WeldingWeb - Welding Community for pros and enthusiasts banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Differences between 6013 and 6011?

1 reading
Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
A

aav1996

· Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 · (Edited)
Aside from the penetration differences i guess im mainly consider with the outcome of the weld's look? My 6013's slag came off easily and it leaves a nice smooth look after the slag is removed although my 6011's came out with a rough look the slag seemed to stick in some places and overall i didn't really like the outcome. Was just wondering if there is some sort of different technique between 6013's and 6011/10's? I checked the recommended amps setting on the 6011's and it is from 75-130 amps i was running it at around 125ish amps and i lowered it to about 115ish give or take but i was getting the same results.

Rods used 6011 and 6013 around 125amps 1/8 rod by 14 and metal thickness about 1/4 of an inch....probably less

1st and 2nd pics are 6011 3rd pic being 6013's Been using these metals for a bit now srry for the unevenness or spatter on them =P
 

Attachments

#2 ·
Those are very different acting rods - do a thread search or google search and you will find a large amount of reading on technique, uses, differences, etc etc etc...

Dave J.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#4 ·
6010/11 are fast freeze rods and will have a very pronounced "harsh" stack of dimes look compared to other rods. Don't expect that fine smooth stack of dimes look you can get with 6013, 7018 or 7014. The slag is thinner and quite different than what you get with 6013. Most times I hardly need the hammer to clear the slag. I can get it to come off with the brush and maybe a few scrapes with the hammer. There are a number a decent examples of 6010/11 beads in this thread.

http://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?t=61332


If I had to guess from pict #2, I'd say you were long arcing that weld. Jam the rod in tighter. Also that 1st pict the bead looks very long. You should get about 6-8" of weld from the rod. If you are getting more, you need to slow down more.


These rods are often tough for people to run well and get nice looking beads. It's probably the rod I run the worst. I really have to run several beads if I haven't done so in a while, to get my hand back in and get semi decent beads.There are any number of ways you can run 60101/11. Whip and pause and circles are usually the two main ones people use. How you run this rod will effect how it lays down and what you can do with it. Even though it's a deep penetrating rod, because it's a fast freeze rod, many times people can manipulate the rod so they can weld thin sheet with it. I'm not that good at doing thin sheet with them honestly.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#5 ·
Your descriptions are right on the money. 6011 slag is like obama in office, it might just take dynamite to get that funker out of there. I use a hammer and chisel, no joke. I only tap on the chisel, but after the wirewheel, I go right to a chisel to clean out that stuff until I can live with it. I use it a lot for repair work, because there is no way to clean out every crevice, nook and cranny where I am sent for repair welding.
6013 always has a smoother surface texture than 6011, it delivers only mildly penetrating welds.
Keep under that hood!
 

Attachments

Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#6 ·
6011 is my hardest running rod. It is totally different to run than 6013. I find 6011 to be very unforgiving. If I am running "timing" patterns with the rod instead of paying close attention to the puddle, the resulting bead will just be a mess. Lots of slag inclusions is the main symptom. If I run the rod properly, the slag is pretty easy to clean off--sometimes just the brush does the job. If I have done a bad job, I really have to dig the slag out, at which point I may as well just grind out the bead and do it again, because it's probably worthless.

I usually run 7018 because I find it so much easier to manage than 6011, but it is terrible with gaps and poor fitup, so I have been practicing lately with 6011 a lot more. I have only just gotten to the point where I am making beads that don't have gob-loads of slag inclusion and undercutting. I actually had a really cool a-ha moment tonight where I was just trying to do whatever I needed to do to get the puddle to look right. I pulled the rod forward because it looked like the puddle was getting too hot/deep, then the puddle thinned out and "collapsed" and I quickly shoved the rod back in to fill it out again. After doing this several times, I realized that I had accidentally "invented" whip-and-pause. Amazingly, this was the only thing that I could find to do that would give a full, round, stable puddle with 6011. And when I cleaned the slag, the resulting bead was the best of the night. It really hit home the maxim that welding is all about watching the puddle and making it do what it should, not about what you're doing with your hands.
 
Discussion starter · #7 ·
joshuabardwell said:
6011 is my hardest running rod. It is totally different to run than 6013. I find 6011 to be very unforgiving. If I am running "timing" patterns with the rod instead of paying close attention to the puddle, the resulting bead will just be a mess. Lots of slag inclusions is the main symptom. If I run the rod properly, the slag is pretty easy to clean off--sometimes just the brush does the job. If I have done a bad job, I really have to dig the slag out, at which point I may as well just grind out the bead and do it again, because it's probably worthless.

