Lesson 9

24/09/2013
Lesson 1 The Basics of Arc Welding
Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Current Chapter Table of Contents
Lesson 2 Common Electric Arc Welding Processes Lesson 3 Covered Electrodes for Welding Mild Steels Lesson 4 Covered Electrodes for Welding Low Alloy Steels Lesson 5 Welding Filler Metals for Stainless Steels
BASIC WELDING FILLER METAL TECHNOLOGY

A Correspondence Course
Go To Test Print
Glossary
LESSON IX ESTIMATING AND COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS
Turn Pages
Lesson 6 Carbon & Low Alloy Steel Filler Metals GMAW,GTAW,SAW Lesson 7 Flux Cored Arc Electrodes Carbon Low Alloy Steels
Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)
Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes
ESAB
ESAB Welding & Cutting Products
Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs
Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

COPYRIGHT 2000 THE ESAB GROUP, INC.
www.esabna.com/EUWeb/AWTC/Lesson9_1.htm
1/1
24/09/2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS LESSON IX ESTIMATING AND COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS

Section Nr. 9.1 9.2 9.2.1 9.2.2 9.2.3 9.2.4 9.2.5 9.2.6 9.2.7 9.2.8 9.2.9 Section Title Introduction .................................................................................................. Factors For Cost Form ulas ...................................................................... Labor & Overhead ......................................................................................... Deposition Rate ............................................................................................. Operating Factor ............................................................................................ Deposition Efficiency .................................................................................... Deposition Efficiency of Coated Electrodes .............................................. Efficiency of Flux Cored Wires ..................................................................... Efficiency of Solid Wires for GMAW ............................................................ Efficiency of Solid Wires for SAW ............................................................... Cost of Electrodes, Wires, Gases and Flux ................................................ Cost of Pow er ................................................................................................ Deposition Data Tables ............................................................................. Cost Calculations ....................................................................................... Calculating the Cost Per Pound of Deposited Weld Metal ....................... Calculating the Cost Per Foot Of Deposited Weld Metal ......................... Cost Calculations - Exam ple 2 ................................................................ Com paring Weld Metal Costs .................................................................. Example 3 ....................................................................................................... Other Useful Form ulas .............................................................................. Am ortization of Equipm ent Costs .......................................................... Page 1 2 2 2 3 4 4 6 6 7 7 7 8 12 12 14 15 17 19 20 21 22 26 27
Go To Test Print
Glossary
Turn Pages
9.2.10 9.3 9.4 9.4.1 9.4.2 9.5 9.6 9.6.1 9.7 9.8
Appendix A Lesson IX Test Questions ......................................................................... Appendix B Problem 1 Worksheet ................................................................................ Appendix C Problem 2 Worksheet ................................................................................
file:///C:/Users/Administrator/Desktop/Lesson 9 - 2.htm
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
ESTIMATING AND COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS
9.1 INTRODUCTION
Estimating the costs of depositing w eld metal can be a difficult task because of the many variables involved. Design engineers must specify the type and size of w eld joint to w ithstand the loads that the w eldment must bear. The w elding engineer must select the w elding process, and type of filler metal that w ill provide the required w elds at the least possible cost. With w ages and the cost of operations rising, selection of the process that deposits w eld metal most expediently must be carefully considered. Labor and overhead account for approximately 85% of the total w elding cost. 9.1.0.1 Welding costs may be divided into tw o categories; the fixed costs involved regard-
Go To Test Print
Glossary
less of the filler metal or w elding process selected, and those related to a specific w elding process. Fixed costs entail material handling, joint preparation, fixturing, tacking, preheating, w eld clean-up and inspection. Although some of these items w ill be affected by the process and filler metal chosen, they are a necessary part of practically all w elding operations. Calculating these costs is best left to the manufacturer since they w ill depend upon his capabilities
Turn Pages
and equipment. The cost of actually depositing the w eld metal how ever, w ill vary considerably w ith the filler metal and w elding process selected. This cost element is influenced by the users labor and overhead rates, deposition rate and efficiency of the filler metal, operating factor, and cost of materials and pow er. 9.1.0.2 This lesson w ill cover cost estimating for steel w eldments produced by the four most
common arc w elding processes in use today: shielded metal-arc w elding, gas metal-arc w elding, flux cored arc w elding and submerged arc w elding. Gas tungsten arc w elding w ill not be considered here because the variables, such as deposition rate and efficiency, are dependent on operator technique, stub use, etc. The GTAW process is a relatively costly method of depositing w eld metal, and is usually chosen for w eld quality or material thickness and composition limitations, rather than economy. 9.1.0.3 w eld metal. 9.1.0.4 In estimating w elding costs, all attempts should be made to w ork w ith accurate data, Large firms w ill frequently conduct their ow n deposition tests and time studies to
determine w elding costs, but many smaller shops do not know the actual cost of depositing
w hich in some cases is difficult to secure. For this reason, this lesson contains charts, graphs

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX and tables that provide average values that you may use. Electrode manufacturers w ill usually supply the deposition data you need through their Technical Services Department, if it is not already published in their literature.
9.2 FACTORS FOR COST FORMULAS

9.2.1 Labor and Overhead - Labor and overhead may be considered jointly in your
Go To Test Print
calculations. Labor is the w elders hourly rate of pay including w ages and benefits. Overhead includes allocated portions of plant operating and maintenance costs. Weld shops in manufacturing plants normally have established labor and overhead rates for each department. Labor and overhead rates can vary greatly from plant to plant, and also w ith location. Figure 1 show s how labor and overhead may vary and suggests an average value to use in your calculations w hen the actual value is unknow n.
Glossary
HOURLY WELDING LABOR & OVERHEAD RATES Small Shops Large Shops Av erage $10.00 to $25.00/hr. $25.00 to $50.00/hr $30.00/hr.
Turn Pages
9.2.2
APPROXIMATE LABOR AND OVERHEAD RATES FIGURE 1
Deposition Rate - The deposition rate is the rate that w eld metal can be deposited
by a given electrode or w elding w ire, expressed in pounds per hour. It is based on continuous operation, not allow ing time for stops and starts caused by inserting a new electrode, cleaning slag, termination of the w eld or other reasons. The deposition rate w ill increase as the w elding current is increased.
9.2.2.1
When using solid or flux cored w ires, deposition rate w ill increase as the electrical
stick-out is increased, and the same amperage is maintained. True deposition rates for each w elding filler metal, w hether it is a coated electrode or a solid or flux cored w ire, can only be established by an actual test in w hich the w eldment is w eighed before w elding and then again after w elding, at the end of a measured period of time. The tables in Figures 8-11 contain average values for the deposition rate of various types of w elding filler metals. These are based on w elding laboratory tests and published data.

