Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 119

Thread: Why not use 7014?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,572
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    The vacuum pouches are no-brainers. They wouldn't hold a vacuum if they weren't hermetically sealed.
    I'm not sure that means the rods are any better-protected from water vapor than the cellophane-wrapped boxes. Water vapor goes through plastic -- it just goes through some plastics faster than others. If I truly needed lo-hy electrodes (and I don't), I wouldn't trust anything except rods that came out of a sealed can less than a few hours ago, unless they were stored in an oven.

    But I think you're getting waaaaay too hung up on the whole lo-hy thing. An oven isn't going to fix your problems, and until you learn to weld, using lo-hy filler isn't going to make your welds any better. It's like worrying about speed-rated tires on your bike when you haven't removed the training wheels yet.

    As Minnesota Dave pointed out, if all you're using is mild steel, you should never have a need for a truly "low-hydrogen" weld. That's not to say you shouldn't bother with 7018 -- you should, because in my experience, even using 7018 that's been stored for years in a damp barn, it still makes welds that are a hell of a lot tougher and more ductile than other rods.
    Last edited by Kelvin; 09-07-2020 at 10:41 PM.

  2. Likes MinnesotaDave, ronsii liked this post
  3. #52
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelvin View Post
    I'm not sure that means the rods are any better-protected from water vapor than the cellophane-wrapped boxes. Water vapor goes through plastic -- it just goes through some plastics faster than others. If I truly needed lo-hy electrodes (and I don't), I wouldn't trust anything except rods that came out of a sealed can less than a few hours ago, unless they were stored in an oven.
    Thanks for the thoughts and chiming in.

    What you say about water vapor getting through plastic I could see may have some merit, however the rods out of a sealed can within a few hours doesn't make any sense to me at all. To ground where I am coming from - in the same materials testing job I did years back I did gradation of aggrigates and soils. The first step was to weigh a sample fresh out of the field then put that sample in an oven. The sample was then taken out of the oven and put in a set of sieves on a shaker table - while it was hot. After some time shaking the sieves were broken apart and the material at each level was weighed with the total of all of them combining to the total weight of the dry sample.

    If I took the sample out of the oven and put it straight on the scale and watched it for 20-30 seconds it was easy to see the weight going up. The reason the weight was going UP was because the hot sample was cooling off, drawing moisture back in to it - from the air.

    So if that moisture is easily measured with soil samples (enough to know it is there and drawing more in, as to the exact accuracy - hard to tell without being more precise with the temp etc) I would imagine flux on a rod attracting moisture as it cools would, likewise, be pretty easy to spot with a precise scale. Again, the weight change on the soil out of the oven is nearly instant as the temp drops the weight goes up - simple as that. So how can that not affect the flux on a rod - within a couple hours?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelvin View Post
    But I think you're getting waaaaay too hung up on the whole lo-hy thing. An oven isn't going to fix your problems, and until you learn to weld, using lo-hy filler isn't going to make your welds any better. It's like worrying about speed-rated tires on your bike when you haven't removed the training wheels yet.
    I do hear you. Everyone is hammering me with reading, researching, analyzing, etc "wont fix your problems". I am not saying I have a "problem" at all - I am learning. That's why I'm here engaging in conversation, picking brains, asking questions, and looking for feedback.

    To that point - this thread was originally (as I asked in the 1st post) about why not to use 7014 rod. The answer, in a round about way, is that it is not going to hold up to dynamic load changes as well as 7018, or some have suggested 7016 as well.

    Since I don't have 7016 at the moment my interest is on the 7018. There isn't much of anything I weld that isn't dynamically loaded (everything I fab is a bracket, mount, frame, etc that is to do something). From the sounds of it - the 7018 rods would be the best candidate for projects that come up (at the moment). So that is why I am concentrating on it right now. It is a challenge to run it and I want to figure it out. That doesn't mean "I have a problem with running 7018", its just "I haven't figured out 7018 yet".

    Part of the difficulty I am running in to could be that the rods I have are AC variants - as was mentioned earlier by one of the Daves on the forum I believe. The other part I suspect is that I am using the rods out of the box - not out of an oven. I did not get far enough today to try some hot/dry rods, but that is what I am going to try tomorrow. I am hoping hot rods make a big difference in the porosity being present thus far, even if I am not "conditioning" them at close to 600deg. A hot rod will surely have less hydrogen content than an ambient temp rod just by nature of the temperature, as to how much less - no idea. Will it make a difference in weldability? I'll find out.

  4. #53
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,621
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Blah, Blah, blah, etc., etc. If you spent half as much time burning rods as you do typing and hypothesizing you'd be years ahead and GET SOME DECENT PRACTICE COUPONS! Those thin strips are going to do nothing but ^%$#@! you up! I don't know how more blunt I can be other than getting someone to beat you over the head with a stick.

    These are the most popular 7018 in Canada and better than anything Lincoln, Esab, Hobart or anyone else puts out. If you zoom in on the pic. the red writing on the plastic wrap on the box reads Hermetically Sealed in English and French. 7014, 6010, 6013 don't come with the plastic wrap. A carton comes with 4 packs of these in a heavier cardboard box. You're also confusing storing rods in an oven with reconditioning rods. You're getting way too ahead of yourself and can't seem to stay focused on one subject. There's no round-about-way, 7014 aren't designed for dynamic loading and 7018 are. 6010 are also but not as good as 7018.

    https://www.airliquide.ca/la-7018-sm...oryId=A0274397
    Last edited by Welder Dave; 09-08-2020 at 01:21 AM.

  5. Likes Sparkie1957 liked this post
  6. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,572
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    ...If I took the sample out of the oven and put it straight on the scale and watched it for 20-30 seconds it was easy to see the weight going up. .....
    So how can that not affect the flux on a rod - within a couple hours?
    My guess would be that it doesn't take up enough moisture within a few hours to degrade the weld quality significantly due to moisture uptake of the flux. Obviously, once the rod cools from the oven, its moisture content is no longer zero. So apparently there is some number -- above zero but below "saturated and stable" -- at which point the number of milligrams of moisture per kg of dry electrodes goes from "acceptable" to "unacceptable." Where is that point? I don't know and don't really care. We could do this all week, but I don't see much profit in it. How many fairies can dance on the head of a pin? How long is a piece of string?

    I guess you would have to ask AWS or one of the rod manufacturers why they say 7018 electrodes are OK for "lo-hy" welds within a few hours of opening the can. I'm sure their engineers weighed the stuff on analytical balances and did their bend tests, x-rays, Charpy notches and everything else and came up with their conclusions. So if you want to second-guess someone, I guess you need to second-guess the AWS, ASME, API, DOT, CFR, ABS, Lloyds of London, Lincoln, Hobart, ESAB and their armies of engineers, metallurgists, scientists, lawyers, accountants and the rest. I suspect that they know more about this than you ... but I may be "all wet!"

    Maybe write them a letter and clue them in ... ? I'm sure they'd appreciate your help!

    Or...you could fire up your machine and work on burning your 10th or 50th or 100th rod. My hunch is that the latter would teach you more than the former.
    Last edited by Kelvin; 09-08-2020 at 08:49 AM.

  7. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,572
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Lastly, I would bet my next paycheck that the porosity you're seeing in your welds is NOT caused by not storing them in an oven, and will NOT be solved by drying them in an oven. I have never used anything EXCEPT 7018 that was presumably "too wet" for lo-hy welds (except when I had just opened a new can) and I have never seen any porosity. If you DO have too much dissolved hydrogen in your welds, I suspect you would need an electron microscope or x-ray to see it. I don't think it's going to be visible to the naked eye. And if you do dry them in an oven, and then your porosity goes away, that doesn't prove anything, either, since you seem to be changing 15 variables every time you light up a rod. It may simply be that your technique is improving enough to stop the porosity problems...or that you "got lucky."
    Last edited by Kelvin; 09-08-2020 at 09:18 AM.

  8. Likes Lis2323, 12V71 liked this post
  9. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelvin View Post
    Lastly, I would bet my next paycheck that the porosity you're seeing in your welds is NOT caused by not storing them in an oven, and will NOT be solved by drying them in an oven. I have never used anything EXCEPT 7018 that was presumably "too wet" for lo-hy welds (except when I had just opened a new can) and I have never seen any porosity. If you DO have too much dissolved hydrogen in your welds, I suspect you would need an electron microscope or x-ray to see it. I don't think it's going to be visible to the naked eye. And if you do dry them in an oven, and then your porosity goes away, that doesn't prove anything, either, since you seem to be changing 15 variables every time you light up a rod. It may simply be that your technique is improving enough to stop the porosity problems...or that you "got lucky."
    Thanks for all the thoughts and info, I can sift through the criticism in all that.

    You mention changing "15 variables every time". I am sure that is a bit of a stretch in critiquing, but can you be factual in what you mean?

    The last strips I did (again, its what I have at the moment) were run at the same amperage and polarity I did the 1st strips of 7018 with - about 105-110 amps, DCEP. The rods were identical and the strips were nearly identical (same thickness, same prep, they weren't cut all perfectly straight so the width varies a bit, but all were prepped on the factory edge = straight when I started). So it would appear the "set up" variables would be as close to the same as possible.

    I have been trying to burn more rod leading in to the start of a bead (which is where I am getting the blow thru in some places at the very beginning). So by burning more rod up front as I get in to the start that "should" (from earlier discussion in the thread on the subject) get the rod warmed up and burn through the chipped off flux portion for the full coverage flux to burn and shield the weld. That, in theory, should stave off the porosity - but in my case that doesn't appear to be working. Once the rods are going and past the "start" I let the rod essentially burn itself riding on the flux cup on/in the joint.

    I agree, lots to learn. But that's why I'm here and that's what I'm doing.

    I have a batch of rods that's been cooking at 350deg for 2 hours so far. When I get a chance (maybe another couple hours or so) I'll give them a run. I have the strips prepped from before so I won't have that work to do.

    We shall see what happens.

  10. #57
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,572
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    You mention changing "15 variables every time". I am sure that is a bit of a stretch in critiquing, but can you be factual in what you mean?
    I dunno, I generally get exhausted by about the 10,000th word in your posts and don't have a spare week to go back through them.

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    I have a batch of rods that's been cooking at 350deg for 2 hours so far. When I get a chance (maybe another couple hours or so) I'll give them a run.
    350F ain't gonna do it. This is from Lincoln's page on "Storing and Redrying Electrodes," which BTW took me about 4 seconds to find:



    Source:
    https://www.lincolnelectric.com/en-u...es-detail.aspx

    Note their caution that "Several hours at lower temperatures is not equivalent to using the specified requirements."

    This stuff is out there and it isn't hard to find. Google is your friend.
    Last edited by Kelvin; 09-08-2020 at 11:22 AM.

  11. Likes FlyFishn, denverguy liked this post
  12. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,621
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    You don't have to recondition new rods unless you left them in the rain. There are millions of people successfully using 7018 that have never seen an oven. You're not building ASME pressure vessels so just use the damn rods and there's a good chance the porosity will be reduced after you've burned more than a few rods. You have time to post essays on a forum but no time to burn rods. You need to change your priorities. Pretty soon nobodies going to respond to your long drawn out posts.

  13. Likes MinnesotaDave liked this post
  14. #59
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    779
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Welder Dave View Post
    You're not building ASME pressure vessels so just use the damn rods and there's a good chance the porosity will be reduced after you've burned more than a few rods. You have time to post essays on a forum but no time to burn rods.
    True, and if I am not mistaken, the underbead cracking associated with the infusion of hydrogen in carbon steel welds is not related to the kind of porosity seen at the start of mild steel welds, caused by poor technique, such as long-arcing.
    Last edited by geezerbill; 09-08-2020 at 04:19 PM. Reason: Spelling

  15. Likes 12V71, MinnesotaDave liked this post
  16. #60
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    1,835
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    That a good chart on temperature.

    It points out how to use low hydrogen rod and pain of using low hydrogen rod

    Dave

    Electrodes for Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) or stick electrodes must be properly stored in order to deposit quality welds. When stick electrodes absorb moisture from the atmosphere, they must be dried in order to restore their ability to deposit quality welds. Electrodes with too much moisture may lead to cracking or porosity. Operational characteristics may be affected as well. If you've experienced unexplained weld cracking problems, or if the stick electrode arc performance has deteriorated, it may be due to your storage methods or re-drying procedures.
    Follow these simple storage, exposure and redrying techniques to ensure the highest quality welds, as well as the best operational characteristics from your stick electrodes.

