Repairing/filling holes/building up metal - thin tubing - SMAW

[FlyFishn]

I got some good practice today on repairing a mower handle frame - relatively thin wall tubing. My angle to it was to clean the breaks, bevel the edges, tack on one side, then bead on the other, cut the tack, and bead the originally tacked side.

Rods were 5/64" 7014 for the beads, tacks were 1/8" 6010.

Amperage on the 7014's I started out with was 40 amps. I had 2 problems with that. 1. The amperage was so low I had a tough time distinguishing where the pool was in relation to the slag. 2. On the main joint I still blew holes in the pipe.

What I did with the holes was wire wheel them clean then do a small bead on each side just long enough to lay down metal, then pop off so as to not heat up the part too much. Then I went back over with the wire wheel to clean, repeat, until the hole was bridged.

With 7014 the slag was really hard to deal with. Filling the blow outs was next to impossible to get the slag completely removed so as to not have slag inclusion on the beads over top. I did the best I could and if there was too much slag down there I used a cut-off wheel to open it back up, then filled back in. PITA.

I overlayed some 3/32" x 1/2" wide strips across the joint also. I welded the strips all the way around. For these I bumped the amperage up to about 55 amps. At that amperage I had better visibility between the pool and slag. Bouncing between heat on the strip vs heat on the tube I was able to get the pool to flow well enough (for the most part) with little blowing through, just in a couple places that were still caught with the pool enough to freeze over.

I almost switched to 6011 or 6010 for the blow out repairs due to the slag problem of the 7014. However, I only have those in 1/8" at the smallest.

It would seem to me that the easiest thing to do would be use a low-slag, fast-freeze rod for the hole fixes and just poke at it little by little so as to not over-heat the part, almost like layering tack welds. However, keeping the amperage down low enough for that work with a 1/8" rod on the thin wall pipe would be so low the rod wouldn't light or stay lit well enough to set enough metal down for the task of building up material.

Therein lies my question - if you had thin material to work with and needed to build up material or fill a hole with a stick electrode - how would you do it? What rod, what amperage?

For what it is worth, the 6010 tacks I did were at 70 amps. That was about where I needed to be for the rod to light well, but it was definitely only good for a quick tack = way too much heat if I held it too long.





Where the hole is closest to the wood brush handle is where the parts were broken - both in the same place all the way across smack in the centerline of the hole.

[M J D]

I would simply make a new piece. Next best would be mig. Worst case is what your attempting now. Pretty much any electrode would work, turn it way down and get some spots built up. After that , connect the dots.

[Kelvin]

Therein lies my question - if you had thin material to work with and needed to build up material or fill a hole with a stick electrode - how would you do it? What rod, what amperage?

I usually use 601X. Asking about amperage is kinda meaningless, since every machine and operator are different. I would set amperage "high enough to wet in, and low enough not to blow through." Looks like what you did will work. If not, reweld it.

[FlyFishn]

I would simply make a new piece. Next best would be mig. Worst case is what your attempting now. Pretty much any electrode would work, turn it way down and get some spots built up. After that , connect the dots.

Other machine is a flux core, and I haven't put it back together yet. So stick is all I have at the moment. Otherwise flux core is the only other process I have (ironically, dad got it years back for just this - mower repairs).

I usually use 601X. Asking about amperage is kinda meaningless, since every machine and operator are different. I would set amperage "high enough to wet in, and low enough not to blow through." Looks like what you did will work. If not, reweld it.

What I was getting at is the amperage for the 6010 I used for tack welding was set to the low end of the spectrum - and had to be there - for the tacks to work. I was fighting sticking rods down at 55 or so (on my machine). I figured it wasn't worth it when I was just trying to throw a tack down real quick, so I cranked the amps up and was able to to knock the tacks out real easy.

But the amperage I was using for the tacks was in "blow through" grounds - by a long shot. So with that rod on my machine with what I was working on I couldn't get to "high enough to wet in, and low enough to not blow through". For the 7014 I used - that is pretty much what I did, but even that small 5/64" rod on low heat blew through the beveled main joint (I made thin metal even thinner - I think that was a bad idea on the tubing, would have been better just to clean up the joint and leave it full thickness). The wetting, as you put it, was better on the added metal strips with 55 amps - even though 40 blew through the main joint. At 55 I could see enough of the pool in relation to the slag that I could get an idea of what was going on and it worked better, but if I didn't move from piece to piece (strip and tube) to spread the heat out it was still definitely in "blow through" territory.

