The Faggot Weld

[basher]

looking at  Alec S"s pictorials in plasticine.

 

One:- is what we are talking over... I think its fine if done well.

 

two:- is the same weld as one but with a lot more material, to get the same hook as on "one"you are going to have to do a great deal more work . Either by upsetting material or a ridiculous amount of work drawing down Material .  You would then have to cut material away to get the same sizes poker tip as in "one"and  besides I see no benefit in it as a better weld .

 

 if you are looking to get more welding done then simply weld gently  multiple times using method "One" and there is not an awful lot of section wastage if its done well.

You can even take a couple of upsetting (jumping back) welding heats to bring more girth to the faggot and allow another welding heat or two if you feel that is needed . I do this a lot with wrapped sword tips where I am welding in all 3 dimentions by drawing out a little (forging both the edge and flat of the blade) and then jumping up a little to bring back to starting size and then doing it all again, normally 3 times when I do it.

 

Three:- yeh sure thats gonna be stronger ( I wonder how much though) but a lot more work and are you really suggesting that a collared wrap around a faggot weld is a better weld to teach as a first forge weld.

 

I always teach the rams head as a first weld and its basicaly the same as the fold back faggot weld.

 The reasons I teach it are that its a simple two handed weld, one hand on one bit of metal and one on yer hammer. it also has a great finished product in a Rams head. Making a first rams head really is one of those cool blacksmithing moments , especially the welding.

 

I think in general these kinds of weld are easily done badly in a coke or coal forge and easier to do  well in a gas forge for a few reasons , 

 

less wastage (less heat) and better visuals of the material in the forge ( so less wastage)

less heat  at the point of welding so that more force from your hammer blow goes into welding rather than plasticly deforming your metal. this is one of the reasons steel is a lot easier to weld up without excess material reductions its red (or in this case orange)hardness is an advantage.

 

 I like to teach these welds in a coke forge as there are bigger lessons that can be learned from using a coke forge , like fire control keeping a clean fire and not burning the steel.

 

but the more time I spend welding steel and iron the more I am running nearly 100% on gas.

[anvil]

let's talk about better methods of skinning a cat. What did you
all think bout all those examples?

actually Alec, all three of your setups are going to end up with wasp waist at the transitions.

the first one has no upset, the second has the upset in the wrong place or is not long enough,the same with the third. also with the third you will end up with a cold shut at the collar/branch transition as your example shows. a light forge weld and leaving the collar proud will prevent this. otherwise you need a rather complex scarf around the whole collar. the latter are especially tough for a novice who does not have the necessary hammer control or fire management skills.

your upsets/ added material needs to be before and beyond the actual forge weld as that is where the thinning occurs during a forge weld.

your center one offers a cool transition if it were 2-3 times longer(or long enough for your end detail) and you left the top third at the infinity point. then you would protect the integrity of the sq mass and have a nice transition/step down to the smaller mass.

[basher]

......cut it , fold it back, Job jobbed. the reason its done is because its simple.

[Ted T]

If you hunt Rabbits, use a Rabbit gun.

If you hunt Elephants, use a Elephant gun. 

If what you do works for you, use it.

 

Otherwise; use what ever process and material that is required and acceptable to meet the job requirements.

Time is money, and money is time. 

 

I would suggest keeping it simple and basic; Just as Basher just suggested. 

It has worked for me over many years.

 

I enjoy all of the views (pro's and con's} that have been expressed. That way we all have a chance to improve.

I have seen many different blacksmiths who seem to apply the same process, but have a slightly different result.

I think basic training, years of experience, and the demand of the product has to always be considered in these discussions!

 

My best to all of you!

 

 

[arcc]

I think Basher pretty much nailed what I was thinking in my humble little comparable experience. Light blows at the temp right before you see sparks. Then three or so at that heat.

Persinally instead of going through all the work upseting, just weld it an inch or so farther back if need be.

[jdinbr]

Goodness gracious y'all!

 

As Strother Martin once said: "What we've got here is failure to communicate."

I'm fairly sure my 2¢ is not going to fix that, but:

 

Good enough - a task that has been completed to the level that the work will perform its intended job, albeit perhaps marginally.  Implies imperfection or room for improvement, otherwise more fitting descriptions would be "excellent" and "perfect".  Some folks that strive for excellence, or even perfection, think "good enough" isn't.  And some folks enjoy the economy of "good enough" and find it's time to move on to the next task... or a Bud Light.

