Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / Technical Discussions / A36-17-4 Via SMAW 309--- slag inclusion troubles
- By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-13-2013 15:21
Ive ran three seperate Macro etch tests on these and cant get the slag inclusion at the root to go away, I have turned the machine up 20 amps and you can see in the photo the weld is clean and nice.  As I watch the welder test he used great technique and the weld so was a solid puddle the entire time.  However when I cut the plates it trouble at the root connection.  The break tests came out great, Im just not sure how to tune this out.  Any suggestions????
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13-1.JPG (136k)
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13-2.JPG (134k)
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13-3.JPG (148k)
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13-4.JPG (151k)
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13-5.JPG (160k)
- - By qcrobert (***) Date 05-13-2013 18:32
Process, position, amp, volt, ipm, gas, matl, surface prep method, etc?
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-13-2013 18:38
SMAW
1/8 309-16 electrode
a36 to 17-4 PH stainless
130 amps
no preheat
fillert weld
Parent - - By qcrobert (***) Date 05-13-2013 18:41
matl thk, fillet weld size, surface prep, position?

In photo 3, I really don't see adequate fusion.
Parent - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-13-2013 18:51
3/16 plates
2F position
1 pass with 1/8 (no weld size)
surface prep is ground smooth with full shine on both weldments
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-13-2013 18:52
I know what im looking at fusion wise, im trying to find a solution to the slag inclusion, not sure why its builing up at the root
Parent - By 99205 (***) Date 05-13-2013 21:29
If the machine is set correctly, the joint design is good and the electrode is OK, the only thing left is the welders technique.
Parent - By qcrobert (***) Date 05-13-2013 21:34
The top toe of the weld appears undercut indicates too much heat input.

I believe 1/8" filler metal using SMAW is too large an electrode and would suggest using a smaller dia electrode with two passes.

My conclusion, suggestion, guesstimate is based on the photo that after scaling to proportion indicates the face measuring 3/8" across and thus a 1/4" leg size.

QCRobert
Attachment: etchsample.jpg (0B)
Parent - - By aevald (*****) Date 05-13-2013 21:26
Hello MRWeldSoCal, from what I am seeing as general parameters, the rod is being run on the upper limits of it's recommended amperages, not that this is necessarily the issue causing the trapped slag, however, could have a contributing influence.

Question? is the joint being welded in the level position or slightly uphill? Hopefully yes, if not, you could possibly experience the slag being run-over and trapped at the root of the deposit. Also, rod angle, is it being run with at least a bit of drag angle as opposed to straight in or pushed? Some of the time a slightly exagerated drag angle may assist with prevention of slag entrapment. Carerful attention to arc length will also help to ensure avoidance of bead roll-over on the bottom toe or other slag entrapment issues from occuring. Need to have enough arc length to prevent the weld slag from being influenced by the end of the electrode(mis-directed, drug off to one side, or other abnormalities). By the look of some of the sectioning there also appears to be a possible work angle issue with the rod as well as the center of the electrode possibly not being directed at the line of the plate intersection point. Just a few thoughts for your consideration. Will be interested to hear from others and also any results that you come up with. Best regards, Allan
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-13-2013 22:25
Thank you for your input, I will be cutting test Samples tomorrow to do some re-testing.  It was in the flat position and certaily on the edge of the electrodes capable limits.   The arm angle was very verticle and I believe that helped contribute to the undercut at the top. I just took a photo with a weld gage and am going to attach it to this thread.
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13gage1.JPG (178k)
Attachment: MacroEtch3-13-13gage2.JPG (152k)
Parent - By qcrobert (***) Date 05-13-2013 23:32
I believe Allen has some excellent suggestions esp the rod angle needing to be dragged and pointed back into the puddle.

Btw, does dwg or job require a full 1/4" fillet weld?
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-14-2013 21:39
So here are the RE-TESTs for our welder, I changed it from the 1/8th initial rod to a 3/32 for the root pass, then a 1/8 cap pass.  I turned the heat up on the 3/32 from 95 amps to 105 amps and it melted greatly. Thank you all for your 2 cents!
Attachment: MacroEtch3-14-13-1.JPG (133k)
Attachment: MacroEtch3-14-13-5.JPG (130k)
Parent - - By jwright650 (*****) Date 05-15-2013 11:15
Hard to tell from the picture but is that small indication at the root now on the acceptable side of the root? It looks like it is by scribing an imaginary line on my computer monitor.
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-15-2013 14:09
I is on the acceptable side of the root yea, I led with the 3/32 this time for the root, and did a cap with the 1/8th inch filler
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 05-15-2013 14:31
Looks like you have got it worked out then...good job :cool:
Parent - By jwright650 (*****) Date 05-14-2013 14:13
You mention 130 amps but you didn't mention the current type. I found with 309L-16 it makes a big difference.
- - By 803056 (*****) Date 05-14-2013 00:05
Your best bet is to switch to EXXX-15 covered electrode. The EXXX-16 and EXXX-17 both tend to produce incomplete fusion in the root.

Al
Parent - By eekpod (****) Date 05-14-2013 11:12
I can only comment on FCAW on this topic but when I gave fillet weld tests and ran into this problem it always came down to travel speed and angle of electrode.  The same setting with two different guys one could pass just fine and another would slow down a little and "burn it in" and end up with slag like yours.  Consider that for what it's worth. Good luck.
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-14-2013 14:02
Al-
    You are wise good sir.  We are being held to a WPS that is calling for a 309-16.  Im trying to get a PQR started to run a 309 wire but that may be another week or so.  Just cut a new set of plates and am going to get it all another go ahead.
Parent - - By cddolan74 (**) Date 05-14-2013 20:29
cut back your Amps to 105-110, a shorter arc length and drag angle to ensure the slag is pushed away from your root.
Parent - - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-14-2013 21:40
The retests are posted in the middle of this thread!!!!!!!!!!
Parent - - By 46.00 (****) Date 05-15-2013 03:09
I would tend to agree with Al that better results would be had by changing to a -15 type electrode.
Parent - By MRWeldSoCal (***) Date 05-15-2013 14:08
I would also agree with Al BUT my WPS calls out for a -16 electrode, and I cant vary from it
Up Topic Welding Industry / Technical Discussions / A36-17-4 Via SMAW 309--- slag inclusion troubles

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill