INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING JOURNAL OF PHYSICS D: APPLIED PHYSICS

J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 39 (2006) 563–574 doi:10.1088/0022-3727/39/3/022

An analysis of the shielding gas flow from

a coaxial conical nozzle during high power
CO2 laser welding
Antonio Ancona1 , Teresa Sibillano1,2 , Pietro Mario Lugarà1,2 ,
Giuseppe Gonnella2 , Giuseppe Pascazio3,4 and Donato Maffione3,4
1
CNR-INFM Regional Laboratory LIT3 , via Orabona 4, 70126 Bari, Italy
2
Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica, Università Degli Studi di Bari, via Orabona 4,
70126 Bari, Italy
3
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica e Gestionale, Politecnico di Bari, via Re David 200,
70125 Bari, Italy
4
Centro di Eccellenza in Meccanica Computazionale, Politecnico di Bari, via Re David 200,
70125 Bari, Italy
E-mail: ancona@fisica.uniba.it

Received 16 September 2005, in final form 8 December 2005

Published 20 January 2006
Online at stacks.iop.org/JPhysD/39/563

Abstract
An experimental and theoretical study on the role of the nitrogen gas stream,
exiting from a conventional conical nozzle tip during a laser welding
process, has been carried out. A mathematical model has been used, based
on the Navier–Stokes equations which express fundamental conservation
laws of mass, momentum and energy for a compressible fluid. Numerical
simulations of the gas stream colliding onto a plane surface have been
performed showing the effects of variations of inlet gas pressure, nozzle exit
diameter and standoff distance on the density and Mach number contours,
axis pressure of the gas jet and plate pressure produced on the workpiece
surface. Laser welding experiments have been performed on carbon and
stainless steel specimens, by varying the process parameters in the same
range as in the simulations and keeping constant the incident power and the
travel speed. Two different gas stream regimes were found, namely sonic
and subsonic, which were experimentally verified to produce cutting and
welding conditions, respectively.
Weld performances have been evaluated in terms of bead width,
penetration depth and melted area. Nozzle standoff distance was found to
have a negligible influence, while the exit diameter and the flow rate
significantly affect the weld results. The numerical predictions allowed an
explanation of the experimental results yielding useful suggestions for
enhancing the weld quality, acting simply on the shielding gas parameters.

1. Introduction
The shielding gas plays a fundamental role in the laser welding
process since it protects the focusing optics from spatters and
screens the solidifying metal from the surrounding atmosphere.
In fact, active gases composing air, like oxygen and nitrogen,
react very easily with the melted pool producing oxides and
nitrides that affect the metallurgical properties of the weld.
For this reason, the laser welding process requires an inert
gas flow, such as helium or argon, onto the laser–metal
interaction area; only in very few cases, when the material is not
negatively affected by nitrides, dry nitrogen may also be used
successfully. Moreover, the gas flow has the beneficial effect
of containing the expansion of the laser-generated plasma
plume that may inhibit, due to defocusing and absorption
mechanisms, effective beam energy delivery to the workpiece,

0022-3727/06/030563+12$30.00 © 2006 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 563

A Ancona et al

when exceeding a characteristic size. In extreme cases of

ineffective gas shielding, the plasma plume detaches from the
sample surface, moves towards the direction of the oncoming
laser beam and blocks the radiation, thus causing a weld
interruption. Shroud design, composition and flow rate of the
shielding gas are key factors in order to limit the perturbing
effect of the plasma plume and cover the reactive hot region of
the weld without causing instabilities and waves on the melt
pool [1–3]. Improvements can be achieved by means of a
thorough understanding of the actual dynamics but most of
the laser processes are very complex, with a large number
of variables; hence their modelling is quite a complex task.
One possible approach is to model specific physical effects
in detail, while neglecting other effects. In the case of laser
cutting processes, several experimental and theoretical works
have been devoted to analysing the dynamic characteristics
of the assist gas flow. The effects of nozzle design, inlet
stagnation pressure, tip to workpiece standoff distance, and
width and thickness of the cut kerf on the behaviour of the gas
jet patterns inside the kerf have been investigated by numerical
simulations [4, 5]. A correlation has been found between
these process parameters, influencing the motion of the viscous
molten pool inside the kerf, and the dross formation or more
generally the quality of the cut surface [6–8].
Due to the complexity of the physical interactions
involved, very few works have studied the dynamics of the
Figure 1. Welding focusing head comprising the conical gas nozzle.
inert gas flow in the laser–metal interaction zone during a
laser welding process. Furthermore, a small number of
experimental data are currently available on the correlation where the behaviour of the gas jet inside a simulated cut kerf has
between the shielding gas flow parameters and the weld quality. been studied. The mathematical model is based on the Navier–
Several laser welding nozzles have been developed, Stokes equations. Numerical simulations are presented of a
characterized by different designs of the shroud gas, aiming nitrogen gas stream exiting from a convergent conical nozzle,
to enhance the coupling between the incident laser beam and specifically reproducing our experimental laser welding setup,
the workpiece and to prevent the formation of oxides on and colliding onto a plane surface. The results of variations of
the weld surface. An early empirical approach consisted of inlet gas pressure, nozzle standoff distance from the workpiece
employing a conical nozzle, coaxial to the laser beam. After and exit diameter on the velocity field, density, axis pressure
several tests the right combination of inlet gas pressure and exit and plate pressure of the gas jet have been investigated for the
diameter was found that allowed a reduction in the turbulence first time, to the best of our knowledge, in a laser welding
of the gas stream, thus stabilizing the plasma plume on the environment. Laser welding experiments on two different
keyhole surface [9]. This was considered a critical condition to steels were carried out by varying the same parameters as in the
obtain reliable and good quality welds. A novel nozzle design simulated operating range. Finally a comparison is reported
developed by Herrmann [10] was characterized by one or more of the simulation work with measurements of the bead cross-
conduits, for auxiliary gas jets, arranged with a rotational section profiles produced.
symmetry around the central opening for the laser beam. The
auxiliary gas jets have a velocity component perpendicular to
the beam axis so that a vacuum is produced at the welding 2. Welding head
point, which is surrounded by an inert atmosphere. Fabbro
et al [11] introduced a ring nozzle, coaxial to the laser beam, Figure 1 shows a picture of the focusing head assembly used
producing a laminar flow of gas that splits into two portions during the laser welding experiments. It consists of a 130 mm
when it impinges on the workpiece surface. The centripetal focal length plano-convex ZnSe lens, a chamber body which
radial flow directs towards the laser–metal interaction zone, is divided into two parts and a convergent conical nozzle tip,
shields the weld pool and then escapes towards the outside via coaxial to the laser beam, of adjustable exit diameter. The
the open inlet face in counter flow to the laser beam. This upper part of the chamber body, comprising the gas flow inlet
outgoing movement fully purges the inside of the nozzle thus and the lens holder, is fixed to the laser system, while the lower
preventing contamination by the ambient air; the centrifugal part, ending with the nozzle tip, can slide for a few millimetres,
radial flow completes the protection of the weld area. by means of a precision thread, relative to the upper part. This
In this paper a theoretical model has been employed system allows adjustment of the standoff distance, the focal
describing the gas flow dynamics in an experimental laser position being fixed with respect to the workpiece surface.
welding configuration. This task is quite different and more Internal and external designs of the welding head have
challenging than previous works concerning laser cutting, been taken into account for determining the geometrical

564
 Analysis of shielding gas flow in CO2 laser welding

boundary conditions for the gas flow simulations described (ii) Since the flow is turbulent, and therefore characterized
in the following paragraph. by random fluctuations of the flow variables, we use a
statistical approach in which all quantities are expressed
3. Theoretical model and gas flow simulations as the sum of mean and fluctuating contributions.
Performing the mean of the governing equation term by
Numerical simulations have been performed of a gas jet exiting term, one obtains the Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes
from a conical convergent nozzle, described in section 2, and (RANS) equations, which are solved to compute the mean
impinging on a plain surface. The commercial code Fluent [12] flow variables. Such an approach is usually employed in
has been used for this purpose. The effects on the gas flow of practical computations allowing solution of the turbulent
the thermal plasma plume as well as of the temperature gradient flows with reasonable computing resources. On the other
on the metal surface, generated by the laser–matter interaction, hand, the non-linearity of the governing equations leads
have been neglected in order to simplify the model. The gas to the introduction of additional fluxes in the momentum
flow has been modelled by the Navier–Stokes equations which and energy equations (arising from the product of the
employ a linear relation between the shear tensor τ̂ and the fluctuations), which are not known a priori and are to
strain rate tensor (∇u + ∇uT )/2. The following set of partial be modelled. In the present study, the k-ε realizable
differential equations, expressing the local conservation laws turbulence model has been used [13]; it is noteworthy that
of mass, momentum and energy, respectively, has been solved: using different turbulence models resulted in negligible
differences on the computed quantities, so that the above
∂ρ model has been employed in all simulations.
+ ∇ · (ρu) = 0, (1)
∂t (iii) The gas is nitrogen and is considered a calorically perfect
∂ gas.
(ρu) + ∇ · (ρuu + pI) − ∇ · τ̂ = 0, (2) (iv) The nitrogen jet is steady and it is ejected in an ambient
∂t
atmosphere composed of nitrogen at standard atmospheric
∂
(ρe) + ∇ · (ρhu) − ∇ · (τ̂ · u − q) = 0. (3) temperature and pressure.
∂t (v) The flow is compressible and the viscosity variation with
In the above equations ρ indicates the density, u the velocity temperature has been computed by means of Sutherland’s
vector, t the time, p the pressure, I is the identity tensor, and law,
e the total specific internal energy,
3/2
T T0 + S
µ = µ0 , (9)
u2 T0 T +S
e = ei + , (4) where the viscosity µ at temperature T is computed with
2
respect to a reference value, µ0 , at temperature T0 . In the
ei is the specific internal energy, h is the total specific enthalpy,
equation above the viscosity is measured in kg (ms)−1 , the
p u2 temperature in K and the following values are used:
h = ei + + ; (5)
ρ 2 µ0 = 1.7894 · 10−5 kg (ms)−1 , T0 = 273.11 K,
finally q indicates the heat flux, evaluated as q = −k ∇T , S = 110.56 K.
where k is the thermal conductivity and T the temperature. Besides these assumptions the following boundary
The employed linear relationship between the shear tensor, τ̂ , conditions have been used:
and the strain rate tensor is (a) Together with the adiabatic assumption, the no-slip
2 velocity boundary condition has been imposed along the
τ̂ = µ(∇u + ∇uT ) − µ I∇ · u, (6)
3 metal surface, the internal walls of the stagnation chamber
and the external walls of the nozzle.
where µ is the molecular viscosity of the fluid. In order to solve
(b) Considering the particular internal geometry of the gas
the above set of differential equations it is necessary to find
conduit at the nozzle entrance, a mass flow inlet condition
further relationships between the thermodynamic variables.
has been assumed, which allowed us to reduce the
This is possible by assuming the following state equations:
uncertainty on the pressure distribution downstream of the

 gas inlet.
u2
p = ρ(γ − 1)ei = ρ(γ − 1) e − ; (7) (c) As regards the pressure outlet, the lateral and upstream
2
sections of the gas flow are fairly distant from the metal
moreover, plate.
γp u2 (d) The turbulence conditions of the gas stream at the nozzle
h= + , (8)
(γ − 1)ρ 2 inlet have been taken into account by means of the
where γ is the specific heat ratio. turbulence intensity, T u:
The following assumptions are made to simplify the
u

calculation: Tu = = 0.16∗(ReDh )1/8 = 0.04, (10)
uavg
(i) The spatial domain of the numerical simulations has an
axial symmetry, therefore an axisymmetric flow has been where ReDh indicates the Reynolds number of the conduit
considered in order to reduce the computational effort with upstream of the nozzle; moreover, the inlet turbulence
respect to the three-dimensional case. length scale has been assumed equal to 21 × 10−6 m.

565
A Ancona et al
Figure 2. Geometry and space discretization employed in the computations; the box sketched in the picture indicates the spatial sub-domain
used to illustrate the simulations shown in the following.
Table 1. Values of process parameters investigated during the
numerical simulations. Labels assigned to each geometrical
parameter are reported in brackets.
Q [Nl/min] D [mm] N SD [mm]
10 1.5 (d1) 3 (h1)
20 3 (d2) 6 (h2)
30 4 (d3) 10 (h3)
40
100
The solution of the RANS equations both inside and
outside the nozzle has been obtained by discretizing the
spatial domain under investigation with a hybrid mesh. This
appositively developed mesh, shown in figure 2, allowed us
to minimize the number of points without losing significant
information on the gas flow dynamics both at the centre of the
nozzle and near its walls.
The values of the process parameters investigated during
the numerical simulations are reported in table 1. Several
gas flow simulations have been performed, one for each
combination of the mass flow rate (measured in normal litres
per minute, Nl min−1 , corresponding to the mass flow rate of
1 l of gas at a pressure of 1 atm and a standard temperature of
293 K per unit time) with the geometrical arrangement of the
nozzle exit (diameter, D, and standoff distance, NSD).
4. Results of the simulations
An early result of the simulations is that two distinct gas
flow regimes, namely sonic and subsonic, are established
at the nozzle exit, according to the combination of mass
flow rate and exit diameter. In fact, for a biatomic gas,
like nitrogen, when the pressure inside the nozzle stagnation
chamber (proportional to the mass flow rate) exceeds a critical
value, the gas reaches the sonic condition at the nozzle exit.
Under these chocking conditions the flow field shows an
oscillating behaviour downstream of the nozzle exit section.
This is due to the pressure difference between the exit section
566
and the ambient air that causes the gas stream to adjust to
the ambient pressure through a series of expansion waves and
oblique shocks producing periodical variations in pressure and
Mach number along the gas jet. These variations slowly fade
as long as the distance from the nozzle exit increases. Such
a flow behaviour has been demonstrated for the case Q =
100 Nl min−1 , D = 1.5 mm and NSD=10 mm. Figures 3–5
show the contour lines of the pressure, Mach number and
density, respectively, whereas figure 6 reports the pressure
along the axis of the nozzle.
On the other hand in the case of lower gas flow rates
and larger exit diameters a subsonic regime is established,
therefore oscillations and instabilities of the gas jet disappear.
Figures 7–9 show an example of a subsonic regime resulting
from the simulations executed for the following parameters:
Q = 40 Nl min−1 , D = 2 mm and NSD = 10 mm.
While sonic and supersonic regimes are more suitable to
laser cutting processes, where a high velocity of the gas jet is
required to expel the melted metal from the cut kerf all along
its thickness, welding processes require a subsonic gas stream.
For this reason the experimental investigation of this work has
been restricted to the sets of process parameters producing
subsonic gas regimes. Operating conditions producing sonic
regimes have been neglected because such a high velocity gas
jet causes instabilities in the melt pool that affect the final
profile of the joint. Results of the numerical simulations
allowed us to make this selection. It was found that an exit
diameter D = 1.5 mm and/or gas flow rates Q greater than
40 Nl min−1 give rise to sonic jets. For each combination
of process variables generating a subsonic gas stream we
calculated the pressure along the gas jet axis and along the
plate, reported in the following graphs. The time averaged
shear stress applied by the shielding gas to the free liquid metal
surface has also been calculated, but it was found to be at least
one order of magnitude smaller than the radial derivative of the
surface tension, which is known to be the driving force for the
convective fluxes within the melt pool.
The axis pressure gives information on how the gas
velocity field adjusts to the ambient pressure as it leaves the
 Analysis of shielding gas flow in CO2 laser welding

4.70e+05
4.48e+05
4.26e+05
4.04e+05
3.82e+05
3.60e+05
3.37e+05
3.15e+05
2.93e+05
2.71e+05
2.49e+05
2.27e+05
2.05e+05
1.83e+05
1.61e+05
1.38e+05
1.16e+05
9.43e+04
7.22e+04
5.01e+04
2.80e+04

Figure 3. Pressure contours for the sonic case (pmin = 28 000 Pa, pmax = 470 000 Pa; operating parameters: Q = 100 Nl min−1 ,
D = 1.5 mm, NSD = 10 mm).

2.29e+00
2.18e+00
2.06e+00
1.95e+00
1.83e+00
1.72e+00
1.60e+00
1.49e+00
1.37e+00
1.26e+00
1.14e+00
1.03e+00
9.16e-01
8.01e-01
6.87e-01
5.72e-01
4.58e-01
3.43e-01
2.29e-01
1.15e-01
0.00e+00

Figure 4. Mach number contours for the sonic case (Mmin = 0, Mmax = 2.29; operating parameters: Q = 100 Nl min−1 , D = 1.5 mm,
NSD = 10 mm).

exit of the nozzle which is positioned at 0.115 m on the x-axis
for D = 3 mm (d2) and at 0.112 m for D = 4 mm (d3). Axis
pressure also allows us to discover possible oscillations of the
gas stream.
Plate pressure gives information about the force exerted
by the gas jet onto the plasma plume and the keyhole opening.
Furthermore it is useful to evaluate the actual plate surface area
covered by the gas stream.
From figures 10 and 11 it can be seen that the axis pressure
decreases as the gas jet exits from the stagnation chamber,
reaches its minimum value just outside the nozzle tip and
then the pressure begins to rise in the vicinity of the plate.
The highest axis pressure is registered inside the stagnation
chamber, near the gas inlet, and on the plate surface. Absolute
values range from 102 000 to 109 000 Pa depending on the flow
rate and the exit diameter. The pressure on the axis measured
at the nozzle exit section and at the wall are resumed in
table 2.
The effects of nozzle standoff distance are negligible both
on the axis and on the plate pressure (see figures10–13).

567
A Ancona et al

5.32e+00
5.09e+00
4.85e+00
4.62e+00
4.38e+00
4.15e+00
3.91e+00
3.68e+00
3.45e+00
3.21e+00
2.98e+00
2.74e+00
2.51e+00
2.27e+00
2.04e+00
1.81e+00
1.57e+00
1.34e+00
1.10e+00
8.69e-01
6.35e-01

Figure 5. Density contours for the sonic case (ρmin = 0.635 kg m−3 , ρmax = 5.32 kg m−3 ; operating parameters: Q = 100 Nl min−1 ,
D = 1.5 mm, NSD = 10 mm).

500000 change significantly as a function of variations of gas flow

rate, standoff and nozzle tip. Nonetheless it is sufficiently
larger than the transverse dimensions of a typical laser induced
400000 weld pool.

