Welding Tips and Tricks

Ok, nothing really that technically fancy but it sounded cool. I have to fit a lot of 1/4" flat stock. 99% of the time, it has to be flush on either side of pipe. Some days, I can measure the ID, add the appropriate amount and nail it repeatedly. Some days, due to some weird, parallax error, I will be off by a 16th. That's not disastrous by any stretch but it's nice when the pieces just sits flush by itself without any jigging or special tricks.

So, I made this.


From there, it's just a matter of sliding the 1/4" tabs into place and then measuring them for an exact number, each and every time, as can be seen by the plate that is fit next to this little jig. It's also a handy layout tool that I can use to simulate the spacing if the two stiffener tubes on either side of the plate.


Then, it's just a matter of welding the parts with just enough overrun to tie in seamlessly.




Alternately, you can flip it a quarter turn and effectively measure the ID of round stock as well.

That's a pretty cool way to do it

Here is a Pythagoras example that allows for finding the overage for a known plate thickness and tubing size.
Once the overage is known it can be added each time for cutting.

For this example I used 1.25" tubing with 0.25" plate.
The overage came out to +1/8" for each end.

what if you found a metal yard stick and used that to make your "tab measurement stick"?

that way, you not only get a real time fit up, but you get the measurement without have to grab a tape measure.

Thank you MinnesotaDave for that.

If you have any other real world math stuff like this you can blast about a thousand of 'em to me in a PM, short of that I'll keep an eye out for future posts.

Srsly, good stuff man.

newschoppafowah wrote:Thank you MinnesotaDave for that.

If you have any other real world math stuff like this you can blast about a thousand of 'em to me in a PM, short of that I'll keep an eye out for future posts.

Srsly, good stuff man.

That's pretty funny, thanks

I generally tell students that because of my blue collar background I have an unlimited supply of real life math examples, whenever I introduce material I throw in whichever one occurs to me at the time.

MinnesotaDave wrote:...I generally tell students that because of my blue collar background I have an unlimited supply of real life math examples, whenever I introduce material I throw in whichever one occurs to me at the time.

That's exactly why I stopped at Calculus I...

I got a professor with the personality of a dial-tone, who'd never done anything outside of school. He knew his material as well as any mathematician, but could not translate anything he tried to show me into a real-world example I could relate to.

I got a "C", where I'd been a "A" student in math, algebra, geometry and trig, all of which I use regularly.

Steve S

Otto Nobedder wrote:
That's exactly why I stopped at Calculus I...

I got a professor with the personality of a dial-tone, who'd never done anything outside of school. He knew his material as well as any mathematician, but could not translate anything he tried to show me into a real-world example I could relate to.

I got a "C", where I'd been a "A" student in math, algebra, geometry and trig, all of which I use regularly.

Steve S

Your experience is unfortunately very common and something I've been trying to change each school I work in.

I know the math and have worked at places that insisted it be done that way, regardless if we found a better method. I aced the math throughout, including electronics school and is actually what pushed me through the ranks faster than average.

Fast forward a few years into the piecework realm, where I had to become two or even three fabricators and what was faster, and free of unaffordable error wins. I still have to use the math for some things, but have found huge time savings with a 100% success rate over the last 15, of my 25 years in this particular trade.

Same with calculating bends. I used to use the math (gains/losses etc) for that too, but adopted instead, a rack of general test bends with automatic reference marks. What used to take the CAD department hours to do, I get done in under an hour, including the cut list. Not just a print, but a full size, working pattern. We use no blueprints whatsoever. These jigs help to model many of these concepts on the fly, as they occur.

I have the tape measure on me at all times. I put a tape on the top of that jig in which to increment it, but never needed to, being I will need the tape measure over at the saw anyway. Measuring with the same implement throughout. . .

TamJeff - I hope you understood my example was not meant to belittle you in any way, was just showing it out of interest

Heck, the best part of being good with math is knowing when it isn't needed

MinnesotaDave wrote:TamJeff - I hope you understood my example was not meant to belittle you in any way, was just showing it out of interest

I doubt Jeff was doing anything other than emphasizing that math can be applied in simple practical, reliable ways from an original solution, so you dont have to repeat the work each time. Once you've solved a problem, build a model, and just duplicate the model, not the math.

A practical application, if I ever saw one.

Steve S

MinnesotaDave wrote:TamJeff - I hope you understood my example was not meant to belittle you in any way, was just showing it out of interest

Heck, the best part of being good with math is knowing when it isn't needed

No, not at all. Sorry if my text came across like that. I thought it a good place for your example.

Otto Nobedder wrote:

MinnesotaDave wrote:TamJeff - I hope you understood my example was not meant to belittle you in any way, was just showing it out of interest

I doubt Jeff was doing anything other than emphasizing that math can be applied in simple practical, reliable ways from an original solution, so you dont have to repeat the work each time. Once you've solved a problem, build a model, and just duplicate the model, not the math.

A practical application, if I ever saw one.

Steve S

That's pretty much it. We had some hot rod fabricators with pedigrees through our shop and they could not accept renegade methods, and I would watch in agony as they clicked away on their scientific calculators. One guy spent a whole day building stands to hold up one part, that took two people to set up each time, whereas I used horses to hold up that part and entire structures. They also could not understand how I could build projects nearly entirely upside down, as if it were some form of hillbilly dyslexia.