Int J Adv Manuf Technol (1999) 15:49–53
 1999 Springer-Verlag London Limited
A Comparison of Gas Metal Arc Welding with Flux-Cored Wires
and Solid Wires Using Shielding Gas
M. T. Liao1 and W. J. Chen2
1
Department of Mechanical Manufacturing Engineering, and 2Department of Mechanical Materials Engineering, National Huwei Institute
of Technology, Yunlin, Taiwan
In the present work, gas metal arc welding (GMAW) with flux-
cored wires and solid wires using shielding gas has been
adopted for welding stainless steel. Five different compositions
of shielding gas are used with flux-cored wire and three with
solid wire. Spatter rates, chemical compositions, tensile
strength and elongation tests have been performed and are
reported. The spatter rates of the sample made using flux-
cored wires are less than that for the sample made using solid
wire. The ultimate tensile strength and elongation are not
influenced by the composition of the shielding gas.
Keywords: Austenitic stainless steels; Flux-cored wires; Gas
metal arc welding (GMAW); Property; Shielding gas; Solid
wires
1. Introduction
Recently, the gas metal arc welding (GMAW) process, with
either solid or flux-cored welding wires, has become popular,
because high-quality and economical welds can be obtained
[1]. In the processes, a shielding gas must be used. The primary
function of the shielding gas is to protect the molten metal
from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen as the weld pool is
being formed. The gas also promotes a stable arc and uniform
metal transfer.
The quality, the efficiency, and the overall operating accept-
ance of the welding operation are strongly dependent on the
shielding gas, since it dominates the mode of the metal transfer.
The shielding gas not only affects the properties of the weld
but also determines the shape and penetration pattern. During
welding, the shielding gas interacts with the welding wire to
form a strong and tough corrosion-resistant weld. The shielding
gas also affects the residual content of hydrogen, nitrogen and
oxygen dissolved in the weld metal [2].
Correspondence and offprint requests to: Dr W.-J. Chen, National
Huwei Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Materials
Engineering, Huwei, Yunlin, 632 Taiwan. E-mail: wjchen얀sparc.nhi-
t.edu.tw
Because of the wide applications of the austenitic stainless
steels under both mild and severe corrosive conditions at
cryogenic or elevated temperatures, the properties and micro-
structures of welded joints in these steels have received atten-
tion from researchers [3–5]. Nowadays, rationalisation of the
welding processes demands more and more gas metal arc
welding of stainless steel. Ar-He-CO2, Ar-He, Ar-N2, Ar-CO2
and Ar-CO2-N2 mixtures are mainly used as the shielding gas
at present [6–8]. The selection of the shielding gas for stainless
steel welds has been reported [2,6,7]. Although the use of
solid and flux-cored welding wires is common, there seem to
be only a few published investigations of the influence of
shielding gas on the metal properties in stainless steel welding
[8]. Hence, this study aims to compare the use of solid wire
(AWS ER308L) and flux-cored wire (AWS E308LT-1) when
using different shielding gases.
2. Experimental Procedure
Premixed gases are used as a shielding gas in this
study. For solid wire, the composition of the shielding
gas is 98%Ar+2%CO2(M1), 90%Ar+10%CO2 (M2), and
80%Ar+20%CO2 (M3) (These group samples are designed as
MAG). For flux-cored wire, the composition of the shielding
gas is 80%Ar+20%CO2(F1), 60%Ar+40%CO2 (F2),
40%Ar+60%CO2 (F3), 20%Ar+80%CO2 (F4), and 100%CO2
(F5) (These group samples are designed as FCAW). Wires
used in the study are of 1.2 mm diameter and conform to the
AWS specifications. A 12 mm(t) × 50 mm(w) × 200 mm(l) base
metal plate of AISI type 304 stainless steel was used for the
down welding. In order to evaluate the properties of the
deposited metal, mild steel plates (19 mm(t) × 125
mm(w) × 300 mm(l)) with a V-shaped groove were used and
a multipass procedure was carried out. In accordance with the
AWS A5.22–80 specification, the V-groove surface was coated
with a JIS 304L stainless steel before the multipass procedure
was performed, as shown in Fig. 1(a).
A Panasonic YD-356KRI welding machine and a cantilever
beam supporting frame comprise the automatic welding system.
A constant-potential power supply was used and the welding
50 M. T. Liao and W. J. Chen
Fig. 1. Details of test assembly for all–weld-metal tension test.
Fig. 2. (a) The spatter rates as a function of the amounts of CO2 in
the Ar + CO2 mixtures. (b) Spatter of the F1 sample. (c) Spatter of
the M3 sample.
Fig. 3. Oxygen and nitrogen content in the weld with the use of solid
wires and flux-cored wires.
voltage was held at 30 V during welding. A constant wire-
feeding rate was maintained for all the welds. However, a
slight variation in current was observed owing to a small
change in the cover gas supply. Consequently, for the solid
wires, the welding current was in the range of 200 ⫾ 10 A.
For the flux-cored wires, the welding current was in the range
of 180 ⫾ 10 A.
Cylindrical tensile specimens were machined from the
deposited metal. These specimens and were taken parallel to
the weld direction at a fixed distance from the weld centre, as
shown in Fig. 1(b). Tensile tests were performed at room
temperature. The fracture surface was investigated by scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) to observe the fracture mode.
Chemical microanalysis was carried out using an SEM
equipped with an EDAX detector.
Magne-gauge readings were taken to determine the ferrite
content of the deposited metal. The spatter rates for each
mixture, were measured by collecting spatter within a fixed
time period.
3. Results and Discussion
Spatter, with solid and flux-cored welding wires, was generated
in the down welding position when using all the mixtures. The
spatter rate depends on the amounts of CO2 in the Ar + CO2
mixture and is shown in Fig. 2(a). The spatter rates for the
sample made using flux-cored wire are less than those for the
sample made using the solid wires. The photographs in Fig.
2(b) and 2(c) are from the flux-cored wire samples (F1) and
the solid wire samples (M3), respectively. With solid wire, the
spatter creates larger particles when the CO2 content is higher.
With flux-cored wires, the spatter is small for all mixtures.
The difference of the spatter and spatter rates between these
two group samples is due to the difference in the welding
wires used in this study. The reason is that the FCAW tests
have flux, whereas the MAG do not have flux. In the FCAW
tests, the flux alters the metal transfer mode, and make the
droplets become smaller, and causes the spatter to become
extremely low [9]. Thus, the spatter rates and spatter are only
influenced by the flux. They are not affected by the compo-
sitions of the shielding gas.
 Gas Metal Arc Welding with Flux-Cored and Solid Wires 51

Table 1. Chemical composition and ferrite content of all weld metal.

MAG FCAW

Chemical M1 M2 M3 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
composition
of MAG 98%Ar+ 90%Ar+ 80%Ar+ 80%Ar+ 60%Ar+ 40%Ar+ 20%Ar+ 100%CO2
wires 2%CO2 10%CO2 20%CO 2 20%CO2 40%CO2 60%CO2 80%CO2

Chemical
composition
C (%) 0.045 0.040 0.050 0.070 0.050 0.040 0.040 0.040 0.040
Si (%) 0.45 0.44 0.38 0.39 0.70 0.70 0.66 0.64 0.61
Mn (%) 1.92 1.73 1.61 1.60 1.60 1.56 1.51 1.47 1.42
Ni (%) 9.15 9.4 9.4 9.4 10.4 10.4 10.4 10.3 10.2
Cr (%) 20.37 19.3 19.3 19.0 19.9 19.8 19.6 19.5 19.5
Mo (%) 0.17 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05
P (%) 0.029 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.018 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.018
S (%) 0.009 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.004 0.006 0.004 0.004 0.003
N (p.p.m.) 412 378 361 123 145 148 144 171
O (p.p.m.) 332 251 245 466 513 521 516 494
Nickel equivalent
(NiEq)* 12.67 12.91 13.5 13.07 12.82 12.80 12.67 12.61
Chromium
equivalent
(CrEq)† 20.15 20.05 19.77 19.16 19.97 20.65 20.51 20.47
Ferrite content
(FN) 8.5 7.35 5.75 10.5 10.4 10.0 9.1 8.8

*Nickel equivalent (NiEq) = %Ni+30 × %C+30 × %N+0.5 × %Mn

†Chromium equivalent (CrEq) = %Cr+%Mo+1.5 × %Si+0.5 × %Nb

gas are shown in Table 1. The ferrite contents of all the

Fig. 4. The ferrite contents of all the deposited metal as a function of
the amounts of CO2 in the Ar + CO2 mixtures.
Figure 3 illustrates a comparison of oxygen and nitrogen
content in the weld when using solid wires and flux-cored
wire. The oxygen content of the weld when using flux-cored
wire is higher than that when using solid wires. This is due
to the action of acidic substances such as rutile and silica sand
in the flux. The nitrogen content of the weld when using flux-
cored wire is lower than that when using the solid wire. This
may be due to the fact that the flux and shielding gas are
more effective in protecting the molten metal from atmospheric
nitrogen as the weld pool is being formed. Therefore, the
nitrogen content of weld is low in the FCAW samples.
The chemical compositions of all the deposited metals and
their ferrite contents, using either solid or flux-cored welding
wires, and measured by the Magne gauge for each shielding
deposited metal as a function of the amounts of CO2 in the
Ar + CO2 mixtures are shown in Fig. 4. For the solid wire
samples, the ferrite content is decreased by increasing the
amount of CO2 in the Ar + CO2 mixtures for CO2 from 2%
to 20%. The increase of the percentage of CO2 in the mixtures
will raise the carbon content in the deposited metal, therefore
the ferrite content will be decreased and the Ni equivalent will
become larger. Also, the increase of the percentage of CO2
will increase the consumption of Cr and Si owing to oxidation,
and make the Cr equivalent smaller [8]. For the flux-cored
wire samples, the ferrite content is also decreased by increasing
the amount of CO2 in the Ar+CO2 mixtures for CO2 from
20% to 100%. The reason is not known.
The ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and elongation of the
deposited metal for each of the samples (MAG and FCAW)
is given in Table 2. The comparison of the ultimate tensile
strength between MAG and FCAW shows that MAG samples
are of higher strength. This may be due to the fact that the
inclusion content of MAG is less than that of FCAW. (This
can be seen from the fracture surface.) The fracture surface of
the F5 and M3 tensile specimens are shown in the SEM
images in Figs 5(a) and 5(b), respectively. Similar fracture
surface morphologies were also observed for FCWA from F1
to F4 and for MAG from M1 to M2. In Figs. 5(a) and 5(b),
it is clear that the fracture surface morphology is dimple
rupture. The dimples are associated with many impurity par-
ticles (inclusions) which are generally round and of various
sizes. With flux-cored wire, the results of the EDX analyses
indicated that the inclusions contained manganese, iron, and
52 M. T. Liao and W. J. Chen

Table 2. Tensile strength and elongation data for FCAW and MAG.

MAG FCAW

M1 M2 M3 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5

98%Ar+ 90%Ar+ 80%Ar+ 80%Ar+ 60%Ar+ 40%Ar+ 20%Ar+ 100%CO2

2%CO2 10%CO2 20%CO2 20%CO2 40%CO2 60%CO2 80%CO2

Tensile strength
(N/mm2) 613 602 610 573 569 567 571 567
Elongation
(%) 38.6 38.2 37.6 36.6 38.6 37.2 36.4 38.0

Fig. 5. Fracture morphology (SEM image) of tensile specimen fractured at room temperature, (a) F5 sample, (b) M3 sample. The inclusion is
indicated by the arrow. The EDAX spectra of the inclusions is shown in (c) and (d). (c) Typical EDAX spectra of the inclusions in (a). (d)
Typical EDAX spectra of the inclusions in (b).

chromium, as shown in Fig. 5(c). With solid wires, the results
of the EDX analyses indicated that inclusions contained silicon,
manganese, iron, and chromium, as shown in Fig. 5(d). This
indicates that inclusions are silicon oxides and manganese
oxides, etc. The difference in composition of the inclusions is
due to the different sources of the inclusions. In MAG, the
impurities mainly arose from the shielding gas. In FCAW, the
impurities mainly arose from the flux and shielding gas.
4. Conclusions
The compositions of the shielding gases have significant effects
on the properties of the stainless steel weld metal using solid
welding wire. The composition of the shielding gas has only
a slight effect on the properties of the stainless steel weld
metal using flux-cored wire. In FCAW samples, the spatter
rates and spatter are influenced only by the flux. They are not

affected by the compositions of the shielding gas. The ferrite
content is decreased by increasing the amount of CO2 in the
Ar + CO2 mixtures for both group samples.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Goodweld corporation for providing
welding wire and Air Liquide Far Eastern corporation for
providing premixed gas.
References
1. N. Stenbacka and K. A. Persson, “Shielding gases for gas metal
arc welding”, Welding Journal, 68, pp. 41–47, November 1989.
2. K. A. Lyttle and W. F. G. Stapon, “Select the best shielding
gas blend for the application”, Welding Journal, 69, pp. 21–27,
November 1990.
Gas Metal Arc Welding with Flux-Cored and Solid Wires 53
3. E. Folkhard, in Welding Metallurgy of Stainless Steel, Springer-
Verlag, 1988.
4. J. A. Brooks and A. W. Thompson, “Microstructural development
and solidification cracking susceptibility of austenitic stainless steel
welds”, International Materials Reviews, 36 (1) pp. 16–43, 1991.
5. P. Bilme, A. Gonzalez and C. L. Lorente et al., “Effect of ferrite
solidification morphology of austenitic stainless steel weld metal
on properties of welded joints”, Welding International, 10 (10), pp.
797–808, October 1996.
6. R. Petersens, I. Ballingal and O. Runnerstam, “Selecting shielding
gases for welding of stainless steels”, Welding Review International,
pp. 152–158, August 1993.
7. K. A. Lyttle, “Shielding gases”, in Material Handbook of ASM,
vol. 6, pp. 64–69, 1993.
8. T. Kobayashi and T. Sugiyama, “The effect of shielding gas
composition on the characteristics of stainless steel weld metal”,
IIW Doc.XIZ-E-33–82.XII-B-25–82, 1982.
9. M. Sato, K. Suda and H. Nagasaki, “How to weld using flux-cored
wires”, Welding International, 11(4), pp. 264–272, April 1997.