Supervisor
Prof. Dr. M.M.I Hammouda
Supervisor
Prof. Dr. M.M.I Hammouda
DECLARATION
I certify that research work titled Expert System for Optimization of Welding
Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures is my own work. The work has not, in
whole or in part, been presented elsewhere for assessment. Where material has been used
from other sources it has been properly acknowledged/referred.
Acknowledgments
Thanks of Al-Mighty-Allah who enable me to do such kind of research work. I am
thankful to all those people who helped and supported me during this research and made it
possible.
My deep gratitude goes to my PhD supervisor, respectable Professor Dr. M.M.I
Hammouda for his supervision, continuous support, encouragement, research approach
and expertise in this research work. The efforts and valuable guidance of Prof. Dr. M.M.I
Hammouda made it possible for me not only to serve the purpose but also to enhance my
research skills as well. I am very grateful for his inspiration and guidance throughout the
research work. I am highly obliged to the invaluable help and guidance of Prof. Dr. M.H.
Sahir, Dean (M & AE) for the finalization of all the PhD thesis/degree requirements as a
supervisor in place of Prof. Dr. M.M.I Hammouda.
My deep gratitude also goes to my Research Committee members, comprising of
Dr. M. Zubair Khan, Dr. Saqlain A. Ghumman and Dr. Asif Iqbal, for their support,
guidance and encouragement during the research work.
I specially owe my deep gratitude to Dr. M. Ejaz Qureshi and Dr. Asif Iqbal for
their support, technical discussions and sharing their knowledge & expertise specifically
in the field of welding analysis/simulations and expert system respectively throughout the
research work. I am really thankful to Engr. Abdul Sammi Khawaja and Engr. Mushtaq
Hussain, his welding and testing team, for the support of all extensive experimental work.
I am very thankful to respected Prof. M. Anwar Khan, Prof. Dr. M.H. Sahir, Prof.
Dr. Shahab Khushnood, Prof. Sageer Ahmed and Dr. Riffat Asim Pasha for their
encouragement and supports extended to me in all matters during my research work as
well as a long time spent in the UET, Taxila. I am also grateful to Prof. Dr. M.A. Wahab,
Louisiana State University, USA and Prof. Dr. Liu Fangjun, BUAA University, China for
their guiding/encouraging comments on research work as foreign experts and official
thesis evaluators.
I would also like to thank of all my valuable teachers, officials of MED &
ASR&TD, dear colleagues, my parents and family who always helped me and prayed for
my success. I always remember their support and contributions for the completion of this
research work.
Engr. Naeem Ullah Dar
ii
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Dedication
iii
Abstract
With the introduction of welding as joining method, the welding technology was
applied as major joining technique in hi-tech industries to the welding of steels for
manufacturing of different structures like pressure vessels and aerospace applications.
Mostly high strength low alloy steels in thin cylindrical shell form are being used for
aerospace structures due to high strength and low weight ratio. Despite being high
strength and light weight by numerous advantages, the welding of thin walled structure of
high strength low alloy steel (also known as HSLA Steel) comes also with a major
problems of weld induced imperfections due to high temperatures like residual stresses
and distortions with shortening of weld strength and it is a still major challenge for the
welding professionals due to the complex nature of the welding phenomenon despite
many innovations in welding technology. The most of the weld induced imperfections are
the result of transient temperature distributions and subsequent cooling of the welds
followed by transient and residual stress fields.
Where as, the reliability of thin-walled structures used for any aerospace or
pressure vessel application is on the prime importance every time for safe operational.
Usually, thin walled cylindrical structures contain two types of weld as longitudinal and
circumferential. The major design and industry constraints are weld strength and cost
competitive. Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) or TIG process is mostly applied due
to the excellent weld strength and cost competitiveness.
The main aim of this research work is to analyze and experimentally investigate
the TIG welding parameters for purpose of minimizing residual stresses and distortion
with the requirements of maximizing of weld strength of thin walled structures of HSLA
steel respectively. To achieve the aforementioned targets, the following strategy was
applied keeping in view the complex phenomena of welding, time and cost of extensive
experimentations involved.
Weld experiments were subdivided into linear and circumferential welding.
Initially for linear welding, TIG welding parameters were analyzed to determine their
significance on thin plates of HSLA steel of different thicknesses (3 to 5 mm) by
following design of experiments (DOE) with employing 2-level full factorial and
response surface method (RSM) designs to have response (weld strength, distortion &
residual stress). Whereas for circumferential welding, a hybrid numerical simulation and
experimental based analysis approach was employed to model and predict TIG welding
process to investigate the transient temperature distributions, transient/residual stress
fields and distortion for circumferentially welded thin-walled cylinders of HSLA steel.
The simulations strategy was developed and implemented by using commercial available
general purpose finite element software ANSYS enhanced with subroutines. First
thermal analysis was completed followed by a separate mechanical analysis based on the
thermal history. From the three dimensional FE model developed for TIG welding
process of circumferential welding, a series of virtual welding experiments based on
statistical designs (DOE) were performed for response (residual stresses and distortion)
with different thicknesses by using full factorial and RSM as applied for linear welding.
The effects of following six parameters, four numeric and two categorical:
welding current, welding voltage, welding speed, sheet/cylinder thickness and trailing
(Ar) & weld type (linear and circumferential) were investigated upon following three
iv
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
performance measures: weld strength, residual stresses and distortions for different
thicknesses of material of HSLA steel. The experimental results were analyzed using
ANOVA and significance of effects of all the tested parameters upon performance
measures was determined. Empirical models for weld strength, distortion and residual
stresses, in terms of significant parameters, were also developed and numerical
optimization was performed according to the desirability for the maximization of weld
strength and minimization of distortion & residual stresses. All the statistical analyses
were performed by using commercial available statistical software Design-Expert and
MINITAB.
From the results of post-experimental analyses, it was noticed that the effects of
welding current, welding voltage and welding speed upon weld strength, residual stresses
and distortion are extremely significant, while the effect of trailing and weld type is also
considerably significant with respect to material thicknesses. The residual stresses are
highly sensitive to heat input (weld temperatures). The residual stresses and distortion in
circumferential welding are low as compared to linear welding for the same welding
parameters and material thickness respectively. The vital recommendation, in this regard,
is to use the parameters of welding resulting low input heat (low current, low voltage and
high speed) with application of trailing with respect to material thicknesses for the
maximum weld strength and minimum residual stresses and distortion in thin walled
structures of HSLA steel.
For the trade-off among aforementioned opposing targets and for prediction of
values of performance measures at different settings of TIG welding parameters, the
expert system tool, employing fuzzy reasoning mechanism, was utilized. Initially, an
expert system was developed for the optimization of parameters according to objectives
of maximization and/or minimization of weld strength, distortion and residual stresses.
The expert system also provided the predicted values of various performance measures
based upon the finalized values of the welding parameters. The analyses, simulations,
experimental and ANOVA results were utilized for the making of fuzzy rule-base. The
fuzzy rule-base was adjusted for maximum accuracy by employing the simulated
annealing (SA) algorithm.
In the next stage, a machine learning (ML) technique was utilized for creation of a
expert system, named as EXWeldHSLASteel, that can: self-retrieve and self-store the
experimental data; automatically develop fuzzy sets for numeric variables involved;
automatically generate rules for optimization and prediction rule-bases; resolve the
conflict among contradictory rules; and automatically update the interface of expert
system according to newly introduced TIG welding process variables. The algorithms for
these constituents were coded using a pointer-enabled language in C++. The coding
involves a data structure named as doubly linked list, which provide the means for fast
and efficient processing.
The presented expert system is used for deciding the values of important welding
process parameters as per objective before the start of actual welding process on shop
floor. The user should be absolutely clear about the nature and requirements of any given
TIG welding process, e.g., the setting parameters, fixed parameters, and geometric
parameters etc. The expert system developed in the domain of welding for optimizing
welding process of thin walled HSLA steel structure possesses all capabilities to adapt
effectively to the unpredictable and continuously changing industrial environment of
mechanical fabrication and manufacturing and to serve the newly emerging field of
v
Key words:
knowledge
into
vi
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Contents
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... ii
Dedication ....................................................................................................................... iii
Abstract ............................................................................................................................ iv
Contents .......................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. xi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................ xvii
List of Symbols ................................................................................................................ xx
Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Welding Technology ........................................................................................ 1
1.1.1 Arc Welding ............................................................................................ 1
1.1.2 Physics of Arc Welding .......................................................................... 2
1.1.3 Development of Welding Technology..................................................... 3
1.1.4 Benefits & Threats of Welding ................................................................ 3
1.1.5 Weld Induced Residual Stresses .............................................................. 4
1.1.6 Weld Induced Distortions ........................................................................ 5
1.1.7 Weld Induced Residual Stresses and Distortions
in Thin-Walled Structure ........................................................................ 7
1.2 GTAW or TIG Welding ................................................................................... 8
1.3 Variables and Performance Measures in GTAW Process ................................ 9
1.4 Current Challenges in Welding Domain .........................................................12
1.5 Application of Artificial Intelligence and Expert System to Manufacturing.. 14
1.5.1 Expert System ....................................................................................... 14
1.6 Objectives, Research Methodology and Organization of Dissertation............15
1.6.1 Objectives ............................................................................................. 15
1.6.2 Research Methodology ......................................................................... 16
1.6.3 Organization of Dissertation ................................................................. 19
2. LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................... 21
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 21
2.2 Literature Survey in Welding Domain ........................................................... 21
2.2.1 Welding Experiments and Optimization ............................................... 22
2.2.2 Welding Simulations ............................................................................. 25
2.2.3 Circumferential Welding Computational Works ................................... 27
2.3 Welding Induced Residual Stresses Measurement ......................................... 33
2.3.1 Residual Stress Measurement by Hole-Drilling .....................................34
2.4 Literature Survey in Artificial Intelligence and Expert System to
Manufacturing ................................................................................................ 35
vii
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
ix
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
List of Figures
Fig. 1.1
Fig. 1.2
Fig. 1.3
Fig. 1.4
Fig. 1.5
Fig. 1.6
Fig. 1.7
Fig. 1.8
Fig. 2.1
Fig. 3.1
Fig. 3.2
Fig. 3.3
Fig. 3.4
Fig. 3.5
Fig. 3.6
Fig. 3.7
Fig. 3.8
Fig. 3.9
Fig. 3.10
Fig. 3.11
Fig. 3.12
Fig. 3.13
Fig. 3.14
Fig. 3.15
Fig. 3.16
Fig. 3.17
Fig. 3.18
Fig. 3.19
Fig. 3.20
Fig. 3.21
Fig. 3.22
Fig. 3.23
Fig. 3.24
Fig. 3.25
Fig. 3.26
Fig. 3.27
Fig. 3.28
Fig. 3.29
Fig. 3.30
Fig. 3.31
Fig. 3.32
Fig. 3.33
Fig. 3.34
Fig. 3.35
Fig. 3.36
Fig. 3.37
Fig. 3.38
Fig. 3.39
Fig. 3.40
Fig. 3.41
Fig. 3.42
Fig. 3.43
Fig. 3.44
Fig. 3.45
Fig. 3.46
Fig. 3.47
Fig. 3.48
Fig. 3.49
Fig. 3.50
Fig. 3.51
Fig. 3.52
Fig. 3.53
Fig. 3.54
Fig. 3.55
Fig. 3.56
Fig. 3.57
Fig. 3.58
Fig. 3.59
Fig. 3.60
Fig. 3.61
Fig. 3.62
Fig. 3.63
Fig. 3.64
Fig. 3.65
Fig. 4.1
Fig. 4.2
Fig. 4.3
Fig. 4.4
xii
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 4.5
Fig. 4.6
Fig. 4.7
Fig. 4.8
Fig. 4.9
Fig. 4.10
Fig. 4.11
Fig. 4.12
Fig. 4.13
Fig. 4.14
Fig. 4.15
Fig. 4.16
Fig. 4.17
Fig. 4.18
Fig. 4.19
Fig. 4.20
Fig. 4.21
Fig. 4.22
Fig. 4.23
Fig. 4.24
Fig. 4.25
Fig. 4.26
Fig. 4.27
Fig. 4.28
Fig. 4.29
Fig. 4.30
xiii
Fig. 4.31
Fig. 4.32
Fig. 4.33
Fig. 4.34
Fig. 5.1
Fig. 5.2
Fig. 5.3
Fig. 5.4
Fig. 5.5
Fig. 5.6
Fig. 5.7
Fig. 5.8
Fig. 5.9
Fig. 5.10
Fig. 5.11
Fig. 5.12
Fig. 5.13
Fig. 5.14 Hoop residual stress variation, circumferentially on the weld line for
cylinder outer surface with different root openings ...................................... 154
Fig. 5.15 Axial displacement of the restraint free face of cylinder for
different root openings .................................................................................. 154
Fig. 5.16 Axial residual stress variations at a longitudinal section 180o from weld
line on cylinder inner surface........................................................................ 157
Fig. 5.17 Axial residual stress variations at a longitudinal section 180o from weld
line on cylinder outer surface........................................................................ 157
xiv
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 5.18 Axial residual stress variations at a circumferential path on the weld
line for cylinder outer surface ....................................................................... 158
Fig. 5.19 Axial residual stress variations at a circumferential path on the weld
line for cylinder inner surface ....................................................................... 158
Fig. 5.20 Distortion of Sixteen Experiments ( t = 3 mm) ............................................ 163
Fig. 5.21 Distortion of Sixteen Experiments ( t = 4 mm) ............................................ 164
Fig. 5.22 Distortion of Sixteen Experiments ( t = 5 mm) ........................................... 164
Fig. 5.23 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion (t = 3 mm) .......................... 167
Fig. 5.24 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion (t = 4 mm) .......................... 167
Fig. 5.25 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion (t = 5 mm) .......................... 168
Fig. 5.26 Distortion Predictions w.r.t Predictors (t = 3 mm) ....................................... 169
Fig. 5.27 Distortion Predictions w.r.t Predictors (t = 4 mm) ....................................... 170
Fig. 5.28 Distortion Predictions w.r.t Predictors (t = 5 mm) ....................................... 170
Fig. 5.29 Residual Stresses of Sixteen Experiments ( t = 3 mm)................................. 171
Fig. 5.30 Residual Stresses of Sixteen Experiments ( t = 4 mm)................................. 171
Fig. 5.31 Residual Stresses of Sixteen Experiments ( t = 5 mm)................................. 171
Fig. 5.32 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses (t = 3 mm) .............. 174
Fig. 5.33 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses (t = 4 mm) .............. 174
Fig. 5.34 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses (t = 5 mm) .............. 175
Fig. 5.35 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors (t = 3 mm)............................ 177
Fig. 5.36 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors (t = 4 mm)............................ 177
Fig. 5.37 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors (t = 5 mm)............................ 177
Fig. 5.38 Response Desirability w.r.t Predictors (t = 3 mm) ....................................... 181
Fig. 5.39 Response Desirability w.r.t Predictors (t = 4 mm) ....................................... 181
Fig. 5.40 Response Desirability w.r.t Predictors (t = 5 mm) ....................................... 181
Fig. 5.41 Effect on Desirability of different Predictors (t = 3 mm) ............................. 182
Fig. 5.42 Effect on Desirability of different Predictors (t = 4 mm) ............................. 182
Fig. 5.43 Effect on Desirability of different Predictors (t = 5 mm) ............................. 182
Fig. 5.44 Response Comparison Scator Plots (t = 3 mm, 4 mm, 5 mm)...................... 183
Fig. 5.45 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion in RSM .............................. 187
Fig. 5.46 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses in RSM .................. 187
Fig. 5.47 Interaction of welding parameters upon Distortion in RSM ........................ 188
Fig. 5.48 Interaction of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses in RSM ............ 188
Fig. 5.49 Distortion Predictions w.r.t Predictors in RSM ........................................... 190
Fig. 5.50 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors in RSM ................................ 190
Fig. 5.51 Effects of welding parameters upon Weld Strength in RSM ....................... 197
Fig. 5.52 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion in RSM .............................. 197
Fig. 5.53 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses in RSM .................. 198
Fig. 5.54 Interaction of welding parameters upon Weld Strength in RSM ................. 198
Fig. 5.55 Interaction of welding parameters upon Distortion in RSM ........................ 199
Fig. 5.56 Interaction of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses in RSM ............ 199
xv
Fig. 5.57
Fig. 5.58
Fig. 5.59
Fig. 5.60
Fig. 5.61
Fig. 5.62
Fig. 6.1
Fig. 6.2
Fig. 6.3
Fig. 6.4
Fig. 6.5
Fig. 6.6
Fig. 6.7
Fig. 7.1
Fig. 7.2
Fig. 7.3
Fig. 7.4
Fig. 7.5
Fig. 7.6
Fig. 7.7
Fig. 7.8
Fig. 7.9
Fig. 7.10
xvi
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
List of Tables
Table 1.1
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 3.3
Table 3.4
Table 3.5
Table 3.6
Table 3.7
Table 3.8
Table 3.9
Table 3.10
Table 3.11
Table 3.12
Table 3.13
Table 3.14
Table 3.15
Table 3.16
Table 3.17
Table 3.18
Table 3.19
Table 3.20
Table 3.21
Table 3.22
Table 3.23
Table 3.24
Table 3.25
Table 3.26
Table 3.27
Table 3.28
Table 3.29
Table 3.30
Table 3.31
Table 3.32
Table 3.33
Table 4.1
Table 4.2
Table 5.1
Table 5.2
Table 5.3
Table 5.4
Table 5.5
Table 5.6
Table 5.7
Table 5.8
Table 5.9
Table 5.10
Table 5.11
Table 5.12
Table 5.13
Table 5.14
Table 5.15
Table 5.16
Table 5.17
Table 5.18
Table 5.19
Table 5.20
Table 5.21
Table 5.22
Table 5.23
Table 5.24
Table 5.25
Table 5.26
Table 5.27
Table 5.28
Table 5.29
Table 5.30
Table 5.31
Table 5.32
Table 5.33
Table 5.34
Table 5.35
Table 5.36
Table 5.37
Table 6.1
Table 6.2
Table 6.3
xviii
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 6.4
Table 6.5
Table 7.1
Table 7.2
Table 7.3
xix
List of Symbols
Symbol
Description
A
A
A
af
ar
AI
AISI
ANN
ANOVA
ASTM
b
BC
BCJ
BWR
c
c
C
C
CF
CI
CLIPS
CFD
CONV
CSM
CVM
D
E
ES
EXP
el
th
em
ff
fr
fw
F
Fa
FE
FEM
FLW
Amp
Cross Sectional Area of Column
Surface area
Length of front ellipsoidal of heat source (mm)
Length of rear ellipsoidal of heat source (mm)
Artificial Intelligence
American Iron & Steel Institute
Artificial Neural Network
Analysis of Variance
American Society for Testing and Materials
Co-efficient of thermal expansion (per degree)
Half width of heat source (mm)
Before Christ
Bammann Chiesa-Johnson
Boiling Water Reactor
Penetration depth of heat source (mm)
Specific heat
Welding Current (Amp)
Concentration Coefficient (m-2)
Certainty Factor
Computational Intelligence
C Language Integrated Production Systems
Computational Fluid Dynamics
Convection
Computational Solid Mechanics
Computational Weld Mechanics
Material Stiffness
Young's Modulus of Column
Expert System
Experimental
Total strain
Elastic strain
Thermal strain
Radiation emissivity of cylinder surface
Arc efficiency (%)
Outer Diameter of Cylinder
Fraction of heat in front ellipsoidal of heat source
Fraction of heat in rear ellipsoidal of heat source
Wire Feed Rate (cm/min)
Circumferential Force
Acceleration force vector
Finite Element
Finite Element Methods or Finite Element Modeling
Fine Line Welding
xx
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
FV
FZ
GMAW
GTAW
H
HAZ
HSW
HSLA
htotal
hconvection
I
imax
ISO
IGSCC
K
KBS
L
L
LPHSW
M
MIG
MMAW
M(r, z)
N
NPL
Q
q(r)
q(0)
qloss
qconvection
qradiation
Ro
RO
RSM
ri
ro
r
r
S
SA
SEM
bol
1, 2, 3
1
2
p
y
Finite Volume
Fusion Zone
Gas Metal Arc Welding
Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
Enthalpy of material
Heat Affected Zone
Heat Sink Welding
High Strength Low Alloy
Combined convection and radiation heat transfer coefficient
(Wm-2K)
Convective heat transfer coefficient (Wm-2K)
Current (amperes)
Maximum Number of Iterations
International Organization for Standardization
Inter-granular Stress Corrosion Cracking
Stiffness of Column
Knowledge-Based Systems
Plate Length
Length of Column
Last Pass Heat Sink Welding
Bending Moment
Metal Inert Gas
Manual Metal Arc Welding
Scalar multiplier as a function of axial and radial position
Rotational Speed of Positioner (rpm)
National Physics Laboratory
Shear Force
Surface flux at radius r (Wm-2)
Maximum flux at the center of the heat source (Wm-2)
Total heat loss
Heat loss by convection
Heat loss by radiation
Outer radius of cylinder (mm)
Root Opening
Residual Stress Measurement (MPa)
Cylinder inner radius (mm)
Cylinder outer radius (mm)
Cylinder mean radius
Radial distance from the center of the heat source (m)
Density of material (Kgm-3)
Weld Speed (cm/min)
Simulated Annealing
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Stefan-Boltzman constant (5.6703 x 10-8 Wm-2K-4)
Three principal stresses (MPa)
Stress (MPa)
Transverse residual stress
Longitudinal residual stress
Tensile stress (MPa)
Yield stress (MPa)
xxi
o
h
t
t
T
T0
TS
TL
T
T
Tamb
t
TIG
TSOFT
V
V
w
W
WS
WL
WPP
xxii
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
The first chapter covers the introduction in brief about welding technology including arc
welding and its physics, summary of development of welding technology, welding benefits
and threats, and weld induced imperfections (distortions and residual stresses) in thin walled
structures. Further, this chapter covers the details of GTAW or TIG welding including the
TIG welding process variables (input parameters) and performance measures (output or
response), current challenges in welding domain related to thin walled structures and
application of artificial intelligence (AI) to manufacturing including the detail of expert
system (ES) to welding. At the end of this chapter, the detail of research objectives, research
methodology adopted to tackle the objectives defined and organization of this dissertation are
presented for the self-development of expert system for optimization of welding process of
thin-walled high strength low alloy (HSLA) steel structures.
1.1 Welding Technology
Welding technology is a major part of any mechanical manufacturing facility in the
world. It is considered as the most wide-spread metal joining process in the industries.
Generally, welding can be defined as any process in which two or more pieces of metal are
joined together by the application of heat, pressure, or a combination of both. Most of the
welding processes may be grouped into two main categories [1]:
1. Pressure Welding. The welding in which the weld is achieved by applying the
pressure.
2. Heat Welding. The welding in which the weld is achieved by the function of
heat. Today, the heat welding is the most common welding type used in the
industries.
1.1.1 Arc Welding
Arc welding, which is heat-type welding, is one of the most important manufacturing
operations for the joining of structural elements for a wide range of applications, including
boilers, guide way for trains, ships, bridges, building structures, automobiles, pressure
vessels, missiles and nuclear reactors, to name a few. The American Welding Society (AWS)
defines arc welding as [1]:
A process that uses an electric arc as a source of heat to melt and join metals
It requires a continuous supply of either direct current (DC) or alternating electric
current (AC), which creates an electric arc to generate enough heat to melt the metal and
form a weld. The direct additions and indirect evolution of heat is one of the key elements of
arc welding process, but it is also the source of tension for most of the welding engineers [2].
Welding machine
AC / DC
Electrode holder
Electrode
Arc
Work
Work cable
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
1860-1865
1885
1886
1887
1891
1908-1940
1960
2000
the thermal strains in the weld metal and base metal regions near the weld, resulting in
stresses, which in turn combine and react to produce internal forces that cause bending,
buckling, and rotation. These displacements are known as welding distortions [10]. As a
widely used mechanical manufacturing technique, welding offers a number of technical
challenges to the welding community specially shop floor engineers engaged in
manufacturing of different welded structures. While joining the components of a structure
together by welding, the complex thermal cycles from welding result in formation of residual
stresses in the joint region, and deformation of the welded structure. Both weld residual
stresses and distortions can significantly impair the performance and reliability of the welded
structures [11]. They must be properly dealt with during the product and process design and
manufacturing phases, to ensure intended in-service use of the welded structures. Despite the
recognition of welding as one of the most important fabrication processes in the engineering
industries, there is a little scientific understanding present in the productivity measurement
and evaluation of the welding processes.
1.1.5 Weld Induced Residual Stresses
Residual stresses are those stresses that would exist in a body if all external loads and
restraints were removed. Various technical terms have been used to refer to residual stress,
such as internal stress, initial stress, inherent stress, reaction stress and locked-in stress [12].
Mechanical structures suffer from residual stresses during different phases of their life cycle.
In engineering structures most of the residual stresses are induced during their manufacturing
phase including casting and forging, sheet metal forming and shaping (shearing, bending,
grinding, machining etc.) and welding.
Plate thickness, t
Lengt
h
Width
Fig. 1.2 Schematic view of residual stresses in welded rectangular plate [4]
4
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 1.3 Example of distortion that can occur during welding [21]
Level of stress/distortion
Deformation
Residual stresses
Minimum clamping
Maximum clamping
Degree of
clamping
Fig. 1.4 Effect of the degree of clamping on the level of distortion & residual stresses [4, 23]
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
1.1.7 Weld Induced Residual Stresses and Distortions in Thin Walled Structure
Thin-walled structures comprises an important and growing proportion of engineering
manufacturing with areas of application becoming increasingly diverse, ranging from
aircraft, missiles, ships, pressure vessels, bridges and oil rigs to storage vessels, industrial
buildings and warehouses due to many factors, including cost and weight economy, new
materials and processes etc. Thin-walled structures are designed with advanced numerical
analysis techniques and manufactured using sophisticated fabrication processes. There are,
however, a number of factors that may effects a structure that is not exactly expected and
considered during the design calculations. These effects may be due to the changes in the
properties of the structure, in the geometry, and many others and sometimes, even small
changes in the structure may produce significant changes in the response. The effects of
imperfections in thin-walled structures may introduce changes in the stresses that are nearly
equal to the stresses due to the loads.
Generally the cylinders are considered as thin-walled if the outer diameter of the cylinder
is greater than the twenty times of the cylinder wall thickness i.e. > 20 x t, where is the
outer diameter of the cylinder and t is the cylinder wall thickness.
(b)
(M is bending moment, Q is shear force, and F is the circumferential force)
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
the detrimental effects of surrounding atmosphere gases. Argon is commonly used in welding
unalloyed, low alloyed and stainless steels. Both power supply sources (AC or DC) are used
for GTAW process. Generally, GTAW process uses a direct current (DC) arc, where the
tungsten electrode has a negative polarity thus the tungsten electrode becomes the cathode
and the work piece becomes the anode and the polarity is called straight polarity or direct
current electrode negative (DCEN) [31]. GTAW process has all welding position capabilities
while others are limited to one or a few welding positions. GTAW or TIG welding process is
well accepted for pressure vessels, aero, rocket, and missile, nuclear and marine industries.
2. Weld geometry. It is used for the selection of welding process. The joint type may be
butt, lap, fillet or T-joint. Bevel may be single-V, double-V or U shape. Weld
geometry is directly influential upon weld quality.
3. Welding Position. It can either be flat, horizontal, vertical, or overhead etc. Mainly
vertical and horizontal welding position is used. Difficult welding position increases
the problems in achieving the required weld quality. Weld bead geometry is affected
by the position in which the work piece is held with respect to welding gun.
4. Shielding Gas (lit/min). It is a protective gas used to prevent atmospheric
contamination. GTAW process is mostly conducted in shielding. It has been very
promising in enhancing weld quality. Shielding Gas Flow Rate has significant effect
on weld bead shape which in turn effects the distortion, residual stresses, heat
effected zone (HAZ) and mechanical properties of the material to be welded.
5. Welding Speed (cm/min). It is the parameter that varies the weld penetration and
width of beads. Maximum weld penetration is at a specific welding speed and
decreases as speed varies. The increased input heat per unit length due to reduced
speed results increase in weld width and vise versa. Variations in travel speed at a set
current and voltage also affect bead shape. As welding speed is decreased, heat input
per length of joint increases, and the penetration and bead width increase. Excessively
high travel speeds results a crowned bead as well as the tendency for undercut and
porosity.
6. Wire Feed Rate (cm/min). It is the parameter that controls the speed of welding
filler wire. It is normally attributed to increased resistance heating which itself is
increased with the increase in wire feed rate. The welding current varies with the
change in wire feeding and the relationship is linear at lower feeding rate.
7. Material Thickness (mm). Material thickness plays a vital role in process selection
and parameters setting. Material thickness is used to decide the input heat required
and to control the cooling rate. Higher thickness means higher cooling rate resulting
increase in heat effected zone (HAZ) and hardness of weld metal.
8. Welding Current (Amp). It is one of the most important parameter that directly
affects the penetration and lack of fusion by affecting the speed of welding. Welding
current is the current being used in the welding circuit during the making of a weld. If
the current is too high at a given welding speed, the depth of fusion or penetration
will be too great. For thinner plates, it tends to melt through the metal being joined. It
also leads to excessive melting of filler wire resulting in excessive reinforcement.
This means additional heat input to the plates being welded leading to increased weld
induced distortions and if the welding current is too low, it may result in lack of
fusion or inadequate penetration.
9. Welding Voltage (V). It is the parameter that directly affects the bead width. It also
influences the microstructure and even the success and failure of the operation. Like
current, welding voltage affects the bead shape and the weld deposit composition.
10
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Increase in the arc voltage results a longer arc length and a correspondingly wider,
flatter bead with less penetration. Slightly increase in the arc voltage results the weld
to bridge gaps when welding in grooves. Excessively high voltage produces a hatshaped concave weld, which has low resistance to cracking and a tendency to
undercut. Lower voltages reduce the arc length and increase penetration. Excessively
low voltage produces an unstable arc and a crowned bead, which has an uneven
contour where it meets the plate.
Following are some of the important performance measures of welding process,
besides weld quality, toughness, hardness, ductility, HAZ and FZ etc:
1. Weld Strength (MPa). It is the most important performance measure that directly
affects the weld efficiency and production cost. Mostly, the weld quality is based and
judged by the weld strength and the strength of base metal. Many factors influence
the weld strength including the base material, filler metal, weld type, joint type, weld
method, heat input, and their interactions. Yield and tensile strength are measured
using a standard tensile test from the weld specimen that is to verify the overload
failure will occur in the base metal rather than the weld metal or HAZ.
2. Weld Induced Residual Stresses (MPa) & Distortions. Residual stress is the most
important in the welding performance. Both, residual stresses and distortions are the
major concerns in welded structures. The residual stresses in weld region are
normally tensile and close to the material yield stress due to the shrinkage of the weld
during cooling. Welding residual stresses not only cause distortion but also
significantly affect the performance of welded structures specially, for the failures
occurring under low applied stresses (pre-mature failure) such as brittle fracture,
fatigue, and stress corrosion cracking. The residual stresses have a significant effect
on the process of the initiation and further propagation of the fatigue cracks in welded
elements. The fatigue life of the welded elements depends on the possible variations
of the residual stress level and in many cases the residual stresses are one of the main
factors, determining the engineering properties of structural components, and plays a
significant role in fatigue of welded elements. In welding process, low values of
residual stresses and distortions are desired.
3. Welding Temperatures (oC). The temperatures experienced by the metal produced
by weld torch during the welding process are called as weld temperatures. Base metal
and welding wire composition, metal thickness, weld geometry and high settings of
welding parameters causes the high values of welding temperatures. The amount of
heat input during welding process is very important as the high heat input results
increase in heat affected zone (HAZ).
The discussion in this thesis is confined to the optimization of GTAW or TIG welding
process of thin-walled structure ( linear weld and circumferential weld only) to maximize the
weld strength and minimize the weld induced residual stresses and distortion whereas the
linear seam welds are not of significant interests in present research.
11
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
design due to the optimized weld parameters, reduced failure rates, improved product life and
most importantly reduction in cost for re-welding / reworking for thin plate and cylindrical
welded shell structures can be the major contributions from this research.
Fig. 1.7 Thin-walled Pressure Vessel failures due to weld induced imperfections [4]
In the light of discussion provided above, the current challenges of thin walled structures
welding process or the research gap present in this field that have also set the aim of the
research presented in this manuscript can be listed in the following way:
1. Weld induced imperfections like residual stresses and distortions are a major demerit
of arc welding technology that adversely affects the weld efficiency. Thus, it is a
major need of the present time to search for the welding conditions that could
significantly suppress the weld induced imperfections. By the term welding
conditions it is meant here the different combinations of welding wire parameters
(e.g., weld wire speed, wire composition, wire size etc.), welding parameters (e.g.,
welding speed, welding current, welding voltage, thickness of base metal &
composition, weld type, weld geometry etc.), heating (pre-heating or post heating)
and cooling (e.g., air or gas etc.).
2. The parameters that lead to enhanced weld strength do not necessarily provide
minimum residual stresses or distortion. In addition, it is also well known that the
parameters favorable for low distortion also cause increase in residual stresses. These
two facts imply that the challenge sought is two-folded. The researchers are required,
not only, to find the ways to minimize residual stresses and distortion but also to
make sure that weld strength is not compromised. In other words, researchers have to
find the trade-off among the two conflicting objectives: (a) maximize weld strength;
and (b) minimize residual stresses and distortions.
3. It is also highly desired to have a fully automated system that should acquire
knowledge from the data generated by the research activities and utilize that
knowledge to: (a) work out the optimal welding conditions for achievement of desired
13
objectives in a best possible way; and (b) predict the values of performance measures
based upon welding conditions selected.
1.5 Application of Artificial Intelligence and Expert System to Manufacturing
The requirement number 3 described in the last section is a hot candidate for application
of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools. AI is a branch of science that imparts to machines the
ability to think and reason. Precisely, it can be defined as the simulation of human
intelligence on a machine, so as to make the machine efficient to identify and use the right
piece of knowledge at a given step of problem solving [32]. The ultimate target of research in
field of AI is to construct a machine that can mimic or exceed human mental capabilities
including reasoning, understanding, imagination, and creativity [33]. In a very broad sense
AI can be subdivided into two categories: (1) Knowledge-Based Systems (KBS); and (2)
Computational Intelligence (CI).
KBS is a kind of non-conventional computer program in which knowledge is kept
explicitly separate from the control module of the program. The module that contains the
knowledge, in the form of rules and facts, is called knowledge-base while the control module
is called inference engine. The inference engine contains meta-knowledge i.e. the knowledge
about how, where, and when to apply the knowledge. Expert System (ES) is a special kind of
KBS that contains some extra frills like knowledge acquisition module and explanation
module etc [33]. CI is different from KBS in the sense that in CI the knowledge is not
explicitly stated in form of rules or facts, rather it is represented by the numbers, which are
adjusted as the system improves its efficiency. One of the common forms of CI is the
Artificial Neural Network (ANN) [33].
1.5.1 Expert System
It is a computer program designed to simulate the problem solving behavior of a human
who is an expert in a narrow domain or discipline or field. An expert system is normally
consisted of a knowledge base (information/heuristics etc.), inference engine (analyzing the
knowledge base) and the end user interface (accepting inputs/generating outputs). In expert
system, the path that leads to the development of expert systems is different from that of
conventional programming techniques. Expert systems are capable of delivering quantitative
information or for use in lieu of quantitative information. The other one feature is that the
expert systems can address imprecise and incomplete data through the assignment of
confidence values to inputs and conclusions. The ability to explain reasoning is one of the
most powerful attribute of the expert systems. This ability enhances the user confidence in
the recommendation and acceptance of the expert system. Further, development of expert
system usually proceeds through many phases including problem selection, knowledge
acquisition, knowledge representation, programming, testing and evaluation. The power of an
expert system is based on the knowledge of the expert. The development of expert systems is
in three parts: i) Selecting a problem, ii) Knowledge acquisition and representation, iii)
Evaluation and adoption.
To identify a suitable problem in developing an expert system is the most critical step.
Expert systems are best suited to problems that require experience, knowledge, judgment,
14
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
and complex interactions to arrive at a solution. The knowledge acquisition phase of expert
system development is started after the problem selection. The next step is to have the
knowledge to solve the problem displayed which the expert used in a systematic way so that
it can be coded into the computer. The development of expert systems is expensive. They
need resources, expertise and time to build.
As the ANN lacks explicit representation of knowledge, so it finds its application, mostly,
in fault diagnosis and tool/process condition monitoring within the manufacturing process
domain, whereas ES possesses high potentials for optimizing the process parameters and
improving the manufacturing efficiency/effectiveness. As the main target of this research
work is to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of thin-walled welding process in form of
achievement of objectives, detailed in previous section, the scope of this manuscript will
remain concerned mostly with ES.
1.6 Objectives, Research Methodology and Organization of Dissertation
1.6.1 Objectives
The scope of the research work in this dissertation is limited to linear butt weld of thin
plates and circumferential welding of thin-walled cylindrical shell structures. Mechanical
effects of welding such as welding strength, welding induced residual stresses and
deformations are primarily focused. The primary objective of this research work is to
optimize the welding process to enhance the structural integrity and in-service performance
of arc welded thin-walled structures of high strength low alloy steel.
The main objective under the scope of the present research work is to find out the ways to
reduce distortion and residual stresses to minimum possible levels & maximize the weld
strength and to find out the trade-off between them according to requirements of end user. As
different welding situations require different settings of parameters for optimization, and
considerable amount of effort and time is spent for determination of optimized values of
parameters, it is mandatory to develop an automatic tool that would suggest the
recommendations of different parameters, within no time, for any kind of welding situation.
The potential solution is development of a self-learning expert system for optimization of
welding process and prediction of its performance measures.
In context of the discussion provided in this chapter and in perspective of the industrial
requirements related to the welding technology, the objectives of this research can be enlisted
as follows:
1. Find out the options for enhancement of welding strength for any given welding
conditions. The term options comprises of the search for best welding parameters,
weld wire parameters, and welding environment parameters (e.g., cooling) that could
suppress the residual stresses & distortion and ultimately increase the weld strength to
a maximum possible level.
2. Work out the best welding, and welding environment parameters that could provide
minimum values of residual stresses and distortion for given welding conditions.
15
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
17
Manufacturing
Machining
Metal Forming
Arc Welding
EBW
GMAW
Plasma
TIG Welding
Circumferential
Linear Welds
Welds
Current, Voltage, Weld
Speed, Trailing, Thickness
RSM, Distortion
Tensile Sample
Testing
EXPERIMENTS
Experimental
Work
Modeling &
Simulation
Thermal
Field
Temp. Field
Mechanical
Field
Stress/Strains
Deformations
Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy
Sets
Max-Min
Inference
C++
Coding
Data
Structures
ANOVA, Regression,
Numerical Optimization
Design of
Experiments
Factorial
Design
Rule-Base
Optimization
Prediction
EXPERT
SYSTEM
Programming
1D linked
list
2-D linked
list
Response Surface
Method (RSM)
SELF-DEVELOPMENT
IF -THEN
Rules
Knowledge
Engineering
Optimal
Formation
Simulated
Annealing
Algorithm
Machine
Learning
New
Algorithms
EXWeldHSLASteel
A self-developing ES
Fig. 1.8 Scope and methodological strategy framework of the research
18
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Influence of each welding parameter upon performance measures has been analyzed
using statistical technique called Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). ANOVA helps to
determine whether the effect of any parameter upon certain performance measure is
significant or not. Only those parameters, whose effects are significant upon important
performance measures, are used in calculations or further experiments for achievement of
best values of those performance measures. Regression has been employed to develop the
empirical models of weld strength, distortion and residual stresses in terms of numeric and
significant input parameters. The empirical models covering all the significant numeric input
parameters for estimating the performance measures were developed on the completion of all
the required sets of experiments.
Accomplishments of objectives 3 and 4 have been sought using numerical optimization
technique. Following on from ANOVA results, the optimal values of input parameters can be
determined for the case maximization or minimization of output parameters (performance
measures). If the number of output parameters is more than one then the optimization of all
of them is worked out simultaneously.
The ANOVA results and numerical optimization provided the input data for development
of knowledge-base of the expert system that marked the accomplishment of objective 5. The
expert system was developed in two modules: optimization module and prediction module.
Simulated Annealing Algorithm was employed for the optimization of the rule-base. Fuzzy
logic was used as reasoning mechanism in order to cope with the uncertainties in
relationships between input parameters and output parameters.
Objective 6 has been accomplished by developing innovative algorithms for storing and
retrieving variables and data; for developing fuzzy sets; for developing knowledge-base; for
resolving conflict among opposing rules; and for updating the expert system interface. C++
language was used to program the pseudo-codes of these algorithms. Figure 1.8 shows, in
graphical form, the scope and methodological framework of the research presented in this
dissertation.
1.6.3 Organization of Dissertation
Manuscript of the dissertation has been divided into eight chapters. Chapter 1 provides
the introduction to welding technology, arc welding, TIG welding process, Artificial
Intelligence application to manufacturing and Expert System. Based upon this overview the
current challenges of welding technology have been pinpointed and stated as targets of this
research. Finally, the methodology to accomplish the stated targets has also been elaborated.
Chapter 2 includes the overview of previous research carried in welding domain, welding
simulations; experimental work pertaining to circumferential welding, weld induced residual
stresses and distortions, residual stresses measurement and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to
manufacturing & welding and the limitations.
Chapters 35 cover the analyzing welding parameters, FEM modeling & simulations,
and statistically powered experimental techniques of studying the TIG welding process. The
main targets of the research have had been the identification of influential parameters upon
welding performance measures and the quantification of their effects for the optimization.
19
Chapter 3 includes the welding experiments for analyzing the TIG welding parameters and
their significance and effect on response (i.e. weld strength, residual stresses and distortions)
for linear welds of thin plates by using DOE, ANOVA and numerical optimization. 2-Level
full factorial and response surface method (RSM) designs based on two factor interaction
(2FI) model are used to quantify the effect and significance of input parameters/variables
upon the response. Chapter 4 presents the welding simulations containing analytical model,
FE formulation, heat models, material model, simulation approach in ANSYS and covered
the details of welding induced residual (axial & hoop) stresses fields and distortions (axial &
radial shrinkages) and also covers the details of experimental setup for the FE models
(thermal and structural) validation for circumferential welding. Chapter 5 includes the effects
of welding process parameters (weld speed and heat input), geometric parameters (cylinder
thickness), root opening and tack weld orientations on residual stresses and distortion, and
includes the detail of virtual design of experiments (DOE) by utilizing the simulations and
optimization of welding parameters for thin walled shell structure of high strength low alloy
steel and details the use of full factorial technique and response surface method for design of
experiments, to investigate the effects of welding upon performance measures in weld
experiments. ANOVA was used to analyze the data and optimization was performed using
numerical optimization for data collection to have knowledge base for the development of
expert system.
Chapters 6 7 deal with application of expert system for optimization of welding
process. Chapter 6 details the expert system configuration, including description of
optimization and prediction modules; fuzzy reasoning, including data fuzzification, rules
aggregation, and output defuzzification; and utilization of simulated annealing algorithm for
optimal formation of the rule-base. Chapter 7 of the dissertation describes the algorithms for
imparting the expert system with capabilities of self-learning, self-correction, and selfexpansion. This chapter also includes the description of data structures for programming
pseudo-codes of these algorithms, interfacing of expert system and the application examples
of expert system.
Chapter 8 presents the important conclusions drawn from the analysis and discussion
provided in the chapters of the manuscript, the recommendations and usefulness of
developed expert system in welding domain regarding applicability of the research
conducted, and some of the proposals regarding future research work that can be conducted
on the basis of this research.
20
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the details of literature survey conducted in arc welding domain for
the analysis of welding residual stresses and distortion followed by the research done in
welding process improvement and optimization by applying design of experiments, welding
simulations and specifically research related to circumferential welding computational works
of thin walled structures for the development of FE model of thin walled HSLA steel
structure for circumferential TIG welding of cylinder in this research work. Further, this
chapter covers the main research work related to welding induced residual stresses
measurement and residual stress measurement by hole-drilling in thin plates and for the
experimental validation of FE model to be developed and used for virtual welding
experiments for the optimization of welding process. Later, it provides the details of
literature survey in artificial intelligence (AI) and expert system (ES) to manufacturing,
welding and the limitations of previously developed AI tools for the development of expert
system in this research work.
2.2 Literature Survey in Welding Domain
Welding process is an important domain of activity of to-day industry, especially in the
sector where a lot of assembly of structures has to be done. Generally, the initial design of
industrial parts requires revisions, because unpredictable changes occur in the shape or the
performance of a component when it is welded because its metallurgical structure was
modified by the process. The re-design is very costly since that happen late in the
development cycle of the product. It is now possible to avoid this by anticipating the
undesirable effects of the manufacturing process early in the design stage, by using numerical
simulation, numerical optimization and AI tools. This shows how much virtual welding
process can be important in the development of a new component. Welding simulation utilize
to optimize process parameters during the earlier stages of a new design cycle avoiding
expensive errors that could occur later. The industrial benefits of using welding simulation
and optimization are:
i)
ii)
Residual stresses: The goal is to minimize the gradient and to have a smooth
distribution of the residual stresses resulting from the welding process. By
acting on the welding process, one can have compressive stresses on the
surface of the component, which improves its quality and avoids corrosion
due to tensile stresses. Residual stresses can be optimized by applying design
of experiments and simulations.
21
iii)
22
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
In [37], the authors presented that a software (Design-Expert) was used to establish
the design matrix and to analyze the experimental data. The relationships between the laserwelding parameters (laser power, welding speed and focal point position) and the three
responses (tensile strength, impact strength and joint-operating cost) were established for butt
joints made of AISI304 and optimization of welding process was performed after ANOVA
to increase the productivity and minimize the total operating cost. In [38], the same authors
further presented the effect of laser power (1.21.43 kW), welding speed (3070 cm/min)
and focal point position (2.5 to 0 mm) on the heat input and the weld-bead geometry (i.e.
penetration (P), welded zone width (W) and heat affected zone width (WHAZ)) was
investigated using response surface methodology (RSM) based on BoxBehnken design for
laser butt-welding of medium carbon steel using CW 1.5 kW CO2 laser and the results
achieved indicate that the proposed models predict the responses adequately within the limits
of welding parameters being used. Further as in [37 and 38], the same researchers presented
and used the design-expert software to optimize the keyhole parameters (i.e. maximize
penetration (P), and minimize the heat input, width of welded zone (W) and width of heataffected zone (WHAZ)) in CW CO2 laser butt-welding of medium carbon steel by using the
process parameters i.e. laser power (LP), welding speed (S) and focused position (F) to
achieve the desirable weld bead quality and to increase the production rate and minimize the
total operation cost [39].
In [40], the author introduced an experimental welding technique which is called lowstress non-distortion (LSND) welding for the LSND welding of AL-alloy and steel sheets for
aerospace structures to overcome of an uneven temperature distribution and restraining
forces applied to the welded parts to prevent out-of-plane buckling caused by the heating and
welding processes. The experimental data indicate that the stretching effect following the
LSND welding can be used to control welding stress as compared to stretching effect with
conventional one-point clamping jig only. LSND welding technique shown to be suitable for
materials that are generally fusion-welded with any heat source and the resulting structures
are generally free from significant heat distortion.
