Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested
using 6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked
down an 11 lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area,
which was no doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder
from only keeps 6013. The place where I found some just had one box in
stock, which I bought.

Soon afterwards I was helping a friend build a large crossbow. He wanted
a ring welding to a piece of flat bar to create an anchor point. Tried
with 6013. Useless: one big slag inclusion with a little metal deposited
down each side. I guess there is a lot of opportunity for a slag
inclusion here as there's a deep crevice where the round section rests
against the flat bar. So I got out the 6011. Got the job done nicely,
but striking the arc seemed hard. Here's a picture of the ring:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/crossbow_ring.jpg

Last night I had chance to experiment properly with the 6011. It was a
bitterly cold night here in England! I put the heater on, but had to
keep the shed door open to let the fumes escape. I noticed it said "AC
min. 70 V" on the box. I was running on 50 V before, so I switched over
to 80 V. No problem striking the arc now. I welded some fillets on 1/8"
mild steel, starting at 120 A. On the 50 V setting 115 A was a little
low, and 145 A too high. Now here's something I don't understand. If I
switch from 50 V to 80 V, but keep the same current setting, does the
arc dissipate 8/5 as much power? Or does the voltage across the arc drop
to a similar value in both cases (perhaps 25 V) as soon as the arc is
struck? I believe my welding set uses a tapped inductor to control
current. But I'm not familiar with the electrical characteristics of the
welding arc, so I haven't yet figured out how it works. If anyone knows
of a site which explains how welding current controllers work, or is
willing to explain, I'd be most interested to know.

120 A seemed a bit hot. It caused small undercuts and large areas of the
metal were red hot after welding. Also, the tip of the electrode was
glowing red when I lifted the mask. I remember someone (perhaps Roy)
saying that this is a clear sign that you're using too much current, so
I turned it down. 110 A still seemed a bit hot, but 100 A perfect. 90 A
was too low. I used maybe 10 or 12 rods practising at 100 A. I had no
problems with slag inclusions, and could lay a reasonably neat bead. But
I couldn't get as neat a bead as I could with 6013. I've read that this
is a characteristic of the rod. Is this true? I found restarts somewhat
harder than I did using 6013. The arc seemer brighter and the rate of
deposition faster, so I found it hard to see the solidified weld pool.
They weren't too messy, though. Here's a picture of one of my fillets:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet6.jpg

I also tried the drag rod technique with 6011. It didn't work at all.
The bead was rough, the rod stuck, and the weld metal ended up on one
side. I also noticed this weird jet of flame emerging between the rod
and the deposited metal. I assume 6011 just isn't meant for the drag rod
technique. Next I made a 2" long test piece and attempted to break it.
Here's a picture of the piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test14.jpg

I bent it back and forth using a mole wrench (vise grips) and counted
the number of complete cycles of bending required to break it. It took
four complete cycles and the parent metal broke rather than the weld.
This is fewer cycles that it took with some of my earlier test pieces,
but I think the amplitude of bending was greater, so fatigue probably
set in earlier. I was pretty happy because the weld proved stronger than
the parent metal. 6011 does appear to give a much stronger weld than
6013, even if it looks uglier. Here's a picture of the broken test piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test15.jpg

I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At
80 V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've
been finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse.
I didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm
getting better at welding. Soon I'm going to be using 1/4" mild steel
(both plate and sections) for a project. If I weld using 6011 at 80 V,
do you think 120 A is enough? I'm guessing that it is if I grind a
chamfer on the edges, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

Thanks for all the advice!

Best wishes,

Chris

Christopher Tidy wrote:
Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested
using 6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked
down an 11 lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area,
which was no doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder
from only keeps 6013. The place where I found some just had one box in
stock, which I bought.

If you haven't experimented with 7014 yet, give that a try, too.
I bet you'll like it...

--Glenn Lyford

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 01:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested
using 6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked
down an 11 lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area,
which was no doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder
from only keeps 6013. The place where I found some just had one box in
stock, which I bought.

Soon afterwards I was helping a friend build a large crossbow. He wanted
a ring welding to a piece of flat bar to create an anchor point. Tried
with 6013. Useless: one big slag inclusion with a little metal deposited
down each side. I guess there is a lot of opportunity for a slag
inclusion here as there's a deep crevice where the round section rests
against the flat bar. So I got out the 6011. Got the job done nicely,
but striking the arc seemed hard. Here's a picture of the ring:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/crossbow_ring.jpg

Last night I had chance to experiment properly with the 6011. It was a
bitterly cold night here in England! I put the heater on, but had to
keep the shed door open to let the fumes escape. I noticed it said "AC
min. 70 V" on the box. I was running on 50 V before, so I switched over
to 80 V. No problem striking the arc now. I welded some fillets on 1/8"
mild steel, starting at 120 A. On the 50 V setting 115 A was a little
low, and 145 A too high. Now here's something I don't understand. If I
switch from 50 V to 80 V, but keep the same current setting, does the
arc dissipate 8/5 as much power? Or does the voltage across the arc drop
to a similar value in both cases (perhaps 25 V) as soon as the arc is
struck? I believe my welding set uses a tapped inductor to control
current. But I'm not familiar with the electrical characteristics of the
welding arc, so I haven't yet figured out how it works. If anyone knows
of a site which explains how welding current controllers work, or is
willing to explain, I'd be most interested to know.

The lower voltage tap can deliver higher current, as you note. But it
is then less of a "constant current" machine, and it has less
open-circuit voltage. Once an arc is struck with a given size and
type of electrode, the arc determines the voltage for a given
current. 6013 and 7014 are "drag rods" and are easy to strike.
6011 is *not* a drag rod and is less easy to strike, so higher
open-circuit voltage helps. Higher OCV at given current may also
help with 6013 because of the better constant-current characteristic
your welder will exhibit in that setting.

But
I couldn't get as neat a bead as I could with 6013. I've read that this
is a characteristic of the rod. Is this true?

Yes. It isn't as "pretty" a rod as 6013 and 7014.

I found restarts somewhat
harder than I did using 6013.
Yes.

Next I made a 2" long test piece and attempted to break it.
Here's a picture of the piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test14.jpg

Not bad at all!

I bent it back and forth using a mole wrench (vise grips) and counted
the number of complete cycles of bending required to break it. It took
four complete cycles and the parent metal broke rather than the weld.
This is fewer cycles that it took with some of my earlier test pieces,
but I think the amplitude of bending was greater, so fatigue probably
set in earlier.

Whatever. Point is, the failure happen in the metal, not at the weld.

I was pretty happy because the weld proved stronger than
the parent metal. 6011 does appear to give a much stronger weld than
6013, even if it looks uglier.

6013 and 7014 can also make strong welds in 1/8", though they run
differently. It's a matter of watching and controlling the puddle.


I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At
80 V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've
been finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse.
I didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm
getting better at welding.

That could very well be. I bet you'd like a 40 to 225 amp buzzbox
with continuous current control. There is no voltage setting on
those; they're always 80 volts or so OCV. I had some 6011 when I had
such a buzzbox, but I very rarely used it except on really crusty
rusty metal. I could weld everthing I wanted to weld, up to 1/4" and
even 3/8", with 6013. I often ran 7014 on 1/8" and thinner. The
trick is to push the puddle into the joint since those rods have such
fluid puddles. 6011 blasts it in, which is why it doesn't make such
pretty welds.

Soon I'm going to be using 1/4" mild steel
(both plate and sections) for a project. If I weld using 6011 at 80 V,
do you think 120 A is enough? I'm guessing that it is if I grind a
chamfer on the edges, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

The "right" current is determined mostly by rod diameter. You
should have no problem doing 1/4" with 1/8" 6011 running at whatever
current it runs well at for you. 120 amps is certainly in the ball
park. In fact, it's about in the middle of the ballpark for 1/8"
sticks.

Weld on, m'man!

Don Foreman wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 01:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Thanks for the advice.

snip

6013 and 7014 can also make strong welds in 1/8", though they run
differently. It's a matter of watching and controlling the puddle.

I might try some 7014 if I can persuade the welding store to order it!
Is it much different from 6013? I find the slag inclusions are the
problem with 6013. With a fillet 6013 doesn't seem to clear the slag
from the root of the weld, and this is where the fracture starts when I
bend a sample back and forth. Here's a picture of what happened to the
6013 sample:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test10.jpg

Perhaps I need to get the arc shorter and the puddle smaller in order to
push the puddle right into the corner? I tried this with 6013 but
couldn't get the puddle smaller than about 1/4" across without using the
drag rod technique. The drag rod fillets using 6013 were stronger than
the parent metal, though. Am I right in thinking that 6013 produces a
softer deposit than 6011, whatever the technique?

I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At
80 V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've
been finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse.
I didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm
getting better at welding.


That could very well be. I bet you'd like a 40 to 225 amp buzzbox
with continuous current control.

I've stayed away from buzzboxes in the past because my metalworking
activities are a bit sporadic. I'll do a lot at once, then get busy with
something else and my welder will sit idle for months in the damp shed!
I'd worry about an air cooled buzzbox suffering, but my oil cooled set
seems fine. Just switch it on and go, which I like. A reputable local
dealer has a large GEC oil cooled set available, which I've had my eye
on. I only have sketchy details at the moment - would want to check the
possible input and output voltages, and probably try it out - but it has
49 current settings (two controllers) giving an output from 21 to 425 A.
350 A continuous. A bit of a beast...might have to upgrade the power
supply for that one!

Best wishes,

Chris

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 01:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested
using 6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked
down an 11 lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area,
which was no doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder
from only keeps 6013. The place where I found some just had one box in
stock, which I bought.

Soon afterwards I was helping a friend build a large crossbow. He wanted
a ring welding to a piece of flat bar to create an anchor point. Tried
with 6013. Useless: one big slag inclusion with a little metal deposited
down each side. I guess there is a lot of opportunity for a slag
inclusion here as there's a deep crevice where the round section rests
against the flat bar. So I got out the 6011. Got the job done nicely,
but striking the arc seemed hard. Here's a picture of the ring:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/crossbow_ring.jpg

Last night I had chance to experiment properly with the 6011. It was a
bitterly cold night here in England! I put the heater on, but had to
keep the shed door open to let the fumes escape. I noticed it said "AC
min. 70 V" on the box. I was running on 50 V before, so I switched over
to 80 V. No problem striking the arc now. I welded some fillets on 1/8"
mild steel, starting at 120 A. On the 50 V setting 115 A was a little
low, and 145 A too high. Now here's something I don't understand. If I
switch from 50 V to 80 V, but keep the same current setting, does the
arc dissipate 8/5 as much power? Or does the voltage across the arc drop
to a similar value in both cases (perhaps 25 V) as soon as the arc is
struck? I believe my welding set uses a tapped inductor to control
current. But I'm not familiar with the electrical characteristics of the
welding arc, so I haven't yet figured out how it works. If anyone knows
of a site which explains how welding current controllers work, or is
willing to explain, I'd be most interested to know.

120 A seemed a bit hot. It caused small undercuts and large areas of the
metal were red hot after welding. Also, the tip of the electrode was
glowing red when I lifted the mask. I remember someone (perhaps Roy)
saying that this is a clear sign that you're using too much current, so
I turned it down. 110 A still seemed a bit hot, but 100 A perfect. 90 A
was too low. I used maybe 10 or 12 rods practising at 100 A. I had no
problems with slag inclusions, and could lay a reasonably neat bead. But
I couldn't get as neat a bead as I could with 6013. I've read that this
is a characteristic of the rod. Is this true? I found restarts somewhat
harder than I did using 6013. The arc seemer brighter and the rate of
deposition faster, so I found it hard to see the solidified weld pool.
They weren't too messy, though. Here's a picture of one of my fillets:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet6.jpg

I also tried the drag rod technique with 6011. It didn't work at all.
The bead was rough, the rod stuck, and the weld metal ended up on one
side. I also noticed this weird jet of flame emerging between the rod
and the deposited metal. I assume 6011 just isn't meant for the drag rod
technique. Next I made a 2" long test piece and attempted to break it.
Here's a picture of the piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test14.jpg

I bent it back and forth using a mole wrench (vise grips) and counted
the number of complete cycles of bending required to break it. It took
four complete cycles and the parent metal broke rather than the weld.
This is fewer cycles that it took with some of my earlier test pieces,
but I think the amplitude of bending was greater, so fatigue probably
set in earlier. I was pretty happy because the weld proved stronger than
the parent metal. 6011 does appear to give a much stronger weld than
6013, even if it looks uglier. Here's a picture of the broken test piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test15.jpg

I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At
80 V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've
been finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse.
I didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm
getting better at welding. Soon I'm going to be using 1/4" mild steel
(both plate and sections) for a project. If I weld using 6011 at 80 V,
do you think 120 A is enough? I'm guessing that it is if I grind a
chamfer on the edges, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

Thanks for all the advice!

Best wishes,

Chris

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 01:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested
using 6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked
down an 11 lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area,
which was no doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder
from only keeps 6013. The place where I found some just had one box in
stock, which I bought.

Soon afterwards I was helping a friend build a large crossbow. He wanted
a ring welding to a piece of flat bar to create an anchor point. Tried
with 6013. Useless: one big slag inclusion with a little metal deposited
down each side. I guess there is a lot of opportunity for a slag
inclusion here as there's a deep crevice where the round section rests
against the flat bar. So I got out the 6011. Got the job done nicely,
but striking the arc seemed hard. Here's a picture of the ring:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/crossbow_ring.jpg

Last night I had chance to experiment properly with the 6011. It was a
bitterly cold night here in England! I put the heater on, but had to
keep the shed door open to let the fumes escape. I noticed it said "AC
min. 70 V" on the box. I was running on 50 V before, so I switched over
to 80 V. No problem striking the arc now. I welded some fillets on 1/8"
mild steel, starting at 120 A. On the 50 V setting 115 A was a little
low, and 145 A too high. Now here's something I don't understand. If I
switch from 50 V to 80 V, but keep the same current setting, does the
arc dissipate 8/5 as much power? Or does the voltage across the arc drop
to a similar value in both cases (perhaps 25 V) as soon as the arc is
struck? I believe my welding set uses a tapped inductor to control
current. But I'm not familiar with the electrical characteristics of the
welding arc, so I haven't yet figured out how it works. If anyone knows
of a site which explains how welding current controllers work, or is
willing to explain, I'd be most interested to know.

120 A seemed a bit hot. It caused small undercuts and large areas of the
metal were red hot after welding. Also, the tip of the electrode was
glowing red when I lifted the mask. I remember someone (perhaps Roy)
saying that this is a clear sign that you're using too much current, so
I turned it down. 110 A still seemed a bit hot, but 100 A perfect. 90 A
was too low. I used maybe 10 or 12 rods practising at 100 A. I had no
problems with slag inclusions, and could lay a reasonably neat bead. But
I couldn't get as neat a bead as I could with 6013. I've read that this
is a characteristic of the rod. Is this true? I found restarts somewhat
harder than I did using 6013. The arc seemer brighter and the rate of
deposition faster, so I found it hard to see the solidified weld pool.
They weren't too messy, though. Here's a picture of one of my fillets:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet6.jpg


Not bad..still running a bit too much heat though, and I think you are
running a bit too fast in travel. 6011 isnt beauty rod, but it does
burn deep, even with rusty stuff.

I also tried the drag rod technique with 6011. It didn't work at all.
The bead was rough, the rod stuck, and the weld metal ended up on one
side. I also noticed this weird jet of flame emerging between the rod
and the deposited metal. I assume 6011 just isn't meant for the drag rod
technique. Next I made a 2" long test piece and attempted to break it.
Here's a picture of the piece:

drag rod? You are putting the rod into the center of the joint,
holding it at a 45 degree angle from verticle, with a slight rearwards
angle? Try the front to back..advance, retreat, advance, retreat, with
the rod nearly perpendicular to the material. Cant say if this is the
proper way..but works for me..for me..with 6011. Pretty well in fact.
You may have to favor the upright piece more, and let the metal melt
down into the joint...say half a rod diameter higher than center of
the v. This of course with AC. DC is its own bag of worms..with arc
blow being an issue.

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test14.jpg

I bent it back and forth using a mole wrench (vise grips) and counted
the number of complete cycles of bending required to break it. It took
four complete cycles and the parent metal broke rather than the weld.
This is fewer cycles that it took with some of my earlier test pieces,
but I think the amplitude of bending was greater, so fatigue probably
set in earlier. I was pretty happy because the weld proved stronger than
the parent metal. 6011 does appear to give a much stronger weld than
6013, even if it looks uglier. Here's a picture of the broken test piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test15.jpg

Good deal. You are using too much rod though, making what we call a
gorilla weld. Thats a mighty big fillet, based on the scale of your
hand and so forth. Im told..and Im hardly and expert..perish the
thought, that the fillet should be the thickness of your base metal,
in cross section.

I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At
80 V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've
been finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse.
I didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm
getting better at welding. Soon I'm going to be using 1/4" mild steel
(both plate and sections) for a project. If I weld using 6011 at 80 V,
do you think 120 A is enough? I'm guessing that it is if I grind a
chamfer on the edges, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

I think 120 amps with 1/8" 6011, is going to be way too hot for 1/4".
I normally run it between 60 and 80 amps for that thickness..usually
at the 80 amp end. My fillet will be about 1/4" deep if I slather it
on, 3/16" deep (depth of the V) if I take care and drop to about 75
amps, and dont dawdle.

I cross posted your post to sci.engr.joining.welding and Im sure we
shall see some feedback on it shortly. Some incredible welders over
there. Even some in the UK.

It would be interesting, if you could find a welder, offer him a few
pints to come over and run some welds with your machine, and find out
if its a machine or a techique related issue. I did that myself, and
it was me, not the machine. Id been used to welding on another lesser
quality machine, and I was subconsiously using techniques Id cobbled
together out of my ass, that I needed with the crappy machine..that
were over the top with the good one Id just gotten.

Fortunately for me..Im in a welders area..oil fields..so they are on
every street corner..so to speak lol.


My gut feeling, is that you are trying to heat up too much real
estate, not keeping your rod nearly submerged in the puddle and are
trying to run too fast, which means you have to up the heat more than
you should, which heats up everything to a nice red glow...

And its one of the most common beginners issues. I fought it for years
with myself, until it finally clicked, even after having real welders
show me what I was doing wrong.

But then..Im not a welder, only a dauber. Im sure others will tell us
both the proper way.

Gunner

Thanks for all the advice!

Best wishes,

Chris

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:18:13 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Don Foreman wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 01:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Thanks for the advice.

snip

6013 and 7014 can also make strong welds in 1/8", though they run
differently. It's a matter of watching and controlling the puddle.

I might try some 7014 if I can persuade the welding store to order it!
Is it much different from 6013? I find the slag inclusions are the
problem with 6013. With a fillet 6013 doesn't seem to clear the slag
from the root of the weld, and this is where the fracture starts when I
bend a sample back and forth. Here's a picture of what happened to the
6013 sample:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test10.jpg

Perhaps I need to get the arc shorter and the puddle smaller in order to
push the puddle right into the corner? I tried this with 6013 but
couldn't get the puddle smaller than about 1/4" across without using the
drag rod technique. The drag rod fillets using 6013 were stronger than
the parent metal, though. Am I right in thinking that 6013 produces a
softer deposit than 6011, whatever the technique?

All correct. 6013 cools slower so the deposit tends to be softer.


And to keep from posting to another portion of this thread I'll put
some answers in this one.

100 amps is about right for 1/8" 6011. It tends to burn hotter so
you need less amperage when compared to other rods. You can vary this
up and down a little based on metal thickness but as you found there's
not a whole lot of room to play.

As Don explained the 50 and 80V setting primarily apply to the open
circuit voltage of the machine. Once welding the voltage is primarily
controlled by the length of the arc. Proper arc length is
automatically going to bring the voltage down to around 20-30 volts.
The longer the arc the higher the voltage needed to jump it. A shorter
arc needs less voltage to keep going. Thus in stick welding pushing
the rod into the work tends to make it run cooler while pulling the
rod away runs hotter (kind of counter intuitive to many people). This
is the technique you need to get down to compensate for the stepped
amperage control of your welder. With a welder like the fine control
is all in arc length. I welded for many years with a machine like that
with good results. It's just easier with a industrial machine like I
have now. This really shows up in the low amperage work. My Hobart
CyberTIG is the easiest welder I've ever used for low amperage work.
Last night I had a friend over helping his friend build a bumper. He
was welding some pretty large gaps in the badly fitted pipe joints. I
had him using 3/32 6011 for the root pass to get everything put
together so that I could later go over everything with 1/8" 7018 for a
good looking weld. Now while my friend has welded some for a long time
he's far from a professional welder. Gorilla welding best describes
his efforts. But when he complained of having trouble filling the gaps
I turned the welder down to the point that it was only putting out 40
amps. He had not trouble at all striking and maintaining the arc at
that setting. I know for the fact that it was a exercised in
frustration for me to try and weld at 40 amps with my old cracker box
like that. I also have trouble with my other industrial welder at that
kind of amperage. Primarily with striking the arc. That welder really
likes to make it stick permanently when striking such a small rod.
Plus when it sticks it takes all of 1/2 second for it to turn the rod
into a glowing piece of wet noodle (that what I get for using a 500
amp capable welder for small rods :-).


Wayne Cook
Shamrock, TX
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/waynecook/index.htm

All good wisdom here! I just question the need for the 6011. I use it for
the needed strength sometimes or for vertical or overhead work but why
didn't the 6013 work on the ring? Is it because I haven't ever used an AC
welder? The only other thing I wonder about is if the steel ring and strip
were of very dissimilar steels. I also think 3/32" rods are easier to learn
with.


"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested using
6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked down an 11
lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area, which was no
doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder from only keeps
6013. The place where I found some just had one box in stock, which I
bought.

Soon afterwards I was helping a friend build a large crossbow. He wanted a
ring welding to a piece of flat bar to create an anchor point. Tried with
6013. Useless: one big slag inclusion with a little metal deposited down
each side. I guess there is a lot of opportunity for a slag inclusion here
as there's a deep crevice where the round section rests against the flat
bar. So I got out the 6011. Got the job done nicely, but striking the arc
seemed hard. Here's a picture of the ring:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/crossbow_ring.jpg

Last night I had chance to experiment properly with the 6011. It was a
bitterly cold night here in England! I put the heater on, but had to keep
the shed door open to let the fumes escape. I noticed it said "AC min. 70
V" on the box. I was running on 50 V before, so I switched over to 80 V.
No problem striking the arc now. I welded some fillets on 1/8" mild steel,
starting at 120 A. On the 50 V setting 115 A was a little low, and 145 A
too high. Now here's something I don't understand. If I switch from 50 V
to 80 V, but keep the same current setting, does the arc dissipate 8/5 as
much power? Or does the voltage across the arc drop to a similar value in
both cases (perhaps 25 V) as soon as the arc is struck? I believe my
welding set uses a tapped inductor to control current. But I'm not
familiar with the electrical characteristics of the welding arc, so I
haven't yet figured out how it works. If anyone knows of a site which
explains how welding current controllers work, or is willing to explain,
I'd be most interested to know.

120 A seemed a bit hot. It caused small undercuts and large areas of the
metal were red hot after welding. Also, the tip of the electrode was
glowing red when I lifted the mask. I remember someone (perhaps Roy)
saying that this is a clear sign that you're using too much current, so I
turned it down. 110 A still seemed a bit hot, but 100 A perfect. 90 A was
too low. I used maybe 10 or 12 rods practising at 100 A. I had no problems
with slag inclusions, and could lay a reasonably neat bead. But I couldn't
get as neat a bead as I could with 6013. I've read that this is a
characteristic of the rod. Is this true? I found restarts somewhat harder
than I did using 6013. The arc seemer brighter and the rate of deposition
faster, so I found it hard to see the solidified weld pool. They weren't
too messy, though. Here's a picture of one of my fillets:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet6.jpg

I also tried the drag rod technique with 6011. It didn't work at all. The
bead was rough, the rod stuck, and the weld metal ended up on one side. I
also noticed this weird jet of flame emerging between the rod and the
deposited metal. I assume 6011 just isn't meant for the drag rod
technique. Next I made a 2" long test piece and attempted to break it.
Here's a picture of the piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test14.jpg

I bent it back and forth using a mole wrench (vise grips) and counted the
number of complete cycles of bending required to break it. It took four
complete cycles and the parent metal broke rather than the weld. This is
fewer cycles that it took with some of my earlier test pieces, but I think
the amplitude of bending was greater, so fatigue probably set in earlier.
I was pretty happy because the weld proved stronger than the parent metal.
6011 does appear to give a much stronger weld than 6013, even if it looks
uglier. Here's a picture of the broken test piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test15.jpg

I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At 80
V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've been
finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse. I
didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm getting
better at welding. Soon I'm going to be using 1/4" mild steel (both plate
and sections) for a project. If I weld using 6011 at 80 V, do you think
120 A is enough? I'm guessing that it is if I grind a chamfer on the
edges, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

Thanks for all the advice!

Best wishes,

Chris

Hi Chris

I've posted before on 6010/6011 and have a web-site with welding
comment. Bit steam-engine like compared to current technology, but
grabbed by this process since tried it after hearing of it.

http://www.weldsmith.co.uk/tech/weld...c/SMA/SMA.html

http://www.weldsmith.co.uk/tech/welding/welding.html

And search the s.e.j.w. newsgroup.
Try at Google
http://groups.google.com/groups?grou...oining.welding


Comments infilled in your post.

Gunner Asch writes:

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 01:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Hi folks,

A while back I posted a thread about fillet welding. Having followed
people's suggestions about technique (Roy, Grant, Randy, Don and a few
others) I found I was getting neat but weak welds. Gunner suggested
using 6011 electrodes instead of 6013. After much searching I tracked
down an 11 lb box of 1/8" 6011. No one seems to stock it in this area,
which was no doubt how I ended up with 6013. The place I got my welder
from only keeps 6013. The place where I found some just had one box in
stock, which I bought.

Soon afterwards I was helping a friend build a large crossbow. He wanted
a ring welding to a piece of flat bar to create an anchor point. Tried
with 6013. Useless: one big slag inclusion with a little metal deposited
down each side. I guess there is a lot of opportunity for a slag
inclusion here as there's a deep crevice where the round section rests
against the flat bar. So I got out the 6011. Got the job done nicely,

Yup - most 6013drop a lot of slag. Not much good for short welds in
awkward locations. They are not awkward with a 6010 or 6011, where
most of the flux covering goes to gas and the arc is directional and
penetrative.

but striking the arc seemed hard. Here's a picture of the ring:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/crossbow_ring.jpg

Last night I had chance to experiment properly with the 6011. It was a
bitterly cold night here in England! I put the heater on, but had to
keep the shed door open to let the fumes escape. I noticed it said "AC
min. 70 V" on the box. I was running on 50 V before, so I switched over
to 80 V. No problem striking the arc now. I welded some fillets on 1/8"
mild steel, starting at 120 A. On the 50 V setting 115 A was a little
low, and 145 A too high. Now here's something I don't understand. If I

125A is the max. for 3.2mm (1/8th inch) 6011 rods. Mustn't degrade
the cellulose by Ohmically (resistance) heating the rod.

140A is max for same sized rods in rutile (6013).

Using 6011 and feeling really psychopathic, dip in water then exceed
the recommended current a bit. The water makes the arc more fierce
and keeps the rod cool, both making for a fiercely penetrating arc.

switch from 50 V to 80 V, but keep the same current setting, does the
arc dissipate 8/5 as much power? Or does the voltage across the arc drop
to a similar value in both cases (perhaps 25 V) as soon as the arc is
struck? I believe my welding set uses a tapped inductor to control

Yes, you've got it. Voltage across the arc is a characteristic of the
rod, not the welding machine, for a given amperage setting.

current. But I'm not familiar with the electrical characteristics of the
welding arc, so I haven't yet figured out how it works. If anyone knows
of a site which explains how welding current controllers work, or is
willing to explain, I'd be most interested to know.

120 A seemed a bit hot. It caused small undercuts and large areas of the
metal were red hot after welding. Also, the tip of the electrode was
glowing red when I lifted the mask. I remember someone (perhaps Roy)
saying that this is a clear sign that you're using too much current, so
I turned it down. 110 A still seemed a bit hot, but 100 A perfect. 90 A

Surprised rod was overheated on 120A. When break arc and flip up
visor, should see little flame from end of 6010 or 6011 rod for a
second or so. But rod should otherwise be cool.

was too low. I used maybe 10 or 12 rods practising at 100 A. I had no

100A would be alright, if it works for you.

problems with slag inclusions, and could lay a reasonably neat bead. But
I couldn't get as neat a bead as I could with 6013. I've read that this
is a characteristic of the rod. Is this true? I found restarts somewhat
harder than I did using 6013. The arc seemer brighter and the rate of
deposition faster, so I found it hard to see the solidified weld pool.
They weren't too messy, though. Here's a picture of one of my fillets:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet6.jpg

I also tried the drag rod technique with 6011. It didn't work at all.
The bead was rough, the rod stuck, and the weld metal ended up on one
side. I also noticed this weird jet of flame emerging between the rod

Dragging the rod is for root-running a butt weld with a
V-preparation. Dragging gives a very misshaped weld bead. On root
run, the advantages of gettign a full-pen. weld with neat underbead
vastly overweight and you accept the price of having to grind off the
raised top-bead, grinding out the "wagon-track" slag traps down by its
vertical sides.

For fillet and all others, you want open arc. There is no tradition
of this in UK, but seems is wideely used in North America. You can
get pretty neat fillet welds by slightly oscillating the rod backwards
and forward by about a rod core diameter (1/8th inch in you case.
Practice of a straight peice of metal until you can get a flat bead
with no undercut, but keeping good penetration.

and the deposited metal. I assume 6011 just isn't meant for the drag rod
technique. Next I made a 2" long test piece and attempted to break it.
Here's a picture of the piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test14.jpg

I bent it back and forth using a mole wrench (vise grips) and counted
the number of complete cycles of bending required to break it. It took

Normally you "nick-break" - you saw a notch in the top surface of the
weld bead so that the break is made to occur across and into the weld
root. Then you look for penetration.

The problem with your test is that you could always make the parent
metal break by over-filling the weld into a great big blob. That
would never break. But is would be a discontinuity in the component
shape and a concentrator of fatigue. Not good. So nick-break to see
is penetrated on underside of weld and visual inspect for good top
shape - a small but minimal fill above plate profile.

four complete cycles and the parent metal broke rather than the weld.
This is fewer cycles that it took with some of my earlier test pieces,
but I think the amplitude of bending was greater, so fatigue probably
set in earlier. I was pretty happy because the weld proved stronger than
the parent metal. 6011 does appear to give a much stronger weld than
6013, even if it looks uglier. Here's a picture of the broken test piece:

http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/fillet_test15.jpg

I've wondered recently if I need another welder. At 50 V (AC) my welder
offers the following current settings: 65, 90, 115, 145, 165, 180 A. At
80 V (AC) it offers 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 A. I've
been finding that the current control on the 50 V range is a bit coarse.
I didn't used to find this, but maybe I'm noticing it because I'm
getting better at welding. Soon I'm going to be using 1/4" mild steel
(both plate and sections) for a project. If I weld using 6011 at 80 V,
do you think 120 A is enough? I'm guessing that it is if I grind a
chamfer on the edges, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts?

Sounds like you have a Oxford oil-cooled arc welder, judging from your
"50V or 80V open-circuit" anbd the current taps. These are AC
machines, so cannot be used for some rods. However, there are rods to
cover every situation, so you are well OK. BTW - 6011's crackle at
mains frequency on AC, compared to a smooth hiss on DC. Makes no
difference. 6013 rutiles hiss on both AC and DC.

Oxford arc welders are superb. They cost twice as much as a
contemporary inverter welding machine, which is inherently DC
welding. The handling of the arc and welding is lovely. With a
well-behaved machine you can bring on your technique well.


Thanks for all the advice!

Best wishes,

Chris

Richard Smith

6011 is a fast-freeze rod for all position welding. It handles dirty
metal better than other rods. Very popular on the farm.G 6013 sets up
slower, but, as you noted, makes a smoother bead due to a slower
freezing puddle. They both have their uses.
Bugs

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:18:13 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy

I might try some 7014 if I can persuade the welding store to order it!

It seems odd that you're having to special order rods that to us seem
very common. You might ask the shop what they sell a lot of and then
post that information to the group to see if any of them are good
choices for you rather than having to special order rods. It may be
that most welders in your area are using 70xx rods rather than the
lower tensile 60xx rods.

RWL


******* Recreate gaps in email address to reply *******

Happy New Year everyone!

Thanks for the wealth of suggestions. I'll offer responses to your
comments individually.

Gunner: That photograph is a bit misleading I think. The weld is very
close to the camera, plus I don't have enormous hands. I've just
measured the leg length of the fillet in that picture and it's 1/4". The
weld pool is therefore a little over 1/4" in diameter. On other samples
I measured the length of deposited bead compared to the length of rod
consumed. I am pretty consistently depositing 5 1/2" of fillet for every
11" of rod consumed. When I try to get the weld pool much smaller than
1/4" diameter I find that the bead becomes uneven and looks rather like
fish scales. Were you suggesting that 6011 should work as a drag rod?
The welds I photographed were not done using the "drag rod" technique
and 6011 rod - those were a disaster. Most of the welders I know locally
are hobby welders like me. I did know a guy who was a pro, but he had a
lot of family problems and I lost touch with him. If I meet a pro I
might well do as you suggest.

Wayne: What you say about a shorter arc reducing the power output makes
sense. I figured this out for myself at one point in the past, but
wasn't sure whether or not to believe it because, as you say, it's
rather counter-intuitive. I'll practise working with a short arc. At the
moment my arc is about the same as the rod diameter (1/8"). I find if I
make it much smaller than this I struggle to see what's going on in the
weld pool.

Tom: I'm pretty sure the ring and strip were both mild steel of a
similar composition. I think the quantity of slag and low penetration of
6013 just allowed the crevice to fill with slag. That's the way it
seemed. I'll try to get some 3/32" 6011 rods. Welding a fillet with 1/8"
I find it hard to get a weld pool smaller than 1/4" across. At the
moment I have 1/16", 5/64" and 1/8" in 6013 and 1/8" in 6011. I couldn't
weld that ring with 5/64" 6013, but was fine with 1/8" 6011.

Richard: Thanks for all the advice and links to your website. You
mention that dragging is for root-running a butt weld with a
V-preparation. Something I want to do soon is make a box from 1/4"
plate. This is an electrical enclosure, but is load bearing too. I don't
want to use intermittent welds as I want the enclosure to be sealed from
moisture, plus I want it to look neat. Do you think that if I grind a V
at every joint, I could drag a rod using the V as a guide in order to
produce a narrow, neat bead? My welder is a Cytringan (180 A @ 50 V, 120
A @ 80 V), which is very similar to an Oxford. From the opinions
expressed here it looks like it will be fine for welding 1/4" mild
steel, and that with experience the coarse current control won't prove
to be a problem.

RWL: The lack of availability of rods is strange. The place I got my
welder from only keeps 6013. They have it in a variety of diameters, but
that's all they keep. They do seem to be specialising in MIG now as
there are a lot of automotive and auto-related businesses in the area.
Another place down the road keeps 6010, 6013 and some 70xx series rods,
although I didn't inspect those closely. I bought the one box of 6011
they had.

Best wishes,

Chris

"RWL" GeoLane_NOSPAM_ @evenlink.com wrote in message
...

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:18:13 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy

I might try some 7014 if I can persuade the welding store to order it!

It seems odd that you're having to special order rods that to us seem
very common. You might ask the shop what they sell a lot of and then
post that information to the group to see if any of them are good
choices for you rather than having to special order rods. It may be
that most welders in your area are using 70xx rods rather than the
lower tensile 60xx rods.

RWL

I can't help but wonder if the difference is more how rod in the UK is
marked and known. Could be that what we call 6011 is something else to
them, but the same rod?

How about it, Christopher? Is that the case?

Harold

Harold and Susan Vordos wrote:
"RWL" GeoLane_NOSPAM_ @evenlink.com wrote in message
...

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:18:13 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy


I might try some 7014 if I can persuade the welding store to order it!

It seems odd that you're having to special order rods that to us seem
very common. You might ask the shop what they sell a lot of and then
post that information to the group to see if any of them are good
choices for you rather than having to special order rods. It may be
that most welders in your area are using 70xx rods rather than the
lower tensile 60xx rods.

RWL


I can't help but wonder if the difference is more how rod in the UK is
marked and known. Could be that what we call 6011 is something else to
them, but the same rod?

How about it, Christopher? Is that the case?

I don't think so. The AWS numbers are very widely used here.

Chris

On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 05:16:20 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Happy New Year everyone!

Thanks for the wealth of suggestions. I'll offer responses to your
comments individually.

Gunner: That photograph is a bit misleading I think. The weld is very
close to the camera, plus I don't have enormous hands. I've just
measured the leg length of the fillet in that picture and it's 1/4". The
weld pool is therefore a little over 1/4" in diameter. On other samples
I measured the length of deposited bead compared to the length of rod
consumed. I am pretty consistently depositing 5 1/2" of fillet for every
11" of rod consumed. When I try to get the weld pool much smaller than
1/4" diameter I find that the bead becomes uneven and looks rather like
fish scales. Were you suggesting that 6011 should work as a drag rod?
The welds I photographed were not done using the "drag rod" technique
and 6011 rod - those were a disaster. Most of the welders I know locally
are hobby welders like me. I did know a guy who was a pro, but he had a
lot of family problems and I lost touch with him. If I meet a pro I
might well do as you suggest.

Wayne: What you say about a shorter arc reducing the power output makes
sense. I figured this out for myself at one point in the past, but
wasn't sure whether or not to believe it because, as you say, it's
rather counter-intuitive. I'll practise working with a short arc. At the
moment my arc is about the same as the rod diameter (1/8"). I find if I
make it much smaller than this I struggle to see what's going on in the
weld pool.

Tom: I'm pretty sure the ring and strip were both mild steel of a
similar composition. I think the quantity of slag and low penetration of
6013 just allowed the crevice to fill with slag. That's the way it
seemed. I'll try to get some 3/32" 6011 rods. Welding a fillet with 1/8"
I find it hard to get a weld pool smaller than 1/4" across. At the
moment I have 1/16", 5/64" and 1/8" in 6013 and 1/8" in 6011. I couldn't
weld that ring with 5/64" 6013, but was fine with 1/8" 6011.

