CHAPTER 5 EFFECT OF WELDING PARAMETERS ON BEAD GEOMETRY AND FLUX CONSUMPTION

5.1

Introduction The need to achieve higher productivity and stringent safety requirement have

put growing emphasis on the use of automated welding systems, submerged arc welding is employed in semiautomatic or automatic mode in industry (Brien, 1978). In such automated applications, a precise means of selection of the process variables and control of weld bead shape has become essential because mechanical strength of weld is influenced not only by the composition of the metal, but also by the weld bead shape (Hould, 1989). The acceptable weld bead shape depends on factors such as line power which is the heat energy supplied by an arc to the base plate per unit length of weld, welding speed, joint preparation, etc. To do these precise relationships between the process parameters and the bead parameters controlling the bead shape are to be established. This may be achieved by the development of mathematical expressions, which can be fed into a computer, relating the weld bead dimensions to the important process control variables affecting these dimensions. Also, optimization of the process parameters to control and obtain the required shape and quality of weld beads is possible with these expressions. A macrophotograph of a real weld bead is shown in Fig.5.1 (A). Cross section of an ideal weld bead showing the bead geometry is given in Fig.5.1 (B).

101

(a)

(b)

Fig.5.1 (a) Photograph of a real weld bead (b) Cross-section of an ideal weld bead Where P: height of penetration (mm); R: height of reinforcement (mm); W: width of the bead (mm); WPSF: penetration shape factor =W/P; WRFF: reinforcement form factor = W/R.

In the present study, an attempt has been made to investigate the effect of open circuit voltage, welding current, welding speed and basicity index on bead geometry and shape relationships (bead width, weld penetration and height of reinforcement, weld penetration shape factor and weld reinforcement form factor), using developed fluxes, through experiments based on design matrix. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique has been adopted to check the level and degree of the direct or interactive effect of welding current, voltage, welding speed and flux basicity index on features of bead geometry and shape relationship. Response surface methodology has been applied to derive mathematical models that correspond to the welding phenomena using developed fluxes. Predictive equations have been used to represent graphically

102

the effects of process parameters on various responses. No work so far has been performed which considers the four important process parameter used in this study using fluxes developed from waste flux dust.

5.2

Operating Variables Control of the operating variables in submerged arc welding is essential if high

production rates and the welds of good quality are to be obtained. The following are the important variables: (i) Welding amperage (ii) Welding voltage (iii) Welding speed (iv) Electrode size (v) Electrode work angle (vi) Electrode stick-out (vii) Depth of flux (viii) Polarity (ix) Melting rate (x) Flux basicity index

5.2.1 Welding amperage Welding current is the most influential parameter because it affects bead shape, controls the rate at which electrode is melted and therefore also controls the deposition
103

rate, heat affected zone, the depth of penetration, and the amount of base metal melted. Penetration and reinforcement increase with the increase in welding current. If the current is too high at a given welding speed, the depth of fusion or penetration will also be too high so that the resulting weld may tend to melt through the metal being joined. High current also leads to waste of electrodes in the form of excessive reinforcement and produces digging arc and undercut. This overwelding increases weld shrinkage and causes greater distortion. Bead width increases with welding current until a critical value is reached and then starts decreasing if the polarity used is DCEP. When DCEN polarity is employed bead width increases with the increase in current for entire range (McGlone, 1982). For the same flux, heat affected zone also increases with the increase in welding current (Kaushal and Gupta, 1988). If the current is too low, inadequate penetration or incomplete fusion may result. Too low current also leads to unstable arc, inadequate penetration and overlapping.

5.2.2 Welding voltage Welding voltage varies with the length of the arc between the electrode and molten weld metal. With the increase in arc length, the arc voltage increases because lengthening of the arc exposes more of the arc column to the cool boundary of the arc. Also, the arc column continuously loses the charge carriers by radial migration to the cool boundary of the arc and therefore, imposing a greater requirement of potential for

104

maintaining appropriate charge carriers between the electrode and weld plate (Weiman, 1981). The voltage principally determines the shape of the weld bead cross section and its external appearance. Increasing the welding voltage with constant current and welding speed produces flatter, wider, less penetrated weld beads and tends to reduce the porosity caused by rust or scale on steel. Higher voltage also bridges an excessive root opening when fit-up is poor. Increase in arc voltage also increases the size of droplets and hence decreases the number of droplets. The time of the movement of droplet transfer also increases. Further increase in voltage increases the possibility of breaking the arc and disrupting the normal welding process. Increase in voltage also enhances flux consumption which increases pick up or loss of the alloying elements and therefore affects the mechanical and metallurgical properties of the weld metal (Gupta and Gupta, 1988; Pandey and Mohan, 2003). Excessively high voltage produces a wide bead shape that is subject to cracking, increases undercut and creates difficulty in removing slag. Lowering the voltage produces stiffer arc, which improves penetration in a deep weld groove and resists arc blow. An excessively low voltage produces a narrow bead and causes difficult slag removal along the bead edges.

5.2.3 Welding speed Welding speed is the linear rate at which an arc is moved along the weld joint. With any combination of welding voltage and welding current, the effect of changing
105

the welding speed confirms to a general pattern. If the welding speed is increased, power or heat input per unit length of weld is decreased and less filler metal is applied per unit length of the weld, resulting in less weld reinforcement. Thus, the weld bead becomes smaller. Weld penetration is affected more by welding speed than any variable other than current. This is true except for excessively slow speeds when the molten weld pool is beneath the welding electrode. Then the penetrating force of the arc is cushioned by the molten pool. Excessive speed any cause undercutting, porosity, arc blow, uneven bead shape, cracking and higher slag inclusion in the weld metal. Higher welding speed results in less heat affected zone and finer grains (Aksoy et al.1999). Within limits, welding speed can be adjusted to control weld size and penetration. Relatively slow welding speed provides time for gases to escape from the molten metal, thus reducing porosity. An excessive slow speed produces a convex bead shape which is subject to cracking and excessive arc exposure which is uncomfortable for the operator. Too low welding speed may also result in a large molten pool that flows around the arc, resulting in rough bead, slag inclusions and burn through of the weld plate. Jackson and Shrubsa (1953) reported that the welding speed did not affect the metal deposition rate significantly.