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX 9.2.3 Operating Factor - Operating factor is the percentage of a w elders w orking day
that is actually spent w elding. It is the arc time in hours divided by the total hours w orked. A
45% (.45) operating factor means that only 45% of the w elders day is actually spent w elding. The balance of time is spent installing a new electrode or w ire, cleaning slag, positioning the w eldment, cleaning spatter from the w elding gun, etc. 9.2.3.1 When using coated electrodes, (SMAW) the operating factor can range from
Go To Test Print
15%-40% depending upon material handling, fixturing and operator dexterity. If the actual operating factor is not know n, an average of 30% may be used for cost estimates w hen w elding w ith the shielded metal arc w elding process. 9.2.3.2 When w elding w ith solid w ires (GMAW) or metal cored w elding (MCAW) using the
semi-automatic method, operating factors ranging from 45%-55% are easily attainable. Use 50% for cost estimating purposes. 9.2.3.3 For w elds produced by flux cored arc w elding (FCAW) semi-automatically, the
Glossary
operating factor usually lies betw een 40%-50%. For cost estimating purposes, use a 45% operating factor. The estimated operating factor for FCAW is about 5% low er than that of GMAW to allow for slag removal time. 9.2.3.4 In semi-automatic submerged arc w elding, slag removal and loose flux handling
Turn Pages
must be considered. A 40% operating factor is typical for this process. 9.2.3.5 Automatic w elding using the GMAW, FCAW, and SAW processes, requires that
each application be studied individually. Operating factors ranging from 50% to values approaching 100% may be obtained depending on the degree of automation. 9.2.3.6 The chart in Figure 2 show s average operating factor values for the various w elding
processes that may be used for cost estimating w hen the actual operating factor is not know n.

SMAW
WELDING PROCESS + * GMAW 50% *FCAW 45% *SAW 40%
30%
*Semi-Automatic Only + Metal Cored Wires are Included APPROXIMATE OPERATING FACTOR FIGURE 2

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX 9.2.4 Deposition Efficiency - Deposition efficiency is the relationship of the weight of
the w eld metal deposited to the w eight of the electrode (or w ire) consumed in making a w eld.
It can be accurately determined only by making a timed test w eld, and carefully w eighing the w eldment and the electrode or w ire, before and after w elding. The efficiency can then be calculated by the formula: Deposition efficiency = Weight of Weld Metal
Weight of Electrode Used (or)
Go To Test Print
Deposition Rate (lbs/hr)
Burn-off Rate (lbs/hr)
9.2.4.1
The deposition efficiency tells us how many pounds of w eld metal can be expected
from a given w eight of the electrode or w elding w ire purchased. As an example, 100 pounds of a flux cored electrode w ith an efficiency of 85%, w ill produce approximately 85 pounds of w eld metal, w hile 100 pounds of coated electrode w ith an efficiency of 65%, w ill produce approximately 65 pounds of w eld metal, less the w eight of the stubs discarded, as described below . 9.2.5 Coated Electrodes - The deposition efficiency of coated electrodes by AWS
Glossary
definition, and in published data, does not consider the loss of the unused electrode stub that
Turn Pages
is discarded. This is understandable since the stub length can vary w ith the operator and the application. Long continuous w elds are usually conducive to short stubs w hile on short intermittent w elds, stub length tends to be longer. Figure 3 illustrates how the stub loss influences the electrode efficiency w hen using coated electrodes. 9.2.5.1 In Figure 3, a 14 long by 5/32 diameter E7018 electrode at 140 amperes is con-
sidered. It is 75% efficient, and a tw o inch stub loss is assumed. The 75% efficiency applies
12" LENGTH OF ELECTRODE CONSUMED
AMOUNT THAT BECOMES WELD METAL (LENGTH CONSUMED X EFFICIENCY)
2" STUB LENGTH
9" 14" DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY = 75% actual efficiency, including stub loss = 9 14 = 64.3%
LOST TO SLAG,SPATTER & FUMES
FIGURE 3
-4-
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
only to the 12 of the electrode consumed in making the w eld, and not to the tw o inch stub. When the tw o inch stub loss and the 25% that is lost to slag, spatter and fumes are considered, the efficiency minus stub loss is low ered to 64.3%. This means that for each 100 pounds of electrodes purchased, you can expect an actual deposit of approximately 64.3 pounds of w eld metal if all electrodes are used to a tw o inch stub length. 9.2.5.2 The formula for the efficiency including stub loss is important, and must alw ays be
Go To Test Print
used w hen estimating the cost of depositing w eld metal by the SMAW method. Figure 4 show s the formula used to establish the efficiency of coated electrodes including stub loss. It is based on the electrode length, and is slightly inaccurate, i.e. it does not take into consideration that the electrode w eight is not evenly distributed, due to the flux being removed from the electrode holder end. (Indicated by the dotted lines in Figure 3.) Use of the formula w ill result in a 1.5-2.3% error that w ill vary w ith electrode size, coating thickness and stub length. The formula how ever, is acceptable for estimating purposes. 9.2.5.3 For the values given in Figure 3 the formula is:
Glossary
EFFICIENCY = MINUS STUB LOSS
(ELECTRODE LENGTH STUB LENGTH) X DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY ELECTRODE LENGTH EFFICIENCY MINUS STUB LOSS
Turn Pages
FIGURE 4
Efficiency - Stub Loss
(14-2) x .75 14
12 x .75 14
9 14
.6429 or 64.3%
In the above example, the electrode length is know n, the stub loss must be estimated, and the efficiency taken from the tables in Figures 8 and 9. Use an average stub loss of three inches for coated electrodes if the actual shop practices concerning stub loss are not know n. 9.2.5.4 The follow ing stub loss correction table w ill assist in your determination of coated
electrode efficiencies. Figure 5 lists various efficiencies at a given stub loss.

