Thank you so much for doing all these. It wasn't until another one of your videos that I understood what was going on with my 6010 backhoe welds were failing. In my head I needed a nice deep weld for the half inch hardened steel, I had no idea it was damaging the original steel.
No problem. Penetration definately makes a weld strong, but using a rod that doesn’t impart hydrogen (7018 properly stored) on potentially higher strength steel is key. Not to mention in that video it’s pretty clear 6010 is weaker than 7018, which definitely holds up in real life. 6010 tends to make a more brittle weld and when exposed to shock loads or vibration it will fail long before 7018 will. If you haven’t seen this video yet: czcams.com/video/wB6NJVGD5Y0/video.htmlsi=J1JbNqI848YMKzze I highly recommend you watch it. It covers a lot about welding higher strength steel, hydrogen embrittlement, and rod ovens. I don’t recall covering it in that video, but many higher strength steels require preheat before welding. Without preheat the weld can crack. I generally weld higher strength steel with a minimum 200 degree preheat. More if I know what steel was used and if it’s required.
I like these tests. A suggestion though, perhaps putting a very thin layer of grease on the base plate the test is being pressed into may eliminate the initial friction and allow more stress directly on the joint.
Good idea. What I really need to do is stop being lazy and either cut a plate out of some ar500 I have laying around or some 304 stainless so the fillet weld slides better on it lol.
The 6010 failed at the heat affected zone and not in either of the weld filler metal or the base metal. It could possibly be a lack of fusion. A sectioning, polishing and etching of both sides of the weld and then look under a microscope, will be needed.
Interresting! I'm waiting for the 6013 video because these electrodes are here as common for universal use as the 6010 in the US I think. Could change the Perspektive of many people of which electrode should be used for different tasks.
6013 and 6011 video will be out tomorrow 😀. Unfortunately I can only test the common American 6013 which is definitely different than what I have seen guys run outside of the US. I have a feeling the other flux blends would result in better results.
Oh Yeah. There are rutil(Titania?) -cellulosic rutil-basic(sodium?) - thin and thicker coated electrodes here. All labled as 6013... But i think the best match for the 6013 common in US is the Thick-coated rutil Elektrode here (but I'm not sure, it's all about the appearence in Videos form US).
@@sebastianleicht 6012 is rutile cellulose rod. It is believed that 6010 is mainly used for welding pipelines. 6010 has poor mechanical properties. 7018 is the king🙂 It's hard to get 6010 in Europe. In local stores you can buy 6012, 6013 and I think 7018
@@wujekradziI found 6010 at boehler - to horrendous prizes. I usually would prefer boehler spezial D 7016 (out of a Vacpac to get rid of the rod oven) when welding S355 or above, oerlikon fincord (RC) for S235 out of position an Oerlikon overcord (RR) for S235 when strength is not the main concern. I have a feeling that we Europeans really like rutile, we seem to literally "stick"😂 to it.
@@sebastianleicht Oh, I didn't know there was a double-coated electrode. Outer rutile cover and inner alkaline cover, ingenious.👍 I have 7016 from Lincoln Electric available online.
Greg, weld dilution! 6010 penetrates deeply so it melts a good portion of the parent metal. the A36 alloyed to the higher strength 6010 deposit adversely effects the strength of the weld. sometimes more penetration is not optimum. The shallow penetration of 7018 and short arc mig are not as susceptible to this phenomenon.
Great thoughts. I will be interested to hear your thoughts on the 6013 vs 7014 video that will be out next week. That also had some “interesting” results lol.
Great thought, I am pretty sure the 6010 would still fail in the same manner. A weld on the opposite side would be under compression and the weld being stressed away from its face would lithely be under the same tension. A two sided fillet weld would improve the overall strength by not allowing the metal to be bent easily towards the face vs a single sided weld. However it wouldn’t likely do much to make 6010 stronger than 7018. I am going to test a 2 sided fillet weld with 6010 and see if it can hold together like 7018, I bet it still won’t.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg this will probably happen, the 6010 weld is brittle and will tear. however, it will withstand more than a one-sided weld or we will be surprised😁
I just uploaded the video a bit earlier. The cliff notes on it is the plate took more force to bend, but once it hit the same bend point as the single sided fillet weld it still broke. My take away is it does transfer more load to the plate and not directly to the weld (mostly because the weld on the backside forces the plate to bend over it). The fact it still broke when 7018 was still holding together still makes it a fail in comparison to 7018. The question is if it would fail in what most people might weld, and that answer is probably not lol.
Do you think the US Forge brand of electrodes at Menards is of ok quality? They're made in the USA and cheaper than the Lincoln, Hobart, KT weld found at Home depot, Tractor supply, and Fleet farm.
Great question. I have ran their 7018, their aluminum rods, their problem solver, and their hard face. I like them overall. I like their 7018 more than harbor freights, and more than Hobarts. I wouldn’t hesitate to buy their rods. Their flux core wire is really solid and I use that all the time.
Second lol. I'm curious if there is a ratio of multiple passes with 6010 where it would perform as good single pass 7018 in the test. 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 or whatever.
Did you bake the 7018 rod to preserve the “low hydrogen” aspect or was it stored in a stick can that wasn’t really moisture tight? (I know I surely won’t bake 7018 rods for my needs)
Unless I have specified it, all rods were out of a sealed package that meets low hydrogen requirements. I generally buy 4lb sealed esab 7018 prime or 10lbs Lincoln sealed containers because I don’t do enough jobs with 7018 that warrant the cost of running a rod oven all the time. I find the 4lb esab packs work great because they are smaller than many others.
@@makingmistakeswithgregThanks for the reply, you are more diligent than most of us. I REALLY appreciate the comparison videos you made. Almost convinced me to get the ESAB, but lots of bad stories on ESABs around. Of course, everyone but Primeweld has horror stories if you look hard enough. I'm an engineer wanting to teach myself to weld. I have some book knowledge about it and AWS stuff but no actual experience. The ESAB's efficiency is a strong selling point.
Esab in general makes pretty good products. One of the issues Esab has (that is somewhat unique to Esab) is they ended up buying/merging with a ton of companies. Because of this their product line has a ton of products all considered Esab yet significantly varied performance. A great example would be the 210em welder that used to be branded as a firepower. It’s an excellent welder, however it doesn’t have power factor correction which causes a lot of issues running it on a generator. They also came out with a rogue 190 MiG welder that I believe does have power factor correction. With all their welders being called esab you might think they are all high end, but they simply aren’t. That’s why miller/hobart exists. That’s why I really take what people say about esab with a grain of salt. Some of their welders are better than others they make, but the same can be said for every welder company out there. I wish there was one company that made the best in all categories but that doesn’t exist. That’s why I buy the best welder for a specific task and I tend not to be brand loyal.
This is why most countries don't use 6010s. They give you more difficult overall control of the arc than a 6013. I once saw a DIY welder made up of 3 transformers in series melt or consume a 6013 like MAG. High penetration and high spatter, but great, overall arc control over a galvanized pipe to rusty rod like MAG. Therefore, 6013s in the right hands can weld pretty good. As long as you don't use inverters. Is 6010 special? I doubt it. Although, welding is weird sometimes.
6010 has certain advantages. 6010 is far easier to weld uphill, downhill, and has 2-3x the penetration vs 6013. It’s also easier to weld a gap shut. 6013 has numerous advantages: it can run on any welder (which many won’t run 6010), it can be run DCEN for reduced penetration on thin material, it’s far better suited overall for thin material, it’s slag is way easier to remove, it is far easier to learn to weld with, and it produces better looking welds with less skill. To me the American 6013 has two main drawbacks, one is being very prone to slag inclusions and the other is it welds uphill worse than most rods. Outside of the US there are different flux blends for 6013 to produce differing results, we simply don’t have those as options, which limits how useful the rod is. From a tensile strength test all 60xx rods will fail the away from face bend test in the video. Not all 70xx rods will pass it. I have a 6013 vs 6011 shootout done the same way as this video coming out shortly, and there are differences for sure.
I purchased some tiny rods the other day from Harbor Freight . It says on the package its excellent for sheet metal. 25-50 amps, but my machine only goes to 50 amps so there is no way to properly test them out. Could you do something on sheet metal with some very tiny rods like what I bought , so I could see the results?
