CHAPTER 1

Introduction
1.1 Submerged Arc Welding
The SAW process is often preferred because it offers high production rate, high melting
efficiency, ease of automation and low operator skill requirement. It was first used in
industries in the mid 1930s as a single-wire welding system. The operating variables used in
the SAW process results in varying heat input in the weldment The consequence of this is
the deterioration of the chemical constituents of the weld bead. Therefore, the properties of
the parent metal cannot adequately match those of the weldment to ensure good
performance in service, especially in low temperature services. An arc is maintained
between the end of a bare wire electrode and the work. As the electrode is melted, it is fed
into the arc by a set of rolls, driven by a governed motor. Wire feed speed is automatically
controlled to equal the rate at which the electrode is melted, thus arc length is constant
(similar to mig/mag - constant voltage). The arc operates under a layer of granular flux,
hence submerged arc. Some of the flux melts to provide a protective blanket over the weld
pool. The remainder of the flux is unaffected and can be recovered and re-used, provided it
is dry and not contaminated. A semi-automatic version is available in which the operator has
control of a welding gun that carries a small quantity of flux in a hopper

Fig. 1.1 SAW setup diagram

1

In submerged arc welding a mineral weld flux layer protects the welding point and the
freezing weld from the influence of the surrounding atmosphere, The arc burns in a cavity
filled with ionised gases and vapours where the droplets from the continuously- fed wire
electrode are transferred into the weld pool. Unfused flux can be extracted from behind the
welding head and subsequently recycled.
Main components of a submerged arc welding unit are: The wire electrode reel, the wire feed
motor equipped with grooved wire feed rolls which are suitable for the demanded wire
diameters, a wire straigthener as well as a torch head for current transmission, Flux supply is
carried out via a hose from the flux container to the feeding hopper which is mounted on the
torch head. Depending on the degree of automation it is possible to install a flux excess
pickup behind the torch. Submerged arc welding can be operated using either an a.c. power
source or a d.c. power source where the electrode is normally connected to the positive
terminal. Welding advance is provided by the welding machine or by workpiece movement.
Submerged arc welding is used in the pipe manufacturing, windmill construction, in pressure
vessel construction and in shipbuilding. Its welding procedure is characterized by the
combination and interaction of multiple parameters: e.g. heat input, voltage, current, plate
preparation and welding speed.

Fig. 1.2 SAW process and components

1.2 Process features

Similar to MIG welding, SAW involves formation of an arc between a continuously-fed bare
wire electrode and the workpiece. The process uses a flux to generate protective gases and
slag, and to add alloying elements to the weld pool. A shielding gas is not required. Prior to
welding, a thin layer of flux powder is placed on the workpiece surface. The arc moves along
the joint line and as it does so, excess flux is recycled via a hopper. Remaining fused slag
layers can be easily removed after welding. As the arc is completely covered by the flux
layer, heat loss is extremely low. This produces a thermal efficiency as high as 60%
(compared with 25% for manual metal arc). There is no visible arc light, welding is spatterfree and there is no need for fume extraction.

1.3 Operating characteristics

SAW is usually operated as a fully-mechanised or automatic process, but it can be semiautomatic. Welding parameters: current, arc voltage and travel speed all affect bead shape,
depth of penetration and chemical composition of the deposited weld metal. Because the
operator cannot see the weld pool, greater reliance must be placed on parameter settings.

1.4 Process variants

According to material thickness, joint type and size of component, varying the following can
increase deposition rate and improve bead shape.

Fig. 1.3 Effect of process variants on deposition rate

1.4.1 Wire
SAW is normally operated with a single wire on either AC or DC current. Common variants
are:

twin wire
3

multiple wire (tandem or triple)

single wire with hot or cold

metal powder addition

tubular wire

All contribute to improved productivity through a marked increase in weld metal deposition
rates and/or travel speeds.
A narrow gap process variant is also established, which utilises a two or three bead per layer
deposition technique. See what is narrow gap welding?
1.4.2 Flux
Fluxes used in SAW are granular fusible minerals containing oxides of manganese, silicon,
titanium, aluminium, calcium, zirconium, magnesium and other compounds such as calcium
fluoride. The flux is specially formulated to be compatible with a given electrode wire type
so that the combination of flux and wire yields desired mechanical properties. All fluxes react
with the weld pool to produce the weld metal chemical composition and mechanical
properties. It is common practice to refer to fluxes as 'active' if they add manganese and
silicon to the weld, the amount of manganese and silicon added is influenced by the arc
voltage and the welding current level. The the main types of flux for SAW are:

Bonded fluxes - produced by drying the ingredients, then bonding them with a low
melting point compound such as a sodium silicate. Most bonded fluxes contain metallic
deoxidisers which help to prevent weldporosity. These fluxes are effective over rust and
mill scale.

Fused fluxes - produced by mixing the ingredients, then melting them in an electric
furnace to form a chemically homogeneous product, cooled and ground to the required
particle size. Smooth stable arcs, with welding currents up to 2000A and consistent weld
metal properties, are the main attraction of these fluxes.

1.5 Applications of SAW

SAW is ideally suited for longitudinal and circumferential butt and fillet welds. However,
because of high fluidity of the weld pool, molten slag and loose flux layer, welding is
generally carried out on butt joints in the flat position and fillet joints in both the flat and
4

horizontal-vertical positions. For circumferential joints, the workpiece is rotated under a

fixed welding head with welding taking place in the flat position. Depending on material
thickness, either single-pass, two-pass or multipass weld procedures can be carried out. There
is virtually no restriction on the material thickness, provided a suitable joint preparation is
adopted. Most commonly welded materials are carbon-manganese steels, low alloy steels and
stainless steels, although the process is capable of welding some non-ferrous materials with
judicious choice of electrode filler wire and flux combinations.

1.6 Stainless Steel 304

Stainless steel is most widely used in industry and in daily life products due to its good
mechanical properties. SS 304 is used world widely as it is easily available and have good
properties discussed below. Properties of SS 304 are
1)
2)
3)
4)

High corrosion resistance

Good heat resistance
Excellent weldability
High machining rates

1.7 Effects of Various Elements on the Mechanical Properties of Steel

1.7.1 Effect of Manganese
Manganese increases hardenability and tensile strength of steel, but to a lesser extent than
carbon. It is also able to decrease the critical cooling rate during hardening, thus increasing
the steels hardenability much more efficient than any other alloying elements. Manganese
also tends to increase the rate of carbon penetration during carburizing and acts as a mild
deoxidizing agent. However when too high carbon and too high manganese accompany each
other, embrittlement sets in. Manganese is capable to form Manganese Sulphide (MnS) with
sulphur, which is beneficial to machining. At the same time, it counters the brittleness from
sulphur and is beneficial to the surface finish of carbon steel.[33]
For welding purposes, the ratio of manganese to sulphur should be at least 10 to 1.
Manganese content of less than 0.30% may promote internal porosity and cracking in the
weld bead, cracking can also result if the content is over 0.80%. Steel with low Manganese
Sulphide ratio may contain sulphur in the form of iron Sulphide (FeS), which can cause
cracking (a hot-short condition) in the weld[32, 35]
1.7.2 Effect of Phosphorus
5

Phosphorus increases strength and hardness, but at the expense of ductility and impact to
toughness, especially in higher carbon steels that are quenched and tempered. As such its
content in most steel is limited to a maximum of 0.05%. Phosphorus prevents the sticking of
light-gage sheets when it is used as an alloy in steel. It strengthens low carbon steel to a
degree, increases resistance to corrosion and improves machinability in free-cutting steels. In
terms of welding, phosphorus content of over 0.04% makes weld brittle and increases the
tendency to crack. The surface tension of the molten weld metal is lowered, making it
difficult to control.[33,34]
1.7.3 Effect of Sulphur
Sulphur improves machinability but lowers transverse ductility and notched impact
toughness and has little effects on the longitudinal mechanical properties. Its content is
limited to 0.05% in steels but is added to freecutting steels in amount up to 0.35% with the
manganese content increased to counter any detrimental effects since sulphur is beneficial to
machining.[32] For welding, weldability decreases with increasing sulphur content. Sulphur
is detrimental to surface quality in low carbon and low manganese steels and it promotes hot
shortness in welding with the tendency increasing with increased sulphur.[34]
1.7.4 Effect of Silicon
Silicon increases strength and hardness but to a lesser extent than manganese. It is one of the
principal deoxidizers used in the making of steels to improve soundness, i.e. to be free from
defects, decays or damages. Silicon is present in all steels to a certain extent. Its content can
be up to 4% for electric sheets that are widely used in alternating current magnetic circuits.
[32]
In welding, silicon is detrimental to surface quality, especially in the low carbon,
resulphurized grades. It aggravates cracking tendencies when the carbon content is fairly
high. For best welding condition, silicon content should not exceed 0.10%. However,
amounts up to 0.30% are not as serious as high sulphur or phosphorus content.[34]
For galvanizing purposes, steels containing more than 0.04% silicon can greatly affect the
thickness and appearance of the galvanized coating. This will result in thick coatings
consisting mainly zinc-iron alloys and the surface has a dark and dull finish. But it provides
as much corrosion protection as a shiny galvanized coating where the outer layer is pure zinc.
[33]
6

1.7.5 Effect of Carbon

Carbon content is important to the overall strength and hardness of the weld metal. The
location of carbon atoms, whether they remain in solution or if they are precipitated,
determines whether the steel is martensitic or ferritic. The level of carbon is critical for
optimising microstructure and mechanical properties.
Greater additions of carbon lowers the martensite transformation temperature. Increasing the
amount of martensite with higher carbon in the HAZ raises the risk of hydrogen cracking and
also decreases toughness. At too low carbon contents ferrite may form so carbon is made up
for by increasing the alloying content.
The carbon content is also directly related to the risk of solidification cracking. At high
carbon levels greater amounts of Mn and lower levels of S are required in order to avoid this
type of cracking. The carbon and sulphur content is generally kept low in welding
consumables and solidification cracking is not a major problem [36].
1.7.6 Effect of Nickel
Nickel improves toughness, adds a solid solution hardening effect and increases quench
hardenability [38]. It is also believed to influence the stacking fault energy of ferrite in such a
manner that plastic deformation is accommodated at low temperatures [37].
1.7.7 Effect of Chromium and Molybdenum
These elements are well known in the alloying of steel. Chromium stabilises ferrite but slows
down transformation rate. It also increases hardness and strength and has a greater influence
when manganese is at low concentrations [39]. With chromium additions, toughness falls as
reported in studies of mechanical properties of high strength steel weld metals. It provides
solid solution strengthening and promotes carbide formation. Both chromium also increases
hardenability and gives both oxidation 21 and corrosion resistance [38]. Chromium and
molybdenum increase resistance to high temperature corrosion and are well known for giving
resistance against creep in heat resistant steels.

CHAPTER 2
Literature Survey
7

2.1 Literature
1994: N.D Pandey, A. Bharti & R.S. Gupta[3] have studied the influence of submerged arc
welding (SAW) parameters and flux basicity index on the weld chemistry and transfer of
elements such as manganese, silicon, carbon and sulphur. They have used five fluxes and
different values of the welding parameters; the welding speed was being kept constant to
produce weld bead on a mild-steel plate. The study was mainly aimed at studying whether
welding parameters or fluxes were more effective on the element transfer and weld
composition.
From the study; finally it was concluded that:
1. For controlling the weld-metal composition, welding voltage was more effective than
is welding current.
2. The basicity index value of fluxes had a definite relationship with silicon but the same
cannot be correlated with the weld-metal manganese, carbon and sulphur contents.
3. The weld-metal composition showed, in general, gain of silicon and loss of carbon,
manganese and sulphur elements. The results showed that welding current and
voltage have an appreciable influence on element transfer, as well as on weld
composition.
1996: H.L Tsai, Y.L Tarng & C.M Tseng[4] have done optimisation of submerged arc
welding process parameters in hardfacing. In this they used a neutral network approach for
modeling and optimisation of SAW process. i.e a freeforward neutral network to construct
the SAW process model. They have used a 30mm thick plate of mild steel of dimensions
120x 80mm. Before use the flux baked at 523 K for two hours. They admitted that
complicated relationship can be obtained between the process parameters and welding
performance. The efficiency of determining optimal SAW process parameter in hardfacing of
steel mill roll can be improved.
1997a: Chandel R.S, Seow H P[22] with the help of their study showed the theoretical
predictions of the effect of current, electrode polarity, electrode diameter and electrode
extension on the melting rate , bead height, bead width and weld penetration, in submerged
arc welding.
1997b: Khallaf M E, Ibrahim M A, El-Mahallawy N A and Taha M A[23] through their study
they described cracking behaviour during the submerged arc welding of medium carbon steel
8

plates and found that the cracking susceptibility increases with an increase in the welding
current and decreases with an increase in the welding speed or the electrode wire feed rate. It
also increases with increases in the plate rolling reduction ratio and with decrease in the plate
thickness.
1998: R. S. CHANDEL, H. P. SEOW, F. L. CHEONG[18] through their study on mild steel
plates 350x220x25mm as test material, showed that The impact properties of welds made
with powder addition are superior. The weld metal is stronger and tougher than the base
metal.
1999a: Gunaraj & Murugan[24] studied the effect of controllable process variables on the
heat input and the area of the heat-affected zone (HAZ) for bead-on-plate and bead-on joint
welding using mathematical models developed for the submerged arc welding of pipes. A
comparative study of the area of the heat-effected zone between bead-on-plate and bead-onjoint welding was then carried out.
2000: Y.S Tarng, W.H Yang & S.C Juang[5] have Used Fuzzy Logic in the Taguchi Method
for the Optimisation of the Submerged Arc Welding Process. They have used L 8 in this study
which means 9 runs and the levels are 3. They have used a mild steel plate of 24mm. having
dimensions 120mm x 60 mm. through their study they show that the performance
characteristics of the Saw process such as deposition rate, dilution and hardness are improved
together by using grey-relation.
2001a: Vera Lu cia Othero de Brito, Herman Jacobus Cornelis Voorwald[6] The aim of
their work is to evaluate the effect of a postweld heat treatment (PWHT) on the
microstructure and mechanical properties of the base metal, heat-affected zone (HAZ) and
weld metal of an submerged arc welded pressure vessel steel. The material used was ASTM
A537 C1 steel.
From this study they concluded that
1. Reduced tensile properties for the base metal. However both yield strength and tensile
strength were slightly above the lower limits established by ASTM.
2. Higher toughness for the weld metal and a reduction of this property for the HAZ and
base metal.

2001b: H.C. Wikle, S. Kottilingam, R.H Zee[19] Through their study by doing
experimentation on plain carbon steel as test material they showed that variation in the plate
gap resulted in depressions where both the weld bead height and width varies significantly.
2001c: Wen SW, Hilton P and Farrugia D C J[25] A multi wire SAW process was modeled
using a general purpose finite element package for thick wall line pipes. It was shown that
the geometric distortion and residual stresses and strains can be minimized through process
optimization.
2002: Y.S. Tarng, S.C. Juang, C.H. Chang[7] have used grey-based Taguchi methods to
determine submerged arc welding process parameters in hardfacing. For Experimentation
they deposited a martensitic stainless steel hardfacing layer on 30x80x120mm mild steel
plate by SAW process. Using grey relation they have done evaluations on dilution rate,
hardness and deposition rate, finally done the analysis of variance.
From this study they concluded that:The performance characteristics such as harness, dilution and deposition rate are improved
together by using grey relation.
2003: Ana Ma. Paniagua-Mercado, Paulino Estrada-Diaz, Victor M. Lopez-Hirata[8] A
study of chemical and structural characterization of fluxes for submerged-arc welding was
conducted. Three flux formulations were prepared using mineral oxides for agglomerating
and sintering processes. A commercial agglomerated and sintered flux was used for
comparison. The four fluxes were then analyzed chemically by atomic absorption and X-ray
diffraction to determinate the quantity and type of oxides formed. Differential thermal
analysis was carried out from 1000 to 1350 0C in order to determine the temperatures for
phase transformations and melting of the different compounds formed in the sintering
process.
From this study they concluded that:The determination of various phases in fluxes helps to identify the different type of oxides
and radicals formed during sintering of intial materials. This quantification makes it possible
to know which anions and cations would be present in the electric arc.
2004: Pandey S[26] proposed a relationship between welding current and direct SAW
process parameters using two level half factorial design. Interactive effects of direct
parameters were also studied.
10

2005: N. Murugan, V. Gunaraj[9] Through their study on prediction and control of weld bead
geometry and shape relationships in submerged arc welding of pipes they concluded that
1. Arc voltage had a less significant negative effect on penetration and reinforcement
but had a positive effect on bead width, penetration size factor and reinforcement
form factor.
2. Wire feed rate had a significant positive effect but welding speed had an appreciable
negative effect on most of the important bead parameters. Penetration increased by
about 1.3mm as wire feed rate was increased from 2 to +2 limit whereas penetration
decreased by about 1mm as welding speed was increased from 2 to +2 limit.
2006a: P. Kanjilal, T.K. Pal, S.K. Majumdar[10] have studied the Combined effect of flux
and welding parameters on chemical composition and mechanical properties of submerged
arc weld metal. For experimentation they have used low carbon steel plate of 18mm
thickness. The test regarding weld metal composition is done. Also the behavior of
mechanical property was also studied.
From this study they concluded that:1. Among the welding parameters, polarity has a profound influence on weld metal
chemical composition.
2. Welding speed influences weld metal carbon content through oxidation reaction;
whereas weld metal sulphur and phosphorous content are affected by dilution of weld
deposit.
3. Welding current influences weld metal manganese content through slagmetal
4.