5. Experimental procedure
Pressure [Pa]

300000

Laser welding experiments have been performed with a CO2

200000
100000
nozzle exit
0
0.114 0.116 0.118 0.12 0.122 0.124 0.126 0.128
Distance from Inlet [m]
Figure 6. Pressure along the nozzle axis for the sonic case
(operating parameters: Q = 100 Nl min−1 , D = 1.5 mm,
NSD = 10 mm).
The variation of the nozzle tip diameter from 3 to 4 mm has
a significant influence on the gas pressure inside and outside
the nozzle. The pressure drop caused by the enlargement of
the nozzle exit varies, depending on the inlet flow rate, from
almost 5000 Pa at Q = 40 Nl min−1 to, approximately, 1500 Pa
at Q = 20 Nl min−1 . A gas flow rate of 10 Nl min−1 does not
produce efficient shielding of the fluxed area, as can be seen
from table 2, where a slight increase of the axis and the plate
pressures with respect to the ambient atmosphere is registered.
Finally it can be noted from the plate pressure graphs shown
in figures 12 and 13 that gas shielding covers an area of 2 mm
radius centred on the axis. This shielded area seems not to
Rofin Sinar DC025 laser source operating at its maximum
output power of 2.5 kW in c.w. mode. The exit beam had
a diameter of 25 mm, before the focusing optics, with a high
quality TEM00 Gaussian transverse mode and a divergence of
wall 0.5 mrad.
Welding samples were fixed to a two-axis translation table;
a third axis controlled the position of the welding head and
0.13 consequently the beam focus position with respect to the metal
surface.
Bead-on-plate welds were carried out on 3 mm-thick
plates of AISI304 stainless steel and Fe360B carbon steel.
To get the best comparison between the two different steels,
specimens of both alloys were processed simultaneously in
the same run, for each combination of process parameters. All
samples were carefully cleaned with acetone prior to the laser
processing, in order to prevent weld defects caused by surface
contamination and moisture.
Nitrogen was used as the shielding gas, whose inlet gas
flow was measured at the entrance of the nozzle by a fluximeter
calibrated at standard ambient temperature and pressure. The
welding speed was 50 mm s−1 and the beam focus position was
located 3 mm beneath the sample surface. These parameters
have been kept constant during the experiments since the study
of their influence on the weld performances was beyond the
scope of this work.

568
 Analysis of shielding gas flow in CO2 laser welding

1.41e+05
1.39e+05
1.36e+05
1.34e+05
1.32e+05
1.29e+05
1.27e+05
1.25e+05
1.22e+05
1.20e+05
1.18e+05
1.15e+05
1.13e+05
1.10e+05
1.08e+05
1.06e+05
1.03e+05
1.01e+05
9.87e+04
9.64e+04
9.40e+04

Figure 7. Pressure contours for the subsonic case (pmin = 94 000 Pa, pmax = 141 000 P a; operating parameters: Q = 40 Nl min−1 ,
D = 2 mm, NSD = 10 mm).

6.86e-01
6.52e-01
6.17e-01
5.83e-01
5.49e-01
5.15e-01
4.80e-01
4.46e-01
4.12e-01
3.77e-01
3.43e-01
3.09e-01
2.74e-01
2.40e-01
2.06e-01
1.71e-01
1.37e-01
1.03e-01
6.86e-02
3.43e-02
0.00e+00

Figure 8. Mach number contours for the subsonic case (Mmin = 0, Mmax = 0.686; operating parameters: Q = 40 Nl min−1 , D = 2 mm,
NSD = 10 mm).

We rather investigated the effects of the variation of the
mass flow rate, the exit diameter of the nozzle tip and the
standoff distance, in the same way as in the theoretical fluid-
dynamic model. For this reason the operating values of
these parameters were chosen to be the same as in table 1,
mainly focusing on the sets of process parameters which, from
the numerical simulations, were found to produce subsonic
gas regimes.
In fact preliminary welding tests carried out using a
nozzle tip with an exit diameter D = 1.5 mm and/or gas
flow rates Q greater than 40 Nl min−1 produced a critical
instability and ejection of material from the melt pool,
typical of a cutting regime. This is due to the high
pressures generated at the nozzle exit, in agreement with the
simulations.
Weld results have been evaluated by measuring the
corresponding bead profiles in terms of width, penetration
depth and melted area. For this purpose samples were
sectioned, mounted, polished and finally etched to show their
macrostructure.

569
A Ancona et al

1.60e+00
1.57e+00
1.55e+00
1.52e+00
1.49e+00
1.47e+00
1.44e+00
1.41e+00
1.39e+00
1.36e+00
1.34e+00
1.31e+00
1.28e+00
1.26e+00
1.23e+00
1.20e+00
1.18e+00
1.15e+00
1.12e+00
1.10e+00
1.07e+00

Figure 9. Density contours for the subsonic case (ρmin = 1.07 kg m−3 , ρmax = 1.60 kg m−3 ; operating parameters: Q = 40 Nl min−1 ,
D = 2 mm, NSD = 10 mm).

110000

108000
Pressure [Pa]

106000

d2-h1
d2-h2
104000 d2-h3
d3-h1
d3-h2
d3-h3
102000

100000
0.11 0.115 0.12 0.125 0.13
Distance from Inlet [m]
Figure 10. Pressure along the nozzle axis, Q = 40 Nl min−1 (d2: D = 3 mm; d3: D = 4 mm; h1: N SD = 3 mm; h2: N SD = 6 mm;
h3: NSD = 10 mm).

6. Results and discussion
Welds performed with a nozzle exit diameter D = 3 mm and
a gas flow rate Q = 40 Nl min−1 showed a critical humping of
the bead surface with a periodical ejection of molten material
out of the seam, as is evident from their visual inspection
reported in figure 14.
Under these operating conditions numerical simulations
calculated that the welding nozzle produces a total pressure
of about 109 000 Pa (figure 12) on the plate surface. This
gas shielding regime was thus experimentally verified to be
undesirable since it causes instability in the melt pool. Then
it can be considered halfway between welding and cutting
regimes.
Using the nozzle exit diameter of 3 mm, the highest
nitrogen flow rate still producing acceptable welds was found
to be 30 Nl min−1 . This corresponds to a calculated pressure,
downstream of the nozzle, of 106 kPa (table 2) that has
been found to be the threshold limit. Indeed all the sets of
process parameters resulting in lower pressures, according to

570
 Analysis of shielding gas flow in CO2 laser welding

the theoretical predictions, were experimentally verified to 6.1. Effects of the gas jet parameters on the bead width
produce acceptable welds.
The nozzle standoff distance has negligible influence on the
For all the welds performed on both the investigated steels
bead widths for both the stainless and the carbon steel. This
results of the measurement of the bead widths, penetration
experimental result is in agreement with the predictions of the
depths, melted areas on the cross-section profiles and of the
numerical simulations, where it was found that, the gas flow
pressure difference between the centre and the edge of the
rate and the nozzle exit diameter being fixed, a variation of the
weld pool are reported in table 3.
standoff distance does not produce a significant change in the
It is worth noting that the same set of process parameters plate and axis pressure distributions.
generally produces deeper penetration depths and larger melted
When the nozzle tip exit diameter is increased from 3 mm
areas in austenitic steel specimens than in carbon steel. This is
to 4 mm and the other conditions remain unchanged, an average
certainly due to the different thermophysical properties of the
enlargement of 0.2 mm of the bead width, corresponding to
two materials. In particular, the lower thermal conduction of
14% of its dimension, has been observed. This effect is due to
the austenitic steels better sustains the formation of the keyhole
a decrease of the pressure exerted on the plate surface by the
and enhances the energy transfer from the laser beam to the
gas jet, as predicted by the simulations. In the case D = 3 mm
metal.
the gas jet confines better the plasma plume volume, thus a
In the following paragraphs we analyse the effects of the weaker perturbation of the laser beam is produced.
investigated gas shielding parameters on the joint profiles. The same mechanism of plasma suppression is responsible
for the decrease of the bead width when the gas flow rate
110000 is increased. This was experimentally verified to be much
more evident when using the 3 mm exit diameter nozzle tip,
d2-h1 where a decrease of the bead width of 0.4 mm (corresponding
d2-h2
108000 d2-h3
to a 28% variation) was found by varying the flow from 10–
d3-h1 20 Nl min−1 to 30 Nl min−1 . When using the 4 mm tip, even if
d3-h2 it has been possible to operate at higher flow rates (40 Nl min−1
d3-h3
instead of 30 Nl min−1 ) still keeping the welding regime, a
Pressure [Pa]

106000
slight variation, less than 0.1 mm of bead width, was observed
at increasing flow rates. This result agrees with the theoretical
104000 predictions which have found that, using the narrower nozzle
tip of D = 3 mm and increasing the flow rate from 20 to
30 Nl min−1 , an increase of about 3000 Pa of the plate pressure
102000 is achieved. This pressure growth is significantly greater than
the corresponding one obtained when using the 4 mm exit
nozzle tip and raising the gas stream from 20 to 40 Nl min−1 .
100000
Furthermore the higher plate pressure yielded at 30 Nl min−1
0.11 0.115 0.12 0.125 0.13 and 3 mm exit diameter, regardless of the standoff distance,
Distance from Inlet [m] has also caused the beginning of some instabilities on the melt
pool resulting in a convexity of the weld surface and lateral
Figure 11. Pressure along the nozzle axis, Q = 20 Nl min−1 (d2:
D = 3 mm; d3: D = 4 mm; h1: N SD = 3 mm; h2: N SD = 6 mm; engraving of the bead, as can be seen from the joint cross-
h3: NSD = 10 mm). sections in figure 15.

