Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Attention Forum Users: On the 28th of December 2023 at 9:00am Central Time, we will be taking the forums down for maintenance while we prepare the new forums for your use. Please click here for more information.

Discussion Forum

Question for Steve.....US Alloy

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Brad

04-12-2002 09:12:44




Report to Moderator

What are your general opinions concerning why you would use one over the other..... spray transfer over a dual shield wire? I generally think that a dual shielded wire, ((gas shielded flux cored wire)), will give you the same amount of penetration, only with the ability of all position welding that you don't get with spray transfer. I think it is easier to just use dual shielded wire so that I don't have to have another tank of shielding gas laying around the shop for the spray transfer application. Instead I can just use my mig gas, assuming it is acceptable shielding gas per manufacturers specs.

Do you have any thoughts regarding the major advantage/disadvantage of one over the other?

Brad

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
Steve U.S. Alloys

04-13-2002 09:34:36




Report to Moderator
 Re: Question for Steve.....US Alloy in reply to Brad, 04-12-2002 09:12:44  
The 'dual shield' electrodes do produce excellent weld penetration Brad. Due to the polarity settings of the gas shielded core wires, the spatter is most likely more pronounced when compared to an 'axial spray transfer' mode.

If current levels are sufficient to raise the current above the critical value referred to as the 'transition current', the result will be a high velocity stream of very tiny molten droplets that will defy gravity so to speak. This can be utilized to achieve all position welding in the spray transfer mode. Where problems arise in using this mode out of position it can be attributed to heavy molten deposits arising from the high deposition rates.

Your dual shield electrode will be better suited for filling gaps, for welding thinner material, and will be less affected by magnetic fields.

There are some in the gas industry who believe that the spray transfer mode can be achieved using the proper CO2/Ar mix. Voltage in the range of 32 to 36 using an .045" diameter wire produces a droplet stream smaller than the electrode diameter. This is also said to be possible with .035" diameter wire at less than 20% C02 mix.

In closing, please allow me to add this. Production and fabrication is not my field of expertise. My field of expertise revolves around repair and salvage. I have not personally tried to experiment with spray transfer from a Ar/CO2 mix.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Brad

04-13-2002 22:33:56




Report to Moderator
 Re: Re: Question for Steve.....US Alloy in reply to Steve U.S. Alloys, 04-13-2002 09:34:36  
I appreciate your feedback. I have tried both, and seem to like the dual shield better, as I can do all position with it, and I don't have to wheel around another tank of shielding gas to have the proper mix for a spray transfer. My feeling and experience has been that I can get the equivalent amount of penetration with a dual shield process as I can with spray transfer.

The main reason I was asking was to see what your thoughts were on the subject as I see more welders and production shops seem to like spray mode for the penetration factor, ((their excuse..... .)), but like I said, I think dual shield wire is equivalent, penetration wise, if not better just for the fact of being able to go all position.

Thanks for your post.
Brad

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy