0
Research Papers

Analysis of an Approach for Detecting Arc Positions During Vacuum Arc Remelting Based on Magnetic Flux Density Measurements

[+] Author and Article Information
Miguel F. Soler

School of Mechanical, Industrial,
and Manufacturing Engineering,
Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR 97331-6001
e-mail: solerm@oregonstate.edu

Kyle E. Niemeyer

School of Mechanical, Industrial,
and Manufacturing Engineering,
Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR 97331-6001
e-mail: kyle.niemeyer@oregonstate.edu

1Present address: Sierra Olympic Technologies, Hood Rover, OR 97031.

2Corresponding author.

Manuscript received May 19, 2017; final manuscript received February 12, 2018; published online April 6, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Satish Bukkapatnam.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 140(7), 071004 (Apr 06, 2018) (9 pages) Paper No: MANU-17-1330; doi: 10.1115/1.4039439 History: Received May 19, 2017; Revised February 12, 2018

Vacuum arc remelting (VAR) is a melting process for the production of homogeneous ingots, achieved by applying a direct current to create electrical arcs between the input electrode and the resultant ingot. Arc behavior drives quality of the end product, but no methodology is currently used in VAR furnaces at large scale to track arcs in real time. An arc position sensing (APS) technology was recently developed as a methodology to predict arc locations using magnetic field values measured by sensors. This system couples finite element analysis of VAR furnace magnetostatics with direct magnetic field measurements to predict arc locations. However, the published APS approach did not consider the effect of various practical issues that could affect the magnetic field distribution and thus arc location predictions. In this paper, we studied how altering assumptions made in the finite element model affect arc location predictions. These include the vertical position of the sensor relative to the electrode–ingot gap, a varying electrode–ingot gap size, ingot shrinkage, and the use of multiple sensors rather than a single sensor. Among the parameters studied, only vertical distance between arc and sensor locations causes large sources of error and should be considered further when applying an APS system. However, averaging the predicted locations from four evenly spaced sensors helps reduce this error to no more than 16% for a sensor position varying from 0.508 m below and above the electrode–ingot gap height.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Yu, K. O. , 2002, Modelling for Casting and Solidification Processing, Dekker, New York.
Woodside, C. R. , King, P. E. , and Nordlund, C. , 2013, “ Arc Distribution During the Vacuum Arc Remelting of Ti–6Al–4V,” Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 44(1), pp. 154–165. [CrossRef]
Pericleous, K. , Djambazov, G. , Ward, M. , Yuan, L. , and Lee, P. D. , 2013, “ A Multiscale 3D Model of the Vacuum Arc Remelting Process,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 44(12), pp. 5365–5376. [CrossRef]
Zhao, X.-H. , Li, J.-S. , Yang, Z.-J. , Kou, H.-C. , Hu, R. , and Zhou, L. , 2011, “ Numerical Simulation of Fluid Flow Caused by Buoyancy Forces During Vacuum Arc Remelting Process,” J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Sci.), 16(3), pp. 272–276. [CrossRef]
Yang, Z.-J. , Zhao, X.-H. , Kou, H.-C. , Li, J.-S. , Hu, R. , and Zhuo, L. , 2010, “ Numerical Simulation of Temperature Distribution and Heat Transfer During Solidification of Titanium Alloy Ingots in Vacuum Arc Remelting Process,” Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China, 20(10), pp. 1957–1962. [CrossRef]
Beaman, J. J. , Felipe Lopez, L. , and Williamson, R. L. , 2014, “ Modeling of the Vacuum Arc Remelting Process for Estimation and Control of the Liquid Pool Profile,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 136(3), p. 031007. [CrossRef]
Ward, R. M. , and Jacobs, M. H. , 2004, “ Electrical and Magnetic Techniques for Monitoring Arc Behaviour During VAR of INCONEL1718: Results From Different Operating Conditions,” J. Mater. Sci., 39(24), pp. 7135–7143. [CrossRef]
Wang, L. , Jia, S. , Shi, Z. , and Rong, M. , 2005, “ Numerical Simulation of Vacuum Arc Under Different Axial Magnetic Fields,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 38(7), pp. 1034–1041. [CrossRef]
Nair, B. G. , and Ward, R. M. , 2009, “ An Analysis of the Use of Magnetic Source Tomography to Measure the Spatial Distribution of Electric Current During Vacuum Arc Remelting,” Meas. Sci. Technol., 20(4), p. 045701. [CrossRef]
Gartling, D. K. , and Sackinger, P. A. , 1997, “ Finite Element Simulation of Vacuum Arc Remelting,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 24(12), pp. 1271–1289. [CrossRef]
Alam, M. K. , Semiatin, S. L. , and Ali, Z. , 1998, “ Thermal Stress Development During Vacuum Arc Remelting and Permanent Mold Casting of Ingots,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 120(4), pp. 755–763. [CrossRef]
Reiter, G. , Maronnier, V. , Sommitsch, C. , Gäumann, M. , Schützenhöfer, W. , and Schneider, R. , 2003, “ Numerical Simulation of the VAR Process With Calcosoft®-2D and Its Validation,” International Symposium on Liquid Metal Processing and Casting (LMPC 2003), Nancy, France, Sept. 21–24, pp. 77–86.
Wang, L. , Jia, S. , Yang, D. , Liu, K. , Su, G. , and Shi, Z. , 2009, “ Modelling and Simulation of Anode Activity in High-Current Vacuum Arc,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 42(14), p. 145203. [CrossRef]
Wang, L. , Jia, S. , Liu, Y. , Chen, B. , Yang, D. , and Shi, Z. , 2010, “ Modeling and Simulation of Anode Melting Pool Flow Under the Action of High-Current Vacuum Arc,” J. Appl. Phys., 107(11), p. 113306. [CrossRef]
Wang, L. , Zhou, X. , Wang, H. , Qian, Z. , Jia, S. , Yang, D. , and Shi, Z. , 2012, “ Anode Activity in a High-Current Vacuum Arc: Three-Dimensional Modeling and Simulation,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., 40(9), pp. 2237–2246. [CrossRef]
Huang, X. , Wang, L. , Deng, J. , Jia, S. , Qin, K. , and Shi, Z. , 2016, “ Modeling of the Anode Surface Deformation in High-Current Vacuum Arcs With AMF Contacts,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 49(7), p. 075202. [CrossRef]
Wang, L. , Zhang, X. , Huang, X. , and Jia, S. , 2017, “ Simulation Results of Influence of Constricted Arc Column on Anode Deformation and Melting Pool Swirl in Vacuum Arcs With AMF Contacts,” Phys. Plasmas, 24(11), p. 113511. [CrossRef]
Mir, H. E. , Jardy, A. , Bellot, J.-P. , Chapelle, P. , Lasalmonie, D. , and Senevat, J. , 2010, “ Thermal Behaviour of the Consumable Electrode in the Vacuum Arc Remelting Process,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 210(3), pp. 564–572. [CrossRef]
Woodside, C. R. , and King, P. E. , 2010, “ A Measurement System for Determining the Positions of Arcs During Vacuum Arc Remelting,” IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference (I2MTC), Austin, TX, May 3–6, pp. 452–457.
Nair, B. G. , Winter, N. , Daniel, B. , and Ward, R. M. , 2016, “ Faster Methods for Estimating Arc Centre Position During VAR and Results From Ti–6Al–4V and INCONEL 718 Alloys,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng., 143(1), p. 012012. [CrossRef]
Djurdjanovic, D. , Mears, L. , Niaki, F. A. , Haq, A. U. , and Li, L. , 2017, “ State of the Art Review on Process, System, and Operations Control in Modern Manufacturing,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., epub.
COMSOL, 2013, “ COMSOL Multiphysics: 4.3b,” COMSOL, Inc., Burlington, MA.
Zanner, F. J. , Adasczik, C. , O'Brien, T. , and Bertram, L. A. , 1984, “ Observations of Melt Rate as a Function of Arc Power, CO Pressure, and Electrode Gap During Vacuum Consumable Arc Remelting of Inconel 718,” Metall. Trans. B, 15(1), pp. 117–125. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Norm (i.e., vector magnitude) of the magnetic flux density with respect to arc location in Cartesian coordinates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Diagram of the geometry employed in the model (not to scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Cross section of VAR furnace. Image taken from Woodside et al., Reprinted by permission from Springer Nature © 2013 [2].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Overhead cross-sectional diagram of a VAR furnace, shown with four two-axis magnetic field sensors and the geometry of the variables for one sensor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Predicted arc locations compared to exact locations (calculated using furnace coefficients mr = 8.15 × 10−8 N/A2, mt = 4.98 × 10−8 N/A2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Statistical error distribution of predicted arc locations with respect to vertical sensor position using constant furnace coefficients

