Welding Tips and Tricks

Anyone here have some .045" L-56(ER70S-6) and 85/15 who can try something for me....?

I made a machine settings chart and want to see if others find this useful in setting up their machine. I intend to start using a chart like this on WPSs that I write for small fab shops that are AISC certified. I usually train the welders in these shops and haven't had any troubles with audits, but...these auditors are getting smarter and are being trained better and I don't want them to trip up any of the welders using my WPSs. I need others to try several of the voltage/amperage settings and also notice if the WFS is somewhere close to being correct or not.

A general rule for measuring the WFS is to squeeze off 6 seconds of wire and measure the length, then add a zero(essentially multiplying by ten)...ie 6 secs produces 14" of wire = 140ipm

Try it at the low end, the high end and a couple places in between and let me know what you think. I took these directly from Lincoln's data sheets and added a few points along the way to get from the low to the high end.

Thanks in advance to any who try this for me.

I took this idea from Al Moore who wrote an article in the Inspection Trends magazine Feb/15 edition (pages 24and 25).

You linear scales for WFS and Amps look good to me - only change I would make is to the Voltage scale.

I would set your voltage increments to 0.5 or 1.0 volt to make it easier for a welder to read.
The digital machines I've seen so far only read out to tenths.

Otherwise, I'd say try some of the setting and see if the wire behaves in a linear fashion with respect to WFS and voltage.

I've run some numbers (regressions) on other wires (just because I was curious) and found the relationship to not be linear.
My assumption is that as the wire reaches hotter temps, the behavior changes.

Edit: I forgot to add, I'm not an expert in this - I just get curious sometimes about using math to help me set my machine with less trial and error

Plus I find that regressions for a real life purpose are better for students than just a random set of numbers.

John, I'd love to help, but I can't get these schmucks to buy anything but .035

I assume it's because the consumables are always the same.

Steve S

MinnesotaDave wrote:You linear scales for WFS and Amps look good to me - only change I would make is to the Voltage scale.

I would set your voltage increments to 0.5 or 1.0 volt to make it easier for a welder to read.
The digital machines I've seen so far only read out to tenths.

Otherwise, I'd say try some of the setting and see if the wire behaves in a linear fashion with respect to WFS and voltage.

I've run some numbers (regressions) on other wires (just because I was curious) and found the relationship to not be linear.
My assumption is that as the wire reaches hotter temps, the behavior changes.

Edit: I forgot to add, I'm not an expert in this - I just get curious sometimes about using math to help me set my machine with less trial and error

Plus I find that regressions for a real life purpose are better for students than just a random set of numbers.

Thanks for the reply and suggestions Dave
I agree with the voltage being displayed to the tenth vs the extra decimal place that I've shown. Lincoln gave me these V/A/WFS relationships and I just added the extra points in between to get from low to high:
27v/285a/350ipm
30v/335a/475ipm
30v/340a/500ipm
(basically a 3 volt spread over 55 amps and 150ipm)

[Edit* BTW, the CTWD is shown across the bottom to show the welder that his electrical stickout(CTWD) needs to somewhat match the V/A relationship for the voltage to work out somewhere close due to Voltage(E) divided by Amperage(I) = CTWD(R)]

Show me where/how your math comes in and plays...I'd love to see if you skin the cat the same way I do or if you use another set of reasonings. Dave, I don't claim to be an expert either, I'm still learning, even after fooling with this stuff for 30 years. For goodness sakes, if a person thinks they know all there is to know in this field, they are only fooling themselves. Welding can be a humbling experience for sure.

Otto Nobedder wrote:John, I'd love to help, but I can't get these schmucks to buy anything but .035

I assume it's because the consumables are always the same.

Steve S

No worries buddy
At the moment, I don't have access to equipment and materials and I was trying to work this all out on paper before I got back to a customer's shop(and still get it fairly close to something workable).

The chart don't need to be exact(although I'd like to be as close as practical)...what I mean is that the AISC(American Institute for Steel Construction) uses AWS D1.1 (structural shops), AWS D1.5(bridge shops)as the code to adhere to. So if you follow those codes, you have some wiggle room for the welder to stay within the WPS and still be compliant.
[ie. Voltage +/-15%, Amperage or WFS +/-10%, Travel speed +/- 25%....for GMAW]....of course the method of filler metal transfer has to be spray mode and not short circuit in this case, hence the use of the 85/15 mix

Formatted the voltage column to 1 decimal place vs 2

I will give it a shot if I can get some free time today but I have 90/10 gas.
-Jonathan

Superiorwelding wrote:I will give it a shot if I can get some free time today but I have 90/10 gas.
-Jonathan

Actually I used the numbers given from Lincoln where they used 90/10. I assumed the 5% wouldn't throw me out of the essential variable tolerances given D1.1

jwright650 wrote: Show me where/how your math comes in and plays...I'd love to see if you skin the cat the same way I do or if you use another set of reasonings. Dave, I don't claim to be an expert either, I'm still learning, even after fooling with this stuff for 30 years. For goodness sakes, if a person thinks they know all there is to know in this field, they are only fooling themselves. Welding can be a humbling experience for sure.

My preference for math in general is that it be used to quantify something that has been experienced.
That way math can be used as a predictor for other situations.

For example - on some wires, the manufacturer has included several recommended WFS/volt settings.
(without those, testing to find several settings would be the first step)

With several data points, a regression (linear, exponential, quadratic, cubic, etc) can be run to see if a graphed line can be used to predict the WFS/volt settings between the known good settings.

What I've found so far, is that the WFS/volt settings do not appear to follow a linear pattern on the wires I've checked.

John,
I FINALLY got around to checking your graph. I found a few interesting results along the way. First the settings.
Lincoln 350MP, Lincoln L-59 .045 ER70S-6 wire
90% argon/ 10% CO2 @35-40cfh
I ran these voltage and wire speed settings and took the average of 4 passes.

27V, 350ipm- 286 amps
27.5V, 370ipm- 289 amps
28.0V, 395ipm- 302 amps
29V, 440ipm- 314 amps
30V, 490 ipm- 332 amps

What I found is your chart is very close and it is in fact reliable. However, I noticed a difference between me and another welder when I was watching his welds at the same settings. After I said something I think he changed how he was welding because he then was right in line with my amperage. I assume his CTWD was completely different than I was using, which was as close to what the chart said as possible.

His findings before he changed his technique;
27.0V, 350ipm- 255 amps
27.5V, 370ipm- 277 amps
28.0V, 395ipm- 290 amps

You can see a huge difference in the first setting for sure. I plan on playing with this a little more as I too have to set up our WPS'.
-Jonathan

Thanks for looking into this for me. As you found...CTWD is important.