In [41], researchers presented a specially designed test rig which was developed and
used for assessment of thermal and residual stresses for given welding conditions
characterized by the peak temperature and cooling time of the thermal cycle of high strength
low alloy quenched and tempered steel with specified minimum yield strength (690 MPa).
An induction coil used for programming the heating and cooling of small specimens for
simulation of actual weld thermal cycles. The chosen range of peak temperature and cooling
time produced varying effects on the temperature field, microstructural state field, and
mechanical field. The longitudinal expansion and contraction of the test specimen was
limited during heating and cooling to synthesize the restraint imposed by welding. This
technique facilitated the study of important relationships between weld thermal cycles, phase
transformations and residual stresses. The thermal stresses are strongly influenced by the
transformation, i.e. by the transformation of austenite into ferrite, pearlite, bainite or
martensite, since these solid state transformations involve a volumetric expansion. In the aswelded condition for fracture assessment of structures, the tensile residual stresses are
assumed to be equal to the room temperature yield strength of the material which exploits the
strength benefit of QT steels.
23
Many welding distortion mitigation methods have been developed by the researchers
to eliminate the welding induced imperfections which are the major concerns of welding
industry. For this purpose, several researchers have used the trailing heat sink during welding
to minimize the distortion. This method is called dynamically controlled low stress no
distortion (DC-LSND) welding which was first developed and introduced by Guan et al.
[42]. However, still its practical application and implementation is complex. In this method, a
trailing heat sink is attached at some short distance behind the welding heat source and
moved as the welding heat source. Usually this method is used to control the welding
buckling of thin plates as the compresses stresses developed during welding of thin sections
exceed the critical level of buckling stress. The welding longitudinal residual stresses effects
significantly with the application of trailing heat sink and residual stresses remains below the
critical buckling stress level and consequently minimize the buckling.
In [43], the two steel plates of AISI 316L of size 250x100x1.5 mm were welded by
TIG welding with same parameters (3mm/s, 750 W) with application of trailing heat sink ( at
fixed distance of 25 mm from welding torch, CO2 as cooling media of trailing). The plate
welded without trailing application was severely buckled whereas the plate welded with
trailing application was free of buckling. Three main factors have been investigated i.e. the
heat sink influence on temperature, the temperature influence on residual stresses and
residual stresses influence on buckling. FE method for thermal mechanical finite element
models is used to study the effect of cooling source parameters (with fixed parameters: 580
W Heat input, 75% efficiency, 3 mm/s welding speed, and 293 K heat sink temperature
whereas the variables: 0-30 mm heat sink diameter (d), 15-50 mm distance (L) from heat
source to heat sink) on temperature field and further the temperature history used for the
study of residual stresses.
In [44], the researcher presented several approaches that have discussed in this
research to analyze the effect of the cooling source parameters. It was determined
analytically that the sensitivity of buckling depends upon stress level and their distribution
behavior and decreases with the decrease of width of compressive zone at the plate edges that
can be achieved with the increase of tension zone width or compressive zone on the weld. It
can be done by predicting and using optimum cooling source parameters. Many approaches
used for cooling source to have desired effect with some merits and demerits i.e. heat
extraction by contact (roll contact with copper shielding box) cooling to have no interference
with arc but surface resistance to contact during moving with heat source, width of cooling
contact and pressure of contact etc. However, the most useful type of cooling source is a jet
of fluid which follows the welding torch at a short distance.
Similarly, many cooling media like compressed air, water, argon gas, helium gas and
liquid nitrogen were used to study the effects after performing several tests. The water and air
are cheap and available very easily. The inert gases (argon and helium) having different
thermal properties provide extra shielding for environment interference with material.
Deformation was checked after TIG welding of steel plates (250x100x2 mm) with
application of cooling and without the application of cooling during welding. Maximum
absolute deflection was measured by pressing one end of plates at flat surface plate and
plates were buckled with different values. The absolute deflection (in mm) of welded plates
was measured with the application of following types of cooling sources: no cooling, air
24
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
cooling (low), water cooling, air cooling (high), and helium cooling whereas the measured
values were 22, 18, 17, 16 and 15 mm respectively. The result values shows that the
deflection decrease 19% with air cooling (low), 23% with water cooling, 28% with air
cooling (high) and 32% with helium cooling respectively. However, the CO2-snow jet is the
best cooling source during welding which resulted drastic decrease in temperature and
consequently deflection but with the drawbacks of un-stability and practical implementation
[44].
2.2.2 Welding Simulations
The main objective in this section would be description of major contributions and
current status of the research in the field of welding simulation specially in circumferential
welding of axis-symmetric structures specifically of thin walled structures like cylinders or
pipe.
Welding simulations techniques are mature enough today to be used in an industrial
context. However, they are extremely CPU time consuming and that is due to the very fine
discretization of the problem needed to observe microscopic phenomena like metallurgical
transformations. The modeled problems are also highly non-linear. High quality, low cost
and shortened time in welding are now the keys of success for manufacturing industries.
Now, thermal-mechanical FEA of the welding process is an emerging and rapidly
maturing technique. Computer aided design of the welding process is becoming an efficient
and effective approach to achieve high quality weld products with reduced residual stresses
and distortions.
In recent years, with the development of powerful computing and data storage facilities,
finite element analysis (FEA) methods have been applied to the simulation of structural
behavior using commercial FE software packages.
In welding process, the measurement of transient thermo-mechanical history is very
important but it is very expensive and time consuming. Usually it fails to give a full picture
of temperature, stress, strains and deformation distribution in the welds. Whereas the detailed
experimental measurements of the residual elastic strain distributions in welded parts are
typically not feasible due to the consumption of significant resources e.g. man, machine &
material. The mathematical modeling of residual stress evaluation is a resource effective
method in comparison to the experimental methods but again the development of the
modeling requires a very careful experimental data.
The analytical approaches were replaced by numerical approaches after the advent of
finite element (FE) based numerical simulation techniques for modeling in welding. It is
possible to study and analyze the nonlinear effects like temperature-dependent convection
and radiation to the surrounding medium, plastic flow and volume expansion during final
phase transformation with the use of finite element method (FEM). The welding process
simulation technique is very expensive due to the requirement of high computational
resources and large data storage capacity, and due to this constraint, some simplification in
the FE model made to reduce computational expenses in the past. Two-dimensional finite
25
element models were analyzed by using the assumptions of lateral and rotational symmetry
in most of the studies regarding circumferential welding. The brief discussion of the
experimental, analytical and numerical work related to the analysis of arc welding to predict
weld induced imperfections like residual stresses and deformation is given below.
By the mid of 1940, the analytical determination of welding and its consequences
studied. However, the significant contribution related to deformations of welded structures
was made in 1950 that led to numerical modeling of heat distributions and structural aspects
of welding processes. The thermo-mechanical analysis of welding is non-linear due to multifield interactions, non-linear thermal as well as structural material response. The field of FEA
of complex welding phenomena is gaining importance in the past three decades and a
significant research work has been contributed and reported in the published literature.
The most of the research work on thermal-structural behavior was dependent on
experiments in 1960-1970 whereas there were only few series classical finite difference
solutions for the non-linear analysis of transient welding heat transfer before 1970. Further,
major efforts were made for the development of computer codes to analyze the complex
mechanism of heat flow through the weldments in late 1970 and sufficient literature on
welding simulation research reported. A detailed review was compiled by Lindgren [45-47]
in three parts in the past and another recent comprehensive review was given in [48].
The most of the unwanted consequences (residual stresses and deformation) from
welding process are considered due to the non-linear heat flow introduced through a moving
heat source. Therefore, the historical development and significant contributions in the heat
source modeling are presented in this section.
Modeling of moving heat source for the analytical solution of transient temperature
distribution in arc welding process presented by Rosenthal [49] was the first step towards the
simulation of welding phenomenon. The author presented linear 2D and 3D heat flow in
solid of infinite size or bounded by planes and validated the model through experimentally
measured temperature distributions during welding of plate of different geometries e.g.
length, width and thickness. A predefined temperature at some defined locations of weld was
used by Goldak et al. [50]. To overcome the issues in previously presented heat source
model, Goldak et al. [51, 52] developed the most dominating heat source model with
Gaussian heat source distribution which also known as Double Ellipsoidal Heat Source
model and most widely utilized now-a-days. The Goldak heat source model with some
necessary adjustments of parameters according to the requirements is used for heat source
modeling in this dissertation in chapter 4 for circumferential welding of thin walled cylinder.
The application of finite element techniques in welding simulation was pioneered by
Ueda and Yamakawa [53] and Hibbitt and Marcal [54]. Further, Friedman [55] and
Andersson [56] presented some research work which clarifies the methodologies involved in
welding simulations and presented the basic methodology for sequentially coupled analysis
technique. They analyzed butt-welding of plates and used plane strain formulation with half
sectional model for thermo-mechanical analysis of welding and various experiments were
conducted to evaluate the effect of modeling techniques, element types, mesh intensity,
modeling of filler materials, type of solvers and numerical integration procedure etc. Both
26
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
studied the material modeling in which the effects of different material properties on thermal
and structural response. The most significant contribution was made by McDill et al. [57-61]
regarding the efficiency and integrity of the computational technique by developing graded
element for dynamic adaptive meshing. At the places of high thermal or stress gradients, the
automatic mesh refinement was achieved and reduced the computational expense
substantially by decreasing the total number of elements in the model by using this gradient
dependant adaptive meshing scheme. Further, for adaptive re-meshing, the same scheme was
modified by Runnemalm et al. [62, 63], Lindgren et al. [64], Hyun and Lindgren [65].
2.2.3 Circumferential Welding Computational Works
Many stress analyses were carried out to understand the residual stress distributions
induced by welding processes by analytically and numerically [66]. Analysis accuracy
depends on the type of model used and the type of computational resource available for
solving problem. For simple geometries like welding of plate, there are several available
simplified analytical expressions for the determination of distortion and residual stress fields.
For butt-welded plates, many researchers [5, 67] summarized such formulas empirically and
analytically for the longitudinal, transverse shrinkage and angular distortion. It is assumed in
the simplified analytical methods that the welding residual stresses are determined by the
local plastic shrinkage strains generated during cooling after the welding process. The
weldment undergoes many complex physical changes, involving interactions between microstructural, thermal and mechanical changes during welding processes, and the plastic strains
accumulated during the final stages of cooling mostly determine the residual distortion. It
means that the temperature and corresponding strain history available during the early stages
of welding can be ignored. This simplified method is also known as Inherent Strain Method
[69]. Vaidyanathan, Finnie and Todato found residual stress in piping by imposing on a
cylinder the residual stress profile generated by a similar weld in a plate through using thinshell theory [70]. There is limited application of this technique to thin-walled pipes with only
one weld pass. The Inherent Strain Method in which a combined experimental and analytical
approach used to determine the source of residual stress by utilizing the characteristics of the
distribution of inherent strains induced in a long welded joint was developed by Ueda et al.
[69]. This method was further developed by Hill and Nelson [71]. The inherent strain model
assumes an axis-symmetric condition which is incapable of predicting the transient residual
stress distributions near the weld start and stop location [72].
Another analytical study by Vaidyanathan et al. [73], the methodology for determination
of residual stresses in thin-walled cylindrical shells welded by single passes full penetration
welds was described in this study and same material was taken for both i.e. base metal and
weld metal. The variation in the calculated and measured stresses values for welding of plate
is considered due to the differential thermal expansion of base and filler metals. They
extended their study further for variety of the welding conditions, partial penetration of weld,
multi-pass weld, and also different materials for base and filler metals.
Rybicki et al. [74] presented a numerical study of multi-pass welding regarding the effect
of pipe wall thickness on welding residual stresses, which is of significant importance for
relating residual stresses with geometrical size of the pipe. Basically it was a parametric
study in which basic FE model was validated for residual stresses measured experimentally
27
and subsequently developed FE model was used for different welding parameters and
geometrical dimensions of the pipe. The author concluded the tensile axial residual stresses
on the inner surface of four inch diameter pipe and observed higher tensile stresses for
relatively thin pipe. Further, as the thickness of pipe increased, the tensile stresses near weld
centerline decreased and compressive stresses away from the weld centerline increased. The
author also concluded that the zone of influence of stresses increased with both the diameter
and the wall thickness increase.
The deformation and stresses for butt welded thin walled pipes were analyzed by
Lindgren and Karlsson [75]. For moving line heat source for thin plates, analytical solution
of Rosenthal [49] was used with the assumptions that temperature through the thickness was
uniform and radius of the pipe was much larger than the wall thickness. This model was the
first complete three-dimensional models for deformation and stresses in thin-walled welded
pipes. To create model geometry, shell element was used which based on the degeneratedsolid concept. This technique was used in two cases i.e. butt-welded plate and butt-welded
pipes. The analytical solution for moving line heat source in thin plates presented by
Rosenthal [49] was used for thin shells with the assumption that temperature across the
thickness was uniform and radius to thickness ratio was very high. The temperature
dependant material model which included phase transformation effects was taken from
Karlsson and Josefson [76]. The strain hardening was not considered in the model. The
comparison between experimental data obtained from literature and calculated axial residual
stress on outer surface shown relatively better agreement but there was complete
disagreement between the hoop stress profile at outer surface near the weld centerline and the
experimental measurement which was considered due to the inadequacies in the material
modeling.
A numerical study for butt welding of pipes by using shell elements was presented by
Karlsson et al. [77]. By considering lateral symmetry, half of the model was analyzed. The
analytical model for temperature distribution and temperature dependant material properties
were taken from literature along with several other simplifications to reduce computational
load like absence of root gap and tack welds and planer symmetry were utilized. A
reasonable agreement was achieved by comparing the predicted radial shrinkage with
experimentally determined values of a manually welded pipe. The variation in measured and
calculated values was considered due to manual welding technique. Due to adequate results
for residual stresses by 2D model, the authors concluded that 3D model is essential for
transient and residual strains.
A complete three-dimensional FE model with solid elements for welding simulation of a
100 mm nominal diameter pipe-pipe joint with 8 mm wall thickness was presented first time
by Karlsson and Josefson [76]. To reduce the computational expense, symmetry along the
weld centerline was also used. The material used for pipe and filler material was of low
carbon steel SIS 2172. A single-pass butt-weld joint geometry was used to model of MIG
welding. To model sequentially coupled thermal stress analysis, a finite element code
ADINAT was used. The heat was generated in thermal model as consistent nodal heat flow
corresponding to the volume of internal heat generation. The intensity of power was assumed
to increase linearly in the axial direction and radially inwards. The results of transient and
residual strain and stresses were presented and compared with the past experimental,
28
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
analytical and numerical results. However, hoop stresses were almost axis-symmetric except
the weld start position.
In [78] author presented a finite element study for multi-pass welding of components of
piping and pressure vessel. Axis-symmetric 2D FE models for girth weld and plane strain
formulation for longitudinal seam were used for the welding of thin pipes of thickness 0.25
inch and thick pipes of thickness 1.3 inch. For FE thermal analysis, Goldak's double
ellipsoidal heat source model [51] was used and to model filler material, approach of inactive
element was used. In this technique, all the elements of the weld passes were removed from
the model before the weld pass and to update FE model for each weld pass, model change
option was used. The assumption of elastic-plastic material was made with kinematic work
hardening and solid-state transformations were also not included. The computational
methodology was validated with good agreement by comparing temperature and stress
distribution with experimentally measured data. Center hole-drilling technique was used to
determine residual stresses experimentally. Various geometrical and loading parameters were
studied like thickness, weld joint geometry, radius to thickness ratio, hydro-test and end
restraint effects. The author concluded that the pipe wall thickness has very small effect for
an r/t ratio of 10 but for r/t ratio of 25 and 50 with the same joint type (double "V"); the axial
residual stress at the inner diameter is higher in thin-walled pipes. Further, as the r/t ratio
increases in thin pipes, the magnitude of axial residual stress at the inner diameter reduces
and whereas in thick pipes, a little variation in stress is observed. Also, the authors described
that the hydro-test reduces the axial residual stress at the inner diameter in girth welds and
the reduction is higher in thin pipes than in thick pipes. Further, the hydro-test has negligible
effect on the transverse residual stress of seam welds whereas the magnitude of axial residual
stress in girth welds of thick pipes of short length with restrained ends is equal to yield stress
through thickness.
In [79], modeling and experimental validation of residual stresses in 304L stainless steel
girth welds in small diameters pipes of 38 mm outer diameter was presented. A 3D
decoupled thermo-mechanical simulation with axial symmetry for autogenous Gas Tungsten
Arc Welding (GTAW) was used. The volumetric heat source with filler metal addition along
with the convection and radiation losses to predict residual stresses was considered.
Bammann-Chiesa-Johnson (BCJ) constitutive model was used to model the mechanical
material behavior at elevated temperature. To capture the temperature profiles at 6 mm and
12 mm from the weld line for the thermal model validation, thermocouples were used and for
the validation of mechanical response, X-ray diffraction method for the measurement of
residual stresses was used. The author concluded close agreement by comparing of predicted
and measured axial and hoop residual stresses on outer surface of the pipes.
A correlation between welding parameters and anticipated welding residual stresses at the
inner surface of the pipe based on the data collected from different analytical, numerical and
experimental studies reported in the literature was developed by Mohr et al. [80]. Author
concluded that residual stresses at the inner surface is the function of heat input in each pass,
number of passes and nominal wall thickness. It was also assumed that about all
circumferential welds have some proportions to be welded in vertical and overhead position
and these positions limits the heat input to maximum value of 50 kJ/in.
29
A 3D finite element simulation for austenitic stainless steel pipe by using shell elements
was performed by Dong et al. [72]. The FE model was similar to the Karlsson et al. [77] and
welding was completed in three passes. The temperature dependent material properties were
taken from the literature. For experimental measurements of residual stresses at inner and
outer surfaces were obtained by blind hole-drilling technique. A qualitative agreement was
found between calculated and measured values of residual axial and hoop stresses on the
outer surface. A parametric study was also performed to predict the effect of wall thickness
and welding speed. Two wall thicknesses of 9.52 mm and 19.04 mm were analyzed for the
effect of wall thickness on stress distributions and the results on the inner surface gave a
similar trend of stress variation as given by Rybicki et al. [74]. Further, three different
welding speeds of 4, 8 and 16 mm/s were used to determine the effect of welding speed. It
was concluded that the effect on the stress distribution due to arc travel speed is minimum.
In [81], the authors performed a parametric study for the determination of residual
stresses in multi-pass girth-butt-welded stainless steel pipes. The main focus of the
parametric study was to investigate the sensitivity of residual stresses due to variation in the
welding parameters. A comparison was made between the predicted stresses and the
expected stress state in ASME Section-IX. 2D FE models were studied by employing
rotational symmetry assumption in order to reduce computational time. Various pipe
diameters from 76.2 mm to 680 mm with corresponding wall thickness from 7.1 mm to 40.0
mm were studied. The number of weld passes depending on the pipe wall thickness varied
from 4 to 36. The temperature dependant material properties with bilinear kinematic
hardening and without solid-state transformation were taken from literature. The Von-Mises
yield criteria were considered and time step duration was chosen on the basis of welding
speed and fraction of circumference included in weld pass volume. To accommodate both the
convection and radiation heat losses from the surface, a combined heat transfer coefficient
was used. The variation of residual stress in radial direction resulting from different weld
parameters were discussed and compared with the available literature results.
A sequentially coupled thermal stress analysis for the determination of residual stresses
was presented by Teng and Chang [82]. They demonstrated the effects of pipe diameter and
wall thickness on residual stresses based on axis-symmetric FE models parametric studies.
The temperature dependant material properties were used for the elastic-plastic material
model without solid state phase transformations. The results exhibited self balancing
behavior of residual stresses. The axial and hoop stresses were tensile on the inner surface
near the weld centerline whereas stress reversal occurred in the regions away from the
centerline. Increase in wall thickness of pipe reduced residual stresses at the weld centerline
and increase in pipe diameter increased influence of residual stresses. Teng and Chang [83]
further enhanced their contribution [82] to 3D shell element models and analyze welding
residual stresses on the same sized pipes to investigate the effect of pipe wall thickness with
same material properties, simulation strategy and most of the welding parameters. Two wall
thicknesses i.e. 2.8 mm (schedule 5) and 3.8 mm (schedule 10) were only studied with
change of welding speed according to wall thickness.
Dong and Zhang [84] presented the effect of strength mismatch welds on residual stress
field and fracture behavior. Their work was related to plate welding as well as thick-walled
(1.5 inch) pipe welding. The temperature independent material properties with bilinear
30
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
kinematic hardening was used and to model multi-pass girth welding of 304 austenitic
stainless steel pipes used 2D axis-symmetric FE model.
In [85], the author experimentally evaluated various techniques for the reduction of
tensile residual stresses at the inner surface of the pipes. Different welding techniques were
used to control in-process of residual stresses. The results were compared of conventional
and optimized GTA (gas tungsten arc) narrow gap welding. The authors concluded that the
width of fusion zone can be reduced to about 45% with optimized narrow gap welding
technique and found relatively less tensile residual stresses due to reduced axial shrinkage
and less sensitized zone. The ring core method and XRD method were used for experimental
determination of residual stresses.
A three-dimensional finite element simulation of sequentially coupled thermo-mechanical
analysis of multi-pass welding of pipes was presented by Frieke et al. [86]. The author
investigated the weld induced residual stresses and three different techniques for the control
of theses residual stresses. Two techniques related to in-process control were application of
narrow gap welding and last pass heat sink welding. The third one technique relates to post
weld stress mitigation was in-service aging technique. The 8-node linear brick elements were
used for temperature dependency of material. A good agreement at discrete locations was
concluded after the comparison of simulation results with experimental data but there was
disagreement between axial stresses distribution along circumferential direction with
experimental results and even did not exhibit qualitative agreement. It was concluded that
residual stresses are by no means axis-symmetric on the basis of axial stress variation in
circumferential direction. Further, it was presented that tensile axial residual stresses at inner
surface change drastically near weld start and end locations.
Fig. 2.1 Axial residual stress plots on outer (left) and inner surface (right) [87]
In [87] the authors presented an important contribution in circumferential welding by
developing 3-D FE model and 2-D axis-symmetric FE model to analyze the temperature
31
fields and the residual stress distributions for arc welding of stainless steel (SS304) pipes.
The numerical simulations results were compared with the experimental measurements and
proved that the proposed computational procedure is an effective method for predicting the
thermal cycles and the welding residual stresses. The authors presented that temperature
distribution around the heat source is very steady when the welding torch moves around the
stainless steel pipe. The simulated results from the 3-D model presented that the residual
stress around the circumferential direction almost has a homogenous distribution except for
the welding start part. The axial residual stresses on the inside and the outside surfaces
showed a contrary distribution. A tensile axial residual stress was produced on the inside
surface as shown in Figure 2.1 (right), and compressive axial stress at outside surface as
shown in Figure 2.1 (left) in weld zone and its vicinity. Tensile axial stress was formed on
the outside surface and compressive axial stress on the inside surface away from the weld
centerline.
In addition to their work the same authors along with Liang [88] presented hybrid
numerical and experimental investigations of welding residual stresses in multi-pass buttwelded of medium thick-walled austenitic stainless steel pipes. Multi-pass welding
experiments were performed initially to examine the evolution of temperature and residual
stress trends. 2D axis-symmetric FE models and similar modeling & simulation approach as
presented in [87] was applied without considering the metallurgical effects. The authors
compared the results with experimental measurements and claimed a precise prediction of
thermal and stress strain fields. It was also concluded from the results that the yield strength
of the weld metal has significant effect on the final welding residual stress especially in the
weld zone.
Siddique [89] presented the field of arc welding simulations of girth welding. The author
focused on the prediction of weld induced imperfections like distortions and residual stresses
in pipe-flange joints and presented the effects of welding parameters, welding procedures and
applied mechanical constraints on residual stress built up and transient deformations. Some
efforts were presented to suggest the mitigation techniques to enhance the in-service life of
welded pipe-flange structures. The effects of number and locations of tack welds on the
transient and residual stress and strains and deformations on the pipe-flange joint were
discussed. The results from some selected simulations were experimentally validated with
close co-relation between the deformations and residual stresses.
A 3D thermo-mechanical analysis was presented for the study of the effects of
welding sequence on welding deformations in pipe joints of AISI stainless steel [90].
Parametric studies were conducted by using single-pass TIG welding with "V" joint
geometry in pipes having a diameter of 274 mm and a thickness of 6.2 mm based on nine
different welding sequences. Few experimental measurements based on conventional
metrology were presented in order to verify the FE simulated data. The authors presented that
it is possible to optimize the weld induced deformations by selection of a suitable welding
sequence.
A 3D finite element simulation of circumferential welding of mild steel pipes was
presented by Lee and Chang [19]. Further, parametric studies with pipe inside radius to wall
thickness ratio ranging from 10 mm to 100 mm were presented for the study of the effects of
32
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
33
34
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
In 1975, Lotfi A. Zadeh proposed the fuzzy set theories and fuzzy logic that deals with
reasoning with inexact or fuzzy concepts. Fuzzy logic (FL) computes with words rather than
with numbers whereas the fuzzy logic controller (FLC) controls with rules (IF-THEN) rather
than with equations. Generally, FLCs are used in industrial process, consumer products,
utility-services such as traffic control, satellite communication systems and military purpose.
Mostly the applications of these are via fuzzy expert systems [119].
Traditionally, AI covers several application areas in manufacturing. Recently developed
systems have demonstrated the importance of artificial intelligence based software to
produce intelligent engineering software that can make many routine engineering decisions
for welding applications and guide a human user to optimum decisions for welding to save
cost and human hours. Mostly, these systems utilize expert systems and neural networks
technology to provide and predict accurate weld process models and engineering decision
making capability [120].
Usually expert systems in welding include the application of to select the suitable filler
metal type and size, to determine the pre-heat and post-weld heat-treatment schedules, to
determine welding parameters and others [120].
In [121] presented a fuzzy expert system approach for the development of the
classification of different types of welding flaws in the radiographic weld domain. The fuzzy
rules were generated from the available examples using two different methods and the
knowledge acquisition problem was carried by using two machine-learning methods by using
a simple genetic algorithm to determine the optimal number of partitions in the domain
space. The author concluded that the improved knowledge acquisition method generates
better fuzzy rules in terms of classification accuracy and the fuzzy expert system approach
shown to perform better than the fuzzy k-nearest neighbor algorithm and the multi-layer
perception neural networks approach based on the bootstrap method. Further concluded that
the fuzzy models are transparent and human understandable, unlike the two other approaches.
In [122] presented that expert system techniques are a more fruitful approach to the
automated generation of procedural plans for arc welding than previous algorithmic methods.
The main purpose was to evaluate recent computing advances in the context of planning for
arc welding and to extract more generic knowledge about the application of expert system
techniques to advanced manufacturing problems. A prototype expert system was presented
which can generate welding procedures to the specification of BS4870.
In [123] the authors developed an expert system for quenching and distortion control in a
heat treatment process. The goals of this expert system were predicting results obtained under
given quenching conditions and to improve the performance by supporting decision making.
Different input parameters (quenchant category, quenchant temperature, agitation velocity,
viscosity, geometry and density of part material, speed, carbon content, suspension and
fixture type etc) were studied for the analysis of several parameters (desired suspension,
cooling rate, cooling nature, hardness, distortion tendency and cracking potential etc). The
system responds with predicted values as high, moderate or low and user can alter the input
values to change the response.
36
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Artificial neural networks (ANN) are general, multi-variable, and non-linear estimators
and the most important benefits of NN are non-linearity and input/output mapping. The most
common network used is back-propagation (BP) which is stochastic approximation to nonlinear regression. Artificial neural networks have a wide scope in the field of welding
analysis for obtaining optimum welding parameters, residual stresses and bead geometry
(width, height and penetration) for a given set of welding parameters and a specific joint
configuration. These are used to predict the temperatures distributions in the weld and to
predict the size and shape of weld liquid pool on the given parameters like voltage, current,
wire speed and travel speed and these can be helpful in selecting the preheat and post weld
heat treatment schedules.
In [124] a genetic algorithm and response surface methodology used for determining
optimal welding conditions and desirability function approach was used for different
objective function values. Application of the method proposed in this research revealed a
good result for finding the optimal welding conditions in the gas metal arc (GMA) welding
process.
In [125] researchers have developed direct measuring techniques for welding residual
stress. The existing tools are limited in application. This research details the development of
intelligent techniques and use of a function-replacing hybrid for predicting the residual stress
in butt-welding to meet the demands of advanced manufacturing planning by using neural
network, genetic algorithm.
In [126] an integrated approach comprising the combination of the Taguchi method and
neural networks for the optimization of the process conditions for GTA welding was
presented. Taguchi method was used for design of experiments and initial optimization with
ANOVA for the significance of parameters of GTA welding (Electrode size, Electrode angle,
Arc length, Welding current, Travel speed, and Flow rate). The author concluded that the
LevenbergMarquardt back propagation (LMBP) algorithm neural networks represent an
easy and quick method to explore a non-linear multivariate relationship between parameters
and responses. By using this technique with Taguchi method only, the average depth-towidth ratio in weld bead of GTA welding process for SS304 improved about 11.96% from
the initial optimal parameters to the real optimal parameters.
In [127] the authors presented a novel attempt to carry out the forward (the outputs as the
functions of input variables) and reverse (the inputs as the functions of output variables)
modeling of the metal inert gas welding (a multi-input and multi-output) process using fuzzy
logic-based approaches. The statistical regression analysis was used for the forward modeling
efficiently. The developed soft computing-based approaches were found to solve the above
problem efficiently.
In [128] a prototype knowledge based expert system named WELDES was presented.
WELDES was developed to identify the aluminum welding defects, to correlate them with
the welding parameters, which cause them, and to offer advice regarding the necessary
corrective actions for a ship industry. The first step in this expert system was the systematic
classification of the aluminum welding defects and the analysis of the reasons, which cause
them. The WELDES system consists of two modules: the Diagnostic Module, and the
37
Adviser Module. The structure of this expert system is ideally suited to the knowledge
domain of the welding.
Today, the potential of expert systems is now well documented if not unanimously
accepted in manufacturing domain. However, the application of expert systems particularly
regarding the welding domain, there is comparatively little evidence of practical and regular
utilization in the industry. Not much work has been done related to application of AI to the
field of welding to predict the response and their optimization. However, some work related
to machining process has been done and would be helpful to understand the AI and expert
system application to manufacturing process which can be used in the welding domain also.
A few papers can be found in manufacturing that describe the utilization of expert system
in online diagnosis of machining conditions, selection of appropriate tools and machining
parameters. A fuzzy knowledge-base for the diagnosis of turning process states was utilized
by Fang [129]. The knowledge-intensive fuzzy feature-state relationships developed with
support of expert system were utilized in the diagnosis process. In [130] a fuzzy expert
system was developed that contained four modules: a database, a cutter-selection module, a
cutting condition design module, and a learning module. The use of fuzzy nonlinear
programming for the optimization of process parameters was made in the cutting condition
design module.
In [131] authors developed an expert system applicable to turning process by utilizing
fuzzy logic as the reasoning mechanism to determine the best cutting speeds for given
combinations of work piece material hardness and depth of cut. In [132] an expert system
presented for the selection and optimization of tool-holder, insert, and cutting conditions of
the turning process. Optimization model has utilized for the selection of machining
conditions in this system. In [133] an adaptive-network based fuzzy inference system
(ANFIS) was utilized to predict the work piece surface roughness by using input parameters
in end milling process. The use of triangular membership functions was reported as better
than trapezoidal ones in accurately predicting the surface roughness.
2.5 Chapter Summary and Conclusions
Rather than concentrating on highly resource intensive welding experiments as in
tradition, welding engineers around the globe feels comfortable with modeling & simulation
tools to predict the response of welding and to analyze and optimize the welding parameters
by systematic design of experiments (DOE), ANOVA and numerical optimization and
subsequently their adverse consequences on in-service structural integrity of welded
structures. With enhanced computational resources and substantial development in numerical
simulation tools, the use of Finite Element techniques in Computational Weld Mechanics
(CVM) focusing on structural response of welded structures has been progressively
increasing to its maturity level and is being successfully employed in to-day industrial
problems.
In the preceding discussion related to CVM (in this chapter), efforts are made to
encompass the evolution process of this technique with reference to circumferential welding
of thin-walled structures specifically. A lot of work pertaining to numerical simulation of
38
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
industries, and metal welding industry is one of them. Mostly the expert systems find their
usage only in research institutes, and the reason is the above-mentioned limitations,
especially the last one. If an expert system cant respond, positively and briskly, to the fast
changing requirements, targets, and methods then it is likely to be eliminated in a highly
dynamic industrial environment.
In this research work an expert system for optimizing GTAW or TIG welding process of
thin walled structures of high strength low alloy steel based on thin plate welding
experimentation and optimization and virtual experiments performed by developing 3D FE
model of circumferential welding with experimental validation as per objectives has been
presented, that has also addressed all the above limitations or the current challenges or
research gap in this area in an effective manner. The details will be provided in the respective
chapters.
40
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 3
ANALYZING & OPTIMIZING TIG WELDING PROCESS
PARAMETERS
3.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the details of experiments conducted, and analyses performed upon
the experimental data of TIG welding of thin high strength low alloy (HSLA) steel sheet, for
the purpose of analyzing and optimizing the welding parameters, their practical range and
effect. Initially, the experiments performed can be regarded as the preliminary set of
experiments, without following a standard design of experiments (DOE) technique. These
were performed to identify the potential significant parameters and to design the upcoming
sets of experiments based upon the results obtained. Though the emphasis would be upon
welding parameters but the effect of thin sheet metal thickness will also be tested. First the
parametric range effect will be observed by weld bead and penetration quality of welding
samples.
Further, this chapter provides in-depth study of effects of welding process parameters
upon weld strength, distortion and residual stresses following the standard design of
experiments (DOE) by using full factorial (2-level) method and response surface method
(RSM). In addition to performing ANOVA of experimental results, the empirical models, for
quantifying the effects of welding parameters, numerical optimization and response
desirability will also be presented along with the detail of experimental setup used for
welding of thin plates of different thicknesses (3, 4 and 5 mm). Mostly, the sheets of
thickness between 3 to 5 mm of high strength low alloy steels are used for aerospace
applications at high pressures i.e. 100 bars or above.
3.2 Design of Experiments
Every experiment has to plan to obtain enough and relevant data so that the science
behind the observed phenomenon can be understand. It can be possible by trial-and-error
approach or design of experiments.
In trial-and-error approach, a series of each experiment performed which gives some
understanding. This technique requires measurements after every experiment so that analysis
of observed data may be used to decide what to do next. Many times such series of
experiments give negative results and cause a discouraging situation for further
experimentation with any change. Therefore, such experimentation usually ends well before
the number of experiments reach to draw any significant conclusions and solution of the
main problem of understanding the phenomenon.
Whereas the design of experiments (DOE) is a well planned set of experiments and is
a much better approach to obtain systematic data in which all parameters of interest are
varied over a specified range to give desired results. The advanced Design of Experiments
(DOE) capabilities help to improve the process. The factors can be screened to determine
which are important for explaining process variation and to understand how the factors
41
interact and drive the process to find out the factor settings that produce optimal process
performance. The number of runs depends on how many factors and their levels [124,126].
3.2.1 Predictor Variables
Predictor variables are the welding process parameters, whose effects upon the
performance measures are tested in the experiments to be conducted. Predictor variables can
also be represented as process input parameters or input variables or control factors as shown
in the Figure 3.1 describing various factors with multi-inputs and multi-outputs. In every
process, there are some inputs which may be converted into desired outputs or response by
means of some process through control factors.
Fig. 3.1 Process showing the factors with multi-inputs and multi-outputs
By the brainstorming, all the factors are listed that could possibly influence any of the
responses to measure and categories according to their influence upon the response. Range
and control of each factor that may cause amount of change in response are determined to
study. Following is the list of possible TIG welding predictor variables with possible
practical parameter values that would be under scrutiny in the actual welding experiments to
be performed on HSLA sheets of different thicknesses:
1. Welding Current (Amp) (170-285)
2. Welding Voltage (Volts) (10-15)
3. Welding Speed (cm/min) (15-20)
4. Sheet Thickness (mm) (3, 4, 5)
5. Wire Speed (cm/min) (110-130)
6. Gas Flow Rate (L/min) (20-25)
7. Trailing Flow Rate (L/min) (20-25)
42
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 3.1 displays the initial settings of predictor variables tested in the initial welding
experiments to have a practical range of these variables for detailed experiments.
Table 3.1 Initial settings of predictor variables
Test
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Welding
Current
(Amp)
170
170
285
285
170
170
285
285
170
170
285
285
Welding
Voltage
(V)
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
15
Welding
Speed
(cm/min)
15
20
15
20
15
20
15
20
15
20
15
20
Sheet
Thickness
(mm)
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
Wire
Speed
(cm/min)
110
130
110
130
110
130
110
130
110
130
110
130
Trailing
Flow Rate
(l/min)
20
25
20
25
20
25
20
25
20
25
20
25
From Table 3.1, four experiments were conducted for each thickness (i.e. 3 mm, 4
mm and 5 mm) with high and low settings of other variables to analyze the effect. The weld
quality in respect of weld bead as shown in Figure 3.2 and penetration of test no. 1, 6 and 11
was good and the quality of test no. 2 and 12 was satisfactory but the quality of test no. 3, 4,
5, 7, 8, 9, 10 was not satisfactory. There was no penetration in test no. 9 and 10 due to high
thickness and very low current and low values of other parameters whereas the test no. 3 and
4 were burnt at weld line due to less thickness and high current and other parameters. The
penetration in test no. 5 was poor and in test no. 7 & 8 was excessive along with the sink of
bead. The weld bead quality achieved of twelve tests has presented in Figure 3.2 by given the
quality ranking from 1-5 for low to high quality of weld bead which was analyzed by visual
inspection. The measurements of weld bead width (10-14 mm), height (1.5-2 mm) and
penetration (1-1.5 mm) was observed for a good weld for the thickness of HSLA steel sheet
from 3-5 mm.
E ffe c ts o f P a r a m e te r s o n W e ld B e a d Q ua lity
5
0
1
6
7
Te s t No .
10
11
12
The most significant parameter is current with high range of values as compared to
others parameters. It shows the practical range of these parameters specifically of welding
current should be specific with respect to thickness of material and the heat input (welding
current, welding voltage and welding speed) required for the fusion and weld of selected
thickness. With the increase in material thickness, the increase in heat input is required
accordingly. The parameters and their levels were required to be reviewed. The revised
parameters and their practical high and low settings were revised to conduct the experiments
as given in detail in the following sub-section.
3.2.1.1 Factorial Design of Experiments
The factorial designs allow for the simultaneous study of the effects that several
factors may have on a process. During an experiment, varying the levels of the different
factors simultaneously rather than one at a time is efficient to save the resources in terms of
time and cost, and also allows for the study of interactions between the different factors.
Without the use of factorial experiments, important interactions may remain undetected
because the interactions are the driving force in many processes.
The number of influential input variables is large in many process development and
manufacturing applications. The screening process is used to reduce the number of input
variables by identifying the key input variables or process conditions that affect product
quality and to focus process improvement efforts on the few really important variables and
also to suggest the "best" or optimal settings for these factors. In industry, two-level full and
fractional factorial designs are often used for screening the actually important factors that
influence process output measures or product quality.
The responses are measured at all combinations of the experimental factor levels in a
full factorial experiment. The factor levels combinations represent the conditions at which
responses will be measured. Each experimental condition is called as run and the response
measurement as an observation where as the entire set of run is called as design. Each
experimental factor in a two-level full factorial design has only two levels. The all
combinations of these factor levels are included in the experimental runs. The two-level
factorial provide useful information for relatively few runs per factor and is used to indicate
the major trends to provide direction for further experimentation and optimal settings.
A 24 (4 factors, 2 levels, 16 test) full factorial design model (replicates 1, block 1, centre
point per block 0 and order 4FI) was used for the welding experiments. Table 3.2, Table 3.3
and Table 3.4 shows the low and high settings (or levels) for the predictor variables (or
parameters) used in sixteen tests for the sheet thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. Three
of these predictor variables (welding current, welding voltage and welding speed) are
numeric while the other one gas trailing is categorical. Complete detail of 16 experiments
following full factorial has been presented in Table 3.5, Table 3.6 and Table 3.7 for sheet
thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. All the statistical analyses were performed using a
commercial computing package named Design-Expert 7.1.6, by Stat-Ease and statistical
software MINITAB Release 14 throughout this manuscript.
44
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Units
Type
Low Actual
High Actual
A
B
C
D
A
V
cm/min
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Categoric
170.00
10.50
15.00
nil
210.00
13.50
18.00
Ar
Current
Voltage
Weld Speed
Trailing
Units
Type
Low Actual
High Actual
A
B
C
D
A
V
cm/min
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Categoric
200.00
10.50
15.00
nil
220.00
13.50
18.00
Ar
Current
Voltage
Weld Speed
Trailing
Units
Type
Low Actual
High Actual
A
B
C
D
A
V
cm/min
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Categoric
230.00
10.50
15.00
nil
270.00
13.50
18.00
Ar
Current
Voltage
Weld Speed
Trailing
Run
12
5
1
3
11
7
8
16
13
4
9
10
2
6
15
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Factor 1
A:Current
A
210.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
210.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
210.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
Factor 2
B:Voltage
V
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
C:Weld Speed
cm/min
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
Factor 4
D: Trailing
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
45
Run
12
5
1
3
11
7
8
16
13
4
9
10
2
6
15
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Factor 1
A:Current
A
220.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
Factor 2
B:Voltage
V
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
C:Weld Speed
cm/min
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
Factor 4
D: Trailing
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
Run
12
5
1
3
11
7
8
16
13
4
9
10
2
6
15
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Factor 1
A:Current
A
270.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
Factor 2
B:Voltage
V
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
C:Weld Speed
cm/min
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
Factor 4
D: Trailing
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
46
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
University of Engin
Engineering & Technology, Taxila-Pakistan
The traverse system that allows a precise and controlled movement of the welding
torch unit.
A control unit that controls the welding power source and traverse system along with
measures the welding parameters.
All the TIG welding experiments, described in this manuscript, have been performed on
SAF TIGMATE 270 AC/DC power source, SAF NERTAMATIC 300 TR and fully
automatic torch control and movement system is utilized in present research with minimum
manual interference. TIGMATE 270 and NERTAMATIC 300 TR welding power sources as
shown in Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 is a computerized
omputerized waveform control technology for high
quality TIG welds. The parameters can be controlled as desired. Automatic torch positioning
system is used to control / locate the torch movement. Tack welded sheets are properly
clamped (as per desired stru
structural
ctural boundary conditions) with torch aiming at 90o. Refer
Figure 3.6 for sample clamping arrangement, Figure 3.
3.7 for details of automatic TIG torch
and clamping arrangements. Weld samples before and after welding are shown in Figure 3.8
3.
and Figure 3.9 respectively.
Fig. 3.4 SAF TIGMATE 270 Power Source Fig. 3.5 NERTAMATIC 300 TR Power Source
48
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Distortion was measured using digital dial indicator (0.001 mm) by placing distorted
welded sample on surface plate as shown in Figure 3.10 and Figure 3.11. The measurements
were taken along the weld line at 15 mm from centre of weld line with incremental of 50 mm
at ten points from end to end of 500 mm plate in length and all the plates are marked
according to this division. The maximum distortion was observed at centre of plate (at about
250 mm from end) and minimum at the ends of plate along the weld in all experiments.
Tensile test samples were prepared by water jet cutting and then machining from the welded
plate of 500 mm in length of thicknesses (3, 4 and 5 mm) according to sizes as given in
Figure 3.12. Testing of tensile weld samples (as welded) as shown in Figure 3.12 and Figure
3.13 was performed using Universal Testing Machine EDC (250 KN / 25 Ton), UNLINGEN
BC-TestTec GmbH, with MF-A axial extensometer with pretension of 50 N and gripping
49
length of 110 mm. Test speed was fixed at 5 mm/min and test standard used for welded
samples was ASME-IX as shown in Figure 3.14 and Figure 3.15.
50
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The hole-drilling method is used for the measurement of residual stresses and the
equipment for hole-drilling strain gage along with P3500 strain meter from Vishay Group as
shown in Figure 3.16 is used for experimental determination of residual stress fields as
shown in Figure 3.17. The milling guide RS-200 can be easily mounted on flat specimens for
flat bottomed holes, followed by hole-diameter measurement with microscopic tube.
Complete experimental setup for residual stress measurement is shown in Figure 3.19. There
are six basic steps involved for measurement of residual stresses by hole-drilling method as
51
follows [134] and this procedure is relatively a simple procedure standardized by ASTM
Standard Test Method ASTM-E837 [135].
On the test part at the point where residual stresses are to be determined, a special
three (or six) element strain gage rosette is installed. Two different types of strain
gage rosette (EA-XX-062RE-120 and CEA-XX-062UM-120) as shown in Figure
3.18 are used with features of 120 0.2% and 120 0.4% in ohms respectively, as
given by [136].
P-3500 strain indicator (a switch and balance unit) as shown in Figure 3.16 (right) is
used for connection of gage grids to a static strain indicator. The accuracy of reading
of P-3500 is 0.5 % and the resolution sensitivity is 1 .
A precision milling guide Model RS-200, as shown in Figure 3.16 (left) from Vishay
Measurement Group is used for accurate placement and centering of a precision
milling guide on the drilling target. The range of error of RS-200 is 20 MPa.
The zero balancing of the gage circuits followed by the drilling of small, shallow hole
through the geometric center of the rosette.
The relaxed strains measurement, corresponding to the initial residual stress values.
The principal residual stresses and their angular orientation are calculated from the
measured strains by using special data-reduction relationships.
Fig. 3.16 Hole-drilling equipment & P-3500 strain indicator from Vishay Group
52
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 3.1
3.19 Residual Stresses Measurement setup
3.3.1
.1 Characteristics of Base Metal and Filler Wire
High Strength Low Alloy (HSLA) steels are produced to provide better mechanical
properties, and/or greater resistance to atmospher
atmospheric
ic corrosion. Important applications of the
HSLA steels include parts of aircraft and rockets, missiles, and hot forging dies. The HSLA
steels have low carbon contents in order to produce adequate formability and the carbon
contents of these steels lies bbetween 0.3-0.5%
0.5% and the main alloying elements are Cr, Ni, Mo
and V. The hardness of this steel is enhanced by means of heat treatment (quenching) and
tempering. When quenched and tempered these steels may attain strength of upto 1700 MPa.
However, these steels
teels are sensitive to cold cracking due to carbon and alloy contents. Thin
sections required preheating before welding and stress relieving after welding to avoid
cracking. Table 3.8 shows the chemical composition of base metal (HSLA steel) analyzed by
spectrometer on shop floor [137, 138, and 139].
53
Content (%)
Cr
Si
Mn
Mo
Ni
0.28-0.32
0.013
Tensile strength is one of the most predominant factor in the application of HSLA steels.
Consequently, the filler metal is selected most frequently on the basis of providing a weld
metal with minimum yield and tensile strength values that are equal to those of base metal
with consideration of alloying contents and corrosion resistance. The low temperature impact
properties, as well as the tensile strength of the weld deposit, can be an important factor when
selecting the filler metals for the welding of HSLA steels [140]. Table 3.9 shows the
chemical composition of filler wire (H08) obtained by wet analysis method [138].
