welding symbol - two tilted sheets

[MBT]

Good morning to all
regulations treat welds widely, but we always talk about plates joined together with an angle of 90°
But how many times does it happen to merge two sheets like this?and what would you put in place of the welding symbol??? ?

to you the word:

 

[Exatem]

continuous angle welding.

 

[sampom]

continuous angle welding.

Yes, I agree.
always the corner welding symbol.
if you Continue I don't know, you should know what those plates are, what the object is. .

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[Exatem]

I say it continues because the soldering at times staggered I see hardly feasible and discontinuous... I don't like it.:biggrin:
I add that if the angle between the two sheets should be sharper, the cyanfrination of the sheet should be contemplated.

 

[MBT]

So you agree with my theory... Good.
someone in the office has feared the hypothesis that it is soldered in full penetration!

Is there any place in the norm that speaks of this kind of welds?

 

[Exatem]

So you agree with my theory... Good.
someone in the office has feared the hypothesis that it is soldered in full penetration!

Is there any place in the norm that speaks of this kind of welds?

thanks for the promotion.
full penetration must be justified by particular conditions. What is the element for? What are you playing? material? Are we building a submarine or a shelf for the cellar?

 

[sampom]

I say it continues because the soldering at times staggered I see hardly feasible and discontinuous... I don't like it.:biggrin:

if I don't have the need to "hold" the balances only at times where it serves (compatibly with the application and the loads in play), otherwise all remain unsealed/deformed. In the subtle it turns out na schifezza.:biggrin:

Of course you're used to the bandage plates. on hold.. you have no problem:

greetings
Mar

 

[sampom]

full penetration must be justified by particular conditions. What is the element for? What are you playing? material? Are we building a submarine or a shelf for the cellar?

I also agree with this.
it could be full penetration if the thickness and type of "middle" require it.. from the scheme I can't deduct it and the loads and stresses you know it.
if it is a strong thickness it would be good, prepare (cianfrini) the lembi and consider the joint (also graphically) as if they were normally soldered at 90° holding an appropriate distance of approach.

greetings
Mar

 

[MBT]

thanks for the promotion.
full penetration must be justified by particular conditions. What is the element for? What are you playing? material? Are we building a submarine or a shelf for the cellar?

Unfortunately in the office I have a cultivator of total penetration, which would rise to full penetration also the swallows of the cages of the canaries... .
:frown:
However the example was "academic" and we talk about carpenters with thicknesses that can vary from 10 to 100mm... more to 100 than 10...

if I don't have the need to "hold" the balances only at times where it serves (compatibly with the application and the loads in play), otherwise all remain unsealed/deformed. In the subtle it turns out na schifezza.:biggrin:

mha, here I had some discussion in his time.. .
better a small but continuous welding or a large at times?

 

[luigi.paiano]

evvaiiii I was posting a message about this topic: you hear ignorance but explain to me the difference between full penetration and angle welding? ?

 

[Exatem]

Unfortunately in the office I have a cultivator of total penetration, which would rise to full penetration also the swallows of the cages of the canaries... .
:frown:
However the example was "academic" and we talk about carpenters with thicknesses that can vary from 10 to 100mm... more to 100 than 10...



mha, here I had some discussion in his time.. .
better a small but continuous welding or a large at times?

I'm talking to you about my field, and I might be contradicted, but that's what we do.
If for example we are positioning a longitudinal element that has no stagnant sealing neutrality (current of the flank), weld at discontinuous traits to contain profile deformations, generally thin and high (see plates with asymmetric bulb). if instead we are talking about the central paramezzale (composed beams), well, then continuous welding.
there is no absolute best but the "less worse" from time to time.

 

[MBT]

Of course the welding is not included in the exact sciences... .
and therefore everything becomes opinable and according to the theories in vogue and the ability of the welder.

 

[Exatem]

evvaiiii I was posting a message about this topic: you hear ignorance but explain to me the difference between full penetration and angle welding? ?

for the purposes of safety the rules refer to: joint to complete penetration and, joint with corner cord.
full penetration links are required in t and head unions where "normal" actions are foreseen at the joint axis and especially traction. the welds must be prepared. Corner unions are used in cutting-edge unions and where normal actions are secondary or negligible.