    Storing Low Hydrogen Stick Electrodes
    Low hydrogen stick electrodes must be dry to perform properly. Unopened Lincoln hermetically sealed containers provide excellent protection in good storage conditions. Opened cans should be stored in a cabinet at 250 to 300F (120 to 150C)

    Low hydrogen stick electrode coatings that have picked up moisture may result in hydrogen induced cracking, particularly in steels with a yield strength of 80,000 psi (550 MPa) and higher.

    Moisture resistant electrodes with an "R" suffix in their AWS classification have a high resistance to moisture pickup coating and, if properly stored, will be less susceptible to this problem, regardless of the yield strength of the steel being welded. Specific code requirements may indicate exposure limits different from these guidelines.

    All low hydrogen stick electrodes should be stored properly, even those with an "R" suffix. Standard EXX18 electrodes should be supplied to welders twice per shift. Moisture resistant types may be exposed for up to 9 hours.

    When containers are punctured or opened, low hydrogen electrodes may pick up moisture. Depending upon the amount of moisture, it will damage weld quality in the following ways:

    1. A greater amount of moisture in low hydrogen electrodes may cause porosity. Detection of this condition requires x-ray inspection or destructive testing. If the base metal or weld metal exceeds 80,000 psi (550 MPa) yield strength, this moisture may contribute to under-bead or weld cracking.

    2. A relatively high amount of moisture in low hydrogen electrodes causes visible external porosity in addition to internal porosity. It also may cause excessive slag fluidity, a rough weld surface, difficult slag removal, and cracking.

    3. Severe moisture pickup can cause weld cracks in addition to under-bead cracking, severe porosity, poor appearance and slag problems.

    Storing low hydrogen stick electrodes.

    Redrying Low Hydrogen Stick Electrodes
    Redrying, when done correctly, restores the electrodes' ability to deposit quality welds. Proper redrying temperature depends upon the electrode type and its condition.

    One hour at the listed final temperature is satisfactory. DO NOT dry electrodes at higher temperatures. Several hours at lower temperatures is not equivalent to using the specified requirements.

    Electrodes of the E8018 and higher strength classifications should be given no more than three one-hour re-dries in the 700 to 800F (370 to 430C) range. This minimizes the possibility of oxidation of alloys in the coating resulting in lower than normal tensile or impact properties.

    Any low hydrogen electrode should be discarded if excessive redrying causes the coating to become fragile and flake or break off while welding, or if there is a noticeable difference in handling or arc characteristics, such as insufficient arc force.

    Electrodes to be redried should be removed from the can and spread out in the oven because each electrode must reach the drying temperature.

    Redrying low hydrogen stick electrodes.

    Redrying Conditions - Low Hydrogen Stick Electrodes

    Final Redrying Temperature

    Condition

    Pre-drying Temperature(1)

    E7018, E7028

    E8018, E9018, E10018, E11018

    Electrodes exposed to air for less than one week; no direct contact with water.

    N/A

    650 to 750F (340 to 400C)

    700 to 800F (370 to 430C)

    Electrodes which have come in direct contact with water or which have been exposed to high humidity.
    180 to 220F (80 to 105C)

    650 to 750F (340 to 400C)

    700 to 800F (370 to 430C)

    (1) Pre-dry for 1 to 2 hours. This will minimize the tendency for coating cracks or oxidation of the alloys in the coating.
    Storing and Redrying Non-Low Hydrogen Electrodes
    Electrodes in unopened Lincoln cans or cartons retain the proper moisture content indefinitely when stored in good condition.

    If exposed to humid air for long periods of time, stick electrodes from opened containers may pick up enough moisture to affect operating characteristics or weld quality. If moisture appears to be a problem, store electrodes from the opened containers in heated cabinets at 100 to 120F (40 to 50C). DO NOT use higher temperatures, particularly for electrodes from the "Fast Freeze" group.

    Some electrodes from wet containers or long exposure to high humidity can be re-dried. Adhere to the procedures in the following table for each type.

    Storing and redrying non-low hydrogen electrodes.


    Redrying Conditions - Non-Low Hydrogen Stick Electrodes

    Stick Electrode

    Electrode Group

    Final Redrying Temperature

    Time

    E6010: Fleetweld 5P, 5P+E6011: Fleetweld 35, 35LS, 180
    E7010-A1: SA-85(1)
    E7010-G: SA-HYP+(1)
    E8010-G: SA-70+(1), SA-80(1)
    E9010-G: SA-90(1)

    Fast Freeze - excessive moisture is indicated by a noisy arc and high spatter, rusty core wire at the holder end or objectionable coating blisters while welding.

    Re-baking of this group of stick electrodes is not recommended.

    Not Recommended

    N/A

    E7024: Jetweld 1, 3E6027: Jetweld 2

    Fast Fill - excessive moisture is indicated by a noisy or "digging" arc, high spatter, tight slag, or undercut. Pre-dry unusually damp electrodes for 30 - 45 minutes at 200F to 230F (90 - 110C) before final drying to minimize cracking of the coating.

    400 to 500F (200to 260C)

    30 - 45 minutes

    E6012: Fleetweld 7
    E6013: Fleetweld 37
    E7014: Fleetweld 47
    E6022: Fleetweld 22
    Fill Freeze - Excessive moisture is indicated by a noisy or "digging" arc, high spatter, tight slag or undercut. Pre-dry unusually damp electrodes for 30 - 45 minutes at 200 - 230F (90 - 110C) before final drying to minimize cracking of the coating

    300 to 350F (150 to 180C)

    20 - 30 minutes

    (1) Pre-dry for 1 to 2 hours. This will minimize the tendency for coating cracks or oxidation of the alloys in the coating.
    Using longer drying times or higher temperatures can easily damage the electrodes. For drying, remove the electrodes from the container and spread them out in the furnace because each stick electrode must reach the drying temperature.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelvin View Post
    I dunno, I generally get exhausted by about the 10,000th word in your posts and don't have a spare week to go back through them.



    350F ain't gonna do it. This is from Lincoln's page on "Storing and Redrying Electrodes," which BTW took me about 4 seconds to find:



    Source:
    https://www.lincolnelectric.com/en-u...es-detail.aspx

    Note their caution that "Several hours at lower temperatures is not equivalent to using the specified requirements."

    This stuff is out there and it isn't hard to find. Google is your friend.

  17. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,621
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    If you're really worried about rods getting moisture, use 6010 and you won't have to worry. None of the makers will tell you but if they get too dry the cure is to dip them in water, wring them out or wipe them off and they'll weld like they're supposed to.

  18. Likes CAVEMANN liked this post
  19. #62
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Pitman PA
    Posts
    479
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by farmersammm View Post
    And a good Labor Day to ya out there in PA The colors on those trees up in the hills ought to be starting now.
    It will start in about a week or week and a half here where Im at, up north of us like potter and tioga and lycoming counties its probly goin pretty good by now, and I hope your Labor Day went well and you had fun.

  20. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,572
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelvin View Post
    Lastly, I would bet my next paycheck that the porosity you're seeing in your welds is NOT caused by not storing them in an oven, and will NOT be solved by drying them in an oven.
    Also, using rusted, pitted, ragged-out, clapped-out Mystery Steel that you found by the side of the road or God-knows-where (that's what your coupons looked like to me, anyway) probably isn't helping your cause, either. For all you know, your porosity may be caused by something cooking out of the substrate, such as sulfur or any number of other contaminants.

    Is that 1" x 12" strip the only piece of steel you have to practice on?
    Last edited by Kelvin; 09-08-2020 at 08:04 PM.

  21. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lititz, PA
    Posts
    119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lis2323 View Post
    Thanks to WW and all these posts I now realize “X-Rayed” and “X Rated” are not the same thing.
    I guess that all depends on what kind of penetration you're getting.

  22. Likes Lis2323 liked this post
  23. #65
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Sebeka and Bemidji MN
    Posts
    14,557
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by geezerbill View Post
    True, and if I am not mistaken, the underbead cracking associated with the infusion of hydrogen in carbon steel welds is not related to the kind of porosity seen at the start of mild steel welds, caused by poor technique, such as long-arcing.
    Yep, that's my recollection on porosity on startups too. Long arc = porosity.
    Dave J.

    Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance. ~George Bernard Shaw~

    Airco 300 - Syncro 350
    Invertec v250-s
    Thermal Arc 161 and 300
    MM210
    Dialarc
    Tried being normal once, didn't take....I think it was a Tuesday.

  24. #66
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    So the rods heated to 350deg did not seem to make any difference. In fact, I dare say the porosity is worse.

    Name:  20200908_133238[1].jpg
Views: 123
Size:  28.9 KB


    After the strips I got a block of 3/8" plate prepped for some beads. It's good steel, but I figured I'd sacrifice it for the cause. Same deal - porosity on starts for the most part.

    Name:  20200908_142250[1].jpg
Views: 131
Size:  149.1 KB



    Interesting.

    I suppose either I still have a lot of work to do, or I have bad rods.

    They are AC-capable rods and I was running them on DCEP. I am not sure if that could contribute to the porosity?

  25. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,621
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    I see 3 beads without porosity. Were all the beads started with a new electrode or did one electrode do 2 or more beads? How you strike the arc and start the bead could be contributing to the porosity. Obviously something was different for 3 of the beads. If you strike the arc ahead of where the bead starts and move back too slowly, you could be welding over slag that is causing the porosity. How are you striking the arc, like lighting a match or tapping it on the plate? Could some flux be getting knocked off the rods when trying to initiate the arc? Were the rods finger nailing (flux burning unevenly) on start up? Here's some info from Lincoln. 7018 is usually the last rod you learn because it can be a little finicky to figure out.

    https://www.lincolnelectric.com/en-u...ty-detail.aspx

  26. Likes FlyFishn liked this post
  27. #68
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Pitman PA
    Posts
    479
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    So the rods heated to 350deg did not seem to make any difference. In fact, I dare say the porosity is worse.

    Name:  20200908_133238[1].jpg
Views: 123
Size:  28.9 KB


    After the strips I got a block of 3/8" plate prepped for some beads. It's good steel, but I figured I'd sacrifice it for the cause. Same deal - porosity on starts for the most part.

    Name:  20200908_142250[1].jpg
Views: 131
Size:  149.1 KB



    Interesting.

    I suppose either I still have a lot of work to do, or I have bad rods.

    They are AC-capable rods and I was running them on DCEP. I am not sure if that could contribute to the porosity?
    There aint a damn thing wrong with your rods. The only way you are gonna correct that mess is stay under a weld hood burn rods watch the puddle and learn how to read it and what its supposed to do and look like and get steadier with your hand as you go.

  28. Likes CAVEMANN, ronsii liked this post
  29. #69
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelvin View Post
    I'm not sure that means the rods are any better-protected from water vapor than the cellophane-wrapped boxes. Water vapor goes through plastic -- it just goes through some plastics faster than others. If I truly needed lo-hy electrodes (and I don't), I wouldn't trust anything except rods that came out of a sealed can less than a few hours ago, unless they were stored in an oven.

    But I think you're getting waaaaay too hung up on the whole lo-hy thing. An oven isn't going to fix your problems, and until you learn to weld, using lo-hy filler isn't going to make your welds any better. It's like worrying about speed-rated tires on your bike when you haven't removed the training wheels yet.

    As Minnesota Dave pointed out, if all you're using is mild steel, you should never have a need for a truly "low-hydrogen" weld. That's not to say you shouldn't bother with 7018 -- you should, because in my experience, even using 7018 that's been stored for years in a damp barn, it still makes welds that are a hell of a lot tougher and more ductile than other rods.
    I'm going to both disagree and agree with you, hermetically sealed rods (such as lincoln's sahara packs) are just as good as oven baked IF its from a trusted manufacturers and they claim it to be so, large companies such as Bechtel (the company building the nuclear reactors for the ford class aircraft carrier) trust them, and they have way more reason to trust that then you or I do.

    With that said your still right in saying that dry rods don't make a lick of difference if you cant weld in the first place, you wont even notice the difference as an amature, and even some pros dont notice it, its metallurgical and doesnt make alot of difference to us 99% of the time

  30. Likes Kelvin, ronsii liked this post
  31. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NW ON Canada
    Posts
    3,434
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    I didn't get far enough to try some oven-heated 7018 (@350deg), had storms blow in and they're still here, but I did another round of out-of-the-box 7018. I am still getting porosity seemingly no matter what I do. That isn't to question it and ask "why" - I am just stating.

    I am hoping tomorrow I can run some "dry" rods out of an oven for comparison.

    These are the AC version of the Lincoln 7018's still.

    Attachment 1715679

    What happened with the bead at 3 in the middle has me curious. I am not sure why that bulge is there. On all the beads I started about 3/4" ahead of the start, backed up, and started slow to allow the start to get some heat under the flux cup before letting the rod burn in the groove on the cup. So the bulge that appeared in the middle - once the rod was going and riding on the cup - seems very odd.

    I got some porosity in the middle of 5. It is hard to tell with the light reflection but there are holes in there, not just at the start.
    Your photo tells me your travel speed is too fast. Your arc length is also inconsistent. You need to work on getting more consistent. Also, spend more time focusing on watching the puddle.
    Jason
    Lincoln Idealarc 250 stick/tig
    Thermal Dynamics Cutmaster 52
    Miller Bobcat 250
    Torchmate CNC table
    Thermal Arc Hefty 2
    Ironworkers Local 720

  32. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NW ON Canada
    Posts
    3,434
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlyFishn View Post
    So the rods heated to 350deg did not seem to make any difference. In fact, I dare say the porosity is worse.

    Name:  20200908_133238[1].jpg
Views: 123
Size:  28.9 KB


    After the strips I got a block of 3/8" plate prepped for some beads. It's good steel, but I figured I'd sacrifice it for the cause. Same deal - porosity on starts for the most part.

    Name:  20200908_142250[1].jpg
Views: 131
Size:  149.1 KB



    Interesting.

    I suppose either I still have a lot of work to do, or I have bad rods.

    They are AC-capable rods and I was running them on DCEP. I am not sure if that could contribute to the porosity?
    The electrodes are not your problem. Your still using too long of an arc at start up. You will get porosity every time at the start with 7018 if your not starting it correctly.
    Jason
    Lincoln Idealarc 250 stick/tig
    Thermal Dynamics Cutmaster 52
    Miller Bobcat 250
    Torchmate CNC table
    Thermal Arc Hefty 2
    Ironworkers Local 720

  33. Likes MinnesotaDave, ronsii liked this post
  34. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    NW New Jersey
    Posts
    501
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Why not use E7014 ??? This thread was about E7014 , wasn't it

    I use it as a general purpose maintenance rod frequently. It should serve you well when used appropriately. It works well on inverters, and limited duty buzz boxes (thunderbolts, AC225s, stickmates) .

    Name:  094.jpg
Views: 105
Size:  155.3 KB

    I like this stuff the best, think its made by MG industries , says its made in America. I'm already half way thru this 50 lb box I bought a year ago. In all honesty, I waste a lot of the rod . So many of the welds are short , and in tight spots, alot of the rod doesn't get used up. I also like the Hobart 7014, but not the lincoln 7014 . Don't know why, the last box I got from home depot just didn't seem to run as well for me. Everybody has different preferences.

    Name:  018.jpg
Views: 103
Size:  195.4 KB



    Name:  135.jpg
Views: 104
Size:  200.1 KB



    Name:  017.jpg
Views: 104
Size:  226.1 KB



    Name:  139.jpg
Views: 105
Size:  203.8 KB

    I think you should use some E7014 to make a nice welding table to mount that vise on. Hopefully you haven't spattered up that nice machinist vise you have mounted on the stump .

    best of luck
    Airco 250 ac/dc Heliwelder Square wave
    Miller Synchrowave 180 sd
    Miller Econo Twin HF
    Lincoln 210 MP
    Dayton 225 ac/dc
    Victor torches
    Snap-On YA-212
    Lotos Cut60D

  35. Likes FlyFishn, tapwelder liked this post
  36. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by Welder Dave View Post
    I see 3 beads without porosity. Were all the beads started with a new electrode or did one electrode do 2 or more beads? How you strike the arc and start the bead could be contributing to the porosity. Obviously something was different for 3 of the beads. If you strike the arc ahead of where the bead starts and move back too slowly, you could be welding over slag that is causing the porosity. How are you striking the arc, like lighting a match or tapping it on the plate? Could some flux be getting knocked off the rods when trying to initiate the arc? Were the rods finger nailing (flux burning unevenly) on start up? Here's some info from Lincoln. 7018 is usually the last rod you learn because it can be a little finicky to figure out.

    https://www.lincolnelectric.com/en-u...ty-detail.aspx
    Good stuff. Thanks for the detail and the initiative to explain.

