Journal of

Manufacturing and
Materials Processing

Article
Influence of the CO2 Content in Shielding Gas on the
Temperature of the Shielding Gas Nozzle during
GMAW Welding
Martin Lohse 1, * , Marcus Trautmann 1 , Uwe Füssel 1 and Sascha Rose 2
1 Institute of Production Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany;
marcus.trautmann@tu-dresden.de (M.T.); uwe.fuessel@tu-dresden.de (U.F.)
2 Alexander Binzel Schweisstechnik GmbH & Co. KG, 35418 Buseck, Germany; rose@binzel-abicor.com
* Correspondence: martin.lohse@tu-dresden.de




Received: 11 November 2020; Accepted: 2 December 2020; Published: 4 December 2020


Abstract: Gas metal arc welding torches are commonly chosen based on their current-carrying
capacity. It is known that the current-carrying capacity of welding torches under CO2 is usually
higher than under argon dominated shielding gases. In this publication, the extent to which this
can be attributed to the shielding gas dependent arc radiation is investigated. For this purpose,
the influence of the shielding gas on the thermal load of the shielding gas nozzle of a GMAW torch
was calorimetrically measured. These experiments were carried out for four different shielding
gases (argon, CO2 , and two argon/CO2 mixtures). The measurements were all performed at an
average current of 300 A. The welding current was set by adjusting the wire feed rate or the voltage
correction. For each case, a separate set of experiments was done. It is shown that the changed arc
radiation resulting from the different shielding gases has an influence on the heat input into the gas
nozzle, and thus into the torch. For the same shielding gas, this influence largely correlates with the
welding voltage.

Keywords: GMAW; radiation; heat input; argon; CO2

1. State-of-the-Art
In gas metal arc welding (GMAW), the filler material is fed via a melting wire electrode. The molten
material is protected from the surrounding atmosphere by a shielding gas. In Europe, argon is mainly
used as a shielding gas, with other gases such as carbon dioxide, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, or helium
being added, depending on the application [1,2].
The choice of the shielding gas is primarily determined by the materials to be welded [3].
Shielding gases with oxidative components, such as CO2 and O2 , are mainly used for unalloyed and
low-alloyed steels. The loss of alloy elements due to oxidation must be compensated by over-alloying
the filler material [4]. The use of inert shielding gases such as argon and/or helium can prevent alloying
elements from oxidizing. Pure CO2 as a shielding gas is highly resistant to pore formation, but is rarely
used in Europe because of the risk of carburization of the parts to be joined and the high level of spatter
formation [1,3–5]. A summary of different shielding gases and shielding gas mixtures with application
areas and recommendations can be found in [2].
Besides an influence on the formation of the molten bath, the shielding gas also has an influence
on the arc. The drop transfer and the energy input into the electrode as well as the work piece can vary.
Detailed investigations were carried out in the AiF project 17431 N [6]. For shielding gases containing
argon with admixtures of max. 10% CO2 , the droplet transfer is uniform and mainly symmetrical to the
wire axis. For CO2 contents above 10%, the drop separation is increasingly asymmetrical and leads to

J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113; doi:10.3390/jmmp4040113 www.mdpi.com/journal/jmmp

J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113 2 of 13

the formation of larger drops. Thus, the drops hit the melt pool in a larger area. For low CO2 admixtures
(<18%), the fusion penetration profile is finger-shaped and becomes lenticular with increasing CO2
content, whereby the fusion penetration depth and seam height decrease. With increasing CO2 content,
the arc length continues to decrease.
The influence of the shielding gas on the torch components has not been scientifically investigated
so far. The design of welding torches is based on the current carrying capacity as a function of the duty
cycle, which is determined, e.g., according to DIN EN 60974-7. This specifies argon for MIG welding of
aluminium and argon-CO2 mixed gases with 15 to 25% CO2 content for MAG welding of mild steel.
The resulting permissible currents for CO2 at a constant duty cycle are specified by the manufacturers
as approximately 30–50 A (10–20%) higher for CO2 than for argon [7,8]. These specifications apply to
both gas-cooled and liquid-cooled torches. This circumstance is usually explained with the increased
cooling effect of CO2 , whereas no proof is provided. There are also no studies on this topic in the
literature. Only in the work of Haelsig [9], it is determined by calorimetric measurements on a GMAW
process that approximately 7–9% of the electrically supplied power of the welding process is dissipated
by cooling the torch. Depending on the process, this can be up to a Kilowatt and explains the need for
water-cooling in welding torches under high loads. However, no publication could be found on how
large the contribution of heat radiation is, especially for different shielding gases.
Nevertheless, there are publications on the temperature-dependent material data of different
shielding gases, which were calculated assuming the local thermodynamic equilibrium. Data can be
found, for example, in [10] for argon and in [11] for CO2 . Selected values are shown in Figure 1. In the
area of the shielding gas nozzle, temperatures of approximately 300–900 K occur. In this temperature
range, both the specific heat capacity and the thermal conductivity of CO2 are in part significantly
higher than those of argon. This leads to a higher cooling effect of CO2 compared with argon in this
temperature range. However, no quantification of this effect can be derived from the material data
alone, as the formation of the gas flow also has an influence on the heat transfer. The density and
viscosity of the gases also play a role. In the temperature range of 300–900 K, the viscosity of argon is
about double as high as for CO2 , while the density of CO2 is about 10% higher than that of argon.

