This answers everything for me. The wrong rod is the wrong rod. I did have my hope that in a pinch I could get away with an oversized weld of 6010 but this really tells the story.
The extra weld did slightly increase the pressure it took to bend it, but ultimately it still failed. I will take having it “hang together” over broken for sure lol. 7018 two bead cap on top of 6010 root will be out tomorrow, with “interesting results” lol.
My uncle's 780 Case backhoe's dipper boom broke at the "elbow" pivot and he repaired it with ER-7018. Well, it broke again on the weld in less than a week. Found out the base metal is 75K psi I did the second repair for him with ER-11018 That's 110K psi tensile strength. It's been 15 years now and it's still holding! ER-8018 would have probably been fine but I had a good bit of ER-11018 on hand. I've always been in the camp of go bigger! LOL!
That higher strength alloy combined with likely thick plates definitely put a hurting on that 7018 lol. 11018 definitely is a big step up in strength. Glad to hear it held together 😀
Thanks for the vid and, well, my only comment was exactly where you ended up - 6010 with a 7018 cover seems like the best of both worlds. But if a single 7018 passed, I'd certainly expect the combination to pass. But this makes me appreciate why that combo is often recommended. The thing I don't get is why there is so much fuss about 7018 and low H - I would assume none of that applies if it's covering 6010.
Tomorrow a video comes out where I test that exact thing. Same 6010 root and 2 bead 7018 cover. Differences are found in the testing vs this video lol.
@makingmistakeswithgreg and I'm really looking forward to watching it. I'll always forward your channel to friends who want to learn welding. Best wishes from Australia
Very interesting. Using a marker on your test pieces was brilliant; you could add it to your coming test - just for clarity, in the test situation and conclusion. Cheers.
So I have tested 7018 extensively in this video: th-cam.com/video/GNu9vEu91ME/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Rm1sWztTcxQ_9lMp and in this video: th-cam.com/video/MVG85I_KCg8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=QLFjhahJyjyFxjdO . To simplify the data from those tests here is my opinion: 6011 breaks on a bend towards the face in testing at 60-70 Ftlbs, 7018 is 70-78. On a bend away from the face 7018 passes with a complete bend on 3/8th plate, 6011 fails. 7018 will surpass the strength of 6011 in both tests given the same weld size and material thickness. If strength is of a concern 7018 should be used. 😀
I know, as you have proven multiple times, that 7018 will always be stronger. But i still use 6011 on a lot of stuff that isn't critical. I always go to 7018, or TIG, if life or limb is at risk. Or if i just want a pretty weld. Looking forward to 7018 over 6010 tested.
I 100% agree. Not to mention in that test in video the equivalent of over 6K pounds was sitting on top of that fillet weld and it didn't break at that point, which in reality is a pretty ridiculous amount of weight. Poor welds (lack of any root fusion, porosity, slag entrapment, etc) could easily knock a 7018 down to far less than that 6010 too.
When I do multi-pass welds I tend to alternate travel direction (to swap starts and ends) between two consecutive passes, this helps to compensate for cold start bulges and hot end craters as one is completing another's profile to an equal height. I don't know if this is a right thing to do, but it kind of helps.
Great vid as usual but I dunno about the harp. This is a family channel so I can't say what the "harp" interlude congers up in my pin head so I'll just say a nice guitar rift would be a better choice for me. Maybe Texas flood by the late great Steve Ray Vaughan, something from Jimmie Page, BB King --you get the idea. lol Also, where you getting all this 3/8" plate from?? If you've found a deal that doesn't involve "borrowing" some stock at 3am from the local supply store --I want a piece of that action. 🙂
Haha the magical harp helps with welds. I wish it was like the old days where I could use actual artists music without them basically shutting down a video. I have some more rock centered music I will use in the future. The 3/8th plates I have been using are cut off two 12' sticks I bought a while back. I actually have a ton of steel from jobs I have done, I have been working through that. Buying new stuff is very expensive. I did buy 300' of 1/4 inch thick flat bar (I think 2" wide) on a fire sale from a local supplier 3 weeks ago. It was about 60% off and I had to take all of it (I think it was 26 sticks of it lol). In future videos I will be using a lot of that for testing purposes.
That thick of plate should have been v groove to get proper penitration on upper plate open root keyholeing would have helped too and grind out wagon tracks 6010 is a fast freeze rod has a lot of pentatration and will weld through rust grease and paint but not always best choice
On a fillet weld v grooving wouldn’t really affect the strength of a 6013 when it’s bent away from the face of the weld. V grooving increases the strength when bent towards the face (on a single sided weld) because it doesn’t allow the plate to use the weld as a fulcrum point to increase leverage. 6013 with a bevel will still not surpass 7018 or er70 mig wire in a bend away from the face, and won’t outperform 7018 or MiG on a bend towards the face if all of them had the same bevel.
I am not sure why you think it’s apples to oranges? 6010, 6011,6013, 7014, and 7018 are all sold on the shelf at most local stores (6010 less common), they are all designed mostly for welding mild steel, and the average person would potentially use them for their project. The purpose of the video (which is one of many in the series) is to demonstrate the strength differences between to rods. This video put forth evidence that the 7018 is significantly stronger than even 3 passes of 6010 on a fillet weld. That is important information because many people are under the illusion that you can just put more weld down and that makes up for weaker welds. It’s not expected that 6010 has more strength in a weld break test away from the face than 7018. However even 3 passes of it (and likely 6013) can’t hold plates together as good as a single pass of 7018. Again the purpose of the testing is so that people make informed decisions on what rod to use when.
@makingmistakeswithgreg well first tell me what the numbers 6013 6013 6012 6011 7024 8018 10018 mean I have used all of them along hard wire mig Flux core mig dual shield mig tig submerged arc and both aluminum and stainless steel. That being said to me looks like your welds with 6010 are either too hot or too fast not very smooth like a stack of dimes so some people say tig should look like your weld puddle looks pointed not smoothly arched like it should no matter what welding rod or type you are doing
I’m curious if you would have turned one of the plates so the bending was more pronounced on the bottom of the weld instead of the top would the weld have broken on the bottom instead of the top
That will be difficult to achieve because the fillet weld has different plate lengths. I am planning on doing a butt welds and testing the strength as well, that will equally load both sides of the weld.
If I had to take a guess it’s probably because it’s strong enough to do the job and it’s fast. It seems to me like every country has a different way of doing the same thing, and clearly it works multiple ways. In the US you would never see a guy welding pipe with 6013, in the UK they don’t run 6010 they run 6013 lol. In Australia they apparently run 7016 on pipe instead of 7018. Pretty wild lol.
Good testing protocol, In your conclusions I think you hit the nail on it's head. Your welding technique appeared to be very competent, I believe any technique using 6010 would have failed. Perhaps you could try 7010 HYP or 8010, they are both considerably stronger than 6010.
I am going to try a 5p+ grey rod which produces a slightly more liquid puddle (thus smoother bead) and see what happens. I am 100% sure it will fail since 6013 and 6011 has failed in the same manner as 6010. Whats interesting to me is the rods that fail, seem to fail in much the same manner, the top toe line. The top toe line is seeing far more stress on it than the bottom toe line due to how the plates bend. From what I have seen (I have a lot more tests that I haven't released yet) 7018 and er70 mig seem to have a magic mix of strength, ductility, and performance that elevates them above the others. To me it really doesn't matter if the plate itself failed, if the weld failed, or if a combination of them failed, the 7018 and er70 bent further and stayed together despite seeing the same level of stress. The 7014 video comes out in a couple days and I will do the same test with 7024, tig, and flux core. I have a feeling 7018, er70, and tig will top all.
Penetration is not a benefit in this test, because the weld is being pulled on. 6010 penetrates deep but the weld deposit has weaker tensile strength when compared to say 7018. If the plate was bent towards the face (opposite as shown in the video) the 6010 would win due to penetration. In pure tensile strength 6010 will never beat 7018.
I will likely do that. The problem is I only have red rod 6010 around and it runs very poorly if you don't manipulate it to knock the flux down. It basically winds up having a very long arc gap trying to run it straight in and it becomes very difficult to control. The grey 5p+ rod is far easier to run "straight in" and produces a much smoother weld bead appearance. I have to wait for the welding store to open to get more of 5p+.
Now from the looks of the video, its user error as in technique why it fail - from looking at the welds you’re not that great at using 6010 but other than that from a perspective of what’s user friendly it would be 7018 regardless.
