0
Research Papers

Fixturing Effects in the Thermal Modeling of Laser Cladding

[+] Author and Article Information
M. F. Gouge

Autodesk Inc.,
200 Innovation Boulevard,
Suite 208, State College, PA 16803
e-mail: michael.gouge@autodesk.com

P. Michaleris

Autodesk Inc.,
200 Innovation Boulevard, Suite 208,
State College, PA 16803
e-mail: pan.michaleris@autodesk.com

T. A. Palmer

Associate Professor
Applied Research Laboratory,
Department of Material Science and Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
4410D Applied Science Building,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: tap103@psu.edu

Manuscript received December 15, 2015; final manuscript received July 6, 2016; published online August 8, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Z. J. Pei.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 139(1), 011001 (Aug 08, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: MANU-15-1666; doi: 10.1115/1.4034136 History: Received December 15, 2015; Revised July 06, 2016

Fixturing of components during laser cladding can incur significant conductive thermal losses. However, due to the surface roughness at contact, interfacial conduction is impeded. The effective contact conductivity, known as gap conductance, is much lower than the contacting material conductivities. This work investigates modeling conduction losses to fixturing bodies during laser cladding. Two laser cladding experiments are performed using contrasting fixturing schemes: one cantilevered substrate with a minimal substrate-fixture contact area and one with a substrate bolted to a work bench, with a significant substrate-fixture contact area. Using calibrated gap conductance values, error for the cantilevered fixture model decreases from 20.5% to 6.49% in the contact region, while the bench fixtured model error decreases from a range of 60–102% to 11–45%. The improvement in accuracy shows the necessity of accounting for conduction losses in the thermal modeling of laser cladding, particularly for fixturing setups with large areas of contact.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Illustration of microsurface contact and microcavities

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Cantilevered cladding experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Work bench cladding experimental setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Cantilevered TC location schematic: (a) substrate top surface and (b) substrate bottom surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Bench TC location schematic: (a) substrate top surface and (b) substrate bottom surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Substrate only FE mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Cantilevered FE mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Work bench FE mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Forced convection as an axisymmetric function from the laser heat source center

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Cantilevered gap conductance FE mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Cantilevered gap conductance FE mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of simulated versus experimental temperatures at TC1–TC5, cantilevered cladding: (a) TC1, (b) TC2, (c) TC3, (d) TC4, and (e) TC5

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of simulated versus experimental temperatures at TC1–TC4, bench cladding: (a) TC1, (b) TC2, (c) TC3, and (d) TC4

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