Page 1 of 1

lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:44 am
by doneinone
I have been using ceriated electrodes on both steel and aluminum since I started. Last night I tried some lanthanated and found that it didn't hold as tight an arc as the ceriated. I made several practice passes on an eighth in piece of aluminum stock. I resharpened the electrode multiple times and switched back and forth and every time it seemed like the lanthanated was throwing a wider arc on the work surface. If I were to guess I would say I had to give the lanthanated more pedal before it would form a puddle and when it did it was much wider than what I was getting with the ceriated. Any ideas?

Re: lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 3:01 am
by Oscar
any ideas as to what? what are you asking specifically? what you have found has already been known. Ceriated has better arc starting capabilities than most other tungstens in aluminum TIG welding. 2%La would likely outlast it under high-power usage over a long period of time though.

Re: lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 4:17 am
by dirtmidget33
Jody does a comparison in a video on this page on tungstens
http://www.weldingtipsandtricks.com/tun ... rodes.html

Another tungsten video by Jody
Tungsten Electrodes - 2% lanthanated vs the rest…: http://youtu.be/bpanERwagaU

There is a great deal of tungsten info in this book put out by diamond products here is link to PDF. Goes into science of the why's and performance of different blends.
http://www.diamondground.com/TungstenGuidebook2013.pdf

Are you using an inverter or transformer machine. That makes a difference on how machine deals with arc and how tungsten performs.

I personally only use 2% Thoriated and 2%Lanthanated. Never ever seen a good reason to try the ceriated even though it seems Miller and a few other manufacturers seem to always recommend it on there calculators. From my personal observations I would have to agree with Jody 2% Lanthanated pretty much is the most useful.

What brand did you use, I use HTP thought about trying the German Wolfram brand out of curiosity ,but have found nothing wrong with HTP stuff

Re: lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 5:20 am
by doneinone
Thanks for the replies, I tried the lanthanated after watching Jody's video. I am mostly practicing on thin wall 6061 tubing and like to be able to keep the arc parked on top of the puddle as I go. I would worry that the lanthanated might make this more difficult. I am running a Lincoln square wave 355 and although TIG is new to me I have done gas welding on aircraft frames in the past. I have been using 1/16th electrodes mostly and running at lower power settings. I only have the 3/32nd lanthanated to play with. I will get some 1/16th and see how they do. Both the rods I tested were Miller brand. Thanks for the link to the tungsten info. I will check it out.

Re: lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:38 pm
by doneinone
Thanks for the links Dirtmidget, the paper from Diamond ground was great. I will print that one out and keep it in the shop. I think that what I saw may have more to do with the way I am grinding the tips and less to do with the type of tungsten.

Re: lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:41 pm
by Oscar
Why worry? Just stick with the ceriated since you already know it works for you. ;)

Re: lanthanated vs ceriated

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2014 7:18 pm
by doneinone
Good advice Oscar, I think that is what I will do.