There’s an age-old dance between the engineering department and the shop floor in many manufacturing companies, and in those where welding is king, this dynamic is particularly prominent. Welders often find themselves scratching their heads, or worse, getting frustrated with the requirements and instructions handed down from engineering. It’s a common tale: weld call-outs in impossible-to-reach locations, mandates for preheat without acknowledging the realities of the welder’s environment, perplexing welding symbols on shop drawings, or specifying processes that simply aren’t feasible for the given application.
This disconnect isn’t just a source of frustration; it directly impacts productivity, quality, and ultimately, your bottom line. We are constantly helping fabricators bridge this gap, and a huge part of that starts with understanding each other’s perspectives.
But this goes both ways. After you review the things welders wish engineers knew about welding you can read 7 Things Engineers Wished Welders Knew About Welding.
So, for all the engineers out there, and for welders who might just want to nod in agreement, here are 6 things welders wished engineers knew about welding:
1. Accessibility is King
You’ve designed a beautiful, structurally sound weldment, and the prints are immaculate. But have you ever tried to weld that intricate joint in the corner, behind a gusset, with only an inch of clearance? Welders often face the challenge of executing welds in incredibly tight or awkward spaces. What looks good on a CAD drawing doesn’t always translate to practical accessibility in the shop.
What welders wish you knew: Before finalizing a design, consider the physical act of welding. Can a welder comfortably reach the joint with the welding gun or electrode holder? Is there enough space for proper torch angles, contact tip to work distance (CTTW), and clear line of sight? Sometimes a slight design modification, like a small relief cut or a different assembly sequence, can make a world of difference in weld quality and efficiency.
2. Preheat is More Than Just a Number
Preheating is a critical step for many higher carbon and alloy steels, essential for preventing hydrogen-induced cracking and ensuring proper mechanical properties. Engineers specify preheat and interpass temperatures based on material properties and code requirements, and rightly so. However, the reality is that welding on preheated parts may not just be uncomfortable, but also dangerous.
What welders wish you knew: When a welder has to spend hours working in close proximity to a part preheated to 300°F or higher, it creates a challenging and uncomfortable environment. This isn’t just a comfort issue; it can lead to welder fatigue, reduced concentration, and ultimately, affect weld quality. While necessary, understanding the practical implications of prolonged exposure to preheated components can lead to more effective strategies, such as breaking down large welds into smaller sections.
Rather than assuming preheat is necessary, engineers should always do a proper evaluation of the welding application, base metal chemistry and heat input implications to determine if preheat can be eliminated.
Engineers should also consider the viability of using another welding procedure that could provide sufficient heat input to reduce or eliminate preheat, such as submerged arc welding. Additionally, the use of automation may be the best way to help the welder by reducing proximity to arc and the preheated structure.
To accurately calculate the required preheat and interpass temperature and avoid excessive requirements read 5 Methods to Determine Preheat Temperature.
3. Welding Symbols Are a Language – Speak It Clearly
Welding symbols are the shorthand of the shop floor, conveying critical information about weld type, size, location, and other supplementary details. When they’re clear, concise, and correctly applied, they streamline communication and ensure everyone is on the same page. When they’re not, it’s a recipe for confusion and costly rework.
What welders wish you knew: Inaccurate, ambiguous, or even contradictory welding symbols can bring production to a grinding halt. Welders spend valuable time trying to decipher unclear instructions, leading to delays and potential misinterpretations that compromise quality. A solid understanding of current welding symbol standards (like AWS A2.4) and consistent application of these symbols on drawings can save countless hours of questioning, re-dos, and frustration.
Of course, the opposite is true in some cases. Engineers will specify weld requirements through weld symbols and the welders are the ones that can’t interpret those symbols. In this case, engineers must train the shop floor on how to interpret welding symbols.
4. Process Selection Isn’t Always “One Size Fits All”
Engineers often specify welding processes based on theoretical deposition rates or general industry practices. While these are important considerations, the best process for a given application involves a deeper dive into the shop’s capabilities, the specific joint configuration, and the overall production environment.
What welders wish you knew: Just because a process offers a high deposition rate doesn’t mean it’s the most practical or efficient for every job. For example, submerged arc welding (SAW) is incredibly productive, but it’s limited to flat and horizontal positions and isn’t ideal for short, intermittent welds. Similarly, specifying Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) for high-volume, structural steel fabrication might achieve high quality, but it will dramatically slow down production compared to a more appropriate process like Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) or Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW). Consider factors like available equipment, part size, required joint preparation, and the welder’s skill set when specifying a process.
5. The “Real World” Impacts Weld Quality
While theoretical calculations and ideal lab conditions are important for design, the shop floor is a dynamic environment where variables like fit-up, material condition, and even ambient temperatures can significantly impact welding.
What welders wish you knew: Poor fit-up, even seemingly minor gaps or misalignments, can drastically increase the time and effort required to produce a quality weld, often necessitating larger welds or multiple passes. Understanding the impact of material imperfections (like rust or mill scale) on weld integrity and the importance of clean surfaces is crucial. Even seemingly minor details, like varying travel speeds or inconsistent contact tip to work distance, can affect the final weld. Weld design with a practical understanding of shop floor tolerances and environmental factors can lead to more robust designs and fewer quality issues down the line.
6. CJP vs. PJP: Bigger Isn’t Always Better
One of the most frequent points of contention arises when engineers mandate Complete Joint Penetration (CJP) welds in situations where a Partial Joint Penetration (PJP) weld would be perfectly adequate and structurally sound. While a CJP weld provides full thickness strength, specifying it universally, without considering the actual loading requirements, is often an unnecessary and costly overdesign.
What welders wish you knew: Calling for CJP welds when PJPs suffice is akin to driving a tank to pick up groceries – overkill and inefficient. CJP welds require more extensive joint preparation (like full bevels), significantly more filler metal, and considerably more welding time. This directly translates to higher material costs, increased labor expenses, and ultimately, a much higher overall fabrication cost. Furthermore, as we’ve highlighted in our article “3 Mistakes that Lead to Distortion,” a larger weld volume inherently increases shrinkage forces, leading to greater distortion. This distortion then necessitates costly and time-consuming rework, like straightening or grinding, to bring the part back into tolerance. A judicious application of PJP welds, where appropriate, can lead to substantial savings in consumables, reduced welding time, and a significant decrease in distortion-related problems.
Solving the communication problem
The goal here isn’t to point fingers, but to foster better understanding and collaboration. When engineers and welders speak the same language and appreciate the challenges of each other’s roles, the result is almost always a smoother, more efficient, and more profitable welding operation.