reaction.
Transfer of nickel from flux to weld, is found to be impeded by oxides formed during

slagmetal reaction.
5. Weld metal yield strength and hardness are mainly determined by welding
parameters; whereas the impact toughness is determined by flux mixtures variables.
2006b: S.D. Bhole, J.B. Nemade, L. Collins, Cheng Liu[20] through their study they showed
that the addition of Mo in the range 0.8170.881 wt.% resulted in a decrease of fracture
appearance transition temperature (FATT) and an increase of impact toughness.
When Ni is added alone in the range of 2.033.75 wt.%, the weld metal shows a lower
toughness and an increased FATT.
2006c: T. Kannan, N. Murugan[21] with the hep of their experimentation they have
concluded that Dilution increases with the rise in welding current and welding speed and
11

decreases with the rise in nozzle-to-plate distance and welding torch angle. Weld bead width
increases with the rise in welding current. Penetration increases with the rise in welding
current and welding speed and decreases with the rise in nozzle-to-plate distance and welding
torch angle. Bead width increases with the increase in welding current at all levels of welding
speed.
2007: S Kumanan, J Edwin Raja Dhas & K Gowthaman[13] have studied the determination
of submerged arc welding process parameters using taguchi method & regression analysis.
The test material was mild steel plates of 500x50x6mm dimensions. Using multiple
regression analysis they concluded that Welding current and arc voltage are significant
welding process parameters that affect the bead width.
2008a: Saurav Datta, Asish Bandyopadhyay & Pradip Kumar Pal[14] have studied the grey
based taguchi method for optimisaion of bead geometry in submerged arc bead on plate
welding. They have used L25 orthogonal array on the test material of mild steel plates of
100x40x10mm.with the grey relation and Analysis of variance they concluded that the area
of HAZ must be minimum to avoid microstructural changes. The traverse speed is most
significant factor to minimize area of HAZ.
2008b: Serdar Karaog lu, Abdullah Secgin[11] have done Sensitivity analysis of
submerged arc welding process parameters. The material used for testing is mild steel plate
of 108x80x10mm size. The mathematical models were constructed using regression analysis.
After carrying out a sensitivity analysis using developed empirical equations, relative effects
of input parameters on output parameters are obtained. Effects of all three design parameters
on the bead width and bead height show that even small changes in these parameters play an
important role in the quality of welding operation.
From this study they concluded that:1.

Bead width is more sensitive to voltage and speed variations than that of bead height

2.

and penetration.
In order to decrease the bead height, higher values of voltage and speed can be

considered.
3. Current is the most important parameter in determining the penetration. Penetration is
almost non-sensitive to variations in voltage and speed. Therefore, voltage and speed
cannot be effectively used to control penetration.
12

4. At maximum heat input level (higher levels of current and voltage, and lower level of
welding speed), current sensitivity of penetration, and speed sensitivity of bead width
reach their maximum values.
2008c: Saurav Datta, Asish Bandyopadhyay & Pradip Kumar Pal[15] have used application
of taguchi philosophy for parametric optimization of bead geometry and HAZ width in
submerged arc welding using mixture of fresh flux and fused flux. The experiment was
performed on mild steel plate of 100x40x12mm using L 9 orthogonal array. From this they
concluded that
1. 10% slag mix can be used to obtain optimum bead width and depth of HAZ.
2. 15 to 20% slag mix for reinforcement and depth of penetration.
2009: Kook-soo Bang, Chan Park, Hong-chul Jung, and Jong-bong Lee[12] have studied
Effect of Flux Composition on the Element Transfer and Mechanical Properties of Weld
Metal in Submerged Arc Welding. Experimentation is done by single and multi pass welds.
The test material was low carbon steel plate of 300x500x34mm. The single V- groove welds
were made with gauge length of 24mm.Pcm index of each weld metal is calculated to
compare the chemical composition.
From this study they concluded that:1. Both carbon and manganese show negative quantity in most combinations, indicating
transfer from the weld metal to the slag.
2. The impact toughness of the weld metal increases with an increase of flux basicity
through a reduction of the oxygen content in the weld metal.
2011a: Ghosh A, Chattopadhyaya S, Das R K and Sarkar P K[27] addressed the issue
associated with the uncertainties involved with the heat affected zone (HAZ) in and around
the weldment produced by SAW process. The most intriguing issue is about HAZ softening
that imparts some uncertainties in the welded quality. It increases the probability of fatigue
failures at the weakest zones caused by the heating and cooling cycle of the weld zone. They
assessed the heat affected zone of submerged arc welding of structural steel plates through
the analysis of the grain structure by means of digital image processing techniques. It was
concluded that the grains are predominantly of smaller variety and the counts for larger grain
are almost negligible. The absence of larger size grains in the image vouch for the soundness
of the weld in comparison to the competing welding methodologies of structural steel plates.

13

2011b: Dhas J E R and Kumanan S[28] used Taguchis design of experiments and regression
analysis to establish inputoutput relationships of the process. By this relationship, an
attempt was made to minimize weld bead width, a good indicator of bead geometry, using
optimization procedures based on the genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm
optimization (PSO) algorithm to determine optimal weld parameters.
2011c: Ghosh A, Chattopadhyaya S, Das R K and Sarkar P K[29] used graphical technique to
predict submerged arc welding yield parameters and studied the effect of main factors, viz.
current, wire feed rate, travel speed and stick out and the interactions among the main factors
on the welding bead parameters. The interactions depicted the level of confounded character
of the main factors with respect to the significant yield parameters of the process.
2012a: A. Bhattacharya, A. Batish, P.Kumar[16] has done experimental investigation for
multi response optimization on plain carbon steel 200x75x12mm as test material. The multi
response from the observation was converted to grey analysis using MATLAB code. Finally
they concluded that Welding current is most significant for maximizing Depth of penetration
& Minimizing Bead height and bead width.
2012b: Shen S, Oguocha I N A and Yannacopoulos S[30] A series of measurements was
carried out on specimens of submerged arc welded plates of ASTM A709 Grade 50 steel. The
bead reinforcement, bead width, penetration depth, HAZ size, deposition area and
penetration area increased with increasing heat input but the bead contact angle decreased
with it. The electrode melting efficiency increased initially and then decreased with
increasing heat input but the plate melting efficiency and percentage dilution changed only
slightly with it. Cooling time exhibited a very good linear relationship with the total nugget
area, heat transfer boundary length, and nugget parameter.
2013a: Hari Om, Sunil Pandey[17] have shown from their work that HAZ width rises more
effectively with wire feed rate. With negative polarity dilution rate decrease more than 20%.
HAZ area varies linearly with heat input.
2013b: Brijpal Singh, Zahid Akthar Khan and Arshad Noor Siddiquee[31] they have done a
review study on effect of flux composition on its behavior and bead geometry. With the help
of their detailed review they showed that flux constituents has a major effect on flux behavior
and bead shape geometry. The load carrying capacity of the welded joint does not only
depend on microstructure but it is also affected by the physical behavior of the flux, and bead
14

geometry. The main characteristics which are affected by flux constituents are arc stability,
slag detachability, capillarity, viscosity and basicity index.

2.2 Problem Formulation

Literature on Submerged arc welding

and its constituent aspects will be reviewed

extensively to design a methodology for carrying out analysis The literature survey will be
focused on various aspects of Submerged arc welding covering economic and technical
viability. In the beginning of D.O.E phase, pilot experiments will be performed for
preliminary study. The various parameters, their ranges and levels will be selected based on
results of the pilot study. Suitable Technique for orthogonal arrays will be used for design of
experiments after the pilot experiments.
Based on the findings of the Pilot study, actual experimentation work will be designed and
input machining parameters and their values will be finalized.
The results are expected to show that the response variables (output parameters) will be
strongly influenced by the control factors (input parameters). So, the results which are
obtained after experimentation shall be analyzed and modeled for their application in
manufacturing industry
The objective of the present work is to study the effect of parameters on submerged arc
welding process on various element transfer The response function of the trial conditions
would be match the constituents of transfer elements with the base metal.

CHAPTER 3
Proposed work
3.1 Introduction
15

The purposed work is to evaluate the effect of SAW parameters for chemical analysis of weld bead.
In this work the experimentation is done to analyze that which factor is most contributing towards the
various element transfers in weld bead. Submerged arc welding is done on SS 304 Plates as work
material by using three controllable process parameters using taguchi technique. Then the Chemical
analysis is done on the weld bead by spectroscopy method for element detection. After that the
optimization is done on saw parameters to get the optimized combination for various process
parameters at their different values or levels.
3.1.1 Experimental Setup
The whole experiment was done on Submerged Arc Welding Machine, Model -Tornado Saw
M-800 transformer and FD10-200T welding tractor available at MM University. The
electrode is EH14.The experimentation was done on SS 304 plates of dimensions 100mm x
62mm x12mm. The welding current, voltage and welding speed could be regulated,
displayed and preset on the panel of the tractor for the convenience of the operator. The
polarity is kept positive. The nozzle distance is kept constant i.e 20 cm.

Fig 3.1 Control Unit

Fig 3.2 Nozzle & Workpiece

16

Fig 3.3 Welding Tractor

3.1.2 Work Material
The work material selected for experimentation is AISI- SS 304. It is easily available and is very
widely used due to good mechanical and chemical properties. The work material is cut into
rectangular plates of dimensions.
Length = 100 mm, Breadth = 62 mm, Height = 12 mm
Chemical Composition of Work material
C

Mn

Si

0.066

1.09

0.28

S
P
Cr
Percentage by weight
0.020

0.017

3.2 Overall Methodology of the Study

The overall research work is divided in to four phases.
(i)

Detailed literature survey

(ii)

Pilot experimentation

(iii)

Design of experiments (D.O.E)

(iv)

Experimentation

(v)

Analysis

(vi)

Conclusion
17

18.06

Ni

Mo

Cu

8.1

0.27

0.36

3.2 Methodology Used

The full factorial design is referred as the technique of defining and investigating all possible
conditions in an experiment involving multiple factors while the fractional factorial design
investigates only a fraction of all the possible combinations. Although these approaches are
widely used, they have certain limitations: they are inefficient in time and cost when the
number of the variables is large; they require strict mathematical treatment in the design of
the experiment and in the analysis of the results; the same experiment may have different
designs thus produce different results; further, determination of contribution of each factor is
normally not permitted in this kind of design (Roy, 1990). The Taguchi method has been
proposed to overcome these limitations by simplifying and standardizing the fractional
factorial design (Roy, 1990). The methodology involves identification of controllable and
uncontrollable parameters and the establishment of a series of experiments to find out the
optimum combination of the parameters which has the greatest influence on the performance
and the least variation from the target of the design.

3.2.1 Procedures of Taguchi Method

The whole procedure of Taguchi method is as under and will be described in the next sections.

Establishment of objective function

Selection of factors and/or interactions to be evaluated

Identification of uncontrollable factors and test conditions

Selection of number of levels for the controllable and uncontrollable factors

Selection of the appropriate OA

Assignment of factors and/or interactions to columns

Execution of experiments according to trail conditions in the array

Analyze results

Confirmation experiment

18

3.2.2 Establishment of objective function

The objective of the present work is to study the effect of parameters on submerged arc
welding process on various element transfer The response function of the trial conditions
would be match the constituents of transfer elements with the base metal.
3.2.3 Determination of controllable factors and their levels
a) Welding Current
It controls the melting rate of the electrode and thereby the weld deposition rate. It also
controls the depth of penetration and thereby the extent of dilution of the weld metal by the
base metal. Too high a current causes excessive weld reinforcement which is wasteful, and
burn-through in the case of thinner plates or in badly fitted joints, which are not provided
with proper backing. Excessive current also produces a high narrow bead and undercut.
Excessively low current gives an unstable arc, inadequate penetration and overlapping. SAW
equipment is usually provided with an ammeter to monitor and control the welding
current[40]
b) Arc-Voltage
Arc voltage, also called welding voltage, means the electrical potential difference between
the electrode wire tip and the surface of the molten weld puddle. It is indicated by the
voltmeter provided on the equipment. It hardly affects the electrode melting rate, but it
determines the profile and surface appearance of the weld bead. The effects of changing
voltage are explained as follows:
Increasing voltage:
a) Produces a flatter and wider bead.
b) Increases flux consumption.
c) Increases resistance to porosity caused by rust or scale.
Lowering the voltage produces a stiffer arc needed for getting penetration in a deep groove
and to resist arc blow on high-speed work. An excessively low voltage produces a high,
narrow bead with poor slag removal.
c) Weld Speed

19

For a given combination of welding current and voltage, increase in the welding speed or the
speed of arc travel results in lesser penetration, lesser weld reinforcement and lower heat
input per unit length of weld. Excessively high travel speeds decrease fusion between the
weld deposit and the parent metal, and increase tendencies for undercut, arc blow, porosity
and irregular bead shape. As the travel speed is decreased, penetration and weld
reinforcement increase. Excessively slow speeds also produce a convex bead shape, which
results in an uneven weld bead with slag inclusions[3]
3.2.4 Design of Taguchi crossed array layout
The Taguchi crossed array layout consists of an inner array and an outer array. The inner
array is made up of the orthogonal array (OA) selected from all the possible combinations of
the controllable factors. The outer array contains the combinations of the uncontrollable
factors. Each run from the inner array will be tested across each run from the outer array,
thus, the latter determines the repetition of each trial run of the controllable factors in the
inner array. All the possible combination of the uncontrollable factors will work as the outer
array. It is proposed to use an appropriate orthogonal array for this experiment.

3.3 Observations
First pilot experiments were done on the workpiece using random values and then from those
pilot experiments the suitable values of these parameters were selected. On the basis of
observations from the pilot experiments these levels were found suitable for the
experimentation.
Table 3.1 Factors and their levels observed from pilot experiments
Symbol
Sr. No.
Factors (Units)
levels
s
1
Current (Amp)
I
325
355
395
2
Voltage (Volt)
V
27
30
33
3
Welding speed (m/h)
ws
18
24
28
On the basis of these observed levels of process parameters welding is done on work material
using taguchi L9 orthogonal array and nine runs were done using three levels of three
parameters
Table 3.2 Orthogonal Array L9 (3x3)
Sr. No.
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
20

A
B
C
1
325
27
18
2
325
30
24
3
325
33
28
4
355
27
24
5
355
30
28
6
355
33
18
7
395
27
28
8
395
30
18
9
395
33
24
After the welding is done, the weld plates were sent for spectroscopy test for element
detection in Research & Development Centre (A Punjab Govt. Society) in Ludhiana. The
results of the test are shown in the observation table below. This table shows the chemical
composition of the weld bead on different runs. It shows the presence of amount different
elements at different runs/experiments.
Table 3.3 Observation table for spectroscopy test for element detection
Sr. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

I( Amp)
A
325
325
325
355
355
355
395
395
395

V(Volt)
B
27
30
33
27
30
33
27
30
33

ws(m/h)
C
18
24
28
24
28
18
28
18
24

0.09
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.08

0.02
0.02
0.021
0.023
0.02
0.022
0.018
0.019
0.022

P
Si
Mn
Percentage by weight
0.027
0.32
1.28
0.028
0.33
1.25
0.029
0.34
1.24
0.028
0.34
1.3
0.028
0.32
1.28
0.028
0.4
1.24
0.028
0.42
1.22
0.031
0.41
1.25
0.03
0.44
1.2

Ni

Cr

4.7
4.5
4.62
4.68
4.85
5.26
5.32
5.35
5.35

10.85
10.5
10.75
10.9
11
11.55
11.66
12.2
12.2

After this these observations are used for doing analysis and finding the results with the help
of Minitab software. The calculations and graph plots for different element are discussed in
detail in the next chapter.

21

CHAPTER 4
Results & Discussion
4.1 Result and Discussion for Carbon
The Carbon percentage increases as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to 355, but after
that it decreases for value of I(Amp) from 355 to 395. C% increases as value of V(Volt)
increases from 27 to 30, but after that for value of V(Volt) from 30 to 33 it shows decrement.
Main Effects Plot for SN ratios
Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

-21.00

Mean of SN ratios

-21.15
-21.30
-21.45
-21.60
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

-21.00
-21.15
-21.30
-21.45
-21.60

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.1 Main effects plot for SN ratios

22

33

Main Effects Plot for Means

Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

0.0900
0.0885

Mean of Means

0.0870
0.0855
0.0840
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

0.0900
0.0885
0.0870
0.0855
0.0840

Graph 4.2 Main effects plot for Means

C% decreases as the value of ws(m/h) increases from 18 to 24, but after that sudden
increment is seen in C% for the value of ws(m/h) from 24 to 28. This trend is same for both
sn ratio and means plot.
After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
mean. The table below shows the calculations of carbon percentage versus current, voltage
and welding speed at their different levels.
Table 4.1 Taguchi Analysis: C % versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
I( Amp)
325
325
325
355
355
355
395
395
395

V(Volt)
27
30
33
27
30
33
27
30
33

ws(m/h)
18
24
28
24
28
18
28
18
24

C%
0.09
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.08

SNRA1
-20.915
-21.938
-20.915
-20.915
-20
-21.938
-21.938
-20.915
-21.938

MEAN1
0.09
0.08
0.09
0.09
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.08

4.1.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.2 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
23

Term
constant
I( Amp)
325
I( Amp)
355
V(Volt)
27
V(Volt)
30
ws(m/h)
18
ws(m/h)
24

Coef
-21.2682
0.012
0.317
0.012
0.0317
0.012
-0.329

SE Coef
0.3352
0.474
0.474
0.474
0.474
0.474
0.474

T
-63.452
0.025
0.669
0.025
0.669
0.025
-0.694

P
0.000
0.982
0.572
0.982
0.572
0.982
0.559

Table 4.3 Analysis of variance for SN ratio

Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.6268
0.6268
0.6268
2.0223
3.9025

Adj SS
0.6268
0.6268
0.6268
2.0223

Adj MS
0.3134
0.3134
0.3134
1.0111

F
0.31
0.31
0.31

P
0.763
0.763
0.763

S = 1.006 R-Sq = 48.2% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%

Table 4.4 Response table for SN ratio
Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
-21.26
-20.95
-21.6
0.65
2

V(Volt)
-21.26
-20.95
-21.6
0.65
2

ws(m/h)
-21.26
-21.6
-20.95
0.65
2

4.1.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.5 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term

Coef

SE Coef

Constant
I( Amp)
325
I( Amp)
355
V(Volt)
27
V(Volt)
30
ws(m/h)
18
ws(m/h)
24

0.086667
0.00
0.003333
0
0.003333
0
-0.00333

0.003333
0.4714
0.4714
0.4714
0.4714
0.4714
0.4714

26
0
0.707
0
0.707
0
-0.707

0.001
1
0.553
1
0.553
1
0.553

24

S = 0.01 R-Sq = 50.0% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%

Table 4.6 Analysis of variance for Means

Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.000067
0.000067
0.000067
0.0002
0.0004

Adj SS
0.000067
0.000067
0.000067
0.0002

Adj MS
0.000033
0.000033
0.000033
0.00001

F
0.33
0.33
0.33

P
0.75
0.75
0.75

Table 4.7 Response table for Means

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
0.08667
0.09
0.08333
0.00667
2

V(Volt)
0.08667
0.09
0.08333
0.00667
2

ws(m/h)
0.08667
0.08333
0.09
0.00667
2

From ANOVA table it is found that all the three factors I(Amp), V(Volt) & ws(m/h) have
same contribution for carbon element transfer in the weld bead. This means all the above
factors are significant for transfer of carbon element in the chemical composition of weld
metal.
The standard deviation of error, S = 0.01
And R2 = 50.0%

4.2 Result and Discussion for Sulphur

The Sulphur percentage increases as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to 355, but after
that it decreases for value of I(Amp) from 355 to 395. S% decreases as value of V(Volt)
increases from 27 to 30, but after that for value of V(Volt) from 30 to 33 it Increases. S%
increases as the value of ws(m/h) increases from 18 to 24, but after that sudden decrement is
seen in S% for the value of ws(m/h) from 24 to 28.

25

Main Effects Plot for SN ratios

Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

-33.4

Mean of SN ratios

-33.6
-33.8
-34.0
-34.2
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

-33.4
-33.6
-33.8
-34.0
-34.2

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.3 Main effects plot for SN ratios

Main Effects Plot for Means
Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

0.0215
0.0210

Mean of Means

0.0205
0.0200
0.0195
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

0.0215
0.0210
0.0205
0.0200
0.0195

Graph 4.4 Main effects plot for Means

After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
26

mean. The table below shows the calculations of sulphur percentage versus current, voltage
and welding speed at their different levels.
Table 4.8 Taguchi Analysis: S versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

ws(m/h)

S%

SNRA1

MEAN1

325

27

18

0.02

-33.979

0.02

325

30

24

0.02

-33.979

0.02

325

33

28

0.021

-33.556

0.021

355

27

24

0.023

-32.765

0.023

355

30

28

0.02

-33.979

0.02

355

33

18

0.022

-33.152

0.022

395

27

28

0.018

-34.895

0.018

395

30

18

0.019

-34.425

0.019

395

33

24

0.022

-33.152

0.022

4.2.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.9 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
Term
Constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef

SE Coef

-33.7646
-0.0735
0.4659
-0.1152
-0.3633
-0.0873
0.4659

0.1269
0.1794
0.1794
0.1794
0.1794
0.1794
0.1794

-266.143
-0.410
2.596
-0.642
-2.025
-0.487
2.596

0.000
0.722
0.122
0.587
0.180
0.675
0.122

S = 0.3806 R-Sq = 92.1% R-Sq(adj) = 68.2%

Table 4.10 Analysis of variance for SN ratio
Source

DF

Seq SS

Adj SS
27

Adj MS

I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

2
2
2
2
8

1.1291
1.1223
1.1038
0.2897
3.6449

1.1291
1.1223
1.1038
0.2897

0.5645
0.5611
0.5519
0.1449

3.90
3.87
3.81

0.204
0.205
0.208

Table 4.11 response table for SN ratio

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
-33.84
-33.30
-34.16
0.86
1

V(Volt)
-33.88
-34.13
-33.29
0.84
3

ws(m/h)
-33.85
-33.30
-34.14
0.84
2

4.2.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.12 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term
constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef
0.020556
-0.00022
0.001111
-0.00022
-0.00889
-0.00022
0.001111

SE Coef
0.000294
0.000416
0.000416
0.000416
0.000416
0.000416
0.000416

T
69.923
-0.535
2.673
-0.535
-2.138
-0.535
2.673

P
0.000
0.646
0.116
0.646
0.166
0.646
0.116

S = 0.0008819 R-Sq = 92.3% R-Sq(adj) = 69.2%

Table 4.13 Analysis of variance for Means
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.000006
0.000006
0.000006
0.000002
0.000020

Adj SS
0.000006
0.000006
0.000006
0.000002

Adj MS
0.000003
0.000003
0.000003
0.000001

Table 4.14 Response table for Means

28

F
4.00
4.00
4.00

P
0.200
0.200
0.200

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
0.02033
0.02167
0.01967
0.00200
2

V(Volt)
0.02033
0.01967
0.02167
0.00200
2

ws(m/h)
0.02033
0.02167
0.01967
0.00200
2

From ANOVA table it is found that all the three factors I(Amp), V(Volt) & ws(m/h) have
same contribution for Sulphur element transfer in the weld bead. This means all the above
factors are significant for transfer of Sulphur element in the chemical composition of weld
metal.
The standard deviation of error, S = 0.0008819
And R2 = 92.3%

4.3Result and Discussion for Phosphorus

The Phosphorus percentage remain constant as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to
355, but after that it increases for value of I(Amp) from 355 to 395. P% increases as value of
V(Volt) increases from 27 to 30, but after that for value of V(Volt) from 30 to 33 it remain
constant. P% increases very slightly ( Approx. constant) as the value of ws(m/h) increases
from 18 to 24, but after that slight decrement is seen in S% for the value of ws(m/h) from 24
to 28.

29

Main Effects Plot for SN ratios

Data Means
I( Amp)

-30.50

V(Volt)

Mean of SN ratios

-30.75
-31.00
-31.25
325

355

395

27

30

33

ws(m/h)

-30.50
-30.75
-31.00
-31.25
18

24

28

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.5 Main effects plot for SN ratios

Main Effects Plot for Means

Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

0.0295
0.0290

Mean of Means

0.0285
0.0280
0.0275
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

0.0295
0.0290
0.0285
0.0280
0.0275

Graph 4.6 Main effects plot for Means

After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
mean. The table below shows the calculations of Phosphorus percentage versus current,
voltage and welding speed at their different levels.
30

Table 4.15 Taguchi Analysis: P versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

I( Amp)
325
325
325
355
355
355
395
395
395

V(Volt)
27
30
33
27
30
33
27
30
33

ws(m/h)
18
24
28
24
28
18
28
18
24

P%
0.027
0.028
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.031
0.03

SNRA1
-31.373
-31.057
-30.752
-31.057
-31.057
-31.057
-31.057
-30.173
-30.458

MEAN1
0.027
0.028
0.029
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.031
0.03

4.3.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.16 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
Term
constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef
-30.8933
-0.1673
-0.1636
-0.2689
0.1311
0.0258
0.0362

SE Coef
0.1195
0.1690
0.1690
0.1690
0.1690
0.1690
0.1690

T
-258.508
-0.990
-0.968
-1.591
0.776
0.153
0.214

P
0.000
0.427
0.435
0.253
0.519
0.893
0.850

S = 0.3585 R-Sq = 76.5% R-Sq(adj) = 5.9%

Table 4.17 Analysis of Variance for SN ratios
Source

DF

Seq SS

Adj SS

Adj MS

I( Amp)

0.49264

0.49264

0.246318

1.92

0.343

V(Volt)

0.32540

0.32540

0.162699

1.27

0.441

ws(m/h)

0.01745

0.01745

0.008725

0.07

0.936

Residual Error

0.25707

0.25707

0.128536

Total
8
1.09255
4.3.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
Table 4.18 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term
constant
I( Amp)
325
I( Amp)
355

Coef
0.028556
-0.00056
-0.00056

SE Coef
0.000401
0.000567
0.000567
31

T
71.279
-0.981
-0.981

P
0.000
0.430
0.430

V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

27
30
18
24

-0.00089
0.000444
0.000111
0.000111

0.000567
0.000567
0.000567
0.000567

-1.569
0.784
0.196
0.196

0.257
0.515
0.863
0.863

S = 0.001202 R-Sq = 76.4% R-Sq(adj) = 5.5%

Table 4.19 Analysis of Variance for Means
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual
Error
Total

DF
2
2
2

Seq SS
0.000006
0.000004
0.000000

Adj SS
0.000006
0.000004
0.000000

Adj MS
0.000003
0.000002
0.000000

0.000003

0.000003

0.000001

0.000012

F
1.92
1.23
0.08

P
0.342
0.448
0.929

Table 4.20 Response Table for SN ratio

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
-31.06
-31.06
-30.56
0.50
1

V(Volt)
-31.16
-30.76
-30.76
0.41
2

ws(m/h)
-30.87
-30.86
-30.96
0.10
3

Table 4.21 Response Table for Means

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
0.02800
0.02800
0.02967
0.00167
1