Richard: Thanks for all the advice and links to your website. You
mention that dragging is for root-running a butt weld with a
V-preparation. Something I want to do soon is make a box from 1/4"
plate. This is an electrical enclosure, but is load bearing too. I don't
want to use intermittent welds as I want the enclosure to be sealed from
moisture, plus I want it to look neat. Do you think that if I grind a V
at every joint, I could drag a rod using the V as a guide in order to
produce a narrow, neat bead? My welder is a Cytringan (180 A @ 50 V, 120
A @ 80 V), which is very similar to an Oxford. From the opinions
expressed here it looks like it will be fine for welding 1/4" mild
steel, and that with experience the coarse current control won't prove
to be a problem.

RWL: The lack of availability of rods is strange. The place I got my
welder from only keeps 6013. They have it in a variety of diameters, but
that's all they keep. They do seem to be specialising in MIG now as
there are a lot of automotive and auto-related businesses in the area.
Another place down the road keeps 6010, 6013 and some 70xx series rods,
although I didn't inspect those closely. I bought the one box of 6011
they had.

Best wishes,

Chris

Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types.

Im not sure what 10lbs of rod shipped to old blimey would cost.

Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it werent
too expesnsive

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Gunner Asch wrote:

Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types.

Im not sure what 10lbs of rod shipped to old blimey would cost.

Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it werent
too expesnsive

Gunner

Thanks for the kind offer, Gunner. I just looked at the USPS website and
the cheapest option for an 11 lb package is $34.45 by surface mail.
Ouch. Pretty expensive! I think my best bet is to have a chat to the guy
at the better of our two local welding stores. Most of the stuff I weld
is 1/8" to 1/4" mild steel. Currently I have 1/16", 5/64" and 1/8" in
6013 and 1/8" in 6011. Is there anything else I should definitely try?
I'd rather stay away from weird rods which need sealed cans and rod
ovens - I keep my 6011 and 6013 in the house, and that seems fine.

Happy New Year!

Chris

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:59:33 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:



Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types.

Im not sure what 10lbs of rod shipped to old blimey would cost.

Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it werent
too expesnsive

Gunner

Postage is pricey but we could courier a bit of welding rod along with
Fritoes, cornmeal, red licorice, more quilted dribblebibs and other
essential survival rations not available in the UK via the Nana Mary
Smuggling Service. Shipping would be to Mnpls, and thence from
London to Chris.

Too late for imminent trip, though, and I expect Chris will find
what he needs in the UK.

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:29:58 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:59:33 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:



Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types.

Im not sure what 10lbs of rod shipped to old blimey would cost.

Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it werent
too expesnsive

Gunner

Postage is pricey but we could courier a bit of welding rod along with
Fritoes, cornmeal, red licorice, more quilted dribblebibs and other
essential survival rations not available in the UK via the Nana Mary
Smuggling Service. Shipping would be to Mnpls, and thence from
London to Chris.

Too late for imminent trip, though, and I expect Chris will find
what he needs in the UK.

No red licorice in the UK????????
No 2 lb bags of Twizzlers Red Licorice??????

The horror...the horror.....

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

www.esab.co.uk unless you're *really* specialist like stubs cast iron
rods they can do you anything you want.

Christopher Tidy writes:

Gunner Asch wrote:

Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types. Im not sure what 10lbs of rod
shipped to old blimey would cost.
Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it
werent
too expesnsive
Gunner

Thanks for the kind offer, Gunner. I just looked at the USPS website
and the cheapest option for an 11 lb package is $34.45 by surface
mail. Ouch. Pretty expensive! I think my best bet is to have a chat to
the guy at the better of our two local welding stores. Most of the
stuff I weld is 1/8" to 1/4" mild steel. Currently I have 1/16", 5/64"
and 1/8" in 6013 and 1/8" in 6011. Is there anything else I should
definitely try? I'd rather stay away from weird rods which need sealed
cans and rod ovens - I keep my 6011 and 6013 in the house, and that
seems fine.

Happy New Year!

Chris

Chris

A good welding supply store in the UK will have all the different
electrodes.

There are some 7018's (basics) for AC. That would be interesting for
you to try.

In a house, all rods will store reasonably. Cellulosic (6010 or 6011)
might get a bit dry. Basics (7018 (also 7015 and 7016 but you never
meet those)) will pick up moisture, but not as much as matters welding
mild steel in smaller thicknesses (less than 6mm / 1/4inch) (???).

7018's come these days in shrink-wrap plastic.

Cellulosics come in a tin to keep the moisture *IN*. But in colleges
they are left in the open in the dry centrally-heated atmosphere and
still work fine. You do know if a cellulosic is too dry. The arc
goes "flat", lacking "bite" or directionality. Well, I reckon that.
So you "re-moisturise" a bit in that case...

Also - don't try to dry 6013's in an oven - they rely on moisture for
shielding.


Richard Smith

On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 05:16:20 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Happy New Year everyone!

Thanks for the wealth of suggestions. I'll offer responses to your
comments individually.

Gunner: That photograph is a bit misleading I think. The weld is very
close to the camera, plus I don't have enormous hands. I've just
measured the leg length of the fillet in that picture and it's 1/4". The
weld pool is therefore a little over 1/4" in diameter. On other samples
I measured the length of deposited bead compared to the length of rod
consumed. I am pretty consistently depositing 5 1/2" of fillet for every
11" of rod consumed. When I try to get the weld pool much smaller than
1/4" diameter I find that the bead becomes uneven and looks rather like
fish scales. Were you suggesting that 6011 should work as a drag rod?
The welds I photographed were not done using the "drag rod" technique
and 6011 rod - those were a disaster. Most of the welders I know locally
are hobby welders like me. I did know a guy who was a pro, but he had a
lot of family problems and I lost touch with him. If I meet a pro I
might well do as you suggest.

On dragging 6011 I don't think you'll be able to or like the
results. One is the fact that you're running a AC machine. My
experience with my old buzz box is that 6011 won't drag with it unless
the current is set way to high for the thickness of metal that you're
welding (it's possible on really thick stuff and high amperages but
still not recommended). Now I can drag it some with my stiffer high
powered DC industrial machines but it produces a high narrow bead
that's not wanted (the only exception I've seen is that the root pass
on pipeline work around here is done that way).

Wayne: What you say about a shorter arc reducing the power output makes
sense. I figured this out for myself at one point in the past, but
wasn't sure whether or not to believe it because, as you say, it's
rather counter-intuitive. I'll practise working with a short arc. At the
moment my arc is about the same as the rod diameter (1/8"). I find if I
make it much smaller than this I struggle to see what's going on in the
weld pool.

You should be watching the trailing edge of the weld pool primarily
with secondary attention to the leading edge (just to make sure it's
actually melting into the metal on both sides). The trailing edge
tells the most info of how the welds going. If it's melting into both
sides you'll see the molten metal drawing itself into the work in. If
it's building up to much you can see it in the trailing edge. If
there's not enough build up you can see it there as well. In other
words you can tell most of what you need to know by watching the
trailing edge. Did I say that enough times. :-)

Tom: I'm pretty sure the ring and strip were both mild steel of a
similar composition. I think the quantity of slag and low penetration of
6013 just allowed the crevice to fill with slag. That's the way it
seemed. I'll try to get some 3/32" 6011 rods. Welding a fillet with 1/8"
I find it hard to get a weld pool smaller than 1/4" across. At the
moment I have 1/16", 5/64" and 1/8" in 6013 and 1/8" in 6011. I couldn't
weld that ring with 5/64" 6013, but was fine with 1/8" 6011.

