Welding Tips and Tricks

I am a hobbyist/weekend welder trying to weld up some brackets for my friend.
Welding 1/4" 304L SS, using 3/32" 308L rod, 140 amp
Small bevels were ground on each side of the weld. A chill block was clamped on the back side. The plan was to weld both sides. Did some basic material prep by grinding the surface using a flap disk followed by an acetone wipe.

Problem: my puddle seems to swim around a lot, resulting in odd shaped, inconsistent beads. See photo.
Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

Probably bad arc length and torch angle. Try to get as 90* to your puddle for best control. And stay tight to the puddle with your arc.

linguages wrote:I am a hobbyist/weekend welder trying to weld up some brackets for my friend.
Welding 1/4" 304L SS, using 3/32" 308L rod, 140 amp
Small bevels were ground on each side of the weld. A chill block was clamped on the back side. The plan was to weld both sides. Did some basic material prep by grinding the surface using a flap disk followed by an acetone wipe.

Problem: my puddle seems to swim around a lot, resulting in odd shaped, inconsistent beads. See photo.
Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

Agreed. The three most common mistakes: too much torch angle, too much arc length, and too much stickout (IMO). It could also be too much gas flow, but you did not disclose that.

Thanks. I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.
Stick out, arc length, and angle wise, I think I was doing OK. 7/16" stick out with the BBW cup, 10-15 degree torch angle from vertical. I am always pretty conscious about these 3 factors and always paid close attention.
This morning I turned down the gas to 30 CFH, did not get noticeable improvement.
One thing I noticed was when I practiced on a piece of flat stock (just laying beads, not actually welding things together), the puddle was a lot more stable and predictable, and as a result, the bead was a lot more consistent. I wonder if it is the geometry that I ground into the weld that caused the heat to travel unevenly, resulting in the puddle progressing in odd directions.
One other thing that i noticed, was that every time I dabbed, the puddle grows in width, in stead of growing in height.

linguages wrote:I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.

You need 'mo cup and 'mo gas.

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

linguages wrote:I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.

You need 'mo cup and 'mo gas.

I actually have an idea for massive gas coverage without using a lot of gas. I just have no way of manufacturing it.

Oscar wrote:

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

linguages wrote:I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.

You need 'mo cup and 'mo gas.

I actually have an idea for massive gas coverage without using a lot of gas. I just have no way of manufacturing it.

Oscar,

You could just use a small tent over the welding area. CK Worldwide sells a purge chamber:

(linky pic) Welder Supply

linguages wrote:Thanks. I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.
Stick out, arc length, and angle wise, I think I was doing OK. 7/16" stick out with the BBW cup, 10-15 degree torch angle from vertical. I am always pretty conscious about these 3 factors and always paid close attention.
This morning I turned down the gas to 30 CFH, did not get noticeable improvement.
One thing I noticed was when I practiced on a piece of flat stock (just laying beads, not actually welding things together), the puddle was a lot more stable and predictable, and as a result, the bead was a lot more consistent. I wonder if it is the geometry that I ground into the weld that caused the heat to travel unevenly, resulting in the puddle progressing in odd directions.
One other thing that i noticed, was that every time I dabbed, the puddle grows in width, in stead of growing in height.

I will say that because you can, doesn’t mean you need to (in response to your stick out length). Despite the BBW providing ample gas coverage for extreme stick out, you also encounter other variables and influences. For instance, turbulence from too much gas flow into corners, or in the case of edge welding, the shielded cone is split thereby rendering your coverage less effective. Just things to bear in mind.

As for puddle growing in width not height, that’s an indication the parent metal is very hot and filler contribution too low. If you’re welding stainless, bead height is superfluous, penetration is everything. Unless of course you’re doing a build-up repair.

cj737 wrote:

linguages wrote:Thanks. I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.
Stick out, arc length, and angle wise, I think I was doing OK. 7/16" stick out with the BBW cup, 10-15 degree torch angle from vertical. I am always pretty conscious about these 3 factors and always paid close attention.
This morning I turned down the gas to 30 CFH, did not get noticeable improvement.
One thing I noticed was when I practiced on a piece of flat stock (just laying beads, not actually welding things together), the puddle was a lot more stable and predictable, and as a result, the bead was a lot more consistent. I wonder if it is the geometry that I ground into the weld that caused the heat to travel unevenly, resulting in the puddle progressing in odd directions.
One other thing that i noticed, was that every time I dabbed, the puddle grows in width, in stead of growing in height.

I will say that because you can, doesn’t mean you need to (in response to your stick out length). Despite the BBW providing ample gas coverage for extreme stick out, you also encounter other variables and influences. For instance, turbulence from too much gas flow into corners, or in the case of edge welding, the shielded cone is split thereby rendering your coverage less effective. Just things to bear in mind.

As for puddle growing in width not height, that’s an indication the parent metal is very hot and filler contribution too low. If you’re welding stainless, bead height is superfluous, penetration is everything. Unless of course you’re doing a build-up repair.