V(Volt)
0.02767
0.02900
0.02900
0.00133
2

ws(m/h)
0.02867
0.02867
0.02833
0.00033
3

From the ANOVA table it is found that I(Amp) is most significant factor as its P value is least
among the three factors. And also ws(m/h) is the least significant factor for transfer of
Phosphorus element in the weld bead.
The standard deviation of error, S = 0.001202
32

And R2 = 76.4%

4.4 Result and Discussion for Silicon

The Silicon percentage shows increases trend as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to
395. Si% decreases slightly as value of V(Volt) increases from 27 to 30, but after that for
value of V(Volt) from 30 to 33 it shows increasing trend. Si% decreases continuously as the
value of ws(m/h) increases from 18 to 28.
Main Effects Plot for SN ratios
Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

-7.5
-8.0

Mean of SN ratios

-8.5
-9.0
-9.5
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

-7.5
-8.0
-8.5
-9.0
-9.5

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.7 Main effects plot for SN ratios

33

33

Main Effects Plot for Means

Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

0.42
0.40

Mean of Means

0.38
0.36
0.34
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

0.42
0.40
0.38
0.36
0.34

Graph 4.8 Main effects plot for Means

After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
mean. The table below shows the calculations Silicon percentage versus current, voltage and
welding speed at their different levels.
Table 4.22 Taguchi Analysis: Si versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
I( Amp)
325
325
325
355
355
355
395
395
395

V(Volt)
27
30
33
27
30
33
27
30
33

ws(m/h)
18
24
28
24
28
18
28
18
24

Si %
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.34
0.32
0.4
0.42
0.41
0.44

SNRA1
-9.897
-9.6297
-9.3704
-9.3704
-9.897
-7.9588
-7.535
-7.7443
-7.131

MEAN1
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.34
0.32
0.4
0.42
0.41
0.44

4.4.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.23 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
34

Term
constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef
-8.72596
-0.90642
-0.34945
-0.20818
-0.36439
0.19259
0.01560

SE Coef
0.1807
0.2556
0.2556
0.2556
0.2556
0.2556
0.2556

T
-48.277
-3.546
-1.367
-0.814
-1.426
0.753
0.061

P
0.000
0.071
0.305
0.501
0.290
0.530
0.957

S = 0.5422 R-Sq = 94.1% R-Sq(adj) = 76.3%

Table 4.24 Analysis of Variance for SN ratios
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
7.5627
1.5119
0.242
0.5881
9.9047

Adj SS
7.5627
1.5119
0.242
0.5881

Adj MS
3.7814
0.7559
0.1210
0.2940

F
12.86
2.57
0.41

P
0.072
0.280
0.708

Table 4.25 Response Table for SN ratio

Level
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
1
-9.632
-8.934
-8.533
2
-9.075
-9.090
-8.710
3
-7.470
-8.153
-8.934
Delta
2.162
0.937
0.401
Rank
1
2
3
4.4.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
Table 4.26 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term
constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef
0.368889
-0.038889
-0.015556
-0.008889
-0.015556
0.007778
0.001111

SE Coef
0.007286
0.010304
0.010304
0.010304
0.010304
0.010304
0.010304

35

T
50.630
-3.774
-1.510
-0.863
-1.510
0.755
0.108

P
0.000
0.064
0.270
0.479
0.270
0.529
0.924

S = 0.02186 R-Sq = 94.8% R-Sq(adj) = 79.1%

Table 4.27 Analysis of Variance for Means
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.014156
0.002756
0.000422
0.000956
0.018289

Adj SS
0.014156
0.002756
0.000422
0.000956

Adj MS
0.007078
0.001378
0.000211
0.000478

F
14.81
2.88
0.44

P
0.063
0.257
0.694

Table 4.28 Response Table for Means

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
0.3300
0.3533
0.4233
0.0933
1

V(Volt)
0.3600
0.3533
0.3933
0.0400
2

ws(m/h)
0.3767
0.3700
0.3600
0.0167
3

From the ANOVA table it is found that I(Amp) is most significant factor as its P value is least
among the three factors i.e 0.063. whereas the P value of V(Volt) and ws(m/h) are 0.257 and
0.694 respectively. Also V(Volt) and ws(m/h) are the less significant factors for transfer of
Silicon element in the weld bead. The standard deviation of error, S = 0.02186
And R2 = 94.8%

4.5 Result and Discussion for Manganese

The Manganese percentage increases as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to 355, but
after that it decreases for value of I(Amp) from 355 to 395. Mn% decreases as value of
V(Volt) increases from 27 to 30, but after that for value of V(Volt) from 30 to 33 it shows
high decrement . Mn% decreases continuously as the value of ws(m/h) increases from 18 to
28.

36

Main Effects Plot for SN ratios

Data Means
I( Amp)

2.1

V(Volt)

2.0

Mean of SN ratios

1.9
1.8
1.7
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

2.1

27

30

33

2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.9 Main effects plot for SN ratios

Main Effects Plot for Means
Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

1.27
1.26

Mean of Means

1.25
1.24
1.23
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

1.27
1.26
1.25
1.24
1.23

Graph 4.10 Main effects plot for Means

After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
mean. The table below shows the calculations of Manganese percentage versus current,
voltage and welding speed at their different levels.
Table 4.29 Taguchi Analysis: Mn versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
I( Amp)
325
325

V(Volt)
27
30

ws(m/h)
18
24

Mn %
1.28
1.25
37

SNRA1
2.1442
1.9382

MEAN1
1.28
1.25

325
355
355
355
395
395
395

33
27
30
33
27
30
33

28
24
28
18
28
18
24

1.24
1.3
1.28
1.24
1.22
1.25
1.2

1.86843
2.27887
2.1442
1.86843
1.7272
1.9382
1.58362

1.24
1.3
1.28
1.24
1.22
1.25
1.2

4.5.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.30 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
Term
constant
I( Amp)
325
I( Amp)
355
V(Volt)
27
V(Volt)
30
ws(m/h)
18
ws(m/h)
24

Coef
1.94348
0.04013
0.15368
0.1066
0.06338
0.04013
-0.00992

SE Coef
0.05353
0.07571
0.07571
0.07571
0.07571
0.07571
0.07571

T
36.303
0.053
2.030
1.408
0.837
0.530
-0.131

P
0.001
0.0649
0.179
0.294
0.491
0.649
0.908

S = 0.1606 R-Sq = 86.4% R-Sq(adj) = 45.8%

Table 4.31 Analysis of Variance for SN ratios

Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.188373
0.132831
0.007863
0.051587
0.380655

Adj SS
0.188373
0.132831
0.007863
0.051587

Adj MS
0.094186
0.066416
0.003932
0.025794

Table 4.32 Response Table for SN ratio

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
1.984
2.097
1.75
0.347
1

V(Volt)
2.05
2.007
1.773
0.277
2
38

ws(m/h)
1.984
1.934
1.913
0.070
3

F
3.65
2.57
0.15

P
0.215
0.280
0.868

4.5.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.33 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term
constant
I( Amp)
325
I( Amp)
355
V(Volt)
27
V(Volt)
30
ws(m/h)
18
ws(m/h)
24

Coef
1.25111
0.00556
0.02222
0.01556
0.00889
0.00556
-0.00111

SE Coef
0.007778
0.010999
0.010999
0.010999
0.010999
0.010999
0.010999

T
160.857
0.505
2.020
1.414
0.808
0.505
-0.101

P
0.000
0.664
0.181
0.293
0.504
0.664
0.929

S = 0.02333 R-Sq = 86.2% R-Sq(adj) = 44.8%

Table 4.34 Analysis of Variance for Means
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.003889
0.002756
0.000156
0.001089
0.007889

Adj SS
0.003889
0.002756
0.000156
0.001089

Adj MS
0.001944
0.001378
0.000078
0.000544

F
3.57
2.53
0.14

P
0.219
0.283
0.875

Table 4.35 Response Table for Means

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
1.257
1.273
1.223
0.050
1

V(Volt)
1.267
1.260
1.227
0.040
2

ws(m/h)
1.257
1.25
1.247
0.010
3

From the ANOVA table it is found that I(Amp) is most significant factor as its P value is least
among the three factors i.e 0.219. whereas the P value of V(Volt) and ws(m/h) are 0.283 and
0.875 respectively. Also ws(m/h) is the least significant factor for transfer of Manganese
element in the weld bead.
The standard deviation of error, S = 0.02333
39

And R2 = 86.2%

4.6 Result and Discussion for Nickel

The Nickel percentage increases continuously as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to
395. Ni% remains constant as value of V(Volt) increases from 27 to 30, but after that for
value of V(Volt) from 30 to 33 it increases. Ni% decreases as the value of ws(m/h) increases
from 18 to 24. , but after that slight increment is seen in Ni% for the value of ws(m/h) from
24 to 28.

Main Effects Plot for SN ratios

Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

14.4

Mean of SN ratios

14.1
13.8
13.5
13.2
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

14.4
14.1
13.8
13.5
13.2

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.11 Main effects plot for SN ratios

40

33

Main Effects Plot for Means

Data Means
I( Amp)

5.4

V(Volt)

5.2

Mean of Means

5.0
4.8
4.6
325

355

395

27

30

33

ws(m/h)

5.4
5.2
5.0
4.8
4.6
18

24

28

Graph 4.12 Main effects plot for Means

After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
mean. The table below shows the calculations of Nickel percentage versus current, voltage
and welding speed at their different levels.
Table 4.36 Taguchi Analysis: Ni versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
I( Amp)
325
325
325
355
355
355
395
395
395

V(Volt)
27
30
33
27
30
33
27
30
33

ws(m/h)
18
24
28
24
28
18
28
18
24

Ni %
4.7
4.5
4.62
4.68
4.85
5.26
5.32
5.35
5.35

41

SNRA1
13.442
13.0643
13.2928
13.4049
13.7148
14.4197
14.5182
14.5671
14.5671

MEAN1
4.7
4.5
4.62
4.68
4.85
5.26
5.32
5.35
5.35

4.6.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.37 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
Term
constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef
13.8879
-0.6215
-0.0414
-0.0995
-0.1058
0.2550
-0.2091

SE Coef
0.07166
0.10134
0.10134
0.10134
0.10134
0.10134
0.10134

T
193.803
-6.133
-0.408
-0.982
-1.044
2.517
-2.064

P
0.000
0.026
0.723
0.430
0.406
0.128
0.175

S = 0.2150 R-Sq = 97.0% R-Sq(adj) = 88.1%

Table 4.38 Analysis of Variance for SN ratios

Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
2.48241
0.18979
0.33266
0.09243
3.09729

Adj SS
2.48241
0.18979
0.33266
0.09243

Adj MS
1.24120
0.09489
0.16633
0.04622

F
26.86
2.05
3.60

P
0.036
0.328
0.217

Table 4.39 Response table for SN ratio

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
13.27
13.85
14.55
1.28
1

V(Volt)
13.79
13.78
14.09
0.31
3

ws(m/h)
14.14
13.68
13.84
0.46
2

4.6.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.40 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term
constant

Coef
4.95889

SE Coef
0.04156
42

T
119.321

P
0.000

I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

-0.35222
-0.02889
-0.05889
-0.05889
0.14444
-0.11556

0.05877
0.05877
0.05877
0.05877
0.05877
0.05877

-5.993
-0.492
-1.002
-1.002
2.458
-1.966

0.027
0.672
0.422
0.422
0.133
0.188

S = 0.1247 R-Sq = 96.9% R-Sq(adj) = 87.7%

Table 4.41 Analysis of Variance for Means
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
0.81042
0.06242
0.10516
0.03109
1.00909

Adj SS
0.81042
0.06242
0.10516
0.03109

Adj MS
0.40521
0.03121
0.05258
0.01554

F
26.07
2.01
3.38

P
0.037
0.332
0.228

Table 4.42 Response Table for Means

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
4.607
4.930
5.340
0.733
1

V(Volt)
4.900
4.900
5.077
0.177
3

ws(m/h)
5.103
4.843
4.930
0.260
2

From the ANOVA table it is found that I(Amp) is most significant factor as its P value is least
among the three factors i.e 0.037. Whereas the P value of V(Volt) and ws(m/h) are 0.332 and
0.228 respectively. Also V(Volt) is the least significant factor for transfer of Nickel element
in the weld bead.
The standard deviation of error, S = 0.1247
And R2 = 96.9%

4.7 Result and Discussion for Chromium

The Chromium percentage increases as the value of I(Amp) increases from 325 to 355. And
it again show increasing trend for the value of I(Amp) from 355 to 395. Cr% increases
slightly as value of V(Volt) increases from 27 to 30, but after that for value of V(Volt) from
30 to 33 it increases with greater amount. Cr% decreases as the value of ws(m/h) increases
43

from 18 to 24. , but after that slight decrement is seen in Cr% for the value of ws(m/h) from
24 to 28.
Main Effects Plot for SN ratios
Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

21.50

Mean of SN ratios

21.25
21.00
20.75
20.50
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

21.50
21.25
21.00
20.75
20.50

Signal-to-noise: Larger is better

Graph 4.13 Main effects plot for SN ratios

44

33

Main Effects Plot for Means

Data Means
I( Amp)

V(Volt)

12.0

Mean of Means

11.5
11.0
325

355
ws(m/h)

395

18

24

28

27

30

33

12.0
11.5
11.0

Graph 4.14 Main effects plot for Means

After the observation from experimentation and from spectroscopy test for element detection,
the data thus obtained is used in MINITAB software for the calculations of S/N ratio and
mean. The table below shows the calculations of Chromium percentage versus current,
voltage and welding speed at their different levels.
Table 4.43 Taguchi Analysis: Cr versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)
I( Amp)
325
325
325
355
355
355
395
395
395

V(Volt)
27
30
33
27
30
33
27
30
33

ws(m/h)
18
24
28
24
28
18
28
18
24

Cr %
10.85
10.5
10.75
10.9
11
11.55
11.66
12.2
12.2

45

SNRA1
20.7086
20.4238
20.6282
20.7485
20.8279
21.2516
21.334
21.7272
21.7272

MEAN1
10.85
10.5
10.75
10.9
11
11.55
11.66
12.2
12.2

4.7.1 Linear Model Analysis: SN ratios versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.44 Estimated Model Coefficients for SN ratios
Term
constant
I( Amp)
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

325
355
27
30
18
24

Coef
21.0419
-0.455
-0.0992
-0.1115
-0.0489
0.1873
-0.0754

SE Coef
0.02473
0.03498
0.03498
0.03498
0.03498
0.03498
0.03498

T
850.79
-13.01
-2.836
-3.188
-1.399
5.354
-2.155

P
0
0.006
0.105
0.086
0.297
0.033
0.164

S = 0.07420 R-Sq = 99.4% R-Sq(adj) = 97.6%

Table 4.45 Analysis of Variance for SN ratios
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
1.57223
0.12173
0.1598
0.01101
1.86477

Adj SS
1.57223
0.12173
0.1598
0.01101

Adj MS
0.786116
0.060864
0.0799
0.005505

F
142.8
11.06
14.51

P
0.007
0.083
0.064

Table 4.46 Response table for SN ratio

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
20.59
20.94
21.6
1.01
1

V(Volt)
20.93
20.99
21.2
0.27
3

ws(m/h)
21.23
20.97
20.93
0.3
2

4.7.2 Linear Model Analysis: Means versus I( Amp), V(Volt), ws(m/h)

Table 4.47 Estimated Model Coefficients for Means
Term
constant
I( Amp)
325

Coef
11.29
-0.59

SE Coef
0.03289
0.04651
46

T
343.308
-12.686

P
0
0.006

I( Amp)
V(Volt)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
ws(m/h)

355
27
30
18
24

-0.14
-0.1533
-0.0567
0.2433
-0.09

0.04651
0.04651
0.04651
0.04651
0.04651

-3.01
-3.297
-1.218
5.232
-1.935

0.095
0.081
0.347
0.035
0.193

S = 0.09866 R-Sq = 99.4% R-Sq(adj) = 97.6%

Table 4.48 Analysis of Variance for Means
Source
I( Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
Residual Error
Total

DF
2
2
2
2
8

Seq SS
2.7018
0.21247
0.27247
0.01947
3.2062

Adj SS
2.7018
0.21247
0.27247
0.01947

Adj MS
1.3509
0.10623
0.13623
0.00973

F
138.79
10.91
14

P
0.007
0.084
0.067

Table 4.49 Response Table for Means

Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

I(Amp)
10.7
11.15
12.02
1.32
1

V(Volt)
11.14
11.23
11.5
0.36
3

ws(m/h)
11.53
11.2
11.4
0.4
2

From the ANOVA table it is found that I(Amp) is most significant factor as its P value is least
among the three factors i.e 0.007. Whereas the P value of V(Volt) and ws(m/h) are 0.084 and
0.067 respectively. Also V(Volt) is the least significant factor for transfer of Chromium
element in the weld bead.
The standard deviation of error, S = 0.09866
And R2 = 99.4%

47

CHAPTER 5
Conclusion & Future Application
5.1 Conclusion
1. It is concluded that for C be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 2,
V(Volt) has to be at high level 2 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 3. As shown in
table below.
Table 5.1 Optimal combination for carbon
Physical
Requirements
Maximum C

Optimal Combination
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
355
30
28
Level-2
Level-2
Level-3

2. It is concluded that for S be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 2, V(Volt)
has to be at high level 3 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 2. As shown in table
below.
Table 5.2 Optimal combination for Sulphur
Physical
Requirements
Maximum S

Optimal Combination
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
355
33
24
Level-2
Level-3
Level-2

3. It is concluded that for P be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 3, V(Volt)
has to be at high level 3 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 2. As shown in table
below.
Table 5.3 Optimal combination for Phosphorus
Physical
Requirements
Maximum P

Optimal Combination
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
395
33
24
Level-3
Level-3
Level-2
48

4. It is concluded that for Si be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 3,

V(Volt) has to be at high level 3 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 1. As shown in
table below
Table 5.4 Optimal combination for Silicon
Physical
Requirements
Maximum Si

