首页> 外文期刊>Modelling and simulation in materials science and engineering >A comparison between two different numerical formulations of welding arc simulation
【24h】

A comparison between two different numerical formulations of welding arc simulation

机译:两种不同的焊接电弧数值公式的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

A mathematical model was developed to simulate gas tungsten arc welding in order to compare two distinct numerical formulations to represent the electromagnetic problem in welding arcs, i.e. the 'potential' and the 'magnetic' approaches. Both formulations, representing the same physics but mathematically and numerically different, are tested against each other and against some experimental measurements available and other numerical studies reported in the literature. The major differences between the two formulations were found in predicting the magnetic and the current density fields. In general, the magnetic approach seems to be more straightforward to implement but the potential approach shows superiority in predicting isotherms, current and heat flux densities at the anode, since they show better agreement with experimental measurements. In view of the experience developed and the analysis carried out in this paper, it is clear to the authors that employing the potential formulation results in an easier, more convenient, and numerically better-behaved approach to represent welding arcs. [References: 30]
机译:开发了一个数学模型来模拟钨极气体保护焊,以便比较两个不同的数值形式来表示焊接电弧中的电磁问题,即“电势”和“电磁”方法。两种表示相同物理原理,但在数学和数值上均不同的公式,相互之间进行了对比,并与现有的一些实验测量值和文献中报道的其他数值研究进行了对比。两种配方之间的主要区别在于预测磁场和电流密度场。通常,磁性方法似乎更易于实施,但潜在方法显示出在预测等温线,阳极电流和热通量密度方面的优势,因为它们与实验测量结果更好地吻合。鉴于本文中积累的经验和进行的分析,对于作者来说很明显,采用潜在的配方可简化,更方便且在数值上表现更好的表示电弧的方法。 [参考:30]

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号