rcm - productivity SMAW 6013 vs 7018

You should see the cobbled cable bracket I'm making to mount an Edelbrock carb on the truck .

-------------------------

I've been advised to elevate such things to "hand-crafted".

Much of what I own is slowly becoming "hand-crafted" and "unique", as though saying that would increase its value.

I can do stuff the farm way too. I tied down Grandpa's corrugated corn crib roof in Alabama with hay wire through 0.22" holes.

A question about 7018 - as long as it's in the original container/packaging , do I need to be concerned with it picking up moisture ? I also have some "old" 7018 that's been exposed to ambient conditions for several years ...

---------------------------

According to this 7018 can be reconditioned at the temperature of the top of my wood stove:

Dunno about yours. I bought a thermal imager for my birthday present so I can do simple, crude things the scientific way.

I'm sippin' my third shot as I type ...

Mine gets plenty hot enough for that . It's turned way down right now and the top of the burner box is over 400° F .

I will comment this:

If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing. eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the plates you've just installed)

Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.

I think that's enough to say.

Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018. There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag under an optical microscope. The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal. Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.

(the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a "see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness - strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)

However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with

7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode types.

I will comment this:

If some does a temporary weld with 7018 you are cursing. eg. crane lifting lugs from heavy channel can end up any shape you like by the time you've got them off the installed plates, no matter how much you work at them with an angle-grinder (without gashing the plates you've just installed)

Given the readiness of breaking temporary welds in 6013, you'd be surprised at that 7018 wasn't specified for structural welds.

I think that's enough to say.

Under a microscope the 6013 weld metal is very characteristic and totally different from high-performing weld metals - like 7018. There are inclusions which look the size of dinner-plates at high-mag under an optical microscope. The compensate, you have to lower the strength of the 6013 weld metal. Problem though - the "acicular ferrite" microstructure of high-performing weld metals is both strong and *tough*. Due to their very fine randomly oriented microstructure. So in this case when you deliberately limit the strength you also lose the toughness.

(the general context which doesn't guide here is that for heat-treated steels - carbon-steels and alloy-steels - there is in general a "see-saw" inverse relationship between strength and toughness - strength-^ toughness-v; toughness-^ strength-v)

However - go with the perception formed by meeting temporary lifting lugs which should be welded on with 6013 but have been welded on with

7018 to see in all the multi-dimensional reality of the electrode types.

--------------------------------

Does that mean that we non-professionals who don't care about high production rate or removing temporary lifting lugs and make welds on unknown steel that failed in service should use only 7018 if we can?

Regarding toughness, I could fold my successful 7018 butt welds of 3/16" coupons over double, 180 degrees, in the 50 ton press without cracking. I also bent a 1/4" Grade 8 bolt shank into a U without a crack. The rolled threads were more brittle and snapped off with little deformation.

One day I was troubleshooting some noise on an 82A 6 channel analog carrier running on open wire with my boss (its not rated for open wire) we came across a tree branch growing into the wire. My boss decided it was a possible cause of the problem, but it was mid span. Climbing gear wouldn't help, and even if it would we didn't have a suitable saw. There was no way I wanted to dangle out in that space trying to hack it off with a drywall saw. We were also never allowed to cut down whole trees. Just branches that grew into the wire. My boss studied on it for a few minutes then retrieved his shotgun from the truck and proceeded to chew that branch in two with successive rounds of bird shot.

An anecdote of which there may be no utility. Your removable lifting lugs reminded me of this.

Many years ago (30 +) Mike Mendiola (a friend I have not seen in nearly as many years) told me of when he worked high rise construction. They did a "temporary" weld. They would take a piece of heavy angle, and tack it to a vertical beam in two or three places, but only at the top edge. Then they would use it as a step. Often for days. When they were done they would lift the bottom leg used as the step and it would break off easily leaving just a bit of the tacks to be ground smooth. He said the hardest part was dealing with inspectors who couldn't comprehend the concept of a weld that was INTENDED to break.

That same boss once added a hole to his climbing belt (working on that same line actually) after he had lost some weight with a .22 magnum revolver.

Yes - strong in the load direction; can snap it off by hand in the "removal" direction from which no load could plausibly come.

Can be used for a lot of lugs and the like used to pull-up steels.

I wish more experienced folk could step in.

No it's not that simple. How do I start?!

