11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

Full Version: Difference

between 7018's and 7016's

Help - Search - Members - Calendar

Welding Forum > UKWelder > Practical Welding Questions

bigchris

Jun 23 2007, 12:43 PM

Can anyone tell me the difference between 7018 and 7016?

I do a lot of mobile welding repairs to agricultural machinery and general use lo hi 7018's.
Was recently recommended to try a box of Oerlikon Spezial 7016 which I really liked.
Is there a significant difference between the two?
try_some_welding

Jun 23 2007, 02:51 PM

Chris
I've been there - done that recently. All welding machines (transformers and petrolgenerators) at a recent workplace were AC - and I wanted Basics.
Got 7016's from Bohler (good folk!).
Given I am far from the top of the expertise pyramid - I found 7016's just fine on AC, with
every characteristic of a 7018 on DC.
Welding operability - superficially you couldn't tell that you were on 7016 AC if you are
used to 7018 on DC.
The 7016's AC gave the superb vertical-up fillet, deeply fused and perfectly shaped, using
"the Christmas tree" manip. - used a stub in my holdall from my test with the Bohler trade
samples to get that one - saved no end of bother!
Properties...
Set up a sledgehammer test with pieces of equal length angle welded to one large plate
with different welding rods. Compared to rutiles (6013's) - far higher strength. Clearly
toughness. The angle iron bent with the 7016's leaving the weld untouched. Therefore, to
totally prove high toughness I would have had to do a similar test but a nick-break - but
that's me being me not claiming anything I haven't seen with my own eyes.
I'm told keep all basics (7016, 7018) dry - like where you would store good clothes. A
locked site-box with 1/4inch of water in the bottom won't do for basics, apparently!
So I would say - go for it.
try_some_welding
Chris - &^%$! - misread your question

Jun 23 2007, 07:22 PM

- you remain on DC. I'd just come back from

overtime - knackered. FWIW - I was shown 7016 as a rod for high-quality positional welding
(15 years ago!). Was used for making the 1970's oil-rigs, apparently. ??? Low-slag 7016
enabled a lot of welders to pass qualification tests. V-butt welds positional without slag
inclusions.
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

1/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

I'll be looking at further responses as keenly as you...

Try_some
1 Dripping hot slag

Jun 24 2007, 03:04 PM

QUOTE(try_some_welding @ Jun 23 2007, 07:22 PM) [snapback]40712[/snapback]

Chris - &^%$! - misread your question

- you remain on DC. I'd just come back from

overtime - knackered. FWIW - I was shown 7016 as a rod for high-quality positional
welding (15 years ago!). Was used for making the 1970's oil-rigs, apparently. ??? Lowslag 7016 enabled a lot of welders to pass qualification tests. V-butt welds positional
without slag inclusions.
I'll be looking at further responses as keenly as you...
Try_some

Without sounding funny here mate, but have you read this question properly?
He's asking the diff between 7016s and 7018s, 2 different types of low hydrogen electrode.
I personally don't know either so am intrigued

BadPenetration

Jun 24 2007, 04:45 PM

IIRC 7016's have a low hydrogen potassium based coating whilst 7018's have an iron
powder based low hydrogen coating.
The last two digits of the electrode number indicate the type of coating it has and AFAIK the
current type.
try_some_welding

Jun 24 2007, 04:46 PM

Technically, I understand from what I have read that:

7016 and 7018 have the same flux chemistry (apart from 7016 have a smidgeon of
potassium salts in the flux so they will stay alight on AC). They are both "basic" rods (their
flux is based on limestone (CaCO3), with additions of fluorspar (CaF2)).
Stay with that formulation and you have 7016.
7018 has some iron powder added to the flux, which goes into the weld-pool when the rod
is burned, so more metal is deposited. That is sometimes classified as "a higher efficiency".
It seems a tradition that rods with nothing but the "basic" minerals in the flux will have
potassium salts and run on AC or DC, whereas 7018 with iron powder in the flux has only
sodium salts and will only run on DC. Anyone say whether there is a technical reason for
this being so?

