Jump to content

Talk:Welding

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ThatBPengineer (talk | contribs) at 16:45, 3 February 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleWelding is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 31, 2005.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 9, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
May 19, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
January 13, 2011Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

WikiProject iconMetalworking FA‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
FAThis article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0 Template:IEP assignment


Photo

This article has (and it's children have) a bunch of great images. What we really need, and what I can't find anywhere on the 'net is a photo taken through welding glass of what the welder sees. I might get a friend and try to get a good picture, but if anyone wants to beat me to it, feel free. I'm not making plans right now. —BenFrantzDale 04:48, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea; though I'm not sure where we would put it. Anyway, that has been suggested before, but never acted on—getting a camera into those helmets might be a little tricky. But an image like that would be really great. --Spangineer (háblame) 00:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The photo with the comment "arc welding" has the title of Smaw. The photo is not of stick, it's a photo of either flux core (fcaw-s) or dual shield (fcaw-g). Judging from the amount of fumes coming off his arc, I would say it's dual shield, but I can't say that for sure as I can't see his welder. Not a huge thing, I just thought people shouldn't be confused by the article. 138 (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Welding. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Welding. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welding plastics is not welding?

"In some linguistic and physics circles, it is debated if welding can ever refer to joining non-metals. Many dictionaries refer to welding as a process specific to metal unless identified otherwise. aka Cambridge https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/weld."

I reverted this edit twice now, so per policy I am bringing it to the talk page for discussion. The problems with this addition are many. First are the use of weasel words, such as the all-knowing "they" or in this case "in some circles." What circles specifically say this. We need a source that specifically names these circles, which the dictionary does not.

The dictionary doesn't even say this. It simply defines the process as joining two pieces of metal together. Other dictionaries, such as https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/welding specifically say "plastics and metals", while yet others put the word metal in parentheses, indicating the word is most often used for metals, but not solely. And no dictionary would ever say that language could never change, because they all change constantly. The Oxford English department has written extensively on this, plus nearly every dictionary describes it in detail right in the front of the book.

The main problem is that a dictionary is only good for defining words, not for defining things. An encyclopedia is about defining things, so, unless the article is about a word, a dictionary is a useless source for defining the thing. Many other sources such as the book Fabrication and Welding Engineering by Roger Timings, Handbook of Laser Welding Technologies by S Katayama, or Welding of Plastics by TWI Core Research are much more reliable sources about the subject. Zaereth (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; welding of plastics should be included as welding. There is an immense amount of sourcing that it is applied to certain processes of joining plastics. Now, on to the topic of the disputed material. Right now the main statements in it as written are unsourced. The first sentence is completely unsourced, and the second "Many" is uncourced......giving one example does not source a many statement. Both should ideally be found in secondary sources to be included in their current form. Failing that, perhaps a dialed back statement could be included like "some definitions limit the use of the term welding to only the joining of metals." North8000 (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with that, as I see it, is that a dictionary does not limit the language in any way. They simply follow the changing language, whatever it does. In fact, they try to take great care not to distort the language in any way with their own view, and most go into great detail about their methods in the beginning of the book. If they controlled or limited the use of words we'd still be speaking Old English today. (For example, in Old English, the word "cattle" meant "any kind of domesticated animal" including your dogs and cats. "Deer" meant "any kind of wild animal", including wolves and bears. "Hund (hound) was any kind of canine, while the word "dog" mysteriously appeared in Middle English, originally referring to a specific breed of canine, but eventually it replaced "hund" as a word for all canines and "hound" became a specific breed. "Gear" originally meant "habits and mannerisms", but it was only in the last century it came to mean "a wheel with interlocking teeth". And don't even get me started on "moose".)
Dictionaries just follow the changing language, and the way it changes is determined by society which often occurs in illogical and unpredictable ways. Dictionaries are often slow to catch up to the language, both in the scientific and general context. (If you think writing an encyclopedia is hard, just imagine trying to go through the entire language, and find every possible meaning, and then condense that all down the just a few simple sentences.) They're not made to be detailed, just to give the gist of the meaning so you can understand it in a sentence. To keep from giving our own synthesis, I think at best we could say, "some sources limit their definitions..."
Really, though, where this info belongs is in an etymology section, which would then be about the word. For example, the term "weld" is one of English origin, containing no cognates in other European languages. It was derived from the Middle English word "well", meaning "to heat, or bring to a boil". Or rather, it was derived from the past-tense participle, "welled". As a method of joining metals, the first recorded use was in 1590. Etc., etc., etc... Zaereth (talk) 20:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree 100%. One point that I was knitting into my post is that the meaning of the word is a part of what defines the article. For example, this article is about: material joining methods which are commonly called welding. North8000 (talk) 21:40, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this confusion between words and things comes up a lot. For example, "glass", to a general audience, only refers to silicate glass. In a scientific context, "glass" is any material that exhibits a glass transition", including plastics, porcelain, sugars and candies, metals, even water if cooled correctly. One person on my talk page even showed me an article about welding chocolate (actually building model bridges out of it). Although that's not common use of the word, it certainly could be in the future. Words like "alloy steel" or "alloy wheel" come from a time when steel was not considered to be an alloy, yet these words are still in use. And "Viking"! There are still ongoing discussions at the Viking article this very moment about whether this refers to raiders or Norsemen in general, as many Scandinavians resent the term not understanding that the meaning in modern English is different from its original meaning in Norway. Language is a funny thing (personally fascinating to me). Zaereth (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rossette welds

I just heard of rossette welds today, for the first time. But cannot find anything on Wikipedia about these.

Found this on google search. Rossette welds seem to be a thing.

If someone who knows about welding agrees, maybe we could/should have a REDIRECT at Rossette weld (currently a red link) to some paragraph on Wikipedia where they are described. Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

High quality images

Welding

What you guys think about this images ? Is it the welding method shown in the pics are mentioned in Wiki articles ? I asked because this welding method produces lots of sparks

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Welding&oldid=881596471"