 

[sampom]

I'm talking to you about my field, and I might be contradicted, but that's what we do.
If for example we are positioning a longitudinal element that has no stagnant sealing neutrality (current of the flank), weld at discontinuous traits to contain profile deformations, generally thin and high (see plates with asymmetric bulb). if instead we are talking about the central paramezzale (composed beams), well, then continuous welding.
there is no absolute best but the "less worse" from time to time.

Ariconcordo:biggrin:
and it is exactly as I said, depends on the application.
in my case in addition to dimensional and geometric motifs I also (and often especially) aesthetic needs and deformations are always harm.
I also work on executing thicknesses, so the total penetration I practically always have (spring of stainless steels with tig process, fine strings without intake material).

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[Exatem]

...and we talk about carpenters with thicknesses that can vary from 10 to 100mm... more to 100 than 10...

if the thicknesses are so "important" it becomes necessary to recover to the reverse after appropriate preparation of the elements.

 

[MBT]

if the thicknesses are so "important" it becomes necessary to recover to the reverse after appropriate preparation of the elements.

In fact.
generally weld to full penetration with joint to y or angle with both sides.
then you evaluate case by chance to do, of course

 

[meccanicamg]

Good evening to all,
according to the legislation the most appropriate indication is "corner arm".

according to the norm un en 22553 in Table 5 n°3 the main quotas of the various types of cords are highlighted, but it is not the classification of welds (see photo attached)

Therefore on the welding note will go on purpose the word "a" followed by the throat value, a rectangle triangle and the cord length. possibly replace the triangle with the symbol of "angle slot with concave cord" or "well-connected corner slot"

 

[radio]

I apologize if I only intervene now but I missed the discussion.
on the initial question:

Good morning to all
regulations treat welds widely, but we always talk about plates joined together with an angle of 90°
But how many times does it happen to merge two sheets like this?
...
and what would you put in place of the welding symbol??? ?

to you the word:

I am only partially in agreement with those who preceded me, for the case mentioned in my opinion depends much on the inclination of the 2 sheets (see attached image).
if we accept that a “t” welding with preparation can be represented as in case 1 (the en 22553 does not speak but the corresponding iso and aws yes) then by extension a “t” welding of two sheets without preparation until a certain angle of incidence (75-80°) can be considered pure angle welding (case 4), for lower angles (up to 40-45°) I would say weld to “half v” (case).
I am talking about continuous structural mag welding to be carried out on sheet with thickness from 5 to 25mm
This is what we do here in the company, considering more intuitive and adherent to the reality a quotation as an attachment but, since en 22553 is (cultably) lacunosa on these cases in the end just agree and put black on white, in an internal document, what is meant for a type of welding and what for another.

Hello, everyone.

 

[meccanicamg]

I apologize if I only intervene now but I missed the discussion.
on the initial question:



I am only partially in agreement with those who preceded me, for the case mentioned in my opinion depends much on the inclination of the 2 sheets (see attached image).
if we accept that a “t” welding with preparation can be represented as in case 1 (the en 22553 does not speak but the corresponding iso and aws yes) then by extension a “t” welding of two sheets without preparation until a certain angle of incidence (75-80°) can be considered pure angle welding (case 4), for lower angles (up to 40-45°) I would say weld to “half v” (case).
I am talking about continuous structural mag welding to be carried out on sheet with thickness from 5 to 25mm
This is what we do here in the company, considering more intuitive and adherent to the reality a quotation as an attachment but, since en 22553 is (cultably) lacunosa on these cases in the end just agree and put black on white, in an internal document, what is meant for a type of welding and what for another.

Hello, everyone.

exactly, the important thing is to put black on white of how you want welding. where I was before I made a lot of electro-welded heavy carpentry I always reported a note with a sketch of how welds were to be made. It is obvious, as long as they are non-structural civil carpenters, but machine tool bases have a greater tolerance on difformity from the indication.