|
Posted by Proctologically Violated©® on May 24, 2007, 11:08 am
Please log in for more thread options
Awl--
Whazzup w/ all the lousy rod I been getting?
Was grooving along just fine w/ my age-old pile of semi-no-name rod, finally
ran out of 60xx 3/32, and local welding supplier didn't have any!
Got the last box at HD (lincoln), and wow, awful. Wild-assed arc, miserable
to use.
Used a couple of rods to get by, returned the box as unusable.
Local welding supplier finally got some rod in, Anchor brand, 6013 3/32, and
wow, *worse than the HD*!!!!
*Really* unusable, and a helluva lot more expensive than the HD: $17 vs.
$10.50 for 5#.
I'm sure this g-d supplier is going to give me a hard time with the return.
Is this a familiar brand?
Arc is really hard to strike, cuz the metal in the rod burns out *into* the
flux, leaving a tube of sorts, with the walls being flux.
After a short bead, the flux flames/burns, like a match, and leaves about a
1" moist/glassy residue on the surface.
The arc itself is incredibly short, no give whatsoever, and the weld is
brittle like I've never seen before. A/C, DC +/-.
It was so bad, I thought there might be something wrong with the machine
(miller econotig).
Found some old rod, works perfectly.
The old "brand" was ____-weld in Fort Lauderdale, FL, and another similar
blue plastic long box says UNI-2000.
Anyone else have these problems?
Solutions? Brands?
Local suppliers also at times seem to buy generic, and put their sticker on
the box. Fine with me, if the stuff worked.
Mebbe a bigger supplier will give/sell me a shmorgasbord of 6013 brands to
try.
What an ordeal.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!
entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs
|
|
Posted by Richard Smith on May 24, 2007, 11:59 am
Please log in for more thread options
> Awl--
>
> Whazzup w/ all the lousy rod I been getting?
>
> Was grooving along just fine w/ my age-old pile of semi-no-name rod, finally
> ran out of 60xx 3/32, and local welding supplier didn't have any!
> Got the last box at HD (lincoln), and wow, awful. Wild-assed arc, miserable
> to use.
> Used a couple of rods to get by, returned the box as unusable.
>
> Local welding supplier finally got some rod in, Anchor brand, 6013 3/32, and
> wow, *worse than the HD*!!!!
> *Really* unusable, and a helluva lot more expensive than the HD: $17 vs.
> $10.50 for 5#.
> I'm sure this g-d supplier is going to give me a hard time with the return.
> Is this a familiar brand?
>
> Arc is really hard to strike, cuz the metal in the rod burns out *into* the
> flux, leaving a tube of sorts, with the walls being flux.
> After a short bead, the flux flames/burns, like a match, and leaves about a
> 1" moist/glassy residue on the surface.
> The arc itself is incredibly short, no give whatsoever, and the weld is
> brittle like I've never seen before. A/C, DC +/-.
>
> It was so bad, I thought there might be something wrong with the machine
> (miller econotig).
> Found some old rod, works perfectly.
> The old "brand" was ____-weld in Fort Lauderdale, FL, and another similar
> blue plastic long box says UNI-2000.
>
> Anyone else have these problems?
> Solutions? Brands?
> Local suppliers also at times seem to buy generic, and put their sticker on
> the box. Fine with me, if the stuff worked.
> Mebbe a bigger supplier will give/sell me a shmorgasbord of 6013 brands to
> try.
> What an ordeal.
> --
> ------
> Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
>
> Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
> Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
> Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
> to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
> The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!
>
> entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
> all d'numbuhs
Hi p.v.
Some "good rods" are "difficult to use" in some ways.
This bit;
"> Arc is really hard to strike,
> ...
> The arc itself is incredibly short, no give whatsoever,"
that describes 7018 (and 7016, its sibling) spot-on perfectly. That's
what they do... Now I reckon 7018 (and 7016) are absolutely the
business for a lot of welds - fillet and V-prep in all positions -
essentially "filling up" welds. But you have to keep a short arc at
all times...
Many say that 6010's are really hard to use. If the welding machine
can actually run them, I don't reckon so. If you have a situation
where you want 6010's (powerful penetration/fusion and/or fast-freeze)
any other rod is going to be hard work to get by with.
6013 "is reckoned to be" the easiest rod to use. I need someone to
demonstrate what it is that I have missed!!! - if this claim is true!
Though definitely - they are easy to strike and restrike, and they are
tolerant of wondering arc-length. Problem for me is - 6010 works for
me when I need pen. and 7018 works for me when I need to fill, leaving
6013 with not much role for me - it's trapped in a no-person's land in
the middle, offering advantages I am not desperate for and not doing
what I am after.
"white packet" / "white box" 6013's are notoriously less purposeful
than branded 6013's with a clear intended use on the packet. You can
control 6013's rutile slag to be entirely different things from a very
smooth capping run downhand to a good positional rod...
One use of 6013 which I did have in my previous job - one where would
only use 6013's...
Because 6013's have the lowest properties by some way between
cellulosics (6010/6011), rutiles (6013) and basics (7016/7018).
- if you wanted to *guarantee* that the weld will fail first!
- used with a joint design giving a progressively tear over a large
angle of the structure failing - which you generally do want in
height-restriction-barriers and the like which people routinely drive
into -
6013 made sure that this happened - the weld would tear before any
other part of the structure could tear - leaving intended "deformable"
parts of the structure to deform!
Hope this is helpful...
Regards
Rich. Smith
|
|
Posted by Leo Lichtman on May 24, 2007, 12:15 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Proc wrote: (clip)The arc itself is incredibly short, no give whatsoever,"
(clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rich wrote: (clip)But you have to keep a short arc at
> all times...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think you guys are using "short" with two different meanings. "No give
whatsoever" suggests a very brittle, non-ductile weld. This is the meaning
of the word as it is used to describe shortbread, or hot-short aluminum.
Rich took it to mean a short arc, as in, not a long arc.
How about that, Proc?
> Many say that 6010's are really hard to use. If the welding machine
> can actually run them, I don't reckon so. If you have a situation
> where you want 6010's (powerful penetration/fusion and/or fast-freeze)
> any other rod is going to be hard work to get by with.
>
> 6013 "is reckoned to be" the easiest rod to use. I need someone to
> demonstrate what it is that I have missed!!! - if this claim is true!
> Though definitely - they are easy to strike and restrike, and they are
> tolerant of wondering arc-length. Problem for me is - 6010 works for
> me when I need pen. and 7018 works for me when I need to fill, leaving
> 6013 with not much role for me - it's trapped in a no-person's land in
> the middle, offering advantages I am not desperate for and not doing
> what I am after.
>
> "white packet" / "white box" 6013's are notoriously less purposeful
> than branded 6013's with a clear intended use on the packet. You can
> control 6013's rutile slag to be entirely different things from a very
> smooth capping run downhand to a good positional rod...
>
> One use of 6013 which I did have in my previous job - one where would
> only use 6013's...
> Because 6013's have the lowest properties by some way between
> cellulosics (6010/6011), rutiles (6013) and basics (7016/7018).
> - if you wanted to *guarantee* that the weld will fail first!
> - used with a joint design giving a progressively tear over a large
> angle of the structure failing - which you generally do want in
> height-restriction-barriers and the like which people routinely drive
> into -
> 6013 made sure that this happened - the weld would tear before any
> other part of the structure could tear - leaving intended "deformable"
> parts of the structure to deform!
>
>
> Hope this is helpful...
>
> Regards
>
> Rich. Smith
|
|
Posted by Proctologically Violated©® on May 24, 2007, 12:57 pm
Please log in for more thread options Indeed, I meant a short arc.
I have long been used to being able to play with the arc length, from right
in the puddle to 1" away, in my amateurish attempts to control heat,
penetration etc.
With this Anchor brand rod, I almost had to be in the puddle.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!
entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs
>
> Proc wrote: (clip)The arc itself is incredibly short, no give
> whatsoever," (clip)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Rich wrote: (clip)But you have to keep a short arc at
>> all times...
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I think you guys are using "short" with two different meanings. "No give
> whatsoever" suggests a very brittle, non-ductile weld. This is the
> meaning of the word as it is used to describe shortbread, or hot-short
> aluminum. Rich took it to mean a short arc, as in, not a long arc.
>
> How about that, Proc?
>
>> Many say that 6010's are really hard to use. If the welding machine
>> can actually run them, I don't reckon so. If you have a situation
>> where you want 6010's (powerful penetration/fusion and/or fast-freeze)
>> any other rod is going to be hard work to get by with.
>>
>> 6013 "is reckoned to be" the easiest rod to use. I need someone to
>> demonstrate what it is that I have missed!!! - if this claim is true!
>> Though definitely - they are easy to strike and restrike, and they are
>> tolerant of wondering arc-length. Problem for me is - 6010 works for
>> me when I need pen. and 7018 works for me when I need to fill, leaving
>> 6013 with not much role for me - it's trapped in a no-person's land in
>> the middle, offering advantages I am not desperate for and not doing
>> what I am after.
>>
>> "white packet" / "white box" 6013's are notoriously less purposeful
>> than branded 6013's with a clear intended use on the packet. You can
>> control 6013's rutile slag to be entirely different things from a very
>> smooth capping run downhand to a good positional rod...
>>
>> One use of 6013 which I did have in my previous job - one where would
>> only use 6013's...
>> Because 6013's have the lowest properties by some way between
>> cellulosics (6010/6011), rutiles (6013) and basics (7016/7018).
>> - if you wanted to *guarantee* that the weld will fail first!
>> - used with a joint design giving a progressively tear over a large
>> angle of the structure failing - which you generally do want in
>> height-restriction-barriers and the like which people routinely drive
>> into -
>> 6013 made sure that this happened - the weld would tear before any
>> other part of the structure could tear - leaving intended "deformable"
>> parts of the structure to deform!
>>
>>
>> Hope this is helpful...
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Rich. Smith
>
>
|
|
Posted by Richard Smith on May 24, 2007, 1:55 pm
Please log in for more thread options Hi p.v., Leo
Leo - yes - his weld is definitely "short" as in lacking in ductility
/ malleability! I've never run basics (7016/7018) with a long
(lengthwise) arc length, but I understand you get a "short"
(ductility-wise) weld deposit.
P.V. - that is right - with a Basic/xx16 or xx18/"lo-hi" rod you do
have to have the puddle following right up behind the rod! So what
with one thing and another, you can't use a Basic/"lo-hi" rod unless
you can get going and keep going at a consistent steady rate.
"another" is that 7018's are reckoned to throw slag inclusions if you
move the rod fast (never found out - always moved steadily!).
It means that you can only use Basic/"lo-hi" when you have a good
fit-up. Which often means fabricating something new from new steel.
So you can't use Basics for many rough-and-ready repair jobs where
rutiles - 6013's - excel
Anyone comment whether they agree on these points?
Richard Smith
> Indeed, I meant a short arc.
> I have long been used to being able to play with the arc length, from right
> in the puddle to 1" away, in my amateurish attempts to control heat,
> penetration etc.
> With this Anchor brand rod, I almost had to be in the puddle.
> --
> ------
> Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
>
> Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
> Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
> Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
> to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
> The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!
>
> entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
> all d'numbuhs
>
> >
> > Proc wrote: (clip)The arc itself is incredibly short, no give
> > whatsoever," (clip)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Rich wrote: (clip)But you have to keep a short arc at
> >> all times...
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > I think you guys are using "short" with two different meanings. "No give
> > whatsoever" suggests a very brittle, non-ductile weld. This is the
> > meaning of the word as it is used to describe shortbread, or hot-short
> > aluminum. Rich took it to mean a short arc, as in, not a long arc.
> >
> > How about that, Proc?
> >
> >> ...
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Is this a decent welder? | May 24, 2006, 10:06 am |
| rich welder - sell Welding Equipment & Machines & mask,Power Tools,Motorcycle & Welding helmet,CUT,TIG,MIG,MMA,BX welder | June 30, 2008, 2:20 am |
| No Gas Welding | March 29, 2007, 7:14 pm |
| new to mig welding | April 30, 2007, 8:29 pm |
| old welding rod | June 19, 2007, 1:35 pm |
| Welding | August 5, 2007, 6:42 pm |
| welding help | October 5, 2007, 7:28 am |
| welding weldING WELDING | September 12, 2007, 7:59 pm |
| ARC Welding: AC/DC vs AC? | September 5, 2007, 6:36 pm |
| What is Welding? | November 9, 2007, 8:03 am |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
>
> Whazzup w/ all the lousy rod I been getting?
>
> Was grooving along just fine w/ my age-old pile of semi-no-name rod, finally
> ran out of 60xx 3/32, and local welding supplier didn't have any!
> Got the last box at HD (lincoln), and wow, awful. Wild-assed arc, miserable
> to use.
> Used a couple of rods to get by, returned the box as unusable.
>
> Local welding supplier finally got some rod in, Anchor brand, 6013 3/32, and
> wow, *worse than the HD*!!!!
> *Really* unusable, and a helluva lot more expensive than the HD: $17 vs.
> $10.50 for 5#.
> I'm sure this g-d supplier is going to give me a hard time with the return.
> Is this a familiar brand?
>
> Arc is really hard to strike, cuz the metal in the rod burns out *into* the
> flux, leaving a tube of sorts, with the walls being flux.
> After a short bead, the flux flames/burns, like a match, and leaves about a
> 1" moist/glassy residue on the surface.
> The arc itself is incredibly short, no give whatsoever, and the weld is
> brittle like I've never seen before. A/C, DC +/-.
>
> It was so bad, I thought there might be something wrong with the machine
> (miller econotig).
> Found some old rod, works perfectly.
> The old "brand" was ____-weld in Fort Lauderdale, FL, and another similar
> blue plastic long box says UNI-2000.
>
> Anyone else have these problems?
> Solutions? Brands?
> Local suppliers also at times seem to buy generic, and put their sticker on
> the box. Fine with me, if the stuff worked.
> Mebbe a bigger supplier will give/sell me a shmorgasbord of 6013 brands to
> try.
> What an ordeal.
> --
> ------
> Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
>
> Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
> Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
> Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
> to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
> The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!
>
> entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
> all d'numbuhs