European Journal of Scientific Research

ISSN 1450-216X Vol.62 No.1 (2011), pp. 76-94

© EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2011
http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.htm

Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead

Geometry and Optimization of Process Parameters to
Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for Stainless Steel Gas
Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm

Sudhakaran R.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Kumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India
E-mail: absudha@yahoo.com

VeL Murugan V.
Principal, Shree Sakthi Engineering College, Coimbatore, India

Senthil Kumar K. M.
Department of Mechatronics Engineering
Kumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India

Jayaram R.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Kumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India

Pushparaj A.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Kumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India

Praveen C.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Kumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India

Venkat Prabhu N.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Kumaraguru College of Technology, Coimbatore, India
Tel: +91-9894030121; Fax: +91-422-2669406

Abstract

The weld quality can be achieved by meeting quality requirements such as bead
geometry which is highly influenced by various process parameters involved in the process.
Inadequate weld bead dimensions will contribute to failure of the welded structure. This
paper presents a study on optimization of process parameters using genetic algorithm (GA)
to optimize depth to width ratio in 202 grade stainless steel gas tungsten arc welded
(GTAW) plates. Experiments were conducted based on central composite rotatable design
and mathematical models were developed correlating the important controllable GTAW
process parameters like welding current, welding speed, shielding gas flow rate and
Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 77

welding gun angle with weld bead parameters like depth of penetration, bead width and
depth to width ratio. Using these models the direct and interaction effects of the process
parameters on weld bead geometry were studied. Optimization of process parameters was
done using GA. A source code was developed using Turbo C to do the optimization for
depth to width ratio with penetration and bead width as constraints. The optimal process
parameters gave a value of 0.9 for depth to width ratio which demonstrates the accuracy
and effectiveness of the model presented and program developed. The obtained results help
in selecting quickly the process parameters to achieve the desired quality.

Keywords: Gas tungsten arc welding, stainless steel, genetic algorithm, weld bead
geometry, central composite rotatable design

1. Introduction
GTAW is an arc welding process that produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc
between a non consumable electrode and a base metal (Kumar and Sundararajan, 2008). It is
commonly used for welding thin and medium thickness materials like stainless steel plates and for
applications where metallurgical control of the weld metal is critical (Gridharan and Murugan, 2008).
Since welding is now highly mechanized, the welding procedure must ensure that the weld bead is of
good quality and is obtained at minimum cost (Gridharan and Murugan, 2008). The weld bead
geometry plays an important role in determining the mechanical properties of the weld (Tarang and
Yang, 1998). Hence the input welding process variables which influence the bead geometry must
therefore be properly selected to obtain an acceptable high quality joint. (Mostafa and Khajavi, 2006)
optimized the welding parameters for flux cored arc welding process. They used central composite
rotatable design to develop a mathematical model for predicting weld bead penetration as a function of
welding process parameters. They used constrained optimization method to optimize process
parameters for maximizing weld penetration. (Rayes et al, 2004) studied the influence of various
hybrid welding parameters on bead geometry. They conducted experiments on 316L austenitic
stainless steel work piece. They varied arc and laser power to study their influence on various bead
dimensions. They found that arc power has a great influence on bead width. (Thao and Kim, 2009)
developed an interaction model for predicting bead geometry for lab joint in gas metal arc welding
(GMAW) process. They conducted experiments based on full factorial design with two levels of five
process parameters to obtain bead geometry using GMAW process. They developed linear, curvilinear
and interaction models for the process and found that prediction capabilities of interaction models are
reliable than the linear and curvilinear models. From the study it was inferred that welding voltage, arc
current, welding speed and welding angle have large significant effects on bead geometry.
(Kannan and Murugan, 2008) optimized flux cored arc welding process parameters which are
used for deposition of duplex stainless steel on low carbon structural steel plates. They developed
mathematical models using multiple regression method and optimized percentage dilution using
particle swarm optimization technique (PSO). (Siva et al, 2009) optimized the weld bead parameters of
nickel based overlay deposited by plasma transferred arc surfacing. They conducted experiments based
on five factor, five level central composite rotatable design and developed mathematical models using
multiple regression technique. They found that penetration, dilution and total area increased when the
welding current is increased and decreased when travel speed is increased. They optimized the process
parameters using Microsoft Excel Solver to achieve the desirable bead dimensions.
(Farhad Kolahan and Mehdi Heidari, 2010) developed an approach to predict and optimize
weld bead geometry in GMAW. They conducted experiments based on Taguchi’s experimental matrix
design. They developed mathematical models for weld bead height, width and penetration. They
optimized the process parameters using simulated annealing technique. (Edwinrajadhas and Kumanan,
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
78 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

2007) proposed an intelligent technique adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) to predict the
weld bead width in the submerged arc welding process for a given set of welding parameters. They
designed the experiments using Taguchi’s principles and used the results to develop a multiple
regression model. Data obtained from multi regression model were used to train the intelligent net
work. They found that the proposed ANFIS is flexible, accurate in predicting bead width.
(Correia et al, 2005) explored the possibility of using GA as a method to decide near optimal
settings of a GMAW process. Their problem was to choose best values of three control variables on
four quality responses i.e. deposition efficiency, bead width, depth of penetration and reinforcement
inside a previous delimited experimental region. From their study they concluded that GA was able to
locate near optimum conditions, with relatively small number of experiments. (Saurav Datta and Siba
Sankar Mahapatra, 2010) carried out multi objective optimization of submerged arc welding process.
They applied response surface methodology to develop mathematical models for depth of penetration,
reinforcement and bead width. They optimized the same using particle swarm optimization. (Tarang
and Yang, 1998) optimized weld bead geometry in GTAW using Taguchi method. They conducted
experiments on pure 1100 aluminium plates. They have shown that Taguchi method provides a
systematic and efficient methodology for searching the welding process parameters with optimal weld
bead geometry.
(Sudhakaran et al, 2010) optimized the process parameters to minimize angular distortion in
202 grade stainless steel plates using GA. From the literature, it can be inferred that
1. There were many studies carried out to using design of experiments for the study of effect
of process parameters on weld bead geometry such as penetration, bead width,
reinforcement and percentage dilution for different grades of stainless steel for various
welding processes but no work has been reported for study of effect of process parameters
and optimization of depth to width ratio for 202 grade stainless steel. 200 series stainless
steel are stronger and harder than 300 series and has yield strength 30% higher than 304
grade stainless steel Hence it can be used as an alternate for 304 grade stainless steel in
most applications like food processing equipment, kitchen equipment, propeller shafts for
motor boats and medical instruments. It is also less costly than 304 grade stainless steel.
2. The effect of shielding gas flow rate has not been taken in account while developing the
mathematical models.
3. The interactive effects of process parameters have not been reported.
Hence an attempt has been made to correlate important GTAW process parameters such as
welding current (I), welding speed (V), shielding gas flow rate (Q) and welding gun angle (θ) with
bead geometry such as depth of penetration (D), bead width (W) and depth to width ratio. Statistically
designed experiment based on central composite rotatable design was employed for the development of
mathematical models 15. The main effects of the process parameters on penetration, bead width and
depth to width ratio are studied and the interactive effects of the process parameters on depth to width
ratio were also discussed. The optimization was done using GA. GA was chosen due to its simplicity,
ease of operation, minimal requirements and global perspective. A source code was developed using
Turbo C to do the optimization. Confirmatory tests were conducted to verify the optimized results and
the error percentage was calculated. The error percentage was within the permissible limit of 5%.

2. Experimental Procedure
The experiments were designed and based on central composite rotatable design with half replication
technique with 31 experimental runs (Cochran and Cox, 1987). These experiments were conducted
using Lincoln V 350 PRO electric digital welding machine. A servo motor driven manipulator was
used to maintain uniform welding speed.
The main experimental set up used consisted of a traveling carriage with a table for supporting
specimens. A power source was kept ready. A welding gun was held stationary in a frame above the
Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 79

table and was provided with an attachment for setting the required nozzle to plate distance and welding
gun angle respectively. The nozzle to plate distance was kept constant at 2.5 mm throughout the
experimentation process. A high frequency attachment was used to generate the arc at this distance.
Test plates of size (100 mm X 30 mm X 5 mm) were cut from grade 202 stainless steel plates and one
surface was cleaned to remove oxide scale and dirt before welding. The chemical composition of AISI
stainless steel plate is given in Table 1.
Argon gas with flow rates between 5 – 25 liters/min was used for shielding. The purpose of
using the shielding gas was to protect the weld area from atmospheric gases such as oxygen, nitrogen,
carbon dioxide and water vapour. The experimental set up used for conducting the experiments is
shown in Fig. 1

Table 1: Chemical Composition of Stainless Steel 202 Grade

AISI UNS
%C %Mn %Si %Cr %Ni %P %S %N %Fe
Designation Designation
202 S20200 0.15 9.25 0.49 17.1 4.1 0.06 0.03 0.25 70.01

Figure 1: Experimental Setup

3. Research Methodology
The independently controllable process parameters were identified based on their effect on weld bead
geometry. These are welding current (I), welding speed (V), shielding gas flow rate (Q) and welding
gun angle (θ). The working ranges of all selected factors were fixed by conducting trial runs. This was
carried out by varying one of the factors while keeping the rest of them as constant. The working range
of each process parameter was determined by inspecting the bead for a smooth appearance. The upper
limit of a given factor was coded as (+2) and the lower limit was coded as (-2). The coded values for
intermediate values were calculated using the Eq. (1) (Velmurugan and Gunaraj, 2005)
2(2X − (X max + X min ))
=
X X max − X min
i (1)
Where Xi is the required coded value of a variable X. X is any value of the variable from Xmin
to Xmax. The selected process parameters with their limits and notations are given in Table 2. All
welding variables at the intermediate (0) level constitute the centre points while the combination of
each variable at either its lower value (-2) or its higher value (+2) with the other two parameters at the
intermediate level constitute the star points (Cochran and Cox, 1987).
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
80 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