5.2.4 Electrode size Electrode size affects the weld bead shape and the depth of penetration at fixed current. Electrode size also influences the deposition rate. At any given current, a small diameter electrode will have a higher current density and a higher deposition rate than
106

a larger electrode. However, a larger diameter electrode can carry more current than a smaller electrode, and produce a higher deposition rate at higher amperage. For the same values of current, arc voltage and welding speed, an increase in electrode diameter results in a slight increase in the spread of the bead (Cornu, 1988).

5.2.5 Electrode work angle The electrode may be held perpendicular to the workpiece or, tilted forward or backward with respect to the weld pool. As the arc stream tends to align itself along the axis of the electrode, the weld pool shape is different in each case, and so is the shape of the weld bead. It is observed that in forehand welding, molten metal flows under the arc, the depth of penetration and reinforcement are reduced while the width of the weld increases, whereas in backhand welding the pressure of the arc scoops the molten metal from beneath the arc, the depth of penetration and height of reinforcement increases while the width of the weld is reduced (Nadkarni, 1988). The electrode in perpendicular position results in bead geometry in between those obtained in the above two cases.

5.2.6 Electrode stick-out and melting rate The distance between the current pick-up tip and the arc root, called electrode stick out, has a considerable effect on the weld bead geometry. Normally the distance between the contact tip and the work is 25-40 mm.

107

The increase in melting rate of the electrode as a result of increase in electrode stickout is proportionate to the product of current density and stick-out. The electrode melting rate in kg/min is given by the relationship,
1 d2 IL 25.4 0.35 + + 2.08 107 1000 645 d2
1.22

Electrode melting rate =

(5.1)

Where d, L and I are the diameter of the electrode, electrode stick-out in mm and current density respectively. Chandel et al. (1997) reported that the melting rate of the electrode increased with the increase in the stick out. This effect is particularly more significant with smaller diameter electrode since electrode heating is caused by the electrode electric resistance, which increases with the decrease in the electrode diameter. The depth of penetration decreases with the increase in electrode stick-out. This factor needs to be given due consideration where deeper penetration is required. Gunaraj and Murugan (1999) reported that heat affected zone decreased with the increase in stick- out. Janez (2000) reported that a mutual influence of the arcs was quite strong and consequently melting rate was high in twin-wire welding. He further reported that arc energy melted more filler material per wire in twin-wire welding than in single-wire welding and with the same welding parameters, this required higher wire feed speed in twin-wire welding.

108

5.2.7 Depth of flux The depth of the layer of the granular flux influences the appearance and soundness of the finished weld as well as welding action. If the granular flux layer is too shallow, the arc will not be entirely submerged in flux. Flashing and spattering will occur. Apart from injurious to the eyes of the operator, this may lead to poor appearance of weld and it may also be porous. If the flux layer is too thick, the arc will be too confined and a rough ropelike appearing weld will result and the weld bead may be narrow and humped. The gases generated during welding may not be able to escape, and the surface of the molten weld metal becomes irregularly distorted. Optimum depth of flux can be established by slowly increasing the flow of flux until the welding arc is submerged and flashing no longer occurs. The gases will then puff up quietly around the electrode, sometimes igniting.

5.2.8 Polarity The amount of heat generated at the electrode and work piece, deposition rate, bead geometry and mechanical properties are affected by polarity. The change in polarity from DCEP to DCEN changes the amount of heat generated at electrode and the work piece and, hence the metal depositing rate, weld bead geometry and mechanical properties of the weld metal (Robinson, 1983). Little (1976) observed that the two third of the total heat was generated at the positive electrode and the one third of the total heat was generated at the negative electrode.

109

It has been reported by Renwick et al. (1976) that DCEN polarity produced higher deposition rate and reinforcement than with DCEP polarity in submerged arc welding. Ghosh et al. (1991) observed high yield strength, ultimate tensile strength and hardness of the weld metal with DCEN polarity as compared to DCEP polarity.

5.2.10 Flux basicity index Flux basicity index also influences the penetration (Gupta and Gupta, 1988). In general higher penetration is obtained with the use of low basicity index fluxes due to high viscosity which enhances the tendency of heat concentration in the narrow zone. Patchett and Dancy (1980) reported that the penetration increased with the increase in slag viscosity and surface tension. They also observed that an increase in viscosity, arc stability and surface tension resulted in deeper penetration.

5.3

Weld Bead Shape The weld bead shape is an indication of bead geometry which affects the load

carrying capacity of the weldments (Baach et al., 1981., Samiti, 1986) and number of passes needed to fill the groove of a joint. The bead geometry is specified by bead width, reinforcement, penetration, penetration shape factor and reinforcement form factor. 5.3.1 Weld bead width The weld bead width is the maximum width of the weld metal deposited. It influences the flux consumption rate and chemistry of the weld metal. Weld bead
110

width is directly proportional to arc current, welding voltage and electrode diameter and indirectly proportional to the welding speed. The bead width increases with an increase in electrode diameter (McGlone, 1982). Gupta and Arora (1991) observed that bead width increased with an increase in current until it reaches a critical value and then it decreases with an increase in welding current. Yang et al. (1992) investigated that the bead width was not affected significantly by the types of power source (constant voltage or constant current) when an acidic fused flux was used. However, using a basic fused flux with constant current operation showed somewhat larger bead width than with welds laid using acidic fused flux.

5.3.2 Penetration Weld bead penetration is the maximum distance between the base plate top surface and depth to which the fusion has taken place. The more the penetration, the less is the number of welding passes required to fill the weld joint which consequently results in higher production rate. It is observed that the penetration is influenced by welding current, polarity, arc travel speed, electrode stick-out, basicity index and physical properties of the flux. McGlone (1982) observed that penetration was directly proportional to welding current. He also observed that the deepest penetration was achieved when DCEP polarity was used and the least with DCEN polarity. He further investigated that the penetration was indirectly proportional to welding speed and electrode diameter. Penetration decreases with the increase in welding speed because the time during which the arc force is allowed to penetrate into the materials surface
111

decreases. The penetration decreases with the increase in electrode diameter due to decrease in current density (Cornu, 1988). Chandel et al. (1987) reported that the penetration increased with the decrease in electrode extension and included angle of the joint. Caddle (1967) reported that the penetration increased with a decrease in thermal conductivity of the weld metal.

5.3.3 Reinforcement Reinforcement is the maximum distance between the base metal level and the top point of the deposited metal. Reinforcement is the crown height of the weld bead from the base plate. It affects the strength of the weld joint and welding wire consumption rate. It increases with the increase in welding wire feed rate irrespective of the welding current and the type of polarity employed (Gunaraj and Murugan 1999). It is indirectly proportional to welding voltage, welding speed and electrode diameter. The reinforcement is more with DCEN polarity and less with DCEP polarity. Increase of reinforcement with an increase of welding filler wire feed rate is mainly due to the larger amount of metal deposited per unit length. The decrease of reinforcement with the increase in voltage is due to increase in weld bead width.

5.3.4 Weld penetration shape factor (WPSF) and weld reinforcement form factor (WRFF) WPSF and WRFF are also called as coefficients of internal shape and external shape respectively. The ratio of bead width to penetration and bead width to
112

reinforcement are termed as Weld Penetration Shape Factor (WPSF) and Weld Reinforcement Form Factor (WRFF) respectively. The smoothness of the weld increases with the increase in WRFF (Cornu, 1988). Mandotov (1969) and Srihari (1992) reported that WPSF and WRFF increased with an increase in voltage.

5.4

Flux Consumption Flux consumption influences the economic aspects of welding and chemical

composition of the weld metal. Flux consumption depends upon the welding parameters such as welding current, arc voltage, welding speed, polarity and type of flux. Flux consumption increases with the increase in arc voltage and decrease in current. The electrode extension has no significant effect on flux consumption (Gupta and Gupta, 1988). Agglomerated fluxes have low flux consumption as compared to fused fluxes (Vishvanath, 1982).

5.5

Experimental Procedure The machine employed for experimentation was Ador TORNADO-800. The

composition of the welding wire (4mm diameter) and base plate are shown in Table 5.1. The mild steel plates were cleaned chemically and mechanically to remove the oxide layer and any other source of hydrogen. Bead on plate welds were laid on the plates of 200x75x12 mm size, using the developed fluxes. The ranges of the parameters and their level have already been reported in Table 3.2 and the parameters were varied as per the design matrix shown in Table 3.3. The basis for selection of the range and the level of
113

the parameters has already been discussed in Chapter-3. The experiments were performed in random manner to avoid any systematic error. After welding, transverse sections of the weld beads were cut from the middle portions of the plates as specimens. These specimens were prepared by standard metallurgical polishing methods. The properly polished specimens were etched with a 2% Nital solution for about 30 seconds, which was followed by investigation and analysis. For each of the bead-on-plate specimens, the important dimensions of the weld bead geometry were measured. The average response parameters (bead width, penetration, reinforcement, weld penetration shape factor and weld reinforcement form factor) and flux consumption were recorded by conducting experiments as per design matrix (Table 4.2) are shown in Table-5.2. With the help of these observed responses, models were developed.

Table 5.1 Chemical composition of base plate and electrode wire Element (%) Base Plate Electrode Wire

C 0.23 0.069

Mn 0.42 1.86

Si 0.127 0.1

S 0.039 0.028

P 0.056 0.023

Ni 0.065 Nil

Cr 0.113 Nil

114

Table 5.2 Observed values of bead parameters and flux consumption

Expt. W Run Bead Width No. (mm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17.76 17.24 17.81 15.192 16.79 17.48 17.2 17.215 17.54 16.345 16.792 19.475 15.812 16.99 17.515

P Penetration (mm) 6.545 7.349 6.735 6.671 10.455 6.389 6.17 8.56 6.66 7.115 6.4 7.53 8.75 6.525 11.323

Response factors R WPSF Reinforcement (mm) 3.201 4.043 3.345 2.955 6.025 2.382 3.245 3.55 2.94 4.58 3.59 2.544 4.392 3.01 4.191 2.71352 2.3459 2.64439 2.27732 1.60593 2.73595 2.78768 2.0111 2.63363 2.29726 2.62375 2.58632 1.80709 2.60383 1.54685

WRFF

5.54827 4.26416 5.32436 5.14112 2.78672 7.33837 5.30046 4.8493 5.96599 3.56878 4.67744 7.65527 3.60018 5.64452 4.17919

F Flux Consumption (gms.) n 50 (gms) 37.02 45.77 40.29 21.88 48.34 43.42 49.53 50.83 40.39 49.08 60.24 32.44 44 26.09

115

Table 5.2 Observed values of bead parameters and flux consumption (Continued) Response factors R WPSF Reinforcement (mm) 2.899 3.22 3.135 3.165 4.875 3.192 3.45 4.045 3.565 3.49 4.906 3.205 3.475 4.005 2.56356 2.0447 2.26282 2.45455 1.92754 2.66136 2.47033 2.09235 2.92418 2.21495 1.61743 2.54358 2.74763 2.0104

Expt. Run No. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

W Bead Width (mm) 18.855 18.985 17.865 16.2 15.295 16.873 19.355 15.18 20.44 15.56 17.905 17.042 17.365 16.63

P Penetration (mm) 7.355 9.285 7.895 6.6 7.935 6.34 7.835 7.255 6.99 7.025 11.07 6.7 6.32 8.272

WRFF

6.50397 5.89596 5.69856 5.11848 3.13744 5.28603 5.61014 3.75278 5.73352 4.45845 3.64961 5.31732 4.99712 4.15231

F Flux Consumption (gms.) n 52 (gms) 52.38 39.46 38.28 31.25 54.23 50.93 30.26 65 32.86 37.69 49.79 54.61 35.89

116

5.6

Development of Model Response surface methodologys Box-Bohnken design consisting of twenty

nine experiments was conducted to develop model showing the relationships between the response Y (bead width, penetration, reinforcement, weld penetration shape factor and weld reinforcement form factor) and the welding parameters (open circuit voltage A, welding current B, welding speed C and flux basicity index D) for coded values of 1 to +1 for each of the welding parameters. To test the goodness of the fit and validation of the developed models, adequacy was determined by the analysis of variance technique (ANOVA). The analysis of variance test was performed to evaluate the statistical significance of the fitted quadratic models and factors involved therein for response factors W, P, R, WPSF,WRFF and flux consumption (F). In addition to this, the goodness of fit of the fitted quadratic model was also evaluated through lack of fit test. The "Prob > F" for all these tests was found in excess of 0.05, implying that the lack of fit is insignificant. The results obtained are summarized in Tables-5.3 to 5.8. All the fitted models are found to be significant, since for all the responses, the Prob. > F are observed to be less than 0.0001. In other words, there is only a 0.01% chance that "Model F-Value" larger than those reported in Tables-5.3 to 5.8 could occur due to noise. The values of "Prob > F" less than 0.05 observed for some factors involved in model equations, indicate that the contribution of these terms to the model is significant. On the other hand, the value of "Prob > F" greater than 0.10 indicates that the impact of model terms are not significant.
117

Table 5.3 ANOVA results for bead width (W) Source Model A B C D A2 B2 C
2

Sum of Squares 45.46 12.79 0.73 9.39 0.18 0.25 1.86 0.56 3.57 0.46 1.44 0.27 0.34 0.065 0.019 1.53 0.88 0.65 46.99

DF 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 4 28

Mean Square 3.25 12.79 0.73 9.39 0.18 0.25 1.86 0.56 3.57 0.46 1.44 0.27 0.34 0.065 0.019 0.11 0.088 0.16

F Value 29.75 117.19 6.69 86.03 1.64 2.33 17.03 5.09 32.66 4.24 13.21 2.43 3.07 0.60 00.17

Prob. > F <0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0216 < 0.0001 0.2213 0.1493 0.0010 0.0405 < 0.0001 0.0587 0.0027 0.1410 0.1016 0.4522 0.6851

Remarks significant significant significant significant not significant not significant significant significant signific ant not significant significant not significant not significant not significant not significant

D2 AB AC AD BC BD CD Residual Lack of Fit Pure Error Cor Total

0.54

0.8037

not significant

118

Table 5.4 ANOVA results for penetration (P) Source Model A B C D A2 B2 C2 D2 AB AC AD BC BD CD Residual Lack of Fit Pure Error Cor Total Sum of Squares 54.66 0.76 7.51 4.10 39.50 0.68 0.53 0.21 5.10 2.5E003 0.16 0.054 1.34 1.64 1.35 1.12 0.88 0.23 55.77 Mean Square 3.90 0.76 7.51 4.10 39.50 0.68 0.53 0.21 5.10 2.5E003 0.16 0.05 1.34 1.64 1.351243 0.08 0.088 0.059 1.50 0.3692 not significant F Value 48.99 9.57 94.26 51.47 495.75 8.49 6.70 2.62 64.02 0.031 1.96 0.68 16.76 20.54 16.96

DF 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 4 28

Prob. > F < 0.0001 0.0079 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0113 0.0215 0.1276 < 0.0001 0.8619 0.1835 0.4244 0.0011 0.0005 0.0010

Remarks significant significant significant significant significant significant significant not significant significant not significant not significant not significant significant significant significant

119

Table 5.5 ANOVA results for reinforcement (R) Source Model A B C D A

2

Sum of Squares 16.67 6.95 0.3 0.47 4.49 1.03 0.14 0.33 3.17 0.71 6.56E003 1.19 4.556E003 1.16E004 1.020E003 0.60 0.38 0.22 17.27

DF 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 4 28

Mean Square 1.19 6.95 0.3 0.47 4.49 1.03 0.14 0.33 3.17 0.71 6.56E003 1.2 4.556E003 1.16E004 1.020E003 0.043 0.038 0.055

F Value 27.64 161.30 7.05 10.92 104.22 23.90 3.21 7.57 73.52 16.52 0.15 27.71 0.11 2.693E003 0.024

Prob. > F < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0188 0.0052 < 0.0001 0.0002 0.0947 0.0156 < 0.0001 0.0012 0.7022 0.0001 0.7498 0.9593 0.8799

Remarks significant significant significant significant significant significant not significant significant significant significant not significant significant not significant not significant not significant not significant

B2 C2 D2 AB AC AD BC BD CD Residual Lack of Fit Pure Error Cor Total

0.69

0.7128

120

Table 5.6 ANOVA results for weld penetration shape factor (WPSF) Source Model A B C 6.806E003 D A2 B2 C2 D
2

Sum of Squares 4.02 0.42 0.31

DF 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 4 28

Mean Square 0.29 0.42 0.31 6.806E003 2.40 0.062 0.17 0.064 0.55 4.727E003 8.384E004 0.02 0.21 0.027 0.05 9.794E003 0.01 7.803E003

F Value 29.30 42.72 31.64 0.69 244.91 6.35 17.34 6.56 55.77 0.48 0.086 2.18 21.31 2.74 5.22

Prob. > F < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.4185 < 0.0001 0.0245 0.0010 0.0226 < 0.0001 0.4988 0.7741 0.1617 0.0004 0.1200 0.0384

Remarks significant significant significant not significant significant significant significant significant significant significant not significant not significant significant not significant significant

2.40 0.062 0.17 0.06 0.55 4.727E003 8.384E004

AB AC AD

0.021 BC BD 0.027 CD Residual Lack of Fit Pure Error Cor Total 0.051 0.14 0.11 0.031 4.16 0.21

1.36

0.4123

not significant

121

Table 5.7 ANOVA results for weld reinforcement form factor (WRFF) Source Model A B 0.39 C 2.737E005 D A2 0.49 B2 0.01 C2 D2 AB AC 0.10 AD 0.74 BC 3.918E003 BD 0.037 CD 2.482E003 Residual Lack of Fit Pure Error Cor Total 2.86 2.03 0.83 37.15 1 14 10 4 28 2.482E003 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.98 0.5583 not significant 0.012 0.9138 1 0.037 0.18 0.6754 1 3.918E003 0.019 0.8919 1 0.74 3.64 0.0772 1 0.10 0.49 0.4964 1.49 9.61 1.30 1 1 1 1 0.01 1.49 9.61 1.30 0.054 7.31 46.98 6.34 0.8193 0.0171 < 0.0001 0.0246 1 0.49 2.40 0.1436 4.51 1 1 2.737E005 4.51 1.338E004 22.07 0.9909 0.0003 1 0.39 1.91 0.1886 Sum of Squares 34.29 16.10 Mean Square 2.45 16.10 F Value 11.98 78.72

DF 14 1

Prob. > F < 0.0001 < 0.0001

Remarks significant significant not significant not significant significant not significant not significant significant significant significant not significant not significant not significant not significant not significant

122

Table 5.8 ANOVA results for flux consumption (F) Source Model A B C D A
2

Sum of Squares 2842.67 1352.9 88.34 137.08 600.1 2.84

DF 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 10 4 28

Mean Square 203.05 1352.9 88.34 137.08 600.1 2.84 118.56 2.39 175.59 3.26 0.10 28.50 2.36 35.62 20.17 7.49 6.67 9.52

F Value 27.12 180.7 11.80 18.31 80.17 0.38 15.84 0.32 23.46 0.44 0.014 3.81 0.31 4.76 2.69

Prob. > F < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0040 0.0008 < 0.0001 0.5481 0.0014 0.5810 0.0003 0.5201 0.9084 0.0714 0.5836 0.0467 0.1230

Remarks significant significant significant significant significant not significant significant not significant significant not significant not significant not significant not significant significant not significant not significant

B2 C
2

118.56 2.39

D2 AB

175.59 3.26

AC 0.10 AD 28.50 BC 2.36 BD CD 20.17 Residual Lack of Fit Pure Error Cor Total 104.80 66.72 38.08 2947.47 35.62

0.70

0.7054

123

The ANOVA results for bead width (Table5.3) show that A, B, C, B2, C2, D2, AC are significant model terms. The ANOVA results for penetration that (Table 5.4) reveals that A, B, C, D, A2, B2, D2, BC, BD, CD are significant model terms. The ANOVA results for reinforcement (Table 5.5) shows that A, B, C, D, A2, C2, D2, AB, AD are significant model terms. The ANOVA results for weld penetration shape factor (Table 5.6) shows that A, B, D, A2, B2, C2, D2, BC, CD are significant model terms. The ANOVA results for weld reinforcement from factor (Table 5.7) reveals that A, D, C2, D2, AB are significant model terms. The ANOVA results for flux consumption (Table 5.7) reveals that A, B, C, D, B2, D2, BD are significant model terms. Tables-5.9 to 5.14 show the model summary statistics for all responses. The coefficients of correlation (R2) for all the models are observed in excess of 0.92 which inspire confidence in the developed models. The predicted and adjusted R2 values for all the response models were in reasonable agreement which again validates the fitness of developed models. The coefficient of variation (C.V.) defined as (S.D./Mean x 100) of model is measurement of error. The low value of C.V. obtained for all the models indicates improved precision and reliability of the experiments performed. The adequate precision values, defined as signal to noise ratio for the fitted value, are significantly higher than 4 indicating the suitability of models for future prediction.

124

Table 5.9 Model summary statistics for bead width Std. Dev. Mean C.V.(%) PRESS 0.33 17.27 1.91 7.28 (R2) Adjusted (R2) Predicted (R )
2

0.967 0.935

0.845 Adequate Precision (AP) 22.143

Table 5.10 Model summary statistics for penetration Std. Dev. Mean C.V.(%) PRESS 0.28 7.59 3.72 5.09 (R2) Adjusted (R ) Predicted (R2)
2

0.98 0.96

0.9087 Adequate Precision (AP) 25.087

Table 5.11 Model summary statistics for reinforcement Std. Dev. Mean C.V.(%) PRESS 0.21 3.61 5.75 2.75 (R2) Adjusted (R ) Predicted (R2) Adequate Precision (AP)
2

0.965 0.930 0.841 24.08

Table 5.12 Model summary statistics for weld penetration shape factor Std. Dev. Mean C.V.(%) PRESS 0.099 2.34 4.24 0.71 (R2) Adjusted (R ) Predicted (R2) Adequate Precision (AP)
2

0.967 0.934 0.829 18.614

125

Table 5.13 Model summary statistics for weld reinforcement form factor Std. Dev. Mean C.V.(%) PRESS 0.45 5.01 9.03 12.08 (R2) Adjusted (R ) Predicted (R2) Adequate Precision (AP)
2

0.9229 0.8459 0.6748 15.638

Table 5.14 Model summary statistics for flux consumption Std. Dev. Mean C.V.(%) PRESS 2.74 43.58 6.28 549.81 (R2) Adjusted (R ) Predicted (R2) Adequate Precision (AP)
2

0.9644 0.9289 0.8135 22.272

To test the accuracy of the models in actual applications, conformity test runs were conducted by assigning different values for process variables within their working limits. Specimens were cut from the conformity test plates and their bead profiles were traced. All bead dimensions were measured. The percentage of errors, which give the deviation of predicted results of responses from the actual measured values, were also calculated and presented in Table-5.15. It is found from the table that the average error for all models is less than 3%.

