the reference line and A DAB will do is pointing at the bottom of the joint with the information on top of the reference line. It sounds bass ackwards when looking at groove welds but makes sense when looking at fillets/t-joint and corner joints ect.Now both ways of showing the symbol (top and bottom) are correct as depicted and acceptable in either position. jrw159
Reply:WellI think the symbol is this one, but i'm not sure.... http://www.imagechicken.com/viewcode...52921400&x=jpgAny opinion?
Reply:Originally Posted by A_DAB_will_doHi JRW,Maybe my references are out of date, but I think I got it straight.  The plate is 1/4" thick, and I want the bevel to extent all the way, with effectively zero root face.  Whether or not the drawing is right about the root face is another matter.  Ahhh.  I just had a revelation.  The symbol should show 1/4" (1/4")  not 1/8" (1/4")....My mistake.  Of course, I can't figure out how to communicate that the weld should be made in 2 passes using the symbology....I suppose using multiple reference lines is the only way to do that.  But those just look silly and are even more of a pain to decode.This is why I like the detailed view that this posting started with....although the point about using symbols to conserve realestate on a drawing is a valid concern...