Table 2: Welding Parameters and their Levels

Units & Levels

Parameters
Notations -2 -1 0 1 2
Welding current Amps (I) 70 80 90 100 110
Welding speed mm/min (V) 170 180 190 200 210
Shielding gas flow rate liters/min (Q) 5 10 15 20 25
Welding gun angle Degrees (θ) 50 60 70 80 90

4. Recording the Responses

To measure the depth of penetration and bead width the following processes were carried out on the
specimens 1) Sectioning, 2) Grinding, 3) Polishing, 4) Etching and 5) Profile tracing
Sectioning: The transverse sections of each weld were cut using bans saw and care was taken
to avoid deformation of the sensitive austenitic grade material.
Grinding: It was performed in order to remove the cold work from cutting. The grinding was
done at speeds of approximately 300 RPM.
Polishing: After grinding the specimens were rough polished by hand. In order to obtain better
edge flatness, the specimens were polished using silicon carbide abrasive papers of grades 100, 220,
400, 600 and 800 respectively. The specimens were then polished using a abrasive – slurry of alumina
(Al2O3) and water (H2O) on a polishing machine.
Etching: After polishing, etching was carried out on the specimens. Etching was necessary for
examining the microstructure of the weld bead. The etchant used was Marble’s reagent which is a
mixture of HCL (50 ml), CuSO4 and H2O (50 ml). The polished faces of each specimen were swabbed
using the etchant for about 50 – 60 seconds to reveal the weld bead.
Profile Tracing: The bead profiles of the specimens were traced using a reflective type optical
profile projector. The traced bead profiles were scanned in order to determine the bead width. The bead
width was measured with the help of AUTOCAD software. The traced bead profile is shown in Fig. 3
and the welded specimens are shown in Fig. 4. The design matrix and measured value of depth of
penetration, bead width and depth to width ratio are shown in Table 3.

Figure 3: Weld Bead Profile

Figure 4: Welded Specimens

Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 81

Table 3: Design Matrix and Responses

Welding Process Parameters in coded values Depth of Bead Width Depth to

S.No
I amps V mm/min Q liters/min θ° Penetration mm mm Width Ratio
01 -1 -1 -1 -1 1.3 3.0268 0.429496
02 1 -1 -1 -1 1.11 3.7861 0.293178
03 -1 1 -1 -1 0.7 2.3194 0.301802
04 1 1 -1 -1 1.03 3.52 0.292614
05 -1 -1 1 -1 0.59 3.0144 0.195727
06 1 -1 1 -1 1.15 3.3449 0.343807
07 -1 1 1 -1 0.42 2.0593 0.203953
08 1 1 1 -1 1.25 2.6845 0.465636
09 -1 -1 -1 1 1.23 3.5187 0.349561
10 1 -1 -1 1 1.1 4.3151 0.254919
11 -1 1 -1 1 0.63 3.3384 0.188713
12 1 1 -1 1 0.92 4.7879 0.192151
13 -1 -1 1 1 0.91 3.4434 0.264274
14 1 -1 1 1 1.54 3.7218 0.413778
15 -1 1 1 1 0.77 3.3701 0.22848
16 1 1 1 1 1.77 3.8312 0.461996
17 -2 0 0 0 0.78 2.7917 0.2794
18 2 0 0 0 1.77 4.4517 0.397601
19 0 -2 0 0 1.1 4.01 0.274314
20 0 2 0 0 0.77 3.3366 0.230774
21 0 0 -2 0 0.79 3.4124 0.231509
22 0 0 2 0 0.83 2.4511 0.338623
23 0 0 0 -2 0.98 2.9074 0.337071
24 0 0 0 2 1.36 4.6083 0.29512
25 0 0 0 0 0.92 3.6754 0.250313
26 0 0 0 0 0.98 3.7935 0.258337
27 0 0 0 0 0.92 3.4325 0.268026
28 0 0 0 0 0.94 3.4425 0.273057
29 0 0 0 0 0.93 3.4788 0.267334
30 0 0 0 0 0.99 3.7886 0.26131
31 0 0 0 0 0.93 3.7345 0.249029

As shown in this table for experimental runs from 25 to 31 all welding conditions remain the
same but the response varies slightly. This was due to the effect of unknown and unpredictable noise
factors which creep into the experiments. To account for the impact of these unknown factors on the
response repeated runs were included in the design matrix.

5. Development of Mathematical Models

The regression procedure was used for the development of mathematical models to predict depth of
penetration, bead width and depth to width ratio. The response function representing the bead
dimensions can be expressed as Y = f (I, V, Q, θ) where Y is the response or yield. The second order
polynomial representing the response surface for ‘k’ factors is given by Eq. (2).
k k
Y = bo + ∑ b X + ∑ b x 2 + ∑ b x x
i=1 i i i = 1 ii i i < j ij i j
(2)
Where bo is the free term of the regression equation. The coefficients b1, b2, b3 and b4 are
linear terms. The coefficients b11, b22, b33, b44 are quadratic terms and the coefficients b12, b13,
b14, b23, b24, b34, are interaction terms (Cochran and Cox, 1987).
Statistical software (Minitab R14, 2004) was used to calculate the values of these coefficients.
Less significant coefficients were eliminated by conducting student’s t – test. According to this test,
when the calculated value of‘t’ corresponding to the coefficients exceeds the standard tabulated value
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
82 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

for the probability criterion kept at 0.75, the coefficient becomes significant (Gunaraj and Murugan,
2000). The final mathematical models as determined by the above analysis are as follows:
D = 0.938 + 0.221I − 0.087V + 0.019Q + 0.019Q + 0.087θ +
0.080I 2 − 0.036Q 2 + 0.054θ 2 + 0.099IV + 0.169IQ + 0.017Iθ + 0.092VQ + 0.114Qθ (3)
W = 3.612 + 0.384I − 0.150V − 0.211Q + 0.416θ
− 0.191Q 2 + 0.098IV − 0.157IQ − 0.056VQ + 0.182Vθ (4)
D
= 0.260 + 0.033I − 0.012V + 0.020Q - 0.011θ + 0.021I 2
W
+ 0.007Q 2 + 0.015θ 2 + 0.026IV + 0.064IQ + 0.031VQ − 0.013Vθ + 0.031Qθ (5)
The reduced models and full models were compared using adjusted square multiple R and
standard error of estimate. These values are presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Comparison of Square Multiple ‘R’ Values and Standard Error of Estimate for Full and Reduced
Models

Adjusted square multiple R Standard error estimate

Response
Full model Reduced model Full model Reduced model
Depth of Penetration 0.980 0.979 0.043 0.045
Bead Width 0.950 0.959 0.14 0.126
Depth to Width ratio 0.979 0.977 0.011 0.012

It is evident from the above table that the reduced models have higher square multiple R values
and less standard error estimate. Hence they are better than the full models. The models were checked
for adequacy using analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis. The results are presented in Table 5.

Table 5: Results of ANOVA Analysis

First order term Second order term Lack of fit Error term
Parameter F ratio R ratio Remarks
SS DOF SS DOF SS DOF SS DOF
Model is
Bead width 9.298 4 2.201 10 0.175 15 0.161 6 0.433 47.525
adequate
Depth of Model is
1.547 4 1.28 10 0.029 12 0.005 6 2.881 284.354
Penetration adequate
Depth to Model is
0.043 4 0.128 10 0.002 12 0.001 6 1.698 171.073
Width ratio adequate

SS - Sum of Squares, DOF- Degrees of Freedom

Mean Sum of Squares = Sum of Square Terms/DOF
F ratio = Ms of Lack of Fit/ Ms of Error Terms
R ratio = Ms of First Order Term & Second Order Term/ MS of Error Term
Percentage Points of the F Distribution for Bead Width
F ratio (15, 6, 0.05) = 0.433
R ratio (9, 6, 0.05) = 4.10
Percentage Points of the F Distribution for Depth of Penetration and Depth to Width Ratio
F ratio (12, 6, 0.05) = 4
R ratio (12, 6, 0.05) = 4
As per this technique the calculated value of F – ratio of the model developed should not
exceed the standard value of F – ratio for a desired level of confidence, i.e. 95% and the calculated
value of R – ratio of the model developed should exceed the standard tabulated value for the same
confidence level (Kim et al, 1996). If these conditions are fulfilled then the model is considered to be
adequate. It is evident from the above table that the models are adequate.
Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 83

6. Optimization Procedure
The purpose of optimization is to maximize depth to width ratio subject to bead width and depth of
penetration as constraints. The tool used for optimization is GA. GA is an adaptive search and
optimization algorithm that mimics principles of natural genetics. Due to their simplicity, ease of
operation, minimum requirements and global perspective they have been successfully used in wide
variety of problem domain (Palaniswamy et al, 2007).

6.1. Working Principe of GA

GA simulates the survival of the fittest among individuals over consecutive generation for solving a
problem. Each generation consists of a population of character. Each individual represent a point in a
search space and a possible solution. The individual in the population are then made to go through a
process of evolution. The basic concept of GA is to encode a potential solution to a problem as a series
of parameters. A single set of parameter value is termed as the genome of an individual solution. An
initial population of individuals is generated randomly. In every generation the individuals in the
current population are decoded according to a fitness function. The chromosomes with the highest
population fitness are selected for mating. The genes of the parameters are allowed to exchange to
produce new ones. These new ones then replace the earlier ones in the next generation. Thus the old
population is discarded and the new population becomes the current population. The current population
is checked for acceptability or solution. The iteration is stopped after the completion of maximum
number of generations or on the attainment of the best results (Palanisamy et al, 2007, Asokan et al,
2005).

6.2. Implementation of GA
The variables are to be first coded to solve the problem. Binary coding is done to represent the
variables I, V, Q and θ. The length of the string is determined according to the solution accuracy. The
solution accuracy obtained in the given interval for the process parameters along with the coding are
given in Table 6.

Table 6: Solution accuracy for the process parameters

Process parameter Limits Code Decode Range Accuracy

0000000000 0 40
Welding current (I) amps 70 to 110 40 = 0.039
1111111111 1023 1023
0000000000 0 40
Welding speed (V) mm/min 170 to 210 40 = 0.039
1111111111 1023 1023
0000000000 0 40
Gas flow rate (Q) litre/min 5 to 25 20 = 0.039
1111111111 1023 1023
0000000000 0 40
Welding Gun Angle (θ) ° 50 to 90 20 = 0.039
1111111111 1023 1023

In this problem 10 bits are chosen for each of the four variables there by making a total string
length of 40. The strings (0000000000) and (1111111111) would represent the lower and upper bounds
of the four variables. The GA operates on three main operators namely 1) Reproduction 2) Cross over
and 3) Mutation.
Reproduction: It selects the copies of chromosomes proportionate to their fitness value. Here
Roulette wheel was used as reproduction operator to select the chromosomes.
Crossover: After reproduction, the population is enriched with good strings from the previous
generation but does not have any new string. A crossover operator is applied to the population to create
better strings.
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
84 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

Mutation: It is the random modification of chromosomes i.e. changing 0 to 1 or vice versa on a

bit by bit basis. The need for mutation is to keep diversity in the population.
The GA algorithm for the optimization problem is given below
Step 1: Choose a coding to represent problem parameters, a selection operator, a crossover
operator and a mutation operator.
Step 2: Choose population size (n), crossover probability (Pc) and mutation probability (Pm).
Step 3: Initialize a random population of strings of size L. Choose a maximum allowable
generation number Gmax. Set G = 0. Evaluate each string in population.
Step 4: If G>Gmax or other termination criteria is satisfied, terminate or perform reproduction
on the population.
Step 5: Perform crossover on random pair of strings
Step 6: Perform mutation on every string
Step 7: Evaluate strings in the new population, set G = G+1 and go to step 3.
After applying the GA operators, a new set of population is created. Then they are decoded and
objective function values are calculated. This completes one generation of GA. The number of
generations is continued till the termination criterion is achieved. The following parameters are used in
GA.
1. Sample size: 80
2. Crossover probability: 0.9
3. Type of crossover: Single point
4. Mutation probability: 0.01
5. Number of generations: 100

6.3. Objective Function

The optimization of depth to width ratio was carried with the help of its mathematical equation. The
mathematical equation is considered as objective function. The source code was developed using
Turbo C. It is desirable to maximize penetration and minimize bead width to obtain maximum depth to
width ratio. The source code was developed in such a way that the objective function itself was taken
as fitness function for minimizing problems whereas for maximization it is taken as 1/ (1+objective
function). The limits of the constraints were selected based on trial runs. From the trial runs it was
found that bead width less than 5 mm and penetration greater than 2 mm ensured good weld bead
geometry. Hence the constraints were set as follows:
Depth of Penetration – 0.3 mm < D <3 mm
Bead Width – 3 mm < W< 5 mm
For depth to width ratio, the constraints were applied based on the bounds of penetration and
bead width. Chromosomes which are not within the bounds are not considered or it is eliminated.

6.4. Results of GA
Figure 5 shows the results obtained by running the C program. The initial variation in the curve is due
to the search for optimum solution. It is evident that the maximum depth to width ratio of 0.9 is
observed at the 38th iteration. It then converges to the same value up to 100 generations.
Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 85

Figure 5: Variation of Depth to Width Ratio with Number of Generations

The optimum values of the process variables obtained from GA for 100 iterations are given
below
1. Welding current = 107.18 amps
2. Welding speed = 209.41 mm/min
3. Shielding gas flow rate = 24.78 liters/min
4. Welding gun angle = 83.27°
Due to the limitations of the experimental set up in setting the above values for the process
parameters, the values of process parameters are rounded off to the nearest integer values for obtaining
optimum value for depth to width ratio.
1. Welding current = 108 amps
2. Welding speed = 210 mm/min
3. Shielding gas flow rate = 25 liters/min
4. Welding gun angle = 84°
The depth to width ratio obtained using the above values for process parameters is 0.94. The
percentage error is 4.44% which is within the acceptable range.

7. Results and Discussion

The developed mathematical models were used to predict bead dimensions by substituting the
respective values of the process parameters. The influence of the process parameters on depth of
penetration, bead width and depth to width ratio were studied using the developed models.

