Ships and Offshore Structures

ISSN: 1744-5302 (Print) 1754-212X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsos20

Parameter determination of double-ellipsoidal

heat source model and its application in the multi-
pass welding process

Guangming Fu, Jijun Gu, Marcelo Igor Lourenco, Menglan Duan & Segen F.
Estefen

To cite this article: Guangming Fu, Jijun Gu, Marcelo Igor Lourenco, Menglan Duan & Segen
F. Estefen (2015) Parameter determination of double-ellipsoidal heat source model and its
application in the multi-pass welding process, Ships and Offshore Structures, 10:2, 204-217, DOI:
10.1080/17445302.2014.937059

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2014.937059

Published online: 10 Jul 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 646

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 11 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsos20
Ships and Offshore Structures, 2015
Vol. 10, No. 2, 204–217, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17445302.2014.937059

Parameter determination of double-ellipsoidal heat source model and its application

in the multi-pass welding process
Guangming Fua,∗ , Jijun Gub , Marcelo Igor Lourencoa , Menglan Duanb and Segen F. Estefena
a
Ocean Engineering Department, COPPE, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; b Offshore Oil/Gas
Research Center, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing, China
(Received 27 November 2013; accepted 16 June 2014)

The parameters of the heat source model have significant influence on the temperature field and sequentially affect the residual
stress field. In this paper, a neural-network programme based on the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm is developed to predict
the parameters of Goldak’s double-ellipsoidal heat source model. The analytical solution of the heat conduction equation
based on the double-ellipsoidal heat source is obtained by integrating a series of instant point heat sources over the volume of
the ellipsoidal heat source. The transient temperature distribution and the sizes of the molten pool are obtained under various
welding processes by using the analytical method. Then, a neural-network programme is employed to train and predict the
heat source parameters. These results of temperature and molten pool size obtained by the numerical simulation with the
predicted heat source parameters are calibrated by the published experimental results. The numerical results show a good
agreement with the experimental measurements. Finally, the developed Levenberg–Marquardt neural network is employed to
predict the heat source parameters in the multi-pass welding process in the laboratory. By comparing the finite element (FE)
numerical results with experimental results, the heat source parameters have been successfully identified in the multi-pass
welding process.
Keywords: heat source model; neural network; temperature distribution; experimental calibration

1. Introduction location are confined, the non-destructive measure method,

Welding technology is widely used in the construction of
onshore and offshore structures due to the high productiv-
ity during the assembly process. However, during the weld-
ing process, non-uniform heat expansion in the weld bead
and the adjacent parent material can induce severe residual
stresses and distortions. The residual stresses give a larger
contribution to the final stress field (Brickstad and Josefson
1998). Severe welding distortion, residual stress and reliev-
ing residual stress process can influence the performance
of welded structural members, such as tensile strength and
impact energy especially after the repair welding (Aloraier
et al. 2013). Moreover, the phase transformation occurred
in the weld metal and the adjacent region of the weld line
will contribute to the residual stresses (Heinze et al. 2012),
particularly in the multi-pass welding process due to prior
weld metal subject to several thermal cycles and some lo-
cations undergo two or more phase transformations (Deng
and Murakawa 2006). To minimise the negative influences
of welding on the structure fabrication quality, investiga-
tion of welding-induced residual stresses and distortions
has become a major concern in the recent years.
Furthermore, since the dimensions of the components
of actual structures are usually very large or the spaces of the
such as neutron and X-ray diffractions, cannot be applied
conveniently. Therefore, the numerical simulation method
calibrated by experimental measurements becomes a fea-
sible solution (Smith and Smith 2009a; Muránsky et al.
2012). When performing an accurate numerical simula-
tion, the parameters of heat source model which have sig-
nificant influence on temperature distribution and molten
pool shape should be initially determined (Smith and Smith
2009b; Joshi et al. 2013). Joshi et al. (2013) evaluated the
geometric parameters of Goldak’s double-ellipsoidal heat
source model by using SYSWELD (2006) in the gas metal
arc welding (GMAW) process. The generated new mate-
rial temperature-dependent properties in the fusion region
were employed for the evaluation of geometric parameters
of heat source. The results show good matching with the
experimental measurements.
In this paper, a neural-network programme based
on the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm (Levenberg 1944;
Marquardt 1963) is developed to predict the geometric pa-
rameters of Goldak’s double-ellipsoidal heat source model.
The solution of the heat conduction equation based on the
double-ellipsoidal heat source model is obtained by su-
perposing a series of instant point heat sources over the

∗
Corresponding author. Email: fu@lts.coppe.ufrj.br


C 2014 Taylor & Francis
 Ships and Offshore Structures 205

volume of the heat source model. The transient tempera- and rear quadrants of the moving heat source model are
ture profiles and the sizes of the molten pool are obtained described in Equations (2a) and (2b), respectively,
under various welding processes by using this analytical
method. Then, the results are employed as the training sam-  
√
ples of the Levenberg–Marquardt neural network. These 6 3ff ηQ 3x 2 3y 2 3z2
numerical results of temperature and molten pool size based qf (x, y, z) = √ exp − 2 − 2 − 2
af bcπ π af b c
on the predicted heat source model are calibrated by pub-
(2a)
lished experimental measurements. Finally, the developed
Levenberg–Marquardt neural network is employed to pre- √  
6 3fr ηQ 3x 2 3y 2 3z2
dict the heat source parameters in the multi-pass welding qr (x, y, z) = √ exp − 2 − 2 − 2
ar bcπ π ar b c
process in the laboratory. The finite element (FE) numerical
(2b)
results show a good agreement with the test measurements,
and the heat source parameters have been successfully iden-
tified in the multi-pass welding process. where af and ar are the front and the rear semi-axes of the
heat source, respectively. The fractions of deposited heat, ff
and fr , represent the heat apportionments of the heat flux in
2. Heat source model
the front and rear quadrants, respectively, whereff + fr =
Since Rosenthal (1941) first developed the travelling point 2. Considering the continuity of the volumetric heat source,
heat source model to investigate the temperature distribu- 2af
ff = af +a and fr = af2a+ar r are assumed (Lundback 2003).
r
tion which formed the basis for the most subsequent studies
on weld heat flow, several heat source models were devel-
oped to obtain an accurate heat transfer analysis in the
welding process by later researchers (Pavelic et al. 1969; 3. Heat transfer analysis and
Goldak et al. 1984). Levenberg–Marquardt neural network
Goldak et al. (1984) developed two different heat source 3.1. Heat transfer analysis
models, semi- and double-ellipsoidal heat source models
In the thermal analysis, for an isotropic material, the tran-
which are widely adopted due to the accuracy in several of
sient temperature field T of the welded plate is a function
welding processes. The formulation of the semi-ellipsoidal
of time t and the spatial coordinates (x, y, z):
heat source model as shown in Figure 1(a) can be expressed
as
 
√   ∂ 2T ∂ 2T ∂ 2T ∂T
6 3f ηQ 3x 2 3y 2 3z2 k + + + q = ρc (3)
q(x, y, z) = √ exp − 2 − 2 − 2 (1) ∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂z2 ∂t
abcπ π a b c

where x, y and z are the local coordinates of the ellipsoidal where q, ρ, c and k are the heat flux, the material density,
model, η is the arc efficiency, Q is the power input, a, b and the specific heat and the thermal conductivity, respectively.
c are the semi-axes of the heat source model. T = T (x, y, z, t) represents the temperature at the point
However, some results with the semi-ellipsoidal heat (x, y, z) at time t.
source show that the temperature gradients are not as steep Rosenthal (1941) first developed the travelling in-
as the experimentally observed in front of the heat source; stant point heat source model to obtain the temperature
however, in rear of heat source, they are steeper than ex- distribution:
perimental measurements. To correct this, Goldak et al.
(1984) proposed a new heat source model, “double el-  R 2

lipsoidal heat source model” which combined two semi- exp − 4πκ(t−t )
dTt  = δQdt  (4)
ellipsoidal heat source models as shown in Figure 1(b). ρc[4π κ(t − t  )]3/2
The double-ellipsoidal heat source can provide more accu-
rate results by comparing the experimental measurements,
especially in the low penetration welding process. Later, where κ = ρc k
is the thermal diffusivity, δQ is the heat
numerous welding-related research works were carried out source, (x , y  , z ) is the location of the heat source δQ at


to investigate the welding residual stress in various welding a time of t  and R 2 = (x − x  )2 + (y − y  )2 + (z − z )2 is

methods, such as gas metal arc welding (GMAW) (Malik
et al. 2008; Joshi et al. 2010), laser welding (Kong et al.
2011; Bannour et al. 2012), metal inert gas welding (MIG)
(Price et al. 2008) and flux cored arc welding (Aloraier and
Joshi 2012). The power density distributions of the front
the distance to the heat source.
Nguyen et al. (1999) applied the semi- and double-
ellipsoidal heat source in a semi-infinite body based on
the instant point solution through integration over the vol-
ume of heat source. The solution of temperature field by
206 G. Fu et al.