Yeah, the welds are ugly (they are uglier on the other piece and the other side) but I think they will hold fine. There is a lot of reinforcement with the strips and the welds distributing that load back against the tubing. If it does crack, we'll re do it.

I've seen where guys doing body work repairs on vehicle sheet metal will tack weld the joints. The added pieces for repairs look like they have a bunch of dots all the way around. I believe that is normally done with MIG, not sure about other processes. It would seem to me a couple tacks and one could TIG those types of joints pretty easy. As to stick welding - especially dealing with the 7014 - slag is a big problem. So the line of tack welds doesn't work as easy.

I've also seen people finishing beads in fillet welds to the ends by doing the "tack welding" at the end. They bring the pool nearly to the end, let it cool, and restart on the end to add metal and bring the pool out to the edge of the part. With a low-slag electrode I could see that, but there again - 7014, 7018, etc - even if you cleaned the flux that might not work, especially if you need to burn the rod for a bit before the coating burns to shield the arc.

In my case, I didn't have the porosity issue on start-up with the 7014 - but the slag was a PITA. If I could have welded that stuff without risk of blowing through (tad thicker metal) it would have been perfect - the flux does come off really easy, so long as it is not jammed between 2 beads. So I guess that is my "take away" of the project - slag is a PITA when burning through thin material.

I'll see if I can find some small diameter 6010's or 6011's. Seems to me I saw some 1/16" 6011's at Tractor Supply, but they came in a 1/2lb box for like $18. That was the day I got my 1/16" 7014's. They were in a 1lb box for about the same price as the other ones - so twice as many rods for the same price is what I figured (though, 1lb of any rod is still a "small box").

[albrightree]

3/32" 6011 is one of the most useful welding rods you can have in the garage/shop. Set machine for 45-50 amps and you should be able to fix up holes in sheet metal. If you don't have any metal to patch, you can always do field filler, break the flux off another rod , and use as filler. 3/32"and 1/8" both 6011, 7014 should always be in your garage/shop. It should cover 99% of most common uses.

Good luck

HTH

[tapwelder]

3/32 6013 or perhaps 1/16 7018. 6010/11 will obviously get it done, however they are deep penetrating rods. You don't need penetration on that. 3/32 is a good general diameter for all my stick welding. I prefer to change rod characteristics than have a bunch od diameters..

it would be pretty difficult to so that with flux core. Hence, diameter doesn't change filler charactertistics

[FlyFishn]

If you don't have any metal to patch, you can always do field filler, break the flux off another rod , and use as filler

You mean like tig? Arc with the primary rod, fill with the bare rod? If I'm not mistaken that is sometimes referred to a s the "Texas Tig" method/style.

With as fast as I blew out the tube I doubt I'd have time to react with filler metal.

I would be really curious about doing the type of repair I made with tig instead. I'd imagine it would be possible to keep the arc going at less amperage than I was able to run a rod at = less heat. Then tune both the heat and introduction of filler to blend the parts back together. One of these days... A nice tig machine is on the radar, as is mig, but the ol' stick is more important in my welding arsenal at the moment.

On another subject - how about gas welding? I didn't think about that but I could have fired up the O/A torch... I have it around for mechanical work - loosening vehicle parts/bolts/etc - never tried to weld with it. The last process I used to join metal with a torch was brazing back in college... Been a while.

[driz]

You mean like tig? Arc with the primary rod, fill with the bare rod? If I'm not mistaken that is sometimes referred to a s the "Texas Tig" method/style.

With as fast as I blew out the tube I doubt I'd have time to react with filler metal.

I would be really curious about doing the type of repair I made with tig instead. I'd imagine it would be possible to keep the arc going at less amperage than I was able to run a rod at = less heat. Then tune both the heat and introduction of filler to blend the parts back together. One of these days... A nice tig machine is on the radar, as is mig, but the ol' stick is more important in my welding arsenal at the moment.

On another subject - how about gas welding? I didn't think about that but I could have fired up the O/A torch... I have it around for mechanical work - loosening vehicle parts/bolts/etc - never tried to weld with it. The last process I used to join metal with a torch was brazing back in college... Been a while.

