Wire and arc additive manufacture has received much concern for its unique advantages in fabrication of large size near net shape components. But the flexibility nature of free arc and time-varying environmental conditions synergistically make shaping path complicated and mutable. In this paper, central composite rotatable experimental design was applied to clarify the mutual relation between input variables (peak current, wire feed speed, and travel speed) and their responses (bead height and width). Moreover, a predicting model was developed, and the validity of the model has been checked by analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique. By using the developed mathematical model, the bead height and width of a single layer are predicted with 95 % confidence level according to the pre-set process parameters. Vice versa, control strategies are proposed to keep the subsequent layer geometrical size unchanged from the former one. A set of process parameters with a desirability of 0.971 is advised basing on the model when the bead height is expected to be 2 mm and the optimum technological parameters, Ip = 160A, vT = 0.23 m/min, vw = 4.91 m/min, have been verified by the confirmatory experiment.
Wire and arc additive manufacture Prediction model Bead geometry Central composite rotatable design
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Baufeld B, Brandl E, van der Biest O (2011) Wire based additive layer manufacturing: comparison of microstructure and mechanical properties of Ti6Al4V components fabricated by laser-beam deposition and shaped metal deposition. J Mater Process Technol 211(6):1146–1158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang F, Williams S, Rush M (2011) Morphology investigation on direct current pulsed gas tungsten arc welded additive layer manufactured Ti6Al4V alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 57(5–8):597–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oshima K, Xiang X, Yamane S (2005) Effects of power source characteristic on CO2 short circuiting arc welding. Sci Technol Weld Join 10(3):281–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouyang JH, Wang H, Kovacevic R (2002) Rapid protyping of 5356-aluminum alloy based on variable polarity gas tungsten arc welding: process control and microstructure. Mater Manuf Process 17(1):103–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang H, Jiang W, Ouyang J et al (2004) Rapid prototyping of 4043 Al-alloy parts by VP-GTAW. J Mater Process Technol 148(1):93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazanas P, Deherkar P, Almeida P et al (2012) Fabrication of geometrical features using wire and arc additive manufacture. J Eng Manuf 226(6):1042–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almeida PMS, Williams S (2010) Innovative process model of Ti-6Al-4V additive layer manufacturing using cold metal transfer (CMT). In: Proceedings of the 21st annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium. University of Texas, Austin, pp 25–36Google Scholar
Vohra A, Satyanarayana T (2002) Statistical optimization of medium components by response surface methodology to enhance phytase production by Pichia anomala. Process Biochem 37:999–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery DC (1997) Design and analysis of experiments, 4th edn. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
Lin WS, Lee BY, Wu CL (2001) Modeling the surface roughness and cutting force for turning. J Mater Process Technol 108:286–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhury IA, El-Baradie MA (1997) Surface roughness prediction in the turning of high-strength steel by factorial design of experiments. J Mater Process Technol 67:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noordin MY, Venkatesh VC, Sharif S et al (2004) Application of response surface methodology in describing the performance of coated carbide tools when turning AISI 1045 steel. J Mater Process Technol 145:46–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murugan N, Parmar RS (1993) Effect of SAW process variables on bead geometry in single wire surfacing. J Mater Process Technol 37:767–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar