[HN Gopher] The Beauty of Pulse Arc Welding
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Beauty of Pulse Arc Welding
        
       Author : mhb
       Score  : 110 points
       Date   : 2023-04-11 12:39 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.hermansilver.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.hermansilver.com)
        
       | anfractuosity wrote:
       | Intriguing, I wonder how this compares to laser welding for
       | jewellery etc.
       | 
       | Edit: Just noticed he mentions in the video laser welding is more
       | suited to smaller items
        
       | farkanoid wrote:
       | I'm so infatuated with these machines that I've been working on
       | designing my own version (using parts available at
       | Mouser/Digikey) for close to a decade.
       | 
       | Unfortunately I've been unable to maintain a decent work/life
       | balance due to the high cost of living. As a result, I honestly
       | die a little inside each time I see an article posted about them.
       | 
       | The last update was in 2013, where I completed the EHT "popstart"
       | circuit (to replace the expensive retractable electrode, and
       | allow the use of a standard TIG head):
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4c5Le2kT6w
       | 
       | Some day I'll complete it!
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | ChatGPT isn't going to destroy Jeff's job.
        
         | Blackthorn wrote:
         | Robotic welding processes have caused quite a bit of grief in
         | the workforce before the advent of ChatGPT, unfortunately.
        
           | buildsjets wrote:
           | Any weld that can be economically automated should be.
           | Several years ago I worked a project to help a supplier
           | implement automated orbital tube welding for an aerospace
           | product. There were two of these welds per part, and 8 parts
           | per airplane, for an airplane that was being produced at
           | around 50 per month. So they needed to make about 800 welds
           | per month, about 37 per day. Including setup, each manual
           | weld took around 15 minute, so over 9 hours of welding the
           | exact same setup over and over, while being exposed to hot
           | surfaces, UV light, and welding gasses. That's no job for a
           | human.
        
           | nimbius wrote:
           | having worked in shops alongside automatic welders its a
           | toss-up at best. See vendors like Fanuc and Motoman will say
           | just about anything to get the bid for a process automation
           | contract. 50k cycles per hour? sure. maintenance period every
           | 25 years? why not. seamless switching between pulsemig,
           | pulseGMAW and cupped tig? you know it. Vision system? it can
           | see through time buddy, this robot does _eeeverything_.
           | 
           | the problems start when your shop retools without a cycle
           | time analysis, makes small tweaks to existing metal profiles
           | without updating the bots, or finds out robots aren't magic
           | money saving golems. for me its been the last one because
           | every shop Ive been in will literally run an autowelder until
           | the teeth in the gears sound like an empty bag of cheetos and
           | the tool path leaves about an inch of over-weld and spatter.
           | the overweld and quality issues get the grinder treatment
           | from a line worker whos pulled out to do lots and lots of
           | reworks so your cycle time is now bob's cycle time. now
           | eventually the setup to pulsemig wont make sense anymore or
           | nobody can remember how to switch it to GMAW or a customer
           | needs a mig joint so more tweaks happen until your $250k bot
           | is now just a pneumatic arm that shoots metal boogers at a
           | joint and sends it to rework.
           | 
           | no shop wants to spend money on a programmer or mechanical
           | maintenance unless the machines literally swinging around in
           | a fiery puddle of its own hydraulic.
        
             | BizarroLand wrote:
             | >the machines literally swinging around in a fiery puddle
             | of its own hydraulic
             | 
             | Just put the fire out and slap some jbweld on it. We don't
             | have time for a repair call.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | There is good money made by people fixing up after the
           | robots.
        
           | WheatMillington wrote:
           | On a production line, sure. But not in the kind of work in
           | the link, and not in almost any kind of repair work, bespoke
           | work or built to order manufacturing.
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | How about ChatGPT producing a suitable CNC program?
         | 
         | (I have no idea how feasible that is, I'm just curious.)
        
           | Blackthorn wrote:
           | And you thought chatgpt was bad with subtle bugs in generated
           | Python code. Now just imagine it scrapping a thirteen hour
           | part or crashing a $300,000 machine.
        
             | CoastalCoder wrote:
             | I've never worked with a CNC. Wouldn't they typically have
             | safeguards against machine-damaging instructions?
        
               | jaipilot747 wrote:
               | Usually not. Especially not in machines where you
               | manually set the bits and the machine has no idea of the
               | bit and it's properties, nor of the piece you are
               | machining.
        
