Why 6010

[HT1]

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) S9074-AR-GIB-010/278, Aug 1995, Requirements for Fabrication Welding and Inspection, and Casting Inspection and Repair for Machinery, Piping, and Pressure Vessels
formerly Mil Std 278 IS almost exclusively used as a reference for Military and Government welding. It is very common to see government contracts state "All welding will accomplished IAW" this reference


with that in mind I have included this direct quote

6.2.4 Prohibited electrodes. Unless specifically approved. Types Mil 6010. 6012 or 6013 electrodes of AWS A5.1 shall not be used for M.P and A applications

By the way
M = Machinery
P = Pipe
A = Pressure vessels

I have never used any of these electrodes. All the shops I have worked in BAN ALL E-60xx electrodes. Many of you have mentioned doing qualifications of 6010 roots covered by 7018 , and a few of you have even mentioned a particular Approval of 6010 WHY:confused:

[Rocky D]

Mil specs differ widely from AWS specs...and example I ran into was the Military 1" steel MIG with 50/50 gas....AWS wouldn't hear of such a test! What you see us talking about here are the AWS testing that would cover what we do in civilian life.

[walker d.]

what site did you get this from thank you

[HT1]

what site did you get this from thank you

The newest version is not available online. the Mil Std 278 is still available, about all that has changed, is that the references are updated. if you Private message me, I will try to place it online for you to download, it is approved for public release, I'm not sure If I have the bandwidth available

[HT1]

Mil specs differ widely from AWS specs...and example I ran into was the Military 1" steel MIG with 50/50 gas....AWS wouldn't hear of such a test! What you see us talking about here are the AWS testing that would cover what we do in civilian life.

I think I asked the question poorly, or without sufficient Background. the 278 is not a weld proceedure, It is far more general then that. It does recommend the appropriate filler metals. but notes Specificallythat those three are banned from use without specific permission

what I'm asking, is why some engineer would specifically ban the use of those electrode, and since he must have had a reason, I have my suspiscions, why do those of you that use those electrodes Like them, or for that matter dislike them. if you just used them because you where told to... well I have done that more then once!

[flamin]

I used 6010/6011 quite extensively (back in the day), and I really enjoyed welding with them. They do take a bit of practice, but once you nail down the technique, are pretty easy to use. I used them mainly to key hole a root in Vee Groove joints. As far as the mil standard is concerend. the 60xx series are probably omitted on basis that they are not low hydrogen and their minimum tensil is below 70ksi.

[HT1]

I used 6010/6011 quite extensively (back in the day), and I really enjoyed welding with them. They do take a bit of practice, but once you nail down the technique, are pretty easy to use. I used them mainly to key hole a root in Vee Groove joints. As far as the mil standard is concerend. the 60xx series are probably omitted on basis that they are not low hydrogen and their minimum tensil is below 70ksi.

the entire series is not omitted 6011 is allowed. though in all the shop I worked in it was not allowed and I quote " because it smokes too much"

[Rocky D]

the entire series is not omitted 6011 is allowed. though in all the shop I worked in it was not allowed and I quote " because it smokes too much"
That's just plain stupid...the 6011 deep digging rod will do things that the lo-hy electrodes won't.... especially in repair, like burn through painted surfaces, and don't need to be heated all the time like lo-hy. They smoke the same as other electrodes. The dude that told you that, didn't know either, obviously.

[Blacksmith]

I work in a shipyard that does 95% Navy work (we get the occasional cruise ship shave and haircut) and our base rod is 7018. That is what we used when I took SMAW at the shipyard welding school. A lot of the Navy's rules are based on lessons learned, some deadly, most decades old. I wonder if the sudden and catastophic failures of numerous Liberty Ships in WW II, one of the first mass produced, welded ships has anything to do with the Navy's preference for lo-hy rods?

[GilaSlim]

... A lot of the Navy's rules are based on lessons learned, some deadly, most decades old. I wonder if the sudden and catastophic failures of numerous Liberty Ships in WW II, one of the first mass produced, welded ships has anything to do with the Navy's preference for lo-hy rods?

During the war, the attribution was to a rather weak design and not understanding the effect of dynamic forces on a welded hull. The problem was solved by welding a reinforcing strip to most of the length on the upper portion of the hull.

