Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of focus and deflection when comparing electron beam welds to laser welds at varying parameters in 304 SS

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Welding in the World Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 27 February 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

In many cases, both laser and electron beam welding may be considered for critical applications involving a wide range of structural materials. The ability to use both processes to make comparable welds in terms of both weld profile (penetration) and microstructure provides considerable process selection flexibility. In this study, autogenous, partial penetration welds on 304 and 304L SS were made using both fiber laser and electron beam processes. To simplify the analysis, many parameters were kept constant between processes, including working distance and spot size. The main variables, power and travel speed, were varied individually. Beam analysis was conducted using a PRIMES Focus Monitor to characterize the laser beam and a pro-beam diagnostic tool (PBD) for the electron beam. Electron beam welds were deflected or defocused to achieve a spot size similar to that of the laser welds, approximately 500 μm. The deflection pattern chosen for electron beam welding was made to mimic the power distribution of the laser. A similar melting efficiency at varying powers and travel speeds was maintained for both processes. Geometries and microstructures of the deflected and defocused electron beam welds and the laser beam welds are compared and related to process parameters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Sánchez-Amaya JM, Pasang T, Amaya-Vazquez MR, De Dios Lopez-Castro J, Churiaque C, Tao Y, Botana Pedemonte FJ (2017) Microstructure and mechanical properties of Ti5553 butt welds performed by LBW under conduction regime. Metals 7(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/met7070269

  2. Lin YD, Lee HT, Kuo TY, Jeng SL, Wu JL (2010) Effects of beam offset on mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of alloy 690-SUS 304L EBW joints for nuclear power plant. J Nucl Mater 401(1–3):78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.04.001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Oliveira JP, Schell N, Zhou N, Wood L, Benafan O (2019) Laser welding of precipitation strengthened Ni-rich NiTiHf high temperature shape memory alloys: microstructure and mechanical properties. Mater Des 162:229–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.11.053

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Shamsolhodaei A, Oliveira JP, Schell N, Maawad E, Panton B, Zhou YN (2020) Controlling intermetallic compounds formation during laser welding of NiTi to 316L stainless steel. Intermetallics 116(July 2019):106656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intermet.2019.106656

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rai R, Burgardt P, Milewski JO, Lienert TJ, Debroy T (2009) Heat transfer and fluid flow during electron beam welding of 21Cr-6Ni-9Mn steel and Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 42(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/42/2/025503

  6. Rai R, Elmer JW, Palmer TA, Debroy T. Heat transfer and fluid flow during keyhole mode laser welding of tantalum, Ti-6Al-4V, 304L stainless steel and vanadium

  7. Kaplan A (1994) A model of deep penetration laser welding based on calculation of the keyhole profile. J Phys D Appl Phys 27(9):1805–1814

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hann DB, Iammi J, Folkes J (2011) A simple methodology for predicting laser-weld properties from material and laser parameters. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 44(44). https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/44/44/445401

  9. Hann DB, Iammi J, Folkes J (2010) Keyholing or conduction – prediction of laser penetration depth. Proc 36th Int MATADOR Conf 22(0):275–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Suder WJ, Williams SW (2012) Investigation of the effects of basic laser material interaction parameters in laser welding. J Laser Appl 24(3):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Elmer JW, Allen SM, Eagar TW (2007) Microstructural development during solidification of stainless steel alloys. Metall Trans A 20A(October):2117–2131, 1989. J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys., vol. 40, no. 18, pp. 5753–5766

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lippold JC (1994) Solidification behavior and cracking susceptibility of pulsed-laser welds in austenitic stainless steels A shift in solidification behavior under rapid solidification conditions promotes an increase in cracking susceptibility. Weld J 73(6):129–139

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kotecki DJ, Siewart TA (1992) WRC-1992 Constitution Diagram for Stainless Steel Weld Metals: A Modification of the WRC-1988 Diagram. Welding Journal 5:171s–178s

  14. Pierce SW, Burgardt P (2016) Comparison of beam defocus and beam oscillation for Ta-10W EB welding. United States. Web

  15. Pierce SW, Burgardt P (2014) Evaluation of two devices for electron beam profiling. United States. Web

  16. Burgardt P, Pierce SW, Dvornak MJ. Definition of beam diameter for electron beam welding. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. https://doi.org/10.2172/1241647

  17. Sudnik W (2011) Arc welding. InTech, Rijeka

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Los Alamos National Laboratory for their support of this project and the work involved in conducting electron beam welding and analysis. Likewise, the authors are particularly grateful to IPG Photonics - Midwest Operations for providing access to perform laser weld trials and beam diagnostic work.

Funding

This work was supported through the NSF sponsored Industry/University Cooperative Research Center (I/UCRC): Manufacturing and Materials Joining and Innovation Center (Ma2JIC).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

    Joris E. Hochanadel, Tate Patterson, John C. Lippold & Boyd Panton

  2. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA

    Matthew Q. Johnson & David C. Tung

Authors
  1. Joris E. Hochanadel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tate Patterson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John C. Lippold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Boyd Panton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Matthew Q. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David C. Tung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joris E. Hochanadel.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: Figure 10 was not correct

Recommended for publication by Commission IV - Power Beam Processes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hochanadel, J.E., Patterson, T., Lippold, J.C. et al. Influence of focus and deflection when comparing electron beam welds to laser welds at varying parameters in 304 SS. Weld World 65, 1007–1014 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-020-01046-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-020-01046-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation