Stacking Horzontal Welds
RSS | Subscribe | Contact Us | Advertise | About Us
Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    1,829

    Stacking Horzontal Welds

    Hey...….I crapped up another thread with this. It should have been here. Apologies to Chickenfarmer. I see a teaching moment, and I get carried away..sorry man.

    Like builtup welds, horizontal welds need to overlap. You shouldn't see the upper toe of the preceding weld.

    I had to go back for these. I think they might have been some comparison welds using Excalibur, and Hobart 7018 from the ag store. Not sure.

    Name:  horizontals1.jpg
Views: 360
Size:  103.2 KB Nothing special, just some padding (aka playing around)

    Name:  horizontals2.jpg
Views: 355
Size:  100.8 KB

    Name:  horizontals3.jpg
Views: 356
Size:  91.3 KB

    The base fillet was just a plain ol' fillet, and I guess I decided to play around, and run some welds up the wall. They're two distinct runs.

    What is important is the way the welds overlap the center on the previous weld below them. Keep an eye on the puddle, and let gravity carry it down over the crest of the bottom weld. Gently, without taking the arc from the face of the puddle, push filler back into the puddle to fill any undercut you get on the top toe. Gravity will try to drag the filler down from the edge of the top toe. This is easier with a wire welder (just a gentle tiny weave), but requires rod manipulation when running drippy 7018. Amperage should be close to a flat weld, or a few amps less when using larger rods. I'm pretty sure these were 3/32 welds (I run 3/32 at 85amps uphill/horizontal/flat/overhead......it's a very versatile rod when used out of position)

    So, again the same principle. You're creating a uniform weld without hills, and valley's. Each subsequent weld fills in the previous valley. Although I don't believe you see this very often, I believe it's considered a 2G out-of-position weld.

    Somethin' tells me that the first set of welds was Excalibur...…..it usually wins any comparisons. Wets out better, and allows for better control out of position. This is for me anyways.

    You get massive amounts of slag with Excalibur. That slag helps you differentiate bead profile against the dark slag background as you weld. Hard to explain, but you know it when you run it. The Hobart generates relatively little slag, and seems to freeze faster. Not saying it's a bad thing...…….it just doesn't mesh with the way I weld. I tend to weld slow, and like to be able to manipulate the puddle to some degree......I think the Excalibur has better surface tension in the puddle. Keeps it from sagging too much, while still remaining pretty fluid.

    Tried some of the ESAB Acclaim when I made the new bale spike thingy. I liked the fact that it's snappier than Excalibur, but the snappy arc also leads to more problems controlling undercut. It was a like/hate relationship I'm sure it's fine stuff, but I haven't run it enough to get used to it. Also didn't like the restrike...…….total PITA....worse than anything I've run. But it's good points outweigh the restrike difficulties....sorta. If you're running a smaller transformer machine like I do, you'll like the dig with the ESAB. It gives you a bit of extra oomph.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,734

    Re: Stacking Horzontal Welds

    lincoln lh-70 would be better for what u do

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
RSS | Home | Penton Media | Contact Us | Subscribe | For Advertisers | Terms of Use | Privacy Statement