Welcome to UKWelder Welding Caps Welding Helmets Pioner Overalls Welding Gloves
UKWelder Shop
Welding Hoods Welding Leathers Welding Helmet Spares Welding Boots

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Join the Forum )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> vodex electrodes
Guest_Paul_*
post Dec 7 2002, 12:33 PM




I have started using Vodex 6013 for verticals,
I am very impressed by the penetration and the finish of the cap,
I would just like to know more about the make up and the history of them,
and how do they differ from standard rutiles ?
Dr Weld
post Dec 10 2002, 10:21 PM
Joined: 23-Sep 02



Vodex is older than I am (and that's saying something!) so I may not have the details 100% - maybe one of the Murex old-stagers will appear and put us right.

It was one of the very early rutile rods invented by a guy (I think his name was Roberts) at Murex Welding Products in the early 1930s. He had two famous rutile rods - Fastex and Vodex. The '-ex' ending is obviously from 'Murex' and I believe that Fastex was considered to be just that - fast for HV welding at a time when rutile rods were just appearing. On the other hand Vodex did the lot - Vertical, Overhead and Downhand - hence V-O-D-ex.

It was a quite amazing design for the time as it was not only easily controlled in all positions but it achieved Grade 3 mechanical properties. All other countries had to use basic covered electrodes to do this. So Vodex was attractive for shipbuilding. In fact Vodex was used for the welds in the Ark Royal that was launched in 1938 and it was used continuously by British shipyards until their relatively recent demise.

Back before WW II, a rival rutile rod quickly appeared from Quaesiarc - Vortic Marine - and these two rods and companies fought it out in the shipyards for years until BOC bought both Quaesiarc and Murex and closed electrode production in Bilston. All electrodes were then made in the Murex factory at Waltham Cross so the rival rods were made down the same lines for years. And I'll tell you a trade secret - Vortic Marine actually became the same formula as Vodex with just a blue dye added to distinguish it.

Unfortunately under ESAB ownership, well actually the British holding company, Charter, the Waltham Cross electrode production has followed the footsteps of all major UK consumable units into oblivion. Vodex is still made by one of the ESAB factories, somewhere in Eastern Europe I think.

I suggest that surviving management by four totally different companies, production on widely varying production plant, and innumerable changes to its raw materials is a real testimony to the original design. It would win my vote for the best stick electrode ever. (Now there's a challenge for all those fans of Fleetweld 5, 56S or whatever - Let's be hearing from you!)

rodofgod
post Feb 23 2003, 10:55 PM
Joined: 23-Feb 03



I agree totally with Dr Weld,Vodex is up there with the best of them,as far as I'm concerned.You might like to try a "Filarc"electrode,43G,I think,same spec. but gave slightly better X-ray results in reguards to slag content.
weldtack
post Feb 25 2003, 02:35 PM
Joined: 13-Feb 03



Vodex was used extensively in the shipyards due to all the above and was able to do all possitions (except vertical down) using the same ampage, this saved thousands of man hours. in the 60-70's you could bend the electrode to weld around corners without the flux breaking off. today's vodex dos'nt have that quality for some reason.
roger rough cap
post Feb 8 2004, 03:18 PM
Joined: 6-Feb 04



used vodex when i served my time at Swan Hunters (Haverton Hill) built some great super tankers, Derbyshire and the Kowloon bridge spring to mind, unfortunately those 2 sank, but nothing to do with the rods i'm sure
W9Y
post Feb 8 2004, 03:36 PM
Joined: 9-Jan 04



I had a school friend who went down with the Derbyshire(he was a chef), it was an incredibly sad occasion. The poor lad was only eighteen at the time and it was his wish to join the merchant & go to sea.

It now seems the blame goes into the design of the vessel. The thing broke in two in the south China sea. It should never have been allowed to happen.
ukwelder
post Feb 8 2004, 03:46 PM
Joined: 15-Sep 02



There is an interesting story in the archive section of NDTCabin about a supertanker sinking. Well worth reading as welding gets a mention and some great photo's.

It's not in their subscriber only section, so it's free access to read.

IS NDT IMPORTANT ?
The sinking of the "FLARE".

NDTCabin Dec 2000


http://www.ndtcabin.com/articles/flare/flare1.php
Guest_Keith Temperley_*
post Feb 8 2004, 07:51 PM




In its day Vodex was popular due to its excellent operability in all positions and was excellent for one sided root runs. As previous comment it could give Grade 3 properties where other 6013's struggled.
Over the years the manufacture of the electrode has changed location and many would say the operability has changed for the worse.
As you would expect with a popular product other electrodes have been developed to compete with Vodex in all respects. Examples would be Vortic Marine (made by the same company except it is coloured turqoise, some say it is the same electrode).
Others are WRX 453(pink) and WRX 50(turqoise) made originally by Welding Rods in Sheffield who are now owned by Lincoln.
Filarc also produced 43G as mentioned and also Filarc 78.
Other manufacturers did likewise.
Welders will still say the 'pink' rods are the best!
Captain
post Feb 8 2004, 09:42 PM
Joined: 18-Nov 03



Aye, Vodex are the "Daddy" as far as I'm concerned.
Haven't used them in anger for over 20 years, but nothing I've used since comes near their versatility.
I remember as an apprentice working in the dry dock getting shown how to do overhead on the ship's hull using Vodex 1/4"s, (6mm to the young-uns). The guy showing me how to go-on always had a handfull of 10's (3.25mm) with him to flush off my noggins with the same juice! - no grinders about then!
The Vodex could handle almost anything, even when damp or wet!
Technic Al
post Feb 9 2004, 01:44 PM
Joined: 14-Oct 03



I can confirm that the WRX453 and WRX50 were exactly the same except for the colour. I worked on the development. There was some discontent with British Ship Builders about the amount of smoke evolving from the Vodex / VM so Welding Rods Ltd became involved.
It was amazing to hear welders tell you that the Red ones were a lot better than those blue crap (or visa versa).
It still happens, just look how many different products are available today.

Of all the ingredients in an electrode coating Nostalgia is probably the best. These products that were made in the 1930s had to be different to those made today. The rules have changed, QA / Metallurgy has moved forward.
fumesnorter
post Feb 10 2004, 08:15 PM
Joined: 5-Feb 04



look man, all this talk of metallurgy and what have you, whats all that about?

just get the pooders out. The flat bash technicians choice.
Guest_deltheweld_*
post Feb 10 2004, 09:58 PM




QUOTE (Dr Weld @ Dec 10 2002, 10:21 PM)
Vodex is older than I am (and that's saying something!) so I may not have the details 100% - maybe one of the Murex old-stagers will appear and put us right.

It was one of the very early rutile rods invented by a guy (I think his name was Roberts) at Murex Welding Products in the early 1930s. He had two famous rutile rods - Fastex and Vodex. The '-ex' ending is obviously from 'Murex' and I believe that Fastex was considered to be just that - fast for HV welding at a time when rutile rods were just appearing. On the other hand Vodex did the lot - Vertical, Overhead and Downhand - hence V-O-D-ex.

It was a quite amazing design for the time as it was not only easily controlled in all positions but it achieved Grade 3 mechanical properties. All other countries had to use basic covered electrodes to do this. So Vodex was attractive for shipbuilding. In fact Vodex was used for the welds in the Ark Royal that was launched in 1938 and it was used continuously by British shipyards until their relatively recent demise.

Back before WW II, a rival rutile rod quickly appeared from Quaesiarc - Vortic Marine - and these two rods and companies fought it out in the shipyards for years until BOC bought both Quaesiarc and Murex and closed electrode production in Bilston. All electrodes were then made in the Murex factory at Waltham Cross so the rival rods were made down the same lines for years. And I'll tell you a trade secret - Vortic Marine actually became the same formula as Vodex with just a blue dye added to distinguish it.

Unfortunately under ESAB ownership, well actually the British holding company, Charter, the Waltham Cross electrode production has followed the footsteps of all major UK consumable units into oblivion. Vodex is still made by one of the ESAB factories, somewhere in Eastern Europe I think.

I suggest that surviving management by four totally different companies, production on widely varying production plant, and innumerable changes to its raw materials is a real testimony to the original design. It would win my vote for the best stick electrode ever. (Now there's a challenge for all those fans of Fleetweld 5, 56S or whatever - Let's be hearing from you!)

Having worked in the technical dept at wx i can reassert that vodex and vortic marine were one and the same rod. I was enlightened by the history detailed by dr weld. Having worked closely with the developers at waltham cross i can say that I have witnessed changes in the formulation of the rod brought about as a result of depletion of raw material sources and accountants penny pinching some of the small but vital ingrediants making vodex what it WAS. Having worked with the consumable on its international approvals , I can also enlighten end users that the charpy impact properties (CVN) values became worryingly low and it was considered to downgrade vodex to grade 2 (-10) only in the mid 90s.
Having heard the old testimony that vodex isnt the same old rod as it used to be I was pleased to recieve a phonecall from roshythe naval shipyard claiming they had some original 1936 vodex if we were interested. we duly ran some trials and can safely say that the modern day vodex came up trumps in all aspects. This is not to say that the rod did improve over time and peaked, but its nice to see it still remains the topic of debate
Guest_spatterman_*
post Feb 11 2004, 02:58 AM




the vodex/VM saga is an interesting read, however the vortic marine was developed with vodex as its base in the harland and wolff shipyard in co operation with quasi-arc. the subtle differences are the VM runs best and gives best results at the top of its range where as vodex likes mid range. this was done to increase the burn off rate. for years the vm in H & W were of a slightly different formulation to the vm sold elsewhere especially the 4mm which was their main rod.
a rutile rod has also a peculiar smell and there is a small but noticable difference between the Vodex and the Vortic marine. Wrx 50 were never at the game sorry.
jbev
post Feb 11 2004, 08:36 PM
Joined: 7-Nov 03



i seem to be in the minority one this one. i have been in this buisiness for the last 45yrs, give or take, and i have never liked using vodex. the simple reason being, that on the slightest decline it is useless. the slag catches up with you too easily. then its a grinding job. i am working at rosyth at the moment and the pinkies they use now is a much better rod. a good allrounder unlike the vodex. i think there is a bit of nostalgia creeping in on the posts on this one.
regards
jbev
rob5ak
post Feb 16 2004, 06:57 AM
Joined: 30-Dec 03



I remember using both vodex and vortec, If my memory serves me, I think that the slag on vortec was more fluid, also fleetweld 5 with vodex fill and cap, vodex used to burn out well, then nu 5 came in and then progressing to LH fill and cap, then the tig root with LH, in inspection now and never really see 6013 normally 7010, only problem the buggers wont bend,
C.Ellis
post Dec 11 2005, 06:02 PM
Joined: 7-Dec 05





W9Y

HELLO MATE , I think you,ll find theDERBYSHIRE did,nt break in two, the hatch cover or covers op foreward was,nt secured correctly, and during very heavy seas they broke loose and the sea pored into the hatches, filling them up,the crew was unaware of the situation gradualy the bow went under, large waves closed over forcing the bow under , and the ship and all its crew plowed its way to the bottom, really sad about yor school friend.
As regards to vodex i searved my time using them, did,nt think the was a better rod than them utill i was introduced to essab 46 and queen arc, if i was still working(im retirednow) i would,nt use them by choice , but its still down to each individual
regard lads oddy
bob99
post Dec 11 2005, 11:25 PM
Joined: 16-Dec 03



well the discovery team on sky tv found the derbyshire, and found that the ship had indeed broke in two due to a catastrophic design error that was introduced to save money and time, her sister ships were all built with three gigantic r.s.j's running the complete length of the ship, the debyshire's r.s.j's only ran as far as the accomadation block and engine house, thus creating a weak point in so far as when water did get in her hold's her back broke and she went down in minutes, with the loss of all crew, i could go on about it but am tired and p****ed
bricep59
post Feb 8 2007, 08:49 PM
Joined: 31-Jul 05



served my time at swans with vortic's when it became british shipbuilders thats when they brought in wrx50's and the weld quality went downhill fast rolleyes.gif
gazweld
post Feb 8 2007, 09:32 PM
Joined: 23-Jan 05



shield-arc nu-five and fleets were made and only made originally for pipelines. and as for vodex there has never been a better electrode for a herring bone cap it looked the dogs bo--ox.

regards gazweld biggrin.gif

shield-arc nu-five and fleets were made and only made originally for pipelines. and as for vodex there has never been a better electrode for a herring bone cap it looked the dogs bo--ox.

regards gazweld biggrin.gif

PS never seen better.
Captain
post Feb 9 2007, 10:34 AM
Joined: 18-Nov 03



QUOTE(bob99 @ Dec 11 2005, 11:25 PM) [snapback]19193[/snapback]

well the discovery team on sky tv found the derbyshire, and found that the ship had indeed broke in two due to a catastrophic design error that was introduced to save money and time, her sister ships were all built with three gigantic r.s.j's running the complete length of the ship, the debyshire's r.s.j's only ran as far as the accomadation block and engine house, thus creating a weak point in so far as when water did get in her hold's her back broke and she went down in minutes, with the loss of all crew, i could go on about it but am tired and p****ed



I also watched a programme regarding the Derbyshire.

The reason they gave for the sinking was that the vents in the forecastle (poiny end) had covers that were of a light construction and were ripped off by the heavy sea. Thus flooding the bow compartment.

The weight of the flooded bow then forced the rest of the ship under, hold by hold.

Captain.
Go to the top of the page
2 Pages V   1 2 >
Start new topicGo to the top of the page
Click on the Lion to return to the homepage Click on the Lion to return to the homepage