 

Sound weld - some might say (engineers and testing labs included) this is a weld that when stressed to failure, rips the original material on the side of the weld rather than coming apart at the original joint.  I'm not suggesting I can do this with a forge weld.  Others might say a forge weld does not have to meet this criteria to be considered a sound or excellent forge weld and suitable for its intended purpose. 

 

I appreciate Brian's original question:  Has anyone achieved a sound weld?

And Dan's response: It's good enough and has a place in blacksmithing.

 

Obviously, I'm paraphrasing.

 

Personally, in the application of the end of a fire poker, I don't think the weld has to meet the requirements of building code officials, structural engineers, or testing labs to be considered excellent for it's application.  In my opinion Dan's weld and poker tip appear excellent, but would the weld pass the scrutiny of a testing lab?

 

Aren't both points/opinions valid?

 

...

And while I'm here: Anvil... why do you bother to put periods at the end of your sentences?

[Dan P.]

Dan P, I stated what I stated, and I've shown both steel and clay, and I have never attacked anyone's methods or tools! You, sir are incorrect. Maybe you should read all of this over.

Now let's talk about better methods of skinning a cat. What did you all think bout all those examples?

 

Well I think the examples were interesting, but I have no idea how the material they were made from behaves. 

Some other things;

If you look at the weld I tested to destruction, you will see that the material is bent, as per the test. In your clay version, it's not bent, the weld is just separated. That suggests the weld did not take at all, not an unsound weld.

My opinion of the weld with the collar; a total waste of time, just adding more weld boundaries and more material to forge down. An interesting experiment, perhaps, but not one I see catching on!

The weld with the upset ends; I'm guessing this is supposed to be the same as the "blob welds" a picture of which featured earlier in this thread. Seems fine, except that the work involved is many times greater than necessary.

 

Brian, you have indeed attacked other peoples methods. This whole thread is dedicated to such an attack, as is your thread about welding on reins.

[anvil]

jdinbr

since my grammer died… all i have left is my hammer and anvil. ;)

[Francis Trez Cole]

Fred Crist, Daniel Lea and 32 others like this.

Brian Karen Brazeal I tried to bring up a discussion about the faggot weld that is being taught in a lot of blacksmithing associations in America, but I don't think they wanted to talk about it. It seemed they wanted to defend it with nothing of substance. Guess which one is the faggot weld?
March 30 at 7:43am · Like · 2

Alec Steele Please run us through it!
March 30 at 8:03am · Like · 2

Brian Karen Brazeal Daniel Lea or Alec Steele, will you post this on blacksmithing enthusiasts so we can discuss this?
March 30 at 8:05am · Like

Alan Dryg The "weakest" looking one?? On the left?
March 30 at 8:16am · Like

Brian Karen Brazeal Yep. That faggot weld setup is impossible to secure and produce a sound weld.
March 30 at 8:18am · Like

Brian Karen Brazeal Alec Steele, this is just like the "Habermann bend" that we use to make the hammer tongs and other things. You simply start by bending past 90 degrees, and draw out the corner past the line of the material then forge back to the line. If no one understands what that means, I'm sure Alec can explain it. Alec, use your words to explain this, please.
March 30 at 8:32am · Like · 2

Alec Steele Ahh that's cool!
March 30 at 8:36am · Like · 1

Alec Steele I'll give it a go
March 30 at 8:36am · Like · 1

Alec Steele Then see if I am able to explain it well enough.
March 30 at 8:37am · Like · 1

Francis Trez Cole none of the welds pictured is a fagot weld The term Fagot refers to a bundle of sticks.
March 30 at 8:40am · Like

Alec Steele The weld on the left was a faggot weld. Faggot comes from a bundle of sticks and it is referring to how the sticks would be welded together. Imagine the equal sign is two pieces of steel-
=
One on top of the other coming from the same direction.
March 30 at 8:42am · Like · 1

Brian Karen Brazeal Francis Trez Cole, I did not come up with that name. The blacksmith associations here in America call it by that name.
March 30 at 8:43am · Like

Blacksmiths Australia In britain now its called same sex marriage...?......lol
March 30 at 9:17am · Like · 4

Charles J Durham this pic took me a minute to get, the first pic is a faggot weld pulled apart. second is the stronger version , and third is it being pulled, right?
March 30 at 9:53am · Like · 2

Alec Steele Yup!
March 30 at 10:04am · Like

Brian Karen Brazeal Yep! Notice the nice arc in the forged area and the unforged parent stock.
March 30 at 10:06am · Like · 1