According to this source, I count only six Liberties that were known to have been lost or abandoned due to hull cracking. Others were recovered and examined to determine the cause. Obviously, there may have been more unrecovered where all hands were lost so no one could report cracking.
http://ww2ships.com/acrobat/us-os-001-f-r00.pdf

Here is a later attribution of the cause to the steel being used...
From: http://www.probusmossvale.org.au/Military%20History_files/Liberty%20Ships/LIBERTY%20SHIPS1.htm on page 2.


STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS

As the war, and the shipbuilding programme progressed, structural failure in welded ships began to rear its ugly head. By the spring of 1944, as the allies prepared to amass a huge Amada for the invasion of Europe, hundreds of recently constructed merchant ships were laid up for repairs in ports around the world. Liberty Ships were not the only ones affected but the problem was more pronounced with them purely because of the sheer numbers in service.

Cracks in steel ships have been common place since the first steel ship was built, but due to the fact that the plates were riveted together, a crack in a single plate was not necessarily catastrophic and the crack would usually run only to the next riveted plate, typically not more than 20 feet in length. Of course some riveted ships did break up in heavy weather but failures of this sort were usually attributed to “A Bad Batch of Steel” or “Severe Weather Conditions”.

But it was now clear that something was badly wrong. It was showing up in a high proportion of welded ships operating in cold waters, while it seemed that there were few such problems occurring in warmer waters. A notable exception being refrigerated cargo vessels.

Scientists on both sides of the Atlantic set out to solve the dilemma, but it took more than 15 years of research to fully understand why the cracking occurred. Without getting too technical, it was found that, with the steel used for the first half of the 20th century, temperatures below about 48 degrees F (9C) caused the steel to crack in a brittle manner, like glass, and it cracked at the speed of sound! With welded construction, the ship’s hull was in fact one single plate so, once the crack started to run, it only stopped when it ran out of steel. It was also noted that few cracks occurred along the actual welded joints. In the meantime, after inspection of salvaged ships which had suffered cracking, successful, temporary modifications were carried out to help overcome it.

[Blacksmith]

I stand partially corrected. The root cause was brittle fracture due to the steel being below its NDTT. However, welding and the embrittlement of the heat affected zone has never been fully exonorated as an initation mechanism, so better steels and lo-hy rods that are not subject to hydrogen cracking could both address the problem.

A committee for investigating these accidents of cargo vessels was established in 1943. The report completed three years thereafter on July 15th, 1946, and the committee was dissolved.
The investigation into the cause of the accidents was wide-ranging and systematic research on structure and welding. The interim report suggested the importance of modification of structural design that reduces stress concentrations, improvement of weld quality that eliminates initial defect, and reduction of residual stresses by welding. However, the lack of steel toughness was not sufficiently recognized; insufficient attention was paid for the material. It was only considered that "rimmed steel" is preferred than "killed steel". So-called "welding steel" which possesses superior fracture toughness and weld crack resistance was not used in the wartime. The production of the welding steel was started after the war. It was regulated to use for vessel's body later.
The final report concluded that the number of accidents due to welding structure was statistically small and it will have no problem by the countermeasures. It is also stated that the construction of the large number of cargo vessels enable the transportation of military logistics which helped the victory. Overall the project, therefore, was thought success. The results of this report show US nationality of positive philosophy which kept affirming the welding joints in spite of the many accidents. The Liberty ship program had technical problems, but when combined with victory in World War II, it was hailed as a success. This program which depends on the strength of US's material superiority was just like US. Technology progresses with failures.
The accidents should be the most expensive and huge scale experiments of the century. The accidents showed importance of fracture toughness, which marked the birth of the fracture mechanics.
Cause At the present day, it is thought that the low weldability of steel was the main cause of the accidents. Furthermore, secondary causes included both the stress concentration due to poor design and initial defect of welding.

Steel experiences ductile fracture at high temperatures and brittle fracture at low temperatures; therefore, steel shows the characteristic of ductile-to-brittle transition. Brittle fracture usually occurs under the conditions of low-temperature, high-loading rate, and multi-axial stress constraint, which can be evaluated by Charpy Impact Test. Absorption energy measured by the test is called the notch toughness. Low notch toughness at low temperature is often the cause of brittle fracture. In other words, notch toughness at low temperature should be high to prevent brittle fracture. The low weldability of steel induces both a reduction of notches toughness at low temperature and weld crack.
The brittle fractures that occurred in the Liberty Ships were caused by low notch toughness at low temperature of steel at welded joint, which started at weld cracks or stress concentration points of the structure. External forces or residual stress due to welding progress the fracture. Almost all accidents by brittle fractures occurred in winter (low temperature). In some cases, residual stress is main cause of fracture, which was typified by the accident of Schenectady ship.

[GilaSlim]

Great info, Blacksmith. That must be the "too technical" information not included in the report I quoted. :)

GS

[Rocky D]

I seem to remember that Cutter introduced a website that described NDTT in relation to the Titanic disaster, and other ships that cracked in half. NDTT for those of you in Rio Linda, is nil-ductility transition temperature.

This is just another example that the members of this Hobart site get smarter and smarter just by logging in. (I borrowed that from Rush) (but is true for here, too) :D

[HT1]

That's just plain stupid...the 6011 deep digging rod will do things that the lo-hy electrodes won't.... especially in repair, like burn through painted surfaces, and don't need to be heated all the time like lo-hy. They smoke the same as other electrodes. The dude that told you that, didn't know either, obviously.

For the average guy on the street I agree, keeping rod hot is an inconvenience.

I, and everyone I have ever worked with professionally simply are not allowed to weld through paint. so I cannot see that as being considered as an advantage.

"Surfaces to be welded and adjacent surfaces for a distance of approximately 1/2 inch from the expected weld area shall be clean, dry and free of surface matter or defects such as paint,oil,grease,moisture,scale,oxide or rust and ojectionable nicks gouges and irregularities."

BTW welding through primer is a tested qualification, BUT i have never met anyone allowed to qualify or do it, the response was always "sand it off then weld it"

[Rocky D]

...
I, and everyone I have ever worked with professionally simply are not allowed to weld through paint. so I cannot see that as being considered as an advantage.


I was an Army weldor, and then industrial maintenance. When you're under fire, or need to get the job done fast, you need a rod the will burn through paint. :D The US Navy weldors IMHO are the best in the world, due largely to the strict training they have to go through. In civilian life you, will be able to pass any shakedown test with ease, and get a job just about anywhere!

[HT1]

the U.S Navy holds individual welders responsible for their welds. in short if I Do a repair in a hurry, and it fails and kills, injures or maines someone I will be held accountable. and the UCMJ has a death penalty. That is pretty good motivation to do a perfect job every time.

Though on occasion you find yourself in a situation where time is more important then correct. for example. SINKING!!!!:eek: will make the the seeming impossible, meerly inconvienient:rolleyes:

[Rocky D]

I know what you mean...I had several friends on the USS Thresher.

[FWI]

that's just plain stupid...the 6011 deep digging rod will do things that the lo-hy electrodes won't.... Especially in repair, like burn through painted surfaces, and don't need to be heated all the time like lo-hy. They smoke the same as other electrodes. The dude that told you that, didn't know either, obviously.

+1..........

[Wheelchair]

I welded in a local shipyard and in my opinion it had one of the best welding schools in the country. We had a series of exercises (about 32 ) and you had to be proficient in every one with 6010, 7018, 11018, and 308. This was in 1966. You had to pass them all in the structural setting and become proficient before going into the pipe welding section. We spent 16 weeks just practicing before testing. I hear now that they have cut out 6010 and the new weldors go for just 5 weeks and the acceptance criteria has been lowered. Maybe that is why the welding program is in a bit of a slide there now.

Wheelchair

[Sandy]

I welded in a local shipyard and in my opinion it had one of the best welding schools in the country. We had a series of exercises (about 32 ) and you had to be proficient in every one with 6010, 7018, 11018, and 308. This was in 1966. You had to pass them all in the structural setting and become proficient before going into the pipe welding section. We spent 16 weeks just practicing before testing. I hear now that they have cut out 6010 and the new weldors go for just 5 weeks and the acceptance criteria has been lowered. Maybe that is why the welding program is in a bit of a slide there now.

Wheelchair

The interesting answer to hear would be why they have excluded some of the 60 series rods. So the open question is; why and did they exlcude them in totality or only in some environments?