Figure 1. Specific heat and thermal conductivity of argon and carbon dioxide in comparison [10,11].

The arc temperatures and thus the radiated heat also differ between the shielding gases.
Corresponding temperatures were published in [12,13] and are shown in Figure 2. In [12], temperatures
of approximately 9000–10,000 K in the metal-vapor dominated arc core were determined for an arc
in an argon shielding gas; see Figure 2. Outside this range, the temperatures in the plasma were
approximately 12,000 K. In [13], shielding gas mixtures of CO2 with high argon content and pure CO2
were investigated. It is shown that the minimum temperature in the arc core is more pronounced for
argon-rich shielding gas mixtures than under pure CO2 ; see Figure 2. The determined arc temperatures
for an argon mixture with 18% CO2 were about 10,000 K in the arc core and between 11,000 K and
almost 14,000 K in the plasma. The temperatures for an arc under pure CO2 shielding gas, however,
are comparatively lower at approximately 8000—9000 K.
 determined
the plasma werefor anapproximately
arc in an argon12,000
shielding gas;
K. In seeshielding
[13], Figure 2. Outside this range,
gas mixtures of COthe temperatures in
2 with high argon
the plasma
content and were
pure CO approximately 12,000 K. In [13], shielding gas mixtures of CO2 with high argon
2 were investigated. It is shown that the minimum temperature in the arc core is
content and pure CO 2 were investigated. It is shown that the minimum temperature in the arc core is
more pronounced for argon-rich shielding gas mixtures than under pure CO2; see Figure 2. The
more pronounced
determined for argon-rich
arc temperatures for anshielding gas mixtures
argon mixture with 18%than
CO2under pure CO
were about 2; see Figure 2. The
10,000 K in the arc core
determined
J.and
Manuf. Mater. arc
between temperatures
Process.
11,000 2020, for an14,000
4, 113almost
K and argonKmixture with 18%The
in the plasma. COtemperatures
2 were about 10,000 K in the arc core
for an arc under3pure
of 13
and between 11,000 K and almost 14,000 K in the plasma. The temperatures
CO2 shielding gas, however, are comparatively lower at approximately 8000—9000 K. for an arc under pure
CO2 shielding gas, however, are comparatively lower at approximately 8000—9000 K.

Figure 2. Measured arc temperatures for a gas metal arc welding (GMAW) pulse process. Values
Figure 2.2.Measured
Figureargon Measured arcarctemperatures
temperatures for a gas metal arc welding (GMAW) pulse pulseprocess. ValuesValues
under
under determined in [12] for an for
arc a1040
gas metal
ms afterarcthe
welding
start of(GMAW)
the high currentprocess.
phase and 1.7
argon
under determined
argon in [12] for an arcfor
1040 ms after
1040 the
ms start of thestart
high current phase and 1.7 mmandabove
mm above thedetermined
workpiece.in [12]
Values foran
82%arcargon/18% after
CO2 theand CO2of the high
determined current
in [13] phase 1.7
for an arc 980
the
mm workpiece.
above the Values for
workpiece. 82% argon/18%
Values for 82% CO 2 and
argon/18% CO 2
CO determined in [13] for an arc 980 ms after
2 and CO2 determined in [13] for an arc 980
the
ms after the start of the high current phase approximately 1.5 mm above the workpiece. The welding
start of the
ms after high current phase approximately 1.5 mm above1.5 themm
workpiece. The welding current at the
current atthe
thestart
timeofofthe high current
measurement phase
was approximately
about 420 A for argon, above
about 250the workpiece.
A for The welding
82% argon/18% CO2,
time of
current measurement
at the was about 420 A for argon, about 250 A for 82% argon/18% CO , and about 330
2 argon/18% CO A2,
and about 330 time
A forofCOmeasurement
2.
was about 420 A for argon, about 250 A for 82%
for CO 2
and about. 330 A for CO2.
The radiation
The radiation behaviour
behaviour can
can be
be described
described by the net
by the net emission
emission coefficient
coefficient (NEC).
(NEC). In
In [14,15],
[14,15],
The radiation
corresponding behaviour
values for canand
argon be CO
described by the net emission coefficient (NEC). In [14,15],
2 in the temperature range from 300 K to 30,000 K are
corresponding values for argon and CO2 in the temperature range from 300 K to 30,000 K are published
corresponding
published and values
they are for argon
shown and CO2 in the temperature range from 300 K to 30,000 K are
and they are shown in Figure 3.in Figure 3.
published and they are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Net emission coefficient of argon and carbon dioxide compared. Data is taken from [14,15].
Figure 3.
Figure 3. Net
Net emission
emission coefficient
coefficient of
of argon
argonand
andcarbon
carbondioxide
dioxidecompared.
compared. Data
Data is
is taken
taken from
from[14,15].
[14,15].

From the published temperatures, it follows that the NEC for an arc under argon is between
1.0 × 107 W/m3 and 3.5 × 109 W/m3 . For a CO2 arc, the NEC decreases to values of 9.0 × 106 W/m3 and
6.7 × 107 W/m3 . When CO2 is used as a shielding gas, this results in lower heat radiation, and thus a
lower thermal load on the torch components due to the arc radiation. However, higher arc temperatures
were measured for a shielding gas mixture of 82% argon and 18% CO2 . For these values, the NEC is
between 1.8 × 108 W/m3 and 5.3 × 109 W/m3 , so that a higher radiation load of the torch components
could be concluded. Based on the material data alone, the heat input into the torch components cannot
be quantified, as other parameters, such as the radiant volume, i.e., the arc size, must be known.
thermal load on the torch components due to the arc radiation. However, higher arc temperatures
were measured for a shielding gas mixture of 82% argon and 18% CO2. For these values, the NEC is
between 1.8 × 108 W/m3 and 5.3 × 109 W/m3, so that a higher radiation load of the torch components
could be concluded. Based on the material data alone, the heat input into the torch components
cannot
J. Manuf. be quantified,
Mater. as4, other
Process. 2020, 113 parameters, such as the radiant volume, i.e., the arc size, must
4 ofbe
13
known.

2. Aim
2. Aimof
ofthe
theStudy
Study
According to
According to the
the state-of-the-art,
state-of-the-art, GMAW
GMAW torches,
torches, which
which are
are designed
designed according
according to to DIN
DIN ENEN
60974-7, can generally be loaded with a higher current under a CO shielding gas
60974-7, can generally be loaded with a higher current under a CO22shielding gas than under argon. than under argon.
The published
The published material
material data
data of
of the
the shielding
shielding gases
gases andand the
the temperatures
temperatures in in the
the arc
arc already
already give
give aa
possible explanation for this “cooling effect”. However, no quantification of individual
possible explanation for this “cooling effect”. However, no quantification of individual effects of effects of the
the
heat transfer from the arc and shielding gas to the torch components has
heat transfer from the arc and shielding gas to the torch components has yet been made. yet been made.
The heat
The heat input
input into
into aa GMAW
GMAW welding
welding torch
torch is is determined
determined by by convection,
convection, solid
solid state
state radiation,
radiation,
and arc radiation. In this work, the heat, which is introduced into the shielding
and arc radiation. In this work, the heat, which is introduced into the shielding gas nozzle by the gas nozzle by arc
the
arc radiation, is determined calorimetrically. It is assumed that the radiation influence
radiation, is determined calorimetrically. It is assumed that the radiation influence on other torch on other torch
components exhibits
components exhibitsanalogous
analogousbehaviour.
behaviour. ForForthethe
calorimetric measurement,
calorimetric measurement, the shielding gas nozzle
the shielding gas
is cooled down to almost room temperature. Thus, a convective heat transfer can
nozzle is cooled down to almost room temperature. Thus, a convective heat transfer can be omitted. be omitted.

3. Experimental Setup
3. Experimental Setup
To determine the radiation input by the arc in an isolated manner, a heavily cooled shielding gas
To determine the radiation input by the arc in an isolated manner, a heavily cooled shielding
nozzle is used, which absorbs the majority of the arc radiation in the direction of the torch. Figure 4
gas nozzle is used, which absorbs the majority of the arc radiation in the direction of the torch. Figure
shows on the left side the principle of the heat sink, which serves as a shielding gas nozzle. The heat
4 shows on the left side the principle of the heat sink, which serves as a shielding gas nozzle. The heat
sink consists of a round copper piece with an internal cooling channel for water-cooling. On the bottom
sink consists of a round copper piece with an internal cooling channel for water-cooling. On the
side, a shortened gas nozzle is screwed in. The heat dissipated by the cooling water is determined
bottom side, a shortened gas nozzle is screwed in. The heat dissipated by the cooling water is
calorimetrically. Because the heat sink is cooled down to almost room temperature and is insulated
determined calorimetrically. Because the heat sink is cooled down to almost room temperature and
against the torch, the cooling capacity corresponds to the heat input by radiation.
is insulated against the torch, the cooling capacity corresponds to the heat input by radiation.

Figure
Figure 4.
4. Design
Design ofof the
the gas
gas nozzle
nozzle cooling
cooling and
and current-carrying
current-carrying torch
torch parts.
parts. (Left)
(Left) principle
principlesketch;
sketch;
(Right) design of the torch.
(Right) design of the torch.

In Figure 4, on the right side, the heat sink is mounted on a liquid cooled 500 A GMAW torch
from ABICOR Binzel, which in turn is mounted on a three-axis gantry. For the experiments, a power
source from EWM “Phoenix 521 Expert Puls forceArc” was used.
The process was recorded with the help of a single-lens reflex (SLR) camera and a high-speed
camera in order to assess the visible part of the arc in a qualitative manner. Furthermore, current and
voltage were recorded with a sampling rate of 10 kHz. A filter with 810 nm was used for the recordings
with the SLR camera. For the recordings with the high-speed camera, a combination of an 810 nm and
an 808 nm filter was used.
For all experiments, a constant welding current of 300 A and a constant contact tip distance of
17 mm were set. These parameters were chosen following the AiF project [6], in order to be able to run
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113 5 of 13

the same welding current for all shielding gases investigated. The welding current was adjusted via
the wire feed rate or voltage correction. This results in two measurement series:

• Measurement series 1: adjusted wire feed (constant voltage correction);

• Measurement series 2: adjusted voltage correction (constant wire feed).

4. Heat Input with Adjusted Wire Feed Rate

Table 1 below lists the process parameters for the experiments. In order to set a current of 300 A
for the various shielding gases, a characteristic curve for the shielding gas was set at the power source
by selecting the appropriate job. The welding current was determined by direct measurement using a
Dewetron measuring device and averaged over a time of approximately 5 s. The wire feed rate was
then adjusted until an average current of approximately 300 A could be measured.

Table 1. Process parameters of the experiments.

Welding Position According to DIN EN ISO 6947 Flat Position

type of welding Overlap joint
mainly free of short circuits
droplet transfer
(determined short circuit time in the results)
wire diameter [mm] 1.2
welding current [A] 300
voltage correction [V] 1
wire feed [m/min] variable
wire material G3Si1/DIN 8559: SG2/AWS: A5.18
power supply direct current, not pulsed, wire positive
contact tip distance [mm] 7
welding speed [mm/s] 12
welding time [min] ~4
weld seam length [m] ~3
100% Argon
Argon 97.5% CO2 2.5%
shielding gas composition
Argon 82% CO2 18%
100% CO2
flow rate of the shielding gas [l/min] 20
flow rate of cooling water for calorimetry [l/min] 1.7

In order to minimize the influence of process fluctuations and of the heating of the torch on
the results, a seam length of 3 m is welded. For this purpose, the torch was moved over the work
piece in a meandering manner. The welding speed was 12 mm/s and the length of one meander path
600 mm. The distance between the individual paths was 15 mm. Five connecting paths were welded,
resulting in a welding time of approximately 4 min.

4.1. Parameter
Table 2 summarizes the determined wire feed rates. Furthermore, the measured current, voltage,
and calculated short circuit time, as well as electrical power, are shown.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13

4.1. Parameter
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113 6 of 13
Table 2 summarizes the determined wire feed rates. Furthermore, the measured current, voltage,
and calculated short circuit time, as well as electrical power, are shown.
Table 2. Process parameters for the individual shielding gases.

Table 2. Process parameters

Argon 100% forArgon
the individual
97.5% shielding
Argon 82%gases. Argon 0%
Shielding Gas
CO2 0% CO2 2.5% CO2 18% CO2 100%
Argon 100% Argon 97.5% Argon 82% Argon 0%
Shielding Gas
Wire feed [m/min] CO2 0% 7.6 CO2 9.0
2.5% 9.0
CO2 18% 10.5 CO2 100%
Short
Wire feed circuit time [%]
[m/min] 7.6 0 9.00 0 9.0 10 10.5
Short circuit time [%]
average current [A] 0 300 0301 302 0 304 10
average current [A] 300 301 302 304
average voltage [V] 30.18 27.78 31.25 26.96
average voltage [V] 30.18 27.78 31.25 26.96
average average
power [W] power [W] 9050 9050 8360
8360 94409440 8200 8200

4.2.
4.2. Current and Voltage Measurement
Figure 55 shows
shows the
the current
current and
and voltage
voltage curves
curves ofof the
the welding
welding experiments.
experiments. From the curves
curves of
the
the voltage,
voltage, it can be seen that the drop transition is short-circuit free for all measurements except for
100%
100% CO
CO22.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Current
Current and
and voltage
voltage for
for an
an argon
argon shielding
shielding gas
gas with
with 0%,
0%, 2.5%,
2.5%, 18%,
18%, and
and 100%
100% CO
CO22..

Figure 5 shows that the scatter of the measured values increases with increasing CO2 content in
the shielding gas. At the same time, the visible part of the arc shortens, as shown in Figure 6. From the
electrical signals, a short-circuit proportion of approximately 10% results for 100% CO2 , while the
process runs without a short circuit for the other gases. The photos shown in Figure 6 illustrate the
visible arc length and were taken with the SLR camera and an 810 nm filter.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13

Figure 5 shows that the scatter of the measured values increases with increasing CO2 content in
Figure 5 shows that the scatter of the measured values increases with increasing CO2 content in
the shielding gas. At the same time, the visible part of the arc shortens, as shown in Figure 6. From
the shielding gas. At the same time, the visible part of the arc shortens, as shown in Figure 6. From
the electrical signals, a short-circuit proportion of approximately 10% results for 100% CO2, while the
the electrical signals, a short-circuit proportion of approximately 10% results for 100% CO2, while the
J.process
Manuf. Mater.
runs Process.
without a 4,
2020, 113 circuit for the other gases. The photos shown in Figure 6 illustrate
short 7 ofthe
13
process runs without a short circuit for the other gases. The photos shown in Figure 6 illustrate the
visible arc length and were taken with the SLR camera and an 810 nm filter.
visible arc length and were taken with the SLR camera and an 810 nm filter.

Figure 6.
6. Visible arc
arc length of
of the examined
examined shielding gases
gases in qualitative
qualitative comparison.
Figure 6. Visible
Figure Visible arc length
length of the
the examined shielding
shielding gases in
in qualitativecomparison.
comparison.

4.3. Heat Input Measurement

4.3. Heat Input Measurement
shows the
Figure 7 shows the heat
heat input
input into
into the
the gas
gas nozzle
nozzle over
over the
the measuring
measuring time
time calculated
calculated from the
the
Figure 7 shows the heat input into the gas nozzle over the measuring time calculated from the
measuring data.
measuring data.
measuring data.

Figure 7. Heat input into the gas nozzle for the examined shielding gases.
Figure 7.
Figure 7. Heat input into
into the
the gas
gas nozzle
nozzle for
for the
the examined
examined shielding
shielding gases.
gases.

