Pictures! Effect of stick electrode polarity on weld penetration

admin

Confused about stick polarity and it's effects on weld penetration?I was!There are conflicting posts saying:electrode negative gives more penetrationelectrode positive gives more penetrationWhich is correct?Contrasting statements on this site (The Welding Web) and between College Course sites.  On the sites of the major welding consumable manufactures, I found: ESAB - I found little to nothingMiller/Hobart - I couldn't find much.Lincoln - clear, concise and to the point (It's all there!)Here's the Lincoln Electric web link.  http://www.lincolnelectric.ca/knowle...ntent/acdc.aspThe article is titled, "AC/DC: Understanding Polarity".Source: adapted from New Lessons in Arc Welding, The Lincoln Electric Company, 1990The author (unknown 'guru' at Lincoln Electric) makes two statements:Statement #1"With few exceptions, electrode-positive (reversed polarity) results in deeper penetration. Electrode-negative (straight polarity) results in faster melt-off of the electrode and, therefore, faster deposition rate. The effect of different chemicals in the covering may change this condition."Statement #2"For proper penetration, uniform bead appearance, and good welding results, the correct polarity must be used when welding with any given metallic electrode. Incorrect polarity will cause poor penetration, irregular bead shape, excessive spatter, difficulty in controlling the arc, overheating, and rapid burning of the electrode."I was interested in part of statement #1.  "Electrode-positive (reversed polarity) results in deeper penetration."  Yeah, yeah, I'd heard that before... but where was the proof?  Where were the pictures of cut up, polished, etched welds showing that!  Why were there no pictures?[Try and find such pictures on the web - "Good Luck!"]OK, I'd do it myself.I'll make up a weld test-piece and use my own stick rods: 3/32 inch diameter in 6011, 6013, 7014 and 7018AC.  When done, I'll slice and dice, polish and etch - then I will know!Welding Rods:The rods were all 3/32 inch diameter.  The 7018AC was Lincoln Electric, 7014 was Forney, 6013 was Forney and the 6011 (no brand name) came from Princess Auto.The picture below shows:1. The test piece – two sections of mild steel cut from one piece.  Each is 10 inches long by 1.5 inches wide and ¼ inch thick.2. The assembled T-shaped test piece for a filet weld test.  I marked out 2 inch regions (with a gap between) for each of the four 3/32” welding rods I would be using 7018AC, 7014, 6013 and 6011.3. One side is for Electrode Negative (-), the other side is for Electrode Positive (+).   The same rod was used on adjacent sides on the T; 6011+ was just across the ‘T’ from 6011-, etc.4. The test piece was laid in a jig to position the weld at 45 degrees for an easy ‘flat-horizontal’ weld.Note: I welded in the following sequence: 6011+, 6011-, then 6013-, 6013+, then 7014+, 7014-, and finally 7018AC-, 7018AC+.The second picture below shows:5. The AC/DC welding machine I was using – simple cracker-box transformer welder with DC converting diodes and an arc-stabilizing inductor .6. The setting of the machine was the same for all rods – (far right scale) says 90 amps but I’m not certain of the exact current that actually came out of the welder.  Judging (later) by the welds, I suspect I welded with 70 – 90 amps.7. I always made certain the weld region returned to room temperature before welding another area.  Note: Temperature meter could not read about 660 degree F.8. I made the first filet weld using 6011, Electrode Positive [DC+].The third picture below shows the end results – after whacking off the slag and wire brushing the welds.Electrode negative (–) for 7018AC, 7014, 6013 and 6011Electrode positive (+) for 6011, 6013, 7014 and 7018AC.In the continuation of this post, I will show close-up views of the paired welds. e.g. 6011+ versus 6011-, etc.To be continued...Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:Continuation...The fourth picture shows the results for 6011.I burned about 10 inches (I measured) of 6011 in each case.  It seemed to me at the time that 6011- (electrode negative) burned faster, was more crackly in sound and produced more splatter – more splatter confirmed later by examination.  Note: I had a stop watch to time my weld time – but with welding gloves and a forgetful memory – “Oh, the stop watch!...darn!”.  Thus, I don’t have an accurate record of actual rod-burning times.  (However, 7018AC burned the fastest of the lot!)6011 produced nice beads, electrode + was better.  The thin slag meant you could see what was really happening.The fifth picture shows the results for 6013.I burned about 9 inches of 6013 in each case.  I made a note that 6013- burned fast.The sixth picture shows the results for 7014.I burned about 8 inches of 7014.  I noticed a softer arc compared to 6013.  On electrode negative, I stuck the rod; you have to be careful with 7014 on DC-.  I don’t like the massive slag covering.  It is so thick that you are blind to what is happening under the slag cover.  I had a complet lack of fusion with electrode negative and had no idea that was taking place; I could see for the heavy slag cover.   It’s always a crap-shoot what happens when you knock of the slag.  A big lump in the slag may cover a tiny thin weld, a regular size weld or a big lump in the weld metal!  I think I needed more amps to run this rod properly.The seventh picture shows the results for 7018AC.As soon as switched from 7014- to 7018-, I noticed the arc was way easier to control and I had a softer arc.  I burned about 8.5 inches in electrode negative and only 7.25 inches in electrode positive.  The arc failed on me one time with electrode negative – likely my fault.  7018AV, electrode positive seemed to work best.  I like 7018AC.OK, so that’s where I got too.ObservationIt turns out that Statement #2 was quite important.  “Incorrect polarity will cause poor penetration, irregular bead shape, excessive spatter, difficulty in controlling the arc, overheating, and rapid burning of the electrode."  Yep, I’d seen all that in spades!What could I have done better?Looking at the welds, likely I should have been running higher amperage, say 100 – 120 amps instead of my estimated 70 – 90 amps.  That would have produced more penetration and a more fluid weld pool that would have tied in more smoothly at the edges .  A more forceful arc  would have pushed the slag away from the weld pool, allowing me to better see what was happening (this was a serious problem with 7014- where I had a complete lack of side-wall fusion and didn’t know it.)For the ¼ inch thickness of my pieces, likely I should have used 1/8 inch diameter electrodes instead of the smaller 3/32 inch electrodes.  That would have produced a wider weld without having to sweep side-to-side and hang around so long and waiting for the 3/32 to form a broader weld pool.  With 1/8 inch, then I would have been running even higher amperage of say 120 – 140 amps.Still, running 3/32 inch rod at perhaps marginal amperage was quite useful because it triggered the shortcomings of each rod type quite clearly – some shortcomings might not have show up  at higher amperage.ConclusionWhat became apparent to me is that welding amps and operator control (rod manipulation & welding speed) could have far more influence on weld penetration than... the electrode polarity.  In fact, polarity looks like rather ‘small potatoes’.   I mean, if you use the recommended polarity, the right amperage, the right travel speed and perform proper hand manipulation... you will get a good weld.I now question whether it is worth the effort to cut up my welds, to polish and etch the surface – to determine the amount of weld penetration. ??? Thanks for reading; I welcome any observations, comments and suggestions.Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:Rick, Very informative, looking for the rest of the pic to see the actual results.  Great post!!!!Bob(Sorry, just got the 2nd installment, that is a great write up!!!)Last edited by Rbeckett; 08-15-2010 at 09:51 AM.Reason: Lag in seeing postsI'm spending my Kids inheritance, I dont like him that much anyway!!!!!!Enuff tools to do the job, enough sense to use em.Anybody got a spare set of kidneys?  Trade?
Reply:A general statement as far as i'm concerned is that most stick electrodes burn best with DC+ ploarity. AC will counter the effects of arc blow if required to do so. DC- and stick welding= not done too often, where I work anyway.DC+ = 70% of heat in the rod, 30% of heat in the base metel.DC- = 70% of heat in the base metal, 30% of heat in the rod.6013 and 7014 are 2 of the most simple of rods to use and you should be able to make very beautifull looking weld beads in short order (much better than what you have in the pics).JasonLincoln Idealarc 250 stick/tigThermal Dynamics Cutmaster 52Miller Bobcat 250Torchmate CNC tableThermal Arc Hefty 2Ironworkers Local 720
Reply:I agree with Jason above, the Percentages he posted were the same that I was taught - It makes a HUGE Difference when selecting Tungsten Size for GTAW.I appreciate all the time and effort that went into your little experiment, and the write up, but it really proves nothing...The part that is the most disturbing to ME, is that regardless of the electrode, you have not ran ONE weld (Including the 7018 on DC+) that I would consider posting on a  WELDING Website, so taking that into consideration, I am left wondering how much is the fault of the Polarity, and how much is you?Last edited by Black Wolf; 08-15-2010 at 11:19 AM.Reason: Read up on manufacturer's specsLater,Jason
Reply:For the cut, polish and etch tests to be worth anything for comparison of the different polarities used, all the welds need to be executed properly.  Otherwise, no sense in doing the test, since the test will be showing the weld execution deficiencies rather than the difference in penetration due to polarity.MM350P/Python/Q300MM175/Q300DialarcHFHTP MIG200PowCon300SMHypertherm380ThermalArc185Purox oaF350CrewCab4x4LoadNGo utilitybedBobcat250XMT304/Optima/SpoolmaticSuitcase12RC/Q300Suitcase8RC/Q400Passport/Q300Smith op
Reply:DesertRider makes a good point; you were testing with penetration but the only way to determine that is to see changes within the base metal; just looking at the surface addition can be very misleading, even with good welds. Any good welding book (or site offering 'basic instruction', I suppose) I have ever seen covers this subject in depth. Much of the information about electrodes that is in brochures or in tables online assumes this basic knowledge and is just to give the  parameters for those specific products. Polarity is only one factor; the coating chemistry also has a profound effect on behavior, a good example being the celulose in 6011 which gives the digging action vs the high iron powder level of 7014 which does not.
Reply:Interesting article and picturesAt work we use 7018MR on DC-    ~120-125A  Just how it was set and i was taught, never questioned it since it works fine
Reply:A 1/4 inch would need about 250a to get things hot enough to fuse.90a is real cold.
Reply:I agree that it is a great experiment and write up. But this experiment is the equivalent of me doing a chemistry experiment. I dont see any proper welding done here so the experiment lacks merit. Not trying to be an a$$ but you have not demonstrated any welding consistency on which to base information or results.UA Local 598
Reply:Originally Posted by BlueweldersA 1/4 inch would need about 250a to get things hot enough to fuse.90a is real cold.
Reply:+1 with desertriderSA-250DLincoln Pro-MIG 140 w/spoolgunVictor Journeyman O/A outfitWP-26, WP-17, WP-9 TIG torches run off my SA-250Metabo grinders and all the other stuff...
Reply:Dial in each rod on a piece of scrap and retest when your comfortable. Slag wil lift easy when your in the zone.Pic1......7014Pic2......7014Pic3......7024 Attached Images
Reply:Originally Posted by Jay OWhat????   He's using a stick welder which does't have the amp limitations as other forms of welding and also uses higher voltage.
Reply:Originally Posted by BlueweldersSo a welder larger than 90amps is just a waste ?The 6011 DCEP is already cracking on the left side,I doubt a wack or two with a hammer would make it look any better.
Reply:Originally Posted by BlueweldersA 1/4 inch would need about 250a to get things hot enough to fuse.90a is real cold.
Reply:Originally Posted by Rick V6011 produced nice beads, electrode + was better.  The thin slag meant you could see what was really happening. I don’t like the massive slag covering.  It is so thick that you are blind to what is happening under the slag cover.  I had a complet lack of fusion with electrode negative and had no idea that was taking place; I could see for the heavy slag cover.   It’s always a crap-shoot what happens when you knock of the slag.  A big lump in the slag may cover a tiny thin weld, a regular size weld or a big lump in the weld metal!  I think I needed more amps to run this rod properly.
Reply:and he was long-arcing the crap out of all of it.UA Local 598
Reply:What's up RickV, NDT not driving you crazy enough?Like WHughes I think you have arc length and travel problems. Try running the 7014 downhand flat, contact and slow pull first (look for slag 3-4 times rod diameter and even). Then start another rod and pull the rod up just a bit (never more than rod diameter) and run the same bead. Then try to increase the arc length to 1/4 or more after starting and see what happens.When you are done, compare the three. The rutile rods like a short arc length but are very easy to run when you get it down.I usually don't polish when I check for penetration, after section and etch you can see it from arms length (quick and dirty).Good luck and "hats off for learning to ride the pony".Matt
Reply:he does not like them because he is running them way too cold.  there is insufficient arc force for those rods at low amps to push the slag out of the weld puddle,  so you cant see the weld puddle. Originally Posted by DSWTo me it looks like you need to learn to read the puddle. It takes a bit to learn to read the puddle from the slag. You note you don't like 6013 and 7014 because of the heavy slag, yet you don't seem to have the issue with 7018 that produces just about the same amount. I find it somewhat interesting that the rods that most new welders usually have the easiest time with (6013/7014) are the ones you had the most issues with. I'd guess you were rushing the weld and not letting the puddle form.
Reply:With all do respect this "TEST" has no validity because it sure doesn't look like you or whoever welded those pieces has a lot if any experience stick welding.
Reply:Dude don't hang your helmet on a definition or a term. The end result is based on all of the factors involved. The discussion of polarity is there for understanding to be used for a broad number of examples, also to specify which electrode and process to use given a set of circumstances, It is no different then AC versus DC or forehand versus backhand it is just knowledge grasshopper. You must know before you can make a decision. I do want to complement you on your desire to set up an experiment to evaluate the problem.
Reply:Thanks for all the feedback... most all negative So after I pulled all the arrows out of myself... I had a re-look at my stick-welding technique.  Originally Posted by mulvahe does not like them because he is running them way too cold.  there is insufficient arc force for those rods at low amps to push the slag out of the weld puddle,  so you cant see the weld puddle.
Reply:with a 3/32 6013 you probably don't want to run over 120 amps,  i would think the sweet spot would be a little lower than that.As a hobbyist welder,  I think you are best suited by keeping rod variety to a minimum.   Ive settled on 6010 and 7018 and rarely reach for anything else.  I keep some 6011 and 7024 around as they also have uses,  but not often.Keep practicing and you will be running good beads in no time.  The biggest thing to remember is plan your actions before striking an arc,  getting consistent travel speeds is all about having your body in the correct position so you can move the rod without getting yourself tangled up 1/2 way through.  If you need to whip a 6010,  do a dry run with that motion also to make sure you can consistently whip the rod for the entire length of the planned pass.
Reply:Rick-Thanks for the post.While the welds were "a little rough",making the results less than definitive,the idea and the post were excellent,I hope the experiment continues.Miller a/c-d/c Thunderbolt XLMillermatic 180 Purox O/ASmith Littletorch O/AHobart Champion EliteI would practice all your chosen rods for the test on scrap and tune in.Just because 6013 3/32 rod gives you a sweet spot of 100amps, does not mean 7014 will have the same sweeet spot.Look on the box or look up manufactures web site for recomended current settings.The practice on the different rods should also give you some practice on consistant travel speed.This test will require consistant welds to produce any kind of result.Good luck.
Reply:Originally Posted by LarryOI would practice all your chosen rods for the test on scrap and tune in.
Reply:Originally Posted by Rick VGood idea Larry.  I agree that would be ideal but... sigh...this is unpaid work and rather consuming of time, materials and consumables. Looking at the results of 3/32 inch rods run at 80-amps  I plan to run the 6011 at 100+ amps and the other rods (6013, 7014 and 7018) at 120+ amps.
Reply:I think I'll do a quick and dirty test too just because I can.I will use 6mm plate also and weld the fillets with my 170A inverter TIG/Stick unitexcept I'll use 6013 and 7016 because thats what I have on hand. Will post resultsin the near future Support Bacteria -  It's the only culture some people have!
Reply:If you dont mind I would like to participate as well!  I dont have a dc machine only an AC, but I have a variety of rods to choose from and will cut the welds with my band saw to show what sort of penetration I get with each.  I have some extra 3/16" flat bar laying around that would probably work well for this.Rods I have at the moment are6011 3/326013 1/16, 3/32, 1/87014 1/16, 1/87018 1/8I feel quite comfy welding with 6013, 7014, and 7018... however my 6011 could def use some practice.
