I brought this up in the other thread, but getting one or two of these guys to let you film their build in their shop with their fixturing, then doing it on a fixture table and comparing the results would be truly telling. If they do it faster and more accurately on a fixture table it proves the table is an investment rather than a luxury and it’ll pay for itself.
1 Like
I would really like to see a challenge for the next part. Draw up some simple plans like the type you have, and set some documentation requirements. Either photo or full video. Let the first viewer who can build two identical weldments to spec, with proper documentation and proof, win some sort of prize. Make it slightly more complicated but keep the material cost down so that nobody can complain it cost too much.
Limit what tooling they can use to build it. No fixture tables.
A set of squares or maybe go big with one of your small fixture tables. Would make a good prize, and investment wise would probably be similar to what you’ve spentt on these previous videos.
Get some reflection from people who do it to see if it was as easy as they thought.
This gives everyone who has said it is easy a chance to prove it. As someone who has fabricated to tolerances tighter than these, I know there is no way I could do it for profit without the proper tooling. It takes way to much time and effort even to build simple parts like these.
I think a part 3 is definitely necessary 
I think you should go to the best, most expensive, highest end shop in your, 100 mile radius, area and give it to them with a 14 day time frame. Let’s see what the big dogs can do…!!
1 Like
@PatGreen You’ll have to define to me what the best is? How do I know as a customer? Price? Equipment or tools?
Jason,
Well slightly easier since you are in the business….but I’d say a larger shop, ones that primarily take commercial/aerospace jobs were tolerances are closely monitored.
If you were not in the business, I’d suggest looking on-line for a fab shop focused on precision.
Showing us that it can’t be done without a fixture table has already been proven. As an owner of your table I am a believer and wish I had done it years ago, and my business is not wrapped around .001’s.
I would like to see part 3.
Not because I care about how they do. I like when you show what can go wrong, why and what we can do to prevent it.
I fabricate a bit for me and farmers around but rarely it needs this kind of precision but to know how to do it as good as it needs to be in as short time as possible is valuable.
I have learnt alot more from your videos than school.
I love your channel and one day we will figure something out to ship megasquares affordable to Iceland.
Thank you
2 Likes
YES
I think this should be Jason’s “Glitter Bomb”
For those of you who watch Mark Rober, you’ll get it.
If you really want to make a 2nd pointless video that still doesn’t add any value compared to the first one, just so you can tell everyone on YouTube how smart you are, go right ahead.
I’m not sure that I understand the logic of making the build more complicated when nobody has really come close to getting the original task completed properly.
@David_Black
Create a new post with more photos and information please.
Absolutely yes. The “improvement” I’d consider adding would be specifically documented sub assemblies. Require either the rectangular frames be made first, then the legs be added OR require the legs be added to the individual tubes to make T shaped subs. Or maybe try both, with different shops.
OR… Get each shop to make one, telling them you’ll take it and check it before they undertake the second… This tells them you will be checking their work, not just “seeing if it’ll fit”. It suggests to them to establish some sort of PROCESS to be run a second time if the first time proves to be successful and to be modified if it isn’t.
Either way, the intermediate sub assembly offers the opportunity to apply specifications TO THE SUBASSEMBLY which if not met are a serious signal to STOP ADDING VALUE (to a discrepant subassembly before correcting it to spec.)
Really, if the T shaped sub won’t lie flat on the reference surface it’s only going to get worse when you weld four of them together, cross your fingers, and try to sell the result to the customer.
Or check the rectangular sub for flatness before adding the legs (consider adding the legs to the flatter side of the sub if you are depending on the squareness of the end cuts to orient the legs (A mistake in my book)). About those legs: Consider welding them all while held perpendicular to a surface upon which the top sub is placed, not simply butting the ends to the middle of each tube in the top sub. And for goodness’ sake tack first!! Don’t add a ton of heat or (contracting) filler metal before the geometric relationships are established!! (Yes I realize this is coming close to requiring a fixture table…**) If the tack welded subs aren’t geometrically correct it is a relatively easy matter to fix them, even if it comes to busting them apart and trying again. Try that with a fully welded leg…
Oh, and if asked by the shop “Is it OK if the welds on both sides are ground flush?” what will you say? If I was the fabricator and you said “No, I don’t want to pay for unnecessary grinding” I’d say “Well if I leave the beads proud I’ll have to charge extra for picking the flattest side around them”.
** But also worth considering would be fixturing four legs together, all located correctly with respect to each other, all parallel, with their tips all extending to the same plane then welding them (while in the fixture) to the top sub. There would likely be some small gaps to be filled/covered by the welds… But the customer will never know.
1 Like