- weldin mike 27
-
Weldmonger
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:59 pm
-
Location:Australia; Victoria
Hey,
Just a few questions, to glean a little more information.
What pos was it welded in? Also, what if defects were visible in your fractured sample? Lack of fusion, porosity? Was the failure though the weld metal or in the plate/ heat affected zone. What filler material is being used.
Mick
Just a few questions, to glean a little more information.
What pos was it welded in? Also, what if defects were visible in your fractured sample? Lack of fusion, porosity? Was the failure though the weld metal or in the plate/ heat affected zone. What filler material is being used.
Mick
Hey Aaron
Many test fail tensile due to excessive heat input.
Are you letting it cool between passes or just welding it up
one right after the other? Let it cool down between passes
and don't speed cool it. Run a pass, go take a whiz. Run another
pass go get a drink of water. Take your sweet time. Slow and
steady wins the race.
Many test fail tensile due to excessive heat input.
Are you letting it cool between passes or just welding it up
one right after the other? Let it cool down between passes
and don't speed cool it. Run a pass, go take a whiz. Run another
pass go get a drink of water. Take your sweet time. Slow and
steady wins the race.
Aaron.
You mentioned that it is for a shop procedure.
Are you following an actual procedure (a welding procedure specification - wps)?
If so, then probably the wps was prepared based upon an actual weld that had the welding parameters written down during the welding, and was later ndt and mechanical tested.
If not, and if it is verbal procedure, there are chances that not all of the procedure is explained to the welder. In these cases, often the welder just bases his parameters on his experience. But this is not a correct approach if the weld is going to be mechanically tested (bends, pulls, impacts, etc.).
What is the alloy of the carbon steel and what is your filler metal?
When you write, "square to bevel", do you mean one piece has zero degrees and the other 35 degrees?
Or do you mean both pieces have a 35 degree bevel and you are working with a 70 degree groove?
Tanks.
Alexa
You mentioned that it is for a shop procedure.
Are you following an actual procedure (a welding procedure specification - wps)?
If so, then probably the wps was prepared based upon an actual weld that had the welding parameters written down during the welding, and was later ndt and mechanical tested.
If not, and if it is verbal procedure, there are chances that not all of the procedure is explained to the welder. In these cases, often the welder just bases his parameters on his experience. But this is not a correct approach if the weld is going to be mechanically tested (bends, pulls, impacts, etc.).
What is the alloy of the carbon steel and what is your filler metal?
When you write, "square to bevel", do you mean one piece has zero degrees and the other 35 degrees?
Or do you mean both pieces have a 35 degree bevel and you are working with a 70 degree groove?
Tanks.
Alexa
The material is 44w. The wire is aristo rod 12.5 by esab. As for position, flat and horizontal. The joint prep was 90○ and 35○degrees again with3/32 land and root opening. There are no stop and starts. This is to develop the shop procedure so parameters are up to me. There are 3, 3/4"side bend coupons and 3, 1 1/2" tensile test. The inspector has said in his 35 yrs he's never done a wps like this.
Aaron.
If I understood correctly, the butt joint, will be a connection from a straight bevel and a 35 degree bevel.
This is a total of 35 degrees for the whole groove.
The 35 degrees seems exceedingly narrow for adequate access and orientation of the wire and/or nozzle during welding.
This might result in a bevel fusion and root penetration problems.
If your plates are very thin, then perhaps it is not a problem, but I doubt this since you are required side bends and pulls.
But if you have thicker plates, then the access and orientation, is very important.
Please consider developing the welding procedure to be welder friendly. Even though a seasoned hand, during the development of a procedure, may be able to weld a difficult joint with satisfactory test results, the procedure may not be so successful in actual production situations, where often the conditions are not as favorable as the development welding.
Tanks for the patience.
Alexa
If I understood correctly, the butt joint, will be a connection from a straight bevel and a 35 degree bevel.
This is a total of 35 degrees for the whole groove.
The 35 degrees seems exceedingly narrow for adequate access and orientation of the wire and/or nozzle during welding.
This might result in a bevel fusion and root penetration problems.
If your plates are very thin, then perhaps it is not a problem, but I doubt this since you are required side bends and pulls.
But if you have thicker plates, then the access and orientation, is very important.