7018's need a very stable exact "burn" which fairly much means only well-prepared joints with exact fit-up and full-length burn of the rods. All of this plus starts / restarts are very specific with 7018. 6013 - essentially it will tolerate all the things you do to keep it running on a very variable job - waving the rod around, varying arc-length, extinguishing the arc and restriking heat is building up too much, etc.

Is that enough to convey - there is no simple rule?

Rich Smith

<snip>

Be a good job for a wadcutter round but never saw any of those in .22 WMR😏

I spent several minutes trying to make a hole with a scratch awl and a hammer. Whatever that belt was made of it was tough. I seem to recall he took two shots to get a hole he was happy with. What really got my attention though was how much unburnt powder there was in the hole. .22 WMR is more powerful than LR even in a hand gun, but its really intended to be used in a rifle.

Okay how about some basic guidelines for 7018. Constant arc length? Dealing with starts and stops, etc.

Here is where I am confused. I've used 6013 and 7018 for mild steel, and generally thought 7018 was much easier to run. I haven't found any stick to be easy at my skill level, but 7018 was easier. Particularly on DC, but also on AC to some degree. Is it misleading? I've used 7018 to weld around well casings. That's probably my most difficult stick weld. Were all those welds just held together with the slag I knocked off? I'm not trying to be a smartass (or a dumbass). I'm just trying to get a feel for what I see and hear.

You talked about water practically pouring off the rod, and still using it, but every academic bit I've read says it must be dry dry dry.

I have read, heard, viewed various welding pundit say 6013 is the rod that can weld the world, but I just haven't found it to be as easy to run.

As to getting pros to weigh in, maybe try some of the more specific welding forums like Miller Welds. Honestly though I see more practical education there than technical education.

There's the Kel-Tec PM30 that's been around for awhile but hard to find (or was) in stock and usually over priced...

Walther just came out with a model WMP.

Quite a few youtube videos of both these in action with awesome muzzle flash. There are a couple loads available with short barrel pistols in mind but still some flash.

It's a round I like a lot. Have had a rifle in WMR around since I was a teen :) A whole lot more ammo choices for them nowadays...

Paul Harris, Buffalo Outdoors and a few others have evaluated various ammos on their YouTube channels, and I have to be honest. I was not all that impressed with their results with made for hand gun .22WMR. Honestly I think the old heavy weight .22 WMR that was all we could get back int eh 70s and early 80s was as good as you can get from a handgun, and I like the new lighter faster rounds for the rifle.

My preference was for FMJ. Used mainly for small game. Hollow point noses where prone to get damaged (tube magazine). Shot placement is way more important than hoping a hollow point would make a bad shot good anyway...

Even if the new rounds suck... all that was available when I was still shooting powder burners was CCI or Winchester Super-X in FMJ or Hollow point. Always wanted to try some target ammo, see what kind of groups it made. That's what I finally did with .22 Long Rifle for hunting. Old Remington Green Box target. Worked GOOD! Those hot rounds suck at making good groups at ~50 yards ;-)

I'll have to run down some of those videos when I get the urge. Thanks!

My son and I have shoot a bit of .22LR the last few years. Just at the range. Due to various shortages and political conditions we now have an eclectic selection of ammo on hand. LOL. I've found some rounds tend to be better than others, but also some rounds tend to be better in some guns. We also have an eclectic collection of iron. Both long and short. Its funny though. I never really did the careful study of weight/velocity/accuracy as I did with my airguns. I've got a really nice chronograph and I've never put a powder round over it. Maybe someday I'll take some time to do that. Mostly we just go to the range and burn up ammo. Occasionally we will play tic tac toe or battleships with some targets I run off on the printer.

<snip>

I've never "plinked" with a powder burner. Either checking the sights and getting the "feel" to shooting a particular gun before season or hunting. Mostly because plinking would tell me nothing useful about where the shot went precisely. A squirrel head at ~30 yards needs precision. I put a ton of BB's and a few pellets through a Crosman 760 as a teen. Learned a lot from that gun plinking away...

Those UK guys have all sorts of targets and games they play with airguns ;-) Wouldn't be hard to make heftier versions for powder burners like the .22's.

A lot more Chrono choices nowadays too. That LAB Radar unit would be really nice if you use one a lot. FX has a radar barrel mount now too (mixed reviews) but only for airguns...