               | jdboyd wrote:
               | They might try, but it is hard to know which instructions
               | will damage something. The machine might not not what the
               | shape of the work piece inside of it is supposed to be,
               | and if it doesn't know that, it might not know when one
               | operation fails in a way that would now cause a later
               | operation to incorrectly collide part of the machine with
               | the work piece.
               | 
               | On stupider machines that are only 10s of thousands of
               | dollars/euros/etc, you also have to be certain that what
               | the machine expects for tool geometry matches reality
               | (meaning that the correct tool was in the correct tool
               | location, that the tool is mounted in the holder at just
               | the right length, that the tool itself hasn't deformed,
               | etc.
               | 
               | That said, I wouldn't bet against AI stuff potentially
               | being good at generating tool paths in the future.
               | 
               | Sometimes I think that existing CNC stuff might be too
               | dumb. Where is the lathe equivalent of auto-probing a 3d
               | printer bed or using machine vision to monitor the print?
               | Where is the mill equivalent of visual examining each
               | part like a pick and place machine does? Why can't I put
               | a piece of metal in a vise and just tell the mill to
               | square of the ends? It could be that what I'm picturing
               | is only stuff that casual users would be interested in,
               | and thus there isn't sufficient money to develop it.
        
               | bglazer wrote:
               | I'm surprised there's not closed loop control for feeds
               | and speeds. Like, it seems relatively easy to tell when
               | the tool is chattering, even a simple microphone and
               | audio processing would probably give a decent signal that
               | could then instruct the machine to slow the feed or take
               | smaller bites.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | There is, actually. Just not on all machines. Typically
               | there is a current sensor and you can set some pretty
               | tight tolerances on what is acceptable under cutting
               | load. This also helps to detect worn out tooling (though
               | normally you'd pre-program this in advance, but there are
               | workpieces that are so large they'll wear out the tool in
               | less than one pass).
        
               | di4na wrote:
               | Re auto probing: it exists but usually not at your level
               | because you rarely need that precision for the work you
               | do. On top of this, it gets far more expensive because
               | the levelling mechanism end up having a precision cost
               | too.
               | 
               | Also let say that the use case are a bit different. a 3d
               | printer is a far far far more controlled environment
        
               | Kirby64 wrote:
               | The difference is simple, a 3d printer starts with
               | nothing on the 'table' or platform and adds. It has 100%
               | of the information of what is added, so in theory it's
               | possible to know where any potential collisions are (this
               | is not done in practice, and also doesn't account for
               | adhesion print failures, etc, but it's possible).
               | 
               | A CNC starts with an unknown block on the table, held by
               | an unknown workholding fixture, made of an unknown
               | material. There just is not enough information to not
               | crash into something unless programmed around it. Or just
               | run way too fast and destroy tools.
               | 
               | In theory you could design sets of rules, but now you're
               | having to add so much specificity to a design it's a big
               | time waste. There's not really any meaningful entry level
               | CNC machines, so if you can pay for the big machine...
               | you kind of can pay for the expertise to not destroy the
               | machine.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | There are FDM processes that go back down in Z direction
               | - like printing multiple units on the same build plate
               | one at a time. And in those situations you do have to be
               | careful not to crash the print head into an already
               | printed part.
        
               | Kirby64 wrote:
               | Almost noone does this, though. But, even then, you have
               | all the information you need in theory because you're
               | putting down the plastic.
        
               | dale_glass wrote:
               | Most will print every copy at once, switching between
               | them.
               | 
               | It also often works better because doing small parts can
               | overheat the plastic. Moving between copies lets things
               | cool down.
        
               | Blackthorn wrote:
               | What the machine knows:
               | 
               | (1) Where the head is. (2) If you program it right, where
               | the end of the tool is. (3) If you program it right, what
               | the width of the cutting edge of the tool is.
               | 
               | That's it. You could maybe prevent it from diving the
               | tool into the table. But you won't prevent it from trying
               | to take a 2" cut into D2 steel. Or going down into a
               | pocket and crashing the tool _holder_ into a section of
               | the workpiece. Or going down into a pocket and rapid
               | moving left, slamming the tool into the workpiece (which
               | if you 're lucky will just break the tool).
        
               | mauvehaus wrote:
               | ... And depending on whether it uses steppers or servos,
               | it may only know where the head is relative to where it
               | was last told its origin was.
               | 
               | ... _And_ , if it's using steppers, it only knows that
               | much if it hasn't slipped/missed/lost a step.
        
               | at_a_remove wrote:
               | Terrifying amounts of no, not even a little.
        
               | davemp wrote:
               | From my at a glance knowledge of the space, complex CNC
               | setups can have NP path routing problems to go from a
               | model to the actual job. So I wouldn't be surprised if
               | the tools are underdeveloped. You're only selling a
               | couple of these machines to very sophisticated operators
               | after all. There isn't the scale/market to justify much
               | polish.
        
