This article was downloaded by: [The University of Texas at El Paso]

On: 31 December 2014, At: 13:10

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpte20

Analysis of Effect of Pressure and Heat on Mechanical

Characteristics of Butt Fusion Welding of Polyethylene
Pipes
a a a
Mohammad Riahi , Khalil Kooshayan & Mohammad Faraji Ghanati
a
Center for Advancement in Mechanical and Non-Destructive Testing School of Mechanical
Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology , Narmak, Tehran, Iran
Published online: 09 Jun 2011.

To cite this article: Mohammad Riahi , Khalil Kooshayan & Mohammad Faraji Ghanati (2011) Analysis of Effect of Pressure
and Heat on Mechanical Characteristics of Butt Fusion Welding of Polyethylene Pipes, Polymer-Plastics Technology and
Engineering, 50:9, 907-915, DOI: 10.1080/03602559.2011.551982

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03602559.2011.551982

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering, 50: 907–915, 2011
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0360-2559 print=1525-6111 online
DOI: 10.1080/03602559.2011.551982
Analysis of Effect of Pressure and Heat on Mechanical
Characteristics of Butt Fusion Welding of Polyethylene Pipes
Mohammad Riahi, Khalil Kooshayan, and Mohammad Faraji Ghanati
Center for Advancement in Mechanical and Non-Destructive Testing School of Mechanical
Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Narmak, Tehran, Iran
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
The butt fusion process is one of the most effective processes in
welding polyethylene pipes. The heating stage is the most important
step in this process. In this investigation, while the main objective
was to reduce the final bead’s size of the weld, 9 different experi-
ments with different heat and pressure conditions and equal timing
for each heating stage were defined. Numerical modeling of Finite
Element Method (FEM) of the heating process was carried out in
the computer software considering governing physical conditions
in the weld to determine heat distribution as well as primary bead
geometry. Subsequently, the model was compared with results from
experimentations. Cross-cut of the formed primary beads at the end
of the heating process were prepared and compared with results
from the model. To review final quality of the weld and its mechan-
ical characteristics, all samples were welded under equal pressure
conditions. Cross-sections of beads formed at the final stage as well
as some samples for tension test and impact test from all welded
areas were prepared according to standard for determination of
mechanical characteristics and then compared with each other.
From mechanical strength perspective, the weld formed in 210
C
and 0.18 MPa pressure demonstrated higher values. However,
impact strength in the weld formed in 180
C was higher. By reduc-
ing pressure in a specified heating process, value of impact energy
required to break the piece was reduced. Mechanical strength in
heating condition 240
C was lower than all other cases. As for
geometry of the formed bead; its size in 180
C and 0.03 MPa press-
ure in the first stage of the heating process was smaller than other
cases.
Keywords Butt fusion; Heating process; Mechanical characteris-
tics; Polyethylene pipes
INTRODUCTION
Using polyethylene pipes in a host of transportation
industries such as gas, water, sewer and other liquids is
on the increase. Butt fusion welding is an effective pro-
cedure for connection of polyethylene pipes. In this
procedure surfaces to be connected are cleaned and if
Address correspondence to Mohammad Riahi, Center for
Advancement in Mechanical and Non-Destructive Testing,
School of Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science
and Technology, Narmak, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: Riahi@iust.
ac.ir
907
needed some of them are face milled to provide smooth
surfaces. Upon preparation of weld surfaces, welding
process comprised of 4 stages takes place. Bead build-up,
heat soak, removal of heating plate and welding are these
stages[1,2]. The welding procedure recommended in many
references are introduced by researchers like Potente
et al.,[2] Benkreira et al.,[3] as well as ASTM.[4]
In all those references, it has been pointed out that on
the condition of carrying prescribed procedures of welding
precisely as suggested, its strength will be as strong as pipes
body. Nonhof by presenting statistical analysis has
attempted to optimize welding process for some thermo-
plastic materials. However; his analysis has not been con-
ducted specifically for the High Density Polyethylene
(HDPE) as it is the case for PE pipes.
Mustafa investigated the weldability of UHMW-
polyethylene via the friction stir welding method. He has
prepared samples with this method and the tensile test,
the durometer hardness test and an optical microstructure
analysis were conducted on welded joint. In the experi-
ments, a tensile strength of 72% was achieved in non-
preheated welds, whereas tensile strength of parent
material was achieved approximately at an optimum value
of 89% by pre-heating at 50
C.
Pimputkar presented a range of welding parameters pro-
ducing an acceptable and strong weld by relying on short
time fracture test.
Colaluca et al. studied the quality of polyethylene pipe
joints in gas field. They have prepared a way to set proces-
sing conditions that will result in an acceptable weld.
Leskovics studied effect of butt fusion weld on micro
structure of the formed surfaces and compared it with the
structure of Medium Density of Polyethylene (MDPE) of
the pipe.
Roopa et al.[11] studied far field welding of semicrystal-
line polymer=high-density polyethylene (HDPE). The tem-
perature distribution has been modeled for varying lengths
of the specimen using Ansys to predict the temperature
spikes, which can be related to the performance of the
joints achieved.
 908 M. RIAHI ET AL.
Zhao et al.[11] has investigated effect of surface contami-
nation on butt fusion welding of polyethylene pipes. Lu
et al. have studied the effect of pressure and surface con-
tamination parameters on the strength and quality of the
weld. Benkreira, Shillitoe and Day[13] have modeled the
heating stage in butt fusion welding process. Salvatore[14]
studied the weld line properties.
Finally, Wood researched numerical analysis and review
of the butt fusion welding process in polyethylene pipes
next to Gueugnanaut who in his studies, has presented
modeling of thermomechanical and chemical physics
phenomena having occurred in the butt fusion welding
process of polyethylene pipes.
Patcharaphun and Jariyatammanukul[17] focused on the
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
effect of part thickness on the weld-line strength of
injection-molded short-fiber-reinforced thermoplastic com-
posites. Comparisons were made with specimens without
weld lines. The use of design data that takes into account
fiber orientation and part thickness will enable designers
to more accurately predict the performance of injection-
molded thermoplastic composites under applied load.
One characteristic of the butt fusion welding process is
its concept of controlling inlet parameters in this process.
This welding process is sensitive to different parameters
having effect on it. As such, any fluctuation in them will
cause change in characteristics and quality of the weld.
Controllable parameters in the heating stage of butt fusion
welding process, are several, one of which is heaters tem-
perature. Another one is pressure at the first stage of heat-
ing, in addition to duration of each heating stage and
pressure at the welding stage. A noticeable point in butt
fusion welding is the formation of beads at the internal
and external surfaces of the pipe. The formed internal
beads cause increase in friction against fluids flow. Also,
it is considered as location of formation of residues and
depositing of contaminants. Any lowering in the height
of the formed beads in the weld, which could be done by
manipulating heating conditions, is a major goal in
reduction of effect of friction in polyethylene pipes.
The main objective of this investigation is the numerical
modeling of the heating process as well as analysis of effect
of pressure and heat on quality of weld in form of numeri-
cal and experimental analysis. Having reduction of the final
size of formed beads as the goal, 8 experiments were
defined comprised of different conditions of heat and press-
ure. However, the parameter of time was considered equal
for all experiments. Experiment conditions included tem-
peratures 180, 210 and 240
C, and pressures at the first
stage of heating were 0.03, 0.01 and 0.18 MPa. Pressure
at the heat absorption stage in all samples was less than
0.01 Mpa. Duration of heating at the first stage in all sam-
ples was 120 s and in the second stage it was 180 s. Experi-
ment TC33 was excluded due to anomalies observed while
experimenting.
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING
Model Geometry and Loading Conditions
Due to symmetric conditions in the pipe around its
central axis, in order to reduce required time for solution
and modeling, a two dimensional Axi-symmetric model
has been considered. This two-dimensional model is
depicted in Figure 1. For a model of the heating plate,
a linear solid model was used. Complete geometry of
the pipe is achieved when it circulates around the sym-
metric axis. Pipe used in this study had an external diam-
