The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Supporting imaging of austenitic welds with finite element welding simulation—which parameters matter?

Supporting imaging of austenitic welds with finite element welding simulation—which parameters matter?
Supporting imaging of austenitic welds with finite element welding simulation—which parameters matter?

The basic principle of ultrasound is to relate the time of flight of a received echo to the location of a reflector, assuming a known and constant velocity of sound. This assumption breaks down in austenitic welds, in which a microstructure with large oriented austenitic grains induces local velocity differences resulting in deviations of the ultrasonic beam. The inspection problem is further complicated by scattering at grain boundaries, which introduces structural noise and attenuation. Embedding material information into imaging algorithms usually improves image quality and aids interpretation. Imaging algorithms can take the weld structure into account if it is known. The usual way to obtain such information is by metallurgical analysis of slices of a representative mock-up fabricated using the same materials and welding procedures as in the actual component. A non-destructive alternative to predict the weld structure is based on the record of the welding procedure, using either phenomenological models or the finite element method. The latter requires detailed modelling of the welding process to capture the weld pool and the microstructure formation. Several parameters are at play, and uncertainties intrinsically affect the process owing to the limited information available. This paper reports a case study aiming to determine the most critical parameters and levels of complexity of the weld formation models from the perspective of ultrasonic imaging. By combining state-of-the-art welding simulation with time-domain finite element prediction of ultrasound in complex welds, we assess the impact of the modelling choices on the offset and spatial spreading of defect signatures. The novelty of this work is in linking welding simulation with ultrasonic imaging and quantifying the effect of the common assumptions in solidification modelling from the non-destructive examination perspective. Both aspects have not been explored in the literature to date since solidification modelling has not been used to support ultrasonic inspection extensively. The results suggest that capturing electrode tilt, welding power, and weld path correctly is less significant. Bead shape was identified as having the greatest influence on delay laws used to compute ultrasonic images. Most importantly, we show that neglecting mechanical deformation in FE, allowing for simpler thermal simulation supplemented with a phenomenological grain growth loop, does not reduce the quality of the images considerably. Our results offer a pragmatic balance between the complexity of the model and the quality of ultrasonic images and suggest a perspective on how weld formation modelling may serve inspections and guide pragmatic implementation.

austenitic welds, delay laws, non-destructive evaluation (NDE), solidification, total focusing method, ultrasonic imaging, ultrasonic testing, weld formation, weld inspection, welding simulation
2076-3417
Kalkowski, Michał K.
6f0d01ef-7f44-459c-82a2-03f9e1275eda
Bézi, Zoltán
0ffc5e28-4a00-474c-96c9-590fcc81bec7
Lowe, Michael J.S.
ea054a45-8b1d-498f-bdf8-995973f76ed7
Schumm, Andreas
c4fe1be7-4e7b-4d21-8d8b-ad9e967ae1aa
Spisák, Bernadett
bf26102f-ff9e-4328-84fb-4c7ad0ad1aef
Szavai, Szabolcs
5a1008b4-63ee-4a08-8d40-9288b309b877
Kalkowski, Michał K.
6f0d01ef-7f44-459c-82a2-03f9e1275eda
Bézi, Zoltán
0ffc5e28-4a00-474c-96c9-590fcc81bec7
Lowe, Michael J.S.
ea054a45-8b1d-498f-bdf8-995973f76ed7
Schumm, Andreas
c4fe1be7-4e7b-4d21-8d8b-ad9e967ae1aa
Spisák, Bernadett
bf26102f-ff9e-4328-84fb-4c7ad0ad1aef
Szavai, Szabolcs
5a1008b4-63ee-4a08-8d40-9288b309b877

Kalkowski, Michał K., Bézi, Zoltán, Lowe, Michael J.S., Schumm, Andreas, Spisák, Bernadett and Szavai, Szabolcs (2023) Supporting imaging of austenitic welds with finite element welding simulation—which parameters matter? Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 13 (13), [7448]. (doi:10.3390/app13137448).

Record type: Article

Abstract

The basic principle of ultrasound is to relate the time of flight of a received echo to the location of a reflector, assuming a known and constant velocity of sound. This assumption breaks down in austenitic welds, in which a microstructure with large oriented austenitic grains induces local velocity differences resulting in deviations of the ultrasonic beam. The inspection problem is further complicated by scattering at grain boundaries, which introduces structural noise and attenuation. Embedding material information into imaging algorithms usually improves image quality and aids interpretation. Imaging algorithms can take the weld structure into account if it is known. The usual way to obtain such information is by metallurgical analysis of slices of a representative mock-up fabricated using the same materials and welding procedures as in the actual component. A non-destructive alternative to predict the weld structure is based on the record of the welding procedure, using either phenomenological models or the finite element method. The latter requires detailed modelling of the welding process to capture the weld pool and the microstructure formation. Several parameters are at play, and uncertainties intrinsically affect the process owing to the limited information available. This paper reports a case study aiming to determine the most critical parameters and levels of complexity of the weld formation models from the perspective of ultrasonic imaging. By combining state-of-the-art welding simulation with time-domain finite element prediction of ultrasound in complex welds, we assess the impact of the modelling choices on the offset and spatial spreading of defect signatures. The novelty of this work is in linking welding simulation with ultrasonic imaging and quantifying the effect of the common assumptions in solidification modelling from the non-destructive examination perspective. Both aspects have not been explored in the literature to date since solidification modelling has not been used to support ultrasonic inspection extensively. The results suggest that capturing electrode tilt, welding power, and weld path correctly is less significant. Bead shape was identified as having the greatest influence on delay laws used to compute ultrasonic images. Most importantly, we show that neglecting mechanical deformation in FE, allowing for simpler thermal simulation supplemented with a phenomenological grain growth loop, does not reduce the quality of the images considerably. Our results offer a pragmatic balance between the complexity of the model and the quality of ultrasonic images and suggest a perspective on how weld formation modelling may serve inspections and guide pragmatic implementation.

Text
applsci-13-07448-v2 - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (9MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 20 June 2023
e-pub ahead of print date: 23 June 2023
Published date: July 2023
Additional Information: Funding Information: This work is supported by the ADVISE project (www.advise-h2020.eu accessed on 10 July 2023) funded by the Euratom research and training programme 2014–2018 under grant agreement no. 755500.
Keywords: austenitic welds, delay laws, non-destructive evaluation (NDE), solidification, total focusing method, ultrasonic imaging, ultrasonic testing, weld formation, weld inspection, welding simulation

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 481644
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/481644
ISSN: 2076-3417
PURE UUID: 38bef2c6-5628-42e7-ac70-024b04eac730

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 05 Sep 2023 16:49
Last modified: 05 Jun 2024 18:48

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Zoltán Bézi
Author: Michael J.S. Lowe
Author: Andreas Schumm
Author: Bernadett Spisák
Author: Szabolcs Szavai

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×