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
ELEC. LENGTH DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY 2" STUB 3" STUB 4" STUB 5" STUB
Lesson 2 Common Electric Arc Welding Processes

STUB LOSS CORRECTION
60% 65% 12" 70% 75% 80% 60% 65% 14" 70% 75% 80% 60% 65% 18" 70% 75% 80%
50.0% 54.2% 58.3% 62.5% 66.6% 51.4% 55.7% 60.0% 64.3% 68.5% 53.3% 57.7% 62.2% 66.6% 71.1%
45.0% 48.7% 52.5% 56.2% 60.0% 47.1% 51.1% 55.0% 58.9% 62.8% 50.0% 54.2% 58.3% 62.5% 66.6%
40.0% 43.3% 46.6% 50.0% 53.3% 42.8% 46.4% 50.0% 53.6% 57.1% 46.6% 50.5% 54.4% 58.3% 62.2%
35.0% 37.9% 40.8% 43.7% 46.6% 38.5% 41.8% 45.0% 48.2% 51.4% 43.3% 46.9% 50.5% 54.2% 57.7%
Lesson 3 Covered Electrodes for Welding Mild Steels Lesson 4 Covered Electrodes for Welding Low Alloy Steels
TABLE FOR COATED ELECTRODES EFFICIENCY INCLUDING STUB LOSS FIGURE 5
Go To Test Print
Glossary
9.2.6
Efficiency of Flux Cored Wires - Flux cored w ires have a low er flux-to-metal ratio
Lesson 5 Welding Filler Metals for Stainless Steels
than coated electrodes, and thereby, a higher deposition efficiency. Stub loss need not be considered since the w ire is continuous. The gas shielded w ires of the E70T-1 and E70T-2 types have efficiencies of 83%-88%. The gas shielded basic slag type (E70T-5) is 85%-90% efficient w ith CO2 as the shielding gas, and the efficiency can reach 92% w hen a 75% argon,
Turn Pages
25% CO2 gas mixture is used. Use the efficiency figures in Figure 9 for your calculations if the actual values are not know n. 9.2.6.1 The efficiency of the self-shielded types of flux cored w ires has more variation
because of the large variety of available types that have been designed for specific applications. The high deposition general purpose type, such as E70T-4, is 81%-86%, depending on w ire size and electrical stick-out. The chart in Figure 9 show s the optimum conditions for each w ire size and may be used in your calculations. 9.2.7 Efficiency of Solid Wires for GMAW - The efficiency of solid w ires in GMAW is
very high and w ill vary w ith the shielding gas or gas mixture used. Using CO2 w ill produce the most spatter and the average efficiency w ill be about 93%. Using a 75% argon-25% CO2 gas mixture w ill result in somew hat less spatter, and an efficiency of approximately 96% can be expected. A 98% argon-2% oxygen mixture w ill produce even less spatter, and the average efficiency w ill be about 98%. Stub loss need not be considered since the w ire is continuous. Figure 6 show s the average efficiencies you may use in your calculations if the actual efficiency is not know n.

1/1
24/09/2013
.045" - 1/16"

Lesson 1 GMAW The Basics of Arc Welding
LESSON IX 9.2.8 Efficiency of Solid Wires for SAW - In submerged arc w elding there is no spatter
loss and an efficiency of 99% may be assumed. The only loss during w elding is the short
piece the operator must clip off the end of the w ire to remove the fused flux that forms at the termination of each w eld. This is done to assure a good start on the succeeding w eld.
Go To Test
Shielding Gas Pure CO2 Ef f iciency Range 88 - 95% 94 - 98% 98% Ar - 2% O2 97 - 98.5% Av erage Ef f iciency 93% 96% 98%
Print
Glossary
DEPOSITION EFFICIENCIES - GAS METAL ARC WELDING CARBON AND LOW ALLOY STEELS FIGURE 6
9.2.9
Cost of Electrodes, Wires, Gases and Flux - You must secure the current cost
per pound of the electrode or w elding w ire, plus the cost of the shielding gas or flux if applicable, from the supplier. The shielding gas flow rate varies slightly w ith the type of gas used. The flow rates in Figure 7 are average values w hether the shielding gas is an argon mixture or
Turn Pages
pure CO2. Use these in your calculations if the actual flow rate is not available. In the submerged arc process (SAW) the ratio of flux to w ire consumed in the w eld is approximately 1 to 1 by w eight. When the losses due to flux handling and flux recovery systems are considered, the average ratio of flux to w ire is approximately 1.4 pounds of flux for each pound of w ire consumed. If the actual flux-to-w ire ratio is unknow n, use the 1.4 for cost estimating.
FCAW/MCAW
Wire Diameter CFH
.035" 30 35
.045" 35
1/16" 40
5/64" - 1/8" 45
APPROXIMATE SHIELDING GAS FLOW RATE - CUBIC FEET PER HOUR FIGURE 7
9.2.10
Cost of Pow er - Cost of electrical pow er is a very small part of the cost of deposit-
ing w eld metal and in most cases is less than 1% of the total. It w ill be necessary for you to know the pow er cost expressed in dollars per kilow att- hour ($/kWh) if required for a total cost estimate.

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
9.3
ELECTRODE DIAMETER
DEPOSITION DATA CHARTS

SHIELDED METAL ARC WELDING - Coated Electrodes.
9.3.1
E6010
ELECTRODE DIAMETER DEPOSITION AMPS RATE lbs/hr EFFICIENCY % ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS
6013
DEPOSITION RATE lbs/hr EFFICIENCY %
Go To Test Print
3/32 1/8 5/32 3/16 7/32
75 100 130 140 170 160 190 190 230
1.5 2.1 2.3 2.8 2.9 3.3 3.5 4.5 5.1
72.0% 76.3% 68.8% 73.6% 64.1% 74.9% 69.7% 76.9% 73.1%
3/32 1/8 5/32
3/16
7/32
85 125 140 160 180 180 200 220 250 270 290
1.6 2.1 2.6 3 3.5 3.2 3.8 4.1 5.3 5.7 6.1
73.0% 73.0% 75.6% 74.1% 71.2% 73.9% 71.1% 72.9% 71.3% 73.0% 72.7%
Glossary
E6011
DEPOSITION AMPS RATE lbs/hr EFFICIENCY %
3/32 1/8 5/32 3/16 7/32 1/4
75 120 150 180 210 250
1.3 2.3 3.7 4.1 5 5.6
61.0% 70.7% 77.0% 73.4% 74.2% 71.9%
E7014
ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS DEPOSITION RATE lbs/hr EFFICIENCY %
Turn Pages
1/8 5/32 3/16
E6012
ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS DEPOSITION RATE lbs/hr EFFICIENCY %
7/32 1/4
1/8 5/32 3/16 7/32
130 165 200 220 250 320
2.9 3.2 3.4 4 4.2 5.6
81.8% 78.8% 69.0% 77.0% 74.5% 69.8%
120 150 160 200 230 270 290 330 350 400
2.4 3.1 3 3.7 4.5 5.5 5.8 7.1 7.1 8.7
63.9% 61.1% 71.9% 67.0% 70.9% 73.2% 67.2% 70.3% 68.7% 69.9%
DEPOSITION DATA - SMAW - COATED ELECTRODES
FIGURE 8
NOTE: EFFICIENCY RATES DO NOT INCLUDE STUB LOSS

