Assessment 2 - Weld Group Design Audit Outline

EGB316 Assessment 2: Welded
Connection Design Audit (40%)

Report Due to TurnItIn Sunday 1st June at 11:59PM
1. Outline
Students are required to carry out a design audit on a weld group of their choosing that is subject to fatigue
loading. The welded joint should be connecting steel or aluminium components (aluminium requires different
SN treatment), and analysis should be possible using the techniques developed in EGB316 classes. Also, you
must be able to measure all weld group and key system dimensions and approximate/calculate/determine the
working loads (application location, direction, magnitude, etc.).
You can choose a welded connection from a machine you are familiar with or some other machine you have
access to. The system CANNOT be akin to any of the systems analysed in the lectures (i.e. not a patient lifter or
like any design workshops etc.). The main requisite is to investigate a real machine and make design decisions
/ engineering judgements regarding properties, forces etc. and determine if the welds are safe. This
designation could be done by leaving weld size or material unknown and evaluating one or other using the
analysis procedure developed in class, or you could measure/determine/estimate/research all necessary
values and establish a factor of safety from the analysis procedure. Either approach will allow you to make
conclusions on the safety of the existing welded arrangement, and the appropriateness of any and all loading
and system assumptions you have made. The analysis must be based on fatigue loading, and the calculations
will be both hand calculations and ANSYS analysis.
Detailed technical drawings of the welded component are also to be produced using Solidworks (refer to CRA).
You can work in a group of up to 4 people in choosing your welded component (indicate your group on your
submission) but each person must carry out the audit ON THEIR OWN and submit an individual report and
drawings to TurnItIn by the due date (this means they can’t be similar to, or copied from, one another as
detected by TurnItIn, refer to https://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/). Examples of welded system you could
choose to analyse include, but are not limited to:
− A car tow-bar (normally a welded SHS type design).

− Gym weight machines or equipment, either at home or in a commercial gym.
− Machines and equipment in a workshop, mechanics shop, or industrial setting (access through existing
relationships or work).
− Welded tube bicycle.
− Loaded components on an aluminium boat.
− Cleats and members in a civil application with variable loading (like a steel walkway).
− Other welded components on a car or motorbike.
− Systems and components on the QUT Motorsport FSAE car (if having existing membership of, or
relationship with, the team).
1 of 7
2. Report
The report for this assignment must be a concise summary of the design audit carried out. It must contain the
following sections and content:
Introduction Section
This section should include a concise summary of the purpose of the design audit as it pertains to your
machine, details on the system being analysed including broad function and a key photo or two (use correct
figure labelling and put multiple photos side-by-side with labels to save space and enhance impact). Also
include broadly what will be contained in the design audit document (section summary). It is the formal report
equivalent of the “Given” section from lectures/tutorials. Length: 0.5-page 11pt font maximum including
figures.
Functional Analysis Section

This should include a high-quality sketch of your welded system with dimensions of all key components and
the weld group itself and an indication of load directions and magnitudes. This is the point where each
possible critical loading scenario should be discussed, including force magnitudes, and directions, and time
series data (i.e. is it cyclic between F and -F, or F and 0, or constant etc., at what angle is it and does that
change, and what are the loading magnitudes and variations for each critical load case – use diagrams). At this
point, also justify which loading scenario you are to analyze in the rest of the report. This is the formal report
equivalent of the “Schematic” section from lectures/tutorials. Length: 1.5-page 11pt font maximum including
figures.
Design Assumptions and Analysis Scope Section

In this section, you should state all design assumptions and decisions that are being made before the analysis,
as well as the scope of the analysis, materials, weld size, mode and distribution of loadings (following on from
previous section discussion), and any other choices or assumptions that are necessary including relating to
load cycles based on system duty. This is the formal report equivalent of the “Assumptions” section from
lectures/tutorials but requires detailed justification on each point to support why or how that assumption was
made. Length: 1-page 11pt font maximum including figures.
Detailed Welded Joint Analysis Section

In this section, you must concisely summarise the whole design audit calculation. It should include:
− A high quality FBD of the system with all force values determined based on the worst-case loading
scenario chosen.
− A reduction of that system to a single welded joint and the resultant loading at the weld group
centroid.
− Full hand calculation of weld stresses on the bases of worst-case loading scenarios. If the worst case is
not clear, carry out test calculations for multiple cases.
− Weld fatigue failure analysis using AM-Diagram.
− Summary of resulting chosen metric (size, material, or FOS) and its comparison to actual.
− ANSYS analysis of the same system including FBD showing boundary condition set-up and type of
model run.
− Comparison of ANSYS and hand calculations.
This is the formal report equivalent of the “Solution or Analysis” section from lectures/tutorials. Length: 15-
pages 11pt font maximum including figures (should only need 10 pages but 15 is allowed for those with
complicated weld groups, or multiple calculations with different materials/assumptions etc.).
2 of 7
Recommendations and Conclusions Section
A section summarising the findings relating to safety of the weld group. Refer to the technical drawings in
Appendix A. Also include any discussion of design choices made and how they affected the results. Discuss
discrepancies and errors between the critical dimensions calculated, and those of the actual weld group being
analysed. IF MAJOR DISCREPANCIES WERE FOUND, RE-DO THE ANALYSIS WITH DIFFERENT OR LESS
CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS. CRITERIA FOR REPEATING ANALYSIS: YOUR FOUND WELD SIZE IS ±25% OF
ACTUAL WELD SIZE, MATERIAL IS UN-REALISTIC, OR FOS <1 OR >6. Length: 1-page 11pt font maximum
including figures.
Appendix A: Technical Drawings

Full technical drawing of the existing welded group and main component held by the weld, produced using
Solidworks and including:
Primary Drawing: Assembly of the whole system (orthographic, section if needed, shaded isometric) with full
detailed annotations on weld size (with correct weld designation arrows), notes on welding rod type, and
dimensions on weld positions only. This assembly should have all welded components (i.e. plates / brackets /
members). If one of the welded components is a large steel structure that continues outside of the direct
loading consideration (like for example the chassis of a car that a tow-bar is connected to, or long sections of
RHS that might make up a piece of gym equipment), you can draw an indicative section of that component and
use break lines to indicate its continuation (see example below). The drawing should also have a BOM and title
block with appropriate details.
Figure 1: Example of large system using break lines to indicate continuation of components [Ref: http://fgg-
web.fgg.uni-lj.si/~/pmoze/esdep/media/wg11/f0110005.jpg].
Secondary Drawings: Any other details that might be necessary for understanding your system. This could be
an explosion or specific dimensions of weld group alone.
All drawings must be produced as a PDF from Solidworks and appended to the PDF of your report (I.E. NOT
CUT AND PASTE INTO WORD, THAT PRODUCES TERRIBLE QUALITY DRAWINGS). A3 drawing size is appropriate.
THE REMAINING PAGES OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAIN THE SPECIFIC CRA FOR THE ASSESSMENT TASK
3 of 7

Assessment 2 - Weld Group Design Audit Outline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment 2 - Weld Group Design Audit Outline

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment 2 - Weld Group Design Audit Outline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the requirements for the report sections?

What analysis must be included in the Detailed Welded Joint Analysis section?

EGB316 Assessment 2: Welded

Connection Design Audit (40%)

− A car tow-bar (normally a welded SHS type design).

Functional Analysis Section

Design Assumptions and Analysis Scope Section

Detailed Welded Joint Analysis Section

Appendix A: Technical Drawings

You might also like