Welding that crap tubing is gnarley at the best of times . With a stick, ouch. That crap is hard with a Mig or anything else .
I always try to use an overlap like a sleeve to act like a fish plate. If I can’t do that as in what you have I chop up a small plate to stick in the curves underside to help shore things up. It’s hard to fix anything that takes force like this does today. Everything is just as thin as they can get away with ........and it shows


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[albrightree]

1)use a piece of 1/8" rod without flux, clamp to work. Start arc on rod, not sheet metal.

2) Start arc on ground clamp(if brass) and moving to fill rod melting fill rod into sheet metal.

3) Use O/A torch, and direct heat to brazing rod and slowly let ball flow out on sheet metal

The key objective is to use the thicker of two pieces of work to start arc , favor that side, and allow it to flow over to the thinner work. You might have to make a series of these in a spot weld fashion, waiting for the metal to cool (not red) before continuing on.
Still , these techniques won't work on rust. Friends, neighbors and family have challenged me over the years with things that were so rusty, with such a thin veneer of metal, its amazing they were able to hold it without it crumbling apart.

These are mainly salvage techniques reserved for emergencies, or off hour repairs when there are no stores open, and machines gotta run(there wasn't always an Amazon, and nobody was open on Sunday). Definitely not endorsed or codified by AWS, OSHA, DOT(yourstate), or any regulatory body. agency, or acting government division there of.

Many a lawnmower deck, tractor fender, engine cover has been repaired this way.

[Oscar]

Pulse stick welding would make quick work of that.

[smithdoor]

6013 is low pen rod.
Using 6011 will blow more holes.
I like flux core with co2 faster
Remember to short welds and let cool or can burn a new hole.
I think all welders when started had holes to repair. Just a right of passage in welding.

When first My father had repair all welders holes.
I can also remove broken taps using arc welding.

Dave

I got some good practice today on repairing a mower handle frame - relatively thin wall tubing. My angle to it was to clean the breaks, bevel the edges, tack on one side, then bead on the other, cut the tack, and bead the originally tacked side.

Rods were 5/64" 7014 for the beads, tacks were 1/8" 6010.

Amperage on the 7014's I started out with was 40 amps. I had 2 problems with that. 1. The amperage was so low I had a tough time distinguishing where the pool was in relation to the slag. 2. On the main joint I still blew holes in the pipe.

What I did with the holes was wire wheel them clean then do a small bead on each side just long enough to lay down metal, then pop off so as to not heat up the part too much. Then I went back over with the wire wheel to clean, repeat, until the hole was bridged.

With 7014 the slag was really hard to deal with. Filling the blow outs was next to impossible to get the slag completely removed so as to not have slag inclusion on the beads over top. I did the best I could and if there was too much slag down there I used a cut-off wheel to open it back up, then filled back in. PITA.

I overlayed some 3/32" x 1/2" wide strips across the joint also. I welded the strips all the way around. For these I bumped the amperage up to about 55 amps. At that amperage I had better visibility between the pool and slag. Bouncing between heat on the strip vs heat on the tube I was able to get the pool to flow well enough (for the most part) with little blowing through, just in a couple places that were still caught with the pool enough to freeze over.

I almost switched to 6011 or 6010 for the blow out repairs due to the slag problem of the 7014. However, I only have those in 1/8" at the smallest.

It would seem to me that the easiest thing to do would be use a low-slag, fast-freeze rod for the hole fixes and just poke at it little by little so as to not over-heat the part, almost like layering tack welds. However, keeping the amperage down low enough for that work with a 1/8" rod on the thin wall pipe would be so low the rod wouldn't light or stay lit well enough to set enough metal down for the task of building up material.

Therein lies my question - if you had thin material to work with and needed to build up material or fill a hole with a stick electrode - how would you do it? What rod, what amperage?

For what it is worth, the 6010 tacks I did were at 70 amps. That was about where I needed to be for the rod to light well, but it was definitely only good for a quick tack = way too much heat if I held it too long.





Where the hole is closest to the wood brush handle is where the parts were broken - both in the same place all the way across smack in the centerline of the hole.

[Kelvin]

3/32" 6011 is one of the most useful welding rods you can have in the garage/shop.

For me, my #1 rod is 1/8" 6010. I'm not that good a welder (not enough arc time) but I find 1/8" 601X easier than 3/32" -- even on thin stuff. (I do blow holes, but it's not hard to fix them with 601X). 3/32" 6010 is just too floppy for me. It's like wet spaghetti.

What I like about 601X is that you know it's cutting in. No having to descab for restrikes like with 7018. Not even all that much need to deslag most of the time for what I do on repairs and reclaimed and scrap steel. If something needs to be tougher, I'll put in root with 6010 and then 7018 over top.

I've got a mower handle here that I welded in the same way in the same place as OP with 1/8" 6010 and it's still going strong 10 yrs later...

[FlyFishn]

I can also remove broken taps using arc welding.

Dave

Side-tracking here - do explain. That, and bolt extraction, are tasks I want to learn how to do. A mechanic buddy of mine does a fair amount of MIG welding and has tack welded nuts on broken bolts.

When you say you've removed broken taps with arc welding I assume by "arc" you mean stick? I find it a bit humorous how often SMAW/stick welding is referred to simply as "arc" welding - when every conventional electric welding process is technically "arc welding" as the heat source is an electrical arc (SMAW, GTAW, MIG, FCAW...)

I would imagine there is a way you can wet a rod to the end of a broken bolt or tap, then potentially spin the rod and the bolt/tap attached at the end. However, if the broken off stud (what ever it is) is tight I could see where the welded on rod wouldn't be able to get the torque to the broken stud without the weld or the rod material giving up first.

[Oscar]

I dont think the rod would hold the torque very easily. Would be tricky. Probably only in limited situations.

[FlyFishn]

3/32" 6011 is one of the most useful welding rods you can have in the garage/shop. Set machine for 45-50 amps and you should be able to fix up holes in sheet metal. If you don't have any metal to patch, you can always do field filler, break the flux off another rod , and use as filler. 3/32"and 1/8" both 6011, 7014 should always be in your garage/shop. It should cover 99% of most common uses.

Good luck

HTH

3/32" 6011 is one of the most useful welding rods you can have in the garage/shop.

For me, my #1 rod is 1/8" 6010. I'm not that good a welder (not enough arc time) but I find 1/8" 601X easier than 3/32" -- even on thin stuff. (I do blow holes, but it's not hard to fix them with 601X). 3/32" 6010 is just too floppy for me. It's like wet spaghetti.

What I like about 601X is that you know it's cutting in. No having to descab for restrikes like with 7018. Not even all that much need to deslag most of the time for what I do on repairs and reclaimed and scrap steel. If something needs to be tougher, I'll put in root with 6010 and then 7018 over top.

I've got a mower handle here that I welded in the same way in the same place as OP with 1/8" 6010 and it's still going strong 10 yrs later...

6013 is low pen rod.
Using 6011 will blow more holes.

I do have a box of 3/32" 6013. I pretty much set my mind against using 6013 for anything, but I got it because I figured I'd try it on sheet metal at some point. The handle isn't, to me, "sheet metal" - it is a structural part, however thin, but still structural. Maybe that would have been a better rod - at least for building the holes back up?

I can't remember the last time I used a 6013 rod - I'm sure I did on a farm somewhere 6-10 years ago. If it doesn't penetrate like 6011 or 6010 - will it get through slag? That was one of the biggest pains with the 7014 - the slag it produced blocked the next weld. If 6013 can get through its thinner slag then the slag inclusion problem of the 7014 would be eliminated. Of course, best practice is to clean the slag. Inside of a hole and crevasse between two welds you can only get it so clean though...

[12V71]

This is a "hail mary" repair in thinned out rusted galvanized pipe, I use 6011C for this kind of work, no grinding, no cleaning except for a scratch with the bare end of a rod (you dont want to remove good metal) The TB 302 showed about 64-66 amps with 1/8" rod. Been doing this for years, got it to hold water for 3 days to wet the crop down so they could install a new pipe.

[FlyFishn]

This is a "hail mary" repair in thinned out rusted galvanized pipe, I use 6011C for this kind of work, no grinding, no cleaning except for a scratch with the bare end of a rod (you dont want to remove good metal) The TB 302 showed about 64-66 amps with 1/8" rod. Been doing this for years, got it to hold water for 3 days to wet the crop down so they could install a new pipe.

Interesting. What is the pipe, specifically, and what type of system is it installed in? I gather irrigation - but that is up on a tower of some kind so you got me really curious...

[12V71]

Interesting. What is the pipe, specifically, and what type of system is it installed in? I gather irrigation - but that is up on a tower of some kind so you got me really curious...

That is the center upright in the pivot of a center pivot irrigation system. 8" 12 ga.wall hot galvanized. The fitting I welded around is where the 480V power and control wires enter the pipe going to a swivel on top. What creates that break is having the top packing too tight and the electrical conduit will flex the pipe wall in that area, cracking the zinc and letting the steel rust out. And it always seems to show up just after a crop is planted and needs the water the most.

[tapwelder]

Thin wall vs ease of welding is relative to field of work. Anything over 16 g is pretty easily accomplished with stick. I would think most lawnmower handles are thinner than 16 g.

6013 does not need to penetrate like 6011 on that project. Hence the holes from your deep penetrating holes.

[smithdoor]

I remove taps 3/8" and up with flux core E71-1 0.053 and 6013 ⅛"
I always having some braking a tap
First started taking with Hammer 🔨 and punch.
Welding is a lot faster

Dave

Side-tracking here - do explain. That, and bolt extraction, are tasks I want to learn how to do. A mechanic buddy of mine does a fair amount of MIG welding and has tack welded nuts on broken bolts.

When you say you've removed broken taps with arc welding I assume by "arc" you mean stick? I find it a bit humorous how often SMAW/stick welding is referred to simply as "arc" welding - when every conventional electric welding process is technically "arc welding" as the heat source is an electrical arc (SMAW, GTAW, MIG, FCAW...)

I would imagine there is a way you can wet a rod to the end of a broken bolt or tap, then potentially spin the rod and the bolt/tap attached at the end. However, if the broken off stud (what ever it is) is tight I could see where the welded on rod wouldn't be able to get the torque to the broken stud without the weld or the rod material giving up first.

[smithdoor]

Most had a hard time with 3/32" 6013
For some unknown reason ⅛ 6013 works better. Most like 5/32” 6013
.

Dave

I do have a box of 3/32" 6013. I pretty much set my mind against using 6013 for anything, but I got it because I figured I'd try it on sheet metal at some point. The handle isn't, to me, "sheet metal" - it is a structural part, however thin, but still structural. Maybe that would have been a better rod - at least for building the holes back up?

I can't remember the last time I used a 6013 rod - I'm sure I did on a farm somewhere 6-10 years ago. If it doesn't penetrate like 6011 or 6010 - will it get through slag? That was one of the biggest pains with the 7014 - the slag it produced blocked the next weld. If 6013 can get through its thinner slag then the slag inclusion problem of the 7014 would be eliminated. Of course, best practice is to clean the slag. Inside of a hole and crevasse between two welds you can only get it so clean though...

[FlyFishn]

Thin wall vs ease of welding is relative to field of work. Anything over 16 g is pretty easily accomplished with stick. I would think most lawnmower handles are thinner than 16 g.

6013 does not need to penetrate like 6011 on that project. Hence the holes from your deep penetrating holes.

You mean over 16 gauge in thickness (meaning thicker than 16g)? Or over 16 gauge in gauge (meaning thinner than 16g)? The bigger the number the smaller the thickness...

I am not sure the thickness of the tubing, I can measure it. The parts didn't make it back on today. Maybe tomorrow.

As to 6011 and the holes - the parts I worked on I only used 5/64" 7014 for the actual welding. 1/8" 6010 was used for tacks, but removed once parts were secured with the 5/64" 7014. So there was no 6011 (or 6010 for that matter) in use when I made the holes - they were made with the 5/64" 7014. The problems I ran in to were with the amperage too low I couldn't distinguish between the pool and slag and the main joint (beveled which I think was a mistake on this thin of metal) was too easy to blow through.

[Welder Dave]

I didn't read through all the drawn out crap but one thing that I don't think has been mentioned is that using 6010/6011 allows for a series of tacks to fill a gap or holes and the flux isn't usually a problem to weld over. This is a huge advantage over other rods. You can also turn the heat down pretty low and still strike an arc. O/A would have been better for the mower handle.

[Welder Dave]

Other machine is a flux core, and I haven't put it back together yet. So stick is all I have at the moment. Otherwise flux core is the only other process I have (ironically, dad got it years back for just this - mower repairs).



What I was getting at is the amperage for the 6010 I used for tack welding was set to the low end of the spectrum - and had to be there - for the tacks to work. I was fighting sticking rods down at 55 or so (on my machine). I figured it wasn't worth it when I was just trying to throw a tack down real quick, so I cranked the amps up and was able to to knock the tacks out real easy.

But the amperage I was using for the tacks was in "blow through" grounds - by a long shot. So with that rod on my machine with what I was working on I couldn't get to "high enough to wet in, and low enough to not blow through". For the 7014 I used - that is pretty much what I did, but even that small 5/64" rod on low heat blew through the beveled main joint (I made thin metal even thinner - I think that was a bad idea on the tubing, would have been better just to clean up the joint and leave it full thickness). The wetting, as you put it, was better on the added metal strips with 55 amps - even though 40 blew through the main joint. At 55 I could see enough of the pool in relation to the slag that I could get an idea of what was going on and it worked better, but if I didn't move from piece to piece (strip and tube) to spread the heat out it was still definitely in "blow through" territory.

Yeah, the welds are ugly (they are uglier on the other piece and the other side) but I think they will hold fine. There is a lot of reinforcement with the strips and the welds distributing that load back against the tubing. If it does crack, we'll re do it.

I've seen where guys doing body work repairs on vehicle sheet metal will tack weld the joints. The added pieces for repairs look like they have a bunch of dots all the way around. I believe that is normally done with MIG, not sure about other processes. It would seem to me a couple tacks and one could TIG those types of joints pretty easy. As to stick welding - especially dealing with the 7014 - slag is a big problem. So the line of tack welds doesn't work as easy.

I've also seen people finishing beads in fillet welds to the ends by doing the "tack welding" at the end. They bring the pool nearly to the end, let it cool, and restart on the end to add metal and bring the pool out to the edge of the part. With a low-slag electrode I could see that, but there again - 7014, 7018, etc - even if you cleaned the flux that might not work, especially if you need to burn the rod for a bit before the coating burns to shield the arc.

In my case, I didn't have the porosity issue on start-up with the 7014 - but the slag was a PITA. If I could have welded that stuff without risk of blowing through (tad thicker metal) it would have been perfect - the flux does come off really easy, so long as it is not jammed between 2 beads. So I guess that is my "take away" of the project - slag is a PITA when burning through thin material.

I'll see if I can find some small diameter 6010's or 6011's. Seems to me I saw some 1/16" 6011's at Tractor Supply, but they came in a 1/2lb box for like $18. That was the day I got my 1/16" 7014's. They were in a 1lb box for about the same price as the other ones - so twice as many rods for the same price is what I figured (though, 1lb of any rod is still a "small box").

I can't understand how you could ever afford the welder in the first place??? Flat bar for coupons is too expensive, rods are too expensive and turning the machine on must be too expensive too because you spend all all your time typing essays on stuff you don't understand instead of burning rods. How did you ever afford all fancy electronic gadgets you have? Your real close to wearing out your welcome with all your long winded queries. I'm sure I'm not the only one getting a little tired of it. Sorry.

[Kelvin]

I do have a box of 3/32" 6013. I pretty much set my mind against using 6013 for anything, but I got it because I figured I'd try it on sheet metal at some point. The handle isn't, to me, "sheet metal" - it is a structural part, however thin, but still structural. Maybe that would have been a better rod - at least for building the holes back up?

I can't remember the last time I used a 6013 rod - I'm sure I did on a farm somewhere 6-10 years ago. If it doesn't penetrate like 6011 or 6010 - will it get through slag? That was one of the biggest pains with the 7014 - the slag it produced blocked the next weld. If 6013 can get through its thinner slag then the slag inclusion problem of the 7014 would be eliminated. Of course, best practice is to clean the slag. Inside of a hole and crevasse between two welds you can only get it so clean though...

I should have been clearer. When I say "601X," what I mean is 6010 or 6011 -- NOT 6013. I don't care for 6013 and don't remember the last time I used any.