Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 343

Thread: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brethren, Mi
    Posts
    4,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    The guy is practicing, sounds pretty conciencious, Most of the worlds work or a good share of it is not highly engineered, some of the biggest failures are. I am not current with those guys but back in the day some of my good buds were Detroit firefighters, I know some from a couple other major cities and they are a bunch of smart and capable guys and know enough about climbing not to get on it if it wobbles and unlikely this will be used 50 or 100 at a time.
    People ride motorcycles, face hundreds of 1000's of tons of steel on the hiway that is driven by,,, lets say not all well trained careful operators,,, repaired by anyone with a pulse, by contractors and this is scary?
    There needs to be a class in high school for estimation, risk that type of thing. My brother cant tell the difference between a little or a lot either. Seems blurred, little, lot, all, none, these mean different things to different people.
    This isnt even a little scary and if it wouldnt pass xray on a nuke doesnt mean it wont work well on this simple ladder.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    7,767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    The way most use low hydrogen rod would not past code or e-ray.
    It is a real pain to do welding that pass X-rays.
    Low hydrogen welding rod can be brittle if not done to welding codes.

    This why shops in 1950's and 1960's used E6013 and E7024. E6010 and E6011 was only used for first pass only on some types work.
    I do not recall shops the using 6012.
    I did see a few times E7016 but when ask the reply was "no one uses today".

    Dave

    Quote Originally Posted by Sberry View Post
    The guy is practicing, sounds pretty conciencious, Most of the worlds work or a good share of it is not highly engineered, some of the biggest failures are. I am not current with those guys but back in the day some of my good buds were Detroit firefighters, I know some from a couple other major cities and they are a bunch of smart and capable guys and know enough about climbing not to get on it if it wobbles and unlikely this will be used 50 or 100 at a time.
    People ride motorcycles, face hundreds of 1000's of tons of steel on the hiway that is driven by,,, lets say not all well trained careful operators,,, repaired by anyone with a pulse, by contractors and this is scary?
    There needs to be a class in high school for estimation, risk that type of thing. My brother cant tell the difference between a little or a lot either. Seems blurred, little, lot, all, none, these mean different things to different people.
    This isnt even a little scary and if it wouldnt pass xray on a nuke doesnt mean it wont work well on this simple ladder.
    Last edited by smithdoor; 11-09-2021 at 09:20 AM.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    7,767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    In some old books it list E5011 and E5013 for use on mid steel.

    Dave

    Quote Originally Posted by Sberry View Post
    The guy is practicing, sounds pretty conciencious, Most of the worlds work or a good share of it is not highly engineered, some of the biggest failures are. I am not current with those guys but back in the day some of my good buds were Detroit firefighters, I know some from a couple other major cities and they are a bunch of smart and capable guys and know enough about climbing not to get on it if it wobbles and unlikely this will be used 50 or 100 at a time.
    People ride motorcycles, face hundreds of 1000's of tons of steel on the hiway that is driven by,,, lets say not all well trained careful operators,,, repaired by anyone with a pulse, by contractors and this is scary?
    There needs to be a class in high school for estimation, risk that type of thing. My brother cant tell the difference between a little or a lot either. Seems blurred, little, lot, all, none, these mean different things to different people.
    This isnt even a little scary and if it wouldnt pass xray on a nuke doesnt mean it wont work well on this simple ladder.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brethren, Mi
    Posts
    4,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    12 was the sheet metal rod alternative to 11. 16 ,,, seems I have seen it somewhere but its so long ago its off the charts.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    7,767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Back 1960's I was learning welding and would see all charts too.
    But when I was in shops they did not use most rods. I wonder how used the other rods and the reply was "it is used at ship yards".

    Dave

    Quote Originally Posted by Sberry View Post
    12 was the sheet metal rod alternative to 11. 16 ,,, seems I have seen it somewhere but its so long ago its off the charts.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    5,208
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    People either didn't notice or are forgetting this tower is only the height of two connex boxes and it is only holding the weight of a couple of guys at a time. Its not a multi story training tower with stairs and windows. Its a makeshift training tool. It doesn't need to be engineered and it doesn't need to be welded with low hydrogen rods. I mean that would be like engineering a tree fort for my kids. Sometimes too much engineering is overkill.
    Miller Multimatic 255

  7. Likes Josey, And256 liked this post
  8. #82
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    7,767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    I would see specifically in 1960's and 1970's with (E60XX). In 1980's I would see (E70XX and no solid wire). It was rarely to some different.

    On my drawings I would spec out E7018, E11018-D2 and or E71T-1 with per heating.

    Dave

    Quote Originally Posted by Louie1961 View Post
    People either didn't notice or are forgetting this tower is only the height of two connex boxes and it is only holding the weight of a couple of guys at a time. Its not a multi story training tower with stairs and windows. Its a makeshift training tool. It doesn't need to be engineered and it doesn't need to be welded with low hydrogen rods. I mean that would be like engineering a tree fort for my kids. Sometimes too much engineering is overkill.