[Wheelchair]

They give only one day to practice 6010 and that is all as far as I have been told. I guess they don't use it as much as they used to. I do know it is banned on the subs but the older pipe welders still use it on galvanize and on commercial work, I guess it is a dying art in there now. Just before I retired they had a lot of new welders that would have tigged all large pipe if they could have gotten away with it. A lot of the young welders seemed to try to shy away from stick welding. I love tig but who would want to spend a full day to tig a job rather than stick it in a much lesser time, that is just not my style.

Wheelchair

[HT1]

I was really hoping someone would have a "magic bullet" answer for this question, because I get asked it ALOT by sailors. My personal opinion is that they are poor welders, and want to blame the electrode rather then their ability. most would love to use 6013 for everything


Now as to why a Naval engineer, the type with a college degree, not the type that turns wrenches and stands on the deckplates, would ban 6010, 6012, and 6013

this is my opinion from reading I have done

1. From how you all talk 6010 requires an acquired technique which would lead me to believe 7018 is easier to weld with.

2. it is generally held as truth, though it is not, that 6010 is designed for welding verticle down. the Navy only allows downhill welding in the most extreme of circumstances. the only one I have ever seen, is when the weld will be gouged out and rewelded uphill! so banning it sort of makes sense in an misinformed way.

3. I have seen many of you mention welding 6010 roots covered with 7018. an engineer might have had concerns that a welder would in error or on purpose do the entire weld in 6010 taking 6010 out of the equation would certainly prevent that

4. This fallacy i hear quite often. "60K is not strong enough that is why those rods are banned" that of course holds no water since 6011 is not banned

now some personnal observations no science involved

I have used 6013 and 6011. 6013 welds perfect little beads very easily, but I do not "feel" it gives very good penetration.

6011 makes sound enough welds BUT has WAY too much spatter, and you can smell it a mile away while it is being used. it has a unique odour in use. kind of like a burning brown paper bag. I think it smokes too much. but I may be over sensative, often working in extremely confined spaces

[Rocky D]

As I was pondering this thread, I remembered my military days. As a soldier, I was never given the luxury to ask "Why" about anything. Which is what boot camp is all about, learning not to question. (Prolly why I never got to be a scientist...they always ask "why" about stuff.) :D

There will prolly never be a satisfactory explanation of the "why" in this thread...I certainly can't see it.

Now there are forums that get a good deal more technical than here...one is the AWS forum, and another is that science\joining ( I forget the address) forum.

[Wheelchair]

If you know what you are doing, 6010 is a very good rod and we used to weld steam lines with it and had very good results. We were never allowed to use 6013 except as a cosmetic rod to weld scars on bulkheads and such. I have seen 6010 used and the cap on pipe was as pretty as one would want.
Spatter can be cleaned very easily when good anti-spatter is used. At the yard I worked in for 30 plus years, if you could not pass a 6010 test you busted out before you could burn the first 7018 rod. We used to have to weld a 1 inch pipe in the horizontal and vertical positon with 7010 and pass x-ray in the old days before we were allowed to weld our first tig bead. I am very thankful that I started my welding career and was taught to weld with every rod available, including seal welds, nuclear pipe and just plain old 60 and 7010. You had to also prove yourself proficient to weld in close places with a mirror because on ships you don't roll pipe. I have seen contractors come in the yard to do jobs on new drydocks and they welded some of the prettiest 6010 pipe that I had ever seen. So yes I think it is a great rod and it takes a good weldor to use it. I welded mostly tig in my later years in my carreer but I have never forgotten that I had to learn to crawl before walking.
Wheelchair

[flamin]

One thing to consider also, 6.2.5 says to refer to tables II and III for specs and guidlines for selcting compatible filler materials for the applicable basemetals. After glancing throught the tables. It seems that the 60xx series is excluded, based on the alloys listed in that particular group, and not excluded from the code all together. Again, this is just from a quick look, I haven't studied any of the literature in depth.

[HT1]

One thing to consider also, 6.2.5 says to refer to tables II and III for specs and guidlines for selcting compatible filler materials for the applicable basemetals. After glancing throught the tables. It seems that the 60xx series is excluded, based on the alloys listed in that particular group, and not excluded from the code all together. Again, this is just from a quick look, I haven't studied any of the literature in depth.

see table II group A1A includes the 60XX series electrodes for use only on base material S1 (plain) carbon steel.

[Sberry]

One reason they may not allow it is in case there are harder steels around, just plain simple to use 7018. Like having soft and hardened bolts, some places just don't have soft on the property. I know a forklift mfg place near here just doesn't allow any 10 or 11 etc on the place, just don't want someone using it on medium carbon steel.