Figure 1. Goldak’s heat source models: (a) Semi-ellipsoidal model (Muránsky et al. 2012) and (b) double-ellipsoidal heat source model.
(This figure is available in colour online.)

employing the double-ellipsoidal heat source is described Fachinotti et al. (2011) proposed a more accurate
by the following equation: solution:

√  ∞ ∞ ∞ T (x, y, z, t) = T0
1 6 3Qdt 
dTt  = √
4 ρcaf ar π π [4π κ(t − t  )]3/2 −∞ −∞ −∞ √  t exp − 3y 2 3z2
− 12κ(t−t

3 3Q 12κ(t−t  )+b2  )+c2
  + √
(x − x  )2 + (y − y  )2 + (z − z )2 ρcπ π 0 12κ(t − t  ) + b2 12κ(t − t  ) + c2
× exp −
4π κ(t − t  )
   × [ff Af (1 − Bf ) + fr Ar (1 − Br )]dt  (6)
ff 3x 2 3y 2 3z2
× exp − 2 − 2 − 2  
af af b c 3(x−vt  )2
exp −
12κ(t−t  )+ai2  ai  
  where Ai = √ , Bi =erf 2
√ √
x−vt
12κ(t−t  )+ai2 κ(t−t  ) 12κ(t−t  )+ai2
fr 3x 2 3y 2 3z2
+ exp − 2 − 2 − 2 dx  dy  dz (5) and i can be replaced by f and r for the front and rear
ar ar b c regions, respectively.
 Ships and Offshore Structures 207

In the present study, the MATLAB programme is em-
ployed to capture the maximum size of the molten pool
(half-width and depth) based on the analytical solution of
the semi-infinity body subjected to the three-dimensional
(3D) moving heat sources. The size of the molten pool and
the corresponding geometric parameters of the heat source
model are recorded as the input data of the neural network.
The following assumptions are considered in the current
study:
• For minimising the computer time consumption, the
size of the rear part of the ellipsoidal heat source is
four times the front part (ar = 4af ). The size of the
semi-axes in a transverse direction equals the front
part (b = af ). Therefore, only two parameters are
calculated.
• In order to reduce the time consumption, the physical
properties (c = 600 J/kg/◦ C; k = 29 J/m/s/◦ C and
ρ = 7820 kg/m3 ) reported by Nguyen et al. (1999)
are employed in the analytical calculations of the
fusion zone (FZ) size. In the numerical simulation,
the temperature independent thermo-properties are
employed.
A subroutine is implemented in MATLAB to cal-
culate the maximum size of the molten pool based on
Equation (6). The subroutine is used to determine the ana-
3.2. The Levenberg–Marquardt neural network
The Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm (Levenberg 1944;
Marquardt 1963) provided a numerical solution to the prob-
lem of minimising a non-linear function. In the artificial
neural-network field, this algorithm is suitable for train-
ing small- and medium-sized problems. Other algorithms
have already been developed for the neural-network learn-
ing, such as the error back propagation algorithm, which
is regarded as the largest breakthrough for neural-network
learning. However, it is limited by its slow convergence.
The Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm interpolates the gra-
dient descent algorithm and the Gauss–Newton algorithm.
It is more robust than the Gauss–Newton algorithm, since
in many cases it can converge well, even if it starts far
off the final value. It inherits the stability advantage of the
gradient descent algorithm and the speed advantage of the
Gauss–Newton algorithm.
Suppose that we have a function V (x) which we want
to minimise with respect to the parameter vector x, then
Newton’s method would be
x = −[∇ 2 V (x)]−1 ∇V (x) (7)
where ∇ 2 V (x) is the Hessian matrix and ∇V (x) is the gra-
dient. If we assume that V (x) is a sum of squares function,

lytical solution for the Goldak’s model geometric parame- V (x) = ei2 (x) (8)
ters for 138 combinations of welding parameters, as shown i=1

in Table 1, in which the welding speed range is from 1 to

7 mm/s, the voltage range is from 10 to 50 Volts and the Then, it can be shown that
current range is from 100 to 500 Amperes. These results are
finally used to train a neural-network algorithm, and later
the neural network is employed to determine the geometric ∇V (x) = J T (x)(x) (9)
parameters of heat source model for any welding procedure
in the considered range. ∇ 2 V (x) = J T (x)J (x) + S(x) (10)

Table 1. The training samples of the Levenberg–Marquardt neural network.

Depth and half-

width – analytical

Speed (mm/s) Voltage (V) Current (A) af (mm) c (mm) (mm)

1 10 500 4 4 8 8
1 30 300 6 6 10 10
1 50 300 6 4 12.5 12
4 50 100 4 2 6 5.5
4 30 300 2 6 8 9
4 30 500 2 2 11 11
7 50 300 6 2 9 8
7 50 500 2 2 11 11
7 50 100 2 6 4.5 5.5
208 G. Fu et al.

Table 2. The calibrations of the Levenberg–Marquardt neural network.

Depth and half-width

Velocity (mm/s) Voltage (V) Current (A) (mm) af (mm) c (mm) af – L.M (mm) c – L.M (mm)

1 10 300 5.5 5.5 4 4 4 4

1 30 300 10.5 10.5 4 4 4 4
7 50 500 11 11 6 6 6 8
1 30 100 5.5 5.5 4 4 4 4
1 30 500 13 13 4 6 4 4
1 50 300 13 13 4 6 4 4
1 50 500 15 14.5 6 4 6 4
1 50 500 15.5 15.5 4 4 4 4
4 10 500 6 6 4 4 4 4
4 50 500 13.5 13 6 4 6 6

where J (x) is the Jacobian matrix The Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm can be considered a
⎡ ⎤ trust-region modification to Gauss–Newton.
∂e1 (x) ∂e1 (x) ∂e1 (x) The Levenberg–Marquardt neural network is developed
⎢ ∂x1 ...
⎢ ∂x2 ∂xn ⎥ ⎥ based on the Labview in the current study. The analytical re-
⎢ ∂e2 (x) ∂e2 (x) ∂e2 (x) ⎥ sults (128 groups) are adopted as the training samples of the
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ...
∂xn ⎥
J (x) = ⎢ ∂x1 ∂x2 ⎥ (11) Levenberg–Marquardt neural network. The last 10 groups
⎢ .. .. .. .. ⎥ are employed to calibrate the Levenberg–Marquardt neural
⎢ . . . . ⎥
⎢ ⎥ network. The predicted results indicate a good agreement
⎣ ∂eN (x) ∂eN (x) ∂eN (x) ⎦
... with the analytical results as shown in Table 2.
∂x1 ∂x2 ∂xn

and
4. Finite element model validation

N
S(x) = ei (x)∇ 2 ei (x)
i=1
For the Gauss–Newton method, it is assumed that S(x) ≈ 0,
and Equation (7) becomes
x = [J T (x)J (x)]−1 J T (x)e(x)
The Levenberg–Marquardt modification to the Gauss–
Newton method is
x = [J T (x)J (x) + μI ]−1 J T (x)e(x)
The parameter μ is multiplied by some factor (β) when-
ever a step would result in an increased V (x). When a step
reduces V (x), μ is divided by β. Notice that when μ is large,
the algorithm becomes steepest descent (with step 1/μ),
while for small μ the algorithm becomes Gauss–Newton.
(12) The finite element model of transient temperature has
been developed based on ABAQUS (2010) and FORTRAN
subroutine. In numerical model, the Goldak’s double-
ellipsoidal heat model is adopted to simulate the power
input, and the subroutine is generated to simulate the weld-
ing process. The same available data reported in the pub-
(13) lished literatures (Goldak et al. 1984; Nguyen et al. 1999)
are employed in the FE model, as shown in Table 3, and the
temperature profiles are calculated by the numerical method
which combines the subroutine and the predicted geomet-
ric parameters of Goldak’s heat source model. The finite
(14) element model is replicated with the size of 200 mm ×
100 mm × 100 mm in the present study, as shown in
Figure 2. The parameters of the double-ellipsoidal heat
source model are predicted by the Levenberg–Marquardt
neural-network programme as shown in Table 4.
In Goldak et al.’s (1984) work, the experimental welding
process parameters are: voltage 32.9 V, welding current

Table 3. Input data for predicting the parameters of heat source.

Voltage (V) Current (A) Velocity (mm/s) Half-width (mm) Depth (mm)

Goldak et al. (1984) 30.9 1170 5 14 14

Nguyen et al. (1999) 26 230 5 6.4 3.65
 Ships and Offshore Structures
Figure 2. Mesh of the finite element model. (This figure is avail-
able in colour online.)
1170 A, welding velocity 5 mm/s and welding efficiency
95%. Considering af = 20 mm and c = 22 mm, according
the first assumption, the rear quadrant of heat source is
four times the front part, ar = 80 mm. In the transverse
direction, b = af = 20 mm.
Based on the numerical simulation with the predicted
geometric parameters of heat source model, the sizes of
the FZ and heat-affected zone (HAZ) (x1 = 12 mm and
x2 = 20.4 mm), are captured as shown in Figure 3. The
results are in good agreement with published experimental
measurements (x1 = 14 mm and x2 = 21 mm) by Goldak
et al. (1984). The errors between the numerical results and
experimental measurements are 14% and 3%, respectively.
Goldak et al. (1984) also suggested the parameters
of heat source (af = 15 mm,ar = 30 mm, b = 20 mm and
c = 20 mm) to simulate this welding process and the re-
sults are presented in Figure 4. The sizes of FZ and HAZ
are captured as x1 = 15 mm and x2 = 21 mm, respectively.
By comparing the experimental results (x1 = 14 mm and
x2 = 21 mm), the error is 7.1% of the size of FZ. The size
of the HAZ was accurately predicted based on Goldak’s
proposal.
Temperature distributions along the transverse direction
in the middle of the specimen are plotted in Figure 5. The
current FEM-1 represents the numerical simulation based
on the heat source parameters suggested by Goldak et al.
(1984). The current FEM-2 indicates the numerical results
based on the current predicted geometric parameters of heat
Table 4. Predicted parameters of heat source model.
af ar b c
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
For Goldak’s model 20 80 20 22
For Nguyen’s model 4 16 4 12
209
Figure 3. Results of FZ and HAZ sizes with parameters predicted
by Levenberg–Marquardt neural network. (This figure is available
in colour online.)
source model. It can be concluded that the temperatures
are overpredicted in the high-temperature regions in the
current FEM-1. However, in the regions below 1400 ◦ C
which provide the largest contributions to the residual stress
fields, the current FEM-2 results are in better agreement
with the experimental measurements than the results of
current FEM-1. The current FEM-2 results also show a
good agreement with the Krutz’s numerical results.
The welding process performed by Nguyen et al. (1999)
is also replicated to calibrate the Levenberg–Marquardt
neural network in the present study. The welding voltage is
26 V, the welding current is 230 A and the welding velocity
is 5 mm/s. The parameters of the heat source model are
predicted by the Levenberg–Marquardt neural network as
af = 4 mm, ar = 16 mm, c = 12 mm and b = 4 mm. The
sizes of the FZ in the transverse direction (x1) and ver-
tical direction (x2) are captured numerically as shown in
Figure 6. By comparing with the experimental measure-
ments performed by Nguyen et al. (1999), there are 6.25%
and 17.2% differences in transverse and vertical directions,
respectively.
By comparing the experimental results presented by
Goldak et al. (1984) and by Nguyen et al. (1999), the devel-
oped Levenberg–Marquardt neural network can reasonably
predict the parameters of heat source model with minimum
CPU time consumption. The current numerical method-
ology combined with the subroutines can provide accept-
able temperature distribution by comparing the experimen-
tal measurements.
210 G. Fu et al.

Figure 6. Comparison of FZ and HAZ sizes between FEM and

experimental results proposed by Nguyen et al. (1999). (This
figure is available in colour online.)
Figure 4. Results of FZ and HAZ sizes with the parameters
provided by Goldak et al. (1984). (This figure is available in colour
online.)
sions of 1200 mm × 500 mm × 19 mm with the groove an-
gle of 20º and the root opening of 6 mm. The plates are
5. Applications in the multi-pass welding process jointed with the single-electrode welding process in five
filling layers. The MIG manual procedure is employed in
5.1. Welding procedure the first two welding passes and the submerged arc weld-
The experiments are performed using the ASTM
A131grade DH36 ferric steel plate typically employed in
the shipbuilding industry. The chemical composition of DH Table 5. Chemical compositions of DH36 steel plate (mass %).
36 is shown in Table 5 and the thermo-physical proper-
C Si Mn P S Ti Nb
ties are reported by Camilleri et al. (2013), as shown in
Figure 7. The laboratory test joints two plates with dimen- 0.160 0.340 1.450 0.025 0.020 0.022 0.025

Figure 5. Temperature distributions on the top of the work piece

in transversal direction. (This figure is available in colour online.) Figure 7. Thermo-mechanical properties.
 Ships and Offshore Structures 211

Table 6. Parameters of welding procedures.

Wire diameter Wire speed Welding speed Inter-pass temperature

Pass Process (mm) Current (A) Voltage (V) (m/min) (m/min) (◦ C)

1 MIG 1.2 160 28.9 4.8 0.16 –

2 MIG 1.2 140 28.1 4.8 0.11 70
3 SAW 4.0 530 31.0 2.0 0.26 32
4 SAW 4.0 563 31.0 1.9 0.26 109
5 SAW 4.0 560 30.0 2.3 0.27 170

ing (SAW) process is performed automatically in the last
three welding passes. The detailed welding procedures are
indicated in Table 6.
The K-type thermocouples are directly mounted in the
middle of the plate (9.5 mm from the upper surface) in the
vertical direction prior to the welding process and connected
directly to the multi-channel data logging system. In this
way, the temperature profile during the welding process
at any specified time can be conveniently stored for later
data processing and comparison with numerical results. The
thermocouples TC-1, TC-2, TC-3, TC-4 and TC-5 are at
20, 20, 24, 30 and 30 mm from the welding line and −40,
−20, 0, 20 and 40 mm from the centreline of the plates as
shown in Figure 8. The temperatures are captured by the
data logging system as illustrated in Figure 9.
5.2. Numerical procedures
The numerical investigation includes two-dimensional (2D)
and 3D FE models of the present welded plate, as shown in
Figure 10. The 8-node quadratic heat transfer quadrilateral
(DC2D8) and 8-node linear heat transfer brick (DC3D8) are
employed in 2D and 3D numerical models, respectively. The
double-ellipsoidal heat source model is employed and the

Figure 8. Experimental set-up and thermocouple arrangement. (This figure is available in colour online.)
212 G. Fu et al.

Figure 9. Experimental set-up: (a) thermocouple position and (b) data logging system. (This figure is available in colour online.)

geometric parameters of the heat source model are predicted
by the Levenberg–Marquardt neural-network programme,
as shown in Table 7.
The thermal boundary conditions, including the con-
vection and radiation to the environment from all ex-
posed surfaces, are considered in the current numerical
model. Heat loss due to convection is assumed as shown in
Equation (15). The heat loss on the surface due to radiation
to the surrounding region is governed by Equation (16),
following the Stefan–Boltzmann law:
qc = −h(T − T0 ) (15)
 Ships and Offshore Structures 213

Figure 10. Finite element model: (a) 2D generalised plain strain and (b) 3D finite element model. (This figure is available in colour
online.)

  in Figure 7. An artificially increased thermal conductivity

qr = eσ (T + 273.15)4 − (T0 + 273.15)4
where qc and qr are the heat fluxes across the surface,
h is a reference film coefficient, T is the temperature at
this point on the surface, T0 is the ambient temperature,
e is the emissivity of the surface and σ is the Stefan–
Boltzmann constant as 5.67 × 10−8 Wm−2 K−4 , and the
ambient temperature is assumed as 25 ◦ C. The film coeffi-
cient and emissivity are defined as 20 Wm−2 K−1 and 0.85,
respectively.
The thermo-mechanical properties of DH 36 are sim-
ilar to the EN 10025 S355J2G3 (Camilleri et al. 2013;
Wang et al. 2013). The temperature-dependent material
properties from the SYSWELD (2006) material database
are employed in the present numerical simulation as shown
(16) is adopted for temperatures above the melting point. The
thermal effects due to solidification of the molten pool are
considered by taking into account the latent heat effects;
the latent heat is assumed as 270 kJ/kg in the present work.
The solid and liquid temperatures are assumed as 1440 and
1505 ◦ C (Joshi et al. 2010), respectively.
5.3. Results and discussions
The temperature distributions during the welding process
at each thermocouple TC-1, TC-2, TC-3, TC-4 and TC-5
are illustrated in Figure 11. The comparisons of the tem-
perature field between the experimental measurements and
3D numerical simulations at several thermocouples in the
multi-pass welding process are also plotted in Figure 11.
The temperature distributions show a good agreement

Table 7. Predicted parameters of Goldak’s heat source model.

