General expressions for heat distribution, pressure, and current density in argon welding arcs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In welding and wire-arc additive manufacturing (WAAM), a mobile arc is the heat source that enables the deposition of metals and the resulting properties of the final product. Because the arc involves temperatures of 20 000 K, and gas velocities of the order of 300 m/s, there are only a few experiments and models available to determine optimal, or at least acceptable, parameters for the operation such as current, voltage, and arc length. On the other hand, there is a lack of engineering guidance to optimize the processes resulting in costly and time-consuming trial-and-error optimization methods, which also involve wasteful use of energy and scrap parts. In this work, a numerical model of the gas-tungsten arc welding (GTAW) arc was created and validated against experiments. The model considers the arc interactions between a non-consumable electrode and the weld pool and accounts for multiple coupled heat transfer mechanisms: Joule heating, conduction, advection, radiation, and Thomson effect. The conditions considered cover the vast majority of GTAW welding operations. The results are generalized in the form of engineering expressions suitable to be embedded in metamodels, in which the heat source is just a part. Applications include penetration and width of welds and deposition rate in external-wire WAAM.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".