Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / Technical Discussions / Friction welding symbol
- - By George (*) Date 07-25-2011 13:55
Hi,
Our company uses the friction welding process for manufacturing axles and related sub-assemblies.
From designer point of view I was searching for the official or recommended welding symbol to correctly reflect it. For the time being most of our drawings are showing a two-sided butt weld with the note in the tail, stating "FRICTION WELD - TYP...". We checked many places for it but we couldn't find any specific sample for friction welding.
Could you please direct us to a specific standard or source that would give us the right / correct symbol?

Thank you in advance for your help,
George
Attachment: 501682-Weld.pdf (67k)
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 07-25-2011 14:13
George
Welcome to the American Welding Society Online Forum.
I have no problem reading the drawing.
Friction Welding process is designated by FRW.
Good Luck
Marshall
Parent - - By George (*) Date 07-25-2011 14:35
Hi Marshall
Thank you for your quick reply.
So, you say that the symbol used is OK? Are you suggesting to shorten the wording to FRW instead of the currently used complete wording?

Thank you,
George
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 07-25-2011 15:07
George
No I wouldn't change it.
A weld symbol usually gives Joint requirements, weld size and depth of weld if applicable. The Weld process may or may not be included it depends on the qualifications and capabilities of the shop doing the work and the Engineer's requirements.
What you have is fine the abbreviation for Friction Welding is shown as FRW.
Again Good Luck and welcome to the American Welding Society Online Forum
Marshall
Parent - - By George (*) Date 07-25-2011 15:14
Hi Marshall,
Thank you for the clarifications, and welcoming...
George
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 07-25-2011 15:20
I agree with Marshall, the welding symbol looks fine to me also. I have no problem understanding it's intent.

.....and Welcome to the forum.
Parent - - By George (*) Date 07-25-2011 15:45
Thank you John
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 07-26-2011 00:15 Edited 07-26-2011 03:59
I hate to stir up the mud, but the welding symbol indicates the square groove edge preparation is welded from both sides. I don't believe that is the case.

AWS A2.4 is the standard that covers welding symbols. In general, the welding symbol does not have to list the welding process or procedure. The designer can simply list CJP in the tail of the welding symbol to indicate a complete joint penetration weld is required. The fabricator is then free to select the "best" welding process and joint detail based on what welding equipment is available.

The most basic welding symbol is simply a horizontal reference line with an attached arrow pointing to the joint. The optional tail is used to indicate the welding process, the welding procedure used, etc.

In your case; the parts are prepared, i.e., machined, before assembly and loading into the friction welding machine. The weld is all around the round "pipe" so there is no need to use the supplementary "all around" symbol. There is no side significance with the friction welding process. The weld is CJP with flash on both the inner surface and the outer surface. You are neither welding from the arrow side nor the other side, so you do not need to indicate from which side the welding is performed.

My vote would be the basic welding symbol, i.e., the reference line with attached arrow, listing the welding process with any additional information in the tail. In your case, you are using friction welding, so it is appropriate to list the process it in the tail. While I do not believe it is necessary, you could add "CJP" in the tail to reiterate a complete joint penetration weld is required and you can list the specific procedure you want the welders to use.

Best regards – Al
Parent - By ssbn727 (*****) Date 07-26-2011 04:05 Edited 07-26-2011 04:07
This is an interesting thread to say the least, and it always boils down to the details...
Now, one question that wasn't asked was: to which welding code or standard is the Welding Procedure Specification written to???

I ask this because the assumption is currently that this must be AWS D1.? or some other code or standard... However, this also could be a totally different code or standard that is required by the EOR (Engineer Of Record)...

In other words, it could be an EN code which we all know uses totally different welding symbols, or ISO, or some other code or standard that we're not aware of since it is not noted in the drawing and the OP (Original Poster) didn't include it in the initial post which started this thread...

