The Chopper Compendium

I cann't see the other pic, but understand what you're saying about the stress going through the straight line.

Maybe this will work.

Yes it did Hans...Nice color too.

The ultimate test of your welding skills or abilities...build it than RIDE it.. Any reputable welding shop in your town should...remember SHOULD be able to do a visual inspection. They can also suggest methods for you to improve your skills or offer advice. Most guys who weld will be happy to help and show you some tricks and tips. Hope that helps some.

http://www.chopperweb.info/forum/showth ... genumber=6

I was looking through an old thread and here was a description. Check post number 83.

I know several mechanical engineers, and they would probably tell you the same thing.

fish11906 wrote:The ultimate test of your welding skills or abilities...build it than RIDE it.. Any reputable welding shop in your town should...remember SHOULD be able to do a visual inspection. They can also suggest methods for you to improve your skills or offer advice. Most guys who weld will be happy to help and show you some tricks and tips. Hope that helps some.

Sorry dude but all a visual inspection will tell you is what the surface looks like.

There was a frame builder a few years back that had some of the prettiest stacks of dimes you've ever seen. (Tallon IIRC)
Zero penetration and a shitload of pissed off customers.

Seat time (practice) is paramount to becoming proficient. But, the last thing a newby needs to be doing is learning on a
motorcycle frame. Get some scraps and practice both fit up and welding. The better you are with the fit up the better you
will get with the welding end of the business. Try to make your joints look as professional as possible. Then cut them open
and see what your penetration actually looks like. The life you save may be your fucking own. For me, I like to see the joint keyhole
in front of the puddle ever so slightly. Then add the filler to fill and chill the puddle and roll on. If the joint keyholes slightly it means
you've penetrated all the way to the bottom. Careful though, you don't want to make a giant sink hole either.

I understand your view on the subject....I was simply offering an alternative to costly mag, radio, or ultrasound testing. Most common newb welder mistake is not running your heat high enough, which in turn leaves unpenetrated weld that can be easily spotted. The ride/test was my attempt at humor.lol. Guess it didn't translate that well. Practice, practice, practice....you'll only get better and find your comfort zone in the process.

Is that your frame Hans?

anyway I'll show whats on mine.

Naw Max;

It was from a build on CW.

This one is mine.

fish11906 wrote:I understand your view on the subject....I was simply offering an alternative to costly mag, radio, or ultrasound testing. Most common newb welder mistake is not running your heat high enough, which in turn leaves unpenetrated weld that can be easily spotted. The ride/test was my attempt at humor.lol. Guess it didn't translate that well. Practice, practice, practice....you'll only get better and find your comfort zone in the process.

Sorry if I came off like a prick but I spent far too many years welding stuff that had to pass X-ray.
I also spent a few years training new recruits in how to weld proficiently enough to pass testing.
I guess the fact that, if one of our welds fail, a whole compliment of sailors don't get to go home to
their wives and children. Ever! I also knew a guy that thought black iron pipe was plenty strong enough
to build a radical rigid frame out of. I was a pallbearer at his funeral. His frame came apart one night
on one of them bumpy assed New England country back roads. He hit a stone wall head first. BTW, his
kid sister and I were the ones that found him. That was almost 30 years ago and it still bothers me when
I talk about it.

Welding a frame ain't no joke.

No problem dude....I've been a welder in the oil fields, nuke and med field for over 15years and sometimes get carried away with giving advice. As a former sailor and SW operator I appreciate your attention to detail .Thank you for your service and professionalism.

max those welds look nice and hans i really like the design of that brace . watterjet?

curt wrote: watterjet?

It is.

I saw something similar online, drew it out to my size, rake, etc., my son made a dxf file for it.

The neck area gusseting is similar to what Gary W. recommended in his CD.

I've been an inspector for many years, and have considerable experience with
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT). Also a CWI.

I personally second the suggestion to use practice welds and destructive test them.

2 of the common NDT methods are surface only, why bother...
PT (dye penetrant) uses a solvent cleaner, a dye, and a developer, each requiring a dwell time (you have to wait for a short time).
MT (magnetic particle) uses equipment to induce a magnetic field in the steel and the technician sprinkles a powder on the part. The powder
has iron filings in it with a dye color, and follows the flux lines. Any unusual indication breaks the flux line, and the powder follows.

Both are limited to surface inspection only. For frame welds, a thoro visual inspection does just as good.

UT (Ultrasound) uses expensive equipment and the technician is trained. The tech uses a handheld transducer to move in patterns over the surface of the material.
Needs to have a certain amount of space to do this, and the weld joint configuration is important.
You would not be able to get a useful scan on something like the welds on a fork neck. Possibly on a tube weld on a straight section of frame.
Very limited application here.

RT (industrial radiography or XRay) uses a portable radioactive source, is HazMat and regulated by the NRC. This method would have very limited application here also.
Round objects (pipe or tubing) require a minimum of 2 shots (xrays), usually more, to get a good view of all areas of the weld. Even then, it is possible
for an indication to be masked by other features.

Better to practice on the same material and joint configurations, get some good looking welds, get comfortable with it,
put one in a vise and tear it up, use a hammer, bars, reef on it like a mean mofo. If it breaks, see where and why, check it carefully,
use the lye solution suggested to check the penetration, all those things.

AA xray might be useful if you wanted to check the penetration on a final weld, one that will be a completed product you don't want to destroy,
but it will not be definitive that there is nothing wrong woth the weld.
Also, any inspection company doing inspection on something like this will not have any code to use when interpreting results,
and will not accept or reject a weld. They will also have disclaimers out the ass that this is only for information.
Again, very limited application.

May the Source be with you... (groan)

railroad bob wrote:I've been an inspector for many years, and have considerable experience with
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT). Also a CWI.

I personally second the suggestion to use practice welds and destructive test them.

2 of the common NDT methods are surface only, why bother...
PT (dye penetrant) uses a solvent cleaner, a dye, and a developer, each requiring a dwell time (you have to wait for a short time).
MT (magnetic particle) uses equipment to induce a magnetic field in the steel and the technician sprinkles a powder on the part. The powder
has iron filings in it with a dye color, and follows the flux lines. Any unusual indication breaks the flux line, and the powder follows.

Both are limited to surface inspection only. For frame welds, a thoro visual inspection does just as good.

UT (Ultrasound) uses expensive equipment and the technician is trained. The tech uses a handheld transducer to move in patterns over the surface of the material.
Needs to have a certain amount of space to do this, and the weld joint configuration is important.
You would not be able to get a useful scan on something like the welds on a fork neck. Possibly on a tube weld on a straight section of frame.
Very limited application here.

RT (industrial radiography or XRay) uses a portable radioactive source, is HazMat and regulated by the NRC. This method would have very limited application here also.
Round objects (pipe or tubing) require a minimum of 2 shots (xrays), usually more, to get a good view of all areas of the weld. Even then, it is possible
for an indication to be masked by other features.

Better to practice on the same material and joint configurations, get some good looking welds, get comfortable with it,
put one in a vise and tear it up, use a hammer, bars, reef on it like a mean mofo. If it breaks, see where and why, check it carefully,
use the lye solution suggested to check the penetration, all those things.

AA xray might be useful if you wanted to check the penetration on a final weld, one that will be a completed product you don't want to destroy,
but it will not be definitive that there is nothing wrong woth the weld.
Also, any inspection company doing inspection on something like this will not have any code to use when interpreting results,
and will not accept or reject a weld. They will also have disclaimers out the ass that this is only for information.
Again, very limited application.

May the Source be with you... (groan)

new international radiation symbol.jpg

Thanks Bob! I was starting to feel like the turd in the punch bowl!