Download - 3rd Review Batch 7
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
1/29
ANALYSIS OF WELDING PARAMETERS FOR
FERRITE NUMBER IN TIG WELDED
202 GRADE STAINLESS STEEL PLATES
PRESENTED BY
N.L.KAARTHIKRAM (06BME21)S.KALAIRAJ (06BME22)
E.PRAVEEN (06BME33)
GUIDED BY
Mr.R.SUDHAKARAN,
(SENIOR LECTURER)
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
2/29
Determination of ferrite number of SS202 grade steels.
Optimization of process parameters
Gun angle.
Welding current.
Gas flow rate.
Plate length.
Welding speed, on ferrite number.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
3/29
Effect of Composition on Corrosion Resistance of High-Alloy Austenitic Stainless Steel Weld Metals was publishedby P.I. Marshall and T.G. Gooch in December 1992 whichstated the composition of stainless steel alloys for
corrosion resistance in them.
M. Vasudevan and A.K. Bhaduri in 2004 published theirwork on Prediction of Ferrite Number in Stainless SteelWelds in which a model was developed for accurate
composition only dependent FN prediction methodcurrently reported in literature.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
4/29
Identification of limits of process variables,
Developing the design matrix,
Conducting experiments as per the design matrix,
Determination of ferrite number of stainless steel grade-
202,
Optimization of process parameters using non traditional
optimization technique.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
5/29
The standard value assigned to austenitic stainless steel todenote a specific ferrite content.
Excessive ferrite in stainless steel can result in poor ductility,toughness, and corrosion resistance.
Insufficient ferrite can also produce inferior mechanical andcorrosion resistance properties.
Hence, control of ferrite in stainless steel cladding is essential toobtain the required mechanical and corrosion-resistantproperties.
Hence, control of ferrite in stainless steel is essential to obtainrequired corrosion-resistant properties ,for which we optimizethe parameters in welding to weld a stainless steel grade 202plate with optimum ferrite number.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
6/29
It is a type of fusion welding.
In this welding, an electric arc is produced between a non-consumable tungsten electrode and the work piece.
When the arc is produced, the inert gas from the cylinderpasses through the welding head around the electrode,which surrounds the arc and protects the weld from
atmospheric effects.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
7/29
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURESEXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
The experiments wereconducted using LincolnV 350 Pro Electric DigitalWelding Machine.
A servo motor driven
manipulator was used tomaintain uniformwelding speed.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
8/29
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURESEXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
The welding gun is held stationary inThe welding gun is held stationary ina frame above the table and it isa frame above the table and it isprovided with an attachment forprovided with an attachment forsetting the required welding gunsetting the required welding gun
angle.angle.
Argon is used as the shielding gasArgon is used as the shielding gasand its flow rate is varied for eachand its flow rate is varied for eachexperiment as per the requirements.experiment as per the requirements.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
9/29
PLAN OF WORKPLAN OF WORK
Identifying the process variablesIdentifying the process variables
Developing the design matrixDeveloping the design matrix
Conducting the experiments as per the design matrixConducting the experiments as per the design matrix
Development of mathematical modelsDevelopment of mathematical models
Evaluation of coefficients of the modelsEvaluation of coefficients of the models
Checking adequacy of the modelsChecking adequacy of the models
Testing the regression coefficients of the modelsTesting the regression coefficients of the models
Validation of the mathematical modelsValidation of the mathematical models
Analyzing theAnalyzing the
resultsresults
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
10/29
LIMITS OF PROCESS VARIABLESLIMITS OF PROCESS VARIABLES
The design plan wasdecided based on thepractical considerationsfor the system
Factor Upperlimit
Lowerlimit
Weldingcurrent (I) amps
110 70
Weldingspeed (V)mm/min
120 80
Gas flow rate(Q) liter/min
25 5
GunAngle ()Degrees
90 50
Plate Length (L)mm
200 100
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
11/29
LIMITS OF PROCESS VARIABLESLIMITS OF PROCESS VARIABLES
Process
parameters
Limits
-2 -1 0 +1 +2
Weldingcurrent amps
70 80 90 100 110
WeldingSpeedmm/min
80 90 100 110 120
Gas flow rate
Liter/min
5 10 15 20 25
Gun angleDegrees
50 60 70 80 90
Plate Lengthmm
100 125 150 175 200
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
12/29
DETERMINATION OF FERRITE NUMBERDETERMINATION OF FERRITE NUMBER
The ferrite number was measured using the Feritscope.The ferrite number was measured using the Feritscope.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
13/29
DESIGN MATRIXDESIGN MATRIX
The design matrix chosen
to conduct the experimentswas five factor, five levelscentral composite rotatabledesigns consisting of 32 setsof coded conditions .
This design matrixcomprises a full replicationfactorial design i.e. 24 = 16factorial design plus 7 centerpoints and 8 star points.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
14/29
MATHEMATICAL MODELMATHEMATICAL MODEL
0.669-0.006*2-0.086*V2-0.037*L2+0.094*I2-0.052*V2*V2 -
0.029*L2*L2+0.006*Q2*Q2+0.073*2*V2-0.07*2*L2-
0.004*2*I2+0.05*V2*L2-0.042*V2*I2+0.012*I2*Q2
Fn=Fn=
The mathematical model was developed using quality america pc IV DOE softwareThe mathematical model was developed using quality america pc IV DOE software
GUN ANGLE ()
WELDING SPEED (V)
PLATE LENGTH (L)
WELDING CURRENT (I)
GAS FLOW RATE (Q)
where,where,
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
15/29
R-ratio = M.S-FACTORS / M.S PURE ERRORR-ratio = M.S-FACTORS / M.S PURE ERROR
= 1022.918= 1022.918
F-ratio = M.S-LACK OF FIT / M.S PURE ERRORF-ratio = M.S-LACK OF FIT / M.S PURE ERROR
= 2.355= 2.355
LACK OF FIT D.F = 12LACK OF FIT D.F = 12
PURE ERROR D.F = 7PURE ERROR D.F = 7
F-ratio (12,7)= 3.57F-ratio (12,7)= 3.57
LACK OF FIT D.F = 13LACK OF FIT D.F = 13
PURE ERROR D.F = 7PURE ERROR D.F = 7
F-ratio (13,7)= 3.55F-ratio (13,7)= 3.55
F-ratio (12,7) < STD . TAB .VALUEF-ratio (12,7) < STD . TAB .VALUE
2.355 < 3.572.355 < 3.57
R-ratio (13,7) > STD . TAB .VALUER-ratio (13,7) > STD . TAB .VALUE
1022.910 > 3.551022.910 > 3.55
HENCE THE MODEL IS ADEQUATEHENCE THE MODEL IS ADEQUATE
MODEL CALCULATIONMODEL CALCULATION
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
16/29
Observed
predicted
error
0.62 0.62 -0.64516
0.64 0.64 0.3125
0.31 0.31 -1.29032
0.57 0.57 -0.35088
0.6 0.61 -2.33333
0.31 0.30 3.225806
0.45 0.46 -1.33333
0.48 0.48 -0.41667
0.9 0.90 -0.44444
0.9 0.90 -0.22222
0.42 0.43 -1.42857
0.68 0.67 1.764706
0.89 0.89 -0.44944
0.56 0.56 -0.71429
0.56 0.57 -1.42857
Observed
predicted
error
0.58 0.58 0.344828
0.7 0.68 2.714286
0.64 0.66 -2.65625
0.64 0.63 1.09375
0.29 0.29 0.344828
0.63 0.63 0.47619
0.49 0.48 2.244898
0.49 0.48 1.836735
0.85 0.86 -0.82353
0.7 0.69 1
0.7 0.69 1
0.68 0.67 1.617647
0.68 0.67 1.617647
0.67 0.67 0.149254
0.66 0.67 -1.36364
0.67 0.67 0.149254
0.66 0.67 -1.36364
ERROR CALCULATIONERROR CALCULATION
SINCE R2 VALUE IS NEAR BY 1 THEOBSERVED VALUE AND THE
PREDICTE DVALUE HAVE CLOSE
RELATION AND ARE MEANT TO BE
EQUAL.
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
17/29
RESULTS AND DICUSSIONSRESULTS AND DICUSSIONS
Response Surface Regression: C6 versus C1, C2, C3, C4, C5
The analysis was done using coded units.