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX

E7016
Go To Test
%
Lesson 3 Covered Electrodes for Welding Mild Steels Lesson 4 Covered Electrodes for Welding Low Alloy Steels Lesson 5 Welding Filler Metals for Stainless Steels
ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS
DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY RATE lbs/hr
1/8 5/32
3/16
1/4
100 130 140 160 190 175 200 225 250 250 275 300 350
1.7 2.3 3.0 3.2 3.6 3.8 4.2 4.4 4.8 5.9 6.4 6.8 7.6
63.9% 65.8% 70.5% 69.1% 66.0% 71.0% 71.0% 70.0% 65.8% 74.5% 74.1% 73.2% 71.5%
Print
LOW ALLOY, IRON POWDER ELECTRODES TYPES E7018, E8018, E9018, E10018, E11018, AND E12018 ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY RATE lbs/hr %
Glossary
3/32
1/8
5/32
E7024
ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY RATE lbs/hr %
3/16
7/32
1/8 5/32
3/16
7/32 1/4
140 180 180 210 240 245 270 290 320 360 400
4.2 5.1 5.3 6.3 7.2 7.5 8.3 9.1 9.4 11.6 12.6
71.8% 70.7% 71.3% 72.5% 69.4% 69.2% 70.5% 68.0% 72.4% 69.1% 71.7%
1/4
70 90 110 120 140 160 140 170 200 200 250 300 250 300 350 300 350 400
1.37 1.65 1.73 2.58 2.74 2.99 3.11 3.78 4.31 4.85 5.36 5.61 6.50 7.20 7.40 7.72 8.67 9.04
70.5% 66.3% 64.4% 71.6% 70.9% 68.1% 75.0% 73.5% 73.0% 76.4% 74.6% 70.3% 75.0% 74.0% 73.0% 78.0% 77.0% 74.0%
Turn Pages
DEPOSITION DATA - SMAW - COATED ELECTRODES (Con't.) FIGURE 9
NOTE: EFFICIENCY RATES DO NOT INCLUDE STUB LOSS
1/1
24/09/2013
0.045


9.3.2 FLUX CORED ARC WELDING/METAL CORED ARC WELDING - Deposition
LESSON IX
Lesson 2 Common Electric Arc Welding Processes Lesson 3 Covered Electrodes for Welding Mild Steels Lesson 4 Covered Electrodes for Welding Low Alloy Steels
data for gas shielded FCAW on all low alloy w ire types and MCAW on all alloy types.
FLUX CORED ARC WELDING (FCAW) GAS SHIELDED TYPES E70T-1, E71T-1, E70T-2, E70T-5, & ALL LOW ALLOY TYPES ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY RATE lbs/hr % METAL CORED ARC WELDING (MCAW) E70T-1, E71T-1, AND ALL ALLOY TYPES ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS DEPOSITION RATE lbs/hr EFFICIENCY %
Go To Test Print
.035
.045

.052
1/16
5/64
3/32
130 140 160 180 200 220 160 180 200 220 240 280 170 190 210 240 270 300 180 200 220 250 275 300 350 250 350 450 400 450 500
3.2 3.6 4.2 5.6 6.5 7.5 4.0 4.9 6.5 6.8 7.3 10.5 3.9 5.3 5.5 6.7 8.1 10.3 4.2 4.7 5.6 7.7 8.5 9.3 11.7 6.4 10.5 14.8 12.7 15.0 18.5
82% 82% 83% 83% 84% 85% 83% 87% 90% 84% 84% 89% 84% 87% 86% 85% 85% 87% 87% 85% 87% 86% 86% 86% 86% 85% 85% 85% 85% 86% 86%
0.035
0.052
1/16
5/64
3/32
150 200 250 250 275 300 275 300 325 300 350 400 450 350 400 450 500 400 450 500 550
4.4 6.5 9.4 8 11.4 11.6 8 9.6 10.1 8.6 11.9 14.6 16.2 11.6 13.2 15.8 20.4 11.5 14.5 16.5 21
93% 92% 92% 91% 93% 95% 90% 93% 93% 89% 94% 93% 96% 94% 95% 97% 97% 95% 97% 97% 98%
Glossary
Turn Pages
NOTE: DATA REFLECTS USE OF 75% ARGON 25% CO2 GAS SHIELDING. DEPOSITION RATES AND EFFICIENCIES WILL INCREASE WITH THE USE OF HIGHER ARGON MIXTURES.
DEPOSITION DATA - FCAW/MCAW FIGURE 10

1/1
24/09/2013
9.3.3

LESSON IX FLUX CORED ARC WELDING,

GAS METAL ARC W ELDING SOLID W IRES
Lesson 2 Common Electric Arc Welding Processes Lesson 3 Covered Electrodes for Welding Mild Steels
GAS METAL ARC WELDING, AND SUBMERGED ARC WELDING - Deposition data for self-shielded FCAW, and solid w ires using GMAW and SubArc.
DEPOSITION RATE lbs/hr

ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS 75 .030 100 150 200 80 .035 100 150 200 250 100 .045 125 150 200 250 300 350 250 1/16 275 300 350 400 450 98%A/2%O2 75%A/25%CO2 Straight CO2 *98% *96% *93% 2.0 1.9 1.8 2.6 2.6 2.5 4.1 4.0 3.9 6.8 6.7 6.5 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.7 2.7 2.6 4.2 4.1 4.0 6.2 6.0 5.9 9.0 8.8 8.6 2.1 2.0 1.9 2.8 2.8 2.7 3.6 3.5 3.4 5.6 5.5 5.3 7.8 7.6 7.4 10.2 10.0 9.7 13.2 12.9 12.5 6.5 6.4 6.2 7.7 7.6 7.3 9.0 8.8 8.5 11.3 11.0 10.7 14.0 13.7 13.3 17.4 17.1 16.5
Go To Test Print
FLUX CORED ARC WELDING (FCAW)
Lesson 4 Covered Electrodes for Welding Low Alloy Steels Lesson 5 Welding Filler Metals for Stainless Steels
SELF-SHIELDED
Glossary
ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS E70T-3 3/32 450
DEPOSITIONEFFICIENCY RATE lbs/hr %
400 450 E70T-6 5/64 350 480 3/32 E70T-6 3/32 325 450 7/64 E71T-7 .068 200 300 5/64 E71T-8 5/64 220 300 3/32 E61T8-K6 5/64 235 E70T-10 .045 150 220 1/16 250 5/64 E71T-11 .045 150 200 1/16 240 5/64 250 3/32 E70T4-K2 3/32 300 E71T-GS .030 100 120 .035 150 .045 200 1/16 250 5/64
E70T-4 3/32 0.12
14 15 20 11.9 14.7 11.4 18 4.2 8 4.4 6.7 4.3 2.6 3.3 4 2.4 3.6 4.5 5 14 1.6 2.1 2.4 3.6 3.9
88% 85% 81% 86% 81% 80% 86% 76% 84% 77% 77% 76% 88% 78% 94% 82% 83% 87% 91% 83% 75% 84% 82% 83% 81%
* USE THIS FIGURE AS THE DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY IN THE COST CALCULATIONS ON SHEET ONE.
SUBMERGED ARC W IRES (1" STICKOUT)
Turn Pages
ELECTRODE DIAMETER AMPS 300 400 500 400 500 600 400 500 600 700 500 600 700 800 3/16 900 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 NOTE: Values f or 1" Stickout
MELT-OFF RATE lbs/hr 7.0 10.2 15.0 9.4 13.0 17.2 8.5 11.5 15.0 19.0 11.3 14.6 18.4 22.0 26.1 13.9 17.5 21.0 25.0 29.2 34.0
EFFICIENCY %
5/64
3/32
Assum e 99%
1/8
5/32
Efficiency
DEPOSITION DATA
FIGURE 11
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
9.4 COST CALCULATIONS - EXAMPLE 1

9.4.1 9.4.1.1 Calculating the Cost Per Pound of Deposited Weld Metal Example 1 - Calculate the cost of w elding 1,280 ft. of a single bevel butt joint as show n in Figure 14 using the follow ing data. a. Electrode - 3/16 diameter, 14 long, E7018, operated at 25 volts, 250 amps. b. Stub Loss - 2 inches c. Labor and Overhead - $30.00/hr d. Electrode Cost - $.57/lb e. Pow er Cost - $.045/kWh
Go To Test Print
Glossary
9.4.1.2 The formulas for the calculations are show n on the Weld Metal Cost Worksheet in Figure 12. The follow ing explains each step in the calculations. Line 1- Labor and Overhead - $30.00/hr (given) Deposition Rate - From shielded metal arc w elding deposition data chart in Figure 9 = 5.36 lbs/hr. Operating Factor - Since it is not stated above, use an average value of 30% (.30) show n in Figure 2.
Turn Pages
The cost of labor and overhead per pound of deposited w eld metal can now be calculated as $18.66/lb. Line 2 - Electrode Cost Per Pound - $.57 (given) Deposition Efficiency - From the shielded metal arc w elding deposition table in Figure 9 = 74.6%. Since this is a coated electrode, the efficiency must be adjusted for stub loss by the formula follow ing Figure 3. We know that the electrode length is 14" and the stub loss is 2" (given). The formula becomes: Efficiency - Stub Loss = (14-2) x .746
14 = .639 or 63.9%
63.9% is the adjusted efficiency to be used in Line 2. The cost of the electrode per pound of deposited w eld metal can now be calculated as $.89/lb. Line 3 - Not applicable for coated electrodes. Line 4 - Not applicable for coated electrodes.

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX

1.
EXAMPLE 1 WELD METAL COST WORKSHEET COST PER POUND OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL
LABOR & OVERHEAD
LABOR & OVERHEAD COST/HR DEPOSITION OPERATING RATE (LBS/HR) x FACTOR
30.00 5.36 x .30
3 0 . 0 0
1.608
= 18.66
Go To Test Print
2.
ELECTRODE
ELECTRODE COST/LB DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY
.57 .639
.89
3.
Glossary
GAS GAS FLOW RATE (CU FT/HR) x GAS COST/CU FT DEPOSITION RATE (LBS/HR)
= = = N A
4.
FLUX
FLUX COST/LB x 1.4 DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY COST/kWh x VOLTS x AMPS 1000 x DEPOSITION RATE
X 1.4
5.
POWER
. 0 4 5x2 5x2 5 0 = 1000 x 5.36
281.25 5,360
.052
Turn Pages Lesson 6 Carbon & Low Alloy Steel Filler Metals GMAW,GTAW,SAW Lesson 7 Flux Cored Arc Electrodes Carbon Low Alloy Steels
6. TOTAL COST PER LB. OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL SUM OF 1 THROUGH 5 ABOVE
$ 19.60
COST PER FOOT OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL

7. COST PER POUND OF DEPOSITED X WELD METAL POUNDS PER FOOT OF WELD JOINT
19.60x .814
= $15.95
COST OF WELD METAL - TOTAL JOB

