Abstract

Two welding methods of FCAW (Flux-cored arc welding) + FCAW, and FCAW + GTAW (Gas tungsten arc welding) were compared to identify effective routes for STS 316L/A516-70N clad stainless steel. Since the welding speed of the FCAW + GTAW welding method is slower than that of the FCAW + FCAW welding method, the amount of heat input is large, the size of the heat-affected zone formed is larger, and the amount of angular deformation is also large. The microstructure and deformation of the welding specimens were investigated by computational simulation, and the results were compared with calculated results for actual specimens. The results were very similar, thus confirming the high accuracy of the calculation. After measuring the hardness value of the actual welded specimens, the specimen welded by the FCAW + FCAW welding method was found to have a higher hardness value. The hardness of the welded portion of the FCAW + GTAW specimen tests tended to remain at nearly the same value throughout the specimen, indicating that the FCAW + GTAW hardness profile is desirable. In the computer simulation, butt welding was used to set the optimal heat source conditions for the two welding methods, and the effect of heat formed during welding was confirmed using the thermal analysis results according to the conditions. Based on the butt welding conditions, the residual stress and strain for the two welding methods are discussed, using calculations for the welding of C-seam (circumferential seam) and L-seam (longitudinal seam) used in the manufacture of pressure vessels.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call