eter of 160 mm and wall thickness of 14.6 mm, which
yields an SDR ¼ 11. Pipe’s length in the model was
50 mm, which is equal to the part left out of the clamps
jaw in the machine. In simulation, the heating plate was
taken as a thick line with approximate diameter of
180 mm so that we could disregard effects of radiation
heat in the premium stages prior to heating.
This assumption results in an impact on the heat distri-
bution on the internal and external surfaces of the pipe.
However, due to very low heat conduction in polyethylene,
it will not have much impact on the heat inside pipe as well
as the depth of penetrating heat in the pipe’s body. To
simulate the pressure exerted from the jaws of the machine,
a normal pressure on the outermost surfaces of the pipes
has been considered. Convection analysis with heat for
simulation and thermomechanical loading forces of the
pipes has been used. Since intensive change in geometry
of pipe in the melting zone in contact with heating plate
occurs, in order to define slippage of melting material, con-
tact between pipe and plate has been considered as slipping
form in the model. Also; ‘‘self-contact’’ is the definition
provided for surfaces close to the outer melting part of
the pipe and prevention of formed bead entrance to the
inside of the pipe.
Heat Transfer
The governing differential equation of the heat transfer
problem to be solved is:
@2T @2T @T
k þ k þ Q  qc ¼0 ð1Þ
@x2 @y2 @t
FIG. 1. Two-dimensional models of the pipe and heating plate along
with final pressure. (color figure available online)
 BUTT FUSION WELDING OF POLYETHYLENE PIPES
TABLE 1
Heat characteristics of polyethylene (HDPE) in room temperature
Heat capacity of Conductivity of
Parameter the material (Cp) the material (k)
Value 2:6  103 j=kg:
k 0:33 w=m:
k
in which q ¼ density (kg=m3), C ¼ special heat capacity of
the material in (J=ko K), Q ¼ volume rate of entering heat
in (W=m3) and k ¼ heat conductivity of the material in
(w=m.ok). In butt fusion welding process, heat conduction
within the pipe’s body is by far larger than heat transfer
taking place through convection or radiation. Conse-
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
quently, heat transferred through convection and radiation
is negligible. Since polyethylene has low heat conduction
coefficient as well as low heat penetration, heat conduction
from melting surface to the internal layers of the pipe takes
place rather slowly. Initially, ambient temperature of 23oC
and heating plate temperature were defined in accordance
with the experiments’ condition. Heat characteristic of
HDPE used in this experiment is presented in Table 1.
Melting Kinetics of Polyethylene
When required melting heat is given to a solid polymeric
material, it is converted into a melt condition. Melting pro-
cess of the material from physical stand point means
exclusion of existing order in the crystal structure and cre-
ation of amorphous structure. Heating rate has effect on
phase change of the material. Therefore, determination of
a relation between phase change in the material and heat-
ing rate would be helpful. To determine relation between
rate of phase change in polyethylene, in light of high simi-
larity between solidification process and melting of
material, an existing model known as the Avarami model
could be used for initiation of material transfer process[14].
aðtÞ ¼ 1  ExpðKavarami ðTÞ:tn Þ ð2Þ
in which a(t) is phase change rate or material transfer from
solid to liquid, kavarami is the Avarami coefficient and n is
the Avarami exponent. Considering the similarity between
solidification and melting process in polyethylene, the
Avarami model could be used to express rate of phase
change in polyethylene while melting[14].
al ðtÞ ¼ 1  ExpðKfusion ðTÞ:tn Þ ð3Þ
in which kfusion is the coefficient similar to avarami
exponent and n is the avarami exponent.
Melting Behavior of Polyethylene
Determination of rheological behavior of polyethylene
has been conducted by Hehn et al.[18] In their studies, rheo-
logical relation of polyethylene was presented using the
909
Density MFI
(kg=m3) (gr=10 min)
997 0.45
simplest model to express the Arrhenius relation, which is
the following:
g ¼ k:j c jm1 ð4Þ
In the above relation k is the materials coefficient and m is
the sensitivity coefficient of material against sheer stress
exerted on it.
For modeling of melted materials behavior; as well as
heated zone inside it, combination of two conditions is
used. First one is elastic-viscous and second one is
elastic-plastic. Law of combining characteristics in essence
is the integration of materials stress tensor in plastic and
viscous condition. In summary, the presented model could
be expressed in the following form:

a ¼ ap þ avp
ð5Þ
e ¼ ep þ evp
in which ‘p’ is used to denote plastic tension and ‘vp’ is
used to express viscous plastic tension of the material used.
Elasto-viscous plastic model is suitable for modeling of
conditions in which an elastic-plastic structure and an elas-
tic viscous network are present. This combinational beha-
vior could be applied in many industrial applications in
which plastic and viscous geometry change of the material
occurs.
EXPERIMENTAL WORK
Material, Pipe and Procedure of Welding
The material was categorized in the PE100 group and
its strength against hydro static pressure is equal to 10
bars. For conducting experimental work, pipes made of
polyethylene material (HDPE-PE100-HE 3490LS) were
used. For the welding process of butt fusion, pipes with
diameters 160 mm and thickness 14.6 mm (surface to diag-
onal ratio SDR ¼ 11) in sizes of 35 cm and 40 cm length
were cut. Conditions of experiments included tempera-
tures of 180, 210 and 240
C. In addition, pressure at
the first stage of heating was 0.03, 0.1 and 0.18 MPa.
For the second stage of heating, the pressure was taken
to be zero. Duration of first stage of heating in all sam-
ples was 120 s and the second stage was 180 s. All weld
samples used in this study were produced by a CNC butt
 910
FIG. 2. Structure of heat measuring system.
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
FIG. 3. Method of placing thermocouples in the pipes body for heat
measurement at its center. (color figure available online)
welding machine in accordance with the conditions
described here.
Heat Measurement
A digital thermometer with capability of recording data
was used. Thermocouple K is the inlet sensor of the heat
measuring system. Also to demonstrate results of heat
measurement, software for graphing was written using
Cþ language. This software is capable of recording and
graphing the data. The structure of system of heat
measurement is presented in Figure 2.
To find depth of heat penetration as well as its distri-
bution in different distances from the heating plate; heat
measurement in 7 points was conducted. Distances of 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, and 15 mm and using thermocouples having
0.7 mm diameter were used in this regard. For this purpose,
initially, holes with 1.5 mm diameter on the distances men-
tioned and in the depth of 7.5 mm in the body were drilled.
Then, thermocouples were placed inside these holes. As
such heat measurement of center of the pipe was possible.
In Figure 3 the condition of placing thermocouples in the
pipe’s body is depicted.
FIG. 4. Stages of formation and completion of primary bead in TA3 experiment. (color figure available online)
M. RIAHI ET AL.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Simulation Results
In the following diagrams, results obtained from simula-
tion and heat distribution for 3 different loading conditions
and defined conditions in experiments in the temperature
ranges of 180, 210 and 240
C are presented. Moreover,
Figures 4–6 are indicative of stages where formation and
development of primary beads in the heating process for
3 different conditions take place.
Analysis of Heat Distribution
Results of heat distribution in simulation are compared
with those obtained from actual measurement of heat in
different distances from the heating plate findings. For
the TC13 simulation conditions are presented here.
Figure 7 depicts heat change in both actual as well as simu-
lation measurements for experiment TC13 in distances 2
and 4 mm.
In distance 2 mm, results of simulation heat distribution
and results obtained from actual measurement by thermo-
couple are basically the same. The highest error observed is
related to actual measurement which is about 2.3%. Dia-
gram of heat change in 4 mm is almost identical to that
of 2 mm, and results obtained from actual measurements
are basically the same as those measured through simula-
tion. However, the error at the end of heating stage reached
a 5% limit.
In distances 6 mm and 10 mm, a larger heat difference
compared to the previous measurement was observed
(Figure 8). This is because by melting the outermost end
of the pipe through heating and subsequently, shape
change of that area, its convection in actual experiment
takes place. Consequently, measured actual heat is higher
than the numerical model.
Discussion of Shape and Size of Primary-Formed
Bead in Weld
By exerting necessary heat and pressure at the outer-
most part of the pipe, its surface at the end of the pipe
being in contact with the heating plate, tends to move
toward weld beads and thus forms an initial bead. The
size of the initially formed bead could be regarded as cri-
teria for quality control of the weld in the process. To
 BUTT FUSION WELDING OF POLYETHYLENE PIPES 911

