MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158502284 · doi:10.18280/jesa.540213

Using Artificial Neural Networks to Predict the Effect of Input Parameters on Weld Bead Geometry for SAW Process

2021· article· en· W3158502284 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Majid Midhat Saeed, Ziad Shakeeb Al Sarraf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Mosul
KeywordsWeldingArtificial neural networkProcess (computing)Submerged arc weldingMechanical engineeringVoltageComputer scienceArc weldingEngineeringArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on high quality and reliability, one of the most efficient methods for joining metals is Submerged Arc Welding (SAW). In this presented work, an attempt has been successfully taken to develop a model to predict the effect of input parameters on weld bead geometry of submerged arc welding process with the help of neural network technique and analysis of various process control variables and important of weld bead parameters in submerged arc welding. The complexity non-linear relationships of input / output variables for any computational models can be addressed by using artificial neural networks (ANN). Today, ANN represents a powerful modeling technique, that depend on statistical approach, presently practiced in many fields of engineering for modeling complex relationships that other physical models cannot be explained it easily. A welding process with automatic or semiautomatic is required to complete the weld through using tubular electrode with consumable flux. Parameters such as welding current, welding speed and voltage are influenced on the quality of the joints. The work conducts many experiments; these are basically depending on many factors and levels. A selection of 2205 duplex stainless steel is carried out in this study to conduct three factors and five levels of central composite design. Neural network model structure having number of neurons layers such as (3 input layers, 1 hidden layer and 3 output layers) with back propagation algorithm has been successfully applied to extract weld bead geometry from predicting the effect of input parameters. Good agreement was obtained between predicted and experiment results, however process parameters such as speed shows opposite effect on all weld parameters. It was seen that weld height and width are proportional to the amount of input current. The prediction of the neural network model showed excellent agreement with the actual results, which indicate that the neural network is viable means for predicting of not only weld bead geometry, but also other parameters such as polarity, current type and flux geometry. This recommends setting the neural network to be applicable for real time work.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207