Optimal Combination
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
395
33
18
Level-3
Level-3
Level-1

5. It is concluded that for Mn be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 2,

V(Volt) has to be at high level 1 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 1. As shown in
table below
Table 5.5 Optimal combination for Manganese
Physical
Requirements
Maximum Mn

I(Amp)
355
Level-2

Optimal Combination
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
27
18
Level-1
Level-1

6. It is concluded that for Ni be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 3,

V(Volt) has to be at high level 3 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 1. As shown in
table below
Table 5.6 Optimal combination for Nickel
Physical
Requirements
Maximum Ni

Optimal Combination
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
395
33
18
Level-3
Level-3
Level-1

7. It is concluded that for Cr be maximum factor I(Amp) has to be at high level 3,

V(Volt) has to be at high level 3 & Ws(m/h) has to be at high level 1. As shown in
table below
Table 5.7 Optimal combination for Chromium
Physical
Requirements
Maximum Cr

Optimal Combination
I(Amp)
V(Volt)
ws(m/h)
395
33
18
49

Level-3

Level-3

Level-1

5.2 Real Life Application & Future Work

Real life application of this study is that, the results and conclusion will be beneficial for
providing the Optimal combination for element transfer to the operator, so that maximum
amount of a particular element will be transferred to the weld bead according to the need of
property of weld bead. This will be very beneficial for industrial purpose as SAW is mostly
used in industries.
In future the experimentation can be done on other grades of stainless steel like SS 301L, SS
302HQ, SS 321 and SS 430 which are widely and commonly used in the industry. Also study
can be done on twin wire submerged arc welding machine in future.

References
1

Parmar, R.S., (1992) Welding Processes and Technology, Khanna Publishers, New

Delhi.
Hould croft, P.T., (1989) Submerged Arc Welding, second ed., Abington Publishing,
Cambridge, England.

50

N.D Pandey, A. Bharti & R.S. Gupta., (1994) Effect of submerged arc welding
parameters and fluxes on element transfer behaviour and weld-metal chemistry, Journal

of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 40, pp.195-211.

H.L Tsai, Y.L Tarng & C.M Tseng, (1996) Optimisation of submerged arc welding
process parameters in hardfacing, International Journal of advanced Manufacturing
Technology, vol. 12, pp402-406.

Y.S Tarng, W.H Yang & S.C Juang, (2000) The Use of Fuzzy Logic in the Taguchi
Method for the Optimisation of the Submerged Arc Welding Process, International

Journal of advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 16, pp688-694.

Vera Lu cia Othero de Brito, Herman Jacobus Cornelis Voorwald, (2001) Effects of a
Postweld Heat Treatment on a Submerged Arc Welded ASTM A537 Pressure Vessel

Steel, ASM International JMEPEG, vol. 10, pp249-257.

Y.S. Tarng, S.C. Juang, C.H. Chang, (2002) The use of grey-based Taguchi methods to
determine submerged arc welding process parameters in hardfacing, Journal of Materials

Processing Technology, vol. 128,pp1-6.

Ana Ma. Paniagua-Mercado, Paulino Estrada-Diaz, Victor M. Lopez-Hirata, (2003)
Chemical and structural characterization of the crystalline phases in agglomerated fluxes
for submerged-arc welding, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 141, pp93-

100.
N. Murugan, V. Gunaraj, (2005) Prediction and control of weld bead geometry and
shape relationships in submerged arc welding of pipes, Journal of Materials Processing

Technology, vol. 168, pp478-487.

10 P. Kanjilal, T.K. Pal, S.K. Majumdar, (2006) Combined effect of flux and welding
parameters on chemical composition and mechanical properties of submerged arc weld
metal, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 171, pp223-231.
11 Serdar Karaog lu, Abdullah Secgin, (2008) Sensitivity analysis of submerged arc
welding process parameters, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 202,
pp500-507.
12 Kook-soo Bang, Chan Park, Hong-chul Jung, and Jong-bong Lee, (2009) Effect of Flux
Composition on the Element Transfer and Mechanical Properties of Weld Metal in
Submerged Arc Welding, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 15, pp471477.

51

13 S Kumanan, J Edwin Raja Dhas & K Gowthaman, (2007) Determination of submerged

arc welding process parameters using Taguchi method and gegression analysis, Indian
Journal of Engineering & Material Science, vol. 14, pp177-183
14 Saurav Datta, Asish Bandyopadhyay & Pradip Kumar Pal, (2008a) Grey-based taguchi
method for optimization of bead geometry in submerged arc bead-on-plate welding,
International Journal of advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 39, pp1136-1143.
15 Saurav Datta, Asish Bandyopadhyay & Pradip Kumar Pal, (2008b) Application of
Taguchi philosophy for parametric optimization of bead geometry and HAZ width in
submerged arc welding using a mixture of fresh flux and fused flux, International
Journal of advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 36, pp689-698.
16 A. Bhattacharya, A. Batish, P.Kumar, (2012) Experimental Investigation for MultiResponse Optimization of Bead Geometry in Submerged Arc Welding using Grey
Analysis, J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. C 93(2):123132.
17 Hari Om, Sunil Pandey, (2013) Effect of heat input on dilution and heat affected zone in
submerged arc welding process, Indian Academy of Sciences Vol. 38, Part 6, pp. 1369
1391
18 R. S. CHANDEL, H. P. SEOW, F. L. CHEONG, (1998) Effect of metal powder addition
on mechanical properties of submerged arc welds, JOURNAL OF MATERIALS
SCIENCE LETTERS Vol. 17, pp 1785-1786
19 H.C. Wikle, S. Kottilingam, R.H Zee, (2001) Infrared sensing techniques for penetration
depth control of submerged arc welding process, Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, vol. 113, pp228-233.
20 S.D. Bhole, J.B. Nemade, L. Collins, Cheng Liu, (2006) Effect of nickel and
molybdenum additions on weld metal toughness in a submerged arc welded HSLA linepipe steel, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol.173,pp 92100.
21 T. Kannan, N. Murugan, (2006) Effect of flux cored arc welding process parameters on
duplex stainless steel clad quality, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol.176,
pp 230 239.
22 Chandel R S, Seow H P and Cheong F L 1997 Effect of increasing deposition rate on the
bead geometry of submerged arc welds. J. Materials Processing Technol. 72(1):124128
23 Khallaf M E, Ibrahim M A, El-Mahallawy N A and Taha M A (1997) On crack
susceptibility in the submerged arc welding of medium-carbon steel plates. J. Materials
Processing Technol. 68(1): 4349

52

24 Gunaraj V and Murugan N (1999) Prediction and comparison of the area of the heataffected zone for the bead-on-plate and bead-on-joint in submerged arc welding of pipes.
J. Materials Processing Technol. 95(13): 246261
25 Wen SW, Hilton P and Farrugia D C J (2001) Finite element modelling of a submerged
arc welding process. J. Materials Processing Technol. 119(13): 203209
26 Pandey S (2004) Welding current and melting rate in submerged arc welding: A new
approach. Australasian Welding Journal Supplements 49(Second Quarter): 3342
27 Ghosh A, Chattopadhyaya S, Das R K and Sarkar P K (2011a) Assessment of heat
affected zone of submerged arc welding process through digital image processing.
Procedia Engineering 10: 27822785
28 Dhas J E R and Kumanan S (2011) Optimization of parameters of submerged arc weld
using non conventional techniques. Appl. Soft Comput. 11(8): 51985204
29 Ghosh A, Chattopadhyaya S, Das R K and Sarkar P K (2011b) Prediction of submerged
arc welding yield parameters through graphical technique. Procedia Engg.,10:27972802
30 Shen S, Oguocha I N A and Yannacopoulos S (2012) Effect of heat input on weld bead
geometry of submerged arc welded ASTM A709 Grade 50 steel joints. J. Materials
Processing Technol. 212(1): 286294
31 Brijpal Singh, Zahid Akthar Khan and Arshad Noor Siddiquee, (2013) Review on effect
of flux composition on its behavior and bead geometry in submerged arc welding
(SAW), Journal of Mechanical Engineering Research, Vol. 5(7), pp123-127.
32 http://www.metal-mart.com/Dictionary/dictlist.htm
33 http://www.steelforge.com/infoservices/steellog/pdoc.htm
34 http://www.macsteel.com/mdb/general_information/glossary_of_metallurgical_terms.htm
35 Lawrence H. Van Vlack, (1980) Elements of Material Science and Engineering,
4th Edition, Addison-Wesley, p 31-32
36 J. Lancaster, (1992) Handbook of structural welding, Abington Publishing
37 L.-E. Svensson: (1994) Control of microstructure and properties in steel arc welds,CRC
Press, Inc.
38 ASM International, (1997) Weld Integrity and Performance, S. Lampman Tech. Ed.
39 G. M. Evans and N. Bailey, (1999) Metallurgy of basic weld metal, Abington Publishing.
40 P. A. Tichauer (1974), The Submerged Arc Weld in HSLA Line Pipe A State-of-the-Art
a Review, Welding Research Council, vol.201, pp. 1-18.

53

54