All the parameters remain the same!
If Yes
What might be the reason for the same? (other than the influence of longitudinal heat flow).
If No
Can anyone suggest an article with 2D(plane stress) and 3D thermal analysis using the Goldak double ellipsoidal model in the arc welding process?
Good day! The difference between 2D and 3D approaches consists in applicability of 2D approximation for specific problem. As far as I understand, you consider the fast moving heat source. So, the question is whether the source is really “fast” and the longitudinal heat propagation rate is lower. If not, you have some preheating of weld zone for 3D case and higher maximum temperatures. Another effect of heat input modification is the change of heat dissipation: heat input could be the same, but dissipation through atmosphere and radiation can be different.
For to ensure the absence of the error in heat balance, you can perform 2D and 3D calculations without surface heat losses with subsequent comparison of the total enthalpy of welded specimen.
Alexey Milenin Thank you for the comment.
Keeping all the parameters including velocity and heat source parameters same; Does the heat propagation rate will change?. What I understood was the initial node at the starting point of the weld in the 3D and the 2D should have the same temperature, keeping parameters the same. In 3D as the heat source moves on the nodes will get heated up before the heat source reaches, results in higher temperature in 3D. Is that concept right, since we are keeping the parameters the same?
Also is there any way to check the total enthalpy in the Abaqus?
Yes, the thing is that next node of welding source pass in 3D is somewhat heated (that could be treated as some level of preliminary heating) and the lower the welding rate is the higher is the temperature of such preheating.
The simplest way to compare the final enthalpy is to let specimen cool down to uniform temperature (without surface dissipation!).
Alexey Milenin I have verified the results after cooling down to uniform temperature. Crosschecked the temperature difference numerically and analytically(Q=m*cp*dt). The results were of only 1% error.
So I came to a conclusion that
We can't conclude that the 2D temperature is always higher than the 3D temperature, it depends on various factors like velocity and heat source parameters. I hope this is right?
Anoop Pillai , if 3D calculation has been performed correctly (for example, residual enthalpy should be equal to input energy of weld heat source), the difference between 2D and 3D approached could be explained with inaccuracy of 2D approximation (your process is not so two-dimensional). But if this difference corresponds the expected accuracy of you results, you can use 2D approximation without hesitation. And yes, 2D temperature could be higher or lower than 3D results depending correlation between thermal conductivity of material and welding rate as well as the total stationarity of the processes, etc.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Thermal Engineering
- Thermofluid
- Heat Transfer