It can be difficult to weld with a high slag rod on a deep groove
provided by a round object sitting on a flat object. It's not
impossible but it does take practice and personally I've never liked
6013 for that particular reason.

Richard: Thanks for all the advice and links to your website. You
mention that dragging is for root-running a butt weld with a
V-preparation. Something I want to do soon is make a box from 1/4"
plate. This is an electrical enclosure, but is load bearing too. I don't
want to use intermittent welds as I want the enclosure to be sealed from
moisture, plus I want it to look neat. Do you think that if I grind a V
at every joint, I could drag a rod using the V as a guide in order to
produce a narrow, neat bead? My welder is a Cytringan (180 A @ 50 V, 120
A @ 80 V), which is very similar to an Oxford. From the opinions
expressed here it looks like it will be fine for welding 1/4" mild
steel, and that with experience the coarse current control won't prove
to be a problem.

My advise here is to butt the corner joints corner to corner leaving
a nice 90 V for the weld to fill. In this case properly run 6013 will
give a nice smooth round cornered appearance to the box. Though my
preference is still for 7018 for jobs like this.

I like 7018 for it's smooth weld with less slag than 6013 making it
easier for me to run. However it's a DC only rod unless you buy the
kind specifically made for AC. As for the purist cry that it's has to
be kept in a oven all I can say is that there's many many pounds of it
run all the time that's not been oven kept. If it's a critical job
then yes it should be kept in a oven. But for mild steel as long as
it's kept reasonably dry then it's perfectly possible to make
acceptable welds with it.


Wayne Cook
Shamrock, TX
http://members.dslextreme.com/users/waynecook/index.htm

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 08:55:35 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:


No red licorice in the UK????????
No 2 lb bags of Twizzlers Red Licorice??????

The horror...the horror.....

Gunner

It's not easy being a Brit expat American!

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Harold and Susan Vordos wrote:
"RWL" GeoLane_NOSPAM_ @evenlink.com wrote in message
...

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:18:13 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy


I might try some 7014 if I can persuade the welding store to order it!

It seems odd that you're having to special order rods that to us seem
very common. You might ask the shop what they sell a lot of and then
post that information to the group to see if any of them are good
choices for you rather than having to special order rods. It may be
that most welders in your area are using 70xx rods rather than the
lower tensile 60xx rods.

RWL


I can't help but wonder if the difference is more how rod in the UK is
marked and known. Could be that what we call 6011 is something else to
them, but the same rod?

How about it, Christopher? Is that the case?

I don't think so. The AWS numbers are very widely used here.

Chris


Thanks!

Harold

Wrap up in poly - and stuff in new postal express ? box - anywhere any weight - $7.++ IIRC.
I sent a bunch of CD's out that way - I had confirm on the other side and it was 11.45.
It was 4lb 1.90 oz.
Might be 11.45 - not 7.++.

Martin
Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH & Endowment Member
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 1 Jan 2006 05:16:20 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:


Happy New Year everyone!

Thanks for the wealth of suggestions. I'll offer responses to your
comments individually.

Gunner: That photograph is a bit misleading I think. The weld is very
close to the camera, plus I don't have enormous hands. I've just
measured the leg length of the fillet in that picture and it's 1/4". The
weld pool is therefore a little over 1/4" in diameter. On other samples
I measured the length of deposited bead compared to the length of rod
consumed. I am pretty consistently depositing 5 1/2" of fillet for every
11" of rod consumed. When I try to get the weld pool much smaller than
1/4" diameter I find that the bead becomes uneven and looks rather like
fish scales. Were you suggesting that 6011 should work as a drag rod?
The welds I photographed were not done using the "drag rod" technique
and 6011 rod - those were a disaster. Most of the welders I know locally
are hobby welders like me. I did know a guy who was a pro, but he had a
lot of family problems and I lost touch with him. If I meet a pro I
might well do as you suggest.

Wayne: What you say about a shorter arc reducing the power output makes
sense. I figured this out for myself at one point in the past, but
wasn't sure whether or not to believe it because, as you say, it's
rather counter-intuitive. I'll practise working with a short arc. At the
moment my arc is about the same as the rod diameter (1/8"). I find if I
make it much smaller than this I struggle to see what's going on in the
weld pool.

Tom: I'm pretty sure the ring and strip were both mild steel of a
similar composition. I think the quantity of slag and low penetration of
6013 just allowed the crevice to fill with slag. That's the way it
seemed. I'll try to get some 3/32" 6011 rods. Welding a fillet with 1/8"
I find it hard to get a weld pool smaller than 1/4" across. At the
moment I have 1/16", 5/64" and 1/8" in 6013 and 1/8" in 6011. I couldn't
weld that ring with 5/64" 6013, but was fine with 1/8" 6011.

Richard: Thanks for all the advice and links to your website. You
mention that dragging is for root-running a butt weld with a
V-preparation. Something I want to do soon is make a box from 1/4"
plate. This is an electrical enclosure, but is load bearing too. I don't
want to use intermittent welds as I want the enclosure to be sealed from
moisture, plus I want it to look neat. Do you think that if I grind a V
at every joint, I could drag a rod using the V as a guide in order to
produce a narrow, neat bead? My welder is a Cytringan (180 A @ 50 V, 120
A @ 80 V), which is very similar to an Oxford. From the opinions
expressed here it looks like it will be fine for welding 1/4" mild
steel, and that with experience the coarse current control won't prove
to be a problem.

RWL: The lack of availability of rods is strange. The place I got my
welder from only keeps 6013. They have it in a variety of diameters, but
that's all they keep. They do seem to be specialising in MIG now as
there are a lot of automotive and auto-related businesses in the area.
Another place down the road keeps 6010, 6013 and some 70xx series rods,
although I didn't inspect those closely. I bought the one box of 6011
they had.

Best wishes,

Chris


Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types.

Im not sure what 10lbs of rod shipped to old blimey would cost.

Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it werent
too expesnsive

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Wayne Cook wrote:

snip

Wayne: What you say about a shorter arc reducing the power output makes
sense. I figured this out for myself at one point in the past, but
wasn't sure whether or not to believe it because, as you say, it's
rather counter-intuitive. I'll practise working with a short arc. At the
moment my arc is about the same as the rod diameter (1/8"). I find if I
make it much smaller than this I struggle to see what's going on in the
weld pool.


You should be watching the trailing edge of the weld pool primarily
with secondary attention to the leading edge (just to make sure it's
actually melting into the metal on both sides). The trailing edge
tells the most info of how the welds going. If it's melting into both
sides you'll see the molten metal drawing itself into the work in. If
it's building up to much you can see it in the trailing edge. If
there's not enough build up you can see it there as well. In other
words you can tell most of what you need to know by watching the
trailing edge. Did I say that enough times. :-)

Yes, you said it enough times. Thanks for the tip. I'll concentrate on
watching the trailing edge :-).

Richard: Thanks for all the advice and links to your website. You
mention that dragging is for root-running a butt weld with a
V-preparation. Something I want to do soon is make a box from 1/4"
plate. This is an electrical enclosure, but is load bearing too. I don't
want to use intermittent welds as I want the enclosure to be sealed from
moisture, plus I want it to look neat. Do you think that if I grind a V
at every joint, I could drag a rod using the V as a guide in order to
produce a narrow, neat bead? My welder is a Cytringan (180 A @ 50 V, 120
A @ 80 V), which is very similar to an Oxford. From the opinions
expressed here it looks like it will be fine for welding 1/4" mild
steel, and that with experience the coarse current control won't prove
to be a problem.


My advise here is to butt the corner joints corner to corner leaving
a nice 90 V for the weld to fill. In this case properly run 6013 will
give a nice smooth round cornered appearance to the box. Though my
preference is still for 7018 for jobs like this.