Front part af Rear part ar Half-width b Depth c

Passes (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

Pass-1 4 16 4 12
Pass-2 4 16 4 12
Pass-3 10 40 10 16
Pass-4 10 40 10 16
Pass-5 10 40 10 16
214 G. Fu et al.

(a)
(b)

(c) (d)

(e)

Figure 11. Temperature distributions at various thermocouples in different welding passes: 3D (solid line) and experimental measurements
(dotted line): (a) first welding pass, (b) second welding pass, (c) third welding pass, (d) fourth welding pass and (e) fifth welding pass.
(This figure is available in colour online.)

between the 3D numerical simulations and the experimental merical simulations at thermocouple TC-3 in five differ-
measurements. ent welding passes. These results show a good agree-
Figure 12 shows the temperature comparisons be- ment between numerical simulations and experimental
tween the experimental measurements, 2D and 3D nu- measurements.
 Ships and Offshore Structures 215

Figure 12. Comparisons of temperature distribution at TC-3 in various welding passes for 2D numerical model, 3D numerical model
and experimental measurements: (a) first welding pass, (b) second welding pass, (c) third welding pass, (d) fourth welding pass and
(e) fifth welding pass. (This figure is available in colour online.)
216 G. Fu et al.
6. Conclusions
The sizes of the FZ and HAZ are calculated by the analyti-
cal method for several welding processes and the assumed
parameters of Goldak’s heat source model. These captured
results are employed as the training and testing samples for
the Levenberg–Marquardt neural network. The numerical
method combined with subroutine and predicted param-
eters of heat source are calibrated. Finally, this method is
employed to predict the parameters of the heat source model
in the experimental test. The following conclusions can be
drawn.
(1) The current FE model combined with subroutines
can be employed to predict the temperature distri-
bution and also can provide reasonable geometric
shapes of molten pool both in transversal and ver-
tical directions.
(2) The numerical simulation of the welding process
coupled with the predicted geometric parameters
of heat source is performed. The temperature distri-
bution obtained by the numerical simulation shows
a good agreement with the experimental measure-
ments performed by Goldak et al. (1984). More-
over, the present numerical results of the sizes
of FZ and HAZ are more accurate than those
obtained based on the parameters suggested by
Goldak et al. (1984). By comparing experimental
results in Goldak et al.’s (1984) and Nguyen et al.’s
(1999) works, the developed Levenberg–Marquardt
neural network can reasonably predict the parame-
ters of heat source model with minimum CPU time
consumption. The proposed numerical methodol-
ogy combined with the subroutines can obtain an
acceptable temperature distribution by comparing
the experimental measurements.
(3) The comparisons of the temperature fields between
the experimental measurements and FE numerical
simulations show that the proposed neural-network
programme can reasonably predict the parameters
of heat source model in the multi-pass welding
process.
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to the technical team from the Subsea Technology
Laboratory – COPPE/UFRJ.
Funding
The authors acknowledge gratefully ANP, CNPq and FINEP
[PROFAB - grant number 01.10.810.00] of Brazil, the National
Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [grant num-
ber 2011CB013702]; the National Natural Science Foundation of
China [grant number 11302264], [grant number 51109185] for
financial support. Guangming Fu acknowledges the financial sup-
port from the China Scholarship Council.
References
ABAQUS. 2010. Example problems manual version 6.10-1.
Rhode Island (RI): Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen, Inc.
Aloraier AS, Joshi S. 2012. Residual stresses in flux cored arc
welding process in bead-on-plate specimens. Mater Sci Eng
A. 534:13–21.
Aloraier AS, Joshi S, Price JW, Alawadhi K. 2013. Mate-
rial properties characterization of low carbon steel using
