Page 1 of 1
FCAW-S Strength
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2016 12:13 am
by medsar
I know this is a really stupid question <ducking for cover>. I'm happy for someone to say 'google XXX' or 'search XXX'. I really did try to search google and search this forum. So here goes -- does FCAW-G give more penetration/strength than FCAW-S? AKA, if I had the same equipment and ability to gasless vs dual shield...is there a structural advantage of FCAW-G?
Re: FCAW-S Strength
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2016 8:20 am
by Poland308
http://www.lincolnelectric.com/en-us/su ... rodes.aspx
Similar process but diferent capabilities. Each has benefits in a given application while strength is rated by the tensil strength of the wire you choose. (Strength) is also a relative term depending on settings, base metal, and weld orientation.
Re: FCAW-S Strength
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 12:05 am
by medsar
Thank you Poland. I appreciate the article.
As mentioned in the article, FCAW-S has a more globular weld deposit profile (if it can even be said that way) and FCAW-G has a more spray profile. This is my confusion -- are they saying that FCAW-G is a type a spray transfer or just 'spray like'? I initially read it as 'spray like'. However, assuming that it is spray transfer, when comparing FCAW-S to FCAW-G on thick materials, the advantage of FCAW-G would be the ability to use relatively smaller wire (as compared to self shielded FCAW-S wire for the same sized metal) while allowing for adequate penetration. Is that a good way of understanding it? This is a bit confusing for me.
Re: FCAW-S Strength
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 8:58 am
by MinnesotaDave
medsar wrote:Thank you Poland. I appreciate the article.
As mentioned in the article, FCAW-S has a more globular weld deposit profile (if it can even be said that way) and FCAW-G has a more spray profile. This is my confusion -- are they saying that FCAW-G is a type a spray transfer or just 'spray like'? I initially read it as 'spray like'. However, assuming that it is spray transfer, when comparing FCAW-S to FCAW-G on thick materials, the advantage of FCAW-G would be the ability to use relatively smaller wire (as compared to self shielded FCAW-S wire for the same sized metal) while allowing for adequate penetration. Is that a good way of understanding it? This is a bit confusing for me.
From that article, why did you decide that the size of the wire was important?
Where are you getting the language of "more globular" or "spray like" ?
- image.jpeg (21.04 KiB) Viewed 866 times
- image.jpeg (43.24 KiB) Viewed 866 times
Re: FCAW-S Strength
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2016 12:09 pm
by medsar
I re-read the article and you are absolutely correct. The article was very clear. I guess I need to read better. Thank you.