Debate on proper practice, or how ot lose a job as a Newbe

[steamin10]

I am steaming over a situation, and really want to hear form some high end welders.

I have already given my answer, but seek a sort of validation here, a rubber stamp to soothe the tempest, that I did it right, regardless of the outcome.

Situation: A single building column of large size, carries beam seats , that crane support beams are bolted to. On top of these substantial beams, are a cap channel, with the running rail of the crane fastened to the top. Above the crane beam is a tie back, that is welded to the building coumn, and the running beam section next to it. There is a gap of about 1.5 inches, that the crane rails span at thsi point, provideing the runways for a light crane. The 7.5 ton crane in a mono beam type overrunnig the structure, with a small hoist package slung under the bridge beam. This particular carne is very worn in the drive section, with couplings and keys in need of mechanical attention, allowing the crane to slew (racking out of square) and banging the drive wheel flanges on the rail head. (double flange).

Problem: With the racking of the crane being a constant source of stress, a tie back wled has broken, and the continued use had allowed the bottom of the runway beam to distort a little to rock a bit, without breaking or losing the beam seat bolts. There is some minor movement under pressure from the crane forcing the beam to rock out of line. The rail is intact, and 'pops' into alignment, whenever the crane forces the issue with side pressure.

The plant had a 'torpedo' welder that failed to operate, and was scrapped, just as I came on the scene. They have an AC Buzz box, that is dual range with about 150 ft of HVY extension cord that will reach most operating areas of the plant. 220 amps available on high range.

The rod provided is 6013 in 1/8, 3/32, or Jet 77 in 1/8. 6018 in 3/32, 1/8, 5/32. And some Iron and unidentified stainless in small size.

I questioned whether a secure weld could be done with materials at hand, and was soundly criticized. My issue was simply getting a rod, like 7014, to do the work on such a structure, as the situation was deficient, but not critical, yet safty related. I voted for no confidence, given by the touched it last rule, I did not want to sign off on the results.

Given this example, I would like to hear from some experienced welders, that can forward an honest opinion. Let 'er rip.

[Dave_C]

Big Dave,

I'm not a certified welder but I give you a big thumbs up for having the sense to say no when something doesn't look or feel right!

I'm behind you all the way when you say "no" to something involving others safety and you don't feel you have the right solution to make a proper repair.

I can think of many situations where management just wants to get it going and pushes to just do your best. But as you said, you would be the last one who touched it and if it failed, no doubt, it comes back on you.

I can't offer anything to help with the proper choice of rod but no doubt, someone will.

You still get an "atta boy" from me!

Dave C.

[Russ Hanscom]

Given mild steel through out, the 6013 or 6018 would work, not familier with Jet 77. 6018 would err on the better side. That does not address the root problem or other design deficencies. A good weld does not correct an inherent design or maintenance problem - and of course the welder would be blamed for subsequent failures.

The correct but hard answer is to say no, you need to address more.

[steamin10]

OK, I will throw this out there that 6013, is a sheet rod usually used in flat position, shallow penetration. An AC/DC rod. By comparison, 6018 is a more viable rod, BUT FAVORS DC FOR DIG, it is a sticky rod for AC.

I had no good AC compatible rod, in my opinion, for a relatively simple "broken" repair weld on mild steel. AKA structure beams of the building. I merely said I was uncomfortable with the tools at hand. Jet 77 and Supemissle rod, are great products, I have used. They are DC rods. AC welding is a weak sister by comparison, and that is my perception of the situation.

Yes, my BS meter is pegged, I made my choice, and live with the horrendous results of being fired. I am not looking for sympathy, only the facts of the decision that ran me into the ditch, because of wild attitudes.

Please continue.

[warmstrong1955]

AC arc welding is for sheet metal...at least in my opinion. Even 7014 with AC will not get the penetration as it will with DC, or most rods using DC. Fine for the ol' cracker-box in the garage....but.....
Most all the stuff I have ever welded with 6013 is sheet metal, other than using it for a tack rod, or some simple non structural repair. 5P, or 6010 would be a better choice than 6013, but....it doesn't run AC.

With any piece of equipment that is either lifting people, or lifting things around people, shortcuts are not a player. I think using an AC welder for repair in this case is a shortcut......and not a good shortcut. I'd want no part of it either.

Myself, I'd rent, or buy a DC welder, and use 7018. 7018 was pretty much the standard for most fabrication prior to mig welders, and probably still is the most common, and most used, at a lot of jobs for repair. It sure was in the underground mining biz....

Maybe you can direct these folks to a welding dealer than can explain the difference between AC & DC welding to where they understand it? Sometimes they listen to 'experts', if you know what I mean.

