use of the perimeter welding symbol

[Matteo Pagliaro]

Hello everyone! Although I wrote here a long time ago, I find myself having to access a different username, probably because I left too much time and I think I was... azzerato. They'll excuse me how many people knew me under another nick!

I come to the problem: as seen in the attached file, I often find myself in the situation of listing the welding of two welded components in the manner indicated (of course I created a very simple example): What of the three methods is the right one? I asked myself the question because many of my clients, in their designs, use method 1, but this method is not covered by en22553 :mixed rule: (only the perimeter welding is planned on the same floor). a brief search on the net made me realize that few people pose the problem: Only on the site of the American aisc there is a brief mention of the fact that it does not use method 1, but I think it is related to the type of structures that is of their competence, not for some unpretentious structural pieces.

I know that I have stretched too far , but my thanks will be so much bigger for those who will give me useful references. bye, matteo:finger:.

 

[gerod]

Hello everyone! Although I wrote here a long time ago, I find myself having to access a different username, probably because I left too much time and I think I was... I'm gonna apologize how many people knew me under another nick!

What was your nick?

It might have been a long time.
Anyway tell us we're checking.

on the designation what to say?
method 1 is used when talking about 1 floor but I would say more: the welding must be on one side of the floor (it is normal on the plane and the verse of the same)
in case 1 from you indicated the plan is the same only that the welding on one side is above the plane, on the other is below.
I'd say that the other methods are okay, but I wouldn't argue much about these things.
I would also interpret n° 1, maybe a judge not!
Hi.

 

[Matteo Pagliaro]

What was your nick?

It might have been a long time.
Anyway tell us we're checking.

Thanks for the immediate answer, gerod! My old nick was matteop but I saw that it is now used by someone else, and there were some discussions both on the weld and on the cad sicad, however it is not a problem, it's okay too!

on the designation what to say?
method 1 is used when talking about 1 floor but I would say more: the welding must be on one side of the floor (it is normal on the plane and the verse of the same)
in case 1 from you indicated the plan is the same only that the welding on one side is above the plane, on the other is below.
I'd say that the other methods are okay, but I wouldn't argue much about these things.
I would also interpret n° 1, maybe a judge not!
Hi.

true that it is not a matter of life or death, but my certified welders (who would like to apply the norm literally) do not accept that the welding along the entire contact profile of two elements such as those represented is indicated in the same way when the two elements are for example as a tube rested on a flange for which the weld is on the same floor and you can use the symbol with the ball. I would just like to read about who had similar experiences, and how he acted.
Thanks anyway, bye.

 

[stefanobruno]

1st classified : method 3
2nd classified : method 2 (for pelandroni )
disqualified by manifest incorrectness: method 1

Bye.

 

[radio]

quoto stefanobruno, although for me it is also incorrect method 2; to the maximum I would set the method 3 modified (see Annex); Perhaps it is more understandable even if it does not convince me much.
Bye.

 

[Matteo Pagliaro]

1st classified : method 3
2nd classified : method 2 (for pelandroni )
disqualified by manifest incorrectness: method 1

Bye.

kindly, do you explain to me why of incorrectness? Is that the same reason I was saying about the norm, or do you see anything more? Thank you!

 

[Matteo Pagliaro]

quoto stefanobruno, although for me it is also incorrect method 2; to the maximum I would set the method 3 modified (see Annex); Perhaps it is more understandable even if it does not convince me much.
Bye.

It doesn't even convince me, even if legally, to think about it well, it would seem the most correct! But I'm sure you'd find shovel designers who would tell you there's an extra symbol, totally useless! Hello and thank you!

 

[stefanobruno]

kindly, do you explain to me why of incorrectness? Is that the same reason I was saying about the norm, or do you see anything more? Thank you! !

for what has already written gerod :

" method 1 is used when talking about 1 floor but I would say more: the welding must be on one side of the floor (it is normal on the plane and the verse of the same)
in case 1 from you indicated the plan is the same only that the welding on one side is above the plane, on the other is below. "

the modified method 3 implies that you non you must weld in the two short sections (where we removed the indication )

method 2 according to me is correct in the view in the plant, where it indicates that you have to weld here and there of the picture piece.
in the view in elevation the symbol is at the limit of the outage, it is understood what it wants to indicate but the already mentioned judge (without celestial socks:biggrin: ) could find a caviar.

Bye.

 

[Matteo Pagliaro]

the modified method 3 implies that you non you must weld in the two short sections (where we removed the indication )

I don't agree here: the symbol with the ball should indicate all perimeter welding on that plane (they are 1 long and two short welding). because there is the ball I would go to weld even in the two short stretches.

It is that I am noticing much confusion, although each of us using the symbols you prefer comes to make it understand that there are 4 welds, 2 long and two short, but the thing escapes from hand because the norm seems to me that it does not contain it.

thanks to every way for all the interventions, very useful to clarify the various points of view. If there are others, well come!! Bye.

 

[stefanobruno]

I don't agree here: the symbol with the ball should indicate all perimeter welding on that plane (they are 1 long and two short welding). because there is the ball I would go to weld even in the two short stretches.

You're right, I didn't notice the circle on the upper sled.

You're right about the confusion, I've been making a round-table appointment years ago to have some kind of disappointment and try to say what I've done?
They told me that the licensed welder knows what they mean some of those symbols, the ones he got his driver's license.
Yeah, okay, I answered, but I have to put them.
Go do a welder course, explain it to him. (!)
I also contacted the professional school, then I decided that I would put it to feeling (after buying the manual of one )
I don't do high-ingenious things and none of my clients have ever challenged me with a welding indication.

Bye.

 

[Matteo Pagliaro]

They told me that the licensed welder knows what they mean some of those symbols, the ones he got his driver's license.
Yeah, okay, I answered, but I have to put them.
Go do a welder course, explain it to him. (!)

ha ha! when I told my colleagues in the technical office they were scattered: hahahahah: from laughing... Fortunately we have the un!!!
I agree, instead, with you when you think that the best thing is to put on us the common sense! Hello and thank you again!

 

[Marco74]

Telling me about the subject, I'm asking something: Does anyone have any manuals or signs of welding symbolism and how to apply them? that are different from the baldassini....thanks

Bye.

 

[radio]

Telling me about the subject, I'm asking something: Does anyone have any manuals or signs of welding symbolism and how to apply them? that are different from the baldassini....thanks

Bye.

the standard for the "symbolic representation of welds on drawings" is the uni en 22553.

 

[Marco74]

the standard for the "symbolic representation of welds on drawings" is the uni en 22553.

I attach the symbolism taken from the baldassini, but in my opinion it is not explained well, as I do not think it is explained well when to use a certain symbolism regarding another, so I was looking for a dispensation on the kind of that post but made a little better.
Thank you.
Bye.

 

[radio]

the annex?

 

[Marco74]

the annex?

left in the mouse....

 

[radio]

in fact in the baldassini what there is an extract of 22553, but it is a little squeezed.
I don't know where to find a pantry like you need.
Bye.

 

[Matteo Pagliaro]

Telling me about the subject, I'm asking something: Does anyone have any manuals or signs of welding symbolism and how to apply them? that are different from the baldassini....thanks

Bye.

you need in-depth research on the internet, in high school sites or universities choosing to display only pdf files. something I found, but they are always extracted, at the most explained a little more, than the norm already mentioned.

much better if you download the document aisc (all in English) for general constructions, or do the same research as above on American sites. Bye.

 

[Marco74]

vedo cosa riesco a trovare. ...

ciao.