0
Research Papers

Combining Variation Simulation With Welding Simulation for Prediction of Deformation and Variation of a Final Assembly

[+] Author and Article Information
Andreas Pahkamaa

Division of Computer Aided Design,  Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Swedenandreas.pahkamaa@gmail.com

Kristina Wärmefjord

Department of Product and Production Development,  Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Göteborg, Swedenkristina.warmefjord@chalmers.se

Lennart Karlsson

Division of Computer Aided Design,  Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Swedenlennart.karlsson@ltu.se

Rikard Söderberg

Department of Product and Production Development,  Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Göteborg, Swedenrikard.soderberg@chalmers.se

John Goldak

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,  Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canadajgoldak@mrco2.carleton.ca

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 12(2), 021002 (Feb 10, 2012) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005720 History: Received July 07, 2011; Revised December 19, 2011; Accepted January 02, 2012; Published February 10, 2012; Online February 10, 2012

In most variation simulations, i.e., simulations of geometric variations in assemblies, the influence from heating and cooling processes, generated when two parts are welded together, is not taken into consideration. In most welding simulations, the influence from geometric tolerances on parts is not taken into consideration, i.e., the simulations are based on nominal parts. In this paper, these two aspects, both crucial for predicting the final outcome of an assembly, are combined. Monte Carlo simulation is used to generate a number of different non-nominal parts in a software for variation simulation. The translation and rotation matrices, representing the deviations from the nominal geometry due to positioning error, are exported to a software for welding simulation, where the effects from welding are applied. The final results are then analyzed with respect to both deviation and variation. The method is applied on a simple case, a T-weld joint, with available measurements of residual stresses and deformations. The effect of the different sources of deviation on the final outcome is analyzed and the difference between welding simulations applied to nominal parts and to disturbed (non-nominal) parts is investigated. The study shows that, in order to achieve realistic results, variation simulations should be combined with welding simulations. It does also show that welding simulations should be applied to a set of non-nominal parts since the difference between deviation of a nominal part and deviation of a non-nominal part due to influence of welding can be quite large.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Flow chart for combining variation simulation and welding simulation using the software rd&t and vrweld . The figure also indicates the file formats and working procedures used in this work.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Simulation mesh and constraints for welding simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Double ellipsoid heat source with Gaussian heat distribution [14]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Weld joint before (left) and after RBT, two cases (centre and right)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Resulting deformation of nominal case. Deformation enhanced 10×. Values in meter.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison between predicted and measured residual stress

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Color coding of deviations from nominal. Values in millimeter. (a) Displacement after welding under nominal condition. (b) The mean displacement for non-nominal conditions before welding. (c) The mean displacement for non-nominal conditions after welding.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

The position of the nodes investigated in Fig. 9. The color coding shows the mean displacement after welding using non-nominal conditions (in millimeter).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

The final results compared to welding of nominal parts and to the tolerance applied

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

(a) 6s for non-nominal conditions before welding. Units in millimeter. (b) 6s for non-nominal conditions after welding. Units in millimeter.

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