Forum WELD TALK TOPIC ARCHIVE Welding Processes DCEN vs. DCEP....GET IT RIGHT!

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To
start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Results 1 to 15 of 19 Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

Thread: DCEN vs. DCEP....GET IT RIGHT!

Thread Tools Rate This Thread Display

04-07-2004, 10:57 PM #1

Join Date: Mar 2003

yjweldor Location: orlando, fl
Senior Member Posts: 134

DCEN vs. DCEP....GET IT RIGHT!

ok in the first welding book i ever bought, Welder's Handbook, by Richard Finch, it states in the arc welding section, page 91, that
DCEP, or reverse polarity, gives shallow penetration......then on page 92, it states that DCEN, or straight polarity, gives deep
penetration. in DCEN, the work gets hotter than the electrode, and vice versa for DCEP. I've proved this to be true b/c if you try and tig
weld mild steel DCEP, the tungsten melts before you get a puddle....now mostly do ac stick welding, and the little bit of DC i've done,
was mixed DCEP, or DCEN depending on which machine i was on, but one machine was set DCEN, and the other 3 were set DCEP......so
is DCEP better for out of position stuff? Now where i get confused, is on both hobart's and miller's website, they state in black and
white, that DCEP gives the most penetration, AC gives medium penetration, and DCEN gives the least....HMMMMMM who's right?
personally, i think they're wrong.

http://www.hobartwelders.com/techtips.html#stick

http://www.millerwelds.com/education...ips.html#stick

regards,
Nathan Hamler.

Reply With Quote

04-07-2004, 11:58 PM #2

Join Date: Feb 2004

dda52 Location: Bulverde, tx.
Senior Member Posts: 3,187

YJ
IMO I think Finch is wrong, or got it backwards and missed it in edit. In sheetmetal, everything we did up to 14ga was with DCEN (
straight pol ) to minimize blow-thru. Reverse always blew out eventually. We switched to reverse pol ( DCEP ) on 12ga and up since we
actually had something there to take the heat. We also used reverse to certify on all our tests. Most of those were on 10ga. One guy
tried it on straight in practice. When the backing plate was ground off, we noticed he didn't penetrate deep enough to fuse the root
completely. ( He had a bunch of pinholes. ) The same run on reverse ended in a fused root with no holes.
I have the same book and noticed that right off.

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 06:37 AM #3

Join Date: Mar 2004

Noel Location: Naples Fl.
Junior Member Posts: 29

Electron theroy states that negative flows to positive. In DCEN the electrode is negative and will act as the emitter to release electrons
into the work. As I recall about 80% of the energy goes into the work and about 20% into the electrode. The opposite is true for DCEP.
A note: The hotter the emitter the easier the electrons will leave. Also electrons like to leave from edges or points. That's why after the
tungsten has been balled it is harder to start the arc than before. The newer machines allow for the initial arc to be started DCEP so the
arc jumps or is emitted from the work (which is rough and will give up electrons easier than the smooth electrode) it also allows the
tungsten to heat quickly making it a good emitter, when the current goes to DCEN a few msec latter. This is why you should size the
tungsten to the work or current being used to allow the tungsten to reach the proper temperture as quickly as possible. Too small an
electrode will not be able to conduct enough current for the job. Soooo this porridge is to hot, this too cold and so on-------. ****ed if
you do, and ****ed if you don't. That's what makes it so much fun.

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 07:37 AM #4

Join Date: Feb 2004

Zrexxer Location: Austin TX
Senior Member Posts: 4,858

That's not the only questionable information in the Welder's Handbook . I bought it from Amazon.com awhile back, and it was so full of
inaccurate and incorrect information I sent it back and got my money back. Probably the only book I've ever asked for a refund on in
my life. There are much better texts out there.

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 07:41 AM #5

Join Date: Nov 2002

dseman Posts: 702
Senior Member

yj*,
I don't have a copy of Finch's book in front of me to check, but I know where your problem lies. The problem is you have assumed that
an arc for tig is the same as an arc for stick welding. This is just not the case. The simplest way I can explain this is that for a 'simple'
arc, that is one which is created from either a bare piece of tungsten, a stick electrode with it's flux removed, or a carbon electrode,
DCEN or DCSP will have the best penetration since more heat is liberated at the positive pole or piece of metal to be welded. This
example is for the case of a non-consuming electrode. Tig arcs operate in this category. As has been stated, dopants are added to the
tungsten to improve it's emission characteristics.

Now for stick welding, you are operating a 'consumable electrode'. In this case there is a flux covering which generates gases and
fluxing agents which alter the penetration characteristics and movement of metal ions from the electrode tip to the metal being welded.
If you have mig welded before with CO2 you will know that this creates the deepest penetration profile. Well,a 6010 rod has a cellulose
covering which in turn creates a CO2 gas shield, thus providing a very deep penetration---as long as it is run DCEP or DCRP.

So in a nutshelll:
TIG: max penetration with DCEN/DCSP
STICK: max penetration with DCEP/DCRP

-dseman
Last edited by dseman; 04-08-2004 at 07:45 AM.

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 07:53 AM #6

Join Date: Mar 2004

TRG-42 Location: Canada
Senior Member Posts: 369

Everyone is right ( Finch is wrong )

In MOST processes of consumable electrodes ( stick, MIG, flux cored, gas shield flux cored, submerged arc and SOME self shielded flux
cored ) operation on DCEP ( reverse polarity ) generates more heat at the work

If you run MIG on DCEN the wire ***** like crazy and you get zero penetration. The only wire process that is commonly run on DCEP
and DCEN and AC is submerged arc. All other wires processes must be run on the polarity it was designed for

Whether or not a stick electrode can be run on DCEN as well as DCEP is determined by the coating type ( example : a XX10 cellulose
sodium should only be run on DC+ , E6012 should only be run on DC- or AC .

Where it gets confusing is EXX18 where some 7018 are designed for DC+ only ( not DC- or limited AC ) . A good rule is if it says AC on
the rod then you are ok for DC- and AC. If it does not it is best to run on DC+. Even though most low hydrogens can run acceptably on
AC the only time you would do this if arc blow is an issue

The most notable exception is GTAW where a tungsten is used as a cathode. 70% of energy is at work on DCEN , balance at electrode.
Another exception is MOST self shielded flux cored wires such as the AWS E71T-11 like Hobart 21B, Lincoln NR211

These wires are run on DCEN. If you try to run them on DCEP you get poor penetration

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 08:32 AM #7

Join Date: Jan 2004

Timinmb Location: Winnipeg
Senior Member Posts: 857

I'd been wondering that ever since I did some reading on tig polarities, and it confused the heck out of me that it was opposite for stick.

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 11:51 AM #8

Join Date: Jan 2004

hankj Location: Browns Valley, CA
Senior Member Posts: 8,518

Got Finch's book. Kinda full of Finch, mostly. I liked "Welding Essentials" by Galvery and Marlowe much better.

Be well.

hankj
...from the Gadget Garage
MM 210 w/3035, BWE
HH 210 w/DP 3035
TA185TSW
Victor O/A "J" series, SuperRange
Avatar courtesy of Bob Sigmon...

Reply With Quote

04-08-2004, 06:08 PM #9

Join Date: Nov 2003

DrIQ Location: ohio
Senior Member Posts: 633

dseman and TRG-42 have given you the correct information

This is because of the non-consumable electrode and inert gas vs consumable electrode and active gas or flux

GTAW = non consumable electrode with inert gas

DCEN = 30% heat on electrode 70% on work
DCEP = 70% heat on electrode 30% on work

SMAW, GMAW, or FCAW = consumable electrode with active gas and or flux
DCEN = 70% heat on electrode 30% on work
DCEP = 30% heat on electrode 70% on work

Some common examples of this are

1. GTAW using DCEP with 3/32" electrode for very thin aluminum, the electrode will ball up before you can establish a puddle on 1/8"
aluminum

2. SMAW using DCEN with E6012 for thin sheet metal resulting in higher dep. rates with less burn through than on DCEP

DrIQ

Reply With Quote

11-26-2014, 03:57 AM #10

Join Date: Nov 2014

ronak macwan Posts: 1
Junior Member

DCEP vs DCEN for penetration

Originally Posted by DrIQ

dseman and TRG-42 have given you the correct information
This is because of the non-consumable electrode and inert gas vs consumable electrode and active gas or flux
GTAW = non consumable electrode with inert gas
DCEN = 30% heat on electrode 70% on work
DCEP = 70% heat on electrode 30% on work
SMAW, GMAW, or FCAW = consumable electrode with active gas and or flux
DCEN = 70% heat on electrode 30% on work
DCEP = 30% heat on electrode 70% on work
Some common examples of this are
1. GTAW using DCEP with 3/32" electrode for very thin aluminum, the electrode will ball up before you can establish a puddle on 1/8"
aluminum
2. SMAW using DCEN with E6012 for thin sheet metal resulting in higher dep. rates with less burn through than on DCEP
Actually DCEP vs DCEN should be compared including the process.
For TIG (non consumable electrode)
DCEN : Deeper penetration
DCEP : Shallow penetration

For stick electrodes, MIG, SAW (consumable electrodes)

DCEN : Shallow penetration
DCEP : deeper penetration

Reason:-

For TIG with DCEN.... electrons transfer from W- electrode to the work place. The kinetic energy of electrones are responsible for
heating and melting of the base metal. Thus it gives deeper penetration.

For MIG or stick electrode with DCEP. ... electrons transfer from work piece to consumable. Majority of the energy of electrones used for
melting of consumable (either stick electrode or wire). Now this energy is transgressive melting the base metal, as the molten droplets
are propelled by electro magnetic pinch effect to impact the base metal.

Reply With Quote

11-27-2014, 06:20 AM #11

Join Date: Mar 2003

Northweldor Location: Calgary
Senior Member Posts: 1,886

Originally Posted by ronak macwan

Actually DCEP vs DCEN should be compared including the process.
For TIG (non consumable electrode)
DCEN : Deeper penetration
DCEP : Shallow penetration
For stick electrodes, MIG, SAW (consumable electrodes)
DCEN : Shallow penetration
DCEP : deeper penetration
Reason:-
For TIG with DCEN.... electrons transfer from W- electrode to the work place. The kinetic energy of electrones are responsible for heating
and melting of the base metal. Thus it gives deeper penetration.
For MIG or stick electrode with DCEP. ... electrons transfer from work piece to consumable. Majority of the energy of electrones used for
melting of consumable (either stick electrode or wire). Now this energy is transgressive melting the base metal, as the molten droplets are
propelled by electro magnetic pinch effect to impact the base metal.
Not quite that simple, if you want to explain the "Why?" Was looking for a better answer to this question a few years ago, and here is
what I came up with. Feel free to correct me, if I am wrong.

"This is my attempt at explaining

" Why does SMAW have greater penetration with EP vs GTAW having greater penetration with EN ?"
(without much reference to particle physics,since I obviously don't know enough!).

First, I think most would agree that a major factor. in achieving penetration, is the heat transmitted to the weld puddle, by various
means, through the arc, in both processes. This is called thermal efficiency.

In GTAW, the most heat energy is transferred to the weld puddle in EN, making this polarity more thermally efficient. When the polarity
is switched to EP, then the major part of the heat energy is focused on the electrode, and this makes the weld puddle cooler and less
penetrating than on EP, or less thermally efficient. Also heat energy is dissipated through the electrode into the shielding gas and
electrode holder.

In SMAW, the most heat energy is transmitted to the weld puddle in EP, because most heat is concentrated on the electrode, as in
GTAW, but since the electrode is being consumed, much of this energy is transferred directly back to the weld pool with the molten
metal, making the weld pool hotter. In SMAW - EN, the weld pool is cooler since less heat being on the electrode also means less
molten metal being transferred to the weld pool, and therefore, EN is less thermally efficient and penetrating.

This is also compounded with other factors in SMAW, such as the fact that the plasma column is directed and focused by the coating
crater, (coating melting slower than the core metal) in a way similar to a hose nozzle. This is not as efficient in GTAW, which has a sort
of pear-shaped column that is controlled mainly by the shape of the electrode. (In some automated GTAW processes, greater plasma
control is achieved with a magnetic field). Another factor influencing thermal efficiency in GTAW EN and EP is that the weld pool is
cooled by the feeding of the filler rod, and the flow of shielding gas. In SMAW, the slag cover slows the weld pool cooling and increases
penetration well. THis is all coupled with the fact that, according to EsabU, there are 9 different purposes for the flux in SMAW, and
many hundreds of ingredients which could affect penetration.

Given the above, you might expect SMAW to have greater thermal efficiency than GTAW, and in fact, it does."

Reply With Quote

12-18-2014, 09:26 AM #12

Join Date: Nov 2005

vicegrip Location: S.E. Wisconsin
Senior Member Posts: 5,704

A three letter acromyme sounds like a word.

By that word I recognise it.

A four letter acronyme is more profane than a four letter word if ya ask me.
Sounds a$$inine. It won't retain at all. Another thing the eggheads
just had to fix that wasn't ever broken.

We went a long long way just fine without,

GTAW SMAW GMAW FCAW FECTAW SCHMUTZTAW and all that cr@p.
Last edited by vicegrip; 12-18-2014 at 09:28 AM.
 ViceGrip
Negative people have a problem for every solution

Reply With Quote

12-19-2014, 07:49 AM #13

Join Date: Mar 2003

Northweldor Location: Calgary
Senior Member Posts: 1,886

Originally Posted by vicegrip

A three letter acromyme sounds like a word.
By that word I recognise it.
A four letter acronyme is more profane than a four letter word if ya ask me.
Sounds a$$inine. It won't retain at all. Another thing the eggheads
just had to fix that wasn't ever broken.
We went a long long way just fine without,
GTAW SMAW GMAW FCAW FECTAW SCHMUTZTAW and all that cr@p.
Didums get up on the wrong side of bed yesterday?

I originally wrote the above, and posted it in another forum, and did not feel I had to alter it, to re-post here.
Like it or not, it happens to be correct internationally-accepted terminology for weld processes. However, here's a one page chart of the
acronyms of all the common current processes to help you out.

Attached Images
Weld Processes AWS .jpg (72.8 KB, 231 views)

Reply With Quote

12-19-2014, 10:07 AM #14

Join Date: Jul 2012

Dale M. Posts: 1,434
Senior Member

Gads... How did we ever manage to convey information before we had acronyms...

Dale

Lives his life vicariously through his own self.

Reply With Quote

12-19-2014, 10:33 AM #15

Join Date: Nov 2005

vicegrip Location: S.E. Wisconsin
Senior Member Posts: 5,704

I just invented a new acronym for correct internationally-accepted terminology

. . . . Gay . . . .

ViceGrip
Negative people have a problem for every solution

Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

Quick Navigation Welding Processes Top

 « Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Permissions
You may not post new threads BB code is On
You may not post replies Smilies are On
You may not post attachments [IMG] code is On
You may not edit your posts [VIDEO] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Rules

-- Hobart Orange (Generated) Feedback/Help Hobart Welding Products Archive Top

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4

Copyright © 2017 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.