Table 2. Calculated pressure values along the axis at the nozzle exit and at the wall for different flow conditions (d2: D = 3 mm;
d3: D = 4 mm; h1: N SD = 3 mm; h2: N SD = 6 mm; h3: N SD = 10 mm).

d2–h1 d2–h2 d2–h3 d3–h1 d3–h2 d3–h3

Q = 40 Nl min−1
Exit [kPa] 103.73 103.54 103.53 102.30 101.97 101.95
Wall [kPa] 109.18 109.30 109.35 103.93 103.80 103.80
Q = 30 Nl min−1
Exit [kPa] 106.68 102.56 102.56 101.87 101.68 101.67
Wall [kPa] 105.80 105.85 105.85 102.80 102.72 102.72
Q = 20 Nl min−1
Exit [kPa] 101.93 101.87 101.87 101.56 101.48 101.48
Wall [kPa] 103.34 103.35 103.33 101.98 101.95 101.95
Q = 10 Nl min−1
Exit [kPa] 101.47 101.46 101.46 101.38 101.36 101.43
Wall [kPa] 101.83 101.84 101.82 101.49 101.48 101.48

571
A Ancona et al

110000 of 5–10% of the penetration depth has been observed,

d2-h1 probably because of the arising of some instabilities in the
d2-h2
d2-h3 melt pool. Likewise, shallower penetrations have been
108000 d3-h1
d3-h2
found for lower pressures: 101 900 Pa for D = 4 mm
d3-h3 and Q = 20 Nl min−1 or Q = 10 Nl min−1 , but in this
Pressure [Pa]

106000 case such a result should be ascribed to the weak plasma

suppression.

104000
6.3. Effects of the gas jet parameters on the melted area

102000 The same considerations, concerning the influence of the gas

shielding process parameters on the penetration depths, apply
to the melted areas. It is confirmed that the variation of the
100000
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 nozzle standoff distance has little influence. Even in this case
Distance from axis [m] the largest melted areas have been obtained for the following
combinations: (i) D = 4 mm and Q = 40 Nl min−1 ; (ii)
Figure 12. Pressure along the plate measured from the nozzle axis, D = 3 mm and Q = 20 Nl min−1 . The hypothesis that
Q = 40 Nl min−1 (d2: D = 3 mm; d3: D = 4 mm; h1: these conditions correspond to the best compromise between
N SD = 3 mm; h2: N SD = 6 mm; h3: N SD = 10 mm).
plasma suppression and energy transfer to the material is thus
corroborated.
110000
d2-h1
d2-h2 7. Conclusions
d2-h3
108000 d3-h1
d3-h2 A fluid-dynamic model based on Navier–Stokes equations
d3-h3
has been employed, aiming to describe a nitrogen gas jet
Pressure [Pa]

106000
104000
102000
100000
0 0.001 0.002 0.003
Distance from axis [m]
Figure 13. Pressure along the plate measured from the nozzle axis,
Q = 20 Nl min−1 (d2: D = 3 mm; d3: D = 4 mm; h1:
N SD = 3 mm; h2: N SD = 6 mm; h3: N SD = 10 mm).
6.2. Effects of the gas jet parameters on the penetration depth
Like the bead width, the penetration depth also has been found
to be slightly affected by variations of the nozzle standoff
distance.
The most interesting experimental result is that two
particular combinations of nozzle exit diameter and gas flow
rate have been found: D = 3 mm with Q = 20 Nl min−1
and D = 4 mm with Q = 40 Nl min−1 , that gave the
highest penetration depths. Both these two combinations
of process parameters produced similar penetration depths
(2.4 mm on the stainless steel and about 2 mm on the carbon
steel), and plate pressures calculated by the theoretical model
(103 300–103 780 Pa). Under these operating conditions it
seems that a steady gas shielding regime is established that
allows optimization of the laser coupling to the material and
production of the best weld performances.
In the case of higher pressures, i.e. 106 000 Pa calculated
for D = 3 mm and Q = 30 Nl min−1 , a general decrease
exiting from a convergent conical nozzle of a standard laser
welding assembly and impinging on a plate surface. The model
allowed us to study the role of the main process parameters
related to gas shielding: flow rate, nozzle exit diameter and
standoff distance, and compare, for the first time, results of
the numerical simulations to weld experiments performed on
two different steels. Computer-simulated results are able
to discriminate sonic from subsonic conditions of the gas
stream, by calculating the axis and the plate pressure profiles,
the Mach number and the density contours. In the case of
sonic conditions, typical of laser cutting regimes, the model
predicted the formation of Mach discs thus demonstrating its
validity, in agreement with experimental results that showed
bead humping and instability of the melt pool. Subsonic
regimes, achieved for larger nozzle exit diameters and lower
gas flow rates, were found to produce steady shielding
conditions and acceptable welds. It has been predicted and
experimentally demonstrated that the nozzle standoff distance
has a negligible influence on the weld performances, while
the exit diameter and the flow rate significantly affect the plate
pressure and the nozzle exit pressure, but have a slight influence
on the dimensions of the area of the metal surface covered by
the gas stream.
An increase of the nozzle exit diameter or a decrease
of the nitrogen flow causes an enlargement of the bead
width due to the weaker pressure exerted by the gas jet on
the welding plasma that absorbs and defocuses to a greater
extent the laser radiation. Two particular combinations
of exit diameter and gas flow (D = 4 mm, Q =
40 Nl min−1 and D = 3 mm, Q = 20 Nl min−1 ) have
been found to produce the best weld performances, in
terms of penetration depth and melted area, on carbon and
stainless steel specimens. The corresponding plate pressure,
calculated from the simulations, was about 103 kPa. For this

