Editorial
Editorial Standards
We ask you to trust technical content from a site you have never heard of. That is a lot to ask, so here is the standard the content is written against. If we break it, the correction policy at the bottom is how you hold us to it.
Where our numbers come from
Every figure in a guide falls into one of three buckets, and we try to make clear which one you are reading.
- Defined by a standard. ISO 5817 quality levels, ISO 13920 tolerance classes, ASTM and EN material designations, AWS code requirements. These we name by number so you can check them against the standard yourself. We do not reproduce the standards, because they are copyrighted documents you should buy or access through your own organisation.
- Published practice. Machining allowances of 3 to 6 mm, post-weld heat treatment around 580 to 650 degrees C with roughly an hour per 25 mm of thickness, typical plate flatness. These are widely used working figures, not rules. We label them typical and we say what they depend on.
- Physics and arithmetic. Fillet weld volume rising with the square of the leg length, steel and aluminium thermal expansion, elastic modulus being roughly equal across structural steel grades. These do not change with opinion.
What you will not find is a number presented as a promise. No shop on this site has committed to a tolerance or a lead time in an article, because an article cannot know your part.
What this site will never claim
- That we hold any certification. We are not ISO 3834 certified, not EN 1090 certified, not AWS anything. We have no welding qualifications because we do no welding. Where those standards appear in our content, they are things you can specify and a shop can hold.
- That we own machines or a factory. We do not, and any page that reads as though we might is a page with a bug in it.
- A track record we do not have. No client counts, no project photos, no years in business, no testimonials, no network size. The site launched in 2026 and we say so on the about page.
- That we have vetted a supplier for you. We record what a shop tells us and we pass it on. Certificate verification and supplier audit are yours, because they belong inside your quality system and not inside ours.
How the guides are written
Articles are researched against published standards, manufacturer technical literature and the engineering trade press, then written to answer one question a person actually has when placing a weldment. They are authored by us as an organisation. We do not invent an engineer, attach a stock photograph to them and present the result as a named expert byline, which is a common practice in this industry and a dishonest one.
We write in plain sentences and we try to be specific rather than reassuring. Where something depends on your part, we say it depends and then say what it depends on, rather than giving a number that sounds authoritative and is wrong half the time.
Where we are uncertain, we say so
Weldment questions frequently have no single right answer. Whether a frame needs stress relief, how much stock to leave, whether vibratory treatment is acceptable in place of a thermal cycle: these depend on the part, the code and the shop. When a guide reaches one of those, it says the decision belongs to the quoting shop and tells you what to ask, rather than manufacturing a false rule of thumb.
No content that exists only to rank
Every page here is meant to be useful to someone with a real part. We do not publish location pages for cities we have no presence in, we do not spin one article into fifteen near-identical variants, and we do not gate a reference table behind an email form. The tools run entirely in your browser and send us nothing, including when you do not contact us afterwards.
Commercial disclosure
This site earns money when a fabrication shop pays for a matched enquiry. Buyers are never charged. That incentive is written out in full on the about page, including the parts that could look bad, because you should be able to judge the content knowing what pays for it.
We publish no sponsored articles, we accept no payment for a mention in a guide, and no shop can buy a recommendation. Outbound links to standards bodies, manufacturers and the trade press are editorial and unpaid.
Corrections
Technical content written by people contains mistakes. When we find one or you report one, we fix the article rather than quietly deleting it, and a material correction is noted on the page with the date.
If something here is wrong, tell us at with the page and what is incorrect. A correction to a factual error is not a debate about tone and we will not argue with you about it. We reply within 24 business hours.
Review cycle
Guides are reviewed when a referenced standard is revised, when we learn something from an enquiry that contradicts what we published, or on a routine pass at least once a year. Where a page has been revised, the article shows an updated date rather than silently keeping its original one.