Table 3.9 Chemical composition of Filler Wire (H08)
C
Cr
Si
Mn
Mo
Ni
Al
Content 0.08-0.12 1.4-1.7 1.1-1.3 0.9-1.1 0.05-0.15 0.4-0.6 1.8-2 0.006 0.005 0.10
(%)
When different low alloy steels welded under same welding conditions, showed varying
weld induced imperfections and weld strength. This implies that material thickness alone is
not an adequate parameter to evaluate weld strength. Chemical composition of base metal
and filler wire also play vital role. Table 3.10 presents the mechanical properties of base
metal (HSLA steel) [139]. After heat treatment ( i.e. quenching and tempering ), these
mechanical properties of base metal reaches to 1600 MPa (Tensile Strength), 1300 MPa
(Yield Strength), 8% (Elongation) and 48 HRC (Hardness). However, the distortion in
thin walled structure increases due to heat treatment process. Generally, these metals are
stress relieved by heat treatment after welding and practically the weld induced stresses are
relieved by this method in ideal condition upto 70-80 %. Therefore, it is required that the
weld induced imperfections (i.e. distortion and residual stresses) should be controlled to
minimum during welding of thin walled structures of HSLA steel.
Table 3.10 Mechanical properties of Base Metal (HSLA Steel)
Tensile Strength
(MPa)
700-800
Yield Strength
(MPa)
500-600
Elongation
(%)
20
Hardness
(HRC)
20
54
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to investigate and to model the relationship
between a response variable and one or more independent variables. The analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was developed by Sir Ronald Fisher in the 1930s as a way to interpret the results
of agricultural experiments. ANOVA is not a complicated method and has a large amount of
mathematical uniqueness associated with it. The purpose of the ANOVA is to investigate
welding process parameters, which can significantly affect the quality characteristics. The
percentage contribution in the total sum of the squared deviations can be used to evaluate the
importance of the welding process parameter change on these quality characteristics. In
addition, the F-test, named after Fisher, can be used to determine which welding process
parameters have a significant effect on the quality characteristics. Usually, when the F-test
value is greater than 4, it means that a change in the process parameter has a significant effect
on the quality characteristics [126]. ANOVA is used to determine the model with the view of
the following points:
- Model F-Value and associated probability value to confirm model significance.
- Predicted R-Squared and Adjusted R-Squared in reasonable agreement.
- Adequate Precision (signal to noise ratio) to use model to navigate design space.
- Tests on individual terms to confirm they are significant.
Regression analysis is also used to investigate and model the relationship between a
response variable and one or more predictors. The least squares (for continuous variable),
partial least squares (for highly correlated predictors), and logistic (for categorical variable)
regression methods are used to estimate the parameters.
Numerical optimization is used to optimize any combination of one or more goals.
The goals may apply to either factors or responses. The optimization module searches for a
combination of factor levels that simultaneously satisfy the requirements placed on each of
the responses and factors after performing ANOVA by choosing the desired goal (maximize,
minimize, target, within range, and none for responses only) for each factor and response.
Optimization of one response or the simultaneous optimization of multiple responses can be
performed by numerically, graphically and using the point prediction node. The desirability
is an objective function that ranges from zero outside of the limits to one at the goal and the
numerical optimization finds a point that maximizes the desirability function.
3.4.1 Weld Strength
Figure 3.20, Figure 3.21 and Figure 3.22 show the comparison of weld strength for
aforementioned sixteen tests in Table 3.5, Table 3.6 and Table 3.7 respectively. The
maximum and minimum values of weld strength obtained with respect to thickness of
material are presented in Table 3.11.
Table 3.11 Max. and Min. Values of Weld Strength Response
Thickness
Response
Units Minimum
Maximum
Mean
3 mm
4 mm
5 mm
Tensile Strength
Tensile Strength
Tensile Strength
MPa
MPa
MPa
791
780.4
765.7
754.294 16.9567
743.994 16.3382
735.506 15.7428
730.6
722.3
715
Std. Dev.
55
R e s p o n s e o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( t = 3 m m )
791
7 8 4 .6
800
7 4 1 .7
751
740
7 5 6 .8
7 4 9 .5
7 7 2 .7
7 5 9 .8
7 3 7 .8
750
7 3 5 .5
7 3 0 .6
7 4 9 .5
7 5 9 .7
7 5 8 .5
14
15
16
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1
7
8
9
10
E x p e r im e n t N o .
11
12
13
78 0.4
770.1
74 8.5
73 7.2
730.3
74 2.5
740.1
7 6 0 .1
750.3
72 5.2
722.3
7 36.4
7 2 4 .3
12
13
7 41.2
7 5 5 .4
14
15
16
7 2 9 .5
7 4 2 .8
7 3 0 .5
14
15
16
7 39.6
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1
7
8
9
10
E x p e r im e n t N o .
11
7 5 9 .6
7 2 6 .7
7 3 7 .8
725
7 3 5 .7
7 2 9 .5
7 4 9 .8
7 1 7 .8
7 6 5 .7
7 5 7 .7
730
715
715
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1
7
8
9
10
E x p e r im e n t N o .
11
12
13
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The combination of welding current, welding voltage, welding speed and gas trailing
gave the high weld strength from 765 MPa to 791 MPa with mean value (744 MPa) from 735
MPa to 754 MPa and standard deviation (16.3) of 15.7-16.9 when it was applied to the
welding of sheet thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm. The results of experiment no. 9 and 10
according to design of experiments applying full factorial as given in Table 3.5, Table 3.6
and Table 3.7 shows the high and low values of weld strength at low level of welding current
and voltage, high value of welding speed with application of trailing and at high level of
welding current and voltage, low level of welding speed without application of trailing for
sheet thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. The weld strength (tensile strength) data were
analyzed using ANOVA technique and observations are presented in Table 3.12, Table 3.13
and Table 3.14 for the sheet thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. The analysis shows that
effects of four parameters (welding current, voltage and welding speed with application of
trailing) are significant upon weld strength for sheet thicknesses of 3, 4 and 5 mm.
Figure 3.23, Figure 3.24 and Figure 3.25 shows the effects of changing the levels of each
parameter upon weld strength while keeping other three parameters fixed for sheet thickness
of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. It is clear that effects of welding current, voltage and speed
are significant. The weld strength decreases with increase of welding current and voltage
values and increases with increase of welding speed along with the application of trailing as
heat sink.
Table 3.12 ANOVA for Tensile Strength (t=3mm) factorial model
Source
Sum sqrs
Model
3540.58
A-Current
1258.48
B-Voltage
716.90
C-Weld Speed785.40
D- Trailing 779.81
Residual
772.35
Cor Total
4312.93
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
885.15
1258.48
716.90
785.40
779.81
70.21
12.61
17.92
10.21
11.19
11.11
Prob>F
0.0004
0.0014
0.0085
0.0065
0.0067
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Sum sqrs
Model
3272.41
A-Current
1423.18
B-Voltage
591.71
C-Weld Speed 633.78
D- Trailing 623.75
Residual
731.64
Cor Total
4004.05
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
818.10
1423.18
591.71
633.78
623.75
66.51
12.30
21.40
8.90
9.53
9.38
Prob>F
0.0005
0.0007
0.0125
0.0103
0.0108
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
57
Sum sqrs
Model
2827.49
A-Current
1216.27
B-Voltage
435.77
C-Weld Speed 423.33
D- Trailing 752.13
Residual
890.04
Cor Total
3717.53
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
706.87
1216.27
435.77
423.33
752.13
80.91
8.74
15.03
5.39
5.23
9.30
Prob>F
0.0020
0.0026
0.0405
0.0430
0.0111
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 3.11 shows the comparison of weld strength values obtained for sixteen
experiments. The response values for weld strength (3, 4 and 5 mm thickness) range from
730.6 to 791 MPa, 722.3 to 780.4 MPa and 715 to 765.7 MPa, providing the ratio of
maximum to minimum equal to 1.08267, 1.08044 and 1.0709 respectively. The ratio is small
and, thus, there is no need to apply any kind of transformation to the data. Table 3.12, Table
3.13 and Table 3.14 presents the ANOVA details for the suggested factorial model.
Table 3.12, the Model F-value of 12.61 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.04% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of
"Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B, C and D
are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 82.09%, R2-adjusted of 75.58%,
and R2-predicted of 62.11%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 62.11% is in reasonable agreement
with the "Adj R-Squared" of 75.58%. "Adeq Precision" measures the signal to noise ratio. A
ratio greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 12.617 indicates an adequate signal.
This model can be used to navigate the design space.
Table 3.13, the Model F-value of 12.30 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.05% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of
"Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B, C and D
are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 81.73%, R2-adjusted of 75.08%,
and R2-predicted of 61.34%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 61.34% is in reasonable agreement
with the "Adj R-Squared" of 75.08%. "Adeq Precision" measures the signal to noise ratio. A
ratio greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 12.305 indicates an adequate signal.
This model can be used to navigate the design space.
In Table 3.14, the Model F-value of 8.74 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.20% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of
"Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B, C and D
are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 76.06%, R2-adjusted of 67.35%,
and R2-predicted of 49.35%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 49.35% is in reasonable agreement
with the "Adj R-Squared" of 67.35%. "Adeq Precision" measures the signal to noise ratio. A
ratio greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 10.316 indicates an adequate signal.
This model can be used to navigate the design space.
After experimental and analytical work related to TIG welding of HSLA steel thin
plates, the possibility of formulation of empirical models for weld strength in terms of all the
significant input parameters (tested in the experiments) was carried out. The models can
consist of numeric variables only. The empirical model for the weld strength (MPa), in terms
of welding parameters, is as follows:
Equation 3.1 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.2 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 3 mm for weld strength:
Weld Strength = +808.04688 - 0.44344*Current - 4.46250*Voltage + 4.67083*Weld Speed
3.1
3.2
60
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Equation 3.3 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.4 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 4 mm for weld strength:
Weld Strength = +915.22500 - 0.94313* Current - 4.05417* Voltage + 4.19583* Weld Speed
3.3
Weld Strength = +927.71250 - 0.94313* Current - 4.05417* Voltage + 4.19583* Weld Speed
3.4
Equation 3.5 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.6 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 5 mm for weld strength:
Weld Strength = +822.80313 - 0.43594* Current - 3.47917* Voltage + 3.42917*Weld Speed
3.5
Weld Strength = +836.51563 - 0.43594* Current - 3.47917* Voltage + 3.42917* Weld Speed
3.6
All the models presented in equations 3.1 to 3.6 for weld strength are valid for the
following ranges of input parameters: welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3 mm, 200 to 220 A
for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and welding speed 15
to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the weld strength data suggests that for any
material thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the weld strength in TIG welding of
HSLA steel can be maximized if the trailing is used along with low values of heat input i.e.
low values of welding current and welding voltage and high value of welding speed. The
predicted weld strength values are 783 MPa, 772 MPa and 762 MPa for thickness 3 mm, 4
mm and 5 mm respectively at input parameters as: i)170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, ii) 200 A,
10.5 V, 18 cm/min and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min respectively as shown in Figure 3.26,
Figure 3.27 and Figure 3.28 with response desirability of 0.80 for minimization of distortion
and maximization of weld strength as shown in Figure 3.35, Figure 3.36 and Figure 3.37.
61
o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d
( t =
m m )
8
7 .2
6 .9
6 .5
6 .4
Distortion (mm)
5 .6
5 .8
5 .2
5 .7
5 .2
5 .7
5 .5
5 .1
4 .9
4
3 .3
3 .2
3
2
1
0
1
7
8
9
E x p e r im e n t
1 0
No .
1 1
1 2
1 3
1 4
1 5
1 6
62
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
R e s p o n s e
o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( t =
m m )
7
6 .2
5 .9
5 .7
5 .4
5 .2
5 .1
4 .9
Distortion (mm)
4 .6
4 .5
4 .3
4 .1
3 .7
3 .4
3 .5
1 5
1 6
2 .8
3
2
1
0
1
7
8
9
1 0
E x p e r im e n t N o .
1 1
1 2
1 3
1 4
o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( t =
m m )
5 .6
5 .2
5
4 .9
4 .7
4 .5
Distortion (mm)
4 .1
3 .9
3 .8
3 .7
3 .7
3 .6
3 .5
3 .4
3
2 .2
0
1
7
8
9
E x p e r im e n t
1 0
No .
1 1
1 2
1 3
1 4
1 5
1 6
Response
Units Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev.
t = 3 mm
Distortion
mm
3.2
7.2
5.5125
1.09293
t = 4 mm
Distortion
mm
2.8
6.2
4.64375 0.96538
t = 5 mm
Distortion
mm
2.2
5.6
4.1125
0.84053
The combination of welding current, welding voltage, welding speed and gas trailing
gave the high and low value of distortion at high level of welding parameters without
application of trailing and at low level of welding parameters with application of trailing
respectively. The results of experiment no. 9 and 10 according to design of experiments
applying full factorial as given in Table 3.5, Table 3.6 and Table 3.7 shows the low and high
values of distortion at low level of welding current and voltage, high value of welding speed
with application of trailing and at high level of welding current and voltage, low level of
welding speed without application of trailing for sheet thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively.
63
As the sheet thickness increases the distortion level decreases although welding
current level increases with increase of material thickness. As the sheet thickness increases
from 3 mm to 5 mm, the minimum distortion observed decreases from 3.2 mm to 2.2 mm and
maximum distortion also decreases from 7.2 mm to 5.6 mm respectively. The mean value
(4.75 mm) of distortion is 4 mm to 5.5 mm whereas the standard deviation is 1.0. The results
show that with increase of sheet thickness from 30% to 65%, the welding distortion
decreases by 15% to 30% in value for 3-5 mm thickness range of HSLA steel sheet in
general.
The distortion data were analyzed using ANOVA technique and observations are
presented in Table 3.16, Table 3.17 and Table 3.18 for the sheet thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm
respectively. The analysis shows that effects of three parameters (welding current, welding
voltage and welding speed) are significant upon distortion. The effect of application of
trailing on distortion is marginally significant.
Sum sqrs
Model
13.94
A-Current
8.41
B-Voltage
1.96
C-Weld Speed 2.25
D- Trailing 1.32
Residual
3.98
Cor Total
17.92
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
3.49
8.41
1.96
2.25
1.32
0.36
9.65
23.27
5.42
6.23
3.66
Prob>F
Significance
0.0013
0.0005
0.0399
0.0298
0.0821
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Sum sqrs
Model
11.62
A-Current
2.64
B-Voltage
4.52
C-Weld Speed 3.52
D-Trailing
0.95
Residual
2.36
Cor Total
13.98
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
2.91
2.64
4.52
3.52
0.95
0.21
13.56
12.32
21.08
16.41
4.44
Prob>F
0.0003
0.0049
0.0008
0.0019
0.0589
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
64
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Sum sqrs
Model
8.45
A-Current
1.82
B-Voltage
1.10
C-Weld Speed 4.62
D-Trailing
0.90
Residual
2.15
Cor Total
10.60
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
2.11
1.82
1.10
4.62
0.90
0.20
10.82
9.34
5.65
23.68
4.62
Prob>F
0.0008
0.0109
0.0367
0.0005
0.0546
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Figure 3.32, Figure 3.33 and Figure 3.34 shows the effects of changing the levels of
each parameter upon distortion while keeping other three parameters fixed for sheet thickness
of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. It is clear that effects of welding current, voltage and speed
are significant. The distortion increases with increase of welding current and voltage values
without the application of trailing and decreases with increase of welding speed with the
application of trailing.
Table 3.15 shows the comparison of weld distortion values obtained for sixteen
experiments. The response values for weld distortion (3, 4 and 5 mm thickness) range from
3.2 to 7.2 mm, 2.8 to 6.2 mm and 2.2 to 5.6 mm, providing the ratio of maximum to
minimum equal to 2.25, 2.2143 and 2.54545 respectively. The ratio is small and, thus, there
is no need to apply any kind of transformation to the data. Table 3.16, Table 3.17 and Table
3.18 presents the ANOVA details for the suggested factorial model.
Table 3.16, the Model F-value of 9.65 implies the model is significant. There is only
a 0.13% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of "Prob
> F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B and C are
significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 77.81%, R2-adjusted of 69.75%, and
R2-predicted of 53.06%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 53.06% is in reasonable agreement with
the "Adj R-Squared" of 69.75%. "Adeq Precision" measures the signal to noise ratio. A ratio
greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 10.341 indicates an adequate signal. This
model can be used to navigate the design space.
Table 3.17, the Model F-value of 13.56 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.02% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of
"Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B and C are
significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 83.14%, R2-adjusted of 77.01%, and
R2-predicted of 64.33%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 64.33% is in reasonable agreement with
the "Adj R-Squared" of 77.01%. In this model, ratio of 12.753 indicates an adequate signal.
This model can be used to navigate the design space.
In Table 3.18, the Model F-value of 10.82 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.08% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. In this case
A, B, C are significant model terms due to values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500. The model
65
possesses the R2 of 79.74%, R2-adjusted of 72.37%, and R2-predicted of 57.13%. The "Pred
R-Squared" of 57.13% is in reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" of 72.37%. In
this model, ratio of 11.134 indicates an adequate signal. This model can be used to navigate
the design space.
66
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The empirical model for the weld distortion (mm), in terms of welding parameters, is
as follows:
Equation 3.7 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.8 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 3 mm for weld distortion:
Distortion = + 0.23750 + 0.036250* Current + 0. 0.23333* Voltage - 0.25000* Weld Speed
3.7
3.8
Equation 3.9 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.10 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 4 mm for weld distortion:
Distortion = - 2.73750+ 0.040625* Current + 0.35417* Voltage - 0.31250* Weld Speed
3.9
3.10
Equation 3.11 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.12 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 5 mm for weld distortion:
Distortion = + 3.94375 + 0.016875*Current + 0.17500* Voltage - 0.35833* Weld Speed
3.11
3.12
All the models presented in equations 3.7 to 3.12 for weld distortion are valid for the
following ranges of input parameters: welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3 mm, 200 to 220 A
for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and welding speed 15
to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the distortion data suggests that for any material
thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the distortion in TIG welding of HSLA steel can
be minimized if the trailing is used along with low values of heat input i.e. low values of
welding current and welding voltage and high value of welding speed. The predicted weld
distortion values are 3.7 mm, 3.0 mm and 2.7 mm for thickness 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm
respectively at input parameters as: i)170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, ii) 200 A, 10.5 V, 18
cm/min and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min respectively as shown in Figure 3.35, Figure 3.36
and Figure 3.37 with response desirability of 0.80 for minimization of distortion and
maximization of weld strength as shown in Figure 3.47, Figure 3.48 and Figure 3.49 for
response desirability with respect to predictors for thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed and trailing) and response (weld strength and distortion) with respect to
desirability are given in detail for thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm in Table 3.23, Table 3.24 and
Table 3.25 respectively. Each table shows fifty different solutions from maximum (0.80)
desirability to minimum (0.50) desirability of response and related input parameters.
Combine effect of desirability of different predictors is shown in Figure 3.50, Figure 3.51
and Figure 3.52 for thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively.
68
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( t =
m m
608
6 0 0
54 0
51 4
547
543
55 3
545
5 42
516
5 0 0
476
47 2
467
4 71
1 1
1 2
468
4 78
1 5
1 6
385
3 90
1 5
1 6
348
357
1 5
1 6
44 8
4 0 0
3 0 0
2 0 0
1 0 0
0
1
7
8
9
E x p e r im e n t
1 0
No .
1 3
1 4
o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( t =
m m
505
5 0 0
45 2
44 8
47 0
459
453
445
422
4 38
409
39 1
4 0 0
382
3 89
1 1
1 2
36 6
3 0 0
2 0 0
1 0 0
0
1
7
8
9
E x p e r im e n t
1 0
No .
1 3
1 4
o f E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( t =
m m
5 0 0
452
425
4 0 0
388
391
404
410
401
398
403
370
357
353
355
1 1
1 2
335
3 0 0
2 0 0
1 0 0
0
1
7
8
9
1 0
E x p e r im e n t N o .
1 3
1 4
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Response
Units Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev.
t = 3 mm
Residual Stresses
MPa
448
608
511.75
44.471
t = 4 mm
Residual Stresses
MPa
366
505
425.25
39.211
t = 5 mm
Residual Stresses
MPa
335
452
384.12
32.087
The combination of welding current, welding voltage, welding speed and gas trailing
gave the high and low value of residual stresses at high level of welding parameters without
application of trailing and at low level of welding parameters with application of trailing
respectively. The results of experiment no. 9 and 10 according to design of experiments
applying full factorial as given in Table 3.5, Table 3.6 and Table 3.7 shows the low and high
values of residual stresses at low level of welding current and voltage, high value of welding
speed with application of trailing and at high level of welding current and voltage, low level
of welding speed without application of trailing for sheet thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm
respectively.
As the sheet thickness increases the residual stresses level decreases although welding
current level increases with increase of material thickness. As the sheet thickness increases
from 3 mm to 5 mm, the minimum residual stresses observed decreases from 448 MPa to 335
MPa and maximum residual stresses also decreases from 608 MPa to 452 MPa respectively.
The mean value of residual stresses is 384 MPa to 511 MPa whereas the standard deviation is
32, 39 and 44 for 5mm, 4mm and 3mm thickness respectively. The results show that with
increase of sheet thickness from 30% to 65%, the welding residual stresses decreases by 20%
to 25% in value for 3-5 mm thickness range of HSLA steel sheet in general.
The residual stresses data were analyzed using ANOVA technique and observations
are presented in Table 3.20, Table 3.21 and Table 3.22 for the sheet thickness of 3, 4 and 5
mm respectively. The analysis shows that effects of three parameters (welding current,
welding voltage and welding speed) are significant upon residual stresses. The effect of
application of trailing on residual stresses is also significant.
Sum sqrs
Model
27779.50
A-Current
2162.25
B-Voltage
1892.25
C-Weld Speed 1225.00
D-Trailing
22500.00
Residual
1885.50
Cor Total
29665.00
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
6944.88
2162.25
1892.25
1225.00
22500.00
171.41
40.52
12.61
11.04
7.15
31.26
Prob>F
0.0001
0.0045
0.0068
0.0217
0.0001
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
71
Sum sqrs
Model
21376.25
A-Current
2304.00
B-Voltage
3721.00
C-Weld Speed 1190.25
D-Trailing
14161.00
Residual
1686.75
Cor Total
23063.00
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
5344.06
2304.00
3721.00
1190.25
14161.00
153.34
34.85
15.03
24.27
7.76
92.35
Prob>F
0.0001
0.0026
0.0005
0.0177
0.0001
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Sum sqrs
Model
14439.75
A-Current
1387.56
B-Voltage
1501.56
C-Weld Speed 473.06
D-Trailing
11077.56
Residual
1004.69
Cor Total
15444.44
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
3609.94
1387.56
1501.56
473.06
11077.56
91.34
39.52
15.19
16.44
5.18
121.28
Prob>F
0.0001
0.0025
0.0019
0.0439
0.0001
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Figure 3.41, Figure 3.42 and Figure 3.43 shows the effects of changing the levels of each
parameter upon residual stresses while keeping other three parameters fixed for sheet
thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. It is clear that effects of welding current, voltage
and speed are significant. The residual stresses increases with increase of welding current and
voltage values without the application of trailing and decreases with increase of welding
speed with the application of trailing.
Table 3.19 shows the comparison of weld residual stresses values obtained for sixteen
experiments. The response values for weld residual stresses (3, 4 and 5 mm thickness) range
from 448 to 608 MPa, 366 to 505 MPa and 335 to 452 MPa, providing the ratio of maximum
to minimum equal to 1.357, 1.379 and 1.349 respectively. The ratio is small and, thus, there
is no need to apply any kind of transformation to the data. Table 3.20, Table 3.21 and Table
3.22 presents the ANOVA details for the suggested factorial model.
Table 3.20, the Model F-value of 40.52 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of
"Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B, C and D
are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 93.64%, R2-adjusted of 91.33%,
and R2-predicted of 86.55%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 86.55% is in reasonable agreement
with the "Adj R-Squared" of 91.33%. "Adeq Precision" measures the signal to noise ratio. A
ratio greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 18.787 indicates an adequate signal.
This model can be used to navigate the design space.
72
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
74
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Equation 3.13 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.14 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 3 mm for weld residual stresses:
Residual Stresses = +448.06250 +0.58125* Current +7.25000* Voltage -5.83333* Weld Speed
3.13
Residual Stresses = +373.06250 +0.58125* Current + 7.25000* Voltage - 5.83333* Weld Speed
3.14
Equation 3.15 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.16 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 4 mm for weld residual stresses:
Residual Stresses = +175.87500 + 1.20000* Current + 10.16667* Voltage - 5.75000* Weld Speed
3.15
Residual Stresses = +116.37500 + 1.20000* Current + 10.16667* Voltage - 5.75000* Weld Speed
3.16
Equation 3.17 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.18 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for t = 5 mm for weld residual stresses:
Residual Stresses = + 276.40625+ 0.46562*Current + 6.45833* Voltage - 3.62500* Weld Speed
3.17
3.18
All the models presented in equations 3.13 to 3.18 for weld residual stresses are valid for
the following ranges of input parameters: welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3 mm, 200 to
220 A for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and welding
speed 15 to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the residual stresses data suggests that for any
material thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the residual stresses in TIG welding of
HSLA steel can be minimized if the trailing is used along with low values of heat input i.e.
low values of welding current and welding voltage and high value of welding speed. The
predicted weld residual stresses values are 443 MPa, 359 MPa and 333 MPa for thickness 3
mm, 4 mm and 5 mm respectively at input parameters as: i)170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, ii) 200
A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min respectively as shown in Figure
3.44, Figure 3.45 and Figure 3.46 with response desirability of 0.91 for minimization of
distortion, residual stresses and maximization of weld strength as shown in Figure 3.47,
Figure 3.48 and Figure 3.49 for response desirability with respect to predictors for thickness
3, 4 and 5 mm respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed and trailing) and response (weld strength, distortion and residual stresses) with
respect to desirability are given in detail for thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm in Table 3.23, Table
3.24 and Table 3.25 respectively. Each table shows about fifty different solutions from
maximum (0.90) desirability to minimum (0.50) desirability of response and related input
parameters.
Combine effect of desirability of different predictors is shown in Figure 3.50, Figure 3.51
and Figure 3.52 for thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. Comparison of responses achieved
is shown in Figure 3.53 which shows that weld strength increases with decrease of distortion
& residual stresses and vice versa respectively.
75
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Weld
Strength
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
783.844
783.767
783.731
783.594
783.639
783.539
783.522
783.473
783.456
783.413
783.32
783.128
783.04
783.104
782.788
782.568
782.395
782.636
782.298
782.003
781.83
780.947
780.592
780.44
778.547
777.143
769.881
769.818
769.795
769.712
769.701
769.673
769.575
769.493
769.511
769.347
769.292
768.896
768.57
767.931
767.851
767.589
767.481
767.227
766.494
766.638
766.286
763.674
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.46
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.26
170.00
170.00
171.67
170.00
170.00
170.00
172.72
170.00
170.04
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
181.94
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.19
170.00
170.01
170.47
170.41
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.02
170.00
170.00
175.99
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
10.50
10.52
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.57
10.58
10.50
10.60
10.50
10.50
10.68
10.50
10.50
10.79
10.82
10.50
10.85
10.50
10.50
11.15
11.23
10.50
10.50
12.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.54
10.50
10.53
10.50
10.58
10.62
10.50
10.50
10.79
10.94
10.95
11.01
11.04
10.50
10.50
11.23
10.50
11.89
18.00
18.00
17.98
17.95
18.00
17.93
18.00
18.00
17.92
18.00
17.91
17.85
18.00
18.00
17.77
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.61
17.57
18.00
18.00
17.27
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.99
18.00
17.96
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.92
18.00
18.00
17.88
17.79
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.27
18.00
17.23
18.00
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
Distortion Residual
Stresses
3.775
3.77899
3.78102
3.78836
3.7917
3.79132
3.79184
3.79437
3.79575
3.7975
3.8062
3.81333
3.81705
3.83546
3.83149
3.8417
3.85078
3.87371
3.85581
3.87403
3.88276
3.92649
3.94503
3.95719
4.208
4.12534
4.35
4.35338
4.35702
4.35906
4.35958
4.367
4.37129
4.37075
4.36937
4.37792
4.38149
4.40271
4.41855
4.45197
4.45642
4.46986
4.47551
4.56698
4.53131
4.5196
4.54244
4.67455
443.00
443.124
443.14
443.312
443.268
443.381
443.523
443.602
443.484
443.699
443.661
443.894
444.306
443.97
444.318
445.072
445.354
444.583
445.511
445.3
445.515
447.707
448.283
447.251
449.943
453.886
518
518.079
518.113
518.211
518.291
518.273
518.44
518.484
518.602
518.868
518.744
519.23
520.13
521.168
521.296
521.724
521.899
521.479
522.231
523.27
522.49
528.084
Desirability
0.910
0.910
0.909
0.908
0.908
0.907
0.907
0.907
0.906
0.906
0.905
0.903
0.902
0.901
0.899
0.897
0.895
0.895
0.894
0.891
0.889
0.880
0.876
0.875
0.837
0.829
0.639
0.638
0.638
0.637
0.636
0.636
0.634
0.634
0.634
0.632
0.631
0.627
0.622
0.613
0.612
0.609
0.607
0.600
0.597
0.596
0.594
0.557
77
Weld Distortion
Strength
Residual Desirability
Stresses
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
772.044
771.982
771.974
771.944
771.921
771.894
771.812
771.733
771.801
771.686
771.573
771.543
771.212
771.41
771.14
771.311
770.948
770.644
770.431
769.751
769.89
768.879
768.703
768.41
768.135
765.982
760.955
760.742
759.556
759.504
759.512
759.454
759.359
759.408
759.186
759.253
759.086
759.086
759.119
758.326
757.965
757.568
757.178
756.206
756.509
755.555
754.447
754.28
755.647
753.494
751.049
748.266
747.616
359.625
359.78
359.72
359.752
359.793
360.001
359.92
360.021
360.233
360.115
360.224
360.881
360.684
361.215
360.775
360.629
361.019
361.406
361.835
362.543
365.025
363.652
368.003
368.736
369.427
367.338
374.822
375.353
419.125
419.196
419.236
419.38
419.376
419.496
419.596
419.887
419.723
419.77
420.135
422.209
421.306
421.655
422.382
423.387
423.302
424.608
425.625
425.839
428.927
426.838
429.977
434.597
435.481
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.11
200.00
200.00
200.25
200.33
200.00
200.00
200.50
200.00
200.88
200.00
200.96
200.00
201.16
201.48
200.00
202.43
200.00
203.36
200.00
200.00
200.00
206.43
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.21
200.00
200.39
200.00
200.50
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
202.11
200.03
203.55
200.00
200.00
205.42
205.59
200.00
206.43
208.72
200.00
200.08
10.50
10.52
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.54
10.50
10.50
10.56
10.50
10.50
10.62
10.50
10.66
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.03
10.50
11.32
11.40
11.46
10.50
10.50
10.55
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.52
10.50
10.54
10.50
10.57
10.50
10.50
10.59
10.80
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.46
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
18.00
18.00
17.98
18.00
17.97
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.91
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.83
18.00
18.00
17.62
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.36
15.36
18.00
17.99
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.89
17.98
18.00
17.62
18.00
17.44
18.00
17.27
17.05
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.93
15.31
15.17
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
2.99375
2.99915
2.99881
2.99804
3.00289
3.00685
3.00372
3.00715
3.01492
3.02036
3.01404
3.03749
3.0296
3.04912
3.03271
3.04831
3.04096
3.05406
3.11384
3.09252
3.18188
3.1301
3.28559
3.31115
3.33522
3.25488
3.81965
3.83818
3.48125
3.48511
3.48513
3.49012
3.4898
3.49416
3.49718
3.50778
3.50149
3.51629
3.51849
3.58871
3.59979
3.56691
3.65752
3.62555
3.70825
3.77924
3.70131
3.70855
3.82272
3.74238
3.85653
4.32211
4.36817
0.931
0.930
0.930
0.930
0.930
0.929
0.929
0.928
0.928
0.926
0.926
0.924
0.922
0.922
0.922
0.921
0.920
0.917
0.909
0.907
0.899
0.898
0.877
0.871
0.865
0.864
0.758
0.754
0.682
0.681
0.681
0.680
0.679
0.679
0.677
0.676
0.676
0.674
0.673
0.657
0.656
0.656
0.644
0.638
0.633
0.618
0.615
0.612
0.603
0.602
0.569
0.500
0.490
78
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Weld Distortion
Strength
Residual Desirability
Stresses
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
761.444
761.382
761.348
761.194
761.23
761.229
761.193
761.193
761.011
761.134
761.016
760.975
760.479
760.489
759.98
760.496
760.1
759.619
760.281
758.952
758.369
756.135
757.158
754.927
753.381
755.966
751.173
747.323
747.731
747.679
747.61
747.61
747.617
747.364
747.465
747.418
747.296
747.42
747.365
747.376
747.28
747.137
746.909
747.06
746.843
746.859
746.722
745.992
746.114
745.85
745.318
745.239
744.38
742.555
741.002
738.707
738.32
333.438
333.553
333.539
333.704
333.757
333.664
333.753
333.704
333.899
333.765
333.889
333.933
334.468
335.21
335.001
334.44
335.932
335.386
334.666
336.072
339.144
339.107
337.968
345.535
342.049
339.228
352.502
356.747
386.063
386.126
386.192
386.288
386.185
386.455
386.345
386.643
386.528
386.392
386.743
386.512
386.901
387.166
386.94
387.309
387.011
387.681
387.935
387.921
389.064
389.554
390.542
388.697
392.284
391.534
398.554
402.813
403.532
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.57
230.00
230.01
230.00
230.00
230.99
230.00
230.00
230.00
232.21
230.00
233.36
230.00
230.00
234.18
230.00
230.00
230.00
242.18
230.00
230.00
248.49
230.00
230.00
238.45
230.00
230.00
230.28
230.00
230.00
230.84
230.00
230.00
231.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
231.89
230.00
232.04
230.00
230.00
233.99
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
10.50
10.52
10.50
10.50
10.53
10.50
10.52
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.77
10.50
10.50
10.89
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.38
10.50
10.50
12.37
10.50
10.50
13.45
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.53
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.59
10.50
10.50
10.61
10.53
10.63
10.67
10.50
10.69
10.50
10.75
10.79
10.50
10.96
11.04
11.19
10.50
11.46
10.50
12.43
13.09
13.20
18.00
18.00
17.97
18.00
17.97
17.94
17.94
17.93
18.00
17.91
17.88
17.86
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.72
18.00
18.00
17.66
17.27
18.00
18.00
16.75
18.00
18.00
16.40
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.99
18.00
18.00
17.97
18.00
17.92
18.00
18.00
17.91
18.00
17.92
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.27
18.00
16.49
18.00
18.00
18.00
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
2.7375
2.74063
2.74754
2.74716
2.75356
2.75959
2.76036
2.76372
2.75424
2.76982
2.78215
2.78645
2.77486
2.78554
2.79417
2.83657
2.8051
2.80813
2.85896
2.9979
2.89213
2.943
3.18535
3.06531
3.04959
3.30988
3.25413
3.40508
3.2125
3.21748
3.21721
3.21861
3.22433
3.22672
3.24026
3.22824
3.22936
3.24502
3.23094
3.24465
3.23522
3.24241
3.24432
3.24627
3.24687
3.25636
3.26324
3.27984
3.29383
3.30711
3.33388
3.4729
3.38108
3.75338
3.55098
3.6664
3.68587
0.917
0.916
0.915
0.914
0.914
0.913
0.913
0.913
0.912
0.912
0.909
0.909
0.907
0.905
0.901
0.900
0.899
0.896
0.896
0.870
0.869
0.849
0.832
0.811
0.811
0.806
0.748
0.695
0.635
0.634
0.633
0.632
0.632
0.630
0.629
0.629
0.629
0.629
0.628
0.628
0.627
0.625
0.624
0.623
0.623
0.620
0.618
0.611
0.607
0.603
0.594
0.587
0.578
0.534
0.521
0.482
0.475
79
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Scator Plots
Scator Plots
800
7
Distortion (mm)
780
760
740
720
4
700
3
450
475
500
525
550
575
Residual Stresses (MPa)
600
625
450
475
500
525
550
Residual Stresses (MPa)
575
600
625
Scator Plots
Scator Plots
6.5
780
6.0
5.5
760
Distortion (mm)
770
750
740
5.0
4.5
4.0
730
3.5
720
3.0
710
350
375
400
425
450
Residual Stresses (MPa)
475
500
350
375
ResponseComparisonfor t=5mm
400
425
450
Residual Stresses (MPa)
475
500
Scator Plots
Scator Plots
770
5
Distortion (mm)
760
750
740
730
3
720
710
2
350
375
400
Residual Stresses (MPa)
425
450
350
375
400
Residual Stresses (MPa)
425
450
82
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
3.5 Numerical Optimization and Empirical Modeling using Response Surface Method
After performing the experimentation and analysis following the 2-level full factorial
design (three numeric factors and one categoric factor) as given in Table 3.5, Table 3.6 and
Table 3.7 for the sheet thicknesses of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively for the responses (weld
strength, distortion and residual stresses), the effect of thickness as another variable with
earlier variables (i.e. four numeric factors and one categoric factor) is analyzed by employing
response surface method (RSM).
The Response Surface Method (RSM), a design of experiments (DOE) methodology,
helps to quantify the relationships between one or more measured responses and the vital
input variables/factors. Usually, a two-level factorial method is used for screening design
first for five or more factors. The objective is to find a desirable (maximum or minimum for a
range of the factors) position in the design to meet a set of parameters for several responses
simultaneously. There are a number of RSM designs, including number of numeric or
categoric factors, like Central Composite Design, Box-Behnken Design, 3-Level Factorial
Design, One Factor RSM Design, Pentagon Design, Hexagon Design, Hybrid Design, RSM
D-optimal Design, Distance Based Design, User Defined Design or Historical Data etc. In
Historical Data design, any set of numeric or categoric data can be used and analyzed by
specifying the number of numeric and categoric factors, the minimum and maximum values
for each numeric factor, the number of experiments (equal to the number of rows available in
data file/historical data), the levels of any categoric factor(s), and the response names.
The factors with low and high settings are given in Table 3.26 and the complete
historical data (3x16 observations for each thickness) is given in Table 3.27 with response
values. The summary of design is given in the Table 3.28. During model analysis, fit
summary suggested to use 2FI model for analysis of variance. ANOVA results are shown in
Table 3.29, Table 3.30 and Table 3.31 for weld strength, distortion and residual stresses
respectively. The values of R-Squared, Adj R-Squared and Pred R-Squared including Adeq
Precision (max to min ratio) are given in Table 3.32. Figure 3.54, Figure 3.55 and Figure
3.56 shows the effects of changing the levels of each parameter upon weld strength,
distortion and residual stresses while keeping other parameters fixed respectively. It is clear
that effects of welding current, voltage, speed and thickness are significant. The distortion
and residual stresses increases with increase of welding current and voltage values without
the application of trailing and decreases with increase of welding speed and thickness with
the application of trailing. Figure 3.57, Figure 3.58 and Figure 3.59 shows the interaction
effect of welding parameters upon weld strength, distortion and residual stresses respectively.
Table 3.26 High and Low Settings of Factors for RSM
Factor Name
Units
Type
A
B
C
D
E
A
V
cm/min
mm
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Categoric
Current
Voltage
Weld Speed
Thickness
Trailing
Low
Actual
170.00
10.50
15.00
3.0
nil
High
Actual
270.0
13.50
18.00
5.0
Ar
Mean
216.66
12.0
16.5
4.0
83
Table 3.27 Historical Data (48 (3x16) observations) including Response Values for RSM
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Factor 1
A:Current
(A)
Factor 2
B:Voltage
(V)
210.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
210.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
210.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
220.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
270.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Responses
C:Weld Speed D: Thickness D: Trailing Weld Distortion
(cm/min)
(mm)
Strength
(MPa)
(mm)
15.00
3.00
Ar
696.8
6.5
18.00
3.00
nil
751.6
4.6
15.00
3.00
nil
733.1
5.2
15.00
3.00
nil
704.3
6.5
15.00
3.00
Ar
708.3
5.7
18.00
3.00
nil
715.4
5.8
18.00
3.00
nil
698.5
6.9
18.00
3.00
Ar
702.7
6.2
18.00
3.00
Ar
791
3.2
15.00
3.00
nil
690.7
7.2
15.00
3.00
Ar
767.5
3.8
15.00
3.00
Ar
718.8
5.3
15.00
3.00
nil
711.7
6.2
18.00
3.00
nil
718.6
5.5
18.00
3.00
Ar
733.4
4.7
18.00
3.00
Ar
748.3
4.3
15.00
4.00
Ar
736.4
5.9
18.00
4.00
nil
751.3
3.7
15.00
4.00
nil
741.2
4.4
15.00
4.00
nil
725.2
5.6
15.00
4.00
Ar
739.6
5.2
18.00
4.00
nil
731.4
4.6
18.00
4.00
nil
724.3
5.7
18.00
4.00
Ar
737.2
5.4
18.00
4.00
Ar
780.4
2.8
15.00
4.00
nil
722.3
6.2
15.00
4.00
Ar
760.1
3.4
15.00
4.00
Ar
742.5
4.9
15.00
4.00
nil
727.5
5.3
18.00
4.00
nil
736.3
4.5
18.00
4.00
Ar
750.3
4.1
18.00
4.00
Ar
755.4
3.5
15.00
5.00
Ar
726.7
5.2
18.00
5.00
nil
759.5
3
15.00
5.00
nil
737.8
4.5
15.00
5.00
nil
717.8
5
15.00
5.00
Ar
730.5
4.5
18.00
5.00
nil
729.5
4
18.00
5.00
nil
715
5.3
18.00
5.00
Ar
730
4.9
18.00
5.00
Ar
765.7
2.2
15.00
5.00
nil
715
5.6
15.00
5.00
Ar
757.7
3.4
15.00
5.00
Ar
735.7
3.7
15.00
5.00
nil
725
4.8
18.00
5.00
nil
729.5
4.6
18.00
5.00
Ar
742.8
3.6
18.00
5.00
Ar
749.8
3.5
Residual
Stresses
(MPa)
514
516
540
547
472
543
553
476
448
608
467
471
545
542
468
478
452
422
448
459
391
453
470
409
366
505
382
389
445
438
385
390
388
391
404
410
357
401
425
370
335
452
353
355
398
403
348
357
84
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Units
MPa
mm
MPa
Minimum
690.7
2.2
335
Maximum
791
7.2
608
Mean
Std. Dev.
733.752 21.3264
4.80417 1.12741
440.396 65.8586
Sum sqrs
Model
A-Current
B-Voltage
C-Weld Speed
D-Thickness
E-Trailing
AB
AC
AD
AE
BC
BD
BE
CD
CE
DE
Residual
Cor Total
19349.59
4960.11
6068.05
1393.28
5692.48
2953.94
319.13
97.02
3.31
88.66
139.74
6.928E-003
227.51
5.95
67.93
17.11
2026.83
21376.42
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
15
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
32
47
1289.97
4960.11
6068.05
1393.28
5692.48
2953.94
319.13
97.02
3.31
88.66
139.74
6.928E-003
227.51
5.95
67.93
17.11
63.34
20.37
78.31
95.80
22.00
89.87
46.64
5.04
1.53
0.052
1.40
2.21
1.094E-004
3.59
0.094
1.07
0.27
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0318
0.2248
0.8205
0.2455
0.1472
0.9917
0.0671
0.7613
0.3082
0.6068
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Sum sqrs
Model
A-Current
B-Voltage
C-Weld Speed
D-Thickness
E-Trailing
AB
AC
AD
AE
BC
BD
BE
CD
CE
DE
Residual
Cor Total
57.66
11.14
18.08
5.43
22.61
7.01
1.03E-003
0.57
0.16
0.011
0.053
0.083
0.70
0.42
0.013
0.027
2.08
59.74
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
15
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
32
47
3.84
11.14
18.08
5.43
22.61
7.01
1.034E-003
0.57
0.16
0.011
0.053
0.083
0.70
0.42
0.013
0.027
0.065
59.23
171.67
278.49
83.74
348.39
108.06
0.016
8.80
2.50
0.18
0.82
1.27
10.80
6.54
0.21
0.42
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.9003
0.0057
0.1237
0.6767
0.3715
0.2674
0.0025
0.0155
0.6534
0.5236
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
85
Sum sqrs
Model
A-Current
B-Voltage
C-Weld Speed
D-Thickness
E-Trailing
AB
AC
AD
AE
BC
BD
BE
CD
CE
DE
Residual
Cor Total
1.977E+005
6810.46
7451.38
2786.90
77338.73
45187.59
751.82
29.60
829.03
0.52
426.02
580.89
188.02
98.54
38.52
372.02
6125.63
2.039E+005
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
15
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
32
47
13181.99
6810.46
7451.38
2786.90
77338.73
45187.59
751.82
29.60
829.03
0.52
426.02
580.89
188.02
98.54
38.52
372.02
191.43
68.86
35.58
38.93
14.56
404.01
236.06
3.93
0.15
4.33
2.736E-003
2.23
3.03
0.98
0.51
0.20
1.94
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0006
0.0001
0.0001
0.0561
0.6967
0.0455
0.9586
0.1455
0.0911
0.3291
0.4783
0.6568
0.1729
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Adeq Precision
R-Squared
Adj R-Squared
Pred R-Squared
Weld Strength
Distortion
Residual Stress
18.98
34.25
32.269
90.52%
96.52%
97.0%
86.07%
94.89%
95.59%
78.77%
92.81%
93.39%
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
88
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
89
90
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
From Table 3.29, Table 3.30 and Table 3.31, the significance of all models is clear
from the Model F-value which is greater than 4. As the values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500
indicate the significance of model terms, in this case A, B, C, D and E terms are significant
with some interaction terms. The Table 3.32 shows that the "Pred R-Squared" values are in
reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" values and Adeq Precision values indicate
an adequate signal that shows the models can be used to navigate the design space.
