Professional Documents
Culture Documents
WELDING RESEARCH
RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
SUPPLEMENT TO THE WELDING JOURNAL, JANUARY 1999
Sponsored by the American Welding Society and the Welding Research Council
Parameters Values
RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
AN 30°
CL 22.0 mm
CR 4.8 mm
HH 6.0 mm
HS 10.0 mm
HW 6.0 mm
MN 0.6 mm
SB 6.4 mm
SH 15.0 mm
ST 6.0 mm
TD 9.0 mm
TI 1.6 mm
TO 2.4 mm
TW 3.0 mm
Electrode/
Parameters Tube Water
1.818 0 1213
1.818 5 1213
Fig. 3 — Finite element model. 1.818 25 1211
Table 4 — Estimated Convective and Radiant Heat Losses at Steady State 25 W/m2-K (Ref. 6), with a zero value
simulating a completely insulated condi-
Convection Radiation tion. Table 3 shows the effect of the mag-
Surface Temperature Length Radius Area Heat Loss Heat Loss nitude of the heat transfer coefficient on
RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
Number (K) (mm) (mm) (mm2) (W) (W) the maximum tip surface temperature.
These values were calculated using
1 1018 0.35 3.12 6.86 0.12 0.41 steady-state thermal analysis, ignoring
2 957 0.69 3.47 15.04 0.25 0.71
3 855 0.87 4.16 22.74 0.32 0.68
radiation. It appears that convection in
4 651 4.85 6.24 190.15 1.70 1.86 free air is not important; therefore, unless
5 549 1.73 8.67 94.24 0.60 0.45 otherwise noted, convection in free air
6 549 5.20 9.19 300.26 1.92 1.42 will not be considered further.
7 446 5.03 9.19 290.45 1.11 0.53 The convective heat loss from the ex-
8 446 2.60 7.80 127.42 0.49 0.23 terior surface can be found by Newton’s
9 344 14.21 6.41 572.31 0.73 0.22
Law (Ref. 6) of cooling,
Total 7.25 6.51
Qi = hAi (Ti – To)
Note: For locations of surfaces in the cap, refer to Fig. 2.
where h is the convective heat transfer
coefficient. (For free convection in air, h
of identification, the end part of the cap The temperature independent material has a maximum value of 25 W/m2-K as
marked “TW” in Fig. 2 is referred to as the properties of the fluid elements (water in mentioned above.) Qi denotes the heat
tip. The shaded region represents the the cooling chamber) and the solid loss on surface i with area Ai, Ti is the
electrode tip body and water tube. The (electrode and water tube) are given in temperature on surface Ai and To is the
water tube has inner (TI) and outer (TO) Table 2. ambient temperature. With an ambient
radii. The water passage in the cooling Two types of boundary conditions temperature of 200°C (392°F) and Ti ob-
chamber has an outer radius of CR and a were applied to the finite element model tained from the temperature distribution
total length of CL. MN represents the as follows: in the electrode, a maximum total con-
clearance between the water tube and 1) Mechanical or flow boundary con- vective heat loss from the weld cap can
conical base of the cooling chamber. ditions — the water flow rate into the be estimated. Values for various surfaces
Other designations are self-explanatory. water tube and the water pressure in the of the cap are shown in Table 4. The total
Water tubes in production use have a cooling chamber. Various flow rates rang- heat loss was found to be 7.25 W, which
beveled end; however, by assuming a ing from 1.7 L/min (0.4 gal/min) to 7.3 would cause a tip surface temperature
squared-off end for the water tube as L/min (1.9 gal/min) were used for previous change of less than ~2°C (~35.6°F).
shown in Fig. 2, a 2-D rather than 3-D experimental investigations (Refs. 3, 4). The net radiant heat exchange of an
axisymmetrical model can be used to fur- Although actual production flow rates ideal black body from surface i and its
ther shorten the computational time. were not available at the time of this anal- surroundings, with an absolute tempera-
Using the geometry described in Fig. ysis, a rate of 3.79 L/min (1.00 gal/min), ture of To, is given by the Stefan-Boltz-
2, an axisymmetric parametric model which is believed to be typical of the flow mann (Ref. 6) equation:
was generated with ANSYS Parametric rate employed in practice, was used for
Design Language (Ref. 9). The model was this study. Ei = σεAi [Ti4 – To4]
then “map-meshed” with FLOTRAN/ 2) Thermal boundary conditions —
= 5.67*[(Ti /100)4 – (To /100)4].
ANSYS FLUID141 quadrilateral ele- the free convection and radiation from
ments — Fig. 3. Note the fine mesh near the exterior face of the electrode and In this equation, Ti is the absolute tem-
the water/electrode interfaces and at the power input to the tip. perature of body surface i, σ is a constant
exterior surface of the electrode, where Values of the convective heat transfer with a value of 5.67* 10–8 W/m2-K, and
high-temperature gradients are expected. coefficients in free air varied from 5 to ε is the emissivity. For an ideal black
Fig. 4 — Experimental power input (dashed line) and analytic power Fig. 5 — Temperature histories of tip working surface and water interface
input (solid line). for two power input levels.
RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
Fig. 6 — Maximum transient temperature distribution in electrode. Fig. 8 — Maximum transient temperature vs. power amplitude ratio.
RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
former power value was used to estimate
the maximum convective and radiant
heat loss as shown in Table 4.
The computational fluid dynamics
software FLOTRAN does not permit the
use of a ramped power waveform for
input. While a sinusoidal power input
could have been approximated by a step
waveform composed of small steps, this
would have made the computational
time extremely long. To simplify the cal-
culation, the sinusoidal power input de-
picted in Fig. 4 was replaced by a step
power input, as shown by the solid curve
in Fig. 5. For each half-cycle of alternat-
ing current (AC), the amplitude of the
stepped power was set equal to one half
of the maximum amplitude of the cor-
responding test power for that particular
ac cycle period. Thus, for each AC cycle,
the energy of the stepped power was ap-
proximately equal to that of the corre-
sponding measured power. There were
23 load steps for the transient simulation.
For the purposes of subsequent discus-
sion, this power input will be termed
“Half Amplitude Power.” An additional
simulation was performed using a power
input twice as large. This latter simulation
will be termed “Full Amplitude Power.”
Results of Simulations
Fig. 10 — Finite element model and temperature distribution for bulk resistive heating of weld
The temperature changes during the cap.
weld cycle at two locations along the line
of axisymmetry of the weld cap are
shown in Fig. 5. The maximum tip sur- power amplitude
face temperature for the Half Amplitude ratio from 0.5 to
Power simulation, 905 K, occurred at the 1.0 — Fig. 7. How-
first half of the last AC cycle. The tem- ever, the water tem-
perature at the cap/water interface, how- perature showed
ever, increased very slowly, and was only only a small in-
309 K at the end of the heating cycle. The crease in tempera-
maximum transient temperature distri- ture to 330 K from
bution for this current cycle is plotted in that determined
Fig. 6. previously. Tem-
Experimental evidence (Ref. 10) indi- perature profiles
cated there were traces of melting of the along the axis of
aluminum workpiece at the tip contact the cap at the end
area. Since aluminum alloys typically of the weld cycle
show incipient melting at temperatures of for both power sim-
~900 K, the tip surface temperature in ulations are shown
this simulation was quite accurately pre- in Fig. 8. The tem-
dicted. Discrepancies may be attributed perature gradients
to the slight underestimation of the near the tip surface
stepped power input and the fact that the and also in the
model did not include the heat contribu- cooling water near
tion from the faying surface and Joule the cap/water inter-
heating. face (9.0 mm from
At the end of the weld cycle, the max- the tip surface)
imum tip surface temperature increased were large.
from 905 to 1518 K by doubling the input A linear regres-
sion was performed on the maximum tip the heat transfer coefficient were taken temperature increased ~70°C (~158°F)
surface and water interface temperatures — 150 and 15,000 W/m2-K (Ref. 6). due to the interface resistance heating
attained at the end of the weld cycle. Fig- Figure 10 shows the model, including and ~35°C due to the bulk resistance
ure 8 shows that the maximum tip tem- the resistive heating from the workpiece, heating in one weld cycle. The bulk re-
RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT/RESEARCH/DEVELOPMENT
perature varies linearly with the power as well as heat loss from the workpiece sistance heating increased the cap tip
amplitude ratio. It is notable that this lin- surface, for the case with the lowest heat temperature by ~127°C (~260.6°F).
ear relationship also held at other loca- transfer coefficient. The temperature con- A simple linear relationship between
tions along the axis of axisymmetry. tours are indicated and Fig. 11 shows the the temperature and the input power
Temperature deviations between the temperature profile along the centerline amplitude ratio was found, indicating a
FLOTRAN and linear regression results axis of the weld cap, from the weld tip in- conduction dominant heat transfer
are small for the half amplitude power terface with the workpiece to the water problem. No significant temperature
input, as shown in Fig. 9. The linear rela- chamber. The maximum temperature changes were found for a decrease of
tion implies that this is a conduction- reached at the water/electrode interface water flow rate from 3.79 to 2.24 L/min,
dominant thermal problem, a conclusion by the end of the weld cycle is ~35°C or a decrease of the cap depth from 9.00
supported by the insignificant convection (~95°F), and the calculated maximum to 6.35 mm. This lack of change may be
and radiation losses described previously. temperature at the same position was attributed to a slow thermal response of
Other parametric studies were also only slightly lower for the case with the the electrode for a fast heating rate.
performed, including changing the flow highest heat transfer coefficient.