7.1. Direct Effects of Welding Parameters on Bead Dimensions

The direct effect of process parameters are studied by keeping all the process parameters at the middle
level except the parameter whose direct effect was studied.
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
86 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

7.1.1. Effect of Welding Current on Bead Dimensions

Figure 6 shows the direct effect of welding current on bead dimensions. As welding current I increases,
the penetration D and bead width W increases. This can be attributed to the fact that heat input
increases due to increase in welding current. The increase in heat input results in pre heating of the
work piece during forward welding. The pre heating results in more melting of base metal and
spreading of heat which increases P and W. Due to the above facts the depth to width ratio also
increases gradually as the welding current increases.

Figure 6: Direct Effect of Welding Current on Bead Dimensions

7.1.2. Effect of Welding Speed on Bead Dimensions

Figure 7 shows the direct effect of welding speed on bead dimensions. Welding speed is one of the
factors that control heat input and bead width. The bead width and dimensions of the heat affected zone
decreases with the increase in welding speed. This is because heat input is inversely proportional to
welding speed. Hence there is a decrease in depth of penetration and bead width as welding speed
increases. Due to the above facts there is a gradual decrease in depth to width ratio as the welding
speed increases.

Figure 7: Direct Effect of Welding Speed on Bead Dimensions

Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 87

7.1.3. Effect of Shielding Gas Flow Rate on Bead Dimensions

Figure 8 shows the direct effect of shielding gas flow rate on bead dimensions. There is a marginal
increase in depth of penetration as the gas flow rate is varied from lower level to higher level where as
bead width decreases at lower levels and increases at higher levels of gas flow rate. This is due to the
fact that at lower levels of gas flow rate less heat is carried away by the gas than at higher levels where
more heat is carried away. Hence there is a marginal decrease in increase in depth of penetration but
due to decrease in dimensions of the heat affected zone there is significant decrease in bead width at
higher levels of gas flow rate. This marginal increase in depth of penetration and significant decrease in
bead width contributes to marginal increase in depth to width ratio at higher levels of gas flow rate.

Figure 8: Direct Effect of Shielding Gas Flow Rate on Bead Dimensions

7.1.4. Effect of Welding Gun Angle on Bead Dimensions

Figure 9 shows the direct effect of welding gun angle on bead dimensions. At lower angles pre heating
of the work piece is less and there is less melting of the base metal where as at higher gun angles the
base metal gets more exposure to the arc and there is more melting of the base metal. Hence there is a
decrease in depth of penetration at lower gun angles and increase in depth of penetration at higher gun
angles. As the welding gun angle increases, there is a significant increase in bead width. This is due to
the increase in dimensions of the heat affected zone. There is a decrease of depth to width ratio for the
corresponding increase in welding gun angle due to significant increase in bead width and marginal
increase in depth of penetration.

Figure 9: Direct Effect of Welding Gun Angle on Bead Dimensions

 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
88 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

7.2. Interaction Effects of Welding Parameters on Bead Dimensions

The change in effect of one variable when the second variable is changed from one level to another is
known as interaction effect. The interaction effects of the process variables are useful in understanding
the process behavior. In this study the two way interactive effects of the process variables on depth to
width ratio are discussed.

7.2.1. Interactive Effect of Welding Current and Welding Speed on Depth to Width Ratio
Figure 10 represents the interactive effect of welding current and welding speed on depth to width
ratio. From the figure, it is clear that D/W ratio increases when welding current is at 100 amps and 110
amps for all levels of welding speed. This is due to increase in heat input from factor I which is more
significant than the negative effect of V. At lower levels of welding current i.e. 70, 80 and 90 amps,
D/W ratio decreases for all levels of welding speed. This is due to the negative effect of V on heat
input which is more significant than the positive effect of I on heat input. These effects are further
explained with the help of a response surface plot shown in Fig. 11. From the contour surface, it is
noted that D/W ratio reaches a minimum of 0.17 when welding current is at 80 amps and welding
speed is at 210 mm/min. It reaches a maximum of 0.5 when welding current is at 110 amps and
welding speed is at 210 mm/min.

Figure 10: Interactive Effect of Welding Current and Welding Speed on Depth to Width Ratio

Figure 11: Response Surface for Effect of Welding Current and Welding Speed on Depth to Width Ratio
Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 89

7.2.2. Interactive Effect of Welding Current and Shielding Gas Flow Rate on Depth to Width
Ratio
Figure 12 shows the interactive effect of welding current and shielding gas flow rate on depth to width
ratio. From the figure it is clear that D/W ratio decreases when welding current is at 70 and 80 amps
for all levels of shielding gas flow rate. This is because the positive effect of factor I is less significant
than the negative effect of factor Q which carries away some of the heat during the process. At higher
levels of welding current i.e. 90,100 and 110 amps the positive effect of factor I on heat input is more
significant than the negative effect of Q. Hence there is an increase in D/W ratio at higher levels of
welding current for all levels of shielding gas flow rate. These effects are further explained with help of
a response surface plot shown in Fig. 13. From the contour diagram, it is noted that D/W ratio reaches
a minimum of 0.1 when welding current is at 70 amps and shielding gas flow rate is at 25 liters/min,
D/W reaches a minimum of 0.1. It reaches a maximum of 0.7 when welding current is at 110 amps and
shielding gas flow rate is at 25 liters/min.

