0
Research Papers: Materials and Fabrication

Fast Computation Based on an Iterative Substructure Method for Three-Dimensional Simulation of Multipass Welding

[+] Author and Article Information
Akira Maekawa

Institute of Nuclear Safety System, Inc.,
64 Sata, Mihama-cho, Mikata-gun,
Fukui 919-1205, Japan
e-mail: maekawa@inss.co.jp

Hisashi Serizawa

Joining and Welding Research Institute,
Osaka University,
11-1 Mihogaoka, Ibaraki,
Osaka 567-0047, Japan
e-mail: serizawa@jwri.osaka-u.ac.jp

Hidekazu Murakawa

Joining and Welding Research Institute,
Osaka University,
11-1 Mihogaoka, Ibaraki,
Osaka 567-0047, Japan
e-mail: murakawa@jwri.osaka-u.ac.jp

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received January 16, 2014; final manuscript received November 17, 2014; published online February 23, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Xian-Kui Zhu.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 137(4), 041410 (Aug 01, 2015) (11 pages) Paper No: PVT-14-1005; doi: 10.1115/1.4029189 History: Received January 16, 2014; Revised November 17, 2014; Online February 23, 2015

An efficient and reliable numerical analysis for three-dimensional (3D) multipass welding simulation is proposed in this paper. A fast analysis method to calculate 3D residual stress distribution in the multipass welds using the iterative substructure method (ISM) was developed and validated using other numerical analysis and measurement results. First, the analysis results by the developed method were compared with those by a conventional method using a commercial finite element analysis code. The comparisons were made for the analysis accuracy and the computational speed of the residual stress analysis in a multipass welded pipe joint. Both sets of analysis results for residual stress agreed well with each other. Furthermore, it was clarified that the developed analysis method could calculate the residual stress in a shorter computing time than the conventional analysis method. Next, the residual stress of the pipe joint computed by the developed analysis method was compared with measurement results obtained using the strain gauge method, and the good analysis accuracy was shown. Consequently, these comparisons demonstrated that the developed method for multipass welding simulation based on the ISM could calculate the residual stress distribution much faster at high analysis accuracy even when the size of the welding problems, such as for multipass welding, was large.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Concept of the ISM: (a) linear region (pseudo-elastic behavior) and (b) Nonlinear region (elastic–plastic behavior)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Computation procedure of the ISM: (a) large scale welding problem, (b) separating the problem into linear problem and nonlinear problem, and (c) redefining nonlinear problem region in accordance with heat source movement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Test piece of welded pipe joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Dimensions and shape of groove

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Cross-sectional photo of welded pipe joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Relationship between true stress and true plastic strain used for abaqus code

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Temperature-dependent properties of material constants, (a) density ρ and specific heat c, (b) heat conductivity λ and linear expansion coefficient α, (c) Young’s modulus E and Poisson’s ratio ν, and (d) initial yield stress σY

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Simplified measurement method for 3D normal stresses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of temperature between heat conduction analysis and measurement, (a) 1st pass at 0 deg and 90 deg, (b) 1st pass at 180 deg and 270 deg, (c) 2nd pass at 0 deg and 90 deg, and (d) 2nd pass at 180 deg and 270 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pipe axial distribution of hoop residual stress, (a) hoop stress on inner surface at 0 deg, (b) hoop stress on inner surface at 180 deg, (c) hoop stress on outer surface at 0 deg, and (d) hoop stress on outer surface at 180 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Pipe axial distribution of axial residual stress, (a) axial stress on inner surface at 0 deg, (b) axial stress on inner surface at 180 deg, (c) axial stress on outer surface at 0 deg, and (d) axial stress on outer surface at 180 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Through-thickness distribution of hoop residual stress at 0 deg, (a) hoop stress at 5 mm from weld edge, and (b) hoop stress at 20 mm from weld edge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Through-thickness distribution of hoop residual stress at 180 deg, (a) hoop stress at 5 mm from weld edge and (b) hoop stress at 20 mm from weld edge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Through-thickness distribution of axial residual stress at 0 deg, (a) axial stress at 5 mm from weld edge and (b) axial stress at 20 mm from weld edge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Through-thickness distribution of axial residual stress at 180 deg, (a) axial stress at 5 mm from weld edge, and (b) axial stress at 20 mm from weld edge

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In