               | jacquesm wrote:
               | To some degree. But if you purposefully program in a
               | toolstrike and ignore the warnings you'll get a
               | toolstrike and depending on how beefy the tool/machine is
               | the damage may well be considerable. Hold down clamps are
               | a particularly good source of toolstrikes.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | auxym wrote:
               | Nope, not in my experience. They will happily ram
               | themselves at full speed into your solid-block-of-steel
               | workpiece if you tell them you (thereby probably causing
               | tens of thousands of dollars in damage).
        
           | edrxty wrote:
           | I'm sure you could train it on a bunch of g code and get g
           | code out but it wouldn't have any context for the
           | specifically targeted CNC machine and would probably just
           | gouge random holes in the bed with random tools
        
           | abakker wrote:
           | SO BAD. It is NOT aware of G and M codes on a per machine
           | basis and will create amazing crashes will full conviction
           | that it will work.
           | 
           | Edit to add: E.g. it fully recommended that I use a G38
           | instead of g31 in a macro, which would on my machine would
           | probably destroy my probe.
        
             | knodi123 wrote:
             | > crashes will full conviction that it will work
             | 
             | That 'full conviction' part is the kicker. I don't mind if
             | an AI says "gee, this might work", or "maybe this?" But the
             | confident idiocy is going to kill someone. I asked one what
             | the best breed of dog was for a family with a child who had
             | allergy problems and was sensitive to dander. It said a
             | golden retriever was best, since they are hypoallergenic
             | and don't ever shed, plus they're friendly and eager to
             | please.
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | maybe wait for gcodeGPT?
        
       | MisterTea wrote:
       | That custom micro TIG setup is really nice. That articulated arm
       | is really neat, but that scope head must be very light. I'd like
       | to know the brand as it looks plenty solid.
       | 
       | Pulsed welding is super useful for filling and repair operations
       | on thin sheet where you can "shoot" a tiny blob of filler wire
       | into the joint/hole/gap and fill it in. Or perform small butt-
       | seam welds without filler. I've worked with fiber and yag lasers
       | and the welds are really clean and solid. You can even weld
       | larger parts together with decent strength or tack fo larger
       | welding operations. Even some of the electron beam welders there
       | had a pulse welding mode.
       | 
       | "Won't fit in a laser cabinet" - You just need a better laser
       | setup instead of a fixed optics machine. Buy a fiber laser, like
       | an IPG QCW 450/4500 get a small D30 head, 125mm lens, coax nozzle
       | with a camera tube (don't buy the camera from them as they just
       | resell a Sentech for double the $) and build another station like
       | your TIG setup but mount the laser head instead. You'll have one
       | hell of a fiber welder. You might even be able to move work over
       | from your TIG setup. They might offer a binocular setup for the
       | head or have one fabricated if you don't want the camera/monitor
       | setup.
        
         | gertrunde wrote:
         | The article refers to it as a "Lampert PUK04" - a search turned
         | up this link: https://www.lampertusa.com/products/puk04-with-
         | microscope-sm...
         | 
         | I suspect that it has since been superseded by the current PUK6
         | model (and previously the PUK 5, judging by search results)
        
       | geocrasher wrote:
       | This reminds me of TIG welding, but on an even more refined
       | level. What an art!
        
       | eimrine wrote:
       | Deleting "DJD" from a knife is kind of adblock but for metal
       | things, as far as I have understood.
        
       | Blackthorn wrote:
       | Only somewhat related: has anyone tried pulse stick? I don't have
       | a machine capable of it, but it seems like it would allow some
       | pretty easy stick welds. Especially on thinner pieces.
        
         | dsfyu404ed wrote:
         | The venn diagram of people who get really exited over pulse
         | welding and people who spend enough time using a stick welder
         | to notice yet alone realize any benefit from those settings" is
         | just two circles.
         | 
         | I can see the theoretical benefit in how quickly you can put
         | down material but all of the people who actually need that in
         | practice are probably already using something that feeds off a
         | spool.
        
           | shirleyquirk wrote:
           | Correct. In a stick welder I care about: working all day, in
           | the rain, up a ladder, at 130A. For ease/quality of the weld,
           | I pay for quality welding rods, not more settings.
        
       | causi wrote:
       | _Sometimes the joined area is not visibly accessible, and I don
       | 't know if lead has been used._
       | 
       | You could use a lead test swab. They come as small as precision
       | q-tips.
        
       | Tepix wrote:
       | Neat, i didn't know this was possible (removing engravings).
        
       | convolvatron wrote:
       | I have done a little silver work with a tig, down around 15A. I
       | really felt this was the bottom of the range and struggled to
       | maintain a puddle. is there anything fundamentally different
       | about this process?
        
         | shirleyquirk wrote:
         | Not fundamentally different, technically, just optimized for
         | that low end. I think this model maxes out at 13A. And you're
         | looking at your weld *through a microscope*.
        
         | 1970-01-01 wrote:
         | This is pulsed MIG.
         | 
         | Edit: It's TIG in the video. I assumed jewelry used MIG because
         | that's normally how thin copper is welded:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyAaX0RZMVc&t=70s
        
           | shirleyquirk wrote:
           | No it's not, there's no spool. It's tungsten electrode, inert
           | gas. Feed wire and electrode diameters are, like, 0.3mm
        
             | 1970-01-01 wrote:
             | You're right, I see in the video he has a filler rod and
             | tungsten electrode.
        
               | galangalalgol wrote:
               | Why is it ok to touch the tungsten to the silver, when it
               | isn't ok to touch it to steel?
        
           | tylerag wrote:
           | And therefor you don't need to maintain a puddle in the
           | workpiece. I'm assuming silver tig welds like copper, the
           | heat flows away from the puddle so fast that the entire thing
           | turns into a blob.
        
             | 1970-01-01 wrote:
             | Yes, silver has the fastest heat conduction of any metal.
             | It's faster than copper.
        
             | convolvatron wrote:
             | thanks, that's pretty key. I've done plenty of copper, but
             | for some reason (maybe just the cost), I didn't think of it
             | like Al or Cu where you really need to take into account
             | thermal mass and preheat. I suspect that's where the pulse
             | settings really shine - getting really local hot spots in a
             | very short period of time.
             | 
             | if silver starts becoming more decorative and less of a
             | specie I'll probably try in earnest
        
       | LorenDB wrote:
       | What an annoying website - when you right-click the page, it pops
       | up a copyright notice dialog.
        
         | h4ch1 wrote:
         | https://0x0.st/HXU8.png
         | 
         | anyone know what these POSTs to play.google.com/log are for
        
         | haunter wrote:
         | Don't see this in Chrome + uBlock
        
         | smegsicle wrote:
         | excellent use of a Free Scroll to Top Button from
         | ScrollToTop.com however!
        
         | calvinmorrison wrote:
         | What a throw back you mean! Haven't seen one of those in years
        
         | mhb wrote:
         | In Firefox, if you click a few times, it offers the option of
         | suppressing that notice in the future.
        
           | danhau wrote:
           | I think Shift+Rightclick should work too. At least it used
           | to.
        
       | analog31 wrote:
       | The first thing I saw was no protective gear. Does this process
       | really produce no UV?
        
         | Gh0stRAT wrote:
         | >Does this process really produce no UV?
         | 
         | I have no idea, but the microscope he's looking through could
         | certainly have UV protection built-in. Or perhaps the pulses
         | are so short and small that the cumulative risk is negligible?
         | 
         | Either way, it seems to me like there could be ways for it to
         | be safe enough to require minimal PPE while still producing
         | some non-zero amount of UV.
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | I'm also thinking about skin exposure. Fortunately glass
           | optics are at least opaque to the most dangerous bands of UV,
           | but not to retinal blue, which has its own special place in
           | the regulations.
        
         | gaze wrote:
         | the microscope blanks when the arc is fired
        
           | MaxikCZ wrote:
           | What happens if one time it fails? Does it instant blind?
        
             | monknomo wrote:
             | Looking straight into a welding arc doesn't blind you
             | instantly. Eventually, sure.
             | 
             | More rapidly it gives you a lingering after image and
             | feeling like your eyeball is full of sand
        
               | convolvatron wrote:
               | the 'eyeball full of sand' can last for several days, and
               | really interfere with your normal functioning. that and
               | the greatly increased acceleration of cataract
               | development means really dont look at the blue light.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | Auto-darkening welding masks block UV and IR all the time
             | [1] so you're protected against things like arc-eye even if
             | it fails to darken. Also, masks generally fail-safe (to
             | darkened, e.g. for flat batteries) and presumably this
             | welding microscope is designed to the same standard.
             | 
             | [1] https://youtu.be/qMyeVXuElkQ?t=333
        
       | binarymax wrote:
       | Really beautiful work. Though not as detailed, This Old Tony has
       | an amazing pulse TIG welding video, for those who want to see it
       | in action https://youtu.be/a6fUCApr03g
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-04-11 23:01 UTC)