5.7

Results and Discussion The developed mathematical models can be employed to predict the geometry

of weld bead and shape relationships for the range of parameters used in the investigation by substituting their respective values in coded form. The predicted
126

values of response factors W, P, R, WPSF, WRFF and Flux consumption F from regression equations (5.2) to (5.7) corresponding to different combination of welding variables reported in Table-3.2 are compared with the corresponding experimental values. A nice agreement is observed between these values, as evident from Figs.5.25.7.

Table 5.15 Comparison of actual and predicted values of weld bead parameters
Predicted values of bead parameters W P 17.83 6.6.48 17.28 16.17 18.89 17.45 18.03 6.53 7.30 7.37 6.33 8.23 R 3.24 3.27 4.66 2.79 2.6 3.24 Actual values of bead parameters W 17.29 17.63 16.63 18.87 17.57 18.12 P 6.54 6.51 7.12 7.39 6.51 7.99 R 3.3 3.19 4.62 2.82 2.67 3.06 W -3.02 2.02 2.87 -0.1 0.68 0.49 0.49 % Error P 1 -0.3 -2.46 0.27 2.84 -2.91 -0.26 R 1.85 -2.44 -3 1.07 2.69 3 0.52

Trial No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Av.error(%)

% Error = Act. Value Pred. Value Pred. Value X100

127

Fig. 5.2 Comparison between measured and predicted value of bead width (W)

Fig. 5.3 Comparison between measured and predicted value of penetration (P)
128

Fig. 5.4 Comparison between measured and predicted value of reinforcement (R)

Fig. 5.5 Comparison between measured and predicted value of WPSF

129

Fig. 5.6 Comparison between measured and predicted value of WRFF

Fig. 5.7 Comparison between measured and predicted value of flux consumption (F)
130

Based on these models, the main and the interaction effects of the process parameters on the bead geometry were computed and plotted as depicted in Figs.5.8-5.40. The results show the general trends between the cause and effect. The possible causes for the effects of different welding variables on bead geometry and shape relationships were analyzed and discussed below:

5.7.1 Effect of process parameters on bead width Direct effect The regression equations obtained for bead width by using multiple regressions are given below: Bead Width W = 18.28 + 1.23 A + 0.29 B1.06 C0.10 D + 0.20 A2 0.54 B20.29 C20.90 D2 + 0.34 A B0.60 A C + 0.19A D + 0.29 B C 0.097 B D + 0.052 C D (5.2)

Figs.5.8-5.10 show the effect of process parameters on bead width. It is apparent that bead width increases with the increase in open circuit voltage. As shown in Fig.5.8, bead width (W) increases from 17.24 to 19.70 mm with the increase in open circuit voltage from 32 to 38 volts. It can be attributed to the increase in arc length with the increase in open circuit voltage, which in turn results in spreading of the arc cone at its base which further results in more melting of work piece instead of penetrating the plate. This extension in bead width causes corresponding reduction in penetration and reinforcement. In fact excessive increase in voltage can result in nearly flat bead.

131

Fig. 5.8 Effect of voltage on bead width Bead width increases from 17.44 to 18.03 mm with increase in welding current from 375 to 475 amperes, as shown in Fig. 5.9. This effect is due to increase in heat input and the weight of the weld metal deposited (Gunaraj and Murgun, 1999). These factors contribute to increase in weld pool size and consequently increase the bead width. As shown in Fig.5.10, weld bead width decreases steadily with the increase in welding speed. The bead width decreases from 19.04 to 16.92 with increase in welding speed from 24 to 30 m/hr. This negative effect of speed on W is due to the fact that when speed increases, the thermal energy transmitted to the base plate from the arc or line power per unit length of the weld bead decreases and less filler metal is deposited per unit length of weld bead, resulting in thinner and narrower weld bead. Hence, at lower travel speeds, the weld bead is larger in mass, whereas at higher travel speeds, it is lesser in mass. If speed decreases, the bead becomes wider, flatter and smoother (Olson et al., 1990). It can be explained on the basis of decrease in metal deposition
132

rate and heat input with the increase in welding speed. The effect of basicity index on bead width is not significant.

Fig. 5.9 Effect of current on bead width

Fig. 5.10 Effect of welding speed on bead width

133

Interaction effect It is apparent from Figs.5.11 and 5.12, showing interaction of open circuit voltage and welding speed on bead width (W) that the increase in voltage increases W for all values of speed. The bead width increases from 17.40 to 21.07 mm and from 16.49 to 17.75 mm with the increase in voltage from 32 to 38 volts, at the welding speed 24 and 30 m/hr respectively. It shows that the increasing trend of bead width with the increase in open circuit voltage decreases with the increase in welding speed. It is due to the fact that open circuit voltage has a positive effect whereas welding speed has a negative effect on bead width. Therefore, the combined effect of these parameters causes the decrease in increasing trend of bead width with the increase in Open circuit voltage.

C = 30m/hr C = 24m/ hr

Fig. 5.11 Interaction effect of voltage and speed on bead width

134

Fig. 5.12 Response surface due to interaction of voltage and speed on bead width

5.7.2 Effect of process parameters on penetration Direct effect The developed model for the penetration is shown below: Penetration (P) = 6.990.30 * A + 0.95 * B0.70 * C1.53* D+0.32 * A2+ 0.29 * B2+0.18 * C2+1.07* D20.025* A* B0.20 * A * C + 0.088 * A * D-0.58 * B * C0.48 * B * D + 0.44 * C * D (5.3)

As shown in Fig.5.13, the penetration (P) increases from 6.33 to 8.22 mm with the increase in welding current from 375 to 475 amperes. Increase in current gives rise to enhanced line power per unit length of the weld bead and higher current density, causing larger volume of the base material to melt and hence, deeper penetration. As current increases the temperature, the heat content of the droplets also increases, which results in more heat being transferred to the base material. Increase in current also
135

increases momentum of the droplets, which on striking the weld pool causes a deeper penetration. An increase in welding current, with other variables remaining constant, results in increased depth of penetration, increased deposition rate and increased weld bead size and shape at a given cross-section. It is also attributed to the increase in digging power of the arc with the increase in welding current. As the current increases, the intensity of the arc and hence the digging power of the arc and penetration increases. This is also consistent with the study of MacGlone (1982).