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Error distribution of predicted arc locations with respect to vertical sensor position using adaptive furnace coefficients

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Arc location prediction trends for varying, single sensor position in the positive z direction using constant furnace coefficients; the sensor is located at (0 and −0.64 m): (a) arc location prediction with a sensor at the electrode–ingot gap (0 m above the electrode–ingot gap), (b) arc location prediction with a sensor 0.0762 m above the electrode–ingot gap, (c) arc location prediction with a sensor 0.254 m above the electrode–ingot gap, and (d) arc location prediction with a sensor 0.508 m above the electrode–ingot gap

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Arc location predictions with varying gap height for a single sensor location

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Error in predicted arc locations with varying contact zone height, mimicking ingot shrinkage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Arc location predictions for two sensors positioned on opposite sides of the furnace: (0 m and −0.64 m) and (0 m and 0.64 m)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Arc location predictions using four sensors around the furnace; these locations are the average of the locations predicted by each of the four sensors

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of error distribution and magnitude from using one sensor versus four sensor averages; error is based on the difference between predicted and exact values: (a) percent error of arc location predictions using one sensor from the exact locations and (b) percent error of arc location predictions using four sensor averaging from the exact locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Percent error statistical distribution for 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 sensors

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Error distribution of predicted arc locations with respect to vertical sensor position using the average results from four sensors

Tables

Errata

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