For the calculation of the average heat input, measured values between 200 and 250 s are
For
For the
thecalculation
calculationof of
thethe
average heatheat
average input, measured
input, valuesvalues
measured between 200 and200
between 250and
s are250
selected,
s are
selected, as steady state measurement can be assumed.
as steady as
selected, state measurement
steady can be assumed.
state measurement can be assumed.
In Figure 8, the corresponding values including their variance over the considered period are
In
In Figure
Figure 8,
8, the
the corresponding
corresponding values
values including
including their
their variance
variance over
over the
the considered
considered period
period are
are
shown in a diagram.
shown
shown in in aa diagram.
diagram.
From the results, it can be seen that the heat input is clearly dependent on the choice of shielding
gas. By adding CO2 to the shielding gas argon, the heat input introduced into the gas nozzle by
radiation is reduced. This reduction is the least pronounced at a CO2 content of 18%. For a CO2 content
of 2.5%, the reduction is already 40% and, for 100% CO2 , 70%. Taking into account the time in which
the welding process is in short circuit, and thus does not emit any radiation, it can be estimated that
the heat input at 100% CO2 is approximately 10% higher, resulting in a value of approximately 81 W.
This difference is small enough for the statements derived so far to stay valid.
J. Manuf.
J. Manuf. Mater.
Mater. Process.
Process. 2020, 4, x113
2020, 4, FOR PEER REVIEW 88 of
of 13
13

Figure 8. Average
Average heat input into the gas nozzle for the examined shielding gases with variance over
the evaluated period at 300 A.

4.4. Interim
From theSummary
results, it can be seen that the heat input is clearly dependent on the choice of shielding
gas. By adding
In this seriesCO to the shielding
of 2measurements, thegas argon,ofthe
influence theheat inputgas
shielding introduced into
on the heat theby
input gasarcnozzle by
radiation
radiation is reduced. This reduction is the least pronounced at a CO 2 content of 18%.
into the gas nozzle was investigated. The admixture of CO2 in argon leads to a reduction of the heat For a CO 2 content
of 2.5%, the
radiation intoreduction
the torchiscomponents
already 40%by and,
up for 100%The
to 40%. CO2use
, 70%. Taking
of 100% CO into account the time in which
2 leads to a reduction of 70%.
the welding
Figure 8process
shows ais in short
local circuit,
maximum in and
heat thus
inputdoes notCO
at 18% emit any radiation, it can be estimated that
2 . This result is interesting, because Figure 6
the heat input at 100% CO 2 is approximately 10% higher,
shows that the arc length decreases continuously with the increasing resulting in a value of approximately
CO2 content. 81 W.
Consequently,
This difference
the radiant is small
volume alsoenough
decreasesforsteadily.
the statements derived
From the so far toon
publications stay
arcvalid.
temperature, however, it is
known that the temperature in the arc is higher for 18% CO2 than for argon or CO2 ; see Figure 2.
4.4. Interim Summary
Consequently, this effect can reduce the influence of the reduced arc length, and thus lead to the
localInmaximum.
this series of measurements, the influence of the shielding gas on the heat input by arc
radiation into the gas nozzle was investigated. The admixture of CO2 in argon leads to a reduction of
5. Heat Input with Constant Wire Feed Rate
the heat radiation into the torch components by up to 40%. The use of 100% CO2 leads to a reduction
of 70%.
From the experiments carried out so far, it can be seen that the GMAW process has very different arc
Figure
lengths 8 showsshielding
for different a local maximum in heatcurrent
gases at constant input and
at 18% CO2. wire
adjusted This feed.
resultTherefore,
is interesting, because
the measured
Figure
heat input6 shows
into thethat the arc
shielding gas length decreases
nozzle cannot continuously
be clearly assignedwith
to thethe increasing
influence of the CO 2 content.
shielding gas.
Consequently,
As a result, thethe radiant
tests volume also
are performed withdecreases
constantsteadily. From
arc length. The the publications
procedure fromonthe
arcAiF
temperature,
project [6]
however,
was applied. it is known that the temperature in the arc is higher for 18% CO2 than for argon or CO2; see
FigureFor2.the
Consequently,
test, the samethis effect can reduce
characteristic curve isthe influence
used of the reduced
for all shielding gases, arc length,
which and thustolead
corresponds the
to the set
same local
jobmaximum.
at the power source, and the same wire feed is used. Then, the voltage correction is set so
that the same welding current results for each shielding gas. This means that the same deposition rate
5.
is Heat
set forInput with
all tests Constant
and, Wire Feed
consequently, Rate
the arc length should be the same.
From the experiments carried out so far, it can be seen that the GMAW process has very different
5.1. Parameter
arc lengths for different shielding gases at constant current and adjusted wire feed. Therefore, the
Table heat
measured 3 summarizes
input intothethedetermined voltage
shielding gas corrections
nozzle cannot befor the examined
clearly assignedshielding gases and
to the influence of the
adjusted wire feed. Furthermore, the measured current and voltage and the calculated short
shielding gas. As a result, the tests are performed with constant arc length. The procedure from the circuit
timeproject
AiF and power areapplied.
[6] was shown. With these values, the deviation of the average welding current from the
targeted 300 test,
For the A was thethe smallest.
same characteristic curve is used for all shielding gases, which corresponds to
the same set job at the power source, and the same wire feed is used. Then, the voltage correction is
set so that the same welding current results for each shielding gas. This means that the same
deposition rate is set for all tests and, consequently, the arc length should be the same.
 5.1. Parameter
Table 3 summarizes the determined voltage corrections for the examined shielding gases and
the adjusted wire feed. Furthermore, the measured current and voltage and the calculated short
circuit
J. Manuf. timeProcess.
Mater. and power
2020, 4, are
113 shown. With these values, the deviation of the average welding current
9 of 13
from the targeted 300 A was the smallest.

Table 3. 3.Process
Table Processparameters
parametersfor
forthe
the individual shieldinggases.
individual shielding gases.

Argon
Argon100%100% Argon
Argon 97.5%
97.5% Argon
Argon 82%82% Argon
Argon
0% 0%
Shielding
Shielding Gas Gas
COCO
2 0%2 0% CO22 2.5%
2.5% COCO
2 18%
2 18% CO2 CO
100%2 100%

Voltage correction
Voltage [V] [V]
correction −4 −4 −2.5
−2.5 4.94.9 14.9 14.9
WireWire
feedfeed
[m/min]
[m/min] 8.3 8.3 8.3
8.3 8.38.3 8.3 8.3
Short circuit
Short timetime
circuit [%] [%] 0 0 00 0 0 0 0
average current
average [A] [A]
current 302302 303
303 303303 286 286
average voltage
average [V] [V]
voltage 28.15
28.15 29.53
29.53 36.92
36.92 46.2446.24
average power [W]
average power [W] 85008500 8950
8950 11,190
11,190 13,220
13,220

5.2. Current and Voltage Measurement

5.2. Current and Voltage Measurement
Figures 9 and 10 show the current and voltage curve of the welding experiments. The welding
Figures 9 and 10 show the current and voltage curve of the welding experiments. The welding
process is short-circuit-free for all measurements.
process is short-circuit-free for all measurements.

Figure
Figure 9. Current
9. Current andand voltagefor
voltage foran
anargon
argonshield
shieldgas
gas with
with 0%,
0%, 2.5%,
2.5%, 18%,
18%,and
and100%
100%CO2 content.
CO 2 content.
 It can be seen from Figure 9 that the scatter of the measured values increases with the increasing
CO2 content in the shielding gas. At the same time, the visible part of the arc lengthens, as shown in
Figure 11. Starting from an admixture of 18% CO2, the arc cone is visibly enlarged.
The photos shown in Figure 10 were taken with a high-speed camera and a combination of an
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113 10 of 13
808 nm and an 810 nm filter.

Figure 10. Visible arc length of the examined shielding gases in qualitative comparison.

Similar to the results of the AiF project [6], the same arc length was expected for the different
shielding gases owing to the constant current and constant wire feed. In the respective project, the
process is illuminated with a laser and recorded with the help of a filter that only allows the laser
radiation to pass. Thus, it could be proven that the distance of the solidus line on the welding wire to
the surfaceFigure
of the10.work piece
Visible arc is approximately
length of the examinedthe shielding
same forgases
constant current comparison.
in qualitative and wire feed values.
Figure 10 shows Figure 10.at
that Visible
least arc
thelength
visibleof part
the examined
of the arcshielding gases in qualitative
is nevertheless comparison.
of a different length.
It can be seen from Figure 9 that the scatter of the measured values increases with the increasing
CO Similar
content
5.3.2Heat to
thethe results of
inMeasurement
Input shielding theAt
gas. AiF project
the same [6], thethe
time, same arc length
visible part ofwas
the expected for theasdifferent
arc lengthens, shown in
shielding
Figure gases owing
11. Starting from anto admixture
the constantofcurrent
18% CO and
2 , constant
the arc wire
cone is feed.
visiblyIn the respective
enlarged. project, the
Figureis11
process shows thewith
illuminated heat ainput
laser into
and the gas nozzle
recorded overhelp
with the the of
measuring time.
a filter that only allows the laser
radiation to pass. Thus, it could be proven that the distance of the solidus line on the welding wire to
the surface of the work piece is approximately the same for constant current and wire feed values.
Figure 10 shows that at least the visible part of the arc is nevertheless of a different length.

5.3. Heat Input Measurement

Figure 11 shows the heat input into the gas nozzle over the measuring time.

Figure 11. Heat input into the gas nozzle for the examined shielding gases.
Figure 11. Heat input into the gas nozzle for the examined shielding gases.

The photos shown in Figure 10 were taken with a high-speed camera and a combination of an
808 nm and an 810 nm filter.
Similar to the results of the AiF project [6], the same arc length was expected for the different
shielding gases owing
Figureto
11.the
Heatconstant
input intocurrent and constant
the gas nozzle wire feed.
for the examined In gases.
shielding the respective project,
the process is illuminated with a laser and recorded with the help of a filter that only allows the laser
radiation to pass. Thus, it could be proven that the distance of the solidus line on the welding wire
to the surface of the work piece is approximately the same for constant current and wire feed values.
Figure 10 shows that at least the visible part of the arc is nevertheless of a different length.