Charles J Durham finally see whats going on, had a devil of a time with these and was never happy how the pokers came out. just seemed week.
March 30 at 10:08am · Like · 2

Charles J Durham weak*
March 30 at 10:09am · Like

Francis Trez Cole the name came about in the 14th century. a fagot weld dose work. your concept is an other option to achieve the same thing. that technique I have seen in German iron work.
March 30 at 10:29am · Like

Alec Steele The faggo weld stays together, but it has no real structural integrity the way it is often carried out.
March 30 at 10:35am · Like · 1

Brian Karen Brazeal I don't think you're getting the point, Francis Trez Cole.
March 30 at 10:36am · Like

Charles J Durham was that a pun? ;0)
March 30 at 10:59am · Like · 3

Brian Karen Brazeal I didn't mean it to be.
March 30 at 11:00am · Like · 1

Francis Trez Cole I get the point it is an other option. If you do a good weld though it will not come apart.
March 30 at 11:52am · Like · 1

Brian Karen Brazeal Francis, you cannot do a good weld that way! Do one and show us and then test it?
March 30 at 12:03pm · Like

Francis Trez Cole ok I have one that is folded over 4 times but it is the same a weld is a weld. I cut one in half there no inclusions and it is now one piece. That is the point of a good weld.
Francis Trez Cole's photo.
March 30 at 12:40pm · Like

Brian Karen Brazeal Francis Trez Cole, that is not what we have been talking about! I did not think you understood. I started this conversation,and I was very specific. I'm talking about the weld that most associations here in America teach beginners often their first day and have them make a poker. I've seen it all over the U.S.
March 30 at 12:49pm · Like · 1

Francis Trez Cole this is what I teach as the first forge weld. But whether it 2 pieces or 100 pieces a good weld is a good weld. Next time I have the forge lit I will do a 2 piece weld that I the way I make forks
March 30 at 1:17pm · Like

Glenn Viveiros I think I understand what Brian is saying and showing. My take is he thinks it's a poor technique and weak at best. He is showing another way to achieve the same thing with I'm guessing less heats and forge time. And a lot less likely to screw up.
March 30 at 1:25pm · Like

Francis Trez Cole glenn I do understand what Brian is showing expecting a person to walk up to a forge and weld on the first project is a poor choice of a project the first thing a new person needs to learn is how to control and maintain a good fire. But its not the technique that is bad its the wrong skill to be used for the first project.
March 30 at 1:44pm · Like · 1

Brian Karen Brazeal Your correct, Glenn Viveiros, Francis Trez Cole you are not!
March 30 at 3:28pm · Like

Francis Trez Cole here is a compass divider that I made it is 2 pieces welded together
Francis Trez Cole's photo.
March 30 at 6:19pm · Like

Brian Karen Brazeal You're still not getting it, Francis Trez Cole.
March 30 at 6:40pm · Like · 1

Jerry Veneziano The weld in the picture isn't a good one, but that variety of weld has its place. So too does the alternative technique shown. I think a lot of the associations teach it as the first weld because you don't have to worry about lining up the stock, etc. I don't; I use a chain link, same results, better weld.
March 30 at 8:41pm · Like · 1

Jerry Veneziano And while it's not the major thrust of this thread, I see nothing wrong with a forge weld as one of, or the, first project for the forge. Demystify the darned thing, let's people find out how easy they actually are before the voices screaming how a weld is "so hard, really an advanced technique" poisons their mindset.
March 30 at 8:43pm · Like · 2

Reinier Hoving I think you are right Brian about the faggot weld as you showed in the pictures. If you double a piece and then weld it, then the place where the weld ends and the two bars come apart a crack is very likely to form making it a weak point. Making it lik...See More
March 31 at 1:16pm · Like · 1

Brian Karen Brazeal You can also put a collar around the two pieces and then weld them, and that also solves the problems with the other setup, or upset a scarf, or draw down like the blob weld. All these ways can work, but the way they teach here alway leaves it weak. You can also pile on material and weld it.
March 31 at 1:25pm · Like · 1

I was able to link the full discussion for you

[2Tim215]

I think Brian accomplished exactly what he was after by starting this thread. Sharing knowledge. Teaching. Getting out to the shop to see for ourselves what happens. Making our own assumptions, then sharing our results thus keeping the learning cycle going. Thanks to all, I gotta head out to the shop to try something!!

 Exactly my thoughts. It's been a while since I have been absorbed by a thread, learnt a few things too.

[JimsShip]

Actually this thread has become a whirl of unrecognizable facts and methods.