There is no undercut and all of the slag is not removed. What needs to be improved in technique to make it pass? I assure you it will break in the manner it did regardless of whipping/pausing, long arcing, etc. You must also remember the weld was done with red rod 6010 and not the grey 5p rod. The red rod leaves a rough bead no matter how you run it. If you want to see me put down a flat cap with 6010 5p I will, but it will still fail lol.
If the weld is stronger than the material then why did a single pass 6013 handle less pressure than 7018 single pass before it failed? The multi pass 6013 failed in the same way as a single pass did, and the 7018 (and er70 mig) did not. Two measures of strength could be 1) how many tons of force did the weld withstand while still holding things together, which the 7018 surpassed 6013 in this, and 2) When pressed to significant levels which weld was still holding the plates together? 7018 wins in this case as well. The same material from the same bar stock was used in both tests, and clearly 7018 and er70 holds things together under more force than 6013, so they are both superior in strength. Which is too be expected since the performance of both is below the average er70 and 7018 rods specs.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg6013 6010 are 60000 strength 7018 is 70000. Different metal welding rod Different Flux material 7018 way Different than 6010 6013
Yes, all rods have different specifications, and all of them test well over the minimum AWS spec you’re citing. If the failure was due to the strength difference in the filler material (which is what I said in the video) then it would be a failure of the weld. You said the weld was stronger than the material, implying the material failed. Or are you saying the 7018 weld didn’t completely fail because it was stronger than the material?
The reason the 6010 broke is because 6010 isnt ductile like 7018 theres a reason they dont use it on bridges and thats because bridges move and sway and 7018 is ductile when stuff moves and sways it is designed to take it 6010 is not the weld bead is stronger than the steel but not being ductile is the reason it broke it is not designed to move like that is the short answer to why it broke it is designed for pipe root passes and for really dirty rusty crap where if you dont have a grinder it can clean the metal by whipping it and then pausing to weld it
The particular steel I used can exceed the strength of 6010 rods tensile strength (as tested) so regardless of ductility it is at a disadvantage. 6010 and 6013 both have better elongation specs than 7018. The purpose of that particular test was more to demonstrate that using a weaker rod for a particular steel cannot be “fixed” by simply adding more weld. In virtually all cases it’s better to have a weld hold things together and to engineer the flex out of something (if desired) with bracing than to use a weld that’s overly brittle and weaker than the base material to prevent things from moving.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg 6010 and 6013 dont have better elongation than 7018 7018 was designed to for things that move and sway under pressure furthermore the way you bend the piece in a press is gonna break it if you have a weld on one side and nothing on the back the piece will break regardless
If you look up specs for common rods, such as on this site: www.washingtonalloy.com/technical-data-sheets/ they show actual test results than put 7018 below 6013 and 7014 on elongation. The ductility of the weld and ability to handle elongation is not why 7018 can handle more of a bend than 6013 and 7014. It’s more of a combination of factors such as actual ultimate tensile/yield strength and penetration. The weld on the backside of a fillet weld has virtually no bearing on failure. I could weld both sides of a fillet weld with 6013 and it won’t handle as much plate bend as 7018. I even welded 3 passes on one side with both 6013 and 6010 and they didn’t bend as far as short arc Mig, dual shield, 7016, or 7018.
This answers everything for me.
The wrong rod is the wrong rod.
I did have my hope that in a pinch I could get away with an oversized weld of 6010 but this really tells the story.
The extra weld did slightly increase the pressure it took to bend it, but ultimately it still failed. I will take having it “hang together” over broken for sure lol. 7018 two bead cap on top of 6010 root will be out tomorrow, with “interesting results” lol.
My uncle's 780 Case backhoe's dipper boom broke at the "elbow" pivot and he repaired it with ER-7018. Well, it broke again on the weld in less than a week. Found out the base metal is 75K psi I did the second repair for him with ER-11018 That's 110K psi tensile strength. It's been 15 years now and it's still holding! ER-8018 would have probably been fine but I had a good bit of ER-11018 on hand. I've always been in the camp of go bigger! LOL!
That higher strength alloy combined with likely thick plates definitely put a hurting on that 7018 lol. 11018 definitely is a big step up in strength. Glad to hear it held together 😀
Great content as always Greg. This test pretty much how I had expected, but it was interesting to see it all play out.