The empirical models for the responses (weld strength (MPa), distortion (mm) and
weld residual stresses (MPa)), in terms of welding parameters, are as follows:
Equation 3.19 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.20 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for weld strength:
Weld Strength = +727.24584 -0.82644 * Current -14.66111 * Voltage +21.63194* Weld Speed
+11.01124* Thickness +0.095761 * Current * Voltage -0.052802* Current * Weld Speed
+0.012346*Current * Thickness -0.75833 * Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.016595* Voltage * Thickness +0.48614* Weld Speed * Thickness
3.19
Weld Strength = +775.28334 -0.97787* Current -17.56389* Voltage +23.21806 * Weld Speed
+13.48516* Thickness +0.095761 * Current * Voltage -0.052802* Current * Weld Speed
+0.012346* Current * Thickness -0.75833 * Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.016595* Voltage * Thickness +0.48614* Weld Speed * Thickness
3.20
Equation 3.21 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.22 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for distortion:
Distortion = +8.48786 -0.027474 * Current +0.35833* Voltage -0.76667 * Weld Speed +1.94671 * Thickness
-1.72414E-004 * Current * Voltage +4.05172E-003 * Current * Weld Speed
-2.73160E-003 * Current * Thickness +0.014815 * Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.057328 * Voltage * Thickness -0.12989* Weld Speed * Thickness
3.21
Distortion = +5.37119 -0.025750* Current +0.51944 * Voltage -0.78889 * Weld Speed +2.04499 * Thickness
-1.72414E-004* Current * Voltage +4.05172E-003* Current * Weld Speed
-2.73160E-003* Current * Thickness +0.014815* Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.057328* Voltage * Thickness -0.12989 * Weld Speed * Thickness
3.22
Equation 3.23 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 3.24 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for weld residual stresses:
Residual Stresses = +749.20823 -1.38427* Current +18.50000* Voltage +8.62500* Weld Speed
-107.71366* Thickness +0.14698* Current * Voltage -0.029167 * Current * Weld Speed
+0.19529* Current * Thickness -1.32407 * Voltage * Weld Speed
-4.80532* Voltage * Thickness +1.97917 * Weld Speed * Thickness
3.23
Residual Stresses = +655.16656 -1.39591* Current +15.86111* Voltage +9.81944* Weld Speed
-96.17702 * Thickness +0.14698* Current * Voltage -0.029167* Current * Weld Speed
+0.19529* Current * Thickness -1.32407 * Voltage * Weld Speed
-4.80532* Voltage * Thickness +1.97917 * Weld Speed * Thickness
3.24
All the models presented in equations 3.19 to 3.24 for weld strength, distortion and weld
residual stresses are valid for the following ranges of input parameters: welding current: 170
to 210 A for 3 mm, 200 to 220 A for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5
to 13.5 V and welding speed 15 to 18 cm/min.
91
The numerical optimization applied to the weld strength, distortion and residual stresses
data suggests that for any material thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the distortion
and residual stresses in TIG welding of HSLA steel can be minimized (or maximization of
weld strength) if the trailing is used along with low values of heat input i.e. low values of
welding current and welding voltage and high value of welding speed. The predicted weld
strength, distortion and weld residual stresses values are as: i) 781.067 MPa, 3.06 mm and
450.59 MPa, ii) 779 MPa, 2.73 mm and 384.89MPa, and iii) 777.72 MPa, 2.24 mm and 331
MPa at input parameters as: i) 170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 3 mm, ii) 200 A, 10.5 V, 18
cm/min, 4 mm and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 5 mm respectively as shown in Figure
3.60, Figure 3.61 and Figure 3.62 with response desirability for minimization of distortion,
residual stresses and maximization of weld strength as shown in Figure 3.63 respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed, thickness and trailing) and response (weld strength, distortion and residual
stresses) with respect to desirability are given in detail in Table 3.33.
Combine effect of desirability of different predictors is shown in Figure 3.64 and the
comparison of responses achieved is shown in Figure 3.65 which shows that weld strength
increases with decrease of distortion & residual stresses and increase in thickness and vice
versa respectively.
92
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
230.00
230.00
230.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
18.00
18.00
17.96
5.00
5.00
5.00
Ar
nil
nil
For Goal: Current is equal to 200 A. Thickness is equal to 4 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.52
18.00
17.97
17.83
18.00
18.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
779.025
778.819
777.865
753.305
753.139
2.73472
2.74535
2.79456
3.82179
3.82828
384.889
384.951
385.238
441.32
441.407
0.863
0.862
0.855
0.636
0.635
For Goal: Current is equal to 170 A. Thickness is equal to 3 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
10.50
10.53
10.57
10.50
10.50
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.86
18.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
781.067
780.543
780.049
780.003
753.279
3.06064
3.08111
3.10036
3.10658
4.29771
450.591
450.682
450.767
451.018
518.21
0.755
0.752
0.749
0.748
0.492
2.17225 310.462
1.82941 329.006
2.08702 291.846
2.09402 295.706
2.11706 294.952
2.09907 309.768
1.52106 282.607
1.56296 295.612
1.57069 286.336
1.4908 317.505
1.81224 295.318
2.06681 296.237
1.99403 307.527
1.48227 284.741
0.845637 305.534
1.97532 334.876
1.21165 312.77
0.810163 301.816
2.18041 308.187
0.827977 295.805
1.8781 305.729
2.17314 302.4
1.6166 307.298
1.77592 321.008
1.93631 331.546
1.84086 296.841
2.10879 322.053
1.65672 297.602
2.15628 309.23
1.50149 300.024
2.10174 287.059
1.84495 304.575
1.31233 306.489
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
For Goal: Current, Thickness, Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
170.08
183.32
173.80
172.19
170.30
175.24
172.61
170.97
172.49
204.32
171.09
173.53
171.37
170.69
177.37
187.54
181.13
178.53
191.87
170.95
173.57
178.72
171.49
186.85
184.16
178.08
170.81
171.97
176.82
173.48
171.29
173.59
177.06
10.52
11.03
12.03
10.77
10.52
11.10
12.78
11.84
12.52
10.52
12.47
11.37
10.55
12.71
10.60
10.60
10.62
10.65
10.65
10.84
10.69
10.54
11.30
11.15
10.60
11.77
10.53
11.45
11.28
11.63
12.11
10.56
11.10
15.30
17.38
16.44
15.37
15.08
16.05
17.99
17.25
17.72
17.98
17.43
15.97
15.61
17.99
17.81
16.99
17.54
17.85
15.89
17.58
15.95
15.34
16.97
17.48
16.81
16.90
15.70
16.78
16.14
17.36
16.30
15.86
17.49
4.79
4.64
4.97
4.97
4.97
4.82
4.99
4.90
4.97
4.97
4.86
4.95
4.83
4.95
4.91
4.61
4.85
4.97
4.99
4.97
4.87
4.95
4.80
4.76
4.63
4.96
4.65
4.91
4.83
4.88
5.00
4.89
4.87
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
800.682
797.225
791.492
800.843
802.881
796.413
793.073
800.452
794.663
798.736
791.756
796.546
802.98
794.488
818.009
795.767
810.681
817.928
792.638
819.052
803.195
798.316
803.146
796.62
797.674
795.354
800.35
801.938
793.9
802.105
791.638
804.677
807.428
94
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
95
Thickness (mm)
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
700
720
740
760
Weld Strength (MPa)
780
800
Thickness (mm)
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2
5
Distortion (mm)
Thickness (mm)
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
300
350
400
450
500
Residua l St re sses (MPa )
550
600
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
97
Further after applying RSM and taking thickness as variable parameter i.e. total five
parameters (four numeric (thickness, current, voltage & speed) and one categoric (trailing)),
it was observed that with the increase of thickness the residual stresses and distortion
decreases and weld strength increases respectively.
At end of the chapter empirical models for weld strength as well as for distortion and
residual stresses, in terms of all the significant numeric input parameters were presented.
Numerical optimization provided the response values and predictors levels as per the
desirability. It was observed from the comparison of responses (weld strength, distortion and
residual stresses) results that the low distorted with low residual stresses samples give the
high weld strength and vice versa respectively.
98
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 4
FE MODELING & SIMULATION OF GTAW PROCESS OF
THIN-WALLED STRUCTURE FOR CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELDING
4.1
Introduction
99
The some subroutines are integrated in ANSYS for the facilitation and the coding
comprises elements activation and deactivation functionality, meshing algorithm, heat source
modeling, material models, heat flux distribution for analytical model and material properties
management depending on the elements temperature etc. Transient thermal analysis followed
by elasto-plastic stress analysis is applied to simplify the simulation procedure.
In the following section, the simulation strategy for the transient thermal modeling
using code(s) from commercially available, analytical model for temperature fields during
arc welding simulation, thermal properties of the materials, adaptation of heat source
modeling and the filler metal deposition mechanism are presented in detail.
4.2.1
T ( x , y , z , )
= .q + Q ( x, y , z , )
(4.1)
The constitutive equation is the Fourier law of heat conduction as given by Equation
4.2 which relates the heat flux and the temperature distribution.
q = k (T ). A.T ( x, y, z , )
(4.2)
T ( x, y, z , )
+ (k (T ). A.T ( x, y, z , )) = Q( x, y, z , )
T
(4.3)
T ( x, y, z ,
+ K (T ). A. 2T ( x, y, z, ) = Q( x, y, z , )
(4.4)
(4.5)
100
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Where i = 1, 2, 3
The stress-stain relationship in terms of Lames constant is given by Equation 4.6 for
linear thermo-elastic problems.
v = v kk + 2 (3 + 2 )T
(4.6)
= (
(4.7)
From Equations 4.6 and 4.7 into Equation 4.5 and simplifying into Equation 4.8.
2ui
T
= ( + ) kk + 2ui (3 + 2 )
+ Fl
2
t
xi
x j
(4.8)
T
provides a coupling between Equations 4.4 and 4.8. The
x j
temperatures are calculated from Equation 4.4 and applied as body loads through
T
(3 + 2 )
in Equation 4.8. From displacements, the strains and stresses are calculated.
x j
The term (3 + 2 )
4.2.2
FE Formulation
Temperature distribution for isotropic material given in Equation 4.4 can be written in
the form as given in Equation 4.9 [4].
C
T
T
T
= (K
) + (K
) + (K
)+Q
t x
x
y
y
z
z
(4.9)
T
= ( L )T ( D { L} T ) + Q
t
Where,
L=
y
(4.10)
and
D= 0
0
0
K
0
0
K
101
Applying convective boundary conditions at the surface enclosing the volume V, it can
be written as given in Equation 4.11.
[ q ]T = h f (TB T )
(4.11)
T
= {L}T ([ D ]{L}T ) + Q + h f (TB T )
t
(4.12)
Equation 4.10 when multiplied by T yields and integrated over the control volume using
the boundary conditions
T
T
(TC )dv + (T{L} [D]{L}T)dv = (TQ)dv + Thf (TB T)dA
t
v
v
v
(4.13)
and
T = [ N ]TE
(4.14)
T = [ N ] TE
(4.15)
Where, TE is the nodal temperature and [N] is the matrix of element shape functions.
This equation is valid for all permissible TE . If
B = [ L ][ N ]
(4.16)
(4.17)
Equation 4.17 containing nodal temperatures can be written in another form as [4]:
[C ]{TE } + [ K ]{TE } = {FE }
(4.18)
Where, [C ] = C[ N ][ N ]T )dv
[ K ] = ([ B ]T [ D ][ B ])dv + h f [ N ][ N ]T dA
v
In thermal analysis, the temperature fields can be obtained from the Equation 4.14.
These results can be used further for structural response in mechanical analysis. By
assembling the individual elemental equations, a system of equations is obtained and solved
102
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
for the unknown nodal temperatures TE. By using the principle of virtual work, which states
that a virtual change of internal strain energy must be offset by an identical change in
external work due to applied load, the finite element form of Equation 4.8 can be obtained
and it can be written mathematically as
U = P
(4.19)
Where,
= Virtual operator
U = { }T { }d {V }
(4.20)
and
= D el
(4.21)
= el + th
(4.22)
Where,
th = T (T )
(4.23)
U = {{ }T [ D ]{ } { }[ D ]{ th }) dV
(4.24)
(4.25)
(4.26)
103
P = { w}T
v
{F a }
dV
v
(4.27)
Where
w = displacement vector of a general point, {F a } = acceleration force vector
According to Newton second law of motion
{F a }
2
= 2 {w}
v
(4.28)
{w} = [ N ]{u}
(4.29)
(4.30)
= { u} p [ N ]T [ N ]dV
2
{u}
2
(4.31)
{ u}T Vector is a set of arbitrary virtual displacement common in all terms, the
condition required to satisfy Equation 4.30 gives [4].
[ K c ] {Fcth } = [ M c ]{u&&}
Where,
[ Kc] = [ B ]T [ D ][ B ]dV
(4.32)
Element stiffness matrix
[ M c ] = [ N ]T [ N ]dV
104
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
4.2.3
4.2.4
The problems of residual stresses, distortion, and reduced strength of structures in and
near the welded joint are a major concern of the welding industry which is in result directly
from the thermal cycle caused by localized intense heat input [51]. Computing the transient
temperature fields accurately is the first critical step of creating an efficient welding
simulation strategy because the temperature has a first order effect on the microstructure,
strain, stress and consequently defects formation in the welds and has a second order effect
on the temperature fields [142].
The welding induced imperfections are believed to be due to non-uniform
temperature fields arising during the welding and this phenomenon is even more significant
in arc welding process like GTAW [143, 144]. Weld induced residual stresses and
deformations are highly dependent on transient temperature gradients, a function of the total
heat input, and the patterns of heat distribution within the weldments, a critical requirement
to determine the temperature gradients in the weldments realistically. Therefore, an accurate
moving heat source modeling is mandatory to analyze the exact temperature distributions and
accordingly the weld induced imperfections like residual stresses and deformations etc.
A double ellipsoidal moving heat source model to incorporate the volume heating was
presented by Goldak et al. [51, 52]. The size and shape of the moving heat source can be
easily modified to model both the shallow and deep penetrating welding processes. Initially,
Goldak presented a semi-ellipsoidal heat source model in which heat flux was distributed in a
Gaussian manner throughout the heat sources volume. The temperature gradients predicted
by using this heat source model were less steep in front of the arc and steeper behind the arc
as compared to experimental observations. Therefore, a double ellipsoidal heat source model
was presented to overcome this problem and here, in the present research, the double
ellipsoidal heat source model is opted to model the heat input from the welding torch.
In Goldak double ellipsoidal heat source model as shown in Figure 4.1, the front half
of the source model is the quadrant of one ellipsoid and the rear half is the quadrant of
another ellipsoid. The specific mathematical equation is shown in the following.
105
The power density distribution of the front half is given in Equation 4.35 [51].
q( x, y, z) =
6 3Qf f
a f bc
3x2 3 y2 3z2
)
b2 c2 a f 2
(4.35)
Whereas the power density distribution of the rear half is given in Equation 4.36 [51].
q( x, y, z) =
6 3Qfr
ar bc
Where,
3x2 3 y2 3 z2
)
b2 c2 ar 2
Q = VI
(4.36)
f f + fr = 2
and
Where af, ar, b c are the shape parameters, qo is the effective heat input, ff and fr are
the fractions of the heat deposited both in the front and rear half, and all are the heat input
parameters. The 63 is heat flux distribution parameter that characterizes the concentration
level of heat flux distribution based on the heat flux concentration level or heat flux
distribution feature of a welding method to determine its value. The shape of the volume of
the power distribution can be selected by varying the parameters af, ar, b and c. By this way,
the geometry of the experimental fusion zone can be achieved. From experiments, the data
for weld pool geometries can be obtained [145]. However, the methods for estimating the
weld pool dimensions for arc welding suggested by Christensen et al. [146] can be used upon
the unavailability of such data. A good agreement between actual and modeled weld pool
sizes, if the modeled heat source size is approximately 10% smaller than the experimental
weld pool size, was presented by Goldak et al. [52]. Further, in the absence of better data, the
distance in front of the heat source equal to one-half of the weld widths and the distance
behind the heat source equal to twice of the width give better approximations [51].
Y
Heat flux
(watt m-3)
Z
b
c
af
ar
X
X
Fig. 4.1 Goldak's double ellipsoid heat source model for welding heat source [52]
The parameters for the Goldak model were derived from the experiments and values
are given in the Table 4.2 in the respective section. The problems may occur by slight
changes in the welding conditions due to lack of a good physical background between the
parameters from Goldaks model. Therefore, a new setting is to be required for every set of
106
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
welding parameters and material composition. Therefore, the model cannot predict any
fusion zone geometries that can be only back-calculated. However, the good results were
obtained from experiments for the weld pool geometry with estimations. In the heat source
geometry, very small changes affect the temperatures very close to the weld pool and in the
resultant, the calculated temperature history in and near the weld pool are less accurate. This
accuracy affects due to the uncertainties in the heat source geometry as well as in the high
temperature thermal material properties and also due to the convective and radiative
boundary conditions.
In the FE model, the origin of the coordinate system is located at the center of the
moving arc in order to simulate the welding torch (heat source) movement with the
respective welding speed. To calculate the centroidal distance of elements from the moving
arc center corresponding to the welding arc position at any instant, a user-subroutine in
APDL is utilized. The welding process parameters and the characteristics of the heat source
transient heat fluxes representing the moving of the distributed heat source can be calculated
at respective positions in welding areas based on the FE mesh generated by the ANSYS. It
is assumed that the heat source moves through volume and the calculated heat applied to
elements is volumetric heat generation. Mainly few researchers reported that the heat
introduces into the work-piece from the surface under welding current of 200 amperes due to
lack of turbulent motion into the work-piece [147]. Whereas, Kermanpur, Shamanian and
Yeganeh [91] proved that the heat flow function depends upon the welding current as well as
on the work-piece thickness.
For circumferential welding, a modified double ellipsoidal heat source model in
cylindrical coordinates is used. For better approximation of the weld pool, the use of
superimposed four ellipsoid quadrants is modeled as per recommendations of Goldak. The
modified double ellipsoid model used for circumferential welding with a single scalar
controlling parameter is given in Equations 4.37 and 4.38 [4].
qf =
6 3 M (r , z ) Q f f
a f bc
3{
r 2 2
af
r 2 2
6 3 M (r , z ) Q f r 3{ ar 2
qr =
e
ar bc
+3
+3
z2
b
Ro2 + r 2 -2 rRo
c2
z 2 Ro2 + r 2 -2 rRo
+
}
b2
c2
(4.37)
(4.38)
The value of scalar multiplier M ( r , z ) can be recalculated iteratively to match the weld
pool shape and dimensions. The origin of the coordinate system is selected at the centre of
the heat source for the calculations of spatial heat distribution from the Equation 4.37 and
Equation 4.38 and a user subroutine provides the movement of heat source at the defined
welding speed. To calculate the centroidal distances of elements from the centre of moving
heat source at every load step, another subroutine is used. The heat input to the elements
from the heat source parameters and welding process parameters is calculated and projected
through the thickness of finite element mesh.
107
A wide range of variation for the value of heat source efficiency in GTAW process is
shown in literature [148]. The temperatures with thermocouples at a specified location are
measured and compared with the related values for different efficiencies. Finally, it can be
concluded that the efficiency of heat source between the range 75% to 80% provides the best
agreement with the experiments. Therefore, an efficiency of 70% to 80% in different studies
is used. The simulations for circumferential welding are performed with the assumption of
perpendicularly focused welding torch as well as during the experimentation.
4.2.5
(4.39)
(4.40)
Where, hconvection
em
bol
=
=
=
(4.41)
In addition to convection and radiation heat losses, some researchers [149] refer that
contact heat losses also play a role whereas the other researchers [150] ignore the contact
heat losses. However, the contact heat losses are ignored in the present research due to point
contact of the clamping fixtures with cylinder through the bolts away from the weld line.
There are two unknown parameters, the convective heat transfer coefficient
(hconvection) and the radiation emissivity (em), in the Equation 4.41. The radiation heat losses
play a major role in high temperature zones and become in significant in low temperature
zones. Whereas the convection heat losses play a major role at lower temperatures only.
Mostly the handbooks on heat transfer have listed tabulated data for temperature dependent
emissivity for several materials [151, 152]. However, the emissivity is strongly dependent on
the surface conditions of the metal from em < 0.1 (for un-oxidized surfaces) to em = 0.8 (for
108
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
oxidized surfaces) [153]. The value of the emissivity is estimated during the welding due to a
constant changing of the temperatures and surface conditions of a metal surface. The
temperature dependent emissivity for common materials including AISI stainless steels and
low carbon steels is listed by many internet resources [154, 155]. The emissivity value (em =
0.51) is used on the surface of the steels in the present research, which is the average value
for hot rolled steel plates [156].
CL
4.2.6
Material Modeling
In arc welding simulation, the FE heat transfer analysis requires the precise values of
thermal conductivity, material density, specific heat and latent heat of fusion upto melting
point. The values of low temperature materials are mostly available in different literature like
[162-164], but the higher temperature values of materials in the published literature are
limited. Therefore, the material values at elevated temperatures are required to be estimated
or extrapolated from the available low temperature data. In the present research work, a high
strength low alloy steel (HSLA) is used for the experimental investigations and the
corresponding finite element predictions. The temperature dependent properties are taken
109
from the published literature. The weld dilution effects on the property changes are not
considered and the materials are assumed as homogenous and isotropic. The materials
temperature dependency is fully considered during the welding (a temperature range from
room temperature to materials melting point) and prescription of temperature independent
properties induces significant errors in the predicted results [46].
YS = YSRM
YS = 5% x YSRM +
YS = 5% x YSRM
Tmelt2/3-T
x
Tmelt2/3-100
(4.42)
(4.43)
(4.44)
Where, YS, YSRM and Tmelt2/3 are yield strength, yield strength at room
temperature and 2/3 of melting temperature of HSLA respectively.
110
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Similar values of yield strength for both base and weld metal are used. For the
experimental work, HSLA steel grade with chemical composition previously
shown in Table 3.8 is used.
Thermal properties i.e. specific heat and thermal conductivity and density as a
function of temperature for HSLA adopted from [166] are given in Figure 4.3.
For specific heat, latent heat associated with low temperature solid-solid phase
transformation is accounted for both the base metal and the weld metal. Enthalpy formulation
is used to avoid the numerical non-convergence. 247 KJ/Kg1 oC-1 of latent heat for solidliquid phase transformation is distributed over the melting and solidification range i.e.
between solidus and liquidus temperatures. Due to similar material i.e. low alloy steels, the
solidus and liquidus temperatures are taken as 1440oC (1713K) and 1560oC (1833K)
respectively.
The rmal C onducti vity x 125 (W /m-C )
Spe ci fi c He at x 1000 (J/Kg-C )
C onve ctive C oe ffe cie nt x 10 (W /m-C )
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0
600
1200
1800
2400
3000
Temperature ( C)
The elastic modulus reduces to almost zero values at elevated temperatures equal
to or greater than the melting temperature. Some recent research work in the
similar area [4] shows that numerical instabilities are encountered when
excessively low values of elastic modulus at and above the melting temperatures
are used. To overcome this issue, a constant value is set to 15.0 GPa. However
even lower values upto 1 GPa are reported in the literature [171].
The values for both the bulk modulus and Poissons coefficient are taken constant
after melting temperature of 1000oC.
Volumetric changes associated with low temperature solid-solid phase
transformations is not taken into account because [75] and [76] reported stress
reversals in hoop stresses at weld centerline, in contradiction to the experimental
measurements from [76]. However, later studies showed that volumetric changes
may give satisfactory results if the transformation plasticity is included which is
not included in the present simulation approach. Therefore, for the thermal
expansion, the material in the melt and heat affected zones follows material
properties of the base metal during heating and cooling.
The material behavior of elastic perfectly-plastic is considered whereas the dislocation
hardening effect and the effects of creep and transformation induced plasticity is not
considered here. A bi-linear kinematic hardening model (von mises yield criterion with
associated flow rule, kinematic hardening rule and bi-linear kinematic hardening material) as
given in Equation 4.45 [141] is used with 1, 2, and 3 being the three principal stresses.
v =
1
2
[( 1 - 2 ) 2 + ( 2 - 3 ) 2 + ( 3 - 1 ) 2 ]
(4.45)
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0
400
800
1200
1600
2000
Temperature ( C)
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
4.2.7
In arc welding, modeling of filler metal deposition with metal addition as Gas
Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) processes is an important aspect for accurate result
prediction in numerical analysis. Presently, three different techniques for the filler metal
addition are in practice as the deactivated element or the elements rebirth technique, the quiet
element technique and the element movement technique. The conventional quiet element
technique is used in the FE models in the present research [175-178], which is relatively easy
to implement by utilizing the ANSYS features of element birth and death. All elements are
generated in the start including the filler metal elements to be deposited later. The filler
elements are not actually removed from the FE model to achieve the element death effect.
Instead, the conductivity, stiffness and other analogous material properties are multiplied by
a severe reduction factor to deactivate their contribution in the analysis. Although zeroed out
of the load vector, element loads associated with the deactivated elements still appears in the
element load lists. During the thermal analysis, all the nodes of deactivated elements except
those shared with the base metal are also fixed at ambient temperature until the birth of the
respective element and deactivated elements are reactivated sequentially when they come
under the influence of the heat source i.e. welding torch. For the sequel mechanical analysis,
a similar approach is used where the elements to be welded are first assigned a set of
artificial, very soft properties. The actual properties of the metal are reassigned as the
elements solidify from the weld pool.
4.2.8
(4.46)
Therefore, a constant time step is used during the heating phase and the heat source
moves with the specified welding speed quasi-stationary. However, the different time steps
are used during the cooling phase. As the cooling of the weldments approaches to the
ambient or equal to pre-heat temperature (if any), the time steps continuously increases.
113
THERMAL ANALYSIS
Thermal boundary conditions
Moving heat source
Non-linear material model
TEMPERATURE
HISTORIES FROM
THERMAL
ANALYSIS
114
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Geometric parameters
Solid Modeling
Next element
Finite element
modeling
Elements centroid
calculation
Meshing parameters
Structural boundary conditions
Structural material properties
Finite element
modeling
Apply heat
source
No
Yes
Elements properties
switching
(If applicable)
Elements material
record file
Elements activation
(If applicable)
Elements activation
time record file
Application of heat
input
Check data
mapping
completion
Activation of elements
under influence of
heat source
No
Next element
Yes
Elements average
temperature calculation
Elements material number
switching
Elements material number
record file
Elements activation time
record file
Iterative transient
non-linear thermal
solution
Yes
Load steps
completed
Yes
Transient
temperature history
Iterative transient
non-linear structural
solution
No
Load steps
completed
No
Next load step
Yes
(4.47)
Where,
Re
Pr
ar
ar
ar
Kar
Car
D
NPD
4.2.9
A general purpose finite element code ANSYS is used for modeling/simulation and
welding phenomena is modeled as sequentially coupled transient non-linear thermal-stress
analysis in the present research work. There are generally three types of non-linearties in the
structural mechanics as geometric non-linearties (large deformations), boundary nonlinearties (contact), and material non-linearties (hyper-elasticity, plasticity, creep, anisotropy
etc.)
The incorporation of geometrical non-linearties (NLGEOM, ON) into welding
simulations can introduce ill conditioned matrix, resulting in numerical non-convergence
issues. Kinematic non-linearties are not included by using small displacement formulation in
modeling. No contact/target elements are used in the present research, therefore in most of
the work non-linearity due to contact opening and closing between the contact and target
elements is not present. Material model with temperature dependency are utilized and
properties used in different studies are, however, highly non-linear and are the major source
of non-linearties in finite elements studies. Iterative incremental Newton-Raphson (NR)
scheme was used to solve the system of equation. The use of this scheme is also essential in
the software to adopt quiet elements technique for filler metal deposition. The opted FULL
NR scheme updates the stiffness matrix at every, equilibrium iteration and thus shows more
flexibility to incorporate non-linear behavior of material properties. Though more frequent
updating of stiffness matrix needs larger matrix formulations and inversions but gives
relatively fast convergence [174]. The matrices obtained from finite element formulations are
usually sparsely populated. Therefore, the system of simultaneous equations is solved by
using direct sparse matrix solver (elimination solver). Since linear elements are used in the
both the thermal and structural analysis, during structural analysis average temperature at the
element centroids is used to calculate constant thermal strain within each element. It is
considered essential to avoid inconsistency between the thermal strain and displacement
strain fields because temperature field directly becomes the thermal strain in mechanical
116
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
analysis. The alternate is to have one degree higher finite element shape function in structural
analysis in comparison to thermal analysis. Similarly, when ever elements with linear shape
function are in use volumetric strain should be under integrated to avoid undesired locking.
Such locking may results in relatively small deformation but significantly high stresses and
excessively large computational time. In the present work, reduced integration is performed
at the element centroid. However, in contrast reduced integration in solid elements may cause
the elements more prone to the zero-energy modes. These modes, commonly referred to as
hourglass modes, are oscillatory in nature and tend to have periods that are much shorter than
those of the overall structural response. They typically have no stiffness and give a zigzag
appearance to a mesh, therefore should always be minimized. Hour-glassing is controlled by
adding artificial elastic stiffness to the model.
To enhance the convergence, different options available within the ANSYS such as
line search (LNSRCH), adaptive decent, ramped and stepped load (KBC, 0/1) are used. The
LINE-SEARCH option attempts to improve a NR solution by scaling the solution vector by a
scalar value termed the LINE-SEARCH parameter at the start of equilibrium iterations. The
scalar multiplier is automatically determined by minimizing the energy of the system which
reduces to find the zero of the nonlinear equation. An adaptive descent is a technique which
switches to a stiffer matrix if convergence difficulties are encountered, and switches back to
the full tangent as the solution convergence, resulting in the desired rapid convergence rate
[174].
4.3
To produce high strength welded structures, arc welding is mostly used as an effective
joining method enabling the welding community around the globe. The thermal stresses
occurs in the weld zone and the adjacent areas producing significant residual stress fields due
to the non-uniform expansion and contraction of the weld metal and surrounding base metal
by heating and cooling cycles during the welding. These high magnitude residual stresses of
the order of yield strength of the material within the heat affected zone (HAZ) can be a major
threat for the in-service structural integrity of welded structures [181]. The strains produced
due to the welding during the heating phase always induce plastic deformation of the metal
and in a result of these strains internal forces produced that cause a variety of welding
distortions. The shortening strength issue of the structures is a major challenge of the welding
industry for decades due to the residual stresses issues in and near the weld zone, and due to
poorly fabricated and distorted structures. Therefore, the accurate prediction of transient and
residual stress fields and distortions patterns is of critical importance to ensure the in-service
structural integrity and reliability of these welded structures.
To predict the magnitude and trends of residual stress fields is a complex phenomenon
due to the involvement of various factors including short term localized heating and rapid
cooling, moving heat source, temperature dependent material behavior and metallurgical
transformations. Therefore, the FE based numerical simulations attained a considerable
importance for the prediction of adverse consequences of complex welding phenomenon in
the last three decades [19, 182-183]. For the analysis of residual stress fields in
circumferentially welded structures focusing on pipe and cylinders, a significant contribution
is available in literature [184-192]. Mostly, the previous researcher [185-188] reduces
117
4.3.1
FE Discretization
118
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
"V" groove
Tack Welds
WL
Root Opening
Total No. of nodes: 71040
Total No. of elements: 54720
Fig. 4.7 (a) 3D FE mesh based on sensitivity analysis. (b) "V" groove, tack weld and root
opening in FE model [197]
2100
Temperature ( K)
1864
1836
1900
1730
1700
1860
1865
1790
1525
1500
1655
1300
1305
1100
1009
900
29,000
35,000
41,000
47,000
53,000
59,000
Numbe r of e le me nts
Fig. 4.8 Mesh sensitivity analysis based on maximum temperature attained [197]
of the weld are modeled comprising each of 4 elements (7.85 mm) in circumferential
direction, 4 elements (4 mm) and 2 elements (2 mm) in two layers in thickness direction. The
mesh sensitivity analysis based on maximum temperature attained was performed for
successive mesh refinements as shown in Figure 4.8 i.e. maximum temperature (1864 K) at
54720 elements. The tack lengths used in the FE models are according to the physical weld
sample. The two cylinders should be considered theoretically as separate parts in the model
setup because they are independent units until the moving heat source passes over them and
join those. But practically these cylinders are tack welded and mechanically restrained before
119
the welding. Therefore, the cylinders are modeled as single model in FE modeling because
they stay stationary relative to each other during the welding.
4.3.2
300 mm
The detail of modeling and simulation approach is already discussed in the previous
sections. For better understanding of the thermo-mechanical results, the other simulation
aspects are given in the following section. The same sequentially coupled thermo-mechanical
simulation approach and material model is used. The Goldak double ellipsoidal heat source
model along with quiet element technique for addition of filler metal is used for heat source
and filler material modeling. The modeling of heat losses from the exposed surfaces (inner
and outer) by convection and radiation are considered in thermal analysis. The combined heat
transfer coefficient is calculated and applied on all the applicable surfaces. The geometric
parameters and joint geometry of two cylinders for circumferential welding by GTAW
process are shown in Figure 4.9 and Figure 4.10 respectively. The total heating time along
the weld path of 300 mm diameter cylinder with a torch speed of 3 mm/s is about 314.16 sec
and the complete welding sequence is divided into 480 load steps of 0.65 sec with equally
space increment. For effective application of thermal load during the load step, the available
stepped load option in ANSYS is used. An other additional 47 load steps of different time
lengths are used for cooling of the weldments after extinguishing the arc. The total cooling
time from the start of the cooling phase to the ambient temperature of 300 K is about 1500
sec (i.e. 25 minutes). Only boundary condition is applied as the constraints to represent the
clamping of the cylinders under welding on welding positioner in the structural analysis. All
the nodes on a cartesian coordinate axis at the positioner end of the cylinders are constrained
in axial direction to match the experimental boundary conditions. In addition, two nodes 180o
apart at the positioner end are also constrained in axial radial and circumferential directions
for the stability of FE model. The welding process parameters and heat source parameters
used in the study are given in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 respectively.
WL
3 mm
X
Y
Z
Y
Z
X
Y
Z
Legends:
X
Y
120
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Current (I)
(amperes)
Voltage (V)
(volts)
200
12.5
15.0
Heat source
width (2b)
depth (c)
(mm)
(mm)
10.0
3.0
0.75
R
F
R
L
O
Fig. 4.10 Butt-weld joint geometry
4.3.3
Experimental Validation
To conduct the full-scale experiments with proper instrumentation for data measurement
for the experimental validation of the developed FE models is a mandatory to ensure the
reliability of the developed models before the application on a shop floor. An automatic TIG
welding setup with minimum human intervention and skill is also mandatory for the proper
validation of FE results due to the possibility of the variations associated with the skill of the
operators and rotary synchronization problems in arc welding experiments. A careful data
acquisition for proper data measurement, calibrated thermocouples and analysis system are
very necessary during the welding experiments for the validation purpose.
For the validation of FE models developed, GTAW (TIG) experiments on two thinwalled cylinders with same parameters of geometric and welding process as used in FE
models were conducted. The material used is high strength low alloy steel with chemical
composition as already given in Table 3.8. Further, argon as shielding gas with 99.999%
purity was used with flow rate (25 liters/min). A high-tech fully automatic SAF GTAW
welding equipment as shown in Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 commercially available along with
rotary positioner and required welding fixtures was used to achieve the desired structural
boundary conditions. A single pass butt-weld geometry was used with single "V" groove of
angle of 90o, 1 mm root face, 1 mm root opening, 3 mm wall thickness and 300 mm length of
cylinder as shown in Figure 4.10.
121
The two cylinders of 300 mm outer diameter, 3 mm wall thickness and 150 mm length
were used with placing of two tack welds of ~ 8 mm length at 0o and 180o from the starting
position of weld. Further, these tack welds were used to create a root opening prior to
welding with the insertion of spacers of 1 mm at some suitable locations during the tack
welding and these were removed after the tack welds cooling to room temperature. The areas
in and near the tack welds were considered as post weld heated upto 300oC to minimize the
effects of initial stress due to tack welds prior to welding. For heating, a conventional gas
torch was used with both infrared and touch probe thermocouples for the measurement.
However, the stress data was not recorded after the tack welds and the post weld heating and
these effects are not considered. Further, the effects of the linear seam weld was not
considered as first these cylinders were linearly seam welded after roll forming of sheet
metals and stress relieved by heat treatment prior tack welds on cylinders for circumferential
welding.
o
1000
Temperature (oC)
850
700
550
400
250
100
0
32
64
96
128
160
Time (sec)
P1-FE
P2-EXP
P2-FE
P3-EXP
P3-FE
P4-FE
P1-EXP
P4-EXP
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
verification for the accurate predictions of subsequent stress fields and distortion patterns. In
the present research for the thermal model validation, the later technique is used by using the
thermocouples and data acquisition system with computer interfacing. Four thermocouples at
different locations were placed and temperatures were recorded through the data logger after
the interval of each 10 seconds for the comparison with FE results. Figure 4.11 shows a
quantitative comparison of measured and predicted transient temperatures at four
thermocouple locations. Three thermocouples at P1, P2 and P3 show a close agreement with
the FE data whereas the fourth thermocouple at P4 shows slightly a higher variation of
predicted and measured temperatures. However, the overall temperatures are within the
maximum variation of about 8% only.
The residual stresses are measured at some specified points for comparison through the
predicted results for structural model validation,. A centre hole drilling strain gauge method
as already discussed in chapter 3 in section 3.3 is used to measure the residual hoop and axial
stresses at specified locations i.e. Points P1 to P3 on cylinder outer surface and P4 to P6 on
cylinder inner surface. Figure 4.12 shows the the gauge locations from P1 to P6. The further
details of the hole drilling residual strain measurement method can be found in [199]. Figure
4.12 shows a quantitative comparison of residual stresses from experiments with predicted
data with a good agreement. Figure 4.11 and Figure 4.12 shows the qualitative comparison of
nodal temperatures and residual stresses which are an evident that predicted results agreed
well with the experimental data showing the experimental validation and the developed FE
models can be used further for the research.
Legends:
o
200
Stress (MPa)
90
-20
-130
-240
-350
FE
EXP -88.8 88.42 12.87 -55.01 101 -39.71 -326.7 187.4 -152.9 163.8 -258.7 153.8
Fig. 4.12 Computed and measured residual stress values for different
locations at cylinder outer surface
123
4.3.4
The temperature distributions at four different times (13 sec, 52 sec, 318 sec and 1277
sec) during the welding process of cylinder of 300 mm diameter are shown in Figure 4.13 (a
d). The peak temperatures are observed close to the weld line at the heat source location and
steep temperatures gradients ahead of the heat source are observed representing the least heat
flow significance ahead of the heat source/welding torch. The cooling phenomenon after the
peak temperature achieved is shown by the gradients behind the torch as the torch moves
ahead from a certain point. The temperature distribution of the weldments after cooling to
almost uniform temperature is shown in Figure 4.13(d) that require some more time steps
further to simulate the cooling phase.
(a) t = 13s
(c) t = 318s
(b) t =
52s
(d) t = 1277s
Fig. 4.13 Temperature profiles at four different time steps during the welding process
The axial temperature distributions for four different cross-sections from the weld start
towards the time progress at different time steps is shown in Figure 4.14 (ad). The
temperature distribution at a section is steep as the arc crosses the section as incase of Figure
4.14 (a), the section is located at an angle of 45o from the weld start position (0o). The
welding torch at a speed of 3 mm/s reaches the section after 39.27s around a circumference
of 300 x mm and the maximum temperature is observed at the torch position. As the torch
crosses the section, the temperature falls down with slow rate. Figure 4.14 (c) and Figure
4.14 (d) shows the preheating action of the section due to the forward heat flow through the
torch just before the torch arrival at a section which is more dominant incase of the sections
oriented at 225o and 315o respectively.
124
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The transient thermal cycles observed at various points at weld line at 5 mm and 15 mm
from the weld line and at 0o, 90o, 180o and 270o from the weld start position respectively are
shown in Figure 4.15(ad). When the arc crosses the corresponding section, the thermal
cycles shows that temperature at a point reaches a peak value corresponding to that time. The
figure shows that a point nearest to the weld line gets heated to a maximum temperature
whereas the points away from the weld line show peak temperatures very low.
1800
1800
Te m p-39.27 s e c
1650
Temperature (K)
Temperature ( K)
Te m p-196.35 s e c
1350
Te m p-39.27 s e c
1650
Te m p-117.81s e c
1500
Te m p-274.89 s e c
1200
1050
900
750
600
450
Te m p-117.81 s e c
1500
Te m p-196.35 s e c
1350
Te m p-274.89 s e c
1200
1050
900
750
600
450
300
300
-85
-68 -51
-34 -17
17
34
51
68
85
-85
-68 -51
-34 -17
(a)
34
51
68
85
51
68
85
1800
Te m p-39.27 s e c
1650
Te m p-196.35 s e c
1350
Te m p-39.27 s e c
1650
Te m p-117.81s e c
1500
Temperature (K)
Te m p-274.89 s e c
17
(b)
1800
Temperature (K)
1200
1050
900
750
600
450
Te m p-117.81 s e c
1500
Te m p-196.35 s e c
1350
Te m p-274.89 s e c
1200
1050
900
750
600
450
300
300
-85
-68 -51
-34
-17
17
34
51
68
85
-85
-68
-51 -34
-17
17
34
(c)
(d)
Fig. 4.14 Axial temperature distributions for four different cross-sections at
different time steps from the weld start position.
4.3.5
125
1800
0 mm from WL
1400
0 mm from WL
1600
5 mm from WL
5 mm from WL
15 mm from WL
1200
1000
800
600
1400
Temperature ( oK)
Temperature ( oK)
1600
15 mm from WL
1200
1000
800
600
400
400
200
200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
50
100
150
(a)
250
300
350
400
300
350
400
(b)
1800
1800
0 mm from WL
1600
5 mm from WL
1400
Temperature ( oK)
1400
0 mm from WL
1600
5 mm from WL
15 mm from WL
1200
1000
800
600
15 mm from WL
1200
1000
800
600
400
400
200
200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
50
100
150
200
250
Time (se c)
Time (se c)
(c)
(d)
Fig. 4.15 Transient thermal cycles experienced by various points at different
cross sections from the weld start position
200
100
Outer Stress (MPa)
Temperature ( oK)
200
Ti me (se c)
Ti me (se c)
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-90
-72
-54
-36
-18
18
36
54
72
90
Axial @ 90 Deg
Fig. 4.16 Residual axial stresses (MPa) on outer surface at different cross
sections from the weld start position
126
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The compressive residual axial stresses near the weld line approaches to zero after 18
mm on both sides of the weld line on the outer surface of cylinder. The stress reversal from
compressive to tensile is observed after 18 mm on outer surface. Almost 70 mm away from
the weld line, these low values tensile stresses again approach to a zero value. A constant
axial stress value near to zero after 70 mm from the weld line is observed as shown in Figure
4.16.
Figure 4.17 shows the high tensile residual stresses on the inner surface near the weld
line approaching to zero and then reversing to lower compressive residual stresses at 18 mm
same as observed in outer surface. Again these lower compressive residual stresses
increasing to almost constant value of zero at 70 mm on both sides of weld line observed for
cylinder inner surfaces at different cross sections (50o, 90o, 150o and 250o) from weld start
position. The general residual axial stresses distribution shows a similar trend as observed in
the previous research [4, 185, 187, 189, 192-193, 197].
500
400
300
200
100
0
-100
-200
-90
-72
-54
-36
-18
18
36
54
72
90
Axial @ 90 Deg
Fig. 4.17 Residual axial stresses (MPa) on inner surface at different cross
sections from the weld start position
The quantitative variation of higher or lower residual stresses in the present research
study are due to the different material properties i.e. mechanical properties like yield strength
for base and weld filler metals along with other parameters such as weld geometry and heat
source parameters etc. The significant related to axial stress fields from Figure 4.16 and
Figure 4.17 are given in the following:
127
The compressive and tensile stress fields of high magnitude are observed on and
near the FZ for outer and inner surfaces respectively. These stresses are
symmetric across the weld line due to the symmetry.
Figure 4.16 shows a bulge showing stress variations beneath the weld crown near
the weld line at the outer surface of cylinder.
Figure 4.16 and Figure 4.17 shows the axial residual stresses on outer and inner
surfaces at four different cross sections (50o, 90o, 150o and 250o) and all are
almost of the same magnitude and trend with slightly higher tensile axial stresses
on inner surface. This previous research [4, 7, 197] shows the same trend. The
axial stresses are weakly dependent on the circumferential location and have
almost homogeneous distribution around the circumferential direction except the
weld start and near region.
The hoop residual stresses are also symmetric due to symmetry across the weld
line.
High tensile stresses of 146 MPa and 333 MPa are observed near the FZ on outer
on inner surfaces respectively. A compressive residual stresses of 230 MPa and
208 MPa are observed away from the HAZ region at about 17 mm from weld line
on outer and inner surfaces respectively.
The hoop stresses are based on the circumferential location from the weld start to
weld end. The hoop residual stresses at three different cross sections (50o, 90o and
250o) varies in magnitude on outer and inner surfaces as shown in Figure 4.18 and
Figure 4.19 with almost similar trend as shown by [4, 7, 197].
128
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
150
17
-50
-117
-183
-250
-90
-72
-54
-36
-18
18
36
54
72
90
Hoop @ 90 Deg
Fig. 4.18 Residual hoop stresses (MPa) on outer surface at different cross
sections from the weld start position
350
250
Inner Stress (MPa)
83
150
50
-50
-150
-250
-90
-72
-54
-36
-18
18
36
54
72
90
Hoop @ 90 Deg
Fig. 4.19 Residual hoop stresses (MPa) on inner surface at different cross
sections from the weld start position
129
4.3.5.3 Axial and Hoop Residual Stress Fields along the Circumference
Figure 4.20 shows the comparison of axial and hoop residual stresses distribution at the
weld line for outer and inner surfaces on a circumferential path. The stress distribution
profiles are generally in agreement with the other previous research. The important
observations are summarized as:
The hoop stress varies from -234 MPa to 117 MPa on the outer surface. However,
some exceptions at weld start and end and tack weld locations at 0o and 180o are
observed and almost a zero hoop residual stress is observed at these locations (0o
and 180o). For hoop residual stresses on inner surface, a slight variation in
magnitude and trend is observed from -95 MPa to 140 MPa, with some exceptions
on weld start and end and tack weld locations. Again the stress values almost to
zero are observed at tack weld locations.
Figure 4.20 shows the compressive axial stresses profile on the outer surface
varying from 203 MPa to 505 MPa. Almost a stable stress profile from weld start
to weld end with some exceptions near to the weld start and end and tack
locations is observed of a low magnitude. The significant effects of weld start and
at tack weld points are observed for axial stress on inner surface. The compressive
axial stresses varies from -286 MPa to about 490 MPa in magnitude with a
reduction upto about 286 MPa and 222 MPa at the weld start of 0o and tack weld
locations of 180o respectively.
575
Stress (MPa)
383
192
0
-192
-383
-575
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
240 270
300
330
360
Axial-Inner
Hoop-Outer
Axial-Outer
Fig. 4.20 Axial and hoop residual stress fields on cylinder outer and inner
surfaces on a circumferential path at the WL
130
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
4.3.6
Welding Distortions
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
-2.0
-2.5
-3.0
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Experimental
Fig. 4.21 Measured and predicted axial deformation (face tilt) of the cylinder face
131
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
Axial-90
Axial-150
Axial-250
Fig. 4.22 Axial shrinkage at four different cross sections from the WL on cylinder outer
surface
132
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
4.00
3.07
2.14
1.21
0.29
-0.64
-1.57
-2.50
-100
-75
-50
-25
25
50
75
100
Radial-90
Radial-150
Radial-250
Fig. 4.24 Radial shrinkage at different cross sections from the WL on cylinder outer surface
133
4.4
To validate the FE models, Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) experiments were
carried out. The appropriate way to ensure the reliability of the numerical simulations for the
utilization of the research work for applications is by conducting the full-scale experiments in
actual with proper instrumentation for data measurement. This section describes the
experimental welding set-up, data measuring and acquisition systems used in the present
research work for circumferential welding with the methodologies for experimental
procedures.