    On the strip I ran 2 rods. I forget which bead was the start of the 2nd.

    The plate - each 10 amp increment (3 beads) was 1 rod, so 1 first strike followed by 2 restrikes.

    I am not sure what your definition of "fingernailing" of the flux is, however I used a file to freshen up the tip before each restrike. Below are a couple pictures of a sample refresh I did - this was somewhere when I was welding on the plate, I don't recall what bead.

    The flux "cup" was cracked when I filed it. Once I got to the metal rod I made the rod a bit shiny on one side, but not all the way around. Sometimes the flux cracked off as you see in the picture and other times there was upwards of 1/8"-3/16" of metal rod exposed in places. The flux, however, did not flake off beyond that - so the flux was still adhered to the rod past that as best I know.

    Name:  20200908_125437[1].jpg
Views: 97
Size:  90.0 KB



    Name:  20200908_125442[1].jpg
Views: 97
Size:  84.3 KB



    As to how I am striking the arc - a short "strike", not quite a tap. So I have some travel across the material when the rod contacts the material, just a small amount. Then I bring the rod back to where I want the bead to start and I pause to heat up that area. My travel speed back to the start I consider "slow", and with a long arc. What I am trying to do is keep the rod going and heating up so that when I get to the start I don't have far to go, if any, before the flux works to shield as it burns. With the flaked off flux from the restart I imagine the lack of shielding at that stage is contributing to the porosity.

    As to whether or not flux could come off and deposit in that initial strike and return to the start - absolutely possible. I don't try to remove any other flux other than what already disappears when I file the rod before a restrike. If some is loose I could see that coming off. Next time I get a chance I can look at that closer and make sure there isn't any loose flux before I restrike.

    The way the plate beads went is bottom to top. So I started with a fresh rod at each amperage increment on the bottom of the 3 beads then worked up. As you can see the porosity is there on new rod strikes just as well as restrikes.

  37. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Quote Originally Posted by albrightree View Post
    Why not use E7014 ??? This thread was about E7014 , wasn't it

    I use it as a general purpose maintenance rod frequently. It should serve you well when used appropriately. It works well on inverters, and limited duty buzz boxes (thunderbolts, AC225s, stickmates).
    Excellent input. Thanks! And yes - the thread was originally on why "not" to use it. The consensus was that it doesn't hold up to dynamic loads as well as 7018 (and some say 7016 as well). So that was where the "shift" went with the thread - towards the 7018 as that is another rod I have at the moment.

    As to your use of the 7014 - thanks for the pictures. Looks like everything you posted pictures of "stays put" = stands, bases, mounts.

    Quote Originally Posted by albrightree View Post
    I think you should use some E7014 to make a nice welding table to mount that vise on. Hopefully you haven't spattered up that nice machinist vise you have mounted on the stump .

    best of luck
    Thats my portable Wilton do-everything vice. I wouldn't say it's a machinists' vice. I have a 2 axis vice on the drill press - that I wouldn't go welding on, but it does have a bunch of holes poked in it (got it that way). I used to use that big Wilton by itself. Then a couple years ago I was ordering steel for some projects and figured I'd finally put it on a plate. So it now sits on a 1/2" steel plate. It works better that way. Whether its on the stump, my tailgate, a table, or where ever - it works pretty good. I clamped it to my hydraulic press table last summer and used it for cutting down longer stock with a reciprocating saw.

  38. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    2,621
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why not use 7014?

    Too much flux chipping off like that could cause porosity. Porosity could be from a combination of things too. 3 beads had no porosity so you did something different for those welds. Instead of trying to figure it out in your head just burn another 50 rods. 6" practice coupons are good because you can better gauge your speed. A 1/8" 7018 typically burns about 6" but could burn further if doing multiple welds on the same piece because of it being so hot from previous welds. Try those rods on AC and see if they have as much porosity.
    Last edited by Welder Dave; 09-09-2020 at 12:05 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Page generated in 1,603,623,681.94362 seconds with 13 queries