33 - Fatigue Performance of AHSS GMAW Lap Joints

Fatigue Performance of AHSS GMAW
Lap Joints
Dave Anderson
Chuck Porter
AISI
Yan (Jack) Sang

Chonghua (Cindy) Jiang
AET Integration, Inc.
www.autosteel.org
Presentation Contents
Project Background.
Review of Test Results and Analysis.
Summary.
Next Step.
www.autosteel.org
Project Objective
Compare GMAW weld fatigue life.

Mild steel and AHSS
Similar joint geometry
Evaluate the effects on weld fatigue life.

Weld geometry
Base steel strength
Welding wire
www.autosteel.org
Project Sponsors
www.autosteel.org
Test Factors
Materials
2.0mm Mild Steel Bare, DP600 Bare, DP780 Bare
2.0 mm Mild Steel HDGI, DP600 HDGI, DP780 HDGA
4.0mm Mild Steel Bare
Filler Metal
ER70S-3, ER80S-D2
Geometry
Min. acceptable
Improved
www.autosteel.org
Methodology
Develop two distinct weld geometries: Acceptable

and Improved.
Compare fatigue response for mild steel and AHSS
joints.
Find statistical significance of weld geometry, steel

strength, filler metal strength.
Utilize FEA modeling to evaluate the effects of
weld geometry.
www.autosteel.org
Related AET Capability
www.autosteel.org
Fatigue Testing Setup
www.autosteel.org
Weld Profile
2.0mm Mild Bare, Acceptable vs. Improved
Mild Steel, Uncoated, Acceptable Geometry
Mild Steel, Uncoated, Improved Geometry
www.autosteel.org
Weld Profile
2.0mm DP780 Bare, Acceptable vs. Improved
DP780, Uncoated, Acceptable Geometry
DP780, Uncoated, Improved Geometry
www.autosteel.org
Weld Profile
2.0mm Mild HDGI , Acceptable vs. Improved
Mild Steel, HDGI, Acceptable Geometry
Mild Steel, HDGI, Improved Geometry
www.autosteel.org
Fatigue Performance
2.0mm Mild Bare
Fatigue Life, 2.0mm Mild Bare

70 Wire Improved Geometry
70 Wire Acceptable Geometry
Stress Range (MPa)
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
2.0mm DP600 Bare
Fatigue Life: 2.0mm DP600 Bare

70 Wire Improv ed Geometry
70 Wire A cceptable Geometry
Nominal Stress Range (MPa)
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
2.0mm DP780 Bare
Fatigue Life, 2.0mm DP780 Bare

150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
2.0mm Mild HDGI
Fatigue Life, 2.0mm Mild GI

70 W ire Improv ed Geometry
70 W ire A cceptable Geometry
80 W ire Improv ed Geometry
80 W ire A cceptable Geometry
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
2.0mm DP600 HDGI
Fatigue Life, 2.0mm DP600 GI

150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
2.0mm DP780 HDGA
Fatigue Life, 2.0mm DP780 GA

150
R=0.1
100
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
70 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Acceptable Geometry

Mild
DP600
DP780
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
70 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Improved Geometry

Mild
DP600
DP780
DP780 Run Out
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance
Fatigue Life, 80 wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Acceptable Geometry
150
Mild Bare
DP600 Bare
DP780 Bare
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Performance

Mild
DP600
DP780
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Why the results are different

from some other studies?
Mixed Geometry, Mixed Wire, 2.0mm Bare Steel
Mild
DP600
DP780
DP780 Run Out
150
R=0.1
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Why the results are different

from some other studies?
70 Wire 2.0mm Steel
M ild Bare A cceptable G eometry
DP 780 Bare Improv ed G eometry
DP 780 Bare Run O ut
150
100
10000
100000
1000000
Cycles to Failure
www.autosteel.org
10000000
Fatigue Life Regression Analysis

using Weibull Distribution
Log (Fatigue Life) is analyzed
Probability Plot for SResids of N

Smallest Extreme Value - 95% CI
Censoring Column in Censor - ML Estimates
99
Percent
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5
3
2
1
0.1
-8
-6
-4
-2
Standardized Residuals
www.autosteel.org
3D Bar Chart
70 Wire Bare Steels at 1200 lb. loading

D es ig n- E xper t S oftwar e
T r ans for med S c ale
Log 10( F atig ue)
X 1 = A : G eometr y
X 2 = B : M ater ial
Log10(Fatigue)
6.7
6.35
5.65
5.3
D P 780
Impr oved
D P 600
B : Ma te ria l
M ild S teel
A c c eptable
www.autosteel.org
A: G e o m e try
Static FEA Analysis
www.autosteel.org
Static FEA Analysis
MPa
Weld toe stress
Oak Ridge National Lab (Dr. Zhili

Feng)s analysis using notch
stress theory indicates that
improvement in weld toe stress
results in more fatigue life
improvement for AHSS than
conventional steel.
www.autosteel.org
Summary
Weld profile can be improved by welding parameter
adjustments.
Weld profile influence weld fatigue life.
Weld profile improvement has more significant
impact on AHSS weld fatigue life than on mild steel.
Base metal strength appears to influence weld
fatigue life.
Higher strength wire in this study does not appear
to improve AHSS weld fatigue life.
www.autosteel.org
Acknowledgement
Dave Anderson, Chuck Porter, American Iron and
Steel.
Tom Natale, AK Steel.
Andy Lee, Elliot Biro, Dofasco.
Benda Yan, Min Kuo, Mittal Steel.
Alex Von Rogov, SeverStal, USA.
Zhili Feng, Oak Ridge National Lab.
www.autosteel.org
Q&A
www.autosteel.org

33 - Fatigue Performance of AHSS GMAW Lap Joints

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

33 - Fatigue Performance of AHSS GMAW Lap Joints

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Fatigue Performance of AHSS GMAW

Yan (Jack) Sang

Compare GMAW weld fatigue life.

Evaluate the effects on weld fatigue life.

Develop two distinct weld geometries: Acceptable

Find statistical significance of weld geometry, steel

Related AET Capability

Fatigue Testing Setup

2.0mm Mild Bare, Acceptable vs. Improved

Mild Steel, Uncoated, Acceptable Geometry

Mild Steel, Uncoated, Improved Geometry

2.0mm DP780 Bare, Acceptable vs. Improved

DP780, Uncoated, Acceptable Geometry

DP780, Uncoated, Improved Geometry

2.0mm Mild HDGI , Acceptable vs. Improved

Mild Steel, HDGI, Acceptable Geometry

Mild Steel, HDGI, Improved Geometry

Fatigue Life, 2.0mm Mild Bare

Stress Range (MPa)

Fatigue Life: 2.0mm DP600 Bare

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Fatigue Life, 2.0mm DP780 Bare

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Fatigue Life, 2.0mm Mild GI

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Fatigue Life, 2.0mm DP600 GI

2.0mm DP780 HDGA

Fatigue Life, 2.0mm DP780 GA

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

70 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Acceptable Geometry

70 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Acceptable Geometry

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

70 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Improved Geometry

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

80 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Acceptable Geometry

Fatigue Life, 80 wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Acceptable Geometry

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

80 Wire 2.0mm Bare Steel Improved Geometry

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Why the results are different

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Why the results are different

Nominal Stress Range (MPa)

Fatigue Life Regression Analysis

Probability Plot for SResids of N

70 Wire Bare Steels at 1200 lb. loading

Static FEA Analysis

Static FEA Analysis

Weld toe stress

Oak Ridge National Lab (Dr. Zhili

S-ar putea să vă placă și