ne Brax Soc Mechanical Sones, Vo. XA, Ne 8, 0988-98, 2000, A Quality and Cost Approach for Welding Process Selection César Rozonde Silva Valtair Antonio Ferraresi Américo Scotti Focodade de Engrave Mectica, Uniersdsse Fesaral de Uberind. CP. 9, 4400-902 Uberarcia MG. sscatigmecanie tu ‘he wim of tis work was 0 propose, apply and evaluate @ methodical aporoach to select welding prosenes a productive environment based on market requements of Quy and Cost. A case Pred nae ws Pi welds wore cored ov laboratory, sbmalaing de Jet conivions of a ‘Momfaonoer and ustg several welding proceses: SAMY, GTA. pulsed GTAW, OMA sith COs ir based shicing gases ond pied GMAW. For Qual analysis geometrical aspects of the beads ere consedered and for Cott anabsis, welding parameters and consumable prices (Quantitative indices were proposed and evaluated. ler da, evaluation of hth Quality and Coss Qee'tone showing 10 be possible to select the mast suitable weldimg process 10 a specific cpplicotion taking nto account the mart condions of @ company Rewonts: Quai, sce cost sensibly, process selection welding Introduction The rise of competition has led many companies to pay more atention in their markets in order to fitead them properly. The first step i= to know well the market in which the company stands, Sztermining market requirements (what and how much) in terms of price, quality, product diversity, Gelivery confidence, ete. Besides, is necessary to choose the most sulable fabrication process to a cific situation, among them welding, cotsigering technical and economical viability. The EXistonce of t great number of welding processes in the market, with their variances (alter and pulsed current, lc,). makes the best process choiee for a specific situation dificult Fence, an evaluation met that helps this task is very important o the final results of any company smarket strategy 4 comprehensive and precise analysis to select eorestly a welding process in real situations is very hard and complex, because of many variables involved. An important point i tha, in market Msteay. Quality tnd Costs, as the other reguizements, need to be analyzed as a whole. Tt i not hough simply fo determine thatthe process "A" isthe best in Quality and the process “Bs the best in Costs. There are minimum requirements of Quality and Costs that need to be determined and ached for eoch case, in order 19 be competitive. These requirements depend mainly on the mix tween prodt and market of the company. In fac, the best process will be that one that presents best overall performance, Gne alt sa¥ that the welding Quality is related to the bead and the heat affected zone (HAZ) characteristies, enclosing presence of defects (surface finishing, spattering, cracking, porosity, degree Gf penetation, excessive reinforcement, ec), meekanical proprieties (sreng, toughness, hardness, Gey and chemical composition. Quality isa relative property. To deseribe Quality in a quantitative Sts), a hard task A good or bad Quality is @ function of the requirements for a particular pplication, Welding Costs seem, a fist glance, to he a more measurable property. However, they involve a reat number of compottents, such as welding execution, process selection, personnel training, joint Sesign, equipment definitionisetting and even fabrication simulation. The determination of welding Costs requires to consider welding parameters and prices of consumables, labor, equipment, ete ‘ne must five close aitention to the relevant components of Costs during the determination and Controlreduction of them, Similarly to Quality, a target for low Costs depends on the particular pplication. - Even considering the specificity of ach company and its welded products, Cost analysis, based fon a given welding condition, is relatively achievable, There are, inclusively, softwares for this30 oduetion of the Quality concept in-an overall analysis brings a new hallengerperspective to welding proves selection approaches, Tee et cork anew approach of Quality and Costs overall analysis i proposed ora company that wishes either purpose. However, the int acconting to aket requirements, to sees the best welding process th change orto introduce new fabrication processes. Determination of Welding Quality ‘As mentioned before, the quantitative assessment of Quality ia more complex task than the one for je mentioned peer ork several flrs wee proposed To compose the anaes of Qualls Gas fur re expe as erative indies, ms ollowing. whose tology is bse) 08 sae tree erate (AWS, 1987 and AWS, TORB) (a) graks: (®) porosities: (2) vrekng Phy penetration index: (e) convexity index: and (spatter den Hee ey tltespaince, Others need addtional deseription, The penetration index Pe Lares eating the depth ofthe weld ead (P) (0 the ses chess (ES was dete in peetation i defined as P= 100%, an ineomplete penton ws PF 100% Ser ation ay PY > 100%, The convexity index (Ci) was defined as relations aud an excessive Poveorsument (f) andthe Bead hh (w), percentage (E.2), The sptering between Pes done te ao Between the spalering rae (SE) and the depostion rte ase fe in poteanag. Fo the deteminaion of depsiton effiiency (de), Eis se PI= (pia 10018) 0 C1= (rw) x 100 (6. eo S1=(8/D) x 100 [96 oy = fFetect or Fire) ~P. B= 36x (Mee ~ Micp) sare © ade = D/(Felect of Fire) 100 (97. o Felect = 36x (Miet— Mf are o “ Fring = 60:8 (62 faire 1/4 snore p the weld penoaton fmm), the joint thickness rm isthe Bead reinforegment Tete fa ad wlth mn, the spattering rate gh, D ie poston ate REM Fly Fe eae de aston fate [kg Mil he intiak mass of the covered electrode, before 2 cote liste inal mas ofthe covered clectrade, afer welding [tars he ate drain elgg IB) MAT he ie fusion tae [bay piste wire diameter [mm fig the wis feed rte fru ne ses Sensty (1.85 103 wal, Mp the Hal mas he ae (eu Ag te nal mass ofthe tps Before wedi and dei the depostion ciency (6) “ee Pe sents the Quality titra adopted for te welding assessment. As there i no speci sane eee oiteation and thickness of materiel (<3 mum), these eiteria were defined standards (Smee gandards, general recommendations (ANSV/AWS, 1996; 0, 1992; INW/IS, arn airs experince. based of the expectation of 0 dredging pipe fabricar. In this oer eras thre subjective fevels of Quality were adopted, namely arade A. for highest Cay amg tran aseepable Quality forthe typeof product and sevice, and grade C Fr none scope Welds | | | | Factor,© sa Rezende Siva etal A Cuaity and Cost Arposch fo ‘Tablet. Quality criteria adopted for woding asseesmant Quali Level x B Factor Acceptability (excellent) (good) (bd) Greek [Not acceptable without cracks without eracks with cracks Porosiies Not aceeptable® without without with porosities . porosit porosities a Tider Una 0257 without 0 Uprar 0.25 Umax 0.35 indereuls © Penetration TRHSPIAISAHNTTOGSPICI We TSHSPIMS PTI Inde or Pras ify Tex Sparring fade Sw CIS SISO Umax * maximum deepness ofthe undercuts (rm () Based on ANSVAW D' 186198) 1) Based on SO 5817 (192), (9) Based on mls (1984 Autor’ judgement Determination of Welding Costs Tere are many objectives to have welding Costs calculated, According to Canetti (1992), they can be used for budget elaboration andlor for comparison and selection af welding processes. Machado (1995) states that Costs determination ean be used for composi sate price, helping lake decisions about @ product fabrication opportunity, determining the necessary. investment volume. foe a seperation, preditng modifications owing to fabrication scale ehanges, establishing the principles iswplement « cuiting Cost program and providing assistance 10 a welding process selection. In the Present case, Costs will be used as a balancing parameter during selection of the most sulable Welding process The Costs can he hased on estimate values (estimations of amount of weld te be deposited) or on tual values (amount in act reached in experimental tess). In tis, work. te aoa depoeton amount was used. The reason for thai thal te used join, a butt weld otnt with no eroave aed wap sakes difficult to estimate the amount of weld 10 be deposited. It portant to point out tha, eerg case of grooved joins, each process may deposit-diflerent lieight of reinforcements misconducting calculations. Therefore, to apply the approach for process selection, weldments of lent lates became necessary, simulating real cass, The composition of Costs takes into secount materials, eletricty, labor and equipment. indirect Costs will not he considered, since they are appeenimately the same in ets of contparioon Tha TWO = Me + LC + BC + EPC o phere THC is the Total Welding Costs, IC isthe Material Cost, EC is the Labor Cost, EC isthe Equipment Cost and £PC is the Electrical Power Cost Ail Costs are exp essed in RS (1.00 RS was about 0.90 USS at that tau), sinee It seems to be he most suitable inlex for Welding process selection applied to the study ‘case, Material Coo involves the electrode andlor wire and the gas Costs. The equipment Cost includes the incestinonn, ‘he depreciation and the maintenance Costs The proposed mathematics equations to the determination of each term of the Total Costs (TC) ae presented in Table 2, for all welding processes under evaluation, where de represents, the postion efficiency, that is, the rate between the weld mass deposited and the melted mass ofthe consumable; fo indtetes the operating factor (or duty factor) tha is, the rate between the runnin are duration tine and the total welding time: ce is the electrical efficiency of te equipasen thar factor telling input and output povver and power factor and Pn isthe monthly production of wel given by the number of hours worked in a month (176 hy mullpled by he operating factor Gor) at by ‘the deposition rate (D). For the deposition rate (0} and the deposition efficiency Gee) determinations, Eqs 6 and 8 were used. respectively.4 cht Brae Soe. Mechenia Stenoes, ol XXI No3, po 386-998, 2000 {obte 2 Equetions utes forthe detrmination ofthe Cost. COST FACTORS [RSM] COST DETERMINING EQUATIONS: T MATERIAL (MC) 4.4. Tungsten Blecirade (Ce) Ce= Pe (6X tons 60/100) 1.2. Fleetrode Wire (Cw) Cw = Pw x (Dx 100/48) igus 60/100) 13. Gas Cy CE=PEXREX 1007 bua SS TABOR LEC SFT 100 FopTODY TEQUIPMENT (EC) “1 frvestment (Ci) 3.2, Depreciation (Ca) 3.3. Maintenance (Cm i= Ve xe! 100) x DU (Pix ya X 60/100) d= Vex D/ (Tx Prt x yan x 60/1) sx D/4Pm § tye 8 60/100) [HOO 100) x ty x 60100) price of W elecod temmin Pre an elocroge price [RBIKI:O = seposion rate (MI ge doe Le Rg gs fw ate Umi Sh wedeioperstor sal, ling lxes and dues ae arf ve = equpment valve (R]t= monly inerestat [Pm = mony veld Frere as deprecation time [0 mon; Em = monthly maintenance expanse [RSIMont ‘Suan curent {alr ¥m = woiing mean voltage fea acieney oF ‘heequipment Experimental Procedure ‘To evaluate the proposed approach, a case study was taken, In this ease dredging pipes, are oe erated by butt welding 2-mmthick plain carbon stels. Therefore, welding test plates were framared weing sheets of pai carbon sel (ABNT 1010), with dimensions of 250 um x 50 tm Fe ait configuration, a type joint applied by the manofactrer of dredging pipes was uscd ram uth Fou opening, welding onthe flat position (denominated by the American Weling ‘Socicty — AWS as 16). ie ain exis were earied out using an electronic mul-process welding souree and an autoratig system for welding 1rch translation. The welding setting sas as follows «Shielding Metal re: Welding process (SMAW): 2.O+mm-diameter AWS E-6013 electrode direct current electode positive (DCEP): 0 eee pimuren Are Welding process (GTAW): 4 0-mndiameter AWS WTh-2 electrode, 6mm serum Gp electrode angle of 450, pure Argon sickling eas at 12 Umin, direct eurent ae eee segauve [DCEN), torch angle perpendicular tothe test plate and an 1 Demmediameter SWS ERTOS-6 wire fe from the back ofthe torch: «eC shielded Gas Metal Are Welding process (GMAW): 1.0-mumediameter AWS ERTOS-S oe aie tiigctowork distance (CTWD) of 8 mm, pure CO2 shielding gas at 12 Viin, DCEP. torch angle perpendicular tothe test plate, eee se nittare philded Gas Metal Aro Welding process (GMAWM): 1.Q-anm-diometey Me one é wire, CLWD of [2 mm, 8%CO2-2%02-Ac temary mixture shielding gas at 12 foun, DCEP, torch angle perpendicular to the test plate opened Gas Tungsten Ate Welding process (PGTAW): 4.0-mm-diameter AWS, WTh-2 ree canvare length tp electzode angle of 450, pure Argon shielding eas at 12, Vinin SR Conc angle perpendicular to the test plate and an 10-mm-diameter AWS ERTVS-6 ‘wie fe Irom the back of the tore, « Dulted Gas Metal Are Welding process (PGMAWW): 1,Qsmm-diameter AWS ERI0S<6 wire eae Gets mum, S6sCO22402-Ar temary mixture shielding gas at 12 Vain, CEP, ereh angle perpendicular o the tx plate For the Quality analysis, visual inspection ofthe beads were appied along all their extensions, aiming ind defects such as crack, porosities and undercuts. In adition, the gsoretic parameters imine oft transverse sections ofeach bead were mcasred by a computerized age analyst eoaPor thatthe specimens Were eut off from he tet plates, ground and chemically etched wih ln iodine-based reagent.‘cesar Razende Sha etal: Quality nd Cont Aproae or = For the Cost term calculations, curent, voltage, welding speed, wire feed speed, and gas flow et andior monitored, Welding times and initial and inal mass af the cet plates were also casured (hy chronometer and a digital seal), Results and Discussion Table 3 shows the sevmonitored welding parameters ofeach process. IL is important to point out that hese values rogaré acceptable conditions, yet nt optimized fparameter optimization was not in the pe ofthis work). With the dats from Table 3 and Eqs(4) (3). (6), (7) and (8). the Feece. Fires D.S anc de valves were caleulated and are presented on Table d Quality Analysis Table $ shows the outeome fram the visual analysis and geometric measurements in wo transverse tions, based on the proposed criteria presented in Table | “ables Seumontored waaing parameters used in the tats, Tm Iporvp pb Ne Process (A]_IALor(VI_tms]_{AL_Imsl_(VI_fem'minf [3] favimin Ja) “wan 300 OS ¢ ae 1.800 GMAT - - 36800 WAM 165.0 - a0, PGTAN 2790 3990 A180 42108-80019 131.80 POMAW 7038018 30 S8 282800 12) S538 Inv = woling mean current Ip = nomi] peek current for PGTAW, Vp = nominal pak voltage for PGMAW, ip Tomina peak tne: Ib= nominal bese current t= nominal bate ine; V cminal evel speed age = oma wie feed rt ‘woling mean voltage: tse = r=measurea arene, im deposited wale moe inal 5 ofthe test late. Table 4 Electrode or wire fuson rats, depostion rates epatering ates ana deposition efiiancles, ocess Fan ot Pa TREAT Dish The er Sua Da ‘oa (022 ot GTA 08 0.86 05 ca eae 1st 1.56 028 s aA 239 zw | 29 fg PGT DST as 005 95 POLAT 2.06 ass O31 30 Table 5. Quanitcatn (2) ana Gualty Degree (2D) of the Qualty Factor, Gualiy Facur Sa [ora PomanC | Gwar | Param | Tanna a alo abl o oo] 9 ol 0 bl 0 o> Tacs NP AP RPA TNFa NPAT WPA PNP NP xp_a[xp_a| neal xp_a{ xr a Porosies NP RPA PNP AT NPAT NPA | NP NP xp_a|xr a | np | xp al xe a Thdersts NP a a im] NPA | 020 B|NP_A| NP Aol Blot PB :sot 4 ote Bae Son Menara! Saleces, VoL XI. NO, BB 888 39 Tables. comtives. mp TOYS BP BP BT SC ins ples cls Bl ples clas € apy se BAe Be BY A) eC dp | we A [27 Bl | 8 B eis a [ie BB A B ‘Guay lovl grade 8 for acceptable Quay lov non aeeeptabie Quality eve, 1a parameter sleation optimization of each process is no considered (optimized parameters oul eb to diffrent resulls) and one concentrates only on the objectives ofthe work, the following ‘servations can he extracted from Table 5 Se LAW process preseied, in general, good performance, However, its big problem was the very bag epatter inde [S, seaching 36%, a value much higher than the 20%» considered acceptable seers and PGTAW eid not present good penetration forthe welding speed used, getting (heyy grade Cin this topie. Thay prsened incomplete penetration sone of the iransers Rare a chan the 1 -mn-minimum value acceptable (75% ofthe thie shee). is worth seers chal anh some changes on welding parameters, st would be possible to achieve (trations within the avveptabilty eitera a TRE HC MAW twas the provess that presented the worst results, ‘The most critical factor was iat oF pensation, For this process, it as noticed the necessity of easel aestsom the welding parameters 0 TRS ERIRIWC and GMAWM presented results in conformance with the acceptability erteria, rtiag eeede Aon the factors named cracks, porosiis and undercuts, and B on penetration. ra beig and spatter indexes, Thereby, the processes that presened the best results in Quality ‘were GMAWC and GMAWM. gure 1 shows ti bead transverse sections produced by the GMAWC and GMAWM welding processes (a) GMAWC, Cost Analysis ——| ‘The prices For material labor, equipment. maintenance and electrical power applied into this analysis TES Bieta Table 6 whose figures were practiced on the Uberlindia-MG market at th time. Table Pogctent the exulated Tal Costs and their component foreach pmcess, whieh are iustratd by FSR ane of 2.5% a month was considered forthe interest a (I) used in the equipment cost Pie Talon Operating factor fap ~ 30% Tor SMAW and fop = 65% for the others) and cletrical SIRENS oes 754) were taken base othe Curent erature, such as Machado (199), Canets {1992}, The Lincoln (1973) and AWS (1989)(César Rezende Siva etal A Qualiy and Gost Approach or Table 6. Materia abor, equipment and eeerca power prices. WTleeode’ Gas Tabor Pqulpment Maintenance Flearical Process Electrode Wire Power [RS] ARSke}—_ERSH] [RSV] ERS]___ERS/month]__[R8/kWhy war 7.00 = 6.00 1500.00 i a3 Tara 3502.50 6,006 000,00 25,0005 THe 3.505 10 6,00. 000,00 25,0001 GHAI 25015103 6.004.000.0250 PGTAW 330 2.5012 x 10° 6,00 12.000,00 25.00, O15 GNA = 250131 6.00 1.000,0025,00 0. As can be seen in Table 7 and Pig, 2. GMAWC presented the lowest Total Welding Costs among ine processes under investigation (a the welding conditions ofthis work), This zesult eflets lower Gas'Cost (the cheapest shielding gas), lower Investment and Depreciation Costs (mainly due We lower equipment price) and a lower Electrical Power Cost (low cutren level durisg operation). On the other hand, Wire Cost was higher than for GTAW and POTAW, because these latter processes use lower wire feed speeds (and, consequently, less deposited material “Table 7. Results of partial and total Costs (RE x10. Cos Process “Co Cw gC r Ti 1903 ee ass 261k is 33a Tai 96 0 19 sa 397 GMATN, 7 ss PGT 180 30 st6 PoMaW—- 17195 36 T7607 ‘Ce tungsten electrode Cost; Cw = shielding gas Cost: LC = investment Cost, Cd= deprecation Cos Cm= maltananee Cost EPC = slecttie power Cost: TWE= Tota Widing Cost, The GTAW achieved a very good positon (sceond place), because of the medium equipment slue aud, mainly the low Wite Cost (low deposition rae). It is worth to mention that inthis process fe is no need of a great amount of deposited material (duet the joint configuration, et 8 deepe penetration = require. The GMAWM presented Total Costs 42% higher than for GMAWC, The main eause of this Gifference is the Gas Cost (mixture price three times higher than for CO2), followed by the Wite Cost ¢higher deposition rate, Excluding SMAW, the PGMAW was the process that presented the highest Total Welding Costs, because of the high Wite Cost (high deposition rite), Gas Cost (high gos price) and Investment and! Depreciation Costs high equipment value). The SMAW process presented the highes: Total Costs (already expected), reaching a value close to four times higher than forthe oer processes which used shielding gas. The main reason for this high Cost i the Labor Cos, owing 10 the low sweiding speed and to the low operation factor88 4 ottn Braz, Soe Mechaiea Slenes, Vol XI, No, pp 888-098, 2000 Ds 2 rs 2 2 < # 500 = 0 2 2 ¢ FE = Peg EEE Fig. 2. Results for paral and total Cost. Another approach of analysis is (0 consider the weighted fraction of each Cost componsat (Material, Labor, Equipment and Electrical Power) in relation to the Total Welding Costs, Table 8 Shaws these results, As presented, the Material and Labor Costs factors had significant influence in ‘every process wilh gaseous shiciding, in which these two components were responsible for more than 80% ofthe Cosis, except forthe PGTAW. The Fleerieal Power Cost stayed ima very low level bot significance For all the processes (< 86) ‘Table & Percontie clstbuton ofeach Factor on the analysis of Cost (3). ‘Masral Labor Equipment’ esincal Total Process Cost Cost Cost___PowerCost_ Costs Sail @ 36 7 7 100 ora an a1 ii + 70 Gane B a 2 a To Garaivat ST 3 6 z i Para i El 19 < 100. PGMA 30 ED ie 3 100. Analysis of Cost Sensitivity [As much important as t9 determine the Costs of a process isto deine the importance of each factor ‘nto the composition ofthe final Cost. A mean of doing this is through Analysis of Cost Sensiivity. ‘This analysis was cated out festly by electing some factors that once varied would affect the cosi, but with no intluenee on the welding parameter stings, such as fop (operating factor). Pw (sire price), Pe (shielding gas price), Sw (Welder‘operator salary) and Ve (equipment value). One car predict that travel sped (tgpcedh for instance, Would affect Significantly the final cost. However, is [etion on the welding parameter setting is also remarkable, that i, speed variation leads to a new Welding setting to keep the same bead Quality, Secondly, each oF those factors was systematically ‘Varied from the inital value (far example, ~ 10%, = 25% +50% and > 100% or up toa reasonable increment) simulating a seenario of facor variations, and the outcome of each factor variation on the ‘Total Welding Cosi is plotied, as can be seen in Fig. 3 ‘a eg van bbosvuaeCcésarRazende Sa etal: A Quaty ana Cost Approach wer hen, visual analysis of te plots is employed to assess the signiffeanes ofthe eetor variations (sensitivity) The more signfieat the factor, the more altention #8 needed, in onder 10 get a cost optimization, i, significant reduction of Total Welling Costs, ” 8 pte vant (@oMawe i) GMAWM Fig. 3. Plot of the Analysos of Coat Sensitivity, ache vara 5) Figure 3 shows the analyses of sensitivity for the GMAWC (process of lower Total Costs} and OMAWM (process of higher Quality). One can notice that variations of Sw (welder‘operator salar) and, in a second position, op (eperating faciox) causes the largest variations in the Cost forthe GMAWE, while their significance decreases for GMAWM atthe expense of the Pe (gas pre). This lysis chows that 10 bevome the process CMAWM also competitive, in tems of Coss (it already competitive in tens of Quality), ane must care mainly about the reduction of the gas pri Process Selection, Based on Quality and Costs he approach proposed in this work for welding process selection wses a balance between Quality and Cost. Applying tis epproach fo fin the mos! suitable welding process for the piven product. the results have shou that, considering Quality only, both GMAWC and GMAWM processes preseated the best performaness. Therefore, the chosen process must be the ane betvesn theve tivo processes that presemed, in addition, the lowest Total Welding Costs, In relation to Costs, the GMAWC was the one that presemed the lowest Total Welding Coss, followed by GTAW. The GMAWM showed Total Cosis 42% higher than GMAWC., fut that leads i 10 less competitiveness. Hence, the GMAWC process was the one that presented the best Quality and Cost performances, considering the welding test conditions as representative and suitable Therefore, this is the process seleted for the application Conclusions From the proposed approach and systematics presented for the welding process selection, based on the best global performance of Quality and Cost analyses (inthis ease, applied lo weld thin sheets of carbon sie), iis possible to conclude that: The selection of te best welding process is possible to a certain industrial activity, considering the best global pecformance of Quality and Costs, aczording to market requirements ofthe company The procedure utilized inthis work showeel fo be suitable tool to this ait Assuming the data used in this work as representative and the welding conditions in each process adequate, the best process for welding the manulacturr product in study would be the GMAW process {Cp pure shielding gas) and the worst one would be the SMAW: According to the Analysis of Cost Sensitivity, the factor welder’operator salary, among the analyzed factors, was the one that tost impact causes in the Total Welding Casts, but this can vary ecording to the process and/or welding parameter seing |ss “ote Bre See. Mechanea Slencos, VoL XI, No. pp 888-98, 2000, Acknowledgements “The authors wish to thank DRAGAS HEFPEL LTDA. forthe support and supply of test materials rant University of Uberlandia, forthe tecbnial support and use of laborataris, both Tocated in Uberlindia, MG, Brazil References ANSWAWS D1.1:96, 1996," AWS Strtural Welding Code ~ Stel”, AWS, USA, 40 p - AAR AAS Pang Handbook» Vol: Welding Technology” 8th Ed. AWS. USA, 638p, AWS L988, "Guide forthe Viet Inspection of Welds”, AWS, USA. Aaa eee ee tttcy ms processor de soldage In Waiter. Brandl SD. & de Mello, ED ldiger:procesose meaufa, Fagard Blusher. Brazil cap. 11- pp rev ta, Seiten! Detects ine Welded Jos in Stat Matis «Clases of Reger ‘Welding ty the World, Vol 22, No.12, pp 34-52 180 S410 02 areel ded Hints Stel guidance on qui eves for imperfections aoa ee ys SA tmmom, ds Soldagen™ Anais do XXI Eneorro Nacional de Tetnologis ‘Geigagen, VolM, esis do Sal, Braz, 9p 999-1013 Beet ene conpany 1973, The Pred Handbook of Ave Wein”, YA 8, Lincoln Else Usa. ascrit eceived: Aust 198. Techie! Ester Alison Roche Maenaco