4.4.1
Experimental Setup
Due to the variations associated with the skill of the operators and rotary synchronization
problems in the manual arc welding, an automatic welding setup with minimum human
intervention is used for arc welding experiments. The skill is mandatory for the proper
validation of numerical simulations results because the heat source moves with constant
speed i.e. the phenomenon is quasi-stationary in numerical simulations. A proper data
acquisition system is required for the careful data measurement and analysis during the
experiments.
The TIG welding setup consisting of SAF TIGMATE 270 AC/DC power source,
automatic rotary positioner, and fully automatic torch control and movement system is used
to conduct the experiments. TIGMATE 270 welding power source as shown in Figure 3.1 in
chapter 3 is a computerized waveform control technology for high quality TIG welds with
the control of required parameters.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4.25 Automatic rotary positioner with clamping and strain gages arrangements
134
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
To control and locate the torch movement, an automatic torch positioning system is used.
Initially, the tack welded cylinders clamped according to the desired structural boundary
conditions are rotated by rotary chuck with torch positioning at 90o to the cylinder. For
details of automatic rotary positioner along with TIG torch, clamping and strain gages
arrangements is given in Figure 4.25.
4.4.2
FE Models Validation
The welded part is subjected to a highly non-uniform and rapidly changing temperature
field during welding approaching to temperatures above the melting point and the heat
conducts away from the weld by convection and radiation to the surroundings. Numerous
factors of the thermal field distribution during welding are the welding heat input, the
thermal material properties, the amount of convective flow in the weld pool, the latent heat of
melting and solidification, cooling to the surroundings, and contact with the surrounding
materials as shown in Figure 4.26 [200]. Figure 4.27 shows the overall experimental
validation approach of TIG welding in the present research for circumferential welding.
Fig. 4.26 Factors affecting the heat distribution during welding [200]
Thermal
Structural
model validation
model validation
Transient
temperature
measurement
Weld pool
measurement
by macrograph
Residual stress
measurement
Distortion
measurement
K-type thermocouples are mounted directly on the outer surface of the cylinder prior to
welding and connected directly to multi-channels data logging system for transient
temperature history measurement. The temperature profile during welding at any specified
time can be easily stored in computer readable formats like MS Excel for data processing and
comparison with FE results later on. The thermocouples and data logger (acuracy and
resolution = 1oC) used in research work are shown in Figures 4.30 and 4.31 respectively.
136
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
As already shown in Figure 3.16 in chapter 3, the hole-drilling method is used for the
measurement of residual stresses and the equipment for hole-drilling strain gage along with
P3500 strain meter from Vishay Group as already discussed is used for experimental
determination of residual stress fields in circumferential welding. The milling guide RS-200
as shown in Figure 3.16 can be used for cylindrical surfaces with some special arrangements.
A separate fixture to hold the welded cylinder for proper mounting of RS-200 milling guide
is used for hole-drilling and measurements. Complete experimental setup for residual stress
measurement in circumferential welding is shown in Figure 4.34. The detail of six basic steps
involved for measurement of residual stresses by hole-drilling method is discussed in section
3.3 of chapter 3. The two strain gage rosettes (EA-XX-062RE-120 and CEA-XX-062UM120) are used as already shown in Figure 3.18.
138
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 4.34 Experimental setup used for experimental measurement of residual stresses
4.5
In this chapter, the theoretical background and finite element modeling aspects of the
thermal-mechanical behavior during arc welding was discussed. In order to validate the FE
models, Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) experiments were carried out to ensure the
reliability of the numerical simulations with proper instrumentation for data measurement.
Computational methodology and techniques based on finite element analysis (FEA) for
the prediction of temperature profiles and subsequent weld induced residual stress fields and
distortion patterns in GTA welded thin-walled cylinders of high strength low alloy steel were
developed and implemented successfully with close correlation to the experimental
investigations. The results related to residual stress fields and distortion was discussed in
detail. The significant conclusions from the results are:
1. Due to symmetry across the weld line, the residual stresses (both hoop and axial) are
symmetric. Along and near the weld line, a high tensile and compressive axial
residual stresses occurs on the cylinder inner and outer surfaces respectively.
139
Compressive and tensile axial residual stresses produced on inner and outer surfaces
away from the weld line. Axial stresses are weakly dependent on the circumferential
locations from weld start.
2. Hoop residual stresses are sensitive to the angular location from the weld start
position. On the inner surface, the weld start effect is more severe for both axial and
hoop stresses and is dominant in the weld start direction. The significant effect of
tacks on the axial stress on the inner surface is observed at angular positions of 0 and
180 from the weld start point, whereas, the effect of tacks on hoop stresses is not as
prominent. The stress distribution is no more axis-symmetric for a single pass butt
circumferential weld with initial tacks. However, if the weld start/end effects are
ignored hoop stresses are almost uniform.
3. Maximum axial and radial deflection is observed near the weld line. The axial
shrinkage decreases continuously away from the WL and a minimum shrinkage of
almost zero shown at the restrained end. However, on the restraint free end some
deflection with face tilting is observed.
Further, this chapter described the details of experimental welding set-up, data measuring
and acquisition systems used for the validation of developed FE models.
The FE model developed proves to be very effective and efficient for conducting virtual
experiments for the prediction of residual stresses and distortion by using design of
experiments (DOE) for optimizing the TIG welding process of thin walled structure
(cylinder) and also to provide the data for developing the expert system.
140
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 5
VIRTUAL DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS (DOE) & OPTIMIZATION OF
GTAW PROCESS OF THIN-WALLED STRUCTURE FOR
CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELDING
5.1 Introduction
In this chapter, analyzing the effects of welding parameters on residual stresses and
distortions by using FE model developed in the previous chapter is presented for parametric
studies focusing on the effects of significant welding processes parameters, geometric
parameters including joint root openings and tack welds orientation on the residual stresses
and distortion. After initial parametric studies for circumferential welding, further parametric
studies and their effect on responses are carried out by DOE methodology as applied in
chapter 3 for linear welding based upon virtual experiments for the response optimization of
welding process by using full factorial and response surface method (RSM) for ANOVA,
empirical modeling and numerical optimization. At the end after obtaining the data of all the
analysis performed in chapter 3 and chapter 5, RSM is also applied on both i.e. linear (sheets)
as well as circumferential (cylinders) welds for empirical modeling containing all the
variables analyzed and optimization accordingly.
5.2 Analyzing the Effects of Welding Parameters on Residual Stresses and Distortions
In the present research fully 3D FE models are developed for the parametric studies
as described later in section 5.2.1.
5.2.1
In this section, the research work based on welding parametric studies primarily focus
on the effects of significant welding processes parameters on the residual stress formation as
analyzed in chapter 3 i.e. welding speed and welding current, cylinder thickness along with
joint root openings and tack welds orientation. Whereas, the stick out distance in arc welding
processes is believed to have no significant effects on thermal fields (HAZ dimensions)
[216], therefore is not considered here. The net heat input to the weldments can be optimized
to obtain desired optimum residual stress level by varying the welding current, welding
voltage or by controlling the welding speed. The welding parameters of thin-walled cylinders
are taken as obtained in chapter 3 as the base parameters for the numerical simulations. To
analyze the effects of welding process parameters on residual stress fields, three different
values of welding speed and welding current are used in parametric studies for analysis. The
values of heat source (fixed) and welding process (variables) parameters are shown in Table
5.1 and Table 5.2 respectively. In these studies, the total heat input to the weldments is used
as a reference value to judge the effect of variable parameters of welding process. The total
heat input (mega joules per meter (MJm-1)) is as given in Equation 5.1.
Heat input =
V *I
1000 * WS
(5.1)
141
Where, V is the welding voltage (volts), I is the welding current (amperes), and WS is
the welding speed (mm/s). The heat input is controlled in such a way that the minimum total
heat input (0.625 MJm-1) incase of maximum welding speed (4 mm/s) remains same to the
total heat input incase of minimum welding current of 150 amperes.
15.0
Heat source
width (2b)
depth (c)
(mm)
(mm)
10.0
3.0
0.75
Current (I)
(amperes)
150
200
300
Voltage (V)
(volts)
12.5
12.5
12.5
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
6 3 M (r , z ) Q f f
a f bc
3{
r 2 2
af 2
r 2 2
6 3 M (r , z ) Q f r 3{ ar 2
qr =
e
ar bc
+3
+3
z2
b2
z2
b2
Ro2 + r 2 -2 rRo
c2
(5.2)
Ro2 + r 2 -2 rRo
c2
(5.3)
But, the validity of the model experimentally is necessary before the use of the
modified heat source model for the parametric studies. The welding experiments are
performed to verify the modified heat source model by measuring the fusion zone (FZ) and
heat affected zones (HAZ) through micrograph. Figure 5.1 shows the comparison of
experimental and simulated FZ and HAZ. To avoid the effects of weld start, stop and tack
welds, the macrograph as shown in Figure 5.1 is taken at section 150o from the weld start
position. Figure 5.1 shows a very good agreement between the predicted HAZ isotherms and
the experimentally measured HAZ. Goldak et al. [51] mentioned that double ellipsoidal heat
source model is not suitable to match with some experimentally determined weld pool shape
FZ
and dimensions.
WL
o
(> 1540 C)
HAZ
(> 1400oC)
(a)
FZ-EXP
FZ-SIM
HAZ-EXP
HAZ-SIM
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-8
-6
-4
-2
Distance from WL
(b)
Fig. 5.1 (a) Experimental macrograph at a section 150o from weld start position
(b) Comparison of experimental and simulated FZ and HAZ dimensions
143
5.2.2
The axial residual stress fields for welding speeds of 2, 3 and 4 mm/s used in the
simulations are shown in the Figure 5.2. The maximum tensile stresses and compressive
stresses are observed at the lowest welding speed of 2 mm/s on the internal and external
surfaces of the cylinder at the weld line respectively. Similarly, the minimum tensile stresses
and compressive stresses are observed at the highest welding speed of 4 mm/s on the internal
and external surfaces of the cylinder at the weld line respectively. It is technically
understandable that the lower welding speed results in more heat input per unit volume which
results wider fusion and HAZ zones and increases the stresses on both sides of cylinder
surfaces. However, it is reversed away from the weld line i.e. compressive on inner surfaces
and tensile on the outer surfaces. The stresses remains almost constant at further away from
the weld line. The trend for the residual axial stresses is similar as in the the previous
research [4, 222]. The higher residual stresses in the present study are due to the different
material properties i.e. mechanical properties of HSLA steel like higher yield stress for base
and filler metals, geometry and heat source parameters.
550
425
300
175
50
-75
-200
-325
-450
-85
-68
-51
-34
-17
17
34
51
68
85
Outer (2 mm/sec)
Outer (3 mm/sec)
Outer (4 mm/sec)
Fig. 5.2 Residual axial stresses on outer and inner surface of the cylinders at a section 150o
from the weld start position with different welding speeds
Figure 5.3 shows the hoop residual stresses circumferentially along the weld line for
the weld speeds of 2, 3 and 4 mm/s. The minimum residual hoop stresses are observed at the
weld start and weld end (i.e. at 0o and 360o) for inner and outer cylinder surfaces
respectively. The trend of lower hoop stress is observed at the tack weld location of 180o.
The trend for the residual hoop stresses is similar as in the previous research [4, 223].
144
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
250
169
88
6
-75
-156
-238
-319
-400
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Inner (2 mm/sec)
Inner (3 mm/sec)
Inner (4 mm/sec)
Fig. 5.3 Residual hoop stresses on outer and inner surface of the cylinders along the
circumference at the WL with different welding speeds
350
233
117
0
-117
-233
-350
-85
-68
-51
-34
-17
17
34
51
68
85
Outer (2 mm/sec)
Outer (3 mm/sec)
Outer (4 mm/sec)
Fig. 5.4 Residual hoop stresses on outer and inner surface of the cylinders at a section
150o from weld start position for different welding speeds
145
Figure 5.4 shows the residual hoop stresses at inner and outer surfaces of cylinder at
150 from the weld start position for the weld speeds of 2, 3 and 4 mm/s. Again similar to
axial residual stresses at different weld speeds, the maximum residual stresses are observed at
lowest welding speed and vice versa. The residual stresses approaches to a minimum level
away from the weld line (WL) in a uniform trend.
o
5.2.3
Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.6 shows the residual hoop and axial stresses at inner and
outer cylinder surface at a section 150o from the start of the weld for the three welding
currents of 150, 200 and 300 amperes by keeping all the other parameters constant. Figures
shows the maximum hoop and axial residual stress fields due to the more heat input per unit
volume as incase of WPP-3 (1.25 MJm-1) and lowest stress fields due to the minimum heat
input per unit volume as incase of WPP-1 (0.625 MJm-1). The effects of total heat input per
unit volume directly influences the temperature distributions and consequently the residual
stress profiles in the welded structures if welding speed and all other parameters are kept
constant as per the heat equation 5.1. For both hoop and axial residual stresses, same trend
and data values are obtained from the respective parametric studies with same heat input in
MJm-1 by varying the welding current whereas the similar trends are observed for axial and
hoop residual stress fields for same heat input parametric studies but controlled by varying
the welding speed as shown in Figure 5.2 and Figure 5.4.
350
233
117
0
-117
-233
-350
-85
-68
-51
-34
-17
17
34
51
68
85
Outer (WPP-1)
Outer (WPP-2)
Outer (WPP-3)
Fig. 5.5 Residual hoop stresses on outer and inner surface of the cylinders at a section 150o
from the weld start position for different welding current
146
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
550
425
300
175
50
-75
-200
-325
-450
-85
-68
-51
-34
-17
17
34
51
68
85
Outer (WPP-1)
Outer (WPP-2)
Outer (WPP-3)
Fig. 5.6 Residual axial stresses on outer and inner surface of the cylinders at a section
150o from the weld start position for different welding current
5.2.4
Three different studies to analyze the effects of varying cylinder wall thickness of 3, 4
and 5 mm on the corresponding stresses are conducted. The outer diameter of cylinder along
with other geometric parameters are taken as same from chapter 4 in section 4.3. The heat
input in all the three studies is varied in such a way that the penetration with respect to wall
thickness remains almost same for a good comparison. Welding process parameters for the
parametric studies with respect to three different wall thicknesses are shown in Table 5.3.
The details of the FE models are earlier discussed in chapter 4 in section 4.3. The heat source
parameters are used as given in the Table 5.1.
Table 5.3 Cylinder thickness and welding process parameters for parametric studies
Cylinder Thickness Current (I)
(mm)
(amperes)
Voltage (V)
(volts)
200
12.5
80
250
14
80
300
15
80
147
Figure 5.7 shows the axial residual stress fields for three different cylinder wall
thickness values on outer and inner surfaces of cylinder at a section 150o from weld start
position. In all studies, tensile and compressive stresses are observed at the WL approaching
to zero away from the weld line and then changing to compressive and tensile at a distance
away from the WL for the inner and outer surfaces of cylinder respectively. There is no
considerable variation observed in magnitude and trend for outer and inner surfaces starting
from WL and proceeding axially to a distance of ~12 mm. However, more prominent tensile
and compressive stresses are observed with the increase of wall thickness for outer and inner
surfaces of cylinder respectively. With the increase in wall thickness from 3 to 5 mm, the
magnitude of stress zone increases from ~12 mm to ~15 mm for outer and inner surfaces.
The increase in stress zone is considered due to the enhanced stiffness for the same outer
diameter of cylinder with increase of wall thickness. Due to increase in stiffness of the
cylinder with the increase of thickness, there is more resistance to local bending, accounting
lesser residual stress and larger tensile and compressive stress zones.
Figure 5.8 shows the hoop residual stress fields at an axial section 150o from weld
start for outer and inner surfaces of cylinder. The hoop stresses of inner surfaces are almost
same in magnitude & trend in HAZ region and show no significant variation for varying the
wall thicknesses.
550
425
300
175
50
-75
-200
-325
-450
0
13
19
26
32
38
45
51
Axial-Outer (3 mm)
Axial-Outer (4 mm)
Axial-Outer (5 mm)
Fig. 5.7 Axial residual stresses on cylinder outer and inner surfaces at a section
of 150o from weld start position for various thicknesses
148
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
233
117
0
-117
-233
-350
0
13
19
26
32
38
45
51
Hoop-Outer (3 mm)
Hoop-Outer (4 mm)
Hoop-Outer (5 mm)
Fig. 5.8 Hoop residual stresses on cylinder outer and inner surfaces at a section
of 150o from weld start position for various thicknesses
In general, cylinder wall thickness has greater influence on hoop residual stresses as
compared to axial residual stresses. As far as the theoretical aspects are concerned, the
variation in hoop residual stresses is directly linked to the radial expansion and contraction,
during heating and cooling sequence.
In Figure 5.8, it is clear that tensile residual hoop stresses are developed for inner
surfaces on and near the weld line. Compressive hoop residual stresses on the outer surface
are observed at the same locations in general. The degree of restraints against the heat
expansion in the hoop direction exceeds to that in the axial direction [82]. The hoop stress
distribution differs in terms of stress variation on inner and outer surface.
A comparative axial and hoop residual stress on cylinder inner surface along the
circumference at weld line is shown in Figure 5.9. The axial and hoop stresses are almost
same in terms of magnitude and trend for three wall thickness values but some minor
149
exceptions are observed at weld start & end and tack weld locations for hoop stresses. The
axial and hoop residual stress fields as shown in Figure 5.10 are of the same magnitude with
similar trend on cylinder outer surface. A significant variation of hoop stresses is observed at
weld start and end and particularly on tack weld locations. A reduction of about 147 MPa in
compressive residual stresses following a similar trend variation is observed for an increase
of wall thickness from 3 mm to 5 mm.
550
425
Stress (MPa)
300
175
50
-75
-200
-325
-450
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Fig. 5.9 Axial and hoop residual stresses on cylinder inner surface at a
circumferential path on WL for various wall thickness values
5.2.5
To analyze the effects of root opening on the residual stress fields and deformations,
four case studies with different root openings are carried by keeping all the parameters
constant i.e. geometric parameters (weld joint, cylinders sizes, tack weld sizes and orientation
etc.), heat source parameters and welding process parameters (welding current, welding
voltage and welding speed etc.). To analyze the effects of varying root opening on residual
stresses and deformation fields, same thermal and structural boundary conditions are used. In
all four studies, two tack welds with same length in circumferential direction along the weld
path are modeled at circumferentially opposite to each other i.e. at weld start of 0o and 180o.
By the manipulation of the element size in axial direction in the fusion zone, same model is
used as previously discussed with the variation of root opening. The four different values of
root opening studied in the case studies are given in Table 5.4.
150
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
150
56
Stress (MPa)
-38
-131
-225
-319
-413
-506
-600
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Hoop-Outer (3 mm)
Hoop-Outer (4 mm)
Hoop-Outer (5 mm)
Fig. 5.10 Axial and hoop residual stresses on cylinder outer surface at a
circumferential path on WL for various wall thickness values
Table 5.4 Studies for the analysis of effects of root openings
Studies
Reference
RO 0
RO - 1.6
RO - 2
RO - 2.6
Root Opening
0 mm
1.6 mm
2.0 mm
2.6 mm
The axial residual stresses on a circumferential path at the weld line on cylinder inner
surface are shown in Figure 5.11 and observed no variation in axial stress profiles by varying
root openings. Figure 5.12 shows the details of hoop residual stress values on the same path.
Except for zero roots opening (RO-0), there is no significant variation. However, some
higher tensile hoop stresses are observed for zero root opening.
At the weld start location, the variation is more significant. In Figure 5.13 and Figure
5.14, similar trends are obtained for residual axial and hoop stresses respectively on the same
path at outer surface. In this case a significant variation of about 170 MPa and 200 MPa is
observed for axial compressive residual stresses and hoop compressive residual stresses
respectively at the tack weld location of 180o for zero root opening.
151
600
475
350
225
100
-25
-150
-275
-400
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Fig. 5.11 Axial residual stress variations, circumferentially on the weld line
for cylinder inner surface with different root openings
Figure 5.15 shows the axial displacement at the restraint free face of the cylinder at
outer diameter of cylinder. It is easily observed that root opening has direct influence on axial
displacement. There is no significant axial deformation observed with zero root opening and
further, there is no significant variation in the axial displacement up to 2 mm root opening.
However, significant axial displacement is shown for root opening of 2.6 mm as compared to
root opening 2 mm. Tack welds can be treated as a column as mentioned by Siddique et al.
[89]. The stiffness of the column is given by the Equation 5.4.
K=
AE
L
(5.4)
Where, K is the stiffness, E is the Young's modulus and A, L are the cross
sectional area and length of the column respectively. The stiffness of the tack weld is to be
inversely proportional to the axial length of the tack by considering the tack weld as a
column as discussed above. The stiffness of the tack weld decreases with the increase in root
opening i.e. increase in tack weld length. Therefore, higher axial displacement is observed
incase of RO-2.6 (2.6 mm root opening) for less stiffened tack weld.
152
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
450
325
200
75
-50
-175
-300
-425
-550
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Fig. 5.12 Hoop residual stress variation, circumferentially on the weld line
for cylinder inner surface with different root openings
0
-75
-150
-225
-300
-375
-450
-525
-600
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Fig. 5.13 Axial residual stress variations, circumferentially on the weld line
for cylinder outer surface with different root openings
153
200
113
25
-63
-150
-238
-325
-413
-500
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Fig. 5.14 Hoop residual stress variation, circumferentially on the weld line
for cylinder outer surface with different root openings
1.00
0.66
Face Tilt (mm)
0.33
0.00
-0.34
-0.67
-1.00
-1.33
-1.67
-2.00
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Fig. 5.15 Axial displacement of the restraint free face of cylinder for different root openings
154
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
5.2.6
In the following, two case studies are conducted for the effects of a critical geometric
parameter i.e. tack welds on the corresponding residual stress fields and distortion patterns.
As the tack welds are normally used to restrain the excessive axial shrinkage and maintain
the desired root opening during the welding. The number of tack welds, their length and the
distance between tacks should be considered for effectiveness [224].
The tack welds provide a considerable resistance to the shrinkage and further, the
orientation and size of tacks can change the distortion patterns with in the weldments. For the
analysis of effects of tack weld orientation and length of tack welds, same FE model for outer
diameter of cylinders with wall thickness of 3 mm is used in the case studies. For these two
case studies, two tack welds are modeled at circumferentially opposite to each other with
same length in circumferential direction along the weld path. The model is similar as
discussed previously but the position of live elements representing tack welds in all the
studies is different for the variation of tack weld orientation. The details of the case studies
are given in Table 5.5.
Heat source parameters are used as given in the Table 5.1 along with welding process
parameters as given in the Table 5.3. The effects of tack weld orientation are given in detail
in the following sections.
Mostly the results given in this domain relates to the effects of tacks expecting to be
in and around the weld fusion zone whereas the axial shrinkage is also discussed in detail at
the restraint free face of the cylinder.
Reference
Case-1
Case-2
0o - 180o
45o - 225o
155
The axial residual stress fields are identical in trend and magnitude for all tack
weld orientations on inner surface. However, few exceptions are observed for
tack weld orientations of 0o-180o. The lower residual axial stresses are observed
due to tack weld at weld start position of 0o. It is observed that the weld tack
reduce the stresses as a stress reducer and a gain in stress reduction of about
110 MPa at weld line is observed. But along this, a slightly larger stress zone of
influence in this case is also observed.
Figure 5.18 and Figure 5.19 show the variation in axial residual stress fields for
different tack weld orientations at a path on the weld line along the
circumference for outer and inner surface of the cylinder respectively.
The axial residual stresses are compressive on outer surface and tensile on inner
surface in general with the following important observations.
With some exceptions at tack weld orientations, the axial residual stress fields
are same in magnitude and trend on both inner and outer surfaces.
The effects of weld start and end on axial residual stresses in all the case studies
shows a strong influence. The effects of weld start and end are significant on
outer surface. However, the effect is more significant at the weld start on inner
surface.
A slight effect of reduction in tensile axial residual stress at the tack weld
locations is observed on inner surface. The maximum reduction of tensile axial
residual stress of about 90 MPa at tack weld locations of 90o, 180o and 270o is
observed. However at tack weld locations of 135o and 315o, no significant
tensile stress reduction is observed.
156
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
550
450
350
250
150
50
-50
-150
-250
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
50
Axial (45-225)
Axial (90-270)
Axial (135-315)
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
10
20
30
40
50
Axial (45-225)
Axial (90-270)
Axial (135-315)
-75
-150
-225
-300
-375
-450
-525
-600
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Axial-(45-225)
Axial-(90-270)
Axial-(135-315)
400
300
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
0
36
72
108
144
180
216
252
288
324
360
Axial-(45-225)
Axial-(90-270)
Axial-(135-315)
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
159
1.
2.
3.
4.
The most significant parameter is current with high range of values as compared to
others parameters that shows the practical range of these parameters specifically of welding
current should be specific with respect to thickness of material and the heat input (welding
current, welding voltage and welding speed) required for the fusion and weld of selected
thickness as discussed in Chapter 3. With the increase in material thickness, the increase in
heat input is required to fuze and weld. The parameters and their levels with high and low
settings are given in detail in the following sub-section to conduct the virtual experiments.
Table 5.6 High and Low Settings of Factors (cylinder thickness = 3 mm)
Factor Name
Units
Type
Low Actual
High Actual
Current
Numeric
170.00
210.00
Voltage
Numeric
10.50
13.50
Weld Speed
cm/min
Numeric
15.00
18.00
Trailing
Categoric
nil
Ar
Table 5.7 High and Low Settings of Factors (cylinder thickness = 4 mm)
Factor Name
Units
Type
Low Actual
High Actual
Current
Numeric
200.00
220.00
Voltage
Numeric
10.50
13.50
Weld Speed
cm/min
Numeric
15.00
18.00
Trailing
Categoric
nil
Ar
160
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 5.8 High and Low Settings of Factors (cylinder thickness = 5 mm)
Factor Name
Units
Type
Low Actual
High Actual
Current
Numeric
230.00
270.00
Voltage
Numeric
10.50
13.50
Weld Speed
cm/min
Numeric
15.00
18.00
Trailing
Categoric
nil
Ar
Table 5.9 Design of 16 Experiments following Full Factorial (cylinder thickness = 3 mm)
Std
Run
12
Factor 1
A:Current
A
210.00
Factor 2
B:Voltage
V
13.50
Factor 3
C:Weld Speed
cm/min
15.00
Factor 4
D: Trailing
170.00
10.50
18.00
nil
170.00
10.50
15.00
nil
170.00
13.50
15.00
nil
11
170.00
13.50
15.00
Ar
170.00
13.50
18.00
nil
210.00
13.50
18.00
nil
16
210.00
13.50
18.00
Ar
13
170.00
10.50
18.00
Ar
10
210.00
13.50
15.00
nil
11
170.00
10.50
15.00
Ar
10
12
210.00
10.50
15.00
Ar
13
210.00
10.50
15.00
nil
14
210.00
10.50
18.00
nil
15
15
170.00
13.50
18.00
Ar
14
16
210.00
10.50
18.00
Ar
Ar
161
Table 5.10 Design of 16 Experiments following Full Factorial (cylinder thickness = 4 mm)
Std
Run
12
5
1
3
11
7
8
16
13
4
9
10
2
6
15
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Factor 1
A:Current
A
220.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
Factor 2
B:Voltage
V
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
C:Weld Speed
cm/min
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
Factor 4
D: Trailing
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
Table 5.11 Design of 16 Experiments following Full Factorial (cylinder thickness = 5 mm)
Std
Run
12
5
1
3
11
7
8
16
13
4
9
10
2
6
15
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Factor 1
A:Current
A
270.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
Factor 2
B:Voltage
V
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
C:Weld Speed
cm/min
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
Factor 4
D: Trailing
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
162
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
5.4.1 Distortion
Figure 5.20, Figure 5.21 and Figure 5.22 show the comparison of distortion for
aforementioned sixteen tests in Table 5.9, Table 5.10 and Table 5.11 respectively. The
maximum and minimum values of distortion obtained with respect to thickness of cylinders
are presented in Table 5.12.
R e s p o n s e o f V ir tu a l E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s =
4
3 .8
3 .7
3 .5
3 .4
3 .4
3 .3
3 .2
3 .1
3 .1
2 .9
3
Distortion (mm)
m m )
3 .6
3 .6
3 .3
3 .9
2 .7
2 .3
0
1
7
8
9
1 0
E x p e r im e n t N o .
1 1
1 2
1 3
1 4
1 5
1 6
R e s p o n s e o f V ir tu a l E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s =
3 .5
4 m m )
3 .3
3 .1
3
2 .9
2 .9
3 .0
2 .8
2 .7
2 .7
2 .7
2 .6
2 .5
2 .5
2 .4
Distortion (mm)
2 .5
2 .3
2 .1
2 .0
1 .8
1 .5
1 .0
0 .5
0 .0
1
7
8
9
10
E x p e r im e n t N o .
11
12
13
14
15
16
2 .5
2 .9
2 .4
2 .2
2 .2
Distortion (mm)
2 .1
2
1 .9
2 .0
1 .9
1 .8
1 .8
1 .7
1 .5
1 .5
1 .4
1 .5
1 .4
1 .2
1 .0
0 .5
0 .0
1
7
8
9
10
E x p e r im e n t N o .
11
12
13
14
15
16
Response
Units Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev.
t = 3 mm
Distortion
mm
2.3
3.9
3.3
t = 4 mm
Distortion
mm
1.8
3.3
2.643 0.379418
t = 5 mm
Distortion
mm
1.2
2.9
1.868 0.434693
0.417931
The combination of welding current, welding voltage, welding speed and trailing
gave the high and low value of distortion at high level of welding parameters without
application of trailing and at low level of welding parameters with application of trailing
respectively. The results of experiment no. 9 and 10 according to design of experiments
applying full factorial as given in Table 5.9, Table 5.10 and Table 5.11 shows the low and
high values of distortion at low level of welding current and voltage, high value of welding
speed with application of trailing and at high level of welding current and voltage, low level
164
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 5.13 ANOVA for Distortion (cylinder thickness =3mm) factorial model
Source
Sum sqrs
Model
2.36
A-Current
0.30
B-Voltage
0.81
C-Weld Speed 0.25
D-Trailing
1.00
Residual
0.26
Cor Total
2.62
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
0.59
0.30
0.81
0.25
1.00
0.023
25.23
12.92
34.60
10.68
42.72
Prob>F
0.0001
0.0042
0.0001
0.0075
0.0001
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Sum sqrs
Model
1.95
A-Current
0.28
B-Voltage
0.68
C-Weld Speed 0.23
D- Trailing 0.77
Residual
0.21
Cor Total
2.16
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
0.49
0.28
0.68
0.23
0.77
0.019
25.28
14.31
35.34
11.71
39.75
Prob>F
0.0001
0.0030
0.0001
0.0057
0.0001
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Figure 5.23, Figure 5.24 and Figure 5.25 shows the effects of changing the levels of
each parameter upon distortion while keeping other three parameters fixed for cylinder
thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. It is clear that effects of welding current, voltage
and speed are significant. The distortion increases with increase of welding current and
voltage values without the application of trailing as heat sink and decreases with increase of
welding speed with the application of trailing.
165
Table 5.12 shows the comparison of weld distortion values obtained for sixteen
experiments. The response values for weld distortion (3, 4 and 5 mm thickness) range from
2.3 to 3.9 mm, 1.8 to 3.3 mm and 1.2 to 2.9 mm, providing the ratio of maximum to
minimum equal to 1.69, 1.83 and 2.416 respectively. The ratio is small and, thus, there is no
need to apply any kind of transformation to the data. Table 5.13, Table 5.14 and Table 5.15
presents the ANOVA details for the suggested factorial model.
Sum sqrs
Model
2.11
A-Current
0.46
B-Voltage
0.53
C-Weld Speed 0.53
D- Trailing 0.60
Residual
0.73
Cor Total
2.83
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
0.53
0.46
0.53
0.53
0.60
0.066
7.97
6.90
7.95
7.95
9.09
Prob>F
0.0029
0.0236
0.0167
0.0167
0.0118
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Table 5.13, the Model F-value of 25.23 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. Values of
"Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate model terms are significant. In this case A, B, C and D
are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 90.17%, R2-adjusted of 86.60%,
and R2-predicted of 79.21%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 79.21% is in reasonable agreement
with the "Adj R-Squared" of 86.60%. "Adeq Precision" measures the signal to noise ratio. A
ratio greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 17.245 indicates an adequate signal.
This model can be used to navigate the design space.
Table 5.14, the Model F-value of 25.28 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. In this case
A, B, C and D are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 90.19%, R2adjusted of 86.62%, and R2-predicted of 79.24%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 79.24% is in
reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" of 86.62%. In this model, ratio of 17.401
indicates an adequate signal. This model can also be used to navigate the design space.
In Table 5.15, the Model F-value of 7.97 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.29% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. In this case
A, B, C and D are significant model terms due to values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500. The
model possesses the R2 of 74.36%, R2-adjusted of 65.03%, and R2-predicted of 45.74%. The
"Pred R-Squared" of 45.74% is in reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" of
65.03%. In this model, the ratio of 10.09 indicates an adequate signal. Therefore model can
also be used to navigate the design space.
166
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 5.23 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion (cylinder thickness = 3 mm)
Fig. 5.24 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion (cylinder thickness = 4 mm)
167
Fig. 5.25 Effects of welding parameters upon Distortion (cylinder thickness = 5 mm)
The empirical model for the weld distortion (mm), in terms of welding parameters, is
as follows:
Equation 5.5 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.6 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for cylinder thickness = 3 mm for weld distortion:
Distortion = +1.81875+6.87500E-003* Current+0.15000* Voltage-0.083333* Weld Speed
5.5
5.6
Equation 5.7 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.8 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for cylinder thickness = 4 mm for weld distortion:
Distortion = -0.23750+0.013125* Current+0.13750 * Voltage-0.079167* Weld Speed
5.7
5.8
Equation 5.9 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.10 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for cylinder thickness = 5 mm for weld distortion:
Distortion = +0.49688+8.43750E-003 * Current+0.12083 * Voltage-0.12083 * Weld Speed
5.9
5.10
168
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
All the models presented in equations 5.5 to 5.10 for weld distortion in cylinders are
valid for the following ranges of input parameters: welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3 mm,
200 to 220 A for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and
welding speed 15 to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the distortion data suggests that for any material
thickness of cylinders value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the distortion in TIG welding of
HSLA steel can be minimized if the trailing is used along with low values of heat input i.e.
low values of welding current and welding voltage and high value of welding speed. The
predicted weld distortion values are 2.56 mm, 1.96 mm and 1.14 mm for cylinder thickness 3
mm, 4 mm and 5 mm respectively at input parameters as: i)170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, ii) 200
A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min respectively as shown in Figure
5.26, Figure 5.27 and Figure 5.28 with response desirability of 0.90 for minimization of
distortion and maximization of weld strength as shown in Figure 5.38, Figure 5.39 and
Figure 5.40 for response desirability with respect to predictors for thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm
respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed and trailing) and response (weld strength and distortion) with respect to
desirability are given in detail for cylinder thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm in Table 5.20, Table 5.21
and Table 5.22 respectively. Each table shows fifty different solutions from maximum (0.90)
desirability to minimum (0.50) desirability of response and related input parameters.
Combine effect of desirability of different predictors is shown in Figure 5.41, Figure 5.42
and Figure 3.43 for cylinder thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively.
169
170
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
5 0 0
Residual Stresses (MPa)
m m )
577
496
501
498
514
497
489
464
447
445
443
444
1 1
1 2
455
441
416
4 0 0
3 0 0
2 0 0
1 0 0
0
1
7
8
9
1 0
E x p e r im e n t N o .
1 3
1 4
1 5
1 6
o f V ir tu a l E x p e r im e n ts
C o n d u c te d
( C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s
m m )
5 0 0
4 6 4
4 3 3
4 2 1
3 9 4
4 0 0
4 0 3
3 9 8
3 8 7
3 7 0
3 6 0
3 5 4
3 4 8
3 5 2
1 1
1 2
3 7 5
3 4 8
3 5 7
1 5
1 6
3 2 4
3 0 0
2 0 0
1 0 0
0
1
7
8
9
E x p e r im e n t
1 0
N o .
1 3
1 4
o f V ir tu a l E x p e r im e n ts C o n d u c te d ( C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s =
37 0
m m )
36 1
332
398
4 0 0
33 5
340
330
329
320
30 7
302
3 06
1 1
1 2
3 33
3 05
293
3 0 0
26 8
2 0 0
1 0 0
0
1
7
8
9
E x p e r im e n t
1 0
No .
1 3
1 4
1 5
1 6
Response
Units Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev.
t = 3 mm
Residual Stresses
MPa
416
577
477
t = 4 mm
Residual Stresses
MPa
324
464
380.5 36.8221
t = 5 mm
Residual Stresses
MPa
268
398
326.8 31.6106
39.9283
The combination of welding current, welding voltage, welding speed and trailing
gave the high and low value of residual stresses at high level of welding parameters without
application of trailing and at low level of welding parameters with application of trailing
respectively. The results of experiment no. 9 and 10 according to design of experiments
applying full factorial as given in Table 5.9, Table 5.10 and Table 5.11 shows the low and
high values of residual stresses at low level of welding current and voltage, high value of
welding speed with application of trailing and at high level of welding current and voltage,
low level of welding speed without application of trailing for cylinder thickness 3, 4 and 5
mm respectively.
As the cylinder thickness increases the residual stresses level decreases although
welding current level increases with increase of material thickness. As the cylinder thickness
increases from 3 mm to 5 mm, the minimum residual stresses observed decreases from 416
MPa to 268 MPa and maximum residual stresses also decreases from 577 MPa to 398 MPa
respectively. The mean value of residual stresses is 327 MPa to 477 MPa whereas the
standard deviation is 36.8. The results show that with increase of cylinder thickness from
30% to 65%, the welding residual stresses decreases by 30% to 35% in value for 3-5 mm
thickness range of HSLA steel cylinder in general.
The residual stresses data were analyzed using ANOVA technique and observations
are presented in Table 5.17, Table 5.18 and Table 5.19 for the cylinder thickness of 3, 4 and
5 mm respectively. The analysis shows that effects of three parameters (welding current,
welding voltage and welding speed) are significant upon residual stresses. The effect of
application of trailing on residual stresses is also significant in circumferential welding.
Table 5.17 ANOVA for Residual Stresses (cylinder thickness =3mm) factorial model
Source
Sum sqrs
Model
20488.00
A-Current
3136.00
B-Voltage
3136.00
C-Weld Speed 2116.00
D-Trailing
12100.00
Residual
3426.00
Cor Total
23914.00
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
5122.00
3136.00
3136.00
2116.00
12100.00
311.45
16.45
10.07
10.07
6.79
38.85
Prob>F
0.0001
0.0089
0.0089
0.0244
0.0001
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
172
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 5.18 ANOVA for Residual Stresses (cylinder thickness=4mm) factorial model
Source
Sum sqrs
Model
17019.75
A-Current
3306.25
B-Voltage
5402.25
C-Weld Speed 2070.25
D-Trailing
6241.00
Residual
3318.25
Cor Total
20338.00
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
4254.94
3306.25
5402.25
2070.25
6241.00
301.66
14.11
10.96
17.91
6.86
20.69
Prob>F
0.0003
0.0069
0.0014
0.0238
0.0008
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Table 5.19 ANOVA for Residual Stresses (cylinder thickness=5mm) factorial model
Source
Sum sqrs
Model
12081.25
A-Current
2889.06
B-Voltage
2730.06
C-Weld Speed 1314.06
D-Trailing
5148.06
Residual
2907.19
Cor Total
14988.44
DoF
4
1
1
1
1
11
15
3020.31
2889.06
2730.06
1314.06
5148.06
264.29
11.43
10.93
10.33
4.97
19.48
Prob>F
0.0007
0.0070
0.0082
0.0475
0.0010
Significance
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Figure 5.32, Figure 5.33 and Figure 5.34 shows the effects of changing the levels of each
parameter upon residual stresses while keeping other three parameters fixed for cylinder
thickness of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. It is clear that effects of welding current, welding
voltage, welding speed and trailing are significant. The residual stresses increases with
increase of welding current and voltage values without the application of trailing as heat sink
and decreases with increase of welding speed with the application of trailing.
Table 5.16 shows the comparison of weld residual stresses values obtained for sixteen
experiments. The response values for weld residual stresses (3, 4 and 5 mm thickness
cylinders) range from 416 to 577 MPa, 324 to 464 MPa and 268 to 398 MPa, providing the
ratio of maximum to minimum equal to 1.38, 1.43 and 1.48 respectively. The ratio is small
and, thus, there is no need to apply any kind of transformation to the data. Table 5.17, Table
5.18 and Table 5.19 presents the ANOVA details for the suggested factorial model.
Table 5.17, the Model F-value of 16.45 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.01% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. In this case
A, B, C and D are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 85.67%, R2adjusted of 80.46%, and R2-predicted of 69.69%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 69.69% is in
reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" of 80.46%. "Adeq Precision" measures the
signal to noise ratio. A ratio greater than 4 is desirable. In this model, ratio of 13.583
indicates an adequate signal. This model can be used to navigate the design space.
173
Fig. 5.32 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses (cylinder thickness = 3 mm)
Fig. 5.33 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses (cylinder thickness = 4 mm)
174
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 5.34 Effects of welding parameters upon Residual Stresses (cylinder thickness = 5 mm)
Table 5.18, the Model F-value of 14.11 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.03% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. In this case
A, B, C and D are significant model terms. The model possesses the R2 of 83.68%, R2adjusted of 77.75%, and R2-predicted of 65.48%. The "Pred R-Squared" of 65.48% is in
reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" of 77.75%. In this model, ratio of 13.158
indicates an adequate signal and this model can be used to navigate the design space.
In Table 5.19, the Model F-value of 11.43 implies the model is significant. There is
only a 0.07% chance that a "Model F-Value" this large could occur due to noise. In this case
A, B, C and D are significant model terms due to values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500. The
model possesses the R2 of 80.60%, R2-adjusted of 73.55%, and R2-predicted of 58.96%. The
"Pred R-Squared" of 58.96% is in reasonable agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" of
73.55%. In this model, ratio of 11.774 indicates an adequate signal. This model can also be
used to navigate the design space.
The empirical model for the weld residual stresses (MPa), in terms of welding
parameters, is as follows:
Equation 5.11 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.12 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for cylinder thickness = 3 mm for weld residual stresses:
175
5.11
5.12
Equation 5.13 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.14 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for cylinder thickness = 4 mm for weld residual stresses:
Residual Stresses = +76.50000+1.43750 * Current+12.25000 * Voltage-7.58333 * Weld Speed
5.13
5.14
Equation 5.15 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.16 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for cylinder thickness = 5 mm for weld residual stresses:
Residual Stresses = +171.96875+0.67187 * Current+8.70833 * Voltage-6.04167 * Weld Speed
5.15
5.16
All the models presented in equations 5.11 to 5.16 for weld residual stresses in cylinders
are valid for the following ranges of input parameters: welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3
mm, 200 to 220 A for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and
welding speed 15 to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the residual stresses data suggests that for any
material cylinder thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the residual stresses in TIG
welding of HSLA steel can be minimized if the trailing is used along with low values of heat
input i.e. low values of welding current and welding voltage and high value of welding
speed. The predicted weld residual stresses values are 410 MPa, 316 MPa and 273 MPa for
cylinder thickness 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm respectively at input parameters as: i)170 A, 10.5
V, 18 cm/min, ii) 200 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min respectively
as shown in Figure 5.35, Figure 5.36 and Figure 5.37 with response desirability of 0.90 for
minimization of distortion and residual stresses as shown in Figure 5.38, Figure 5.39 and
Figure 5.40 for response desirability with respect to predictors for cylinder thickness 3, 4 and
5 mm respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed and trailing) and response (distortion and residual stresses) with respect to
desirability are given in detail for cylinder thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm in Table 5.20, Table 5.21
and Table 5.22 respectively. Each table shows fifty different solutions from maximum (0.90)
desirability to minimum (0.50) desirability of response and related input parameters.
Combine effect of desirability of different predictors is shown in Figure 5.41, Figure 5.42
and Figure 5.43 for cylinder thickness 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively. Comparison of responses
achieved is shown in Figure 5.44 which shows the effect of increase or decrease of distortion
& residual stresses respectively.
176
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Fig. 5.35 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors (cylinder thickness = 3 mm)
Fig. 5.36 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors (cylinder thickness = 4 mm)
Fig. 5.37 Residual Stresses Predictions w.r.t Predictors (cylinder thickness = 5 mm)
177
Distortion
Residual
Stresses
Desirability
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
2.5625
2.56354
2.56414
2.56457
2.56693
2.56768
2.57023
2.57362
2.57374
2.57699
2.58088
2.58427
2.58862
2.58967
2.60046
2.61961
2.62153
2.62294
2.6293
2.64247
2.64402
2.64399
2.67057
2.69949
2.69042
2.70302
2.7158
3.0625
3.06366
3.06451
3.06472
3.06547
3.06697
3.06802
3.07102
3.0745
3.07344
3.07459
3.07549
3.0837
3.08953
3.09494
3.09843
3.09796
3.12306
3.13221
3.12929
3.13545
3.19949
3.20639
3.22774
410
410.096
410.163
410.129
410.276
410.477
410.692
410.692
411.144
410.902
411.87
412.002
412.66
412.767
413.493
415.814
415.431
415.561
416.801
414.976
417.5
417.61
419.942
418.524
421.769
422.928
424.104
465
465.118
465.126
465.204
465.302
465.411
465.343
465.53
465.747
466.114
466.231
466.195
466.319
467.486
467.019
467.236
468.262
470.571
469.338
471.8
471.711
473.524
478.237
480.202
0.914
0.914
0.914
0.914
0.913
0.913
0.912
0.910
0.910
0.909
0.908
0.907
0.905
0.905
0.901
0.895
0.894
0.893
0.889
0.887
0.882
0.882
0.866
0.859
0.854
0.846
0.838
0.603
0.603
0.602
0.602
0.602
0.601
0.601
0.599
0.597
0.596
0.596
0.596
0.592
0.587
0.586
0.584
0.582
0.567
0.566
0.561
0.559
0.530
0.516
0.503
170.00
170.00
170.18
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
171.63
170.00
172.67
170.00
173.80
173.95
170.01
178.30
170.00
170.00
179.72
170.00
170.00
171.68
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.17
170.00
170.00
170.43
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
171.59
171.76
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
179.71
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.53
10.50
10.50
10.57
10.50
10.60
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.03
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.41
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.54
10.56
10.58
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.64
10.50
10.72
10.74
10.50
10.50
10.96
10.50
10.50
11.41
10.50
10.50
18.00
17.99
17.99
18.00
18.00
17.94
17.92
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.74
18.00
18.00
17.55
18.00
17.29
17.27
18.00
18.00
17.02
17.16
16.70
18.00
16.46
16.31
16.16
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.97
18.00
17.95
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.84
18.00
17.68
18.00
18.00
17.57
17.27
18.00
18.00
17.12
18.00
16.27
16.02
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
178
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Distortion
Residual
Stresses
Desirability
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
1.96875
1.96992
1.97027
1.97166
1.97367
1.97723
1.97908
1.97982
1.9804
1.98285
1.98867
1.98912
1.99109
1.99164
1.99204
1.9976
2.00961
2.02617
2.02852
2.03202
2.03266
2.06231
2.06542
2.09432
2.0842
2.09654
2.13271
2.16851
2.40625
2.40861
2.40971
2.41117
2.41148
2.41272
2.41456
2.41552
2.41633
2.41688
2.41777
2.42063
2.42259
2.43855
2.46378
2.47016
2.51169
2.53182
316.625
316.737
316.76
316.928
317.096
317.554
317.545
317.685
317.899
318.169
318.533
318.856
318.615
318.817
319.176
319.785
320.539
322.125
323.171
322.686
323.625
324.966
327.212
327.812
329.27
328.866
334.583
335.76
356.125
356.351
356.456
356.596
356.591
356.834
356.866
357.14
357.194
357.287
357.387
357.406
357.581
359.219
361.636
363.125
366.225
367.312
0.942
0.942
0.942
0.941
0.940
0.939
0.938
0.938
0.938
0.937
0.935
0.935
0.934
0.934
0.934
0.932
0.928
0.922
0.921
0.919
0.919
0.905
0.897
0.884
0.883
0.880
0.848
0.831
0.678
0.676
0.675
0.674
0.674
0.673
0.672
0.671
0.670
0.670
0.669
0.668
0.667
0.656
0.638
0.631
0.606
0.595
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.14
200.00
200.65
200.00
200.00
200.88
201.07
200.00
201.55
200.00
200.00
201.77
202.20
200.00
200.00
204.55
200.00
204.87
200.02
207.36
200.00
208.80
200.00
212.49
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.49
200.00
200.71
200.64
200.80
200.88
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
204.87
200.00
200.00
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.58
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.66
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.18
10.50
11.41
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.54
10.50
10.56
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.50
10.60
10.62
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.41
18.00
17.99
18.00
17.99
17.94
18.00
18.00
17.86
18.00
18.00
17.75
18.00
18.00
17.71
18.00
18.00
17.48
17.27
18.00
17.20
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
16.39
18.00
15.48
18.00
17.97
17.96
17.94
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.59
17.27
18.00
16.67
18.00
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
179
Distortion
Residual
Stresses
Desirability
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
1.14375
1.14519
1.146
1.14761
1.14834
1.14976
1.15056
1.15269
1.15208
1.15479
1.15497
1.16043
1.16364
1.15745
1.16118
1.16318
1.17692
1.17036
1.19074
1.19223
1.23766
1.24255
1.24377
1.25222
1.26025
1.28619
1.53125
1.53428
1.53443
1.53712
1.53994
1.53845
1.54028
1.54209
1.54514
1.54671
1.55035
1.55647
1.55501
1.5644
1.56054
1.56238
1.57524
1.57009
1.63972
1.64775
1.76235
1.80629
1.82298
1.86125
273.313
273.427
273.478
273.506
273.678
273.745
273.75
273.957
273.975
274.055
274.121
274.147
274.307
274.403
274.568
274.86
274.971
275.231
276.699
276.807
278.008
280.454
281.277
281.95
281.709
284.654
309.188
309.345
309.417
309.611
309.622
309.761
309.838
310.051
310.293
310.301
310.143
310.449
310.9
310.845
311.52
311.665
311.387
312.28
317.825
317.584
320.743
322.939
323.774
325.688
0.979
0.979
0.979
0.979
0.978
0.978
0.978
0.977
0.977
0.976
0.976
0.976
0.975
0.975
0.974
0.973
0.973
0.972
0.966
0.966
0.950
0.939
0.935
0.930
0.929
0.910
0.742
0.740
0.740
0.738
0.737
0.737
0.736
0.735
0.733
0.733
0.732
0.730
0.728
0.726
0.724
0.723
0.721
0.718
0.676
0.675
0.631
0.609
0.601
0.583
230.00
230.17
230.05
230.00
230.54
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.99
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
231.62
230.00
232.30
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.33
241.85
242.86
230.00
246.87
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.02
230.00
230.85
230.00
231.28
231.65
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
233.47
233.67
230.00
234.60
242.86
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.50
10.55
10.54
10.57
10.50
10.57
10.59
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.64
10.50
10.50
10.72
10.89
10.90
10.50
11.29
10.50
10.50
11.46
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.53
10.55
10.50
10.50
10.57
10.50
10.50
10.63
10.50
10.50
10.70
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
11.46
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.97
18.00
18.00
17.98
18.00
18.00
17.98
18.00
17.86
17.84
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.73
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.22
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.98
18.00
18.00
17.93
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.84
17.79
18.00
17.73
18.00
18.00
17.64
18.00
18.00
18.00
16.09
15.72
15.59
15.27
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
nil
180
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
181
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
R e s p o n s e C o m p a r is o n fo r C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s = 3 m m
S c a to r P lo t
600
550
500
450
400
2 .5
3 .0
D is t o r t io n ( m m )
3 .5
4 .0
R e s p o n s e C o m p a r is o n fo r C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s = 4 m m
S c a to r P lo t
480
460
440
420
400
380
360
340
320
300
2 .0
2 .5
D is t o r t io n ( m m )
3 .0
3 .5
R e s p o n s e C o m p a r is o n fo r C y lin d e r T h ic k n e s s = 5 m m
S c a to r P lo t
400
375
350
325
300
275
250
1 .0
1 .5
2 .0
D is t o r t io n ( m m )
2 .5
3 .0
Fig. 5.44 Response Comparison Scator Plots (cylinder thickness = 3 mm, 4 mm, 5 mm)
183
5.4.3 Numerical Optimization & Empirical Modeling using Response Surface Method
By performing the virtual experimentation and analysis following the 2-level full
factorial design (three numeric factors and one categoric factor) as given in Table 5.9, Table
5.10 and Table 5.11 for the cylinder thicknesses of 3, 4 and 5 mm respectively for the
responses (distortion and residual stresses), the effect of cylinder thickness as another
variable with earlier variables (i.e. four numeric factors and one categoric factor) is analyzed
by employing response surface method (RSM) as discussed in chapter 3.
The low and high settings of factors are given in Table 5.23 and the complete
historical data (3x16 observations for each thickness) is given in Table 5.24 with response
values. The summary of design is given in the Table 5.25. During model analysis, fit
summary suggested to use 2FI model for analysis of variance. ANOVA results are shown in
Table 3.26 and Table 3.27 for weld distortion and residual stresses respectively.
The values of R-Squared, Adj R-Squared and Pred R-Squared including Adeq
Precision (max to min ratio) are given in Table 5.28. Figure 5.45 and Figure 3.46 shows the
effects of changing the levels of each parameter upon distortion and residual stresses while
keeping other parameters fixed respectively. It is clear that effects of welding current,
voltage, speed and thickness are significant. The distortion and residual stresses increases
with increase of welding current and voltage values without the application of trailing and
decreases with increase of welding speed and thickness with the application of trailing.
Figure 5.47 and Figure 3.48 shows the interaction effect of welding parameters upon
distortion and residual stresses respectively.
From Table 5.26 and Table 5.27, the significance of all models is clear from the
Model F-value which is greater than 4. As the values of "Prob > F" less than 0.0500 indicate
the significance of model terms, in this case A, B, C, D and E terms are significant with some
interaction terms. The Table 5.28 shows that the "Pred R-Squared" values are in reasonable
agreement with the "Adj R-Squared" values and Adeq Precision values indicate an
adequate signal that shows the models can be used to navigate the design space.
Units
Type
A
B
C
D
E
A
V
cm/min
mm
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Categoric
Current
Voltage
Weld Speed
Thickness
Trailing
Low
Actual
170.00
10.50
15.00
3.0
nil
High
Actual
270.0
13.50
18.00
5.0
Ar
Mean
216.66
12.0
16.5
4.0
184
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 5.24 Historical Data (48 (3x16) observations) including Response Values for RSM
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Factor 1
A:Current
(A)
Factor 2
B:Voltage
(V)
210.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
210.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
210.00
210.00
170.00
210.00
220.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
220.00
220.00
200.00
220.00
270.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
270.00
270.00
230.00
270.00
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
Factor 3
Factor 4
Factor 5
Responses
C:Weld Speed D: Thickness D: Trailing Distortion
(cm/min)
(mm)
(mm)
15.00
3.00
Ar
3.4
18.00
3.00
nil
3.1
15.00
3.00
nil
3.3
15.00
3.00
nil
3.7
15.00
3.00
Ar
3.5
18.00
3.00
nil
3.6
18.00
3.00
nil
3.8
18.00
3.00
Ar
3.2
18.00
3.00
Ar
2.3
15.00
3.00
nil
3.9
15.00
3.00
Ar
2.7
15.00
3.00
Ar
3.3
15.00
3.00
nil
3.6
18.00
3.00
nil
3.4
18.00
3.00
Ar
3.1
18.00
3.00
Ar
2.9
15.00
4.00
Ar
2.7
18.00
4.00
nil
2.4
15.00
4.00
nil
2.6
15.00
4.00
nil
3
15.00
4.00
Ar
2.8
18.00
4.00
nil
2.9
18.00
4.00
nil
3.1
18.00
4.00
Ar
2.5
18.00
4.00
Ar
1.8
15.00
4.00
nil
3.3
15.00
4.00
Ar
2.1
15.00
4.00
Ar
2.7
15.00
4.00
nil
2.9
18.00
4.00
nil
2.7
18.00
4.00
Ar
2.5
18.00
4.00
Ar
2.3
15.00
5.00
Ar
2.4
18.00
5.00
nil
1.9
15.00
5.00
nil
2.2
15.00
5.00
nil
2.1
15.00
5.00
Ar
1.8
18.00
5.00
nil
1.5
18.00
5.00
nil
2.2
18.00
5.00
Ar
2
18.00
5.00
Ar
1.2
15.00
5.00
nil
2.9
15.00
5.00
Ar
1.4
15.00
5.00
Ar
1.7
15.00
5.00
nil
1.9
18.00
5.00
nil
1.8
18.00
5.00
Ar
1.5
18.00
5.00
Ar
1.4
Residual
Stresses
(MPa)
505
464
496
501
445
498
514
447
416
577
443
444
497
489
441
455
433
360
394
403
354
398
421
370
324
464
348
352
387
375
348
357
370
332
335
340
307
330
361
320
268
398
302
306
329
333
293
305
185
Units
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev.
Distortion
mm
1.2
3.9
2.60417
0.715172
Residual Stress
MPa
268
577
394.771
72.1374
Sum sqrs
Model
22.51
A-Current
B-Voltage
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
4.50
123.96
0.0001
Significant
0.82
0.82
22.59
0.0001
Significant
2.00
2.00
55.08
0.0001
Significant
0.96
26.52
0.0001
Significant
D-Thickness 9.76
9.76
268.60
0.0001
Significant
E-Trailing
2.34
2.34
64.44
0.0001
Significant
Residual
1.53
42
0.036
Cor Total
24.04
47
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
2.311E+005
46222.18
144.15
0.0001
Significant
A-Current
11546.04
11546.04
36.01
0.0001
Significant
B-Voltage
11011.02
11011.02
34.34
0.0001
Significant
5440.02
16.97
0.0002
Significant
D-Thickness 1.141E+005
1.141E+005
355.79
0.0001
Significant
E-Trailing
22663.52
22663.52
70.68
0.0001
Significant
Residual
13467.60
42
320.66
Cor Total
2.446E+005
47
Model
Sum sqrs
Significance
Adeq Precision
R-Squared
Adj R-Squared
Pred
R-Squared
Distortion
42.383
93.65%
92.90%
91.68%
Residual Stress
44.193
94.49%
93.84%
92.83%
186
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
188
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The empirical models for the responses (distortion (mm) and weld residual stresses
(MPa)), in terms of welding parameters (welding current, welding voltage, welding speed
and thickness of cylinders with or without application of trailing), are as follows:
Equation 5.17 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.18 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for distortion:
5.17
5.18
Equation 5.19 (Trailing = nil) and Equation 5.20 (Trailing = Ar) in terms of actual
factors for weld residual stresses:
5.19
5.20
All the models presented in equations 5.17 to 5.20 for distortion and weld residual
stresses in circumferential welding are valid for the following ranges of input parameters:
welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3 mm, 200 to 220 A for 4 mm and 230 to 270 A for 5 mm;
welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and welding speed 15 to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the distortion and residual stresses data suggests
that for any material thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the distortion and residual
stresses in TIG welding of HSLA steel can be minimized if the trailing is used along with
low values of heat input i.e. low values of welding current and welding voltage and high
value of welding speed. The predicted weld distortion and weld residual stresses values are
as: i) 3.06 mm and 450.59 MPa, ii) 2.73 mm and 384.89MPa, and iii) 2.24 mm and 331 MPa
at input parameters as: i) 170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 3 mm, ii) 200 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 4
mm and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 5 mm respectively as shown in Figure 5.49 and
Figure 5.50 with response desirability for minimization of distortion and residual stresses
respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed, thickness and trailing) and response (distortion and residual stresses) with
respect to desirability are given in detail in Table 5.29.
189
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
For Goal: Current is equal to 230 A. Thickness is equal to 5 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
230.00
230.00
230.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
18.00
18.00
17.67
5.00
5.00
5.00
Ar
nil
nil
For Goal: Current is equal to 200 A. Thickness is equal to 4 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
18.00
17.96
18.00
17.89
17.74
17.71
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
1.91609
1.91953
2.35776
2.36847
2.38259
2.3847
332.85
333.109
376.308
377.113
378.174
378.333
0.762
0.761
0.609
0.606
0.601
0.601
For Goal: Current is equal to 170 A. Thickness is equal to 3 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
10.50
10.71
10.50
10.50
10.58
10.63
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.90
18.00
18.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
nil
2.63172
2.66096
3.07338
3.08287
3.08365
3.09046
407.944
410.113
451.402
452.115
452.164
452.669
0.507
0.498
0.353
0.350
0.350
0.347
241.877
229.346
238.509
241.414
236.726
226.803
235.217
243.732
249.911
238.568
251.457
252.71
245.96
242.702
247.45
248.359
247.464
233.735
214.292
239.733
252.738
249.335
220.11
232.786
247.043
238.564
235.005
241.301
253.963
241.659
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
For Goal: Current, Thickness, Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
191.61
173.76
174.47
186.41
170.47
170.87
171.66
181.15
217.84
183.61
220.32
175.04
170.23
184.11
170.48
171.96
195.36
173.76
171.84
175.18
214.08
170.23
172.43
174.72
207.82
170.09
176.31
196.91
211.25
171.55
11.15
10.77
10.88
10.52
12.75
10.57
11.43
11.96
10.67
11.59
10.56
10.56
10.56
10.92
11.20
10.75
10.51
12.23
10.56
11.70
10.56
10.84
11.10
11.61
10.81
12.39
12.74
11.54
10.78
10.91
17.24
16.27
15.02
15.33
17.41
16.16
15.70
16.97
17.90
17.06
17.91
17.92
17.49
15.16
17.96
17.26
16.51
17.73
17.56
16.57
17.65
17.97
17.84
17.84
17.87
16.16
17.91
17.85
17.86
16.20
4.95
4.95
4.96
4.98
4.97
4.94
4.98
4.94
5.00
4.97
4.99
4.59
4.65
5.00
4.67
4.67
4.91
4.95
4.97
4.93
4.94
4.61
4.95
4.90
4.96
5.00
5.00
4.99
4.92
4.83
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
1.13014
1.03869
1.16358
1.1578
1.1612
1.01188
1.13915
1.19723
1.14671
1.12958
1.15451
1.19767
1.15087
1.19355
1.17809
1.18643
1.17333
1.09964
0.85481
1.16496
1.17795
1.18028
0.92321
1.06062
1.13387
1.19903
1.12607
1.12034
1.19487
1.16213
191
Units
Type
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
V
cm/min
mm
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Categoric
Categoric
Current
Voltage
Weld Speed
Thickness
Trailing
Weld Type
Low
Actual
170.00
10.50
15.00
3.0
nil
Linear
High Mean
Actual
270.0 216.66
13.50 12.0
18.00 16.5
5.0
4.0
Ar
Circumferential
192
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 5.31 Historical Data (96 (2x3x16) observations) including Response Values for RSM
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Residual
Stresses (MPa)
514
516
540
547
472
543
553
476
448
608
467
471
545
542
468
478
452
422
448
459
391
453
470
409
366
505
382
389
445
438
385
390
388
391
404
410
357
401
425
370
335
452
353
355
398
403
348
357
193
Table 5.31 Historical Data (96 (2x3x16) observations) including Response Values for RSM
Run
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
13.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
13.50
10.50
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
nil
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
Ar
Ar
nil
nil
Ar
Ar
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Circumferential
Responses
Weld
Distortion Residual
Strength (MPa) (mm) Stresses(MPa)
696.8
751.6
733.1
704.3
708.3
715.4
698.5
702.7
791
690.7
767.5
718.8
711.7
718.6
733.4
748.3
736.4
751.3
741.2
725.2
739.6
731.4
724.3
737.2
780.4
722.3
760.1
742.5
727.5
736.3
750.3
755.4
726.7
759.5
737.8
717.8
730.5
729.5
715
730
765.7
715
757.7
735.7
725
729.5
742.8
749.8
3.4
3.1
3.3
3.7
3.5
3.6
3.8
3.2
2.3
3.9
2.7
3.3
3.6
3.4
3.1
2.9
2.7
2.4
2.6
3
2.8
2.9
3.1
2.5
1.8
3.3
2.1
2.7
2.9
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.4
1.9
2.2
2.1
1.8
1.5
2.2
2
1.2
2.9
1.4
1.7
1.9
1.8
1.5
1.4
505
464
496
501
445
498
514
447
416
577
443
444
497
489
441
455
433
360
394
403
354
398
421
370
324
464
348
352
387
375
348
357
370
332
335
340
307
330
361
320
268
398
302
306
329
333
293
305
194
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Sum sqrs
Model
A-Current
B-Voltage
C-Weld Speed
D-Thickness
E-Trailing
F-Weld Type
AB
AC
AD
AE
AF
BC
BD
BE
BF
CD
CE
CF
DE
DF
EF
Residual
Cor Total
38699.18
9920.23
12136.10
2786.56
11384.95
5907.88
0.000
638.25
194.05
6.63
177.32
0.000
279.48
0.014
455.01
0.000
11.89
135.85
0.000
34.21
0.000
0.000
4053.66
42752.84
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
21
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
74
95
1842.82
9920.23
12136.10
2786.56
11384.95
5907.88
0.000
638.25
194.05
6.63
177.32
0.000
279.48
0.014
455.01
0.000
11.89
135.85
0.000
34.21
0.000
0.000
54.78
33.64
181.10
221.55
50.87
207.83
107.85
0.000
11.65
3.54
0.12
3.24
0.000
5.10
2.529E-004
8.31
0.000
0.22
2.48
0.000
0.62
0.000
0.000
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
1.0000
0.0010
0.0638
0.7290
0.0761
1.0000
0.0268
0.9874
0.0052
1.0000
0.6427
0.1196
1.0000
0.4319
1.0000
1.0000
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Sum sqrs
Model
A-Current
B-Voltage
C-Weld Speed
D-Thickness
E-Trailing
F-Weld Type
AB
AC
AD
AE
AF
BC
BD
BE
BF
CD
CE
CF
DE
DF
EF
Residual
Cor Total
195.83
9.11
15.99
5.45
31.04
8.55
118.98
7.040E-004
0.27
0.19
0.022
2.91
0.015
0.087
0.54
4.25
0.27
0.027
1.17
0.016
1.32
0.70
4.10
199.94
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
21
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
74
95
9.33
9.11
15.99
5.45
31.04
8.55
118.98
7.040E-004
0.27
0.19
0.022
2.91
0.015
0.087
0.54
4.25
0.27
0.027
1.17
0.016
1.32
0.70
0.055
168.12
164.21
288.26
98.18
559.57
154.06
2145.12
0.013
4.86
3.49
0.39
52.45
0.27
1.57
9.74
76.63
4.78
0.48
21.10
0.28
23.71
12.63
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.9106
0.0306
0.0658
0.5321
0.0001
0.6046
0.2146
0.0026
0.0001
0.0320
0.4902
0.0001
0.5984
0.0001
0.0007
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
195
Sum sqrs
Model
A-Current
B-Voltage
C-Weld Speed
D-Thickness
E-Trailing
F-Weld Type
AB
AC
AD
AE
AF
BC
BD
BE
BF
CD
CE
CF
DE
DF
EF
Residual
Cor Total
4.833E+005
16895.72
19540.21
8190.03
1.854E+005
64566.00
47241.36
2614.66
202.05
1527.93
18.35
174.00
1232.67
1914.64
400.17
247.04
333.53
6.00
222.04
444.19
1397.79
2147.04
15082.74
4.984E+005
DoF
Mean square
F-value
Prob>F
Significance
21
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
74
95
23014.79
16895.72
19540.21
8190.03
1.854E+005
64566.00
47241.36
2614.66
202.05
1527.93
18.35
174.00
1232.67
1914.64
400.17
247.04
333.53
6.00
222.04
444.19
1397.79
2147.04
203.82
112.92
82.89
95.87
40.18
909.45
316.78
231.78
12.83
0.99
7.50
0.090
0.85
6.05
9.39
1.96
1.21
1.64
0.029
1.09
2.18
6.86
10.53
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0006
0.3227
0.0077
0.7650
0.3585
0.0163
0.0030
0.1653
0.2745
0.2048
0.8642
0.3000
0.1441
0.0107
0.0018
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Significant
Units
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev.
Weld Strength
MPa
690.7
791
733.752
21.2139
Distortion
mm
1.2
7.2
3.70417
1.45073
Residual Stress
MPa
268
608
417.583
72.431
Adeq Precision
R-Squared
Weld Strength
24.614
90.52%
87.83%
84.31%
Distortion
55.145
97.95%
97.36%
96.56%
Residual Stress
46.028
96.97%
96.11%
95.01%
196
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
197
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The overall empirical models for the responses (weld strength (MPa), distortion (mm)
and weld residual stresses (MPa)), in terms of welding parameters, are as follows:
Equation 5.21 (Trailing = nil, Weld Type = Linear), Equation 5.22 (Trailing = Ar,
Weld Type = Linear), Equation 5.23 (Trailing = nil, Weld Type = Circumferential),
and Equation 5.24 (Trailing = Ar, Weld Type = Circumferential) in terms of actual
factors for weld strength:
Equation 5.25 (Trailing = nil, Weld Type = Linear), Equation 5.26 (Trailing = Ar,
Weld Type = Linear), Equation 5.27 (Trailing = nil, Weld Type = Circumferential),
and Equation 5.28 (Trailing = Ar, Weld Type = Circumferential) in terms of actual
factors for distortion:
Distortion = +4.53993+1.02743E-003 * Current+0.41944 * Voltage-0.43333 * Weld Speed
+0.70185 * Thickness+1.00575E-004* Current * Voltage+1.96839E-003* Current * Weld Speed
-2.10898E-003* Current * Thickness+5.55556E-003* Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.041559 * Voltage * Thickness-0.072593 * Weld Speed * Thickness
5.25
Distortion = +2.34827+2.70846E-003 * Current+0.51944 * Voltage-0.45556* Weld Speed
+0.75455* Thickness+1.00575E-004* Current * Voltage+1.96839E-003* Current * Weld Speed
-2.10898E-003* Current * Thickness+5.55556E-003* Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.041559* Voltage * Thickness-0.072593* Weld Speed * Thickness
5.26
Distortion = +5.36910-0.018369* Current+0.13889 * Voltage-0.28611* Weld Speed
+1.18688 * Thickness+1.00575E-004* Current * Voltage+1.96839E-003 * Current * Weld Speed
-2.10898E-003 * Current * Thickness+5.55556E-003 * Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.041559 * Voltage * Thickness-0.072593 * Weld Speed * Thickness
5.27
Distortion = +3.51910-0.016688 * Current+0.23889* Voltage-0.30833* Weld Speed
+1.23957* Thickness+1.00575E-004* Current * Voltage+1.96839E-003* Current * Weld Speed
-2.10898E-003* Current * Thickness+5.55556E-003* Voltage * Weld Speed
-0.041559 * Voltage * Thickness-0.072593* Weld Speed * Thickness
5.28
200
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Equation 5.29 (Trailing = nil, Weld Type = Linear), Equation 5.30 (Trailing = Ar,
Weld Type = Linear), Equation 5.31 (Trailing = nil, Weld Type = Circumferential),
and Equation 5.32 (Trailing = Ar, Weld Type = Circumferential) in terms of actual
factors for weld residual stresses:
5.29
5.30
5.31
5.32
All the models presented in equations 5.21 to 5.32 for weld strength, distortion and weld
residual stresses in linear and circumferential welding are valid for the following ranges of
input parameters: welding current: 170 to 210 A for 3 mm, 200 to 220 A for 4 mm and 230 to
270 A for 5 mm; welding voltage 10.5 to 13.5 V and welding speed 15 to 18 cm/min.
The numerical optimization applied to the distortion and residual stresses data suggests
that for any material thickness value lying between 3 and 5 mm, the distortion and residual
stresses in TIG welding of HSLA steel can be minimized if the trailing is used along with
low values of heat input i.e. low values of welding current and welding voltage and high
value of welding speed. The predicted weld distortion and weld residual stresses values are
as: i) 781.067 MPa, 3.06 mm and 450.59 MPa, ii) 779 MPa, 2.73 mm and 384.89MPa, and
iii) 777.72 MPa, 2.24 mm and 331 MPa at input parameters as: i) 170 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min,
3 mm, ii) 200 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 4 mm and iii) 230 A, 10.5 V, 18 cm/min, 5 mm
respectively as shown in Figure 5.57, Figure 5.58 and Figure 5.59 with response desirability
for minimization of distortion and residual stresses and maximization of weld strength
respectively. Figure 5.60, Figure 5.61 and Figure 5.62 show the response desirability for
maximization of weld strength and minimization of distortion and residual stresses with
respect to predictors respectively.
Response desirability solutions containing predictors (welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed, thickness, trailing and weld type) and response (weld strength, distortion and
residual stresses) with respect to desirability are given in detail in Table 5.37.
201
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
For Goal: Current is equal to 230 A. Thickness is equal to 5 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
230.00
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.50
10.54
10.50
10.57
10.50
10.74
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.58
10.50
18.00
18.00
17.97
17.94
18.00
17.98
18.00
17.65
18.00
17.89
18.00
18.00
17.94
18.00
18.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.98
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.99
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Linear
Linear
Linear
Linear
Linear
777.723
777.6
777.534
777.38
777.348
777.505
777.076
775.778
775.515
776.634
777.723
777.587
777.395
776.983
777.38
1.13848
1.14052
1.14394
1.14842
1.14472
1.14583
1.14924
1.1947
1.17521
1.17526
2.29958
2.3064
2.3178
2.33429
2.31985
275.346
275.383
275.437
275.517
275.458
275.72
275.539
276.288
276.004
277.256
331.575
331.672
331.614
331.625
332.449
0.960
0.960
0.959
0.959
0.959
0.959
0.958
0.954
0.953
0.953
0.871
0.870
0.870
0.868
0.867
For Goal: Current is equal to 200 A. Thickness is equal to 4 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
200.00
10.50
10.50
10.52
10.50
10.55
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.50
10.50
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
17.91
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
4.00
4.01
4.00
4.03
4.00
4.04
4.00
4.06
4.07
4.08
4.00
4.01
4.00
4.04
4.06
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Circumfer 779.025
Circumfer 779.241
Circumfer 778.789
Circumfer 779.728
Circumfer 778.399
Circumfer 779.999
Circumfer 778.411
Circumfer 780.518
Circumfer 780.719
Circumfer 780.898
Linear 779.025
Linear 779.202
Linear 778.881
Linear 779.924
Linear 780.479
1.78613
1.77782
1.78987
1.75961
1.79604
1.74937
1.79966
1.72978
1.72217
1.71544
2.85035
2.84015
2.85594
2.79866
2.7667
341.409
340.625
341.469
338.943
341.557
337.99
341.741
336.17
335.456
334.835
386.325
385.817
386.337
383.751
382.158
0.888
0.888
0.888
0.887
0.886
0.886
0.886
0.885
0.884
0.884
0.803
0.803
0.803
0.802
0.802
For Goal: Current is equal to 170 A. Thickness is equal to 3 mm. Voltage, Speed and Trailing are in range.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
170.00
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.52
10.50
10.50
10.55
10.50
10.58
10.60
10.50
10.50
10.51
10.51
10.50
18.00
18.00
17.98
18.00
18.00
17.95
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
3.41
3.42
3.42
3.43
3.44
3.43
3.44
3.48
3.46
3.47
3.53
3.53
3.52
3.57
3.44
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Circumf
Linear
Linear
Linear
Linear
Linear
791.001
791.262
791.006
791.019
791.654
790.998
791
792.751
791.002
791.016
793.772
793.959
793.491
794.752
791.685
1.9528
1.94306
1.94974
1.94502
1.92924
1.94679
1.93597
1.89037
1.92758
1.92062
2.5662
2.55552
2.57725
2.50747
2.68213
381.034
379.969
380.373
379.72
378.51
379.679
378.097
374.395
376.64
375.462
412.44
411.806
412.667
408.78
418.927
0.825
0.825
0.825
0.825
0.825
0.825
0.824
0.824
0.824
0.823
0.756
0.756
0.756
0.756
0.756
205
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 6
KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING FOR OPTIMIZING TIG
WELDING PROCESS
6.1 Introduction
After completion of all welding analysis required to obtain the data by experimental
work or virtual experiments by simulations and statistical analysis related to optimization of
welding process, the next process is to manage the available welding experimental data and
optimization information at a single platform and to utilize some automated means to extract
the useful information from that platform in most effective manner as knowledge. The
selection of expert system is the best option for this requirement as already mentioned in
Chapter 1. Further more, the relationship among welding parameters and response is complex
and it is very difficult to represent it using some mathematical model. In this chapter, the
objectives of developing expert system and application to welding; the configuration; the
utilization of fuzzy logic for reasoning mechanism; and the optimal formation of rule-base of
the expert system are presented.
207
The main objective of the research carried out in the welding domain and described in
this manuscript is the optimal settings of the welding process input parameters so as to
maximize the weld strength and minimize the residual stresses and distortion without
compromising the welding quality. The detail of experimental work and simulations
presented in chapters 3 5 provides the set of crude directives towards achievement of the
objective. The highly generalized information generated by the experimental work and
virtual based on simulations is very difficult to be utilized by the welder, operator, or
engineers for solution of their highly specific welding problems.
208
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
First consider the selection of five predictor variables only for the purpose of simplicity
in description. These five predictor variables are the ones that were tested in the set of
experiments explained in Chapter 3, i.e. material thickness, welding current, welding voltage,
welding speed, and choice of trailing. The sheet or cylinder thickness will be considered as a
parameter that needs not to be optimized. This is so because thickness is the geometric
property of the work piece and it cannot be changed unless the work piece is removed from
the welding setup and changed. The comprehensive treatment of all the process input
parameters will be provided in the Chapter-7 by using the expert system. The configuration
of the proposed expert system is shown in Figure 6.2.
Knowledge Base
-Welding Current selection rules
-Welding voltage/speed selection
rule
-Trailing selection rules
Shell
Module
User
Interface
Forward
Chaining
Inference
Engine
Operation Modules
Optimization
Use
Data
Fuzzifier
Working
Memory
Prediction
Module
Recommendation
Data
Defuzzifier
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
which the fuzzy values of welding current, weld strength, distortion and residual stresses are
defuzzified in accordance with preferred defuzzification algorithm. Finally, in the last step,
the recommendation of predictor variables and prediction of response variables are printed
out.
Start
Fix Objective & material Thickness
Fuzzify numeric input
Determine
current
No
Current
fixed?
Yes
Voltage
fixed?
No
Determine
voltage
Yes
Determine
speed
No
Speed
fixed?
Yes
Trailing
fixed?
No
Determine
trailing
Yes
Determine weld strength, distortion and
residual stresses
Print Output
Stop
Fig. 6.3 The flow chart representing the operational procedure of the expert system
211
212
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
(deftemplate Distortion 1 7 mm
( (vlow (1 1) (2 1) (3 0) ); very low
(low (2 0) (3 1) (4 0) ); low
(med (3 0) (4 1) (5 0) ); medium
(high (4 0) (5 1) (6 0) ); high
(vhigh (5 0) (6 1) (7 1) ) ) ); very high
(deftemplate Residual_Stresses 100 700 MPa
( (vlow (100 1) (200 1) (300 0) ); very low
(low (200 0) (300 1) (400 0) ); low
(med (300 0) (400 1) (500 0) ); medium
(high (400 0) (500 1) (600 0) ); high
(vhigh (500 0) (600 1) (700 1) ) ) ); very high
The one predictor variable (trailing) is categorical, therefore cannot be fuzzified.
However, this variable is used as crisp variable in the fuzzy knowledge-base. This shows that
in this expert system development, both crisp and fuzzy antecedents and consequents are
freely mixed for the creation of the rules. The step of application of fuzzy rule provides the
recommendation as a crisp value and/or fuzzy set, specifying a fuzzy distribution of a
conclusion. But in welding process, the operator or welder needs a single discrete valued
direction. Therefore, it is required to select a single point from fuzzy distribution that
provides the best value. The process of reducing a fuzzy set to a single point is known as
defuzzification [229]. There are two methods commonly used for defuzzifying the fuzzy sets
i.e. center of gravity (CoG) or moment method and mean of maxima (MoM) method. The
detail of both methods can be referred in [229, 230]. For this expert system development, the
centre of gravity (CoG) method is used as defuzzification method for the reason that it
provides smoothly varying output of response variables for gradually varying input values of
material thickness and welding current. Whereas the utilization of mean of maxima (MoM)
method contained the risk of generating highly abrupt output values of response variables for
small and gradual variations in material thickness and welding current values that was
observable at specific ranges of these two predictor variables.
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
By using all possible combinations of two inputs and applying AND operation, the fuzzy
membership values for output variable weld strength (considering application of above listed
four rules) can be as given in the following:
1. Low (0.8) and Small (0.25) will yield Low (0.25)
2. Low (0.8) and Large (0.75) will yield Medium (0.75)
3. High (0.2) and Small (0.25) will yield Very Low (0.2)
4. High (0.2) and Large (0.75) will yield Low (0.2)
By using the above mentioned four rules according to the max-min strategy, Table 6.1
can be obtained following the procedure of aggregation. By applying OR operation to all the
fuzzy set values as given in Table 6.1, the maximum value for the output fuzzy set can be
obtained as shown in Table 6.2. The defuzzified output which gives the value of weld
strength can be obtained as follows:
Weld Strength = 690x0.2+700x0.2+710x0.25+720x0.25+730x0.5+740x0.75+750x0.5+760x0
0.2+0.2+0.25+0.25+0.5+0.75+0.5+0
Weld Strength = 728.49 MPa
Table 6.1 Weld Strength values from all the four rules
Fuzzy
Subsets
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
740
750
760
Low
0.25
0.25
0.25
Medium
0.5
0.75
0.5
Very Low
0.2
0.2
0.2
Low
0.2
0.2
0.2
700
710
720
730
740
750
760
770
780
790
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.5
0.75
0.5
0.2
216
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[1.2] Initialize rules combination for inner loop, rules [i][0] = rules [i] and error [i][0] =
error [i]
[1.3] Execute inner loop, i.e. steps 1.3.1 to 1.3.5 until conditions in step 1.3.5 are met
[1.3.1] Update l = l + 1
[1.3.2] Generate a neighboring solution by changing randomly one rule, and compute
estimation error for new rules combination (rules [i][l] and error [i][l])
[1.3.3] Assign q = error [i][l] error [i][l 1]
[1.3.4] If q 0 or Random (0, 1) e-q/To then
Accept rules [i][l] and error [i][l]
Update AT = AT + 1
Else reject generated combination: rules [i][l] = rules [i][l 1], error [i][l] = error [i][l 1]
[1.3.5] If one of following conditions hold true: AT ATmin; OR l 5S2 (S No. of
fuzzy sets of output variable), then assign length of Markov chain L [i] = l. Terminate
inner loop and go to 1.4, else continue the inner loop and go to 1.3.1
[1.4] Update i = i + 1
[1.5] Update: rules [i] = rules [i 1][L[i] 1] and error [i 1][L[i] 1]
[1.6] Reduce cooling temperature: T [i] = .T[i 1]
[1.7] If one of following conditions hold true: i imax; OR (AT / L[i]) Rf; OR
estimation error value does not reduce for last 20 iterations, then terminate the outer
loop and go to 2, else continue outer loop and go to 1.1
[2] Print out the best rules combination along with minimum estimation error value
and terminate the procedure
The C++ was used to generate the algorithm code. Further, the SA parameters are
operated using following values: (1) starting annealing temperature (T0) = 1300 MPa; (2) rate
of cooling () = 0.98; (3) maximum number of iterations (imax) = 100; (4) length of Markov
Chain at each iteration (L) = 5 7 7 = 245; (5) minimum acceptance ratio (Rf) = 0.01; (6)
minimum number of accepted transitions at each iteration (ATmin) = 100.
The objective function of the optimization of fuzzy rules problem is the minimization
of estimation error, where the term estimation error can be as given in Equation 6.1.
Whereas l, m, n, o = Number of levels (not the fuzzy sets) provided by the user for each
of four variables: material thickness, welding current, welding speed and trailing
respectively.
218
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Whereas the prediction module is assigned to generate the best possible estimate of all
the three response variables for any given combination of four predictor variables whether all
of the four predictor variables have been fixed by the user or any combination of these has
been determined by the optimization module. Table 6.4 presents these 16 rules with two
consequents as displayed i.e. weld strength and distortion. Table 6.5 shows the other
consequents residual stresses for the same 16 rules arranged in same order as in Table
6.4. Table 6.4 and Table 6.5 show the rules that made by using Simulated Annealing
Algorithm for maximum precision in predicting the values of output variables.
Antecedents
Thickness
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Small
Large
Large
Large
Large
Large
Large
Large
Large
Current Speed
High Low
High Low
High High
High High
Low Low
Low Low
Low High
Low High
High Low
High Low
High High
High High
Low Low
Low Low
Low High
Low High
Trailing
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Nil
Ar
Consequents
Weld Strength
Distortion
very low
high & very high
very low & low
medium
medium
low & medium
medium & high
very low
very low & low
low
low
medium
high
low
high & very high
very low
very low
high
low
low& medium
medium
low
high
very low
extremely low
low
extremely low very low & low
very low
low
low & medium
very low
220
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Table 6.5 List of consequents (Residual stresses) for the antecedents enlisted in table 6.4
(See the fuzzy sets provided in sub-section 6.4.1)
Rule
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Residual Stresses
high & very high
medium
low & medium
very low
low
medium
low
very low
high
low& medium
low
very low
low
very low & low
low
very low
221
222
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 7
THE SELF-DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPTIMIZING
TIG WELDING PROCESS
7.1 Introduction
The development of an expert system for optimization of predictor variables (welding
current, welding voltage, welding speed and trailing) and prediction of performance
measures (weld strength, distortion and residual stresses) of TIG welding process of thin
walled HSLA steel structure was presented in the previous chapter. Even the developed
expert system consumed a considerable amount of effort and time but still its scope remained
limited. The developed expert system deals only the effects of four welding process input
parameters after the formulation of 23 rules, 16 of them employing 3 output variables (weld
strength, distortion and residual stresses) and also required to be optimized using a complex
optimization algorithm. In order to expand the scope of expert system, the developer would
have to redo the same hectic efforts in order to incorporate the incoming knowledge from
experimental work on welding in knowledge-base. Such type of requirement and situation
represents a picture of a major barrier in the way of successful application of expert system at
industrial level. In this way, there is strong need to have a computer-based consultation
system that can develop and expand its scope of application by itself without requiring
knowledge engineering skills of the developers. In this context, this chapter presents this
important area of artificial intelligence in detail.
statistical learning technique, to diagnose the condition of tool during a milling process in
[239]. Now it is obvious that machine learning approach has been utilized on a very limited
scale for optimization of few process parameters or for the purpose of tool condition
monitoring as given in above review.
In this chapter development of a fuzzy expert system for optimizing the welding process
will be presented that have the capability of self-learning, self-correcting and also selfexpanding. Following are the salient features of the self developing expert system [240].
1. To predict the values of output process variables based upon values of input process
variables.
2. To suggest the best values of input process variables to maximize and/or minimize
the values of selected set of output process variables.
3. Adjustment of newly entered variable at any stage of development automatically.
4. Self learning and correction according to the new data set provided.
5. Generates fuzzy sets for newly entered process variable and regenerates sets for other
variables according to newly added data automatically.
6. Generates the rules for the knowledge-base automatically.
7. Solve contradictory rules with conflict resolution facility.
8. Deletion facility of outdated data from database.
The first two features represent the main objective of the expert system while the other
features describe the automation required for the system to self developing. This self
developing expert system offers numerous benefits as given in the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The main components of the self-development mode of the expert system are: data
acquisition module; fuzzy sets development module; and rule-base (optimization and
prediction) development module [240]. In the following sections, the objectives,
functionality, and algorithms for these modules, are described. This chapter presents the
details with explanation of data structures and coding techniques for programming these
modules. Two comprehensive examples will be presented to show the functioning of the
developed expert system at the end of chapter.
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The flow chart of the data acquisition algorithm is shown in Figure 7.1. The user is asked
first of all whether to introduce a new variable or not. If the user says yes then he is further
asked to give the details of that variable related to the name, units and input variable or
output variable. If the selected variable is input, then the user has to further describe whether
it is numeric or categorical input. If the input variable is numerical then a check box is
assigned to the interface of the developed expert system asking whether that variable should
be prefixed or not. If the input variable is categorical then a choice box, showing all the
possible values of that variable, is assigned to the interface of ES. The output variable can be
numeric only and for each new output variable, the user is asked whether to include that
output variable for optimization purpose or not. If user says yes, then a slider bar for that
output variable is assigned to the interface of the ES. The user can specify whether to
minimize or maximize that output variable along with the weightage of the objective required
from that slider bar. The given specifications of new variable are stored in file Variable.dat.
represents the minimization requirement and the set high represents the maximization. In
Figure 7.2, the design of sets for category 3 is fixed whereas the design of first two categories
is dynamic and based upon data values of respective variables. Figure 7.2 shows the
weightage values that are set by the user using the slider bar available on the interface of the
developed expert system. However, any value below 5% means desirability is of totally
minimizing the output variable and above 95% means total desirability of maximization. The
weightage of 50% means that optimization of that output variable makes no difference. The
pseudo-code of the algorithm that deals with development of the fuzzy sets of the numeric
variables is given in Appendix A2-2.
Membership
function
Low
High
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Weightage (%)
Fig. 7.2 Fuzzy sets for maximization and/or minimization of output variable [240]
The customized flow chart for the methodology used for self-development of fuzzy sets
is shown in Figure 7.3. The user has to decide the maximum allowable number of fuzzy sets
for input as well as for output variables first of all. For any numeric variable x, copy its
values, appearing in all the data records, to a linked list L1 and sort it in the ascending order.
If x is input variable, then copy all its distinct values from L1 to another linked list CL1.
If any value appears more than once in L1, then dont copy it more than once but record the
number of appearances of that value in CL1. Sort CL1 in descending order of number of
appearances of the values. If the total number of values in the CL1 is greater than the
maximum number of allowable fuzzy sets (say N1 number of sets) for input variable then
copy top N1 number of values to another linked list L2, otherwise copy all the values of CL1
to L2. To each of the values contained by L2 assign a separate triangular fuzzy set in Fuzzy
CLIPS format. The logic involved in this methodology is that a value (of input variable),
which has higher frequency of appearance, in the data records, has more right to be picked up
for allocation of a fuzzy set.
If x is an output variable and number of its distinct values appearing in all the data
records is less than or equal to maximum number of allowable fuzzy sets (say N2) for an
output variable then follow the same strategy described in the last paragraph. On the other
hand if the number of distinct values of x is greater than N2 then do the following: Copy all
the distinct values from L1 to CL1. For each of the values contained by CL1, compute
neighbor distance by using the following Equation 7.1 [240].
226
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Value[i + 1] Value[i ];
if (i = first )
(7.1)
Assign respective neighbor distance to each value in CL1 and sort it in descending order
of the neighbor distance and copy top N2 number of values from CL1 to L2. Assign separate
triangular fuzzy set to each of the values contained by the list L2. The idea given in this
technique is that any value, of an output variable, having greater difference from its previous
and next values in the list, possesses more right to be picked up for allocation of a fuzzy set.
Print the fuzzy sets for the variable to fuzzy CLIPS file Sets_Rules.clp and repeat the same
procedure for all the numeric variables.
Fig. 7.3 Customized flow chart for auto-development of fuzzy sets [240]
7.5 Self-Development of Prediction Rule-Base Module
This section covers two parts: (1) automatic development of rules, for prediction of
welding performance measures, based upon the data records provided by the users and (2)
conflict resolution among self-developed contradictory rules. In the expert systems
execution the priority of rules firing is based upon the fulfillment of antecedent part of rule
and after that upon salience of the respective rules specified by the rule-base developer. So
the sequence of appearance of rules in CLIPS file is absolutely immaterial. In view of this,
even though the rules of optimization module are supposed to fire before those of prediction
227
module, the development of prediction rule-base will be described before that of optimization
rule-base.
The pseudo-code of the algorithm describing the automatic development of prediction
rule-base is given in Appendix A2-3.
In the linked list Set there would be lot of data records that contain data values of more
than one output variables. First of all, detach these output variables and for each output
variable keep record of same set of input variables. The data in this format is copied in
doubly linked list named Data_output. Each node of this list contains value of output
variable and to each node there is also connected a linked list Data_input that contains
respective data of input variables. Now Data_output is the list of data records with one
output variable per record. In section 7.7, the structure of doubly linked list is discussed.
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
The graphical description of the above discussed algorithm is shown in Figure 7.4. The
objective of algorithm is to convert each node of Data_output (including list of related values
of input variables Data_input) into a rule. This is achieved by finding and assigning the most
suitable fuzzy sets for all of the values involved per node of Data_output. The list
Data_output is navigated from first node to last and for all of its values the closest values in
fuzzy sets of respective variables are matched. If the match is perfect then certainty factor
(CF) of 1 is assigned to the match of data value and fuzzy set. If the suitable match of any
fuzzy set for a given data value is not found then the data value is assigned the intersection of
two closest fuzzy sets. The CF for non-perfect matches are calculated according to formulae
provided in the pseudo-code. This results in formation of prediction rules-base containing the
number of rules equal to number of nodes in Data_output.
All the rules are stored in a doubly linked list named Rule_Consequent and each node of
represents a rule. Each node contains the assigned fuzzy set of output variable and also a
linked list (Rule_antecedent) containing assigned fuzzy sets of all the relevant input
variables. To each rule is assigned a priority factor called salience, whose value is in direct
proportion to the number of input variables involved in that rule. This emphasizes that a rule
containing larger number of variables in its antecedent part enjoys a higher priority.
229
minimization of the selected output variables. The pseudo-code of the algorithm for selfdevelopment of optimization rule-base is given in Appendix A2-5.
The idea given in this algorithm is that for maximization of any output variable, select an
ideal fuzzy set for each numeric input variable, which, on average, would generate the
maximum value of the output variable. For the minimization purpose, select those fuzzy sets
for respective input variables that would result in the least possible value of the output
variable, available in the data records.
