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
 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.
Effect of Composition on Corrosion Resistance of High-
Alloy Austenitic Stainless Steel Weld Metals was published
by P.I. Marshall and T.G. Gooch in December 1992 which
stated the composition of stainless steel alloys for
corrosion resistance in them.

M. Vasudevan and A.K. Bhaduri in 2004 published their

work on Prediction of ‘Ferrite Number in Stainless Steel
Welds’ in which a model was developed for accurate
composition only dependent FN prediction method
currently reported in literature.
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.
 The standard value assigned to austenitic stainless steel to
denote 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 and

corrosion resistance properties.

 Hence, control of ferrite in stainless steel cladding is essential to

obtain the required mechanical and corrosion-resistant
properties.

 Hence, control of ferrite in stainless steel is essential to obtain

required corrosion-resistant properties ,for which we optimize
the parameters in welding to weld a stainless steel grade 202
plate with optimum ferrite number.
 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 cylinder
passes through the welding head around the electrode,
which surrounds the arc and protects the weld from
atmospheric effects.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 The experiments were
conducted using Lincoln
V 350 Pro Electric Digital
Welding Machine.

 A servo motor driven

manipulator was used to
maintain uniform
welding speed.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

 The welding gun is held stationary in

a frame above the table and it is
provided with an attachment for
setting the required welding gun
angle.

 Argon is used as the shielding gas

and its flow rate is varied for each
experiment as per the requirements.
PLAN OF WORK
Identifying the process variables

Developing the design matrix

Conducting the experiments as per the design matrix

Development of mathematical models

Evaluation of coefficients of the models

Checking adequacy of the models

Testing the regression coefficients of the models

Validation of the mathematical models

Analyzing the
results
 LIMITS OF PROCESS VARIABLES
Factor Upper Lower
limit limit
 The design plan was
Welding 110 70
decided based on the
current (I) amps
practical considerations
for the system
Welding 120 80
speed (V)
mm/min
Gas flow rate 25 5
(Q) liter/min
Gun 90 50
Angle (θ)
Degrees
Plate Length (L) 200 100
mm
LIMITS OF PROCESS VARIABLES

Process Limits
parameters -2 -1 0 +1 +2

Welding 70 80 90 100 110

current amps

Welding 80 90 100 110 120

Speed
mm/min
Gas flow rate 5 10 15 20 25
Liter/min
Gun angle 50 60 70 80 90
Degrees
Plate Length 100 125 150 175 200
mm
DETERMINATION OF FERRITE NUMBER

The ferrite number was measured using the Feritscope.

DESIGN MATRIX
The design matrix chosen
to conduct the experiments
was five factor, five levels
central composite rotatable
designs consisting of 32 sets
of coded conditions .
This design matrix
comprises a full replication
factorial design i.e. 24 = 16
factorial design plus 7 center
points and 8 star points.
MATHEMATICAL MODEL

The mathematical model was developed using quality america pc IV DOE software

Fn= 0.669-0.006*Ө2-0.086*V2-0.037*L2+0.094*I2-0.052*V2*V2 -
0.029*L2*L2+0.006*Q2*Q2+0.073*Ө2*V2-0.07*Ө2*L2-
0.004*Ө2*I2+0.05*V2*L2-0.042*V2*I2+0.012*I2*Q2

where, GUN ANGLE (θ)

WELDING SPEED (V)
PLATE LENGTH (L)
WELDING CURRENT (I)
GAS FLOW RATE (Q)
MODEL CALCULATION
F-ratio = M.S-LACK OF FIT / M.S PURE ERROR
= 2.355

F-ratio (12,7) < STD . TAB .VALUE

LACK OF FIT D.F = 12
PURE ERROR D.F = 7 2.355 < 3.57
F-ratio (12,7)= 3.57

R-ratio = M.S-FACTORS / M.S PURE ERROR

= 1022.918 R-ratio (13,7) > STD . TAB .VALUE
LACK OF FIT D.F = 13 1022.910 > 3.55
PURE ERROR D.F = 7
F-ratio (13,7)= 3.55