[Mr Meck]

So I could use 7010? I was told if ya don't use 60xx for root it will leak. So much for that. I was also shown years ago on pipe to bevel, Do 6010 root, grind out the tracks, hot pass with 7018 to incorperate the 6010 with the 7018, then cover with 7018. Since I don't do any pipe as in steam fitting its mote with me. I don't use the 60 series 99% of the time. The other 1% is 7010 acrost scraper floor cracks which are usually full of dirt.
I grind the crack out, get as much dirt out as possible, run 7010 against the dirt, grind that out, then mig over that as ya can't mig over dirt. Works better than just 7018 over the crack with no grinding as they like to do in the field which just cracks again, weld over, cracks again and again till it gets to the shop and I got a real mess to straighten out. I don't like the 6010,11,12,13 cause I hold so close on so much 7018 that I have trouble keeping the 60 series held away and it sticks.

[Sberry]

It isn't that one wont work etc but with different grades of steel around it makes sense to just eliminate so many choices, just a simple solution. Thats the magic bullet answer, not everyone realize the grade of material they are working on. Look at all the debate and opinion, easy to reduce a huge portion of it by restricting the choices of electrode. Like I mention earlier, instead of having every mechanic assess every situation about bolts make it simple and stock only grade 5, takes the guess work and mistakes away from using soft bolts where there should be hardened. Not that soft wouldn't be suitable for a lot of application, just like some of the electrodes but they dont want each guy figuring out each detail.

[metarinka]

hmm as a welding engineer I'm a little stumped as for the reason

I don't work to that code or dabble too much in SMAW joint design so my opinion is probably not too informed.

For the record the only difference between the 60XX series is going to be chemistry composition of the flux. 6010 and 6011 both are all position rods, so it woudln't be an issue of people trying to go vertical or overhead with the wrong rod.

My guess is that the differences in flux create some difference in welding technique or create some undesirable affect. It could also be a standardization issue as well.

I'll tell you what a lot of those clauses were written based upon experience and then lost to time. It comes to bite you more in the very restrictive codes like Nuclear applications, when it seemingly calls out bans on all sorts of common practices for no reason, and no explanation. The original engineer who did the failure analysis and pushed through the change is probably long dead or retired.

[snoeproe]

15 years at the local pulp/paper mill and 95% of our black iron pipe is welded with a 6010 root and a 7018 fill and cap via SMAW. This includes high pressure steam lines. Our TSSA ticket for black iron pipe is welded the same way.

[tickintimebomb]

HT1

Good luck with the navy got medically retired and have been fighten with em on some of the welding and mechanic issues still and I am not even in any more. CM2 (SCW)

are you still in? and if you are where you located? if you dont mind me askin.

Luke Hauf

[jw macawful]

i am a maint. welder in a prison and i use the 6010 to repair high pressure steam lines. this electrode burns through rust and light paint very well. the 7018 lo-hi rod is much more difficult to get a satisfactory root pass, especially in tight places. the low hydrogen rods don't have the penetration of 6010. i find the 6010 dc and 6011 ac rods excellent all round welding rods. military specs are a different kettle of fish entirely and some of them in my opinion are not based on logic.

[hockeyguynick]

I'm gonna by sort of vague, since I'm new to the NAVY shipyard world, and not sure how much i'm allowed to talk about, but...
In addition to Wheelchair's comments (as I am in the same yard, and just got out of the welding school he is referring to) and they have just about eliminated 6010. Like he said, I did 8 hrs of 6010 work, and none of it got NDT'd, just some practice beads. Our main metal is 7018/10718/70S tig. I'm working subs, and we have a completely different set of rules pertaining to weld specs compared to carrier work. We had a set of xray's to pass in stcik V,H,O (none of it open root) as well as tests in dual shield, and mig. I finished in low hours, so they sent me to pipe school, and more x-rays along with socket welds that got PT'd. All in all, I was in the school for 3 1/2 months. And yes, the NAVY does make the welder responsible for his welds to a degree. We have a whole set of VT rules we go by after each bead as far as what is acceptable/rejectable. It then gets VT'd by the supervisor, along with any additional NDT req'd. They are very very strict about filler metal verification as well. All joints are numbered and must match our work packet, right down to thickness of material, preheat/interpass, bead size, type of filler. This also makes it possible for them to track down who welded what.