Thank you. Let me reduce my stick out more. Thing is though, with the big cup, it blocks the view so there is only so much more i can go before i can no longer see the tip. Also going to play with the gas flow rate more.
I think the turbulent gas flow point makes a lot of sense. I'll try adding a chill bar to the outside of the edge, creating a flat surface for the gas to flow and see if that helps.

linguages wrote:Thank you. Let me reduce my stick out more. Thing is though, with the big cup, it blocks the view so there is only so much more i can go before i can no longer see the tip.

You can always go with a small Ally5 clear pyrex, or a #8 Pro clear pyrex. Any of the pyrex cups will get you better vision, if that's what you're seeking. I have found they are not without their faults also...

I was just yankin' your chain on the cup, hopefully I didn't upset you...I'm not having a very good track record on online forums today...

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

linguages wrote:Thank you. Let me reduce my stick out more. Thing is though, with the big cup, it blocks the view so there is only so much more i can go before i can no longer see the tip.

You can always go with a small Ally5 clear pyrex, or a #8 Pro clear pyrex. Any of the pyrex cups will get you better vision, if that's what you're seeking. I have found they are not without their faults also...

I was just yankin' your chain on the cup, hopefully I didn't upset you...I'm not having a very good track record on online forums today...

Not a problem at all. I took it as a joke and I guess I was right.
I actually did go back to a No. 8 alumina cup after changing the chill bar setup and had reasonable result.

Since you're dealing with 304SS, try NOT hitting it with a flap disk during the prep. Just try an acetone wipe only so long as the metal is fairly clean, which it should be. That flap disk may be leaving some junk behind that could be contributing to your puddle issues. Just a thought.

cj737 wrote:

linguages wrote:Thanks. I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.
Stick out, arc length, and angle wise, I think I was doing OK. 7/16" stick out with the BBW cup, 10-15 degree torch angle from vertical. I am always pretty conscious about these 3 factors and always paid close attention.
This morning I turned down the gas to 30 CFH, did not get noticeable improvement.
One thing I noticed was when I practiced on a piece of flat stock (just laying beads, not actually welding things together), the puddle was a lot more stable and predictable, and as a result, the bead was a lot more consistent. I wonder if it is the geometry that I ground into the weld that caused the heat to travel unevenly, resulting in the puddle progressing in odd directions.
One other thing that i noticed, was that every time I dabbed, the puddle grows in width, in stead of growing in height.

I will say that because you can, doesn’t mean you need to (in response to your stick out length). Despite the BBW providing ample gas coverage for extreme stick out, you also encounter other variables and influences. For instance, turbulence from too much gas flow into corners, or in the case of edge welding, the shielded cone is split thereby rendering your coverage less effective. Just things to bear in mind.

As for puddle growing in width not height, that’s an indication the parent metal is very hot and filler contribution too low. If you’re welding stainless, bead height is superfluous, penetration is everything. Unless of course you’re doing a build-up repair.

So I changed the chill bar configuration, essentially added a fence on the edge of the corner to help cool and control the gas flow. Switched back to a No 8 cup (because the BBW would no longer fit in the tight corner), a lot shorter stick out due to the cup size change, of course. 25 CFH.

I actually got better result. The puddle was more consistent and more predictable.

Spartan wrote:Since you're dealing with 304SS, try NOT hitting it with a flap disk during the prep. Just try an acetone wipe only so long as the metal is fairly clean, which it should be. That flap disk may be leaving some junk behind that could be contributing to your puddle issues. Just a thought.

Thank you. I will keep that in mind.

linguages wrote:Not a problem at all. I took it as a joke and I guess I was right.

Yeah, I was just funnin' with 'ya...

linguages wrote:I actually did go back to a No. 8 alumina cup after changing the chill bar setup and had reasonable result.

If you're using a #8, the #8 Pro will get you better view...I have used them, not bad at all. I do use the alumina cups mostly nowadays, but I've pondered going back to an Ally5, just hard to justify the cost, the pyrex breaks easily. Also pyrex is only good to 175 amps or 200 amps on the smaller ones and most are not recommended for aluminum.

I've been using a #5 cup to save on argon in this "shelter-in-place" mess. Just figure it can't be bad to save on gas. For Stainless a #8 is probably a good thing for gas coverage.

FWIW, your welds don't look too bad, so I haven't added anything into the fray. I'm certainly no pro. I try to listen to cj, Richard and Josh here. I also find good info and tips from Spartan, Coldman, Oscar, and others. There's lots of good advice here.

Oscar wrote:

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

linguages wrote:I was using 35 CFH, Furick BBW ceramic cup.

You need 'mo cup and 'mo gas.

I actually have an idea for massive gas coverage without using a lot of gas. I just have no way of manufacturing it.

You've piqued my interest, Oscar. What's your idea??? I was thinking something along the lines of a purge chamber like TTW mentioned...

TraditionalToolworks wrote:You could just use a small tent over the welding area. CK Worldwide sells a purge chamber:

(linky pic) Welder Supply

You do realize that a purge kit uses up A LOT of gas, right? You might want to re-check my initial requirements regarding that.

Spartan wrote:You've piqued my interest, Oscar. What's your idea??? I was thinking something along the lines of a purge chamber like TTW mentioned...

Absolutely nothing like a purge chamber what so ever. Remember, my idea is massive coverage without using a lot of gas. I'm envisioning a very intricate design with special flow characteristics. But I can't/don't want to disclose it, in case it is profitable.

I actually kinda sorta have a way to make it, but I would need extra stuff. At my school we have a Form-Labs 3-D printer. Right now we only have the standard resins, but this printer can be made to work with ceramic resins, to 3-D print heat-resistant parts, but we don't have those materials. If I can convince my principal to invest in it, which I think he might because we are a S.T.E.M. school, perhaps later this year I can 3-D print my own ceramic cups exactly to my liking.

Oscar wrote:

Spartan wrote:You've piqued my interest, Oscar. What's your idea??? I was thinking something along the lines of a purge chamber like TTW mentioned...

Absolutely nothing like a purge chamber what so ever. Remember, my idea is massive coverage without using a lot of gas. I'm envisioning a very intricate design with special flow characteristics. But I can't/don't want to disclose it, in case it is profitable.

I actually kinda sorta have a way to make it, but I would need extra stuff. At my school we have a Form-Labs 3-D printer. Right now we only have the standard resins, but this printer can be made to work with ceramic resins, to 3-D print heat-resistant parts, but we don't have those materials. If I can convince my principal to invest in it, which I think he might because we are a S.T.E.M. school, perhaps later this year I can 3-D print my own ceramic cups exactly to my liking.

Interesting. Yeah, I figured you'd probably want to keep it close to the vest. I guess whether or not a purge chamber uses "a lot" of gas or not is relative to the application. If you can keep it filled all day and load enough parts in there to do in one shot, it may use less gas than say running a BBW all day. But I don't really know...never used a purge chamber, so just guessing!!

Oscar wrote:You do realize that a purge kit uses up A LOT of gas, right? You might want to re-check my initial requirements regarding that.

That's not what any of the literature says on the CK site. That said, I've never used one and at $2400 I probably won't be using one any time soon.

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

linguages wrote:Not a problem at all. I took it as a joke and I guess I was right.

Yeah, I was just funnin' with 'ya...

linguages wrote:I actually did go back to a No. 8 alumina cup after changing the chill bar setup and had reasonable result.

If you're using a #8, the #8 Pro will get you better view...I have used them, not bad at all. I do use the alumina cups mostly nowadays, but I've pondered going back to an Ally5, just hard to justify the cost, the pyrex breaks easily. Also pyrex is only good to 175 amps or 200 amps on the smaller ones and most are not recommended for aluminum.

I've been using a #5 cup to save on argon in this "shelter-in-place" mess. Just figure it can't be bad to save on gas. For Stainless a #8 is probably a good thing for gas coverage.

FWIW, your welds don't look too bad, so I haven't added anything into the fray. I'm certainly no pro. I try to listen to cj, Richard and Josh here. I also find good info and tips from Spartan, Coldman, Oscar, and others. There's lots of good advice here.

Good to know. I'll definitely be posting more questions in the future.

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

Oscar wrote:You do realize that a purge kit uses up A LOT of gas, right? You might want to re-check my initial requirements regarding that.

That's not what any of the literature says on the CK site. That said, I've never used one and at $2400 I probably won't be using one any time soon.

I used one some time ago, it works as advertised, I've also used hard plastic chambers, each has a place.

LtBadd wrote:

TraditionalToolworks wrote:

Oscar wrote:You do realize that a purge kit uses up A LOT of gas, right? You might want to re-check my initial requirements regarding that.

That's not what any of the literature says on the CK site. That said, I've never used one and at $2400 I probably won't be using one any time soon.

I used one some time ago, it works as advertised, I've also used hard plastic chambers, each has a place.

Don't you have to keep a small but constant flow of argon going into it?

Spartan wrote:If you can keep it filled all day and load enough parts in there to do in one shot, it may use less gas than say running a BBW all day. But I don't really know...never used a purge chamber, so just guessing!!

Assuming your parts would fit inside it. What about when you're outside/out in the field/inside a roll-cage/chassis?

Oscar wrote:

Spartan wrote:If you can keep it filled all day and load enough parts in there to do in one shot, it may use less gas than say running a BBW all day. But I don't really know...never used a purge chamber, so just guessing!!

Assuming your parts would fit inside it. What about when you're outside/out in the field/inside a roll-cage/chassis?

Exactly! That's why I'm planning to buy one of these mystery contraptions you're building. But hopefully the design won't mandate a 1/64" Oscar-style stickout