5.3. Heat Input Measurement

Figure 11 shows the heat input into the gas nozzle over the measuring time.
For all measurements, it can be seen that the heat input has settled after 100 s. For the measurements
with 18% or 100% CO2 , a medium to strong decrease of the energy input can be seen in the middle
of the measurement. This was attributed to a thermal deformation of the sheets. As soon as the
deformed area is left, the energy input rises again to a constant average value. For the calculation of the
 J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13

For all measurements, it can be seen that the heat input has settled after 100 s. For the
For all measurements, it can be seen that the heat input has settled after 100 s. For the
measurements with 18% or 100% CO2, a medium to strong decrease of the energy input can be seen
measurements with 18% or 100% CO2, a medium to strong decrease of the energy input can be seen
in
J. in
the Mater.
middle of the measurement. This was attributed to a thermal deformation of the sheets. As
the middle
Manuf. of the
Process. 2020,measurement.
4, 113 This was attributed to a thermal deformation of the sheets. As
11 of 13
soon as the deformed area is left, the energy input rises again to a constant average value. For the
soon as the deformed area is left, the energy input rises again to a constant average value. For the
calculation of the average heat input, measuring values between 200 and 250 s are chosen, because
calculation of the average heat input, measuring values between 200 and 250 s are chosen, because
average heat input,
here, steady valuesmeasuring values
are available between
for all 200 and 250 s are chosen, because here, steady values
measurements.
here, steady values are available for all measurements.
are available for all measurements.
In Figure 12, the corresponding mean values including their variance over the observed period
In Figure 12, the corresponding mean values including their variance over the observed period
are In Figure
shown in 12, the corresponding mean values including their variance over the observed period
a diagram.
are shown in a diagram.
are shown in a diagram.

Figure 12. Average heat input into the gas nozzle for the examined shielding gases with variance over
Figure12.
Figure 12.Average
Averageheat
heatinput
inputinto
intothe
thegas
gasnozzle
nozzlefor
forthe
theexamined
examinedshielding
shieldinggases
gaseswith
withvariance
varianceover
over
the evaluated period.
theevaluated
the evaluatedperiod.
period.

Figure 12 shows that, in contrast to the previous investigations, the heat input increases with the
Figure
Figure1212shows
showsthat,
that,inincontrast
contrasttotothe
theprevious
previousinvestigations,
investigations,the theheat
heatinput
inputincreases
increaseswithwiththe
the
increasing CO2 content. There is also no local maximum at a content of 18% CO2 in the shielding gas.
increasing
increasingCO CO2 content.
2 content. There
There is
isalso
alsononolocal
localmaximum
maximum at a
at acontent
content of
of18%
18% CO
CO 2 2in
inthe
theshielding
shielding gas.
gas.
Figure 13 shows the results of both test series in a diagram. In addition, the measured mean
Figure
Figure1313showsshowsthetheresults
resultsofofboth
bothtest
testseries
seriesinina adiagram.
diagram.InInaddition,
addition,the themeasured
measuredmean mean
current and the measured mean voltage are shown at each entry. From this comparison, it can be
current
currentand
andthethemeasured
measuredmean meanvoltage
voltageareareshown
shownatateach eachentry.
entry.From
Fromthisthiscomparison,
comparison,ititcan canbebe
seen that the radiation-induced energy input can vary considerably even with the same shielding gas.
seen
seenthat
thatthe
theradiation-induced
radiation-induced energy input inputcancanvary
varyconsiderably
considerablyeven even with
with thethesamesame shielding
shielding gas.
Thus, the largest and smallest measured heat input was determined for 100% CO2. Therefore, the
gas. Thus,
Thus, the the largest
largest andand smallest
smallest measured
measured heatheat input
input was was determined
determined forfor 100%
100% COCO 2 . Therefore,
2. Therefore, the
radiation-related heat input into the shielding gas nozzle can be increased or reduced for the same
the radiation-related
radiation-related heat
heat inputinto
input intothe
theshielding
shieldinggasgasnozzle
nozzle cancan be
be increased oror reduced
reducedfor forthe
thesame
same
shielding gas by adjusting the process voltage.
shielding
shieldinggas
gasby byadjusting
adjustingthetheprocess
processvoltage.
voltage.

Figure 13. Average heat input into the gas nozzle for the examined shielding gases from the two
test series.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113 12 of 13

6. Summary
With the measurements carried out, the influence of the shielding gas in GMAW welding on the
energy input into the shielding gas nozzle due to radiation was quantified. For the evaluation of the
results, it has to be considered that the different process gases partly differ strongly in their process
voltage and arc characteristics.
In the first part of the experiments, the process parameters were selected by adjusting the
characteristic curve and the wire feed to the shielding gas. These tests showed a reduction of the
radiation-induced energy input into the shielding gas nozzle for increasing CO2 contents, whereby a
local maximum exists for a mixture of 82% argon and 18% CO2 . At the same time, a decrease of the
visible arc length and, consequently, of the radiant volume was observed with the increasing CO2
content. This decrease is presumably counteracted by higher temperatures in the arc at 18% CO2
compared with 100% argon or 100% CO2 .
In the second part, the process parameters were selected with the aim of achieving a constant
radiating volume. Therefore, the selection of parameters was analogous to the results from [6].
However, the investigations in this publication show that the visible arc length for increasing CO2
contents in the shielding gas nevertheless increases steadily. The experiments also show that an
increase in the CO2 content in the shielding gas is accompanied by an increase in the radiation-related
energy input into the shielding gas nozzle.
In the tests carried out, the smallest as well as the largest radiation-related energy input into the
shielding gas nozzle was determined for an arc below 100% CO2 . This effect was achieved with a
massive increase of the welding voltage. This also increased the arc length. However, this correlation
does not allow for a causation. On the contrary, under any shielding gas, the radiation-related energy
input into the shielding gas nozzle can be increased by increasing the voltage.
Using standard parameters, it can be assumed that an arc under CO2 emits less radiation into
the shielding gas nozzle than an arc under argon–CO2 mixtures. However, with the tests performed,
this finding cannot be addressed to a cooling effect of the CO2 shielding gas compared with argon.
In future research work at the TU Dresden, the cooling effect of the shield gases will be directly
investigated. This knowledge can further be used to develop welding processes with less radiation
emission, keeping in mind that health and safety regulations restrict the allowable ozone levels,
which are directly linked to arc radiation emission [16].