As for welding downhill, here, even in extreme cases they dont normally allow it, some of the spots i've been in, its nearly impossible not to, but ya gotta do what ya gotta do

[LittleJohnDeere]

This is just me talking, coming from a long line of frontiersmen and outdoorsmen, but some Nancy from Annapolis probably saw some dude gettin down with some 6010 root and asked him, "why are you using that smokey, sparky rod?" They guy probably replied, as I would, "because your old lady likes deep penetration." Hence, all 6010 has now been banned from our nation's finest vessels because somebody important got their teiny, tiny feelings hurt.

[donald branscom]

I work in a shipyard that does 95% Navy work (we get the occasional cruise ship shave and haircut) and our base rod is 7018. That is what we used when I took SMAW at the shipyard welding school. A lot of the Navy's rules are based on lessons learned, some deadly, most decades old. I wonder if the sudden and catastophic failures of numerous Liberty Ships in WW II, one of the first mass produced, welded ships has anything to do with the Navy's preference for lo-hy rods?

No it did not.
The liberty ships cracked at the corners of the deck hatches. Poor design.
The corners and reinforcment were not strong enough. Not rounded. But it was not the welding rods it was the design.
About 1/3 of the liberty ships had failures and some of them were lost at sea. Atlantic ocean.

I no longer have the book. That was a mistake to let that go but I believe I gave it to the Sausalito Ca,. California library. The book had historic photos.

The 7018 low hydrogen rods are made just for these type of applications.
The 6010 is a deep penetrating rod but does not deposit much metal.
However the 6010 used to be known as the "grandfather rod of shipping"

[Sberry]

I agree not much 6010 likely found in a sub, same as a nuke, all 7018 if stick or tig.

[donald branscom]

I'm gonna by sort of vague, since I'm new to the NAVY shipyard world, and not sure how much i'm allowed to talk about, but...
In addition to Wheelchair's comments (as I am in the same yard, and just got out of the welding school he is referring to) and they have just about eliminated 6010. Like he said, I did 8 hrs of 6010 work, and none of it got NDT'd, just some practice beads. Our main metal is 7018/10718/70S tig. I'm working subs, and we have a completely different set of rules pertaining to weld specs compared to carrier work. We had a set of xray's to pass in stcik V,H,O (none of it open root) as well as tests in dual shield, and mig. I finished in low hours, so they sent me to pipe school, and more x-rays along with socket welds that got PT'd. All in all, I was in the school for 3 1/2 months. And yes, the NAVY does make the welder responsible for his welds to a degree. We have a whole set of VT rules we go by after each bead as far as what is acceptable/rejectable. It then gets VT'd by the supervisor, along with any additional NDT req'd. They are very very strict about filler metal verification as well. All joints are numbered and must match our work packet, right down to thickness of material, preheat/interpass, bead size, type of filler. This also makes it possible for them to track down who welded what.

As for welding downhill, here, even in extreme cases they dont normally allow it, some of the spots i've been in, its nearly impossible not to, but ya gotta do what ya gotta do

The American Welding Society did a study and found that exterior steel boat hulls welded downhill with FCAW cracked due to the travel speed getting too high.

It is not recommend to downhill weld even with dual shield stainless, but I have taken tests where a company asked me to do that very thing, and I even asked them if they were sure that is what they wanted. I thought it might be a test to see if I would know not to do that. They would not answer my question, and I never heard from them.

[Roger]

Esab magazine a few years ago had ship building article about how weld production and profits was greatly improved by welding down hill. Wonder if new article will be about profitable business repairing those welds.

[urch55]

Esab magazine a few years ago had ship building article about how weld production and profits was greatly improved by welding down hill. Wonder if new article will be about profitable business repairing those welds.

Roger,
Maybe so especially if it was not done right. ;) Ok give me a chance to put on my flame proof suit.:rolleyes: I have had a test from a company who wanted both uphill and downhill. I guess they wanted to know if you had too you could do it either way..

