ARTICLE - Evaluating Consumable Alternatives - …

1 Some further design differences are magnified in Figure 2 (indicatedby reference numbers in figure 2b):(1) There is a distinct gap between ATTC s contact tip and the gasdiffuser s front bore, creating an area where spatter can collectduring welding operations and create potential problems. Also,the ATTC gas diffuser is noticeably shorter than the Tregaskissretaining head.(2) The finer thread of the Tregaskiss Tough Lock tip is designed with more threads per inch and a more secure , ATTC s thread length and pitch is much different andthe connection is considered less reliable because fewer threadsare engaged.(3) Only a small part of the ATTC contact tip s thread is engagedwith the diffuser; thus, the connection is unreliable and has agreater likelihood of coming loose during welding operations.

2 (4) The taper of ATTC contact tip appears similar to the Tough Locktapered angle. Double lead threads engage the retaining head at two points along the circumference, separated by 180 . The tip then requires less turn to reach the sameaxial distance compared to the tip with normal ROUGHNESSThe roughness parameters were measured in the locations noted in figure 3 above: the average roughness (Ra), and the peakroughness (Ry). Figure 4 demonstrates the difference in surfacefinish between Tregaskiss Tough Lock (indicated as TG) and ATTC contact is clear that the surface of the ATTC contact tip is significantlyrougher than that of the Tregaskiss Tough Lock contact tip. Undernormal to mild welding conditions (for example, welding with solidwire), spatter accumulation is significantly affected by the surfacefinish of the front-end components; the finer the surface finish,the less the spatter will accumulate on the consumables .

3 Thus, theTregaskiss contact tip is superior to ATTC s in preventing excessivespatter accumulation, which could result in the contact tip beingelectronically shorted to the denotes Average RoughnessRy denotes Peak RoughnessFigure 4 The surface roughness of the Tough Lock and ATTC contact COMPOSITIONThe chemical composition test performed by Cambridge Limiteddetermined that the ATTC contact tips are made from CopSil which is different from the C12200 copper alloy in theTregaskiss than ever, manufacturing companies utilizing GMAW (GasMetal Arc Welding) are concerned with reducing costly downtime ofwelding equipment. Since production downtime is often a result ofcontact tip failure, the performance of the contact tip is a keycomponent of a GMAW (or MIG) welding are many sourcing options available in the marketplace forcontact tips and related consumables .

4 Suppliers are coming out ofthe woodwork and claiming to offer comparable quality products at much lower prices. Although much of this product may look thesame on the surface, there are often substantial quality differencesthat, in the end, result in a higher total cost of ownership. As aresult, Tregaskiss decided to conduct an empirical study to furtherunderstand the important design, quality, and performancedifferences that could exist between two tip systems that, at firstglance, appear to be physically research presented in this ARTICLE was carried out in theResearch and Development Lab at the Tregaskiss Welding Productsmanufacturing facility in Windsor, Ontario, PRODUCTSS amples used for this study included the ATTC contact tip with corresponding gas diffuser and the TregaskissTough Lock contact tip (403-20-52) with retaining head (404-30).

5 Contact tips and retaining heads/diffusers were inspected for the following: Physical Features Surface Roughness Chemical Composition Wear Patterns Thermal PerformancePHYSICAL FEATURESIn terms of physical features, it is quite obvious that the ATTC contact tip and gas diffuser have the same basic look and designprinciples as the Tough Lock contact tip and retaining head system(See figure 1).For example: The tapered feature found in both of these products is adistinguishing characteristic from a conventional contact tip,retaining head and gas 1 Front-end systems from Tregaskiss and ATTC.(a) Tough Lock retaining head (404-30) and Tough Lock contact tip (403-20-52)(b) ATTC gas diffuser and contact tip ( ) Both systems use a double-lead thread design; however, theTregaskiss Tough Lock thread provides adequate pitch and lengthfor a secure engagement into the diffuser.

6 ATTC, in an effort to avoid patent infringements, has altereddimensions that hinder their contact tip s ability to be adequatelysecured into the gas diffuser (figure 2).Figure 2 Magnified cross-section detail of the interface between the contact tips and retaining head (Tregaskiss) or gas diffuser (ATTC). Evaluating Consumable Alternatives LOOKS CAN BE DECEIVING2 (a) Tregaskiss Tough Lock2 (b) ATTCF igure 3 Locations of surface roughness (1)Surface(2)Surface(3)(a)(b)1234 THE FREEDOM TO INNOVATE6 WEAR PATTERNSA lthough ATTC claims that their contact tips made from CopSil help reduce wear better than Tregaskiss Toughlock copper alloy tips, the post-test wear patterns between the two are marginal,as indicated by figure 5 PERFORMANCEThe following procedure was used to characterize the thermalperformance of the contact tips and retaining heads.

7 Figure 6 found below shows the apparatus used to measure thetemperature of the contact tip. A K-Type thermocouple is pluggedinto a notch ( x ) on the contact tip, located 6 mmaway from the front end of the determine working temperatures, each of the assembledsystems were subjected to welding parameters set in Table temperatures were recorded by a data acquisition system(National Instrument DAQ System) at the rate of 100 data / sec,and averaged to 1 data / sec. Three tests were conducted on eachof the Tregaskiss Tough Lock and ATTC tapered contact Figure 7 above, the contact tip s service temperatures over thelast 20 minutes (minutes 10 to 30) of testing are presented. Notethat the data is regressed to tendency lines (the dashed lines), so aquantitative comparison can be used.

8 The most obvious trend is theTregaskiss Tough Lock s (403-20-52) working temperature is about30 C to 40 C lower than the ATTC contact 1 Welding parameters for thermal performance 7 The temperatures of the Tregaskiss and ATTC tips during the last 20minutes of the welding test.(a) Apparatus(b) SchematicParameterValueParameterValueWel ding SystemLincoln PowerWave 450,Current~ 275 AmpLincoln Power FeederVoltage32 VWireAir Liquide, LA C6,WFS320 IPM(E4801C6CH), Wire Feeding ( m/s)SystemTorchTregaskiss M5408 GasAr-CO2(80-20) mixedAmbient70 2 F (21 1 C),Cycle30 min, 100%40 5%RHFig 5(a) Fig 5(b) Fig 5(a) The front bore (left) and rear inlet (right) of the Tregaskiss tip after 5(b) The front bore (left) and rear inlet (right) of the ATTC tip after 6 Apparatus (a) and schematic drawing (b) used to measure contact tiptemperature during welding Consumable Alternatives LOOKS CAN BE DECEIVINGD ecreasing the working temperature is regarded as one of the mosteffective ways to improve the performance of a contact tip.

9 At lowtemperatures, the hardness, strength, thermal and electricalconductivities of the copper are higher than at higher , the Tregaskiss Tough Lock contact tip is expected to havesuperior tightness, current flow (arc characteristics), andtemperature dissipation over the ATTC contact terms of physical features, each tip differs in exact dimensionsand detail primarily because of differing thread and taper detailsprotected under the Tough Lock patent held by Tregaskiss. As such,the performance of the ATTC contact tip suffers in weldingapplications. For example, the ATTC tip has a different taper, threadlength and thread pitch; thus, the connection is unreliable and coulddislodge during welding operations. In direct comparison, the ToughLock system has a finer thread and sufficient length, allowing formore engaged threads, resulting in a secure the ATTC tips being made from CopSil material, there is amarginal difference in wear resistance between the two brands ofcontact tips.

10 Digital photos (to scale) confirmed that the amount ofwear in each tip is similar; thus, there is no significant advantage in preventing contact tip wear by using CopSil instead of respect to the working temperatures of the tips during weldingtests, the Tough Lock was the clear winner. The ATTC contact tiphad a working temperature approximately 30 C to 40 C higher thanthe Tough Lock contact tip. Since higher temperatures lead topremature tip failure, the ATTC contact tip is more susceptible tofailure than the Tough Lock contact the data in this study indicates, despite looking very similar on the surface, there are distinct quality differences betweenTregaskiss and ATTC tip systems. These results bring to theforefront the importance of the customer s decision-making process when making critical Consumable purchases.