So, we really do need to know which code or standard this company from Ingersoll, Ontario in Canada is working to in order to produce these "Whippy - Whappy's.":eek::lol::grin::smile::roll::wink::cool:

So what do say there George? which one is it?:razz::roll::eek::confused::wink::cool:

Respectfully,
Henry
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 07-26-2011 10:35
Al
Stir away.
Sometimes we forget the difference in a weld symbol and what is required of a welding symbol.
Thank You for bringing me back to the basics.
AWS A2.4 clause 1

Marshall
Parent - - By George (*) Date 07-26-2011 13:42 Edited 07-28-2011 18:22
Al, Henry,

Thank you for the deep immersion into the subject and bringing up so many and relevant questions and things to be considered.
As you pointed out, we are located in Ontario, Canada, so the first reaction would be to have our procedures done in accordance with CWB's (Canadian Welding Bureau) requirements, however, we decided to prepare our welding procedures against AWS D1.1 (better later than never...), since most of our customers are located in the USA.
I am the person who was designated to prepare the welding specs for all processes (FRW, GMAW, GTAW), and reviewing different drawings, I just realized that we don't have an in-house consensus about how to represent the FRW in the simplest, clearest, and definitely the most acceptable format. To add to our aggravation, we couldn't find a sample in the welding symbols sections of the AWS D1.1 or AWS Welding Handbook Welding Processes, Volume 2 (Eighth edition), Chapter 23, Friction Welding.
I like the simplest and direct way of showing the arrow with the notes in the tail: CJP - FRW, this way there is no room for ifs or butts...
Thank you again all for your thoughts and recommendations.
Best regards,
George
Parent - - By ssbn727 (*****) Date 07-26-2011 15:59
First off George,

I apologize for not personally "Weldcoming you to THE WORLD'S GREATEST WELDING FORUM!!!:lol::wink::cool:" as I usually do to new participants... Now that I got that out of the way, I must say that it is indeed refreshing that folks like yourself are starting to realize that they need at times to seek out the knowledge of welding folks like ourselves in order to improve their drawings so that the fabricators clearly understand what the detailer/designer/engineer are attempting to communicate in order to efficiently produce such components.

Al can certainly agree with me on this since we, and others who participate in here have experienced working with drawings that are vague to say the least in listing the appropriate details required for fabricator/welders to clearly understand what folks like yourself are attempting to convey with respect to the welding to be performed as per some of the drawings we have encountered over the years... I wish I had a dollar for every time I encountered strange, incorrect welding symbols, and other details in drawings I had the displeasure to work with, because I know for sure that I'd be a rich man today!

If it is D1.1, then Al is certainly correct in his explanation as to why there is no need to include a square groove weld symbol on both sides of the reference line, and instead to include the abbreviation for Friction welding that Marshall posted in the tail attached to the reference line opposite of the arrow with any other pertinent information required to complete the weld(s).

If we can assist you further in the future please do not hesitate to post here.

Respectfully,
Henry
Parent - By George (*) Date 07-26-2011 18:39
Hi Henry,

Thank you for the personalized "Weldcoming". I always enjoy any kind of humor inserted into the "serious" stuff, so it is refreshing to see how some theoretical issues can be solved in a fun way.
Based on what I'm encountering through my current project, it's more than likely that I'll be back for more assistance.
Thank you again, to all of you, for your quick and to the point support.
Best regards,
George
Parent - - By 803056 (*****) Date 07-26-2011 18:49
Hello Henry;

How are you doing these days?

The welding symbol I offered as an example is not applicable to AWS D1.X welding codes exculsively, but is applicable whenever AWS welding symbols are used.

The listing of the groove type, weld type, details such as groove angle, etc. are not required per AWS A2.4. The hook, and there is always a hook, is that the user doesn't know what is required unless the welding symbol or other working document provides the direction needed.

In this case, the fitter, tacker, or welder does not have to prepare an edge, i.e., a bevel, J-, or other wise.  The details would be included in the machine drawing. As such, it is not necessary to include details of how to prepare the "square groove" edge preparation with the welding symbol. In this case the "other working document", e.g. the machine drawings provide all the details needed.

This is one case where less information is sufficient to allow the welding operator to make the required weld. This is perhaps a case where too much information could be confusing to the user.

Best regards - Al :wink:
Parent - By ssbn727 (*****) Date 07-27-2011 03:06
Good Al!

I had lunch with a mutual friend of ours today, and it was funny as heck to say the least!:lol::wink::cool:

I agree and that's what I was trying to convey myself, then again you had already made it clear for me in your previous post, and yet I'm glad you explained it in greater detail for the rest of the folks in here.:eek::smile::lol::wink::cool:

Respectfully,
Henry
Parent - - By George (*) Date 07-29-2011 12:43
Hi Marshall,

Finally, I have the AWS A2.4 standard, but I have a problem identifying the "clause1" that you mentioned.
Could you, please, direct me to the right spot?