I have used those exact super small rods in a 2 videos directly (and in a few random ones I made stuff). They are quite the challenge to use. If you only have 50amps as the lowest they will be a bit harder, because that will be hot. Flux core wire is infinitely easier than stick on thin material. Part 1:czcams.com/video/k8sU3LtVZwg/video.htmlsi=QioJKuOw8rxq32vn Here is part 2: czcams.com/video/3F6Yqn2UEhY/video.htmlsi=OweUDIU6o71wPFH3
Try using a block of copper on the other side of the metal sheets, it might not work at all but copper should help a bit to sink the heat, plus the metal isn't going to stick to the copper block. That trick is sort of like a last resort to weld thin sheet metal.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg thank you man you always respond with some very helpful information and I appreciate you and your channel. I will always stay subscribed
So a 6010 root and 7018 fill and cap does work, I went down the rabbit hole with that one lol. I tested 3 pass 6010 and 6010 root with 7018 cap with differing results lol. I still rather use 7018 root to cap for most things.
Yes, I was a little bit disappointed in project farms video on testing welders. He is a great guy and has done a ton for finding good products, but the welder episode was not really the best. There are so many more things beyond what was covered that are differences. Higher quality welders have more accurate displays, are more energy efficient, and are generally built better. They also make it easier to make quality welds. I might have to do a project farm weld comparison shootout soon, that could be entertaining 😀.
looks like 15'000psi for the 6010 at 2.25 metric ton, if the base metal is 17'800psi. that 7018 from what i know should have broke at the 6 metric ton mark but the base metal is to soft. use 7018 for driveshafts because over 1040 or 1540 4140 4340 type base metal it does blend up to 78'000psi to 105'000psi, because those bases are 115'000psi to 180'000psi. ... no real benefit in using 7018 for that base metal. "base metal made from recycled sheet metal?"
I am not sure how you are basing your calculations but you are missing a critical component, leverage. The weld is not loaded in a purely straight pull tensile strength test. The weld is essentially being pulled apart being somewhat centered between two levers. 5 tons on the same fillet weld with 5 inch long plates will impart far more force on the weld than 5 tons with 1/2in plates. Without taking the length of the plates into account, and the pressure lost due to the plates bending, it’s impossible to know the true force being put on the weld. The test in specific is more of a real world test to show how what someone might weld would perform. All of the info exists that shows 7018 having significantly more strength/performance (AWS testing criteria) than 6010. This test shows that in practical testing/building things the difference is pretty significant. Not even a 3 pass 6010 can hold plates together like a single pass 7018 can. 7018 far exceeds the strength of 6010 in all practical tests with the exception of a single pass single side fillet weld bent towards the face. The simple reason for that would be lack of penetration, which could be made up for by a bigger weld.
i need a good rod for a medium carbon steel that does well under pressure the type that well the weld being preesed beteen two steel jaws for a 7 ton vice for bending steel i got 6011 6012 6013 7014 7010 ac 7018 8018 and well of course two bareld of hundred punds of 7024 y uh ship repair and rescue
Honestly my thoughts would be 309 or 312 stainless with tig. Medium carbon is susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement so low hydrogen rods should be used if stick welded. The base material will really dictate what specific rod to use (8018 or higher). Honestly 7018 would probably work. If it’s dissimilar metals 312 and 309 rods are the way to go, however I would test them on similar metals first.
Yeah, gotta love 7018, bu I expected more from the 6010 - I didnt anticipate the brittleness. Very interesting result Greg, many thanks.
Just wait until you see the 7014 vs 6013 video, that had some surprises lol.
If there is marker on the sample or sticky notes, that will be great. Whenever jumping in the any part of the video, can still keep track of the weld.
Thank you so much for doing all these. It wasn't until another one of your videos that I understood what was going on with my 6010 backhoe welds were failing. In my head I needed a nice deep weld for the half inch hardened steel, I had no idea it was damaging the original steel.
No problem. Penetration definately makes a weld strong, but using a rod that doesn’t impart hydrogen (7018 properly stored) on potentially higher strength steel is key. Not to mention in that video it’s pretty clear 6010 is weaker than 7018, which definitely holds up in real life. 6010 tends to make a more brittle weld and when exposed to shock loads or vibration it will fail long before 7018 will.