rate from 3.79 to 2.24 L/min and chang- Although these two heating sources References
ing the cap depth — TD in Fig. 2 — from separately do not cause the water tem-
1. Hensel, F. R., Larsen, E. I., and Holt,
9.00 to 6.35 mm. For the same power perature to increase to the boiling point
E. F. 1941. Thermal gradients in spot welding
ratio, the differences in maximum tem- of water, in combination it is seen that electrodes. Welding Journal 20(12).
perature caused by these changes were water temperatures in excess of 100°C 2. Hess, W. F., Wyant, R. A., Stabler, O. E.,
insignificant, which is typical for compo- (212°F) may be attained. The maximum and Winsor, F. J. 1943. A study of the applica-
nents with a slow thermal response but a water temperature caused by the heat tion of refrigeration to the cooling of spot-
fast heating rate. generated at the weld tip/workpiece in- welding electrodes. Welding Journal 22(11).
3. Browne, D. J., Chandler, H. W., Evans,
One limitation of the model used in terface is ~70°C (~158°F) combined with
J. T., and Wen, J. 1995. Computer simulation
this analysis lies in the assumption of the temperature increase caused by cur- of resistance spot welding in aluminum: Part I.
complete contact at the electrode cap/ rent flow in the electrode tip body, ~35°C Welding Journal 74(10): 339-s to 344-s.
workpiece interface. In reality, because (~95°F) — Fig. 5. 4. Browne, D., Newton, C., and Keay, B.
of irregular surface contours of each sur- The observation of water boiling does 1996. Aluminum and steel resistance spot
face, actual physical contact is initially place a limitation on one of the assump- welding: Modelling the differences. Advanced
Technologies & Processes, IBEC ’96, pp.
made over a limited number of individ- tions used in the analysis, i.e., there was
50–57.
ual contact points. Consequently, very no change of state for the coolant. How- 5. Ikeda, R., Yasuda, K., Hashiguchi, K.,
high, but extremely local, temperatures ever, since water boiling was predicted to Okita, T., and Yahaba, T. 1995. Effect of elec-
will be reached (Ref. 11) before any sig- occur in only a small region, the as- trode configuration on electrode life in resis-
nificant temperature increase occurs in sumption appears to be plausible. The tance spot welding of galvannealed steel and
the main bulk of the cap. This aspect of results highlight the difficulty faced when aluminum alloy for car body sheets. Advanced
Technologies & Processes, IBEC ’95, pp.
the model is discussed below. spot welding low-melting-point-temper-
144–151.
ature metals such as aluminum, i.e., that 6. Chapman, A. J. 1987. Fundamentals of
Resistive Heating of the Weld Cap the electrode tip working surface rapidly Heat Transfer. Macmillan, N.Y.
reaches temperatures of the same magni- 7. Keung, K. S. 1992. Conjugate heat
Results of the previous analysis indi- tude as the melting point and that con- transfer and stress analysis of the 1.91 CFI en-
cate that the water temperature is not ap- tamination of the tip by alloying will gine production exhaust valve. SRL Technical
preciably raised by one welding cycle of Report No. SR-92-126.
quickly occur.
8. FLOTRAN. Compuflo Inc., Charlottes-
heat input, although the working surface ville, Va.
of the electrode weld tip reaches temper- Conclusions 9. ANSYS User’s Manual for Rev. 5.1,
atures sufficient to melt aluminum. 1994.
While water temperatures in the vicinity A parametric model that uses conju- 10. Thornton, P. H., Krause, A. R., and
of the fill tube were not measured directly gate heat analysis and does not require Davies, R. G. 1995. Spot weld brazing of alu-
(generally only the exit water tempera- heat transfer coefficients was developed minum alloys. Proc. Int. Symp. Met. Adv. Light
Metals Industries, CIM, Vancouver, B.C., pp.
ture was monitored at a point remote to predict the transient thermal behavior 217–228.
from the weld cap interior), scaling on of spot welding electrodes. The analysis 11. Thornton, P. H., Krause, A. R., and
the interior surface of the weld cap was indicated that convective and radiant Davies, R. G. 1997. Contact resistance of
taken as evidence that water can boil lo- heat losses were not important. Maxi- aluminum. Welding Journal 76(8): 331-s to
cally during the welding operation (Ref. mum tip surface temperatures of the 341-s.
12). Joule heating due to the bulk resis- same magnitude as the melting point of 12. Boomer, D. R. 1997. Alcan Interna-
tional Limited, private communication.
tance of the electrode could contribute to aluminum alloys were calculated. The
this effect. To calculate the transient Joule rapid temperature development at the
heating, a second, classical heat analysis working surface of the electrode high-
was performed using typical values for lights the difficulties to be expected in de-
the heat transfer coefficient for the ther- signing electrode tips for spot welding
mal boundary condition and the same metals with low melting points, since tip
current input of 10 cycles, 21 kA RMS surface temperatures approaching the
used for the conjugate heat transfer melting point of the material being spot
analysis. For comparison, two values for welded are rapidly attained. The water