572
 Analysis of shielding gas flow in CO2 laser welding

Figure 14. Humping on the bead surface observed on (a) AISI304 and (b) Fe360B when operating with Q = 40 Nl min−1 and D = 3 mm.
(This figure is in colour only in the electronic version)

Table 3. Results of the measurements of the weld cross-section profiles. BW = bead width; P D = penetration depth; MA = melted area,
P = Paxis − PBW/2 .
N SD [mm] D [mm] Q [Nl min−1 ] BW [mm] P D [mm] MA [mm2 ] P [Pa]
AISI 304
3 3 30 1.41 2.07 0.85 200
3 3 20 1.49 2.35 1.45 160
3 3 10 1.60 2.15 1.35 50
3 4 40 1.53 2.33 1.47 70
3 4 20 1.56 2.29 1.37 30
3 4 10 1.56 2.26 1.37 0
6 3 30 1.26 2.20 1.39 260
6 3 20 1.50 2.37 1.48 210
6 3 10 1.52 2.32 1.44 90
6 4 40 1.56 2.41 1.53 130
6 4 20 1.53 2.24 1.37 30
6 4 10 1.54 2.32 1.39 0
10 3 30 1.17 2.04 1.22 470
10 3 20 1.63 2.30 1.49 350
10 3 10 1.55 2.29 1.45 110
10 4 40 1.50 2.34 1.48 190
10 4 20 1.54 2.29 1.43 30
10 4 10 1.54 2.37 1.50 0
Fe360B
3 3 30 1.41 1.81 1.05 200
3 3 20 1.51 1.95 1.19 160
3 3 10 1.54 1.95 1.23 110
3 4 40 1.67 1.98 1.33 70
3 4 20 1.52 1.99 1.28 30
3 4 10 1.52 2.00 1.27 0
6 3 30 1.21 2.01 1.23 520
6 3 20 1.58 2.07 1.23 200
6 3 10 1.53 1.99 1.24 90
6 4 40 1.61 2.24 1.50 130
6 4 20 1.51 1.93 1.24 30
6 4 10 1.55 1.96 1.30 0
10 3 30 1.37 1.97 1.15 650
10 3 20 1.50 2.02 1.19 340
10 3 10 1.51 2.02 1.28 110
10 4 40 1.50 2.10 1.32 190
10 4 20 1.54 1.82 1.14 30
10 4 10 1.59 1.92 1.28 0

particular experimental configuration this pressure distribution
is considered the best compromise allowing an effective plasma
suppression and an efficient laser coupling to the material.
Although several approximations have been assumed, this
mathematical model has been demonstrated to be valuable
in describing the complex interactions of the shielding gas
with the laser–metal interaction area during a laser welding
process, as confirmed by the experimental results, giving
qualitative information to build up an optimal set of welding
parameters.

573
A Ancona et al
Figure 15. Comparison of the cross-sections of the welds obtained on AISI 304 with D = 3 mm, N SD = 6 mm and, respectively,
(a) Q = 10 Nl min−1 , (b) Q = 30 Nl min−1 .
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by MIUR (Ministero
dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, Italy), under
projects DD1105 and Cofinlab2000 and by CNR-INFM, under
PONTE-project LEGOLAS. G Gonnella acknowledges sup-
port by MIUR-PRIN 2004. The authors would like to
acknowledge Pietro Paolo Calabrese for technical support.
References
[1] Beck M, Berger P and Hugel H 1995 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.
28 2430
[2] Glowacki M H 1995 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 28 2051
[3] Semak V V, Steele R J, Fuerschbach P W and Damkroger B K
2000 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 33 1179
574
[4] Leidinger D, Penz A and Schuocker D 1995 Infrared Phys.
Technol. 36 251
[5] Duan J, Man H C and Yue T M 2001 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.
34 2135
[6] Duan J, Man H C and Yue T M 2001 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.
34 2143
[7] Man H C, Duan J and Yue T M 1999 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.
32 1469
[8] Chen S-L 1999 J. Mater. Process. Technol. 88 57
[9] Grevey D, Sallamand P, Cicala E, and Ignat S 2005 Opt. Laser
Technol. 37 647
[10] Herrmann J 1997 European Patent EP0600250B1
[11] Fabbro R A, Coste F, Sabatier L and Billon J P 2004 US Patent
US2004/0099643 A1
[12] Fluent Inc. 2003 Fluent 6.1 Documentation, User’s
Guide
[13] Shih T-H, Liou W W, Shabbir A,Yang Z, and Zhu J 1995
Comput. Fluids 24 227