Reply:Hi distractor and ggarner; I am delighted to have you and any one else participate!The more, the merrier... and the more we all learn.A few 'Master Welders' doing this would really help... I can retain my position as the 'stumbling amateur'.I did finish welding my second test piece today (Tuesday) with all four rods at higher amperage (real interesting) but I can't finalize the pictures for posting until I remove a few spots of 'really' stubborn slag.  Tomorrow, I'll post.Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:Originally Posted by distractorI think I'll do a quick and dirty test too just because I can.I will use 6mm plate also and weld the fillets with my 170A inverter TIG/Stick unitexcept I'll use 6013 and 7016 because thats what I have on hand. Will post resultsin the near future
Reply:7016 DCEN slag and weld on 6mm plate. I am not very proficient with 7016 yet and these onesreally dont like DCEN and it was hard for me to maintain an arc so it was a surprise thatthe weld actually turned out semi OK.7016 DCEP weld on 6mm plate.7016 DCEN on left and DCEP on rightSo theres the quick and dirty. I aint cuttin these up to see. The results are pretty clear to me. Thanks for lettin me playLast edited by distractor; 08-18-2010 at 04:35 AM.Support Bacteria -  It's the only culture some people have!
Reply:Originally Posted by distractorI aint cuttin these up to see.  The results are pretty clear to me. Thanks for lettin me play
Reply:Originally Posted by distractor7016 DCEN on left and DCEP on rightSo theres the quick and dirty. I aint cuttin these up to see. The results are pretty clear to me. Thanks for lettin me play
Reply:The saga continues...Here is the second attempt – Test Piece #2.Under construction...The set up used for welding...Note: The 3/32 inch 6011 rod was run at 100 amps, the other 3/32 inch rods (6013, 7014 and 7018) were run at 120 amps – according to the ‘rough’ welder settings.After welding, slag still in place...After welding, most slag removed...Notes6011(-): severe undercut likely due to a long arc, high current and small mis-angle of electrode.7018AC(-): short weld because I stuck a rod and made cherry red the flux coating.7018AC(+): This was the best weld I laid down.Here is a comparison between the welds of Test Piece #1 (80 amps) and Test Piece #2 (100 amps for 6011 and 125 amps for 6013, 7014 and 7018).In General:6011+ welded better this time, however 6011- showed severe undercut.  Slag removal was more difficult after welding at the higher (Test Piece 2) amperage (100 amps instead of ~80 amps).6013+ welded better this time, so did 6013-.  Higher amperage helped.7014+ was marginally better than before – still not good.  7014- welded better this time.7018+ was excellent, much better than before.  7018- was going sort of ok until I stuck a rod.Continued on next post...Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:Here are close up pictures of the welds.Continued on next post...Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:I tried cutting up the weld sections, polishing (with a well-used 40 grit zirconia flap disk) and etching with muriatic acid.  I found I had to heat the weld section with a heat gun to get any action from the acid.  The etching just didn’t work out too well.With several sections, I had luck successfully etching just one – the 7014 weld.On this one example (7014) we see perhaps a potential problem for comparing any welds.At first look, it appears that electrode positive (+) has more penetration than electrode negative (-)... but it is also a bigger weld.To make a valid comparison of penetration, do we need similar size weld beads on each side?If yes, then what happens if a stick rod, say electrode positive just runs a bigger bead?Is that likely to happen if the amperage and speed of travel are say identical? I don’t know.As has been said by many on this post, we require more consistent laying of the welds beads.What is consistency?Suppose two beads (electrode + and electrode -) are run at the same amperage, but the welder’s speed is not constant and the weld beads vary in size along their length.  (Who could that be?)Is it possible to pick a location where both beads are similar in size, section and etch there and compare those results?  (I could likely find such locations on my Test Piece #2.)What do you think?Thanks for listening.Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:So let me get this straight... You are running these welds for your "Test" in a 1F configuration,(Also Known As the SIMPLEST WELD ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET) and this is the BEST that you can do?I am very sorry to sound so mean and rude, but WOW, have you ever got some SERIOUS Learning to do...The last apprentice I trained from scratch - A 19 year old that had NEVER picked up an Arc Welder in his life, was running better 2F beads than that in less than 1 day.Here I was cutting you a bunch of slack before, trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, and allowing for some inclination errors ,but there is NO REASON for a 1F weld to look THAT POOR.Unfortunately, you don't seem that keen on listening either... There is NO REASON that a satisfactory weld cannot be run with a 3/32" E7018 Electrode, at a much LOWER, and MORE REASONABLE Amperage, with better results than anything you have shown.I do not come onto these forums to be Negative, or to be a Jerk, so I will refrain from any comments further on this thread.Have a Good Day.Later,Jason
