Advertisement

Nonlinear Identification of Weld Penetration Control System in Pulsed Gas Metal Arc Welding

  • Wandong Wang
  • Zhijiang WangEmail author
  • Shengsun Hu
  • Yue Cao
  • Shuangyang Zou
Conference paper
Part of the Transactions on Intelligent Welding Manufacturing book series (TRINWM)

Abstract

Weld penetration plays an important role in the joint strength and its control has always been the focus of study. The paper established a single-input–single-output (SISO) weld penetration control system in pulsed gas metal arc welding (GMAW-P), where the base current (Ib) was taken as system input and the change in arc voltage during peak current period (ΔU) was taken as the system output. According to the nonlinear relationship between Ib and ΔU, a Hammerstein model with disturbances, composed of nonlinear static model and linear dynamic model, was proposed to describe the nonlinear control system. The nonlinear static system was determined based on the model of Ib and ΔU in steady state, and the parameters of linear dynamic system were identified by the recursive least square algorithm. Pseudo-random ternary signals (PRTS) were designed for the system identification. The identified results showed the Hammerstein model with disturbances can represent the penetration control system in GMAW-P within an acceptable range, which was validated by the step experiments data.

Keywords

Hammerstein model System identification Weld penetration control Pulsed gas metal arc welding 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51505326), the Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin (16JCQNJC04300).

References

  1. 1.
    Wang ZJ, Zhang YM, Wu L (2010) Measurement and estimation of weld pool surface depth and weld penetration in pulsed gas metal arc welding. Weld J 89(6):117s–126sGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pal K, Pal SK (2011) Effect of pulse parameters on weld quality in pulsed gas metal arc welding: a review. J Mater Eng Perform 20(6):918–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Saeed G, Zhang YM (2007) Weld pool surface depth measurement using a calibrated camera and structured light. Meas Sci Technol 18(8):2570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xiao YH (1993) Weld pool oscillation during GTA welding of mild steel. Weld J 72(8):428s–434sGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nagarajan S, Banerjee P, Chen W et al (1992) Control of the welding process using infrared sensors. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 8(1):86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fan C, Lv F, Chen S (2009) Visual sensing and penetration control in aluminum alloy pulsed GTA welding. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 42(1–2):126–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ramos EG, Caribé Guilherme, de Carvalho Sadek, Alfaro Crisóstomo Absi (2015) Analysis of weld pool oscillation in GMAW-P by means of shadow graphy image processing. Weld Int 29(3):9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang Z, Zhang YM, Wu L (2012) Adaptive interval model control of weld pool surface in pulsed gas metal arc welding. Automatica 48(1):233–238MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang Z, Zhang YM, Wu L (2011) Predictive control of weld penetration in pulsed gas metal arc welding. Robot Weld Intell Autom 2011:263–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu YK, Chen SJ, Zhang WJ et al (2013) Nonlinear dynamic modelling of weld penetration in gas tungsten arc welding process. Adv Mater Res 658:292–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu YK, Zhang YM (2013) Weld penetration control in gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) process. In: IECON 2013—39th annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics society, IEEE, pp 3842–3847Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu Y (2013) Estimation of weld joint penetration under varying GTA pools. Weld J 92(11):313s–321sGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ding F, Chen T (2005) Identification of Hammerstein nonlinear ARMAX systems. Pergamon PressGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Narendra K, Gallman P (2003) An iterative method for the identification of nonlinear systems using a Hammerstein model. IEEE Trans Autom Control 11(3):546–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lang ZQ (1997) A nonparametric polynomial identification algorithm for the Hammerstein system. IEEE Trans Autom Control 42(10):1435–1441MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chang F, Luus R (1971) A noniterative method for identification using Hammerstein model. IEEE Trans Autom Control 16(5):464–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bai EW (1998) An optimal two stage identification algorithm for Hammerstein-Wiener nonlinear systems. In: Proceedings of the 1998 American control conference, ACC, pp 2756–2760Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Na X, Zhang YM, Liu YS et al (2010) Nonlinear identification of laser welding process. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 18(4):927–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ye X, Hu L, Liu Y (2009) Nonlinear identification and self-learning CMAC neural network based control system of laser welding process. In: 9th international conference on electronic measurement & instruments, IEEE, pp 3440–3445Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang Z (2010) Adaptive interval model control for depth of weld penetration in pulsed gas metal arc welding. Dissertation, Harbin Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wandong Wang
    • 1
  • Zhijiang Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shengsun Hu
    • 1
  • Yue Cao
    • 1
  • Shuangyang Zou
    • 1
  1. 1.Tianjin Key Laboratory of Advanced Joining Technology, School of Materials Science and EngineeringTianjin UniversityTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations