What is so special about 6010 that makes it a pipe rod? And why is that rod so agressive, and hard to run? Its exclusively DC reverse polarity, right? There is no running it on A/C, or straight polarity, right?
There's also a lot of hydrogen. I understand that is the really crucial thing. It has a fearsome effect on the arc, giving the "forceful, high-heat" characteristic. The voltage drop across the arc goes up (must measure this!) so the amount of power for a given current goes up. That's why say 70A on cellulosic is worth more than a considerably higher current on other rods. Also, the hydrogen makes the arc stiffer, hence the ability to blow a controlled hole through the work ("keyholing").
The hydrogen thing makes many folk run scared of cellulosics. The level of hydrogen is incredibly high - something like 20X that of a basic ("LoHi", 7018) rod. In reality, for mild steel (steel which will not harden by quenching) and for thicknesses no more than 13mm /
1/2inch - don't mention a hydrogen problem - you are seeing phantoms, because it simply won't affect you. Problems start at greater thicknesses in higher-strength hardenable steels. But many people ignore or do not know that rutiles (6013's) give a high hydrogen level
- so will "forbid" cellulosics which are penetrative and give a good weld wihtout realising that the 6013's they use which are not penetrative also give a high hydrogen.
On higher strength steels if you want to use cellulosics you must preheat so that
1) the hydrogen cannot cause cracking
2) it's escaping through the weld surfaces so that by the time the weld zone has cooled the hydrogen is gone and down to a level which is no longer a problem.
However, big picture - these realities
cellulosics are steam-engine age technology - they don't match the strength of modern pipeline and constructional steels and if you push up their strength you have more conditions to meet.
flux-cored-wire MIG is offering higher productivity, better properties, etc. - and none of the hydrogen problems issues
There are 6011's for use on AC. They work well. Lincoln certainly offers one specifically formulated for use on "buzz-boxes".
I was amazed when I first met cellulosics and offered this web-page
Holley smokes, really? Sawdust, water, slicing? Interesting. I got a few punds of it left from last year, didn't know you can "slice" with it, so maybe I'll play with it on my pile of old railroad "stuff" I got (cleats, clamps, plates, other rusty stuff). Not sure my Thermal Arc 185 STW is "industrial" enough, but I'll give it another try. Thanks for the info !
Dman, 6013 is also high hydrogen too ? And that is one of my favorite rods to run too because it basically runs itself - very user friendly. So what of 7014? - thats another of my favorite. I know 7018 is the way to go, but gosh darn it, I've never learned to make a pretty weld with 7018 without at least one area of the weld having them damn little pin holes in it.
A pipeline welder gave me a half of a big can of 6010 5P+ (Lincoln designation). The rod covering is gray as opposed to brick red, like my earlier 6010 rods. I tried it (farm gadgets and repair) and it "seems" to weld better - less sticking, smoother bead, easier to handle - but I wonder what the differences between 6010 red rod and 6010 5P+ really are. I am using a small Miller engine driven welder and a Miller buzz box, the one with the crank on top. Both of these units seem to handle either rod ok.
6013. Yup. Especially (?) if it is rutile-cellulose (?) - which most (?) 6013's are. "straight rutiles" with no cellulose are fill-pass rods giving a very smooth bead surface. But general purpose? No way. Anything genearl purpose is rutile-cellulose, with about 3% cellulose. No cellulose - no bite. No a nice rod to use.
The British Standard classification tells you if the rod is RC or R
"Zodian Universal" AWS A/SFA 5.1-91 : E6013 EN 499 : E 38 0 RC 11
"Satinex" EN 499 : E 42 A R 12
But both are AWS 6013
Here is a snaffled list of AWS classifications.
Exx10 High cellulose, bonded with sodium silicate. Deeply penetrating, forceful spray-type arc. Thin friable slag. Exx11 Similar to Exx10 but bonded with potassium silicate to allow use on AC or DC; covering bonded with sodium silicate. Exx12 High rutile. Quiet arc, medium penetration. Exx13 Similar to Exx12 but bonded with potassium silicate and other easily ionized materials. Fluid slag, easily removed. Exx14 Similar to Exx13 and Exx13 types with the addition of iron powder. Exx15 Basic low hydrogen type bonded with sodium silicate. For high tensile strength steels. Exx16 Similar to Exx15 but bonded with potassium silicate. Exx18 Covering similar to Exx15 and Exx16 but with addition of iron powder. Exx20 High iron oxide coating bonded with sodium silicate. Exx24 Similar to Exx12 and Exx13. Heavily coated plus iron powder. Exx27 Flux ingredients similar to Exx20 with the addition of iron powder. Exx28 Similar to Exx18 but with heavier covering. Low hydrogen, potassium silicate as binder. Flat and horizontal fillets. Exx48 Similar to Exx28, low hydrogen but suitable for most positions.
So 6014 is a rutile and would be expected to have high hydrogen.
Pinholes in 7018 - are you keeping a short arc length? You don't get voluminous shield with 7018. So short arc length verging on dragging the rod along the work. And absolutely no sending the rod flying around like with 6010 - or 6013 (plus you would get slag inclusions) - see advice of Ernie Leimkuhler, Randy Zimmerman, ...
Shield of 7018 (quote from previous post):
- Basics, based on limestone, CaCO3, giving high mechanical properties and the breakdown of CaCO3 into CaO (flux) and CO2 (gas) - the gas gives shielding so the rod doesn't rely on water vapour turning to steam for shielding so can be baked dry
'ahite, I'll run some more 18 tomorrow night. So on about a 6-8 inch bead (1/8" road at about 100-ish Amps on 1/4" plate) I almost always get that area of them dam pin holes, usually towards the beginning of the bead. After that, the rest of the bead is text-book perfect.
Oh yeah, got lots (and run lots) of 6011 on A/C, so familiar. Its just that 10 rod, dang, never done anything good with that to the point that I put the 10 rod back in the tube, and set it aside (and just scratched my head wondering what the hell good that stuff was for). But as a new welder of just a coupla years, I really DO want to master this stuff, so I'd at least like to try again (while listening to you pro's). Also gotta talk to Earnie to see what class enrolement looks like - need help on my Al TIG work, and need someone to show me how to "properly" run 18. Earnie, best way to contact you is by E-mail, yes ?
Still no no no. In pipeline work the stringer bead is sometimes welded on straight polarity, in europe I believe ALL of them are. In the U.S. tho the vast majority are welded reverse. Straight is used sometimes to solve burn thru problems as the penetration is lessened in straight mode.
No problem with these statements. You have the knowledge of the on-the-ground (on-the-barge?) use.
BTW - I have driven a steam loco. If you have to shift merchandise, it beats having no loco at all. You are only splitting over the steam loco. using at least twice as much fuel (and needing more TLC (tender loving care)).
Not really - I'm not quoting from a book. I'm quoting from direct knowledge and experience -- as far as it goes...
On the other hand - never got experience working in commercial welding conditions.
Very frustrating after the work I put into welding and understanding the relationship of welds to new types of steel - especially the low-carbon zero-pearlite Thermo-Mechanically Controlled-Processed steels (US manufactures contend their steels are "TCMP" - and of course they control temperatures and processing - but they don't give them the powerful low-temperature roll and rapid cool which gives the fine-grained zero-pearlite ferrite microstructure of the German/French and Japanese steels).
Fascinated by xx10's because the sky-high hydrogen, flying in the face of all "low hydrogen ideals" - a lot of what I worked for! - gives a very powerful and useful welding rod and a very reliable welding method.
Was trained in FCW welding. Easy positional welding with the slag controlling the weld bead so well. That was Rutile FCW for slag control with 1% Nickel addition to weld metal for toughness at low temperatures. Welding so fast that you had to train yourself to split attention to two places - one the tracking of the arc along the joint and two the forming size of the weld bead. No spatter. No stop-starts. Etc, etc.
With FCW you have totally consistent conditions - except if the wind blows your shield away!!!
However - you couldn't penetrate a root.
(Can have backing plate / ring? Yes -> use one, with different joint design. No backing plate / ring allowable * Access to other side of joint? - back-gouge and sealing run * No access to other side (eg. pipe) - need another process to root-run)
With stick, the conditions are changing as the rod burns away, from long and new to short and becoming a stub. Told this does represent a problem in formulating a rod.
Thanks for showing the interest and concern for my level of information in contributing to this thread.
Well, you could ask someone involved in pipeline welding in your country. If you don't know anyone in that industry then you could try to locate someone, and ask them. Failing that you could search for written documentation which in this field would be sparse. But the Lincoln booklet titled "Welding Pressure Pipelines & Piping Systems" will get you a bit of information on the use of 5P+ in straight polarity. I do work as a Pipeline Welder and have for years.
You are clouding the issue with irrellevant information. I'm only commenting on what procedures are actually in use in the field and attempting to correct missinformation posted by people with little to no experience in what they are posting about. I have no intention of offending you, but when you speak of how things are welded on cross country pipelines you have to understand that there are people who live and work in that field that may come along and comment accuratly and with many years (or decades) of first hand knowledge. And, they may have an intimate understanding of the latest pipeline steels used, their composition, their weldability, procedures actually in use, ect.