Author Affiliations
1Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China2Center of Materials Science and Optoelectronics Engineering, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China3School of Engineering Science, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the laser welding of dissimilar metals
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of the calculation model
Fig. 3. Cross-section of the molten pool. (a) Simulation result; (b) experimental result
Fig. 4. Calculation and experimental results of the element distribution
Fig. 5. Evolution of the molten pool. (a) Geometry profile and the distribution of Fe elements on the top surface; (b) geometric dimensions
Fig. 6. Distribution of Fe elements and liquid velocity on the cross section of the molten pool. (a) Relative position of the cross section; (b) plane 1; (c) plane 2; (d) plane 3
Fig. 7. Orthogonal simulation results of the process parameter correlation
Fig. 8. Mass fraction of Fe element in the longitudinal section. (a) Vscan=10 mm/s; (b) Vscan=20 mm/s; (c) Vscan=30 mm/s
Fig. 9. Mass fraction of Fe element under different offsets. (a) Longitudinal section; (b) cross section
Fig. 10. Distribution of Fe element under different parameters. (a) Parameters before adjustment; (b) parameters after adjustment
C | Si | Cr | Ni | Fe |
---|
0.08 | 1.8 | 19.0 | 11.0 | Bal. |
|
Table 1. Mass fraction of elements in 304SS material unit: %
Factor | Level |
---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
---|
Q /W | 600 | 700 | 800 | 900 | 1000 | doffset /μm | -100 | -50 | 0 | 50 | 100 | Vscan /(mm·s-1) | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 |
|
Table 2. Design of orthogonal parameters
No. | Q /W | doffset /μm | Vscan /(mm·s-1) | Caver /% | No. | Q /W | doffset /μm | Vscan /(mm·s-1) | Caver /% |
---|
1 | 600 | -100 | 10 | 29.74 | 14 | 800 | 50 | 10 | 37.03 | 2 | 600 | -50 | 15 | 31.32 | 15 | 800 | 100 | 15 | 37.01 | 3 | 600 | 0 | 20 | 28.78 | 16 | 900 | -100 | 25 | 22.01 | 4 | 600 | 50 | 25 | 29.48 | 17 | 900 | -50 | 30 | 23.34 | 5 | 600 | 100 | 30 | 30.36 | 18 | 900 | 0 | 10 | 34.70 | 6 | 700 | -100 | 15 | 26.36 | 19 | 900 | 50 | 15 | 32.19 | 7 | 700 | -50 | 20 | 26.20 | 20 | 900 | 100 | 20 | 31.89 | 8 | 700 | 0 | 25 | 26.02 | 21 | 1000 | -100 | 30 | 24.38 | 9 | 700 | 50 | 30 | 24.47 | 22 | 1000 | -50 | 10 | 31.92 | 10 | 700 | 100 | 10 | 41.43 | 23 | 1000 | 0 | 15 | 30.35 | 11 | 800 | -100 | 20 | 23.19 | 24 | 1000 | 50 | 20 | 29.55 | 12 | 800 | -50 | 25 | 23.35 | 25 | 1000 | 100 | 25 | 30.80 | 13 | 800 | 0 | 30 | 25.06 | | | | | |
|
Table 3. Experimental results of the orthogonal simulation
Factor | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | R |
---|
Q /W | 29.94 | 28.90 | 29.13 | 28.83 | 29.04 | 1.11 | doffset /μm | 25.14 | 27.23 | 28.29 | 30.55 | 34.30 | 9.17 | Vscan /(mm·s-1) | 34.97 | 31.45 | 27.92 | 26.33 | 25.52 | 9.45 |
|
Table 4. Range analysis results
Vscan/(mm·s-1) | 10 | 20 | 30 |
---|
Mixing time/ms | 168 | 80 | 52 |
|
Table 5. Mixing time the molten pool at different scanning velocity