Please consider developing the welding procedure to be welder friendly. Even though a seasoned hand, during the development of a procedure, may be able to weld a difficult joint with satisfactory test results, the procedure may not be so successful in actual production situations, where often the conditions are not as favorable as the development welding.
Tanks for the patience.
Alexa
- weldin mike 27
-
Weldmonger
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:59 pm
-
Location:Australia; Victoria
Hey,
Where i work, we were always told that 45 degrees was the minimum for a full pen weld. All tests with the same joint configuration as this, were either back ground or had big root gaps, up to 1/8". One test with this config was deemed too hard to achieve fusion with the square edge so was changed to a single vee prep. Id follow Alexas advice and increase your bevel angle or at least the root gap or both. (At least to the maximum allowed, some things like this can be altered if the customer agrees.)
Maybe you could ask the inspector for his input. 35 years, he may have picked up a few thricks.
Mick
Where i work, we were always told that 45 degrees was the minimum for a full pen weld. All tests with the same joint configuration as this, were either back ground or had big root gaps, up to 1/8". One test with this config was deemed too hard to achieve fusion with the square edge so was changed to a single vee prep. Id follow Alexas advice and increase your bevel angle or at least the root gap or both. (At least to the maximum allowed, some things like this can be altered if the customer agrees.)
Maybe you could ask the inspector for his input. 35 years, he may have picked up a few thricks.
Mick
- Otto Nobedder
-
Weldmonger
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:40 pm
-
Location:Near New Orleans
If you're passing the bends and failing the tensile, you may have wire that is not meeting it's claims. Where does it fail during the tensile? I'm guessing, with a pass in the bends, that a "cut and etch" of a failed part will show a filler failure, rather than an interface failure.
I never liked ESAB's consumables... They perform inconsistently spool-to-spool. I've not researched it, but I suspect they buy from several suppliers and slap their label on it.
Consider repeating your "best results" settings with, for example, a Lincoln brand wire of the same specification.
Steve S
I never liked ESAB's consumables... They perform inconsistently spool-to-spool. I've not researched it, but I suspect they buy from several suppliers and slap their label on it.
Consider repeating your "best results" settings with, for example, a Lincoln brand wire of the same specification.
Steve S
- weldin mike 27
-
Weldmonger
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:59 pm
-
Location:Australia; Victoria
Hey,
I had intially considered mentioning that, but then in all my wisdom thought better of it, and guess what, off the trail...... ....again. Nice work brain.
Mick
I had intially considered mentioning that, but then in all my wisdom thought better of it, and guess what, off the trail...... ....again. Nice work brain.
Mick
- Otto Nobedder
-
Weldmonger
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:40 pm
-
Location:Near New Orleans
Well, Mick, it's just one possibility.
When he mentioned ESAB, though... The most glaring example was an ethanol plant I worked, where we rejected an entire pallet of ESAB stick-rod (7018), when samples from three different cans welded inconsistently, not just one rod to another, but in the length of one rod. The flux would melt off unevenly, pointing the arc in random directions. We never even tried a bend test, since we couldnt get a reliable bead in the first place. I never saw anything but Lincoln Excalibur after that.
Steve S
When he mentioned ESAB, though... The most glaring example was an ethanol plant I worked, where we rejected an entire pallet of ESAB stick-rod (7018), when samples from three different cans welded inconsistently, not just one rod to another, but in the length of one rod. The flux would melt off unevenly, pointing the arc in random directions. We never even tried a bend test, since we couldnt get a reliable bead in the first place. I never saw anything but Lincoln Excalibur after that.
Steve S
- MotherFluxxer
-
Active Member
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Thu Dec 29, 2011 2:24 pm
I second Otto's comments on the ESAB consumables. The shop I work for uses ESAB ER70S-6 .035 exclusively and it is the most inconsistent wire I have ever used. Lincoln is the way to go for consumables.
- weldin mike 27
-
Weldmonger
-
Posts:
-
Joined:Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:59 pm
-
Location:Australia; Victoria
Hey,
Its funny, I always thought that esab were one of the heavy hitters of the industry. MMMM maybe not. I bought a packet of 6013 rods of theirs, they seemed a bit..... .....funny. I thought it was just me, as i only stick weld at home.
Mick
Its funny, I always thought that esab were one of the heavy hitters of the industry. MMMM maybe not. I bought a packet of 6013 rods of theirs, they seemed a bit..... .....funny. I thought it was just me, as i only stick weld at home.
Mick