FIG. 5. Stages of formation and completion of primary bead in TB3 experiment. (color figure available online)
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014

FIG. 6. Stages of formation and completion of primary bead in TC1 experiment. (color figure available online)

prepare actual samples, first, pipes were tested under pre-
scribed conditions and then by cutting from its end, the
samples’ cross-section with the initial bead was produced.
In Figures 9 and 10, cross-areas of the formed bead for
both conditions, actual and simulation at the end of
heating process for 3 different conditions are presented.
Table 2 presents the dimensions of initially formed inter-
nal and external bead in different heating conditions.
Values of internal and external beads’ heights in differ-
ent test conditions are depicted in Figure 11. In light of
these diagrams, the weld with TA13 conditions shows
lowest height and width of internal and external bead of
the weld. Thus, thinnest weld has been produced. Experi-
ment under TC23 conditions in which bead build-up
pressure was 0.1 MPa and pressure of weld was
0.18 MPa, showed largest dimensions for the welds bead.
Moreover; results obtained from heat distribution indicate
that by increase in pressure up to 0.3 MPa, depth of melt-
ing layer increases as well. However, for higher pressures;
this value does not change noticeably. Consequently, it
could be stated that increasing pressure higher than a cer-
tain point causes increase in the surfaces of contact

FIG. 8. Diagram of heat changes in both actual heat measurement and

FIG. 7. Diagram of heat change in actual and simulated measurements simulation in TA1 experiment in distances 6 and 10 mm. (color figure
of TC1 experiment in distances 2 and 4 mm. (color figure available online) available online)
 912 M. RIAHI ET AL.

by reduction of pressure as well as reduction in heating

temperature, dimensions and sizes of formed beads will
decrease as well.

ANALYSIS OF MECHANICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF

FIG. 9. Cross-sections of formed bead for actual and simulated in TA13
and TB33 experiments. (color figure available online)
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
WELD
For all welded samples under different conditions, non
destructive and mechanical testing could be used to deter-
mine optimized parameters of the weld. Short term tests
could also be used as criteria for analysis of strength and
resistance of weld next to the material of pipe[2]. In this
investigation, 3 types of mechanical tests under different
conditions including standard tension test, low temperature
tension test and Izod impact test were conducted.

Dimensions of impact test samples were in accordance

FIG. 10. Cross-sections of formed bead for actual and simulated experi-
ment TC13. (color figure available online)
between plate and pipe. On the other hand, increasing the
pressure excessively will have no obvious effect on depth
of melting layer. As such, pressure impact on the dimen-
sions of initial bead would be higher. Results indicate that
with ASTM256, which was equal to 64  12.7  6.4 mm.
Depth of carved grove on the surface of sample was
2 mm and its angle compared to symmetrical weld axis
was equal to 45 degrees (22.5o  0.5) on both sides of the
weld line. Center of V shape groove was carefully placed
on the weld line. Samples of the standard tension test
were prepared in accordance with EN12814-2, and low
temperature tension test samples were produced according
to EN12814-6 standard. Figure 12 presents the points

TABLE 2
Dimensions of internal and external beads formed initially at heating stage and depth of meld layer
External Bead Internal Bead
Depth of Meld Layer (mm) Bead’s Width Bead’s Height Bead’s Width Bead’s Height Test Condition
2.5 2.64 1.62 1.9 1.3 TA13
3 3.02 1.94 1.94 1.52 TA23
3 3.48 2.06 2.92 2.08 TA33
3.5 3.10 1.92 2.92 1.4 TB13
4.5 3.54 2.1 3.16 2.12 TB23
4.5 4.32 2.52 3.32 2.52 TB33
5 4.32 2.46 4.12 2.22 TC13
6 5.2 3.02 4.2 3.02 TC23

FIG. 11. Diagram of height change (A) external bead of weld and (B) internal bead of weld under different experiments conditions. (color figure
available online)
 BUTT FUSION WELDING OF POLYETHYLENE PIPES 913

FIG. 12. Dimensions of (A) standard tension test sample and (B) low temperature tension test sample.

