A promising start. A bit hard to tell from your photos, but that looks like a T piece you're working with? If so, make the first (root) run without weaving the rod - that looks like a bit of undercut top-left of the second photo which suggests a rushed weave. Try keeping the rod more stable by resting it on the top side of the index finger around two inches plus away from the weld and slide the rod forward over the glove as it burns down. I always found that pointing the rod up (holder downward) about 5 degrees from the horizontal gave pretty good results. When you come to practising weaves, just pause briefly at the outside edge of the weld pool before travelling back in the opposite direction - this should reduce the risk of undercut.
I would cut the amps back a bit if only using 2.5 rods . 80 - 85 is a bit strong .. I would be down around the 70-75 mark and move a bit slower .
First , second , third and weave as a rough quick example . 2.5 Esab 7018 running at 73 amps . Didn't clean properly or anything just slapped it on , but it's a functional example , showpiece it is not haha
Always do my vertical up code welds using 3.2 7018 at 105 amps , so working back down to 2.5 I would say that was about right . Machine to machine there is maybe a difference in what amps say and what amps you get , but on mine that worked fine .
Woah, woah slow down there. 75A for a 3/32” might just about work, but 105A for a 1/8” 7018 vertical up, that’s just way too cold.
Got a code pass many times with it ..have the certificate . Overhead at 116 amps , vertical up at 105 amps . Never had a fail at those .
You could qualify a vertical down weld with no penetration if you wished. A coding is only as good as the procedure and that’s only as good as the person who wrote it.
I'd feel more confident with 115A really, but I've cut an etched at sub 100A with sufficient penetration. Mind you different electrodes perform different ive been using alot of conarc 49c lately and they do enjoy a little more juice than most.
I have always felt speed and arc length matter more than amps . 105 amps on my machine is hot enough to give a steady run with no drop and ample penetration with an esab 7018 . It passed visual and macro testing . And they hold stuff together , that's out there smashing up concrete and other steel . Near every weld I do gets tested to total destruction , usually it ain't the weld that breaks , they snap a turning joint or bend the whole assembly ,my weld stays unmovable . I really don't mind having a weld tested by anyone ,I know mine hold ....mine get tested and tested far beyond reasonable constantly .
105 amps with enough arc force is the same as 130 amps on some other machines... Who's to say it's too cold if it passes a code test? If it's a WPS to 15614 then you need proper penetration on the qualifying weld, and it should be a UT/rad test for the weldor to 9606 which should pick up any major flaws.
Yeah, my point was that even a 9606 weldor qualification requires a good solid weld to pass a UT test, and the WPS certification (15614) requires an even higher standard of weld. A pass is a pass It's the WPS you want to see though, it gives you max and min amps acceptable.