Fig. 5.13 Effect of current on penetration

As depicted in Fig.5.14, the penetration decreases from 7.86 to 6.47 mm with the increase in welding speed from 24 to 30 m/hr. This could obviously be due to the reduced line power per unit length of weld bead as speed increases. Also, at higher welding speeds, the electrode travels faster and covers more distance per unit time. The combined effects of lesser line power and faster electrode travel speed result in
136

decreased metal deposition rate per unit length of weld bead (Box et al., 1976). It is also attributed to decrease in heat input, metal deposition rate and digging power of the arc with the increase in welding speed resulting in decrease in weld metal penetration.

Fig. 5.14 Effect of welding speed on penetration

From Fig. 5.15, it is observed that P decreases from 7.61 to 7.01 when open circuit voltage increases from 32 to 38 volts. This is obviously due to the fact that the increase in voltage results in increased arc length and spreading of arc cone at its base which results in more melting of work piece surface instead of penetrating the plate. This is consistent with the study conducted by Murugan and Gunaraj (2005). In fact, excessive increase in voltage can result in nearly flat bead. Flux basicity index also influences the penetration. It is observed from Fig.5.16, the higher value of

penetration i.e 9.59 mm is obtained with using low basicity index flux (0.6), because
137

low basicity index fluxes have high viscosity which enhances the tendency of heat concentration in the narrow zone and hence high penetration. This is consistent with the study conducted by Gupta and Gupta (1988).

Fig. 5.15 Effect of voltage on penetration

Fig. 5.16 Effect of basicity index on penetration

138

Interaction effect From the Fig.5.17, it is evident that P increases with the increase in welding current for all values of welding speed. It shows that the weld metal penetration increases from 6.63 to 9.67 mm and from 6.38 to 7.12, with the increase in current, at the welding speed of 24 to 30 m/hr respectively. The rate of increase in P with the increase in current decreases gradually as speed increases. These effects on P are due to the reasons that current has positive effect but speed has a negative effect on P as discussed already in the direct effects of current and speed on P. It is found that at lower values of speed, the positive effect of current on P is stronger but at higher values of speed, the negative effect of speed on P is stronger. These effects are further explained with the help of a response surface plot as shown in Fig.5.18. From the contour surface, it is noted that P is maximum (about 9.67 mm) when current and speed are at their maximum (+1) and minimum (1) limits, respectively, and the lowest value of P (about 6.39 mm) is obtained when current and speed are at their minimum and maximum limits, respectively. From Figs. 5.19 and 5.20, it is observed that penetration increases from 8.45 to 11.31 mm and from 6.38 to 7.28 mm, with increase in current, at the basicity index of 0.6 and 1.2 respectively. It is evident form Figs.5.21 and 5.22 that penetration decreases form 10.91 to 8.63 and from 6.97 to 6.45 with increase in welding speed from low basicity index to higher value of basicity index. These results can be

explained with the help of effects of welding variables such as welding speed and basicity index on penetration.
139

C = 30m/hr C = 24m/ hr

Fig.5.17 Interaction effect of current and speed on penetration

Fig. 5.18 Response surface due to interaction of current and speed on penetration

140

D = 0.6

D = 1.2

Fig. 5.19 Interaction effect of current and basicity index on penetration

Fig. 5.20 Response surface due to interaction of current and basicity index on penetration

141

D = 0.6

D = 1.2

Fig. 5.21 Interaction effect of welding speed and basicity index on penetration

Fig. 5.22 Response surface due to interaction of welding speed and basicity index on penetration
142

5.7.3 Effect of process parameters on reinforcement (R) Direct effects The developed model for the reinforcement is shown below: Reinforcement (R) = 2.94-0.91* A+ 0.19 * B-0.24 * C-0.52* D + 0.40 * A20.15 * B2+0.22 * C2 + 0.85 * D2 0.42*A*B + 0.041*A*C + 0.41* A* D + 0.034* B * C + 4.071E003 * B * D+0.012*C * D (5.4)

From Figs.5.235.25, it is observed that the reinforcement (R) decreases with the increase in open circuit voltage and welding speed, it increases with the increase in welding current. Reinforcement decreases with increase in basicity index due to similar reasons as described for penetration. It is seen from these graphs that reinforcement decreases from 4.24 to 2.42 mm with change of voltage from 32 to 38 volts, and decreases from 3.39 to 2.92 mm when welding speed increases from 24 to 30 m/hr. When current changes from 375 to 475 amperes, it changes from 2.59 to 2.97 mm. As evident from Fig.5.26, its value increases from 4.29 to 3.26 mm with increase in basicity index from 0.6 to 1.2. The reasons for these changes are due to same reasons as described in preceding section for penetration.