Reply:Seems to be a number of people pooping on my stick welding skills. I never claimed to be a Master Welder.  That my stick welding skills may not meet with your approval is relevant only in so far as it applies to answer the question asked in this post.Question: Of the typical stick electrodes that may be run either electrode positive or electrode negative, such as 6011, 6013, 7014, 7018AC, etc., which polarity gives the most penetration as proven by photos?To date/time, 1179 people have read this post, so plenty of folks are interested to know the answer to the question.While I may not have answered the question, at least I tried, tried twice – but seems that wasn’t good enough.Distractor tried too – laid down some great weld beads too - but seems that too wasn’t good enough.Ggarner said he would try too – will something also seem to be wrong with his effort too?The point is, it is easy to find all sorts of things the current players are doing wrong – yes, being in the stands as a kibitzer is easy.(Note: Positive suggestions are always welcome.)Therefore, I would encourage you; if you have the interest to comment and think you may possess the skill needed  to answer the question, why not step out of the audience and onto the playing field?  Shows us how it’s done.  Be a Hero.  Give us all the answer.Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:Originally Posted by Rick VIt's a big play pen! Distractor, I wish you would cut or or at least grind some of the end of the T weld.As it is now, some of that electrode positive (DCEP) penetration that is obvious to you... well it looks like the rod might have gone too close the the edge melting in more than normal.  That confuses the issue.  You did all the welding work, won't ya please cut them and post a couple pictures it so we can all see an undisputable, very clear result?
Reply:There is a reason we run rods dcep, it's because they run better that way.  In theory, dcen would put more heat in the material and get more penetration.  However, if you can't keep the rod lit or lay down a consistant, well sized, placed, etc., bead.  Penetration doesn't mean ****.  You have to look at the net result.  I'll take a decent consistant weld with OK penetration over a ****ty weld with massive penetration any day of the week.My name's not Jim....
Reply:Originally Posted by distractorWe are not here to show off beautiful code quality welds. It's a quick and dirty test.Oh please master, pick up a stinger and prove YOURSELF.
Reply:Originally Posted by Black WolfAnd Sorry, No, I have NOTHING to "Prove" to you, or anyone else on here, so I will not be contributing.Have a Good Day.
Reply:Rick Your "test" is flawed in many ways. Lets take a rod that is designed to be run both DC+ and DC- like 6013. Picking an arbitrary amp setting doesn't prove much. The "correct" setting in amps for DC+ may be quite different than that for DC-. After all you are looking for a different result so it stands to reason the settings would be different. The setting for flat vs overhead are different even for the same joint often.  Also things like travel speed and rod manipulation have a lot to do with how it's run. 6010/11 is a "DEEP" penetrating rod, yet many use it for sheet metal because it's also a fast freeze rod. If you need good penetration the best way is thru proper prep not rod choice. The rod is usually chosen for other reasons, low hydrogen (7018), heavy deposit in flat (7024), fast freeze (6010), good all position welds (say picking  7014 over 7024), high tensile strength (11018) or simply because thats whats called for in the print.You are interested in learning and thats a good thing, but your interest is more academic than anything else. You seem to be missing the point Jason (Black Wolf) is trying to make. You need to concentrate on learning skill, not learning what whizzbang special rod  or polarity is the "magic" rod. Deep penetration/shallow penetration means nothing if your welds are CR@P! We've all met guys who think deeper penetration is a cure all for poor welding skills. ( I'm not saying you fall into this category, but it's usually the underlying reason for many discussions like this)Pick a rod, doesn't matter which one, but I'd skip 6010/11 as it welds so different than all the others at this point. I'd suggest a drag rod like 6013 or 7014 so you dont have to maintain arc length at this point. Look at the suggested settings for the rod from the mfg and pick the mid point for your starting setting. Get some 1/4" or 3/8" 3"x3" angle about a foot long and start running beads next to each other so the one over laps the other by 1/2 way on the inside of the angle like you are trying to fill up the V. The 12" length will mean you run out a full stick (usually in 8" or so) and have to start a new rod to finish to bead out. Run 20 rods or so to get the feel.  After you can run fairly good beads with minimal undercut/ slag inclusions etc move on. You are learning travel speed at this point. Forget rod manipulation just run straight stringers.  Remember as the steel heats up with multiple passes, it will affect how the rods run, so either have a couple of practice pieces or cool the metal down frequently. Be sure to post up picts of your runs so people can give suggestions. Expect to burn a lot of rod. I suggest the angle at this point since you can keep using it over and over and save some cash, but there's no getting around needin lots of rod. It's not uncommon for the kids at the tech school to use over 10 lbs of rod in just one 3 hr night.Then adjust the amps up or down say 10 amps and do it again. See what difference it makes. Keep it up till you are 20-30 amps over and under  the mfg's suggested settings. You are learning how the change in amps affects the bead, and if your machine actually welds as set, or if it runs "hot" or "cold"I know it's tedious and often boring, but thats how you learn the basics. You need to learn to crawl before you can run. Once you really understand what a rod is supposed to act like when it's running properly, then you can begin to understand how it's acting when you run it outside it's normal parameters.Last edited by DSW; 08-19-2010 at 09:04 AM..No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth! Ronald Reagan
Reply:Originally Posted by distractorI dont have anything to etch the metal with. I can polish with a 80G flap disc though.