If you haven’t seen this video yet: czcams.com/video/wB6NJVGD5Y0/video.htmlsi=J1JbNqI848YMKzze I highly recommend you watch it. It covers a lot about welding higher strength steel, hydrogen embrittlement, and rod ovens. I don’t recall covering it in that video, but many higher strength steels require preheat before welding. Without preheat the weld can crack. I generally weld higher strength steel with a minimum 200 degree preheat. More if I know what steel was used and if it’s required.
I like these tests.
A suggestion though, perhaps putting a very thin layer of grease on the base plate the test is being pressed into may eliminate the initial friction and allow more stress directly on the joint.
Good idea. What I really need to do is stop being lazy and either cut a plate out of some ar500 I have laying around or some 304 stainless so the fillet weld slides better on it lol.
Agree on the elongation specs being unexpected.
Thank you!
No problem 👍
The 6010 failed at the heat affected zone and not in either of the weld filler metal or the base metal. It could possibly be a lack of fusion. A sectioning, polishing and etching of both sides of the weld and then look under a microscope, will be needed.
Good content! 6010/11 for the root and 7018 multi passes for the goodness and the chooch for the win.
A video on that will be out shortly, where I compare a 3 pass 6010 and a 3 pass 6010 root/7018 2 bead cap. The difference is night and day lol.
Interresting! I'm waiting for the 6013 video because these electrodes are here as common for universal use as the 6010 in the US I think. Could change the Perspektive of many people of which electrode should be used for different tasks.
6013 and 6011 video will be out tomorrow 😀. Unfortunately I can only test the common American 6013 which is definitely different than what I have seen guys run outside of the US. I have a feeling the other flux blends would result in better results.
Oh Yeah. There are rutil(Titania?) -cellulosic rutil-basic(sodium?) - thin and thicker coated electrodes here. All labled as 6013... But i think the best match for the 6013 common in US is the Thick-coated rutil Elektrode here (but I'm not sure, it's all about the appearence in Videos form US).
@@sebastianleicht 6012 is rutile cellulose rod. It is believed that 6010 is mainly used for welding pipelines. 6010 has poor mechanical properties. 7018 is the king🙂 It's hard to get 6010 in Europe. In local stores you can buy 6012, 6013 and I think 7018
@@wujekradziI found 6010 at boehler - to horrendous prizes. I usually would prefer boehler spezial D 7016 (out of a Vacpac to get rid of the rod oven) when welding S355 or above, oerlikon fincord (RC) for S235 out of position an Oerlikon overcord (RR) for S235 when strength is not the main concern. I have a feeling that we Europeans really like rutile, we seem to literally "stick"😂 to it.
@@sebastianleicht Oh, I didn't know there was a double-coated electrode. Outer rutile cover and inner alkaline cover, ingenious.👍 I have 7016 from Lincoln Electric available online.
Awesome work. That's great info there.
I have a bunch more videos rolling out in the next week. Everything from multi pass 6010 to 7014 vs 6013. Lots of surprising results lol.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg can't wait. But next time have your cider beer. 😉 😆
Well I run 6011 for the man pass then use 6013 on top of that now this would be a video you could do see if it's stronger then 7018
I did test 6013 single pass vs 6011, that will be out tomorrow 😀.
Ok thanks
Greg, weld dilution! 6010 penetrates deeply so it melts a good portion of the parent metal. the A36 alloyed to the higher strength 6010 deposit adversely effects the strength of the weld. sometimes more penetration is not optimum. The shallow penetration of 7018 and short arc mig are not as susceptible to this phenomenon.
Great thoughts. I will be interested to hear your thoughts on the 6013 vs 7014 video that will be out next week. That also had some “interesting” results lol.
I will comment if I have anything germane to contribute.@@makingmistakeswithgreg
shouldn't it be welded on both sides of the T joint ?🤔
Great thought, I am pretty sure the 6010 would still fail in the same manner. A weld on the opposite side would be under compression and the weld being stressed away from its face would lithely be under the same tension. A two sided fillet weld would improve the overall strength by not allowing the metal to be bent easily towards the face vs a single sided weld. However it wouldn’t likely do much to make 6010 stronger than 7018. I am going to test a 2 sided fillet weld with 6010 and see if it can hold together like 7018, I bet it still won’t.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg this will probably happen, the 6010 weld is brittle and will tear. however, it will withstand more than a one-sided weld or we will be surprised😁
I just uploaded the video a bit earlier. The cliff notes on it is the plate took more force to bend, but once it hit the same bend point as the single sided fillet weld it still broke. My take away is it does transfer more load to the plate and not directly to the weld (mostly because the weld on the backside forces the plate to bend over it). The fact it still broke when 7018 was still holding together still makes it a fail in comparison to 7018. The question is if it would fail in what most people might weld, and that answer is probably not lol.
Do you think the US Forge brand of electrodes at Menards is of ok quality? They're made in the USA and cheaper than the Lincoln, Hobart, KT weld found at Home depot, Tractor supply, and Fleet farm.
Great question. I have ran their 7018, their aluminum rods, their problem solver, and their hard face. I like them overall. I like their 7018 more than harbor freights, and more than Hobarts. I wouldn’t hesitate to buy their rods. Their flux core wire is really solid and I use that all the time.
Second lol. I'm curious if there is a ratio of multiple passes with 6010 where it would perform as good single pass 7018 in the test. 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 or whatever.
Great question, and I wondered the same thing. That video will be out Monday, and it’s a eye opener lol.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg I can't wait!
Did you bake the 7018 rod to preserve the “low hydrogen” aspect or was it stored in a stick can that wasn’t really moisture tight? (I know I surely won’t bake 7018 rods for my needs)
Unless I have specified it, all rods were out of a sealed package that meets low hydrogen requirements. I generally buy 4lb sealed esab 7018 prime or 10lbs Lincoln sealed containers because I don’t do enough jobs with 7018 that warrant the cost of running a rod oven all the time. I find the 4lb esab packs work great because they are smaller than many others.
@@makingmistakeswithgregThanks for the reply, you are more diligent than most of us. I REALLY appreciate the comparison videos you made. Almost convinced me to get the ESAB, but lots of bad stories on ESABs around. Of course, everyone but Primeweld has horror stories if you look hard enough.
I'm an engineer wanting to teach myself to weld. I have some book knowledge about it and AWS stuff but no actual experience. The ESAB's efficiency is a strong selling point.
Esab in general makes pretty good products. One of the issues Esab has (that is somewhat unique to Esab) is they ended up buying/merging with a ton of companies. Because of this their product line has a ton of products all considered Esab yet significantly varied performance. A great example would be the 210em welder that used to be branded as a firepower. It’s an excellent welder, however it doesn’t have power factor correction which causes a lot of issues running it on a generator. They also came out with a rogue 190 MiG welder that I believe does have power factor correction. With all their welders being called esab you might think they are all high end, but they simply aren’t. That’s why miller/hobart exists.
That’s why I really take what people say about esab with a grain of salt. Some of their welders are better than others they make, but the same can be said for every welder company out there. I wish there was one company that made the best in all categories but that doesn’t exist. That’s why I buy the best welder for a specific task and I tend not to be brand loyal.
This is why most countries don't use 6010s. They give you more difficult overall control of the arc than a 6013.
I once saw a DIY welder made up of 3 transformers in series melt or consume a 6013 like MAG. High penetration and high spatter, but great, overall arc control over a galvanized pipe to rusty rod like MAG. Therefore, 6013s in the right hands can weld pretty good. As long as you don't use inverters.
Is 6010 special? I doubt it. Although, welding is weird sometimes.
6010 has certain advantages. 6010 is far easier to weld uphill, downhill, and has 2-3x the penetration vs 6013. It’s also easier to weld a gap shut. 6013 has numerous advantages: it can run on any welder (which many won’t run 6010), it can be run DCEN for reduced penetration on thin material, it’s far better suited overall for thin material, it’s slag is way easier to remove, it is far easier to learn to weld with, and it produces better looking welds with less skill. To me the American 6013 has two main drawbacks, one is being very prone to slag inclusions and the other is it welds uphill worse than most rods. Outside of the US there are different flux blends for 6013 to produce differing results, we simply don’t have those as options, which limits how useful the rod is. From a tensile strength test all 60xx rods will fail the away from face bend test in the video. Not all 70xx rods will pass it. I have a 6013 vs 6011 shootout done the same way as this video coming out shortly, and there are differences for sure.
❤❤❤❤
I purchased some tiny rods the other day from Harbor Freight . It says on the package its excellent for sheet metal. 25-50 amps, but my machine only goes to 50 amps so there is no way to properly test them out. Could you do something on sheet metal with some very tiny rods like what I bought , so I could see the results?
I have used those exact super small rods in a 2 videos directly (and in a few random ones I made stuff). They are quite the challenge to use. If you only have 50amps as the lowest they will be a bit harder, because that will be hot. Flux core wire is infinitely easier than stick on thin material.
Part 1:czcams.com/video/k8sU3LtVZwg/video.htmlsi=QioJKuOw8rxq32vn
Here is part 2: czcams.com/video/3F6Yqn2UEhY/video.htmlsi=OweUDIU6o71wPFH3
Try using a block of copper on the other side of the metal sheets, it might not work at all but copper should help a bit to sink the heat, plus the metal isn't going to stick to the copper block.
That trick is sort of like a last resort to weld thin sheet metal.
@@makingmistakeswithgreg thank you man you always respond with some very helpful information and I appreciate you and your channel. I will always stay subscribed
Hope all those pipe welders turned equipment welders who insist on using 60xx for root passes!!
So a 6010 root and 7018 fill and cap does work, I went down the rabbit hole with that one lol. I tested 3 pass 6010 and 6010 root with 7018 cap with differing results lol. I still rather use 7018 root to cap for most things.
Take a look at "Project Farm" and his welding and bend tests. I think they quenched the coupons. Lame
Yes, I was a little bit disappointed in project farms video on testing welders. He is a great guy and has done a ton for finding good products, but the welder episode was not really the best. There are so many more things beyond what was covered that are differences. Higher quality welders have more accurate displays, are more energy efficient, and are generally built better. They also make it easier to make quality welds. I might have to do a project farm weld comparison shootout soon, that could be entertaining 😀.
Wow, would have lost that bet.
looks like 15'000psi for the 6010 at 2.25 metric ton, if the base metal is 17'800psi. that 7018 from what i know should have broke at the 6 metric ton mark but the base metal is to soft. use 7018 for driveshafts because over 1040 or 1540 4140 4340 type base metal it does blend up to 78'000psi to 105'000psi, because those bases are 115'000psi to 180'000psi. ... no real benefit in using 7018 for that base metal. "base metal made from recycled sheet metal?"
would see up to 11 metric tons in the same test using 7018 on an appropriate base metal.
I am not sure how you are basing your calculations but you are missing a critical component, leverage. The weld is not loaded in a purely straight pull tensile strength test. The weld is essentially being pulled apart being somewhat centered between two levers. 5 tons on the same fillet weld with 5 inch long plates will impart far more force on the weld than 5 tons with 1/2in plates. Without taking the length of the plates into account, and the pressure lost due to the plates bending, it’s impossible to know the true force being put on the weld. The test in specific is more of a real world test to show how what someone might weld would perform. All of the info exists that shows 7018 having significantly more strength/performance (AWS testing criteria) than 6010. This test shows that in practical testing/building things the difference is pretty significant. Not even a 3 pass 6010 can hold plates together like a single pass 7018 can.
7018 far exceeds the strength of 6010 in all practical tests with the exception of a single pass single side fillet weld bent towards the face. The simple reason for that would be lack of penetration, which could be made up for by a bigger weld.
first twice in a row today wow
If I could give you a key to the 🏰 castle I would lol. Congrats on being first 😀
But if u do it Right, then that mean's you've aLready Learned It.........haa
i need a good rod for a medium carbon steel that does well under pressure the type that well the weld being preesed beteen two steel jaws for a 7 ton vice for bending steel i got 6011 6012 6013 7014 7010 ac 7018 8018 and well of course two bareld of hundred punds of 7024 y uh ship repair and rescue
Honestly my thoughts would be 309 or 312 stainless with tig. Medium carbon is susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement so low hydrogen rods should be used if stick welded. The base material will really dictate what specific rod to use (8018 or higher). Honestly 7018 would probably work. If it’s dissimilar metals 312 and 309 rods are the way to go, however I would test them on similar metals first.
Medium carbon which is most likely CrV or 4140.
@@luciusirving5926 thanks comrade i will have to ask the navy if they have some
@@makingmistakeswithgreg thanks comrade i will probly do some testing on some spare steel with those recommedion