Thank you in advance,
George
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 07-29-2011 12:59
I don't mean to put words in his mouth, but I think he was referencing the "Scope" of AWS A2.4.
AWS has recently started using the reference of the "sections" of some of it's other documents as "clauses". (ie AWS D1.1)
Parent - - By waccobird (****) Date 07-29-2011 14:20
George

As John typed/covered for me while I was playing bad guy to those needing it in the shop.

AWS A2.4 pg.1 Clause 1.3.

But the whole thing is a good read just to help keep us reminded of the little things we sometime forget.

Good Luck
Marshall

edit: Thanks John for having my Back like that :cool:
Parent - - By 99205 (***) Date 07-29-2011 15:07 Edited 07-29-2011 17:23
Nope, no Clause 1.3 in A2.4:2007.

I did find a old Mil-Doc that has a reference to FRW symbol.

http://www.everyspec.com/MIL-STD/MIL-STD+(1100+-+1299)/download.php?spec=MIL_STD_1252.813.pdf

You have to cut and paste this link.  Go down to page 10.
Parent - By George (*) Date 07-29-2011 16:23
This is a great supporting document to compare to.
I see that they use, like us, the same welding symbol: butt weld - square groove on both sides, so they should've ask you guys before they wrote it...:evil:

Regarding AWS 2.4, I have the lates, 2007 edition, and this one does not have any numbered clauses on its page 1. I assume that it was part of a previous edition.

Thank you very much for this info.
Best regards,
George
Parent - - By George (*) Date 07-29-2011 16:26
Hi Marshall,

I have the 2007 edition, and it does not have any clauses on page 1. I assume that your version is an older one.
Could you, please, scan and post this page only?

Thank you in advance,
George
Parent - By waccobird (****) Date 07-29-2011 16:52
George

It is a 98 vintage.

Good Luck

Marshall
Parent - - By ssbn727 (*****) Date 07-29-2011 16:56 Edited 07-29-2011 17:04
Hi George,

Perhaps Marshall was referring to an older version of A 2.4... I'm reading in AWS A2.4 98 the clause he mentions on page 1 as follows:

"1.3 Welding Symbols. The welding symbols consists of several elements (See figure 2). Only the reference line and arrow are required elements. Additional elements may be included to convey specific welding information. Alternatively, welding information may be conveyed by other means such as by drawing notes or details, specifications, standards, codes, or other drawings which eliminates the need to include the corresponding elements in the welding symbol.

All elements when used shall have specific locations within the welding symbol as shown in figure 2 (Standard Location of Elements of a Welding symbol).

Mandatory requirements regarding each element in a welding symbol refer to the location of the element and should not be interpreted as a necessity to include the element in every welding symbol."

Hopefully, this will help clarify what Marshall was trying to convey.:smile::wink::cool:

Edit: Marshall! I was about 4  minutes too slow to post!!!:yell::lol::wink: Gotta sharpen my typing speed!:lol::eek::roll::wink::cool: Good show friend!

Btw, "FSW" means Friction Stir Welding 99205... George is referring to 'FRW", otherwise known as Friction Resistance Welding.:wink::cool:

Respectfully,
Henry
Parent - By waccobird (****) Date 07-29-2011 17:00
Henry

Thank You 

That is exactly where I took it from.

God Bless us All
Marshall
Parent - - By 99205 (***) Date 07-29-2011 17:25
My bad, i was reading an article on FSW the other day.
Parent - By ssbn727 (*****) Date 07-29-2011 17:34
Hey Man, nobody's perfect - especially myself.:eek::roll::lol::wink::cool:

Respectfully,
Henry
Parent - By George (*) Date 07-29-2011 17:36
Thank you both!
I see that the 2007 edition has it under 3.5, page 2.

You guys are great!
George
- - By jbndt (**) Date 07-27-2011 17:51
George,

Welcome to the Forum!

As we know, ALL prints reach the shop floor in perfect condition, and the welders read ALL of the information in the “tails” (when legible …)

How about a (flush) contour symbol on the arrow side?

Just trying to cover ‘most’ of the bases …

Cheers,
jb
Parent - By George (*) Date 07-27-2011 18:33
Hi Jimmy,

Thank you for the tip. It definitely adds extra visual information. I'll discuss it with my colleagues to include it in the future representations.

Thank you again,
George
Up Topic Welding Industry / Technical Discussions / Friction welding symbol

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill