Talk:Gas tungsten arc welding

message: Quick question to anyone who knows more about arc-welding than I do - should the guy in the picture be wearing gloves on both hands? Just curious.
:It would be a good idea, but it's not absolutely necessary.  That rod of metal does get pretty hot, but not wearing a glove gives him better control, which sometimes is more important, especially if he's only going to be welding for a short time. --Spangineer (háblame) 14:22, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
::My girlfriend knitted me a Twig-n-Berries cozy to go with my hood, and nothing more......   you know, when "welding for just a short time".  And alone.  TTLightningRod
  
Phosgene is NOT a nerve agent.  It is a very toxic gas though, and can cause pulmonary edema which can be lethal.  I changed the wording to reflect this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.55.200.20 (talk) 17:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Safety in welding issue

message: I would like to add an outbound link to two great guides and resources that deal with the proper preparation and selection of material on tungsten electrodes. The link is at: www.diamondground.com/downloads.html. Do you feel that this would be appropriate?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.112.164.100 (talk) 21:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Valuable Links for Welding

message: A hot horse shoe is hot, and most animals with any brain will let go of it before they get burned too bad.  Therefor, direct and immediate sensible surface heat, is far less of real danger than the intense UV of the plasma arch as Gaiusjuliuscesar talked about 'sun burn', often called "flash burn".  Fully covering any skin, just as one might wish to reduce sun burn.  It's the same stuff.  Welders, responsible ones, will even clear a room of bystanders, even ones who "know not to look into the light with out a hood".  Side vision (looking off to one side) doesn't work either, as the cornea and retina damage (not dependent on center of focused vision) is extremely painful when experienced, (ya, I know) and not felt for many hours after excessive exposure.  TTLightningRod 05:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: As to the safety stuff.

message: Nathaniel's cool.   Great stuff you put together.  Sorry i couldn't help out more.  Don't forget to visit the new shop Jan1.  CNC Centrump, Clausing Coulchester and TIG up the wazo. Erin
since it will be more beneficial.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.21.61.142 (talk) 14:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Who's Cool?

message: The following doesn't make much sense:
:To strike the welding arc, a high frequency generator provides a path for the welding current through the shielding gas, allowing the arc to be struck when the separation between the electrode and the workpiece is approximately 1.5-3 mm (0.06-0.12 in).
I think this may be trying to say "High voltage is required to strike an arc at the 1.5–3 mm range. Before the arc is struck, the power supply provides a high-frequency high-voltage potential to the electrode. This creates an inital spark which conducts electricity much better than the gasious inert gas. From there the full "flame" expands." Does this sound right? If not, what's actually going on? The phrase "a high frequency generator provides a path for the welding current" makes particularly little sense. —BenFrantzDale 20:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification 

message: Some-one knowledgeable please revert the vandalization in the Quality section of the page Khalil Sawant 13:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just reverted a couple of vandalisms in the lead.  I thought FAs were edit-protected to keep them from being vandalized during their feature period. Apparently not. Applejuicefool 16:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See User:Raul654/protection for the reasoning. --Spangineeres (háblame) 17:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalising of Quality Section 

message: Great article, but I would appreciate an image of a person with more respect for their health :-) mstroeck 14:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it's a great article.  But.. Have you ever tried arc welding?  It's difficult enough to keep the working head steady enough to achieve a clean joint without having to worry about the filler rod. --Jdedmond 20:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The guy in the picture is missing a glove 

message: I notice that in the lead section, it doesn't say what welding is. Nor does the single article about welding that it links to. Sure, everybody has a general idea of what welding does, but I think it's just technical enough that a sentence might be devoted to its purpose. -Freekee 15:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That information is available in the first sentence of welding, which can be accessed from the first sentence of arc welding, which is linked in the first sentence of this article.  I wouldn't be opposed to linking to welding instead of arc welding here, but adding description of welding would be overkill considering how well the topic is already covered on wikipedia. --Spangineeres (háblame) 18:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure what you're getting at—I don't think the current wording suggests that GTAW and TIG are different processes. GTAW is the more accurate name (since you don't need an inert gas to perform the process), and both names are used on both sides of the ocean (I have a British welding manual that uses TIG as the default but mentions GTAW as an alternative).  We have to pick one for the article name, and given the accuracy consideration, GTAW should get it. --Spangineerws (háblame) 14:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: TIG is the British term? I'm sorry, but I've never heard GTAW used in America. TIG is the only term I've used. --Sable232 15:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: TIG is certainly more common in everyday usage (hence the previous wording of "commonly known as TIG"), but lately GTAW seems to becoming the "official" name (recent textbooks use it, for example).  I've removed the geography sentence from the lead (since there really isn't much of a distinction anyway), but I left the modified wording—"also known as TIG". --Spangineerws (háblame) 17:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is welding?

message: guys, what a fine job u guys did here.  i learnt alot.
anyway, im doing a research and fabricating a gokart frame.  i plan to use mild steel as the base material.  and i would like to check with you guys if it is ok for me to use TIG to join the metals since it doesnt mention anything about the suitability of mild steel.  thx much!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.187.49.65 (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MATERIAL SUITABILITY 

message: Minor problem with the SVG of "anatomy of a torch" - some of the arrowheads point the wrong way (straight right) when viewed via Firefox as embedded images, and also when "not full size", but the arrowheads magically flip around when I click on the full size image.  I have no clue why this happens or how to fix it.  --User:Dr. Crash
:There are still some bugs in the WM rendering of .svg images. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-10-13/Technology report claims a fix, but problems remain. Compare :File:Indicator diagram steam admission.svg with its .png version; an editor asked me to leave the failed rendering on file as a example to the devs, but nothing's happened yet. Changing to .gif should also work. --Old Moonraker (talk) 14:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bug in SVG

message: This is an old question that triggered my first reaction on this talk page. 
Proceeding with two independent lists (Notes and References) is a first step in the good direction and has as main advantage to avoid to clutter the body text of the article page. This page is easy to read thanks to this trick, but I was first surprised by the fact it was necessary to use two lists in cascade: it could be simplified to use only one list. 
See some suggestions made here: 
strategy:Proposal_talk:Move_references_out_of_article_text#Update
Shinkolobwe (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's much easier to use a reference section that is separate from the list of notes, simply because all the works are in a simple list.  But while I prefer the current structure, I'm not opposed to someone going through and reformatting all the citations... seems unnecessary and not particularly helpful, but not worth arguing about. --Spangineerws (háblame) 18:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to best move references out of the body text of an article ? 

message: I read this bit: " in parts of the world where tungsten is called wolfram, it is known as WIG."
I live in Sweden where it's called Wolfram, and I have never heard the term WIG before, we've always called it TIG. Can someone confirm that WIG actullay is used?
90.228.206.65 (talk) 18:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wolfram 

message: There is considerable uncited text, and unattributed opinion.  , are you able to tune up the article to avoid a Featured article review?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR ?