So as to start a new thread, will someone who is familiar with 6013 explain
the rod to me? I have never burned a stick of it since I started welding in
1974. What is the attraction that causes so many people to use it? Easy to
weld? Fast fill? Fast freeze? Guess I need to go buy some and try it.
When I want something to stick, I get out the 7018. Guess I could use 6010
for a root pass, then cover with 7018 like the old pipe days, just find it
easier to use 7018, less grinding and cleaning out before applying the 7018,
although I usually boil out the excess 6010 slag with the 7018 hot pass.
I answered this in the other thread, but...
6013 is a cellulosic rod and is the weaker cousin or 7014.
Both are now just hobby rods.
They make pretty welds very easy, but are both low pen rods that really
need clean steel.
Like 6011, they will both run on any polarity, with different effects.
For a pro it is a lame rod.
If you can run 6010 and 7018, you really don't need 6013, 7014 or 6011.
Teaching welding for 15 years gives me some perspective.
I taught for 5.5 years at The Divers Institute of Technology, training
commercial divers to do basic welding.
I learned a lot about underwater welding, the most surprising part
being that 7014 is the king of underwater welding.
This is due to an accident of chemistry that makes 7014 a lower
hydrogen rod than 7018, but only underwater.
6013 is usually plenty strong for most applications. It is not low
hydrogen so not good for welding high strength steel. But then most
low hydrogen rod has not been kept dry enough to be low hydrogen when
used. The big attraction for me is that it is easy to restrike an
arc. The rod does not burn back inside the flux like 7018 does. So
it is easy to run a tack weld and then run another tack without having
to break the flux off the end of the rod so it will restrike.
6013 is low strength - well below other welding rods - and not that
tough either, surely?
For anything temporary you want to be able to knock off with a
club-hammer, 6013 is your rod.
They do burn smoothly on any machine and you want a run-out about the
same as the rod length (whereas Basic 7018 you want a run-out about
half the rod-length(?)).
Hi Iggy, Steve, everyone
60ksi is 414MPa
So yes, you don't meet many plate steels with that strength.
However, I can say this from my own look in a metallurgy lab. - Rutile
Stick (6013) has non-metallic inclusions which look as big as
dinner-plates when you look at it under a microscope at 500X. They
would be an unacceptable stress concentrator at higher strengths. So
the only way is to lower the strength. But then here is the
problem... On begining systematic work on weld metals, the starting
point was fairly horrible remelted structures with low properties.
Impact toughness is the property you really want to have way up there.
Pursuing that, the metallurgical design arrived at gave a very fine
structure as-welded. Which had several good features. Not least of
which is that structure is not only very tough but also strong.- of
which on the "mechanicals" side not only was it tough but it was
strong. That's fairly much "hitting the jackpot".
So for Rutile Stick, the only way to lower the strength is to drop out
of the strong tough structure which particularly Basics (7016, 7018,
etc) have. The 6013's have a weld microstructure which is coarse and
therefore neither tough nor strong.
So there you have it - a temporary weld which you can readily break
with a club-hammer.
As a BTW - with heat-treated steels you tend to have to trade between
strength and toughness. Creating a very fine microstructure is the
way to get both.
Even more BTW - the weld microstructure with this and other advantages
is so desirable that great efforts have gone into trying to work out
how you could have the same in a mill plate. Thermodynamicists, you
name it, have worked on this. Not easy... No-one has seen a way yet,
last as I heard. Anyway, that's digressing - back to the point.
OTOH, at welding school doing break tests on fillets, I have tried
putting 6013 fillets in the press without nicking (notching) them
first (as you would if you have any healthy wish to learn about you)
and I have seen the plate tear out - a thin about 0.5mm to 1mm (20thou
to 40thou) layer * where the steel is very low quality * (but only in
And yet again, weld performance can be most limited by fatigue
performance under fluctuating loads - which is not, I believe, much
affected by the type of welding rod - it would "level" the performance
rating with 6013 not much disadvantaged...
The "higher strength" but still common plate steel here is S355,
(355MPa nominal yield strength), which would be 51ksi yield against a
6013's 60ksi. But the plate is likely to overmatch the strength,
whereas the 6013 will stay low near the min. required. In general you
can end up with the weld taking all the deformation, which makes it
easy to break with a club-hammer...
Anyway, nice to see you all around here.
I have trouble with 6013 having a very fluid flux which loves to run under
the weld, while 6011 doesn't have this problem. Now, I'm a humble hobbyist
so this may not apply to people who have the training, but fwiw 6011 may be
easier to work with, offering similar strength, for the occasional
6013 is definitely not fast fill as there is no iron powder in the coating.
6013 does freeze quickly but not as fast as 6010/11.
6013 is a low penetration rod which IMHO makes it unsuitable for root pass
work or on steel that is rusty or covered with paint or is otherwise dirty.
I do not like it for tacking for these reasons unless the base material is
very thin or I want a tack that will sit above the base material for removal
by grinding with minimal admixture with the base metal.
The characteristic that is most unique about 6013 is fast follow. This is
most useful when using high travel speeds to stay ahead of the puddle and
avoid overpenetration and burn through when welding thin sheet metal. It
welds well downhill which is also good when you want to leave your heat
behind. Similar high travel speeds using 6010/11 will often result in skips
as the puddle fails to keep up with the arc.
I seldom use 6013, IMHO it is a poor choice for most work, but I do keep a
small amount of 6013 on my rig (DC CC power only) in 1/8" and 3/32" and also
some 5/64" which is useful for fine work on thin material. 6013 is good for
thin work in the field that is normally better done with a wire feeder in
IMHO 7018 is the best rod for almost everything and I need a good very
reason to use anything else.
Good Luck, YMMV
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.