Reply:Some detailed information on the etching process...A – It is important to polish the surface to a mirror-like finish (see my finger).  I managed to achieve that finish with a worn out 40G flap wheel and a light touch.B – Here was my set up.  A little muriatic acid in a small plastic cup (red cap off a can of spray-paint).  I use a small artist brush to brush the acid on the piece.C – I found I had to heat the piece to get the acid to etch.D – Brushing on the acid.The procedure that seemed to work best for me was repeatedly (~3 to 7 times) heat the piece, brush on the acid.  How hot?  Make it just hot enough so that when you brush the acid on, the acid reacts (may discolour and tiny foam) but not boiling!  Watch for say 30 to 60 seconds for a visible pattern to emerge.  At this stage, likely you will see nothing.  Brush again.  Keep brushing the acid on.Repeat the above heating/brush/brush/brush cycle... and by maybe the 3rd time, a pattern will begin emerge.  The trick is to keep repeating the cycle until you have a good solid definite pattern – then STOP!  (If you don’t stop, further etching seems to blur the sharpness of the delineation between the weld and base metals and the pattern begins to fade.)Once you stop, take pictures immediately while in place*... or... thoroughly wash the piece off, dry with cloth (gentle padding – no rubbing) and then take your pictures right away – because the surface will begin to rust very quickly (less than 5 to 10 minutes...even if you dried it off).  *Be sure to thoroughly wash the piece later.Here are my results... “Honey, come over to my place and I’ll show you my etchings.”Because my welding technique was not consistent, I won’t try to draw any conclusions from these etches.  Still, there it is...Rick V 1 Airco Heliwelder 3A/DDR3 CTC 70/90 amp Stick/Tig Inverters in Parallel1 Lincoln MIG PAK 151 Oxy-Acet
Reply:Mind if i make a suggestion??All welding involves manipulating a puddle of molten metal.In order to be successful, you need to recognize the puddle when you see it.NEVER LOOK AT THE ARC (the point closest to the tip of the rod, and the brightest )Focus on the area between the arc, and the slag.  It's where the puddle is.  The height of the puddle, and the eventual height of a fillet for example, can be determined by looking at the spot where the puddle meets the darker slag.  It's a good reference point.With the rods you're using..........DRAG SLOWLY, ANGLE THE ROD INTO THE PUDDLE, AND AGAINST THE UPRIGHT PIECE OF METAL ON A FILLET.  You want to wash the molten metal with the force of the arc.  Slight side to side oscillation is acceptable if it's your style.  But remember to drag slow, and watch the puddle, not the rod.With 7018...........BURY THAT SUCKER IN THE STEEL, AND KEEP SHOVING Attached Images"Any day above ground is a good day"http://www.farmersamm.com/
Reply:Originally Posted by Black WolfMy sincerest apologies Distractor, my comment above was NOT directed towatds YOU... In actuality, your weld bead looks quite good - The 6013 would pass a visual inspection, while none of Rick's "Welds" would ...As to the rest of the comment - I just hadn't realized you both were running beads in a 1F...And Sorry, No, I have NOTHING to "Prove" to you, or anyone else on here, so I will not be contributing.Have a Good Day.
Reply:Hey Rick V hang in there and keep up the effort.  Your effort to learn is admirable!   The way you take criticism is like no other I have found