How do I indicate this non-structural "cap" weld? 1

[jmarkus]

Please see attached image. This is a plate with a slot that fits over another plate. The weld shown as hatched is just there to keep the plate from falling off. It doesn't serve any structural purpose.

What AWS symbology should I use to call out this weld on a drawing?

Thanks,
Jeff

 

[MechEng2005]

Perhaps a fillet weld on both sides and a surface weld over the top?

See link for descriptions of welds:

http://www.metallicfusion.com/symbols_and_definitions.htm

-- MechEng2005

 

[paddingtongreen]

Show a fillet weld and write "Tackweld" in the tail of the symbol.

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

 

[gtaw]

Standard welding symbols may be sufficient to describe the majority of the welds used for many applications. However, the minority of the welds needed can't be adequately described by a standard welding symbol, in which case a section through the weld is the easiest way to define the welding requirements.

Best regards - Al

 

[Ron]

Use the same symbol you would use if it were a structural weld.

 

[SKIAK]

A welder is not going to be able to produce the weld you illustrated; at least not without multiple passes. The arc (assuming some kind of arc welding) can't jump to all those faces at once. I'd show a fillet weld that points to both grooves and say "tackweld" as paddingtongreen mentioned. I don't see a reason for the weld over the top.

 

[jmarkus]

The part is being made today. They are doing 2 passes and creating a weld as shown (more or less, the image is not to scale). Now they want a drawing to indicate this weld so they can use it to check against in their quality department.

Jeff

 

[unclesyd]

Convex fillet weld with all the way around symbol.

The only places I've seen a weld button as you posted was on the restoration of a steam locomotive and on some wrought iron restoration, emulating a rivet.

 

[Mr168]

Your best bet is to put the weld cross section as a note and reference it in the tail of the drawing as gtaw mentioned. Otherwise, you can probably expect a phone call from their QA department asking what they're looking at.

 

[dik]

ME2005... excellent link...

Dik

 

[dik]

If it's non-structural, you can have the metal pieces flush on top and cover them all by using a butt weld. The symbol would be a butt weld on both sides, but this may be achieved with a single pass if the material is thin enough. My first consideration was to treat it as two fillet welds as noted above.

Dik

 

[gtaw]

The link is OK if you don't mind using welding symbols that are out dated. Case in point, the edge flange weld has changed. Another example; the symbol indicating the depth of preparation (bevel depth) and root penetration was changed over 30 years ago by the 1976 edition of AWS A2.4.

There were no dimensions provided, so it is a crap shoot as to what weld type is best suited for this inquiry. Looking at the scale of the weld vs. the base metal in the attachment I assumed it was sheet metal, but any assumption, well, you know where that discussion is headed.

As for welding symbols, be careful. There are a number of references in use by designers and engineers that list welding symbols that are 20 and 30 years out of date. The latest edition of AWS A2.4 is the 2007 edition. Buy it, look through it to see which weld type is best suited for your needs. Keep in mind that the standard dissects the welding symbol, so all the information is not listed in one concise manner. The reader is responsible to locate all the necessary information on the reference line, i.e., weld type, weld size, length, etc.


Best regards - Al

 

[dik]

thanks, gtaw... any other errors?

Dik