Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Chapter 6
6.1 INTRODUCTION
investigated.
consider any possible interaction between the factors and they are
less efficient.
phase b) the conducting phase and c) the analysis phase. The block
welding process are rpm, friction time, forging time, friction pressure
trail details are given in Table 6.1 and Table 6.2 respectively.
temperature.
populations are equal or not. The null hypothesis states that all
that at least one is different. The experimental data for each of the
presented in the Table 6.3, Table 6.4 and Table 6.5 respectively. It
includes the source of variation, their degrees of freedom and the total
also included into the ANOVA table to find out whether the predictors
ratio against a critical F found in the table or use the p--value to find
an alpha value of 0.05. If the p-value is lower than 0.05, then the
factor is significant.
STRENGTH
Table 6.3 Analysis of variance for UTS, using adjusted SS for tests
Figure 6.2 Pie chart for percentage contribution for ultimate tensile
strength
143
pressure are the most significant factor and forging time has least
different and in general the p value have to be less than 0.05 to say
STRENGTH
The main effect plots for ultimate tensile strength in shown in Figure
6.3.
linking. The steeper the slope of the line, the greater is the magnitude
of the main effect. The main effect plots for the rpm, friction pressure,
144
friction time, forging pressure and forging time are placed together in
plasticity for welding. With increase in friction time the heat at the
tensile strength.
STRENGTH
one factor depends on the level of the other factor. Interaction plots
Table 6.4 Analysis of variance for upset, using adjusted SS for tests
From the Figure 6.5 it is observed that friction time has highest
contribution of 54%.
The main effect plots for upset are given in Figure 6.6.
time.
148
TEMPERATURE
layer formation and it is responsible for brittle failure. The Anova for
Figure 6.8 Pie chart for percentage contribution for weld interface
temperature
forging pressure and friction time and also between friction time and
forging time.
response.
for one unit of change in the predictor while holding other predictors
in the model constant. P-value for each coefficient tests the null
predictor values.
152
STRENGTH
UTS = 253 - 0.0326 RPM - 0.364 FRP - 12.2 FT + 0.610 FOP - 0.28 FOT (6.1)
strength
Upset = - 13.1 + 0.00427 RPM + 0.0828 FRP + 4.51 FT + 0.0406 FOP - 0.433 FOT
(6.2)
in Figure 6.12.
Temp = 81.9 + 0.110 RPM + 2.50 FRP + 93.5 FT - 1.33 FOP - 24.0 FOT (6.3)
interface temperature
154
6.5 OPTIMIZATION
higher than parent material and upset and temperature are within
forging pressure 140 MPa and forging time 6 second. The maximum
Figure 6.14 Contour plot for UTS vs friction pressure and forging
pressure
Figure 6.15 Contour plot for UTS vs RPM and forging pressure
Figure 6.16 Contour plot for UTS vs RPM and friction pressure
156
Figure 6.17 Contour plot for UTS vs friction pressure and friction time
Figure 6.18 Contour plot for upset vs friction pressure and friction
time
Figure 6.19 Contour plot for upset vs friction pressure and forging
pressure
157
Figure 6.20 Contour plot for upset vs friction time and forging
pressure
Figure 6.22 Contour plot for temperature vs friction time and forging
pressure
158
TENSILE STRENGTH
displacement etc.
The acceptance criteria for good weld strength for Al 6061 to SS 304
270 C.
chapter 7)
The typical photo graph for good weld and bad weld is shown in
Figure 6.27 and Figure 6.28 and a typical DAS graph for good weld