You could always search on-line for more information - try the "Knowledge" link on the LHS
of this page, follow "manual metal arc" and there is a listing of the different types of rod
BadPenetration
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

Jun 24 2007, 04:51 PM

2/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

Actually, thinking back, the second last digit tells you the postions the rod can be used in,
the last tells you the current type and the last two together make up the type of coating.
Something like that anyway.
You can tell I haven't used the stick for a while
can't you?

try_some_welding

Jun 24 2007, 05:49 PM

American spec - eg "6013" is

"60" - the strength in thousands of pounds-force per square inch
the last two numbers - the "13" is the flux type
Copied from A.C.Davies, "The science and practice of welding Volume 2 The practice of
welding", 9th Edn
Exx10 High cellulose, bonded with sodium silicate. Deeply penetrating, forceful spray-type
arc. Thin friable slag.
Exx11 Similar to Exx10 but bonded with potassium silicate to allow use on AC or DC;
covering bonded with sodium silicate.
Exx12 High rutile. Quiet arc, medium penetration.
Exx13 Similar to Exx12 but bonded with potassium silicate and other easily ionized
materials. Fluid slag, easily removed.
Exx14 Similar to Exx13 and Exx13 types with the addition of iron powder.
Exx15 Basic low hydrogen type bonded with sodium silicate. For high tensile strength
steels.
Exx16 Similar to Exx15 but bonded with potassium silicate.
Exx18 Covering similar to Exx15 and Exx16 but with addition of iron powder.
Exx20 High iron oxide coating bonded with sodium silicate.
Exx24 Similar to Exx12 and Exx13. Heavily coated plus iron powder.
Exx27 Flux ingredients similar to Exx20 with the addition of iron powder.
Exx28 Similar to Exx18 but with heavier covering. Low hydrogen, potassium silicate as
binder. Flat and horizontal fillets.

What you are referring to is the the one used in Europe - which is a much longer series of
numbers and letters.
Here's how Davies explains this - unfortunately proportional font on the UKW website will
mess up this diagram... best understood reading from the bottom up and comparing to the
"E nn n ..." line
E nn n n [X] (nnn n n H)
^^^^^^^^^
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | present if hydrogen-controlled
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | code number indicating power requirement (AC, DCEP, ...)
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | code number indicating welding positions
| | | | | |
| | | | | effiency in percent, if a high-depostion electrode (will be above 100)
| | | | |
| | | | type of flux R=rutile, B=basic, C=cellulose, RR, BB = heavy-coated
| | | |
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

3/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

| | | code for temperature of 47J impact energy

| | |
| | code for temperature of 28J impact energy
| |
| strength in (N/mm^2|Mpa) divided by 10 (eg. 51 = 510MPa)
|
Is an arc welding electrode
bigchris

Jun 25 2007, 05:26 PM

Thanks TSW and bad penetration.

I had no idea what all the numbers meant..
TSW.
Got some Bolher 7016's (Comet J50N's).They also weld really nicely. Easy to use in vertical
and overhead. Nice shaped bead and good penetration. The oerlikon spezial were equally
good. In fact I couldn't tell the difference. They burn't the same. Same glassy slag. Same
shape and finish on the weld. Could they be the same?
Ran both on DC+ on Lincoln Ranger. They may be a little more expensive than I 7018's I
use normally but I think they may be worth the extra.
Chris
try_some_welding

Jun 25 2007, 06:23 PM

Thanks Bigchris - read what you found keenly.

Bohler sent me "Pheonix Spezial D".
Only had a few - so all I can say is that what you say sounds like what I found too.
They list "EV50-A" in their catalogue - which are 7016 - ("EV50" is their 7018, which I have)
but explained they had the "pheonix" available in 7016 and sent those.
My only original contribution is to say - if you hanker after what you get with 7018 on DC
but have only AC, 7016's should leave you feeling happy.

Bigchris - would you say the 7016 controlled better positionally that 7018?
Try_some
bigchris

Jun 28 2007, 08:13 PM

Try some
Have tried both oerlikon spezial and some of the phoenix spezial D same as you tried.

Can't tell the difference. Spec sheets suggest they might be.

Yes I would say the 7016 are better controlled positionally. I won't be going back to 7018's
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

4/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

thats for sure!

Chris
handrag

Jun 29 2007, 02:07 PM

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEM 7018 AND 7016 IS......2

Ballbearing

Jul 3 2007, 01:04 AM

Try some welding,

Had a bit of trouble reading the chart above (as you say the font doesn't help), but I think
the information you have quoted is a bit jumbled.
You are correct that the British and Americans have different numbering for electrodes but
the information listed has got a combination of British and American.
The first 2 numbers are the minimum required tensile strength and in Britain that is
measured in Megapascals (mpa) and America it is pounds per square inch (psi).
The 3rd number is the position/s the electrode should be used in and the 4th is the flux
type and welding current/polarity.
Anything after the 4 digits indicates chemical analysis requirements.
For example, E7018 is 70,000 psi, positions are F,V,OH & H and it is a Low Hydrogen Iron
Powder electrode that can be used with AC and DC+.
E7016 is 70,000 psi, positions are F,V,OH & H and it is a Low Hydrogen Potassium electrode
that can be used with AC and DC+.
I have taken this info straight out of AWS 5.5 Low Alloy Steel Covered Arc Welding
Electrodes.
From a welders point of view the main difference I found between the 2 was the 7016
seemed to be a quicker cooling electrode which made them more suitable for putting root
runs in pipes.
Hope that helps,
Ballbearing
try_some_welding

Jul 3 2007, 06:36 PM

Hi Ballbearing - appreciate explanation - so now I know - 7018 is all position iron-powder

basic, 7028 is same flux but restricted positions (never used one, but understand is high
dep'n downhand and h-v fillet electrode).
So 7014 and 7024 are related - and so on. Thanks - Try some
asmeIX6G

Jul 4 2007, 09:24 PM

yeh a guy i worked with dropped a b0llock when i sent him for 4mm lo hi's came back with
some iron powders 7024s i think?? he took over welding some flanges on and made a right
mess! trying vertical up and stuff!

major tom
Are you sure you are propper welders not just found

BadPenetration

Jul 6 2007, 07:11 PM

a head shade in the skip???

Jul 7 2007, 06:44 PM

Watch out lads. Super-welder alert!!!!!!

http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

5/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

Jesus!
arc bishop

Jul 7 2007, 07:40 PM

stop reading ac davies whilst your on the (beep) house and get a life lads ....ha ha ha.
asmeIX6G

Jul 8 2007, 08:13 AM

can someone mention to me why when i was being tested at TWI we had to root with 7016
but fill n cap wiv 7018s?? from my understanding on here the difference is one will arc up
on AC one wont??
major tom

Jul 8 2007, 06:03 PM

It stops root cracks!!!

try_some_welding

Jul 8 2007, 08:32 PM

OK - It stops root cracks...

How/why?
What is it controlling, or what does it enable you to control, which makes this the case?
My guess is that as 7016 is a lighter slag, lighter deposition electrode than 7018, it gives
better control of what is going on in the root, and less chance / problem of slag overrunning the weld pool area, give you more for-fusion manipulation options. But what you
could tell use would be 100 times more valuable than my guess...
Technic Al

Jul 9 2007, 08:08 AM

The 7016 (without Fe powder) will be thinner coated and therefore more controllable and
physically the diameter will not cause access problems. The 7016 deposits less metal so
protecting it from the atmosphere is easier, which in the root is more susceptible. This is
why its less likely to crack, or be porous.
In many cases the flux used for 7016 and 7018 is the same or very similar, the difference is
the diameter. There is more flux on 7018s, therfore the weld is more fluid, wets better, but
is more difficult to control and the higher Fe powder will produce a slightly inferior steel
with lower ductility.
Many 7016s contain Iron Powder, they dont weld very well without it.
asmeIX6G

Jul 9 2007, 03:35 PM

thanks techinc AL nice to have someone explain actually why they do what they do!
try_some_welding