THE CONTOUR AND SURFACE GRAPHS FOR VARIOUS PARAMETERS WERE
DRAWN AND ANALYSED USING MINITAB 15 STATISTICAL SOFTWARE .
Contour Plot of C6 vs C2, C1
Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C1
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C1
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C1
Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C2
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C2
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C2
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C3
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C3
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C4
Surface Plot of C6 vs C2, C1
Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C1
Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C1
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C1
Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C2
Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C2
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C2
Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C3
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C3
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C4
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
18/29
2
0.000
0.25
0.50
0.75
-2
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C3 0
C4 0
C5 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C2, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2,WELDINGSPEED(V
)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C3 0
C4 0
C5 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.2
0.2 0.4
0.4 0.6
0.6 0.8
0.8
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C2, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDINGCURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
19/29
2
0.20
0.4
0.6
0.8
-2
0 -22
C6, FN
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2 0
C4 0C5 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C3,PLATELENGTH
(L)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C2 0
C4 0
C5 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.2
0.2 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.60.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.8
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDINGCURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
20/29
2
0.5
0
0.7
-2
0.9
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C4, WELDING CURRENT (I )
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2 0
C3 0
C5 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C4,
WELDINGCU
RRENT(I)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C2 0
C3 0
C5 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.8
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDINGCURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
21/29
2
0.650 0
0.675
0.700
-2
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C5, GAS FLOW RATE ( Q)
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2 0
C3 0
C4 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C5,
GASFLOWRA
TE(Q)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C2 0
C3 0
C4 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.66
0.66 0.67
0.67 0.68
0.68 0.69
0.69 0.70
0.70
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C1
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
22/29
2
0.00 0
0.25
0.50
-2
0.75
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C1 0
C4 0
C5 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C2
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C3,PLATELENG
TH(L)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C1 0
C4 0
C5 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.2 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C2
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
23/29
20.4
0
0.6
0.8
-2
1.0
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C4, WELDING CURRENT (I )
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C1 0
C3 0
C5 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C2
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C4,WELDINGCURR
ENT(I)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C1 0
C3 0
C5 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.8 0.9
0.9
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C2
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
24/29
2
0
0.4
0.6
-2
0.8
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C5, GAS FLOW RATE ( Q)
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C1 0
C3 0
C4 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C2
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C5,
GASFLOWRA
TE(Q)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C1 0
C3 0
C4 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C2
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDINGCURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
25/29
20.4
0
0.6
-2
0.8
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT (I )
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C1 0
C2 0
C5 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C3
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4,
WELDING
CURRENT(I)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C1 0
C2 0
C5 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.8
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C3
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDINGCURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
26/29
2
0.5
0
0.6
-2
0.7
0 -2
2
C6, FN
C5, GAS FLOW RATE (Q)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C1 0
C2 0
C4 0
Hold Values
Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C3
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C5,GASFLO
WRATE(Q)
210-1-2
2
1
0
-1
-2
C1 0
C2 0
C4 0
Hold Values
>
< 0.50
0.50 0.55
0.55 0.60
0.60 0.65
0.65 0.70
0.70
C6
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C3
C1, GUN ANGLE ()
C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
C6, FN
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
27/29
SCHEDULE OF WORKSSCHEDULE OF WORKS
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
28/29
ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE
COLLECTION OF INFORMATION 07-09-2009 TO 28-09-2009
BUYING THE PLATES AND MATERIALSREQUIRED.
ON 16-12-2009
WELDING PROCESS. 28-12-2009 TO 04-01-2010
DETERMINATION OF FERRITENUMBER.
ON 18-01-2010
DEVELOPMENT THE DESIGN MATRIX. 20-01-2010 TO 27-01-2010
DEVELOPMENT OF MATHEMATICALMODEL (USING (DOE PC IV )).
ON 18-02-2010
ANALYSING THE RESULTS(USING (MINITAB)).
ON 02-03-2010
CONFIRMATORY TESTS 25-03-2010 TO 04-04-2010
PREPARATION OF REPORTS. BEFORE 7-04-2010
SCHEDULE OF WORKSSCHEDULE OF WORKS
-
8/8/2019 3rd Review Batch 7
29/29