  9. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brethren, Mi
    Posts
    4,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Louie1961 View Post
    People either didn't notice or are forgetting this tower is only the height of two connex boxes and it is only holding the weight of a couple of guys at a time. Its not a multi story training tower with stairs and windows. Its a makeshift training tool. It doesn't need to be engineered and it doesn't need to be welded with low hydrogen rods. I mean that would be like engineering a tree fort for my kids. Sometimes too much engineering is overkill.
    You and I think a lot alike. Its not that we are always right but we are moderates. I have great appreciation for engineers.

  10. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brethren, Mi
    Posts
    4,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    I have seen this before, used telephone poles or 4x4's

  11. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    central Wis.
    Posts
    6,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    What's the big deal with using 7018? It's used every day by professional weldors. If it's any more $$ , it's a small difference. There's a reason you don't see 6013, 7014 or 7016 on a job site, it doesn't meet structural codes that are commonly used. If one can't run 7018 to acceptable standards, that person has no business welding on that job site. And once again this nonsense that 7018 MUST be kept in an oven for every use. Tons of it are burnt every day without seeing an oven. Most of it that does see an oven isnt used in full accordance with the certain code either. Anyways, 100 percent code compliance most likely isn't required here, but if one is to do it, why not at least attempt to do it correctly?

  12. #86
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    5,208
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by M J D View Post
    What's the big deal with using 7018?
    There's no big deal other than the OP said he felt more comfortable using 6013, and I don't think there is any reason to not use 6013. The structure as it stands was welded with either 6010 or 6011 and has been fine for a long time up to now.
    Miller Multimatic 255

  13. #87
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    central Wis.
    Posts
    6,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Louie1961 View Post
    There's no big deal other than the OP said he felt more comfortable using 6013, and I don't think there is any reason to not use 6013. The structure as it stands was welded with either 6010 or 6011 and has been fine for a long time up to now.
    So because it was a hack job then it's OK to do a hack job now?

  14. #88
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    B.C. Canada
    Posts
    8,380
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by M J D View Post
    So because it was a hack job then it's OK to do a hack job now?
    Iíve seen the OPís work and itís highly unlikely he will be doing a ďhack jobĒ on this job or elsewhere.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    :

  15. #89
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Mount Tabor VT
    Posts
    8,985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by farmersammm View Post
    I can't believe they'd use 60xx on a building site. It's not seismic rated as far as I know, and it just isn't what I've seen used. Any good structural guy should be well versed in 7018, or seismic rated wire. I couldn't imagine any WP calling for 60xx on structural iron. I might be wrong......dunno.
    As I said it was freestanding before welding. They cut out concrete floor anywhere a post would be, placed a 2' thick concrete pad. Posts supported horizontal beams, then perpendicular to those were steel truss joists. All this was inside a 20 year old steel warehouse. It was converted to a doctor's office facility.

    I can't say what standard it was built to, or what engineer signed off on it. I was surprised a faster process wasn't used. The welder explained that 6010 penetrates through rust better than other rods.
    An optimist is usually wrong, and when the unexpected happens is unprepared. A pessimist is usually right, when wrong, is delighted, and well prepared.

  16. #90
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,487
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    I like 7018

    I get great results with it.

    I don't like 6013


    That's how I base my decisions.

    Just need 7018, use it, keep it fresh, stay practised and current on it.


    Burning through rust is a moot point, I have a grinder and I know how to use it.

  17. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    7,767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    The 6013, 7014 or 7016 are in codes.

    It just welders for hire like using one rod like E7018. They also use E7018 per specifications for low hydrogen rod.

    Most today use flux core wire like E71T-11.

    Dave

    Quote Originally Posted by M J D View Post
    What's the big deal with using 7018? It's used every day by professional weldors. If it's any more $$ , it's a small difference. There's a reason you don't see 6013, 7014 or 7016 on a job site, it doesn't meet structural codes that are commonly used. If one can't run 7018 to acceptable standards, that person has no business welding on that job site. And once again this nonsense that 7018 MUST be kept in an oven for every use. Tons of it are burnt every day without seeing an oven. Most of it that does see an oven isnt used in full accordance with the certain code either. Anyways, 100 percent code compliance most likely isn't required here, but if one is to do it, why not at least attempt to do it correctly?

  18. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    central Wis.
    Posts
    6,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lis2323 View Post
    Iíve seen the OPís work and itís highly unlikely he will be doing a ďhack jobĒ on this job or elsewhere.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    I never said or implied that BB,the OP was going to do a hack job. What I meant was if the OP was to follow some " expert advice" posted on here, it would become a hack job.

  19. #93
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    central Wis.
    Posts
    6,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by smithdoor View Post
    The 6013, 7014 or 7016 are in codes.

    It just welders for hire like using one rod like E7018. They also use E7018 per specifications for low hydrogen rod.

    Most today use flux core wire like E71T-11.

    Dave
    If those other electrodes we're acceptable by code standard one would think they would be used for pre-approved code work. I'm sure there are scenarios where an in-house code may use them but certainly not for pre-approved code work . Why would one go thru the same work using an inferior material when there is no cost or labor savings?

  20. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Clovis California
    Posts
    7,767
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    My self going to a job sites I would use E7018. But that does not mean I could not use the other rods. The codes do not specify or only would say must comfor to AWS. Sometimes on specifications I would see " E70XX or greater ".
    Pipeline work is different set of rules.

    Dave

    FYI When going in to field I would have some E6011 and E6013 if need. But everyone would ask are using 7018 they had on idea what 7018 was or even how to use rod. Just

    Quote Originally Posted by M J D View Post
    If those other electrodes we're acceptable by code standard one would think they would be used for pre-approved code work. I'm sure there are scenarios where an in-house code may use them but certainly not for pre-approved code work . Why would one go thru the same work using an inferior material when there is no cost or labor savings?
    Last edited by smithdoor; 11-09-2021 at 03:49 PM.

  21. #95
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Mount Tabor VT
    Posts
    8,985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    I'd have said there is no reason to make other rod types if 7018 does it all. In my ignorance I've said 7018 was important to use, don't want to risk underbead hydrogen induced cracking. Others here more knowledgeable than I corrected it only matters in high carbon steel.

    6013 is a smooth weld to lay down flat. It would not be my choice for a vertical weld, takes too long to freeze.

    Messer 80TAC+ is the smoothest running all position rod ever.

    Unprepared steel, I want 6010 or 6011. I have blasted through rust & paint for welds on nasty steel. Its fast freeze properties mean it runs well vertical & overhead.
    An optimist is usually wrong, and when the unexpected happens is unprepared. A pessimist is usually right, when wrong, is delighted, and well prepared.

  22. #96
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    central Wis.
    Posts
    6,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    All the low hydrogen stuff aside, 7018 offers much more ductility which means less chance of cracking.

  23. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brethren, Mi
    Posts
    4,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    I think this is great. Guys likely doing this on down time but we could always get the government so hated to get involved,,, or better yet lets get a grant, a couple grant writers, some proposals, some review meetings, bet it could get done for say,,,,, what,,, 75k or so? To do something a ladder and decent tree branch could do?

  24. #98
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brethren, Mi
    Posts
    4,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    As Louie pointed out if this was a kids tree house everyone would be jumping on the fact it is overkill. A few bolts would hold it together and this guy is gonna weld it top bottom and up the sides. How we figure this all to "crack" and fall down more than most other stuff in the world, this is heavy duty and then some. Gonna work itself in to failure simply sitting there I seen lots of stuff 1/2 as good as this bouncing down hiways on logging equipment and this load aint squat.
    Any welder worth a pinch of **** can weld this up with any one of these rods without looking up a code.
    Last edited by Sberry; 11-09-2021 at 05:43 PM.

  25. Likes 12V71 liked this post
  26. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Mount Tabor VT
    Posts
    8,985
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sberry View Post
    I think this is great. Guys likely doing this on down time but we could always get the government so hated to get involved,,, or better yet lets get a grant, a couple grant writers, some proposals, some review meetings, bet it could get done for say,,,,, what,,, 75k or so? To do something a ladder and decent tree branch could do?
    Bring in some Feds. It'll cost $137,500. & it'll likely collapse with three firemen on it.

    I guess my point is this structure needs to support 1000 LBS. 6 square inches of weld cross section support the weight. If this weld is sound, it'll hold. Could weld it with coat hangers, it'd hold.

    The man hopes to use product familiar to him so his odds of a presentable weld are improved. I'd bet his weldment steel is A36. A 60,000 PSI tensile rod is almost overkill. If fusion is 1/4 of filler strength, there is no hazard.
    An optimist is usually wrong, and when the unexpected happens is unprepared. A pessimist is usually right, when wrong, is delighted, and well prepared.

  27. Likes 12V71, Munkul liked this post
  28. #100
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Laredo, Tx
    Posts
    6,661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Would I be wrong to use 6013 over 7018 on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie B View Post
    Messer 80TAC+ is the smoothest running all position rod ever.
    While I haven't ran all the all-position rods, but I do agree with how great it runs. I usually order a pound or two of 3/32" and 1/8" each time I place an order with HTP, which is pretty dang often, LOL.
    1st on WeldingWeb to have a scrolling sig!



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 1,664,384,413.86459 seconds with 12 queries