I usually run 7018 because I find it so much easier to manage than 6011, but it is terrible with gaps and poor fitup, so I have been practicing lately with 6011 a lot more. I have only just gotten to the point where I am making beads that don't have gob-loads of slag inclusion and undercutting. I actually had a really cool a-ha moment tonight where I was just trying to do whatever I needed to do to get the puddle to look right. I pulled the rod forward because it looked like the puddle was getting too hot/deep, then the puddle thinned out and "collapsed" and I quickly shoved the rod back in to fill it out again. After doing this several times, I realized that I had accidentally "invented" whip-and-pause. Amazingly, this was the only thing that I could find to do that would give a full, round, stable puddle with 6011. And when I cleaned the slag, the resulting bead was the best of the night. It really hit home the maxim that welding is all about watching the puddle and making it do what it should, not about what you're doing with your hands.
Click to expand...
Sounds good i'll have to try that method next time. I was using a circular motion method that i used for 6013 but it doesn't seem to work as well with 6011
 
#8 ·
aav1996 said:
Sounds good i'll have to try that method next time. I was using a circular motion method that i used for 6013 but it doesn't seem to work as well with 6011
Click to expand...
Some folks like whip-and-pause for 6011, but others say they just can't make it work. Small circles and a series of "U" shapes tracing the front of the puddle are two other methods that people use.
 
Discussion starter · #10 ·
Inkydoggy said:
I gave all my 6011 away with the few welders I sold recently as I hate the stuff. 6013 is way better for me after the welding is all done and over with.

6011 = :eek:

6013 = :D

7018 = :)

7024 = :cool2:
Click to expand...
From my understanding 6011 is used primarily for structural use where penetration is need? Can 6013 be used for structural welding? Who am i kidding damn right it can!!! I mean is it allowed by safety regulations and what not? im not that familiar with 7018 or 7024 i believe 7018 is used more as a finish? Im pretty sure im missing some stuff o_O
 
#11 ·
Well, here is more opinion....

I didn't see anyone address your original post about 6011 and your amperage setting. I believe you said you run it at 125 amps. Well, my own belief is that you're running that 6011 too hot. My own starting out point for 6011's on AC is about 100 amps. . If I'm running it on DC+ its at 90ish.

For 6013 1/8", AC at 130ish and DC+ at 115ish.

For me, the 6013's look beautiful when I'm welding flat. If I try to weld vertical or overhead with it, forget it. I end up long arcing a bit and its just a very unforgiving rod that produces worm holes. Have you tried 7014's instead? I find those a better rod than 6013's.

The 6011's or 6010's for me now are pretty easy, but that took a lot of practice. The slag is really more like black soot across the weld and really comes off nicely with just a wire wheel or brush. My favorite consistent slag is 7018 and 7014 in a close second. The slag just comes off in one piece when my parameters are set just right.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #12 ·
ANVIL said:
Well, here is more opinion....

I didn't see anyone address your original post about 6011 and your amperage setting. I believe you said you run it at 125 amps. Well, my own belief is that you're running that 6011 too hot. My own starting out point for 6011's on AC is about 100 amps. . If I'm running it on DC+ its at 90ish.

For 6013 1/8", AC at 130ish and DC+ at 115ish.

For me, the 6013's look beautiful when I'm welding flat. If I try to weld vertical or overhead with it, forget it. I end up long arcing a bit and its just a very unforgiving rod that produces worm holes. Have you tried 7014's instead? I find those a better rod than 6013's.

The 6011's or 6010's for me now are pretty easy, but that took a lot of practice. The slag is really more like black soot across the weld and really comes off nicely with just a wire wheel or brush. My favorite consistent slag is 7018 and 7014 in a close second. The slag just comes off in one piece when my parameters are set just right.
Click to expand...
No i haven't tried out 7014's yet i'm actually thinking of buying a few boxes of different electrodes to test em all out. For the 6013 being ran at Dc+ i run it at about 120ish which isn't bad but since you say you run 6011 at Dc+ 90 amps I'll have to try that out. I was getting these big black burns when welding with the 6011 was running it at 125ish i even cranked it up to 130 to see if that would solve the problem hehe So the different amperage might make the difference :eek:
 
#13 ·
aav1996 said:
From my understanding 6011 is used primarily for structural use where penetration is need? Can 6013 be used for structural welding? Who am i kidding damn right it can!!! I mean is it allowed by safety regulations and what not? im not that familiar with 7018 or 7024 i believe 7018 is used more as a finish? Im pretty sure im missing some stuff o_O
Click to expand...
Well, here's my educated guess, but DSW or a more experienced stick welder can correct me if I'm wrong..... First the "yeses" for 6013:

6013 for structural???? Like a lawn mower deck, yes. Patio furniture, yes. Lawn art, yes. A wheel barrow bottom or handle, yes. A garage shelf with angle iron slapped together, yes.

...and now the "No's" for 6013:

A trailer hitch, tongue or receiver? HELL NO. A Clevis hook on a tractor bucket, no. A heavy duty truck bumper, no (albeit some have been made with it though). A 30' steel radio antenna tower, no. A cattle guard gate, no.

6013's are considered a light penetrating rod and probably rated as the #1 rod for being the "weakest" in the "penetration department." It was designed as a sheet metal electrode, if that tells you anything.

Addressing your belief about 7018.... It is NOT just used solely as a "finish" rod for purely cosmetic reasons as you suggest. Rather, it is the #1 pick for the strongest "critical" welds amongst the 6 most common electrodes "readily" available (6010, 6011, 6013, 7014, 7018 and 7024). 7018 is the "strongest" because it has the best ductile characteristics of all the above electrodes mentioned above. 6010/6011's are used for poor gap fit up, followed by the very strong 7018's as a cap for both cosmetic appearance and more importantly, strength.

Your 7024's are just like 7014's, however their deposition rate is much greater. IIRC and without looking it up, a 7014 has about 30% iron powder in the flux, whereas 7024's have close to 50% iron powder. (Someone please correct me if I'm crazy-off with those numbers). The more iron powder, the faster and thicker the metal deposition is. 7014's and 7024's are only a light to medium penetrating rod and they also do NOT hold up to 7018's strength characteristics.

I'm not mentioning the 80xx, 90xx or 100xx series rods. Nor am I talking about SS Ni rods or other alloy types. For simplicity, I'm staying with mild steel rods for this topic.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #14 ·
ANVIL said:
Well, here's my educated guess, but DSW or a more experienced stick welder can correct me if I'm wrong..... First the "yeses" for 6013:

6013 for structural???? Like a lawn mower deck, yes. Patio furniture, yes. Lawn art, yes. A wheel barrow bottom or handle, yes. A garage shelf with angle iron slapped together, yes.

...and now the "No's" for 6013:

A trailer hitch, tongue or receiver? HELL NO. A Clevis hook on a tractor bucket, no. A heavy duty truck bumper, no (albeit some have been made with it though). A 30' steel radio antenna tower, no. A cattle guard gate, no.

6013's are considered a light penetrating rod and probably rated as the #1 rod for being the "weakest" in the "penetration department." It was designed as a sheet metal electrode, if that tells you anything.

Addressing your belief about 7018.... It is NOT just used solely as a "finish" rod for purely cosmetic reasons as you suggest. Rather, it is the #1 pick for the strongest "critical" welds amongst the 6 most common electrodes "readily" available (6010, 6011, 6013, 7014, 7018 and 7024). 7018 is the "strongest" because it has the best ductile characteristics of all the above electrodes mentioned above. 6010/6011's are used for poor gap fit up, followed by the very strong 7018's as a cap for both cosmetic appearance and more importantly, strength.

Your 7024's are just like 7014's, however their deposition rate is much greater. IIRC and without looking it up, a 7014 has about 30% iron powder in the flux, whereas 7024's have close to 50% iron powder. (Someone please correct me if I'm crazy-off with those numbers). The more iron powder, the faster and thicker the metal deposition is. 7014's and 7024's are only a light to medium penetrating rod and they also do NOT hold up to 7018's strength characteristics.

I'm not mentioning the 80xx, 90xx or 100xx series rods. Nor am I talking about SS Ni rods or other alloy types. For simplicity, I'm staying with mild steel rods for this topic.
Click to expand...
Interesting!! :D By what you said,"... followed by the very strong 7018's as a cap for both cosmetic appearance and more importantly, strength. " Is it possible to make a weld stronger by starting off with 6011/6010 (for penetration purposes) and finish it off with a 7018? Since it has a higher Tensile strength per psi? Every rod has their strengths and weaknesses if you combine them in welds maybe it can be stronger? O_O

By the 7024's having a greater deposition rate than the 7014's does that mean that the rods weld faster?

I also haven't even read on the 80xx, 90xx or 100xx series rods yet alone heard of them!!! Until now =)
 
#15 ·
I think you nailed it, Anvil. A WeldingWeb poll confirms that most people here use primarily either 6010/6011 or 7018. 6010/6011 are deep penetrating and very versatile rod, with the ability to handle poor fitup, dirty or rusty material, and out of position welds. However, it is a rod that requires some skill to run. 7018 is the strongest of the common rods and is relatively easy to run, at least in the flat position. It produces smooth, nice looking weld beads. However, it has a heavy slag that can make it difficult to see the puddle sometimes, and you have to break the slag off of the end of the electrode when restarting, making it a bit slower to work with.

