I checked - and the machine is locked at 60Hz.
I'll have to wait till tomorrow to run it on a 220 circuit - but ran it tonight without filler metal at 140 amps on a 115 and the results were far less than desirable. I'll post photos in the am. Bead width was nearly 1/2" wide in no time - even with backing off the pedal...
It certainly puddled faster and was able to push the puddle along - but cooked the work piece in no time with a fairly decent travel speed. 2 of the beads have what looks like a crack running down the middle of them.
Anyway - it's late - camera is inside... Live to fight another day. So far - the results with the machine are all over the place... Toward the end the arc started wandering everywhere. I still think I've got a crap regulator, dodgy ground and now, a less than crisp argon tank... Waiting for the moment when I can blame everything on ME.
- IMG_2899[1].JPG (40.83 KiB) Viewed 2215 times
I'll get a new tank of argon tomorrow and and new ground clamp - just to rule them out - and see if I can't get a few beads laid down at 170 while running the machine at 220.
Then I'll post the results.
The middle bead shows where you fouled your tungsten and kept welding. That's why it cracked when cooling because you created a pocket of porosity. Same for the bottom.
It is likely that your interpretation of a "puddle" is incorrect. You only want to see a shallow pool of the surface wetting. Not too deep. Once the oxide layer comes off, the surface will immediately turn molten. That's your key to add filler or move.
Don't be alarmed that you get cracks with no filler at this stage. The point of that drill is to get you to read the puddle, move the torch, and feather the pedal. Top bead looks good. A little less heat once you travel will keep the material from heat soaking and you losing the width of the puddle.
Also pay attention to the backside of the material. At this stage, you should not expect to see a pronounced penetration line. If you do, less heat once you establish the puddle.
It is likely that your interpretation of a "puddle" is incorrect. You only want to see a shallow pool of the surface wetting. Not too deep. Once the oxide layer comes off, the surface will immediately turn molten. That's your key to add filler or move.
Don't be alarmed that you get cracks with no filler at this stage. The point of that drill is to get you to read the puddle, move the torch, and feather the pedal. Top bead looks good. A little less heat once you travel will keep the material from heat soaking and you losing the width of the puddle.
Also pay attention to the backside of the material. At this stage, you should not expect to see a pronounced penetration line. If you do, less heat once you establish the puddle.
Both of those welds penetrated all the way through. Once I let off the pedal a little bit the pool would no longer advance - and of course - no matter what - the metal would get too hot and start to blow away by the end.Also pay attention to the backside of the material. At this stage, you should not expect to see a pronounced penetration line. If you do, less heat once you establish the puddle.
Come tomorrow I'll give it another shot... Looking forward to it.
But I've seen people - Jody being one of them - weld very thin sheets of aluminum at all sorts of amperage - and have the weld take several minutes to complete with maybe one restart - with no burn-through, distortion or major calamities - so I'm having a hard time believing that the only solution to all of this is "turn the amps up almost as far as they will go and then race like hell to make it to the other side of the coupon." The metal in the picture was lit up for less than 20- 30 seconds.
Somewhere - there's a piece of the puzzle missing. I'll be really happy when I find it...
The recommended settings for this machine for 1/8" aluminum are 90-140 amps with a 3/32 electrode. I've heard people recommend always going with the lowest possible setting for amps, Jody being one of them... So the recommendation for setting the machine to 170 is out of spec with the manufacturers guidelines and doesn't match what other people are saying - but I'll do it - because there has to be a baseline somewhere.
I'll get everything set and document it - then work back from there... I really do appreciate all the help and guidance...
Use up to 170 to get your puddle, then back off. Also, when you use filler you’ll need more amps.
On the drill with no filler, the puddle won’t advance. But move your torch and linger until the new location creates a puddle to width you seek.
On 1/8” ally, it takes amps to create a puddle and probably 90-100 to keep it. If that range helps you better understand how much you need to back off, all the better. Or use 130 and get a puddle, but you’ll still need to taper the heat as you move along.
On the drill with no filler, the puddle won’t advance. But move your torch and linger until the new location creates a puddle to width you seek.
On 1/8” ally, it takes amps to create a puddle and probably 90-100 to keep it. If that range helps you better understand how much you need to back off, all the better. Or use 130 and get a puddle, but you’ll still need to taper the heat as you move along.
I don't recall seeing Jody saying that. It's funny because 99% of the time people on forums have trouble with TIG welding aluminum, it ends up being A) too little amperage because they're scared B) incorrect torch angle and C) too long arc length. Usually "A" ends up being something ridiculous like 70-80A for 1/8" thick aluminum and they wonder why they can't get anything going. Stick around about a decade. You'll see it. A lot.studioq wrote:I've heard people recommend always going with the lowest possible setting for amps, Jody being one of them... So the recommendation for setting the machine to 170 is out of spec with the manufacturers guidelines and doesn't match what other people are saying - but I'll do it - because there has to be a baseline somewhere.
[youtube]https://youtu.be/K3NTAuDjuYA[/youtube]
This video - starting around 8:08 - has Jody welding some really thin metal at a very comfortable, slow pace, at around 80 amps - or 2 amps per thousandth (roughly). No racing. No running. No burn-through - on a 60Hz machine...
So - I'm not crazy that it CAN be done... Just isn't happening for me... If there's a foot pedal involved here it would lead one to believe that 80 amps is only the starting frequency... So - one might be a little curious why I only have about 10-15 seconds to run across a 5" coupon before the metal starts to burn away... But I think I'm beginning to learn... New machine settings used on some test coupons...
Machine running on 240 power - 170 amps - 2% lanthanated 3/32 electrode - #8 stubby gas lens @15-17 CFM - 2" x 1/8" aluminum brushed and wiped - no filler - just the torch (but you already knew that).
Certainly far better results than before - certainly far from perfect... But I'm learning a lot more this way... Just no imaginable time for adding filler at the speed I have to travel. My hand is propped - and I even cheated one time and used the other hand to meter my movement. I stopped that right away once I caught myself doing it.
This video - starting around 8:08 - has Jody welding some really thin metal at a very comfortable, slow pace, at around 80 amps - or 2 amps per thousandth (roughly). No racing. No running. No burn-through - on a 60Hz machine...
So - I'm not crazy that it CAN be done... Just isn't happening for me... If there's a foot pedal involved here it would lead one to believe that 80 amps is only the starting frequency... So - one might be a little curious why I only have about 10-15 seconds to run across a 5" coupon before the metal starts to burn away... But I think I'm beginning to learn... New machine settings used on some test coupons...
Machine running on 240 power - 170 amps - 2% lanthanated 3/32 electrode - #8 stubby gas lens @15-17 CFM - 2" x 1/8" aluminum brushed and wiped - no filler - just the torch (but you already knew that).
Certainly far better results than before - certainly far from perfect... But I'm learning a lot more this way... Just no imaginable time for adding filler at the speed I have to travel. My hand is propped - and I even cheated one time and used the other hand to meter my movement. I stopped that right away once I caught myself doing it.
- IMG_2903[1].JPG (42.74 KiB) Viewed 2200 times
- IMG_2904[1].JPG (52.17 KiB) Viewed 2200 times
- IMG_2905[1].JPG (53.24 KiB) Viewed 2200 times
- IMG_2906[1].JPG (38.01 KiB) Viewed 2200 times
And a few minutes before the argon ran out... Or pretty much as it was running out...
Some dividends... Not getting cocky... Just happy to see something somewhat recognizable...
Some dividends... Not getting cocky... Just happy to see something somewhat recognizable...