8. TOTAL FEET X OF WELD COST PER FOOT
1 , 2 8 0 x 1 5 . 9 5 =$ 2 0 , 4 2 2
FIGURE 12

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX Line 5 - Cost of Pow er - $ .045/kWh (given). Volts & Amperes - 25V and 250A (given). Constant - The 1,000 already entered, is a constant necessary to convert to w att-hours. Deposition Rate - 5.36 lbs/hr as used in Line 1. The cost of electrical pow er to deposit one pound of w eld metal can now be calculated as $.052. Line 6 - Total Lines 1, 2, and 5 to find the total cost of depositing one pound w eld metal. The total of $19.60. 9.4.2 Calculating The Cost Per Foot of Deposited Weld Metal
Go To Test Print
Glossary
Calculating the w eight of w eld metal requires that w e consider the follow ing items. a. b. c. d. Area of the cross-section of the w eld. Length of the w eld. Volume of the w eld in cubic inches. Weight of the w eld metal per cubic inch.
Turn Pages
9.4.2.1
In the fillet w eld show in Figure 13, w e know that the area of the cross-section (the
triangle) is equal to one-half the base times the height, the volume of the w eld is equal to the area times the length, and the w eight of the w eld then, is the volume times the w eight of the material (steel) per cubic inch. 9.4.2.2 We can then w rite the formula: Weight of Weld Metal = x Base x Height x Length x Weight of Material Substituting the values from Figure 13, w e have: Wt/Ft = .5 x .5 x .5 x 12 x .283 = .4245 lbs 9.4.2.3 Weights may vary depending on the density of the particular material you are at-
tempting to calculate. The chart in Figure 14 w ill eliminate the need for these calculations for
steel fillet and butt joints, since it lists the w eight per foot directly. 9.4.2.4 Estimating the w eight per foot of a w eld using the chart, requires that you make a
draw ing of the w eld joint to exact scale, and dimension the leg lengths, root gap, thickness, angles and other pertinent measurements as show n in Figure 15. Divide the cross-section of the w eld into right triangles and rectangles as show n. Sketch in the reinforcement, i.e., the
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
Lesson 2 Common Electric Arc Welding Processes Lesson 3 Covered Electrodes for Welding Mild Steels Lesson 4 Covered Electrodes for Welding Low Alloy Steels
(A) HEIGHT
1/2" Volume of Weld Weight of Steel = Weight of Weld = = = 1/2 B x A x 12 .283 lb per cu. in. 1/2 (1/2) x 1/2 x 12 x .283 .424 lbs.
1/2" (B) BASE
Go To Test Print
CALCULATING THE WEIGHT PER FOOT OF A FILLET WELD FIGURE 13
Glossary
domed portion above or below the surface of the plate, w here required. The reinforcement
should extend slightly beyond the edges of the joint. Measure the length and height of the reinforcement and note them on your draw ing. The reinforcement is only an approximation because the contour cannot be exactly controlled in w elding. Refer to the w eight tables in Figure 14 for the w eights per foot of each of the component parts of the w eld, as sketched.
Turn Pages
The sum of the w eights of all the components is the total w eight of the w eld, per foot as show n in Figure 15A. Line 7 - The total cost per pound as determined in Line 6 is entered, and multiplied by the w eight per foot as determined in Figure 14. 9.4.3 Calculating the Cost of Weld Metal - Total Job Line 8 - The cost of the w eld for the total job is determined by multiplying the total feet of w eld (given) by the cost per foot as determined in Line 7.
9.5 COST CALCULATIONS - EXAMPLE 2

Calculate the total cost of depositing 1,280 ft of w eld metal using the CO2 shielded, flux cored w elding process in the double V-groove joint show n in Figure 14 using the follow ing data. 1. 2. 3. 4. Electrode - 3/32, E70T-1 @ 31 volts, 450 amps. Labor and Overhead - $30.00/hr. Deposition Rate - 15 lbs/hr. From Table in Figure 10. Operating Factor - 45% (.45). Average from Figure 2.
1/1
24/09/2013
V-GROOVE


WEIGHT PER FOOT OF WELD METAL FOR FILLET WELDS AND ELEMENTS OF COMMON BUTT JOINTS (lbs/ft) STEEL
LESSON IX
G
C B
S
B
S
C B B A
S G
Go To Test
T
Print
EQUAL LEG FILLETS (USE 45COLUMN)
C SINGLE BEVEL SINGLE V-GROOVE
Glossary
S
G
C B B A B C DOUBLE B
S T T
S
C B A B C DOUBLE BEVEL
S
C B B
S H T T
REINFORCEMENT
SINGLE V NO GAP
Turn Pages
lbs./f t. of Rectangle A T Inches 1/8 3/16 1/4 5/16 3/8 7/16 9/16 5/8 11/16 3/4 13/16 7/8 15/16 1 1/16" .027 .040 .053 .066 .080 .091 .106 .119 .133 .146 .159 .172 .186 .199 .212 .239 .265 .292 .318 .345 .371 .390 .425 .478 .530 .584 .636 1/8" .053 .080 .106 .133 .159 .186 .212 .239 .265 .292 .318 .345 .371 .398 .425 .478 .531 .584 .637 .690 .743 .796 .649 .955 1.061 1.167 1.274 3/16" .080 .119 .159 .199 .239 .279 .318 .358 .398 .438 .478 .517 .557 .597 .637 .716 .796 .876 .955 1.035 1.114 1.194 1.274 1.433 1.592 1.751 1.910 G 1/4" .106 .159 .212 .265 .318 .371 .425 .478 .531 .584 .637 .690 .743 .796 .849 .955 1.061 1.167 1.274 1.380 1.486 1.592 1.698 1.910 2.123 2.335 2.547 3/8" .159 .239 .318 .390 .478 .557 .637 .716 .796 .876 .995 1.035 1.114 1.194 1.274 1.433 1.592 1.751 1.910 2.069 2.229 2.388 2.547 2.865 3.184 3.502 3.821 1/2" .212 .318 .425 .531 .637 .743 .849 .955 1.061 1.167 1.274 1.380 1.486 1.592 1.698 1.910 2.123 2.335 2.547 2.759 2.972 3.184 3.396 3.821 4.245 4.669 5.094 5 .002 .005 .009 .015 .021 .028 .037 .047 .058 .070 .084 .098 .114 .131 .149 .188 .232 .281 .334 .393 .455 .523 .594 .752 .928 1.123 1.337 10 .005 .011 .019 .029 .042 .057 .075 .095 .117 .142 .169 .198 .230 .263 .300 .379 .468 .567 .674 .792 .918 1.053 1.197 1.516 1.871 2.264 2.695 15 .007 .016 .028 .044 .064 .087 .114 .144 .178 .215 .256 .301 .349 .400 .456
lbs./f t. of Triangle B S 22 1/2 .011 .025 .044 .069 .099 .129 .176 .223 .275 .332 .396 .464 .538 .618 .703 .890 1.099 1.330 1.582 1.857 2.154 2.473 2.813 3.561 4.396 5.319 6.330 30 .015 .035 .061 .096 .138 .188 .245 .311 .383 .464 .552 .648 .751 .863 .981 1.241 1.532 1.853 2.206 2.589 3.002 3.447 3.921 4.963 6.127 7.414 8.823 45 .027 .060 .106 .166 .239 .325 .425 .451 .664 .804 .956 1.121 1.300 1.493 1.698 2.149 2.653 3.210 3.821 4.484 5.200 5.970 6.792
lbs./f t. Reinf orcement C H 1/16" 1/8" 3/16" 1/4"
.027 .035 .044 .053 .062 .071 .080 .088 .097 .106 .115 .124 .133 .141 .159 .177 .195 .212 .230 .248 .266 .283 .884 .106 .124 .141 .159 .177 .195 .212 .230 .248 .266 .283 .318 .354 .389 .424 .460 .495 .531 .566 .637 .707 .778 .849
Search Chapter (Faster Download)