Yep, as expected the 7018 solved the issue 6010 had. What will be really interesting is figuring out if 7014 and 7024 can match 7018s performance.
Thanks for the vid and, well, my only comment was exactly where you ended up - 6010 with a 7018 cover seems like the best of both worlds. But if a single 7018 passed, I'd certainly expect the combination to pass. But this makes me appreciate why that combo is often recommended. The thing I don't get is why there is so much fuss about 7018 and low H - I would assume none of that applies if it's covering 6010.
Tomorrow a video comes out where I test that exact thing. Same 6010 root and 2 bead 7018 cover. Differences are found in the testing vs this video lol.
You have a really informative channel. Well done!
Thanks 😀. The video where I do a 6010 root and 7018 cap is out tomorrow (basically the same setup as this video). It will have interesting results :0
@makingmistakeswithgreg and I'm really looking forward to watching it. I'll always forward your channel to friends who want to learn welding. Best wishes from Australia
Very interesting. Using a marker on your test pieces was brilliant; you could add it to your coming test - just for clarity, in the test situation and conclusion. Cheers.
I started doing that because there were so many test welds laying around it was hard to keep them straight lol.
Thanks for the video , would love to see 6011 vs 7018 test
So I have tested 7018 extensively in this video: th-cam.com/video/GNu9vEu91ME/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Rm1sWztTcxQ_9lMp and in this video: th-cam.com/video/MVG85I_KCg8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=QLFjhahJyjyFxjdO . To simplify the data from those tests here is my opinion: 6011 breaks on a bend towards the face in testing at 60-70 Ftlbs, 7018 is 70-78. On a bend away from the face 7018 passes with a complete bend on 3/8th plate, 6011 fails. 7018 will surpass the strength of 6011 in both tests given the same weld size and material thickness. If strength is of a concern 7018 should be used. 😀
I know, as you have proven multiple times, that 7018 will always be stronger. But i still use 6011 on a lot of stuff that isn't critical. I always go to 7018, or TIG, if life or limb is at risk. Or if i just want a pretty weld.
Looking forward to 7018 over 6010 tested.
I 100% agree. Not to mention in that test in video the equivalent of over 6K pounds was sitting on top of that fillet weld and it didn't break at that point, which in reality is a pretty ridiculous amount of weight. Poor welds (lack of any root fusion, porosity, slag entrapment, etc) could easily knock a 7018 down to far less than that 6010 too.
When I do multi-pass welds I tend to alternate travel direction (to swap starts and ends) between two consecutive passes, this helps to compensate for cold start bulges and hot end craters as one is completing another's profile to an equal height. I don't know if this is a right thing to do, but it kind of helps.
always good stuff.......thanks so much....Paul
Incredible work 👍👍
Looking foward to it.
Great vid as usual but I dunno about the harp. This is a family channel so I can't say what the "harp" interlude congers up in my pin head so I'll just say a nice guitar rift would be a better choice for me. Maybe Texas flood by the late great Steve Ray Vaughan, something from Jimmie Page, BB King --you get the idea. lol Also, where you getting all this 3/8" plate from?? If you've found a deal that doesn't involve "borrowing" some stock at 3am from the local supply store --I want a piece of that action. 🙂
Haha the magical harp helps with welds. I wish it was like the old days where I could use actual artists music without them basically shutting down a video. I have some more rock centered music I will use in the future. The 3/8th plates I have been using are cut off two 12' sticks I bought a while back. I actually have a ton of steel from jobs I have done, I have been working through that. Buying new stuff is very expensive. I did buy 300' of 1/4 inch thick flat bar (I think 2" wide) on a fire sale from a local supplier 3 weeks ago. It was about 60% off and I had to take all of it (I think it was 26 sticks of it lol). In future videos I will be using a lot of that for testing purposes.
That thick of plate should have been v groove to get proper penitration on upper plate open root keyholeing would have helped too and grind out wagon tracks 6010 is a fast freeze rod has a lot of pentatration and will weld through rust grease and paint but not always best choice
On a fillet weld v grooving wouldn’t really affect the strength of a 6013 when it’s bent away from the face of the weld. V grooving increases the strength when bent towards the face (on a single sided weld) because it doesn’t allow the plate to use the weld as a fulcrum point to increase leverage. 6013 with a bevel will still not surpass 7018 or er70 mig wire in a bend away from the face, and won’t outperform 7018 or MiG on a bend towards the face if all of them had the same bevel.
@@makingmistakeswithgregthe welding rods are completely different welding rods for different applications comparing apples and oranges
I am not sure why you think it’s apples to oranges? 6010, 6011,6013, 7014, and 7018 are all sold on the shelf at most local stores (6010 less common), they are all designed mostly for welding mild steel, and the average person would potentially use them for their project. The purpose of the video (which is one of many in the series) is to demonstrate the strength differences between to rods. This video put forth evidence that the 7018 is significantly stronger than even 3 passes of 6010 on a fillet weld. That is important information because many people are under the illusion that you can just put more weld down and that makes up for weaker welds. It’s not expected that 6010 has more strength in a weld break test away from the face than 7018. However even 3 passes of it (and likely 6013) can’t hold plates together as good as a single pass of 7018. Again the purpose of the testing is so that people make informed decisions on what rod to use when.
@makingmistakeswithgreg well first tell me what the numbers 6013 6013 6012 6011 7024 8018 10018 mean I have used all of them along hard wire mig Flux core mig dual shield mig tig submerged arc and both aluminum and stainless steel. That being said to me looks like your welds with 6010 are either too hot or too fast not very smooth like a stack of dimes so some people say tig should look like your weld puddle looks pointed not smoothly arched like it should no matter what welding rod or type you are doing
I’m curious if you would have turned one of the plates so the bending was more pronounced on the bottom of the weld instead of the top would the weld have broken on the bottom instead of the top
That will be difficult to achieve because the fillet weld has different plate lengths. I am planning on doing a butt welds and testing the strength as well, that will equally load both sides of the weld.
I weld natural gas pipeline for a living and the sop in the gulf coast is 6010 root fill and cover. Don't k own why , just is.
If I had to take a guess it’s probably because it’s strong enough to do the job and it’s fast. It seems to me like every country has a different way of doing the same thing, and clearly it works multiple ways. In the US you would never see a guy welding pipe with 6013, in the UK they don’t run 6010 they run 6013 lol. In Australia they apparently run 7016 on pipe instead of 7018. Pretty wild lol.
Good testing protocol, In your conclusions I think you hit the nail on it's head. Your welding technique appeared to be very competent, I believe any technique using 6010 would have failed. Perhaps you could try 7010 HYP or 8010, they are both considerably stronger than 6010.
I am going to try a 5p+ grey rod which produces a slightly more liquid puddle (thus smoother bead) and see what happens. I am 100% sure it will fail since 6013 and 6011 has failed in the same manner as 6010. Whats interesting to me is the rods that fail, seem to fail in much the same manner, the top toe line. The top toe line is seeing far more stress on it than the bottom toe line due to how the plates bend. From what I have seen (I have a lot more tests that I haven't released yet) 7018 and er70 mig seem to have a magic mix of strength, ductility, and performance that elevates them above the others. To me it really doesn't matter if the plate itself failed, if the weld failed, or if a combination of them failed, the 7018 and er70 bent further and stayed together despite seeing the same level of stress. The 7014 video comes out in a couple days and I will do the same test with 7024, tig, and flux core. I have a feeling 7018, er70, and tig will top all.
Looking forward to 6010/7018 combination test.
It will be out today 😀
try some Old Blenheim, it is only sold in the US down near South Carolina....it will shoot blue flame out your nose...
I will find some for sure lol 😂. Sounds like my kind of stuff.
Hahaha i was typing out can you do this with a 6010 root 7018 fillers and you finished out sayin your gonna hahahahaha
6010 with 7018 cap works pretty good 😀. It should be avoided with anything but mild steel, but it does work 😀
So how does this square with the penetration of a 6010 vs. 7018? Isn't the 6010 a more penetrating rod vs. 7018?
Penetration is not a benefit in this test, because the weld is being pulled on. 6010 penetrates deep but the weld deposit has weaker tensile strength when compared to say 7018. If the plate was bent towards the face (opposite as shown in the video) the 6010 would win due to penetration. In pure tensile strength 6010 will never beat 7018.
have you ever tried a bend test like this with 3 passes of 6013?