- IMG_E2908[1].JPG (34.45 KiB) Viewed 2197 times
- IMG_E2908[1].JPG (34.45 KiB) Viewed 2197 times
- Attachments
-
- IMG_2909[1].JPG (52.99 KiB) Viewed 2197 times
There you go- lots of progress there.
As you move the torch, watch the oxide layer just get blown away and reveal the base aluminum. You should begin to see that, and then the surface wets, and you're off.
The same will be true as you introduce filler. Get a puddle, add filler, advance. Add filler, advance.
With filler, you have lot's more time to control your travel speed. The filler cools the puddle promptly.
Look at the end of each of your beads above. That "fisheye" or "crater" at the end- that is where you did not taper off the amps nearly enough. It's exaggerated now with no filler, but as you approach the end, really TAPER the heat, perhaps even circle as you do. That will help eliminate the crater.
The crater is a stress point that will crack later. Learn this habit now to avoid solving the problem later when it matters
As you move the torch, watch the oxide layer just get blown away and reveal the base aluminum. You should begin to see that, and then the surface wets, and you're off.
The same will be true as you introduce filler. Get a puddle, add filler, advance. Add filler, advance.
With filler, you have lot's more time to control your travel speed. The filler cools the puddle promptly.
Look at the end of each of your beads above. That "fisheye" or "crater" at the end- that is where you did not taper off the amps nearly enough. It's exaggerated now with no filler, but as you approach the end, really TAPER the heat, perhaps even circle as you do. That will help eliminate the crater.
The crater is a stress point that will crack later. Learn this habit now to avoid solving the problem later when it matters
New Argon bottle - #6 stubby gas lens - 170 amps - 3/32 filler rod.
The cleaning action is far better and no more soot in the welds...
If it stays like this - and gets better from here - I'll be a happy man...
Thanks to all for helping me think it through... I'm sure I'll have more questions and issues... It is after all - welding...
The cleaning action is far better and no more soot in the welds...
If it stays like this - and gets better from here - I'll be a happy man...
Thanks to all for helping me think it through... I'm sure I'll have more questions and issues... It is after all - welding...
- IMG_2911[1].jpg (58.07 KiB) Viewed 2185 times
I remember doing all those aluminum drills when I first got an AC TIG machine. Lots of learning and muscle memory to be obtained. I'm definintely out of practice, but proper practice is all it boils down to, when the essential variables are known, controlled, and addressed.
Still a babe in the woods - but 6 pieces of aluminum became 3...
Practicing pulsing the pedal and adding filler. 1/8 aluminum - #6 stubby - 3/32 electrode - 1/16 filler - 140 amps.
They seem a little cold - but it's the first time I was able to do it without blowing away the metal on any of the parts.
I doubt I got much above mid-pedal for very long - but would pulse higher and then advance and feed rod when it got hotter... Still a vast improvement from a few days ago... Not very consistent - but I'll take it.
2 pieces of 3/4" angle...
Practicing pulsing the pedal and adding filler. 1/8 aluminum - #6 stubby - 3/32 electrode - 1/16 filler - 140 amps.
They seem a little cold - but it's the first time I was able to do it without blowing away the metal on any of the parts.
I doubt I got much above mid-pedal for very long - but would pulse higher and then advance and feed rod when it got hotter... Still a vast improvement from a few days ago... Not very consistent - but I'll take it.
- IMG_2917[1].JPG (28.17 KiB) Viewed 1860 times
- IMG_2918[1].JPG (33.78 KiB) Viewed 1860 times
- IMG_2919[1].JPG (26.99 KiB) Viewed 1860 times
It looks to me that your arc length is too long. That can cause two issues: an excessive frost line outside the weld area, and cold welds. Some of the bead looks really good.
Overall you look just like a guy who's only been TIG welding for a few hours and is making progress everyday! A few more days, and it will all magically start coming together.
Overall you look just like a guy who's only been TIG welding for a few hours and is making progress everyday! A few more days, and it will all magically start coming together.
Finally about as dialed in as I can be on this 1/8 stock... Time to pad beads... One right after the other on top of a 1/4" chill plate. No blown out metal... Just learning to lay them down and control the pedal. I really appreciate you guys here... Couldn't have figured it out with out you.
Thanks!
Thanks!
- IMG_2920[1].JPG (53.79 KiB) Viewed 1873 times
The consistency of those last beads looks really good.
The frost line looks really wide on your beads. What Hz are you running? That is probably the biggest contributor to their width (etching). The lower the Hz, the wider the cleaning action, the deeper the penetration usually.
The frost line looks really wide on your beads. What Hz are you running? That is probably the biggest contributor to their width (etching). The lower the Hz, the wider the cleaning action, the deeper the penetration usually.
The machine is locked at 60Hz and only has "clearance effect" as a setting to balance cleaning vs penetration.
I have yet to really grow to understand it - but the negative side is supposed to be "more penetration - less cleaning" and the opposite when switched into the positive.
I have yet to really grow to understand it - but the negative side is supposed to be "more penetration - less cleaning" and the opposite when switched into the positive.
That is correct. I used to have one. At -5, that provides the most penetration/least cleaning, which in terms of Electrode Polarity, it is equivalent to 80% EN. At 0, it's 50% EN/50% EP, and at +5 it's 80% EP. So generally speaking, using the numbers from the knob, you want to be between -3 and -5. The more clockwise (numerically higher knob number) the more cleaning and heat into the tungsten and wider etching band. -5 is ideal if your metal is clean enough, so long as you don't see "black pepper" floating in the puddle.studioq wrote:The machine is locked at 60Hz and only has "clearance effect" as a setting to balance cleaning vs penetration.
I have yet to really grow to understand it - but the negative side is supposed to be "more penetration - less cleaning" and the opposite when switched into the positive.
Right now I'm a hair beyond -1 in the negative direction.
I can try fiddling with it. I have a new flow meter on the way - so waiting for it to arrive before I start changing settings arbitrarily. I'd like to (best as possible) be able to meter the results.
Change one thing at a time... Same goes for computer coding...
I'll post more results as I get them. Really excited by some of the ones I'm seeing now.
I can try fiddling with it. I have a new flow meter on the way - so waiting for it to arrive before I start changing settings arbitrarily. I'd like to (best as possible) be able to meter the results.
Change one thing at a time... Same goes for computer coding...
I'll post more results as I get them. Really excited by some of the ones I'm seeing now.
Nothing wrong with that setting as you get your muscle memory down, but eventually you'll likely want a narrower etched zone, and wonder why there isn't all that much depth of fusion into the joint; that's partially where that "clearance effect" will come into play. Just FYI for the future.studioq wrote:Right now I'm a hair beyond -1 in the negative direction.
I can try fiddling with it. I have a new flow meter on the way - so waiting for it to arrive before I start changing settings arbitrarily. I'd like to (best as possible) be able to meter the results.
Change one thing at a time... Same goes for computer coding...
I'll post more results as I get them. Really excited by some of the ones I'm seeing now.
Of all the grips that I've tried - which allow me to feed filler rod without having to really think about it? The Kane-Grip - ala Kid Kane...
With every other method so far - I end up feeding the rod by moving my hand around - rather than just a fluid motion with my fingers. I still have a long, long way to go - but I'm really surprised that this one seems to work. At first I never thought it would... Thank you Rush Kane for sharing it... Really helped me a lot...
I can only do it from one well-rested position - but a hell of a start...
With every other method so far - I end up feeding the rod by moving my hand around - rather than just a fluid motion with my fingers. I still have a long, long way to go - but I'm really surprised that this one seems to work. At first I never thought it would... Thank you Rush Kane for sharing it... Really helped me a lot...
I can only do it from one well-rested position - but a hell of a start...
- 20191227_Kane_Grip_Tests.jpg (52 KiB) Viewed 1788 times