TBW and PWHT techniques in smooth-contoured and u-
shaped geometries. Int J Press Vessel Piping. 111–112:269–
278.
Bannour S, Abderrazak K, Mhiri H, Palec GL. 2012. Effects of
temperature-dependent material properties and shielding gas
on molten pool formation during continuous laser welding
of AZ91 magnesium alloy. Opt Laser Technol. 44(8):2459–
2468.
Brickstad B, Josefson B. 1998. A parametric study of residual
stresses in multi-pass butt-welded stainless steel pipes. Int J
Press Vessel Piping. 75(1):11–25.
Camilleri D, McPherson N, Gray TG. 2013. The applicability of
using low transformation temperature welding wire to mini-
mize unwanted residual stresses and distortions. Int J Press
Vessel Piping. 110:2–8.
Deng D, Murakawa H. 2006. Prediction of welding residual stress
in multi-pass butt-welded modified 9Cr-1Mo steel pipe con-
sidering phase transformation effects. Comput Mater Sci.
37:209–219.
Fachinotti VD, Anca AA, Cardona A. 2011. A method for the
solution of certain problems in least squares. Int J Numer
Method Biomed Eng. 27(4):595–607.
Goldak J, Chakravarti A, Bibby M. 1984. A new finite ele-
ment model for welding heat source. Metall Mater Trans B.
15B:299–305.
Heinze C, Schwenk C, Rethmeier M. 2012. Numerical calculation
of residual stress development of multi-pass gas metal arc
welding. J Constr Steel Res. 72:12–19.
Joshi S, Hildebrand J, Aloraier AS, Rabczuk T. 2013. Character-
ization of material properties and heat source parameters in
welding simulation of two overlapping beads on a substrate
plate. Comput Mater Sci. 69:559–565.
Joshi S, Semetay C, Price JW, Nied HF. 2010. Weld-induced
residual stresses in a prototype dragline cluster and compari-
son with design codes. Thin-Walled Struct. 48(2):89–102.
Kong F, Ma J, Kovacevic R. 2011. Numerical and experimental
study of thermally induced residual stress in the hybrid laser-
GMA welding process. J Mater Process Technol. 211:1102–
1111.
Levenberg K. 1944. A method for the solution of certain problems
in least squares. Q Appl Math. 5:164–168.
Lundback A. 2003. Finite element modeling and simulation of
welding of aerospace components [master’s thesis]. Sweden:
Lulea University of Technology.
Malik AM, Qureshi EM, Dar NU, Khan I. 2008. Analysis of cir-
cumferentially arc welded thin-walled cylinders to investigate
the residual stress fields. Thin-Walled Struct. 46(12):1391–
1401.
Marquardt D. 1963. An algorithm for least-squares estimation of
nonlinear parameters. SIAM J Appl Math. 11(2):431–441.
Muránsky O, Smith MC, Bendeich PJ, Holden TM, Luzin V, Mar-
tins RV, Edwards L. 2012. Comprehensive numerical analysis
of a three-pass bead-in-slot weld and its critical validation us-
ing neutron and synchrotron diffraction residual stress mea-
surements. Int J Solids Struct. 49:1045–1062.
Nguyen N, Ohta A, Matsuoka K, Suzuki N, Maeda Y. 1999.
Analytical solutions for transient temperature of semi-infinite
 Ships and Offshore Structures
body subjected to 3D moving heat sources. Weld Res. 3:265s–
274s.
Pavelic V, Tanbakuchi R, Auyehara O. 1969. Experimental
and computed temperature histories in gas tungsten arc
welding of thin plates. Weld J Res Suppl. 48(7):295s–
305s.
Price JW, Ziara-Paradowska A, Joshi S, Finlayson T, Semetay C,
Nied H. 2008. Comparison of experimental and theoretical
residual stresses in welds: the issue of gauge volume. Int J
Mech Sci. 50(3):513–521.
Rosenthal D. 1941. Mathematical theory of heat distribution dur-
ing welding and cutting. Weld J 20(5):220s–234s.
217
Smith MC, Smith AC. 2009a. NeT bead-on-plate round robin:
comparison of residual stress predictions and measurements.
Int J Press Vessel Piping. 86:79–95.
Smith MC, Smith AC. 2009b. NeT bead-on-plate round robin:
comparison of transient thermal predictions and measure-
ments. Int J Press Vessel Piping. 86:96–109.
SYSWELD. 2006. Engineering guide of training and toolbox.
France: ESI Group.
Wang Y, Wang L, Di X, Shi Y, Bao X, Gao X. 2013. Simulation
and analysis of temperature field for in-service multi-pass
welding of a sleeve fillet weld. Comput Mater Sci. 68:198–
205.