Interaction effects It is observed from Figs.5.27 and 5.28 that reinforcement decreases with the increase in voltage, when the current changes from 375 to 475 amperes and it also decreases with voltage from low basicity index to higher value of basicity index, as shown in Figs.5.29 and 5.30. These interaction effects can be explained on the basis of effect of voltage, current and basicity index on reinforcement.
143

Fig. 5.23 Effect of voltage on reinforcement

Fig. 5.24 Effect of welding speed on reinforcement

144

Fig. 5.25 Effect of current on reinforcement

Fig. 5.26 Effect of basicity index on reinforcement

145

B =475 amp

B = 375 amp

Fig. 5.27 Interaction effect of voltage and current on reinforcement

Fig. 5.28 Response surface due to interaction of voltage and current on reinforcement
146

D = 1.2

D = 0.6

Fig. 5.29 Interaction effect of voltage and basicity index on reinforcement

Fig. 5.30 Response surface due to interaction of voltage and basicity index on reinforcement
147

5.7.4 Effect of process parameters on weld penetration shape factor (WPSF) and weld reinforcement form factor (WRFF) Direct effects The developed model for the weld penetration shape factor and weld reinforcement form factor are shown below: WPSF = 2.62 + 0.22*A0.19 * B+0.028 * C+0.38* D0.098 * A20.16* B20.100* C20.35* D2+ 0.034 * A* B0.014 * A * C+0.055 * A * D + 0.23* B * C + 0.062 * B * D0.086* C* D (5.5)

WRFF = 6.27 + 1.38 * A0.22 * B + 1.805E-003 * C + 0.52* D0.28 * A2 + 0.041* B20.48 * C21.47 * D2 + 0.57 * A * B0.16 * A * C0.33 * A * D + 0.031* B * C + 0.073 * B * D + 0.019* C * D (5.6)

Figs.5.31 and 5.32 show the effect of open circuit voltage on both weld penetration shape factor (WPSF) and weld reinforcement form factor (WRFF). WPSF increases from 2.29 to 2.74 and with the increase in open circuit voltage from 32 to 38 volts and WRFF increases from 4.61 to 7.38 with increase of open circuit voltage from 32 to 38 volts. This is also in consistent with the studies of Mandotov (1969) and Srihari (1992).The positive effect of voltage on both the factors is due to the reasons that bead width (W) increases almost steadily, but penetration (P) and reinforcement (R) decrease little as voltage increases from 1 to +1 limit as discussed already. Hence, they increase steadily as voltage increases.
148

WPSF decreases when current increases, but it remains nearly constant from 375 to 400 amperes and it decreases from 2.65 to 2.26 (Fig.5.33) when current changes from 400 to 475 amperes. This could be due to reason that WPSF which is the ratio of W/P, decreases when current changes from 400 ampere to 475 amperes, because rate of increase of P is more than that of W with in this range of current. It is also observed in Fig.5.34 that WPSF increases 1.89 to 2.64 with increase of basicity index from 0.6 to 1.2. It is seen from Fig.5.34 that WRFF decreases from 4.28 to 5.31 with increase of basicity index from 0.6 to 1.2. These results can be explained with the help of effects of welding variables on bead width, penetration and reinforcement respectively.

Fig. 5.31 Effect of voltage on WPSF

149

Fig. 5.32 Effect of voltage on WRFF

Fig. 5.33 Effect of current on WPSF

150

Fig. 5.34 Effect of basicity index on WPSF

Fig. 5.35 Effect of basicity index on WRFF

151

Interaction effect Figs.5.36 and 5.37 show the interaction effects of voltage and current on WRFF. It is evident from these graphs that WRFF increases for all values of current when voltage increases from 32 to 38 volts. But the increasing trend of WRFF is more at higher value of current i.e. at 475 amperes than that at 375 amperes. This is due to fact that WRFF= W/R, W increases with increase of voltage and nearly remains constant with change of current whereas R decreases with increasing voltage and increases with the increase of current. Thus, voltage has a positive effect on WRFF whereas current has a negative effect on WRFF. This increasing trend of WRFF at higher current is due to more positive effect of voltage on WRFF. This can also be explained on the basis of effects of voltage and current on bead width and reinforcement.

The interaction effect of current and speed on WPSF is shown in Fig.5.38. Fig.5.39 shows the effect of welding speed on WPSF with change in basicity index. These can be explained on the basis of effects of welding variables on the bead width and penetration respectively.

152

B: Current

B =475 amp

B = 375 amp

Fig. 5.36 Interaction effect of voltage and current on WRFF

Fig. 5.37 Response surface due to interaction of voltage and current on WRFF
153

Fig. 5.38 Response surface due to interaction of current and speed on WPSF

Fig. 5.39 Response Surface due to interaction of welding speed and basicity index on WPSF
154

5.7.5 Effect of process parameters on flux consumption Direct effects The developed model for the flux consumption is shown below: Flux Consmption (F) = 48.11 + 12.69 * A3.24 * B4.04 * C + 5.97 * D 0.66 * A24.28 * B2 + 0.61* C26.30 * D2 + 0.90 * A * B0.16 * A * C2.02 * A * D+0.77 * B * C + 2.26 * B *D1.70*C*D (5.7)

As shown in Fig. 5.40, flux consumption increases from 34.757 to 60.139 gms with the increase in open circuit voltage from 32 to 38 volts. This is due to the positive effect of voltage on bead width. This is also consistent with the findings of Gunaraj and Murgun (1999). In Fig. 5.41, the effect of change in welding speed on flux consumption can be explained on the basis of effect of speed on bead width. At higher welding speed there is less spread of bead, and hence less consumption of flux compared to that at lower speed. Fig. 5.42 shows the effect of basicity index on consumption of flux. Flux consumption increases with the increase in basicity index. This is due to the fact that because low basicity index fluxes have high viscosity which enhances the tendency of heat concentration in the narrow zone and hence high penetration and lower bead width. This is consistent with the study conducted by Gupta (1988). The Flux consumption decreases with the increases in current, as shown in Fig.5.43. This can be

155

explained on the basis of individual effect of welding current on bead width, penetration and reinforcement.

Interaction effect Response surface due to interaction of current and basicity index on flux consumption is shown in Fig.5.44. These effects can be explained on the basis of individual effects of current and basicity index on bead width and consumption of flux.

Fig.5.40 Effect of voltage on flux consumption

156

Fig.5.41 Effect of welding speed on flux consumption

Fig.5.42 Effect of basicity index on flux consumption

157

Fig.5.43 Effect of current on flux consumption

Fig. 5.44 Response surface due to interaction of current and basicity index on flux consumption
158