.212 .239 .265 .292 .318 .345 .371 .398 .424 .477 .531 .584 .637 .690 .743 .796 .849 .955 1.061 1.167 1.273 .354 .389 .424 .460 .495 .530 .566 .637 .707 .777 .849 .920 .990 1.061 1.132 1.273 1.415 1.556 1.698
Search Document (Slower Download)
1 1/4 1 3/8 1 1/2 1 5/8 1 3/4 2 2 1/4 2 3/4 3
.577 .712 .861 1.023 1.201 1.393 1.599 1.820 2.303 2.844 3.441 4.095
8.596 .318 10.613 .354 12.841 .389 15.282 .424
FIGURE 14
COPYRIGHT 2000 T HE ESAB GROUP, INC.
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
22.5 45 22.5
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
1/ 16"
7/8" C B
5/8"
1/2"
1/2"
1" B
Go To Test Print
1/8" lbs./f t. A= B= C= TOTAL WEIGHT/FT. .265 .425 .124 .814 lbs
C 1/2" B = .176 x 4 = C = .071 x 2 = TOTAL WEIGHT/FT. lbs./f t.
1/16"
.704 .142 .846 lbs
Glossary
ESTIMATING WELD METAL WEIGHT FIGURE 15
Electrode Cost - $.80/lb (from supplier). Deposition Efficiency - 86% (.86) From Table in Figure 10. Gas Flow Rate - 45 cubic feet per hour. From Figure 7. Gas Cost - $.03/cubic foot (from supplier). Cost of Pow er - $.045/kWh. Wt/Ft of Weld - From Figure 15B = .846 lbs/ft.
Turn Pages
10. Figure 16.
These values are show n inserted into the formulas on the Weld Metal Cost Worksheet in
9.6 COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS

It is interesting to note that the amount of w eld metal deposited in Example 1 and Example 2 is almost the same, w hile the total cost of depositing the w eld metal is three times higher in Example 1 as show n below . This is because the flux cored process has a higher deposition rate, efficiency and operating factor and also allow s a tighter joint due to the deep penetrating characteristics of the process. Example 1 - 1,280 ft x .814 lbs/ft = 1,041.9 lbs at $13,939 Example 2 - 1,280 ft x .846 lbs/ft = 1,082.9 lbs at $ 4,352 9.6.0.1 When comparing w elding processes, all efforts should be made to assure that you
use the proper w elding current for the electrode or w ire in the position in w hich the w eld must
be made. As an example, consider depositing a given size fillet w eld in the vertical-up posi-
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX

1.
EXAMPLE 2 WELD METAL COST WORKSHEET COST PER POUND OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL
LABOR & OVERHEAD
LABOR & OVERHEAD COST/HR DEPOSITION OPERATING RATE (LBS/HR) x FACTOR
30.00 15 x .45
30.00 6.75
= 4.44
Go To Test Print
2.
ELECTRODE
ELECTRODE COST/LB DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY GAS FLOW RATE (CU FT/HR) x GAS COST/CU FT DEPOSITION RATE (LBS/HR)
.80 .86
.93
3. GAS
Glossary
=
45 x .03 1 5 x 1.4
1.35 1 5
.09
4. FLUX
FLUX COST/LB x 1.4 DEPOSITION EFFICIENCY COST/kWh x VOLTS x AMPS 1000 x DEPOSITION RATE
NA
5.
POWER
.045 x 31 x 450 1000 x 15
627.75 15,000
.042
Turn Pages Lesson 6 Carbon & Low Alloy Steel Filler Metals GMAW,GTAW,SAW Lesson 7 Flux Cored Arc Electrodes Carbon Low Alloy Steels
6. TOTAL COST PER LB. OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL SUM OF 1 THROUGH 5 ABOVE
$ 5.51
COST PER FOOT OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL

7. COST PER POUND OF DEPOSITED WELD METAL POUNDS PER FOOT OF WELD JOINT
5.51
x .846
$4.66
COST OF WELD METAL - TOTAL JOB

8. TOTAL FEET OF WELD X COST PER FOOT
1,280x 4.66
= $5,965
FIGURE 16

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX tion by the GMAW process and FCAW process semi-automatically. In both processes the w elding current and voltage must be low ered to w eld out-of-position, and in GMAW, the short circuiting arc transfer must be used. Example 3 compares the w eld metal cost per pound deposited by these processes, using the proper current and voltage for depositing a fillet w eld on plate, vertically up.
Note: The cost of electrical power is comparable in all processes and therefore, can be eliminated as a factor.
Go To Test Print
9.6.1
Exam ple 3 FCAW GMAW .045 dia. ER70S-3 $30.00/hr 125 amperes 2.8 lbs/hr (Fig. 10) 50% (Fig. 2) $.66/lb 96% (Fig. 6) 35 cfh (Fig. 7) $.11 75% Ar/25% CO2
Electrode Type Labor & Overhead Welding Current Deposition Rate Operating Factor Electrode Cost Deposition Efficiency Gas Flow Rate -
.045 dia. E71T-1 $30.00/hr 180 amperes 4.9 lbs/hr (Fig. 9) 45% (Fig. 2) $1.44/lb 85% (Fig. 9) 35 cfh (Fig. 7) $.03 CO2
Glossary
Turn Pages
Gas Cost Per Cu. Ft. -
This data is tabulated in the chart in Figure 17. 9.6.1.1 As you can see, the cost of depositing the w eld metal is about 33% less using the
Flux Cored Arc Welding process. Since there is no slag to help hold the vertical w eld puddle in the GMAW process, the w elding current w ith solid w ire must be low ered considerably. This, of course, low ers the deposition rate, and since labor and overhead is the largest factor involved, it substantially raises deposition costs. In the flat or horizontal position, w here the w elding current on the solid w ire w ould be much higher, the cost difference w ould be considerably less pronounced.

1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
The f ollowing inf ormation/v ariables (1) Proposed Method Cost Calculation Flux Cored Arc Welding E71T-1 .045 Dia. at 180 Amps Actual Labor & O/H Rate f or y our Customer Deposition Rate in Pounds per Hour Operating Factor Electrode Cost per Pound Deposition Ef f iciency Gas Ty pe Gas Flow Rate Gas Cost per Cubic Foot Equipment Cost Prepared For: NAME INFO must be determined prior to completing calculations: (2) Present Method Cost Calculation Gas Metal Arc Welding (3) (4) ER70S-3 .045 Dia. at 125 Amps $ 30.00 $ 30.00 Actual Labor & O/H Rate f or y our Customer 4.9 2.8 Deposition Rate in Pounds per Hour 45% 50% Operating Factor $ 1.44 $ 0.66 Electrode Cost per Pound 85% 96% Deposition Ef f iciency CO2 75% Ar/25% CO2 Gas Ty pe 35 30 Gas Flow Rate $ 0.03 $ 0.11 Gas Cost per Cubic Foot $ NAME INFO Date: Result Customer Name: (1) Proposed Method Cost Calculation (2) Present Method Cost Calculation (Cost Reduction ) Flux Cored Arc Welding Gas Metal Arc Welding Cost E71T-1 .045 Dia. at 180 Amps ER70S-3 .045 Dia. at 125 Amps Increase $30.00 4.9 X 0.45 = = $30.00 = $13.605 2.205 $30.00 2.8 X = $30.00 = $21.429 1.4 ($7.823 )
Go To Test Print
Formulas f or Calculating Cost per Pound Deposited Weld Metal Labor& Ov erhead = Labor & Ov erhead Cost /Hr = Deposition Operating X Rate (lbs / hr) Factor Electrode Cost/lb Deposition Ef f iciency Gas Gas Flow Rate (Cuf t/hr) = X Gas Cost/Cu f t. Deposition Rate (lbs&/hr) Sum of the Abov e =
Glossary
0.5 =
Electrode
1.44 0.85
Gas T ype = CO2
1.694
0.66 0.96
0.688
$1.007
Gas T ype = 75% Ar/25% CO2
35
0.03
1.05 4.9
0.214 3 0
X 0.11 =
3.3 = 2.8
1.179
($0.964 )
Turn Pages
( $7.781) T otal
Total Variable Cost/lb Deposited Weld Metal
Total Variable Cost/lb = $15.514 Deposited Weld Metal = $23.295
9.7 OTHER USEFUL FORMULAS

The information discussed below will assist you in making other useful calculations:
TOTAL POUNDS OF ELECTRODES REQUIRED (REF. EXAMPLE 1)

Total Pounds =
Wt/Ft of Weld x No. of Ft of Weld Deposition Efficiency
Substituting the values from Example 1:
.814 x 1,280 .630 = 1,631 lbs
WELDING TIME REQUIRED (REF. EXAMPLE 1)

Welding Time =
Wt/Ft of Weld x Ft of Weld Deposition Rate x Operating Factor .814 x 1,280 5.36 x .30 = 1,042 1.608 = 648 Hrs.
Substituting the values in Example 1:
1/1
24/09/2013

LESSON IX
9.8 AMORTIZATION OF EQUIPMENT COSTS

Calculations show that you can save $7.00 per pound of deposited w eld metal by sw itching from E7018 electrodes and the SMAW process to an ER70S0-3 solid w ire using the GMAW process. How ever, the cost of the necessary equipment (pow er source, w ire feeder and gun) is $2,800. How long w ill it take to amortize or regain the cost of the equipment know ing that the deposition rate of the ER70S-3 is 7.4 lbs/hr and the operating factor of the GMAW process
Go To Test Print
is 50%? The formula is: Equipment Cost $ Savings/Lb
(Deposition Rate x Operating Factor) = Man Hrs
Substituting the values in the formula:
2,800
7.00
Glossary
(7.4 x .50) = Man Hrs
400
3.7 = Man Hrs
If w e divide 108 into eight hour days (108 8 = 13.5) the deposited w eld metal savings of one man w orking an eight hour day for 13-1/2 days w ill pay for the cost of the equipment.
Turn Pages Lesson 6 Carbon & Low Alloy Steel Filler Metals GMAW,GTAW,SAW Lesson 7 Flux Cored Arc Electrodes Carbon Low Alloy Steels Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

1/1

Lesson 9

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lesson 9

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

24/09/2013

Lesson 1 The Basics of Arc Welding

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

BASIC WELDING FILLER METAL TECHNOLOGY

LESSON IX ESTIMATING AND COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

ESAB Welding & Cutting Products

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

TABLE OF CONTENTS LESSON IX ESTIMATING AND COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

ESTIMATING AND COMPARING WELD METAL COSTS

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

9.2 FACTORS FOR COST FORMULAS

APPROXIMATE LABOR AND OVERHEAD RATES FIGURE 1

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

WELDING PROCESS + * GMAW 50% *FCAW 45% *SAW 40%

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Weight of Electrode Used (or)

Deposition Rate (lbs/hr)

Burn-off Rate (lbs/hr)

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

12" LENGTH OF ELECTRODE CONSUMED

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

AMOUNT THAT BECOMES WELD METAL (LENGTH CONSUMED X EFFICIENCY)

2" STUB LENGTH

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

LOST TO SLAG,SPATTER & FUMES

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

EFFICIENCY = MINUS STUB LOSS

Efficiency - Stub Loss

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

electrode efficiencies. Figure 5 lists various efficiencies at a given stub loss.

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

Lesson 9 - Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 2 Common Electric Arc Welding Processes

TABLE FOR COATED ELECTRODES EFFICIENCY INCLUDING STUB LOSS FIGURE 5

Lesson 5 Welding Filler Metals for Stainless Steels

Search Chapter (Faster Download) Search Document (Slower Download)

Lesson 8 Hardsurfacing Electrodes

Lesson 9 Estimating & Comparing Weld Metal Costs

Lesson 10 Reliability of Welding Filler Metals

WELDING PROCESS + * GMAW 50% FCAW 45% SAW 40%