The procedural operation for automatic generation of rules for optimization purpose is
based upon following outline. For every output variable that has been chosen by the user for
optimization purpose, do as given in the following:
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
that is currently under scrutiny, do as given in the following: Find the peak value of the fuzzy
set assigned to the output variable in that rule. Suppose it is equal to N1. Next, identify all the
input variables and their assigned fuzzy sets involved in antecedent part of that rule, and for
all these fuzzy sets of corresponding input variables, listed in VariScore, add N1 to their slots
Score and add 1 to their slots Count. Perform the same process for all the rules and at the end
calculate the average score for each fuzzy set of all the input variables by dividing the
respective value of Score with that of Count. Next, find out for each input variable, which
fuzzy set possesses the highest average score and which one possesses the lowest. The fuzzy
set with highest average score, for each input variable, is selected for maximization and the
one with lowest average score is selected for minimization of that particular output variable.
Figure 7.5 shows the framework graphically of the same methodology that was explained.
The same procedure is repeated for all the other output variables that have been chosen
for optimization purpose. At the end, the optimization rule-base would be ready and all the
rules would be printed to the CLIPS file Sets_Rules.clp.
Fig. 7.6 Mechanism of the linked list Set, consisting of 6 nodes [240]
231
Linked list is a self-referential structure containing not only the items of information but
also the pointer to the next structure in the list. The mechanism of a simple linked list Set
used in the above mentioned algorithm is shown in Figure 7.6. The each node of the list
contains following: (1) Record number; (2) Identity of variable (variable ID 1 represents
input variable thickness, 2 represents welding current, and 3 represents weld strength); (3)
Value of the variable used in each node; and (4) A link (or pointer) to next node of the list.
Figure 7.6 shows the linked list consists of six nodes, i.e. of two record sets only, and three
data values per record set. The finally developed expert system for welding process
optimization consists of about 112 record sets with up to 18 data values per record set,
employing that the linked list Set consisted of more than 2000 nodes.
Following is the code, in C++ pattern, representing the declaration of linked list Set:
struct Set
{
//The name
int Record_num;
int Variable_ID;
double Value;
struct Set *next;
};
The coding starts with the declaration of the name of the structure, the ingredients of
whose are contained within the braces. The first three ingredients are the declaration of
proper data types for items of information. These items of information are record number,
variable identity, and value of the variable involved. The fourth ingredient is the pointer that
would contain the address, in memory, of next node of the linked list of structure Set. Unlike
arrays, there is no limit of amount of data to be added to the linked lists. If the data would
have been contained and managed using arrays instead of linked list, it would have led to
occupation of major portion of memory, thus, leading to slow processing or even halting of
the program.
232
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
//Rule No.
//Output variable ID
//Assigned set number for output variable
//CF for output variable
//Salience of the rule
//Pointer to first input variable of the rule
//Pointer to next rule
233
The first declaration is that of structure of 1-D linked list Rule_antecedent containing
details of input variables involved in making of any rule. The second declaration is that of 2D linked list Rule-consequent, which contains also the pointers to next node of its own (i.e.
detail of output variable of next rule) as well as to the first node of the related linked list
Rule_antecedent containing details of all of input variables involved in the rule.
Thickness
(mm)
Voltage
Speed
Weld strength
Distortion
(V)
(cm/min)
(MPa)
(mm)
10.5
18
784.6
4.9
13.5
18
749.5
5.2
10.5
15
751.0
5.1
13.5
15
740.0
5.6
10.5
18
759.6
4.1
13.5
18
729.5
3.7
10.5
15
737.8
3.6
13.5
15
725.0
5.0
234
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
238
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
239
and prediction of welding process, while the second one is for self-development of expert
system for optimizing welding process according to new data provided to it. The slider bar
provides the user whether to maximize or minimize the selected output variable and by how
much weightage. Check-boxes are for numerical input variables asking the user whether to
pre-fix them or optimize them according to the desired objective(s). These are followed by
the choice-boxes for categorical input variables providing the possible choices for respective
variables, including the option of leaving them open for optimization (i.e. Do not know).
Button for
selfdevelopment
Processing
button
Slider bar for
optimization
240
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Pressing the Process button starts the processing of expert system and finally following
results are displayed in the information pane:
The recommended welding speed is 17 cm/min.
The recommended welding voltage is 11 A.
The predicted weld strength is 755 MPa.
The predicted distortion is 4.3 mm.
242
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
01
02
03
04
Sheet
Thickness
(mm)
Welding
Current
(A)
Welding
Voltage
(V)
Welding
Speed
(cm/min)
Trailing
Weld-Type
3.5
4.5
3.5
4.5
200
220
200
220
11.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
17
17
17
17
Ar
Ar
Ar
Ar
Linear
Linear
Circumferential
Circumferential
Distortion
01
Weld
Strength
(MPa)
746
(mm)
3.00
Residual
Stresses
(MPa)
460.0
Weld
Strength
(MPa)
724
02
763
2.59
395.4
03
742
2.36
04
763
2.33
Experiment/
Simulation
Distortion
(mm)
3.25
Residual
Stresses
(MPa)
485
778
2.48
420
428.0
2.21
405
318.6
2.15
298
243
244
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
CHAPTER 8
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapters summary and conclusion is presented at the end of each chapter pertaining to
particular studies conducted within the corresponding chapter. The seven chapters of this
manuscript comprehensively dealt with the contemporary need of optimizing the welding
process with the use of hybrid technique of experimental, simulation, analysis, optimization
and artificial intelligence tools. Summarized concluding remarks of chapters are presented in
the following to draw some recommendations and proposals for future research work.
The first chapter was of introductory nature and provided the basics of welding
technology, arc welding, welding variables, weld induced residual stresses and distortions in
thin walled structures, artificial intelligence, expert system, challenges in welding domain,
scope and objectives of the research, research methodology and organization of this
dissertation. Chapter 2 covered the literature review related to welding technology and issues,
welding process and optimization, welding simulation (computational weld mechanics)
including computational and experimental work pertaining to circumferential welding,
measurement of residual stresses including hole drilling residual stress measurements,
application of artificial intelligence to manufacturing and welding along with the AI tools
limitations. Chapters 3 5 utilized the statistically and FEM powered experimental
techniques of studying the TIG welding process. The main targets of the research have been
the identification of influential parameters upon welding performance measures and the
quantification of their effects. The chapters summary detail is as:
Chapter 3 included the welding experiments for analyzing and optimizing the TIG
welding variable parameters (welding current, welding voltage, welding speed and
application of Ar trailing) and their effect and significant on response (weld strength, residual
stresses and distortion) on thin plates of HSLA steel of thicknesses 3 to 5 mm by applying
DOE, ANOVA and numerical optimization according to desirability statistical techniques by
using Design-Expert and MINITAB. Chapter 4 presented the welding simulations
containing analytical model, FE formulation, heat models, material model, simulation
approach in ANSYS, details of welding induced residual (axial & hoop) stresses fields and
distortions (axial & radial shrinkages) and covered the details of experiments performed for
the FE models (thermal and structural) validation. Chapter 5 included the detail of virtual
design of experiments (DOE) by utilizing the simulations and optimization of welding
parameters for circumferential welding of thin walled shell structure of high strength low
alloy steel of thicknesses 3 to 5 mm and covered the effects of welding process parameters
(weld speed and heat input), geometric parameters (cylinder thickness), root opening and
tack weld orientations on residual stresses. It also included the detail of analysis and
optimization of process parameters for linear and circumferential welding comprising nine
variables i.e. six input variables (welding current, welding voltage, welding speed, material
thickness, trailing and weld type) and three output variables (weld strength, distortion and
residual stresses).
Chapters 6 and 7 dealt with application of expert system tool, employing fuzzy
reasoning mechanism, for finding the most suitable values of TIG welding parameters for
245
8.1 Conclusions
The conclusive points related to the welding of thin walled structures of high strength
low alloy (HSLA) steel and optimization of the TIG welding process using expert system
tool developed after performing experiments (actual and virtual DOE based on simulation)
and statistical optimization, have been categorized under following sub-headings of welding
induced stresses & distortion and weld strength, effect of welding process parameters, the
expert system and the researchers main contributions from the present research work:
8.1.1
1. Weld strength increases with the reduction of residual stresses and distortion and
decreases with the increase of residual stresses and distortion.
2. Weld strength increases with low values of welding current and voltage and high
value of welding speed with the application of trailing according to the material
thickness. Weld strength decreases above or below the optimal process parameters.
3. Residual stresses and distortion reduces with low values of welding current and
voltage and high value of welding speed with the application of trailing according to
the material thickness and increases with high values of welding current and voltage
and low values of welding speed without the trailing application respectively.
4. From the comparison of responses (distortion and residual stresses), the results show
that the low distorted samples give the low residual stresses and vice versa
respectively.
5. In circumferential welding, high tensile and compressive axial residual stresses are
observed on the thin walled cylinder inner and outer surfaces along and near the
weld line respectively. Whereas, away from the weld line, compressive and tensile
axial residual stresses observed on inner and outer surfaces respectively.
6. In circumferential welding near the weld line, the maximum axial and radial
deflection is observed. Whereas, the axial shrinkage reduces continuously away from
the weld line to a minimum or zero level. Similarly, in linear welding, the maximum
deflection is observed along the weld line at about the centre of plate length and it
reduces to minimum to the ends of plates both in longitudinal and axial direction.
246
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
8.1.2
1. Heat input per unit volume (i.e. welding current, welding voltage and welding speed)
to the welded structures is the main influential parameter for the occurrence and
control of residual stress & distortion levels. Increase in the value directly enhances
the residual stress and distortion levels resulting reduction in the weld strength.
2. In parametric studies, the welding current with large parametric range is the most
influential parameter with respect to thickness of sheets/cylinders besides other
parameters.
3. Generally, plate thickness and cylinder wall thickness has negative effects on the
magnitude of residual stress and distortion fields. Increased wall thickness results in
reduction of distortion and residual stresses.
4. The increase in plate thickness from 30% to 65% (i.e. 3-5 mm thickness) result
decrease in distortion about 15% to 30% and 20% to 25% in residual stresses
respectively. The range of increase in weld strength is 10-15% (i.e. 690-790 MPa)
only whereas the reduction in distortion is three times (2.2 - 7.2 mm) and two times in
residual stresses (335 608 MPa) respectively.
5. Similarly, the increase in cylinder thickness from 30% to 65% (i.e. 3-5 mm thickness)
result decrease in distortion about 25% to 45% and 30% to 35% in residual stresses
respectively. Whereas, the reduction in distortion is three times (1.2 3.9 mm) and in
residual stresses (268 577 MPa) is two times respectively.
6. The application of Ar trailing has negative effects on the magnitude of residual stress
& distortion levels and positive effects on weld strength. Application of trailing
results in reduction up to 15% of residual stresses and distortion accordingly.
7. The residual stresses and distortion of TIG welding are lower in circumferential welds
than in linear welds at same parameters for same thicknesses of HSLA steel thin
walled structures.
8.1.3
1. In this research work, expert system tool has been successfully applied for
optimization of parameters and prediction of performance measures related to TIG
welding process of thin walled HSLA steel structures domain. The optimization of
parameters is performed based upon objective(s) of maximization and/or
minimization of certain combination of performance measures. At the completion of
optimization process the finalized settings of input variables are used to predict the
values of the performance measures. This expert system tool possesses high potentials
for reducing production cost, cutting down lead-time, and improving the product
quality at expense of few seconds that the expert system would take to process.
2. The uncertainty and vagueness in relationship between inputs and outputs of the
welding process can be effectively tackled by utilization of fuzzy logic. In this way,
the knowledge related to the welding process can be represented by sets of fuzzy
rules. The fuzzy rule-base can be optimized for maximum accuracy by applying
simulated annealing algorithm.
247
3. The important feature of this research work is the success in imparting selfdeveloping abilities to the fuzzy expert system for welding process optimization. The
presented expert system is capable of auto-managing data, self-developing fuzzy sets,
self-generating rule-base, automatically updating expert system interface, and
providing conflict resolution among contradictory rules. These abilities make the
expert system exceedingly adaptable to continuously changing high-tech industrial
environments, without need of human intervention in the field of welding of thin
walled structures.
4. A data structure, named as doubly linked list, was introduced for handling the data
related to rules for process decision making. This linked list provides efficient way of
managing the storage and the processing of data along with allocation of just minute
portion of memory.
5. Simulation and optimization of the welding process is becoming an efficient and
effective approach to achieve high quality weld products with reduced residual stress
and distortion. An expert system, EXWeldHSLASteel, based on experiments for
linear welding as well as virtual experiments by performing FEA and simulation of
welding process with experimental validation for circumferential welding, has
developed to predict welding distortion and residual stress in thin walled structures.
Due to its accuracy, computation speed and time, EXWeldHSLASteel can be applied
in welding process and product design by engineers on shop floor very easily with
minimum know-how.
6. Optimization using expert system, on the other hand, allows engineer to reach
optimized process parameters much more efficiently and without hazardous impact to
the environment by using the simulation results in real welding process of thin walled
cylinders with the quality concept of do it right at first time. By using developed
ES, the time to have optimized parameters for required response has reduced with
cost avoidance and eliminates associated waste, rework, reduced cost of operation,
reduced scrap and consumables and energy, as well as fumes and emissions.
7. Usually, an actual welding experiment sample of HSLA steel sheet of 3x260x500 mm
(sheet cutting, preparation and welding) including testing (weld strength samples or
residual stresses measurement and distortion) related to thin walled structures
consume time 3-4 days with use of a good experimental setup and cost of $200
whereas in case of circumferential welding (3 x 300 x 300 mm), the cost would be
two times. However, in optimization following DOE, the number of experiments
required depends upon the number of factors and their levels. The sixteen
experiments are required for only four factors with two levels for a full factorial
design and time & cost would be sixteen times as mentioned above for only one
material thickness. Whereas each simulation time (based on the element topology,
thermal & structural boundary conditions, material model, time of load-steps and the
corresponding sub-steps etc) required after developing three dimensional FE models
is 7-8 hrs for plate and 20-24 hrs for circumferential welding for both thermal and
structural analysis with the use of an IBM compatible PENTIUM-IV 2.4 GHz
248
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
computing machine with 6 GB RAM on a 64 bit platform for computational and data
storage with extra hard disks whereas the size of one result file is 108 GB. The
developed tool for optimization of welding process parameters and prediction of
responses consumes only few seconds to give desired solution before the start of
process on shop floor and this may be used in shipbuilding, aerospace and nuclear
industries, oil and gas engineering and in other areas before the manufacturing of
structural elements.
8.1.4
these requirements, the expert system will provide the suggestions of most suitable values for
the parameters or response predictions under control of the user. Presently, the ES covers the
six input parameters and three responses with the capability of automatic enhancement of the
scope upon feeding the experimental data after further experimentation at any stage.
Today, knowledge management is an emerging area which is gaining interest and
importance by both industry and public sectors. For knowledge organizations, knowledge
management will play a key role towards the success of transforming individual (expert)
knowledge into organizational knowledge. Artificial intelligence is one of the key fields for
developing and advancing the field of knowledge management and many knowledge
management practitioners and theorists are overlooking this field [241]. This research work
related to artificial intelligence by developing expert system in the domain of welding for
optimizing welding process of thin walled structure will also serve the newly emerging field
of knowledge management.
8.2.1
250
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
251
[18] M. Siddique, M. Abid, H.F. Junejo and R.A. Mufti. 3-D Finite Element Simulation of
Welding Residual Stresses in Pipe-Flange Joints: Effect of Welding Parameters.
Materials Science Forum; Vol. 490-491: pp. 79-84, 2005.
[19] C.H. Lee and K.H. Chang. Three-dimensional finite element simulation of residual
stresses in Circumferential Welds of Steel Pipe Including Pipe Diameter Effects.
Journal of Material Science & Engineering-A, 2007. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2007.10.011.
[20] A.M. Malik, E.M. Qureshi and N.U. Dar. Analysis of Arc Welded Thin-Walled
Cylinders to Investigate the Effects of Welding Process Parameters on Residual
Stresses. Materials Science Forum; Vol. 575-578, pp. 763-768, 2008.
[21] Y. Ueda and T. Yamakawa, Thermal stress analysis of metals with temperature
dependent mechanical properties, Proc. of Int. Conf. on Mechanical Behavior of
Materials, Vol. III, pp. 10-20, 1971.
[22] Fanous IFZ, Younman MYA, Wifi A.S. Study of the Effects of Boundary Conditions
on Residual Stresses in Welding Using Element Birth and Element Movement
Techniques. ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology; Vol. 125(4), pp. 432439, 2003.
[23] H. Porzner-Possibilities of Numerical Simulation for Evaluation and optimization of
Welded Designs-Mathematical Modeling of Weld Phenomena 5, Seggau, Graz,
Austria, 2001.
[24] S.R. Ikeagu. Evaluating the Effects of Different Welding Processes on the Distortion
of 4mm Thick DH36 Ship Panels. M. Sc. Thesis, School of Applied Sciences,
Cranfield University, 2007.
[25] D. Deng, W. Liang and H. Murakawa. Determination of Welding Deformation in
Fillet-Welded Joint by means of Numerical Simulation and Comparison with
Experimental Measurements. Journal of Materials Processing Technology; Vol.
183(2-3): pp. 219-225, 2007.
[26] B. Ahmed. Distortion Response of Synchronized Tandem Wire Gas Metal Arc
Welding. M. Sc. Thesis, School of Industrial and Manufacturing Science, Cranfield
University, 2006.
[27] Y. Takeda. Prediction of Butt Welding Deformation of Curved Shell Plates by
Inherent Strain Method. Journal of Ship Production; Vol. 18(2): pp. 99-104, 2002.
[28] Teng JG, Lin X, Rotter JM, Ding XL. Analysis of Geometric Imperfections in FullScale Welded Steel Silos. Journal of Engineering Structures; Vol. 27(6): pp. 938950, 2005.
[29] Naeem Ullah Dar, Ejaz M.Qureshi, Iqbal Khan and A.M. Malik. Welding Quality and
Cost: A Comprehensive Comparative Study. Advanced Design and Manufacture
Conference, Harbin, China, 2006.
[30] Mikael Ericsson, Simulation of robotic TIG-welding, Division of Robotics
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Lund Institute of Technology Lund
University, P.O. Box 118, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden.
[31] ASM Handbook (Welding, Brazing and Soldering). Vol. 6, pp.190.
[32] Konar, A.: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, in: Artificial
Intelligence and Soft Computing; CRC Press LLC, Florida, 2000.
252
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[33] Hopgood, A.A.: Introduction, in: Intelligent Systems for Engineers and Scientists; 2nd
Edition; CRC Press LLC, Florida, 2001.
[34] K.Y. Benyounis and A.G. Olabi; Optimization of different welding processes using
statistical and numerical approaches A reference guide; Advances in Engineering
Software, Vol. 39, Issue 6, pp. 483-496, 2008.
[35] Tanco, M; Ilzarbe, L; Viles, E; Alvarez, M J; Applying design of experiments to improve a
laser welding process; Proceedings of the I MECH E Part B Journal of Engineering
Manufacture, Vol. 222, No. 8, pp. 1035-1042, 2008.
[36] V Gunaraj, N Murugan; Application of response surface methodology for predicting
weld bead quality in submerged arc welding of pipes; Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, Vol. 88, Issues 1-3, pp. 266-275, 1999.
[37] K.Y. Benyounis, A.G. Olabi, M.S.J. Hashmi; Multi-response optimization of CO2
laser-welding process of austenitic stainless steel; Optics & Laser Technology, Vol.
40, Issue 1, pp. 76-87, 2008.
[38] K.Y. Benyounis, A.G. Olabi, M.S.J. Hashmi; Effect of laser welding parameters on
the heat input and weld-bead profile; Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
Vol. 164-165, pp. 978-985, 2005.
[39] K.Y. Benyounis, A.G. Olabi, M.S.J. Hashmi; Optimizing the laser-welded butt joints
of medium carbon steel using RSM; Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
Vol. 164-165, pp. 986-989, 2005.
[40] Guo, D. L.; Guan, Q.; Li, C. Q., New welding technique for aerospace thin-walled
structures-LSND technology, In: ICAS, Congress, 18th, Beijing, China, Sept. 20-25,
1992, Proceedings. Vol. 2 (A93-14151 03-01), pp. 1705-1711.
[41] L. Volden, O. Gundersen, G. Rarvik, Development of Residual Stresses in High
Strength Low Alloy Steel, Proceedings of the Ninth International Offshore and Polar
Engineering Conference Brest, France, May 30-June 4, 1999, ISBN 1-880653-39-7
(Set); ISBN 1-880653-43-5 (Vol. IV); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set).
[42] Q. Guan, C.X. Zhang, and D.L. Guo, Dynamic control of welding distortion by
moving spot heat sink, Welding in the World, Vol. 33(4), pp. 308-313, 1994.
[43] E.M. van der Aa, I.M. Richardson and M.J.M. Hermans: Welding with a Trailing
Heat Sink: How to Optimise the Cooling Parameters?, Trends in Welding Research,
Pine Mountain, Georgia USA, ASM International, 2005.
[44] E.M. van der Aa, Local Cooling during Welding: Prediction and Control of Residual
Stresses and Buckling Distortion, PhD thesis Delft University of Technology, 2007.
[45] Lindgren, L.E., Finite Element Modeling and Simulation. Part 1: Increased
Complexity, Journal of Thermal Stresses, Vol. 24, pp. 141-192, 2001.
[46] Lindgren, L.E., Finite Element Modeling and Simulation. Part 2: Improved Material
Modeling, Journal of Thermal Stresses, Vol. 24, pp. 195-231, 2001.
[47] Lindgren, L.E., Finite Element Modeling and Simulation. Part 3: Efficiency and
Integration, Journal of Thermal Stresses, Vol. 24, pp. 305-334, 2001.
[48] Yaghi, A., Becker, A., State of the ReviewWelding Simulations using Finite Element
Methods, Report No. FENET-UNOTT-DLE-08, School of Mechanical, Materials &
Manufacturing Engineering, University of Nottingham, UK, 2004.
253
[49] Rosenthal, D., The Theory of Moving Heat Source and its Application to Metal
Treatment, Transaction ASME, 1946.
[50] Goldak, J., Zhou, J., Breiguine, V., and Montoya, F., Thermal Stress Analysis of
Welds: From melting Point to Room Temperature, JWRI, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 185189, 1996.
[51] Goldak, J Chakravarti, A. and Bibby, M., A new Finite Element Model for Heat
Sources, Metallurgical Transactions B, vol. 15 B, pp. 299-305, 1984.
[52] Goldak, J Bibby, M, Moore, J., House, R. and Patel, B Computer Modeling of Heat
Flow in Welds, Metallurgical Transactions B, Vol. 17 B, pp. 587-600, 1986.
[53] Ueda, Y., and Yamakawa, T., Analysis of Thermal-Elastic Stress and Strain During
Welding by Finite Element Method, JWRI, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1971.
[54] Hibbitt, H.D., and Marcal, P.V., A Numerical Thermo-Mechanical Model for the
Welding and Subsequent Loading of Fabricated Structure, Journal of Computers and
Structures, Vol. 3, pp. 1145-1174, 1973.
[55] Friedman, E., Thermo-Mechanical Analysis of the Welding Process using the Finite
Element Method, ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, pp. 206-213, 1975.
[56] Andersson, B.A.B., Thermal Stresses in Submerged Arc Welded Joint Considering
Phase transformations, ASME Journal of Engineering Material and Technology, Vol.
100, pp. 356-362, 1978.
[57] McDill, J.M., Oddy, A.S. and Klien, M.E., Data Transfer for 3-D Adaptive ThermalElasto-Plastic Finite Element Analysis, Simulation of Materials Processing: Methods
and Applications, Shen & Dawson (eds), 1995.
[58] McDill, J.M., Oddy, and Goldak, J.A., An Adaptive Mesh-management Algorithm for
Three Dimensional Automatic Finite Element Analysis, Transactions of CSME, Vol.
15, No. I, pp. 57-70, 1991.
[59] McDill, J.M., Goldak, J.A., Oddy, A.S., and Bibby, M J., Isoparametric Quadrilaterals
and Hexahedrons for Mesh-Grading Algorithms, Communications in Applied
Numerical Methods, Vol. 3, pp. 155-163, 1987.
[60] McDill, J.M and Oddy, A.S., A Non-Conforming Eight to 26-Node Hexahedron for
Three Dimensional Thermal-Elasto-Plastic Finite Element Analysis, Journal of
Computers and Structures, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 183-189, 1995.
[61] McDill, J.M and Oddy, A.S., Arbitrary Coarsening for Adaptive Mesh Management
in Three Dimensional Automatic Finite Element Analysis, Mathematical Modeling
and Science Computing, Vol. 2, pp. 1072-1077, 1993.
[62] Runnemalm, H. and Hyun, S., Three-Dimensional Welding Analysis using an
Adaptive Mesh Scheme, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering,
Vol. 189, pp. 515-523, 2000.
[63] McDill, J.M, Runnemalm, K.H. and Oddy, A.S., An 8-to-16 Node Solid Graded Shell
Elements for Far-Field Applications in 3-D Thermal Mechanical FEA, 12th
International Conference on Mathematical and Computer Modeling and Scientific
Computing, Chicago, 1999.
254
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[64] Lindgren L.E., Haggblad H.A., McDill J.M.J. and Oddy A.S., Automatic Re-meshing
for Three-Dimensional Finite Element Simulation of Welding, Computer Methods in
Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 147, pp. 401-409, 1997.
[65] Hyun, S. and Lindgren, L.E., Smoothing and Adaptive Re-meshing Schemes for
Graded Elements, International Journal of Communications in Numerical Methods in
Engineering., Vol. 14, pp. 1-17, 2001.
[66] H.F. Junejo. Finite Element Modeling of Weld Based Rapid Prototyping, PhD Thesis,
Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering & Technology, Pakistan, 2006.
[67] Leggatt, R.H., White, J.D., Predicting Shrinkage and Distortion in a Welded Plate,
Proceedings of the Conference on Residual Stresses in Welded Construction and their
Effects, pp.119-132, 1978.
[68] Steen W. M., Laser Materials Processing, 2nd edition, Springer Verlag, London, UK,
1998.
[69] Ueda, Y., Kim, Y.C., Measuring Theory of Three Dimensional Residual Stresses
using a Thinly Sliced Plate Perpendicular to Welded Line, Transactions of JWRI,
Vol.14, No.2, pp.151-157, 1985.
[70] Vaidyanathan S., Todato A.T., and Finnic, I., Residual Stresses due to Circumferential
Welds, ASME J. Engineering Material and Technology, pp. 239-242, 1973.
[71] Hill, M.R. and Nelson, D.V., The Localized Eigenstrain Method for Determination of
Triaxial Residual Stress in Welds, PVP 373, pp.397-403, 1998.
[72] Dong, Y., Hong, J.K., Tsai, C.L. and Dong, P., Finite Element Modeling of Residual
Stresses in Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipe Girth Welds, Welding Journal, Vol.76,
No.10, pp.442-449, 1997.
[73] Vaidyanathan, S Weiss, H. and Finnic, I., A Further Study of Residual Stresses in
Circumferential Welds, ASME Journal of Engineering Material and Technology, pp.
239-242, 1973.
[74] Rybicki, E.F., McGuire, P.A., Merrick, E., and Wert, B., "The Effect of Pipe
Thickness on Residual Stresses due to Girth Welds," Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, Vol. 104, pp. 204-209, 1982.
[75] Lindgren L.E. and Karlsson, L., Deformations and Stresses in Welding of Shell
Structures, Int. Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 25, pp. 635-655,
1988.
[76] Karlsson, R.I. and Josefson, B.L, Three Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of
Temperature and Stresses in a Single-Pass Butt-Welded Pipe, ASME Journal of
Pressure Vessel Technology, Vol. 112, pp. 76-84, 1990.
[77] Karlsson, L., Jonsson, M., Lindgren, L,E., Nasstrom, M. and Troive, L., Residual
Stresses and Deformations in a Welded Thin-Walled Pipe, Proceedings of ASME
Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference, Hawaii, Weld Residual Stresses and Plastic
Deformation, PVP-Vol. 17.1, pp. 7-14, 1989.
[78] Michaleris, P., Residual Stress Distributions for Multi-Pass Welds in Pressure Vessel
and Piping Components, Proceedings of ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping
Conference, Montreal, Canada, 1996, Residual Stresses in Design Fabrication,
Assessment and Repair, PVP-Vol. 327, 1996.
255
[79] Dike, J.J., Ortega, A.R. and Cadden, C.H., Finite Element Modeling and Validation of
Residual Stresses in 304L Girth Welds, 5th International Conference on Trends in
Welding Research, Pine Mountain, GA, June 1-5, 1998.
[80] Mohr, W.C., Michaleris, P. and Kirk, M.T., An Improved Treatment of Residual
Stresses in Flaw Assessment of Pipes and Pressure Vessel Fabricated From Ferritic
Steel, Proceedings of ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping Conference, Orlando,
Florida, 1997.
[81] Brickstad, B. and Josefson, B.L A Parametric Study of Residual Stresses in MultiPass Butt-Welded Stainless Steel Pipes, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and
Piping, Vol. 75, pp. 11-25, 1998.
[82] Teng, T.L. and Chang, P.H., A Study of Residual Stresses in Multi-Pass Girth Butt
Welded Pipes, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 74, pp. 5970, 1997.
[83] Teng, T.L. and Chang, P.H Three-Dimensional Thermo-mechanical Analysis of
Circumferentially Welded Thin-Walled Pipes, International Journal of Pressure
Vessels and Piping, vol. 75, pp. 237-247, 1998.
[84] Dong, P. and Zhang, J Residual Stresses in Strength-Mismatched Welds and
Implication on Fracture Behavior, Engineering Fracture mechanics, Vol. 64, pp. 485505, 1999.
[85] Engelhard, G., Halrip, L.M., Pellkofer, D., Schmidt, J. and Weber, J Optimization of
Residual Welding Stresses in Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping: Proof testing and
Numerical Simulation of Welding and Post Welding Process, Nuclear Engineering
and Design, Vol. 198, pp. 141-151, 2000.
[86] Fricke, S Keim, E. and Schmidt, J Numerical Weld Modeling - A Method for
Calculating Weld-Induced Residual Stresses, Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol.
206, pp. 139-150, 2001.
[87] D, Deng and H, Murakawa. Numerical Simulation of Temperature Field and Residual
Stresses in Multi-Pass Welds in Stainless Steel Pipe and Comparison with
Experimental Measurements. Journal of Computational Materials Science, Vol. 37,
pp. 269-277, 2006.
[88] D, Deng, H, Murakawa and W. Liang. Numerical and Experimental Investigations on
Welding Residual Stress in Multi-Pass Butt-Welded Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipe.
Journal of Computational Materials Science, Vol. 42, pp. 234-244, 2008.
[89] M. Siddique, Experimental and Finite Element Investigation of Residual Stresses and
Distortions in Welded Pipe-Flange Joints, PhD Thesis, Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute
of Engineering & Technology, Pakistan, 2005.
[90] I. Sattari-Far and Y. Jawadi. Influence of Welding Sequence on Welding Distortions
in Pipes. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2007.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpvp.2007.07.003
[91] A. Kermanpur, M. Shamanian and V.E. Yeganeh. Three Dimensional Thermal
Simulation and Experimental Investigation of GTAW Circumferentially Butt-Welded
Incoloy 800 Pipes. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2007.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.08.009.
256
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[92] Withers P. and Bhadeshia H. Overview-Residual Stress Part 2 - Nature and origins.
Materials Science and Technology, Vol. 17(4): pp. 366-375, 2001.
[93] Moreira PMGP, Trummer V.R. and Da-silva RAM. Residual Stress Evaluation of a
MIG Welded Plate using the Sectioning Method and the Hole Drilling Method.
www.fe.up.pt/~pedrom/artigos2/residual_APAET2008.pdf.
[94] Totten, G., Howes, M. and Inoue, T., Handbook of Residual Stresses and Deformation
of Steel, ASM International, Material Park, USA, 2003.
[95] C.W. Tuck. The Measurement of Residual Stresses, BGA Technical Publications,
British Gear Association, 1999.
[96] Withers, P.J. and Bhadeshia, H.K.D.H, Residual Stress Part 1 - Measurement
Techniques, Material Science and Technology, Vol. 17, pp. 355-365, 2001.
[97] J. Lu. Handbook of Measurement of Residual Stresses, Society of Experimental
Mechanics Inc. The Fairmont Press, Inc. USA. 1996.
[98] M. Hayashi and M. Ishiwata. Residual Stress Measurement of Butt Welded Carbon
Steel Pipe by Neutron Diffraction, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference
on NDE in the Nuclear and Pressure Vessel Industries, pp.477-485, 1995.
[99] W.J. Shack, W.A. Ellingson and L.E. Pahis. Measurement of Residual Stresses in
Type 304 Stainless Steel Piping Butt Weldments, EPRI NP-1413, 1980.
[100] W.J. Shack. Measurement of Through wall Residual Stresses in Large Diameter
Type 304 Stainless Steel Piping Butt Weldments, ANL-82-15, Argonne National
Laboratory, 1984.
[101] M. Hayashi, M. Ishiwata, N. Minakawa and S. Funahashi. Residual-Stress
Measurement in Socket Welded Joints by Neutron Diffraction. Proceedings of the
12th International Conference on NDE in the Nuclear and Pressure Vessel Industries,
pp.449-454, 1993.
[102] Kandil, F.A., Lord, J.D., Fry, A.T. and Grant. P.V., A Review of Residual Stress
Measurement Methods - A Guide to Technique Selection, NPL Report MATC(A)04,
Project CPM4.5, Measurement of Residual Stresses in Components, NPL Material
Center, UK, 2001.
[103] G. Focht and K. Schiffner. Determination of Residual Stresses by an Optical
Correlative Hole-Drilling Method. Journal of Experimental Mechanics; Vol. 43(1),
pp. 97-104, 2003.
[104] D. Stefanescu1, C.E. Truman, D.J. Smith and P.S. Whitehead. Improvements in
Residual Stress Measurement by the Incremental Centre Hole-Drilling Technique.
Journal of Experimental Mechanics; Vol. 46(4), pp. 417-427, 2006.
[105] N.J. Rendler and I. Vigness. Hole-Drilling Strain-Gage Method of Measuring
Residual Stresses. Journal of Experimental Mechanics; Vol. 6(12): pp. 577-586,
1966.
[106] ASTM E-837-94a: Standard Test Method for Determining Residual Stresses by the
Hole Drilling Strain -Gage Method, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, 1994.
257
[107] Flaman, M.T., Investigation of Ultra-High Speed Drilling for Residual Stress
Measurement by the Center Hole Method, Experimental Mechanics, vol. 22, No. I,
pp. 26-30, 1982.
[108] Anon: Measurement of Residual Stress by the Hole Drilling Strain Gauge Method,
TN-503, Vishay-Measurements Group, Inc. Raleigh, 1993.
[109] Schajer, G.S., Application of Finite Element Calculations to Residual Stress
Measurements, ASME J. Engineering Material and Technology, vol. 103, pp.
157-163, 1981.
[110] Schajer, O.S., Measurement of Non-Uniform Residual Stresses Using the Hole
Drilling Method. Part-11 - Practical Implementation of the Integral Method, ASME J.
Engineering Material and Technology, vol. 110, pp. 344-349, 1988.
[111] Wern, H., Measurement of Non-Uniform Stresses using the Hole Drilling Method, a
New Integral Formalism, Strain, vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 63-68, 1995.
[112] Wern, H., A New Approach to Triaxial Residual Stress Evaluation by the Hole
Drilling Method, Strain, vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 121-125, 1997.
[113] Wern, H., Cavelius, R. and Schlafer, D., A New Method to Determine Triaxial NonUniform Residual Stresses from Measurements Using the Hole Drilling Method,
Strain, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 39-45, 1997.
[114] Zuccarello, B., Optimal Calculation Steps for the Evaluation of Residual Stresses by
the Incremental Hole Drilling Method, Experimental Mechanics, vol. 39, No. 2, pp.
117-127, 1999.
[115] Aoh, J.N. and Wei, C.S., On the Improvement of Calibration Coefficients for HoleDrilling Integral method: Part I - Analysis of Calibration Coefficients Obtained by a
3-D FEM Model, ASME J. Engineering Material and Technology, vol. 124, pp. 250258, 2002.
[116] Aoh, J.N. and Wei, C.S., On the Improvement of Calibration Coefficients for HoleDrilling Integral method: Part II-Experimental Validation of Calibration Coefficients,
ASME J. Engineering Material and Technology, vol. 125, pp. 107-115, 2003.
[117] Nils J. Nilsson; Artificial Intelligence: A New Synthesis; Morgan Kaufmann
Publishers, USA, pp 1-2, 1998.
[118] Avelino J. Gonzalez, Douglas D. Dankel; The Engineering of Knowledge-Based
Systems: Theory and Practice; Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp 16-22, 1993.
[119] M. Ganesh; Introduction to Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic; Prentice Hall, pp 147-174,
2006.
[120] ASM Handbook (Welding, Brazing and Soldering). Vol. 6. pp.1025, pp.1059.
[121] T.W. Liao, Classification of welding flaw types with fuzzy expert systems, Expert
Systems with Applications, Vol. 25, pp. 101111, 2003.
[122] Andrew Taylor, An investigation of knowledge-based models for automated
procedure generation in the arc welding domain, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 27, No. 11, pp. 1855 1862, 1989.
[123] Aparna S. Vardo, Mohammad Maniruzzaman, Elke A. Rundensteiner and Richard D.
Sisson Jr, The QuenchMinerTM Expert System for Quenching and Distortion
Control, Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Worcester, MA 01609, USA.
258
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[124] Dongcheol Kim, Sehun Rhee and Hyunsung Park. Modelling and optimization of a
GMA welding process by genetic algorithm and response surface methodology. Int.
Journal of Production Research. Vol. 40, pp. 1699 1711, 2004.
[125] S. Kumanan, R. Ashok Kumar and J. Edwin Raja Dhas. Development of a welding
residual stress predictor using a function-replacing hybrid system. Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology. Vol-31, 2007.
[126] H. L. Lin and C. P. Chou, Optimisation of the GTA welding process using the
Taguchi method and a neural network, Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining,
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.120, 2006.
[127] J.P. Ganjigatti, Dilip Kumar Pratihar; Forward and reverse modeling in MIG welding
process using fuzzy logic-based approaches, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy
Systems, Volume 19, Number 2, pp. 115-130, 2008.
[128] V. Tsoukalas, M.Kontesis, E.Badogiannis, D.Papachristos, N.Fragiadakis; Prototype
of an expert system for aluminum welding; Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS
International Conference on Computational Intelligence, Man-Machine Systems and
Cybernetics; Venice, Italy, pp.78-83, 2006. ISBN ~ ISSN:1790-5117, 960-8457-56-4.
[129] Fang, X.D.: Expert System Supported Fuzzy Diagnosis of Finish Turning Process
States; International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, Vol. 35 (6), pp.913924, 1995.
[130] Chen, Y.; Hui, A.; Du, R.: A Fuzzy Expert System for the Design of Machining
Operations; International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, Vol. 35 (12),
pp.1605-1621, 1995.
[131] Hashmi, K.; El-Baradie, M.A.; Ryan, M.: Fuzzy Logic Based Intelligent Selection of
Machining Parameters; Computers in Industrial Engineering, Vol. 35 (3-4), pp.571574, 1998.
[132] Arezoo, B.; Ridgway, K.; Al-Ahmari, A.M.A.: Selection of Cutting Tools and
Conditions of Machining Operations Using an Expert System; Computers in Industry,
Vol. 42, pp.43-58, 2000.
[133] Lo, S.P.: An Adaptive-Network Based Fuzzy Inference System for Prediction of
Workpiece Surface Roughness in End Milling; Journal of Materials Processing
Technology; Vol. 142, pp.665-675, 2003.
[134] J.N. Aoh and C.S. Wei. On the improvements of Calibration Coefficients for HoleDrilling Integral Method: Part-I Analysis of Calibration Coefficients obtained by 3-D
FEM Method. ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology; Vol. 124(2):
pp. 250-258, 2002.
[135] J.N. Aoh and C.S. Wei. On the improvements of Calibration Coefficients for HoleDrilling Integral Method: Part-II Experimental Validation of Calibration Coefficients.
ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology; Vol. 125(2): pp. 107-115,
2003.
[136] G.S. Schajer. Measurement of Non-Uniform Residual Stresses using the HoleDrilling Method: Part-1 Stress Calculation Procedures. ASME Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology; Vol. 110, pp.338-343, 1998.
[137] M.C. Sun, Y.H. Sun, and R.K.Wang, Vibratory Stress Releiving of welded sheet
steels of low alloy high strength steel, Materials Letters 58(2004), pp. 1396-1399.
259
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[157] E.M. Vander. Local Cooling during Welding: Prediction and Control of Residual
Stresses and Buckling Distortion, Delft University of Technology, 2007.
[158] L. Fenggui, Y. Shun, L. Songnian and L. Yongbin. Modeling and Finite Element
Analysis GTAW Arc and Weld Pool. Journal of Computational Materials Science;
Vol. 29, pp. 371-378, 2004.
[159] C.K. Lee, J. Candy and C.P.H. Tan. Measurement and Finite Element Analysis of
Temperature Distribution in Arc Welding Process. International Journal of Computer
Applications in Technology; Vol. 21(4): pp. 171-177, 2004.
[160] I.F.Z. Fanous, M.Y.A. Younan and A.S. Wifi. Study of the Effect of Boundary
Conditions on Residual Stresses in Welding using Element Birth and Element
Movement Techniques. ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology; Vol. 125, pp.
432439, 2003.
[161] K.T. Chaouch, H. Maza and B. Belkessa. A Finite Volume Analysis of TwoDimensional Transient Heat Transfer in TIG Welding. Journal of Physics IV; Vol.
120, pp. 669-675, 2004.
[162] ASM Metals Handbook Volume 2-Properties and Selection Nonferrous Alloys and
Special Purpose Materials, ASM International, ISBN 0-87170-378-5 (v. 2).
[163] E. A. Brandes, and G. B. Brook., Smithels Metals Reference Book,. Handbook,
Seventh Edition, Butterworth-Heinneman, 1992.
[164] Materials Handbook (5th edition), George S. Brady, Henry R. Clauser, John A.
Vaccari, McGraw-hill Handbooks.
[165] X.K. Zhu and Y.J. Chao. Effects of Temperature-Dependent Material Properties on
Welding Simulations. Journal of Computers and Structures; Vol. 80(11), pp.967-976,
2002.
[166] Xinhai Qi, Numerical Simulation of Buckling in Thin Panels, PhD Thesis, University
of Carolina, 2003.
[167] Andersson, B. A. B., Thermal Stresses in Submerged Arc Welded Joint Considering
Phase Transformations, ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology,
vol. 100, pp. 356 362, 1978.
[168] Mahin, K. W., Winters, W., Holden, T. M., Hosbons, R. R., and MacEwen, S. R.,
Prediction and Measurement of Residual Elastic Strain Distributions in Gas Tungsten
Arc Weld, Welding Journal, 70(9), pp. 245s-260s, 1991.
[169] Pardo, E., and Weckman, D.C., Prediction of Weld Pool and Reinforcement
Dimensions of GMA Weld using a Finite Element Model, Metallurgical Transactions
B, 20B(12), pp. 937 947, 1989.
[170] Ule, R. L., Joshy, Y., and Sedy, E. B., A New Technique for Three Dimensional
Transient Heat Transfer Computations of Autogenous Arc Welding, Metallurgical
Transactions B, 21B(12), pp. 1033 1047, 1990.
[171] Lindgren; L. E. Runnemalm, H. and Nsstrom M. O., Simulation of Multipass
Welding of Thick Plate, Int. J. Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 44, pp. 1301
1316, 1999.
[172] Lu. Xiangyang, Influence of Residual Stress on Fatigue Failure of Welded Joints,
PhD Thesis, North Carolina State University, 2002.
261
[173] Brickstad, B., and Josefson, B.L. (1998), A Parametric Study of Residual Stresses in
Multipass Butt-welded Stainless Steel Pipes, International Journal of Pressure
Vessels and Piping, Vol.75, pp.11-25.
[174] ANSYS 10.0 user's documentation, SAS IP Inc, Canonburg, PA 15317, USA,
2005.
[175] H. Yu, L. Shouju and L. Yingxi. Finite Element Simulation for Residual Stresses in
Welding Process. Key Engineering Materials; 353-358, pp. 1915-1918, 2007.
[176] M. Afzaal Malik, M. Ejaz Qureshi, Naeem Ullah Dar, Iqbal Khan; Analysis of
Circumferentially Arc Welded Thin-Walled Cylinders to Investigate the Residual
Stress Fields; Elsevier's International Journal of Thin Walled Structures, Vol. 46
(2008), pp. 1391-1401, 2008. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2008.03.011.
[177] Z. Dong, Y. Wei and X. Yanli. Predicting Weld Solidification Cracks in Multipass
Welds of SUS310 Stainless Steel. Journal of Computational Materials Science; Vol.
38(2), pp. 459-466, 2006.
[178] M.M. Mahapatra, G.L. Datta, B. Pradhan, and N.R. Mandal. Three-Dimensional
Finite Element Analysis to Predict the Effects of SAW Process Parameters on
Temperature Distribution and Angular Distortions in Single-Pass Butt Joints with
Top and Bottom Reinforcements. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and
Piping; Vol. 83(10), pp. 721-729, 2006.
[179] L.E. Lindgren. Computational Weld Mechanics: Thermo-mechanical and
Microstructural Simulations. Woodhead Publishing, 2007.
[180] N U Dar, E M Qureshi, A M Malik, M M I Hammouda, R A Azeem; Analysis of
Circumferentially Welded Thin-Walled Cylinders to Study the Effects of Tack Weld
Orientations and Joint Root Opening on Residual Stress Fields; Proc. ImechE, Part C:
Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol. 223, Number 5/2009, pp 10371047, DOI: 10.1243/09544062JMES1191.
[181] C.C. Silva and J.P. Farias. Non-uniformity of Residual Stress Profiles in Butt Welded
Pipes in Manual Arc Welding. Journal of Materials Processing Technology; Vol.
199(6): pp. 452455, 2008.
[182] Hibbitt HD, Marcal PV. A Numerical Thermo-mechanical Model for the Welding
and Subsequent Loading of a Fabricated Structure. Journal of Computers and
Structures; Vol. 3, pp. 11531174, 1973.
[183] Jonsson M, Karlsson L. and Lindgren LE. Simulation of Tack Welding Procedures in
Deformations in a Welded Thin-Walled Pipe. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology;
Vol. 112(2), pp.76-84, 1990.
[184] A. Yaghi, T.H. Hyde, A.A. Becker, W. Sun and J.A. Williams, Residual stress
simulation in thin and thick-walled stainless steel pipe welds including pipe diameter
effects, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping. Vol. 83 (11-12), pp.864874, 2006.
[185] D. Deng and H. Murakawa, Numerical simulation of temperature field and residual
stress in multi-pass welds in stainless steel pipe and comparison with experimental
measurements, Computational Material Science. Vol. 37 (3), pp. 269-277, 2006.
262
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[186] E.F. Rybicki, D.W. Schmueser, R.W. Stonesifer, J.J. Groom and H.W. Mishaler, A
Finite Element model for residual stresses and deflections in girth-butt welded pipes,
ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology. 100, pp. 256262, 1978.