Jul 9 2007, 07:49 PM

Yeah - I second what asme says - thanks Technic Al

Ballbearing
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

Jul 10 2007, 01:10 AM

6/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

Technic Al,
I would have to query a couple of your statements.
" [b]In many cases the flux used for 7016 and 7018 is the same or very similar, the
difference is the diameter[/b]. There is more flux on 7018s, therfore the weld is more fluid,
wets better, but is more difficult to control and the higher Fe powder will produce a
slightly inferior steel with lower ductility."
" Many 7016s contain Iron Powder, they dont weld very well without it."
1 If you remove the iron powder from a 7018 you will have the "same or very similar" flux,
but then it is no longer a 7018, it is a 7016.They both start as exactly the same flux and
then one has iron powder added so they become two totally different electrodes. The only
relevance to the diameter is the 7018 is thicker due to the iron powder that is added to
increase deposition efficiency.
2 I was a pipe welder for many years and I have always found a 7018 easier to control than
a 7016 not "more difficult to control".
The WIA Welding Handbook states for an E7018 "This still permits all positional welding on
AC or DCEP but the presence of the iron powder also improves metal transfer and
operational characteristics."
3 "slightly inferior steel with lower ductility". Quoting from AWS 5.1 Part C Specifications for
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals, the 7018 and 7016 have exactly the same
minimum requirements for tensile strength (482 mpa),Yield strength (399 mpa) and
Elongation (22%) so unsure how one can be inferior or less ductile.
4 Again quoting from AWS 5.1, it states that E7016 is Low Hydrogen Potassium and E7018
is Low Hydrogen Potassium Iron Powder. I can find no reference in any of my welding
handbooks to any E7016 electrode that has iron powder in it.
This posting is not meant to be personal, I have just noted in the past that you are quick to
shoot someone down if you feel they have not done their research properly and in this case
I feel some of your answers are misleading.
However, I am well aware of the conflicts between various welding publications so if you
have any information that supports your statements I will have no problem in apologising.
Regards,
BB

Technic Al

Jul 11 2007, 09:14 AM

QUOTE(Ballbearing @ Jul 10 2007, 02:10 AM) [snapback]41221[/snapback]

This posting is not meant to be personal, I have just noted in the past that you are quick
to shoot someone down if you feel they have not done their research properly and in this
case I feel some of your answers are misleading.
BB

BB.........If thats not meant to be personal........ I dont what is !!!!

http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

7/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

However
I think we can agree that Filarc (Phillips) 56S is probably the most common 7106 used in
Europe
http://products.esab.com/Templates/T041.asp?id=58388
If you look at the spec sheet you will see on the top right. Recovery 100%. If there was no
Iron Powder the recovery would be a lot less than 100%. If you dont know, 100% means
that the electrode (core and flux) will deposit a weld weighing exactly the same as the
electrode. Considering that the core probably contributes about 70% of the weight, if there
is no iron powder the recovery would be 70% ish.
They also quote CVNs at -50oC which I believe is in excess of the AWS requirement.
The AWS mechanical property spec gives the minimum required to meet the spec.
Generally, the 7016 will exceed the minimum by a bigger margin than the 7018.
The AWS definition is not strictly adhered to by manufacturers. They want a product that
performs in a specific application. If adding Fe powder improves the performance in root
welding, they will add Iron Powder but as 7016 is considered the norm for the job the
classification will not be changed.
I am talking generally, there may be exceptions but these will be few and far between.
Iron Powder additions will improve the arc characteristics but the downside is that they will
be detrimental to mechanical properties. There is a very large report highlighting this from a
very eminent metallurgist called Tad Bonicewski who worked in electrode development for
many years. I dont have a link and I cant remember the title but I think it was published in
the TWI magazine. I recall Hoganas the Fe Powder supplier being rather miffed about it.
As for control, I was referring to the previous post about root welding. Most would agree
that 7016 are better, more controllable, for root welding (lower recovery = less metal =
easier to control). The usual procedure is 7016 root and 7018 fill and cap, thus making the
best of both types. I agree that 7018 are generally easier to use other than in the root.
I used to work in the development of electrode coatings for a major manufacturer and I can
assure you that as far as the AWS descriptions are concerned they are followed morally
rather than technically. For example the difference between 6012 and 6013 according to
AWS is the addition of Na or K. In truth most Rutiles contain both so the rules are applied
morally.
6012 more fiery, arc more spatter, better pen
6103 soft arc, low spatter, low pen
There are also rutiles that probably (even using the moral code) should be 6012s but in
Europe this is not as acceptable as 6103 so they are classified accordingly (6013).
Hope Ive answered your questions to your satisfaction.
Finally I am disappointed that you consider me "quick to shoot down". I hope your opinion
isnt popular.

Technic Al

Jul 11 2007, 01:50 PM

The effects of iron powder in basic low hydrogen all-positional electrodes.

BONISZEWSKI T
In: Trends in Steels and Consumables for Welding. Proceedings, International Conference,
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

8/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

London, 13-16 Nov.1978. Publ: Abington, Cambridge CB1 6AL; The Welding Institute; 1979.
ISBN 0-85300128-6 (Papers), 0-85300132-4 (Discussions). Paper 15. pp.199-215; session
discussion, pp.618-628. 9 fig., 5 tab., 14 ref. [ISBN: 0-85300128-6 (Papers)]
[in English]
Availability: TWI holds this reference
Ballbearing

Jul 12 2007, 02:21 AM

Technic Al,
It was definitely not my intention to make a personal attack on you, I just felt that
statements you made were misleading and I didn't agree with them.
From your response I feel you have made more misleading statements and I will try and
explain why.
" The AWS mechanical property spec gives the minimum required to meet the spec.
Generally, the 7016 will exceed the minimum by a bigger margin than the 7018."
You have quoted the 56S (E7016) so I have used the 76S (E7018) from the same company
for comparison.
The Typical Mechanical Properties All Weld Metal for the 7016 are Yield Stress = Greater
than 420 mpa, Tensile strength = 510-640 mpa, Elongation is greater than 22%.
The Typical Mechanical Properties All Weld Metal for the 7018 are Yield Stress = Greater
than 460 mpa, Tensile strength = 530-640 mpa, Elongation is greater than 22%.
Another example - Weldwell 56S (E7016) and Weldwell 77 (E7018) (Made in Australia)
The Typical Mechanical Properties All Weld Metal (as welded)for the 7016 are Yield Stress =
480 mpa, Tensile strength = 547 mpa, Elongation is 28%.
The Typical Mechanical Properties All Weld Metal (as welded)for the 7018 are Yield Stress =
482 mpa, Tensile strength = 552 mpa, Elongation is 32%.
In none of these examples does the 7016 exceed the 7018.
"They also quote CVNs at -50oC which I believe is in excess of the AWS
requirement."
Not sure of the relevance of this statement because the 76S (E7018) is tested at a lower
temperature (-60 degrees C) than the 56S (E7016).
The Weldwell electrodes are both tested at -40 degrees C and the 7016 has CVNs of 150
joules and the 7018 has CVNs of 160 joules.
" If you look at the spec sheet you will see on the top right. Recovery 100%. If there
was no Iron Powder the recovery would be a lot less than 100%. If you dont know,
100% means that the electrode (core and flux) will deposit a weld weighing exactly
the same as the electrode. Considering that the core probably contributes about
70% of the weight, if there is no iron powder the recovery would be 70% ish."
This statement is just incorrect.
TWI Feqs
TWI Frequently Asked Questions " How can a manual metal arc electrode have an electrode
efficiency greater than 100% ?"
"The electrode efficiency is calculated by dividing the mass of weld metal deposited by the
mass of core wire consumed, not the total mass of electrode consumed i.e core wire
and flux covering.
An electrode efficiency greater than 100% is possible when constituents of the flux covering
on the electrode contribute to the mass of the weld mtal deposited." (The addition of iron
powder will give a recovery of up to 130% in some circumstances)
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

9/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

or
Welding Consumbles-Part 2
"By adding substantial amounts of iron powder, up to 50% of the weight of the flux coating,
to either basic or rutile electrode coatings it is possible to deposit a greater weight of weld
metal than is contained in the core wire. These electrodes are described as having an
efficiency above 100% eg 120%, 140% etc and 3 digit figure is often included in the
electrode classification."
If I give an opinion on this forum, that is all I am giving, generally based on past
experiences.
If I give technical advice I make damn sure I have the information in front of me in black
and white.
That is all I am asking, if you are going to give technical advice, please ensure it is correct.
Regards,
BB

wavey dave

Jul 12 2007, 07:14 AM

Come on people, surely this subject has been flogged to death by now!!!
Technic Al

Jul 12 2007, 08:15 AM

Ballbearing
You are confusing EFFICIENCY with RECOVERY
Tell NANJING to look up the Filarc 76S again, it is a 1% Nickel so you are comparing
Apples with Oranges.