HENCE THE MODEL IS ADEQUATE

ERROR CALCULATION

Observe predicte error Observe predicte error

d d d d
0.62 0.62 -0.64516 0.58 0.58 0.344828
0.7 0.68 2.714286
0.64 0.64 0.3125
0.64 0.66 -2.65625
0.31 0.31 -1.29032
0.64 0.63 1.09375
0.57 0.57 -0.35088
0.29 0.29 0.344828
0.6 0.61 -2.33333
0.63 0.63 0.47619
0.31 0.30 3.225806 0.49 0.48 2.244898
0.45 0.46 -1.33333 0.49 0.48 1.836735

0.48 0.48 -0.41667 0.85 0.86 -0.82353

0.9 0.90 -0.44444 0.7 0.69 1

0.9 0.90 -0.22222

0.7 0.69 1 SINCE R2 VALUE IS NEAR BY 1 THE
0.68 0.67 1.617647 OBSERVED VALUE AND THE
0.42 0.43 -1.42857
0.68 0.67 1.617647 PREDICTE DVALUE HAVE CLOSE
0.68 0.67 1.764706
0.67 0.67 0.149254
RELATION AND ARE MEANT TO BE
0.89 0.89 -0.44944 EQUAL.
0.66 0.67 -1.36364
0.56 0.56 -0.71429 0.67 0.67 0.149254
0.56 0.57 -1.42857 0.66 0.67 -1.36364
RESULTS 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 Surface Plot of C6 vs C2, C1

Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C1 Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C1

Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C1 Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C1

Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C1 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C1

Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C2 Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C2

Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C2 Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C2

Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C2 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C2

Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C3 Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C3

Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C3 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C3

Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C4 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C4

 Surface Plot of C6 vs C2, C1
Hold Values
C3 0
C4 0
C5 0

C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)

C2, WELDING SPEED
(V)
C6, FN
0.75
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
0.50

0.25 2
C4, WELDING
0.00
0
CURRENT (I)
-2
0 -2
C2, WELDING SPEED (V)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
2
(Q)
C6, FN

Contour Plot of C6 vs C2, C1

2
C6
< 0.2
C2, WELDI NG SPEED (V)

0.2 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.6
1 0.6 – 0.8
> 0.8

Hold Values
C3 0
C4 0
0
C5 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C1
Hold Values
C2 0
C4 0
C5 0

0.8

C6, FN 0.6 C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)

0.4 2
C2, WELDING SPEED
0.2
(V)
0
-2
C3, PLA TE LENGTH ( L) C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
0 -2
2 C4, WELDING
C1, GUN A NGLE (θ)
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C1 C6, FN
2
C6
< 0.2
0.2 – 0.3
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)

0.3 – 0.4
1 0.4 – 0.5
0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
0.7 – 0.8
> 0.8
0
Hold Values
C2 0
C4 0
C5 0
-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C1
Hold Values
C2 0
C3 0
C5 0

0.9

C6, FN 0.7
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
2
0.5
C2, WELDING SPEED
-2
0
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT ( I ) (V)
0
2
-2
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C1, GUN A NGLE ( θ)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C1
(Q)
2
C6, FN
C6
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT (I )

< 0.5
0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
1 0.7 – 0.8
> 0.8

Hold Values
C2 0
C3 0
0
C5 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C1
Hold Values
C2 0
C3 0
C4 0

0.700

C6, FN
0.675
2
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
0.650 0
C5, GA S FLOW RA TE ( Q) C2, WELDING SPEED
-2
0
2
-2 (V)
C1 , GUN A NGLE ( θ)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C1
(Q)
2
C6 C6, FN
< 0.66
C5, GAS FLOW RATE (Q)

0.66 – 0.67
0.67 – 0.68
1 0.68 – 0.69
0.69 – 0.70
> 0.70

Hold Values
C2 0
0
C3 0
C4 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C3, C2
Hold Values
C1 0
C4 0
C5 0

0.75

C6, FN 0.50

0.25 2
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
0.00 0
-2
C3, PLA T E LENGTH ( L) C2, WELDING SPEED
0
2
-2
(V)
C2, WELDI NG SPEED (V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C3, C2 C5, GAS FLOW RATE
2
(Q)
C6
< 0.1
C6, FN
0.1 – 0.2
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)

0.2 – 0.3
1 0.3 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.5
0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
> 0.7
0
Hold Values
C1 0
C4 0
C5 0
-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C2, WELDI NG SPEED (V)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C2
Hold Values
C1 0
C3 0
C5 0

1.0

0.8
C6, FN
0.6
2
0.4
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
0
-2
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT (I ) C2, WELDING SPEED
0
2
-2
(V)
C2, WELDI NG SPEED ( V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C2 C5, GAS FLOW RATE
2
(Q)
C6
C6, FN
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT (I )

< 0.3
0.3 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.5
1 0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
0.7 – 0.8
0.8 – 0.9
> 0.9
0
Hold Values
C1 0
C3 0
C5 0
-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C2, WELDI NG SPEED (V)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C2
Hold Values
C1 0
C3 0
C4 0

0.8

0.6
C6, FN
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
0.4 2
C2, WELDING SPEED
0
C5, GA S FLOW RA TE ( Q)
(V)
-2
0 -2 C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
2
C2, WELDI NG SPEED ( V) C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
(Q)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C2
C6, FN
2
C6
< 0.3
C5, GAS FLOW RATE (Q)

0.3 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.5
1 0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
> 0.7

Hold Values
C1 0
0
C3 0
C4 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C2, WELDI NG SPEED (V)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C4, C3
Hold Values
C1 0
C2 0
C5 0

0.8

C6, FN 0.6

2
0.4

0
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT ( I )
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
-2
0 -2 C2, WELDING SPEED
2
C3, PLA TE LENGTH ( L) (V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C4, C3 C5, GAS FLOW RATE
2
C6
(Q)
C6, FN
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT (I )

< 0.3
0.3 – 0.4
0.4 – 0.5
1 0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
0.7 – 0.8
> 0.8

Hold Values
0
C1 0
C2 0
C5 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C3
Hold Values
C1 0
C2 0
C4 0

0.7

C6, FN 0.6

2
0.5

-2
0
C5, GA S FLOW RA TE ( Q) C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
0
2
-2 C2, WELDING SPEED
C3, PLA TE LENGTH (L)
(V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C3
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
2
C6
< 0.50
(Q)
C6, FN
C5, GAS FLOW RATE (Q)

0.50 – 0.55
0.55 – 0.60
1 0.60 – 0.65
0.65 – 0.70
> 0.70

Hold Values
C1 0
0
C2 0
C4 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
 Surface Plot of C6 vs C5, C4
Hold Values
C1 0
C2 0
C3 0

0.8

C6, FN

0.6
2

0.4 0
C5, GA S FLOW RA TE (Q)
C1, GUN ANGLE (θ)
-2
0
2
-2 C2, WELDING SPEED
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT ( I ) (V)
C3, PLATE LENGTH (L)
C4, WELDING
CURRENT (I)
Contour Plot of C6 vs C5, C4
2
C5, GAS FLOW RATE
C6
< 0.5
(Q)
C6, FN
C5, GAS FLOW RATE (Q)

0.5 – 0.6
0.6 – 0.7
1 0.7 – 0.8
0.8 – 0.9
> 0.9

Hold Values
C1 0
0
C2 0
C3 0

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
C4, WELDI NG CURRENT (I )
 SCHEDULE OF WORKS
ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE
COLLECTION OF INFORMATION 07-09-2009 TO 28-09-2009
BUYING THE PLATES AND MATERIALS ON 16-12-2009
REQUIRED.
WELDING PROCESS. 28-12-2009 TO 04-01-2010
DETERMINATION OF FERRITE ON 18-01-2010
NUMBER.
DEVELOPMENT THE DESIGN MATRIX. 20-01-2010 TO 27-01-2010

DEVELOPMENT OF MATHEMATICAL ON 18-02-2010

MODEL (USING (DOE PC IV )).

ANALYSING THE RESULTS ON 02-03-2010

(USING (MINITAB)).

CONFIRMATORY TESTS 25-03-2010 TO 04-04-2010

PREPARATION OF REPORTS. BEFORE 7-04-2010