Figure 12: Interactive Effect of Welding Current and Shielding Gas Flow Rate on Depth to Width Ratio

Figure 13: Response Surface for Effect of Welding Current and Gas Flow Rate on Depth to Width Ratio
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
90 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

7.2.3. Interactive Effect of Welding Gun Angle and Shielding Gas Flow Rate on Depth to Width
Ratio
Figure 14 represents the interactive effect of welding gun angle and shielding gas flow rate on depth to
width ratio. From the figure, it is clear that D/W ratio decreases when the welding gun angle is at 50°
for all levels of shielding gas flow rate. The D/W ratio decreases when the welding gun angle is at 60°
for gas flow rate up to 15 liters/min and marginally increases for gas flow rate up to 25 liters/min. The
D/W ratio increases for welding gun angle at 70°, 80° and 90° for all levels of shielding gas flow rate.
This is because at higher gun angles the exposure of the parent metal to the arc is more which increases
the D/W ratio. At lower gun angles the positive effect of factor Q is more significant than the negative
effect of θ. This results in decrease in D/W ratio. These effects are further explained with help of a
contour plot shown in Fig. 15. From the contour plot D/W ratio reaches a minimum of 0.2 when the
welding gun angle is at 50° and shielding gas flow rate is at 25 liters/min. It reaches a maximum of 0.5
when the welding gun angle is at 90° and shielding gas flow rate is at 25 liters/min.

Figure 14: Interactive Effect of Welding Gun Angle and Shielding Gas Flow Rate on Depth to Width Ratio

Figure 15: Response Surface for Effect of Welding Gun Angle and Gas Flow Rate on Depth to Width Ratio
Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 91

8. Validation of the Results

Conformity tests were conducted with the same experimental set up to validate the accuracy of the
results obtained. The results of the conformity test are presented in Table 7

Table 6: Results of Conformity Test

Test Depth of Penetration

Process Parameters Bead Width mm Depth to Width Ratio
No mm
V
I Q % % %Erro
mm/m θ° OV PV OV PV OV PV
amps lit/min Error Error r
in
1 70 210 10 60 0.27 0.281 -3.91 2.78 2.75 1.09 0.16 0.15 6.66
2 80 170 15 90 1.28 1.267 1.03 3.51 3.62 -3.30 0.34 0.354 -3.95
3 100 190 20 70 1.42 1.391 2.08 3.48 3.43 1.25 0.42 0.405 3.7
Mean Error -0.27 -0.31 2.13
Where OV is Observed Value and PV is predicted value

From the conformity test, it was found that the developed models were able to predict bead
dimensions with reasonable accuracy. The percentage of error of the regression model was calculated
as the percentage difference between the experimental and predicted value relative to the experimental
value. The results show that the percentage error is below 8%. This is shown from Fig. 16 to Fig. 18.

Figure 16: Percentage Error between Observed and Predicted Values for Depth of Penetration

Figure 17: Percentage Error between Observed and Predicted Values for Bead Width
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
92 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

Figure 18: Percentage Error between Observed and Predicted Values for Depth to Width Ratio

The regression analysis was performed to find out the correlation coefficient. The correlation
coefficient was used to measure the relationship between the measured and predicted values. The R2
value of ‘1’ means a close relationship and ‘0’ a random relationship. It was observed that a regression
coefficient of R2 = 0.987 was obtained for depth of penetration, R2 = 0.971 for bead width and R2
=0.987 for depth to width ratio Hence, accurate prediction of bead dimensions was possible using the
models. The line of best fit was calculated using the regression coefficients and is shown from Fig. 19
to Fig. 21

Figure 19: Regression Graph for Depth of Penetration

Figure 20: Regression Graph for Bead Width

Effect of Welding Process Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry and
Optimization of Process Parameters to Maximize Depth to Width Ratio for
Stainless Steel Gas Tungsten Arc Welded Plates Using Genetic Algorithm 93

Figure 21: Regression Graph for Depth to Width Ratio

9. Conclusions
1. The following conclusions were arrived at from the present investigations
2. The mathematical models developed in the present work can be effectively used to predict the
bead dimensions in GTAW of 202 grade stainless steel plates.
3. Central composite designs can be conveniently used to study the direct and interactive effects
of the process parameters on the bead geometry within the range of investigation.
4. The predicted results are compared with the experimental results and the deviation falls within
the limit of 95% confidence level.
5. The minimum depth to width ratio obtained from experimental studies was 0.18 when the
process parameters such as welding current, welding speed, shielding gas flow rate and welding
gun angle were maintained at 80 amps, 180 mm/min, 10 litres/min and 80° respectively.
6. The maximum depth to width ratio obtained from experimental studies was 0.46 when the
process parameters such as welding current, welding speed, shielding gas flow rate and welding
gun angle were maintained at 100 amps, 200 mm/min, 20 litres/min and 80° respectively.
7. Out of the four process parameters selected for investigation, welding current, shielding gas
flow rate have positive effect on depth to width ratio where as welding speed and welding gun
angle have negative effect on depth to width ratio.

References
[1] Asokan, N., P., Asokan, R., Saravanan, and G., Prabhakaran, 2005. “Optimization of machining
parameters for milling operations using non – conventional methods”, Int J Adv Manuf
Technol, Vol.25, pp. 1078 – 1088.
[2] Cochran, W. G and G.M., Cox, 1987. Experimental Designs, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
[3] Correia., D.S, C.V., C.V., Concalves, S. C., Sebastiao Junior, and V. A., Ferraresi, 2005.
“Comparison between genetic algorithms and response surface methodology in GMAW
optimization”, J of Mater Process Technol, Vol. 160, pp.70 – 76.
[4] Edwin Raja Dhas, J and S., Kumanan, 2007. “ANFIS for prediction of weld bead width in a
submerged arc welding process”, J Sci Ind Res, Vol.66, pp.335 – 338.
 Sudhakaran R., VeL Murugan V., Senthil Kumar K. M.,
94 Jayaram R., Pushparaj A., Praveen C. and Venkat Prabhu N.

[5] Farhad Kolahan and Mehdi Heidari. 2010. “A new approach for predicting and optimizing weld
bead geometry in GMAW”, International Journal of Mechanical Systems Science and
Engineering, Vol. 2, pp.138 – 142.
[6] Gridharan, P.K and N., Murugan, 2008. “Optimization of pulsed welding process parameters
for the welding of AISI 304 L stainless steel sheets”, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, DOI
10.1.1007/S00170 – 008 – 1373 – 0.
[7] Gunaraj, V and N., Murugan, 2000. “Prediction and optimization of weld bead volume for the
submerged arc process – part 1”, Welding Journal, pp.286s – 294s.
[8] Kannan, T and N., Murugan, 2008. “Optimization of flux cored arc welding process parameters
using particle swarm optimization technique”, Int. Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Production, Vol. 9, pp.229 – 236.
[9] Kumar, A. and S., Sundararajan, 2008 “Effect of welding parameters on mechanical properties
and optimization of pulsed TIG welding of Al –Mg – Si alloy”, Int. J Adv Manu Technol, DOI
10.1007/s00170-008-1527-8.
[10] Kim, I.S., W.H., Kwon, and C.E., Park, 1996. “The effects of welding process parameters on
weld bead width in GMAW processes”, Korea Weld Soc, Vol. 14, pp.204 – 213.
[11] Mostafa, N.B and M.N., Khajavi, 2006 “Optimization of welding parameters for weld
penetration in FCAW”, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering.
Vol. 16, pp.132 – 138.
[12] Mini Tab Release 14, (2004), Minitab Inc.
[13] Palaniswamy, P., I., Rajendran, and S.,Shanmugasundram, 2007 “Optimization of machining
parameters using genetic algorithm and experimental validation for end milling operations”, Int
J Adv Manuf Technol, Vol. 32, pp.644 – 655.
[14] Rayes, E.L., C., Walz, and G., Sepold, 2004. “The influence of various hybrid welding
parameters on bead geometry”, Welding Journal, pp.147s – 153s
[15] Saurav Datta and Siba Sankar Mahapatra, 2010. “Multi – objective optimization of submerged
arc welding process”, The Journal of Engineering Research, Vol. 7, pp.42 – 52.
[16] Siva, K., N.,Murugan, and V.P., Raghupathy, 2009. “Modeling, analysis and optimization of
weld bead parameters of nickel based overlay deposited by plasma transferred arc surfacing”,
Computational Material Science and Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 174 – 182.
[17] Sudhakaran, R., V.,VeL Murugan, and P.S., Sivasakthivel, 2010. “Optimization of process
parameters to minimize angular distortion in 202 grade stainless steel gas tungsten arc welded
plates”. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, Vol. 2, No.5, pp.731 –
748.
[18] Tarang, Y.S. and W.H.,Yang, 1998. “Optimization of weld bead geometry in GTAW by
Taguchi method”, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, Vol. 14, pp.549 – 554.
[19] Thao, D.S. and I.S., Kim, 2009. “Interaction model for predicting bead geometry for lab joint in
GMA welding process”, Computational Material Science and Surface Engineering. Vol.1,
pp.237 – 244.
[20] VeL Murugan, V. and V., Gunaraj, 2005. “Effect of process parameters on angular distortion of
gas metal arc welded structural steel plates”, Welding Journal, pp.165s – 171s.
[21] Yang, I.J., M.J.,Bibby, and R.S., Chandel, 1993. “Linear regression equations for modeling the
submerged arc welding process”, J Mat Process Technol, Vol. 39, pp.33 – 42.