Personally, I try to stick with those two rods for most of my stuff: 7018 when fitup is good and the metal is clean, and 6011 when fitup is poor or the metal is dirty. I used to do nearly everything with 7018, but the more fabrication I do, the more I realize how useful 6011 is when fitup is less than perfect, which it always is.
 
#16 ·
6010 and 7018 is your go to for almost all repair work
6013 is a hi deposition rod for thin metals i used it for gate repairs Before i got my 12 RC
7024 is a high deposition rod flat only rod i use in large fill joints using 5/32 rods ...It's called mud rod for a reason
But i have the 12 RC running .045 wire at this time
I don't run 7014 as i have no use for it and 6011 is the ac dc version of 6010 and i very rarely run in ac mode

When you go to college your first class ..Welding 101 Beginning SMAW will be your nightmare come true...It's ALL 6010 all the time for a good reason :(
once you master it advanced SMAW is a breeze it's mostly 7018

Where in so cal do you live ? or PM me
I live by Hemet and i'm working in Lake Elsinore
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#17 · (Edited)
I have very liitle stick experience, but I don't use 6013 for anything other than filling in non-weight bearing or structurally need gaps in a weld. Or sheet metal when MIG cant be used.

One day practicing with 6013, I welded what appeared to be a nice bead on material that I could not perfectly clean. the bead characteristics looked OK. The joint fell apart with one hammer blow. The 6013 bead sat right on top of the workpiece with no penetration. I hit the same joint with 6011 and it chewed right in.

I personally think that 6010/11 are the best rods to practice with because they aren't forgiving in the least. You have to watch the puddle and your arc length. Once you can run them, your results with all the other rods will be greater.

Also, as others mentioned, way too hot for 1/8" 6010/11. I used to run 1/8 at 90-95 amps on my little TA 95, 3/32" at around 60-75. The trick it that 1/8 6011 runs at roughly the same amps as 3/32" 7018, so you can switch rods and not go back to your machine.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#18 ·
Read this ENTIRE thread, and perhaps missed the answer being sought to this question: Why are 6010/11 still made, if other of the aforementioned rods will match 'em in deep fusion? For structural welds that is. Why hasn't 6011 gone the way of the BetaMax VideoTape? Welders prefer options. Check?

Hearing that 6011 is unforgiving, but yields excellent fusion when properly wielded in the hands of an experienced welder/fabricator. The iconic imagery of 'aav1996' lays it out quite well.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#19 ·
ManoKai said:
Read this ENTIRE thread, and perhaps missed the answer being sought to this question: Why are 6010/11 still made, if other of the aforementioned rods will match 'em in deep fusion? .
Click to expand...
6010/11 are often used to weld in a "backing" when doing open root joints and close up the root. Other rods like 7018 have major issues with porosity if you do this, and usually require you back gouge and reweld the root if you run open root joints. That's not always possible, so you need something else, thus the use of 6010/11.

The same basic reasons that allow 6101/11 to work well on open roots also allows them to tolerate more oil, rust, paint etc then other rods do. Even though good prep always helps, it's not always possible to get all that cud off 100%. 6010/11 can be used to help "clear" some of that crud and get rid of it, so subsequent layers have a good base to start from.


Then there's the fast freeze characteristics of the rods that lend themselves to doing things like filling gaps where "runnier" rods wouldn't work as well or doing thin sheet.


Every rod has it's strengths and weaknesses. You choose the rod based on what you need it to do. I've had students ask why they still make 7024 when there are other high deposition methods like FC and dual shield wire available today. The answer is there is still a need for it in some applications. You may not need a large quantity of wire to do the job at hand, or you may not be able to reach the location with a mig gun. Same can be said with any of the other rods, 6010/11, 6013... even stick in general.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#20 · (Edited)
@ DSW - Major thanks for laying out "Why" 6010/11 are relevant.

Makes complete sense. Open root joints, root close up, fast "freeze up", and significant tolerance for fusion and 'self-cleaning' feature in the presence of foreign debris (e.g. oil, rust, paint, previous beads) on the weld surface. Have very very limited time w/ SMAW.....but planning to learn this technique via the Dynasty DX200. Aloha.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
About this Discussion
26 Replies
13 Participants
Last post:
taz00
WeldingWeb - Welding Community for pros and enthusiasts
posts
1.8M
members
82K
Since
2003
Community Forum for Welding Professionals and Enthusiasts To Interact and Learn - Free
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Welding Projects & Pictures General Welding Questions MIG, TIG, Stick, And Oxy/Fuel Welding Machines - Tools and Cutting Methods Lincoln