[donald branscom]

I was really hoping someone would have a "magic bullet" answer for this question, because I get asked it ALOT by sailors. My personal opinion is that they are poor welders, and want to blame the electrode rather then their ability. most would love to use 6013 for everything


Now as to why a Naval engineer, the type with a college degree, not the type that turns wrenches and stands on the deckplates, would ban 6010, 6012, and 6013

this is my opinion from reading I have done

1. From how you all talk 6010 requires an acquired technique which would lead me to believe 7018 is easier to weld with.

2. it is generally held as truth, though it is not, that 6010 is designed for welding verticle down. the Navy only allows downhill welding in the most extreme of circumstances. the only one I have ever seen, is when the weld will be gouged out and rewelded uphill! so banning it sort of makes sense in an misinformed way.

3. I have seen many of you mention welding 6010 roots covered with 7018. an engineer might have had concerns that a welder would in error or on purpose do the entire weld in 6010 taking 6010 out of the equation would certainly prevent that

4. This fallacy i hear quite often. "60K is not strong enough that is why those rods are banned" that of course holds no water since 6011 is not banned

now some personnal observations no science involved

I have used 6013 and 6011. 6013 welds perfect little beads very easily, but I do not "feel" it gives very good penetration.

6011 makes sound enough welds BUT has WAY too much spatter, and you can smell it a mile away while it is being used. it has a unique odour in use. kind of like a burning brown paper bag. I think it smokes too much. but I may be over sensative, often working in extremely confined spaces

"strong enough"?

A 6010 rod means 60,000 lbs tensile strength.
The "1" means all position.
The "0" means the type of coating (nitrocellulose.)
It is a deep penetrating rod .Easy to strike.
IT does not deposit much metal.

6013 is a medium penetration rod, and medium amount of deposit.

7018 is NOT easier to weld with for most people when they are beginners.
It is hard to light and can "fingernail" making it hard to re-strike.
70,000 lbs tensile strength.
All position electrode.
Medium penetration and medium deposit.
X-ray quality. Low hydrogen.

You really need to buy a "pocket welding guide" and read about these filler metals.
That is the easy way to learn about them.

[monckywrench]

It is hard to light and can "fingernail" making it hard to re-strike.

Just crunch the "fingernail" before restrike on glove tip, concrete floor, what ever is handy.

Our students were delighted to switch to 7018 after beginning on 6010.

[aametalmaster]

I agree not much 6010 likely found in a sub, same as a nuke, all 7018 if stick or tig.

I have worked in a few places where its all 7018 or special rod to match some pipe that has chrome or TIG...Bob

[slash09]

Looking at 278 I noticed that while these three electrodes shall not be used for M(machinery), P(piping) and A(pressure vessels) applications, they are allowed on T(steam turbines)? Also it says not to use these electrodes being from QQ-E-450. Maybe it's just from this spec which is for mild steel. There are like 10 other specs for covered electrodes in MIL-E-22200, maybe one of those has 6010's that are allowed? Also, in normal structural or pipeline work with 6010 root passes do you not grind the tracks out before laying down fill w/ 7018? In 278 NO grinding allowed exept for bead starts and limited operator error. Oh, and 6011's are preferred for downhill welding and welds requiring minimal silicon deposit according to the procedure handbook. Maybe the low Si deposit has something to do with not being prohibited?

[Fireman]

From welding in a former war i liked the 6010 because of easy starts, nice penetration (even through marine grade primer and paint) while the unit ran poorly/low power due to crappy fuel, when along side the water, in the dark with few to watch your back because the short little BastXXds were everywhere in a hurry. It did everything that my 1st srgnt trained us to do. Cant talk about my deployment because of my current DOD involvement but you guys bring up good points....

[michael.connor]

We do a lot of repair down here and some times you have to weld paint and rust 6011 is one of the best for that I wonder where he works that no one has used 6011 so all his work must be in new construction

[cope]

No it did not.
The liberty ships cracked at the corners of the deck hatches. Poor design.
The corners and reinforcment were not strong enough. Not rounded. But it was not the welding rods it was the design.
About 1/3 of the liberty ships had failures and some of them were lost at sea. Atlantic ocean.

I no longer have the book. That was a mistake to let that go but I believe I gave it to the Sausalito Ca,. California library. The book had historic photos.

The 7018 low hydrogen rods are made just for these type of applications.
The 6010 is a deep penetrating rod but does not deposit much metal.
However the 6010 used to be known as the "grandfather rod of shipping"
There is a section in Jefferson's Welding Encyclopedia
which goes over WWII ships, and part of the issue was sub-standard steel.