Author Contributions: Data curation, M.L.; Formal analysis, M.L.; Methodology, M.T.; Project administration, M.T.;
Resources, U.F.; Supervision, M.T. and U.F.; Validation, M.L., M.T. and S.R.; Visualization, M.L.; Writing—original
draft, M.L.; Writing—review & editing, M.L., M.T. and S.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Bleck, W.; Moeller, E. (Eds.) Handbuch Stahl: Auswahl, Verarbeitung, Anwendung; Carl Hanser Verlag
GmbH & Co. KG: München, Germany, 2017; p. 240. ISBN 978-3-446-44961-9. [CrossRef]
2. Mvola, B.; Kah, P. Effects of Shielding gas Control: Welded Joint Properties in GMAW Process Optimization.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 88, 2369–2387. [CrossRef]
3. Matthes, K.-J.; Schneider, W. (Eds.) Schweißtechnik: Schweißen Von metallischen Konstruktionswerkstoffen, 6th ed.;
Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG: München, Germany, 2016; ISBN 978-3-446-44561-1.
4. Dilthey, U. Schweißtechnische Fertigungsverfahren 1: Schweiß-und Schneidtechnologien, 3rd ed.; Springer: Berlin,
Germany, 2006; p. 68. ISBN 3-540-21673-1.
5. Kah, P.; Martikainen, J. Influence of shielding gases in the welding of metals. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
2013, 64, 1411–1421. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2020, 4, 113 13 of 13

6. Füssel, U. Steigerung der Wirtschaftlichkeit der MSG-Schweißprozesse durch Konsequente Nutzung der Potentiale
Von Schutzgasen; AiF Schlussbericht. IGF 17431 N/DVS-Nr. 03.106; TU Dresden: Dresden, Germany, 2014;
Available online: https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/if/fue/ressourcen/dateien/lichtbogenprozesse/
projekte-_datei/AiF_17.431__Abschlussbericht_MSG_Schutzgase (accessed on 20 November 2020).
7. Alexander Binzel Schweisstechnik GmbH & Co. KG. MIG/MAG-Schweißbrenner MB EVO PRO; Alexander
Binzel Schweisstechnik GmbH & Co. KG: Buseck, Germany, 2020; Available online: https://www.binzel-
abicor.com/DE/deu/produkte/manuell/migmag-schweissbrenner/schweissbrenner-mb-evo-pro/ (accessed on
2 July 2020).
8. Alexander Binzel Schweisstechnik GmbH & Co. KG. MIG/MAG-Schweißbrenner MB ERGO; Alexander
Binzel Schweisstechnik GmbH & Co. KG: Buseck, Germany, 2020; Available online: https://www.binzel-
abicor.com/DE/deu/produkte/manuell/migmag-schweissbrenner/schweissbrenner-mb-ergo// (accessed on
9 September 2020).
9. Haelsig, A.; Kusch, M.; Mayr, P. Calorimetric analyses of the comprehensive heat flow for gas metal arc
welding. Weld. World 2015, 59, 191–199. [CrossRef]
10. Murphy, A.B.; Arundelli, C.J. Transport coefficients of argon, nitrogen, oxygen, argon-nitrogen,
and argon-oxygen plasmas. Plasma Chem. Plasma Process. 1994, 14, 1572–8986. [CrossRef]
11. Yang, A.; Liu, Y.; Sun, B.; Wang, X.; Cressault, Y.; Zhong, L.; Rong, M.; Wu, Y.; Niu, P. Thermodynamic
properties and transport coefficients of high-temperature CO2 thermal plasmas mixed with C2F4. J. Phys. D
Appl. Phys. 2015, 48, 495202. [CrossRef]
12. Kozakov, R.; Gött, G.; Schöpp, H.; Uhrlandt, D.; Schnick, M.; Häßler, M.; Füssel, U.; Rose, S. Spatial structure
of the arc in a pulsed GMAW process. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2012, 46, 224001. [CrossRef]
13. Wilhelm, G.; Kozakov, R.; Gött, G.; Schöpp, H.; Uhrlandt, D. Behaviour of the iron vapour core in the arc of a
controlled short-arc {GMAW} process with different shielding gases. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2012, 45, 085202.
[CrossRef]
14. Hannachi, R.; Ben Nasr, S.; Cressault, Y.; Teulet, P.; Béji, L. Net emission coefficient of complex thermal
plasmas used in {SWNT} synthesis. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2018, 52, 095203. [CrossRef]
15. Cressault, Y.; Teulet, P.; Gonzalez, J.J.; Gleizes, A.; Robin-Juan, P. Transport and radiative properties of
CO2 arc plasma: Application for circuit-breaker modelling. In Proceedings of the XVIth Symposium
on Physics of Switching Arc, Brno University of Technology, Brno, Česká Republika, 2005; pp. 46–49.
Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261994037_Transport_and_radiative_properties_
of_CO2_arc_plasma_Application_for_circuit-breaker_modelling/citations (accessed on 20 November 2020).
16. Wagner, R.; Siewert, E.; Schein, J.; Hussary, N.; Jäckel, S. Shielding gas influence on emissions in arc welding.
Weld. World 2018, 62, 647–652. [CrossRef]

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).