I've done a lot of welding.... new fabrication of mining equipment, as well as a lot of repair. I've also welded miles & miles of pipe, and was certified for that, although that was quite some time ago...

Bill

[hammermill]

dave, being a overhead crane support i would want no part of it as a guy would need a structural ticket to even strike a arc. and to be covered it would need to be inspected. this from 2 fellows with structural tags and a inspecter.the proper type if you will, would be L7018 family run on a dc welder second ac would be poor chice as it will not offer the penetration you should have.


rental of a dc unit should be reasonable here i can get one, a 400a lincolin gas driven for 75.00 a day
second question is who is doing the safety inspections on this unit.

in oregon we have to have all of the cranes inspected anually by a outside vender i have some that date ww2 for assembling shermans to 100 foot span for chopper maintance

the other thing to consider is the safety culture of where you work which all by its self is another subject.

i edited for clarity as i was inputting on a small tablet .

[Russ Hanscom]

FYI, There are AC versions of 7018 (and 6010 too) by most reputable rod manufacturers, so do not condem AC machines quite so fast. I have a 400 amp AC/DC machine and frankly I cannot usually tell a difference in the welds. If you have a higher comfort level with one process, then by all means use it.

The problem with this situation was not with the welding, as I read it, but expecting the welding to correct inherent design flaws that even perfect welds would not remedy. Steaming10 took the high road as well he should have.

[ken572]

Russ,

You are 100% correct.

E6010 is a certified rod for DC Reverse polarity.

and it's equivalent is,

E6011 and, is a certified rod for AC.

In the 1/8" rod size, you use from 110 to aprox 145amps.

We used them for pipe, boiler repair, and structural work.
In my opinion the best E6010 rod I prefer is the Lincoln Fleetweld 5P.
In my opinion the best E6011 rod I prefer is the Lincoln Fleetweld 35 .

Once you learn how to weld with these rod’s you will want
no other. They will blow dirt, oil film, rust, and paint, out of
the weld area without contamination of the weld area.
The only other rod I have used with the same characteristics
Was a E8016C1.

Ken.

[refinery mike]

I have about 10 years of structural welding under my belt, and 40 years total of other welding. I would go with 7018 AC rod. That is only if they are cleaning up the metal and getting a clean working surface. If they are a ratty company and want you to weld on dirty painted steel, then 6013 rod would be my choice. 7018 is strong, welds in all positions, and makes strong welds. But it does not do very well on cruddy metal. The 6010 or 6013 will get in there and blow out the dirt. 6013 is often thought of as a sheet metal rod but only if used on straight polarity DC. On AC or Reverse it has good penetration. I learned on 6010, then everything went 7018, now i haven't used anything but mig for ten years.

[ken572]

I have about 10 years of structural welding under my belt, and 40 years total of other welding. I would go with 7018 AC rod. That is only if they are cleaning up the metal and getting a clean working surface. If they are a ratty company and want you to weld on dirty painted steel, then 6013 rod would be my choice. 7018 is strong, welds in all positions, and makes strong welds. But it does not do very well on cruddy metal. The 6010 or 6013 will get in there and blow out the dirt. 6013 is often thought of as a sheet metal rod but only if used on straight polarity DC. On AC or Reverse it has good penetration. I learned on 6010, then everything went 7018, now i haven't used anything but mig for ten years.

I think you mean 6010 and or 6011 rods, these rods are and have been
certified pipe, boiler, and structural rods.
The 6013 is not, and never was. 6013 is a low penitration sheet metal production rod.
The 7018 is a certified rod, but when I have seen it used on pipe they would put the
root weld in first with wire and or a backing ring, or 6010 or 6011.
Ken.

[Harold_V]

I tend to agree with Ken on this one. 6013 rod is lousy for penetration, although it does yield a pretty bead. Sort of like Jet, in fact.

I recall all too well when Modeltec ran a "how to" article on building a small boiler, suggesting it be welded with 6013. This was back in the late 80's. That was the beginning of the end of my subscription, as I felt a magazine should NOT be promoting a dangerous practice. I was less than impressed when I received a terse reply from the editor, suggesting he had no problem with the article. Funny thing is, the boiler code certainly did. There are no approved procedures for boilers with 6013 rod.

If I was stuck with stick welding on this project, I'd use either 6010, 6011, or 7018.

Harold

[Russ Hanscom]

E6013 sheet metal rod is commonly dismissed as a sheet metal rod, but it is sold in sizes up to 3/16" by Lincoln, among others. Some kind of sheet metal - 3/8"+ thick?