Off camera I have, and it will break before the plate bends just like 6010 does.
Now do one where you puddle cap style 6010 vs a whip and pause 6010
I will likely do that. The problem is I only have red rod 6010 around and it runs very poorly if you don't manipulate it to knock the flux down. It basically winds up having a very long arc gap trying to run it straight in and it becomes very difficult to control. The grey 5p+ rod is far easier to run "straight in" and produces a much smoother weld bead appearance. I have to wait for the welding store to open to get more of 5p+.
When you start doing grinding disc reviews could you tell us how much vibration there is
I will definitely do that
Getting older and vibrations mess with the joints
Now from the looks of the video, its user error as in technique why it fail - from looking at the welds you’re not that great at using 6010 but other than that from a perspective of what’s user friendly it would be 7018 regardless.
There is no undercut and all of the slag is not removed. What needs to be improved in technique to make it pass? I assure you it will break in the manner it did regardless of whipping/pausing, long arcing, etc. You must also remember the weld was done with red rod 6010 and not the grey 5p rod. The red rod leaves a rough bead no matter how you run it. If you want to see me put down a flat cap with 6010 5p I will, but it will still fail lol.
Your weld was stronger than material
If the weld is stronger than the material then why did a single pass 6013 handle less pressure than 7018 single pass before it failed? The multi pass 6013 failed in the same way as a single pass did, and the 7018 (and er70 mig) did not. Two measures of strength could be 1) how many tons of force did the weld withstand while still holding things together, which the 7018 surpassed 6013 in this, and 2) When pressed to significant levels which weld was still holding the plates together? 7018 wins in this case as well. The same material from the same bar stock was used in both tests, and clearly 7018 and er70 holds things together under more force than 6013, so they are both superior in strength. Which is too be expected since the performance of both is below the average er70 and 7018 rods specs.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg6013 6010 are 60000 strength 7018 is 70000. Different metal welding rod Different Flux material 7018 way Different than 6010 6013
Yes, all rods have different specifications, and all of them test well over the minimum AWS spec you’re citing. If the failure was due to the strength difference in the filler material (which is what I said in the video) then it would be a failure of the weld. You said the weld was stronger than the material, implying the material failed. Or are you saying the 7018 weld didn’t completely fail because it was stronger than the material?
7018 & mig= 💪💪
7018 will hold things together longer, that’s for sure 😀
The reason the 6010 broke is because 6010 isnt ductile like 7018 theres a reason they dont use it on bridges and thats because bridges move and sway and 7018 is ductile when stuff moves and sways it is designed to take it 6010 is not the weld bead is stronger than the steel but not being ductile is the reason it broke it is not designed to move like that is the short answer to why it broke it is designed for pipe root passes and for really dirty rusty crap where if you dont have a grinder it can clean the metal by whipping it and then pausing to weld it
The particular steel I used can exceed the strength of 6010 rods tensile strength (as tested) so regardless of ductility it is at a disadvantage. 6010 and 6013 both have better elongation specs than 7018. The purpose of that particular test was more to demonstrate that using a weaker rod for a particular steel cannot be “fixed” by simply adding more weld. In virtually all cases it’s better to have a weld hold things together and to engineer the flex out of something (if desired) with bracing than to use a weld that’s overly brittle and weaker than the base material to prevent things from moving.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg 6010 and 6013 dont have better elongation than 7018 7018 was designed to for things that move and sway under pressure furthermore the way you bend the piece in a press is gonna break it if you have a weld on one side and nothing on the back the piece will break regardless
If you look up specs for common rods, such as on this site: www.washingtonalloy.com/technical-data-sheets/ they show actual test results than put 7018 below 6013 and 7014 on elongation. The ductility of the weld and ability to handle elongation is not why 7018 can handle more of a bend than 6013 and 7014. It’s more of a combination of factors such as actual ultimate tensile/yield strength and penetration.
The weld on the backside of a fillet weld has virtually no bearing on failure. I could weld both sides of a fillet weld with 6013 and it won’t handle as much plate bend as 7018. I even welded 3 passes on one side with both 6013 and 6010 and they didn’t bend as far as short arc Mig, dual shield, 7016, or 7018.