TABLE 3
Results of standard tensile test
Considerations Weld factor Yield strength el @ Max load Max load (N) Test Condition
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014

– 1 15.603 73.431 4317.873 TA13

– 1 15.435 75.78 4204.939 TA23
– 1 15.554 83.535 4143.254 TA33
– 1 15.877 69.951 4137.426 TB13
– 1 15.831 74.919 4255.568 TB23
– 1 15.019 74.031 4153.51 TB33
Fracture from Weld’s Side 0.95 15.373 75.092 4261.407 TC13
Fracture from Weld’s Side 0.92 13.46 69.016 3989.255 TC23
Without Fracture – 15.601 76.595 4190.923 Pipe body

RESULTS OF STANDARD TENSION TESTS

The standard tension test was carried out for all samples
just as it was for pipe’s body. In Table 3, summary of
results obtained from tension test and type of produced
fracture in samples has been depicted. In these tests, value
of strength of weld for all samples was measured and found
to be very close to that of pipe’s body. Figure 13 shows
FIG. 13. Tension test samples after conducting the test showing their
place of fracture in two samples.
place of fracture. (color figure available online)

Low-Temperature Tension Test

discussed. Standard tension test was conducted in ambient
temperature of 23
C and 55% Relative Humidity Index
(RHI) under uni-axial tension. Tension movement in this
test was equal to 50 mm=min. Low-temperature test sam-
ples were conditioned at 10
C and were placed on a test
machine, upon which tension movement of 25 mm=min
was exerted for the test procedure. All samples mentioned
herein were tested by a Gotech tension test machine.
The low-temperature tension test is a destructive method
used for evaluation of weld quality and comparison of weld
conditions effect on the ductility of connection with pipe’s
body. Figure 14 shows comparison between stress=strain
diagram for test pieces of pipe’s body and TC23 sample.
It is noteworthy from Figure 15 that tension force in
welded samples is relatively higher at test conditions with
higher temperatures. This means, by increase in weld’s

FIG. 14. Comparison between stress=strain diagram for test piece of pipe’s body and TC23 sample.
 914
FIG. 15. Diagram (A) Maximum force at rupture point and (B) Limit of length change at rupture point on the basis of test condition. (color figure
available online)
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
FIG. 16. Low temperature tension test samples after conducting the test.
(color figure available online)
FIG. 17. Diagram of changes in rupture energy at 26oC. (color figure
available online)
temperature, strength of welded samples has gone up.
Another important conclusion of this diagram could be
that strength of weld in relation to the pipe’s body is
higher. However, quantity of elongation in the pipe’s body
sample is by far higher than that of the weld samples.
Results of Impact Test
Impact test samples were tested at 26
C by using a
standard impact test machine. Figure 17 depicts changes
in rupture energy on the basis of different test conditions.
It could be observed that in a certain temperature,
by increasing pressure, impact energy will decrease.
M. RIAHI ET AL.
Also, impact strength is higher at low temperature of
welding.
CONCLUSION
In this investigation, the heating process in butt fusion
welds was studied, and selected data was collected by defin-
ing different heating conditions for 8 samples in both
theory and experiment. Furthermore, a numerical model
of heating process was produced. By measurement of heat,
results obtained from heat distribution and geometry of
formed beads were compared. The effects of loading con-
ditions on dimensions and geometry of initially formed
beads, as well as formed beads at the final stage, was pre-
cisely analyzed and compared. TA13 sample with 180
C
and initial pressure of 0.03 MPa presented the smallest size
of formed beads at final stage. Tension tests, low tempera-
ture tension test and impact test were conducted to study
mechanical characteristics of all welded samples. In all
samples, weld strength in low temperature, tension test
and standard tension test was measured to be approxi-
mately same as that of the pipe’s body. However, the value
of measured toughness for weld samples was lower than the
pipe’s body. Also, an impact test at ambient temperature
was conducted on weld samples and it was determined that
in general, by any increase in heating pressure at the given
level, specific heat of impact energy for that sample was
reduced. Moreover, strength at low temperature for sam-
ples with high temperature weld was higher.
REFERENCES
1. Grewell, D.A.; Benatar, J.A.; Park, B. Plastics and Composites Weld-
ing Handbook, Hanser Publishers, Munich, 2003.
2. Potente, H.; Michel, P.; Tappe, P. The principles of hot plate welding
of semi-crystalline thermoplastics. Joining Plastics in Production,
Welding Institute, Abington, UK, 105–126, 1988.
3. Benkreira, H.; Day, A.J.; Shillitoe, S. Butt fusion joining of polyethyl-
ene pipes: A theoretical approach. Proc. Int. Conf. on Advances in
Joining Plastics and Composites, 10–12 June 1991.
4. ASTM D 2657–97. 1997. Standard practice for heat fusion joining of
polyolefin pipe and fittings. American Society for Testing and Materi-
als. Philadelphia, PA, 1997.
 BUTT FUSION WELDING OF POLYETHYLENE PIPES
5. Nonhof, C.J. Optimization of hot plate welding for series and mass
production, TNO Plastics and Rubber Research Institute Delft, The
Netherlands; 1996.
6. Mustafa, A. Effects of welding parameters and pre-heating on the fric-
tion stir welding of UHMW-polyethylene. Polym. Plast. Technol.
Engr. 2010, 49 (6), 595–601.
7. Pimputkar, S.M. The dependence of butt fusion bond strength on join-
ing conditions for polyethylene pipe. Polym. Eng. Sci. 1989, 29, 1387.
8. Colaluca, M.A.; Earles, L.L.; Malguarnera, S.C. Fractional factorial testing
to determine processing parameters producing acceptable heat fused joints
in polyethylene pipe. Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng. 1983, 20 (2), 181–195.
9. Leskovics, K.; Koll, M.; Barczy, P. B. A study of structure and mech-
anical properties of welded joints in polyethylene pipes. Materials
Science and Engineering: A. 2006, 419(1–2), 138–143.
10. Zhao, J.Q.; Daigle, L.; Beaulieu, D. Effect of joint contamination on
the quality of butt-fused high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe. J.
Civ. Eng. 2002, 29, 787–798.
Downloaded by [The University of Texas at El Paso] at 13:10 31 December 2014
11. Roopa, R.M.; Prakasan, K.; Rudramoorthy, R. Studies on high den-
sity polyethylene in the far-field region in ultrasonic welding of plas-
tics. Polym. Plast. Technol. Engr. 2008, 47 (8), 762–770.
915
12. Lu, X.; Qian, R.; Brown, N.; Buczala, G. The effect of pressure and
contamination on slow crack growth in a butt fusion in a polyethylene
gas pipe, 1992.
13. Benkreira, H.; Shillitoe, S.; Day, A.J. Modelling of the butt fusion
welding process. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1991, 46, 135–142.
14. Malguarnera, S.C. Weld lines in polymer processing. Polym. Plast.
Technol. Eng. 1982, 18 (1), 1–45.
15. Wood, A.S. Numerical simulation of the butt-fusion welding process.
Department of Mathematics, University of Bradford, West Yorkshire
BD7 1DP, UK, 1996.
16. Gueugnaut, D.; Hehn, O.; Vincent, M. Modeling of the physico-
chemical and thermomechanical phenomena arising during
Butt-Fusion jointing of polyethylene components, GAS de France-
R&D report, F-93211 Saint Denis Laplaine, France, 2006.
17. Patcharaphun, S.; Jariyatammanukul, P. The effect of thickness on
the weld-line strength of injection-molded thermoplastic composites.
Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng. 2010, 49 (13), 1305–1309.
18. Hehn, M.N. Analyse Experimentale et Simulation Thermomecanique
du Soudage Bout a Bout de Tubes de Polyethylene, eres. Ph.D. Thesis.
Ecole polytechnique 2006.