I still don't understand what the difference is between taking 2 pieces (like a branch to a tree) and welding them, and folding over a rod and welding it.
It's still 2 pieces of metal, scarfed (If you notch at the fold) and welded. There will still be a "V" at the end of the welds right?

 

I get the feeling this has been 11 pages  of looking at the same result from 2 different methods.

VIDEOS ARE NEEDED!

[arkie]

I summarize this thread as follows:

 

I learned a lot,

I saw arguments, insults, and personal attacks,

I read more than I wanted,

(Kinda like a trailer-building thread on a welding forum, if you know what I mean)

 

Now I have a splitting headache....

 

Maybe tomorrow I'll practice some welds, but I certainly didn't come away with a clear idea of how might be best, if there IS one...

[Steve Sells]

But we all have to admit we started to think about the method and quality of our forge welds, and that I feel is a good thing. Thank you all.

[Gundog48]

Can't say that this is going to add anything new to the discussion, but I've been doing a lot of pokers recently and thought I'd add by experience.

 

I've been forging some pokers recently using the faggot welding technique, purely because it is the easiest way for me. I was concerned with the strength of the welds too, especially on my first one, and decided to test it out. I was only working with a roughly 1.5" overlap for a light poker for a woodburner. In the spirit of good scientific method I hooked the hook part of the poker over a solid gate frame and dangled from the poker!

 

The hook itself bent a bit as the hook had a thinnish taper on it, but the weld wasn't going anywhere. It's my view that, for a poker, a weld that supports almost 12 stone will be more than sufficient for dragging a few logs or coals. Also, if other parts of the poker (the tapered hook) bend before the weld shows any signs of failing, then the quality of the weld is not really a concern.

 

I don't doubt that Brian's techniques here produce a better quality weld, but for the sake of saving time, a faggot weld is more than equal to the task of your average fire poker, when done properly.

 

EDIT: I see that Owen has given his a much more strenuous test! I think it really depends on what is meant by 'sound'. Because if you mean the weld having the strength of the original material... I'm not sure if that can be done through forge welding- as I understand it even with the most well welded pieces there is always a risk of delamination in certain circumstances.

[SJS]

As I remember James Naysmyth did some destructive testing of forgewelds back in the mid 1800s and found that the best you could do with most welds was 80% the strength of the parent stock. The Arsenal in England was a happen place back in the day. Naysmyth in addition to inventing the steam hammer, and the shaper, built a 75' gap bed lathe and other cool machines to manufacture arms for the royal navy. Google has his biography available for free cool stuff...

[Ironduck]

I'm comming late in reading and now posting to this thread, and it is tempting to let the dog lie but in the oft chance that someone is still considering the OP I shall offer the following assessment.

For me it has been both an interesting and disapointing thread to read.  So many knowledgable Smiths in regards to methods that have worked for them, both in practice and in teaching settings, but I'm not sure that many were listening to each other or staying on the topic or kernal of the OP.  Brian didn't help his cause much during his opening proposal or his early attempts to convey motivation of the same.  I usually find Brian very good at explanations, but he failed to explain clearly what was deficient about the weld or the teaching method, and worse yet, failed to offer suggestions, early on before the emotions surfaced, as to how to mitigate the weld's shortcommings or a better method of accomplishing the weld.  You made several attempts, but each was late in the game and at that point emotions seemed to be surfacing by all.

Now if the weld was taught with a purpose and as a means of both building confidence and rudimentarily showing a simple forge weld, then I think all is well and good.  But while the glow of success is still bright (during that teaching session) there needs also be an explanation or demonstration as to what the weld or method deficiencies are so that the student understands what to look for in a weld, and furthermore gives the student cause to consider what is going on near and at the boundaries of the joint so they can better choose jointery methods or preparation.  Is this done in classes coving forge welding, I don't know.  But it should be, otherwise the learning experience is more than just lacking.  

IMO kudos go to Anvil for his understanding of the OP and his methodlogical explanation of how to achieve a proper (translation: as near complete weld with most importantly, no loss of cross-sectional area at the weld or adjecent to it).  Unfortunately others continued talking about end use, completely missing premise of the OP (poorly presented as it was I still understood that Brian wsa concerned about x-sectional area preservation as much as fusion along the boundaries.    

Now, I am not a disciple of any of the smiths that post on this or any other forum, though it would be a disservice to say that I haven't learned a good deal from each, herein or at demos.   As was said more than once in this thread there was "a failure to communicate."