You are on page 1of 21

9.

1 INTRODUCTION Estimating the costs of depositing weld metal can be a difficult task because of the many variables involved. Design engineers must specify the type and size of weld joint to withstand the loads that the weldment must bear. The welding engineer must select the welding process, and type of filler metal that will provide the required welds at the least possible cost. With wages and the cost of operations rising, selection of the process that deposits weld metal most expediently must be carefully considered. Labor and overhead account for approxi- mately 85% of the total welding cost. 9.1.0.1 Welding costs may be divided into two categories; the fixed costs involved regard- less of the filler metal or welding process selected, and those related to a specific welding process. Fixed costs entail material handling, joint preparation, fixturing, tacking, preheating, weld clean-up and inspection. Although some of these items will be affected by the process and filler metal chosen, they are a necessary part of practically all welding operations. Calcu- lating these costs is best left to the manufacturer since they will depend upon his capabilities and equipment. The cost of actually depositing the weld metal however, will vary considerably with the filler metal and welding 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 power. 9.1.0.2 This lesson will cover cost estimating for steel weldments produced by the four most common arc welding processes in use today: shielded metal-arc welding, gas metal-arc welding, flux cored arc welding and submerged arc welding. Gas tungsten arc welding will not be considered here because the variables, such as deposition rate and efficiency, are depen- dent on operator technique, stub use, etc. The GTAW process is a relatively costly method of depositing weld metal, and is usually chosen for weld quality or material thickness and compo- sition limitations, rather than economy. 9.1.0.3 Large firms will frequently conduct their own deposition tests and time studies to determine welding costs, but many smaller shops do not know the actual cost of depositing weld metal. 9.1.0.4 In estimating welding costs, all attempts should be made to work with accurate data, which in some cases is difficult to secure. For this reason, this lesson contains charts, graphs and tables that provide average values that you may use. Electrode manufacturers will 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 calculations. Labor is the welders hourly rate of pay including wages and benefits. Overhead includes allocated portions of plant operating and maintenance costs. Weld shops in manu- facturing plants normally have established labor and overhead rates for each department. Labor and overhead rates can vary greatly from plant to plant, and also with location. Figure 1 shows how labor and overhead may vary and suggests an average value to use in your calcu- lations when the actual value is unknown.

9.2.2 Deposition Rate - The deposition rate is the rate that weld metal can be deposited by a given electrode or welding wire, expressed in pounds per hour. It is based on continuous operation, not allowing time for stops and starts caused by inserting a new electrode, cleaning slag, termination of the weld or other reasons. The deposition rate will increase as the welding current is increased. 9.2.2.1 When using solid or flux cored wires, deposition rate will increase as the electrical stick-out is increased, and the same amperage is maintained. True deposition rates for each welding filler metal, whether it is a coated electrode or a solid or flux cored wire, can only be established by an actual test in which the weldment is weighed before welding and then again after welding, 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 welding filler metals. These are based on welding laboratory tests and published data. 9.2.3 Operating Factor - Operating factor is the percentage of a welders working day that is actually spent welding. It is the arc time in hours divided by the total hours worked. A 45% (.45) operating factor means that only 45% of the welders day is actually spent welding. The balance of time is spent installing a new electrode or wire, cleaning slag, positioning the weldment, cleaning spatter from the welding gun, etc. 9.2.3.1 When using coated electrodes, (SMAW) the operating factor can range from 15%-40% depending upon material handling, fixturing and operator dexterity. If the actual operating factor is not known, an average of 30% may be used for cost estimates when weld- ing with the shielded metal arc welding process. 9.2.3.2 When welding with solid wires (GMAW) or metal cored welding (MCAW) using the semiautomatic method, operating factors ranging from 45%-55% are easily attainable. Use 50% for cost estimating purposes. 9.2.3.3 For welds produced by flux cored arc welding (FCAW) semi-automatic- ally, the operating factor usually lies between 40%-50%. For cost estimating purposes, use a 45% operating factor. The estimated operating factor for FCAW is about 5% lower than that of GMAW to allow for slag removal time. 9.2.3.4 In semi-automatic submerged arc welding, slag removal and loose flux handling must be considered. A 40% operating factor is typical for this process.

9.2.3.5 Automatic welding using the GMAW, FCAW, and SAW processes, requires that each application be studied individually. Operating factors ranging from 50% to values ap- proaching 100% may be obtained depending on the degree of automation. 9.2.3.6 The chart in Figure 2 shows average operating factor values for the various welding processes that may be used for cost estimating when the actual operating factor is not known.

9.2.4 Deposition Efficiency - Deposition efficiency is the relationship of the weight of the weld metal deposited to the weight of the electrode (or wire) consumed in making a weld. It can be accurately determined only by making a timed test weld, and carefully weighing the weldment and the electrode or wire, before and after welding. The efficiency can then be calculated by the formula:

9.2.4.1 The deposition efficiency tells us how many pounds of weld metal can be expected from a given weight of the electrode or welding wire purchased. As an example, 100 pounds of a flux cored electrode with an efficiency of 85%, will produce approximately 85 pounds of weld metal, while 100 pounds of coated electrode with an efficiency of 65%, will produce approximately 65 pounds of weld metal, less the weight of the stubs discarded, as described below. 9.2.5 Coated Electrodes - The deposition efficiency of coated electrodes by AWS definition, and in published data, does not consider the loss of the unused electrode stub that is discarded. This is understandable since the stub length can vary with the operator and the application. Long continuous welds are usually conducive to short stubs while on short inter- mittent welds, stub length tends to be longer. Figure 3 illustrates how the stub loss influences the electrode efficiency when 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 two inch stub loss is assumed. The 75% efficiency applies

only to the 12 of the electrode consumed in making the weld, and not to the two inch stub. When the two inch stub loss and the 25% that is lost to slag, spatter and fumes are consid- ered, the efficiency minus stub loss is lowered 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 weld metal if all electrodes are used to a two inch stub length. 9.2.5.2 The formula for the efficiency including stub loss is important, and must always be used when estimating the cost of depositing weld metal by the SMAW method. Figure 4 shows 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 consider- ation that the electrode weight 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 will result in a 1.5-2.3% error that will vary with electrode size, coating thickness and stub length. The formula however, is acceptable for estimating purposes. 9.2.5.3 For the values given in Figure 3 the formula is:

In the above example, the electrode length is known, 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 known. 9.2.5.4 The following stub loss correction table will assist in your determination of coated electrode efficiencies. Figure 5 lists various efficiencies at a given stub loss.

9.2.6 Efficiency of Flux Cored Wires - Flux cored wires have a lower flux-to-metal ratio than coated electrodes, and thereby, a higher deposition efficiency. Stub loss need not be considered since the wire is continuous. The gas shielded wires 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 with CO2 as the shielding gas, and the efficiency can reach 92% when a 75% argon, 25% CO2 gas mixture is used. Use the efficiency figures in Figure 9 for your calculations if the actual values are not known. 9.2.6.1 The efficiency of the self-shielded types of flux cored wires has more variation because of the large variety of available types that have been designed for specific applica- tions. The high deposition general purpose type, such as E70T-4, is 81%-86%, depending on wire size and electrical stick-out. The chart in Figure 9 shows the optimum conditions for each wire size and may be used in your calculations. 9.2.7 Efficiency of Solid Wires for GMAW - The efficiency of solid wires in GMAW is very high and will vary with the shielding gas or gas mixture used. Using CO2 will produce the most spatter and the average efficiency will be about 93%. Using a 75% argon-25% CO2 gas mixture will result in somewhat less spatter, and an efficiency of approximately 96% can be expected. A 98% argon-2% oxygen mixture will produce even less spatter, and the average efficiency will be about 98%. Stub loss need not be considered since the wire is continuous. Figure 6 shows the average efficiencies you may use in your calculations if the actual effi- ciency is not known. 9.2.8 Efficiency of Solid Wires for SAW - In submerged arc welding there is no spatter loss and an efficiency of 99% may be assumed. The only loss during welding is the short piece the operator must clip off the end of the wire to remove the fused flux that forms at the termination of each weld. This is done to assure a good start on the succeeding weld.

9.2.9 Cost of Electrodes, Wires, Gases and Flux - You must secure the current cost per pound of the electrode or welding wire, plus the cost of the shielding gas or flux if appli- cable, from the supplier. The shielding gas flow rate varies slightly with the type of gas used. The flow rates in Figure 7 are average values whether the shielding gas is an argon mixture or 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 wire consumed

in the weld is approxi- mately 1 to 1 by weight. When the losses due to flux handling and flux recovery systems are considered, the average ratio of flux to wire is approximately 1.4 pounds of flux for each pound of wire consumed. If the actual flux-to-wire ratio is unknown, use the 1.4 for cost estimating.

9.2.10 Cost of Power - Cost of electrical power is a very small part of the cost of deposit- ing weld metal and in most cases is less than 1% of the total. It will be necessary for you to know the power cost expressed in dollars per kilowatt- hour ($/kWh) if required for a total cost estimate.

You might also like