[187] E.F. Rybicki, P.A. McGuire, E. Merrick and J. Wert, The effect of Pipe thickness on
residual stresses due to girth welds. ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology.
104, pp. 204209, 1982.
[188] E.F. Rybicki and R.B. Stonesifer, Computation of residual stresses due to multi-pass
welds in piping system. ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology. 101, pp. 49
54, 1979.
[189] Y. Dong, J. Hong, C. Tsai and P. Dong. Finite Element modeling of residual stresses
in austenitic stainless steel pipe girth welds, Welding Journal, Weld Research
Supplement. 442, pp.449444, 1997.
[190] R.I. Karlsson and B.L. Josefson, Three-dimensional Finite Element analysis of
temperature and stresses in single-pass butt-welded pipe. ASME Journal of Pressure
Vessel Technology. Vol. 112, pp.7684, 1990.
[191] P.H. Chang and T.L. Teng, Numerical and experimental investigation on the residual
stresses of the butt-welded joints, Journal of Computational Material Science. Vol. 29
(4), pp.511-522, 2004.
[192] M. Jonsson and B.L. Josefson, Experimentally determined transient and residual
stresses in the butt-welded pipes, Journal of Strain Analysis. Vol.23 (1), pp.25-31,
1998.
[193] L. Karlsson, M. Jonsson, L.E. Lindgren, M. Nsstrm and L. Troive, Residual
stresses and deformations in a welded thin-walled pipe, Proc. ASME Pressure Vessel
and Piping Conf. (Hawaii, July 1989) PVP-173, pp.711, 1989.
[194] Dong P. and Burst BW. Welding Residual Stresses and Effects on Fracture in
Pressure Vessel and Piping Components: A Millennium Review and Beyond. Journal
of Pressure Vessel Technology; Vol. 122(3), pp.329-338, 2000.
[195] Dong P. Residual Stress Analyses of a Multi-Pass Girth Weld: 3-D Special Shell
versus Axis-symmetric Models. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology; Vol. 123(2),
pp.207-213, 2001.
[196] S. Fricke, E. Keim and J. Schmidt, Numerical weld modeling - a method for
calculating weld-induced residual stresses, Nuclear Engineering and Design. Vol. 206
(2-3), pp.139-150, 2001.
[197] Naeem Ullah Dar, Ejaz M. Qureshi, M.M.I Hammouda; Analysis of Weld Induced
Residual Stresses and Distortions in Thin Walled Cylinders; Journal of Mechanical
Science and Technology, KSME, Vol. 23, Number 4/April, 2009, pp. 1118-1131,
DOI: 10.1007/s12206-008-1012-6.
[198] ANSYS-10.0 user manual.
[199] Vishay Group, Measurement of residual stresses by the hole drilling strain gage
method, Technical Note No. TN-503. (www.vishay.com/brands/)
[200] R. Spina, L. Tricarico, G. Basile and T. Sibillano. Residual Thermo-mechanical
Modeling of Laser Welding of AA5083 Sheets. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology; Vol. 191(1-3), pp.215-219, 2007.
263
[201] X. Y. Shan, M. J. Tan and N.P. O'Dowd. Developing a Realistic FE Analysis Method
for the Welding of a NET Single-Bead-on-Plate Test Specimen. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology; Vol.192-193(1-3): pp.497-503, 2007.
[202] A. Kermanpur, M. Shamanian and V.E. Yeganeh. Three-Dimensional Thermal
Simulation and Experimental Investigation of GTAW Circumferentially Butt-Welded
Incoloy 800 Pipes. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2007;
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.08.009.
[203] D. Gery, H. Long and P. Maropoulos. Effects of Welding Speed, Energy Input and
Heat Source Distribution on Temperature Variations in Butt Joint Welding. Journal
of Material Processing Technology; Vol. 167(2-3), pp.393-401, 2005.
[204] P. Groombridge and A. Oloyede. A Control System for Microwave Processing of
Materials. ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering; Vol. 122(1),
pp.253-261, 2000.
[205] F. Bardin, R. McBride, A. Moore, S. Morgan, S. Williams, J.D.C Jones and D.P.
Hand. Real-Time Temperature Measurement for Process Monitoring of Laser
Conduction Welding. Proceedings of 23rd International Congress on Applications of
Lasers and Electro-Optics, 2004;
http://www.aop.hw.ac.uk/Projects/Papers/LFRef11.pdf.
[206] C.S. Wu, J. Chen and Y. M. Zhang. Numerical Analysis of Both Front and Back-Side
Deformation of Fully Penetrated GTAW Weld Pool Surfaces. Journal of
Computational Materials Science; Vol. 39(3), pp.635-642, 2007.
[207] M.A. Quintana, T. DebRoy, J.M. Vitek and S. Babu. Novel Optimization
Methodology for Welding Process/Consumable Integration. Final Technical Report
#: DOE-ID14204-F1, United States Department of Energy, Scientific and Technical
Information,2005-2006;
http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/862404DMY9RJ/862404.pdf.
[208] H.F. Junejo. Finite Element Modeling of Weld Based Rapid Prototyping. PhD Thesis,
Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, 2006.
[209] X.K. Zhu and Y.J. Chao. Effects of Temperature-Dependent Material Properties on
Welding Simulations. Journal of Computers and Structures; Vol. 80(11), pp.967-976,
2002.
[210] A.N. Lari, J. Lu and J.F. Flavenot. Measurement of Residual Stress Distribution by
the Incremental Hole-Drilling Method. Journal of Mechanical Working Technology;
Vol. 11(2): pp.167-188, 1985.
[211] Measurement of Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method,
Application Note TN-503-6, Document No. 11053, Revision January 2005, Vishay
Micro-Measurement Group.
[212] Determining Residual Stresses by the Hole-Drilling Strain Gage Method, ASTM
Standard E837.
[213] J.N. Aoh and C.S. Wei. On the improvements of Calibration Coefficients for HoleDrilling Integral Method: Part-I Analysis of Calibration Coefficients obtained by 3-D
FEM Method. ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology; Vol.124(2),
pp.250-258, 2002.
264
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[214] J.N. Aoh and C.S. Wei. On the improvements of Calibration Coefficients for HoleDrilling Integral Method: Part-II Experimental Validation of Calibration Coefficients.
ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology; Vol. 125(2): pp.107-115,
2003.
[215] G.S. Schajer. Measurement of Non-Uniform Residual Stresses using the HoleDrilling Method: Part-1 Stress Calculation Procedures. ASME Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology; 110, pp.338-343, 1998.
[216] Gunaraj, V., and Muragan, M., Prediction of Heat Affected Zone Characteristic in
Submerged Arc Welding of Structural Steel Pipes, Welding Research Supplement,
pp.94-102, 2002.
[217] Jonsson, M., Karlsson, L., and Lindgren, L.E., Simulation of Tack Welding
Procedure in Butt Joint Welding of Plates, Welding Research Supplement, pp.296301, 1995.
[218] Jonsson, M., Karlsson, L., and Lindgren, L.E., Plate Motion and Thermal Stresses in
Root-Bead Butt-Welding of Plates, 4th International Conference on Numerical
Methods in Thermal Problems (eds. R W Lewis and K Morgan), Swansea, July 1985,
Pineridge Press, Swansea.
[219] Shibahara, M., Serizawa, H., and Murakawa, H., Finite Element Analysis using
Interface Elements for Predicting Deformation during Butt-Welding considering Root
Gap and Tack Welds, Transactions of JWRI, 31, No. 1, pp.63-70, 2002.
[220] Deng, D., Murakawa, H., and Ueda, Y., Theoretical Prediction of Welding Distortion
Considering Positioning and Gap between Parts, The Proceedings of the 12th
International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 2002.
[221] Jang, G.B., Kim, H.K., and Kang, S.S., The Effects of Root Opening on Mechanical
Properties, Deformations and Residual Stresses of Weldments, Welding Research
Supplement, pp.80-88, 2001.
[222] Tso-Liang, Peng-Hsiang Chang; Three Dimensional Thermo-mechanical Analysis of
Circumferentially Welded Thin Walled Pipes. International Journal of Pressure
Vessels and Piping, Vol.75, pp.237-247, 1998.
[223] Xiangyang, L., Influence of Residual Stress on Fatigue Failure of Welded Joints, PhD
Thesis, North Carolina State University, 2002.
[224] Allen, J., Distortion caused by welding a plate at the centre of a thin plate before
welding into a bridge girder section, http://adhesivetoolkit.com/j32k/protected
/band3/ jk36.html.
[225] Thomas Pyzdek; Virtual DOE, Data Mining and Artificial Neural Networks; Quality
Digest, July 1999, pp.26.
[226] Thomas Pyzdek, Virtual DOE using simulation software, Six Sigma Hand Book,
McGraw-Hill, pp.699.
[227] Martin Tanco, Elisabeth Viles, Lourdes Pozueta, Are All of Experiments Approaches
Suitable for Your Company?, World Congress on Engineering (WCE-2008),
pp.1202-1207.
[228] Pham, D.T.; Pham, P.T.N.: Computational Intelligence for Manufacturing, in:
Computational Intelligence in Manufacturing Handbook; CRC Press LLC, Florida,
2001.
265
[229] Orchard, R.A.: Fuzzy CLIPS, Version 6.04A; Users Guide, National Research
Council, Canada, 1998
[230] http://www.iit.nrc.ca/IR_public/fuzzy/fuzzyJDocs/APIdocs/nrc/fuzzy/FuzzyValue.html
[231] Hashmi, K.; Graham, I.D.; Mills, B.; Hashmi, M.S.J.: Adjustment Approach for
Fuzzy Logic Model Based Selection of Non-Overlapping Machining Data in Turning
Operation; Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 142, pp.152-162, 2003.
[232] Laarhoven, P.J.M.; Arts, E.H.L.: Simulated Annealing: Theory and Applications;
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 1987.
[233] Asif Iqbal, Ning He, Liang Li, Naeem Ullah Dar; Simulated Annealing Assisted
Optimization of Fuzzy Rules For Maximizing Tool Life in High-Speed Milling
Process; Proceedings of 5th IASTED International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence & Applications, Innsbruck, Austria, February 13-16, 2006, pp. 335-340.
[234] Lekova, A.; Batanov, D.: Self-Testing and Self-Learning Fuzzy Expert System for
Technological Process Control; Computers in Industry, Vol. 37, pp.135-141, 1998.
[235] Castro, J.L.; Castro-Schez, J.J.; Zurita, J.M.: Use of a Fuzzy Machine Learning
Technique in Knowledge-Acquisition Process; Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 123,
pp.307-320, 2001.
[236] Filipic, B.; Junkar, M.: Using Inductive Machine Learning to Support Decision
Making in Machining Processes; Computers in Industry, Vol. 43, pp.31-41, 2000.
[237] Monostori, L.: AI and Machine Learning Techniques for Managing Complexity,
Changes, and Uncertainty in Manufacturing; Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence, Vol. 16, pp.277-291, 2003
[238] Al Assadi, H.M.A.A.; Wong, S.V.; Hamouda, A.M.S.; Ahmad, M.M.M.H.:
Development of Machine Learning Strategy for Acquiring On-Line Machining Skills
during Turning Process; Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 155-156,
pp.2087-2092, 2004.
[239] Cho, S.; Asfour, S.; Onar, A.; Kaundinya, N.: Tool Breakage Detection using Support
Vector Machine Learning in a Milling Process; International Journal of Machine
Tools & Manufacture, Vol. 45, pp.241-249, 2005.
[240] Asif Iqbal, Naeem U. Dar, Ning He, Muhammad M.I Hammouda, Liang Li; SelfDeveloping Fuzzy Expert System: A Novel Learning Approach, Fitting for
Manufacturing Domain; Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (JIMS), Manuscript
Number: JIMS-232R2, DOI: 10.1007/s10845-009-0252-3.
[241] J. Liebowitz; Knowledge management and its link to artificial intelligence, Expert
Systems with Applications, Vol-20, Issue 1, pp 1-6, Jan 2001.
266
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
List of Publications
Journals:
1. Naeem Ullah Dar, Ejaz M. Qureshi, M.M.I Hammouda; Analysis of Weld Induced
Residual Stresses and Distortions in Thin Walled Cylinders; Journal of Mechanical
Science and Technology, KSME, Vol. 23, Number 4/April, 2009, pp. 1118-1131,
DOI: 10.1007/s12206-008-1012-6.
2. N U Dar, E M Qureshi, A M Malik, M M I Hammouda, R A Azeem; Analysis of
Circumferentially Welded Thin-Walled Cylinders to Study the Effects of Tack Weld
Orientations and Joint Root Opening on Residual Stress Fields; Proc. ImechE, Part C:
Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol. 223, Number 5/2009, pp 10371047, DOI: 10.1243/09544062JMES1191.
3. Asif Iqbal, Naeem U. Dar, Ning He, Muhammad M.I Hammouda, Liang Li; SelfDeveloping Fuzzy Expert System: A Novel Learning Approach, Fitting for
Manufacturing Domain; Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (JIMS), Manuscript
Number: JIMS-232R2 (online: 05 March, 2009), DOI: 10.1007/s10845-009-0252-3.
4. E.M. Qureshi, A.M. Malik , N.U. Dar; Residual Stress Fields due to varying Tack
Welds Orientation in Circumferrentially Welded Thin-Walled Cylinders; Advances in
Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 2009, Article ID351369, 9 pages, 2009. DOI:
10.1155/2009/351369.
5. E.M.Qureshi, A.M. Malik, R.A. Azeem, N.U. Dar, M. Hussain; Analysis of Residual
Stress Fields due to Different Tack Welds Orientation in Circumferentially Welded
Thin Walled Cylinders; Journal of Welding in the World, IIW (2008) Issue: Special,
Vol. 52 (2008), pp. 571-578.
6. M. Ejaz Qureshi, M. Afzaal Malik , Naeem Ullah Dar; Analysis of Arc Welded
Thin-Walled Cylinders to Investigate the Effects of Welding Process Parameters on
Residual Stresses; Material Science Forum, Vol. 575-578 (2008), pp. 763-768.
7. M. Ejaz Qureshi, M. Afzaal Malik, Naeem Ullah Dar, Iqbal Khan; Analysis of
Circumferentially Welded Thin-Walled Cylinders to Investigate the Effects of
Varying Clamping Conditions; Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Part-B, Vol. 222
(2008), pp. 901-914.
8. M. Afzaal Malik, M. Ejaz Qureshi, Naeem Ullah Dar, Iqbal Khan; Analysis of
Circumferentially Arc Welded Thin-Walled Cylinders to Investigate the Residual
Stress Fields; Elsevier's International Journal of Thin Walled Structures (2008), Vol.
46 (2008), pp. 1391-1401. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2008.03.011.
9. A Iqbal, N U Dar, N He, I Khan, L Li; Optimizing Cutting Parameters in Minimum
Quantity Lubrication Milling of Hardened Cold Work Tool Steel; Proc. IMechE Vol.
223 Part B: J. Engineering Manufacture, JEM1231 _ IMechE 2009, pp 43-54. DOI:
10.1243/09544054JEM1231.
10. Asif Iqbal, Ning He, Iqbal Khan, Liang Li, Naeem Ullah Dar; Modeling the Effects
of Cutting Parameters in MQL-Employed Finish Hard Milling Process Using DOptimal Method; Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 199, Issues 1-3,
April 2008, pp. 379-390.
267
11. G. Hussain, L. Gao, N. Hayat, N.U. Dar; The formability of annealed and pre-aged
AA-2024 sheets in single-point incremental forming; The Int. Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Online published: 15 August 2009, DOI 0.1007/s00170009-2120-x.
12. Hussain G, Gao L, Hayat N., Cui, Z., Pang, Y.C., N.U. Dar; Tool and lubrication for
Negative Incremental Forming of a commercially pure-Titanium sheet; Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, vol. 203, Issues 1-3, 18 July 2008, pp 193-201.
13. Hussain G, N.U. Dar, Gao L, Chen M.H; A Comparative Study on the Forming
Limits of the Aluminum Sheet in Negative Incremental Forming. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, vol. 187-188, 12 June 2007, pp. 94-98.
14. Hussain G, Gao L, N.U. Dar; An Experimental Study on some Formability
Evaluation Methods in Negative Incremental Forming. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, vol. 186, Issues 1-3, 7 May 2007, pp. 45-53.
15. Asif Iqbal, Ning He, Naeem Ullah Dar, Liang Li; Comparison of Fuzzy Expert
System Based Strategies of Offline & Online Estimation of Tools Flank Wear in
Hard-Milling Process; Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 33, Issue 1, July 2007,
pp.61-66.
16. Asif Iqbal, Ning He, Liang Li, Naeem Ullah Dar; A Fuzzy Expert System for
Optimizing Parameters and Predicting Performance Measures in Hard-Milling
Process; Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 32, Issue 4, May 2007, pp.10201027.
Edited Books:
17. Asif Iqbal, Iqbal Khan, Ning He, Naeem Ullah Dar, Liang Li; Application of Expert
Systems in Manufacturing Domain; In: Progress in Expert Systems Research;
Edited book; Nova Science Publishers, NY, USA, 2007, pp. 73-118. ISBN-13:
9781600216909.
18. Asif Iqbal, Naeem Ullah Dar; "A Self-Progressing Fuzzy Rule-Based System for
Optimizing and Predicting Machining Process", Edited book "Advances in Electrical
Engineering and Computational Science", Springer Netherlands Publisher, May
2009. Vol. 39, Chapter 37, pp 435-446. DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-2311-7_37.
Conferences:
19. Naeem Ullah Dar, Ejaz M. Qureshi, Iqbal Khan, Afzaal M. Malik; Welding Quality
and Cost: A Comprehensive Comparative Study. (Paper No. 473) Proceedings of
ADM-2006 Conference on Design and Manufacture, Harbin, China, January 8-10,
2006.
20. Afzaal M. Malik, Ejaz M. Qureshi, Naeem Ullah Dar, Iqbal Khan; TIG Welding
Process: Experimental Validation of Simulated Results. (Paper No. 472) Proceedings
of ADM-2006 Conference on Design and Manufacture, Harbin, China, January 8-10,
2006.
268
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
21. M. Afzaal Malik, M. Ejaz Qureshi, Naeem Ullah Dar, Iqbal Khan; Cost Estimation
and Quality Comparison for Sound Welds. Proceedings of ASME-2005 International
Mech. Engg. Congress and Exposition, Orlando, Florida-USA, Nov 5-11, 2005.
22. Asif Iqbal, Ning He, Liang Li, Naeem Ullah Dar; Simulated Annealing Assisted
Optimization of Fuzzy Rules For Maximizing Tool Life in High-Speed Milling
Process; Proceedings of 5th IASTED International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence & Applications, Innsbruck, Austria, February 13-16, 2006, pp. 335-340.
23. M.Ejaz Qureshi, M. Afzaal Malik, Iqbal Khan, N.U. Dar; Fatigue in Engineering
Structures: A three-fold analysis approach; Proceedings of 15th International
Conference on Nuclear Engineering (ICONE-15), Nagoya, Japan, April 22-26, 2007.
24. M. Ejaz Qureshi, M. Afzaal Malik, Naeem Ullah Dar; Analysis of Circumferentially
Welded Thin Walled Cylinders: Effects of Welding Process Parameters on Residual
Stresses; Proceedings of 5th Int. Conference Physical & Numerical Simulation of
Materials Processing (ICPNS-23-27 Oct 2007), Zhengzhou, China.
25. M Ejaz M. Qureshi, Afzaal M. Malik, Raja Amer Azeem, Naeem Ullah Dar;
Transient non-linear Thermal Analysis of Arc Welding Process to study the effects of
Heat Source and Process Parameters; Proc. of 5th Int. Conf. Physical & Numerical
Simulation of Materials Processing (ICPNS-23-27 Oct 2007), Zhengzhou, China.
26. M. Afzaal Malik , M. Ejaz Qureshi, Naeem Ullah Dar; Numerical Simulation of Arc
Welding Investigation of various Process and Heat Source Parameters; Proceedings
of FEMS (22-23 October 2007) conference on Failure of Engineering Materials &
Structures, UET Taxila, Pakistan.
27. Asif Iqbal, Naeem Ullah Dar, Iqbal Khan, He Ning; Assessment of Wear Failure
Modes of Carbide Cutters in High-Speed Milling of Hardened Steels; Proceedings of
FEMS (22-23 October 2007) conference on Failure of Engineering Materials &
Structures, UET Taxila, Pakistan.
28. Asif Iqbal, Naeem Ullah Dar, Mubasher Chohan; Effects of Cutting Parameters in
Erosion Failure of Ductile Materials in Abrasive Water Jet Machining; Proceedings
of FEMS (22-23 October 2007) conference on Failure of Engineering Materials &
Structures, UET Taxila, Pakistan.
29. G. Hussain, L. Gao, Wang Hui, N.U. Dar; A fundamental comparison on the
formability of a commercially-pure titanium sheet-metal in the incremental and
conventional forming processes; Accepted in 2007- ASME Manufacturing Science
and Engineering Conference (MSEC2007-31138).
30. Farooq M., Wang Dao Bo, Dar N.U.; A New Approach to Implementation of an
Open Architecture Controller for a PUMA Robot; Proceedings of International
Conference on Intelligent Automation & Robotics (ICIAR07). World Congress on
Engineering & Computer Science 2007. San Francisco, USA. 24-26 Oct. 2007.
31. Asif Iqbal, Iqbal Khan, Naeem Ullah Dar, Ning He; A Self-Developing Fuzzy
Expert System, Designed for Optimization of Machining Process; Proceedings of
World Congress on Engineering (WCE 2008) UK, July 2-4, 2008, pp.1728-1733
(ICCIIS).
269
32. Asif Iqbal, Iqbal Khan, Naeem Ullah Dar, Ning He; Efficacy of Applying Expert
System in Monitoring of Milling Process; Proceedings of World Congress on
Engineering (WCE 2008) UK, July 2-4, 2008, pp. 1734-1738 (ICCIIS).
33. E.M.Qureshi, A.M. Malik, R.A. Azeem, N.U. Dar, M. Hussain; Analysis of Residual
Stress Fields due to Different Tack Welds Orientation in Circumferentially Welded
Thin Walled Cylinders; Proceedings of International Conference on Safety and
Reliability of Welded Components in Energy and Processing Industry (IIW 2008),
Graz Austria, July 10-11, 2008, pp. 571-578.
34. Farooq, M.; Wang, D.B.; Dar, N.U.; Adaptive sliding-mode hybrid force/position
controller for flexible joint robot; Mechatronics and Automation, 2008. ICMA 2008.
IEEE International Conference on 5-8 Aug. 2008, pp. 724 731.
35. A. Iqbal, N.U. Dar, I. Khan; Knowledge-Based Intelligent Diagnostics of Tool Wear
States; Proceedings of International Bhurban Conference on Applied Sciences &
Technology (IBCAST), Islamabad-Pakistan, January 19 22, 2009.
270
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
Appendix A1
271
EFF=0.8
WELDI=200
WELDV=15
TOTHTLS=4*NCIR
FACT_COR=0
/COM
K,,0,0,0
K,,0,0,0.7
*DO,I,1,2,1
X=CIR+(I-1)*CWT
K,,X,0,0
K,,X,0,WZ1
K,,X,0,-WZ1
K,,X,0,WZ1+WZ2
K,,X,0,-WZ1-WZ2
K,,X,0,WZ1+WZ2+WZ3
K,,X,0,-WZ1-WZ2-WZ3
K,,X,0,WZ1+WZ2+WZ3+WZ4
K,,X,0,-WZ1-WZ2-WZ3-WZ4
K,,X,0,WZ1+WZ2+WZ3+WZ4+WZ5
K,,X,0,-WZ1-WZ2-WZ3-WZ4-WZ5
*ENDDO
/COM
A,3,4,15,14
A,4,6,17,15
A,6,8,19,17
A,8,10,21,19
A,10,12,23,21
/COM
A,3,5,16,14
A,5,7,18,16
A,7,9,20,18
A,9,11,22,20
A,11,13,24,22
/COM
ASEL,ALL
VROTATE,ALL,,,,,,1,2,360,2
ALLSEL,ALL
/COM
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,CWT
LESIZE,ALL,,,NCWT
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ1
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ1
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ2
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ2
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ3
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ3
/COM
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ4
LSEL,R,LOC,X,COR
/COMLESIZE,ALL,,,NZ4,0.5
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ4,1
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ4
272
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
LSEL,R,LOC,X,CIR
/COMLESIZE,ALL,,,NZ4,2
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ4,1
/COM
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ5
LSEL,R,LOC,X,COR
/COMLESIZE,ALL,,,NZ5,0.5
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ5,1
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ5
LSEL,R,LOC,X,CIR
/COMLESIZE,ALL,,,NZ5,2,1
LESIZE,ALL,,,NZ5,1
/COM
LSEL,S,RADIUS,,CIR
LSEL,A,RADIUS,,COR
LESIZE,ALL,,,NCIR
/COM/COM
/COM ******************************** MESHING ********************************
/COM
ASEL,S,,,11,32,21
ASEL,A,,,13,34,21
ASEL,A,,,52,68,16
ASEL,A,,,54,70,16
/COM
MSHKEY,1
AMESH,ALL
ESEL,S,TYPE,,2
*GET,TNELEM,ELEM,0,COUNT
CM,AREA2UNSEL,AREA
ALLSEL,ALL
ASEL,S,EXT
ASEL,U,,,AREA2UNSEL
AMESH,ALL
ALLSEL,ALL
EREFINE,1,TNELEM,1,LEVEL,DEPTH,SMOOTH,OFF /COM NZ1*NCIR*4
ACLEAR,AREA2UNSEL
ASEL,S,,,AREA2UNSEL
LSLA,ALL
LSEL,U,LENGTH,,WZ1
LSEL,U,LENGTH,,THICK
LESIZE,ALL,,,2*NCIR,,1
LSEL,S,LENGTH,,WZ1
LESIZE,ALL,,,NFZR,,1
ALLSEL,ALL
AMESH,AREA2UNSEL
/COM
VSWEEP,1
VSWEEP,6
VSWEEP,11
VSWEEP,16
ESEL,S,TYPE,,1
*GET,TOTELEM,ELEM,0,COUNT
/COM
273
*DO,I,2,5,1
VSWEEP,I
VSWEEP,I+10
*ENDDO
/COM
*DO,II,7,10,1
VSWEEP,II
VSWEEP,II+10
*ENDDO
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
ACLEAR,ALL
NUMCMP,ALL
SHPP,SUMMARY
/COM
*DIM,EZCENT,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,EXCENT,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,EYCENT,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,MATREF,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,PEAKTEMP,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,INDICATE,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,EPTIME,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,ELESTATUS,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,MATPCTIME,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,ELEMVOL,ARRAY,TOTELEM
*DIM,INPUT_HEAT,ARRAY,TOTHTLS+5
*DIM,ELEMENTNO,ARRAY,TOTHTLS+5
/COM
*VGET,EZCENT,ELEM,1,CENT,Z,,2
*VGET,EXCENT,ELEM,1,CENT,X,,2
*VGET,EYCENT,ELEM,1,CENT,Y,,2
/COM
/COM ************* HEAT SOURCE AND WELD PROCESS PARAMETERS *************
/COM
TLHS=0.02
/COM TOTAL LENGTH OF HEAT SOURCE
AF=0.005
/COM LENGTH OF FRONT ELLIPSOIDAL
AR=TLHS-AF
/COM LENGTH OF REAR ELLIPSOIDAL
FR=0.75
/COM FRACTION OF HEAT IN FRONT
ELLIPSOIDAL
FF=2-FR
/COM FRACTION OF HEAT IN REAR
ELLIPSOIDAL
B=0.005
/COM HALF WIDTH OF HEAT SOURCE
C=CWT*1.4
/COM DEPTH OF HEAT SOURCE
Q=EFF*WELDV*WELDI
/COM NET HEAT INPUT
/COM
*DIM, CONVEC, TABLE, 49, 1, 1,,,
/COM DEFINE TABLE TO STORE TEMP VS
/COM CONVECTION
*TREAD, CONVEC, HTOTAL, TXT, , 2
/COM READ CONVECTION (htotal) FROM FILE
/COM
/COM ************************* SOLUTION CONTROL ****************************
/COM
/SOLUTION
/COM
274
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
ANTYPE,4,NEW
/COMNLGEOM,ON
TRNOPT,FULL
NROPT,AUTO
LUMPM,OFF
LNSRCH,ON
TIMINT,ON,THERM
TINTP,,,,1,0.5
AUTOTS,ON
KBC,1
NEQIT,125
OUTRESS,NSOL,LAST
/COMOUTRESS,NSOL,LAST
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
/COM
ESEL,S,,,1,1,1
/COM
*DO,K,1,TOTELEM,1
/COM
ZCENTER=1000*EZCENT(K)
XCENTER=(COR-EXCENT(K))*1000
/COMD_VALUE=2*ZCENTER+XCENTER
D_VALUE=2*ZCENTER+2*XCENTER
D_VALUE1=-2*ZCENTER+2*XCENTER
/COM*IF,D_VALUE,LT,7.0,THEN
/COM
/COMFOR NZ1=4, D_VALUE AND D_VALUE1 ARE 6.5
/COMFOR NZ1=5, D_VALUE AND D_VALUE1 ARE 5.5
/COMFOR NZ1=6, D_VALUE AND D_VALUE1 ARE 4.5
/COM
*IF,NZ1,EQ,4,THEN
*IF,D_VALUE,LT,6.5,AND,D_VALUE1,LT,6.5,THEN
ESEL,A,,,K
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
/COM
*IF,NZ1,EQ,5,THEN
*IF,D_VALUE,LT,5.5,AND,D_VALUE1,LT,5.5,THEN
ESEL,A,,,K
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
/COM
*IF,NZ1,EQ,6,THEN
*IF,D_VALUE,LT,4.5,AND,D_VALUE1,LT,4.5,THEN
ESEL,A,,,K
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
/COM
*ENDDO
/COM
ESEL,U,,,1,1,1
/COM
275
EKILL,ALL
ALLSEL,ALL
/COM
CSYS,1
SELTOL,1.0E-6
NSEL,S,LOC,X,CIR
NSEL,R,LOC,Z,0
ESLN,S,0
EALIVE,ALL
ALLSEL,ALL
CSYS,0
/COM
ESEL,S,LIVE
NSLE,S
NSEL,INVE
D,ALL,TEMP,300
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
*DO,I,1,TOTELEM,1
/COM
*GET,ELESTATUS(1),ELEM,I,ATTR,LIVE
*GET,ELEMVOL(I),ELEM,I,VOLU
/COM
*ENDDO
/COM
/COM ******************** WRITE ELEMENT STATUS TO A FILE *******************
/COM
*CFOPEN, ELEMSTAT, TXT,
*VWRITE, ELESTATUS(1)
(F3.0)
*CFCLOSE
/COM
/COM **************************************************************************
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
TUNIF,300
ASEL,S,EXT
ASEL,U,,,9,30,21
SFA,ALL,1,CONV,%CONVEC%,300
ALLSEL,ALL
/COM
SAVE, CYLINDER WELD (THERMAL),,DB,,ALL
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
PI=4*ATAN(1)
OUT_CIR=2*PI*COR
CIRTIME=OUT_CIR/WELDVEL
DEL_T=CIRTIME/TOTHTLS
CIR_THETA=360/TOTHTLS
TIMPAR=0
LOOPPAR=TOTHTLS+5
BEGINPAR=1
/COM
276
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
277
ANG-POSITION=360+EYCENT(K)
*ENDIF
/COM
DEL_CIR=EXCENT(K)*(ANG-POSITION-SOURCE_YLOC)*PI/180
*IF,DEL_AXIAL,LT,B,THEN
*IF,DEL_CIR,LT,-0.0002,THEN
A=AR
F=FR
ADEL_CIR=-1*DEL_CIR
*ELSE
A=AF
F=FF
ADEL_CIR=DEL_CIR
*ENDIF
/COM
*IF, ADEL_CIR, LT, 1.0E-6, THEN
ADEL_CIR=0
*ENDIF
*IF, ADEL_CIR, LE, A, THEN
/COM
*IF, DEL_RAD, LE, C, THEN
/COM
*GET,ELEMSTAT,ELEM,K,ATTR,LIVE
*IF,DEL_CIR,GE,-0.0002,AND,ELEMSTAT,LE,0,THEN
ELEMSTAT=1
EALIVE,K
MPCHG,2,K
NSLE,INACTIVE
DDELE,ALL,TEMP
*ENDIF
/COM
FACTOR2ADD=1
/COM
*IF,DEL_AXIAL,LT,0.006,AND,DEL_AXIAL,GT,0.0032,THEN
*IF,DEL_RAD,LT,0.0012,THEN
FACTOR2ADD=11.8
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*IF,DEL_AXIAL,LT,0.0012,AND,DEL_RAD,GT,0.0045,THEN
FACTOR2ADD=4.02
*ENDIF
*IF,DEL_RAD,LT,0.0045,AND,DEL_RAD,GT,0.003,THEN
*IF,DEL_AXIAL,LT,0.0012,THEN
FACTOR2ADD=0.79
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*IF,DEL_RAD,LT,0.003,THEN
*IF,DEL_AXIAL,LT,0.0006,THEN
FACTOR2ADD=0.55
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*IF,DEL_AXIAL,GT,0.002,THEN
*IF,DEL_RAD,GT,0.0015,AND,DEL_RAD,LT,0.006,THEN
278
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
FACTOR2ADD=0.0
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
/COM
GEN_HEAT=0
Y_FACT=3*ADEL_CIR*ADEL_CIR/(A**2)
X_FACT=3*DEL_RAD*DEL_RAD/(C**2)
Z_FACT=3*DEL_AXIAL*DEL_AXIAL/(B**2)
HEAT_FACTOR=FACTOR2ADD*FACT_COR*6*(3**0.5)*F*Q/(A*B*C*PI*(PI**0.5))
GEN_HEAT=HEAT_FACTOR*EXP(-X_FACT)*EXP(-Y_FACT)*EXP(-Z_FACT)
/COM
*IF,ELEMSTAT,EQ,1,THEN
INPUT_HEAT(T)=INPUT_HEAT(T)+(GEN_HEAT*ELEMVOL(K))
*ENDIF
*IF,T,LE,TOTHTLS+1,THEN
BFE,K,HGEN,,GEN_HEAT
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*ENDDO
/REPLOT
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
TIME,DEL_T*T
NSUBST,2,4,2
SOLVE
ESEL,S,,,1,TOTELEM,1
BFEDELE,ALL,HGEN
ALLSEL,ALL
SAVE, CYLINDER WELD (THERMAL),DB,,ALL
/COM
*DO,K,1,TOTELEM,1
ELEMNO=K
*IF,SOURCE_YLOC,GE,EYCENT(K),THEN
*IF,INDICATE(ELEMNO),LT,1,THEN
AVRG_TEMP=0
T1=0
*DO,NNO,1,8,1
*GET,N1,ELEM,ELEMNO,NODE,NNO
*GET,T1,NODE,N1,TEMP
AVRG_TEMP=AVRG_TEMP+T1
*ENDDO
AVRG_TEMP=AVRG_TEMP/8
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),LT,AVRG_TEMP,THEN
PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO)=AVRG_TEMP
EPTIME(ELEMNO)=TIMPAR
*ENDIF
/COM
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),GT,AVRG_TEMP,OR,T,EQ,LOOPPAR,THEN
*IF,AVRG_TEMP,LT,1740,OR,T,EQ,LOOPPAR,THEN
/COM
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),GE,1740,THEN
279
MPCHG,6,ELEMNO
MNO=6
*ENDIF
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),LT,1740,AND,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),GE,1423,THEN
MPCHG,5,ELEMNO
MNO=5
*ENDIF
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),LT,1423,AND,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),GE,1323,THEN
MPCHG,4,ELEMNO
MNO=4
*ENDIF
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),LT,1323,AND,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),GE,1223,THEN
MPCHG,3,ELEMNO
MNO=3
*ENDIF
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),LT,1223,AND,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),GE,1083,THEN
MPCHG,2,ELEMNO
MNO=2
*ENDIF
*IF,PEAKTEMP(ELEMNO),LT,1083,THEN
MPCHG,1,ELEMNO
MNO=1
*ENDIF
MATREF(ELEMNO)=MNO
INDICATE(ELEMNO)=1
TIMEMPCHD(ELEMNO)=TIMPAR
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*ENDIF
*ENDDO
/COM
ALLSEL, ALL
SAVE, CYLINDER WELD (THERMAL),DB,,ALL
/COM
*ENDDO
/COM
*CFOPEN,MATREF,TXT
*VWRITE,MATREF(1)
(F2.0)
*CFCLOSE
*CFOPEN,MATPCTIME,TXT
*VWRITE,MATPCTIME(1)
(F11.8)
*CFCLOSE
*CFOPEN,EPTIME,TXT
*VWRITE,EPTIME(1)
(F11.8)
*CFCLOSE
/COM
/COM ***************************** COOLING PHASE ****************************
/COM
ALLSEL,ALL
280
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
TIMPAR=LOOPPAR*DEL_T
T=TIMPAR
*DO,I,1,6,1
T=T+0.5
TIME,T
NSUBST,2,4,2
SOLVE
*ENDDO
/COM
T=TIMPAR+3
*DO,I,1,10,1
T=T+1
TIME,T
NSUBST,2
SOLVE
*ENDDO
/COM
T=TIMPAR+13
*DO,I,1,6,1
T=T+5
TIME,T
NSUBST,2
SOLVE
*ENDDO
/COM
T=TIMPAR+43
*DO,I,1,6,1
T=T+15*I
TIME,T
NSUBST,2
SOLVE
*ENDDO
/COM
T=TIMPAR+358
*DO,I,1,6,1
T=T+100*I
TIME,T
NSUBST,2
SOLVE
*ENDDO
/COM
T=TIMPAR+2458
*DO,I,1,8,1
T=T+(I+0.5)*200
TIME,T
NSUBST,2
SOLVE
*ENDDO
/COM
SAVE, CYLINDER WELD (THERMAL), DB, ALL
281
Appendix A2
A2-1:
[0] Initialize
[1] IA User Input: Introduce new welding variable? If IA = Yes then execute steps 1.1
to 1.4, otherwise go to step 2.
[1.1] Intake following from user in single structure St1:
Name of variable {name}
Whether the variable is used in antecedent or consequent part of rules? {type}
Whether the variable is numeric or categorical? {categ}
Units for numeric variable OR Options for categorical variable {units/options}
[1.2] Assign new identity number variable_ID to the variable. Increment the total
count of variables, i.e., n = n + 1
[1.3] If, for newly entered variable, variable{type} = input then store details of this
variable in between details of first output variable and last input variable in file
Variable.dat, ELSE if variable{type} = output then append details of this variable at
the end of file
[1.4] User Input: Introduce another variable? If Yes then go to step 1.1, else continue
[2] IB User Input: Enter new data set? If IB=Yes then Open file: Data.dat. AND
assign count_records = (number of records already stored in the file) AND execute steps
2.1 to 2.4, ELSE go to step 3
[2.1] Increment count_records= count_records + 1
[2.2] For x = 1 to n, Do: IC User Input: Enter value for variable[x]? If IC = Yes
then intake value for variable[x], in given units/options AND assign record_num =
count_records
[2.3] Append data values to file: Data.dat
[2.4] User Input: Enter another data set? If Yes then go to step 2.1, ELSE store value
of count_records to Data.dat AND go to step 3
[3] Copy all data sets Data.dat Linked List Set of structure St1 plus record_num
[4] ID User Input: Erase any data set? If ID=Yes then execute steps 4.1 to 4.5,
otherwise go to step 5
[4.1] N1 User Input: Number of data set to be erased?
[4.2] For x = 1 to count_records, execute loop, i.e., steps 4.2.1 to 4.2.2
[4.2.1] If Set[x]{record_num} = N1 then delete structure Set[x] AND go to step
4.3
[4.2.2] Increment x = x + 1
[4.3] For all the records having
Set{record_num} > x, do following:
Set{record_num} = Set{record_num} 1
[4.4] Delete: Data.Dat. Open new file: Data.Dat. Copy the linked list Set to file
Data.Dat
[4.5] User Input: Erase another data set? If Yes then go to step 4.1, else continue
[5] Add field obj to the structure St1. For x = 1 to n, do following, until condition in step
5.1.3 or step 5.1.7 is met:
282
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
A2-2:
284
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
A2-3:
285
[14.6]
ELSE
If
(Ratio>0.35
&
Ratio<0.5)
then
assign
Rule_consequent{fuzzy_set_num} = (A_Set + B_Set) / 2 AND Rule_consequent {CF}
= (Ratio0.35)/0.15 AND go to step 14.9
[14.7]
ELSE
If
(Ratio>=0.5
&
Ratio<0.65)
then
assign
Rule_consequent{fuzzy_set_num} = (A_Set + B_Set) / 2 AND Rule_consequent {CF}
= (0.65Ratio)/0.15 AND go to step 14.9
[14.8]
ELSE
If
(Ratio>=0.65
&
Ratio<=1)
then
assign
Rule_consequent{fuzzy_set_num} = B_Set AND Rule_consequent {CF} = (Ratio
0.65)/0.35
[14.9] Assign Rule_consequent{variable_ID} = Data_output {out_variable_ID}
[14.10] Set linked list Fuzzy to its first node. Set linked list Rule_consequent to its
node: Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node}. Set linked list Data_output to
its node: Data_output{Data_input down_node}
[14.11] Initialize count_INP=0. Execute inner loop, i.e., steps 14.11.1 to 14.11.12
until condition in step 14.11.12 is met
[14.11.1] Increment count_INP = count_INP + 1
[14.11.2] Assign Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node{variable_ID}}
= Data_output {Data_input down_node{in_variable_ID}}
[14.11.3]
If
Fuzzy{variable_ID}
=
Data_output
{Data_input
down_node{in_variable_ID}} then go to step 14.11.4 ELSE move Fuzzy =
Fuzzy{next_node} AND repeat step 14.11.3
[14.11.4] If Data_output {Data_input down_node{data_value}} < Fuzzy{FS
down_node{FS down_node {peak_value}}} then go to step 14.11.5 ELSE move
Fuzzy{FS down_node} = Fuzzy{FS down_node{FS down_node}} AND repeat
step 14.11.4
[14.11.5] Assign AA = Data_output {Data_input down_node{data_value}}
Fuzzy{FS down_node{peak_value}} AND assign BB = Fuzzy{FS down_node{FS
down_node{peak_value}}} Data_output {Data_input down_node{data_value}}
AND assign AA_Set = Fuzzy{FS down_node{set_number}} AND assign BB_Set
= Fuzzy{FS down_node{FS down_node{set_number}}}
[14.11.6] Assign Ratio2 = AA/(AA+BB)
[14.11.7] If (Ratio2 >= 0 & Ratio2 <= 0.35) then assign
Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node{fuzzy_set_num}} = AA_Set AND
Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node {CF}} = 1 Ratio2/0.35 AND go
to step 14.11.11
[14.11.8] ELSE If (Ratio2 > 0.35 & Ratio2 < 0.5) then assign
Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node{fuzzy_set_num}} = (AA_Set +
BB_Set) / 2 AND Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node {CF}} =
(Ratio20.35)/0.15 AND go to step 14.11.11
[14.11.9] ELSE If (Ratio2 >= 0.5 & Ratio2 < 0.65) then assign
Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node{fuzzy_set_num}} = (AA_Set +
BB_Set) / 2 AND Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node {CF}} = (0.65
Ratio2)/0.15 AND go to step 14.11.11
[14.11.10] ELSE If (Ratio2 >= 0.65 & Ratio2 <= 1) then assign
Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node{fuzzy_set_num}} = BB_Set AND
Rule_consequent{Rule_antecedent down_node {CF}} = (Ratio20.65)/0.35
286
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
[14.11.11] Set linked list Fuzzy to its first node. Move: Data_output {Data_input
down_node} = Data_output {Data_input down_node{Data_input down_node}}.
Append new node to Rule_consequent {Rule_antecedent down_node} AND
move Rule_consequent {Rule_antecedent down_node} = Rule_consequent
{Rule_antecedent down_node {Rule_antecedent down_node}}
[14.11.12] If Data_output {Data_input down_node{Data_input down_node}} =
NULL then go to step 14.12 ELSE go to step 14.11.1
[14.12] Assign Rule_consequent{salience} = 5count_INP
[14.13] Set linked list Fuzzy to its first node. Move Data_output = Data_output
{next_node}. Append new node to Rule_consequent AND move Rule_consequent =
Rule_consequent{next_node}
[14.14] If Data_output{next_node} = NULL then go to step [15] ELSE continue with
outer loop and go to step [14.1]
[15] Set Rule_consequent to its first node. Set Data_output to its first node
287
A2-5:
288
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
289
[24.5] Print the optimization rules, using information contained in linked lists Maxim
and Minim, to the CLIPS file Sets_Rules.clp
[24.6] Switch over to next output variable and repeat step 24. If all the output
variables have been processed then go to step 25
[25] END
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
(S5 (5 0) (5.5 1) (6 0) )
(S6 (5.5 0) (6 1) (6.5 0) )
(S7 (6 0) 6.5 1) (7 0) )
(S8 (6.5 0) (7 1) (7.5 1) ) ) )
(deftemplate Residual_Stresses 100 550 MPa
( (S1 (100 1) (150 1) (200 0) )
(S2 (150 0) (200 1) (250 0) )
(S3 (200 0) (250 1) (300 0) )
(S4 (250 0) (300 1) (350 0) )
(S5 (300 0) (350 1) (400 0) )
(S6 (350 0) (400 1) (450 0) )
(S7 (400 0) (450 1) (500 0) )
(S8 (450 0) (500 1) (550 1) ) ) )
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
=>
(assert (Welding_Speed S1)))
(defrule optimization16 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion High)
(or (not (Thickness ?)) (Thickness S1))
=>
(assert (Thickness S1)))
(defrule optimization17 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion High)
(or (not (Weld_Type ?)) (Weld_Type S1))
=>
(if (>= ?*slid2* 50) then (assert (Weld_Type S1))))
(defrule optimization18 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion High)
(or (not (Trailing ?)) (Trailing S0))
=>
(if (>= ?*slid2* 50) then (assert (Trailing S0))))
(defrule optimization19 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion Low)
(or (not (Welding_Current ?)) (Welding_Current S1))
=>
(assert (Welding_Current S1)))
(defrule optimization20 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion Low)
(or (not (Welding_Voltage ?)) (Welding_Voltage S1))
=>
(assert (Welding_Voltage S1)))
(defrule optimization21 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion Low)
(or (not (Welding_Speed ?)) (Welding_Speed S3))
=>
(assert (Welding_Speed S3)))
(defrule optimization22 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion Low)
(or (not (Thickness ?)) (Thickness S3))
=>
(assert (Thickness S3)))
(defrule optimization23 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion Low)
(or (not (Weld_Type ?)) (Weld_Type S1))
=>
(if (< ?*slid2* 50) then (assert (Weld_Type S1))))
(defrule optimization24 (declare (salience 4000))
(Obj_ Distortion Low)
(or (not (Trailing ?)) (Trailing S1))
=>
293
Expert System for Optimization of Welding Process of Thin Walled HSLA Steel Structures
295
Bien plus que des documents.
Découvrez tout ce que Scribd a à offrir, dont les livres et les livres audio des principaux éditeurs.
Annulez à tout moment.