I like 7018 for it's smooth weld with less slag than 6013 making it
easier for me to run. However it's a DC only rod unless you buy the
kind specifically made for AC. As for the purist cry that it's has to
be kept in a oven all I can say is that there's many many pounds of it
run all the time that's not been oven kept. If it's a critical job
then yes it should be kept in a oven. But for mild steel as long as
it's kept reasonably dry then it's perfectly possible to make
acceptable welds with it.

I might buy some 7018 or 7014. Am I right in thinking that 7018 is more
penetrating, but that 7014 deposits metal at a higher rate?

Best wishes,

Chris

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 01:29:58 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:


On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 05:59:33 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:



Hummm..I wonder if there is some special "educational" rate by which
we could all send Chris some samples of the various rods we have. I
think I alone have 9 different types.

Im not sure what 10lbs of rod shipped to old blimey would cost.

Anybody know? Id donate 10 lbs of rod, single or assorted if it werent
too expesnsive

Gunner

Postage is pricey but we could courier a bit of welding rod along with
Fritoes, cornmeal, red licorice, more quilted dribblebibs and other
essential survival rations not available in the UK via the Nana Mary
Smuggling Service. Shipping would be to Mnpls, and thence from
London to Chris.

Too late for imminent trip, though, and I expect Chris will find
what he needs in the UK.


No red licorice in the UK????????
No 2 lb bags of Twizzlers Red Licorice??????

I think this is what we used to call "shoe laces" at school. Long
strings of red liquorice? I preferred black liquorice, though. And
Liquorice Allsorts are the best!

Chris

Guy Fawkes wrote:
www.esab.co.uk unless you're *really* specialist like stubs cast iron
rods they can do you anything you want.

Thanks for the link. Odd that they don't keep 6011 or 7014, don't you think?

Best wishes,

Chris

Christopher Tidy writes:

Wayne Cook wrote:

snip

Wayne: What you say about a shorter arc reducing the power output
makes sense. I figured this out for myself at one point in the
past, but wasn't sure whether or not to believe it because, as you
say, it's rather counter-intuitive. I'll practise working with a
short arc. At the moment my arc is about the same as the rod
diameter (1/8"). I find if I make it much smaller than this I
struggle to see what's going on in the weld pool.

A short arc is good though. You need to keep a very short arc with
7018, as you only get so much shielding gas from breaking up the
limestone in the flux -- CaCo3 - CaO (flux) + CO2 (shield) -- and you
are likely to be working outdoors if you are doing commerical welding,
as MIG indoors and stick outdoors.

...

Richard Smith

Christopher Tidy writes:

Wayne Cook wrote:

snip

snip

You should be watching the trailing edge of the weld pool primarily
with secondary attention to the leading edge (just to make sure it's
actually melting into the metal on both sides). The trailing edge
tells the most info of how the welds going. If it's melting into both
sides you'll see the molten metal drawing itself into the work in. If
it's building up to much you can see it in the trailing edge. If
there's not enough build up you can see it there as well. In other
words you can tell most of what you need to know by watching the
trailing edge. Did I say that enough times. :-)

Yes, you said it enough times. Thanks for the tip. I'll concentrate on
watching the trailing edge :-).

That's because what Wayne is telling you is very crucial advice.

That is especially so when you are using "low slag" processes. Like
6011. You can see the weld metal solidifying at the back of the pool
and what you see there is what you get as your finished weld. So if
what you are seeing is not good, you better do something about the
technique of rod manipulation, etc.

Sometimes with 6011 used open arc, if you simply move the rod down the
joint at a steady rate you get a good weld with deep penetration and a
smooth flat top bead without undercut. Other times it doesn't behave
for reasons I have never deduced and you have to "whip" the rod to
take control yourself of the weld bead shape you are producing. In
"whipping" you oscillate the rod quicly along the direction you are
going, by about a rod core diameter. You can both "dig" a deep
pentration into a fillet corner and drop metal where it is needed on
th eweld pool, giving a flat weld fillet.

6010 and 6011 are "cellulosics" - the main part of the flux cover on
the rod is cellulose.

Only cellulosics can be manipulated really fast, as they put out so
much shielding gas. Rutile can be moved around a fair amount. Basics
(typically 7018) must not be moved around. You must doing everything
(thanks Ernie L.) s...l...o...w...l...y.

Cellulosics are "fast freezing", probably mainly because there is so
little slag. Good for a lot of bits of welding, as you metal goes
where ou put it and it stays there. Godo for postional welding, where
you don't want big sloshing volumes of liquid falling out of the weld
(and probably down your neck!). Good for full-penetration root runs,
where form a neat underbead by surface tension and freeze that into
place quickly before anything can muck it up. OTOH, you get a rough
weld top surface. Apart from these really skille dfolk who know how
to manipulate the process so well they get a smooth top surface
anyway! As someone once said to me "you could used cellulosics and
get good weld fusion, but your weld will look like s*%t". Well, with
the control which Wayne poointed you to most correctly, you can fairly
easily master getting a good weld profile, but it will always be
slightly "ribbed" in the direction of welding.

With "high slag" processes like for example 6013's (rutiles) the thick
slag covers the weld blocking view of weld shape and the function of
the slag is to take command of shaping the finished weld. You get a
very smooth and well-shaped weld. I think but have not enquired or
had it explained to me that the length of time in the liquid state
under a thick insulating slag enables surface tension to pull the weld
top bead very flat and smooth. BTW - look up "self-peeling slag" -
nott only is a smooth profile engineering desirable, it makes for the
welding economical feature that a correctly formulated slag peels
itself off the weld.

Richard Smith

I have used a rod, that I can't find, a 6012. When I first started welding,
too many years ago, this was used to build car haulers. Best mild steel rod
that I have ever seen. Bead looked like the 6013 but not all of the flux.
Man you could run downhand, and it would look as if it was painted. Anyone
got any idea why this rod is not being made?
Of course now, all I use in my shop is a MIG. Have to go for speed and no
slag. Building handrails and stairs, MIG is the way for me. All of the other
shops around use the MIG like I do and very little stick welding. I do stick
in the field on installing, but I also have a 110 volt MIG that I can carry
when leads cannot be used, like on the 5th floor of a building.

Please for everyone, keep in mind, when you are doing welding for somone
that there is a LOT of liability. I carry over a million dollars of
liability insurance with products completed insurance. Typicial liability
insurance ceases when the job is completed. Products completed carries the
liability insurance forever, which is extremely important. Also if you are
not incorporated, you are putting you, your family, and your home at risk of
being lost if you are sued and don't win. I have known of cases where this
does happen.

OK, that is my soapbox for today.

"Paul Wilson" writes:

I have used a rod, that I can't find, a 6012. When I first started welding,
too many years ago, this was used to build car haulers. Best mild steel rod
that I have ever seen. Bead looked like the 6013 but not all of the flux.
Man you could run downhand, and it would look as if it was painted. Anyone
got any idea why this rod is not being made?
Of course now, all I use in my shop is a MIG. ...

I've heard of this rod, a 6012. Described by national Lincoln
headquarters folk.

It's there to be seen on Lincoln website. Is called a "Fleetweld 7".
Most Fleetweld's are cellulosics, but this one isn't. I found for
instance
http://www.mylincolnelectric.com/Cat...eet.asp?p=5549
for 1/8th inch 6012

Is a sodium-binder rutile. 6013 is potassium-based-binder rutile.

6012 was decribed to me as being slightly harsher and fiercer than
6013. And seems particularly likes to run on AC.

My own AWS classigication list copied from goodness-knows-where lists
this:

"Exx12 High rutile. Quiet arc, medium penetration."

Reason had this conversation - was trying to deal with problem of
technical colleges here demanding melting of fillet corner as pass
criterion for "weld penetration" for T-fillet welds Lincoln mentioned
6012 which they said is more penetrative than 6013, which is almost
the only rod you meet here in the UK in technical colleges (they keep
some 6011's "for the pipewelders" and usually get very upset if you
use them open-arc and for any other purpose).

Richard Smith