Your mate Nanjing must be really short of something to do. Trying to get at me through you
is particularly pathetic.
BB You should be careful, people will think its you making the comments and they will think
you are a bit of a .....er
chunkolini

Jul 12 2007, 09:57 AM

To quote Molesworth Junior on the difference twixt 7018's and 7016's

'As any fool kno the differens is 2.'
Ballbearing

Jul 12 2007, 09:34 PM

Technic Al,
I am quite capable of conducting my own research, I do not need Nanjing or anyone else to
do it.
To suggest I am firing bullets on Nanjings behalf is laughable, if you looked back through
all my previous postings you would see Nanjing and I never agreed on anything, in fact he
was usually my harshest critic.
Go back to your first posting where I highlighted things that I said were misleading and I
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

10/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

also said I would apologise if you proved me wrong.

7018s are slightly inferior and less ductile - can you show me one data sheet that proves
this. I can find a dozen that say the opposite.
Most 7016s have iron powder - still awaiting proof.
7018s are harder to control - yes, for the root run they are but you never mentioned that.
All you have to do is post the information, then I will say sorry and shut up.
Regards,
BB
Flatcap

Jul 13 2007, 06:06 AM

Been away for a while but its good to see that some things don't change - fascinating stuff
boys - well done

SWT

Jul 13 2007, 08:20 AM

i go to work do my bit then go home and chill with family or if i'm working away chill with
co workers.Looks like i'm gonna have to start reading welding books get a life boys
godlikegenius

Jul 26 2007, 04:20 PM

root with 7016 fill and cap 7018, most of us old timers have done this for 25 years or more.
7018 is a real pain to root with.They dont like to stand up on the bottom!
zilingsad

Jul 26 2007, 07:34 PM

Strictly personelly!
I am explained that today modern 7016 electrodes are made like this: metal core, putting
rutile coat over core, baking in the oven and after 2 days they put basic cover over rutile
one. Therefore they call 7016 as "double coated" with description "easy to work as with
6013 rutile one" and "low hydrogen as 7018 one" (to be honest 7016 is ...H10 unlike 7018
that is ...H5).
Definetelly, it is much easier to use 7016 for roots and we like to use 7016.
frankieboy

Aug 13 2007, 11:10 AM

HI MATEY
BLIMEY... THERES A LOT OF CLEVER PEOPLE OUT THERE.. IVE JES JOINED THE FORUM..
ONE GUY MENTIONED BOHLER... THE 7018 BOHLER IS CALLED AN EV 50... AND NICE TO
USE... THEY ALSO MAKE AN EV50W WHICH IS STILL A 7018 BUT MADE TO BE USED ON
AC.. AND THE LADDO WHO SAID USE A 7016 TO STOP ROOT CRACKING I BELIEVE TO BE
THE CASE ALSO...
THERE IS ANOTHER STICK CALLED THE FILARC 56S FOR THE ROOT ( 7016 ) AND FILARC
35S FOR THE FILL.. (7018 ) I THINK THAT IS THE RIGHT WAY ROUND.. NO DOUBT YOU
WILL BE PUTTIN ME RIGHT....
WELL DONE LADS...... CARRY ON......
..........FR4NKIE
http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

11/12

11/3/2014

Welding Forum > Difference between 7018's and 7016's

pipesmoker

Aug 14 2007, 08:43 PM

FLUX IS DIFFERENT AND THICKER ON 7018 BOTH ELECTRODES ARE THE SAME OTHERWISE
frankieboy

Aug 19 2007, 07:44 AM

Love that reply Pipe smoker... ROFL !....... it is true for all coated electrodes... but there is
a bit more depth to the subject... it is also true about some stainless steel electrodes as
some manufacturers use a mild steel core, the only diffefrence is the flux... keep puffin
that St Bruno..... ( in an outside open space of course )
kindest regards Frankie

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.
Invision Power Board 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.

http://www.ukwelder.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t5253.html

12/12