0ff961df-0aef-4a94-a5cc-813d659e6975

A Systematic Methodology to Develop Scaling Laws for Thermal
Features of Temperature Field Induced by a Moving Heat Source

by
Yi Lu
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
Materials Engineering
Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering

University of Alberta
© Yi Lu, 2021
Abstract
A systematic methodology is developed to formulate scaling laws in closed-form for

thermal features of moving line heat source and Gaussian heat source problems, with
wide generality, high accuracy and practical simplicity, from fundamental principles.
The expressions are written in form of a simple solution for the dominant factor and
correction factors for secondary phenomena. In this thesis, the simple solutions are
derived from asymptotic analysis of dimensionless models, and the correction factors
are achieved with blending technique which is a standardized approach to generate a
global approximation based on asymptotic solutions. The 1-D blending technique is
modified to extend its scope of application and increase its accuracy. A systematic
2-D blending method is proposed to capture all possible cases of two independent
variables.
This thesis presents explicit, predictive and simple expressions for vital thermal
features of moving line heat source and Gaussian heat source, that are general to
different materials, processes and operating parameters. Based on the Rosenthal’s
moving line heat source model, expressions for 13 thermal features are tabulated,
including: isotherm half-width, location of the half-width, isotherm trailing length,
centerline cooling rate, isotherm leading length, centerline heating rate, maximum
temperature, gradients of maximum temperature, isotherm aspect ratio, melting ef-
ficiency, cooling time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, solidification time, and thickness of
the heat affected zone. All expressions are obtained with modified 1-D blending on
one dimensionless group, Ro number that represents the intensity of heat source (ex-
cept for maximum temperature), and are accurate to 8 % of the analytical solutions,
ii
except heating rate at 16 %.
By employing the proposed 2-D blending method, correction factors of surface
heat losses are established for isotherm half-width and its location, isotherm trailing
length, and centerline cooling rate, resulting in errors within 12 %, with the intro-
duction of the second dimensionless group h∗ . For isotherms around the heat source,
the energy distribution of the heat source affects the temperature field significantly.
The correction factors of Gaussian heat source distribution are developed with the
proposed 2-D blending method for isotherm half-width.
A comprehensive survey of published experiments and simulations is conducted
to validate the proposed engineering expressions. The comparisons illustrate good
agreements between predictions from the proposed expressions and collected data for
a broad range of materials, processes, and parameters.
The engineering expressions for all thermal features of moving line heat source
and Gaussian heat source are simple enough to be evaluated with a calculator or
spreadsheet conveniently, and are useful for a broad range of diverse materials or
processes. The expressions provide design guidelines for engineers and practitioners,
bring physical intuitions and insights, and speed up designing cycles especially at con-
ceptual stage in design and development of new technologies by inspiring creativity
and filtering infeasible or inferior designing options by evaluating many optional pa-
rameters and processes. The blending method can be adopted in broader engineering
problems since it captures the inherent essence of complex physical phenomena based
on the governing equations.
iii
Preface
This dissertation summarizes the author’s research work and papers in CCWJ, De-
partment of Chemical and Materials Engineering, University of Alberta, to pursue a
Ph.D. degree under the supervision of Dr. Patricio Mendez.
Chapter 1 is the introduction of this dissertation. It is based on the author’s
candidacy report and the published paper “Mendez, P. F., Lu, Y., & Wang, Y. (2018).
Scaling analysis of a moving point heat source in steady-state on a semi-infinite solid.
Journal of Heat Transfer, 140(8).”
Chapter 2 is published as “Lu, Y., Wang, Y., & Mendez, P. F. (2020). Width
of thermal features induced by a 2-D moving heat source. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, 156, 119793.” Ying Wang is the co-author of the paper.
Her role was to collect published data to validate proposed formulae and contribute
to the conceptualization and writing validation section. Dr. Patricio Mendez was the
supervisory author, and he provided ideas and revised the paper before submission.
Chapter 3 is published as “Lu, Y., & Mendez, P. F. (2020). Characteristic values
of the temperature field induced by a moving line heat source. International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer, 120671.” Dr. Patricio Mendez was the supervisory author,
and he provided ideas and revised the paper before submission.
Chapter 4 is submitted to the Journal of Materials Processing Technology as
“Lu, Y., & Mendez, P. F. (2021). Cooling rate in moving-heat-source manufacturing
processes with intensive surface heat losses”. Dr. Patricio Mendez was the supervisory
author, and he provided ideas and revised the paper before submission.
Chapter 5 is under review to the International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
iv
as “Lu, Y., Grams, M. R. & Mendez, P. F. (2021). Width of thermal features induced
by a moving heat source on a thin plate with surface heat losses.” Mitchell R. Grams is
the co-author. He provided simulation data for validation and contributed to writing
validation and discussion sections. Dr. Patricio Mendez was the supervisory author,
and he provided ideas and revised the paper before submission.
Chapter 6 is a draft that will be submitted as “Isotherm half-width of Gaussian
moving heat sources on a thick substrate”. Ying Wang is the co-author of the paper.
Her role was to collect published data to validate proposed formulae and contribute to
the conceptualization and writing validation and introduction sections. Dr. Patricio
Mendez was the supervisory author, and he provided ideas and revised the paper
before submission.
Chapter 7 is the summary of the results, novelties of the papers and proposes
recommendations for future work to continue the research.
The appendix chapters include the supplementary materials, such as supporting
figures and Matlab codes, to achieve the equations in this thesis. The appendix
also includes scaling laws and engineering expressions for catchment efficiencies of
Gaussian distributed powder cloud under moving Gaussian heat source.
v
Dedicate this thesis to my partner for her love and support in my life.
vi
Acknowledgements
These years at the University of Alberta have been a great and memorable time in my
life. It could not happen without the ongoing help and support from many friends.
At the final stage of my Ph.D. program, I want to convey my great gratitude to them
in this thesis.
Firstly, I have to thank my supervisor Dr. Patricio Mendez. Thank you for your
help in training my academic skills and systematic thinking, discussing new ideas
and research directions, teaching writing skills and revising papers. Your passion and
wisdom inspire me deeply. You also teach me about Canadian cultures and help me
overcome the culture gap, and encourage me to make friends from different countries,
join coffee breaks and parties. You also tried hard to learn Chinese cultures, reading
Chinese characters and “The Analects”. As an old Chinese saying goes, “Teacher is
like a father.” I am looking forward to keeping the friendship with you lifetime.
I would like to thank friends in the lab. Thank you, Goetz, for your help in lab ac-
tivities and wise suggestions. Thank you, Mitch, for bouncing creative ideals, honing
English writing skills, and engaging me in Canadian culture. Thank you, Dmytro,
Alejandro, Syed, Daniel, and our alumni, Gentry, Nairn, Cory, Vivek, Matt, Steven.
Your achievements, leadership and love for the CCWJ lab always motivate me. Thank
you, Jason, Huan, Fan, Zhaoyang, Chaoqun. We have great fun celebrating Chinese
festivals in Canada, making me feel at home.
I would like to acknowledge support from the Natural Sciences and Engineer-
ingResearch Council of Canada (NSERC).
Thank you, my father and mother, for your consistent love and support. Most
vii
importantly, I must thank my partner for your love and accompanying in these years.
Thank you for your care and delicious food. You are an excellent cook now! Thank
you for your encouragement and comfort when I am down. We went through many
difficulties and challenges, joys and pleasures together in the past nine years. I hope
we can go through all burdens and happiness for the rest of my life.
viii
Table of Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 Knowledge gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.3 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2 Literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.4 Thesis outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2 Width of thermal features induced by a 2-D moving heat source 31

2.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.3 Governing equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.4 Normalization and dimensional analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.5 Limitations of idealized model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.5.1 Effect of finite heat source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.5.2 Effect of substrate thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.5.3 Effect of temperature dependence on thermophysical properties 42
2.5.4 Effect of melting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.5.5 Effect of surface heat losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
2.6 Asymptotic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
ix
2.7 Blending of asymptotic solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2.7.1 Correction factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.7.2 Expressions with units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.8 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2.9 Example of application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
2.10 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.11 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.A Estimation of effective thermophysical properties . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.A.1 Thermal diffusivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.A.2 Thermal conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.A.3 Specific heat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
2.B Asymptotics for maximum isotherm half-width . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.C Criterion for point heat source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.D Criterion for insulated surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3 Characteristic values of a two-dimensional point moving heat source 77

3.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
3.3 Mathematical model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3.4 Location of maximum isotherm half-width xmax . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3.5 Trailing length of isotherm xb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
3.6 Centerline cooling rate Ṫb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3.7 Leading length of isotherm xf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
3.8 Centerline heating rate Ṫf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
3.9 Maximum temperature Tmax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.10 Gradient of maximum temperature dTmax /dy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.11 Aspect ratio A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
x
3.12 Melting efficiency ηm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
3.13 Cooling time t8/5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
3.14 Solidification time at centerline tsl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3.15 Thickness of the heat affected zone ∆yHAZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
3.16 Effect of joint configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
3.17 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3.18 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
3.19 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.A Blending of asymptotic solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3.B Blending of Lambert W function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
4 Cooling rate in moving-heat-source manufacturing processes with

intensive surface heat losses 122
4.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
4.2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
4.3 Moving heat source model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
4.4 Scaling Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
4.4.1 Asymptotic Regimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
4.4.2 2D Blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
4.5 Trailing length xb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
4.5.1 Asymptotic analysis of trailing length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
4.5.2 Partial blending of trailing length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
4.5.3 Full blending of trailing length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
4.6 Centerline cooling rate Ṫb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
4.6.1 Asymptotic analysis of cooling rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
4.6.2 Partial blending of cooling rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
4.6.3 Full blending of cooling rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
xi
4.7 Criterion to neglect surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
4.8 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
4.9 Extensions of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
4.9.1 Extension to different geometries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
4.9.2 Consideration of the bioheat equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
4.10 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
4.11 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
4.A Asymptotics of x∗b in the asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa . . . . . . 157
4.B Asymptotics of x∗b in the asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa . . . . . . 158
4.C Asymptotics of Ṫb∗ in the asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa . . . . . . 159
4.D Asymptotics of Ṫb∗ in the asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa . . . . . . 160
4.E Critical surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
4.F Estimation of effective thermal conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
5 Width of thermal features induced by a moving heat source on a

thin plate with surface heat losses 165
5.1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
5.2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
5.3 Governing equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
5.4 Normalization and asymptotics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
5.5 Two-dimensional blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
5.6 Asymptotic analysis of isotherm half-width ymax . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
5.7 Blending of isotherm half-width ymax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
5.7.1 Side partial blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
5.7.2 2-D blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
5.7.3 Engineering expression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
5.8 Blending of isotherm half-width location x∗max . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
xii
5.8.1 Partial blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
5.8.2 2-D blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
5.8.3 Engineering expression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
5.9 Criterion to neglect surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
5.10 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
5.10.1 Published data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
5.10.2 Simulation results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
5.11 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
5.12 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
5.A Asymptotic analysis in asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa . . . . . . . 195
5.B Asymptotic analysis in asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa . . . . . . . 197
6 Isotherm half-width of Gaussian moving heat sources on a thick

substrate 199
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
6.2 Moving Gaussian heat source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
6.3 Isotherms with two local width maxima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
6.4 Asymptotic analysis of isotherm half-width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
∗
6.5 Blending of isotherm half-width ymax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
6.5.1 Partial blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
6.5.2 2-D blending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
6.6 Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.7 Example of application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
6.8 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
6.9 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
6.A Expressions for isotherm half-width and its location . . . . . . . . . . 224
xiii
6.B Regime VI, σ ∗ → σmax
∗
→ 0, Ry → 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
6.C Regime V: σ ∗ → σmax
∗
→ ∞, Ry → ∞ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
7 Conclusions and future work 228

7.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
7.2 Future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Appendix A: Matlab codes for blending 254
Appendix B: Supplementary materials for the moving line heat source

model 280
B.1 Matlab codes for isotherm width of moving line heat source in Chapter 2280
B.2 Matlab codes for characteristic values of moving line heat source in
Chapter 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
B.3 Supporting figures for blending results in Chapter 3 . . . . . . . . . . 287
B.3.1 x∗max . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
B.3.2 x∗f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
B.3.3 Ṫf∗ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
B.3.4 x∗b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
B.3.5 Ṫb∗ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
∗
B.3.6 Tmax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
B.3.7 dTm∗ /dy ∗ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
B.3.8 A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
Appendix C: Supplementary materials for the moving line heat source

under convection 303
C.1 Matlab codes for isotherm trailing length and centerline cooling rate
of moving heat source under surface heat loss in Chapter 4 . . . . . . 303
C.1.1 Calculation of isotherm trailing length x∗b of moving line heat
source under surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
xiv
C.1.2 Blending of isotherm trailing length x∗b of moving line heat
source under surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
C.1.3 Blending of centerline cooling rate Ṫb∗ of moving line heat source
under surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
C.1.4 Critical values of convection coefficients to neglect effects of
surface heat loss for trailing length and cooling rate . . . . . . 307
C.2 Matlab codes for isotherm width and its location of moving line heat
source under surface heat losses in Chapter 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
∗
C.2.1 Calculation of isotherm width ymax and its location x∗max of
moving line heat source under surface heat loss . . . . . . . . 308
∗
C.2.2 Blending of isotherm width ymax and its location x∗max of moving
line heat source under surface heat loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
C.2.3 Critical values of convection coefficients to neglect effects of
surface heat loss for isotherm width and its location . . . . . . 311
Appendix D: Supplementary materials for moving Gaussian heat source

model 313
D.1 Matlab codes for isotherm width under a moving Gaussian heat source
in Chapter 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
D.1.1 Calculation of isotherms with two peaks under a moving Gaus-
sian heat source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
∗
D.1.2 Calculation of isotherm width ymax under a moving Gaussian
heat source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
D.1.3 Blending of isotherm width under a moving Gaussian heat source319
∗
D.2 Supporting figures for partial blending of ymax . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324
D.2.1 Supporting figures for partial blending in side Regime II – VI 324
D.2.2 Supporting figures for partial blending in side Regime V – VI 324
Appendix E: Catchment efficiency of Gaussian distributed powder cloud
xv
under moving Gaussian heat source 327
E.1 Engineering expression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
E.2 Matlab code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
xvi
List of Tables
2.1 Variables used in Chapter 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

2.2 Operating conditions and average thermal properties utilized in calcu-
lation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

3.2 Summary of characteristic values and correction factors. . . . . . . . 115
xvii
List of Figures
1.1 Schematic of moving heat source. The isotherm of interest can be

temperatures such as melting temperature, phase transformation tem-
perature, or thermal residual temperature, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1 Isotherms for a 2-D point heat source of intensity q on a substrate of

thickness d. The domain is −∞ < x < ∞, −∞ < y < ∞ and there
are no gradients in z. The 2D behavior is approximated in thin plates
(a) or thick plates with the heat input distributed uniformly along the
thickness (b). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.2 Isotherms corresponding to Ro = 0.5, 1, and 2. For large Ro (Regime
III, fast) the isotherms are elongated, and for small Ro (Regime IV,
slow), the isotherms are rounder and narrower. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
∗
2.3 Dimensionless maximum isotherm half-width ymax as a function of Ro.
Equation 2.23 and Equation 2.24 are asymptotic behaviors represented
with thinner lines. The thicker solid line represents numerical calcu-
lations obtained by solving Equation 2.21 and Equation 2.22. The
dashed line represents the modified asymptote in Regime III, which

includes the modification factor exp −Ro−1 . The blended solution is
undistinguishable from the numerical solution (thick solid line) . . . . 46
2.4 Blending error of dimensionless maximum isotherm half-width ymax as
a function of Ro for the blending parameter n at or near the optimal
value of 1.407. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
xviii
2.5 Maximum blending error as a function of the blending parameter n.
The maximum error reaches its minimum, 6.8% at n =1.407. . . . . . 49
2.6 Correction factors for the maximum isotherm half-width ymax as func-
tions of Ro. For Ro > 3.553 or Ro < 0.3856, neglecting correction
factors yield an error in estimation smaller than 10% compared to
blended solution of 2.25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.7 Comparison of explicit blending solution (Equation 2.25) with pub-
lished data for weld width in arc welding (GTAW, SMAW, SAW,
GMAW). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
lished data for isotherm width in laser processes (LBW, AM). . . . . 56
lished data for weld width in EBW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.10 The simulation result and criteria proposed Equation 2.70 to neglect
heat source size effect for isotherm width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2.11 The numerical result and criteria proposed Equation 2.78 to neglect
surface convection for isotherm width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3.1 Characteristic values of isotherm T = Tc for moving heat source prob-

lems [207]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
′
3.2 Equivalent power source intensity (qeff ) and energy distribution (qi ) for
typical welding joint. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
3.3 Validation of predictions for cooling rate using Equation 3.27. The
curve corresponding to the exact solution (Equation 3.2) is undistin-
guishable within the thickness of the line. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
3.4 Validation of predictions of isotherm length b
l∗ = x
b∗f − x
b∗b using equa-
tions 3.34 and 3.17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
xix
3.5 Validation of predictions of maximum temperature using Equation 3.49.
The curve corresponding to the exact solution (Equation 3.2) is undis-
tinguishable within the thickness of the line. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
3.6 Validation of predictions of heat affected zone half-width using Equa-
tion 3.94. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
3.7 Validation of predictions of isotherm aspect ratio using Equation 3.65. 107
3.8 Traditional blending and three extended methodologies. . . . . . . . 120
4.1 Schematic of trailing length xb and cooling rate Ṫb = −U ∂T /∂x as-
sociated with isotherm T = Tc induced by a point heat source at the
origin moving at velocity U. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.2 Error map of blending of trailing length (Equations 4.19 to 4.22) for
the optimal blending parameters a1 = 0.7806, b1 = 1.517, a2 = 0.1260,
b2 = −0.1273, c2 = 3.815. The maximum relative error is 7.1 %. . . . 137
4.3 b∗+
The xb , calculated from the blending result Equation 4.19 to 4.22,
changes with h∗ for Ro = 0.1, 1, 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

4.4 Error map of blending of cooling rate (Equations 4.35 to 4.37) for the
optimal blending parameters a1 = 3.652, b1 = 1.971, a2 = 0.06407, b2 =
−0.1004, c2 = 6.252. The maximum relative error is 7.6 %. . . . . . 142
4.5 ḃ ∗+ , calculated from the blending result Equation 4.35 to 4.37,
The T b
changes with h∗ for Ro = 0.1, 1, 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

4.6 Critical values of h∗ to neglect the effect of surface heat loss results
in a relative errors within 10 % between side blending at side Regime
III – IV and exact numerical results. The thick lines h∗c,x∗b and h∗c,Ṫ ∗
b
are critical values for trailing length and cooling rate. The thin lines
equations 4.39 and 4.40 are estimation of the critical values h∗c . . . . . 145
xx
4.7 Comparisons of predictions of cooling rate. 4.7(a): Equation 4.35 with-
out corrections for surface heat loss. 4.7(b): Equation 4.37 with cor-
rection factors for surface heat loss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
5.1 Isotherms for a point heat source of intensity q on a thin substrate of

thickness d. The domain is −∞ < x < ∞, −∞ < y < ∞ and gradients
in z are negligible [130]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
5.2 Isotherms corresponding to Ro = 1 and 2, and h∗ =0 and 1. The surface
heat losses have a significant effect on the half-width of the isotherm. 171
5.3 Schematic of process map u∗c depending on Π1 and Π2 . Four asymptotic
regimes are defined for extreme values of Π1 and Π2 . . . . . . . . . . 173
∗
5.4 The error map of isotherm half-width ymax for Equation 5.40. . . . . 180
5.5 Critical values of surface heat losses h∗c and its blending approximation
b
h∗+ ∗ ∗
c for isotherm width ymax and its location xmax under an acceptable
error of 10 %. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
5.6 Validation of engineering expression for isotherm half-width neglecting
correction factors for surface heat loss (Equation 5.40 to 5.41). . . . 187
5.7 Validation of engineering expression for isotherm half-width consid-
ering correction factors for surface heat loss (Equation 5.40 to 5.43).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
6.1 Example of the isotherm with two peaks for Ry = 110 and σ ∗ = 4. . 207
6.2 The criterion function ∂(χ2max )/∂(ρ2max ) changes with ρmax for σ ∗ =
1 ∼ 10. The critical value of normalized Gaussian standard deviation
satisfying criterion Equation 6.15 is σ ∗ = 2.893. . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
6.3 Process map for combinations of Ry and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
. In the shaded region,
the isotherms have two peaks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
xxi
6.4 The map of 2-D blending errors (equations 6.28 to 6.32) and asymptotic
∗
regimes for isotherm half-width ymax for Ry ≤ 1000 and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤ 0.9.
The four asymptotic regimes can be sliced according to a given relative
error (dash lines indicate 10 % of error for asymptotic expressions) or
the matching of the two asymptotic expressions in side regimes (side
regime asymptotics equal on side lines). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
6.5 Validation of Equations 6.28 and 6.30 with collected published data,
neglecting correction factors for size of heat source, equations 6.31
and 6.32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
6.6 Validation of Equations 6.28 and 6.32 with collected published data,
taking account correction factors for size of heat source. . . . . . . . 217
B.1 Location of isotherm width x∗max changes with Ro number. . . . . . . 287

B.2 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of x∗max . . . . . . . . . 287
B.3 Optimizing parameters for blending of x∗max . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
B.4 Correction factors for engineering expressions for x∗max . . . . . . . . . 288
B.5 x∗f changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
B.6 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of x∗f . . . . . . . . . . 289
B.7 Optimizing parameters for blending of x∗f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
B.8 Correction factors for engineering expressions for x∗f . . . . . . . . . . . 290
B.9 Ṫf∗ changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
B.10 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of Ṫf∗ . . . . . . . . . . 291
B.11 Optimizing parameters for blending of Ṫf∗ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
B.12 Correction factors for engineering expressions for Ṫf∗ . . . . . . . . . . 292
B.13 x∗b changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
B.14 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of x∗b . . . . . . . . . . 293
B.15 Optimizing parameters for blending of x∗b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
B.16 Correction factors for engineering expressions for x∗b . . . . . . . . . . 294
xxii
B.17 Ṫb∗ changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
B.18 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of Ṫb∗ . . . . . . . . . . 295
B.19 Optimizing parameters for blending of Ṫb∗ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
B.20 Correction factors for engineering expressions for Ṫb∗ . . . . . . . . . . 296
∗
B.21 Tmax changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
∗
B.22 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of Tmax . . . . . . . . . 297
∗
B.23 Optimizing parameters for blending of Tmax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
∗
B.24 Correction factors for engineering expressions for Tmax . . . . . . . . . 298
B.25 dTm∗ /dy ∗ changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
B.26 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of dTm∗ /dy ∗. . . . . . . 299
B.27 Optimizing parameters for blending of dTm∗ /dy ∗. . . . . . . . . . . . 300
B.28 Correction factors for engineering expressions for dTm∗ /dy ∗. . . . . . . 300
B.29 A changes with Ro number. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
B.30 Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of A. . . . . . . . . . 301
B.31 Optimizing parameters for blending of A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
B.32 Correction factors for engineering expressions for A. . . . . . . . . . 302
∗ ∗
D.1 Partial blending of ymax in side Regime II – VI. ymax /Ry changes with
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
∗
D.2 Error of partial blending in Side Regime II – VI for ymax (Equation 6.26)
when a = −1.560, b = 4.463, n = 4.112 for σ ∗ /σmax
∗
≤ 0.9. . . . . . . 323
q
ln σσmax
∗ ∗
∗
D.3 Partial blending of ymax ∗+
in side Regime V – VI. ybmax / σσ∗ ∗
max
changes with Ry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324

∗
D.4 Error of partial blending of ymax in side Regime V – VI (Equation 6.27)
when n = −3.055. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
D.5 Maximum error changes with blending parameter n for partial blending
∗
of ymax in side Regime V – VI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
σ∗
E.1 The catchment efficiency of melt pool wl change with σmax
∗ for 5 ≤
Ry ≤ 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328
xxiii
σ∗
E.2 The catchment efficiency ahead of melt pool ws change with σmax
∗ for
5 ≤ Ry ≤ 100. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
xxiv
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Motivation
1.1.1 Background
This dissertation conducts a systematic research on important thermal features re-

lated to isotherms in temperature field of a moving line heat source or Gaussian
distributed heat source model, where moving heat source model is referred to a heat
source of constant intensity moving on a substrate at a constant speed, as illustrated
in Figure 1.1. The research involves dimensional analysis to generalize the problem,
asymptotic analysis in extreme regimes and blending to achieve global approximation.
Many processes can be modelled as moving heat source problems in thermal analysis,
such as welding [174, 175, 179], additive manufacturing [73, 85, 190], cladding [31,
219], surface treatment [86, 106, 124], cutting [66, 149], tribology [89, 94], grinding [25,
132], machining [51, 107], wheel and track contact [102, 103], bone surgery [121, 228]
and many more.
An example is made to demonstrate the importance of studying thermal features
of moving heat source problems for the welding process. Welding is one of the crucial
fabrication technologies to form one component continuously from two by applying
heat, some times with pressure, in which “rapprochement” is built by moving atoms
close enough to share bonds. It is widely applied in many fields like chemical plants,
oil and gas, mining, aerospace industry and many more. In the most common cir-
1
cumstance, the term welding is often referred to joining metals by applying heat. In
fusion welding processes, a part of substrates is heated up by moving energy sources
such as plasmas or laser beams, and a melt pool forms during heating where the base
material mixes. Then, the molten materials solidify to form a continuous joint bead
as heat source leaves and heat conducts away. The joint of fusion welds consists of
a distinct fusion zone, heat-affected zones and unaffected base materials. For alloys,
there is also a partially melted zone between the fusion zone and heat-affected zone.
Moving heat source Isotherm of interest Substrate
Figure 1.1: Schematic of moving heat source. The isotherm of interest can be temper-
atures such as melting temperature, phase transformation temperature, or thermal
residual temperature, etc.
During this thermal cycle, some thermal features are crucial to reactions and prop-
erties of fusion welding processes, such as metallurgical phase transformation, me-
chanical properties, efficiencies, and reliabilities. For example, the isotherm width is
a significant characteristic reflecting the shape of the weld pool, the region of phase
transformation, and thermal residual stresses [76]; the cooling rate affects the phase
transformation in solidification, martensitic transformation [87], and sensitivity to
cold crack [99]; aspect ratio is a vital characteristic in in-situ monitoring [195]; melt-
ing efficiency is crucial to dilution in welding of dissimilar materials [49]; and many
2
more.
Similar to welding processes, investigations of thermal features related to isotherms
of temperature field under moving heat sources are central to many other processes
as addressed above, like additive manufacturing, cladding, surface treatment, cutting,
tribology, grinding, machining, wheel and track contact, and bone surgery.
The research proposes a systematic approach to build explicit, general, convenient
and practical formulae to describe relationships between operating parameters (like
heat input, travel speed and plate thickness) and important thermal thermal fea-
tures (like maximum temperature, cooling rate) for moving line heat source of two-
dimensional problems or moving Gaussian heat source of three-dimensional problems.
The practical formulae provide design guidelines for engineers and practitioners and
bring insights into initial evaluations of the process mechanisms and parameters. The
predictive formulae in closed form are suitable for transmission in textbooks and stan-
dards and general enough to be easily adapted to different materials and processes.
1.1.2 Knowledge gap
There is a significant lack of practical, reliable, and general engineering expressions

for moving heat source processes to predict critical thermal features of interest to the
practitioners, such as maximum temperature, cooling rate, size of the heat-affected
zone, and melt pool size.
In the past thirty years, the rapidly evolving numerical simulations help under-
stand and predict moving heat source processes such as laser cladding and additive
manufacturing, building up more realistic and comprehensive models benefiting from
explosively growing operator forces of computers. Simulation models are convenient
when prototype is expensive, such as cars and airplanes. Sophisticated numerical sim-
ulations are usually difficult for practitioners without training or software, especially
for highly interdisciplinary processes like welding. The experimental technologies are
also developing rapidly for accurate control and measurements. Experiments can gen-
3
erate simple empirical models. Results of experiments and simulations are usually
valid for given parameters with limit amount of generalities to specific materials and
properties.
Despite the progress of simulation and experiment techniques, there is a lack of
rigorous, general, explicit, convenient, accurate and physically meaningful engineer-
ing expressions for moving heat source problems, which are essential in conceptual
designing at the first stage of engineering design [137]. At the conceptual designing
stage, many concepts, optional processes, and parameters are proposed based on in-
tuition and experience. The engineering expressions can filter infeasible or inferior
designing options by evaluating a large amount of optional parameters and processes
conveniently. With ample time and money, trial-and-error methods or numerical sim-
ulations could be utilized for accurate predictions and thorough explorations of the
whole space of possible parameters and options. However, in practical applications,
it is crucial to evaluate versatile considerations of technologies and materials with
limited time or money, which prevents the usage of detailed analysis at beginning of
designing. Moreover, the exact answer to particular materials, processes and oper-
ating parameters from perfect models or experiments is not enough as the possible
parameter spaces of them also need to be explored at conceptual design stage. Basic
design rules and engineering expressions are essential for the evaluation and creation
of parameters and technologies at the conceptual stage. They deliver engineering un-
derstanding, inspire creativity and screens infeasible and inferior designing options.
For the remaining designing options, further analysis in detail can the conducted with
sophisticated numerical simulations or experiments to form the final design.
The success of engineering expressions have been implemented in a variety of en-
gineering fields, such as stress concentration analysis in solid mechanics [165], drag
coefficient in fluid dynamics [116], stress in gear teeth [187], and calculation of convec-
tion coefficient in heat transfer [92]. One concrete example of its implementation is the
calculation of Nusselt number of external cross flows over a cylinder, which describes
4
the convective heat exchanging between the cylinder and flows, from the textbook
“Fundamental of Heat and Mass Transfer” [92]. Correlation between average Nusselt
number, Reynolds number and Prandtl number can be expressed as:
" 5/8 #4/5
0.62ReD 1/2 Pr1/3 ReD
NuD = 0.3 + h i1/4 1 + (1.1)
2/3 282, 000
1 + (0.4/Pr)
where NuD is defined as the ratio of convective heat transfer to conductive heat
transfer, ReD is the Reynolds number for the cylinder, and Pr number is the ratio of
momentum diffusivity to thermal diffusivity of the cross flow. Equation 1.1 is compre-
hensive for calculating convection coefficients, covering a wide range of ReD and Pr.
Many engineering expressions in similar form in heat and mass transfer fields can not
only provide an estimation of the heat transfer coefficient efficiently and economically
but also bring engineering insights on the interplay between involved mechanisms and
parameters. There are a bunch of correlations under different conditions, which do
not provide an accurate solution to the Nusselt number but are significant and practi-
cal to the design of heat exchangers, bringing insightful and intuitive understandings
of convective heat transfer. However, Equation 1.1 obtained with Churchill’s blending
methodology is recommended for ReD · Pr ≥ 0.2 which can not cover all values of ReD
and Pr. There is lack of systematic approach to obtain blending depending on two
dimensionless groups, which will be discussed later in this dissertation.
However, very few engineering expressions are developed for moving heat source
problems, and some published correlations are not presented correctly. The engineer-
ing expressions are usually valid for a narrow range of materials and processes [137].
For example, in American Welding Society (AWS) standard D1.1 [9], standardized
Charpy V-notch tests are required at the heat-affected zone. However, there are no
predictive methods suitable for a standard to estimate the location of fusion and
width of heat affected zone, namely bead width of melting isotherm and thickness of
heat-affected zone, and only some rough values (1 mm and 5 mm) are attributed to
thickness of heat-affected zone for different processes, which could vary significantly
5
with different operating parameters and base materials. Another example is the for-
mula for cooling time from 800 ◦ C to 500◦ C presented in British code [192], which is a
crucial thermal feature associated with metallurgical transformations of steel, tightly
related to mechanical properties of weld bead:

q2 1 1
t8/5 = × − (1.2)
4πkρcd2 U 2 (500◦ C − T0 )2 (800◦ C − T0 )2
where t8/5 represents the cooling time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, q is the heat absorbed
by the workpiece, k is the thermal conductivity of the base material, U is the speed,
ρ is the density, c is the specific heat, d is the plate thickness, and T0 is the initial
or preheat temperature. Equation 1.2 provides some reasonable estimations when
welding speed is fast enough. However, in many cases of practical welding parameters,
travel speeds are not always large enough, and Equation 1.2 is not valid anymore, that
was not addressed explicitly. There are a vast wealth of known expressions related to
the heat flow and resulting thermal features; however, current knowledge is typically
process-specific or material-specific. There is a lack of insightful, practical, convenient
and general engineering expressions that are amenable to practitioners and engineers.
1.1.3 Scope
This dissertation is to propose a systematic approach to establish a set of practi-

cal, reliable and general engineering expressions for thermal features of moving heat
source problems to deliver physical understanding, enhance engineering judgment and
provide reasonable predictions. The engineering expressions are in the form of:
Characteristic Value = Ideal Solution × Correction Factor×
Correction Factor × . . . (1.3)
The ideal solution is an expression in closed-form with great simplicity for the ideal
cases, typically obtained by considering only dominant phenomena. The dominant
phenomena can be identified with analytical scaling analysis [138], experiments or
6
numerical simulations with extreme operating parameter values [61], or from prac-
tical engineering experience conceptually. Heat conduction or advection due to the
motion of heat source is the dominant phenomenon for moving heat source problems
depending on whether the isotherm of interest is close or far to the heat source. To
ensure the generality of proposed engineering expressions to be independent of spe-
cific materials or processes, the ideal solutions in this dissertation are obtained by the
asymptotic analysis of normalized analytical solutions based on the classic Rosenthal
heat source model to capture the essence of heat flow under moving heat source.
Correction factors are developed to measure the departure of the ideal solutions
for ideal cases from the “reality” to capture the secondary effects. The secondary
phenomena can be surface heat loss to the environment, phase transformations, fluid
dynamics, heat source distributions and many other more, which depend on practical
processes and requirements. The “reality” can be analytical solutions, experiments,
or numerical simulation results [141]. The correction factors can be formulated by
statistic regression or blending technique. In this dissertation, the 1-D/2-D blend-
ing methodology is used to formulate correction factors for conduction or advection,
effects of surface heat losses and size of Gaussian distributed heat source.
1.2 Literature review

Point heat source
The moving point heat source model, which was proposed and solved by Wilson [215]
and popularized in welding engineering by Rosenthal [175], is the most classic moving
heat source model. Rosenthal successfully applied the model to welding and cutting
processes, and it presented reasonable estimations of the temperature field far away
from the heat source. Comparisons have been made between experimental data and
Rosenthal’s prediction [160, 176]. Rosenthal and Schmerber [176] verified Rosenthal’s
thermal distribution theory on thin plates, measuring isotherms with thermocouples.
It has been widely applied in many fields, including mass transfer [171], additive
7
manufacturing such as beam-based fabrication of thin-wall structures, [73, 85, 190]
and metal cutting [66, 149], even general enough to be utilized to simulate the shell-
forming by line heating [227]. It has also been adopted to speed up and verify nu-
merical simulation procedures of heat flow due to its fundamental feature [52, 112,
163]. The experiments and theoretical equation are in satisfactory agreement on the
thin plate, excepting the area close to the heat source and the edge regions.
The point heat source model is widely utilized in welding engineering due to its
explicit analytical solution to the temperature field and capturing the essence of the
moving heat source problems with much simplicity and reasonable accuracy. Heller et
al. [84] characterized the radius of near field region, far-field region and transitional re-
gion of the temperature field based on point heat source models and achieved asymp-
totic expressions for the trailing length and maximum isotherm width. Goyal et
al. [75] employed the point heat source model as an approximation of the heat in-
put of droplets in modelling the thermal processes of PGMAW (Pulse Gas Metal
Arc Welding). Yajun [205] integrated the two-dimensional and three-dimensional
point heat source models and verified with measurements from EBM (Electron Beam
Welding) experiments where good agreements were achieved between predicted and
measured fusion line locations. Gajapathi et al. [64] reported simulation results of
micro electron beam welding processes and compared the numerical temperature field
against Rosenthal’s point heat source solution in the far-field (out of (−10µm, 1µm))
in the centerline with good agreements.
Kou [112] developed a numerical model to simulate the steady-state, two-dimensional
heat flow based on the finite difference method and adopted Rosenthal thin solution
as the first guess to speed up the computation. Comparison between calculation
given by this line heat model with his numerical results within the limits of listed
assumptions showed that the numerical and analytical solutions are nearly identical
for temperature below the melting temperature of the workpiece and thermal cycles
are also nearly identical except at the location of heat source where the temperature
8
is infinity due to the point source assumption. Kazuya [154] tested the effect of latent
heat on temperature field induced by a two-dimensional heat flow numerically and
concluded that the latent heat might not be necessarily considered in the calculation
for the cases of small heat input.
The model must be applied with an understanding of its limitations caused by its
assumptions. The point heat source model is inferior in predicting temperature fields
close to heat sources, but the model can provide fair estimations for points away from
the heat source, where many critical regions locate such as the heat-affected zone.
The moving point heat source is the critical model capturing the essence of moving
heat source problems. Therefore, the moving point heat source model is utilized
in the first step of current research and serves as the theoretical basis to establish
preliminary engineering expressions. To capture the influence of sizes of heat source,
Gaussian distributed heat source model, which are reviewed below, will be employed
to develop engineering expressions for isotherm half-width associated with the vicinity
of the heat source.
More sophisticated heat source models, for example, volumetric heat sources, as
reviewed below, can improve the accuracy of temperature field prediction, particularly
for the regions close to the heat source, with elaborate choices of parameters. However,
here comes two problems. Firstly, the relevant parameters in the heat source models
are challenging to measure or estimate. Secondly, it is nearly unachievable to control
the parameters of volumetric heat sources in welding processes, making it impractical
to involve the volumetric heat source parameters in designing rules.
Surface heat source
Surface heat source models, heat imposed on the flat surface of the base material,
are utilized in many analytical and numerical methods because they provide a better
temperature description around the heat source by taking the sizes of heat sources
into account.
9
The most common surface heat source model is the moving Gaussian distributed
heat source proposed by Eagar and Tsai [53]. Ghosh et al. [69] modelled the heat
input of welding arc as a Gaussian distributed heat source. Akbari et al. [8] ap-
plied Gaussian distributed heat source model to simulations of laser beam welding
of Ti6Al4V. Roberts et al. [170] and Nikam and Jain [151] employed Gaussian heat
source model to simulate laser additive manufacturing processes.
There are some other types of surface heat sources other than the Gaussian dis-
tributed heat source. One typical model is the uniform distribution or top-hat heat
source, and the top-hat models are widely used in laser beam processes [115, 161,
198]. Haghpanahi et al. [81] modelled a surface ring heat source to represent the
heat generated by friction in the shear layers. To achieve a more realistic heat source
model for simulations, Kubiak et al. [115] measured the energy distribution of Yd:
YAG laser and built a mathematical model of the heat source by interpolation for
more accuracy.
The surface heat source models introduce geometry parameters to capture the heat
source’s size and energy distribution, such as the distribution parameter σ for moving
Gaussian distributed heat source models. Those parameters can be measured directly
in experiments [115], or estimated based on the temperature fields [178].
Volumetric heat source
The heat input is not always imposed on a flat surface due to arc force and metal
evaporation and so on, especially under high current or high energy density. Volu-
metric heat source models, or more accurately speaking, curved surface heat source
models, are utilized, mostly in numerical simulations.
The double ellipsoidal heat source model proposed by Goldak et al. [74] is the most
popular volumetric heat source model, which describes the heat distribution in front
and rear parts as the of different sets of parameters. The size and shape of a double
ellipsoidal heat source can be easily manipulated with seven parameters, which has the
10
advantage of versatility and flexibility to deal with different processes but also causes
difficulty in setting appropriate geometry parameters. The double ellipsoidal heat
source model is widely utilized in simulations of many moving heat source processes,
such as electron beam welding [32], laser beam welding [16], plasma arc welding [125],
and so on. Other than applications on simulations, the double ellipsoidal heat source is
also utilized in analytical approaches. For example, Fachinotti et al. [56] analytically
solved the temperature distribution of a double ellipsoidal heat source on a semi-
infinite solid medium, reducing the computation cost to a large extent.
Some volumetric heat source models have been developed for specific processes or
phenomena. Yadaiah and Bag [223] modified the double ellipsoidal heat source into
an egg-shape configuration to capture the influence of molten metal. Parkitny and
Winczek [158] built up a tilted Gaussian distributed volumetric heat source to describe
the effect of the angle of laser. Piekarska and Kubiak [164] proposed a truncated
cone-cylinder volumetric heat source model for lasers symmetric in x-y directions.
Gajapathi et al. [64] presented an exponentially decaying Gaussian distribution heat
source in the thickness direction for modelling of electron beams.
Hybrid models by integrations of well-established heat source models for different
phenomena have been developed according to the superposition principle. Chowd-
hury et al. [32] reported a combination of Gaussian distribution model and conical
heat source model to study the keyhole mode. Yajun et al. [205] merged moving
point and line heat source model in the numerical simulation of the keyhole mode in
electron beam welding. Goyal et al. [75] analytically described the temperature dis-
tribution of PGMAW as a combination of solutions to Rosenthal’s point heat source
model and double ellipsoidal model. Ghosh et al. [69] combined Gaussian heat density
distribution and ellipsoidal heat source model to analyze the heat from the arc and
molten metal separately. Winczek [216] solved the temperature field to heat sources
with changeable directions by a straight segment method. Azar et al. [13] built a
relationship between the point heat source model and ellipsoidal heat source by a
11
so-called “discretely distributed heat source model” where the temperature field of
double ellipsoidal heat source was approximated by the summation of temperature
field of point heat sources positioning in a fixed distance in horizontal and vertical
directions.
Volumetric heat source models are usually more accurate with the careful selec-
tion of parameters. However, the parameters are difficult to be defined or evaluated
before welding [14, 224]. The geometry parameters of volumetric heat sources, such
as double ellipsoidal heat source, are nearly not possible directly obtained from mea-
surements and are usually via trial and error methods from experiments [14, 224]
or experience [10, 98]. Many efforts are made to achieve or reduce the unknown
geometries parameters of volumetric heat source models. Jia et al. [98] achieved ge-
ometry parameters of double ellipsoidal heat source model from multiple regression
and partial least-square regression analysis and verified the results from comparing
width penetration and peak temperature. Yadaiah and Bag [224] established the re-
lationship between the ratio of front and rear length and travel speed by least square
regression of polynomial equation method.Bag et al. [14] developed an adaptive vol-
umetric heat source model that does not need inputting of heat source parameters,
relying on the heat source diameter and the real-time weld pool size, overcoming the
disadvantage of the double ellipsoidal heat source model.
Because the geometry parameters of volumetric heat sources are usually unknown
before experiments, and it is barely possible to control the geometry of volumetric heat
inputs, the engineering expressions will not be established according to volumetric
heat source models.
Experiments
Temperature distribution of the whole field or some of the points can be measured
from thermocouples, camera, or estimation from microstructure.
Since the microstructure of weld bead is directly related to the thermal history,
12
specific temperatures can be estimated from microstructure distribution, such as the
maximum temperature of the particle at fusion line is melting temperature, and the
maximum temperature of the particle at heat affected zone line is phase transforma-
tion temperature [68, 75]. However, the transformation temperature is under uncer-
tainty of chemical composition, heating rate and so on, bringing error in temperature
estimation.
The temperature can be measured directly with thermocouples or thermal cam-
eras. Thermocouple, a device based on thermoelectric effect, is widely utilized to
measure the temperature at a certain point with time [8, 161], by attaching thermo-
couples on the workpiece. Thermal cameras, based on infrared radiation, are used
to measure the radiation of the weld pool to show the temperature of a range of
wavelengths. Chen and Gao[30] detected the size of molten pool on-the-fly with
a high-speed near-infrared sensitive camera. Lammlein et al. [118] determined the
temperature of shoulder edge temperature in friction stir welding (FSW). Heller et
al. [84] measured the temperature distribution of laser keyhole welding from thermog-
raphy images and verified his mathematical model of the combination of Rosenthal’s
two-dimensional and three-dimensional formula.
Analytical methods
The temperature distribution can be approached theoretically via solving the thermal
diffusion equation, such as the solution to moving point heat source proposed by
Rosenthal[175]. The analytical solutions are usually general, but limited to simple
geometry [194] and constant physical properties [56, 161, 216, 217].
Green function method is popular to express the temperature field [56, 81, 101,
158, 161, 198, 216, 217, 223], and could be conventionally applied to various heat
source configurations. Peng [161] presented a general solution for the transient tem-
perature field by a moving laser heat source of uniform distribution and validated with
experiments and FEM solutions. Van Elsen et al. [198] investigated the temperature
13
distribution of top-hat heat source or uniformly distributed heat source analytically
and numerically. In analytical solutions, Green function is applied to integrate the
instantaneous solution. Yadaiah et al. [223] analytically solved the temperature of
his proposed egg-configuration heat source model for GTAW and validated it with
experiments and simulations. Parkitny and Winczek [158] provided a solution to
temperature distribution under a tilted Gaussian distributed heat source consider
the angle of the heat source. Fachinotti et al. [56] analytically solved the temper-
ature field of a double-elliptical heat sourced and compared it with FEM solution.
Kidawa-Kukla [101] reported the solution to a moving heat source along an elliptical
trajectory on a rectangle solid.
The analytical solution can be approached by the integration of established an-
alytical solutions. Goyal et al. [75] combined the solutions to point heat source
and distributed heat source to model PGMAW and validated with experiments.
Ghosh et al. [69] predicted temperature distribution by modelling arc droplet and
surface heat loss independently. Sundqvista et al. [188] superposed Gaussian dis-
tributed heat source to describe the temperature field of any heat source profiles.
Heller et al. [84] analytically divided the workpiece plate into different regions accord-
ing to their relative position to the heat source, and integrated Rosenthal’s models
for two-dimensional heat flow and three-dimensional heat flow to capture the tem-
perature distribution of different region, and verified the integrated analytical model
with laser beam keyhole weldings.
Both the simulation and analytical methods attempt to solve the same thermal
diffusion equation in different approaches for the moving heat source problems. The
numerical solutions are more visualized and intuitive, directly illustrating the temper-
ature field, and can deal with complex material models, geometries and heat source
models. However, it is more time and computational resource consuming and brings
discretization error into the result. The analytical method can only deal with less
complex models than numerical approaches, and analytical solutions are usually ob-
14
scure with complex integrals and summations. However, the analytical methods are
accurate and general, independent of the specific values and easy to be transferred to
different problems, and consume less time and computational resources.
Simulations
The temperature field can be approached by numerical simulations with fewer as-
sumptions than analytical methods, bringing temperature-dependent variables into
numerical models and considering secondary phenomena, but usually with more time
or computational resource consumption.
To reduce the time and computational resource consumption of simulation, Ding et
al. [45] reported modelling the moving heat source problem as a quasi-steady problem
rather than a transient thermal problem and reduced the simulations time signifi-
cantly from 51 hours 24 minutes down to 10 minutes, by 99%.
There are typically five methods to model melting and solidification in the mov-
ing heat source simulations: apparent heat capacity method, effective heat capacity
method, heat integration method, source-based method, and enthalpy method, where
the enthalpy method is the most popular one. Li et al. [125] utilized the enthalpy
method, bringing enthalpy as a function of temperature into the governing equation,
including the latent heat, and considered thermal conductivity, convection coefficient,
and viscosity coefficient as piece-wise linear functions. Nisar et al. [152] carried out
FEM analysis of laser enamelling processes considering the phase transformation la-
tent heat employing enthalpy method. The latent heat of melting or solidification can
also be treated as an energy source in the energy balance equation. Anca et al. [10],
Bannour et al. [16] and Akbari et al. [8] treated latent heat as a term of heat source
or sink located at fusion line. Piekarska and Kubiak [164] considered the latent heat
of fusion into effective heat capacity based on the volumetric percentage of different
phases. Van Elson et al. [198]study of temperature under moving top-hat heat source
with FDM analysis, comparing different ways to accomplish latent heat; among the
15
five methods, the enthalpy method is the most stable, converges fast and incorpo-
rates the conservation of energy. Van Elsen investigated the influence of latent heat.
For large thermal conductivity, the effect of latent heat is little, and for low thermal
conductivity, the effect of latent heat causes sharping tail.
As addressed in the previous section, the physical properties are usually treated
as constant in analytical methods. In simulations, more realistic models can be es-
tablished for physical properties. Piece-wise linear functions are usually brought
to model the temperature-dependent properties, such as heat capacity[8], thermal
conductivity[8, 125]. Power-law functions are employed to describe the surface con-
vection coefficient [8, 14, 224]. Akbari et al. [8] utilized the piece-wise linear function
to describe the temperature-dependent heat capacity and heat conductivity, power-
law function to describe the surface convection coefficient and constant value models
to density and viscosity. Rouquette et al. [178] approximated the value of thermal
properties of multiphase coexistence state with the law of mixture of different phases.
Kubiak et al. [115] measured the realistic heat energy distribution of Yb: YAG laser
and proposed an interpolated heat source model for exact heat input distribution,
and compared different heat source models, Gaussian distributed heat source, top-
hat heat source, super-Gaussian heat source model. Roberts et al. [170] simulated the
transient temperature field in additive layer manufacturing processes (ALM), captur-
ing the material deposition of multilayers with the element birth and death method
(activation of new elements), where some thermal properties (enthalpy, density) are
functions of temperature, while some properties (conductivity) are not only functions
of temperature, but also depending on powder porosity. Chen et al. [28] assumed the
physical properties are of different constants for gas, liquid and solid, established a set
of transition rules for the transformation of the interface cells between three states.
Komanduri and Ho reported that appropriate choice of the average value of thermal
properties at intermediate temperature could compensate the assumption of constant
thermal properties and yield reasonable results close to experimental observations as
16
long as room-temperature thermal properties are not taken [104, 106].
Bannour et al. [16] investigated the influence of thermal properties by comparing
simulation results of temperature-dependent values and constant values. For density
and enthalpy, the temperature field varies slightly between temperature-dependent
values and constant values. For thermal conductivity and efficiency, the temperature
field away from the heat source is underestimated, and at the high-temperature region
around the heat source, a good estimation is performed.
The convective fluid flow in moving heat source processes enhances the heat transfer
in the weld pool that could be captured by simulation but difficult to adequately
describe. The surface tension force is the main drive force in molten metal flow and
is usually considered as a boundary condition on the contact surface[8, 16, 125]. The
buoyancy force is considered as a term in momentum balance in vertical direction [8,
16, 125, 172]. The electromagnetic force is considered a body force that is symmetric
on the top surface, balancing the momentum in three equations, promoting fluid flow
downward[125]. The convective molten fluid flow can be captured by modification
on thermal properties or heat source model. Anca et al. [10] reported that molten
metal flow in the welding pool could be treated as increasing conductivity. Nikam
and Jain [151] treated the conductivity of molten liquid 2.5 times of solid to capture
the Marangoni flow caused by surface tension. Yadaiah and Bag [223] established an
egg configuration heat source for capturing the influence of convective molten metal.
The meshless simulation technique is employed to moving heat source problems.
Pham [163] utilized the meshless element-free Galerkin method to approximate Rosen-
thal’s two-dimensional quasi-steady temperature field for moving point heat source
and Gaussian distributed heat source, and compared the temperature in centerline
with FEM solutions.
17
Blending techniques
In many transfer processes, the asymptotic solutions for extremely large or small
values of independent variables are known, while the solutions for non-asymptotic
regions are typically not in closed form. For these intermediate regions, simple and
accurate expressions can be obtained using the blending technique, which was first
proposed by Acrivos [3, 4] for the rate of heat and mass transfer in several lami-
nar boundary layer flows and was later extended and generalized by Churchill and
Usagi [34, 38] named CUE (Churchill-Usagi equation):
Y = (1 + Z n )1/n (1.4)
where Y and Z are expressions of asymptotic solutions of limiting values of the inde-
pendent variable, and n is an empirical number that could be achieved numerically or
experimentally. The proposed blending method is successfully applied to many prob-
lems, like heat transfer [35–37, 200], mass transfer [58], fluid dynamics [50]. The CUE
provides a new paradigm to obtain a general solution over the whole domain in terms
of simple, known, limiting solutions with a minimal degree of explicit empiricism,
which is typically caused by the additional introduction of the blending exponent n.
Besides blending, there are also some other methodologies to obtain global approx-
imation based on asymptotics for extreme values, such as asymptotic matching [159]
by adding inner and outer asymptotics minus the matching term, which is usually
used in perturbing differential equations.
1.3 Objectives
This work establishes predictive scaling expressions in the form of ideal solutions
timing correction factors, for crucial and practical thermal features under a moving
line heat source or Gaussian heat source. Some ideal solutions have been reported
based on the moving line heat source model, such as cooling time [192] and isotherm
width [190], and they are only valid for either “fast” or “slow” travel speed cases.
18
This work contributes ideal solutions to both “slow” and “fast” travel speed cases
for thirteen thermal features of practical applications, if have not been reported.
This work contributes modifications of blending to extend the scope of application
to non-power-law, non-crossing asymptotics, and develops a systematic approach for
two-dimensional blending. The proposed blending methods are practiced to establish
correction factors for ideal solutions. This work contributes correction factors to
ideal solutions to improve the usefulness to all cases covering “slow”, “fast” and
intermediate speeds. The work also contributes correction factors that depend on
two dimensionless variables to account for secondary phenomena. They are correction
factors for effects of surface heat losses for the isotherm width and its location, the
trailing length and the cooling rate, and for effects of heat source distributions for
the isotherm width on a thick plate.
The following objectives are fulfilled:
• Modify Churchill-Usagi 1-D blending equation systematic to extend its scope of

application and improve accuracy at intermediate regimes to generate explicit
scaling laws that predict characteristics of interest depending on one dimension-
less group.
• Develop predictive engineering expressions for characteristics related to isotherms

with an implement of the modified 1-D blending methodology proposed, in-
cluding: maximum isotherm width ymax and its location xmax , trailing length of
isotherm xb , leading length of isotherm xf , centerline cooling rate Ṫb , centerline
heating rate Ṫf , maximum temperature of a point in the cross-section Tmax and
transverse temperature gradient at the maximum isotherm width dTmax /dy.
Secondary thermal features are the aspect ratio A of the chosen isotherm and
melting efficiency ηm which is defined as the ratio of energy to melt the base
material to that absorbed by the workpiece, solidification time tsl which is im-
portant to the transformation of microstructures, cooling time from 800 ◦ C to
19
500 ◦ C, t8/5 , which is a key characteristic for steel processes, width of heat
affected zone ∆yHAZ .
• Propose a systematic 2-D blending methodology that generates explicit scal-

ing laws to predict characteristics of interest depending on two dimensionless
groups.
• Develop correction factors of the effects of surface heat loss for isotherm trailing
xb and centerline cooling rate Ṫb by implementing the proposed 2-D blending
methodology.
• Develop correction factors of the effects of surface heat loss for isotherm width
ymax by implementing the proposed 2-D blending methodology.
∗
• Develop correction factors of the size of heat source for isotherm width ymax
based on moving Gaussian heat source model by implementing the proposed
2-D blending methodology.
• Validate the proposed predictive formulae by comparing with data collected

from published papers for a wide range of sources, materials, processes, and
operating parameters.
1.4 Thesis outline
This dissertation includes chapters as follows:
• Chapter 2 proposes the modified 1-D blending methodology by introducing ex-

ponential modification term for non-crossing asymptotics. The implement of the
modified 1-D blending methodology yields engineering expressions for isotherm
half-width ymax under moving line heat source. A comprehensive survey of ex-
perimental results indicates a good agreement with the predictions resulting
from the proposed expression.
20
• Chapter 3 proposes modified 1-D blending methodology by introducing a tran-
sitional term for better accuracy in the intermediate region. Based on the
modified 1-D blending, the engineering expressions for thermal features of 12
magnitudes associated with a moving point heat source in a 2-D space are pre-
sented: location of maximum width, trailing length, centerline cooling rate,
leading length, centerline heating rate, maximum temperature, the gradient
of maximum temperature, aspect ratio, melting efficiency, cooling time from
800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, solidification time, the thickness of the heat-affected zone.
The expressions for cooling rate, isotherm length (xf − xb ), maximum tempera-
ture, heat-affected zone thickness, and isotherm aspect ratio are validated with
data collected from published papers.
• Chapter 4 proposes a special case of 2-D blending and presents correction fac-
tor of trailing length and centerline cooling rate to account for the effects of
surface heat losses based on the 2-D blending. The engineering expressions and
correct factors proposed are validated with data collected from published data
for welding, hard facing and additive manufacturing under water and air.
• Chapter 5 proposes a systematic approach to achieve 2-D blending and presents

correction factor of isotherm width and its location to account for the effects
of surface heat losses with the proposed 2-D blending approach. A comparison
illustrates acceptable agreements between the predictive equations and collected
data from published papers and welding simulation results for thermal residual
stresses.
• Chapter 6 develops correction factors of size of heat source for isotherm half-
width based on moving Gaussian heat source on thick plate, with the proposed
2-D blending approach. Comparisons of the proposed equations are conducted
with measurements from literatures.
21
• Chapter 7 summarizes the results and novelties in this dissertation and proposes
potential future work to continue this research.
• The appendix chapters list the supplementary materials to achieve the scaling
laws in the papers, including figures supporting blending results and Matlab
codes. The appendix chapters also proposed engineering expressions for catch-
ment efficiencies of Gaussian distributed powder cloud.
22
References
[3] A. Acrivos, “On the solution of the convection equation in laminar boundary
layer flows,” Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 457–465, 1962.
[4] A. Acrivos, “A rapid method for estimating the shear stress and the sepa-
ration point in laminar incompressible boundary-layer flows,” Journal of the
Aero/Space Sciences, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 314–315, 1960.
[8] M. Akbari, S. Saedodin, D. Toghraie, R. Shoja-Razavi, and F. Kowsari, “Ex-
perimental and numerical investigation of temperature distribution and melt
pool geometry during pulsed laser welding of Ti6Al4V alloy,” Optics & Laser
Technology, vol. 59, pp. 52–59, 2014.
[9] American Welding Society (AWS) D1 Committee, Structural welding code -
steel, American Welding Society (AWS) D1 Committee, 2015.
[10] A. Anca, A. Cardona, J. Risso, and V. D. Fachinotti, “Finite element modeling
of welding processes,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 688–
707, 2011.
[13] A. S. Azar, S. K. Ås, and O. M. Akselsen, “Determination of welding heat
source parameters from actual bead shape,” Computational Materials Science,
vol. 54, pp. 176–182, 2012.
[14] S. Bag, A. Trivedi, and A. De, “Development of a finite element based heat
transfer model for conduction mode laser spot welding process using an adap-
tive volumetric heat source,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 48,
no. 10, pp. 1923–1931, 2009.
[16] S. Bannour, K. Abderrazak, H. Mhiri, and G. Le Palec, “Effects of temperature-
dependent material properties and shielding gas on molten pool formation
during continuous laser welding of AZ91 magnesium alloy,” Optics & Laser
Technology, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 2459–2468, 2012.
[25] V. H. Bulsara, Y. Ahn, S. Chandrasekar, and T. N. Farris, “Polishing and
lapping temperatures,” Journal of Tribology, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 163–170, 1997.
[28] S. Chen, G. Guillemot, and C.-A. Gandin, “Three-dimensional cellular automaton-
finite element modeling of solidification grain structures for arc-welding pro-
cesses,” Acta Materialia, vol. 115, pp. 448–467, 2016.
[30] Z. Chen and X. Gao, “Detection of weld pool width using infrared imaging
during high-power fiber laser welding of type 304 austenitic stainless steel,”
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 74,
no. 9-12, pp. 1247–1254, 2014.
[31] J. Cheng and A. Kar, “Mathematical model for laser densification of ceramic
coating,” Journal of materials science, vol. 32, no. 23, pp. 6269–6278, 1997.
23
[32] S. Chowdhury, N. Yadaiah, S. M. Khan, R. Ozah, B. Das, and M. Muralidhar,
“A perspective review on experimental investigation and numerical modeling
of electron beam welding process,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 5, no. 2,
pp. 4811–4817, 2018.
[34] S. W. Churchill and R. Usagi, “A general expression for the correlation of rates
of transfer and other phenomena,” AIChE Journal, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 1121–
1128, 1972.
[35] S. W. Churchill, “Comprehensive correlating equations for heat, mass and
momentum transfer in fully developed flow in smooth tubes,” Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 109–116, 1977.
[36] S. W. Churchill, “Comprehensive, theoretically based, correlating equations
for free convection from isothermal spheres,” Chemical Engineering Commu-
nications, vol. 24, no. 4:6, pp. 339–352, 1983.
[37] S. W. Churchill and H. H. S. Chu, “Correlating equations for laminar and
turbulent free convection from a horizontal cylinder,” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 1049–1053, 1975.
[38] S. W. Churchill and R. Usagi, “A standardized procedure for the production
of correlations in the form of a common empirical equation,” Industrial &
[45] J. Ding, P. Colegrove, J. Mehnen, S. Williams, F. Wang, and P. S. Almeida, “A
computationally efficient finite element model of wire and arc additive man-
ufacture,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
vol. 70, no. 1-4, pp. 227–236, 2014.
[49] J. DuPont, “Dilution in fusion welding,” ASM handbook, vol. 6, pp. 115–121,
2011.
[50] F. Durst, S. Ray, B. Ünsal, and O. A. Bayoumi, “The development lengths
of laminar pipe and channel flows,” Journal of Fluids Engineering, vol. 127,
no. 6, pp. 1154–1160, 2005.
[51] R. P. Dutt and R. C. Brewer, “On the theoretical determination of the tem-
perature field in orthogonal machining,” International Journal of Production
Research, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 91–114, 1965.
[52] D. Dye, O. Hunziker, and R. C. Reed, “Numerical analysis of the weldability
of superalloys,” Acta Materialia, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 683–697, 2001.
[53] T. W. Eagar and N. S. Tsai, “Temperature fields produced by traveling dis-
tributed heat sources,” Welding Journal, vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 346–355, 1983.
[56] V. D. Fachinotti, A. A. Anca, and A. Cardona, “Analytical solutions of the
thermal field induced by moving double-ellipsoidal and double-elliptical heat
sources in a semi-infinite body,” International Journal for Numerical Methods
in Biomedical Engineerin, vol. 27, pp. 595–607, 2011.
24
[58] P. S. Fedkiw and J. Newman, “Mass-transfer coefficients in packed beds at
very low reynolds numbers,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 935–943, 1982.
[61] P. W. Fuerschbach and G. A. Knorovsky, “A study of melting efficiency in
plasma arc and gas tungsten arc welding,” Welding Research Supplement,
vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 287–297, 1991.
[64] S. S. Gajapathi, S. K. Mitra, and P. F. Mendez, “Controlling heat transfer in
micro electron beam welding using volumetric heating,” International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 54, no. 25-26, pp. 5545–5553, 2011.
[66] E. Gariboldi and B. Previtali, “High tolerance plasma arc cutting of commer-
cially pure titanium,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 160,
no. 1, pp. 77–89, 2005.
[68] A. Ghosh and H. Chattopadhyay, “Mathematical modeling of moving heat
source shape for submerged arc welding process,” The International Journal
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 69, no. 9-12, pp. 2691–2701, 2013.
[69] A. Ghosh, A. Yadav, and A. Kumar, “Modelling and experimental validation
of moving tilted volumetric heat source in gas metal arc welding process,”
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 239, pp. 52–65, 2017.
[73] J. Gockel, N. Klingbeil, and S. Bontha, “A closed-form solution for the ef-
fect of free edges on melt pool geometry and solidification microstructure in
additive manufacturing of thin-wall geometries,” Metallurgical and Materials
Transactions B, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 1400–1408, 2016.
[74] J. Goldak, A. Chakravarti, and M. Bibby, “A new finite element model for
welding heat sources,” Metallurgical Transactions B, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 299–
305, 1984.
[75] V. K. Goyal, P. K. Ghosh, and J. S. Saini, “Analytical studies on thermal
behaviour and geometry of weld pool in pulsed current gas metal arc welding,”
Journal of materials processing technology, vol. 209, no. 3, pp. 1318–1336, 2009.
[76] M. R. Grams and P. F. Mendez, “Scaling analysis of the thermal stress field
produced by a moving point heat source in a thin plate,” Journal of Applied
Mechanics, pp. 1–34, Sep. 2020.
[81] M. Haghpanahi, S. Salimi, P. Bahemmat, and S. Sima, “3-D transient analyti-
cal solution based on green’s function to temperature field in friction stir weld-
ing,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 37, no. 24, pp. 9865–9884, 2013.
[84] K. Heller, S. Kessler, F. Dorsch, P. Berger, and T. Graf, “Analytical description
of the surface temperature for the characterization of laser welding processes,”
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 106, pp. 958–969, 2017.
[85] H. Hemmer and Ø. Grong, “Prediction of penetration depths during electron
beam welding,” Science and technology of welding and joining, vol. 4, no. 4,
pp. 219–225, 1999.
25
[86] J. W. Hill, M. J. Lee, and I. J. Spalding, “Surface treatments by laser,” Optics
& Laser Technology, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 276–278, 1974.
[87] A. Hintze Cesaro and P. F. Mendez, “Models to predict hardness in the HAZ,”
Weld Magazine, pp. 42–55, 2019.
[89] Z. B. Hou and R. Komanduri, “General solutions for stationary/moving plane
heat source problems in manufacturing and tribology,” International Journal
of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 1679–1698, 2000.
[92] F. P. Incropera, D. P. DeWitt, T. L. Bergman, and A. S. Lavine, Fundamentals
of heat and mass transfer. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
[94] J. C. Jaeger, “Moving sources of heat and the temperature of sliding contacts,”
in Proceedings of the royal society of New South Wales, vol. 76, 1942, pp. 203–
224.
[98] X. Jia, J. Xu, Z. Liu, S. Huang, Y. Fan, and Z. Sun, “A new method to estimate
heat source parameters in gas metal arc welding simulation process,” Fusion
Engineering and Design, vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 40–48, 2014.
[99] T. Kasuya and N. Yurioka, “Prediction of welding thermal history by a com-
prehensive solution,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 72, no. 3, 107s–115s,
1993.
[101] J. Kidawa-Kukla, “Temperature distribution in a rectangular plate heated
by a moving heat source,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
vol. 51, pp. 865–872, 2008.
[102] K. Knothe and S. Liebelt, “Determination of temperatures for sliding contact
with applications for wheel-rail systems,” Wear, vol. 189, no. 1-2, pp. 91–99,
1995.
[103] F. Kolonits, “Analysis of the temperature of the rail/wheel contact surface
using a half-space model and a moving heat source,” Proceedings of the In-
stitution of Mechanical Engineers Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit,
vol. 230, no. 2, pp. 502–509, 2016.
[104] R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, “Thermal analysis of the arc welding pro-
cess : Part I . general solutions,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions
B, vol. 31B, no. 6, pp. 1353–1370, 2000.
[106] R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, “Thermal analysis of the laser surface transfor-
mation hardening process,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
vol. 44, no. 15, pp. 2845–2862, 2001.
[107] R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, “Unified approach and interactive program
for thermal analysis of various manufacturing processes with application to
machining,” Machining Science and Technology, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 143–176,
2009.
[112] S. Kou, “Simulation of heat flow during the welding of thin plates,” Metallur-
gical Transactions A, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 2025–2030, 1981.
26
[115] M. Kubiak, W. Piekarska, and S. Stano, “Modelling of laser beam heat source
based on experimental research of Yb : YAG laser power distribution,” Inter-
national Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 83, pp. 679–689, 2015.
[116] P. K. Kundu, I. M. Cohen, and D. R. Dowling, Fluid mechanics, Fifth. Waltham,
MA: Academic Press, 2012, isbn: 978-0-12-382100-3.
[118] D. H. Lammlein, D. R. DeLapp, P. A. Fleming, A. M. Strauss, and G. E.
Cook, “The application of shoulderless conical tools in friction stir welding:
An experimental and theoretical study,” Materials & Design, vol. 30, no. 10,
pp. 4012–4022, 2009.
[121] J. Lee, O. B. Ozdoganlar, and Y. Rabin, “An experimental investigation
on thermal exposure during bone drilling,” Medical Engineering & Physics,
vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 1510–1520, 2012.
[124] W.-B. Li, K. E. Easterling, and M. F. Ashby, “Laser transformation hardening
of steel-II. hypereutectoid steels,” Acta Metallurgica, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1533–
1543, 1986.
[125] Y. Li, Y.-h. Feng, X.-x. Zhang, and C.-s. Wu, “An improved simulation of
heat transfer and fluid flow in plasma arc welding with modified heat source
model,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 64, pp. 93–104, 2013.
[132] S. Malkin, “Thermal aspects of grinding: Part 2 – surface temperatures and
workpiece burn,” Journal of Engineering for Industry, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 1184–
1191, 1974.
[137] P. F. Mendez, K. E. Tello, and S. S. Gajapathi, “Generalization and commu-
nication of welding simulations and experiments using scaling analysis design
rules in welding design rules in engineering : Calibrated minimal representation
approach,” in Trends in Welding Research, Proceedings of the 9th International
Conference, ASM International, 2012, pp. 249–258.
[138] P. F. Mendez, “Advanced scaling techniques for the modeling of materials
processing,” in Industrial Practice, vol. 7, ASME, 2006, pp. 393–404, isbn:
978-0-7918-4358-1.
[141] P. F. Mendez, K. E. Tello, and T. J. Lienert, “Scaling of coupled heat transfer
and plastic deformation around the pin in friction stir welding,” Acta Materi-
alia, vol. 58, no. 18, pp. 6012–6026, 2010.
[149] V. Nemchinsky, “Temperature created by a moving heat source that heats
and melts the metal plate (plasma arc cutting),” Journal of Heat Transfer,
vol. 138, no. 12, p. 122 301, 2016.
[151] S. H. Nikam and N. K. Jain, “Finite element simulation of pre-heating effect on
melt pool size during micro-plasma transferred arc deposition process,” in IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, ser. IOP Conference
Series: IOP Publishing, vol. 389, 2018, p. 012 006.
27
[152] A. Nisar, M. J. J. Schmidt, M. A. Sheikh, and L. Li, “Three-dimensional
transient finite element analysis of the laser enamelling process and moving
heat source and phase change considerations,” Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, vol. 217,
no. 6, pp. 753–764, 2003.
[154] K. Ogawa, “Analysis of temperature distribution around moving heat source
in thin plate,” Journal of the Marine Engineering Society in Japan, vol. 22,
no. 4, pp. 257–262, 1987.
[158] R. Parkitny and J. Winczek, “Analytical solution of temporary temperature
field in half-infinite body caused by moving tilted volumetric heat source,”
[159] W. Paulsen, Asymptotic analysis and perturbation theory. CRC Press, 2013.
[160] V. Pavelic, R. Tanbakuchi, O. A. Uyehara, and P. S. Myers, “Experimental and
computed temperature histories in gas tungsten-arc welding of thin plates,”
Welding Research Supplement, vol. 48, pp. 295–305, 1969.
[161] Q. Peng, “An analytical solution for a transient temperature field during
laser heating a finite slab,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 40, no. 5-
6, pp. 4129–4135, 2016.
[163] X.-T. Pham, “Two-dimensional Rosenthal moving heat source analysis using
the meshless element free Galerkin method,” Numerical Heat Transfer, Part
A: Applications, vol. 63, no. 11, pp. 807–823, 2013.
[164] W. Piekarska and M. Kubiak, “Theoretical investigations into heat transfer
in laser-welded steel sheets,” Journal of thermal analysis and calorimetry,
vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 159–166, 2012.
[165] W. D. Pilkey and D. F. Pilkey, Peterson’s stress concentration factors. John
Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[170] I. A. Roberts, C. J. Wang, R. Esterlein, M. Stanford, and D. J. Mynors, “A
three-dimensional finite element analysis of the temperature field during laser
melting of metal powders in additive layer manufacturing,” International Jour-
nal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, vol. 49, no. 12-13, pp. 916–923, 2009.
[171] O. F. T. Roberts, “The theoretical scattering of smoke in a turbulent atmo-
sphere,” in Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, ser. Series A, Contain-
ing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character, vol. 104, Royal Society,
1923, pp. 640–654.
[172] M. Rohde, C. Markert, and W. Pfleging, “Laser micro-welding of aluminum
alloys: Experimental studies and numerical modeling,” The International Jour-
nal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 50, no. 1-4, pp. 207–215, 2010.
[174] D. Rosenthal, “Etude théorique du régime thermique pendant la soudure
à l’arc,” Congres National des Sciences Comptes Rendus Bruxelles, vol. 2,
pp. 1277–1292, 1935.
28
[175] D. Rosenthal, “The theory of moving sources of heat and its application to
metal treatments,” Transactions of the A.S.M.E., vol. 68, pp. 849–866, 1946.
[176] D. Rosenthal and R. Schmerber, “Thermal study of arc welding,” Welding
journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2–8, 1938.
[178] S. Rouquette, J. Guo, and P. Le Masson, “Estimation of the parameters of a
Gaussian heat source by the Levenberg–Marquardt method: Application to the
electron beam welding,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 46,
no. 2, pp. 128–138, 2007.
[179] N. N. Rykalin, Calculation of heat flow in welding. Mashgis, Moscow, Russia:
Mashgis, 1951.
[187] Stock Drive Products / Sterling Instrument, Handbook of METRIC drive com-
ponents D805. 2010.
[188] J. Sundqvist, A. F. H. Kaplan, L. Shachaf, and C. Kong, “Analytical heat
conduction modelling for shaped laser beams,” Journal of Materials Processing
[190] D. T. Swift-Hook and A. E. F. Gick, “Penetration welding with lasers,” Weld-
ing Research Supplement, vol. 52, no. 11, 492s–499s, 1973.
[192] Technical Committee CEN/TC 121 Welding, Welding - recommendations for
welding of metallic materials - Part 2 : Arc welding of ferritic steels, Technical
Committee CEN/TC 121 Welding, 2001.
[194] K. Tello, U. Duman, and P. F. Mendez, “Scaling laws for the welding arc,
weld penetration and friction stir welding,” in Trends in Welding Research,
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference, The Material Information
Society, ASM International, 2009, pp. 172–181, isbn: 9781615030026.
[195] R Trivedi, S. David, M. Eshelman, J. Vitek, S. Babu, T Hong, and T DebRoy,
“In situ observations of weld pool solidification using transparent metal-analog
systems,” Journal of applied physics, vol. 93, no. 8, pp. 4885–4895, 2003.
[198] M. Van Elsen, M. Baelmans, P. Mercelis, and J.-P. Kruth, “Solutions for mod-
elling moving heat sources in a semi-infinite medium and applications to laser
material processing,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 50,
no. 23-24, pp. 4872–4882, 2007.
[200] C. S. W. and C. H. H.S., “Correlating equations for laminar and turbulent
free convection from a vertical plate,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, vol. 18, no. 11, 1975.
[205] Y. Wang, P. Fu, Y. Guan, Z. Lu, and Y. Wei, “Research on modeling of heat
source for electron beam welding fusion-solidification zone,” Chinese Journal
of Aeronautics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 217–223, 2013.
[215] H. A. Wilson, “On convection of heat,” in Proceedings of the Cambridge Philo-
sophical Society, vol. 12, 1904, pp. 406–423.
29
[216] J. Winczek, “Analytical solution to transient temperature field in a half-infinite
body caused by moving volumetric heat source,” International Journal of Heat
and Mass Transfer, vol. 53, no. 25-26, pp. 5774–5781, 2010.
[217] J. Winczek, A. Modrzycka, and E. Gawrońska, “Analytical description of the
temperature field induced by laser heat source with any trajectory,” Procedia
Engineering, vol. 149, pp. 553–558, 2016.
[219] G. Wood and P. F. Mendez, “First order prediction of bead width and height
in coaxial laser cladding,” in Proceedings of Numerical Analysis of Weldability,
Graz, Austria, 2015.
[223] N. Yadaiah and S. Bag, “Development of egg-configuration heat source model
in numerical simulation of autogenous fusion welding process,” International
Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 86, pp. 125–138, 2014.
[224] N. Yadaiah and S. Bag, “Effect of heat source parameters in thermal and
mechanical analysis of linear GTA welding process,” ISIJ international, vol. 52,
no. 11, pp. 2069–2075, 2012.
[227] G. Yu, R. J. Anderson, T. Maekawa, and N. M. Patrikalakis, “Efficient sim-
ulation of shell forming by line heating,” International Journal of Mechanical
Sciences, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 2349–2370, 2001.
[228] L. Zhang, B. L. Tai, G. Wang, K. Zhang, S. Sullivan, and A. J. Shih, “Thermal
model to investigate the temperature in bone grinding for skull base neuro-
surgery,” Medical Engineering & Physics, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1391–1398, 2013.
30
Chapter 2
Width of thermal features induced

by a 2-D moving heat source
2.1 Abstract
Novel expressions in explicit form are presented for the estimation of the width of the
bead, location of heat affected zone, and the width of any chosen isotherm in materials
processes such as welding, additive manufacturing, laser heat treatment, and cutting.
These expressions are applicable when the substrate is relatively thin (as in most cases
of welding and additive manufacturing of walls), or when the heat source penetrates
deeply into the substrate (as in keyhole mode in laser or electron beam welding). The
explicit expressions are based on the widely used Rosenthal 2-D solution, which yields
results of the correct order of magnitude compared to experiments for a broad range
of materials, processes, and parameters. Asymptotic analysis was applied and a new
blending technique was developed to arrive to explicit expressions within 7% of the
exact solution. The key dimensionless group in this case is the Rosenthal number Ro,
which enables the blending of solutions corresponding to fast and slow heat sources.
A comprehensive survey of experimental results indicates a good agreement with the
predictions resulting from the proposed expression.
31
Table 2.1: Notation
Variables Unit Description
Ac m2 Cross sectional area of melt

c J kg−1 K−1 Specific heat of the substrate
d m Thickness of the substrate
dc,2D m Maximum thickness to approximate as
2D
dc,h m Minimum thickness to ignore convec-
tion
h W m−2 K−1 Convection coefficient on top surface
h′ W m−2 K−1 Convection coefficient on bottom sur-
face
i0 J kg−1 Enthalpy at the far temperature
il J kg−1 Enthalpy at the liquidus temperature
isl J kg−1 Latent heat of fusion
k W m−1 K−1 Thermal conductivity of the substrate
q W Power absorbed by substrate
q′ Wm−1 Intensity of line heat source
r m Distance from the heat source
t s Time
T K Temperature
T0 K Far temperature or preheat
Tc K Temperature of interest
U m s−1 Travel speed of the moving heat source
x, y m Cartesian coordinates
xmax m Location of maximum isotherm width
ymax m Isotherm half-width
Greek symbols
α m2 s−1 Thermal diffusivity of the substrate
Continued on next page
32
Table 2.1 – continued from previous page
γ 1 Euler–Mascheroni constant
ρ kg m−3 Density of the substrate
σ m Distribution parameter of the heat
source
ηm 1 Melting efficiency
Dimensionless
Groups
Bi Biot number
Pe Peclet number
Ro Rosenthal number
Ry Rykalin number
St Stefan number
Superscripts
∗
Dimensionless value
b Asymptotic behavior
+
Correction for intermediate regions
Subscripts
III Regime III (large Ro, fast)
IV Regime IV (small Ro, slow)
Acronyms
AM Additive manufacturing
EBW Electron beam welding
FSW Friction stir welding
GMAW Gas metal arc welding
GTAW Gas tungsten arc welding
HAZ Heat affected zone
33
LBW Laser beam welding

SAW Submerged arc welding
SMAW Shielded metal arc welding
2.2 Introduction
In the thermal analysis of moving heat source problems, the estimation of the size and
shape of isotherms is essential because it determines the extent of thermal alterations
in the base metal and resulting properties. For example, in the field of welding, the
size and shape of the melting isotherm determine critical features such as weld seam
geometry and metallurgical dilution. For the case of steel, the maximum width of
the isotherm of austenization temperature (Ac1 ) has a large influence in the reach of
the heat affected zone (HAZ), which has a decisive effect on joint properties. Despite
the importance of prediction of isotherm width and the numerous previous efforts to
calculate it, there is no engineering expression to anticipate it in typical conditions,
and in practice engineers typically resort to previous experience or trial and error
when developing parameters for moving heat sources.
Previous efforts to predict the width of isotherms fall into three main categories:
analytical approaches [53, 140, 179, 190, 213], measurements from experiments [54,
62, 71, 155, 176], and numerical simulations [12, 90, 146, 160, 163, 183].
Analytical approaches of isotherm width for extreme (asymptotic) cases have been
investigated before; however, published expressions focus only on one extreme [145,
213], or both extremes [84, 88, 190], neglecting the intermediate regime. Paradox-
ically, most real-life applications are in the intermediate regime for which there is
currently no available closed-form solution.
Case-by-case results of experiments with different processing parameters and par-
34
ent materials are insufficient to inform novel applications. Also, empirical equations
in open literature [70, 96, 190, 213] are only valid for specific processes and limited
to narrow ranges of operating parameters for which empirical parameters were fitted.
The practical application of numerical simulations is frequently restricted by the
need of specialized software, demand of computational skills, and the need to consider
parameters that are difficult to measure in real operating situations. Numerical sim-
ulations are seldom part of standards the way explicit expressions are, and are often
difficult to implement into metamodels, while explicit expressions like those devel-
oped here can readily be assembled into larger models. The intuitive and pedagogical
advantage of explicit expressions is often challenging to obtain with simulations.
The work presented here is part of a broader research program aimed at identi-
fying moving heat source features and presenting practical and accurate predictive
expressions useful to practitioners. The overall program is based on the understand-
ing that many important aspects of complex problems such as welding and additive
manufacturing can be treated using a minimal representation that captures only the
dominant physics, with the secondary physics included as correction factors. This
approach is often used in all engineering disciplines at an intuitive level, and a formal
implementation is described in [134, 137, 140, 141, 218].
The predictive equations proposed in this investigation were developed within the
framework of the broader program and also consist of closed-form asymptotic solutions
and correction factors to account for intermediate cases. In this work, the asymptotic
cases are based on Rosenthal’s 2-D solution [176], also called the “thin plate” solution
or “line heat source” solution. This solution is accurate enough to be used routinely
used in practice for a wide range of materials and problems including arc welding [62,
160, 176, 213], laser and electron beam welding [73, 85, 190], metal cutting [66, 149],
thermal forming of shells [227], and has even been adapted to mass transfer [171].
Due to its fundamental nature, the expressions developed in this work can be used
for the estimation of heat source efficiency, optimization of processing parameters, or
35
determination of resulting material properties in a simple and economical manner in
many applications, including welding with most techniques, additive manufacturing,
laser heat treating, grinding, and machining. In addition, the effect of processing
parameters and their interplay are displayed explicitly, bringing understanding and
intuition for the physical phenomena involved.
2.3 Governing equation
The idealized model considered in this work consists of a point heat source of intensity
q which moves with constant velocity along a straight path on an infinite 2-D domain
of constant thermophysical properties. The 2-D domain represents in practice a
substrate of thickness d which can be either very thin with a point heat source on the
surface, or of any thickness with the heat source becoming a line of constant linear
heat intensity q ′ = q/d penetrating the full thickness, as represented in Figure 2.1.
Surface heat losses by convection and radiation can be taken into account easily when
the substrate is thin. It will be shown later that beyond certain thickness (typical
of many processes such as welding) surface heat losses are negligible compared to
conduction in the substrate.
y
y x
q
x
q
d
d
(a) (b)
Figure 2.1: Isotherms for a 2-D point heat source of intensity q on a substrate of
thickness d. The domain is −∞ < x < ∞, −∞ < y < ∞ and there are no gradients
in z. The 2D behavior is approximated in thin plates (a) or thick plates with the
heat input distributed uniformly along the thickness (b).
Except for the start and stop stages, the moving heat source is in a convenient
36
pseudo-steady state, captured with an Eulerian formulation with the heat source
considered fixed and the substrate moving along the x-axis in the negative direction.
The governing equation in this case is:
∂2T ∂2T U ∂T h + h′
+ = − + (T − T0 ) (2.1)
∂x2 ∂y 2 α ∂x kd
with the following boundary conditions:
∂T q
= − as r → 0 (2.2)
∂r 2πrkd
T = T0 as r → ∞ (2.3)
p
where x, y are the coordinates defined in Figure 2.1, r = x2 + y 2 , T (x, y) is the
temperature at each point, U is the relative velocity between the heat source and
the substrate, h and h′ are the effective convection coefficients on the top and bot-
tom surface (they also account for radiation in an approximate way), α and k are
the thermal diffusivity and thermal conductivity of the substrate, d is the substrate
thickness, q is the rate of heat (W) absorbed by the substrate, which accounts for the
thermal efficiency of the process, and T0 is the uniform temperature of the substrate
far from the heat source.
In Equation 2.1, the surface heat losses are be approximated as volumetric losses, in
a way similar to the study of fins [19]. This is an accurate approximation for substrates
thin enough as to have a small Biot number Bi= (h+h′ )d/k. This condition is common
in practical processes such as arc welding; for example, a representative weld would
have surface heat losses h + h′ of the order of 20 W/m2 K (natural convection in air)
and a thermal conductivity of 50 W/mK (steel). In these conditions, a large substrate
thickness such as 100 mm still would yield a small Biot number of 0.04.
This problem was first solved by Wilson in 1904 [215], and it was solved indepen-
dently again by Rosenthal [175–177] in the 1940s, with a focus on welding. Compre-
hensive reviews of these solutions are in [27, 78, 145]. The solution to Equation 2.1
with the boundary conditions of Equation 2.2 and Equation 2.3 is:
37
 s 
2 ′
q Ux U h+h 
T (x, y) = T0 + exp − K0  r + (2.4)
2πkd 2α 2α kd
where K0 is the modified Bessel function of second kind and zero order. This equation
provides the temperature value for each point in the substrate. The singularity at
the origin (r = 0) is a consequence of assuming the heat source is concentrated in an
infinitesimal area.
2.4 Normalization and dimensional analysis
The analytical solution of Equation 2.4 can be expressed more concisely in dimen-
sionless form as:
√
T ∗ (x∗ , y ∗) = exp (−x∗ ) K0 r ∗ 1 + h∗ (2.5)
where
2πkd (T − T0 )
T∗ = (2.6)
q
2
4α (h + h′ )
h∗ = (2.7)
kdU 2
Ux
x∗ = (2.8)
2α
Uy
y∗ = (2.9)
2α
Ur
r∗ = (2.10)
2α
∗
In Equations 2.5-2.9, the superscript indicates a dimensionless quantity, con-
sistent with [43, 139, 140] and other modern literature. Equation 2.5 involves four
dimensionless groups: two independent variables x∗ , y ∗ (r ∗ is not independent), the
dependent variable T ∗ (x∗ , y ∗), and the parameter h∗ associated with surface heat
losses. Normalization of spatial variables x∗ and y ∗ is similar to the definition of
Peclet number in convection heat transfer, representing the ratio of the rate of ad-
vection to that of conduction mechanisms.
38
The number of dimensionless groups obtained is consistent with the number ex-
pected from applying dimensional analysis theory [24]. Equation 2.4 involves nine
magnitudes with units: the two independent variables x, y, the dependent variable
T (x, y), and six problem parameters T0 , q/d,k,U, α, and h + h′ . The groups q/d and
h + h′ are considered together because they never appear separately in this analysis.
There are four independent units for the magnitude with dimension (m, kg, s, ◦ C)
and the number of dimensionless groups is 9 − 4 − 1 = 4 (the “-1” on the left hand
side appears because no temperature must be measured in absolute terms [210]).
When considering the maximum width of isotherm T ∗ = Tc∗ , the four dimensionless
∗
groups are constrained by Equation 2.5 and by the condition ymax = max(y ∗), leaving
only two degrees of freedom. For practical reasons, and for consistency with previous
literature, one of the degrees of freedom will be h∗ , and the other the Rosenthal
number (Ro), first proposed by Fuerschbach et al. [62], who used it to collapse onto a
single curve several measurements with various welding methods and base materials.
The expression of the Rosenthal number is:
q 1
Ro = = ∗ (2.11)
2πkd (Tc − T0 ) Tc
where the factor of 1/2π is included to simplify the final expressions detailed below.
This definition is consistent with the dimensionless groups of [62, 85, 160, 186, 190].
Similarly to the Rykalin number (Ry) [140, 207], the Rosenthal number can also
be interpreted as a Peclet number Pe = UL/α where the characteristic length L =
Q”/ (2πρc∆T ) is related to the amount of heat deposited per unit length of travel and
unit thickness of substrate Q” = q/(Ud) and the heat absorbed by the substrate by
heating the material next to the weld (within a distance L from the centerline) by an
amount ∆T = Tc − T0 . The Peclet number relates the effect of advection relative to
conduction and therefore a high Ro value can be interpreted as a “fast heat source”
where advection dominates over conduction, and a low Ro value can be interpreted as
a “slow heat source” with heat transfer dominated by conduction. The dimensionless
39
groups Ro and Ry are related to each other as
Ry
Ro = (2.12)
d∗
where
Ud
d∗ = (2.13)
2α
2.5 Limitations of idealized model
The idealizations that result in Equation 2.4, enable for a much desired practical
formula. Fortunately, the gains in practicality come at a relatively low cost in terms
of accuracy. The most important simplifications have been addressed in previous
research indicating that the idealizations are consistent with most practical problems.
Four idealizations are reviewed here: the effect of a finite heat source, the effect of
temperature on thermophysical properties, the effect of latent heat, and the effect of
surface heat losses. The effects of more complex phenomena such as convective flows
during melting involve multiple additional physics and new dimensionless groups, and
deserve a special treatment such as [169].
2.5.1 Effect of finite heat source
Equation 2.4 considers that the heat source is concentrated in a point, contradicting
the reality that all heat sources have a finite size. The effect of finite heat sources is
noticeable when the heat source is larger than a critical value. A finite heat source can
have many different distributions of surface heat intensity [144, 198] or volumetric heat
intensity [64, 74]. Here, we consider a circular gaussian surface distribution which
includes the additional parameter of distribution σ as the next step in complexity
beyond a point heat source. It is reasonable to expect that heat sources other than
gaussian, but of similar size will have comparable thresholds for separating point-like
behavior from distributed behavior. Gaussian heat sources were studied for thick
substrates in [39, 53] and intermediate thickness in [117, 133]. The expression of a
40
circular gaussian surface heat source is:

r2
q”(x, y) = q”max exp − 2 (2.14)
2σ
where q”max = q/(2πσ 2 ) and σ is the standard deviation of Gaussian distribution.

A preliminary numerical analysis using Matlab and COMSOL Multiphysics indi-
cates that the maximum width assuming a point heat source is overestimated with
an error smaller than 10% compared to a Gaussian heat source for 0.1<Ro<100:
Uσ 1 + 2Ro ∗
σ∗ = ∗
< σc∗ = 0.6 ybmax < 0.6 yb (2.15)
2α 1 + Ro max
∗
where ymax is the dimensionless half-width of an isotherm, explained in detail later in
∗
this paper and expressed explicitly in Equation 2.25. The criteria 0.6(1 + 2Ro)/(1 + Ro)b
ymax
∗
agrees with the simulation results and could be simplified to 0.6ymax as a conserva-
tive rule-of-thumb (σ < 0.6ymax). The derivation of Equation 2.15 is included in
Appendix 2.C. For the case of very fast moving heat sources (Ro≫1), this criterion
might be too conservative and is the subject of current research.
2.5.2 Effect of substrate thickness
When the heat source is a line of uniform intensity through the thickness of the
substrate, if the intensity of the line heat source q ′ is constant through the thickness
and surface heat losses are negligible, the substrate thickness is irrelevant. This
condition also applies approximately for full penetration welds and for deep keyhole
welds with partial penetration, in which the heat source is a segment; in this case the
length of the line heat source is the keyhole penetration.
When the heat source is a point applied on the surface of a plate of finite thickness,
3D effects will exist near the heat source, but 2D conditions will exist further from
the heat source. The 3D effects on maximum width of an isotherm are smaller for
thinner substrates. A comparison of the 2D solution against the exact solution for
plates of intermediate thickness was performed in [146]; following this work, the error
41
of in using the 2D for a point heat source on the surface of a finite plate is an
underestimation smaller than 5% for 0.2 < Ro < 100 when
d∗ < d∗c,2D ≈ 1/4 ymax

∗
(2.16)
2.5.3 Effect of temperature dependence on thermophysical

properties
Equation 2.4 assumes that the thermophysical properties of the substrate are con-
stant. Real materials have temperature-dependent properties, and this commonly use
approximation must be assessed for practical cases. This assessment requires numer-
ical methods and has been explored for the case of melt pool length in 304 stainless
steels [20], showing that constant properties assessed at 1000 K result in errors within
±6.5%. For estimates of maximum width of weld pool in mild steel (Tmelt ≈ 1500◦ C)
and heat affected zone width (THAZ ≈ 727◦C), the errors of assuming constant proper-
ties were approximately 5% and 2%, respectively, for all values of thermal properties
in the temperature range of 400◦ C to 1300◦ C [106].
In this work, when effective thermophysical properties of the substrate needed to
be calculated, they were obtained as detailed in Appendix 2.A.
2.5.4 Effect of melting
For the case of welding, where melting is involved, the assumption of constant ther-
mophysical properties cannot account for the variations associated with the latent
heat of phase change. Melting also introduces convective heat transfer in the melt.
The effect of convection has been studied extensively, for example [114, 156], and
captured with scaling laws based on three dimensionless groups (Marangoni, Prandtl,
and aspect ratio of cross section) [169]. These convective flows affect mostly the shape
of the fusion line, often captured by width and depth. The effect of convective flows
is less important in highly conductive materials (e.g. aluminum) and in small welds.
Currently, it is known than in aluminum and steels with low sulfur or low oxygen
42
contents, weld are typically wider and shallower than predicted, while in steels with
higher sulfur or oxygen welds are narrower and deeper. There is no general rule to
assess when convective flows affect estimates of width and depth, and no attempt has
been made on quantifying the magnitude of departure from the ideal case. A more
comprehensive analysis is the focus of ongoing research. Other effects of melting
also include the depression of the free surface [136], and impingement from metal
transferred from the electrode [95].
The effect of latent heat on moving heat sources can be tackled with different nu-
merical methods such as the apparent heat capacity method [40], the source based
method [199], and the enthalpy approach [147]. The dimensionless group that ac-
counts for latent heat is the Stefan number:
St = c(Tm − T0 )/isl (2.17)
where isl is the latent heat of fusion. Larger Stefan numbers indicate a relatively
smaller influence of the latent heat. Typical values for 304 stainless steel are St≈4.3
(properties from [57]), for mild steel St≈3.7 (properties from [55]), for Ti-6Al-4V,
St≈3.2 (properties from [198]) and for aluminum St≈ 1.5 (properties from [54]).
Ushio et al. [197] explored the influence of latent heat in mild steel and showed that
the main effect on the temperature profile is to delay the point where isotherm width
reaches a maximum (increasing the magnitude of xm using the notation of [207], with
ym essentially unaffected. Numerical work on Ti-6Al-4V by Van Elsen et al. [198] also
concluded that the influence of latent heat is small for Ti-6Al-4V, except for the case
of a loose power bed.
2.5.5 Effect of surface heat losses
The surface of the substrate typically exchanges heat with the surroundings via con-
vection and radiation. These surface heat losses act in parallel with the heat conduc-
tion through the bulk of the substrate. When the surface heat losses are low enough,
43
or when the substrate is thick enough, surface heat losses can be neglected. Asymp-
totic analysis indicates that the error in isotherm width when assuming an adiabatic
surface is an overestimation below 10% when:
h π n i−1/n
h∗ < h∗c = 0.2 1 + Ro2 (2.18)
2e
where h∗c is the threshold ensuring an error below 10% in the estimation of isotherm
width and n = 0.9405. Equation 2.18 is derived in Appendix 2.D. This criterion can
be expressed in dimensional form in terms of plate thickness:
20α2 (h + h′ ) h π
2
n i1/n
d > dc,h = 1 + Ro (2.19)
kU 2 2e
This condition is typically met in electron beam and laser beam welding in keyhole
mode where the plate is usually relatively thick and velocities are large, arc welding
of steel of plate thicker than about 0.2 mm and aluminum plate thicker than 0.7
mm (assuming U=10 mm/s and h + h′ =100 W/m2 K), and most other practical cases
with moderate convection coefficient. Surface heat losses become relevant in problems
with enhanced heat transfer such as in-service weld repairs (e.g. “hot tapping”), and
underwater wet welding in which liquid flow causes strong convective cooling, even
in relatively thick material.
This paper focuses on the cases when surface heat losses can be neglected, where
the solution to the governing equations (Equation 2.4) reduces to:

q Ux Ur
T = T0 + exp − K0 (2.20)
2πkd 2α 2α
2.6 Asymptotic analysis
When surface heat losses are neglected, the geometry of isotherms in dimensionless
space depends only on the Rosenthal number, as illustrated in Figure 2.2. The value
of Ro can vary between zero and infinity, defining two asymptotic regimes: Regime
III, corresponding to large values of Ro, and Regime IV with small values of Ro,
44
representing the high-speed and low-speed limits of the problem. The naming of
regimes is consistent with [140, 206, 207], where Regimes I and II are the 3D (thick
substrate) equivalents of 2D Regimes III and IV.
ymax
Ro = 2 Ro = 1 Ro = 0.5 x
Figure 2.2: Isotherms corresponding to Ro = 0.5, 1, and 2. For large Ro (Regime III,
fast) the isotherms are elongated, and for small Ro (Regime IV, slow), the isotherms
are rounder and narrower.
The point of maximum width of the isotherm is located with two coordinates. In
cartesian coordinates, the maximum width would occur at (x∗m , ym
∗
); however, for this
analysis, it is convenient to consider a hybrid set of coordinates (x∗ , r ∗ ), where r ∗ is
in polar coordinates, yielding the following coupled equations:
1
= exp (−x∗max ) K0 (rmax
∗
) (2.21)
Ro
∂T ∗ ∗ ∗ x∗max ∗
= − exp (−xmax ) K0 (rmax ) + ∗ K1 (rmax ) = 0 (2.22)
∂x∗ x∗∗ =x∗∗max rmax
y =ymax
Equation 2.21 corresponds to the constraint given by Equation 2.20 at a selected

isotherm T = Tc , and Equation 2.22 corresponds to the zero-slope condition at a max-
imum width. The asymptotic analysis of these equations is detailed in Appendix 2.B,
resulting in:
r
π
yb∗ maxIII (Ro) = Ro for Regime III (2.23)
2e

yb∗ maxIV (Ro) = 2 exp(−γ) exp −Ro−1 for Regime IV (2.24)
where γ = 0.5772 . . . is the Euler Mascheroni constant, and the symbol b indicates an
asymptotic behavior. These asymptotic approximations are illustrated in Figure 2.3.
45
Equation 2.23 is consistent with similar asymptotic analysis in [84, 145, 179, 190] for
fast moving heat sources, and Equation 2.24 is consistent with [84, 190] for slow mov-
ing heat sources. The asymptotic behavior of ymax is a power law in Regime III (fast)
and an exponential dependence, not a power law, in Regime IV (slow).
105
Equation 2.23
Equations 2.21 and 2.22

100
Equation 2.24
10-5
10-10
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
∗
Figure 2.3: Dimensionless maximum isotherm half-width ymax as a function of Ro.
Equation 2.23 and Equation 2.24 are asymptotic behaviors represented with thinner
lines. The thicker solid line represents numerical calculations obtained by solving
Equation 2.21 and Equation 2.22. The dashed line represents the modified
asymptote
−1
in Regime III, which includes the modification factor exp −Ro . The blended
solution is undistinguishable from the numerical solution (thick solid line)
2.7 Blending of asymptotic solutions
The simple expressions obtained for each asymptotic regime are less accurate for
intermediate values (Ro=O(1)). The powerful methodology of blending proposed
in [34] and used in [140, 207] is not able to blend Equation 2.23 and Equation 2.24
46
because they do not cross, which is an essential requirement [34]. The extended
blending technique proposed in [206] is used here. This extended technique is general,
and useful for problems beyond maximum isothermal width, with non-crossing or
non-power-law asymptotic behavior.
The extended blending technique consists of multiplying one of the non-crossing
asymptotic functions by the factor exp(aRob ) where a and b are constants (positive
or negative), and then performing a standard blending technique. This approach
forces the asymptotic functions to cross at an intermediate point without affecting
their asymptotic behavior, thus enabling a standard blending approach. A similar
approach was used in [58] to blend mass transfer limited Sherwood numbers for packed
beds with the introduction of an exponential dependence on Reynolds number. This
methodology is limited to asymptotic behaviors in which the asymptotic behavior is
the same as or weaker than exponential.
In this work, the modification was applied to the asymptote for Regime III (rep-
resented graphically in dashed line in Figure 2.3) yielding the following blending
expression:
+
∗
ymax (Ro) ≈ yb∗max (Ro) =
n 1/n
= yb∗ maxIII (Ro) exp −Ro−1 + yb∗maxIV (Ro)n (2.25)
This choice of blending is convenient because by choosing a = b = −1, the exponen-

tial factor results in a common factor with Regime IV, helping simplify the resulting
expression, and having only n as the adjustment variable in the optimization.
The optimal value of n is determined with the same optimization procedure detailed
in [140], by minimizing the absolute maximum error of estimation compared to the
value of ymax calculated by solving numerically the system of Equation 2.21 and
Equation 2.22 over a wide range of Ro. The error has the same definition as in [137,
139, 140], and it is equivalent to the standard form of relative error when the error is
47
small:
+
yb∗ max
error = ln ∗ (2.26)
y max
For the calculation of ymax , the error depends only on Ro and n. Figure 2.4
illustrates the error as a function of Ro for different values of n. This figure also shows
that the error tends to zero in the asymptotic extremes; this is not by coincidence,
but an essential property of the blending methodology. Figure 2.5 illustrates the
maximum absolute value of error (over all Ro) as a function of n. The sharp minimum
is because the maximum error can be positive (for n below the optimum), or negative
(for n above the optimum). For the optimum value n =1.407, the absolute value of
the maximum error is below 6.8% over the whole domain of Ro (0 < Ro < ∞).
10
n = 1.407
n = 1.507
n = 1.307
5
Error (%)
-5
-10
10-2 100 102
Ro
Figure 2.4: Blending error of dimensionless maximum isotherm half-width ymax as a

function of Ro for the blending parameter n at or near the optimal value of 1.407.
48
20
n = 1.407
15
Maximum error (%)
10
5
1
n
Figure 2.5: Maximum blending error as a function of the blending parameter n. The
maximum error reaches its minimum, 6.8% at n =1.407.
2.7.1 Correction factors
Practical engineering expressions often have the form of a simple formula that provides
a rough prediction accompanied by one or more correction factors. This is possible in
this work too, and the correction factors addressing the effect of travel speed can be
calculated explicitly. Correction factors addressing the simplifications beyond travel
speed, addressed above, require further work, which is the focus of current research.
Because the formulation used in this work has two asymptotic extremes (high and
low Ro), there are two simple formulae associated with each. The correction factors
associated with the maximum isotherm half-width ymax can be derived directly by
49
rearranging Equation 2.25:
( " #n )1/n
+
n b
y ∗
max (Ro)
ymax ≈ ybmax = ybmaxIII exp −Ro−1 + ∗ IV =
b
y maxIII (Ro)
= ybmaxIII fymaxIII (Ro) (2.27)
( " #n )1/n
+ yb∗ maxIII (Ro) exp −Ro−1
ymax ≈ ybmax = ybmaxIV 1 + =
yb∗ max (Ro)
IV
= ybmaxIV fymaxIV (Ro) (2.28)
where the optimal blending parameter n = 1.407 is the same for Equations 2.27
and 2.28.
Equations 2.27 and 2.28 are exactly equivalent and they are the same approxima-
tion to the exact solution, but based on the asymptotic solutions for Regime III and
Regime IV, respectively. By substituting the asymptotic behavior in these equations,
a practical closed-form for the correction factors can be obtained:
( "r #n )1/n
8e exp(−γ)
fymaxIII (Ro) = exp(−Ro−1 ) 1 + ≈
π Ro
" 1.407 #0.7107
1.477
≈ exp(−Ro−1 ) 1 + (2.29)
Ro
( "r #−n )1/n " −1.407 #0.7107
8e exp(−γ) 1.477
fymaxIV (Ro) = 1 + ≈ 1+ (2.30)
π Ro Ro
These correction factors are illustrated in Figure 2.6. As Ro approaches infinity

(Regime III), fymaxIII (Ro) tends to the exact value of 1 and when Ro tends to 0 (Regime
IV), fymaxIV (Ro) tends to 1 indicating that as the asymptotic regime is approximated,
no correction is necessary. In traditional blending, a conventional limit between the
two asymptotic regimes can be determined at the crossing point of the correction
factors, where the error of ignoring both corrections would be the same. In this case
in which modified blending is used, the correction factors in this case do not cross,
and a new convention needs to be established to estimate a limit between the two
regimes. The new convention proposed considers the value of Ro at which the absolute
50
value of the error is the same, resulting in a critical value Roc =0.9499. This value of
O(1) is typical of the vast majority of limits between regimes.
The limits of 10% error (when the correction factor is 0.9 or 1.1) are useful to
estimate when correction factors can be omitted. In Regime III, the error of omitting
the correction factors is less than 10% when Ro > RoIII = 3.553, and in Regime IV
when Ro < RoIV = 0.3856.
101
Correction factors for ymax
∗
fymaxIV fymaxIII
100
RoIV Roc RoIII

-1
10
10-1 100 101
Ro
Figure 2.6: Correction factors for the maximum isotherm half-width ymax as functions
of Ro. For Ro > 3.553 or Ro < 0.3856, neglecting correction factors yield an error in
estimation smaller than 10% compared to blended solution of 2.25.
2.7.2 Expressions with units
In practical calculations it is convenient to count with explicit expressions using units.

Conversion of Equations 2.27 and 2.28 into expressions with units is done by substi-
51
tuting Equation 2.9 and Equation 2.11 into Equation 2.25:
+ 1 qα
ybmax = ybmaxIII fymaxIII (Ro) = √ fymaxIII (Ro) (2.31)
2πe Ukd (Tc − T0 )
+ 4α
ybmax = ybmaxIV fymaxIV (Ro) = exp −Ro−1 fymaxIV (Ro) (2.32)
U exp(γ)
2.8 Validation
The focus of this paper is on the width of isotherms in general, not only the melting
isotherm in welding. However, the high-quality data available in the literature is in
its vast majority for the melt width, and it is the data that will be used for validation.
The validation of the proposed predictive expressions was made by comparison
against published data and shown in Figures 2.7-2.9, spanning a range of Ro of two
orders of magnitude from (0.1 to 10). Measurements were collected for arc welding
processes including Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW), Shielded Metal Arc Welding
(SMAW), Submerged Arc Welding (SAW), Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW); for
concentrated heat sources including Laser Beam Welding (LBW), Electron Beam
Welding (EBW); and for Additive Manufacturing (AM) for a wide range of materials
including aluminum, titanium, carbon steel, stainless steel, and superalloys.
The published values were normalized using Equation 2.9 and Equation 2.11, and
compared against the blended expression in Equation 2.25. Some of the experimental
points were already in dimensionless form [62, 71, 160, 213]. In some cases, the
isotherm width was not directly reported, but inferred from associated magnitudes
such as cross sectional area [72] or melting efficiency [62, 213]. The characteristic
temperature used in these calculations (Tc ) corresponds to the melting temperature
(Tm ) in all cases, except some points in [142] which correspond to the edge of the
HAZ (Ac1 ).
Assuming full penetration, 2D heat transfer, isotherm width and cross sectional
area are related as follows:
Ac
ymax ≈ (2.33)
2d
52
When melting efficiency is provided, the corresponding cross sectional area is:
ηm q
Ac = (2.34)
ρ(il − i0 )U
where ηm is the melting efficiency, il is the enthalpy at liquidus temperature, and i0 is

the enthalpy at the far temperature T0 . For data corresponding to partial penetration
keyhole welding [54], the plate thickness considered was that of the penetration, and
the average width considered was half the width measured at the top surface.
The thermal properties, thermal efficiencies, and processing parameters used in
the literature survey are listed in Table 2.2. When not listed in the original sources,
the thermophysical properties were obtained from the literatures or software (JMat-
Pro v11). Thermal efficiency was assessed from original sources or from the AWS
handbook [96]. The far temperature T0 was always assumed or given as 20◦ C except
for [153], which measured 23◦ C. The data for GTAW in [62, 160] and EBW in [70]
were published in dimensionless form. For assessment of surface heat losses in the
references consulted, an approximate effective convection coefficient of 10 W/m2 K
whose used to assess processes with low expected effective convection (EBW, SAW,
and EB based AM), and a coefficient of 100 W/m2 K was used for processes with
higher expected convective effects (GTAW, GMAW, SMAW, and LBW).
The validity of simplifying hypotheses discussed above was verified when data was
available or could be inferred feasibly. In almost all cases the simplifying hypotheses
are valid, except some points from [54] for which the heat source cannot be considered
a point (Equation 2.15). Details about the verification of hypotheses are included
as attached excel. The neglected secondary phenomena are a source of scatter in
the comparisons. Other sources of scatter are uncertainties in the thermophysical
properties used, uncertainties in thermal efficiency, which is especially broad for laser
processes, and of course, experimental error. The criteria for negligible surface heat
loss is fulfilled for all data collected.
Figure 2.7 compares Equation 2.25 with published data for width in four arc weld-
53
ing processes (GTAW, SMAW, SAW, GMAW). For these processes the agreement
with experiments is good and unbiased, except with a slight overprediction of width
at height Rosenthal numbers. Arc welding processes, unlike laser or electron beam
processes, are not capable of keyhole penetration, and operate only as surface heat
sources. In these cases, the face of the weld is much wider than the root (or waist
in [153]), and incipient 3D effects might reduce the actual weld width at large values
of Ro.
Figure 2.8 compares Equation 2.25 with published data for weld width in laser
beam welding (LBW) and additive manufacturing (AM). The results are accurate
and unbiased, except for a slight underprediction for the date from [153]. If the ther-
mophysical properties and measurements are correct, the underprediction of width is
typically due to the finite size of the heat source or to fluid flow effects in the weld
pool. Given that the welds considered meet the criterion for “point heat source,” the
slight bias is likely to be due to fluid flow effects. The near-perfect agreement with [72]
is not surprising, given that it corresponds to numerical simulations, not to experi-
mental data. The excellent agreement also supports the applicability of Rosenthal’s
2D solution and the small error caused by its simplifications.
Figure 2.9 compares Equation 2.25 with published data for electron beam welding
(EBW) in a broad diversity of conditions. This figure includes points for which
the “point heat source” simplification is invalid (indicated with different symbols).
Predictably, Equation 2.25 underpredicts the width in those cases. The comparison
with data from [190] shows a small systematic over prediction, while comparisons
with [70] show a systematic underprediction. It is likely that these small and opposite
systematic errors are associated with the materials and process properties used in the
estimates. At low Ro, the underpredictions for [70] are larger; although no beam size
is provided in this case, it is likely that the condition for point heat source is not met
for those points. Another possible source of error for comparisons with [54] is that
most of the welds considered are partial penetration keyhole welds, which have a 3D
54
effect at the bottom of the keyhole. For the comparisons, only welds with a depth to
width ratio greater than 0.75 were considered.
Table 2.2: Operating conditions and average thermal properties utilized in calculation.
The temperature of interest is the melting temperature in all cases except when
marked. The blanks in the table correspond to data published only in normalized
form.
Plate thickness Power Thermal Velocity Conductivity Diffusivity Tc
Process Material Ref.
(mm) (kW) Efficiency (mm/s) (W/mK) (m2 /s) (◦ C)
Kovar 75.2 1.1 × 10−5 1490 [62]

Hastelloy B2 50.6 7.2 × 10−6 1431 [62]
GTAW Aluminum 1100 237 6.0 × 10−6 660 [62]
Mild steel 1-4 0.75∗ [96] 0.4-12.7 [160]
Stainless steel 304 38.4 6.3 × 10−6 1454 [61, 62]
SMAW
Mild steel 2-50 0.75 8.2 × 10−6 [93, 213]
SAW
+
Carbon steel 2 2.138-2.790 0.79-0.88 5.5-7 35 5.9 × 10−6+ 725× [142]
GMAW
+
Carbon steel 2 2.138-2.790 0.79-0.88 5.5-7 43 8.4 × 10−6+ 1510 [142]
Inconel718 1.6 1.5-2.9 0.3 ∗ [96] 11.85-38.94 20+ 3.5 × 10−6+ 1375+ [153]
Stainless steel 321 0.125-0.417 0.25 0.15 4.7-38 24 4.9 × 10−6 1530 [190, 211]
Stainless steel 302 0.125-0.250 0.25 0.15 4.2-21.1 24 4.9 × 10−6 1530 [190, 211]
17-7PH 0.125 0.25 0.15 47 27 5.9 × 10−6 1530 [190, 211]
Inconel 0.1-0.25 0.25 0.15 16.9-63.5 24 5 × 10−6 1410 [190, 211]
LBW
Nickel 0.125 0.25 0.15 14.8 67 1.3 × 10−5 1450 [190, 211]
Monel 0.25 0.25 0.15 6.4 35 7 × 10−5 1340 [190, 211]
Titanium 0.125-0.250 0.25 0.15 21.1-59 24 7.2 × 10−6 1680 [190, 211]
Stainless steel 304 6.4-8.9 8 0.5 12.5-16.7 24 4.9 × 10−6 1530 [126, 190]
Stainless steel 304 12.7-20.2 20 0.9 21.2-42.4 24 4.9 × 10−6 1530 [126, 190]
AA 6065T4 2.5 3 0.37/0.80 83.3-133 193-199+ 7.7-7.9 × 10−5+ 59-292 [1, 2]
AM Ti-6Al-4V 12.7-20.2 1-5 0-42.3 17.6 [143] 5.6 × 10−6 [143] 1660 [72]
HY-130 3.3-0.04 1.5-22.5 0.9 4.16-41.6 35 7.3 × 10−6 1530 [108, 190]
EN58B 8.4 2.5 0.9 25 24 5.5 × 10−6 1530 [79, 190]
EN58J 8.8-12.5 3.6 0.9 5.7-25.9 24 5.3 × 10−6 1530 [7, 190]
EBW EN58J 7.4-12 5.2 0.9 21.1-50.8 24 5.3 × 10−6 1530 [6, 190]
† [70]
−6
Stainless steel 304 6.3 0.35-1.4 0.95 6.4-3200 25 4.5 × 10 1433 [54]
Aluminum 2024 6.3 0.3-1.2 0.95 6.4-3200 175 6.7 × 10−5 595 [54]
* Estimated + Properties calculated by software JMatPro v11 × Ac1 † Aluminum 1100, 2024, 6061, carbon steel, and stainless steel
304 and 316
2.9 Example of application
Consider the LBW of 321 stainless steel of 0.005 in (0.127 mm) thickness performed
by Webster [211]. The laser power was 250 W CO2 , with a spot diameter between
0.002 in (50 µm) and 0.005 in (127 µm), a travel speed of 90 in/min (38 mm/s),
55
101
100
ymax
∗
Equation 2.25
10-1 Fuerschbach [61, 62]
Pavelic [96, 160]
Wells [213] and Jackson [93]
Meseguer-Valdenebro [142]
10-2
100 101
Ro
Figure 2.7: Comparison of explicit blending solution (Equation 2.25) with published
data for weld width in arc welding (GTAW, SMAW, SAW, GMAW).
101
100
ymax
Equation 2.25
∗
Swift-Hook [126, 190, 211]

Odabasi [153]
10-1 Gockel [72, 143]
Zain-ul-abdein [1, 2]
10-2
100 101
Ro
data for isotherm width in laser processes (LBW, AM).
56
101
100
ymax
∗
Equation 2.25
Giedt [70]
10-1 Swift-Hook [6, 7, 79, 108, 190]
Elmer [54]“point” (Equation 2.15)
Elmer [54]distributed heat source
10-2
10-1 100 101
Ro
data for weld width in EBW.
a thermal efficiency of 0.15 estimated based on analysis of [190]. Interpreting this

spot size as a full width at half maximum (FWHM) in a gaussian distribution, the
corresponding standard deviation σ ranges between 22 µm and 54 µm. Effective
thermophysical properties and heat transfer efficiency are provided in [190] and listed
in Table 2.2. The measured full width of bead was 0.018 in (457 µm).
For the weld considered, the Rosenthal number using weld penetration for d is
Ro=1.3 (Equation 2.11), corresponding to Regime III (fast moving heat source).
Equation 2.15 indicates that the heat source can be considered a point (σ ∗ = 0.084
to 0.21 <0.49), and Equation 2.19 indicates that the effect of surface heat losses are
negligible (d= 0.005 in > dc,h = 10−4 in, assuming h + h′ =100 W/m2 K). A 2D model
is appropriate in this case because this is a full penetration weld, and the criterion for
thin substrate (Equation 2.16) is not relevant. For this example, the dimensionless
plate thickness is larger than the critical thickness for 2D heat transfer for a point
heat source on the surface (d∗ =0.49> d∗c,2D =0.20), but this is not a problem. The
57
Stefan number for stainless is of the order of 4.3, indicating latent heat is not likely
to affect the calculations significantly.
The prediction of weld width is made using the appropriate equation for Regime
III (Equation 2.31), which yields ybmaxIII = 0.010 in (254 µm), and fymaxIII (Ro) = 0.81
(Equation 2.27). The correction applied in this case is larger than 10%, consistently
+
with the intermediate value of Ro. The predicted weld width is 2b
ymax =0.016 in (406
µm), which is an underprediction with an error of 12% compared to the measured
value of 0.018 in (457 µm).
2.10 Discussion
Consistently with the foundations established in [140], the analysis presented here
dispels old misconceptions and brings new insights. Similarly as before, proper di-
mensional analysis of Equation 2.20 yields four, not five dimensionless groups as
usually considered based on [33]. There is no variable-independent dimensionless
group, as attempted unsuccessfully in [33], and the dimensionless group associated
with temperature (Rosenthal number) is slightly different than in [140] (the Rykalin
number), but carries the same physical meaning.
For fast welds (Regime III), the weld width is proportional to the heat input
(q/U) making it an essential welding parameter; however, this relationship breaks
down for slower welds (Regime IV). Codes and standards tend to omit the slow
welding regime. This omission is seldom a problem since slow 2D welds are less
frequent in practice; however, Regime IV is typical in friction stir welding (FSW)
and full penetration gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) of aluminum, among others
process/material combinations. In Regime IV, two welds with the same heat input
do not necessarily have similar width.
Similarly to [140], the work presented here brings new insight in the understanding
of the origins of the Rosenthal number, and in agreement with [60], a single dimen-
sionless group (in this case Ro) can be singled out as a key magnitude to characterize
58
the behavior of a moving heat source in 2D.
The extended blending technique used in this work overcomes the limitations of
the Churchill-Usagi blending methodology, and can be used for problems beyond
the one analyzed here. Although the factor introduced (exp(aRob )) would involve
a 3-parameter optimization (a, b, and n), a smart choice of a and b reduces the
problem back to an optimization of a relatively simple expression with only n as the
optimization variable. The error in the blending used here is always below 6.8%, for
any value of Ro, and Figure 2.4 can be used together with Equation 2.26 to generate
a local correction greatly reducing the error in a chosen range of interest. Just as
in [140], the correction factors are accurate even far from the asymptotic regime.
The validation performed shows a relatively narrow and symmetric scatter, which is
somewhat unexpected, considering the important approximations made in the model,
the broad range of materials, processes, and authors, and also that the melting tem-
perature isotherm is more affected by the “solid heat transfer” approximation than
isotherms further into the solid substrate. It is not obvious at this stage how much of
the scatter is due to the approximations of the model, how much is due to experimental
error, and how much is due to error in the values used for thermophysical proper-
ties [134]. Although the errors observed suggest room for improvement (especially
when the error is systematic), a validation of similar scope has never been performed
between numerical results and experiments, at least for welding simulations. There
is no evidence in the literature that a numerical simulation (without ad-hoc calibra-
tions) would show less scatter when compared against the same dataset used in this
work.
Possible sources for systematic underpredictions are the presence of outward ther-
mocapillary flows. This possibility cannot be evaluated within the limitations of the
formulation presented here. Other possible cause for underpredictions is that the
heat source can sometimes bee too large to be considered a point. This is possible
at the lowest Ro ranges, when the predicted isotherm width is unfeasibly small. Pre-
59
vious attempts to capture the low Ro regime assumed the dimensionless isotherm
width to become zero at Ro<0.25, without proper physical justification or further
considerations of the nature of different heat sources and their size. Possible causes
for systematic overpredictions are 3D effects in partial penetration welds, or welds in
which the root is much narrower than the face.
2.11 Conclusions
This work presents for the first time practical and rigorous expressions for calculating
the width of an isotherm (ymax , Equation 2.29 and Equation 2.30) in conditions of 2D
heat transfer. The expressions proposed have the form of an asymptotic expression
multiplied by a correction factor, and are based on theoretical analysis, not empirical
fitting.
The dimensionless width depends only on the Rosenthal number, Ro, which is a
metric of how fast or slow a heat source is in 2D conditions. The Rosenthal number
divides all possible solutions in two regimes: Regime III corresponding to high Ro
(“fast” 2D heat sources) and low Ro (“slow” 2D heat sources). Because Ro depends
on a chosen temperature, moving 2D heat sources cannot be deemed as intrinsically
fast or slow until a temperature of interest is selected.
The Churchill-Usagi blending equation has been extended to consider non-power-
law, non-crossing asymptotic expressions (Equation 2.25). The modified blending
technique approach is novel, and it overcomes a limitation of previous studies in-
capable of capturing properly the behavior of slow heat sources (e.g. [213]). These
asymptotic expressions coincide with the exact solution in the extremes, and the
blending expression for the intermediate regime, exhibits a discrepancy always within
7% of the exact solution.
The practical expressions presented here require much smaller computational effort
than numerical methods, do not present convergence issues, and can be calculated
using a handheld calculator or a basic spreadsheet; these expressions can also be used
60
to estimate, for example, the width of a weld, the size of zone affected by the heat
source in a broad diversity of processes, or to validate numerical models.
The methodologies and results obtained are applicable to moving heat sources
within the hypotheses of the problem formulation, and are valid beyond welding
to additive manufacturing and many other manufacturing and broader engineering
problems, since they capture the inherent essence of complex physical phenomena
based on the governing equations.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering
Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the China Scholarship Council (CSC).
Student scholarships from the American Welding Society and the CWB Welding
Foundation were also gratefully received.
61
References
[1] M. Zain-ul abdein, D. Nelias, J. F. Jullien, and D. Deloison, “Prediction of laser
beam welding-induced distortions and residual stresses by numerical simula-
tion for aeronautic application,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
vol. 209, no. 6, pp. 2907–2917, 2009.
[2] M. Zain-ul abdein, D. Nélias, J. F. Jullien, and D. Deloison, “Experimental
investigation and finite element simulation of laser beam welding induced resid-
ual stresses and distortions in thin sheets of AA 6056-T4,” Materials Science
and Engineering A, vol. 527, no. 12, pp. 3025–3039, 2010.
[6] M. J. Adams, “High voltage electron-beam welding,” British Welding Journal,
vol. 15, pp. 451–467, 1968.
[7] M. J. Adams, “Low voltage electron-beam welding,” British Welding Journal,
vol. 15, pp. 134–142, 1968.
[12] H. J. Aval, A. Farzadi, S. Serajzadeh, and A. H. Kokabi, “Theoretical and
experimental study of microstructures and weld pool geometry during GATW
of 304 stainless steel,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Tech-
nology, vol. 42, no. 11-12, pp. 1043–1051, 2009.
[19] T. L. Bergman, F. P. Incropera, D. P. DeWitt, and A. S. Lavine, Fundamentals
[20] A. Birnbaum, P. Aggarangsi, and J. Beuth, “Process scaling and transient
melt pool size control in laser-based additive manufacturing processes,” in Pro-
ceedings - Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, University of Texas, 2003,
pp. 328–339.
[21] I. N. Bronshtein, K. A. Semendyayev, G. Musiol, and H. Mühlig, Handbook
of mathematics, Fifth. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg,
2007.
[24] E. Buckingham, “On physically similar systems; illustrations of the use of
dimensional equations,” Physical Review, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 345–376, 1914.
[27] H. S. Carslaw and J. C. Jaeger, Conduction of heat in solids, Second. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1959.
[33] N. Christensen, V. d. L. Davies, and K. Gjermundsen, “Distribution of tem-
peratures in arc welding,” British Welding Journal, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 54–75,
1965.
1128, 1972.
[39] H. E. Cline and T. R. Anthony, “Heat treating and melting material with a
scanning laser or electron beam,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 48, no. 9,
pp. 3895–3900, 1977.
62
[40] G. Comini, S. Del Guidice, R. Lewis, and O. Zienkiewicz, “Finite element
solution of non-linear heat conduction problems with special reference to phase
change,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 8,
no. 3, pp. 613–624, 1974.
[43] J. A. Dantzig and C. L. Tucker, Modeling in materials processing. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[54] J. W. Elmer, W. H. Giedt, and T. W. Eagar, “The transition from shallow
to deep penetration during electron beam welding,” Welding Research Supple-
ment, vol. 69, no. 5, 167s–176s, 1990.
[55] G. V. Ermolaev, O. B. Kovalev, A. M. Orishich, and V. M. Fomin, “Mathe-
matical modelling of striation formation in oxygen laser cutting of mild steel,”
Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, vol. 39, no. 19, p. 4236, 2006.
[57] H. G. Fan, H.-L. Tsai, and S.-J. Na, “Heat transfer and fluid flow in a par-
tially or fully penetrated weld pool in gas tungsten arc welding,” International
Journal of heat and mass transfer, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 417–428, 2001.
vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 935–943, 1982.
[60] P. W. Fuerschbach, “A dimensionless parameter model for arc welding pro-
cesses,” in Trends in Welding Research, Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference, ASM International, 1994.
vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 287–297, 1991.
[62] P. W. Fuerschbach and G. R. Eisler, “Determination of material properties
for welding models by means of arc weld experiments,” in Trends in Welding
Research, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference, Callaway Gardens
Resort, Phoenix, Arizona: ASM International, 2002.
no. 1, pp. 77–89, 2005.
[70] W. H. Giedt and L. N. Tallerico, “Prediction of electron beam depth of pene-
tration,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 67, no. 12, 299s–305s, 1988.
[71] W. H. Giedt, L. N. Tallerico, and P. W. Fuerschbach, “GTA welding efficiency
: Calorimetric and temperature field measurements,” Welding Research Sup-
plement, vol. 68, no. 1, 28s–32s, 1989.
63
[72] J. Gockel, J. Fox, J. Beuth, and R. Hafley, “Integrated melt pool and mi-
crostructure control for Ti-6Al-4V thin wall additive manufacturing,” Materi-
als Science and Technology, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 912–916, 2015.
305, 1984.
[78] Ø. Grong, Metallurgical modelling of welding, First. Cambridge, Great Britain:
Institute of Materials, 1994.
[79] M. G. Gunn and E. G. King, “Electron-beam fusion zone penetration in 12
mm (1/2 in.) austenitic stainless steel,” in Advances in Welding Processes
Conference, Harrogate, 1970, pp. 183–186.
pp. 219–225, 1999.
[88] C. Y. Ho, “Asymptotic analysis for penetration depth during laser welding,”
Procedia Engineering, vol. 15, pp. 5212–5216, 2011.
[90] Y. F. Hsu and B. Rubinsky, “Two-dimensional heat transfer study on the
keyhole plasma arc welding process,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1409–1421, 1988.
[93] C. E. Jackson and A. E. Shrubsall, “Energy distribution in electric welding,”
Welding Journal, vol. 29, no. 5, 231s–241s, 1950.
[95] S. J. N. Jason Cheon Degala Venkata Kiran, “Cfd based visualization of the
finger shaped evolution in the gas metal arc welding process,” International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 2016.
[96] C. L. Jenney and A. O’Brien, Eds., Welding science and technology, Ninth.
American Welding Society (AWS), 2001, vol. 1, isbn: 978-0-87171-657-6.
vol. 44, no. 15, pp. 2845–2862, 2001.
[108] P. J. Konkol, P. M. Smith, C. F. Willibrand, and L. P. Connor, “Parameter
study of electron-beam welding,” Welding Journal, vol. 50, pp. 765–776, 1971.
[114] S. Kou and D. K. Sun, “Fluid Flow and Weld Penetration in Stationary Arc
Welds,” Metallurgical Transactions A, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 203–213, 1985.
64
[117] Y. Kwon and D. C. Weckman, “Analytical thermal model of conduction mode
double sided arc welding,” Science and Technology of Welding and Joining,
vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 539–549, 2008.
[126] E. V. Locke, E. D. Hoag, and R. A. Hella, “Deep penetration welding with
high-power CO2 lasers,” IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, vol. 8, no. 2,
pp. 132–135, 1972.
[133] O. Manca, B. Morrone, and V. Naso, “Quasi-steady-state three-dimensional
temperature distribution induced by a moving circular Gaussian heat source in
a finite depth solid,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 38,
no. 7, pp. 1305–1315, 1995.
[134] P. F. Mendez, “Synthesis and generalisation of welding fundamentals to de-
sign new welding technologies: Status challenges and a promising approach,”
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 348–356,
2011.
[136] P. F. Mendez and T. W. Eagar, “Penetration and defect formation in high-
current arc welding,” Welding Journal, vol. 82, no. 10, 296S–306S, 2003.
[139] P. F. Mendez, “Characteristic values in the scaling of differential equations in
engineering,” Journal of Applied Mechanics, vol. 77, no. 6, p. 061 017, 2010.
[140] P. F. Mendez, Y. Lu, and Y. Wang, “Scaling analysis of a moving point heat
source in steady- state on a semi-infinite solid,” Journal of Heat Transfer,
vol. 140, no. 8, p. 081 301, 2018.
alia, vol. 58, no. 18, pp. 6012–6026, 2010.
[142] J. L. Meseguer-Valdenebro, J. Serna, A. Portoles, M. Estrems, V. Miguel, and
E. Martı́nez-Conesa, “Experimental validation of a numerical method that
predicts the size of the heat affected zone. optimization of the welding pa-
rameters by the Taguchi’s method,” Transactions of the Indian Institute of
Metals, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 783–791, 2016.
[143] K. C. Mills, Recommended values of thermophysical properties for selected com-
mercial alloys. Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2002.
[144] Y. S. Muzychka and M. M. Yovanovich, “Thermal resistance models for non-
circular moving heat sources on a half space,” Journal of Heat Transfer,
vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 624–632, 2001.
[145] P. S. Myers, O. A. Uyehara, and G. L. Borman, “Fundamentals of heat flow
in welding,” Welding Research Council Bulletin, vol. 123, pp. 1–46, 1967.
65
[146] O. R. Myhr and Ø. Grong, “Dimensionless maps for heat flow analyses in
fusion welding,” Acta Metallurgica et Materialia, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 449–460,
1990.
[147] A.-K. Nehad, “Enthalpy technique for solution of stefan problems: Application
to the keyhole plasma arc welding process involving moving heat source,” In-
ternational communications in heat and mass transfer, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 779–
790, 1995.
vol. 138, no. 12, p. 122 301, 2016.
[153] A. Odabaşı, N. Ünlü, G. Göller, and M. N. Eruslu, “A Study on Laser Beam
Welding (LBW) Technique: Effect of Heat Input on the Microstructural Evo-
lution of Superalloy Inconel 718,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A,
vol. 41A, no. 9, pp. 2357–2365, 2010.
[155] N. Okui, D. Ketron, F. Bordelon, Y. Hirata, and G. Clark, “A methodology
for prediction of fusion zone shape,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 86,
no. 2, pp. 35–43, 2007.
[156] G. M. Oreper, T. W. Eagar, and J. Szekely, “Convection in arc weld pools,”
Welding Journal, vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 307–312, 1983.
[169] D. Rivas and S. Ostrach, “Scaling of low-prandtl-number thermocapillary
flows,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1469–
1479, 1992.
1923, pp. 640–654.
journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2–8, 1938.
[177] D. Rosenthal, “Mathematical theory of heat distribution during welding and
cutting,” The Welding Journal, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 220–234, 1941.
Mashgis, 1951.
66
[183] Y. Sharir, A. Grill, and J. Pelleg, “Computation of temperatures in thin tanta-
lum sheet welding,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, vol. 11, no. 2,
pp. 257–265, 1980.
[186] W. M. Steen and J. Mazumder, Laser material processing, Fourth. London:
Springer, 2010.
[197] M. Ushio, T. Ishimura, F. Matsuda, and Y. Arata, “Theoretical calculation on
shape of fusion boundary and temperature distribution around moving heat
source (Report I),” Transactions of JWRI, vol. 6(1), no. 1, p1–p6, 1977.
no. 23-24, pp. 4872–4882, 2007.
[199] V. R. Voller and C. R. Swaminathan, “General source-based method for solid-
ification phase change,” Numerical Heat Transfer, vol. 19, pp. 175–189, 1991.
[206] Y. Wang, Y. Lu, M. Grams, A. H. Cesaro, and P. F. Mendez, “Asymptotics and
blending in the modeling of welding,” in Numerical Analysis of Weldability,
[207] Y. Wang, Y. Lu, and P. F. Mendez, “Scaling expressions of characteristic
values for a moving point heat source in steady state on a semi-infinite solid,”
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 135, pp. 1118–1129,
2019.
[210] T. Washio and H. Motoda, “Extension of dimensional analysis for scale-types
and its application to discovery of admissible models of complex processes,”
in International Workshop on Similarity Method, 1999, pp. 129–147.
[211] J. M. Webster, “Welding at high speed with the CO2 laser,” Metal Progress,
vol. 98, pp. 59–61, 1970.
[213] A. A. Wells, “Heat flow in welding,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 31,
no. 5, 263s–267s, 1952.
[218] G. Wood, S. A. Islam, and P. F. Mendez, “Calibrated expressions for welding
and their application to isotherm width in a thick plate,” Soldagem & Inspeção,
vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 212–220, 2014.
67
Appendix 2.A Estimation of effective thermophys-
ical properties
2.A.1 Thermal diffusivity
Thermal diffusivity can ba calculated based on effective values of thermal conductivity

and specific heat.
keff
αeff = (2.35)
(ρc)eff
2.A.2 Thermal conductivity
A reasonable approach to calculating an effective thermal conductivity keff is to con-

sider the overall thermal resistance of a wall of thickness L in steady state.
∆T L
R′′ = = (2.36)
q ′′ keff
where R′′ is the thermal resistance associated with the absolute values of heat flux q ′′
(in the direction of coordinate ξ, perpendicular to the wall) and temperature difference
∆T through the thickness d of the wall. In steady state, the heat flux is constant
because there can be no accumulation or depletion of heat at any point in the wall:
dT
q ′′ = −k(T ) = constant (2.37)
dξ
where T = T (ξ) and k = k(T ). The temperature difference between the surfaces of
the wall can be calculated by integration of Equation 2.37.
Z Z Z
dT q ′′ dξ
∆T = dξ = − dξ = −q ′′ (2.38)
L dξ L k(T ) L k(T )
Because T = T (ξ), we can say
dT
dT = dξ (2.39)
dξ
Comparing Equations 2.36, 2.38, and 2.39 we obtain

"Z #−1
1 dT
keff = L dT
(2.40)
∆T dξ k(T )
68
which for the case when the temperature gradient is approximately constant can be
approximated as
dT ∆T
≈ = constant (2.41)
dξ L
resulting in
Z −1
1 −1
keff ≈ k(T ) dT (2.42)
∆T ∆T
where
∆T = Tc − T0 (2.43)
This definition of ∆T accounts for thermal conduction between the isotherm of

interest Tc and the far regions of the substrate which are at the far temperature T0 .
2.A.3 Specific heat
The selection of an average value of c is potentially problematic. Phase changes

cause peaks with significant amounts of enthalpy, but the peaks can be missed or
underestimated in the resolution of thermodynamic calculations, and in the case of
isothermal phase changes, the peak becomes a line at a given temperature. A better
approach is to use the definition of specific heat:
di
c= (2.44)
dT
Equation 2.44 requires a constant density, such that cp = cv = c, then it is possible

to write, because density is considered constant in the governing equation,
dρi
ρc = (2.45)
dT
∆(ρi)
(ρc)eff = (2.46)
∆T
with the same definition of ∆T as before.
69
Appendix 2.B Asymptotics for maximum isotherm
half-width
∗
The maximum isotherm half-width ym and its location x∗m can be implicitly expressed
as:
p
Tc∗ = exp (−x∗max ) K0 x∗2
m + y ∗2
m (2.47)
∂T ∗
=0 (2.48)
∂x∗ x∗m ,ym
∗
dKn (ξ)
Based on the relationship between derivatives of Bessel function Kn (ξ), =
dξ
n
−Kn−1 (ξ) − Kn (ξ)[21], Equation 2.47 and Equation 2.48 can be represented by
ξ
using the zeroth order (K0 ) and first order (K1 ) of the second kind of modified Bessel
function to obtain:
p
1/Ro = exp (−x∗max ) K0 x∗2
m + y ∗2
m (2.49)
p
p xmax K1
∗ ∗2
xm + ym ∗2
K0 x∗2
m + y ∗2 +
m p =0 (2.50)
x∗2
m + ym
∗2
p
Therefore, x∗m and ym
∗
can be written as a function of rm ∗
= x∗2 ∗2
m + ym :
∗
K0 (rmax )
x∗max = −rmax
∗
∗
(2.51)
K1 (rmax )
s
∗ ) 2
K0 (rmax
∗ ∗
ym = rmax 1 − ∗ )
(2.52)
K1 (rmax
∗
where rm can be implicitly expressed as a function of Ro number by Equation 2.47:
∗

∗ ∗ ∗ K0 (rmax ) ∗
1/Ro = Tc (rm ) = exp rmax ∗ )
K0 (rm ) (2.53)
K1 (rmax
Tc∗ (rm
∗ ∗
) is continuous and has a strictly monotonic dependence on rm , the inverse
∗
function of Equation 2.53(rm (Ro)) exists and has an unique representation. Asymp-
∗
totic analysis of Equation 2.53 yields two limiting solutions of rm (Ro) in Regime
III and IV, which would be substituted into Equation 2.52 to obtain asymptotes for
∗
maximum isotherm half-width ym (Ro).
70
Regime III: Ro → ∞
In regime III where Ro → ∞ and Tc∗ → 0, the point locating at isotherm width is far
∗ ∗
from the heat source (rmaxIII
→ ∞). For large values of rm , the asymptotic behavior
∗
of Ro number changing with rm is achieved by asymptotic analysis of the right side
of Equation 2.53:
r
π ∗−3/2
1/Ro = ∗
+ O r max (2.54)
2e rmaxIII
III
∗
To solve rmax III
∗
, let rmax III
= π
2e
Ro2 [1 + ǫ (Ro)], assuming ǫ (Ro) → 0 which is equiv-
∗
alent to rbmaxIII
= π
2e
Ro2 . If ǫ (Ro) can be solved and satisfies the assumption, the
∗
solution to rmaxIII
for Equation 2.54 is determined and unique. Substituting the as-
∗
sumed expression of rmaxIII
into Equation 2.54, Equation 2.54 turns into:
s
1 nπ o−3/2
2
1/Ro = + O Ro [1 + ǫ (Ro)] (2.55)
Ro2 [1 + ǫ (Ro)] 2e
According to the assumption ǫ (Ro) → 0 in Regime III, ǫ is solved:

ǫ (Ro) = O Ro−2 (2.56)

The solution O Ro−2 ≪ 1 satisfies the assumption in Regime III where Ro → ∞.
∗
rmaxIII
has a parabolic dependence on Ro in Regime III:
π π
∗
rmax = Ro2 [1 + ǫ (Ro)] = Ro2 + O(1) (2.57)
III
2e 2e
Substituting Equation 2.57 into Equation 2.52 yields solution to half-width in

Regime III:
v "
u #2 r
u K r ∗
π 1
∗
ymax ∗ t
= rmaxIII 1 −
0 maxIII
= Ro + O (2.58)
III ∗
K1 rmax III
2e Ro
The asymptotic expression of half-width in Regime III is:

r
∗ π
ybmaxIII = Ro (2.59)
2e
71
Regime IV: Ro → 0
In Regime IV where Ro → 0 and Tc∗ → ∞, rmax

∗
IV
is small as it decreases with Tc∗ .
∗
The asymptotic analysis of the right side of Equation 2.53 for rmax IV
→ 0 in Regime
IV produces:
∗
∗2

1/Ro = − ln rmaxIV
− γ + ln(2) + O rmax IV
(2.60)
where γ ≈ 0.5772 is Euler–Mascheroni constant. Performing exponential transforma-

tion on both sides yields:
∗2

exp [−1/Ro − γ + ln (2)] = rmaxIV exp O rmax IV
∗2
∗2

= rmaxIV 1 + O O rmax IV
= r maxIV
1 + O r maxIV
(2.61)
As is the asymptotic analysis in Regime III Equation 2.55, writing the rmaxIV as
rmaxIV = exp [−1/Ro − γ + ln(2)] [1 + ǫ (Ro)] assuming ǫ (Ro) → 0, into Equation 2.61:

1 = [1 + ǫ (Ro)] 1 + O exp [−1/Ro − γ + ln (2)]2 [1 + ǫ (Ro)]2

2
= [1 + ǫ (Ro)] 1 + O exp − (2.62)
Ro
According to the assumption ǫ (Ro) → 0, it is solved:

2
ǫ (Ro) = O exp − (2.63)
Ro
2

The solution O exp − Ro ≪ 1 satisfies the assumption because Ro → 0 in Regime
IV. Therefore, in Regime IV, the solution to Equation 2.53 is:

∗ 3
rmaxIV = 2 exp (−1/Ro − γ) + O exp − (2.64)
Ro
∗
The solution to half-width ymax in Regime IV can be obtained by substituting Equa-
tion 2.64 into Equation 2.52:
v "
u #2
u K r ∗
ymaxIV ∗
= rmax t1 − 0 max IV

IV
K1 rmax
∗
IV
= 2 exp (−γ−1/Ro) + O [exp (−3/Ro)] (2.65)
72
Therefore, the asymptotic expression to half-width of isotherm in regime IV when
Ro → 0:
∗
ybmaxIV
= 2 exp (−γ−1/Ro) (2.66)
Appendix 2.C Criterion for point heat source
The criterion is established to ignore heat source size assuming under gaussian dis-
tribution. The temperature field is simulated with Comsol Multiphysics v5.4 setting
thermal properties k, ρ, cp , α as 1 for convenience of normalization. The simulations
are under three groups of operating parameters:
q = 2πW, U = 2m/s, σ = 0.1 : 0.1 : 0.9, 1 : 1 : 55m (2.67)
q = 20πW, U = 20m/s, σ = 0.1 : 0.1 : 0.9, 1 : 1 : 55m (2.68)
q = 2πW, U = 2m/s, σ = 3 : 6 × 10−4 , 3 : 6 × 10−3 , 3 : 6 × 10−2 m (2.69)
The result of simulation is illustrated in Figure 2.10. The criteria to neglect effect of
heat source size for 0.1 < Ro < 100 is:
1 + 2Ro ∗
σc∗ ≈ 0.6b∗
ymax < 0.6 yb (2.70)
1 + Ro max
Appendix 2.D Criterion for insulated surface
Under mild convection for small values h∗ , the isotherm width ymax
∗
h
and its location
x∗maxh can be written as:
x∗maxh = x∗max + δx∗ ∗

ymaxh
∗
= ymax + δy∗
where x∗max and ymax

∗
are isotherm width and its location for adiabatic surface cases
that can be estimated with Equation 2.31 and Equation 2.32, and the variation δx∗ ≪
73
102
100
10-2
σ∗
Equation 2.67
Equation 2.68
10-4 Equation 2.69
σc∗ ≈ 0.6b∗
ymax
∗ 1+2Ro ∗
σc ≈ 0.6 1+Ro ybmax
10-6
10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure 2.10: The simulation result and criteria proposed Equation 2.70 to neglect
heat source size effect for isotherm width
x∗max , δy∗ ≪ ymax

∗
. The isotherm width can be expressed implicitly as:
1
= T∗ ≈
Ro x∗max ,ymax
∗ ,h∗
h
"h #
∗
1 ∗
K1 (rmax ) 2δx∗ x∗max + 2δy∗ ymax
∗
+ h∗ rmax
∗2
∗ ∗
≈ exp (−xmax ) − ∗
− 2(δx − 1)K0 (rmax )
2 rmax
(2.71)
∗
∂T
0= =
∂x∗ x∗maxh ,ymax
∗ ,h∗
h
1 1
= exp (−xmax ) ∗2 x∗max K2 (rmax
∗ ∗
) 2δx∗ x∗max + 2δy∗ ymax
∗
+ h∗ rmax
∗2
+
2 rmax
∗

K1 (rmax ) δx∗ (4x∗max − 2) + 2δy∗ ymax
∗
+ x∗max h∗ (x∗max − 2) − 2x∗max + h∗ ymax
∗2
+ ∗
+
rmax
+2(δx∗ − 1)K0 (rmax
∗
)} (2.72)
74
According to the implicit expression of isotherm width and its location neglecting
surface heat loss Equation 2.49 and Equation 2.50,
∗ 1
K0 (rmax )= exp (x∗max ) (2.73)
Ro
r ∗ exp (x∗max )
∗
,K1 (rmax ) = − max ∗ , (2.74)
xmax Ro
∗ ∗ 2 ∗
K2 (rmax ) = K0 (rmax ) + ∗ K1 (rmax ) (2.75)
rmax
Bringing the relationships of equations 2.73 to 2.75 into Equation 2.71 and 2.72,
∗ ∗ 2 ∗ 2
∗ 2 ∗ 2

xmax x max + y max xmax + y max
δx∗ ≈ ∗ 2 ∗ 2
· h∗ δy∗ ≈ − · h∗ (2.76)
xmax + (x∗max − 1)ymax ∗
2ymax
For accepted relative error EA % for isotherm width,
δy∗ ∗2
rmax
∗
= ∗2 h∗ ≤ EA % (2.77)
ymax 2ymax
The criteria to ignore surface convection under 10% accepted error is:
∗2
ymax h π n i−1/n
2
h∗c = 0.2 ∗2
≈ 0.2 1 + Ro (2.78)
rmax 2e
2 ′ h n i1/n
20α (h + h ) π 2
dc,h = 1 + Ro (2.79)
kU 2 2e
where n = 0.9405 is the optimal blending parameter. The criterion of Equation 2.78
is compared to the numerical solution from Equation 2.5 in Figure 2.11.
75
Numerical result from Equation 2.5
0
10 Criteria Equation 2.78
10-2
h∗c
10-4
10-6
10-2 100 102

Ro
Figure 2.11: The numerical result and criteria proposed Equation 2.78 to neglect
surface convection for isotherm width
76
Chapter 3
Characteristic values of a
two-dimensional point moving heat
source
3.1 Abstract
This paper presents engineering expressions for characteristic values of 12 magnitudes

associated with a moving point heat source in a 2D space: location of maximum
width, trailing length, centerline cooling rate, leading length, centerline heating rate,
maximum temperature, gradient of maximum temperature, aspect ratio, melting ef-
ficiency, cooling time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, solidification time, and thickness of the
heat affected zone. A modification of the heat intensity enables the extension of pre-
dictions to dissimilar thicknesses and alternative joint configurations. All proposed
expressions are obtained with a systematic approach and are accurate to within 8 %
of the exact solutions, except heating rate at 16 %. The explicit expressions proposed
depend on a single dimensionless group that captures all possible cases. This dimen-
sionless number is the Rosenthal number (Ro) for all cases, except for the estimation
of maximum temperature, for which a dimensionless width is used. The engineering
equations obtained are simple enough to be evaluated with a calculator or spread-
sheet, and are useful for a broad range of diverse applications such as welding, additive
manufacturing, heat treating, sliding contact, and more.
77
Table 3.1: Notation.
c J kg−1 K−1 Specific heat

d m Thickness of substrate
f Correction factor
i J kg−1 Enthalpy
k W m−1 K−1 Thermal conductivity
q W Power of heat source absorbed by substrate
Ro 1 Rosenthal number
St 1 Stefan number
t s Time
t8/5 s Cooling time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C
T K Temperature
T0 K Initial temperature
Tmax K Maximum temperature
dTmax /dy K m−1 Gradient of maximum temperature
U m s−1 Travel speed of moving heat source
W Lambert function
Greek symbols
α m2 s−1 Thermal diffusivity
ηm 1 Melting efficiency
◦
φ Actual heat flow angle
γ 1 Euler-Mascheroni constant (0.5772. . .)
Superscripts
∗
Dimensionless value
78
+
Correction for intermediate values
˙ Time derivative
Subscripts
500 500 ◦ C
800 800 ◦ C
b Isotherm trailing point
c Variable of interest
eff Effective value
f Isotherm leading point
HAZ Heat affected zone
III Regime III
IV Regime IV
i Intermediate value
m Melting
max Isotherm half-width
sl Solidification
Others
A 1 Aspect ratio of isotherm
Acronyms
EBW Electron Beam Welding
GMAW Gas Metal Arc Welding
GTAW Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
LBW Laser Beam Welding
SAW Submerged Arc Welding
79
SMAW Shielded Metal Arc Welding
3.2 Introduction
Moving heat sources are ubiquitous in heat transfer problems, with practical techno-
logical applications including welding [174, 175, 179], heat treatment [86, 106, 124],
tribology [89, 94], grinding [25, 132], machining [51, 107], and railroad wheel and
track contact [102, 103].
Despite the abundance of analytical solutions (e.g. [174, 175, 179, 212], also Green’s
function methods [157]), numerical solutions (e.g. [59, 74]), and empirical expressions
(some of them compiled in [173, 181]), this knowledge is seldom used by practitioners.
The main obstacle is that in practice, important temperatures are known, such as
transformation temperatures, melting temperatures, and degradation temperatures,
and what is desired is to know the extent of their reach into a substrate, the cooling
or heating rate around transformation, or other process information associated with
a particular temperature.
Analytic or numerical solutions calculate the temperature at a given location, which
is the inverse of what is typically needed in practice; thus they do not readily provide
an answer to many practical questions. Root finding and optimization algorithms
can be used to obtain the desired answer, but at an increased level of involvement,
which is often beyond the abilities or time availability of practitioners. The need
to use numerical tools also makes the development of metamodels significantly more
difficult.
Dimensional analysis indicates that idealized moving heat source problems can be
much reduced in their number of degrees of freedom with mathematical exactness; for
the cases studied in this paper, all magnitudes associated with a temperature depend
80
on a single dimensionless group, regardless the nature of the heat source and the base
material. The theory of blending [34] enables the development of explicit expressions
that approximate inverse functions with high accuracy.
This paper applies the methodologies of scaling analysis, asymptotic analysis, and
blending techniques to the exact solutions originally developed by Rosenthal [174,
175] and verified experimentally in [176] for the study of temperature fields in weld-
ing. These exact solutions were independently developed also by Rykalin [179], Wil-
son [215] and Roberts [171] (for the case of mass transfer). Based on the exact
solution, 12 novel characteristic values associated with the isotherm T (x, y) = Tc
are calculated, represented in Figure 3.1. The approach used here is based on the
Minimal Representation and Correction Factors methodology [135], and the details
of its application to a moving point heat source on a thin plate are in [130], where
only the maximum isotherm half-width (ymax ) was analyzed as demonstration of the
methodology.
Closed-form, explicit expressions are presented for 7 new primary characteristic
values (in addition to isotherm half-width ymax studied in [130]), and 5 associated
secondary characteristic values. The new primary characteristic values are: the lo-
cation of isotherm half-width xmax , the trailing length of isotherm xb , the centerline
cooling rate Ṫb , the leading length of isotherm xf , the centerline heating rate Ṫf , the
maximum temperature Tmax and the gradient of maximum temperature dTmax /dy.
The associated secondary characteristic values studied are the aspect ratio A of
isotherm, the melting efficiency ηm which is a rough approximation to estimate the
dilution of filler metal in welding, especially important in corrosion resistant alloys
such as stainless steels [48], centerline cooling time t8/5 from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C corre-
sponding to the time it takes for the center line to cool from 800◦ Cto 500◦ C, and a key
determinant of hardness in weldments [23, 87], solidification time tsl which is a rough
approximation of the time needed to dissipate the latent heat of fusion, and thickness
of Heat Affected Zone ∆yHAZ which is the difference between isotherm half-widths.
81
The relevance of the characteristic values studied is detailed in [207].
The methodology used does not have problems of convergence, and the explicit ex-
pressions obtained can be implemented directly into higher order models, or spread-
sheets for direct estimations. The effects of the parameters are directly visible in the
expressions, and facilitate the intuitive understanding of the problem.
3.3 Mathematical model
The mathematical model employed here is the 2D solution for a moving point heat
source in steady state in Eulerian coordinates presented in [171, 175, 215]:

q Ux Ur
T (x, y) = T0 + exp − K0 (3.1)
2πkd 2α 2α
where K0 is modified Bessel function of the second kind and zeroth order, x and y
are two independent variables illustrated in Figure 3.1, q is the heat input of the
point heat source, d is the thickness of the substrate (in a 2D formulation, q and d
always appear together as q/d = q ′ , where q ′ is the intensity per unit thickness in 2D
model), k is the thermal conductivity of the substrate, T0 is the temperature of the
substrate far from the heat source, U is the velocity of the heat source relative to the
substrate, and α is the thermal diffusivity of the substrate. The radial coordinate r
p
is defined in relation to the independent variables as r = x2 + y 2 . In the welding
community, this solution is called the “thin-plate Rosenthal solution”, although it is
also applicable to thick substrates provided the heat source resembles a line through
the thickness. In these cases, this same solution is often called the “moving line heat
source solution”
The scope of this model and its range of validity is analyzed in detail in [130],
including the effect of a finite heat source, substrate thickness, variable material
properties, latent heat, and surface heat losses (convection and radiation). For the
case of welding, these effects are shown to be secondary for most practical applications
for temperatures below the melting point. The unrealistic asymptotic behavior at the
82
origin is an artifact of considering the heat source as a point and is not a problem
in practice. Further validation against experimental and numerical data the authors
found in the literature is also performed in this work.
Equation 3.1 can be rewritten in dimensionless form as:
T ∗ = exp (−x∗ ) K0 (r ∗ ) (3.2)
where:
2πkd (T − T0 )
T∗ = (3.3)
q
Ux
x∗ = (3.4)
2α
Uy
y∗ = (3.5)
2α
Ur
r∗ = (3.6)
2α
∗
In Equations 3.3-3.6, the superscript indicates a dimensionless quantity. Dimen-
sional analysis suggests that dimensionless characteristic values for an isotherm Tc
(except for maximum temperature) depend only on the Rosenthal number (Ro) [130]:
q
Ro = (3.7)
2πkd (Tc − T0 )
In this paper, expressions of characteristic values in asymptotic regimes are pre-

sented for the two regimes corresponding to high and low Ro. For consistency with
previous work [130], these regimes are named Regime III (high Ro), and Regime IV
(low Ro). Based on these regimes, correction factors are developed to provide explicit
estimates at the intermediate Ro numbers regime with accuracy and simplicity. The
correction factors are especially well suited for engineering applications.
83
Figure 3.1: Characteristic values of isotherm T = Tc for moving heat source prob-
lems [207].
84
3.4 Location of maximum isotherm half-width xmax
For xmax the location of maximum isotherm half-width as illustrated in Figure 3.1,
the dimensionless asymptotic behavior is:
π
b∗maxIII (Ro) = −
x Ro2 for Regime III (3.8)
2e
∗ 4 2
bmaxIV (Ro) = −
x exp −2γ − for Regime IV (3.9)
Ro Ro
Equations 3.8 and 3.9 have an important asymmetry; the former is a power law,
while the latter is an exponential. In this case, the advanced blending techniques
explained in the Appendix yield a lower blending error than traditional blending
techniques. The lowest blending error is obtained using the alternative methodology
described in 3.A (Equation 3.113), resulting in:

2 π 4
b∗+
xmax (Ro) = − exp − Ro2 + + aRob (3.10)
Ro 2e exp (2γ) Ro
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 1.427, b = 1.077, with a maximum
error of 6.3%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 0.6799, and their error against
the exact solution is less than 10 % for Ro > 1.650 or Ro < 0.2999. Traditional
blending (Equation 3.104) would have resulted in a higher error (18% versus 6.3%).
Correction factors for asymptotic behaviors of equations 3.8 and 3.9 are obtained
from Equation 3.10, yielding:

2 8 2ae b−2
fxmaxIII (Ro) = exp − 1+ + Ro for Regime III
Ro π exp (2γ − 1) Ro3 π
(3.11)
h π a i
fxmaxIV (Ro) = 1 + exp (2γ − 1)Ro3 + exp (2γ) Rob+1 for Regime IV
8 4
(3.12)
The engineering expressions with units are obtained for the location of isotherm half-
85
width as:
αq 2
b+
xmax bmaxIII fxmaxIII (Ro) = −
=x fxmaxIII (Ro) for Regime III
4eπUd2 k 2 (Tc − T0 )2
(3.13)
16παdk (Tc − T0 )
b+
x bmaxIV fxmaxIV (Ro) = −
max = x fx (Ro) for Regime IV
Uq exp (2γ + 2/Ro) maxIV
(3.14)
3.5 Trailing length of isotherm xb
The trailing length, xb , is the length of the hot area behind the heat source. The
trailing length x∗b is calculated by solving the negative root of Equation 3.2 (T ∗ = Tc∗ )
at the centerline (y ∗ = 0) (the positive root is the leading length). Asymptotic analysis
of Equation 3.2 yields:
π 2
b∗bIII (Ro) = −
x Ro for Regime III (3.15)
2
1
b∗bIV (Ro) = − 2 exp −
x −γ for Regime IV (3.16)
Ro
The blending equation for trailing length x∗b employing blending Equation 3.113
with a positive exponent is:

1 h π i
b∗+
xb (Ro) = − exp − 2 exp (−γ) + Ro2 + aRob (3.17)
Ro 2
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 0.7659, b = 1.541, with a maximum
error of 6.8%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 0.5111, and have an error
below 10 % against the exact solution when Ro > 1.700 or Ro < 0.1919. Similarly as
before, the choice of blending technique was based on smallest error. If blending had
been performed using Equation 3.104, the error would have been larger: 12% instead
of 6.8% .
The blending Equation 3.17 generates the following correction factors for asymp-
totics Equation 3.15 and Equation 3.16:

1 4 −2 2a b−2
fxbIII (Ro) = exp − 1+ Ro + Ro for Regime III (3.18)
Ro π exp (γ) π
h π a i
fxbIV (Ro) = 1 + exp (γ) Ro2 + exp (γ) Rob for Regime IV (3.19)
4 2
86
The engineering expressions with units are obtained by substituting Equation 3.4
and 3.7 into Equation 3.15 and Equation 3.16:
αq 2
b+
x bbIII fxbIII (Ro) = −
b = x fxbIII (Ro) for Regime III (3.20)
4πUd2 k 2 (Tc − T0 )2
4α
b+
x bbIV fxbIV (Ro) = −
b = x 1
fxb (Ro) for Regime IV (3.21)
U exp γ + Ro IV
3.6 Centerline cooling rate Ṫb
The centerline cooling rate is a crucial characteristic value to determine because of its
dominant influence on the microstructure when phase transformations are present.
Because of the Eulerian formulation of the problem, the cooling rate is defined using
material derivatives:
DT
Ṫb = (3.22)
Dt xb
Using the following definition of t∗ [207]:
U 2t
t∗ = (3.23)
2α
the cooling rate can be calculated using the following dimensionless expression:
4πkαd DT ∂T ∗
Ṫb∗ = =− (3.24)
qU 2 Dt xb ∂x∗ xb
The derivative ∂T ∗ /∂x∗ at the trailing point xb is derived from Equation 3.2,
resulting in:
∗ 1
Tḃ bIII (Ro) = − for Regime III (3.25)
πRo3
ḃ ∗ 1 1
T bIV (Ro) = − exp +γ for Regime IV (3.26)
2 Ro
The blending equation for cooling rate Ṫb using blending Equation 3.113 with n = −1
is:
1

ḃ ∗+ (Ro) = − exp Ro
T b (3.27)
πRo3 + 2exp (−γ) + aRo−b
87
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 3.839, b = −2.108 resulting in a
maximum error of 5.8%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 0.3338 and have an
error below 10 % for Ro > 0.7569 or Ro < 0.1776. The choice of blending technique
was based on smallest error. If blending had been performed using Equation 3.104,
the error would have been larger: 18% instead of 5.8%.
−1
1 2 −3 −b−3
fṪb (Ro) = exp 1 + exp (−γ) Ro + aRo for Regime III (3.28)
III Ro π
−1
1 3 1 −b
fṪb (Ro) = 1 + π exp (γ) Ro + a exp (γ) Ro for Regime IV (3.29)
IV 2 2
The engineering expressions with units are obtained for cooling rate:
ḃ +
ḃ 2πU 2 d2 k 2 (Tc − T0 )3
T b = T bIII fṪb (Ro) = − fṪb (Ro) for Regime III (3.30)
III αq 2 III

ḃ +
ḃ U 2q 1
T b = T bIV fṪb (Ro) = − exp γ + fṪb (Ro) for Regime IV (3.31)
IV 8παdk Ro IV
3.7 Leading length of isotherm xf
The leading length of an isotherm, xf , is a metric of heat conduction against advection

ahead of the heat source. The magnitude x∗f is the positive root of Equation 3.2 for
T = Tc at the centerline. Asymptotic analysis of Equation 3.2 yields expressions for
the leading length in Regime III and IV:
1
b∗fIII (Ro) = W 2πRo2
x for Regime III (3.32)
4
∗ 1
bfIV (Ro) =2 exp −γ −
x for Regime IV (3.33)
Ro
where W is the Lambert W function [41], defined as the solution to x = W (x) exp [W (x)].
The Lambert W function can be calculated numerically with existing code such as
in Matlab, Scipy, and Mathematica. When a precoded function is not available,
approximate functions using ubiquitous closed-form expressions can be used. The
88
approximation in [17] has a maximum error of 0.196 %, but it is tedious to input and
prone to human input error. 3.B uses blending techniques to arrive to a much simpler
expressions, albeit with a larger error of 5.9 %.
Blending in this case is performed using Equation 3.104 with n = −1 and applying
the weight factor to the Regime IV asymptotics (neither of both asymptotics obeys
power law), resulting in:
1
b∗f (Ro) =
x 2
(3.34)
4W −1 1
(2πRo ) + exp(γ +
2
1
Ro
+ aRob )
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 1.548, b = 1.389, with a blending
error smaller than 7.3%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 0.6819 and have
an error below 10 % for Ro > 1.246 or Ro < 0.2653. If blending had been performed
using Equation 3.104 with modification on asymptotic for Regime III, the error would
have been larger: 30% instead of 7.3%.
−1
1 2
1 b
fxfIII (Ro) = 1 + W 2πRo exp γ + + aRo for Regime III (3.35)
8 Ro
" #−1
1
8 exp −γ − Ro
fxfIV (Ro) = + exp aRob for Regime IV (3.36)
W 2πRo2
The corresponding engineering expressions with units are obtained by substituting

Equation 3.4 into Equation 3.32 and Equation 3.33, resulting in:
α
b+
x bfIII fxfIII (Ro) =
f = x W 2πRo2 fxfIII (Ro) for Regime III (3.37)
2U
+ 4α 1
bf = x
x bfIV fxfIV (Ro) = exp −γ − fxfIV (Ro) for Regime IV (3.38)
U Ro
3.8 Centerline heating rate Ṫf
The centerline heating rate, Ṫf , is relevant to understand phase transformations and
phase changes in thermal processes. The derivations for Ṫf follow the same path as
89
those for Ṫb , also involving Equation 3.24. Asymptotic analysis of Equation 3.2 yields:
ḃ ∗ (Ro) = 2
T for Regime III (3.39)
fIII
Ro
ḃ ∗ 1 1
T fIV (Ro) = exp γ + for Regime IV (3.40)
2 Ro
Blending for the heating rate Ṫf∗ is performed using Equation 3.113 with n = −1,
resulting in:
ḃ ∗+ = exp (1/Ro)
T f (3.41)
1
2
Ro + 2 exp (−γ) + aRob
where the optimal blending parameters are a = −0.6618, b = 0.5055, with a blending
error smaller than 16%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 3.440 and have an
error below 10 % for Ro > 175.6 or Ro < 0.03730. If blending had been performed
using Equation 3.104, the error would have been larger: 36% instead of 16%. The
blending Equation 3.41 generates the following correction factors for asymptotics
Equation 3.39 and Equation 3.40:
exp(1/Ro)
fṪf (Ro) = for Regime III (3.42)
III 1 + 4Ro exp (−γ) + 2aRob−1
−1
1
fṪf (Ro) = for Regime IV (3.43)
IV 1 + 4 exp (γ) Ro + a2 exp (γ) Rob
1

Equation 3.3 into Equation 3.39 and Equation 3.40, resulting in:
2
ḃ + = T
T ḃ f (Ro) = U (Tc − T0 ) f (Ro) for Regime III (3.44)
f fIII xfIII xfIII
α
ḃ +
ḃ U 2q 1
T f = T fIV fxfIV (Ro) = exp γ + fxfIV (Ro) for Regime IV (3.45)
8παdk Ro
3.9 Maximum temperature Tmax
The maximum temperature of a point at given y is an indication of possible thermal

effects that are desired or should be avoided. In contrast with all previous char-
acteristic values that depended on the Rosenthal number, in this case, dependence
∗
is on position and is the reverse of isotherm half-width ymax (Ro) studied in [130].
90
Asymptotic analysis of Equation 3.2 result in the asymptotic expressions of maxi-
mum temperature for Regime III and Regime IV:
r
b∗ ∗ π 1
TmaxIII (yc ) = for Regime III (3.46)
2e yc∗

1
TbmaxIV (yc ) = ln
∗ ∗
for Regime IV (3.47)
yc∗
The asymptotic behavior of Equation 3.47 cannot be extended into Regime III to
perform blending because it changes sign for yc∗ = 1. 3.A describes the blending
approach in this case, in which a modified function is proposed for the asymptotic of
Regime IV:

1 1
Tbmax
∗′
(yc∗ ) = ln ∗
+ modified for Regime IV (3.48)
IV
yc a
which is valid for the whole domain when a < 1. The blending of Equation 3.46 and
Equation 3.48 using equations 3.119 and 3.104 is:
r n n 1/n
c∗ + π 1 1 1
T max = + ln + (3.49)
2e yc∗ yc∗ a
where the optimal blending value is a =0.3350 and n =-2.013, with a blending error
smaller than 2.1%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 0.4645 and have an error
below 10 % for Ro > 1.195 or Ro < 0.1632. The blending Equation 3.49 generates
the following correction factors for asymptotics Equation 3.46 and Equation 3.47:
( "r #n )1/n
2e ∗ 1 1
fTmax
∗ (Ro) = 1+ y ln + for Regime III (3.50)
III π c yc
∗ a
  n 1/n
 r 
fTmax
∗ (Ro) = 1 +  π
1
 for Regime IV (3.51)
IV  2e y ∗ln 1 + 1 
c y∗ a c
The corresponding dimensionless engineering expression for maximum temperature

are generated by substituting Equation 3.3 and 3.5 into Equations 3.46 and 3.47,
91
resulting in:
αq
Tbmax
+
= T0 + TbmaxIII − T0 fTmaxIII (yc∗ ) = T0 + √ fTmaxIII (yc∗ ) (3.52)
2πeUdkyc
for Regime III

q 2α 1
Tbmax
+
= T0 + Tbmax
′ ∗
− T0 fTmaxIV (yc ) = T0 + ln + fTmaxIV (yc∗)
IV
2πdk Uyc a
(3.53)
for Regime IV
3.10 Gradient of maximum temperature dTmax /dy
The maximum temperature experienced by each point in the plate depends on the
distance to the center line yc ; therefore, there is a lateral gradient associated with
the maximum temperature in the substrate. The gradient of maximum temperature
is useful to build single-term predictions of thickness of areas affected by different
temperatures such as the HAZ (heat affected zone) in welding. The dimensionless
∗
maximum temperature gradient can be calculated by the derivative of Tmax (y ∗) =
T [x∗max (y ∗), y ∗], as shown in [207]:
∗
dTmax ∂T ∗
= (3.54)
dy ∗ ∂y ∗ x∗max ,ymax
∗
with the following asymptotics:

r
\
dT ∗
max 2e 1
(Ro) = − for Regime III (3.55)
dy ∗ π Ro2
III

\
dT ∗
max 1 1
(Ro) = − exp γ + for Regime IV (3.56)
dy ∗ 2 Ro
IV
∗
Blending for the maximum temperature gradient dTmax /dy ∗ is performed using
Equation 3.113 with n = −1, resulting in:
+
\
dT ∗
max
1
exp( Ro )
= −p π (3.57)
dy ∗ 2e
Ro2 + 2exp(−γ) + aRob
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 0.2765, b = 1.629, with a blending
error smaller than 6.6%. The asymptotic behaviors cross at Ro = 0.3903 and have an
92
error below 10 % for Ro > 0.4144 or Ro < 0.3158. If blending had been performed
using Equation 3.104, the error would have been larger: 11% instead of 6.6%. The
blending Equation 3.57 generates the following correction factors for asymptotics
Equation 3.55 and Equation 3.56:
" r r #−1
1 8e 2e b−2
f dTmax | (Ro) = exp 1+ exp (−γ)Ro−2 + a Ro for Regime III
dy III Ro π π
(3.58)
r −1
π 2 1 b
f dTmax | (Ro) = 1 + exp (γ) Ro + a exp (γ) Ro for Regime IV
dy IV 8e 2
(3.59)
The corresponding engineering expressions with units are:

+ √
\
dTmax
\
dTmax 2πeUdk (Tc − T0 )2
= f dTmax | (Ro) = − f dTmax | (Ro) (3.60)
dy dy dy III αq dy III
III
for Regime III
+
\
dTmax
\
dTmax Uq 1
= f dTmax | (Ro) = − exp γ + f dTmax | (Ro) (3.61)
dy dy dy IV 8παdk Ro dy IV
IV
for Regime IV
3.11 Aspect ratio A
The aspect ratio of an isotherm is easily visualized in practice, and it is also a proxy
for Ro because it depends only on Ro. The aspect ratio, A, is the ratio of length
(xf − xb ) to width (2ymax) of an isotherm:
xf − xb x∗f − x∗b
A= = ∗
(3.62)
2ymax 2ymax
The asymptotic expressions for trailing length, leading length and isotherm half-
width yield the following expressions for Regime III and Regime IV:
r
c πe
AIII (Ro) = Ro for Regime III (3.63)
8
c IV (Ro) = 1
A for Regime IV (3.64)
93
The aspect ratio of 1 in Regime IV is consistent with the radical symmetry of the
pure conduction problem. Blending in this case can be done using the traditional
approach (Equation 3.99):
r n 1/n
c + πe
A = 1+ Ro (3.65)
8
with the optimal blending parameter n = 1.972 and an error always less than 3.3%.
The crossover point for the asymptotes is Ro = 0.9679. Asymptotic expressions result
in an error less than 10 % for Ro > 2.095 or Ro < 0.4471. Equation 3.65 yields the
following correction factors for Equation 3.63 and Equation 3.64:
" r !n #1/n
8 1
fAIII (Ro) = 1 + for Regime III (3.66)
πe Ro
r n 1/n
πe
fAIV (Ro) = 1 + Ro for Regime IV (3.67)
8
Equation 3.7 into Equations 3.63 and 3.64 to obtain:
√
c +
c 2eq
A = AIII fAIII (Ro) = √ fAIII (Ro) for Regime III (3.68)
8 πdk (Tc − T0 )
c+ = A
A c IV fA (Ro) =1 · fA (Ro) for Regime IV (3.69)
IV IV
3.12 Melting efficiency ηm
Melting efficiency, ηm , is a magnitude defined for fusion welding processes; despite the
limitations of Rosenthal’s equation, expressions for melting efficiency are qualitatively
correct, and quantitatively not far from reality, as reviewed in [207].
The melting efficiency is the ratio of the energy used to reach liquidus temperature
relative to the total energy deposited from the heat source. For 2D moving heat source
problems, the energy per unit thickness needed to reach melting is ρc(Tm −T0 )/d, and
the width of the fusion zone is (2 ymax,m), where subscript m indicates the isotherm
of melting temperature. The melting efficiency can then be calculated as:
ρcU(Tm − T0 )(2d ymax,m )
ηm =
q
94
which can be rewritten using equations 3.5 and 3.7 as:
∗
2ymax,m
ηm = (3.70)
πRom
where Rom corresponds to melting temperature Tm (liquidus temperature). Replacing

∗
the asymptotic expressions for ybmax , Equation 3.70 yields the following dimensionless
expressions:
r
2
ηbmIII (Rom ) = for Regime III (3.71)
πe
4
ηbmIV (Rom ) = for Regime IV (3.72)
1
πRom exp γ + Rom
∗
Because ηm is based on ymax , the correction factors for Regime III and Regime IV
∗
are the same as correction factors for ymax .
Equation 3.71 indicates that for 2D moving point heat source, the maximum of
melting efficiency reaches 48.39 % for large Rosenthal numbers, but it never reaches
100 % because of the superheat inside the melt pool and the temperature gradients
on substrate. Equation 3.72 indicates that for small Ro, heat conduction decreases
the melting efficiency significantly.
Equations 3.71 and 3.72 suggest that the melting efficiency is always greater than
zero, regardless of the power of the heat source; in practice, the finite size of the heat
source implies that melting efficiency can be zero for diffuse heat sources [207].
Equation 3.7 into Equations 3.71 and 3.72, obtaining:
r
+ 2
ηbm = ηbmIII fηmIII (Rom ) = fy (Rom ) for Regime III (3.73)
πe maxIII
+ 8dk (Tc − T0 )
ηbm = ηbmIV fηmIV (Rom ) = fymaxIV (Rom ) for Regime IV (3.74)
q exp γ + Ro1m
where fymaxIII (Ro) and fymaxIV (Ro) are the correction factors for isotherm half-width
calculated from [130].
95
3.13 Cooling time t8/5
The characteristic value t8/5 is a metric of cooling rate for steels. t8/5 is the time a
point at centerline takes to cool down from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, which is equivalent to
the time it takes for the heat source travelling the difference of the trailing length of
two temperatures xb,800 and xb,500 ; thus:
xb,800 − xb,500
t8/5 = (3.75)
U
where xb,800 and xb,500 are rear lengths for 800 ◦ C and 500 ◦ C. Substituting Equa-
tion 3.20 and Equation 3.21 into Equation 3.75 gives:

+ αq 2 fxbIII (Ro500 ) fxbIII (Ro800 )
td8/5 III = − (3.76)
4πU 2 k 2 d2 (T500 − T0 )2 (T800 − T0 )2
for Regime III

+ 4α 1 1
td
8/5 IV = 2 exp − fxbIV (Ro500 ) − exp − fxbIV (Ro800 )
U exp (γ) Ro500 Ro800
(3.77)
for Regime IV
where Ro800 and Ro500 are the Rosenthal numbers for 800 ◦ C and 500 ◦ C, T800 and
T500 represents 800 ◦ C and 500 ◦ C, fxbIII and fxbIV are correction factors for trailing
length of Regime III and IV. When Ro800 ≫ 1, in Equation 3.76, fxbIII (Ro500 ) =
fxbIII (Ro800 ) ≈ 1; when Ro500 ≪ 1, in Equation 3.77, fxbIV (Ro500 ) = fxbIV (Ro800 ) ≈
1.
The time t8/5 can be approximated by using the cooling rate calculated above:
800◦ C − 500◦ C
t8/5 ≈ (3.78)
Ṫb ,i
where Ṫb ,i is the cooling rate of Ti between 500 ◦ C and 800 ◦ C. Replacing Equation 3.30
and Equation 3.31 into Equation 3.78 produces the following approximations:
+ αq 2 (T800 − T500 )
td
8/5 III ≈ f (Roi )−1 for Regime III (3.79)
2πU 2 d2 k 2 (Ti − T0 )3 ṪbIII
+ 8παdk(T800 − T500 )
td
8/5 IV ≈ fṪb (Roi )−1 for Regime IV (3.80)
1 IV
qU 2 exp γ + Roi
96
where Roi is the Rosenthal number for intermediate temperature Ti , and fṪb (Roi )−1
III
−1
and fṪb (Roi ) are the reciprocal of correction factors for cooling rate.
IV
There is an intermediate temperature Ti for which equations 3.76 and 3.77 are
exactly the same as equations 3.79 and 3.80. The exact expression of that intermediate
temperature is not practical, but following [207], it can be approximated as:
p
Ti ≈ T0 + (T800 − T0 ) (T500 − T0 ) (3.81)
which for a 20 ◦ C preheat corresponds to Ti ≈632◦ C.
3.14 Solidification time at centerline tsl
The Rosenthal model can be extended to capture phase transformations when their
presence causes second-order effects. At the trailing point xb , the enthalpy loss rate
can be estimated as:
Di
= c Ṫb (3.82)
Dt xb
where i is enthalpy per unit mass, and c is the effective specific heat assumed constant
for all points in the domain, whether they are solid or liquid state.
When phase transformations have a small effect on the solution (as is the case of
steels [197]), Rosenthal’s formulation can be extended to estimate the phase transfor-
mation time by considering the rate of enthalpy loss. For solidification, the time tsl
could be calculated with the latent heat of solidification isl , which can be presented
in dimensionless form:
b∗ πRo2m
tslIII = for Regime III (3.83)
St
b∗ 2
tslIV = for Regime IV (3.84)
1
Rom St exp γ + Rom
where Rom is Rosenthal number corresponding to melting temperature, t∗sl is normal-
97
ized time and St is the Stefan number:
U 2 tsl
t∗sl = (3.85)
2α
c (Tm − T0 )
St = (3.86)
isl
where Tm (“melting temperature”) is a temperature representative of the solidifica-

tion, typically intermediate between liquidus and solidus.
The corresponding engineering expression with units can be expressed as:
b isl αq 2 isl
t+
slIII = − = f (Rom )−1 for Regime III (3.87)
Di/Dt|xb 2πU d k (Tm − T0 ) c ṪbIII
2 2 2 3
isl 8παdk i
b
t+
slIV =− = sl fṪb (Rom )−1 for Regime IV (3.88)
Di/Dt|xb 2 1
qU exp γ + Rom c IV
where Tm (“melting temperature”) is a temperature representative of the solidifica-

tion, typically intermediate between liquidus and solidus, Rom is the corresponding
Rosenthal number, fṪb (Rom )−1 and fṪb (Rom )−1 are the reciprocal of correction
III IV
factors for cooling rate. Note the similarity of equations 3.87 and 3.88 with equa-
tions 3.79 and 3.80, which are equivalent if the factor isl /c, which has units of tem-
perature, is expressed as a temperature variation.
The extension of Rosenthal model can be applied to other phase transformations,
for example austenite decomposition.
3.15 Thickness of the heat affected zone ∆y HAZ
The heat affected zone (HAZ) is a central concept in welding and thermal cutting
of metals. It is defined as the amount of material that experiences temperatures
between the melting temperature Tm (typically solidus) and a temperature specific
to the metal THAZ (typically Ac,1 in the case of carbon steels. The thickness of the
HAZ is then defined as:
∆yHAZ = ymax,HAZ − ymax,m (3.89)
98
where ymax,HAZ is the half-width of the isotherm THAZ and ymax,m is the half-width of
the melting isotherm Tm . Substituting THAZ and Tm into blending results of isotherm
half-width ymax [130] results in the following predictions for thickness of the HAZ:

+ αq fymaxIII (RoHAZ ) fymaxIII (Rom )
c
∆y HAZ = √ − for Regime III (3.90)
2πeUdk THAZ − T0 Tm − T0

+ 4α fymaxIV (RoHAZ ) fymaxIV (Rom )
c
∆y = − for Regime IV (3.91)
HAZ
exp (γ) U exp (1/RoHAZ ) exp (1/Rom )
For a relatively thin HAZ, its thickness can be approximated using the lateral
temperature gradient:
c + ≈ Tm − THAZ = √ αq(Tm − THAZ ) f dTmax (Roi )−1 for Regime III (3.92)
∆y
2πeUkd(Ti − T0 )2 dy |III
HAZ
|dTmax /dy|i
c + ≈ Tm − THAZ = 8παdk(Tm − THAZ) f dTmax (Roi )−1 for Regime IV (3.93)
∆y
dy |IV
HAZ
|dTmax /dy|i 1
qU exp γ + Ro i
where dTmax /dy|i is the gradient of maximum temperature in a cross section, evalu-
ated at a temperature Ti intermediate between THAZ and Tm , Roi is the corresponding
Rosenthal number, and f dTmax | (Roi )−1 and f dTmax | (Roi )−1 are the reciprocal of
dy III dy IV
correction factors of maximum temperature gradient as in Equation 3.58 and Equa-

tion 3.59. The dimensionless counterpart of equations 3.92 and 3.93 is expressed
as:
d∗ HAZ ∗
∆y dTmax,m −1
∗
= (3.94)
Tm∗ − THAZ dy ∗
where the right hand member depends only on Ro, and can be estimated using Equa-
tion 3.57.
A good choice for intermediate temperature is:
p
Ti = T0 + (Tm − T0 ) (THAZ − T0 ) (3.95)
which makes equations 3.90 and 3.92 and equations 3.93 and 3.92 nearly equivalent.
For the asymptotics of Regime III, Equation 3.95 is exact.
99
3.16 Effect of joint configuration
The 2D moving point heat source model has two symmetrical heat flow paths, in the
direction of +y and −y with a heat intensity per unit thickness q/(2d) for each side.
This configuration could be extended to multiple paths of heat flow in thin plates,
such as those illustrated in Figure 3.2.
For a joint configuration involving m half-panels of thickness d1 , d2 , . . . , dm , there
are m paths of heat flow with independent heat inputs q1 , q2 , . . . , qm such that:
m
X
q= qi (3.96)
i=1
and each panel experiences its own heat intensity per unit thickness qj′ = qj /dj .
Considered individually, each panel behaves exactly as if it was a symmetric thin
plate with a heat intensity per unit thickness of:
′ 2qj
qeff = (3.97)
j
dj
All formulae developed above will be applicable to each individual heat path by
′
replacing q/d by qeff j
. When the heat intensity per unit thickness is the same for all
panels, this generalization is exact; when not, the asymmetry can cause heat transfer
from one plate to another, which is not captured by the symmetric 2D formulation
used here, and this generalization is only approximate.
An example of application of generalized joint configuration is the building of
high thin walls in additive manufacturing, shown in Figure 3.2(c). In this case, the
path of heat flow is only one (m =1), and all the predictions of characteristic values
apply exactly when using an effective heat intensity per unit thickness of 2q/d. This
can be interpreted also as considering an effective heat intensity qeff = 2q and the
nominal wall thickness, or a nominal heat intensity q and an effective wall thickness
deff = d/2. Another example is the case of a T-joint of members of equal thickness
(m =3, Figure 3.2(e)), assuming the heat intensity q is divided equally in all three
directions, the effective heat intensity per unit thickness in each direction would be
100
(2/3)q/d. This can be interpreted also as considering an effective heat intensity
qeff = (2/3)q and the nominal thickness, or a nominal heat intensity q and an effective
wall thickness deff = (3/2)d. These joints configurations are contemplated already in
standards such as [192].
Typically, the same characteristic values (such as cooling rate) are desirable for
all members of the joint. In this case, the generalization to m paths of heat flow is
exact, and the heat intensity applied to each path of heat flow is proportional to the
thickness of the path:
qj dj
= Pm (3.98)
q i=1 qi
where j = 1, 2 . . . m identifies each heat path. For example, for the dissimilar thickness
butt joint of Figure 3.2(b), d2 = 1.5d1 , resulting in q1 = qd1 /(d1 + 1.5d1 ) = 0.4q and
q2 = q1.5d1 /(d1 + 1.5d1 ) = 0.6q. In this case, the partition of heat for welding should
be 40 % on the thinner side, and 60 % on the thicker side. The same approach can be
applied to other joint configuration examples Figure 3.2(c) to 3.2(e). The practical
implementation of partition of heat in welding is discussed in detail in [207].
3.17 Validation
The proposed predictive expressions are validated against available published data
for cooling rate Ṫb , weld pool length (xf − xb ), maximum temperature (Tmax , away
from the centerline), HAZ thickness (∆yHAZ ), and isotherm aspect ratio A, shown
in figures 3.3 to 3.7.
Experimental values were collected for various welding processes including sur-
face hardening, Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW), Shielded Metal Arc Welding
(SMAW), Submerged Arc Welding (SAW), Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW), under
water wet welding, Laser Beam Welding (LBW) and Electron Beam Welding (EBW)
for a wide range of materials including aluminum, titanium, carbon steel, stainless
steel, ultra-high-strength steel and superalloys.
101
Tc
ym
ax q1 q2 ymax
d
q1
2ymax
Tc
d1 q1 Tc q2 d2
d1 d2
(a) Thin-wall additive manu- (b) Joining of different thick- ′ 2q

(c) Edge joint qeff = d1 +d2 .
′
facturing qeff = d2q1 . ′
ness plates qeff = d12q
+d2 .
d2
d2
ymax q2
q2
ymax
2ymax
Tc q2 d2
q1 Tc d1 q1 Tc q1 d1 q1 q1 d1
′ 2q ′ 2q ′ 2q
(d) Corner joint qeff = d1 +d2 . (e) Tee joint qeff = 2d1 +d2 . (f) Lap joint qeff = 2d1 +d2 .
′
Figure 3.2: Equivalent power source intensity (qeff ) and energy distribution (qi ) for
typical welding joint.
102
The thermal properties used for the calculation of predictive expressions were ob-
tained from the original sources, other literature, or software (JMatPro v11). When
temperature-dependent properties were available, effective values were obtained using
the methodology introduced in [130]. Thermal efficiency, when not listed in the orig-
inal sources, was assessed from the American Welding Society handbook [96]. The
far temperature T0 was either reported [99, 120, 142, 166, 184, 189] or assumed to be
20 ◦ C. The raw data from literature and all values used to calculate the points are
listed in the supporting online material.
Figure 3.3 compares the cooling rate predictions of Equation 3.27 with data for
nine published sources. In the comparison, the thermal efficiency is estimated 0.8 for
GMAW [63]. When cooling time t8/5 was provided instead of cooling rate [12, 99,

120, 166, 182, 184, 189], the cooling rate at 632 ◦ C was estimated as 300◦ C t8/5 , with
effective thermal properties calculated between 500 ◦ C and 800 ◦ C. The agreement
of the predictions with eight sources shows a relatively narrow scatter and a slight
underprediction (in absolute value) for large Ro numbers and a slight overprediction
in absolute value for small Ro numbers. The ninth source ([63]) shows cooling rates
much faster in absolute value than predicted. This discrepancy is because the data
considered corresponds to underwater wet welding, where the very intense convec-
tion invalidates the hypothesis of negligible surface heat losses. Surface heat losses
might also be the main source of the small systematic error observed. This effect is
considered in current work to be published separately.
x∗f − x
Figure 3.4 compares the weld pool length (b b∗b ) predicted using Equation 3.17,
against measurements for two different welding processes (GTAW in [109, 160], and
LBW in [46]). The thermal efficiency for [160] is assumed as 0.5. The comparison
shows a relatively narrow scatter and a no obvious bias.
Figure 3.5 compares maximum temperature away from the centerline predicted
using Equation 3.49 against experiments from five sources from the literature. In
this comparison, the thermal efficiency for EBW is estimated as 0.95, for LBW in
103
102
Dimensionless cooling rate Ṫb∗

100
10-2 K. Poorhaydari [166]

A. K. Shah [182]
T. Kasuya [99]
T. Fukuoka(air) [63]
10-4 S. Kou [111]
Equation 3.27 and exact solution
from Equation 3.2
10-6
10-1 100 101
Ro
Figure 3.3: Validation of predictions for cooling rate using Equation 3.27. The curve
corresponding to the exact solution (Equation 3.2) is undistinguishable within the
thickness of the line.
10 2
Dimensionless length (x∗f − x∗b )
10 0
V. Pavelic [160]
R. Ducharme [46]
10 -2 S. Kou [109]
10 -4
10-1 10 0 10 1
Ro
Figure 3.4: Validation of predictions of isotherm length b

l∗ = x
b∗f − x
b∗b using equa-
tions 3.34 and 3.17.
104
conduction mode as 0.15, for LBW keyhole mode as 0.9 [190]. The comparison shows
a relatively narrow scatter and a consistent slight overprediction against most authors.
101
Dimensionless maximum temperature Tmax
∗
100 M. Zain-ul-abdein [2]

M. Zain-ul-abdein (T-joint) [2]
J. L. Meseguer-Valdenebro [142]
D. T. Swift-Hook [190]
C. Luo [131]
Equation 3.49 and exact solution
10-1 from Equation 3.2
10-2 10-1 100 101

yc∗
Figure 3.5: Validation of predictions of maximum temperature using Equation 3.49.

The curve corresponding to the exact solution (Equation 3.2) is undistinguishable
within the thickness of the line.
Figure 3.6 compares the thickness of heat affected zone predicted using Equa-
tion 3.92 against experiments from three sources from the literature. The thermal
efficiency is estimated as 0.9 for LBW on ultra-high-strength steel [131] and 0.7 for
LBW on Ti-6Al-4V [185]. The effective thermal properties are calculated between
melting temperature Tm and heat affected zone temperature THAZ . THAZ for Ti-6Al-
4V is listed as 995◦ C [143], and for ultra-high-strength steel, it is stated that it is below
Ac1 [131] , and is assumed as 500◦ C, which is when martensite tempering accelerates
greatly [42].
Figure 3.7 compares the weld pool aspect ratio predicted using Equation 3.65
against three sources from the literature. The shape of weld pool was measured from
105
10 2
10 0
Tm∗ − THAZ
HAZ
∗
c∗
∆y
K. Poorhaydari [166]
C. Luo [131]
10 -2
A. Squillace [185]
Equation 3.94
10 -4
10-1 10 0 10 1
Ro
Figure 3.6: Validation of predictions of heat affected zone half-width using Equa-
tion 3.94.
optical images for [46, 204] and from simulations for [109]. The comparison shows a
relatively narrow scatter and slight systematic error of underprediction.
3.18 Discussion
The formulae in closed form for a 2D moving heat source are novel. They are different
from previous research in that the intermediate regime can now be calculated with
explicit expressions. A single dimensionless group is identified that determines all
characteristic values. This dimensionless group is defined as the Rosenthal number
for most of the characteristic value except for maximum temperature (yc∗) that is
proposed by Fuerschbach and Knorovsky [61] based on experiments, but had not
been widely adopted by the heat transfer or welding communities. This approach
is also consistent with [207], in which the Rykalin number is used to generalize 3D
moving heat sources. The characteristic values can be calculated with the proposed
106
101
R. Ducharme [46]
X. W. Wang [204]
S. Kou [109]
Aspect ratio A Equation 3.65
Exact solution from Equation 3.2
100
10-1 100 101
Ro
Figure 3.7: Validation of predictions of isotherm aspect ratio using Equation 3.65.
formulae using ubiquitous means such as calculators or spreadsheets.

The engineering expressions are based on the equation of heat diffusion, are simple
to use and general to a wide range of processes and materials, and are within 8
% of the exact analytical solutions with the only exception of heating rate (16 %
maximum error against exact solution). Comparisons of the expressions proposed
against experiments or simulations show relatively low scatter and systematic error
comparable with the experimental error in welding experiments (random error in
GTAW experiments were assessed to be of the order of ±15 % [47]).
Aside from heating rate, for values of Ro larger than 10 or smaller than 0.1, the
correction factors account for less than 10 % and can be omitted in most applications;
the final expressions are very simple and practical. Many industrial applications, such
as laser and electron beams operate at Rosenthal values consistently much larger than
10.
The accuracy of proposed expressions cannot exceed that of the original exact solu-
107
tion, which includes many simplifications to the physics and mathematics of moving
heat source problem. Some of those limitations can be overcome in practical ways.
The limitation of constant thermophysical properties can be addressed in a practical
way by using effective values, such as those proposed in [130]. The limitation of a
point heat source can be addressed with the consideration of distributed heat sources,
which would add precision and physical meaning with a single extra parameter (di-
mensionless size of the heat source). For heating rate, the errors in the blending
expressions are secondary to the errors incurred by neglecting the finite size of the
heat source, this is because the front of the isotherm is very close to the origin. The
limitation of considering only conduction can be addressed by accounting for the
effect of fluid flow as in [169], which would add two dimensionless groups (Prandtl
number and Marangoni number). The challenge to considering secondary phenom-
ena is that blending must be extended to two or more dimensionless groups, which is
beyond the capabilities of the techniques described in 3.A and is the focus of current
research [135].
The asymptotic formulae and correction factors proposed also serve as accurate
predictors of actual processes and their metallurgical implications, in a way similar,
but more general and based on fundamentals than the predictions of [91] used in [181].
In these references, the correction factors to asymptotic solutions are developed em-
pirically.
The engineering expressions developed also enhance engineering intuition and re-
flect quantitative effects of process parameters and their implications for the thermal
history of the material involved. Although most validations were carried out for
welding and additive manufacturing cases, the methodology (asymptotic analysis,
blending and correction factors) and engineering expressions obtained can be applied
to a number of processes and materials in different disciplines, since they capture the
essence of the thermal problem based on fundamental equations, not ad-hoc treat-
ment.
108
3.19 Conclusions
This work presents novel engineering expressions for 12 characteristic values of tech-
nological relevance in welding, additive manufacturing, and other processes involving
a moving heat source. The characteristic values analyzed are: location of isotherm
half-width, trailing length of an isotherm, cooling rate at a given temperature in the
center line, leading length of an isotherm, heating rate at a given temperature in the
center line, maximum temperature at a point away from the center line, lateral gradi-
ent of maximum temperature, aspect ratio of an isotherm, melting efficiency, cooling
time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, solidification time and heat affected zone thickness. The
expressions associated with these characteristic values are listed in Table 3.2.
The findings of Table 3.2 can be extended to alternative joint configurations by
replacing the intensity of the heat source q ′ = q/d by qeff
′
according to Equation 3.97.
As a general rule of thumb, for Ro < 0.1 or Ro > 10 except for heating rate,
the asymptotic solutions alone yield an error below 8 % against analytical results for
listed characteristic values.
The engineering expressions were validated against published data when it was
available in the literature: length of isotherm (Figure 3.4), centerline cooling rate
(Figure 3.3), maximum temperature (Figure 3.5), thickness of heat affected zone
(Figure 3.6), and isotherm aspect ratio (Figure 3.7).
Acknowledgment
The authors wish to acknowledge funding support from the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). Student scholarships from the
American Welding Society and the Canadian Welding Association Foundation were
gratefully received.
109
References
nology, vol. 42, no. 11-12, pp. 1043–1051, 2009.
[17] D. A. Barry, J. Parlange, L. Li, H. Prommer, C. J. Cunningham, and F. Stag-
nitti, “Analytical approximations for real values of the Lambert W function,”
Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, vol. 53, pp. 95–103, 2000.
[23] B. Buchmayr and J. S. Kirkaldy, “Modeling of the temperature field, trans-
formation behavior, hardness and mechanical response of low alloy steels dur-
ing cooling from the austenite region,” Journal of heat treating, vol. 8, no. 2,
pp. 127–136, 1990.
1128, 1972.
[41] R. M. Corless, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. G. Hare, D. J. Jeffrey, and D. E. Knuth,
“On the Lambert W function,” Advances in Computational Mathematics, vol. 5,
no. 1, pp. 329–359, 1996.
[42] L. Cretteur, “Welding and joining of advanced high strength steels (AHSS),”
in, ser. Woodhead publishing series in welding and other joining technologies
85. Elsevier, 2015, ch. High-power beam welding of advanced high-strength
steels (AHSS), pp. 93–119, isbn: 978-0-85709-858-0.
[46] R. Ducharme, K. Williams, P. Kapadia, J. Dowden, B. Steen, and M. Glowacki,
“The laser welding of thin metal sheets: An integrated keyhole and weld pool
model with supporting experiments,” Journal of Physics D: Appllied Physics,
vol. 27, pp. 1619–1627, 1994.
110
[47] U. Duman, “Modeling of weld penetration in high productivity GTAW,” Ph.D.
Colorado School of Mines, 2009.
[48] J. N. DuPont and A. R. Marder, “Thermal efficiency of arc welding processes,”
Welding Research Supplement, vol. 74, no. 12, 406s–416s, 1995.
[59] E. Friedman, “Thermomechanical analysis of the welding process using the
finite element method,” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 97, no. 3,
pp. 206–213, 1975.
vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 287–297, 1991.
[63] T. Fukuoka and S. Fuku, “Analysis for cooling process of underwater welding–
comparison with welding in air,” Bulletin of Marine Engineering Society in
Japan, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 86–92, 1994.
305, 1984.
[91] M. Inagaki, H. Nakamura, and A. Okada, “Studies of cooling processes in the
cases of welding with coated electrode and submerged arc welding,” Journal
of the Japan Welding Society, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 1064–1075, 1965.
224.
1993.
1995.
111
vol. 230, no. 2, pp. 502–509, 2016.
vol. 44, no. 15, pp. 2845–2862, 2001.
2009.
[109] S. Kou, T. Kanevsky, and S. Fyfitch, “Welding thin plates of aluminum alloys–
a quantitative heat-flow analysis,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 61, no. 6,
175s–181s, 1982.
[111] S. Kou and Y. Le, “Welding parameters and the grain structure of weld metal –
A thermodynamic consideration,” Metallurgical Transactions A, vol. 19, no. 4,
pp. 1075–1082, 1988.
[120] V. N. Lazić, A. S. Sedmak, M. M. Živković, S. M. Aleksandrović, R. D. Čukić,
R. D. Jovičić, and I. B. Ivanović, “Theoretical-experimental determining of
cooling time (t8 /5) in hard facing of steels for forging dies,” Thermal Science,
vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 235–246, 2010.
1543, 1986.
[130] Y. Lu, Y. Wang, and P. F. Mendez, “Width of thermal features induced by
a 2-D moving heat source,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
vol. 156, p. 119 793, 2020.
[131] C. Luo, Y. Cao, Y. Zhao, L. Zhao, and J. Shan, “Fiber laser welding of 1700-
MPa, ultrahigh-strength,” Welding Journal, vol. 97, 214s–228s, 2018.
1191, 1974.
[135] P. F. Mendez, “Reduced order models for welding and solidification processes,”
in Proceedings of the 15th Modelling of Casting, Welding and Advanced Solid-
ification Processes Conference (MCWASP XV), IOP Conference series: Mate-
rials Science and Engineering, 2020.
Metals, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 783–791, 2016.
112
[157] M. N. Özisik, Heat conduction, Second. New York;Toronto: A Wiley-Interscience
Publication, 1993.
[166] K. Poorhaydari, B. M. Patchett, and D. G. Ivey, “Estimation of cooling rate in
the welding of plates with intermediate thickness,” Welding Journal, vol. 84,
no. 10, 149s–155s, 2005.
1479, 1992.
1923, pp. 640–654.
[173] W. M. Rohsenow, J. P. Hartnett, Y. I. Cho, et al., Handbook of heat transfer,
Third, W. M. Rohsenow, J. P. Hartnett, and Y. I. Cho, Eds., ser. McGraw-Hill
handbooks. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.
pp. 1277–1292, 1935.
journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2–8, 1938.
Mashgis, 1951.
[181] P. Seyffarth, B. Meyer, and A. Scharff, Grosser atlas schweiss-ztu-schaubilder,
ser. Fachbuchreihe Schweisstechnik. Düsseldorf: Deutscher Verlag für Schweis-
stechnik, 1992, isbn: 9783871551277.
[182] A. K. Shah, S. D. Kulkarni, V. Gopinathan, and R. Krishnan, “Weld heat-
affected zone in Ti-6AI-4V alloy Part l–computer simulation of the effect of
weld variables on the thermal cycles in the HAZ,” Welding Research Supple-
ment, vol. 74, no. 9, pp. 297–304, 1995.
[184] S. Shen, I. N. A. Oguocha, and S. Yannacopoulos, “Effect of heat input on weld
bead geometry of submerged arc welded ASTM A709 Grade 50 steel joints,”
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 212, no. 1, pp. 286–294, 2012.
113
[185] A. Squillace, U. Prisco, S. Ciliberto, and A. Astarita, “Effect of welding pa-
rameters on morphology and mechanical properties of Ti-6Al-4V laser beam
welded butt joints,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 212, no. 2,
pp. 427–436, 2012.
[189] L. E. Svensson, B. Gretoft, and H. K. D. H. Bhadeshia, “An analysis of cooling
curves from the fusion zone of steel weld deposits,” Scandinavian Journal of
Metallurgy, vol. 15, pp. 97–103, 1986.
[204] X. Wang and R. Li, “Intelligent modelling of back-side weld bead geometry
using weld pool surface characteristic parameters,” Journal of Intelligent Man-
ufacturing, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1301–1313, Jan. 2014.
2019.
[212] P. S. Wei and W. H. Giedt, “Surface tension gradient-driven flow around an
electron beam welding cavity,” Welding Journal, vol. 64, no. 9, 251s–259s,
1985.
114
Table 3.2: Summary of characteristic values and correction factors.
Variable Regime Asymptotic Correction factor Parameter Error(%) Eq.
n h q in o1/n
αq 1
III √
2πeU dk(Tc −T0 )
exp − Ro 1 + 2 2e 1
π exp(γ)Ro
[130]
ymax n = 1.407 6.8%
4α 1
p π n 1/n
IV U
exp −γ − Ro
1+ 8e
exp (γ) Ro [130]
αq 2
h i
III − 4eπU d2 k2 (T 2
2
exp − Ro 1+ 8
π exp(2γ−1)Ro3
+ 2ae
π
Rob−2 a = 1.427 3.13
c −T0 )
xmax 6.3%

IV − U16παdk(T c −T0 )
q exp(2γ+2/Ro)
1+ π
8
exp (2γ 3
− 1)Ro + exp (2γ) Ro a
4
b+1
b = 1.077 3.14
2 h i
III − 4πU d2 kαq
2 (T 2
1
exp − Ro 1+ 4
π exp(γ)
Ro−2 + 2a
π
Rob−2 a = 0.7659 3.20
c −T0 )
xb 6.8%
2 b

IV − U exp 4αγ+ 1 1+ π
exp (γ) Ro + exp (γ) Ro a
b = 1.541 3.21
( Ro ) 4 2
2 d2 k 2 (T −T )3 −1
III − 2πU αq 2
c 0
exp 1
Ro
1+ 2
π
exp (−γ) Ro−3 + aRo−b−3 a = 3.839 3.30
Ṫb 5.8%
U 2q
−1
IV − 8παdk exp γ + 1
Ro
1 + 12 π exp (γ) Ro3 + 12 a exp (γ) Ro−b b = −2.108 3.31
−1
III α
2U
W 2πRo2 1 + 18 W 2πRo2 exp γ + Ro 1
+ aRob a = 1.548 3.37
xf 7.3%
8 exp(−γ− Ro
1
) −1
IV 4α
U
exp −γ − 1
Ro W (2πRo2 )
+ exp aRob b = 1.389 3.38
U 2 (Tc −T0 ) exp(1/Ro)

III α 1+4Ro−1 exp(−γ)+2aRob−1
a = −0.6618 3.44
Ṫf 16%
U 2q 1
1
IV 8παdk
exp γ + Ro 1+ 14 exp(γ)Ro+ a2 exp(γ)Rob
b = 0.5055 3.45
n hq in o1/n
III √ αq 1+ y ln y1∗ + a1
2e ∗
a = 0.3350 3.52
2πeU dkyc π c c
Tmax − T0 n 1/n 2.1%
q 2α 1
pπ
IV ln + 1+ 1 n = −2.013 3.53
2πdk U yc a 2e ∗ 1 1
yc ln +a
∗
yc
√ h q q i−1
2πeU dk(Tc −T0 )2
III − αq
exp 1
Ro
1+ 8e
π
exp (−γ)Ro−2 + a 2e
π
Rob−2 a = 0.2765 3.60
dTmax /dy 6.6%
Uq
pπ
b −1
IV − 8παdk exp γ + 1
Ro
1+ 8e
exp (γ) Ro2 + 12 a exp (γ) Ro b = 1.629 3.61
√ h q n i1/n
2eq 8 1
III √
8 πdk(Tc −T0 )
1+ πe Ro
3.68
A n = 1.972 3.3%
p πe n 1/n
IV 1 1+ 8
Ro 3.69
q n h q in o1/n
2
III πe
exp − Ro1m 1 + 2 2e 1
π exp(γ)Rom
3.73
ηm n = 1.407 6.8%
8dk(Tc −T0 )
p π n 1/n
IV q exp(γ+ Ro1 )
1+ 8e
exp (γ) Rom 3.74
m

αq 2 isl
tsl III 2πU 2 d2 k 2 (Tm −T0 )3 c
exp − Ro1m 1 + 2
π
exp (−γ) Rom −3 + aRom b−3 a = 3.839 3.87
isl

IV 8παdk
qU 2 exp(γ+ Ro1
1+ 1
π exp (γ) Rom 3 + 1
a exp (γ) Rom b b = −2.108 3.88
m
) c 2 2
h fx (Ro500 ) fx (Ro800 )
i
αq 2 bIII
III (T500 −T0 )2
4πU 2 k 2 d2
− (TbIII −T )2 3.76
800 0
h i
4α 1 1
IV 2
U exp(γ)
exp − Ro500
fx bIV
(Ro 500 ) − exp − Ro800 fxbIV (Ro800 ) 3.77
t8/5

αq 2 (T800 −T500 )
III 2πU 2 d2 k 2 (Ti −T0 )3
exp − Ro1 i 1 + 2
π
exp (−γ) Roi −3 + aRoi b−3 a = 3.839 3.79
8παdk(T
IV )
800 −T500
1 + 12 π exp (γ) Roi 3 + 12 a exp (γ) Roi b
b = −2.108 3.80
1
qU 2 exp γ+ Ro
i
hf (RoHAZ ) fymax (Rom )

i
√ αq
ymax
III 2πeU dk
III
THAZ −T0
− III
Tm −T0
3.90
hf (RoHAZ ) fymax (Rom )
i
4α ymax
IV exp(γ)U
IV
exp(1/RoHAZ )
− IV
exp(1/Rom )
3.91
∆yHAZ
h q q i
αq(Tm −THAZ )
III √
2πeU kd(Ti −T0 )2
exp − Ro1 i 1 + 8e
π
exp (−γ)Roi −2 + a 2e
π
Roi b−2 a = 0.2765 3.92
8παdk(Tm −THAZ
pπ
IV ) 1+ exp (γ) Roi 2 + 12 a exp (γ) Roi b
b = 1.629 3.93
1
qU exp γ+ Ro 8e
i
115
Appendix 3.A Blending of asymptotic solutions
Blending is a methodology to achieve simple expressions for all conditions, based on

the expressions for asymptotic regimes. It is based on the observation that almost
always intermediate cases yield results that are based on combinations of asymptotic
cases, for example. Blending has been explored in [3, 4] and generalized in [34, 38]
for simpler cases. As an example of traditional blending, consider the two asymptotic
behaviors of the dimensionless characteristic value u∗c (Π): ub∗c i (Π), when Π → 0, and
ub∗c j (Π), when Π → ∞. When these asymptotic behaviors are monotonous in Π and
cross only once, traditional blending yields:
h n n
i1/n
d
u b
∗+ (Π) = u b
∗ (Π) + u ∗ (Π) (3.99)
c ci cj
d
where u ∗+ (Π) is the blending approximation of u∗ (Π) and is illustrated schematically
c c
in Figure 3.8(a) for the case of blending two power laws. In this methodology and all
that follow, the general expressions used have the following corresponding concepts
in the blending derivations of this paper when they are based on Ro:
Π = Ro (3.100)
Regime i = Regime IV (3.101)
Regime j = Regime III (3.102)
Many asymptotic behaviors studied in this paper cannot be blended with the tra-
ditional approach described above, or yield larger errors than the novel alternatives
developed here. In these paper, three extensions of traditional blending techniques
were developed: for the case of monotonic functions that do not cross or are not
power laws, for functions in which the error in traditional blending is too high, and
for functions that change sign or are not defined over the whole domain.
116
Blending of monotonic functions that do not cross or are not
power laws
Consider a modification of the previous example in which ub∗c i (Π) is not a power law,
and it is possible that it does not cross ub∗c j (Π); in this case, it can be expressed as:
ub∗c i (Π) = vi∗ (Π)p∗i (Π) (3.103)
where p∗i (Π) is a power law and vi∗ (Π) is not, but vi∗ (Π) is chosen such that vi∗ (Π) → 1
in Regime j. In this case, the power law ub∗c j (Π) can be replaced by vi∗ (Π)ub∗c j (Π), with
the same asymptotic behavior, and after taking vi∗ as a common factor, the blending
involves two power laws that typically cross, and can be blended, for example, using
the traditional approach:
h n
i1/n
d∗+ ∗ ∗n b∗
uc (Π) = vi (Π) pi (Π) + uc j (Π) (3.104)
and the resulting correction factors are:

!
ub∗c j (Π)
fi (Π) = 1+ ∗ (3.105)
pi (Π)
!
p∗ (Π)
fj (Π) = vi∗ (Π) 1 + ∗i (3.106)
ubc j (Π)
This blending methodology is illustrated in Figure 3.8(b), and is applied, for exam-
ple to the calculation of maximum isotherm half-width ymax . The asymptotic behavior
for yb∗ maxIII (Ro) is a power law, while yb∗ maxIV (Ro) is not [130]. In this case:

ub∗c i (Π) = 2 exp γ − Ro−1 (3.107)
r
π
ubc j (Π) =
∗ Ro (3.108)
2e

vi∗ (Π) = exp −Ro−1 (3.109)
p∗i (Π) = 2 exp(γ) (3.110)
The blending of these two equations based on Equation 3.104 is:

r n 1/n
+ n π
b∗
y max (Ro) = exp −Ro −1
[2 exp (−γ)] + Ro (3.111)
2e
from which the correction factors fymaxIII (Ro) and fymaxIV (Ro) are derived.
117
Alternative blending of monotonic functions that cross
An effective novel approach can yield blending errors smaller than Equation 3.99,
often when one or both asymptotic behaviors are not power laws:
+
h ±1 ±1
i±1
ub∗c (Π) = ub∗c i (Π) + ub∗c j (Π) + aΠ±b (3.112)
where a > 0 and b are determined by optimization minimizing the maximum error
over all values of Π. The value of 1 in the exponents could also be replaced by a third
adjusting parameter c and 1/c; however, fixing it to 1 reduces the complexity of the
expression, and experience has shown that the two adjusting parameters a and b are
enough to give acceptable errors. This approach requires the asymptotic behaviors
to be monotonic and to cross one each other. When ub∗c i (Π) and ub∗c j (Π) are power
laws (illustrated in Figure 3.8(c)), the exponent b in Equation 3.112 is intermediate
between the exponent of the two power laws.
If the functions that do not cross or are not power laws, instead of the blending of
Equation 3.104, this alternative approach would yield:
+
h ±1 ±1
i±1
ub∗c (Π) = vi∗ (Π) pb∗ i (Π) + ub∗c j (Π) + aΠ±b (3.113)
This blending methodology is applied, for example, to the calculation of centerline

cooling rate Ṫb∗ (Ro). The asymptotic behavior T ċ∗ (Ro) is a power law (Equa-
bIII
tion 3.25), while Tċ∗ (Ro) is not (Equation 3.26). These two asymptotic behaviors
bIV
do not cross; in this case:
1
ub∗c i (Π) = exp γ + Ro−1 (3.114)
2
1
ub∗c j (Π) = Ro−3 (3.115)
π

vi (Π) = exp Ro−1
∗
(3.116)
1
p∗i (Π) = exp(γ) (3.117)
2
(3.118)
118
and Equation 3.112 with negative exponents yields a lower error than Equation 3.112,
resulting in the blended expression of Equation 3.27.
Blending of functions that change sign or are not defined over

the whole domain
Consider the case in which ub∗c i (Π) is not defined or changes sign for values of Π below
or above a certain critical value Πc , and ub∗c j (Π) is a power law. A new function vbc∗ i (Π)
can be defined as:
h ±1 i
vbc∗ i (Π) = ub∗c i Π±1 + a±1 (3.119)
with values of a always positive, and in the range in which the domain is defined, and
positive exponents when the problems with the domain are at small values of Π and
negative exponents when they are at large values of Π. The value of a is adjusted by
optimization; the value of 1 in the exponents was chosen for simplicity similarly to the
previous blending extension discussed. For all values of a, the asymptotic behavior
of vbc∗ i (Π) is the same as ub∗c i (Π) in Regime i, and function vbc∗ i (Π) can replace ub∗c i (Π)
in any of the blending techniques described above. The correction factor is applied
to vbc∗ i (Π), not ub∗c i (Π).
This blending methodology is illustrated in Figure 3.8(d), and is applied, for ex-
ample to the calculation of maximum temperature at a distance yc from the center-
c∗ max (yc∗) is a power law (Equation 3.46), while
line. The asymptotic behavior for T III
c∗ max (y ∗ ) (Equation 3.47) involves a change in sign above y ∗ = 1. In this case, the
T IV c c
equivalent asymptotic behavior is obtained using the negative sign, resulting in:
Π = yc∗ (3.120)
Regime i = yc∗ → 0 (Regime IV) (3.121)
Regime j = yc∗ → ∞ (Regime III) (3.122)

ub∗c i (yc∗) = ln yc∗−1 (3.123)

vi∗ (yc∗) = ln yc∗−1 + a−1 (3.124)
119
c∗ max (y ∗ ) using Equation 3.99, resulting in the blended ex-
which is blended with T III c
pression of Equation 3.49.
uc∗ (Π)
ci
+
uc
∗ (Π)p∗ (Π)
cj i
+
ub∗c (Π)
ub∗c (Π)
ln u∗c (Π)
ln u∗c (Π)
uc
∗ (Π)
cj uc
∗ (Π)
cj
uc
∗ (Π)
ci
ln Π ln Π
(a) Traditional blending (b) Extension for “non-crossing” asymptotics
+
+ ub∗c (Π)
ub∗c (Π)
ln u∗c (Π)
ln u∗c (Π)
aΠ±b
uc
∗ (Π)
cj
uc
∗ (Π)
cj
h i
±1
ub∗c i (Π±1 + a±1 ) uc
∗ (Π)
uc
∗ (Π)
ci ci
Πc
ln Π ln Π
(d) Undefined asymptotic in part of the
(c) Alternative blending
domain
Figure 3.8: Traditional blending and three extended methodologies.
Appendix 3.B Blending of Lambert W function
The Lambert W function W (x) is the solution to:
W (x) exp [W (x)] = x (3.125)
The asymptotic expressions to Lambert W function, according to Equation 3.125,

for large and small x are:
cI (x) = ln (x)
W for large x (3.126)
cII (x) = x
W for small x (3.127)
120
Using equations 3.112 and 3.119 from the blending methods introduced above, the
positive branch of the Lambert W function could be calculated approximately with:

c + (x) = x−1 + ln (x + c)−1 + a x−b −1
W (3.128)
where a = 0.08568, b = 0.1028, c = 2.586, and the relative error is smaller than 5.9
% for the positive branch and all x > 0.
121
Chapter 4
Cooling rate in moving-heat-source

manufacturing processes with
intensive surface heat losses
4.1 Abstract
Closed-form engineering expressions for trailing length and cooling rate at a given
temperature are developed based on a two dimensional moving point heat source
model which also accounts for surface heat losses. Cooling rate is a dominant fac-
tor in determining material properties, and trailing length determines the needed
reach of gas shielding in moving heat source problems such as welding and additive
manufacturing. The consideration of surface heat losses enables the extension of the
moving heat source analysis to complex, but technologically relevant problems such
as underwater wet welding, in-service welding, additive manufacturing of thin walls,
and combinations of thickness and low target temperatures where natural convec-
tion in air becomes relevant (e.g. analysis of residual stresses) for which closed-form
predictive expressions do not exist. The novel expressions presented are generalized
using two dimensionless numbers: the Rosenthal number, which captures the balance
of conduction and advection, and a dimensionless surface heat loss coefficient which
takes into account the effect of surface heat loss. These expressions consist of asymp-
totic expressions with rigorous correction factors for the intermediate cases. The
122
correction factors are developed for all possible combinations of Rosenthal number
and dimensionless surface heat loss coefficient, yielding predictions with a maximum
relative error less than 8 % compared to the exact analytical solution. The engineer-
ing expressions proposed are validated with data collected from published data for
welding, hard facing and additive manufacturing on steel under water and air. These
expressions are also applicable to moving heat sources in biological tissue that can be
represented with the bioheat equation.
Table 4.1: Variables used in the paper with the units and
description.
c J kg−1 K−1 Specific heat of the substrate

f, g - Correction factors
h W m−2 K−1 Surface heat loss coefficient on top surface
h′ W m−2 K−1 Surface heat loss coefficient on bottom sur-
face
Ro 1 Rosenthal number
t s Time
t8/5 s Cooling time from 800◦ C to 500◦ C
T K Temperature
T0 K Initial temperature or preheat
Ṫb K/s Cooling rate
W0 - Principal branch Lambert W function
123
Greek
symbols
γ 1 Euler–Mascheroni constant
ρ kg m−3 Density of the substrate
ω m3 s−1 Perfusion rate
ǫ 1 Emissivity
ǫA 1 Acceptable relative error
σ Wm−2 K−4 Stefan–Boltzmann constant
Superscripts
∗
Dimensionless value
+
Improvement or modification over asymp-
totic
· Time derivative
Subscripts
b Trailing point of isotherm
c Critical value
i Intermediate value
III Regime III
IV Regime IV
IIIa Regime IIIa
IVa Regime IVa
124
4.2 Introduction
In thermal analysis of moving heat source problems, trailing length and cooling rate
(represented in Figure 4.1) determine key properties such as microstructure, mechan-
ical properties, and need for shielding gas in welding and additive manufacturing.
For example, for a given steel composition, the microstructures resulting from the
decomposition of austenite, which are crucial to the properties of fabrications and
laser or wire-arc additive manufacturing (WAAM), are often predicted by the cool-
ing time between 800 ◦ C and 500 ◦ C, which can be calculated by trailing length or
approximated by an average cooling rate.
Previous investigations have proposed predictive scaling laws for trailing length,
and cooling rate without considering the effect of surface heat loss in thick plates [140,
207] and thin plates [128, 130]. The resulting scaling expressions neglecting heat
losses match well with available data for processes under mild convection conditions.
However, these expressions are unable to capture technological relevant processes
such as underwater wet welding, in-service weld repairs, and water cooling in additive
manufacturing. This work aims to close this gap.
The validity of ignoring surface heat loss is discussed in [130]. For the case of
isotherm width, the criterion to ignore surface heat loss within 10 % of relative error
is proposed as:
20α2 (h + h′ ) h π
2
n i1/n
d> 1+ Ro (4.1)
kU 2 2e
where d is the thickness of substrate, h and h′ are surface heat loss coefficient on
top and bottom surface, k is the thermal conductivity, U is the traveling speed of
heat source, Ro is a dimensionless number representing isotherm which is defined as
Equation 4.9 consistently with [128, 130].
Equation 4.1 indicates that the relevance of surface heat loss depends not only on
surface heat transfer coefficient, but also on parameters such as plate thicknesses,
velocities, and the temperature of interest.
125
Empirical or semi-empirical correction factors of the effect of surface heat loss have
to been implemented for processes with intense surface heat loss such as underwater
wet welding [63] or in-service welding [22, 29], thin-wall additive manufacturing [15,
203], thin-plate welding [111], and problems concerning low temperatures far away
from heat source (residual stress zone [76], hydrogen cracking [99]). Correction factors
are typically based on a single parameter (1D blending techniques). 1D blending is
studied in detail in [128, 130, 140, 207]. The consideration of the two parameters in
this paper (surface heat losses and Rosenthal number) required the novel extension
of blending techniques to two parameters (2D blending).
T (y = 0)
∂T 1
= − Ṫb
∂x U
T = Tc
y
x
xb
Figure 4.1: Schematic of trailing length xb and cooling rate Ṫb = −U ∂T /∂x associ-
ated with isotherm T = Tc induced by a point heat source at the origin moving at
velocity U.
This paper aims to establish practical and accurate engineering expressions for
characteristic values of moving heat source problems. The engineering expressions
close up the gap in textbooks and standards, synthesize the essence of simultaneous
conduction and advection, and deliver understanding of process scaling. The scaling
law formulae have clear physical relevance, and provide a means for accurate and
insightful predictions for engineering practitioners.
126
4.3 Moving heat source model
The two dimensional moving point heat source model, which is also often termed as
‘moving line heat source model’, describes a point heat source traveling on a 2D panel
that is large enough to ignore edge effects, as illustrated in Figure 4.1.
The assumptions, limitations, validity, and scope of this model have been discussed
in detail in [128, 130]. In this approach, the substrate is assumed to have constant
thermophysical properties, the heat flow is essentially 2D in a substrate which is infi-
nite in the x and y directions, the heat source is very small in the x and y dimensions,
and is moving in a straight line with constant velocity. These hypotheses prevent the
model from being applied to small workpieces due to edge effects and from capturing
melting and fluid flow effects accurately. The effect of surface heat losses, however
intense, are accounted for, which is an important new consideration that has not been
made before for explicit predictive expressions.
In this model, the temperature field is pseudo-steady in the coordinate system of
the moving heat source, which establishes quickly after the start of heat deposition,
typically on the order of seconds [105]. The 2D temperature field is proposed as [27,
175, 215]:
q
q −
Ux
U 2
h+h′
T = T0 + 2πkd
e 2α K0 r 2α
+ kd
(4.2)
where K0 is the modified Bessel function of the second kind and zero order, T0 is the
ambient temperature or preheat temperature of substrate, x, y are spatial location,
p
r = x2 + y 2 is distance to the heat source, q is amount of heat applied on the
base material, and other parameters are the same as introduced in Equation 4.1.
Equation 4.2 implies the following heat transfer mechanisms: conduction in the solid
workpiece, advection due to relative motion, and surface heat loss. In Equation 4.2,
the assumption of point heat source exerts a singularity at the origin r = 0. The heat
input per unit thickness, q ′ = q/d, can be defined to represent heat input intensity
and extend the Equation 4.2 to configurations in addition to a 2D panel, which has
127
been discussed in [130].
Equation 4.2 can be normalized as follows:
√
T ∗ = exp (−x∗ ) K0 r ∗ 1 + h∗ (4.3)
where the dimensionless groups are defined as:
2πkd (T − T0 )
T∗ = (4.4)
q
Ux
x∗ = (4.5)
2α
Uy
y∗ = (4.6)
2α
Ur
r∗ = (4.7)
2α
4α2 (h + h′ )
h∗ = (4.8)
kU 2 d
The dimensionless groups (equations 4.4 to 4.8) are consistent with normalization in
previous work [128, 130]. The dimensionless variables x∗ and y ∗ are essentially Peclet
numbers that that capture the relative relevance of advection to conduction [144],
and the dimensionless heat loss factor h∗ has been interpreted as Biot number [109],
although the physical meaning of its effective length is not obvious.
Following [130], the dimensional analysis of Equation 4.2 suggests four dimension-
less groups, consistently with Buckingham Pi theorem [24], and corresponding to
p
equations 4.4 to 4.8 (r ∗ = x∗2 + y ∗2 is not an independent variable).
Typically, a particular temperature T ∗ = Tc∗ is of interest, which leads to, defining
the Rosenthal number as:
q 1
Ro = = ∗ (4.9)
2πkd(Tc − T0 ) Tc
The Rosenthal number has shown to be useful to synthesize and data of 2D heat flow
for diverse processes and materials [26, 62, 128, 130].
128
4.4 Scaling Considerations
4.4.1 Asymptotic Regimes
In the calculations of trailing length and cooling rate, two constraints are implied: a
temperature of interest T = Tc , which defines an isotherm, and location at the cen-
terline y = 0. These two constraints reduce the number of independent dimensionless
groups (degrees of freedom) from four to two, which are chosen as the Rosenthal num-
ber (Equation 4.9) and the normalized surface heat loss coefficient h∗ (Equation 4.8).
The Rosenthal number Ro has been discussed in previous work [128, 130]; it char-
acterizes 2D moving heat source problems and is always larger than zero. Large Ro
typically indicates fast speed, low-temperature region or high-intensity heat sources.
The dimensionless heat loss coefficient h∗ is greater than or equal to zero, with h∗ = 0
indicating adiabatic surfaces; large h∗ typically indicates intense surface heat loss such
as in underwater wet welding, in-service welding, or welding of thin plates.
With the definition of Ro and h∗ , four asymptotic regimes are identified:
• Regime III (Ro → ∞, h∗ → 0), corresponding to fast heat sources with negli-
gible heat losses
• Regime IV (Ro → 0, h∗ → 0), corresponding to slow heat sources with negligible

heat losses
• Regime IIIa (Ro → ∞, h∗ → ∞), corresponding to fast heat sources dominated

by heat losses
• Regime IVa (Ro → 0, h∗ → ∞), corresponding to slow heat sources dominated

by heat losses
The choice of names for the regimes is consistent with [128, 130]. The four
asymptotic regimes for trailing length and cooling rate are illustrated in figures 4.2
and 4.4. The transition between regimes is not sharp, but gradual. Different criteria
can be used to divide regimes.
129
A useful criterion to bound the regimes, is to determine the boundary at which the
error (defined as in [140]) between the asymptotic behavior and the exact solution
reaches a small arbitrary number. In figures 4.2 and 4.4, the dashed lines correspond
to the application of this criterion with an error of 10 %.
When the asymptotic expressions between contiguous regimes intersect, the line
of intersection is a reasonable heuristic for the division between regimes. This is the
criterion used to draw the continuous lines between regimes IV and IVa, IIIa and IVa
in Figure 4.2 and regimes IV and IVa in Figure 4.4.
When the asymptotic expressions between contiguous regimes do not intersect, the
line of division between regimes can be determined as the points where the absolute
relative error of each asymptotic regime (relative to the exact solution) is the same.
This is the criterion used to draw the continuous lines between regimes III and IV,
III and IIIa in Figures 4.2 and regimes III and IV, III and IIIa, IIIa and IVa in
Figures 4.4.
Some of the solid lines near the center of the figures have been excluded because of
their complex geometry in that region, which betrays the intuitive purpose of placing
a line to identify a smooth transition.
4.4.2 2D Blending
Blending is a rigorous approach to achieve approximate, but accurate engineering

expressions in closed-form when the exact expression is expressed in implicit form, or
when asymptotic behavior at the extremes is known form experiments or simulations.
From blending expressions, correction factors can be developed to extend the range
of validity of an asymptotic expression. Often, the correction factors extend the
validity of an asymptotic formula into its opposite asymptotic extreme [135]. Blending
techniques are typically simple and practical approximations with accuracy better
than 10 %; occasionally, blending results in exact expressions.
When blending depends only on one dimensionless group (1D blending) the method-
130
ology is well understood [3, 4, 34]. 1D blending has been used successfully used to
develop engineering expressions for moving heat sources on a thick substrate [140,
207] (with the Rykalin number as blending parameter) and on thin substrates [128,
130] (with the Rosenthal number as blending parameter).
This investigation in this paper faces and important challenge, in which the dimen-
sionless exact solution depends on two, not one parameter (2D blending). The two
dimensionless parameters are Ro and h∗ . The increase in complexity is enormous,
comparable to the increase in complexity from single variable calculus to multivariate
calculus, and there is no generalized approach for 2D blending. Some fundamental
concepts are lay down here to help solve the concrete problem of interest, and also to
pave the way for future progress in 2D (and higher order) blending.
Fully asymptotic regimes correspond to situations in which all blending parameters
are at an asymptotic extreme, and will be identified with just one label (e.g. Regime
III). Not all 2D blending problems have 4 fully asymptotic regimes, for example in [82],
the 2D parameter domain is divided into five fully asymptotic regimes. For trailing
length and cooling rate in this research, the two dimensionless groups define four fully
asymptotic regimes. All asymptotic expressions are indicated with absymbol.
In addition to the four fully asymptotic regimes (Regimes III, IV, IIIa, and IVa)
and the blending over the full domain (full blending), there is blending over sub-
domains (“partial blending”). Partial blending has two forms: “side blending” and
“corner blending,” corresponding to “side regimes” and “corner regimes”. All blend-
ing expressions are based on asymptotic expressions and carry thebsymbol. Blending
+
expressions are distinguished from fully asymptotic regimes with a superscript.
Side regimes are problem configurations in which all but one of the blending pa-
rameters are at an asymptotic extreme. Side blending consists of 1D blending of two
contiguous regimes across one of the blending parameters, while all other blending
parameters are at an asymptotic extreme. Side regimes will be identified with two
labels (e.g. Regime III-IIIa). There are four side regimes in this research: Regime
131
III-IIIa (yielding exact blending), and side regimes IV – IVa, IIIa – IVa, and III – IV,
yielding approximate 1D blending.
Corner regimes are problem configurations around a fully asymptotic regime, and
its contiguous regimes. In these configurations, at least one of the blending parameters
corresponds to the reference fully asymptotic regime. Corner blending consists of an
asymptotic expression corresponding to a regime, with its range of validity extended
into the two adjacent regimes using correction factors. In 2D blending, corner regimes
will be identified with three labels, with the first label corresponding to the central
fully asymptotic regime. The corner regime of relevance in this work is Regime III-
IIIa-IV, developed around Regime III.
Full blending (or overall blending) consists of an approximate expression that ap-
proximates the target magnitude over the whole blending domain. When full blending
is based on a particular fully asymptotic regime, the corresponding expressions indi-
cate this regime. If no regime is indicated, the expression corresponds to full blending
without a particular fully asymptotic regime as center.
The methodology employed here to obtain 2D blending expressions for trailing
length and cooling rate over the whole domain has three steps: First, expressions for
all four fully asymptotic regimes are obtained. Second, partial blending is defined
on asymptotic side and corner regimes. Third, 2D blending for the full domain is
obtained by combining partial blending results.
In this paper, the 2D blended expressions trailing length and cooling rate have
the form of an asymptotic expression for Regime III multiplied by correction factors
that account for motion of the heat source and heat losses extend the validity of
calculations to fast and slow heat sources with negligible or dominant heat losses.
4.5 Trailing length xb
Trailing length xb is the location of the rear point of the isotherm T = Tc . At large
Rosenthal numbers, xb is also a good estimate of the length of an isotherm.
132
4.5.1 Asymptotic analysis of trailing length
To perform 2D blending of the trailing length, four asymptotic expressions are ob-
tained for each of the four asymptotic regimes: III, IV, IIIa and IVa.
In regimes III and IV, where h∗ → 0, the surface heat loss is negligible. The
asymptotic expressions for trailing length are derived from Equation 4.3 with h∗ = 0
and y ∗ = 0, and were obtained in previous work [128]:
π
b∗bIII = − Ro2
x (4.10)
2
1
b∗bIV = −2 exp −
x −γ (4.11)
Ro
In Regime IIIa, where Ro → ∞ and h∗ → ∞, isotherms of low temperatures away
from the heat source are studied under intense surface heat loss conditions. The
asymptotic behavior of trailing length in Regime IIIa is derived in 4.A, resulting in:
1
b∗bIIIa = − √ W0 πRo2
x (4.12)
2 h∗
where W0 (x) is the principal branch of the Lambert W function, which is the solution
to x = W0 (x) exp [W0 (x)] [41]. The Lambert W function is built-in in Matlab,
Mathematica and other common scientific software. It can also be approximated by
explicit functions such as [17]. A practical simple approximation using 1D blending
is proposed in [128]:

c + (x) = x−1 + ln (x + c)−1 + a xb −1
W (4.13)
0
where x and ln (x) are asymptotic expressions for small and large values of x. The
optimal blending parameters are a = 0.08568, b = −0.1028, c = 2.586. The maximum
relative error Equation 4.13 for all x > 0 is 5.9 %.
In Regime IVa, where Ro → 0 and h∗ → ∞, the isotherms of interest are in the
high-temperature zone closed to the heat source. The asymptotic behavior of trailing
length in Regime IVa is derived in 4.B, resulting in:

∗ 2 1
bbIVa = − √ exp −
x −γ (4.14)
h∗ Ro
133
4.5.2 Partial blending of trailing length
The asymptotics expressions, equations 4.10 to 4.12 and 4.14, are accurate at each
asymptotic regime but less accurate at intermediate regimes, as shown in Figure 4.2.
Along four asymptotic side regimes: III – IV (h∗ → 0), III – IIIa (Ro → ∞), IV – IVa
(Ro → 0) and IIIa – IVa (h∗ → ∞), side blending expressions are obtained to provide
accurate estimations at intermediate regimes between adjacent asymptotic regimes.
In side Regime III – IV, where h∗ tends to zero (negligible surface heat loss), the
behavior of trailing length changes only with Ro. Side partial blending in this case
reduces to 1D blending of equations 4.12 and 4.14, obtained in [128]:
1
h π 2 i
b
b∗+
xbIII−IV = −e− Ro
2 exp (−γ) + Ro + aRo (4.15)
2
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 0.7659, b = 1.541. The maximum
error is 6.8 % [128].
In side Regime IIIa – IVa, where h∗ tends to infinity (surface heat loss is dominant),
the behavior of trailing length changes only with Ro. Side partial blending in this
case reduces to 1D blending of equations 4.12 and 4.14:
1
e− Ro n −γ n 1/n
b∗+
xbIIIa−IVa =− √ W0 πRo2 + 4e (4.16)
2 h∗
where the blending parameter n = 2.205 and the maximum error 2.4%.
In side Regime III – IIIa, where Ro tends to infinity (fast heat source), considering
isotherms away from the heat source, the behavior of trailing length changes with
both Ro and h∗ according to equations 4.10 and 4.12; therefore, the 1D blending
on one variable cannot be applied directly. The scaling law for trailing length along
asymptotic side III – IIIa is obtained by asymptotic analysis of large Ro according
to 4.A:
h i
1
b∗bIII-IIIa = − 2√1+h
x ∗ −2 W0 π 1− √ 1
1+h∗
Ro2 (4.17)
which is an exact asymptotic expression for trailing length for Ro → ∞ with no

blending parameters involved.
134
In side Regime IV – IVa, where Ro tends to zero (low heat source), considering
isotherms close to the heat source, the behavior of trailing length changes only with h∗ .
Side partial blending in this case reduces to 1D blending of equations 4.11 and 4.14:
n 1/n
1 1
b∗bIV-IVa
x = −2 exp − −γ 1+ √ (4.18)
Ro h∗
where n = −2. In this case, the 1D blending is also the exact expression, derived
from asymptotic analysis for small Ro in 4.B.
4.5.3 Full blending of trailing length
The expressions developed above provide accurate estimations for four fully asymp-
totic regimes (III, IV, IIIa, IVa) and four side regimes (III – IV, III – IIIa, IV – IVa,
IIIa – IVa). Full blending over the 2D domain is carried out by a combination of par-
tial blending results and fully asymptotic expressions. In addition, the parameters
of partial blending are improved by simultaneous optimization of the full blending
expression over the whole domain.
With the expressions for fully asymptotic regimes (equations 4.10 to 4.12 and 4.14)
and side blending expressions (equations 4.15 to 4.18), 2D blending of trailing length
over the full domain can be developed around Regime III as:
π 2
b∗+
x ∗ ∗
b (Ro, h ) = − Ro · f (Ro) · g (Ro, h ) (4.19)
2
where f (Ro) is a correction factor between regimes III and IV according to Equa-
tion 4.15:

−
1 4 −2 2a1 b1 −2
f (Ro) = e Ro 1 + γ Ro + Ro (4.20)
πe π
where the blending parameter a1 = 0.7659, b1 = 1.541. The correction factor f (Ro)
are from [128].
g(Ro, h∗ ) is a correction factor for the effect of surface heat loss according to Equa-
135
tion 4.17, depending on both Ro and h∗ :
h i
W0 π 1 − √h1∗ +1 Ro2
g (Ro, h∗ ) = √ (4.21)
π 1 + h∗ − 1 Ro2
−1 −1
Π + ln (Π + c2 )−1 + a2 Πb2
≈ √ (4.22)
π 1 + h∗ − 1 Ro2

where Π is denoted as Π = π 1 − √h1∗ +1 Ro2 , a2 = 0.08568, b2 = −0.1028, c2 =
2.586 adhering to the approximation of Lambert W function (Equation 4.13). The
maximum relative error over the full domain is 13 %. The 2D blending for trailing
length, equations 4.19 to 4.22, satisfies all of the asymptotic expressions in extreme
regimes and sides and provides estimation over all values of Ro and h∗ .
The blending parameters are optimal for partial blendings along asymptotic sides,
but not optimal over the full domain. With the adjustment of blending parameters,
the maximum relative error over the full domain is reduced to 7.1 % when a1 = 0.7806,
b1 = 1.517, a2 = 0.1260, b2 = −0.1273, c2 = 3.815. The relative error of trailing length
over the full domain of Ro and h∗ is illustrated in Figure 4.2. Figure 4.3 relates the
b∗+
blending result of trailing length x ∗
b and surface heat loss h for Ro =0.1, 1 and 10
from Equation 4.19 to 4.22.

The engineering expressions with units for trailing length xb is:
αq 2
b+
xb =− 2 2 2
· f (Ro) · g (Ro, h∗ ) (4.23)
4πUd k (Tc − T0 )
where f (Ro) is proposed as Equation 4.20 and g(Ro, h∗ ) is proposed as Equation 4.22.
4.6 Centerline cooling rate Ṫb
Cooling rate is a crucial magnitude to assess phase transformations associated with

engineered moving heat sources such as welding, laser heat treating, or accidental
heat sources such as sliding contact in railroad wheels.
The cooling rate at the centerline is often representative of the whole area experi-
encing phase transformations. For example, the cooling rate in the heat affected zone
in welding is just 5 % to 10 % lower than in the centerline [97, 166].
136
replacemen
5
10
IVa IIIa
0
h∗
10
IV III
-5
10
-2 0 2
10 10 10
Ro
Figure 4.2: Error map of blending of trailing length (Equations 4.19 to 4.22) for the
optimal blending parameters a1 = 0.7806, b1 = 1.517, a2 = 0.1260, b2 = −0.1273,
c2 = 3.815. The maximum relative error is 7.1 %.
Centerline cooling rate can be derived from the temperature gradient ∂T /∂x by
the material derivative as introduced in [128]:
DT ∂T
Ṫb ≡ =−U (4.24)
Dt xb ∂x xb
In dimensionless form, the centerline cooling rate can be calculated with:
4πkαd DT ∂T ∗
Ṫb∗ = =− (4.25)
qU 2 Dt ∂x∗ x∗b
which is consistent with [128]. According to equations 4.3 and 4.25, Ṫb∗ can be ex-
plicitly expressed in terms of Ro, h∗ and x∗b :
" √ √ #
∗ + 1K ∗ ∗ +1
1 h 1 −x h
Ṫb∗ = 1− √ b (4.26)
Ro ∗
K0 −xb h∗ + 1
where x∗b is a function of Ro and h∗ that can be estimated by Equations 4.19 to 4.22.
137
-10-6
-10-4
-10-2
b∗+
xb
-100
-102 Ro = 0.1
Ro = 1
Ro = 10
4
-10
10-4 10-2 100 102
h∗
Figure 4.3: The xb∗+

b , calculated from the blending result Equation 4.19 to 4.22,
∗
changes with h for Ro = 0.1, 1, 10.
4.6.1 Asymptotic analysis of cooling rate
Asymptotic expressions for cooling rate are obtained by combining the asymptotic
expressions for trailing length (equations 4.10 and 4.11) into Equation 4.26 as studied
in previous work [128]. In regimes III and IV, h∗ tends to zero with negligible surface
heat loss, resulting in
ḃ ∗ = − 1
T (4.27)
bIII
πRo3
ḃ ∗ 1 1
T bIV = − exp +γ (4.28)
2 Ro
In Regime IIIa, where Ro → ∞ and h∗ → ∞, low-temperature isotherms experi-

ence intense surface heat loss. According to Equation 4.74 derived in Appendix, the
138
asymptotic behavior of cooling rates in Regime IIIa is:
√
∗ h∗
Tḃ bIIIa = − (4.29)
Ro
In Regime IVa, where Ro → 0 and h∗ → ∞, the asymptotic behavior of cooling

rate is derived in the Appendix (Equation 4.79), resulting in

ḃ ∗ 1√ ∗ 1
T bIVa = − h exp +γ (4.30)
2 Ro
4.6.2 Partial blending of cooling rate
Similar to trailing length, partial blending of cooling rate are obtained along four
asymptotic sides with 1D blending between adjacent asymptotic regimes (III – IV,
IV – IVa, IIIa – IVa) and asymptotic analysis in III – IIIa where the asymptotic
behavior changes with both Ro and h∗ and 1D blending is not applicable.
In side Regime III – IV, where h∗ → 0 with negligible surface heat loss, the
behavior of cooling rate changes only with Ro. The side blending of cooling rate has
been presented in previous work by 1D blending of equation 4.27 and 4.28 [128]:
1

ḃ ∗+ exp Ro
T bIII−IV = − (4.31)
πRo3 + 2exp (−γ) + aRob
where the optimal blending parameters are a = 3.839, b = 2.108 and the maximum
error is 5.8% [128].
In side Regime IIIa – IVa, where h∗ → ∞ with intense surface heat loss, the
behavior of cooling rate changes only with Ro. The side blending of cooling rate is
obtained by 1D blending of equations 4.29 and 4.30:
√ 1

ḃ ∗+ h∗ exp Ro
T bIIIa−IVa = − (4.32)
2 exp (−γ) + Ro + aRob
where the optimal blending parameters are a = −0.6004, b = 0.6014 and the maxi-
mum error reaches 4.7%.
In side Regime III – IIIa, where Ro → ∞ considering isotherms away from the
heat source, the asymptotic behavior of trailing length changes with both Ro and h∗
139
according to equations 4.27 and 4.29. Similar to x∗bIII-IIIa , the scaling law for cooling
rate in the asymptotic side III – IIIa is obtained by asymptotic analysis of large Ro
number according to Equation 4.73 derived in Appendix:
( )
∗+ √
Tḃ = − h +1−1 1 + 1
∗
bIII−IIIa Ro
(4.33)
1
W0 π 1− √ Ro2
h∗ +1
In side Regime IV – IVa, where Ro → 0 considering heat transfer around the heat
source, the behavior of cooling rate changes only with h∗ . The side blending of cooling
rate is obtained by 1D blending of equations 4.28 and 4.30:
h √ n i n1
∗+ 1 1
Tḃ bIV−IVa = − exp +γ 1+ h∗ (4.34)
2 Ro
where n = 2. Akin to Equation 4.18, the value of n is derived from asymmetric

analysis according ton Appendix 4.78, rather than from blending processes.
4.6.3 Full blending of cooling rate
Similar to 2D blending of trailing length (equations 4.19 to 4.22), 2D blending of

cooling rate over the full domain is carried out by combination of asymptotic expres-
sions (equations 4.27 to 4.30) and partial blending results (equations 4.31 to 4.34).
2D blending of cooling length for all Ro and h∗ can be expressed based on asymptotic
of Regime III together with two correction factors:
∗+ 1
Tḃ b (Ro, h∗ ) = − ∗
3 · f (Ro) · g (Ro, h ) (4.35)
πRo
f (Ro) is a correction factor between regimes III and IV according to Equation 4.31:
−1
1 2 −3 a1 b1 −3
f (Ro) = e Ro 1 + γ Ro + Ro (4.36)
πe π
where the blending parameter a1 = 3.652, b1 = 1.971. The correction factor is con-
sistent [128].
g (Ro, h∗ ) is a correction factor for the effect of surface heat loss depending on both
140
Ro and h∗ according to Equation 4.33:
( )
√
g(Ro, h∗ ) = π 1 + h∗ − 1 Ro2 · 1+ 1
1

W0 π 1− √ Ro2
1+h ∗
√ h i
Π b2 +1
≈ 1+ h∗ 1+Π+ ln(Π+c2 )
+ a2 Π (4.37)

where Π = π 1 − √ 1
h∗ +1
Ro2 , a2 = 0.08568, b2 = −0.1028, c2 = 2.586 when using
the approximation of lambert function of Equation 4.13, yielding a maximum error of
20 %. The 2D blending for cooling rate, equations 4.35 to 4.37, satisfies asymptotic
expressions in all regimes and sides. If the parameters of Equation 4.13 are reassessed
in a global optimization together with blending, the blending parameters are adjusted
to a2 = 0.06407, b2 = −0.1004, c2 = 6.252, the maximum error is reduced to 7.6 %.
The maximum absolute error of 2D blending of cooling rate, equation 4.35 to 4.37 is
much lower (20 %), as is illustrated in Figure 4.4. Figure 4.5 relates the blending result
ḃ ∗+ and surface heat loss h∗ for Ro =0.1, 1 and 10 from Equation 4.35
of cooling rate T b
to 4.37.
The engineering expressions with units for cooling rate Ṫb is:
+ 2πU 2 d2 k 2 (Tc − T0 )3
Tḃ b = − · f (Ro) · g (Ro, h∗ ) (4.38)
αq 2
where f (Ro) corresponds to Equation 4.36, and g (Ro, h∗ ) corresponds to Equa-

tion 4.37 that expresses the effect of surface heat loss.
4.7 Criterion to neglect surface heat loss
When the surface heat loss is mild, the trailing length and cooling rates could be
calculated directly with equations 4.15 and 4.31, without the correction factors for
surface heat loss g(Ro, h∗ ), equation 4.22 and 4.37. For a certain acceptable relative
error of ǫA , the critical heat loss coefficients in dimensionless form to neglect surface
dissipation in the prediction of trailing length are obtained by comparing equation 4.19
and 4.15 with equations 4.35 and 4.31.
141
5
10
0.06
0.04
IVa IIIa
0.02
0
h∗
10 0
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
IV III
-5
10
-2 0 2
10 10 10
Ro
Figure 4.4: Error map of blending of cooling rate (Equations 4.35 to 4.37) for the op-
timal blending parameters a1 = 3.652, b1 = 1.971, a2 = 0.06407, b2 = −0.1004, c2 =
6.252. The maximum relative error is 7.6 %.
142
-10-4
Ro = 0.1
Ro = 1
-10-2 Ro = 10
-100
∗+
Tḃ b
-102
-104
-106
10-4 10-2 100 102
h∗
∗+
Figure 4.5: The Tḃ b , calculated from the blending result Equation 4.35 to 4.37,
changes with h∗ for Ro = 0.1, 1, 10.
For trailing length, following the derivation in the Appendix (Equation 4.83), the
critical value for h∗ is:
" #
b x∗bIII-IV
K0 −b
h∗c,x∗b = 2ǫA 1− (4.39)
x∗bIII-IV
K1 −b
while for cooling rate, according to 4.87 in the Appendix, the critical value for h∗ is:
2
b
h∗c,Ṫ ∗ = 2ǫA K0 −b
x∗bIII-IV − K1 −b x∗bIII-IV ·
b
h 2 2 i−1
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
bbIII-IV + 1 K1 −b
x bbIII-IV K0 −b
xbIII-IV − x xbIII-IV (4.40)
In Regime III, according to equations 4.88 and 4.84 derived in Appendix, the
143
critical values of surface heat loss coefficient to neglect surface heat loss are:
b 2ǫA
h∗c,x∗b ,III ≈ (4.41)
πRo2
b ǫA
h∗c,Ṫ ∗ ,III ≈ (4.42)
b πRo2
In Regime IV, according to equations 4.89 and 4.85 derived in Appendix, the
critical values of surface heat loss coefficient to neglect surface heat loss are:
b
h∗c,x∗b ,IV ≈ b
h∗c,Ṫ ∗ ,IV ≈ 2ǫA (4.43)
b
The critical values of h∗ (Equations 4.39 and 4.40) and their approximations (Equa-
tions 4.39 and 4.40) are illustrated in Figure 4.6.
For fast moving heat sources, substituting equations 4.8 and 4.9 into Equation 4.42
to obtain the critical heat transfer coefficient with units within 10 % error in Regimes
III for cooling rate:
π(Tc − T0 )2 k 3 d3
h + h′ ≤ (4.44)
10α2(q/U)2
The power law on each parameter in Equation 4.44 is the same as the condition
proposed by Jhaveri [97]. Equation 4.44 implies that surface heat loss may become
important for large convection coefficients, such as in underwater wet welding and
in-service welding, large heat input q/U such as in thick welding passes, materials
having low thermal conductivity such as titanium, thin sheets, and isotherms of low
temperature such as the yield temperatures associated with plasticity in welding.
Correction factors for surface heat losses are necessary when they exceed the threshold
given by Equation 4.44.
As an example, consider the case of welding of steel under typical conditions,
assuming thermal conductivity is k ≈ 50 W/mK, thermal diffusivity of α ≈ 10−5
m2 /s and an absorbed power of 2000 W supplied at a speed of 10 mm/s with a total
heat loss coefficient 200 W/m2 K, typical of cooling in a gentle current of air. For the
isotherm of 632 ◦ C which is an effective intermediate temperature representing the
cooling rate between 800 ◦ C and 500 ◦ C [207], the effect of surface heat loss is negligible
144
for steel plates thicker than 4 mm (Ro = 2.6). For steel of 1 mm (Ro = 2.9 × 10−4 ),
the critical value to neglect surface heat loss is 3.7 W/m2 K, which is below typical
values of natural convection, and would require surface insulation. For the case of
additive manufacturing, local surface heat losses are relevant for walls thinner than 6
mm or interpass temperatures above 1244 ◦ C. Surface heat losses affecting the overall
(not just local) accumulation of heat and interpass temperatures involve different
calculations outside the scope of this work.
100
10-1
10-2
h∗c,x∗b
h∗c
-3 h∗c,Ṫ ∗
10 b
Equation 4.39
10-4 Equation 4.40
10-5
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure 4.6: Critical values of h∗ to neglect the effect of surface heat loss results in a
relative errors within 10 % between side blending at side Regime III – IV and exact
numerical results. The thick lines h∗c,x∗ and h∗c,Ṫ ∗ are critical values for trailing length
b b
and cooling rate. The thin lines equations 4.39 and 4.40 are estimation of the critical
values h∗c .
145
4.8 Validation
The engineering expressions proposed for cooling rate, equations 4.35 to 4.37, are
validated with data collected from published research, as illustrated in Figure 4.7
Measurements were collected for processes including: Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
(GTAW), Submerged Arc Welding (SAW), Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW), hard
facing, additive manufacturing and underwater wet welding.
The published cooling rates are normalized with Equation 4.25. Some cooling rates
are reported directly at a given temperature [63, 111]. In other measurements, cooling
rates are not reported directly, but calculated by cooling time, such as cooling time
from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C (t8/5 ) [120, 166]. An intermediate temperature is estimated
by Equation 4.53. For the case of room temperature at 20 ◦ C, the intermediate
temperature for t8/5 calculations is 632 ◦ C.
Thermal properties, like conductivity and diffusivity, are either listed in original
sources or obtained from software (JMatPro v11). An estimate of effective ther-
mal conductivity is in the Appendix, and estimates for other effective properties are
in [130]. Thermal efficiency, the ratio of amount of heat deposited on the substrate
to the heat generated, is assumed 0.8 for underwater arc welding [63, 122].
For underwater processes, surface heat loss coefficients are assumed 4000 W/m2 K
for underwater flux-cored arc welding conducted by Li et al. [122] and 10000 W/m2 K
for underwater wet welding conducted by Fukuoka [63], which are in the range of
surface heat loss coefficients involving boiling [19]. For processes in atmosphere, the
surface heat loss coefficient is assumed 100 W/m2 K for GTAW by Poorhaydari et
al. [166] and GMAW by Fukuoka et al. [63] and 300 W/m2 K for hard facing by Lazic
et al. [120] and additive manufacturing by Wang et al. [202].
Figure 4.7(a) compares the published data with predictions calculated with equa-
tions 4.35 and 4.36, without taking into account the correction factor for the effect of
surface heat loss g (Ro, h∗ ). Figure 4.7(b) compares the published data with predic-
146
tions calculated with equations 4.35 and 4.36. In general, the predictions lacking the
correction factor of surface heat loss can underestimate cooling rates severely, while
the predictions with correction factors (Equation 4.37) agree with experiments and
show no obvious bias.
4.9 Extensions of Results

4.9.1 Extension to different geometries
When the effects of surface heat losses are secondary, satisfying the criteria of Equa-
tion 4.40 for the case of cooling rate, the obtained engineering expressions can be
extended to other geometries in addition to a flat plate, including plates of different
thicknesses, thin-wall additive manufacturing, and Tee-joints [128]. Those configu-
rations are treated as combination of half-panels. For example, a flat plate can be
treated as two half-panels of the same thickness, while additive manufacturing of thin
walls corresponds to a single half-panel.
All formulae developed above will be applicable to each individual half-panel by
′
replacing q/d by qeffj
.
′ 2qj
qeff = (4.45)
j
dj
′
When the heat intensity per unit thickness qeffj
is the same for all panels, and when
the h∗j is the same for all panels, this generalization is exact; when not, the asymmetry
can cause heat transfer from one plate to another, which is not captured by the
symmetric 2D formulation used here, and this generalization is only approximate.
Additive manufacturing of thin walls and welding of plates of same thickness with
similar heat loss conditions approximate closely the conditions for exact predictions.
4.9.2 Consideration of the bioheat equation
The “fin” treatment of heat losses, in which they are equivalent to a volumetric heat
loss in a thin plate, opens the door to applying the results obtained to systems with
147
actual volumetric heat losses, such as energy exchange between blood and tissue in
human body captured by the bioheat equation.
The bioheat equation was first introduced in [162], with generalizations to beyond
1D [44] and moving heat sources [191] and can be written in 2D as
∂2T ∂2T q̇m ωρb cb

2
+ 2
+ + (Ta − T ) = 0 (4.46)
∂x ∂y k k
where T (x, y, z) is the local tissue temperature, q̇m is metabolic heat generation, ω
is the perfusion rate, ρb and cb are blood density and specific heat, k is the thermal
conductivity of tissue, and Ta is the arterial temperature entering capillaries.
With a change to Eulerian coordinates x′ , y ′ fixed to a heat source moving with
constant velocity U in the x′ direction and a variable substitution
T ′ (x′ , y ′ ) = T (x, y) − q̇m /ωρb cb (4.47)
Equation 4.46 can then be rewritten as
∂2T ′ ∂2T ′ U ∂T ′ ωρb cb

+ = − + (Ta − T ′ ) = 0 (4.48)
∂x′2 ∂y ′2 α ∂x′ k
which is the exact equivalent of Equation 1 in [130] and is the governing equation for
moving heat sources in 2D, of which Equation 4.2 is the solution. In this equivalency,
the heat transfer by blood perfusion is captured by the surface heat loss term when
h + h′
= ωρb cb (4.49)
d
T0 = Ta (4.50)
The expressions derived in this work are thus applicable to 2D moving heat sources
in biological systems that obey the bioheat equation.
4.10 Discussion
The Ro is a key number of characterizing isotherms of 2D moving heat source prob-

lems, that has been analyzed in [128, 130]. The h∗ is a dimensionless number reflecting
148
the significance of surface heat loss. According to the definition Equation 4.8, the
value of h∗ depends not only on the surface heat loss conditions h and h′ on each
side, but also on material properties, travel speed, plate thickness. The definition of
normalized surface heat loss coefficient is consistent with the dimensionless number
proposed by Kou et al. [109] and Heller et al. [84] except by a factor of 4, where h∗
was interpreted as a Biot number [109] with characteristic length L = α2 /kU 2 .
The value of heat loss coefficients h and h′ can be measured [83] or calculated
based on theoretical or semi-empirical correlations [19, 214]. The surface heat loss
mechanisms usually involve convection and radiation, or thermal contact.
The natural convection coefficient hconv is a magnitude of the order of 2 W/m2 K
to 25 W/m2 K in gases, while forced convection involving externally imposed flows
is of the order of magnitude of 25 W/m2 K to 250 W/m2 K for gases such as air
or shielding gas, and of the order of magnitude of 100 W/m2 K to 20,000 W/m2 K
for liquids, such as in in-service welding. The presence of bubbling in underwater
wet welding is comparable to boiling heat transfer with convection coefficients of the
order of 2500 W/m2 K to 100,000 W/m2 K [19]. Natural convection during welding
was determined also in [15, 83].
In general, surface convection is mild and negligible for processes in air when the
isotherms of melting temperature are studied. Surface heat loss for welding in air is
reported less than 1 % of the heat input for aluminum alloys by Kou and Le [110],
and less than 5 % for carbon steels by Tekriwal and Mazumder [193]. When study
the isotherms in low temperature zones, surface heat loss is usually crucial, even for
small values of h∗ , because the critical value to ignore surface heat loss decreases
considerably for large values of Ro, as illustrated in Figure 4.6.
The effect of surface convection is central to many processes such as welding on
thin plates, underwater wet welding, in-service welding, or when considering the low-
temperatures away from the heat source, as in the case of calculation of residual
stresses. For thin plates, resistance to conduction in the substrate is larger than that
149
for thick plates, and the heat loss plays a more significant role on characteristic values.
For underwater wet welding processes, the surface heat loss coefficient could in-
crease considerably of orders of magnitude. Habchi reported a Leidenfrost tempera-
ture (the critical temperature for film boiling) for water on stainless steel at 1 atm
to be around 280 ◦ C [80], which is below the typical temperatures of interest for
processes like welding.
Besides convection, radiation and thermal contact resistance can also be taken into
account with equivalent coefficients. One practical equivalent coefficient to account
radiation within the formulation of this work is [19]:
hrad = ǫσ(Ti2 + T02 )(Ti + T0 ) (4.51)
where ǫ is emissivity, σ is Stefan-Boltzmann constant, and Ti is an intermediate tem-

perature between the temperature of interest. This coefficient assumes that radiation
is towards an environment at T0 . All temperatures in Equation 4.51 are in absolute
scale.
The heat transfer between the workpiece and backing plate can be captured with
a coefficient hcont of the order of magnitude of 104 W/m2 K under the contact pressure
in the order of 0.1 − 10 MPa as reported by Yovanovich [226].
The total surface heat loss coefficient, htot , is the summation of the three surface
heat loss coefficients.
The trailing length and cooling rate magnitudes yield much information related
to the cooling time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C (t8/5 ), which has a decisive effect on
phase transformations in steel, the cooling time from solidification temperature to
100 ◦ C which is in relevance with evolution of hydrogen and cold cracking [99], and
the cooling time from 400 ◦ C to 290 ◦ C which affects the tensile strengths for high
quench sensitivity aluminum alloy [148]. With the engineering expressions for trailing
150
length and cooling rate, cooling time from T1 to T2 can be calculated as
c
T2 1 T1 − T2
∆t = (b bb,T1 ) ≈
xb,T2 − x (4.52)
T1 U Tḃ b,Ti
where Ti is an intermediate temperature between T1 and T2 . Consistently with [128,

207], the intermediate temperature can be approximated by geometric mean:
p
Ti = T0 + (T1 − T0 )(T2 − T0 ) (4.53)
4.11 Conclusions
Practical engineering expressions derived from fundamental analysis are presented for
the trailing length (equations 4.19 to 4.22) and cooling rate (equations 4.35 to 4.37)
of an isotherm for the case of 2D heat sources subject to surface heat losses. The
engineering expressions depends on two dimensionless groups, Ro and h∗ , and the
blending technique is extended to consider two parameters. The engineering ex-
pressions developed are not empirical, and are valid for all materials (metallic or
otherwise), heat sources, and surface heat losses that match the framework of the
problem. Their closed-form is amenable to practical calculations, for example with
spreadsheets. The predicted cooling rates are validated against experimental work
from the literature (Figure 4.7(b)).
The engineering expressions coincide with the exact solution in four asymptotic
regimes, and exhibit a discrepancy within 8 % of the exact solution in the interme-
diate regimes. A critical value of dimensionless heat transfer coefficient is proposed
(equations 4.39 and 4.40); for larger values, the correction factors for surface heat
losses enable predictions within acceptable errors (for Ro = O(1), the critical value
of h∗ is around 0.01). The expressions obtained are also applicable to moving heat
sources in biological tissue that can be represented with the bioheat equation.
151
Acknowledgment
Research Council of Canada (NSERC RGPIN-2019-05981). Student scholarships from
the AWS and the CWB-A Foundation were also gratefully received.
152
References
[15] X. Bai, H. Zhang, and G. Wang, “Improving prediction accuracy of thermal
analysis for weld-based additive manufacturing by calibrating input parame-
ters using IR imaging,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, vol. 69, no. 5-8, pp. 1087–1095, 2013.
[22] W. A. Bruce and M. A. Boring, “Comparison of methods for predicting safe pa-
rameters for welding onto in-service pipelines,” in 2006 International Pipeline
Conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2006,
pp. 283–296.
[26] P. Burgardt and C. R. Heiple, “Weld penetration sensitivity to welding vari-
ables when near full joint penetration,” Welding journal, vol. 72, no. 9, pp. 341–
347, 1992.
[29] Y. H. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z. F. Wang, “Numerical simulation of thermal cycle
of in-service welding on X70 steel gas pipeline,” in Multi-Functional Materi-
als and Structures II, ser. Advanced Materials Research, vol. 79, Trans Tech
Publications Ltd, Nov. 2009, pp. 1169–1172.
1128, 1972.
no. 1, pp. 329–359, 1996.
[44] Z.-S. Deng and J. Liu, “Analytical solutions to 3-D bioheat transfer problems
with or without phase change,” Heat Transfer Phenomena and Applications,
p. 205, 2012.
153
Japan, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 86–92, 1994.
[80] C. Habchi, “New correlations for Leidenfrost and Nukiyama temperatures with
gas pressure-application to liquid film boiling simulation,” in ILASS Europe,
2010.
[82] D. Havrylov, “Hydrodynamic regimes in autogenous fusion welding,” PhD
thesis, University of Alberta, 2020.
[83] J. C. Heigel, P. Michaleris, and E. W. Reutzel, “Thermo-mechanical model de-
velopment and validation of directed energy deposition additive manufacturing
of Ti–6Al–4V,” Additive manufacturing, vol. 5, pp. 9–19, 2015.
[97] P. Jhaveri, W. G. Moffatt, and C. M. Adams, “The effect of plate thickness and
radiation on heat flow in welding and cutting,” Welding Research Supplement,
vol. 41, no. 1, 12s–16s, 1962.
1993.
[105] R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, “Thermal analysis of the arc welding process.
Part II: Effect of variation of thermophysical properties with temperature.,”
Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, vol. 32, no. 3, 2001.
175s–181s, 1982.
[110] S. Kou and Y. Le, “Three-dimensional heat flow and solidification during the
autogeneous GTA welding of aluminum plates,” Metallurgical Transactions A,
vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 2245–2253, 1983.
pp. 1075–1082, 1988.
154
vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 235–246, 2010.
[122] H. Li, D. Liu, Y. Yan, N. Guo, Y. Liu, and J. Feng, “Effects of heat input on
arc stability and weld quality in underwater wet flux-cored arc welding of E40
steel,” Journal of Manufacturing Processes, vol. 31, pp. 833–843, 2018.
[128] Y. Lu and P. F. Mendez, “Characteristic values of the temperature field in-
duced by a moving line heat source,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, p. 120 671, 2020.
vol. 156, p. 119 793, 2020.
vol. 140, no. 8, p. 081 301, 2018.
vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 624–632, 2001.
[148] T. W. Nelson, R. J. Steel, and W. J. Arbegast, “In situthermal studies and
post-weld mechanical properties of friction stir welds in age hardenable alu-
minium alloys,” Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, vol. 8, no. 4,
pp. 283–288, Aug. 2003.
[162] H. H. Pennes, “Analysis of tissue and arterial blood temperatures in the resting
human forearm,” Journal of applied physiology, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 93–122, 1948.
no. 10, 149s–155s, 2005.
[191] M. R. Talaee and A. Kabiri, “Exact analytical solution of bioheat equation
subjected to intensive moving heat source,” Journal of Mechanics in Medicine
and Biology, vol. 17, no. 05, p. 1 750 081, 2017.
[193] P. Tekriwal and J. Mazumder, “Finite element analysis of three-dimensional
transient heat transfer in GMA welding,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 67,
150s–156s, 1988.
155
[202] L. Wang, S. Felicelli, Y. Gooroochurn, P. T. Wang, and M. F. Horstemeyer,
“Optimization of the LENS® process for steady molten pool size,” Materials
Science and Engineering: A, vol. 474, no. 1-2, pp. 148–156, 2008.
[203] L. Wang and S. Felicelli, “Analysis of thermal phenomena in LENSTM depo-
sition,” Materials Science and Engineering: A, vol. 435, pp. 625–631, 2006.
2019.
[214] J. B. Will, N. P. Kruyt, and C. H. Venner, “An experimental study of forced
convective heat transfer from smooth, solid spheres,” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 109, pp. 1059–1067, 2017.
[226] M. M. Yovanovich, “Four decades of research on thermal contact, gap, and
joint resistance in microelectronics,” IEEE transactions on components and
packaging technologies, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 182–206, 2005.
156
Appendix 4.A Asymptotics of x∗b in the asymp-
totic side Regime III – IIIa
√
In the asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa, where Ro → ∞ and Tc∗ → 0, −x∗bIII-IIIa h∗ + 1
tends to infinity since exp(−x∗bIII-IIIa ) > 1 for x∗bIII-IIIa < 0. Therefore, centerline tem-
perature distribution in Regimes III − IIIa is:
h √ i q √ − 32
π
Tc∗ ∗
= exp xbIII-IIIa ∗
1+h −1 · √
−2 1+h∗ x∗
+O 1+ h∗ x∗bIII-IIIa
bIII-IIIa
(4.54)
h i
For simplicity, the denotation w = W π 1 − √ 1
1+h∗
Ro2 is utilized in the current
w
section. Let x∗bIII-IIIa = − 2 √1+h (1 + ǫ), and to find the solution to trailing length
( ∗ −1
)
is equivalent to finding ǫ. Because there is one root to ǫ corresponding to each Ro, if
ǫ is solved based on assumption ǫ ≪ 1, the asymptotic is achieved. The right side of
temperature distribution, Equation 4.54, can be rewritten asymptotically,
s √ √
∗ w (ǫ + 1) π 1 + h∗ −1
1 + h∗ − 1
Tc = exp − √ · 1+O √ (4.55)
2 w (ǫ + 1) 1 + h∗ w 1 + h∗
The root of ǫ is found:
√
1 1+h∗ −1
W π 1− √ Ro2 1+O √
1+h∗ w 1+h∗
ǫ= −1 (4.56)
W π 1− √ 1 ∗ Ro2
1+h
W [χ(υ+1)] υ
Because W (χ)
=1+ + O (υ 2 ) = 1 + O (υ) when υ → 0, the ǫ is:
W (χ)+1
 
 1
1 − √1+h ∗

ǫ=O h i (4.57)
W π 1 − √ 1 Ro 2 
1+h∗
Because
d 1− √ 1 ∗ ∗ −2 3
1+h
= 1/2
(h +1) >0
dh∗ W π 1− √ 1 ∗ Ro2 1+W π 1− √ 1 ∗ Ro2
1+h 1+h
,
  " #
 1
1 − √1+h ∗
 1
ǫ = O lim h i =O 2
≪1 as Ro →∞
h∗ →∞ W π 1 − √ 1 Ro2  W πRo
1+h∗
(4.58)
157
As the solution to ǫ is found and much smaller than one, the solution to trailing
length is
h i ( " #)
1 2
W π 1 − √1+h ∗ Ro 1
x∗bIII-IIIa = − √ · 1+O (4.59)
2 1 + h∗ − 1 W πRo2
The asymptotic expression for the dimensionless trailing length when Ro → ∞ (the
asymptotic side III – IIIa) is:
h i
1 2
W π 1 − √1+h ∗ Ro
b∗bIII-IIIa = −
x √ (4.60)
2 1 + h∗ − 1

In Regime III when h∗ → 0, π 1 − √1+h 1
∗ Ro2 tends to zero, and the Equation 4.60
can thus be simplified to asymptotic expression of trailing length in Regime III:
πRo2
b∗bIII = −
x (4.61)
2
In regime IIIa when h∗ → ∞, the asymptotic expression can be derived from

Equation 4.60 as:

W πRo2
b∗bIIIa
x =− √ (4.62)
2 h∗
Appendix 4.B Asymptotics of x∗b in the asymptotic

side Regime IV – IVa
√
In the asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa when Ro → 0, x∗bIV-IVa → 0 x∗bIV-IVa h∗ + 1 →
0, and temperature distribution at centerline can thus be written as:

∗
2 √
√
T = 1+O x∗bIV-IVa · ln −x∗ h∗ +1
∗
− γ + O xbIV-IVa h∗ + 1 (4.63)
bIV-IVa

Let x∗bIV-IVa = − √h2∗ +1 exp − Ro
1
− γ (1 + ǫ), assuming ǫ ≪ 1, resulting in the
following temperature field at trailing length:

1 1 1
∗ − −
T = 1 + O e Ro ln (1 + ǫ) e Ro + O e Ro (4.64)
158
The ǫ is solved:
1 !
−
O e Ro −γ
1 1
1 ! − " 1 !# + Ro +γ
− −
O e Ro +1 Ro O 1+e Ro

1
1 − Ro
ǫ =e −1= O Ro
e ≪1 as Ro → 0
(4.65)
Therefore, the solution to trailing length for Ro → 0 is:
1
∗ 2e− Ro −γ 1
1 − Ro
xbIV-IVa = − √ 1 + O Ro e (4.66)
h∗ + 1
and the asymptotic for x∗b in the asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa is:
2 1

b∗bIV-IVa = − √
x exp − Ro −γ (4.67)
h∗ + 1
In Regime IV when h∗ → 0, the Equation 4.67 can be simplified to asymptotic
expression of trailing length in Regime IV:
1

b∗bIV = −2 exp − Ro
x −γ (4.68)
In Regime IVa when h∗ → ∞, the Equation 4.67 can be simplified to asymptotic

expression of trailing length in Regime IVa:
2 1

b∗bIVa = − √ exp − Ro
x −γ (4.69)
h∗
Appendix 4.C Asymptotics of Ṫb∗ in the asymp-

totic side Regime III – IIIa
√
In the asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa, −x∗b h∗ + 1 → ∞, the right side of Equa-
tion 4.26 could be expressed asymptotically:
 !2 
1  √ 1 1
Ṫb∗ = 1 − h∗ + 1 + ∗ +O √ ∗  (4.70)
Ro 2xbIII-IIIa h + 1x∗bIII-IIIa
 
 2
1  √
∗ 1 1

= 1− h +1+ ( " # ) +O √ (4.71)
Ro  2x∗b O
1
+1
h∗ +1x∗b
III-IIIa 

III-IIIa W (πRo2 )
( 2 )
1 √ 1 1
= 1 − h∗ + 1 + ∗ + O x∗ + O √h∗ +1x1∗
bIII-IIIa W (πRo )
2
Ro 2xb III-IIIa
bIII-IIIa
(4.72)
159
2
1 1 1 1
Because O x∗b W (πRo2 )
≪ 2x∗b
and O √
h∗ +1x∗b
≪ 2x∗b
for
√ III-IIIa III-IIIa III-IIIa III-IIIa
large Ro number and x∗b h∗ + 1 , the asymptotic cooling rate is derived by substi-
tution Equation 4.59:
 
∗ √  1 
ḃ
T h∗ +1−1
= − Ro 1+ h i (4.73)
bIII-IIIa
 W π 1 − √h1∗ +1 Ro2 
In Regime IIIa, h∗ tends to infinity, the asymptotic cooling rate is:

√
ḃ ∗ h∗
T bIIIa = − (4.74)
Ro
In Regime III, h∗ tends to zero, the asymptotic cooling rate is:

∗ 1
Tḃ bIII = − (4.75)
πRo3
Appendix 4.D Asymptotics of Ṫb∗ in the asymp-

totic side Regime IV – IVa
√
In the asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, −x∗b h∗ + 1 → 0, the right side of Equa-
tion 4.26 could be expressed asymptotically:

∗ 1 1
Tḃ bIV-IVa = −
1
√ + O (4.76)
−x∗b Ro ln − 2 h + 1x∗b + γ Ro
Bringing the solution to trailing length Equation 4.67 into Equation 4.76, the cooling
rate is:
√ 1
ḃ ∗ h∗ + 1 e Ro +γ 1
Tb = − h i h i + O
1
1 − Ro
2 1 + O Ro e
1
1 + O e− Ro Ro
√
1√ ∗ 1 h∗ + 1
=− h + 1 e Ro +γ +O (4.77)
2 Ro
√ √ 1
h+1
Because O Ro
≪ − 21 h∗ + 1 e Ro +γ for small Ro number, the asymptotic cool-
ing rate in the asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa is:
ḃ ∗ 1√ ∗ 1
T bIV-IVa = − h + 1 e Ro +γ (4.78)
2
160
In Regime IVa, h∗ tends to infinity, the asymptotic cooling rate is:
√
ḃ ∗ h∗ 1 +γ
T bIVa = − e Ro (4.79)
2
In Regime IV, h∗ tends to zero, the asymptotic cooling rate is:
ḃ ∗ = − 1 e Ro
T
1
+γ
(4.80)
bIV
2
Appendix 4.E Critical surface heat loss
For small h∗ , trailing length is expressed as perturbation x∗b = x∗bIII-IV + δx , where

δx ≪ x∗bIII-IV . Substitution of x∗b = x∗bIII-IV + δx into Equation 4.3 yields the following
temperature distribution at the trailing length:
h √ i
−x∗b −δx
Tc∗ = e K0 − x∗bIII-IV + δx
III-IV h∗ + 1
∗ x∗ K1 −x∗
h
≈ Tc∗ − Tc∗ δx − δx + b b
2
III-IV
∗
III-IV
(4.81)
K0 −xb
III-IV
Thus, the solution to δx is:

h∗ x∗bIII-IV K1 −x∗bIII-IV
δx ≈ (4.82)
2 K0 −x∗bIII-IV − K1 −x∗bIII-IV
δx
Considering certain percent error ǫA = x∗b
, the critical value of h∗c to neglect
III-IV
surface heat loss for trailing length can be obtained:

" #
∗
K 0 −b
x bIII-IV
h∗c,x∗b ≈ 2ǫA 1 − (4.83)
K1 −bx∗bIII-IV
In Regimes III, when Ro → ∞, Equation 4.83 is simplified as:
2ǫA
h∗c,x∗b ≈ (4.84)
πRo2
In Regimes IV, when Ro → 0, Equation 4.83 is simplified as:
h∗c,x∗b ≈ 2ǫA (4.85)
161
For small values of h∗ , according to Equation 4.82 and 4.26, the cooling rate can
be written as:
√ h √ i
∗ 1 h∗ +1K1 − h∗ +1 x∗b +δx
Ṫb = 1− h √ III-IV i
Ro K0 − h∗ +1 x∗b +δx
n III-IV
∗
h 2
≈ Ṫb∗III-IV1 + h2 x∗bIII-IV + 1 K1 −x∗bIII-IV −
2 i −2 o
x∗bIII-IV K0 −x∗bIII-IV K0 −x∗bIII-IV − K1 −x∗bIII-IV (4.86)
Considering certain relative error ǫA = Ṫb∗III-IV /Ṫb∗ − 1 , the critical value of h∗c to
neglect surface heat loss for cooling rate can be obtained:
2
h∗c,Ṫ ∗ = 2ǫA K0 −x∗bIII-IV − K1 −x∗bIII-IV ·
b
h 2 2 i−1
x∗bIII-IV + 1 K1 −x∗bIII-IV − x∗bIII-IV K0 −x∗bIII-IV (4.87)
In Regime III, when Ro → ∞, Equation 4.83 is simplified as:

ǫA
h∗c,Ṫ ∗ ≈ (4.88)
b πRo2
In Regime IV, when Ro → 0, Equation 4.83 is simplified as:
h∗c,Ṫ ∗ ≈ 2ǫA (4.89)

b
Appendix 4.F Estimation of effective thermal con-

ductivity
An effective thermal conductivity keff can be approximated as the constant conduc-

tivity yielding the same thermal resistance in a wall of thickness L in steady state.
∆T L
R′′ = − ′′
= (4.90)
q keff
where R′′ is the thermal resistance associated with the absolute values of heat flux q ′′
in the direction of coordinate ξ, perpendicular to the wall, and temperature difference
∆T through the thickness d of the wall. In steady state, without accumulation or
depletion of heat:
dT
q ′′ = −k(T ) = constant (4.91)
dξ
162
Integrating Equation 4.91 along the thickness of the wall results in
Z L Z T2
dT
−k(T ) dξ = −k(T )dT = q ′′ L (4.92)
0 dξ T1
Combining equations 4.92 and 4.90 results in

Z L
1
keff = k(T )dT (4.93)
∆T 0
indicating that a good approximation to the effective value of thermal conductivity

is the average value between two temperatures. For problems involving just one
temperature of interest, the average is suggested between T0 and the temperature of
interest Tc . For problems involving a temperature range, the suggested average is
within that range, for example, between 800 ◦ C and 500 ◦ C for t8/5 .
163
101
V. N. Lazic [120]
100 H. L. Li [122]
Calculated normalized cooling rate T. Fukuoka (in air) [63]
T. Fukuoka (underwater) [63]
10-1 L. Wang [202]
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-4 10-2 100
Published normalized cooling rate
(a)
101
V. N. Lazic [120]
100 H. L. Li [122]
T. Fukuoka (in air) [63]
Calculated normalized cooling rate
T. Fukuoka (underwater) [63]

10-1 L. Wang [202]
10-2
10-3
10-4
10-4 10-2 100
Published normalized cooling rate
(b)
Figure 4.7: Comparisons of predictions of164

cooling rate. 4.7(a): Equation 4.35 without
corrections for surface heat loss. 4.7(b): Equation 4.37 with correction factors for
surface heat loss.
Chapter 5
Width of thermal features induced

by a moving heat source on a thin
plate with surface heat losses
5.1 Abstract
This paper proposes explicit expressions to estimate isotherm half-width and its lo-
cation of moving heat source on a thin plate with correction factors for the effect of
surface heat losses. The expressions depend on two dimensionless groups: the Rosen-
thal number relative to the intensity of the heat source and h∗ representing the effects
of surface heat losses. A systematic approach is proposed to establish 2-D blending
with the two dimensionless groups, which yields predictive equations in closed-form
within 9.6 % and 12 % of the exact solution for isotherm width and location. Valida-
tion against published experimental results and simulations shows a close agreement
with the predictive equations.
Table 5.1: Notation

h W m−2 K−1 Convection coefficient on top surface
h′ W m−2 K−1 Convection coefficient on bottom surface
165

K0 Modified Bessel function of the second kind, zero order
T K Temperature
T0 K Far temperature or preheat
uc Dependent variable for 2-D blending
W Lambert function
Greek symbols
γ Euler–Mascheroni constant
η 1 Thermal efficiency
Π Independent variables for 2-D blending
Superscripts
∗
Dimensionless value
+
Correction for intermediate regions
Subscripts
c Critical values
max Related to maximum isotherm half-width
III Regime III
IV Regime IV
IIIa Regime IIIa
166
IVa Regime IVa
5.2 Introduction
The estimation of the half-width of an isotherm is one of the central questions in

analyzing moving heat sources. For example, in laser cladding, the half-width of
the melting isotherm determines the half-width of the bead [219]; in the analysis
of thermal distortions in welding or additive manufacturing, the amount of material
experiencing plasticity is determined by the isotherm of yield temperature [76].
While numerical simulations can often make an accurate prediction, in practice,
engineers typically resort to previous experience or trial and error when developing
parameters for moving heat sources. Engineering expressions and empirical formulae
have been explored to predict the half-width of an isotherm induced by a moving heat
source in a very large substrate [140] and a 2-D situation such as thin plates [70, 84,
88, 96, 130, 145, 190, 213]. For neither of these cases, the effect of surface heat losses
was considered.
While for moving heat sources on a thick substrate, the effect of surface heat losses
is negligible in almost all practical conditions. The effects of surface heat losses on
a thin substrate are relevant in two common families of problems. The first type of
problems includes systems experiencing intense convection, such as in-service welding
where the weld is made on a pipe carrying a moving fluid [22], or underwater wet
welding [67], in which the plate is exposed to the convective cooling of water. The
second type of problems includes the calculation of residual stresses during welding,
in which the yield temperature is low (of the order of 100 ◦ C), compared to other
temperatures of interest such as melting (around 1500 ◦ C for steels) or transformations
(around 700 ◦ C in steels).
167
The aim of this work is not to obtain predictions for particular cases, for which
numerical simulations are already very advanced [222]; or to solve particular problems,
which are routinely solved by trial and error in practice. Instead, this work aims to
provide predictions of great generality, simplicity, and accurate enough for practical
applications. The results presented here are valid for any material and any type of
heat source within the basic hypotheses.
The work presented here is part of a broader research program aimed at identi-
fying moving heat source features and presenting practical and accurate predictive
expressions useful to practitioners. The overall program is based on the understand-
ing that many important aspects of complex problems such as welding and additive
manufacturing can be treated using a minimal representation that captures only the
dominant physics, with the secondary physics included as correction factors. This
approach is often used in all engineering disciplines at an intuitive level, and a formal
implementation is described in [134, 137, 140, 141, 144, 167, 218].
The proposed predictive equations consist of closed-form asymptotic solutions and
correction factors to account for intermediate cases. In this work, the asymptotic cases
are based on Rosenthal’s 2-D solution [176], also called the “thin plate” solution or
“line heat source” solution. This solution is accurate enough to be used routinely
used in practice for a wide range of materials and problems including arc welding [62,
160, 176, 213], laser and electron beam welding [73, 85, 190], metal cutting [66, 149],
thermal forming of shells [227], and has even been adapted to mass transfer [171].
5.3 Governing equation
The model considered in this work consists of a point heat source of intensity q
moving with constant velocity along a straight path on a thin plate of thickness d,
infinite length and width, and constant thermophysical properties, as illustrated in
Figure 5.1.
The formulation of this problem is discussed in detail in [130]. The governing
168
y
x
q
Figure 5.1: Isotherms for a point heat source of intensity q on a thin substrate of
thickness d. The domain is −∞ < x < ∞, −∞ < y < ∞ and gradients in z are
negligible [130].
equation is:
∂2T ∂2T U ∂T h + h′
+ = − + (T − T0 ) (5.1)
∂x2 ∂y 2 α ∂x kd
with the following boundary conditions:
∂T q
= − as r → 0 (5.2)
∂r 2πrkd
T = T0 as r → ∞ (5.3)
p
where x, y are the coordinates defined in Figure 5.1, r = x2 + y 2 is the distance to
the heat source, T is the temperature field, q and U are the rate of heat and velocity
of the heat source, h and h′ are surface heat loss coefficients on the top and bottom
surfaces combining the effects of convection, radiation and contact resistance, α, k, d
and T0 are the thermal diffusivity, conductivity, thickness and initial temperature of
the substrate.
This equation approximates the surface heat losses as volumetric losses, as it is
common in the study of fins, which is accurate for substrates with a small Biot
number Bi= (h + h′ )d/k. Equation 5.1 can also capture the transient behavior of
a fin under the condition of an instant amount of heat deposited at the root. This
problem is of much relevance for the calculation of residual stresses in manufacturing
processes involving moving heat sources such as additive manufacturing of walls or
welding of relatively thin plates [77].
The solution of Equation 5.1 with boundary conditions of equations 5.2-5.3 and
169
accounting for surface heat losses was first obtained by [176]:
q
q
U 2
h+h′
T (x, y) = T0 + 2πkd
exp − U2αx K0 r 2α
+ kd
(5.4)
where K0 is the modified Bessel function of second kind and zero order. This equation
provides the temperature value for each point in the substrate.
The idealizations used to obtain Equation 5.4 have relatively little impact on the
predictive accuracy and were reviewed in detail in [130]. The fin approximation
is accurate for most welding conditions; for example, a representative underwater
wet weld would have surface heat losses h + h′ of the order of 50 – 1000 W/m2 K
(natural convection in water) and thermal conductivity of 50 W/mK (steel). In these
conditions, a large substrate thickness such as 25 mm still would yield a small Biot
number of 0.5.
5.4 Normalization and asymptotics
The normalization of Equation 5.4 is discussed in detail in [130], resulting in:

√
T ∗ (x∗ , y ∗) = exp (−x∗ ) K0 r ∗ 1 + h∗ (5.5)
∗
where the superscript indicates a dimensionless quantity:
2πkd (T − T0 )
T∗ = (5.6)
q
2
4α (h + h′ )
h∗ = (5.7)
kdU 2
Ux
x∗ = (5.8)
2α
Uy
y∗ = (5.9)
2α
Ur
r∗ = (5.10)
2α
p
where r ∗ = x∗2 + y ∗2 . Equation 5.5 involves four dimensionless groups: two inde-
pendent variables x∗ , y ∗ (r ∗ is not independent), the dependent variable T ∗ (x∗ , y ∗),
and the parameter h∗ associated with surface heat losses.
170
When considering the maximum half-width of isotherm T ∗ = Tc∗ , the four dimen-
∗
sionless groups are constrained by Equation 5.5 and by the condition ymax = max(y ∗ ),
leaving only two degrees of freedom: h∗ , and the Rosenthal number (Ro) [62, 130]:
q 1
Ro = = ∗ (5.11)
2πkd (Tc − T0 ) Tc
When surface heat losses are considered, the geometry of isotherms in dimensionless
space depends on Ro and h∗ , as illustrated in Figure 5.2. The values of Ro and h∗
can vary between zero and infinity, defining four asymptotic regimes in this paper,
illustrated in Figure 5.4. For small values of h∗ , Regimes III (for large Ro) and Regime
IV (for low Ro) were introduced in [130]. When surface heat losses are important,
two new regimes appear: Regime IIIa for high values of h∗ and high values of Ro,
and Regime IVa, for high values of h∗ and low values of Ro. Regime I and Regime II
correspond to a moving heat source in 3D conditions and were defined in [140].
Ro = 2, h∗ = 0
Ro = 1, h∗ = 0
Ro = 1, h∗ = 1
ymax
Figure 5.2: Isotherms corresponding to Ro = 1 and 2, and h∗ =0 and 1. The surface

heat losses have a significant effect on the half-width of the isotherm.
5.5 Two-dimensional blending
Blending is a methodology that produces explicit prediction on the full domain for
all values of dependent variables. The full domain can be divided into asymptotic
171
regimes where variables tend to extreme values, like zero or infinity, and intermediate
transitional regimes. At asymptotic regimes, simple expressions can be obtained
with asymptotic analysis or regression on experimental data; by combining two or
more asymptotic expressions, blending yields closed-form approximate expressions
that cover not only asymptotic regimes but also intermediate regimes.
For a characteristic value u∗c depending on one variable Π, two asymptotic regimes
are: ub∗c i (Π) at Regime i (Ri ) where Π → 0 and ub∗c j (Π) at Regime j (Rj ) where Π → ∞,
where the superscript b indicates asymptotic behavior. 1-D blending results in an
+
approximation over the full domain ub∗ (Π) where the superscript + indicates results
of blending, as discussed at [4, 34, 38, 140, 207] and modified to extend its scope of
applicability as discussed at [128, 130].
For a characteristic value u∗c that depends on two variables Π1 and Π2 , the general
approach to two-dimensional blending has not yet been established systematically.
Previous attempts achieve the partial 1-D blending on a subdomain that works only
for a limited range of variables [214]. A general and systematic approach is proposed
to achieve 2-D blending of u∗c (Π1 , Π2 ) as follows.
For extreme values of Π1 and Π2 , the full domain of (Π1 , Π2 ) is divided into four
asymptotic regimes: ub∗c i (Π1 , Π2 ) at Regime i (Ri ) where Π1 → 0 and Π2 → 0,
ub∗c j (Π1 , Π2 ) at Regime j (Rj ) where Π1 → ∞ and Π2 → 0, ub∗c k (Π1 , Π2 ) at Regime k
(Rk ) where Π1 → 0 and Π2 → ∞, ub∗c l (Π1 , Π2 ) at Regime l (Rl ) where Π1 → ∞ and
Π2 → ∞, as illustrated in Figure 5.3. In this paper, the general expressions used
172
have the following corresponding concepts in the blending derivations:
u∗c = ymax
∗
or x∗max (5.12)
Π1 = Ro (5.13)
Π2 = h∗ (5.14)
Regime i = Ri = Regime IV (5.15)
Regime j = Rj = Regime III (5.16)
Regime k = Rk = Regime IVa (5.17)
Regime l = Rl = Regime IIIa (5.18)
The subscripts III and IV indicated the previously identified regimes for the case of
negligible surface losses [130]. The subscripts IIIa and IVa refer to the corresponding
regimes with intense surface loss.
Π2
ub∗c k at Rk ub∗c l at Rl
Π1
ub∗c i at Ri ub∗c j at Rj
Figure 5.3: Schematic of process map u∗c depending on Π1 and Π2 . Four asymptotic
regimes are defined for extreme values of Π1 and Π2 .
Along asymptotic ‘sides’ of the full domain, partial blending results are achieved for
173
the following combined regimes: side Regime i − j (Ri−j ) when Π2 → 0, side Regime
k − l (Rk−l ) when Π2 → ∞, side Regime i − k (Ri−k ) when Π1 → 0, side Regime
j − l (Rj−l ) when Π1 → ∞. Side partial blending, for example ub∗c i−j (Π1 , Π2 ) along
the asymptotic side Ri−j , can be obtained with 1-D blending when side asymptotic
behaviours change with one variable (Π1 for side Ri−j and Rk−l , Π2 for side Ri−k and
Rj−l ). When side asymptotic behaviours change with both Π1 and Π2 , 1-D blending
cannot be applied directly and side partial blending must be derived using asymptotic
analysis.
After obtaining side partial blending results, correction factors (f ) can be devel-
oped for each of the asymptotic formulae. For instance, the correction factor can be
obtained for side Ri−j based on the asymptotic formula for Ri is:
+
ub∗c i−j (Π1 , Π2 )
fi−j (Π1 , Π2 ) = ∗ (5.19)
ubc (Π1 , Π2 )
i
At asymptotic ‘corners’ of the full domain, partial blending results are defined on
the subdomain consisting of two asymptotic sides sharing the same base asymptotic
regime, for example the asymptotic corner Ri−j−k based on Ri containing side Ri−j
and side Ri−k . Corner partial blending combines asymptotic expressions at the base
regime and correction factors along both sides, for example at corner Ri−j−k based
on Ri :
+
ub∗c i−j−k (Π1 , Π2 ) = ub∗c i · fi−k · fi−j (5.20)
where fi−k (Π1 , Π2 ) and fi−j (Π1 , Π2 ) are calculated with Equation 5.19.
With a corner partial blending developed, the correction factor g(Π1 , Π2 ) is de-
+
fined to estimate u∗c /ub∗c i−j−k that represents 2-D blending of ub∗c (Π1 , Π2 ). g(Π1 , Π2 ) is
+ +
asymptotically 1 at Ri Rk Rj , and ub∗c l /(ub∗c i−j−k )l at the opposite Rl , where (ub∗c i−j−k )l
is the asymptotic behavior of the corner partial blending in Rl . The 2-D blending of
g(Π1 , Π2 ) could not be obtained with corner partial blending directly which can only
satisfy three asymptotic regimes.
174
When the asymptotic in Rl is large, gl (Π1 , Π2 ) ≥ 1, a systematic approach to 2-D
blending of g (Π1 , Π2 ) that is used in this paper is:
+
g (Π1 , Π2 ) = 1 + Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) (5.21)
+
where Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) is a corner partial blending based on the opposite Rl . If the asymp-
totic in Rl is small, (g)l (Π1 , Π2 ) < 1, 2-D blending of g (Π1 , Π2 ) can be transformed
to 2-D blending of the reciprocal 1/g (Π1 , Π2 ) that is larger than one.
In Equation 5.21, Gl (Π1 , Π2 ) is an auxiliary function constructed as:
u∗c (Π1 , Π2 )
Gl (Π1 , Π2 ) = + −1 (5.22)
ub∗c i−j−k (Π1 , Π2 )
which tends to zero at Ri Rk Rj , and (g)l − 1 at the opposite Rl . If the asymptotic
behaviors of g (Π1 , Π2 ) change with one variable along side Rk−l and Rj−l , blending
of Gl (Π1 , Π2 ) can be achieved with corner partial blending based on Rl similar to
Equation 5.20:
+
Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) = Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) · I (Π1 , Π2 ) (5.23)
where Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) is the asymptotic expression of Gl (Equation 5.22) at the base Rl is:
ub∗c (Π1 , Π2 )
Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) = + l −1 (5.24)
ub∗ci−j−k
(Π1 , Π2 )
l
and I (Π1 , Π2 ) is an unit correction factor for corner partial blending:

h n1 i1/n1 h n2 i1/n2
I (Π1 , Π2 ) = 1 + a1 Πb11 1 + a2 Πb22 (5.25)
where a1 , b1 , n1 , a2 , b2 , n2 are arbitrary blending parameters. Equation 5.25 is one

at Rl , a1 Πb11 at Rj and a2 Πb22 at Rk that tends to zero.
The 2-D blending of the characteristic value u∗c is formulated on one asymptotic
regime, Ri for example, as:
+
ub∗c (Π1 , Π2 ) = ub∗c i · fi−k · fi−j · g (5.26)
where fi−k (Π1 , Π2 ) and fi−j (Π1 , Π2 ) are obtained through side partial blending Equa-
tion 5.19 and g(Π1 , Π2 ) is obtained through Equation 5.21.
175
5.6 Asymptotic analysis of isotherm half-width ymax
The asymptotic analysis of Equation 5.5 for isotherm half-width ymax and its location
x∗max in Regime III and Regime IV where surface heat losses are negligible yields
simple expressions:
r
∗ π
ybmax = Ro for Regime III (5.27)
III
2e
π
b∗maxIII
x = − Ro2 for Regime III (5.28)
2e
∗ 1
ybmax = 2 exp −γ− for Regime IV (5.29)
IV
Ro

∗ 4 2
bmaxIV = −
x exp −2γ − for Regime IV (5.30)
Ro Ro
where γ = 0.5772 . . . is the Euler-Mascheroni constant. Equations 5.27 and 5.29 are
consistent with asymptotic analysis in [130] for fast heat sources and low surface
heat losses, and equations 5.28 and 5.28 are consistent with [128]. The asymptotic
behaviour is a power law in Regime III (fast) and an exponential dependence, not a
power law, in Regime IV (slow); the modified 1D blending is used to obtain global
approximation [130].
The asymptotic analysis when surface heat losses are intense is detailed in Ap-
pendix. In Regime IIIa, for large values of Ro and h∗ , the asymptotic behavior of
∗
ymax is obtained according to Equation 5.94 and x∗max is obtained according to Equa-
tion 5.93:
r
∗ 1 1 2

ybmax = W πRo for Regime IIIa (5.31)
IIIa
2 h∗
W πRo2
b∗maxIIIa
x =− for Regime IIIa (5.32)
2h∗
where W (x) is Lambert W function, which is the solution to x = W (x) eW (x) [41].
Regime IIIa also captures characteristic values for the case of a fin with an instant
∗
amount of heat deposited at the root. The value ybmaxIIIa
represents the maximum
b∗maxIIIa ,
reach of a particular temperature along the length of the fin, while the value x
176
corresponds to time b bmaxIIIa /U, and indicates the time it takes for the
tmaxIIIa = x
temperature of interest to reach its maximum reach along the length of the fin.
In Regime IVa, for small values of Ro and large values of h∗ , the asymptotic
∗
behavior of ymax is obtained according to Equation 5.81 and x∗max is obtained according
to Equation 5.80:

∗ 2 1
ybmax = √ exp − −γ for Regime IVa (5.33)
IVa
h∗ Ro

4 2
b∗maxIVa
x =− exp − − 2γ for Regime IVa (5.34)
Ro h∗ Ro
5.7 Blending of isotherm half-width ymax
With the asymptotic behaviours of isotherm half-width in asymptotic regimes, equa-

tions 5.27, 5.29, 5.31 and 5.33, side partial blending results are developed firstly along
four side regimes, and then 2-D blending of isotherm half-width for the full domain
is achieved based on Regime III.
5.7.1 Side partial blending
In asymptotic side Regime III – IV, for small values of h∗ , the predictive scaling law
has been proposed in previous work neglecting surface heat convection [128]:
( q −n )1/n
8e exp (−γ)
1
∗+
ybmax = 2e− Ro −γ 1+ π
(5.35)
III−IV
Ro
where the blending parameters n = 1.407 and the maximum relative error is 6.8% for
all values of Ro and h∗ = 0 [130].
In asymptotic side Regime IIIa – IVa, for large values of h∗ , partial blending is
obtained with 1-D blending on Ro:
n n1
∗+ exp(− Ro1
)
−γ n W (πRo2 )
ybmaxIIIa−IVa
= √
h∗
2e + 2
(5.36)
where the blending parameter n = 2.205 and the maximum relative error 2.4%.
177
In asymptotic side III – IIIa, for large values of Ro, side partial blending can not be
obtained through 1-D blending as the asymptotic behaviors of isotherm half-width
change with both h∗ and Ro. The partial blending results is derived through the
asymptotic analysis under Ro → 0 according to Equation 5.90:
∗ ω q 2
ybmaxIII−IIIa
= √ 1+ (1+h∗ )ω
(5.37)
2 h∗
where ω is a blending function of Lambert W function:

( −1 −1 b )−1
πh ∗ Ro2 πh ∗ Ro2 πh∗ Ro2
ω≈
1
+ ln
1
+c +a
1

exp ∗ (1+h ) exp ∗ (1+h ) exp (1+h∗ )
1+h∗ 1+h∗ 1+h∗
(5.38)
where a = 0.08568, b = −0.1028, c = 2.586 to be consistent with [128].

In asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, for small values of Ro, the partial blending
for isotherm half-width is obtained with 1-D blending on h∗ :
n 1/n
∗+ 1 1
ybmax = 2 exp − −γ √ +1 (5.39)
IV−IVa
Ro h∗
where n = −2, which is derived according to Equation 5.77 rather than from opti-
mization.
5.7.2 2-D blending
With asymptotic and side partial blending expressions proposed, 2-D blending of
isotherm half-width for any values of Ro or h∗ for isotherm half-width ymax
∗
is formu-
lated based on Regime III (Equation 5.27) multiplying three correction factors:
r
∗+ π
ybmax = Ro · fIII-IV (Ro) · fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) · g (Ro, h∗ ) (5.40)
2e
where the correction factor fIII-IV (Ro) is for asymptotic side III – IV according to
Equation 5.35:
( "r #n ) n1
1 8e exp (−γ)
fIII-IV (Ro) = exp − 1+ (5.41)
Ro π Ro
178
where n = 1.407 to be consistent with [130]. The correction factor fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ), ac-
cording to side partial blending along asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa Equation 5.37,
is:
r s
e ω 2
fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) = 1+ (5.42)
2πh∗ Ro ω(1 + h∗ )
where ω is a function of Ro and h∗ calculated with Equation 5.38. The correction
factor g(Ro, h∗ ) is:
g (Ro, h∗ ) = 1 + Gd ∗ ∗
IVa (Ro, h ) · I (Ro, h ) (5.43)
∗
∗

where the asymptotic expression of ymax ybmaxIII
· fIII-IV · fIII-IIIa − 1 at Regime IVa
is Gd ∗ ∗
IVa (Ro, h ) and corner blending correction factors is I(Ro, h ):
s
2
Gd ∗
IVa (Ro, h ) = 2 (5.44)
πeRo + 2e/(1 + h∗ )
n1 n2
I(Ro, h∗ ) = 1 + a1 Rob1 1 + a2 h∗b2 (5.45)
The optimal blending parameters are a1 = 16.09, b1 = 1.438, n1 = −0.2508, a2 =

0.05885, b2 = −0.3583, n2 = −24.44. The maximum relative error is 9.6 %.
5.7.3 Engineering expression
The engineering expression with units of isotherm half-width is obtained from Equa-
tion 5.40:
+ 1 qα
ybmax =√ · fIII - IV (Ro) · fIII - IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) · g (Ro, h∗ ) (5.46)
2πe Ukd (Tc − T0 )
where the correction factor fIII - IV (Ro) is Equation 5.41, fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) is Equa-
tion 5.42 and g (Ro, h∗ ) is Equation 5.43.
5.8 Blending of isotherm half-width location x∗max
Similar to the 2-D blending of isotherm half-width, with the asymptotic behaviours of
isotherm half-width location x∗max in asymptotic regimes, side partial blending results
are developed along four side regimes first, and then 2-D blending for the full domain
is achieved based on Regime III in this section.
179
105
IVa IIIa
h∗ 100
10-5
IV III
10-2 100 102

Ro
∗
Figure 5.4: The error map of isotherm half-width ymax for Equation 5.40.
5.8.1 Partial blending
In asymptotic side Regime III – IV, for small values of h∗ , the predictive scaling law
has been proposed in previous work ignoring surface heat convection [128]:
h π i
b∗+
x 2
maxIII−IV = − exp − Ro 2e
Ro2 + 4
exp(2γ)Ro
+ aRob (5.47)
where the blending parameters are a = 1.427, b = 1.077. The maximum error is 6.3%
when h∗ = 0 [128].
In asymptotic side Regime IIIa – IVa, for large values of h∗ with intense surface
heat loss, the behavior of isotherm half-width location changes with Ro as:
n h in 1/n
exp(− 2 ) W (πRo2 ) 4
b∗+
xmaxIIIa−IVa = − h∗ Ro 2
+ Ro exp(−2γ)
(5.48)
where the blending parameter n = 1.112 and the maximum error is 9.9%.
In asymptotic side Regime IIIa – IIIa, for large values of Ro, the asymptotic be-
havior of isotherm half-width location changes with both Ro and h∗ and can only
be achieved by asymptotic analysis. According to Equation 5.89, the side partial
180
blending of x∗max is:
" #
1 πh∗ Ro2
b∗maxIII−IIIa
x = − ∗W 1
(5.49)
2h exp 1+h ∗ (1 + h∗ )
In asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, for small values of Ro, the asymptotic behavior
changes with h∗ and the side partial blending of x∗max is:
n 1/n
∗+ 4 2 1
bmaxIV−IVa = −
x exp − − 2γ 1 + (5.50)
Ro Ro h∗
where n = −1 is derived by asymptotic analysis according to Equation 5.76 rather

than optimization.
5.8.2 2-D blending

∗
Similar to 2-D blending of ymax in Equation 5.40, isotherm half-width location x∗max
is formulated with 2-D blending as asymptotic of Regime III and three correction
factors:
π
b∗+
xmax = − Ro2 · fIII-IV (Ro) · fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) · g (Ro, h∗ ) (5.51)
2e
The correction factor fIII-IV (Ro) between Regime III – IV is according to Equa-
tion 5.47:
h i
2
fIII-IV (Ro) = exp − 1+ 8e
π exp(2γ)
Ro−3 + 2ae
π
Rob−2 (5.52)
Ro
where a = 1.427, b = 1.077 to be consistent with [128].

The correction factor between Regime III – IIIa fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) according to Equa-
tion 5.49 is:
eω
fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) = (5.53)
πRo2 h∗
where ω is a function of Ro and h∗ calculated with Equation 5.38.

The correction factor from the opposite corner g (Ro, h∗ ) is:
h i−1
∗ d ∗ ∗
g (Ro, h ) = 1 + GIVa (Ro, h ) · I (Ro, h ) (5.54)
181
b∗maxIII ·fIII-IV ·fIII-IIIa
x
where Gb (Ro, h∗ ) is a function constructed as: x∗max
−1 = eω
πRo2
− 1. At
Regime IVa, the asymptotic behavior of Gd ∗ ∗
IVa (Ro, h ) for small Ro and large h is:
Gd ∗
IVa (Ro, h ) = e − 1 (5.55)
and the corner blending correction factors I(Ro, h∗ ) is:
n1 n2
I (Ro, h∗ ) = 1 + a1 Rob1 1 + a2 h∗b2 (5.56)
where a1 = 3.143, b1 = 0.8608, n1 = −0.5360, a2 = 0.3143, b2 = −0.7133, n2 =

−2.645. The maximum relative error is 12 %.
5.8.3 Engineering expression
The engineering expression with units of isotherm half-width location is written based
on Regime III:
αq 2
b+
xmax = −
∗ ∗
2 · fIII - IV (Ro) · fIII - IIIa (Ro, h ) · g (Ro, h ) (5.57)
2 2
4eπUd k (Tc − T0 )
where the correction factor fIII - IV (Ro) is Equation 5.52, fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ ) is Equa-
tion 5.53 and g (Ro, h∗ ) is Equation 5.54.
5.9 Criterion to neglect surface heat loss
For the cases with negligible surface heat loss effects (h∗ = 0), previous investigations
∗
have reported explicit predictive expressions for isotherm half-width ymax [130] and
its location x∗max [128]. The expressions are obtained with modified 1-D blending
method of one dimensionless group (Ro number), and they are used as partial blending
∗
results in asymptotic side Regime III – IV in this paper (Equation 5.39 for ymax
and Equation 5.47 for x∗max respectively). Consistent with the previous predictive
expressions, the correction factors for the effect of surface heat losses, fIII-IIIa (Ro, h∗ )
and g(Ro, h∗ ) in 2-D blending (Equation 5.42, 5.43 for ymax
∗
and Equation 5.53, 5.54
for x∗max ), approach one pointwisely when h∗ tends to 0.
182
For an acceptable relative error of 10 %, for example, the effect of surface heat
losses can be neglect under a critical value of h∗c . The critical value h∗c depends on the
Ro number, as illustrated in Figure 5.5. The criterion to disregard correction factors
∗
of surface heat loss is suggested for the isotherm half-width ymax within a relative
error of 10 % in [130]:
h π n i−1/n
b
h∗c,ymax
∗ = 0.2 1 + Ro2 (5.58)
2e
where n = 0.9405; the criterion for the location of isotherm x∗max can be estimated by
the blending equation:
h e n i1/n
b
h∗c,x∗max = 0.1 1 + (5.59)
πRo2
where n = −1.296. Blending results of the critical surface heat losses, b

h∗c,ymax
∗ and
b
h∗c,x∗max , are shown in Figure 5.5.
100
10-2
h∗c,ymax
∗
∗
hc,x∗max
b
h∗+
h∗c
Equation 5.58
10-4
c,ymax
∗
b
h∗+ Equation 5.59
c,x∗max
10-6
10-2 100 102

Ro
Figure 5.5: Critical values of surface heat losses h∗c and its blending approximation
b
h∗+ ∗ ∗
c for isotherm width ymax and its location xmax under an acceptable error of 10 %.
For a typical welding processes on steel, thermal diffusivity α = 10−5 m2 /s, thermal
183
conductivity k = 50 W/mK, the velocity U = 10 mm/s, the heat input q = 3000 W,
the thermal efficiency η = 0.85, the plate thickness d = 1 mm, the room temperature
T0 = 20 ◦C. In consideration of the critical temperature of thermal residual stress
Tc = 100 ◦C, the Rosenthal number is Ro = 101; the critical to neglect the effect of
surface heat loss is h∗c = 3.36 × 10−5 and the corresponding coefficient of surface heat
loss is 0.42 W/m2 K that is much smaller than the order of natural convection in air,
10 W/m2 K, and the effect of surface heat loss is therefore significant.
The critical values of the proposed surface heat loss correction factors, h∗c (equa-
tions 5.58 for isotherm half-width and equations 5.59 for isotherm width location),
suggest that more significant effects will be necessary for the higher Rosenthal num-
bers (i.e. lower temperature ranges). The temperature range for the plastic zone
associated with residual stress has been previously shown to be approximately an or-
der of magnitude lower than the fusion zone [76] and will therefore be more influenced
by surface heat losses.
5.10 Validation
The explicit engineering expressions for isotherm width are validated with data col-
lected from published papers and simulation results of thermal residual stress ne-
glecting and considering the correction factors for surface heat losses, as shown in
Figure 5.6 and 5.7. The experimental values were normalized using Equation 5.9,
and compared against the partial blending expression (equations 5.40 and 5.41) in
Figure 5.7 and 2-D blending expressions with correction factors for surface heat losses
(equations 5.40 to 5.43) in Figure 5.7. With the lower temperature range relevant
for residual stress, limited literature data is available for measurement of isotherm
widths, so additional numerical validation was performed using the computational
weld mechanics software package Simufact Welding.
184
5.10.1 Published data
Measurements were collected for processes like Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) [11,
123], Laser Beam Welding (LBW) [100], Underwater Cutting [201], Friction Stir Weld-
ing (FSW) [168] for materials including titanium alloys (Ti-6Al-4V [123],Ti [100]),
steel (St37 [11],Q235 [201]), stainless steel [11, 168].
In addition to the properties listed in the published papers, the thermal properties
of base materials (thermal conductivity and diffusivity) are obtained from material
property textbook [143] or software JMatPro (v11), and the effective values are calcu-
lated with the method presented in previous work [129, 130]. The thermal efficiency
is assumed 0.9 in [11, 168]. The effective surface heat loss coefficient is estimated for
validation. The heat loss coefficient is assumed 300 W/m2 K in [11, 100] for processes
in atmosphere, and is assumed 500 W/m2 K in [123, 168] accounting for clamping
and backing, which are in the order of magnitude 10 2 W/m2 K. For underwater cut-
ting, the effective surface heat loss coefficient is assumed 100,000 W/m2 K in [201].
In [11], only the points away from the centerline in 4× the plate thickness is included,
satisfying the criterion for two-dimensional heat flow [130].
5.10.2 Simulation results
A large thin flat plate substrate is considered with a thickness in the z direction
of d = 3 mm, a length in the x direction of 2400 mm and a half-width in the y
direction of 1000 mm. The substrate material was chosen as A36 structural steel
with temperature-dependent material properties obtained from the computational
material software JMatPro (v11). The heat source was modelled as a cylinder with
a depth equal to the plate thickness and a radius of 5 mm.
The substrate mesh consists of 8-node isoparametric bricks with a maximum ele-
ment size of 40 mm at the plate edge, which decreases to a minimum element size of
2.5 mm at the weld axis. A single layer of elements in the plate thickness direction
is adequate to capture the 2-D temperature field associated with the full-penetration
185
heat source. The mesh size at the weld line is equal to half of the heat source radius,
which represents a balance between computational efficiency and limiting instabilities
associated with the heat source “jumping” between nodes on the weld line.
The heat transfer coefficient for the bottom plate surface is held constant at h′ =
0 W/m2 K. Three levels are studied for the heat loss coefficient of the top plate
surface: h = 10 W/m2 K (free convection), h = 20 W/m2 K and h = 100 W/m2 K
(forced convection). The edges of the plate are assumed to be perfectly insulated.
All simulations consider a net power of q = 1920 W and a travel speed of U =
8 mm/s for an effective welding heat input of Q′ = 240 J/mm. A xz symmetry plane
is applied at the weld axis resulting in a thermal condition equivalent to a centre weld
between two plates, and therefore a shape correction to the heat source power used
to calculate the 2D Rosenthal temperature field is not necessary.
The isotherm widths are reported for temperatures of ∆T = 50 − 350◦ C, measured
on the top surface of the substrate at the mid-plane. The reported value is obtained
by linear interpolation between the maximum temperature recorded for the nodes
adjacent to the mid-plane section. The minimum isotherm size corresponding to
∆T = 300◦ C and h = 100 W/m2 K was ymax = 12 mm which is more than 4× the
plate thickness, thereby satisfying the criterion necessary to apply the 2D point heat
source model [130].
5.11 Discussion
Similar to the study of the effects of surface heat losses to cooling rate [129], the
∗
2-D blending of isotherm half-width, equations 5.40 to 5.43 for ymax , and its location,
equations 5.51 to 5.54 for x∗max , depends on two dimensionless groups: the Rosenthal
number (Equation 5.11) and h∗ (Equation 5.7). The Rosenthal number was first
proposed by Fuerschbach and Eisler to match experimental results [62]. Ro represents
an isotherm in the temperature field of moving heat source problems that is consistent
with [128–130]. The h∗ is a dimensionless group to illustrate the significance of the
186
104
103
102
Simulation
1
10 J. Li [123]
ybmax
∗+
Y. Kawahito [100]
M. J. Attarha [11]
100 J. Wang [201]
A. P. Reynolds [168]
10-1
100 102 104
∗
ymax
Figure 5.6: Validation of engineering expression for isotherm half-width neglecting
correction factors for surface heat loss (Equation 5.40 to 5.41).
104
103
102
Simulation
1
10 J. Li [123]
Y. Kawahito [100]
ybmax
M. J. Attarha [11]
∗+
100 J. Wang [201]

A. P. Reynolds [168]
10-1
100 102 104
∗
ymax
Figure 5.7: Validation of engineering expression for isotherm half-width considering
correction factors for surface heat loss (Equation 5.40 to 5.43).
187
effects of surface heat losses. The surface heat loss (htot ) is total effect of convection
(hconv ), radiation (hrad ) and contact resistance (hcond ), htot = htot + hrad + hcont . The
surface heat losses are in different orders of magnitudes for different cases as discussed
in [129]. For cases in air, the surface heat loss is in order of 10 W/m2 K without forced
convection and in order of 102 W/m2 K with forced convection. For cases underwater,
the surface heat loss is in order of 50−103 W/m2 K without forced convection, in order
of 102 −2×104 W/m2 K with forced convection, and in order of 2.5×103 −105 W/m2 K
with phase transformations [92].
To achieve global approximations of x∗max and ymax
∗
over the full domain of Ro and
h∗ , a systematic approach is proposed to obtain 2-D blending results for a character-
istic depending on two variables, as introduced in Equation 5.26. The full domain of
2-D blending could be divided into four asymptotic regimes (III, IIIa, IV and IVa in
this paper), in terms of extreme values of the two dimensionless groups (0 or ∞ of Ro
and h∗ ). Based on asymptotic expressions in the four regimes, side partial blending
can be obtained with either 1-D blending or asymptotic analysis along asymptotic
sides between asymptotic regimes next to each other. Then, corner partial blending
is obtained by combining partial blending sharing the base regime Equation 5.20.
The 2-D blending is finally formulated systematically with corner partial blending
on one regime (Regime III in this paper) and blending based on the opposite regime
(Regime IVa in this paper), as shown in Equation 5.26. The systematic 2-D blending
approach extends the scope of blending methodology from characteristics depending
on one dimensionless group [34, 128, 130, 140, 207] to characteristics depending on
two dimensionless groups for the first time. Different from 1-D blending that has one
correction factor, 2-D blending usually involves three correction factors from the base
regime to the other three regimes. However, when Gbl (Π1 , Π2 ) in Equation 5.24 is
zero, 2-D blending is simplified to two correction factors, such as trailing length and
centerline cooling rate for a 2-D moving point heat source in [129]. The proposed 2-D
blending approach does not engage with the cases with more than four asymptotic
188
regimes.
The novel 2-D blended expressions presented here offer immense value to industrial
practitioners. Since these expressions are explicit and closed-form, they can readily be
implemented in procedure development problems or codes and standards. The gen-
erality of these equations makes them particularly suitable to broad design problems
where empirical methods are neither feasible nor cost-effective. However, the ana-
lytical method and associated understanding may also be leveraged in combination
with experimental and numerical techniques. For example, consider a time-intensive
numerical simulation that has been previously performed with an assumed value for
the surface loss coefficient h. The correction factors in this work might be readily
applied to answer questions such as how the width of the weld pool and HAZ be
expected to change if this coefficient was doubled. It also creates the possibility to
perform fewer simulations with parameters optimizing for computational efficiency.
The same is true for empirical investigations. For example, consider a small-scale
experiment with forced surface-convection via flowing water, which is conducted for
a given material, substrate thickness and flow rate. The blended equations in this
work enable previously inaccessible insight as to whether these results will remain
valid or need adjustment if applied to field conditions that do not precisely match
those which were tested. This methodology is inherent in consideration of essential
variables for modern welding procedure design. The theory presented here, for the
first time, provides a fundamental basis to extend that philosophy to include the
effects of surface heat losses.
5.12 Conclusions
This work presents for the first time practical and rigorous expressions for correction
factor for the effects of surface heat losses of an isotherm half-width (ymax , Equa-
tion 5.46) and its location (xmax , Equation 5.57). Examples of processes, where these
expressions apply, include underwater processes, in-service welding, welding on a thin
189
plate, and the calculation of residual stresses associated with moving heat sources.
The isotherm half-width and its location depends on two dimensionless groups:
the Rosenthal number and h∗ ; all cases are therefore divided into four asymptotic
regimes: Regime III and Regime IV without convection, Regime IIIa and Regime IVa
under intense convection. The proposed expressions have the form of an asymptotic
expression (in Regime III) multiplied by three correction factors.
A novel systematic approach is developed for the blending of two variables (Equa-
tion 5.26), which develops engineering expressions based on theoretical analysis rather
than empirical fitting. The 2-D blending of isotherm width and its location yields
global approximation within 9.6 % and 12 % of the exact numerical solution, respec-
tively.
The critical thickness to neglect effects of surface heat losses in the predictions
(error below 10 %) of width depends on the temperature considered. For a typical
welding process on steel with a convection coefficient of the order of 100 W/m2 K,
surface heat losses are negligible for thickness above 0.07 mm for the width of melt
(with typical values of Ro ≈ 1). Also, for steel, if a temperature of 630◦ C is considered
as representative of the 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C, the critical thickness is 2.4 mm. (with typical
Ro ≈ 10). For the calculations of residual stresses in steel, in which the characteristic
temperatures are of the order of 100 ◦ C, the critical thickness is 23 mm (with typical
Ro ≈ 100).
Validation against published experimental results and simulations shows a close
agreement with the predictive equations (Figure 5.7).
Acknowledgments
Research Council of Canada (NSERC RGPIN-2019-05981). Student scholarships from
the AWS and the CWB were also gratefully received.
190
References
[11] M. Attarha and I. Sattari-Far, “Study on welding temperature distribution in
thin welded plates through experimental measurements and finite element sim-
ulation,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 211, no. 4, pp. 688
–694, 2011.
pp. 283–296.
1128, 1972.
no. 1, pp. 329–359, 1996.
no. 1, pp. 77–89, 2005.
[67] P. Ghadimi, H. Ghassemi, M. Ghassabzadeh, and Z. Kiaei, “Three-dimensional
simulation of underwater welding and investigation of effective parameters,”
Welding journal, vol. 92, no. 8, pp. 239–249, 2013.
191
[77] M. R. Grams and P. F. Mendez, “A general expression for the welding tendon
force,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. (under review), 2021.
pp. 219–225, 1999.
[100] Y. Kawahito, T. Ohnishi, and S. Katayama, “In-process monitoring and feed-
back control for stable production of full-penetration weld in continuous wave
fibre laser welding,” Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, vol. 42, no. 8,
p. 085 501, 2009.
[123] J. Li, Q. Guan, Y. W. Shi, and D. L. Guo, “Stress and distortion mitigation
technique for welding titanium alloy thin sheet,” Science and Technology of
Welding and Joining, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 451–458, 2004.
Transfer, p. 120 671, 2020.
[129] Y. Lu and P. F. Mendez, “The effect of surface heat losses on isotherm trailing
length and cooling rate,” 2021.
vol. 156, p. 119 793, 2020.
2011.
vol. 140, no. 8, p. 081 301, 2018.
192
alia, vol. 58, no. 18, pp. 6012–6026, 2010.
vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 624–632, 2001.
vol. 138, no. 12, p. 122 301, 2016.
[167] J. A. Ramos-Grez and M. Sen, Analytical, quasi-stationary wilson-rosenthal
solution for moving heat sources, 2019.
[168] A. P. Reynolds, W. Tang, T. Gnaupel-Herold, and H Prask, “Structure, prop-
erties, and residual stress of 304l stainless steel friction stir welds,” Scripta
materialia, vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 1289–1294, 2003.
1923, pp. 640–654.
journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2–8, 1938.
[201] J. Wang, J. Shi, J. Wang, W. Li, C. Liu, G. Xu, S. Y. Maksimov, and Q.
Zhu, “Numerical study on the temperature field of underwater flux-cored wire
arc cutting process,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
2019.
no. 5, 263s–267s, 1952.
193
vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 212–220, 2014.
[222] B. Xu, F. Jiang, S. Chen, M. Tanaka, S. Tashiro, and N. Van Anh, “Numerical
analysis of plasma arc physical characteristics under additional constraint of
keyhole,” Chinese Physics B, vol. 27, no. 3, p. 034 701, 2018.
194
Appendix 5.A Asymptotic analysis in asymptotic
side Regime IV – IVa
∗
The isotherm half-width ymax and its location x∗max are expressed implicitly relating
to a given temperature Tc :
√
Tc∗ = exp (−x∗max ) K0 rmax
∗
1 + h∗ (5.60)
∂T ∗
=0 (5.61)
∂x∗ x∗max ,ymax
∗
∗
p
where rmax = x∗2 ∗2
max + ymax . Equations 5.60 and 5.61 can be transformed to the
Rosenthal number, zeroth and first order modified Bessel function of the second kind:
√ 1
exp (−x∗max ) K0 rmax
∗
1 + h∗ = (5.62)
√ √ Ro

∗
x∗max 1 + h∗ K1 rmax 1 + h∗
1+ ∗
√ =0 (5.63)
rmax K0 rmax
∗ 1 + h∗
∗
√
According to Equation 5.63 and the denotation R = rmax 1 + h∗ , the isotherm
∗
half-width ymax and its location x∗max can be expressed as:
√
∗
rmax K0 (rmax
∗ 1+h∗ ) R K0 (R)
x∗max = − √1+h∗ K r∗ √1+h∗ = − 1+h (5.64)
1 ( max ) ∗ K (R)
1
s √
2 ∗ ∗
∗ ∗ K 0 r max 1 + h
ymax = rmax 1− √ (5.65)
(1 + h∗ )K12 rmax
∗ 1 + h∗
s
R K0 (R)2
=√ 1− (5.66)
1 + h∗ (1 + h∗ ) K1 (R)2
In asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, where Ro → 0 considering the isotherms close
∗
to the heat source, the isotherm half-width ymaxIV−IVa
≪ 1, its location x∗maxIV−IVa ≪
∗
1, rmaxIV−IVa
≪ 1 and RIV−IVa ≪ 1. By replacing x∗maxIV−IVa with Equation 5.64,
asymptotic analysis of Equation 5.62 in asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa produces:
1
= −γ + ln (2) − ln (RIV−IVa ) + O (RIV−IVa ) (5.67)
Ro
Writing the R in asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa as:
RIV−IVa = 2 exp (− 1/Ro − γ) (1 + ǫ) (5.68)
195
Solving RIV−IVa in Equation 5.67 is identical to finding the root of ǫ. To obtain
asymptotic expressions in asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, asymptotic analysis is
performed assuming ǫ → 0. If the solution to ǫ assures the assumption, asymptotic
b is obtained; asymptotic expressions to yb∗ and x
expression to R b∗max are then derived.
max
Bringing the denotation Equation 5.68 into Equation 5.67 yields:

1
O exp − = ln (1 + ǫ) (5.69)
Ro
Therefore, as Ro → 0 in asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, the solution to Equa-

tion 5.67 is:
1
1

ǫ = −1 + exp O exp − Ro = O exp − Ro (5.70)
1
1

RIV−IVa = 2 exp − Ro − γ 1 + O exp − Ro (5.71)
Substituting Equation 5.71 into Equation 5.64 and Equation 5.66, the solutions to
∗
isotherm half-width ymaxIV−IVa
and its location x∗maxIV−IVa are:

2
RIV−IVa 1 3

x∗maxIV−IVa = γ + ln RIV−IVa + O RIV−IVa (5.72)
1 + h∗ 2
2

4 exp −2γ − Ro 1 3
=− +O exp − (5.73)
(1 + h∗ ) Ro Ro Ro
∗ RIV−IVa 2

ymaxIV−IVa
=√ + O RIV−IVa (5.74)
1 + h∗
1

2 exp −γ − Ro 2
= √ + O exp − (5.75)
1 + h∗ Ro
In asymptotic side Regime IV – IVa, the partial blending of isotherm half-width and
its location are:
2

4 exp −2γ − Ro
b∗maxIV−IVa
x =− (5.76)
(1 + h∗ ) Ro
1

∗ 2 exp −γ − Ro
ybmaxIV−IVa
= √ (5.77)
1 + h∗
In Regime IV as h∗ → 0, the asymptotic expressions for isotherm half-width and
196
its location are

4 2
b∗maxIV
x =− exp −2γ − (5.78)
Ro Ro

∗ 1
ybmax = 2 exp − −γ (5.79)
IV
Ro
In Regime IVa as h∗ → ∞, the asymptotic expressions for isotherm half-width and

its location are

4 2
b∗maxIVa
x =− ∗ exp −2γ − (5.80)
h Ro Ro

∗ 2 1
ybmax = √ exp − −γ (5.81)
IVa
h∗ Ro
Appendix 5.B Asymptotic analysis in asymptotic

side Regime III – IIIa
In asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa, where Ro → ∞ considering isotherms away

from the heat source, RIII - IIIa → ∞. By replacing x∗maxIII−IIIa with Equation 5.64,
asymptotic analysis of Equation 5.62 in asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa produces:
∗ r
1 h RIII - IIIa 1 π 1
= exp − − · +O (5.82)
Ro 1 + h∗ 2 + 2h∗ 2RIII - IIIa RIII - IIIa
Denote ω as: " #

πh∗ Ro2
ω=W (5.83)
exp h∗1+1 (h∗ + 1)
Write the R in the asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa as:
h∗ + 1
RIII - IIIa = ω(1 + ǫ) (5.84)
2h∗
Equation 5.82 is can be written as:

ǫω 1
1

1 = exp − √ 1+O √ (5.85)
2 1+ǫ R
III - IIIa
ǫω 1 1
0≈− − ǫ+O √ (5.86)
2 2 RIII - IIIa
197
The solution to ǫ is:
√
hq i
1 √ 2h ∗ h∗
ǫ=O 1+ω
=O (h∗ +1)ω
(5.87)
(h∗ +1)ω
In asymptotic side Regime III – IIIa, partial blending results of isotherm half-width
and its location are:
∗
RbIII - IIIa = h + 1 ω (5.88)
2h∗
1
b∗maxIII−IIIa = − ∗ ω
x (5.89)
2h s
∗ ω 2
ybmax = √ 1+ (5.90)
III−IIIa
2 h∗ (1 + h∗ ) ω
In Regime III as h∗ → 0, the asymptotic expressions for isotherm half-width and

its location are:
π
b∗maxIII = −
x Ro2 (5.91)
2e
∗ 1
ybmax = 2 exp − −γ (5.92)
III
Ro
In Regime IIIa as h∗ → ∞, the asymptotic expressions for isotherm half-width and

its location are:
1 2

b∗maxIIIa = −
x W πRo (5.93)
2h∗
1
∗
ybmaxIIIa
= √ W πRo2 (5.94)
2 h∗
198
Chapter 6
Isotherm half-width of Gaussian

moving heat sources on a thick
substrate
Abstract
This paper presents a systematic analysis of the maximum isotherm half-width under
a Gaussian distributed heat source on a semi-infinite solid. Dimensionless isotherm
∗
half-width ymax depends on two dimensionless groups: the Ry number representing
velocities of heat source, and normalized standard deviation of Gaussian distribution
σ ∗ representing sizes of heat source. A new phenomenon is identified for the first
time: the presence of two local width maxima in an isotherm under some parameter
combinations. Correction factors for maximum isotherm half-width are determined in
closed-form for the first time over a wide range of σ ∗ and Ry. The methodology em-
ployed consists of dimensional analysis, asymptotic analysis, and blending techniques.
The maximum error of the proposed equations is within 6.1 % from the analytical
solution for Ry ≤ 1000 and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ∗+
bmax
(Ry) ≤ 0.9, where σ (Ry) is the maximum
heat source size for certain Ry. The expressions obtained can be calculated using a
calculator or a basic spreadsheet and are useful for engineers. Comparisons of the
proposed equations are conducted with measurements from literatures.
199
Table 6.1: Variables used in the paper with the units and
description
Variable Unit Description
Im 1 Constant Im = 1.280
Ry 1 Rykalin number
T K Temperature
T0 K Initial temperature or preheat
Tmax,c K Maximum temperature at centerline
x, y, z m Cartesian coordinates
xmax,c m Location of maximum temperature at center-
line
xmax m Location of maximum isotherm half-width
ymax m Maximum isotherm half-width
Greek symbols
χ 1 χ = x∗ − σ ∗2
p
ρ 1 ρ = (x∗ − σ ∗2 )2 + y ∗2
σ m Standard deviation of a Gaussian function
σmax m Maximum heat source distribution parame-
ter
Superscripts
∗
Dimensionless value
+
Improvement over asymptotic approximation
200
Variable Unit Description
Subscripts
I Regime I (concentrated and fast heat
sources)
II Regime II (concentrated and slow heat
sources)
V RegVme V (wide and fast heat sources)
VI Regime VI (wide and slow heat sources)
6.1 Introduction
The maximum isotherm half-width at a temperature of interest is one of the most

critical dimension characteristics in investigations of moving heat source problems.
For example, maximum isotherm half-widths of melting temperature determine the
size of the melt pool and melting efficiencies for fusion welding processes. Maximum
isotherm half-widths of phase transformation temperatures, such as Ac1 for carbon
steel, determines sizes of the heat-affected zone or area of surface hardening.
Prediction of the maximum isotherm half-width based on the classic point heat
source model has been proposed in previous investigations for thick plates [140, 207]
and thin plates [130], which is a reasonable assumption in considering isotherms away
from the heat source. However, for isotherms near the heat source, the distribution
and size of heat source can not be neglected, that drives development of moving dis-
tributed heat source models [39, 74, 150, 212]. The moving Gaussian heat source is
one of the most widely applied models [39, 53], that a good representation of heat
sources like electronic arcs [113], laser beam [65]. It describes a Gaussian distributed
heat source moving on the surface of the workpiece, avoiding the problem of singu-
larity for the temperature field induced by a point heat source. It has been proved
that a moving Gaussian source can predict important thermal characteristics such as
201
isotherm shape, cooling rate and peak temperature with high accuracy [39, 196, 209].
There have been many studies of the maximum isotherm half-width with varying
emphases on experiments, numerical simulations and analytical modelling. Based on
Rosenthal’s thick plate solution, an approximation of fusion zone width was obtained
by regression of experimental data for bead-on-plate welds with a limited applicable
range [155]. Empirical equations for HAZ width or fusion width have been proposed as
a function of interactive processing variables by multiple linear regression [5, 18, 98].
Despite the simplicity, empirical equations are valid for a limited range of parameters
and can hardly be extrapolated to conditions beyond which they were developed.
Temperature field in a two-dimensional plate was solved using a finite difference
method, and the isotherm width at the melting temperature was correlated to the pro-
cess variables [160]. Thermal history and shape of isotherms under a double ellipsoid
model have been calculated by the finite element method for thick workpieces [74].
A computer model for three-dimensional heat flow under a Gaussian surface source
was developed using the finite element method to predict the configuration of the
fusion zone and the resultant grain structure [110]. Sophisticated numerical models
can take complicated geometry and multiple physics such as latent heat into account.
However, the requirement of specialized software and computational skills restricts
the applicability of simulations in industrial practice. Furthermore, simulation re-
sults can seldom be generalized as explicit and intuitively understood design rules
amenable to use by practitioners.
A simple estimation of fusion line width was reported by Wells for single-run butt
welds on thin plates [213], but it is only valid under very limited conditions. Asymp-
totes of fusion width for large Peclet and small Peclet numbers have been derived
from Rosenthal’s 2D solution [190] but failed to obtain an explicit solution valid for
intermediate Peclet numbers. The analytical temperature field of a distributed heat
source typically involves improper integrals or summations that require a careful com-
putational implementation to extract a solution for the maximum isotherm width [39,
202
53, 216].
The objective of this paper is to present a general and easily applicable solution
that would predict with high accuracy the maximum isotherm width at a temperature
of interest when given operational parameters and thermal properties of the substrate
based on previous work on moving point heat source model [140]. A moving Gaussian
source model was used as the theoretical basis. A correction factor for the heat
distribution parameter was obtained using the 2D blending technique to improve
predictions derived from Rosenthal’s solutions. The obtained explicit equation for
the maximum isotherm width is compared against the Rosenthal calculations and
experimental measurements from the literature.
6.2 Moving Gaussian heat source
The moving Gaussian heat source model refers to a constant heat source obeying
Gaussian distribution moving at a constant speed on a plate that is thick and wide
enough to ignore edge effects. The temperature distribution after a given time interval
is solved by Eagar and Tsai using Green’s function with average substrate’s thermal
properties [53]:
1 Z t0 1 2
qα 2 τ−2 x + 2xτ U + U 2 τ 2 + y 2 z2
T = T0 + 3 exp − − dτ (6.1)
2kπ 2 0 2ατ + σ 2 4ατ + 2σ 2 4ατ
where x, y, z are coordinates relative to the center of the heat source, T is the
temperature field and T0 is the initial temperature, q and U are the rate and velocity
of the heat source, α and k are thermal diffusivity and conductivity of the substrate,
σ is the standard deviation of Gaussian distribution, t0 is the time interval of the
heat source motion. As t0 increases to infinity, the term of time is omitted and the
temperature field approach pseudo-steady state.
Normalization reduces the Equation 6.1 to dimensionless form, independent of
203
specific operating parameters and material properties, with:
4πkα (T − T0 )
T∗ = (6.2)
qU
Ux
x∗ = (6.3)
2α
Uy
y∗ = (6.4)
2α
Uz
z∗ = (6.5)
2α
Uσ
σ∗ = (6.6)
2α
where ∗ indicates dimensionless numbers.

The dimensionless pseudo-steady temperature field on the top-surface (z ∗ = 0) is
written with Equation 6.2 to 6.6 as:
Z ∞ 1 ∗2
∗ 1 τ−2 x + 2τ ∗ x∗ + τ ∗2 + y ∗2
T =√ exp − dτ (6.7)
2π 0 τ + σ ∗2 2τ + 2σ ∗2
With variable substitution

√
τ
t = arctan (6.8)
σ∗
the improper bounds of the integral in the normalized temperature field, Equation 6.7,
can be avoided:
Z π
( 2 )
2 2 σ ∗2 x∗ y ∗2 cos2 t
T∗ = √ exp − − 1 cos t + sec t − dt (6.9)
2πσ ∗ 0 2 σ ∗2 2σ ∗2
The integrand has one peak value located at:

 
∗
σ
t = arccos  q  (6.10)
4 ∗2 ∗ 2 ∗2
(σ − x ) + y
q
By defining variable χ = x − σ , ρ = (σ ∗2 − x∗ )2 + y ∗2 , the temperature field
∗ ∗2
can be reduced to:

Rπ h i
σ∗ 2
2
0
exp − 12 cos
σ∗
t
ρ− cos t
dt
T ∗ = exp(−χ − ρ) p (6.11)
π/2 σ ∗
204
The temperature field is analogous to the temperature field of moving point heat
source (the term exp(−χ − ρ)) as discussed in [140, 207].
Equations 6.11 and 6.7 contain four degrees of freedom. With the normalized
temperature field function and the constraints for maximum width, ∂T ∗ /∂x∗ = 0, the
investigation of isotherm half-width leaves two degrees-of-freedom. One is captured
by Ry number that has been discussed in detail in [140, 207]:
qU
Ry = (6.12)
4πkα(Tc − T0 )
The remaining degree-of-freedom is σ ∗ (Equation 6.6) to represent the diameter of

Gaussian heat sources, categorizing the heat sources into concentrated and wide cases.
The judgement of concentrated or wide heat source depends not only on the value
of σ ∗ , but also on the temperature of interest, i.e., Ry number. The maximum heat
∗
source size σmax for a given Ry has been studied in [208]. A variable σ ∗ /σmax
∗
is defined
to address the moving Gaussian heat source problems in a better way.
The Ry number ranges from zero to infinity, and the values of σ ∗ ranges from zero to
one. Four asymptotic regimes can be defined for combinations of Ry and σ ∗ describing
four types of heat sources, which are: Regime I for Ry → ∞, σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0 (fast and
concentrated), Regime II for Ry → 0, σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0 (slow and concentrated), Regime
V for Ry → ∞, σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1 (fast and wide), Regime VI for Ry → 0, σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→1
(slow and wide). The regimes are illustrated in Figure 6.4.
To deal with characteristic values depending on two variables, a systematic 2-
D blending method is proposed in previous research in the investigations of two-
dimensional heat flow under intense heat losses [127, 129]. The whole domain for 2-D
blending involves four asymptotic regimes, where both variables tend to their bounds,
and four asymptotic side regimes between neighbor asymptotic regimes, where one
of the variables tends to its bounds. When all asymptotic side regimes converges to
dependence on one variable and side partial blending can be achieved either with 1-D
blending or asymptotic analysis directly, the proposed 2-D blending method produces
205
global approximations covering the whole domain of two dimensionless groups. In this
paper, side partial blending results can be obtained in asymptotic side regimes I – II
(σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0), II – VI (Ry → 0), V – VI (σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1). However, in the asymptotic
side Regime I – V (Ry → ∞), isotherms with two peaks might occur and this paper
did not manage to find corresponding side partial blending. The problem can be
treated by considering part of whole domain. For example, the blending result of
isotherm half-width is researched for Ry ≤ 1000 in this work.
In the following sections, the cases of isotherms with two local maximum width
are studied and the corresponding region in process map is illustrated; the asymp-
totic expressions for four asymptotic regimes are derived; the side partial blending
results are obtained with 1-D blending; the 2-D blending results is formulated and
the engineering expressions for isotherm half-width are developed.
6.3 Isotherms with two local width maxima
Study about the moving point heat source model on thick plate [140] has shown that
∗
the normalized width of isotherm ymax depends only on one dimensionless group Ry
∗
number, i.e. the value of ymax can be determined solely for any given Ry number.
However, isotherms with two peaks, referring to the cases of two local maximum
∗
half-widths ymax for one isotherm, can be found for some Ry and σ ∗ numbers. An
example of the isotherm with two peaks is the isotherm of Ry = 110 under Gaussian
heat source of normalized distribution parameter σ ∗ = 4 as illustrated in Figure 6.1.
The special situations of two-peak isotherms can be explained by alternating domi-
nant mechanisms in different regions. In Regime I, in which the heat source moves fast
and the distribution parameter of the heat source could be neglected (σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0,
Ry → ∞), the heat advection due to the relative motion between the heat source
and substrate dominates where the isotherms are far away from the heat source. In
Regime II, in which the heat source moves slowly and the distribution parameter of
the heat source is neglected (σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0, Ry → 0), the heat conduction in the near
206
field of heat source is the dominant phenomenon. In regimes V and VI, where the
distribution parameter of heat source is the critical factor to the temperature field
around the maximum centerline temperature (σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1), the distribution heat
source deposited on the substrate is the primary phenomenon. Between regime I
and V, when the heat source is large and moves fast (Ry → ∞ and σ ∗ → ∞), the
isotherms with two peaks can be found. These isotherms can be interpreted with
caution that one isotherm peak is in the near field of heat source and is dominated
by direct energy depositions from the Gaussian heat source; the other isotherm peak
locates at far field of heat source and is dominated by heat advection.
10.5
Isotherm Ry = 110, σ ∗ = 4
10
y∗
9.5
-40 -30 -20 -10
x∗
Figure 6.1: Example of the isotherm with two peaks for Ry = 110 and σ ∗ = 4.
By substituting Equation 6.35 into Equation 6.11, ρmax can be solved for maxima
and minima of isotherms. For a given normalized Gaussian parameter σ ∗ , ρmax is a
∗
function of Ry; the isotherm half-width ymax and its location x∗max can be calculated by
the value of ρmax with equation 6.38 and 6.36 (the isotherm minima is also calculated
∗
as width ymax in this method). For a σ ∗ where all isotherms have only one peak, the
207
∗
ymax increase with ρmax ; for a σ ∗ where the isotherms with two peaks exist, there is
∗
a range of ρmax in which ymax decreasing with ρmax . The criterion can, therefore, be
expressed for the existence of isotherms with two peaks:
∗
∂ymax ∗
For a given σ , ∃ ρmax , <0 (6.13)
∂ρmax
p
Because of the definition of ρmax = ymax∗2 + χ2
max , the criterion, Equation 6.13, can
be rewritten as:
p
∗
∂ymax ∂ ρ2max − χ2max 2ρmax − 2χmax ( ∂χ max
∂ρmax
)
= = p <0 (6.14)
∂ρmax ∂ρmax 2 ρ2max − χ2max
Thus, the criterion is that for a σ ∗ , a ρmax exist such that:
∂(χ2max )
>1 (6.15)
∂(ρ2max )
A function is constructed to further formulate the criterion (Equation 6.15), and

derivatives with respect to ρ2max :
Z π ( " 2 2 #)
2 1 cos t σ∗
I(n) = cosn t · exp − ρ2max + dt (6.16)
0 2 σ∗ cos t
A recursive relationship is established on the derivatives of function I(n) with respect

to ρ2max :
Z
1 ρ2max cos2 t
π
∂I (n) 2
cosn+2 t σ∗2 I (n + 2)
= 2σ∗2
· exp − σ∗2
+ cos2 t
dt = (6.17)
∂ (ρ2max ) 0 2 2σ ∗2
Equation 6.35 can be written based on the constructed functions I(n):
I(0)
χmax = −σ ∗2 (6.18)
I(2)
The derivatives of χ2max with respect to ρ2max in the criterion, Equation 6.15, can be
formulated according to equations 6.17 and 6.18:
∂(χ2max ) ∂χmax ∗2 I(4)I(0) − I(2)2

= 2χmax = σ I(0) · (6.19)
∂(ρ2max ) ∂(ρ2max ) I(2)3
∂(χ2max )/∂(ρ2max ) is calculated with Equation 6.19 for some σ ∗ from 1 to 10, as illus-
trated in Figure 6.2.
208
1.2
0.8
∂(χ2max )
∂(ρ2max )
0.6
σ∗ =1
σ∗ =2
0.4 σ∗ = 2.893
σ∗ =5
0.2 σ∗ = 10
0
100 101 102 103
ρmax
Figure 6.2: The criterion function ∂(χ2max )/∂(ρ2max ) changes with ρmax for σ ∗ = 1 ∼
10. The critical value of normalized Gaussian standard deviation satisfying criterion
Equation 6.15 is σ ∗ = 2.893.
The criterion for the existence of isotherms with two peak, Equation 6.15, can be
rewritten for a given σ ∗ :
" #
I (4) I (0) − I (2)2
max σ ∗2 I (0) >1 (6.20)
ρmax I (2)3
As shown in Figure 6.2, the critical value of σ ∗ is 2.893, larger than which isotherms
with two peaks exist, and the corresponding critical value of Ry number is 58.20,
larger than which there are some values of σ ∗ induce an isotherm Ry having two
peaks. The combinations of Ry and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
standing for isotherms with two maxima
are illustrated in the shaded region in Figure 6.3. For any Ry and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
in the
shaded region, two values of isotherm half-width can be calculated, and the larger
∗
value is used in 2-D blending of ymax .
For example, a heat source of 4000W moves at a velocity U = 40 mm/s on Ti-
209
6Al-4V, assuming thermal conductivity is k ≈ 13 W/mK and thermal diffusivity
α ≈ 5 × 10−6 m2 /s. The initial temperature is 25 ◦ C. In considering the isotherm of
1000 ◦ C relating to the heat affected zone, the corresponding Ry number is 402 and
∗
the normalized maximum heat source size σmax is 55. The range of σ ∗ /σmax
∗
results
in two-peak isotherms is 0.11 - 0.14, where the minimum value of heat source size is
σ ∗ = 6.2 and σ = 1.6 mm; the maximum critical heat source size is σ ∗ = 8.1 and
σ = 2.0 mm. In considering the isotherm of 200 ◦ C relating to thermal residual stress,
the corresponding Ry number is 2239 and the normalized maximum heat source size
∗
σmax is 173. The range of σ ∗ /σmax
∗
results in two-peak isotherms is 0.057 - 0.11, where
the minimum value of heat source size is σ ∗ = 9.9 and σ = 2.5 mm; the maximum
critical heat source size is σ ∗ = 19 and σ = 4.8 mm. On the other hand, for a moving
heat source of size σ = 2 mm corresponding to σ ∗ = 8, the isotherms involves two
peaks for Ry numbers ranging from 396 to 952, or for temperature ranging from 436
◦
C to 1014 ◦ C.
Ry
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
Figure 6.3: Process map for combinations of Ry and σ ∗ /σmax

∗
. In the shaded region,
the isotherms have two peaks.
210
6.4 Asymptotic analysis of isotherm half-width
The asymptotic analysis of the normalized temperature field gives asymptotic expres-
sions in four asymptotic regimes.
In regimes I and II, where σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0 and the Gaussian heat source can be
treated as point heat source, the asymptotic expressions are obtained in previous
work [140]:
r
∗ 2
ybmax,I = Ry (6.21)
e
∗
ybmax,II = Ry (6.22)
In Regime V, where Ry → ∞ and σ ∗ /σmax

∗
→ 1 the isotherms are close to the
heat source, the asymptotic analysis around the centerline maximum temperature is
derived in Appendix Equation 6.61 as:
r ! 32 s ∗
∗
√ 2 2 σ ∗
σmax
ybmax,V = 3 Im Ry 3 ln (6.23)
π σmax
∗ σ∗
In Regime VI, where Ry → 0 and σ ∗ /σmax

∗
→ 1 the isotherms are close to the
heat source, the asymptotic analysis around the centerline maximum temperature is
derived in Appendix Equation 6.48 as:
s ∗
∗
√ σ∗ σmax
ybmax,VI = 2πRy ∗
ln (6.24)
σmax σ∗
∗
6.5 Blending of isotherm half-width ymax
6.5.1 Partial blending
Based on the asymptotic expressions for isotherm half-with, equations 6.21 to 6.24,
side partial blending results are obtained along the side regimes I – II, II – VI, V – VI
with 1-D blending. In the side Regime I –V, the larger asymptotic value is chosen to
predict the isotherm half-width.
211
In side Regime I – II, where σ ∗ /σmax
∗
tends to zero and the heat source can be
∗
treated as point heat source, the isotherm half-width ymax is independent on σ ∗ . Side
partial blending side Regime I – II have been proposed in [140]:
r n 1/n
∗+ 2
ybmax,I−II = Ry 1 + (6.25)
eRy
where the optimal blending parameter is n = −1.731 with maximum error 0.72 %.
In side Regime II – VI, where Ry tends to zero considering the isotherms around
∗
the heat source, the asymptotic behavior of isotherm half-width ymax changes with
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
. Side partial blending along the side Regime II – VI can be derived by 1-D
h i
blending on σ ∗ /σmax
∗
between asymptotic Equation 6.22 (multiplied by exp a (σ ∗ /σmax
∗
)b
to force crossing as discussed in [128]) and Equation 6.24:
( " b #n " s #n )1/n
∗+ √
ybmax,II−VI σ∗ σ∗ σmax
∗
= exp a ∗
+ 2π ∗ ln (6.26)
Ry σmax σmax σ∗
where a = −1.560, b = 4.463, n = 4.112 with maximum error of 0.27 %.
In side Regime V – VI, where σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1 considering isotherms under the heat
∗
source, the asymptotic behavior of ymax changes with Ry. Side partial blending along
the side Regime V – VI can be derived by 1-D blending on Ry number between
asymptotic Equation 6.23 and Equation 6.24:
 r ! 32 n 1/n
∗+
ybmax,V−VI  √ 2 √ n 
q =  3 I Ry  + 2πRy (6.27)
 π
m

ln σmax
∗
σ∗
σmax
∗ σ∗
where n = −3.055 resulting in a maximum error within 0.38 %.

In side Regime I – V, where Ry tends to infinity, the isotherms with two peaks
occur. The isotherm half-widths in this side regime do not converge to a 1-D problem.
This paper did not obtain partial blending on side Regime I – V, which results in 2-D
blending has an upper bound for Ry (Ry ≤ 1000 herein).
6.5.2 2-D blending
The asymptotics in four asymptotic regimes and side partial blending in side regimes
are proposed from Equation 6.21 to Equation 6.27. The expressions coincide with
212
exact solutions calculated from the analytical model (Equation 6.7) in their corre-
sponding regimes, but there is a lack of equation covering the whole domain. The
formulae for the full domain is carried out with the 2-D blending proposed in [127] by
combining the asymptotics and partial blending results. The parameters of partial
blending results in Equation 6.25 to 6.27 are adjusted to improve the accuracy of the
full domain of 2-D blending.
∗
The 2-D blending of isotherm half-width, ymax , can be developed based on Regime
II with three correction factors for Ry ≤ 1000 and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤ 0.9
∗
ybmax = Ry · fII−I · fII−VI · g (6.28)
The blending equation for maximum heat source size to reach the given tempera-
ture Tc∗ = 1/Ry is studied in [208] as:
h n p n i1/n
∗
bmax
σ = 1.014Ry2/3 + π/2Ry (6.29)
where n = −2.644.
The correction factor, fII−I , is for side Regime I – II, depending only on Ry:
r n 1/n
2
fII−I = 1+ (6.30)
eRy
where n = −1.791.
The correction factor, fII−VI , is for side Regime II – VI, depending only on σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax :
( " b # " s ∗+ #n )1/n
σ∗ √ σ∗ bmax
σ
fII−VI = exp a n + 2π ln (6.31)
bmax
σ ∗+ bmax
σ ∗+ σ∗
where n = 4.533, a = −3.603, b = 13.09.

The correction factor, g, is for the opposite corner, depending on both Ry and
σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax :
" ∗ b2 #n2
1
n σ
g = 1 + 0.8170 Ry 6 − 1 1 + a1 Ryb1
1
1 + a2 (6.32)
bmax
σ ∗+
213
100
Regime VI Regime V

10-1 0
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
-
-
Regime II Regime I
10-2 -
-2 0 2
10 10 10
Ry
Figure 6.4: The map of 2-D blending errors (equations 6.28 to 6.32) and asymptotic
∗
regimes for isotherm half-width ymax for Ry ≤ 1000 and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤ 0.9. The four
asymptotic regimes can be sliced according to a given relative error (dash lines indicate
10 % of error for asymptotic expressions) or the matching of the two asymptotic
expressions in side regimes (side regime asymptotics equal on side lines).
√ p p
where the constant 3( 2/πIm )2/3 /(2 π/e) ≈ 0.8170, and the blending parameters
are where a1 = 3.859, b1 = −0.5737, n1 = −0.8034, a2 = 0.01703, b2 = −2.202,
n2 = −2.226. The maximum error is 6.1 %, as illustrated in Figure 6.4.
∗
The engineering expressions for isotherm half-width ymax can be delivered in di-
mensional form:
1 q
ybmax = · fII−I · fII−VI · g (6.33)
2π k(Tc − T0 )
The correction factors fII−I , fII−VI , g, are equations 6.30 to 6.32. The engineering
expressions result in a maximum error of 6.1 % for Ry ≤ 1000 and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤ 0.9.
6.6 Validation
Prediction of the maximum isotherm half-width calculated by equations 6.28 to 6.32

is validated with experimental measurements collected from the literature for various
214
materials, including 4145MOD steel, Ti6Al4V, alumina-based refractory, and 316L
stainless steel [123, 220, 221, 225].
Although the expressions proposed for isotherm half-widths applies to general mov-
ing heat source problems, laser processing of materials is the primary data used for
validation because reliable measurements or reasonable estimation of laser beam ra-
dius are readily to access. The collected measurements were normalized using equa-
tions 6.2 to 6.6 into a dimensionless form such that data of different processes can
be plotted and compared in a single graph. The characteristic temperature, Tc in
Equation 6.12 corresponds to the melting point of the substrate [123, 220, 221] or the
temperature of the heat affected zone [220, 225]. The preheat temperature T0 were
provided in [220, 225] and estimated as 20◦ C for [123, 221].
Thermal properties are listed in the original papers in all cases, except for [221],
where an effective thermal conductivity was obtained using temperature-dependent
data from software JMatPro v11. Values of laser absorptivity are provided in the
original papers, except for [123] where an estimation of 0.6 was taken to represent
the absorption of alumina-based refractory of CO2 laser radiation according to liter-
ature [119].
Measured isotherm half-width is compared with the point heat source prediction
(Equations 6.28 and 6.30 without Equation 6.31 and 6.32) in Figure 6.5 and the
Gaussian heat source prediction (Equations 6.28 to 6.32) in Figure 6.6. It is obvious
that the Gaussian source prediction has a much better agreement with collected
experimental data, and there is no obvious bias. The correction factors for the heat
distribution parameter can significantly improve the underestimation by point source
solution. Despite the large simplifications in the moving Gaussian surface source
model, the obtained expression can still predict the maximum isotherm half-width
using parameters known before experiments with high accuracy, at least as accurate
as measurements.
Secondary phenomena neglected in the model, such as surface heat loss, latent heat
215
102
Calculated ybmax
∗
101
G. Wood [220]
J. Yang [225]
J. F. Li [123]
A. S. Wu [221]
100
100 101 102
∗
Published ymax
Figure 6.5: Validation of Equations 6.28 and 6.30 with collected published data,
neglecting correction factors for size of heat source, equations 6.31 and 6.32.
associated with phase transformations, and fluid flow in the molten pool, contribute
to the scatter in the comparisons. Other sources of error include uncertainties in
the laser absorptivity and constants used for thermal properties and errors in the
measurements.
6.7 Example of application
The laser cladding test performed by Wood [220] is used here as an example of
application. The power source was a 3980 W laser in TEM00 mode. The distribution
parameter of the laser beam was estimated as 1.62 mm. The test was performed on
a 20.3 mm-thick 4145-MOD steel substrate. Travel speed and preheat temperature
were measured as 38.18 mm/s and 267 ◦ C, respectively. A laser absorptivity of 0.3
was taken from literature [180]. Effective thermophysical properties are provided as:
k = 32.52W/mK and α = 5.73 × 10−6 m2 /s [220]. The measured melt width was 1.23
216
102
Calculated ybmax
101
∗
G. Wood [220]
J. Yang [225]
J. F. Li [123]
A. S. Wu [221]
Equations 6.28 to 6.32
100
100 101 102
∗
Published ymax
Figure 6.6: Validation of Equations 6.28 and 6.32 with collected published data,
taking account correction factors for size of heat source.
mm.
For the case considered, Ry = 16.9 (Equation 6.12), dimensionless heat distribution
parameter is σ ∗ = 5.40 (Equation 6.6), the dimensionless maximum feasible heat
∗+
bmax
distribution parameter is σ = 6.56 (Equation 6.29), yielding a ratio of σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax =
+
0.822. Predicted melt half-width by the point source solution is ybmax,point = 1.02 mm,
indicating a relative error of the estimation of -19 % compared to the measured half-
width. As Ry ≤ 1000 and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤ 0.9, Equation 6.31 and 6.32 can be applied to
obtain correction factors for the heat distribution parameter: fII−VI (Ry, σ ∗ ) = 0.988
+
and g(Ry, σ ∗ ) = 1.18. Prediction by the Gaussian model is given by ybmax,Gaussian =
+
ybmax,point · fII−VI (Ry, σ ∗ ) · g(Ry, σ ∗ ) = 1.19 mm, and it has an error of 3.3 % compared
to the measurement. This is case of calculation, and the accuracy should not be
expected for all problems.
217
6.8 Discussion
Novel expressions in closed-form for maximum isotherm half-width, ymax , are obtained
under moving Gaussian heat source using a systematic method of asymptotic analysis
and blending, based on previous investigation on point heat source problems [140].
Correction factors for the size of heat sources are obtained for the first time to improve
the prediction of half-width for isotherms close to heat source. With an introduction of
heat distribution size parameter σ (the standard deviation of Gaussian function), the
singularity in temperature field caused by point heat source assumption is avoided,
and the prediction of isotherm half-width is significantly improved without much
complexity, as indicated in Figure 6.5 and 6.6. The correction factors of the heat
distribution are presented to extend the usefulness of the point heat source solution
to a Gaussian distributed heat source. When σ tends to zero, the correction factors,
Equation 6.31 and 6.32, tend to one and the engineering expressions coincide with
the point heat source solution in [140].
Division of Regime I, II and Regime V, VI reflects the dominance of two heat
transfer mechanisms: heat directly absorbed from the Gaussian surface heat source
and heat conduction and advection in the substrate. For a fixed heat source power,
the maximum isotherm half-width has different dependence on the heat distribution
parameter depending on the distance between the location of interest to the heat
source. In the near-field region where the heat absorbed directly from the Gaus-
sian source dominates (Regime V and VI), the maximum isotherm half-width ymax
increases with heat distribution parameter σ to a maximum at σ ≈ 0.5 ∼ 0.6σmax
and then decreases to zero until σ = σmax . In the far-field region where conduction
and advection dominate (Regime I and II), the maximum isotherm half-width always
increases with heat source size parameter. The balance between the heat from the
Gaussian source and conduction in the solid can also explain the isotherms with two
peaks, which occurs in the transition region from Regime I (far-field) to Regime V
218
(near-field). Heat absorbed directly from the Gaussian source generates the first peak
in the isotherm half-width, while the heat transferred by conduction in the substrate
yields the second peak.
The convectional 1-D blending technique has been extended to a 2-D domain in
a way consistent with previous publication [127]. The obtained expression maintains
the asymptotic behaviours in all regimes, and it can provide accurate prediction in
the intermediate regimes with optimized blending constants. When partial blending
results can be obtained in side regimes, the 2-D blending is valid in the whole domain.
However, because half-width does not converge to dependence on one parameter in
side Regime I – V as for Ry → ∞, partial blending can not be derived and the
2-D blending result fails to cover the whole domain, which is valid only for Ry ≤
1000. In side Regime V – VI, the asymptotics, Equation 6.23 and 6.24, involves a
∗
logarithm term ln(σmax /σ ∗ ), where a small error in σmax
∗
could result in a huge error in
∗
approximation. In this paper, σmax is estimated by Equation 6.29, which will generate
a large error when σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1. The 2-D blending is valid only for σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤ 0.9.
6.9 Conclusions
The paper presents practical, accurate expressions in closed-form to predict the max-
imum isotherm half-width under a moving Gaussian surface heat source. The dimen-
∗
sionless form of maximum isotherm half-width, ymax , depends on two dimensionless
groups: Rykalin number (Ry) and σ ∗ /σmax
∗ ∗
(Ry), where σmax (Ry) is a function of
Ry calculating the maximum heat source size to reach the temperature of interest
Tc∗ = 1/Ry. The full domain is divided into four regimes: Regime I (large Ry and
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0), Regime II (small Ry and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 0), Regime V (large Ry and
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1), and Regime VI (small Ry and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
→ 1).
The expressions to estimate the maximum isotherm half-width are presented in
from of a simple formula multiplied by three correction factors written as scaling laws
(Equation 6.28 to 6.32), and dimensional engineering expressions (Equation 6.33).
219
The correction factors consists of the correction factor for moving point heat source,
Equation 6.30, and correction factors for the size of heat source (Equation 6.31
and 6.32). The correction factors are obtained with a systematic methodology of
dimensional analysis, asymptotic analysis and 2-D blending.
The engineering expressions, derived from 2-D blending, matches the asymptotic
behaviours in all four regimes exactly. The maximum error at intermediate regimes
compared to the analytical model is smaller than 6.1 % for Ry ≤ 1000, and σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ≤
0.9. Although the blending result, Equation 6.28 to 6.32, inherits all limitations of
the moving Gaussian heat source model, it still can reasonably predict the maximum
isotherm half-width over a wide range of processes and materials, as indicated in the
validation Figure 6.6.
Derived from fundamental principles of heat transfer, the expressions proposed can
be applied to manufacturing processes other than laser processing. The expressions
in closed-form can be easily calculated by a calculator or a single spreadsheet or
embedded into larger metamodels.
220
References
[5] D. K. Adak, M. Mukherjee, and T. K. Pal, “Development of a direct correlation
of bead geometry, grain size and haz width with the gmaw process parameters
on bead-on-plate welds of mild steel,” Transactions of the Indian Institute of
Metals, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 839–849, 2015.
[18] K. Y. Benyounis, A. G. Olabi, and M. S. J. Hashmi, “Optimizing the laser-
welded butt joints of medium carbon steel using RSM,” Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, vol. 164-165, pp. 986–989, 2005.
pp. 3895–3900, 1977.
[65] Z. Gan, G. Yu, X. He, and S. Li, “Numerical simulation of thermal behavior
and multicomponent mass transfer in direct laser deposition of co-base alloy on
steel,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 104, pp. 28–38,
2017, issn: 0017-9310.
305, 1984.
vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 2245–2253, 1983.
[113] S. Kou, Welding metallurgy, Second Edi. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 2003, 234–235 t85, isbn: 0471434914.
[119] J. Lawrence and L. Li, “Determination of the absorption length of CO2 and
high power diode laser radiation for a high volume alumina-based refractory
material,” Applied surface science, vol. 168, no. 1-4, pp. 71–74, 2000.
[127] Y. Lu, M. R. Grams, and P. F. Mendez, “Width of thermal features induced
by a moving heat source on a thin plate with surface heat losses,” 2021.
Transfer, p. 120 671, 2020.
221
vol. 156, p. 119 793, 2020.
vol. 140, no. 8, p. 081 301, 2018.
[150] N. T. Nguyen, A. Ohta, K. Matsuoka, N. Suzuki, and Y. Maeda, “Analytical
solutions for transient temperature of semi-infinite body subjected to 3-D mov-
ing heat sources,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 78, no. August, 265s–
274s, 1999.
no. 2, pp. 35–43, 2007.
[180] M. F. Schneider and M. F. Schneider, “Laser cladding with powder,” PhD
thesis, University of Twente, 1998.
[196] N. Tsai, “Heat distribution and weld bead geometry in arc welding,” PhD
thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1983.
2019.
[208] Y. Wang, Y. Lu, and P. F. Mendez, “Prediction of peak temperature under a
moving gaussian surface heat source,” 2021.
[209] Y. Wang and P. F. Mendez, “Prediction of maximum isotherm depth under a
moving gaussian surface heat source.”
1985.
no. 5, 263s–267s, 1952.
222
[220] G. D. Wood, “Heat and mass transfer aspects of coaxial laser cladding and
its application to nickel-tungsten carbide alloys,” PhD thesis, University of
Alberta, 2017.
[221] A. S. Wu, D. W. Brown, M. Kumar, G. F. Gallegos, and W. E. King, “An ex-
perimental investigation into additive manufacturing-induced residual stresses
in 316l stainless steel,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, vol. 45,
no. 13, pp. 6260–6270, 2014.
[225] J. Yang, S. Sun, M. Brandt, and W. Yan, “Experimental investigation and 3D
finite element prediction of the heat affected zone during laser assisted machin-
ing of Ti6Al4V alloy,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 210,
no. 15, pp. 2215–2222, 2010, issn: 0924-0136.
223
Appendix 6.A Expressions for isotherm half-width
and its location
According to the definition of isotherm half-width,

∂T ∗ 2 exp (−χmax − ρmax )
= √ ·
∂x∗ x∗max ,ymax
∗ 2πσ ∗3
Z π " 2 #
2 1 cos t σ ∗
−σ ∗2 + σ ∗2 − χmax cos2 t exp − ρmax − dt = 0 (6.34)
0 2 σ∗ cos t
Thus, χmax depends only on ρmax :
Rπ h i
σ∗ 2
−σ 0 exp − 12
∗2 2 cos t
ρ
σ∗ max
− cos t
dt
χmax = R π h 2 i (6.35)
2
cos 2 t exp − 1 cos t
ρ − σ∗
dt
0 2 σ∗ max cos t
∗
The isotherm half-width ymax and its location x∗max can be calculated:
Rπ h i
σ∗ 2
σ ∗2 02 exp − 12 cos t
ρ
σ∗ max
− cos t
dt
x∗max = σ ∗2 − R π h i (6.36)
σ∗ 2
0
2
cos2 t exp − 12 cos t
σ∗ max
ρ − cos t
dt
∗
p
ymax = ρ2max − χ2max (6.37)
v
u  Rπ h i 2
u  1 cos t σ∗ 2
u ∗2
σ 0 exp − 2 σ∗ ρmax − cos t
2
dt 
=utρ2max −  R π h i  (6.38)
2 t exp − 1 cos t ρ σ∗ 2
0
2
cos 2 σ ∗ max − cos t
dt
Appendix 6.B Regime VI, σ ∗ → σmax

∗
→ 0, Ry → 0
For cases σ ∗ tending to σmax

∗
, the isotherm of the given temperature Tc∗ surrounds the
∗
maximum temperature Tmax,c locating x∗max,c at centerline. The maximum tempera-
ture and its location are studied in previous work [208].
∗
At the isotherm half-width ymax = 0 + dy ∗ , and its location x∗max = x∗max,c − dx∗ ,
where dx∗ , dy ∗ → 0, the temperature gradient along x-direction equals zero. In first
order Taylor expansion, the thermal gradient ∂T ∗ /∂x∗ = Tx∗∗ (x∗max , ymax
∗
) is written
as:
Tx∗∗ (x∗max , ymax

∗
)=0 (6.39)

≈ Tx∗∗ x∗max,c , 0 + Tx∗∗ x∗ x∗max,c , 0 dx∗ + Tx∗∗ y∗ x∗max,c , 0 dy ∗ (6.40)
224

where Tx∗∗ x∗max,c , 0 = 0 according to definition of maximum temperature, and

Tx∗∗ y∗ x∗max,c , 0 = 0 because the temperature function only involves the term of the
second order (y ∗2 ). Therefore, the increment of isotherm half-width location dx∗ ≈ 0,
and the location of isotherm half-width can be assumed as the location of centerline
temperature
x∗max ≈ x∗max,c (6.41)
∗ ∗
pπ
For σmax → 0, the maximum temperature at Regime VI is Tmax,c = 2
σ ∗−1
and the location is x∗max,c = −σ ∗2 [208]. The location of isotherm half-width x∗max =
x∗max,c = −σ ∗2 according to Equation 6.41. The temperature near the centerline
maximum temperature is expanded in taylor series:
1
T ∗ (x∗max , ymax
∗
) ≈ T ∗ (x∗max,c , 0) + Ty∗∗ (x∗max,c , 0)dy ∗ + Ty∗∗ y∗ (x∗max,c , 0)dy ∗2
( 2 )
Z π ∗ 2
2 2 σ ∗2 xmax,c
=√ exp − − 1 cos t + sec t dt
2πσ ∗ 0Z π ( 2 σ ∗2 2 )
2 2 σ ∗2 x∗max,c cos2 t ∗2
−√ exp − − 1 cos t + sec t dy dt
2πσ ∗ 0 2 σ ∗2 2σ ∗2
Z π ∗2
π dy ∗2 2 σ 2
=√ −√ exp − (−2 cos t + sec t) cos2 t dt (6.42)
2πσ ∗ 2πσ ∗3
0 2
Z π
π dy ∗2 2
≈√ −√ 1 · cos2 t dt (6.43)
2πσ ∗ 2πσ ∗3 0
π dy ∗2 π
≈√ −√ (6.44)
2πσ ∗ 2πσ ∗3 4

∗ dy ∗2
= Tmax,c · 1 − ∗2 (6.45)
4σ
Therefore, the isotherm half-width at Regime VI can be solved with Equation 6.45:
s
∗ T∗
ybmax,VI ≈ dy ∗ = 2σ ∗ 1 − ∗ (6.46)
Tmax,c
Because of the relationship between maximum temperature and heat source diam-
p
∗
eters at Regime VI [208], Tmax,c = π2 σ ∗−1 , the asymptotic Equation 6.46 can be
225
written as function of Ry and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
:
s
∗
σmax
∗ ∗
ybmax,VI = 2σ ln (6.47)
σ∗
∗ s ∗
√ σ σmax
= 2πRy ∗
ln (6.48)
σmax σ∗
Appendix 6.C Regime V: σ ∗ → σmax

∗
→ ∞, Ry → ∞
In Regime V, when σ ∗ → σmax ∗ ∗

and σmax ∗
→ ∞, the maximum temperature is Tmax,c =
q
2
I σ ∗−1.5 and its location x∗max,c = −0.7650σ ∗ [208], where Im = 1.280. The loca-
π m
tion of isotherm half-width, according to Equation 6.41, is x∗max = x∗max,c − 0.7650σ ∗ .

The temperature around the maximum temperature is expanded in taylor series:
1
∗
) ≈ T ∗ (x∗max,c , 0) + Ty∗∗ (x∗max,c , 0)dy ∗ + Ty∗∗ y∗ (x∗max,c , 0)dy ∗2
( 2 )
Z π ∗ 2
2 2 σ ∗2 xmax,c
=√ exp − − 1 cos t + sec t dt
2πσ ∗ 0Z π ( 2 σ ∗2 )
2
2 2 σ ∗2 x∗max,c cos2 t ∗2
−√ exp − − 1 cos t + sec t dy dt
2πσ ∗ 0 2 σ ∗2 2σ ∗2
In Regime V, as σ ∗ → ∞, the integrand is non-zero around t ≈ 0, according to

Equation 6.10:
 

 

σ∗
t = arccos h i1  (6.49)

 σ ∗2 − x∗ 2
+ y ∗2 4 
max,c
 
 σ ∗ 
≈ arccos (6.50)
 (σ ∗2 + 0.7650σ ∗)2 + y ∗2 14 
 
 σ ∗ 
≈ arccos ≈0 (6.51)
 (σ ∗2 )2 41 
226
Z π ( ∗ 2 )
2 2 σ ∗2 xmax,c
∗
)= √ exp − ∗2
− 1 cos t + sec t dt
∗
2πσ 0 2 σ
Z π ( ∗ 2 ) ∗2
2 2 σ ∗2 xmax,c dy
−√ exp − ∗2
− 1 cos t + sec t dt (6.52)
2πσ ∗ 0 2 σ 2σ ∗2
Z π ( ∗ 2 )
2 2 σ ∗2 xmax,c dy ∗2
=√ exp − − 1 cos t + sec t dt · 1 − ∗2 (6.53)
2πσ ∗ 0 2 σ ∗2 2σ
Z π ( 2 )
2 2 1 x∗max,c ∗ dy ∗2
≈√ exp − + σ (sec t − cos t) dt · 1 − ∗2 (6.54)
2πσ ∗ 0 2 σ∗ 2σ
(6.55)
Z π
2 2 1
∗ 2 2 dy ∗2
≈√ exp − −0.7650 + σ t dt · 1 − ∗2 (6.56)
2πσ ∗ 0 2 2σ
∗2

∗ dy
= Tmax,c · 1 − ∗2 (6.57)
2σ
Thus, the asymptotic for isotherm half-width at Regime V can be solved:

s
∗
√ T∗
ybmax,V ≈ 0 + dy ∗ = 2σ ∗ = 1 − ∗ (6.58)
Tmax,c
T∗
Similarly, because Tmax,c
∗ → 1 in Regime V,
s
∗
√ ∗ Tmax
∗
ybmax,V = 2σ ln (6.59)
T∗
q
c∗ max,c =
In Regime V, with the relationship T 2
I σ ∗−1.5 [208]:
π m
r ! 32 s ∗
∗
√ 2 σ∗ σmax
ybmax,V = 3 Im Ry ∗
ln (6.60)
π σmax σ∗
r ! 32 ∗ s ∗
√ 2 2 σ σmax
= 3 Im Ry 3 ∗
ln (6.61)
π σmax σ∗
227
Chapter 7
Conclusions and future work
7.1 Conclusions
This thesis presented systematic methodologies to obtain engineering expressions in

closed-form with broad generalities, high accuracies and practical simplicities, for
thermal features of temperature field under moving line or Gaussian heat sources. The
proposed engineering expressions are based on theoretical analysis and not empirical.
They are valid for all materials, heat source sizes, and surface heat losses that match
the framework of the problem.
The engineering expressions are written in the form of a simple solution for the
dominant factor and correction factors for secondary phenomena, by dimensional
analysis, asymptotic analysis and blending. Normalization and dimensional analysis
ensures the generality of the proposed expressions that do not depend on specific
processes, operating parameters or material properties; asymptotic analysis yields
simple solutions in extreme regimes for dominant factor; blending generates correc-
tion factors in the intermediate regimes. The blending of functions with only one
dependence is developed based on the modification of the Churchill-Usagi blending
equation. The modified 1-D blending method is extended to consider non-power-law,
non-crossing asymptotic expressions (Equation 2.25). The modified 1-D blending
method also improves the behaviour at the intermediate regime by introducing an
additional term, especially when the exact solution is asymmetric (Equation 3.112).
228
The modified blending technique approach is novel, and it overcomes the limitation of
previous studies which was incapable of capturing the behaviour of slow heat sources
(e.g. [213]) properly. Beyond modifying and improving the 1-D blending formula, a
two-dimensional blending technique is proposed for the first time herein to extend
the blending technique applicable to functions of two independent variables (Equa-
tion 5.26).
This thesis presents for the first time practical and rigorous expressions for calcu-
lating 13 isotherm features of 2-D temperature field under moving line heat source.
The isotherm thermal features include: isotherm half-width (ymax , Equation 2.29
and Equation 2.30), location of isotherm half-width (xmax , Equation 3.13 and Equa-
tion 3.14), trailing length of an isotherm (xb , Equation 3.20 and Equation 3.21),
cooling rate at a given temperature in the center line (Ṫb , Equation 3.30 and Equa-
tion 3.31), leading length of an isotherm (xf , Equation 3.37 and Equation 3.38),
heating rate at a given temperature in the center line (Ṫf , Equation 3.44 and Equa-
tion 3.45), maximum temperature at a point away from the center line (Tmax , Equa-
tion 3.52 and Equation 3.53), lateral gradient of maximum temperature (dTmax /dy,
Equation 3.60 and Equation 3.61), aspect ratio of an isotherm (A, Equation 3.68
and Equation 3.69), melting efficiency (ηm , Equation 3.73 and Equation 3.74), cool-
ing time from 800 ◦ C to 500 ◦ C (t8/5 , Equation 3.79 and Equation 3.80), solidification
time (tsl , Equation 3.87 and Equation 3.88) and heat affected zone thickness (∆yHAZ ,
Equation 3.92 and Equation 3.93). These expressions associated with thermal fea-
tures of moving line heat source are listed in Table 3.2.
These engineering expressions are developed with the modified 1-D blending method
based on Rosenthal’s model of moving line heat source. The expressions depend only
on the Rosenthal number, Ro, a metric of the intensity of heat source. The Rosen-
thal number divides all possible solutions into two asymptotic regimes: Regime III
corresponding to high Ro (large intensity) and low Ro (small intensity). Because Ro
depends on a chosen temperature, the heat sources cannot be deemed intrinsically
229
high or low intensity until a temperature of interest is selected. The expressions coin-
cide with the exact solution of Rosenthal’s model in the extremes, and the blending
expression for the intermediate regime, exhibiting a discrepancy within 8 % of the
exact solution, except for heating rate within 16 %. A modification of the heat in-
tensity can be made to extend the scope of predictions to dissimilar thicknesses and
alternative joint configurations, by replacing the intensity of the heat source q ′ = q/d
′
with qeff according to Equation 3.97.
The equations in Table 3.2 can not be applied in processes subject to intense
surface losses, such as underwater processes, welding on extreme thin plates, thin-wall
additive manufacturing, and the calculation of thermal residual-stresses associated
with moving heat sources. A dimensionless number h∗ is defined to capture the
relative intensity of surface heat losses, and a systematic 2-D blending approach is
proposed to capture all combinations of Ro and h∗ for the first time. Practical
engineering expressions are derived from fundamental analysis for the trailing length
(xb , equations 4.19 to 4.22), cooling rate (Ṫb , equations 4.35 to 4.37), isotherm half-
width (ymax , equation 5.40 to 5.43) and its location (xmax , equation 5.51 to 5.54). All
cases are divided into four asymptotic regimes: Regime III and Regime IV without
convection, Regime IIIa and Regime IVa under intense convection. The proposed
expressions are in the form of an asymptotic expression (in Regime III) multiplied by
two or three correction factors, yielding global approximation within 7.1 % for trailing
length, 7.6 % for cooling rate, 9.6 % for isotherm width and 12 % for its location. The
consideration of surface heat losses enables the extension of the moving heat source
analysis to complex but technologically relevant problems such as underwater wet
welding, in-service welding, additive manufacturing of thin walls, and combinations
of thickness and low target temperatures where natural convection in the atmosphere
becomes relevant (e.g. analysis of residual stresses).
Critical value of dimensionless heat transfer coefficient, h∗c , is proposed for an
acceptable error of 10 % depending on the value of temperature of interest, less than
230
which the correction factors for surface heat losses can be neglected. The critical h∗
for trailing length is Equations 4.39, for cooling rate is Equation 4.40, for isotherm
half-width is Equation 5.58, and for location of isotherm half-width is Equation 5.59.
For Ro = O(1), the critical value of h∗ is around 0.01.
For the temperature field near the heat source, the heat flow typically can not
be treated as two-dimensional, and the distribution of the heat source is a crucial
factor. Based on Eagar’s Gaussian distributed heat source model [53], the correction
factors for Gaussian heat source depend on two dimensionless groups, Ry number (an
alternative number for Ro in three-dimensional heat transfer) and σ ∗ (representing
the size of heat source). Therefore, all cases are divided into four asymptotic regimes:
Regime I and Regime II for the point heat source, Regime V and Regime VI for
Gaussian heat source. The correction factors for isotherm half-width, ymax , are derived
with the proposed 2-D blending approach, similar to correction factors for surface heat
losses, as Equation 6.28 to 6.32 with the maximum error 6.1 % for Ry ≤ 1000 and
σ ∗ /b ∗+
σmax ∗
bmax
(Ry) ≤ 0.9, where σ (Ry) is a function of Ry calculating the maximum
heat source size to reach the temperature of interest Tc∗ = 1/Ry.
A comprehensive survey of published experiments and simulations is conducted
to validate the proposed engineering expressions. The thermal features from a wide
range of materials, processes, and parameters are collected to compare with the pro-
posed engineering expressions. The validation of isotherm width, ymax , is illustrated
in Figures 2.7-2.9, the validation for length of isotherm (xf − xb ) is illustrated in
Figure 3.4; the validation for centerline cooling rate, Tb , is illustrated in Figure 3.3;
the validation for maximum temperature, Tmax , is illustrated in Figure 3.5, the val-
idation for thickness of heat affected zone, ∆yHAZ , is illustrated inFigure 3.6, and
the validation for isotherm aspect ratio, A, is illustrated in (Figure 3.7). The cor-
rection factors derived from 2-D blending are also validated. The validation for the
correction factors of cooling rate for surface heat losses is illustrated in Figure 4.7(a)
and Figure 4.7(b). The validation for the correction factors of isotherm half-width
231
for surface heat losses is illustrated in Figure 5.6 and Figure 5.7. The validation for
the correction factors of isotherm half-width for Gaussian distributed heat source is
illustrated in Figure 6.5 and Figure 6.6. Validation against published experiments
and simulations shows a close agreement with the predictive engineering expressions
despite its simplicity. They capture the essence of the complex physics of moving
heat source problems.
The engineering expressions must be applied with an understanding of their lim-
itations caused by the assumptions. For example, they can not be applied in edge
parts because of the assumption of the infinitely thin plate. They can not be applied
in multilayer welding since the temperature gradient in thickness direction usually
can not be neglected. They can not be applied in pulse heat input because of the
assumption of pseudo-steady state and constant heat input. They can not be applied
when the marangoni flow in the melt pool is significant [82]. For the processes where
the engineering expressions can not be applied because of a secondary phenomenon,
as mentioned above, correction factors for the secondary phenomenon can be derived
by 2-D blending, following similar steps in Chapters 4 and 5 for the effect of surface
heat losses.
The engineering expressions provide reasonable predictions of the thermal features,
but exact matching to the experiments or sophisticated simulations should not be
expected for most engineering calculations. Higher accuracy can be achieved with
more sophisticated simulation models or well-designed experiments; however, with
the cost of more computational resources, convergence problems, more parameters
to be determined prior to calculation, equipment and skill training. For example,
volumetric heat sources can improve the accuracy of temperature field prediction in
regions close to the heat source, with elaborate choices of parameters. However, it
comes with two problems. Firstly, the relevant parameters in the heat source models
are difficult to measure or estimate. Secondly, it is nearly unachievable to control the
parameters of volumetric heat sources in welding processes, making it impractical to
232
employ the volumetric heat source parameters in designing rules. The idealizations in
this dissertation enable for a much desired practical formula. Fortunately, the gains
in practicality come at a relatively low cost in terms of accuracy. The application
of analytical modelling at the initial design stage can significantly reduce the time
and effort spent in trial and error tests and ensure the mathematical and physical
exactness of the obtained expression from the fundamental principles of heat transfer.
The validation figures indicate that the idealizations are consistent with most practical
problems.
The proposed engineering expressions are rigorous, general, explicit, convenient
and accurate. The closed-form expressions are amenable to practical calculations,
for example, with Excel spreadsheets or calculators. The engineering expressions
deliver engineering understanding and judgment, have clear physical relevance, and
provide reasonable predictions in the initial stage in designing and developing new
technologies, inspiring creativity and filtering infeasible or inferior designing options
by evaluating many optional parameters and processes. The engineering expressions
are obtained with a systematic methodology consisting of identification of the dom-
inant phenomena, asymptotic analysis to obtain a simple solution to the dominant
mechanism, blending technique to achieve approximation over the whole domain, de-
veloping correction factors to capture the deviation from simple solution and validat-
ing against analytical solutions, experimental measurements or numerical simulations.
The methodology can be adopted in broader engineering problems since the engineer-
ing expressions in this thesis show that many important aspects of complex problems
can be studied with this methodology. The simple formulae and correction factors
can be derived either from asymptotic analysis and blending of analytical modelling
as in this thesis, or from regressions of numerical or experimental data.
Novelties
Here is a brief summary of the novelties of this dissertation:
233
• Modified 1-D blending method (Churchill-Usagi equation) to extend its scope
of application to consider non-power-law, non-crossing asymptotic expressions;
• Modified 1-D blending method (Churchill-Usagi equation) with a transitional

term to improve accuracy in the intermediate region, especially for “asymmet-
ric” solutions;
• Established a set of engineering expressions for 13 thermal features induced by

moving line by implementing the modified 1-D blending method and validated
the expressions with published data;
• Extended moving line heat source engineering expressions to dissimilar plate

thicknesses and various joint configurations;
• Proposed a systematic 2-D blending approach to achieve global approximation

covering the full domain of two dimensionless numbers;
• Proposed correction factors of surface heat losses for isotherm trailing length
by implementing the proposed 2-D blending method;
• Proposed correction factors of surface heat losses for cooling rate by implement-
ing the proposed 2-D blending method and validated the correction factors with
published data;
• Proposed correction factors of surface heat losses for isotherm half-width and
its location by implementing the proposed 2-D blending method and validated
the correction factors for isotherm half-width with published data;
• Proposed correction factors of size of Gaussian distributed heat source for

isotherm half-width by implementing the proposed 2-D blending method and
validated the correction factors with published data;
234
7.2 Future work
Base on the results presented in this thesis, future work can be conducted on the
following aspects:
• To investigate other thermal features of moving heat source problems, for ex-
ample, correction factors for leading length and heating rate of Gaussian heat
sources, moving rectangle heat source that is widely used in surface heat treat-
ments, catchment efficiencies, and many other engineering problems.
• To develop a more general 2-D blending method for cases with more than four
asymptotic regimes;
• To implement the 2-D blending approach to establish correction factors for prac-
tical characteristic values in other disciplines, like correlations between Nusselt
number, Reynold number and Prandtl number;
• To conduct the sensitivity analysis of different operating parameters for practi-

cal problems;
• To study blending method depending on more than two variables.
235
Bibliography
[1] M. Zain-ul abdein, D. Nelias, J. F. Jullien, and D. Deloison, “Prediction of laser

beam welding-induced distortions and residual stresses by numerical simula-
tion for aeronautic application,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
vol. 209, no. 6, pp. 2907–2917, 2009.
[5] D. K. Adak, M. Mukherjee, and T. K. Pal, “Development of a direct correlation
of bead geometry, grain size and haz width with the gmaw process parameters
on bead-on-plate welds of mild steel,” Transactions of the Indian Institute of
Metals, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 839–849, 2015.
[6] M. J. Adams, “High voltage electron-beam welding,” British Welding Journal,
vol. 15, pp. 451–467, 1968.
[7] M. J. Adams, “Low voltage electron-beam welding,” British Welding Journal,
vol. 15, pp. 134–142, 1968.
[8] M. Akbari, S. Saedodin, D. Toghraie, R. Shoja-Razavi, and F. Kowsari, “Ex-
perimental and numerical investigation of temperature distribution and melt
pool geometry during pulsed laser welding of Ti6Al4V alloy,” Optics & Laser
[9] American Welding Society (AWS) D1 Committee, Structural welding code -
steel, American Welding Society (AWS) D1 Committee, 2015.
[10] A. Anca, A. Cardona, J. Risso, and V. D. Fachinotti, “Finite element modeling
of welding processes,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 688–
707, 2011.
236
[11] M. Attarha and I. Sattari-Far, “Study on welding temperature distribution in
thin welded plates through experimental measurements and finite element sim-
ulation,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 211, no. 4, pp. 688
–694, 2011.
nology, vol. 42, no. 11-12, pp. 1043–1051, 2009.
[13] A. S. Azar, S. K. Ås, and O. M. Akselsen, “Determination of welding heat
source parameters from actual bead shape,” Computational Materials Science,
vol. 54, pp. 176–182, 2012.
[14] S. Bag, A. Trivedi, and A. De, “Development of a finite element based heat
transfer model for conduction mode laser spot welding process using an adap-
tive volumetric heat source,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 48,
no. 10, pp. 1923–1931, 2009.
[15] X. Bai, H. Zhang, and G. Wang, “Improving prediction accuracy of thermal
analysis for weld-based additive manufacturing by calibrating input parame-
ters using IR imaging,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
[16] S. Bannour, K. Abderrazak, H. Mhiri, and G. Le Palec, “Effects of temperature-
dependent material properties and shielding gas on molten pool formation
during continuous laser welding of AZ91 magnesium alloy,” Optics & Laser
Technology, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 2459–2468, 2012.
[18] K. Y. Benyounis, A. G. Olabi, and M. S. J. Hashmi, “Optimizing the laser-
welded butt joints of medium carbon steel using RSM,” Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, vol. 164-165, pp. 986–989, 2005.
[20] A. Birnbaum, P. Aggarangsi, and J. Beuth, “Process scaling and transient
melt pool size control in laser-based additive manufacturing processes,” in Pro-
ceedings - Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, University of Texas, 2003,
pp. 328–339.
[21] I. N. Bronshtein, K. A. Semendyayev, G. Musiol, and H. Mühlig, Handbook
of mathematics, Fifth. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg,
2007.
237
pp. 283–296.
[23] B. Buchmayr and J. S. Kirkaldy, “Modeling of the temperature field, trans-
formation behavior, hardness and mechanical response of low alloy steels dur-
ing cooling from the austenite region,” Journal of heat treating, vol. 8, no. 2,
pp. 127–136, 1990.
[26] P. Burgardt and C. R. Heiple, “Weld penetration sensitivity to welding vari-
ables when near full joint penetration,” Welding journal, vol. 72, no. 9, pp. 341–
347, 1992.
[28] S. Chen, G. Guillemot, and C.-A. Gandin, “Three-dimensional cellular automaton-
finite element modeling of solidification grain structures for arc-welding pro-
cesses,” Acta Materialia, vol. 115, pp. 448–467, 2016.
[29] Y. H. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z. F. Wang, “Numerical simulation of thermal cycle
of in-service welding on X70 steel gas pipeline,” in Multi-Functional Materi-
als and Structures II, ser. Advanced Materials Research, vol. 79, Trans Tech
Publications Ltd, Nov. 2009, pp. 1169–1172.
[30] Z. Chen and X. Gao, “Detection of weld pool width using infrared imaging
during high-power fiber laser welding of type 304 austenitic stainless steel,”
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 74,
no. 9-12, pp. 1247–1254, 2014.
[31] J. Cheng and A. Kar, “Mathematical model for laser densification of ceramic
coating,” Journal of materials science, vol. 32, no. 23, pp. 6269–6278, 1997.
[32] S. Chowdhury, N. Yadaiah, S. M. Khan, R. Ozah, B. Das, and M. Muralidhar,
“A perspective review on experimental investigation and numerical modeling
of electron beam welding process,” Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 5, no. 2,
pp. 4811–4817, 2018.
[33] N. Christensen, V. d. L. Davies, and K. Gjermundsen, “Distribution of tem-
peratures in arc welding,” British Welding Journal, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 54–75,
1965.
1128, 1972.
238
[35] S. W. Churchill, “Comprehensive correlating equations for heat, mass and
momentum transfer in fully developed flow in smooth tubes,” Industrial &
[36] S. W. Churchill, “Comprehensive, theoretically based, correlating equations
for free convection from isothermal spheres,” Chemical Engineering Commu-
nications, vol. 24, no. 4:6, pp. 339–352, 1983.
[37] S. W. Churchill and H. H. S. Chu, “Correlating equations for laminar and
turbulent free convection from a horizontal cylinder,” International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 1049–1053, 1975.
pp. 3895–3900, 1977.
[40] G. Comini, S. Del Guidice, R. Lewis, and O. Zienkiewicz, “Finite element
solution of non-linear heat conduction problems with special reference to phase
change,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 8,
no. 3, pp. 613–624, 1974.
no. 1, pp. 329–359, 1996.
[42] L. Cretteur, “Welding and joining of advanced high strength steels (AHSS),”
in, ser. Woodhead publishing series in welding and other joining technologies
85. Elsevier, 2015, ch. High-power beam welding of advanced high-strength
steels (AHSS), pp. 93–119, isbn: 978-0-85709-858-0.
[43] J. A. Dantzig and C. L. Tucker, Modeling in materials processing. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[44] Z.-S. Deng and J. Liu, “Analytical solutions to 3-D bioheat transfer problems
with or without phase change,” Heat Transfer Phenomena and Applications,
p. 205, 2012.
[45] J. Ding, P. Colegrove, J. Mehnen, S. Williams, F. Wang, and P. S. Almeida, “A
computationally efficient finite element model of wire and arc additive man-
ufacture,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
vol. 70, no. 1-4, pp. 227–236, 2014.
[46] R. Ducharme, K. Williams, P. Kapadia, J. Dowden, B. Steen, and M. Glowacki,
“The laser welding of thin metal sheets: An integrated keyhole and weld pool
model with supporting experiments,” Journal of Physics D: Appllied Physics,
vol. 27, pp. 1619–1627, 1994.
[47] U. Duman, “Modeling of weld penetration in high productivity GTAW,” Ph.D.
Colorado School of Mines, 2009.
239
[48] J. N. DuPont and A. R. Marder, “Thermal efficiency of arc welding processes,”
Welding Research Supplement, vol. 74, no. 12, 406s–416s, 1995.
[49] J. DuPont, “Dilution in fusion welding,” ASM handbook, vol. 6, pp. 115–121,
2011.
[50] F. Durst, S. Ray, B. Ünsal, and O. A. Bayoumi, “The development lengths
of laminar pipe and channel flows,” Journal of Fluids Engineering, vol. 127,
no. 6, pp. 1154–1160, 2005.
[52] D. Dye, O. Hunziker, and R. C. Reed, “Numerical analysis of the weldability
of superalloys,” Acta Materialia, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 683–697, 2001.
[54] J. W. Elmer, W. H. Giedt, and T. W. Eagar, “The transition from shallow
to deep penetration during electron beam welding,” Welding Research Supple-
ment, vol. 69, no. 5, 167s–176s, 1990.
[55] G. V. Ermolaev, O. B. Kovalev, A. M. Orishich, and V. M. Fomin, “Mathe-
matical modelling of striation formation in oxygen laser cutting of mild steel,”
Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, vol. 39, no. 19, p. 4236, 2006.
[56] V. D. Fachinotti, A. A. Anca, and A. Cardona, “Analytical solutions of the
thermal field induced by moving double-ellipsoidal and double-elliptical heat
sources in a semi-infinite body,” International Journal for Numerical Methods
in Biomedical Engineerin, vol. 27, pp. 595–607, 2011.
[57] H. G. Fan, H.-L. Tsai, and S.-J. Na, “Heat transfer and fluid flow in a par-
tially or fully penetrated weld pool in gas tungsten arc welding,” International
Journal of heat and mass transfer, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 417–428, 2001.
vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 935–943, 1982.
[59] E. Friedman, “Thermomechanical analysis of the welding process using the
finite element method,” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, vol. 97, no. 3,
pp. 206–213, 1975.
[60] P. W. Fuerschbach, “A dimensionless parameter model for arc welding pro-
cesses,” in Trends in Welding Research, Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference, ASM International, 1994.
vol. 70, no. 11, pp. 287–297, 1991.
240
Japan, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 86–92, 1994.
[65] Z. Gan, G. Yu, X. He, and S. Li, “Numerical simulation of thermal behavior
and multicomponent mass transfer in direct laser deposition of co-base alloy on
steel,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 104, pp. 28–38,
2017, issn: 0017-9310.
no. 1, pp. 77–89, 2005.
[67] P. Ghadimi, H. Ghassemi, M. Ghassabzadeh, and Z. Kiaei, “Three-dimensional
simulation of underwater welding and investigation of effective parameters,”
Welding journal, vol. 92, no. 8, pp. 239–249, 2013.
[68] A. Ghosh and H. Chattopadhyay, “Mathematical modeling of moving heat
source shape for submerged arc welding process,” The International Journal
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 69, no. 9-12, pp. 2691–2701, 2013.
[69] A. Ghosh, A. Yadav, and A. Kumar, “Modelling and experimental validation
of moving tilted volumetric heat source in gas metal arc welding process,”
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 239, pp. 52–65, 2017.
[71] W. H. Giedt, L. N. Tallerico, and P. W. Fuerschbach, “GTA welding efficiency
: Calorimetric and temperature field measurements,” Welding Research Sup-
plement, vol. 68, no. 1, 28s–32s, 1989.
[72] J. Gockel, J. Fox, J. Beuth, and R. Hafley, “Integrated melt pool and mi-
crostructure control for Ti-6Al-4V thin wall additive manufacturing,” Materi-
als Science and Technology, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 912–916, 2015.
305, 1984.
241
[75] V. K. Goyal, P. K. Ghosh, and J. S. Saini, “Analytical studies on thermal
behaviour and geometry of weld pool in pulsed current gas metal arc welding,”
Journal of materials processing technology, vol. 209, no. 3, pp. 1318–1336, 2009.
[77] M. R. Grams and P. F. Mendez, “A general expression for the welding tendon
force,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. (under review), 2021.
[78] Ø. Grong, Metallurgical modelling of welding, First. Cambridge, Great Britain:
Institute of Materials, 1994.
[79] M. G. Gunn and E. G. King, “Electron-beam fusion zone penetration in 12
mm (1/2 in.) austenitic stainless steel,” in Advances in Welding Processes
Conference, Harrogate, 1970, pp. 183–186.
[80] C. Habchi, “New correlations for Leidenfrost and Nukiyama temperatures with
gas pressure-application to liquid film boiling simulation,” in ILASS Europe,
2010.
[81] M. Haghpanahi, S. Salimi, P. Bahemmat, and S. Sima, “3-D transient analyti-
cal solution based on green’s function to temperature field in friction stir weld-
ing,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 37, no. 24, pp. 9865–9884, 2013.
[82] D. Havrylov, “Hydrodynamic regimes in autogenous fusion welding,” PhD
thesis, University of Alberta, 2020.
[83] J. C. Heigel, P. Michaleris, and E. W. Reutzel, “Thermo-mechanical model de-
velopment and validation of directed energy deposition additive manufacturing
of Ti–6Al–4V,” Additive manufacturing, vol. 5, pp. 9–19, 2015.
pp. 219–225, 1999.
242
[90] Y. F. Hsu and B. Rubinsky, “Two-dimensional heat transfer study on the
keyhole plasma arc welding process,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1409–1421, 1988.
[91] M. Inagaki, H. Nakamura, and A. Okada, “Studies of cooling processes in the
cases of welding with coated electrode and submerged arc welding,” Journal
of the Japan Welding Society, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 1064–1075, 1965.
[93] C. E. Jackson and A. E. Shrubsall, “Energy distribution in electric welding,”
Welding Journal, vol. 29, no. 5, 231s–241s, 1950.
224.
[95] S. J. N. Jason Cheon Degala Venkata Kiran, “Cfd based visualization of the
finger shaped evolution in the gas metal arc welding process,” International
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 2016.
[97] P. Jhaveri, W. G. Moffatt, and C. M. Adams, “The effect of plate thickness and
radiation on heat flow in welding and cutting,” Welding Research Supplement,
vol. 41, no. 1, 12s–16s, 1962.
1993.
[100] Y. Kawahito, T. Ohnishi, and S. Katayama, “In-process monitoring and feed-
back control for stable production of full-penetration weld in continuous wave
fibre laser welding,” Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, vol. 42, no. 8,
p. 085 501, 2009.
[101] J. Kidawa-Kukla, “Temperature distribution in a rectangular plate heated
by a moving heat source,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer,
vol. 51, pp. 865–872, 2008.
1995.
vol. 230, no. 2, pp. 502–509, 2016.
243
[104] R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, “Thermal analysis of the arc welding pro-
cess : Part I . general solutions,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions
B, vol. 31B, no. 6, pp. 1353–1370, 2000.
[105] R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, “Thermal analysis of the arc welding process.
Part II: Effect of variation of thermophysical properties with temperature.,”
Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, vol. 32, no. 3, 2001.
vol. 44, no. 15, pp. 2845–2862, 2001.
2009.
[108] P. J. Konkol, P. M. Smith, C. F. Willibrand, and L. P. Connor, “Parameter
study of electron-beam welding,” Welding Journal, vol. 50, pp. 765–776, 1971.
175s–181s, 1982.
vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 2245–2253, 1983.
pp. 1075–1082, 1988.
[112] S. Kou, “Simulation of heat flow during the welding of thin plates,” Metallur-
gical Transactions A, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 2025–2030, 1981.
[113] S. Kou, Welding metallurgy, Second Edi. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 2003, 234–235 t85, isbn: 0471434914.
[114] S. Kou and D. K. Sun, “Fluid Flow and Weld Penetration in Stationary Arc
Welds,” Metallurgical Transactions A, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 203–213, 1985.
[115] M. Kubiak, W. Piekarska, and S. Stano, “Modelling of laser beam heat source
based on experimental research of Yb : YAG laser power distribution,” Inter-
national Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 83, pp. 679–689, 2015.
[116] P. K. Kundu, I. M. Cohen, and D. R. Dowling, Fluid mechanics, Fifth. Waltham,
MA: Academic Press, 2012, isbn: 978-0-12-382100-3.
[117] Y. Kwon and D. C. Weckman, “Analytical thermal model of conduction mode
double sided arc welding,” Science and Technology of Welding and Joining,
vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 539–549, 2008.
244
[118] D. H. Lammlein, D. R. DeLapp, P. A. Fleming, A. M. Strauss, and G. E.
Cook, “The application of shoulderless conical tools in friction stir welding:
An experimental and theoretical study,” Materials & Design, vol. 30, no. 10,
pp. 4012–4022, 2009.
[119] J. Lawrence and L. Li, “Determination of the absorption length of CO2 and
high power diode laser radiation for a high volume alumina-based refractory
material,” Applied surface science, vol. 168, no. 1-4, pp. 71–74, 2000.
vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 235–246, 2010.
[121] J. Lee, O. B. Ozdoganlar, and Y. Rabin, “An experimental investigation
on thermal exposure during bone drilling,” Medical Engineering & Physics,
vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 1510–1520, 2012.
[122] H. Li, D. Liu, Y. Yan, N. Guo, Y. Liu, and J. Feng, “Effects of heat input on
arc stability and weld quality in underwater wet flux-cored arc welding of E40
steel,” Journal of Manufacturing Processes, vol. 31, pp. 833–843, 2018.
1543, 1986.
[125] Y. Li, Y.-h. Feng, X.-x. Zhang, and C.-s. Wu, “An improved simulation of
heat transfer and fluid flow in plasma arc welding with modified heat source
model,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 64, pp. 93–104, 2013.
[126] E. V. Locke, E. D. Hoag, and R. A. Hella, “Deep penetration welding with
high-power CO2 lasers,” IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics, vol. 8, no. 2,
pp. 132–135, 1972.
[127] Y. Lu, M. R. Grams, and P. F. Mendez, “Width of thermal features induced
by a moving heat source on a thin plate with surface heat losses,” 2021.
Transfer, p. 120 671, 2020.
vol. 156, p. 119 793, 2020.
[131] C. Luo, Y. Cao, Y. Zhao, L. Zhao, and J. Shan, “Fiber laser welding of 1700-
MPa, ultrahigh-strength,” Welding Journal, vol. 97, 214s–228s, 2018.
245
1191, 1974.
[133] O. Manca, B. Morrone, and V. Naso, “Quasi-steady-state three-dimensional
temperature distribution induced by a moving circular Gaussian heat source in
a finite depth solid,” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, vol. 38,
no. 7, pp. 1305–1315, 1995.
2011.
[136] P. F. Mendez and T. W. Eagar, “Penetration and defect formation in high-
current arc welding,” Welding Journal, vol. 82, no. 10, 296S–306S, 2003.
[138] P. F. Mendez, “Advanced scaling techniques for the modeling of materials
processing,” in Industrial Practice, vol. 7, ASME, 2006, pp. 393–404, isbn:
978-0-7918-4358-1.
[139] P. F. Mendez, “Characteristic values in the scaling of differential equations in
engineering,” Journal of Applied Mechanics, vol. 77, no. 6, p. 061 017, 2010.
vol. 140, no. 8, p. 081 301, 2018.
alia, vol. 58, no. 18, pp. 6012–6026, 2010.
Metals, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 783–791, 2016.
246
vol. 123, no. 4, pp. 624–632, 2001.
[146] O. R. Myhr and Ø. Grong, “Dimensionless maps for heat flow analyses in
fusion welding,” Acta Metallurgica et Materialia, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 449–460,
1990.
[147] A.-K. Nehad, “Enthalpy technique for solution of stefan problems: Application
to the keyhole plasma arc welding process involving moving heat source,” In-
ternational communications in heat and mass transfer, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 779–
790, 1995.
[148] T. W. Nelson, R. J. Steel, and W. J. Arbegast, “In situthermal studies and
post-weld mechanical properties of friction stir welds in age hardenable alu-
minium alloys,” Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, vol. 8, no. 4,
pp. 283–288, Aug. 2003.
vol. 138, no. 12, p. 122 301, 2016.
[150] N. T. Nguyen, A. Ohta, K. Matsuoka, N. Suzuki, and Y. Maeda, “Analytical
solutions for transient temperature of semi-infinite body subjected to 3-D mov-
ing heat sources,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 78, no. August, 265s–
274s, 1999.
[151] S. H. Nikam and N. K. Jain, “Finite element simulation of pre-heating effect on
melt pool size during micro-plasma transferred arc deposition process,” in IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, ser. IOP Conference
Series: IOP Publishing, vol. 389, 2018, p. 012 006.
[152] A. Nisar, M. J. J. Schmidt, M. A. Sheikh, and L. Li, “Three-dimensional
transient finite element analysis of the laser enamelling process and moving
heat source and phase change considerations,” Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, vol. 217,
no. 6, pp. 753–764, 2003.
[153] A. Odabaşı, N. Ünlü, G. Göller, and M. N. Eruslu, “A Study on Laser Beam
Welding (LBW) Technique: Effect of Heat Input on the Microstructural Evo-
lution of Superalloy Inconel 718,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A,
vol. 41A, no. 9, pp. 2357–2365, 2010.
[154] K. Ogawa, “Analysis of temperature distribution around moving heat source
in thin plate,” Journal of the Marine Engineering Society in Japan, vol. 22,
no. 4, pp. 257–262, 1987.
247
no. 2, pp. 35–43, 2007.
[156] G. M. Oreper, T. W. Eagar, and J. Szekely, “Convection in arc weld pools,”
Welding Journal, vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 307–312, 1983.
[157] M. N. Özisik, Heat conduction, Second. New York;Toronto: A Wiley-Interscience
Publication, 1993.
[158] R. Parkitny and J. Winczek, “Analytical solution of temporary temperature
field in half-infinite body caused by moving tilted volumetric heat source,”
[159] W. Paulsen, Asymptotic analysis and perturbation theory. CRC Press, 2013.
[161] Q. Peng, “An analytical solution for a transient temperature field during
laser heating a finite slab,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 40, no. 5-
6, pp. 4129–4135, 2016.
[162] H. H. Pennes, “Analysis of tissue and arterial blood temperatures in the resting
human forearm,” Journal of applied physiology, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 93–122, 1948.
[164] W. Piekarska and M. Kubiak, “Theoretical investigations into heat transfer
in laser-welded steel sheets,” Journal of thermal analysis and calorimetry,
vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 159–166, 2012.
[165] W. D. Pilkey and D. F. Pilkey, Peterson’s stress concentration factors. John
Wiley & Sons, 2008.
no. 10, 149s–155s, 2005.
[167] J. A. Ramos-Grez and M. Sen, Analytical, quasi-stationary wilson-rosenthal
solution for moving heat sources, 2019.
[168] A. P. Reynolds, W. Tang, T. Gnaupel-Herold, and H Prask, “Structure, prop-
erties, and residual stress of 304l stainless steel friction stir welds,” Scripta
materialia, vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 1289–1294, 2003.
1479, 1992.
248
[170] I. A. Roberts, C. J. Wang, R. Esterlein, M. Stanford, and D. J. Mynors, “A
three-dimensional finite element analysis of the temperature field during laser
melting of metal powders in additive layer manufacturing,” International Jour-
nal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, vol. 49, no. 12-13, pp. 916–923, 2009.
1923, pp. 640–654.
[172] M. Rohde, C. Markert, and W. Pfleging, “Laser micro-welding of aluminum
alloys: Experimental studies and numerical modeling,” The International Jour-
nal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 50, no. 1-4, pp. 207–215, 2010.
[173] W. M. Rohsenow, J. P. Hartnett, Y. I. Cho, et al., Handbook of heat transfer,
Third, W. M. Rohsenow, J. P. Hartnett, and Y. I. Cho, Eds., ser. McGraw-Hill
handbooks. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.
pp. 1277–1292, 1935.
journal, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2–8, 1938.
[177] D. Rosenthal, “Mathematical theory of heat distribution during welding and
cutting,” The Welding Journal, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 220–234, 1941.
[178] S. Rouquette, J. Guo, and P. Le Masson, “Estimation of the parameters of a
Gaussian heat source by the Levenberg–Marquardt method: Application to the
electron beam welding,” International Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 46,
no. 2, pp. 128–138, 2007.
Mashgis, 1951.
[180] M. F. Schneider and M. F. Schneider, “Laser cladding with powder,” PhD
thesis, University of Twente, 1998.
[181] P. Seyffarth, B. Meyer, and A. Scharff, Grosser atlas schweiss-ztu-schaubilder,
ser. Fachbuchreihe Schweisstechnik. Düsseldorf: Deutscher Verlag für Schweis-
stechnik, 1992, isbn: 9783871551277.
[182] A. K. Shah, S. D. Kulkarni, V. Gopinathan, and R. Krishnan, “Weld heat-
affected zone in Ti-6AI-4V alloy Part l–computer simulation of the effect of
weld variables on the thermal cycles in the HAZ,” Welding Research Supple-
ment, vol. 74, no. 9, pp. 297–304, 1995.
[183] Y. Sharir, A. Grill, and J. Pelleg, “Computation of temperatures in thin tanta-
lum sheet welding,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, vol. 11, no. 2,
pp. 257–265, 1980.
249
[184] S. Shen, I. N. A. Oguocha, and S. Yannacopoulos, “Effect of heat input on weld
bead geometry of submerged arc welded ASTM A709 Grade 50 steel joints,”
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 212, no. 1, pp. 286–294, 2012.
[185] A. Squillace, U. Prisco, S. Ciliberto, and A. Astarita, “Effect of welding pa-
rameters on morphology and mechanical properties of Ti-6Al-4V laser beam
welded butt joints,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 212, no. 2,
pp. 427–436, 2012.
[186] W. M. Steen and J. Mazumder, Laser material processing, Fourth. London:
Springer, 2010.
[187] Stock Drive Products / Sterling Instrument, Handbook of METRIC drive com-
ponents D805. 2010.
[188] J. Sundqvist, A. F. H. Kaplan, L. Shachaf, and C. Kong, “Analytical heat
conduction modelling for shaped laser beams,” Journal of Materials Processing
[189] L. E. Svensson, B. Gretoft, and H. K. D. H. Bhadeshia, “An analysis of cooling
curves from the fusion zone of steel weld deposits,” Scandinavian Journal of
Metallurgy, vol. 15, pp. 97–103, 1986.
[191] M. R. Talaee and A. Kabiri, “Exact analytical solution of bioheat equation
subjected to intensive moving heat source,” Journal of Mechanics in Medicine
and Biology, vol. 17, no. 05, p. 1 750 081, 2017.
[193] P. Tekriwal and J. Mazumder, “Finite element analysis of three-dimensional
transient heat transfer in GMA welding,” Welding Research Supplement, vol. 67,
150s–156s, 1988.
[194] K. Tello, U. Duman, and P. F. Mendez, “Scaling laws for the welding arc,
weld penetration and friction stir welding,” in Trends in Welding Research,
Proceedings of the 8th International Conference, The Material Information
Society, ASM International, 2009, pp. 172–181, isbn: 9781615030026.
[195] R Trivedi, S. David, M. Eshelman, J. Vitek, S. Babu, T Hong, and T DebRoy,
“In situ observations of weld pool solidification using transparent metal-analog
systems,” Journal of applied physics, vol. 93, no. 8, pp. 4885–4895, 2003.
[196] N. Tsai, “Heat distribution and weld bead geometry in arc welding,” PhD
thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1983.
250
no. 23-24, pp. 4872–4882, 2007.
[199] V. R. Voller and C. R. Swaminathan, “General source-based method for solid-
ification phase change,” Numerical Heat Transfer, vol. 19, pp. 175–189, 1991.
[200] C. S. W. and C. H. H.S., “Correlating equations for laminar and turbulent
free convection from a vertical plate,” International Journal of Heat and Mass
Transfer, vol. 18, no. 11, 1975.
[201] J. Wang, J. Shi, J. Wang, W. Li, C. Liu, G. Xu, S. Y. Maksimov, and Q.
Zhu, “Numerical study on the temperature field of underwater flux-cored wire
arc cutting process,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
[202] L. Wang, S. Felicelli, Y. Gooroochurn, P. T. Wang, and M. F. Horstemeyer,
“Optimization of the LENS® process for steady molten pool size,” Materials
Science and Engineering: A, vol. 474, no. 1-2, pp. 148–156, 2008.
[203] L. Wang and S. Felicelli, “Analysis of thermal phenomena in LENSTM depo-
sition,” Materials Science and Engineering: A, vol. 435, pp. 625–631, 2006.
[204] X. Wang and R. Li, “Intelligent modelling of back-side weld bead geometry
using weld pool surface characteristic parameters,” Journal of Intelligent Man-
ufacturing, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1301–1313, Jan. 2014.
[205] Y. Wang, P. Fu, Y. Guan, Z. Lu, and Y. Wei, “Research on modeling of heat
source for electron beam welding fusion-solidification zone,” Chinese Journal
of Aeronautics, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 217–223, 2013.
[206] Y. Wang, Y. Lu, M. Grams, A. H. Cesaro, and P. F. Mendez, “Asymptotics and
blending in the modeling of welding,” in Numerical Analysis of Weldability,
2019.
[208] Y. Wang, Y. Lu, and P. F. Mendez, “Prediction of peak temperature under a
moving gaussian surface heat source,” 2021.
[209] Y. Wang and P. F. Mendez, “Prediction of maximum isotherm depth under a
moving gaussian surface heat source.”
[210] T. Washio and H. Motoda, “Extension of dimensional analysis for scale-types
and its application to discovery of admissible models of complex processes,”
in International Workshop on Similarity Method, 1999, pp. 129–147.
[211] J. M. Webster, “Welding at high speed with the CO2 laser,” Metal Progress,
vol. 98, pp. 59–61, 1970.
251
1985.
no. 5, 263s–267s, 1952.
[217] J. Winczek, A. Modrzycka, and E. Gawrońska, “Analytical description of the
temperature field induced by laser heat source with any trajectory,” Procedia
Engineering, vol. 149, pp. 553–558, 2016.
vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 212–220, 2014.
[220] G. D. Wood, “Heat and mass transfer aspects of coaxial laser cladding and
its application to nickel-tungsten carbide alloys,” PhD thesis, University of
Alberta, 2017.
[221] A. S. Wu, D. W. Brown, M. Kumar, G. F. Gallegos, and W. E. King, “An ex-
perimental investigation into additive manufacturing-induced residual stresses
in 316l stainless steel,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, vol. 45,
no. 13, pp. 6260–6270, 2014.
[222] B. Xu, F. Jiang, S. Chen, M. Tanaka, S. Tashiro, and N. Van Anh, “Numerical
analysis of plasma arc physical characteristics under additional constraint of
keyhole,” Chinese Physics B, vol. 27, no. 3, p. 034 701, 2018.
[223] N. Yadaiah and S. Bag, “Development of egg-configuration heat source model
in numerical simulation of autogenous fusion welding process,” International
Journal of Thermal Sciences, vol. 86, pp. 125–138, 2014.
[224] N. Yadaiah and S. Bag, “Effect of heat source parameters in thermal and
mechanical analysis of linear GTA welding process,” ISIJ international, vol. 52,
no. 11, pp. 2069–2075, 2012.
252
[225] J. Yang, S. Sun, M. Brandt, and W. Yan, “Experimental investigation and 3D
finite element prediction of the heat affected zone during laser assisted machin-
ing of Ti6Al4V alloy,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 210,
no. 15, pp. 2215–2222, 2010, issn: 0924-0136.
[226] M. M. Yovanovich, “Four decades of research on thermal contact, gap, and
joint resistance in microelectronics,” IEEE transactions on components and
packaging technologies, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 182–206, 2005.
[228] L. Zhang, B. L. Tai, G. Wang, K. Zhang, S. Sullivan, and A. J. Shih, “Thermal
model to investigate the temperature in bone grinding for skull base neuro-
surgery,” Medical Engineering & Physics, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1391–1398, 2013.
253
Appendix A: Matlab codes for
blending
Listing A.1: General Matlab class for 1D blending and export latex files.
1 classdef Blending_Grid_size
2 %BLENDING_GRID_SIZE blending over varying blending grid size
3
4 properties
5 Xdef=struct(’xsize’,[10,20,40,60,80,100,200,400,600,800,1000,],
...
6 ’xmin’,[],’xmax’,[]);
7 BP=struct(’pseed’,[],’PList’,[],’MaxEList’,[],’P’,[],’MaxE’,[],’
BResult’,[])
8 FigCorrectionFactor=struct(’cross_cf_val_error_y2’,[],’
figure_correction_factor’,[], ...
9 ’accept_error_valy_y1’,[], ’accept_error_valx_y1’,[], ’
accept_error_valy_y2’,[],...
10 ’accept_error_valx_y2’,[], ’cross_cf_valx’,[], ’
cross_cf_valy_y1’,[], ’cross_cf_valy_y2’,[],...
11 ’cross_cf_val_error_y1’,[]);
12 end
13
14 properties
15 Funyest
16 Blending_Equation
17 funy1=@(x) nan;
18 funy2=@(x) nan;
19 funmodify1=@(x) nan;
20 funmodify2=@(x) nan;
21 funinter=@(x) nan;
22 end
23 properties
24 latexRegimeI=’I’ % name of Regime I
25 latexRegimeII=’II’ % name of Regime II
26 latexX % name of dependent variable
27 latexY % name of dependent variable
254
28 latexBlendingEquation % blending equation
29 latexAsyI % asymptotic I
30 latexAsyII % asymptotic II
31 latexCfI % correction factor for regime I
32 latexCfII % correction factor for regime II
33 latexBps % blending parameters
34 end
35 properties
36 Opt=struct(’Isminsearch’,1,’options_minsearch’,optimset(’
MaxFunEvals’,1e10),...
37 ’Isminunc’,1,’options_minunc’,optimoptions(@fminunc,’
StepTolerance’,1e-40),...
38 ’Ismincon’,1,’options_mincon’,optimoptions(@fmincon,’
StepTolerance’,1e-60),...
39 ’Isga’,1,’options_ga’,optimoptions(@ga,’PopulationSize’,
1000,...
40 ’HybridFcn’, { @fminsearch },’Display’, ’off’,...
41 ’PlotFcn’, {@gaplotbestf @gaplotscorediversity }));
42 Pplot=struct(’x_label’,’xx’,’y_label’,’yy’,...
43 ’figname’,’yx’,...
44 ’plot_yx’,{{true}},...
45 ’plot_error’,{{true,’x_label’,’x’,’y_label’,’error’}},...
46 ’plot_error_p’,{{true}},...
47 ’pvallist’,[]); %[;;])
48 end
49
50 methods
51 function obj = Blending_Grid_size(Funyest,Blending_Equation,xmin,
xmax,pseed)
52 %BLENDING_GRID_SIZE Construct an instance of this class
53 obj.Funyest =Funyest ;
54 obj.Xdef.xmin = xmin;
55 obj.Xdef.xmax = xmax;
56 obj.BP.pseed = pseed;
57 obj.Blending_Equation = Blending_Equation;
58 end
59
60 function obj = Blending(obj)

61 %Blendig: Blending on different grid size of X
62 for i=1:max(size(obj.Xdef.xsize))
63 X=logspace(log10(obj.Xdef.xmin),log10(obj.Xdef.xmax),obj.
Xdef.xsize(i));
64 Y=obj.Funyest(X);
65 Fun_Blending=obj.Blending_Equation(X);
255
66 [obj.BP.PList{i},obj.BP.MaxEList{i},˜] =
fun_blending_general_1D(Fun_Blending,X,Y,obj.BP.pseed)
;
67 disp([’n=’,num2str(obj.Xdef.xsize(i))]);
68 end
69 figure(1)
70 plot(obj.Xdef.xsize,100*cell2mat(obj.BP.MaxEList),’-k’,’
linewidth’,2)
71 xlabel(’N’)
72 ylabel(’Err%’)
73 figure(2)
74 p=[];
75 for j=1:max(size(obj.BP.PList))
76 p=[p;obj.BP.PList{j}];
77 end
78 plot(obj.Xdef.xsize,p,’k’,’linewidth’,2); hold on
79 legend
80 xlabel(’N’)
81 ylabel(’p’)
82 end
83
84 function obj=FBlending(obj,N)
85 X=logspace(log10(obj.Xdef.xmin),log10(obj.Xdef.xmax),N);
86 Y=obj.Funyest(X);
87 Fun_Blending=obj.Blending_Equation(X);
88 Y1=obj.funy1(X);
89 Y2=obj.funy2(X);
90 Y1modify=obj.funmodify1(X);
91 Y2modify=obj.funmodify2(X);
92
93 [obj.BP.P,obj.BP.MaxE,obj.BP.Result]=fun_blending_general_1D(
Fun_Blending,X,Y,obj.BP.pseed,...
94 ’Y1’,Y1,...
95 ’Y2’,Y2,...
96 ’Y1modify’,Y1modify,...
97 ’Y2modify’,Y2modify,...
98 ’Isminsearch’,obj.Opt.Isminsearch,’options_minsearch’,obj
.Opt.options_minsearch,...
99 ’Isminunc’,obj.Opt.Isminunc,’options_minunc’,obj.Opt.
options_minunc,...
100 ’Ismincon’,obj.Opt.Ismincon,’options_mincon’,obj.Opt.
options_mincon,...
101 ’Isga’,obj.Opt.Isga,’options_ga’,obj.Opt.options_ga,...
102 ’plot_yx’,obj.Pplot.plot_yx,...
103 ’plot_error’,obj.Pplot.plot_error,...
256
104 ’plot_error_p’,obj.Pplot.plot_error_p,...
105 ’pvallist’,obj.Pplot.pvallist...
106 );
107
108 if min((size(Y1)==size(Y)).*(size(Y2)==size(Y)))
109 obj.FigCorrectionFactor= fun_plot_correction_factors_1D(X
,obj.BP.Result.estimation,Y1,Y2,...
110 ’ea’,0.1,....
111 ’xlabel’,obj.Pplot.x_label,’ylabel’,obj.Pplot.y_label)
;
112 end
113 end
114
115 function obj=funWrite(obj,filename)

116 fileID = fopen(filename,’w’);
117 fprintf(fileID,[’\\section{’,obj.latexY,’}\n’]);
118 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,obj.latexRegimeI,’{’,obj
.latexAsyI,’} %% asymptotic \n’]);
119 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,obj.latexRegimeII,’{’,
obj.latexAsyII,’} %% asymptotic \n’]);
120 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,’B’,’{’,obj.
latexBlendingEquation,’} %% blending equation \n’]);
121 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,’cf’,obj.latexRegimeI,’{
’,obj.latexCfI,’} %% correction factor \n’]);
122 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,’cf’,obj.latexRegimeII,
’{’,obj.latexCfII,’} %% correction factor\n’]);
123 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,’Bps’,’{’,obj.latexBps,’
} %% blending parameters \n’]);
124 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,’BME’,’{’,num2str(round(
obj.BP.MaxE*100,2,’significant’)),’\\%%} %% blending error
\n’]);
125 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,obj.latexX,obj.
latexRegimeI,’{’,num2str(round(obj.FigCorrectionFactor.
accept_error_valx_y1,4,’significant’)),’} %% valx of 10%%
acceptable error \n’]);
126 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,obj.latexX,obj.
latexRegimeII,’{’,num2str(round(obj.FigCorrectionFactor.
accept_error_valx_y2,4,’significant’)),’} %% valx of 10%%
acceptable error \n’]);
127 fprintf(fileID,[’\\def\\’,obj.latexY,obj.latexX,’c’,’{’,
num2str(round(obj.FigCorrectionFactor.cross_cf_valx,4,’
significant’)),’} %% valx of the same error \n’]);
128 fprintf(fileID,’\n\n\n\\paragraph{Result of blending:}\n’);
129 fprintf(fileID,[’Blending parameters are:P= ’,num2str(round(
obj.BP.P,4,’significant’)),’, the maximum error is ’,
257
num2str(round(obj.BP.MaxE*100,4,’significant’)),’\\%% \\\\
\n’]);
130 fprintf(fileID,’It is grid size independent:\n’);
131 for j=1:max(size(obj.BP.PList))
132 fprintf(fileID,[’P=’,num2str(round(obj.BP.PList{j},4,’
significant’)),’, Error ’,num2str(round(obj.BP.
MaxEList{j}*100,4,’significant’)),’\\%%, N=’,num2str(
obj.Xdef.xsize(j)),’ \\\\ \n’]);
133 end
134 fprintf(fileID,’\n\n\n\\paragraph{Result of Correction
factors:}\n’);
135 fprintf(fileID,’\\begin{align}\n’);
136 fprintf(fileID,[’Ro_{I}=’,num2str(round(obj.
FigCorrectionFactor.accept_error_valx_y1,4,’significant’))
,’\\qquad \\mathrm{where \\quad }f1=’,num2str(round(obj.
FigCorrectionFactor.accept_error_valy_y1,4,’significant’))
,’\\\\ \n’]);
137 fprintf(fileID,[’Ro_{II}=’,num2str(round(obj.
FigCorrectionFactor.accept_error_valx_y2,4,’significant’))
,’\\qquad \\mathrm{where \\quad }f1=’,num2str(round(obj.
FigCorrectionFactor.accept_error_valy_y2,4,’significant’))
,’\\\\ \n’]);
138 fprintf(fileID,[’Ro_{c}=’,num2str(round(obj.
FigCorrectionFactor.cross_cf_valx,4,’significant’)),’\\
qquad \\mathrm{where \\quad }f1=’,num2str(obj.
FigCorrectionFactor.cross_cf_valy_y1),’\\quad f2=’,num2str
(round(obj.FigCorrectionFactor.cross_cf_valy_y2,4,’
significant’)),’ \n’]);
139 fprintf(fileID,’\\end{align}’);
140 fclose(fileID);
141 end
142
143 end
144
145 methods
146 function value = get.latexAsyI(obj)
147 value=obj.function2str(func2str(obj.funy1));
148 end
149 function value = get.latexAsyII(obj)
150 value=obj.function2str(func2str(obj.funy2));
151 end
152 function value = get.latexBlendingEquation(obj)
153 value=obj.function2str(func2str(obj.Blending_Equation));
154 end
155 function value = get.latexCfI(obj)
258
156 value=obj.function2str([’(’,func2str(obj.Blending_Equation),’
)/(’,func2str(obj.funy1),’)’]);
157 end
158 function value = get.latexCfII(obj)
159 value=obj.function2str([’(’,func2str(obj.Blending_Equation),’
)/(’,func2str(obj.funy2),’)’]);
160 end
161 function value = get.latexX(obj)
162 value=obj.Pplot.x_label;
163 end
164 function value = get.latexY(obj)
165 value=obj.Pplot.y_label;
166 end
167 function value = get.latexBps(obj)
168 if max(size(obj.BP.P))==1
169 value=[’n=’,num2str(obj.BP.P)];
170 else
171 if max(size(obj.BP.P))==2
172 value=[’a=’,num2str(obj.BP.P(1)),’, b=’,num2str(obj.BP
.P(2))];
173 else
174 value=[’P=’,num2str(obj.BP.P)];
175 end
176 end
177 end
178 function strout=function2str(obj,f)
179 str = regexprep(f, ’ˆ@$.*?$|@$.*?$|@$.*?$|@$.*?$|@
$.*?$’, ’’);
180 str = regexprep(str, ’\.\*’, ’*’);
181 str = regexprep(str, ’\.\ˆ’, ’ˆ’);
182 str = regexprep(str, ’\./’, ’/’);
183 str = regexprep(str, ’exp$1$’, ’e’);
184 if max(size(obj.BP.pseed))>1
185 str =regexprep(str,’p$1$’,’a’);
186 str =regexprep(str,’p$2$’,’b’);
187 str =regexprep(str,’p$3$’,’c’);
188 else
189 str =regexprep(str,’p$1$’,’n’);
190 end
191 strsym = feval(symengine, ’hold’, str);
192 strout=strrep(latex(strsym),’\,’,’’);
193 strout=strrep(strout,’\’,’\\’);
194 end
195 function strout = sym2latex2print(fs)
196 strout=strrep(latex(fs),’\,’,’’);
259
197 strout=strrep(strout,’\’,’\\’);
198 strout=[strout,’\n’];
199 end
200 end
201 end
Listing A.2: Matlab function for general 1D blending.

1 function [P,MaxE,ResultStruct] = fun_blending_general_1D(
Blending_Equation,X,Y,Pseed,varargin)
2 %FUN_BLENDING_GENERAL_1D
3 % GENERAL 1D BLENDING THAT HAVE TO INPUT BLENDING FORMULA
_BLENDING_EQUATION_
4 %
5 % −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
6 % −−−−− USAGE EXAMPLE −−−−
7 % −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
8 % [P,MaxE,ResultStruct] = fun_blending_general_1D(...
9 % Blending_Equation,X,Y,Pseed ,...
10 % ’Y1’, ,...
11 % ’Y2’, ,...
12 % ’ Isminsearch ’,1,’ options_minsearch ’,{},...
13 % ’Isminunc ’,1,’ options_minunc ’,{},...
14 % ’Ismincon ’,1,’ options_mincon ’,{},...
15 % ’ Isga ’,1,’ options_ga ’,{},...
16 % ’Y1modify’, ,...
17 % ’Y2modify’, ,...
18 % ’plot_yx ’,{ true ,..},...
19 % ’ plot_error ’,{ true ,..},...
20 % ’plot_error_p ’,{ true ,..},...
21 % ’ pvallist ’,[,,;,,;,,],...
22 %)
23
24 % −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
25 % −−−−− INPUT PARAMETERS −−−−
26 % −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
27 % Blending_Equation: handle of blending function
28 % X: vector of independent variable
29 % Y: vector of dependent variable
30 % Pseed: initial guess for blending parameters
31 % ’ Isminsearch ’,’ options_minsearch ’{}: settings of "fminsearch"
32 % ’Isminunc ’,1,’ options_minunc’,{}: settings of "fminunc"
33 % ’Ismincon ’,1,’ options_mincon’,{}: settings of "fmincon"
34 % ’ Isga ’,1,’ options_ga ’,{}: settings of "ga"
35 % ’Y1’: vector of asymptotic in regime I
260
36 % ’Y2’: vector of asymptotic in regime II
37 % ’Y1modify’: vector of modified asymptotic in regime I
38 % ’Y2modify’: vector of modified asymptotic in regime II
39 % ’plot_yx ’,{ true ,..}: setting of plotting figure y vs x
40 % ’ plot_error ’,{ true ,..}: setting of plotting figure error vs x
41 % ’plot_error_p ’,{ true ,..}: setting of plotting figure maximum error vs P
42 % ’ pvallist ’,[,,;,,;,,]: different blending parameters for figure maximum
error vs P
43
44 % −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
45 % −−−−− SETTING FOR PLOT −−−−−−−
46 % −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
47 %’Y1’,y1 ,’ Y2’,y2 ,’ xlabel ’, xlabel ,...
48 %’ylabel ’, ylabel ,’ xscale ’, xscale ,’ yscale ’, yscale ,...
49 %’axis_range ’,[ x0,x1,y0,y1 ],’ xtick ’, xtick ,’ ytick ’, ytick
50
51 %% Set output
52 P=[]; MaxE=[]; ResultStruct=[];
53 %% Checking size
54 Yseed=Blending_Equation(Pseed);
55 if size(Yseed)˜= size(Y) & size(X) ˜=size(Y)
56 disp(’X and Y have to be of same size’);
57 return;
58 end
59 %% Parse inputs
60 [default,parse]=SetDefalutParse;
61 [p,exitflag]=Parse_Input(default,parse,varargin{:});
62 if ˜exitflag
63 disp(’Error happends in parsing inputs’);
64 return;
65 end
66 %% error / maximum error function
67 fun_error=@(p) log(Blending_Equation(p)./Y);
68 fun_max_error=@(p) max(abs(fun_error(p)));
69 %% search optimal value
70 if p.Isminsearch
71 Methods{1}=’Isminsearch’;
72 [p_optimal{1,2},m_error(1)]=fminsearch(@(p) fun_max_error(p),Pseed,p
.options_minsearch);
73 end
74 if p.Isminunc
75 Methods{2}=’Isminunc’;
76 [p_optimal{2,2},m_error(2)]=fminunc(@(p) fun_max_error(p),Pseed,p.
options_minunc);
77 end
261
78 if p.Ismincon
79 Methods{3}=’Ismincon’;
80 [p_optimal{3,2},m_error(3)]=fmincon(@(p) fun_max_error(p),Pseed
,[],[],[],[],[],[],[],p.options_mincon);
81 end
82 if p.Isga
83 Methods{4}=’Isga’;
84 p_vars=max(size(Pseed));
85 [p_optimal{4,2},m_error(4)] = ga (fun_max_error,p_vars
,[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],p.options_ga);
86 end
87 %% find the best one among four results
88 MaxE=min(m_error);
89 P=p_optimal{m_error==MaxE,2};
90 E=fun_error(P);
91 Yest=Blending_Equation(P);
92 ResultStruct=struct(’maximum_error’,MaxE,’optimal_p’,P,...
93 ’error’, E,’estimation’,Yest,’ErrFunHandle’,fun_error,’
MaxErrFunHandle’,fun_max_error);
94 ResultStruct.results_of_different_fmin.p=p_optimal;
95 ResultStruct.results_of_different_fmin.max_error=m_error;
96 ResultStruct.results_of_different_fmin.methods=Methods;
97 %% Plotting
98 % plot the y vs . x graph
99 if p.plot_yx{1}
100 ResultStruct.handle_of_figure_y_x=fun_plot_yx_1D(X,Y,p.plot_yx{2:end
});
101 if size(p.Y1) == size(Y)
102 hold on;
103 plot(X,p.Y1,’--k’,’linewidth’,1);
104 end
105 if size(p.Y2) == size(Y)
106 hold on;
107 plot(X,p.Y2,’--k’,’linewidth’,1);
108 end
109 if size(p.Y1modify) == size(Y)
110 hold on;
111 plot(X,p.Y1modify,’-.k’,’linewidth’,1);
112 end
113 if size(p.Y2modify) == size(Y)
114 hold on;
115 plot(X,p.Y2modify,’-.k’,’linewidth’,1);
116 end
117 end
118
262
119 % plot the error vs x graph
120 if p.plot_error{1}
121 pY=100*fun_error(P);
122 [ResultStruct.handle_of_figure_error,l]=fun_plot_yx_1D(X,pY,p.
plot_error{2:end},’yscale’,’linear’);
123 title(’error vs x’); hold on
124 set(l{1},{’DisplayName’},{strcat(’n=’,num2str(P))});
125
126 if size(p.pvallist,2)==size(Pseed,2)
127 for ipval=1:size(p.pvallist,1)
128 l2=semilogx(X,100*fun_error(p.pvallist(ipval,:))); hold on
129 set(l2,{’DisplayName’},{strcat(’p=’,num2str(p.pvallist(ipval
,:)))});
130 end
131 end
132 legend show
133 legend(’boxoff’)
134 end
135
136 % plot the error vs p graph

137 if p.plot_error_p{1}
138 if max(size(P))==1
139 plist=linspace(P*0.5,P*1.5,31);
140 MElist=arrayfun(@(x) fun_max_error(x),plist);
141 ResultStruct.handle_of_figure_maximum_error_p=fun_plot_yx_1D(
plist,100*MElist,’xlabel’,’n’,’ylabel’,’maximum error (\%)’,’
xscale’,’linear’,’yscale’,’linear’,p.plot_error_p{2:end});
142 title(’maximum error vs n’); hold on
143 plot([P,P],[0,1000*MaxE],’--k’); hold on
144 text(P,200*MaxE,strcat(’n=’,num2str(P)),’Interpreter’,’tex’,’
FontSize’,14);
145 else
146 if max(size(P))==2
147 av=linspace(0.7*P(1),1.3*P(1),151);
148 bv=linspace(0.7*P(2),1.3*P(2),151);
149 fun_plot_contour_error_ab(av,bv,fun_max_error,’aop’,P(1),’bop
’,P(2),p.plot_error_p{2:end})
150 else
151 disp(’plot maximum error on P only works for one or two
blending parameter’);
152 end
153 end
154 end
155
156 end
263
157
158 function [default,parse]=SetDefalutParse

159 default.Isminsearch=true;
160 parse.Isminsearch=@(x) islogical(x) || x==0|| x==1;
161 default.Isminunc=true;
162 parse.Isminunc=@(x) islogical(x) || x==0|| x==1;
163 default.Ismincon=false;
164 parse.Ismincon=@(x) islogical(x) || x==0|| x==1;
165 default.Isga=false;
166 parse.Isga=@(x) islogical(x) || x==0|| x==1;
167
168 default.p_lb=[nan,nan];
169 parse.p_lb=@(x) size(x) == [1,2];
170 default.p_ub=[nan,nan];
171 parse.p_ub=@(x) size(x) == [1,2];
172
173 default.options_minsearch=optimset(’TolX’,1E-20,’TolFun’,1E-10,’
MaxFunEvals’,1e10);
174 parse.options_minsearch=@(x) 1;
175 default.options_minunc=optimoptions(@fminunc,’StepTolerance’,1e-40);
176 parse.options_minunc=@(x) 1;
177 default.options_mincon=optimoptions(@fmincon,’StepTolerance’,1e-60);
178 parse.options_mincon=@(x) 1;
179 default.options_ga=optimoptions(@ga,’PopulationSize’, 1000,...
180 ’HybridFcn’, { @fminsearch [default.options_minsearch] },’Display’,
’off’,...
181 ’PlotFcn’, {@gaplotbestf @gaplotscorediversity });% options =
optimoptions(options ,’ PlotFcn ’, { @gaplotbestf @gaplotscorediversity }) ;
182 parse.options_ga=@(x) 1;
183
184 default.Y1=[];
185 parse.Y1=@(x) 1;
186 default.Y2=[];
187 parse.Y2=@(x) 1;
188
189 default.Y1modify=[];
190 parse.Y1modify=@(x) 1;
191 default.Y2modify=[];
192 parse.Y2modify=@(x) 1;
193
194
195 default.plot_yx={false};
196 parse.plot_yx=@(x) 1;
197 default.plot_error={false};
198 parse.plot_error=@(x) 1;
264
199 default.plot_error_p={false};
200 parse.plot_error_p=@(x) 1;
201 parse.pvallist=@(x) 1;
202 default.pvallist=[0];
203 end
204 function [p,exitflag]=Parse_Input(default,parse,varargin)
205 % 1. parse the inputs , choosing default value if it ’ s not showed in varargin
206 % 2. check output with function parse .
207 % Usage
208 % [p, exitflag ]=Parse_Input(default , parse , varargin )
209 %% if some problems happened, exitflag = 0
210 exitflag=1;
211 %% size of varargin
212 [r_varargin,c_varargin]=size(varargin);
213 %% if varargin is empty use default
214 if r_varargin˜=0
215 % varargin should be a cell of [1x2n]
217 disp(’Inputs must be a line.’);
218 exitflag=0;
219 return;
220 end
221 if rem(c_varargin,2)==1
222 disp(’Inputs must be in pairs’);
223 exitflag=0;
224 return
225 end
226 % transform the [1x2n] cell to a struct of n.
227 varargin_field=varargin(1:2:c_varargin);
228 varargin_value=varargin(2:2:c_varargin);
229 % check the field name of varargin in default struct
230 is_in_fields=isfield(default,varargin_field);
231 for i=1:size(is_in_fields,2)
232 if is_in_fields(i)<eps
233 disp(char(strcat(’Property name ’,{’ ’}, varargin_field{i},{’
’}, ’is wrong’)));
234 else
235 % change the value of default
236 default.(varargin_field{i})=varargin_value{i};
237 end
238 end
239 end
240 % pass the changed struct to output
241 p=default;
242 % check if the output satisfied the parse
265
243 for fld = fieldnames(p)’
244 if ˜parse.(fld{1})(p.(fld{1}))
245 disp(char(strcat(’Error happened in the value of’,{’ ’}, fld{1}))
);
246 exitflag=0;
247 end
248 end
249 end
250 function [h,l] = fun_plot_yx_1D(X,Y,varargin)
251 %FUN_PLOT_Y_X_1D format plot of 1D graph
252 %Example:
253 % [H,l]=fun_plot_yx_1D(X,Y,’Y1’,y1,’Y2’,y2,’ xlabel ’, xlabel ,...
254 % ’ ylabel ’, ylabel ,’ xscale ’, xscale ,’ yscale ’, yscale ,...
255 % ’axis_range ’,[ x0,x1,y0,y1 ],’ xtick ’, xtick ,’ ytick ’, ytick ) ;
256 %
257 % Output:
258 % H: handle of figure
259 % l : handle of line
260 % Properties include :[[[ properties : description [ type ] { default }]]]
261 % Y1/Y2: asymptotics [ vector ] {nan( size (X))}
262 % xlabel : name of x [ string ] {’x’}
263 % ylabel : name of y [ string ] {’y’}
264 % xscale : salce of x [ log/ linear ] {’ log ’}
265 % yscale : salce of y [ log/ linear ] {’ log ’}
266 % axis_range: range of figure [4X1] {[xmin,xmax,ymin,ymax
]}
267 % xtick : tick of x axis [ vector ] {[]}
268 % ytick : tick of x axis [ vector ] {[]}
269
270 %% GRAPH SETTINGS (DONT CAHNGE IF NOT SURE)

271 default_curve={’-k’,’linewidth’,2};
272 default_label={’FontSize’,14};
273 default_gca={’FontSize’,14, ’MinorGridLineStyle’,’none’, ’linewidth’,1,’
box’,’on’};
274 default_curve_asymptotics={’-k’,’linewidth’,1};
275 %% ckeck for X and Y
276 h=[];
277 if ˜min(size(X) == size(Y) )
278 disp(’Inputs X Y have to be of same size’);
279 return;
280 end
281 if isempty(X)
282 disp(’X and Y can not be empty’);
283 return;
284 end
266
285
286 %% parse varargin

287 [default,parse]=SetDefalutParse(X,Y);
288 % parse inputs
289 [p,exitflag]=Parse_Input(default,parse,varargin{:});
290
291 % if error happened in parsing inputs

292 if ˜exitflag
294 return;
295 end
296
297
298 if ˜isempty(p.xtick)
299 p.xtickmode=’manual’;
300 end
301 if ˜isempty(p.ytick)
302 p.ytickmode=’manual’;
303 end
304
305 %% plotting
306 h=figure; % creating handle
307 DefaultGca
308 xdata=X; ydata=Y; % passing data
309
310 l{1}=plot(xdata,ydata,default_curve{:}); hold on;

311 if ˜min(isnan(p.Y1))
312 l{2}=plot(xdata,p.Y1,default_curve_asymptotics{:}); hold on;
313 end
314 if ˜min(isnan(p.Y1))
315 l{3}=plot(xdata,p.Y2,default_curve_asymptotics{:}); hold on;
316 end
317 xlabel(p.xlabel,default_label{:});
318 ylabel(p.ylabel,default_label{:});
319 set(gca,default_gca{:},...
320 ’Xscale’,p.xscale,’Yscale’,p.yscale,...
321 ’XTick’,p.xtick,’XTickMode’,p.xtickmode,...
322 ’YTick’,p.ytick,’YTickMode’,p.ytickmode,...
323 default_gca{:});
324 grid on;box on;
325 axis(p.axis_range);
326 DefaultGca
327 end
328 function DefaultGca
329 box on;
267
330 set(gca,’FontSize’,14,’LineWidth’,1,...
331 ’MinorGridLineStyle’,’none’,’box’,’on’);
332 set(gcf,’color’,[1,1,1],...
333 ’Units’,’pixels’,...
334 ’PaperPosition’,[1.33,3.3125,5.83,4.375],...
335 ’PaperPositionMode’,’manual’,...
336 ’Render’,’painters’)
337 grid on
338 end
Listing A.3: Matlab function to plot maximum error changing with two blending
paramters for 1D blending.
1 function fun_plot_contour_error_ab(a,b,funerror,varargin)
2 %FUN_PLOT_CONTOUR_ERROR_AB: Plot error map for optimization of 2
parameters
3 % fun_plot_contour_error_ab(a,b,funerror ,’ aop ’,,’ bop ’,,’ vectsz ’,,...
4 % ’ xlabel ’,’’,’ ylabel ’,’’)
5 figure
6 % default value
7 default.aop=nan;
8 parse.aop=@(x) size(x)==[1,1];
9 default.bop=nan;
10 parse.bop=@(x) size(x)==[1,1];
11 default.vectsz=30;
12 parse.vectsz=@(x) min(size(x))==1;
13 default.xlabel=’a’;
14 parse.xlabel=@(x) 1;
15 default.ylabel=’b’;
16 parse.ylabel=@(x) 1;
17 default.axis_range=[-inf,inf,-inf,inf];
18 parse.axis_range=@(x) 1;
19 % parse inputs
20 [p,exitflag]=parsevarargin(default,parse,varargin{:});
22 if ˜exitflag
24 return;
25 end
26
27 [AL,BL]=meshgrid(a,b);
28 error=100*arrayfun(@(a,b) funerror([a,b]),AL,BL);
29 Vector=linspace(min(min(error)),max(max(error)),p.vectsz);
30 Vector=round(Vector,1);
31 contour(a,b,error,Vector,’-k’,’ShowText’,’on’); hold on
268
32 contour(a,b,error,max(max(error))*[0,1],’-k’,’ShowText’,’on’); hold on
33 plot(p.aop*[1,1],[min(b),max(b)],’-.k’); hold on
34 plot([min(a),max(a)],p.bop*[1,1],’--k’); hold on
35 plot(p.aop*[1,1],p.bop*[1,1],’.k’,’MarkerSize’,24); hold on
36 shading interp
37 text(p.aop,p.bop,’me’)
38 title(’maximum error vs a,b’); hold on
39 xlabel(p.xlabel)
40 ylabel(p.ylabel)
41 axis(p.axis_range)
42 DefaultGca;
43 end
44
46 box on;
49 set(gcf,’color’,[1,1,1],...
51 ’PaperPosition’,[1.33,3.3125,5.83,4.375],...
54 grid on
55 end
56
57 function [p,exitflag]=parsevarargin(default,parse,varargin)
60 % if some problems happened, exitflag = 0
61 exitflag=1;
62 % size of varargin
64 % if varargin is empty use default
69 exitflag=0;
70 return;
71 end
74 exitflag=0;
75 return
76 end
269
’}, ’is wrong’)));
85 else
88 end
89 end
90 end
92 p=default;
);
97 exitflag=0;
98 end
99 end
100 end
Listing A.4: Matlab function to plot correction factors for 1D blending.

1 function [R] = fun_plot_correction_factors_1D(X,Y,Y1,Y2,varargin)
2 %FUN_PLOT_CORRECTION_FACTORS_1D plots the correction factors
3 %
4 %FUN_PLOT_CORRECTION_FACTOR_1D(X,Y,Y1,Y2,...
5 % ’ea ’,0.1,....
6 % ’Y1est ’,[ vect ],’ Y2est ’,[ vect ],,...
7 % ’ xlabel ’,’ X ’,’ ylabel ’,’ y ’,
8 % ’ xscale ’,,’ yscale ’,,’ axis_range ’,,’ xtick ’,,’ ytick ’,,...
9 % ’ cf_table ’,,...
10 % ’figure_name’,)
11 %
12 %INPUTS
13 % X is the independent variable
14 % Y is the dependent varible
15 % Y1, Y2 are the asymtotics for y [ vector ] {can be empty}
16 %
270
17 % Properties include :
18 % − ea: error acceptable , [ scalar ] {0.1}
19 % − xlabel : name of x, [ string ] {’x’}
20 % − ylabel : name of y, [ string ] {’y’}
21 % − xscale : salce of x [ log/ linear ] {’ log ’}
22 % − yscale : salce of y [ log/ linear ] {’ log ’}
23 % − axis_range: range of figure [4X1] {[−inf , inf ,−inf , inf ]}
24 % − xtick : tick of x axis [ vector ] {[]}
25 % − ytick : tick of x axis [ vector ] {[]}
26 %
27 % OUTPUTS:
28 % R is a cell , containing the handle of figure and the X_1 X_2 X_c etc.
29
30 %% GRAPH SETTINGS (DONT CAHNGE IF NOT SURE)

31 default_curve={’-k’,’linewidth’,2};
32 default_label={’FontSize’,14};
33 default_gca={’FontSize’,14, ’MinorGridLineStyle’,’none’, ’linewidth’,1};
34 default_vertical_dashline={’-.k’,’linewidth’, 1};
35 default_horizontal_dashline={’--k’,’linewidth’, 1};
36 %% ckeck X Y
37 if size(X) ˜= size(Y)
38 disp(’Inputs X Y have to be of same size’);
39 R=[];
40 return;
41 end
42 if isempty(X)
43 disp(’Inputs X Y can not be empty’);
44 R=[];
45 return;
46 end
47 %% parse varargin
48 % figure range
49 if size(Y1)˜=size(X)
50 min_py1=0.1;
51 max_py1=10;
52 else
53 min_py1=min(Y./Y1);
54 max_py1=max(Y./Y1);
55 end
56 if size(Y2)˜=size(X)
57 min_py2=0.1;
58 max_py2=10;
59 else
60 min_py2=min(Y./Y2);
61 max_py2=max(Y./Y2);
271
62 end
63 %% default and parse criterial
64 default.axis_range=[min(X),max(X),0.1,10];
65 if min_py1>0.1&& min_py2>0.1
66 default.axis_range(3)=0.1;
67 else
68 default.axis_range(3)=min(min_py1,min_py2);
69 end
70 if max_py1<10 && max_py2<10
71 default.axis_range(4)=10;
72 else
73 default.axis_range(4)=max(max_py1,max_py2);
74 end
75 parse.axis_range=@(x) min(size(x)==[1,4]);
76 default.ea=0.1;
77 parse.ea=@(x) isscalar(x) && x>0 ;
78 default.xlabel=’x’;
79 parse.xlabel=@(x) ischar(x);
80 default.ylabel=’y’;
81 parse.ylabel=@(x) ischar(x);
82 default.xscale=’log’;
83 parse.xscale=@(x) sum(strcmpi(x,{’log’, ’linear’}));
84 default.yscale=’log’;
85 parse.yscale=@(x)sum(strcmpi(x,{’log’, ’linear’}));
86 default.xtick=[];
87 default.xtickmode=’auto’;
88 parse.xtick=@(x) isa(x,’double’);
89 parse.xtickmode=@(x) sum(strcmpi(x,{’auto’,’manual’}));
90 default.ytick=[];
91 default.ytickmode=’auto’;
92 parse.ytick=@(x) isa(x,’double’);
93 parse.ytickmode=@(x) sum(strcmpi(x,{’auto’,’manual’}));
94 default.Y1est=nan*Y1./Y1;
95 default.Y2est=nan*Y2./Y2;
96 parse.Y1est=@(x) size(x)==size(Y1);
97 parse.Y2est=@(x) size(x)==size(Y2);
98 default.cf_table=’’;
99 parse.cf_table=@(x) 1;
100 default.figure_name=’’;
101 parse.figure_name=@(x) 1;
102 % parse inputs
103 [p,exitflag]=parsevarargin(default,parse,varargin{:});
105 if ˜exitflag
272
107 R=[];
108 return;
109 end
110
111
112 if ˜isempty(p.xtick)
113 p.xtickmode=’manual’;
114 end
115 if ˜isempty(p.ytick)
116 p.ytickmode=’manual’;
117 end
118
119 %% initialization
120 % cf corresponding to acceptable error
121 vapy1=exp(p.ea); % acceptable cf under acceptable error >1
122 vapy2=exp(-p.ea); % acceptable cf under acceptable error <1
123
124 % indicator of plotting vapy1 vapy2

125 indicator_plot_apy=[false,false]; % vector to describle which dash line (apy1 or
apy2) has been plot , to avoid plotting one line twice
126
127 % labels on figure X_1 X_2 X_c

128 if p.xlabel(end)==’$’
129 sx=find(p.xlabel==’$’);
130 x_strI=strcat(p.xlabel(1:sx(end-1)),’{’,p.xlabel(sx(end-1)+1:end-1),
’}’,’I’);
131 x_strII=strcat(p.xlabel(1:sx(end-1)),’{’,p.xlabel(sx(end-1)+1:end-1)
,’}’,’II’);
132 x_strc=strcat(p.xlabel(1:sx(end-1)),’{’,p.xlabel(sx(end-1)+1:end-1),
’}’,’c’);
133 else
134 x_strI=strcat(p.xlabel,’I’);
135 x_strII=strcat(p.xlabel,’II’);
136 x_strc=strcat(p.xlabel,’c’);
137 end
138
139 % labels on figure f_I f_II

140 ylcf=p.ylabel; ylcf(ylcf==’$’)=[];
141 f_strI=strcat(’f’,ylcf,’I’);
142 f_strII=strcat(’f’,ylcf,’II’);
143
144 if isnan(p.axis_range(1))|| isinf(p.axis_range(1))

145 textfyxval(1)=min(X);
146 else
147 textfyxval(1) = p.axis_range(1);
273
148 end
149 if isnan(p.axis_range(2))|| isinf(p.axis_range(2))
150 textfyxval(2)=max(X);
151 else
152 textfyxval(2) = p.axis_range(2);
153 end
154
155 % creat figure

156 R.figure_correction_factor=figure;
157
158 %% correction factor for Y1

159 if ˜isempty(Y1)
160 %check size
161 if size(X) ˜= size(Y1)
162 disp(’Inputs X Y1 have to be of same size’);
163 return;
164 end
165
166 pY1=Y./Y1; % creat correction factor

167
168 % characteristics
169 mean_py1=mean(pY1);
170
171 plot(X,pY1,default_curve{:}); hold on;

172
173 % acceptable error dash lines >1

174 if mean_py1>1
175 % plot dash line if there is none
176 if ˜indicator_plot_apy(1)
177 plot(X,vapy1*X./X,default_horizontal_dashline{:}); hold on
178 indicator_plot_apy(1)=true; % apy1 has been plot
179 end
180 % find the critical value coressponding to acceptable error
181 interp_y=pY1(pY1>((vapy1+1)/2)&pY1<1.2*vapy1);
182 interp_x=X(pY1>((vapy1+1)/2)&pY1<1.2*vapy1);
183 vp1=interp1(interp_y,interp_x,vapy1,’linear’);
184 R.accept_error_valy_y1=vapy1;
185 end
186 % acceptable error dash lines <1
187
188 if mean_py1<1
189 % plot dash line if there is none
192 indicator_plot_apy(2)=true; % apy2 has been plot
274
193 end
194 interp_y=pY1(pY1>0.8*vapy2&pY1<(vapy2+1)/2); interp_x=X(pY1>0.8*
vapy2&pY1<(vapy2+1)/2);
196 R.accept_error_valy_y1=vapy2;
197 end
198
199 % plot vertical dashline

200 plot([vp1,vp1],[p.axis_range(3),R.accept_error_valy_y1],
default_vertical_dashline{:}); hold on
201 % label X_1
202 % text_y1=5∗p.axis_range(3);
203 text(vp1,1,x_strI,default_label{:});
204 % label f_I
205 if abs(pY1(1)-1)>abs(pY1(end)-1)
206 text(textfyxval(2).ˆ(5/6)*textfyxval(1).ˆ(1/6),2,f_strI,
default_label{:});
207 else
208 text(textfyxval(2).ˆ(1/6)*textfyxval(1).ˆ(5/6),2,f_strI,
default_label{:});
209 end
210 % out put
211 % R.correction_factor_y1=pY1;
212 R.accept_error_valx_y1=vp1;
213 else
214 %output
215 % R.correction_factor_y1=[]; % vector of correction factor for Y1
216 R.accept_error_valx_y1=[]; % the x vlaue of acceptable error for Y1
217 R.accept_error_valy_y1=[]; % the correction factor of acceptable error Y1
218 end
219
220 %% correction factor for Y2

221 if ˜isempty(Y2)
222 % check size
223 if size(X) ˜= size(Y2)
224 disp(’Inputs X Y2 have to be of same size’);
225 return;
226 end
227 % define correction factor
228 pY2=Y./Y2;
229 % characteristics
230 mean_py2=mean(pY2);
231
232 plot(X,pY2,default_curve{:}); hold on;

233
275
234 % plot acceptable error dash lines
235 if mean_py2>1
238 indicator_plot_apy(1)=1; % apy1 has been plot
239 end
240 interp_y=pY2(pY2>((vapy1+1)/2)&pY2<1.2*vapy1); interp_x=X(pY2>((
vapy1+1)/2)&pY2<1.2*vapy1);
242 R.accept_error_valy_y2=vapy1; % the correction factor of acceptable
error Y2
243 end
244
245 if mean_py2<1
248 indicator_plot_apy(2)=1; % apy2 has been plot
249 end
250 interp_y=pY2(pY2>0.8*vapy2&pY2<((vapy2+1)/2)); interp_x=X(pY2
>0.8*vapy2&pY2<((vapy2+1)/2));
252 R.accept_error_valy_y2=vapy2; % the correction factor of acceptable
error Y2
253 end
254 % plot
255 plot([vp2,vp2],[p.axis_range(3),R.accept_error_valy_y2],
256 % label x_II
257 % text_y2=5∗p.axis_range(3);
258 text(vp2,1,x_strII,default_label{:});
259 % label f_II
260 if abs(pY2(1)-1)>abs(pY2(end)-1)
261 text(textfyxval(2).ˆ(5/6)*textfyxval(1).ˆ(1/6),2,f_strII,
default_label{:});
262 else
263 text(textfyxval(2).ˆ(1/6)*textfyxval(1).ˆ(5/6),2,f_strII,
default_label{:});
264 end
265 %
266 %R.correction_factor_y2=pY2; % vector of correction factor for Y2
267 R.accept_error_valx_y2=vp2;% the x vlaue of acceptable error for Y2
268
269 else
270 %output
271 % R.correction_factor_y2=[]; % vector of correction factor for Y2
276
272 R.accept_error_valx_y2=[]; % the x vlaue of acceptable error for Y2
273 R.accept_error_valy_y2=[]; % the correction factor of acceptable error Y2
274 end
275
276 %% plot estimated cf

277 plot(X,p.Y1est,’--k’,’linewidth’,1); hold on;
278 plot(X,p.Y2est,’--k’,’linewidth’,1); hold on;
279 %% cross point
280 if ˜isempty(Y1) && ˜isempty(Y2)
281 % interp value
282 Delta_Y=abs(log(pY1))-abs(log(pY2));
283 interp_y=Delta_Y(Delta_Y>-0.5&Delta_Y<0.5);
284 interp_x=X(Delta_Y>-0.5&Delta_Y<0.5);
285 vc_x=interp1(interp_y,interp_x,0,’linear’);
286 vc_y1=interp1(X,pY1,vc_x,’linear’); vc_y2=interp1(X,pY2,vc_x,’linear
’);
287 %plot vertical dash line
288 plot([vc_x,vc_x],[p.axis_range(3),max(vc_y1,vc_y2)],
289 % label x_c
290 text(vc_x,1,x_strc,default_label{:});
291 % output
292 R.cross_cf_valx=vc_x; % the x value of cross cf
293 R.cross_cf_valy_y1=vc_y1; % the value of cf for y1 at cross point
294 R.cross_cf_valy_y2=vc_y2; % the value of cf for y2 at cross point
295 R.cross_cf_val_error_y1=log(vc_y1); % the error of Y1 at cross point
296 R.cross_cf_val_error_y2=log(vc_y2); % the error if Y2 at cross point
297 else
298 R.cross_cf_valx=[]; % the x value of cross cf
299 R.cross_cf_valy_y1=[]; % the value of cf for y1 at cross point
300 R.cross_cf_valy_y2=[]; % the value of cf for y2 at cross point
301 R.cross_cf_val_error_y1=[]; % the error of Y1 at cross point
302 R.cross_cf_val_error_y2=[]; % the error if Y2 at cross point
303 end
304
305 %% label axis

306 xlabel(p.xlabel,default_label{:});
307 ylabel(strcat(’correction factor for ’,p.ylabel),default_label{:});
308 set(gca,default_gca{:},...
309 ’Xscale’,p.xscale,’Yscale’,p.yscale,...
310 ’XTick’,p.xtick,’XTickMode’,p.xtickmode,...
311 ’YTick’,p.ytick,’YTickMode’,p.ytickmode);
312 axis([-inf,inf,0.1,10]);
313 grid on;box on
314 DefaultGca
277
315 %% save files
316 if ˜isempty(p.cf_table)
317 writetable(struct2table(R), strcat(p.cf_table,’.txt’))
318 end
319 if ˜isempty(p.figure_name)
320 % saveas( gcf ,p.figure_name,’epsc ’)
321 % saveas( gcf , strcat (p.figure_name ,’. fig ’) )
322 end
323
324
325 end
327 box on;
330 set(gcf,’color’,[1,1,1],...
332 ’PaperPosition’,[1.33,3.3125,5.83,4.375],...
335 grid on
336 end
337 function [p,exitflag]=parsevarargin(default,parse,varargin)
340
341 % if some problems happened, exitflag = 0

342 exitflag=1;
343
344 % size of varargin

346 % if varargin is empty use default
351 exitflag=0;
352 return;
353 end
356 exitflag=0;
357 return
358 end
359
278
’}, ’is wrong’)));
368 else
371 end
372 end
373 end
375 p=default;
);
380 exitflag=0;
381 end
382 end
383 end
279
Appendix B: Supplementary
materials for the moving line heat
source model
B.1 Matlab codes for isotherm width of moving

line heat source in Chapter 2
∗
Listing B.1: Matlab code to calculate and blending isotherm width ymax of moving
line heat source.
1 clear;clc;close all;
2 ymII=@(Ro) 2*exp(-0.5772)*exp(-Ro.ˆ-1);
3 ymI=@(Ro) sqrt(pi./(2*exp(1)))*Ro;
4 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) exp(-Ro.ˆ-1).*((2*exp(-0.5772)).ˆp(1)+(sqrt
(pi./(2*exp(1)))*Ro).ˆp(1)).ˆ(1/p(1));
5 %% blending
6 Bym=Blending_Grid_size(@fun_ymaxcal,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e5,1);
7 Bym.Pplot.pvallist=[1.507;1.307];
8 Bym.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
9 Bym.Pplot.y_label= ’ymax’;
10 Bym.funy1= ymI; Bym.funy2= ymII;
11 Bym.funmodify1= @(Ro) sqrt(pi./(2*exp(1)))*Ro.*exp(-Ro.ˆ-1);
12 Bym=Bym.Blending;
13 Bym=Bym.FBlending(1000);
14 %% export latex
15 Bym.latexRegimeI=’III’; Bym.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
16 Bym=Bym.funWrite(’thin_ymax.tex’);
17 %% calculation of ymax
18 function [ym]= fun_ymaxcal(Ro)
19 % fun_ymaxcal: calculate numerical result of ymax
20 funTRmax=@(rmax) exp(rmax.*besselk(0,rmax,1)./besselk(1,rmax,1)-rmax).*
besselk(0,rmax,1);
21 options = optimset(’TolX’,1e-50);
22 rmax=zeros(size(Ro));
23 for i=1:max(size(Ro))
280
24 rmax(i)= fzero(@(rmax) funTRmax(rmax)-1./Ro(i),[1e-50,1e10],options)
;
25 end
26 ym=rmax.*sqrt(1-(besselk(0,rmax,1)./besselk(1,rmax,1)).ˆ2);
27 end
B.2 Matlab codes for characteristic values of mov-

ing line heat source in Chapter 3
Listing B.2: Matlab code to calculate and blending location of isotherm width x∗max
of moving line heat source.
2 xmI=@(Ro) -4*exp(-2*0.5772)*Ro.ˆ-1.*exp(-2*Ro.ˆ-1);
3 xmII=@(Ro) -pi./(2*exp(1))*Ro.ˆ2;
4 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) -exp(-2*Ro.ˆ-1).*(((pi./(2*exp(1))*Ro.ˆ2))
+(4*exp(-2*0.5772)*Ro.ˆ-1)+p(1)*Ro.ˆp(2));
5 %% blending
6 Bxmax=Blending_Grid_size(@fun_xmaxcal,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e4,[1,1]);
7 Bxmax.Pplot.pvallist=[1.507;1.307];
8 Bxmax.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
9 Bxmax.Pplot.y_label= ’xmax’;
10 Bxmax.funy1= xmI; Bxmax.funy2= xmII;
11 Bxmax.funmodify1= @(Ro) -pi./(2*exp(1))*Ro.ˆ2.*exp(-2*Ro.ˆ-1);
12 Bxmax=Bxmax.Blending;
13 Bxmax=Bxmax.FBlending(1000);
14 %% export latex
15 Bxmax.latexRegimeI=’III’; Bxmax.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
16 Bxmax=Bxmax.funWrite(’thin_xmax.tex’);
17 function [xm]= fun_xmaxcal(Ro)
18 % fun_ymaxcal: calculate numerical result of xmax
besselk(0,rmax,1);
23 rmax(i)= fzero(@(rmax) funTRmax(rmax)-1./Ro(i),[1e-50,1e10],options);
24 end
25 xm=-rmax.*besselk(0,rmax,1)./besselk(1,rmax,1);
26 end
Listing B.3: Matlab code to calculate and blending trailing length x∗b of moving line
heat source.
281
2 %%
3 options=optimset(’TolX’,1e-50,’MaxIter’,1e10);
4 funTh=@(x) besselk(0,-x,1);
5 funxb=@(Ro)fzero(@(x) funTh(x) -1./Ro,[-1e300,-1e-300],options);
6 fun_xbcal=@(Ro) arrayfun(@(a) funxb(a),Ro);
7 gamma=0.5772;
8 xbI=@(Ro) -pi/2*Ro.ˆ2;
9 xbII=@(Ro)-2*exp(-1./Ro-gamma);
10 Blending_Equation= @(Ro) @(p) -exp(-1./Ro).*((pi/2*Ro.ˆ2)+(2*exp(-gamma)
)+p(1).*Ro.ˆp(2));
11 %% blending
12 Bxb=Blending_Grid_size(fun_xbcal,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e4,[1,1]);
13 Bxb.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
14 Bxb.Pplot.y_label= ’xb’;
15 Bxb.funy1= xbI;
16 Bxb.funy2= xbII;
17 Bxb.funmodify1= @(Ro) -pi/2*Ro.ˆ2.*exp(-1./Ro);
18 Bxb=Bxb.Blending;
19 Bxb=Bxb.FBlending(1000);
20 %% export latex
21 Bxb.latexRegimeI=’III’; Bxb.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
22 Bxb=Bxb.funWrite(’thin_xb.tex’);
Listing B.4: Matlab code to calculate and blending centerline cooling rate Ṫb∗ of
moving line heat source.
2 %%
6 fun_Tbcal=@(Ro) arrayfun(@(Ro) 1./Ro.*(1-besselk(1, -funxb(Ro),1)./
besselk(0, -funxb(Ro),1)),Ro);
7
8 gamma=0.5772;
9 TbIII=@(Ro) -1./(pi*Ro.ˆ3);
10 TbIV=@(Ro) -1/2*exp(1./Ro+gamma);
11 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) -exp(1./Ro).*((1./(pi*Ro.ˆ3)).ˆ-1+(1/2*exp(
gamma)).ˆ-1+p(1).*Ro.ˆp(2)).ˆ-1;
12 %% blending
13 BTb=Blending_Grid_size(fun_Tbcal,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e2,[-1,-5]);
14 BTb.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
15 BTb.Pplot.y_label= ’Tb’;
16 BTb.Pplot.figname= ’thin_Tb’;
282
17 BTb.funy1= TbIII;
18 BTb.funy2= TbIV;
19 BTb.funmodify1= @(Ro) -1./(pi*Ro.ˆ3).*exp(1./Ro);
20 BTb=BTb.Blending;
21 BTb=BTb.FBlending(1000);
22 %% export latex
23 % BTb.latexRegimeI=’III ’; BTb.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
24 % BTb.funWrite(’thin_Tb.tex’);
Listing B.5: Matlab code to calculate and blending leading length x∗f of moving line
heat source.
2 %%
4 T=@(x) exp(-2*x).*besselk(0,x,1);
5 funxf=@(t) fzero(@(x) T(x)-t,[1e-300,100],options);
6 fun_xfcal=@(Ro) arrayfun(@(a) funxf(1./a),Ro);
7 gamma=0.5772;
8 xfIII=@(Ro) 2*exp(-gamma-Ro.ˆ-1+1.5484*Ro.ˆ1.3878);%’a=1.5484, b=1.3878’
9 xfIV=@(Ro) 1/4*lambertw(2*pi*Ro.ˆ2);
10 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) ((1/4*lambertw(2*pi*Ro.ˆ2)).ˆ-1+(2*exp(-
gamma-Ro.ˆ-1+p(1)*Ro.ˆp(2))).ˆ-1).ˆ(-1);
11 %% blending
12 Bxf=Blending_Grid_size(fun_xfcal,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e4,[1,1]);
13 Bxf.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
14 Bxf.Pplot.y_label= ’xf’;
15 Bxf.funy1= xfIII;
16 Bxf=Bxf.Blending;
17 Bxf=Bxf.FBlending(1000);
18 %% export latex
19 Bxf.latexRegimeI=’III’; Bxf.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
20 % Bxf=Bxf.funWrite(’thin_xf.tex ’) ;
Listing B.6: Matlab code to calculate and blending centerline heating rate Ṫf∗ of
2 %%
4 T=@(x) exp(-2*x).*besselk(0,x,1);
5 funxf=@(Tc) fzero(@(x) T(x)-Tc,[1e-300,100],options);
6 fun_Tfcal=@(Ro) arrayfun(@(Ro) 1./Ro.* (1+besselk(1,funxf(1./Ro),1)./
besselk(0,funxf(1./Ro),1)),Ro);
7
8 gamma=0.5772;
283
9 TfIII=@(Ro) 2./Ro;
10 TfIV=@(Ro) 1/2*exp(gamma+1./Ro);
11 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) exp(1./Ro).*((2./Ro).ˆ-1+(1/2*exp(gamma))
.ˆ-1+p(1)*Ro.ˆp(2)).ˆ-1 ;
12 %% blending
13 BTf=Blending_Grid_size(fun_Tfcal,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e4,[1,-1]);
14 BTf.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
15 BTf.Pplot.y_label= ’Tf’;
16 BTf.funy1= TfIII;
17 BTf.funy2= TfIV;
18 BTf.funmodify1= @(Ro) 2./Ro.*exp(1./Ro);
19 BTf=BTf.Blending;
20 BTf=BTf.FBlending(1000);
21 %% export latex
22 BTf.latexRegimeI=’III’; BTf.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
23 % BTf=BTf.funWrite(’thin_Tf.tex’);
∗
Listing B.7: Matlab code to calculate and blending maximum temperature Tmax of
2 TmaxIII=@(yc) sqrt(pi/(2*exp(1)))./yc;
3 TmaxIV=@(yc) log(1./yc+2);
4 Blending_Equation=@(yc) @(p) ((sqrt(pi/(2*exp(1)))./yc).ˆp+ log(1./yc+2)
.ˆp).ˆ(1./p);
5 %%
6 BTmax=Blending_Grid_size(@fun_Tmax,Blending_Equation,1e-5,1e5,[-1]);
7 BTmax.Pplot.pvallist=[-2.400;-2.7];
8 BTmax.Pplot.x_label= ’yc’;
9 BTmax.Pplot.y_label= ’Tmax’;
10 BTmax.funy1= TmaxIII;
11 BTmax.funy2= TmaxIV;
12 BTmax=BTmax.Blending;
13 BTmax=BTmax.FBlending(1000);
14 %% export latex
15 BTmax.latexRegimeI=’III’; BTmax.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
16 % BTmax=BTmax.funWrite(’thin_Tmax.tex’);
17
18 %% calculate Tmax
19 function [Tmax]= fun_Tmax(yc)
21 xmax = arrayfun(@(yc) fzero(@(x) 1+x./sqrt(x.ˆ2+yc.ˆ2).*besselk(1,sqrt(x
.ˆ2+yc.ˆ2),1)./besselk(0,sqrt(x.ˆ2+yc.ˆ2),1),-yc,options),yc);
22 Tmax= exp(-xmax-sqrt(xmax.ˆ2+yc.ˆ2)).*besselk(0,sqrt(xmax.ˆ2+yc.ˆ2),1);
23 end
284
Listing B.8: Matlab code to calculate and blending maximum temperature gradient
∗
dTmax /dy ∗ of moving line heat source.
2 gamma=0.5772;
3 TmaxIII=@(Ro) -sqrt(2*exp(1)./(pi))./Ro.ˆ2;
4 TmaxIV=@(Ro) -1/2*exp(gamma+1./Ro);
5 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) -exp(1./Ro).* ((sqrt(2*exp(1)./(pi))./Ro
.ˆ2).ˆ-1+(1/2*exp(gamma)).ˆ-1+p(1).*Ro.ˆp(2)).ˆ-1;
6 %%
7 BdTmdy=Blending_Grid_size(@fun_dTmdy,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e4,[1,1]);
8 BdTmdy.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
9 BdTmdy.Pplot.y_label= ’dTmdy’;
10 BdTmdy.funy1= TmaxIII;
11 BdTmdy.funy2= TmaxIV;
12 BdTmdy.funmodify1= @(Ro) -sqrt(2*exp(1)./(pi))./Ro.ˆ2.*exp(1./Ro);
13 BdTmdy=BdTmdy.Blending;
14 BdTmdy=BdTmdy.FBlending(1000);
15 %% export latex
16 BdTmdy.latexRegimeI=’III’; BdTmdy.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
17 BdTmdy=BdTmdy.funWrite(’thin_dTmdy.tex’);
18
19 %% calculate dTmaxdy
20 function [dTmaxdy]= fun_dTmdy(Ro)
besselk(0,rmax,1);
;
26 end
29 dTmaxdy=-exp(-xm-sqrt(xm.ˆ2+ym.ˆ2)).*ym.*besselk(1,sqrt(xm.ˆ2+ym.ˆ2),1)
./sqrt(xm.ˆ2+ym.ˆ2);
30 end
Listing B.9: Matlab code to calculate and blending isotherm aspect ratio A of moving
line heat source.
2 ARIII=@(Ro) sqrt(pi*exp(1)./8).*Ro;
3 ARIV=@(Ro) Ro./Ro;
4 Blending_Equation=@(Ro) @(p) (1+( sqrt(pi*exp(1)./8).*Ro).ˆp(1)).ˆ(1./p
(1));
285
5 %% blending
6 BAR=Blending_Grid_size(@fun_AR,Blending_Equation,1e-2,1e2,1);
7 BAR.Pplot.pvallist=[1.8;2.1];
8 BAR.Pplot.x_label= ’Ro’;
9 BAR.Pplot.y_label= ’AR’;
10 BAR.funy1= ARIII;
11 BAR.funy2= ARIV;
12 BAR=BAR.Blending;
13 BAR=BAR.FBlending(1000);
14 %% export latex
15 BAR.latexRegimeI=’III’; BAR.latexRegimeII=’IV’;
16 % BAR=BAR.funWrite(’thin_AR.tex’);
17
18 %% calculate function
19 function [AR]= fun_AR(Ro)
besselk(0,rmax,1);
;
25 end
29 T=@(x) exp(-2*x).*besselk(0,x,1);
30 funxf=@(t) fzero(@(x) T(x)-t,[1e-300,100],options);
31 xf= arrayfun(@(a) funxf(1./a),Ro);
34 xb= arrayfun(@(a) funxb(a),Ro);
35 AR=(xf-xb)./(2*ym);
36 end
286
B.3 Supporting figures for blending results in Chap-
ter 3
B.3.1 x∗max
-10-10
-10-5
x∗max
-100
-105
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.1: Location of isotherm width x∗max changes with Ro number.
8
Relative error (%)
-2
-4
-6
-8
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.2: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of x∗max .
287
42 56.3
54.4
27.4
25 3 37 3940.9 .8 46.7 52.4
50.5
48.6
23 .5
.6 29.331.333.25.1 44.7
42
1.4 21.7 27.4 37 3940.9 .8
35.1
33.2
19.7 25 .5 31.3
29.3
23 .6
17.8
15.9
21.7 27.4
21.7
12 25 .5
1.2 14 19.7 23 .6
19.7
17.8
10.1 15.9
1 7 .8
23.6
14
12
b
15.9
me 14
1 8.2
8 .2
1
10. 12
10
.1
14
0.8 12
21
25 .4 .7 19 9
.7 17 15.
27 .3
.5 1
23 .8 15 4
29
8
.6 .9 17.
0.6
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
a
Figure B.3: Optimizing parameters for blending of x∗max .

Correction factors for x∗max
101
fx∗maxIII fx∗maxIV
100
Roc
RoIII RoIV
10-1
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.4: Correction factors for engineering expressions for x∗max .
288
B.3.2 x∗f
102
100
x∗f
10-2
10-4
10-1 100 101 102

Ro
Figure B.5: x∗f changes with Ro number.
8
Relative error (%)
-2
-4
-6
-8
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.6: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of x∗f .
289
.6 16 7
1.8 19 .2 11.
15 9.9
7 .3 8
1 8. 1 4 10.
.8 .4
17 13
.9 2 .5
1.6 16
1
9
7
1 1. 9.9
.8
1 16
10 me
12 13 14. 5.2
1.4 8.1
9 9.9
b
.5 .4 3
8.1 10.8.7
11.5
9 12.4
9.9 13.3
9 14.2
10.8.7 15 16
1.2 11.5
12.4 167.9
9
13.3 118.8
9.
.7 .7
14.2
11
15 16 1290.6
.4
10.8 2212.3
.2
11..7 9
167..8 3
2 24 .1
1 12.5 118.7 2245.8
13.43 1290.6
.4
.7
2267.6.5
14 2212.3 2289.3
15.126 .2 .2
30.1 31
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
a
Figure B.7: Optimizing parameters for blending of x∗f .
101
Correction factors for x∗f
fx∗maxIII fx∗maxIV
0
10
RoIV RoIII
Roc
10-1
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.8: Correction factors for engineering expressions for x∗f .
290
B.3.3 Ṫf∗
1015
1010
Ṫf∗
105
100
10-2 100 102 104

Ro
Figure B.9: Ṫf∗ changes with Ro number.
20
Relative error (%)
10
-10
-20
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.10: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of Ṫf∗ .
291
0.65 33 .8
485.9
4 3.7 30
4 1.6
4 9.4 8 .7 6.5
24.4
3 7.3 2 2
30.8
28.7
0.6 3 .1
35
26.5
33 .8
30 20.1
0.55
22.2
.4
24 2
.7 6.5 .
2 8 2 22
17.9
0.5 me
20
24.4
17
.1
24.4 .9
28.7
22
.2
0.45
20.1
26.5
22.2
0.4
-0.8 -0.75 -0.7 -0.65 -0.6 -0.55 -0.5
a
Figure B.11: Optimizing parameters for blending of Ṫf∗ .
101
Correction factors for Ṫf∗
fṪ ∗ fṪ ∗
fIII
0 fIV
10
RoIV Roc RoIII
10-1
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.12: Correction factors for engineering expressions for Ṫf∗ .
292
B.3.4 x∗b
-10-15
-10-10
x∗b
-10-5
-100
-105
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.13: x∗b changes with Ro number.
8
Relative error (%)
-2
-4
-6
-8
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.14: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of x∗b .
293
23.9 262
.383 384.51 43.4
36.1
33.7
.81.2 48.3 50.7
45.8 53.5 6 60.562.965.367.870.2
25.58
2
21.5 45 48.3
36.1
33.7 384.51 43.4 .8
19 2 8 31.2
23.9 26.3 .8
1.8 16.6 21.5
21.5
14.2
1 .7 19 23.9
16.6
1 14.2
19
16.6
1.6 11.7
9.3
b me
1.4
9.3
.7
11 14.
2
1.2 16.
6
11.
21.5
14.2
16.6
7
19
19
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

a
Figure B.15: Optimizing parameters for blending of x∗b .
101
Correction factors for x∗b
fx∗b fx∗b
IV III
100
Roc
RoIV RoIII
10-1
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.16: Correction factors for engineering expressions for x∗b .
294
B.3.5 Ṫb∗
-100
Ṫb∗
-105
-1010
-1015
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.17: Ṫb∗ changes with Ro number.

Relative error (%)
-2
-4
-6
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.18: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of Ṫb∗ .
295
16.7 17.418 18.7 19.3 19.9 20.6 21.2 21.9 22.5 23.2
2.4 .7
16 1 1 .1
156.4
.
1 6 1144.2
.8 16.7 17.418 18.7
2.3 . 4 1123.9.5
15 8 1 2
11.6.2 1 .1
4 . 156.4
1 2
. 1 0.9 1144.2
.8
14 1
123.9.5
1
2.2 1 3 .5
8.4
10.3
9.7 10.9
2
11.6.2
.3 9
.6 .2 .9
10 7 7.7 9
1 1 1 2 12
9. 7.1
2.1
b
me 8.4
4
6. 6.4
7.7
8.4
7.1 9
2
7.1
.9
9.7
10 7.7 8.4
7.7
10.3
8.4
9 10.9
1.9 9.7 11.6
12.2
10.3
12.9
10.3
10.9
9
9.7 13.5
11.6 14.2
1.8 12.2 14.8
3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4
a
Figure B.19: Optimizing parameters for blending of Ṫb∗ .
101
Correction factors for Ṫb∗
fṪ ∗ fṪ ∗
bIV bIII
0
10
RoIV RoIII
Roc
-1
10
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.20: Correction factors for engineering expressions for Ṫb∗ .
296
∗
B.3.6 Tmax
100
Tmax
∗
10-2
10-4
10-5 100 105

Ro
∗
Figure B.21: Tmax changes with Ro number.
Relative error (%)
-2
-4
100 105
Ro
∗
Figure B.22: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of Tmax .
297
6
5.5
n = −2.569
5
Maximum error
4.5
3.5
2.5
-3 -2.8 -2.6 -2.4 -2.2

n
∗
Figure B.23: Optimizing parameters for blending of Tmax .
Correction factors for Tmax
fTmax
∗ fTmax
∗
100
∗
IV III
yc∗IV yc∗c yc∗III
10-1
10-2 10-1 100 101 102

yc∗
∗
Figure B.24: Correction factors for engineering expressions for Tmax .
298
B.3.7 dTm∗ /dy ∗
dTm∗ /dy ∗
-100
-1010
-1020
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.25: dTm∗ /dy ∗ changes with Ro number.

Relative error (%)
-2
-4
-6
-8
10-2 100 102 104
Ro
Figure B.26: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of dTm∗ /dy ∗.
299
1.8 12
11.5 13.5 15.5
15
11 13 14 .5
12.5 14
10.5 12 13.5
10 11.5 13
9.6 11 12.5
9.1 10.5 12
8.6 10 11.5
9.6 11
1.7 8.1 9.1 10.5
10
8.6 9.6
8.1 9.1
7.6 8.6
7.
7.1
6
me
8.
7.6
7.
1.6
1
b
8.
7.1
1
7.6
1.5 7.
9. 6
6 8.
6
10
9. 8.
1 1
8.1
1.4
0.24 0.26 0.28 0.3
a
Figure B.27: Optimizing parameters for blending of dTm∗ /dy ∗.

Correction factors for dTm∗ /dy ∗
101
fdTm∗ /dyIV
∗ fdTm∗ /dyIII
∗
0
10
RoIV RoIII
Roc
-1
10
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.28: Correction factors for engineering expressions for dTm∗ /dy ∗.
300
B.3.8 A
102
101
100
10-1
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.29: A changes with Ro number.

Relative error (%)
-2
-4
-6
10-2 10-1 100 101 102
Ro
Figure B.30: Relative error changes with Ro for scaling laws of A.
301
10
n = 1.972
8
Maximum error
6
2
1.5 2 2.5
n
Figure B.31: Optimizing parameters for blending of A.
101
Correction factors for A
fAIV fAIII
0
10
RoIV RocRoIII
10-2 10-1 100 101 102

Ro
Figure B.32: Correction factors for engineering expressions for A.
302
Appendix C: Supplementary
materials for the moving line heat
source under convection
C.1 Matlab codes for isotherm trailing length and

centerline cooling rate of moving heat source
under surface heat loss in Chapter 4
C.1.1 Calculation of isotherm trailing length x∗b of moving
line heat source under surface heat loss
Listing C.1: Calculation of trailing length x∗b of moving line heat source under surface
heat loss.
1 function main
2 %%
3 % Numerical result of xb for Rosenthal model for thin plate with surface
4 % convection
5 % The mathematical solution is
6 % $T^∗=\exp(−x^∗) K_0 (r^∗ \sqrt{1+h^∗})$
8 global PROGRESS_COUNTER PROGRESS_MAX options bar
9 %% Initialization
10 vRo=logspace(-5,5,1000);
11 vh=logspace(-5,5,999);
12
13 [mRo,mh]=meshgrid(vRo,vh);
14
15 PROGRESS_COUNTER=0;
16 PROGRESS_MAX = 999*1e3;
18 bar = waitbar(0,’Please wait...’);
19
20 %% Calculation
303
21 xb=arrayfun(@(Ro,h)funxb(Ro,h),mRo,mh)
22 bar = waitbar(1,’Finished’);
23
24 %% export solution
25 save thin2_xb_result.mat vh vRo xb
26 %%
27
28 function xb=funxb(Ro,h)
29 %%
30 funT=@(x,h) exp(-x+x*sqrt(1+h)).*besselk(0,-x*sqrt(1+h),1);
31 %%
32 % determination of the valid range of x for each h
33 % calculate form funT=@(x,h) exp(−x+x∗sqrt(1+h)).∗besselk(0,−x∗sqrt(1+
h),1);
34 % −700<x∗(sqrt(1+h)−1) % => x>−700/(sqrt(1+h)−1)
35 % x∗(sqrt(1+h)−1)<700 % => automatically satisfied because x<0 h>0
36 % 1e−300<−x∗sqrt(1+h)<1e300 % => −1e300/sqrt(1+h)<x<1e−300/sqrt
(1+h)
37 x1=-700./(sqrt(1+h)-1);
38 x2= -1e-300;
39 Ro1=1./funT(x1,h);
40 Ro2=1./funT(x2,h);
41
42 PROGRESS_COUNTER = PROGRESS_COUNTER + 1;
43 waitbar(PROGRESS_COUNTER / PROGRESS_MAX,bar);
44
45 if Ro>Ro1 || Ro<Ro2
46 xb=nan;
47 else
48 xb= fzero(@(x) funT(x,h)-1./Ro,[x1,x2],options);
49 end
50 end
51
52 end
C.1.2 Blending of isotherm trailing length x∗b of moving line

heat source under surface heat loss
Listing C.2: Blending of trailing length x∗b of moving line heat source under surface
heat loss.
1 clear;clc;close all
2 load(’thin2_xb_result.mat’)
3 [Ro,h]=meshgrid(vRo,vh);
304
4 Ro(isnan(xb))=nan;
5
6 PI= pi*(1-1./sqrt(1+h)).*Ro.ˆ2;
7
8 xbest=@(p) -pi* Ro.ˆ2./(2*sqrt(1+h)).* 1./PI.*( 1./PI+log(PI+p(5)).ˆ-1+p

(3).*PI.ˆp(4) ).ˆ-1.*...
9 exp(-1./Ro).*(1+4./pi*exp(-0.5772).*Ro.ˆ-2+2*p(1)./pi.*Ro.ˆ(p(2)-2))
;
10
11 E=@(p) log(xbest(p)./xb);
12 disp(’Original parameters’)
13 pseed=[0.7659 1.541 0.08568 -0.1028 2.586]
14 max(max(abs(E(pseed))))
15
16 disp(’2D Optimizing parameters’)

17 [P,fval]=fminsearch(@(p) max(max(abs(E(p)))),pseed)
18
19 figure
20 ErrorXb = E(P)
21 surf(vRo,vh,ErrorXb);
22 set(gca,’xscale’,’log’,’yscale’,’log’)
23 shading interp
24 xlabel(’Ro’); ylabel(’h’)
25 axis([0.0014527,1e3,1e-5,1e5,-inf,inf])
C.1.3 Blending of centerline cooling rate Ṫb∗ of moving line

heat source under surface heat loss
Listing C.3: Blending of centerline cooling rate Ṫb∗ of moving line heat source under
surface heat loss.
2 BlendFourRegimes = false ;
3 BlendIV_IVh = true;
4 BlendIIIh_IVh= true;
5 %%
7 [Ro,h]=meshgrid(vRo,vh);
8 Ro(isnan(xb))=nan;
9 fun_Tb=@(h,Ro,xb) 1./Ro.*(1- sqrt(h+1).*besselk(1,-xb.*sqrt(h+1),1)./
besselk(0,-xb.*sqrt(h+1),1));
10 Tb=fun_Tb(h,Ro,xb);
11 %% four regime blending
12 if BlendFourRegimes
305
13 PI= pi*(1-1./sqrt(1+h)).*Ro.ˆ2;
14 TbIIIiiih = 1./Ro.*(1-sqrt(1+h)).*(1+1./lambertw(pi*(1-1./sqrt(1+h))
.*Ro.ˆ2));
15 a0=3.839; b0=2.108;
16 Tbest=@(p) - sqrt(1+h)./(pi*Ro.ˆ3).* PI.*(1+1./PI+log(PI+p(5)).ˆ-1+p
(3).*PI.ˆp(4) ).*exp(1./Ro).*(1+2./pi*exp(-0.5772).*Ro.ˆ-3+p(1)./
pi.*Ro.ˆ(p(2)-3)).ˆ-1;
17
18 E=@(p) log(Tbest(p)./Tb);
19 pseed = [3.839 2.108 0.08568 -0.1028 2.586]
20
21 Xiii = logspace(-5,5,1000);
22 EIIIIIIH = @(p) log( (Xiii.*(1+1./Xiii+log(Xiii+p(5)).ˆ-1+p(3).*Xiii
.ˆp(4) ))./(Xiii.*(1+1./lambertw(Xiii))));
23
24 ME=@(p) max([max(max(abs(E(p)))),max(max(abs(EIIIIIIH(p))))]);
25 [P,fval] = fminsearch(@(p) ME(p),pseed)
26 % 3.6524 1.9708 0.0641 −0.1004 6.2523
27 PnotBlending= [3.839 2.108 0.08568 -0.1028 2.586];
28
29 ME(PnotBlending)
30
31 figure
32 ErrorTb = E(P);
33 surf(vRo,vh,ErrorTb);
35 shading interp
36 xlabel(’Ro’); ylabel(’h’);
37 axis([0.0014527,1e3,1e-5,1e5,-inf,inf])
38 end
39 %% Regime IV IVh
40 if BlendIV_IVh
41 Tbiv= - Tb(:,220)’./(1./2*exp(0.5772+1./vRo(220)));
42 funTbivest=@(n) (1+sqrt(vh).ˆn).ˆ(1./n);
43 E=@(n) log(funTbivest(n)./Tbiv);
44 [P,fval]=fminsearch(@(p) max(max(abs(E(p)))),1)
45 end
46 %% Regime IIIh IVh
47 if BlendIIIh_IVh
48 Tbh= - Tb(end,:)./(sqrt(vh(end)));
49 loglog(Tbh,’k’); hold on
50 loglog(1./vRo.*exp(1./vRo)); hold on
51 loglog(1./2*exp(1./vRo+0.5772)); hold on
52 funTbh=@(p) exp(1./vRo)./( 2*exp( - 0.5772) + vRo+p(1).*vRo.ˆp(2));
53 E=@(n) log(funTbh(n)./Tbh);
306
54 [P,fval]=fminsearch(@(p) max(max(abs(E(p)))),[1,1])
55 end
C.1.4 Critical values of convection coefficients to neglect ef-

fects of surface heat loss for trailing length and cooling
rate
Listing C.4: Critical values of convection coefficients to neglect effects of surface heat
loss.
2 % calculate the negeligible convection area
3 %% Load data
5 [mRo,mh]=meshgrid(vRo,vh);
6 mRo(isnan(xb))=nan;
7 fun_Tb=@(h,Ro,xb) 1./Ro.*(1- sqrt(h+1).*besselk(1,-xb.*sqrt(h+1),1)./
besselk(0,-xb.*sqrt(h+1),1));
8 Tb=fun_Tb(mh,mRo,xb);
9 %
10 funTh0=@(x) besselk(0,-x,1);
12 funxb0=@(Ro) fzero(@(x) funTh0(x)-1./Ro,[-1e300,-1e-300],options);
13
14 xbesth0=nan*vRo;
15
16 for j=1:size(vRo,2)
17 if vRo(j) > 1e-2
18 xbesth0(j)= funxb0(vRo(j));
19 end
20 end
21
22 Tbesth0=1./vRo.*(1- besselk(1,-xbesth0,1)./besselk(0,-xbesth0,1));
23 [xbesth0,˜]=meshgrid(xbesth0,vh);
24 [Tbesth0,˜]=meshgrid(Tbesth0,vh);
25
26 figure
27 error_xbesth0=log(xbesth0./xb);
28 error_Tbesth0=log(Tbesth0./Tb);
29 contour(vRo,vh,error_xbesth0,[-0.1,0.1],’--k’,’linewidth’,2); hold on
30 contour(vRo,vh,error_Tbesth0,[-0.1,0.1],’-k’,’linewidth’,2); hold on
32
33 axis([1e-2,1e2,1e-2,1e2])
307
34 xlabel(’Ro’)
35 ylabel(’h’)
36 DefaultGca
37
38
39 a=0.7659; b=1.541;
40 AE=0.1;
41 Rolist=logspace(-2,5,1000);
42 xbest0= -exp(-1./Rolist) .*(2*exp(-0.5772)+pi/2.*Rolist.ˆ2+a.*Rolist.ˆb)
;
43
44 hcrxb=-((2*(besselk(0, -xbest0,1)- besselk(1, -xbest0,1)))./ besselk(1,

-xbest0,1)).* AE;
45 hcrtb=-((2*AE*(besselk(0,-xbest0,1) - besselk(1,-xbest0,1)).ˆ2)./(
xbest0.*besselk(0,-xbest0,1).ˆ2 - besselk(1,-xbest0,1).ˆ2 - xbest0.*
besselk(1,-xbest0,1).ˆ2));
46 plot(Rolist,hcrxb,’--k’,’linewidth’,1); hold on
47 plot(Rolist,hcrtb,’-k’,’linewidth’,1); hold on
48 legend(’hc for xb for\newline 10% accepted error’,...
49 ’hc for Tb for \newline 10% cooling rate’,...
50 ’estimated hc for xb for\newline 10% accepted error’,...
51 ’estimated hc for Tb for\newline 10% accepted error’)
C.2 Matlab codes for isotherm width and its loca-

tion of moving line heat source under surface
heat losses in Chapter 5
∗
C.2.1 Calculation of isotherm width ymax and its location x∗max
of moving line heat source under surface heat loss
∗
Listing C.5: Calculation of ymax and x∗max for moving line heat source under surface
heat loss.
1 %% Thin plate with heat disspation :
3 % Calculating the width and it ’ s location
4 %% Functions used according to original equation and dimensional analysis
5 fun_T=@(x,r,h) exp(-x-r.*sqrt(1+h)).*besselk(0,r.*sqrt(1+h),1);
6 fun_xm=@(r,h) -r.*besselk(0,r.*sqrt(1+h),1)./(sqrt(h+1).*besselk(1,r.*
sqrt(1+h),1));
7 fun_ym=@(r,h) r.*sqrt(1-(besselk(0,r.*sqrt(1+h),1)./(sqrt(h+1).*besselk
(1,r.*sqrt(1+h),1))).ˆ2);
8 fun_Tm=@(r,h) fun_T(fun_xm(r,h),r,h);
308
10 % Simplify this function : fun_rm=@(T,h,a,b) fzero(@(r) T−fun_Tm(r,h),[a,b],
options) ;
11 fun_rm=@(T,h,a,b) fzero(@(r) T-(exp(r.*(besselk(0,r.*sqrt(1+h),1)./(sqrt
(h+1).*besselk(1,r.*sqrt(1+h),1))-sqrt(1+h))).*besselk(0,r.*sqrt(1+h
),1)),[a,b],options);
12 %% Setting values
13 % To make sure @fun_Tm make sense in MATLAB, must be in [1e−308,1e308], and
must be in[−700,700]
14 % increase with by plotting
15 h_val=logspace(-7,7,900);
16 r0=1e-300*h_val./h_val;r1=arrayfun(@(h) fzero( @(r) -fun_xm(r,h)-r*sqrt
(1+h) +700,[1e-300,1e300]),h_val);
17 RANGE_T=[max(fun_Tm(r1,h_val)),min(fun_Tm(r0,h_val))];
18 T_val=logspace(-3,log10(300),1000);
19 [T,h]=meshgrid(T_val,h_val); [˜,r0]=meshgrid(T_val,r0);[˜,r1]=meshgrid(
T_val,r1);
20 %% Calculating with disspation
21 tic
22 rm=arrayfun(@(T,h,a,b) fun_rm(T,h,a,b),T,h,r0,r1);
23 toc
24 xm=fun_xm(rm,h);
25 ym=fun_ym(rm,h);
26
27 rm0= arrayfun(@(T) fun_rm(T,0,1e-300,1e300),T_val);

28 xm0=fun_xm(rm0,0);
29 ym0=fun_ym(rm0,0);
30 save THIN_RES_XM_YM T h T_val h_val xm ym rm xm0 ym0 rm0
∗
C.2.2 Blending of isotherm width ymax and its location x∗max
of moving line heat source under surface heat loss
Listing C.6: Blending x∗max for moving line heat source under surface heat loss.
2 %% load calculation results
3 path = pwd;
4 cd ../../
5 load(’THIN_RES_XM_YM.mat’); cd(path)
6 vRo=1./T_val; Ro=1./T; vh=h_val; e= exp(1);
7 clear T_val h_val rm rm0 T xm0 ym0
8 %% Corner III
9 x_omega = pi*h.*Ro.ˆ2./(exp(1./(1+h)).*(1+h));
309
10 omega = (x_omega.ˆ-1+log(x_omega+2.585).ˆ-1+0.08568*x_omega.ˆ(-0.1028))
.ˆ-1;
11 f_III_IV = exp(-2./Ro).*(1+ 8*e/(pi*exp(2*0.5772))*Ro.ˆ-3 +2*1.427*e/pi*
Ro.ˆ(1.077-2));
12 f_III_IIIa = e./(pi*Ro.ˆ2.*h).*omega;
13 xmax_III_IV_IIIA = - pi/(2*exp(1))*Ro.ˆ2.* f_III_IV.*f_III_IIIa;
14 %% Opposite corner
15 g = xm./xmax_III_IV_IIIA;
16 g2 = 1./g ;
17 G_IVa = e-1 ;
18 gest =@(p) (1+ G_IVa.*(1 + p(1).*Ro.ˆp(2)).ˆ(p(3)) .*(1+ p(4).*h.ˆp(5))
.ˆp(6)).ˆ-1 ;
19 E=@(p) log(gest(p)./g);
20 options = optimset(’MaxFunEvals’,1e10);
21 ME=@(p) max(max(abs(E(p))));
22 pseed=[3.143 0.8608 -0.5360 0.3143 -0.7133 -2.645];
23 ME(pseed)
24 [P,fval] = fminsearch(@(p) ME(p) ,pseed)
25 %% Plot errormap
26 EC= E(P);
27 surf(Ro,h,100*EC)
28 shading interp
30 xlabel(’Ro’) ; ylabel(’h’)
∗
Listing C.7: Blenidng ymax for moving line heat source under surface heat loss.
2 cd ../../
3 load(’THIN_RES_XM_YM.mat’)
4 cd ./Blending/Blending_ymax
5 vRo=1./T_val; Ro=1./T; vh=h_val;
6 e=exp(1);
7 %% Corner III
8 x_omega = pi*h.*Ro.ˆ2./(exp(1./(1+h)).*(1+h));
9 omega = (x_omega.ˆ-1+log(x_omega+2.585).ˆ-1+0.08568*x_omega.ˆ(-0.1028))
.ˆ-1;
10
11 f_III_IV = exp(-1./Ro).*(1+(sqrt(8*exp(1)/pi).*exp(-0.5772)./Ro)
.ˆ(1.407)).ˆ(1./1.407) ;
12 f_III_IIIa = sqrt(e./(2*pi*h)).*omega./Ro.*sqrt(1+2./((1+h).*omega));
13 ymax_III_IV_IIIA = sqrt(pi/(2*exp(1))).*Ro.* f_III_IV.*f_III_IIIa;
14 %% Opposite corner
15 g = ym./ymax_III_IV_IIIA;
16 % G_IVa = Ro./omega.∗1./sqrt(e/(2∗pi).∗(1+(2./((1+h).∗omega)))) − 1
310
17 % pseed=[5.929 1.829 −0.5464 0.06783 −0.6749 −19.76];
18 G_IVa = sqrt(2./(pi*e*Ro.ˆ2+2*e./(1+h))) ;
19 gest =@(p) (1+ (G_IVa.*(1 +p(1).*Ro.ˆp(2)).ˆ(p(3)) .*(1+ p(4).*h.ˆp(5))
.ˆp(6))) ;
20 E=@(p) log(gest(p)./g);
21 ME=@(p) max(max(abs(E(p))));
23 %% Optimization
24 pseed=[16.09 1.438 -0.2508 0.05885 -0.3583 -24.44];
25 ME(pseed)
26 options = optimset(’MaxFunEvals’,1e5);
27 [P,fval] = fminsearch(@(p) ME(p) ,pseed,options)
28 %%
29 EC = E(P);
30 surf(Ro,h,100*EC)
31 shading interp
33 xlabel(’Ro’) ; ylabel(’h’)
C.2.3 Critical values of convection coefficients to neglect ef-

fects of surface heat loss for isotherm width and its
location
Listing C.8: Critical values of h∗c to neglect effects of convection within 10 % relative
∗
eror for ymax and x∗max .
2 %%
3 load(’THIN_RES_XM_YM.mat’)
4 %%
5 [Mym0,˜]= meshgrid(ym0,h_val);
6 Eym = abs(log(ym./Mym0));
7 contour(1./T_val,h_val,Eym,[0.1,0.1],’-k’,’linewidth’,2); hold on
8
9 [Mxm0,˜]= meshgrid(xm0,h_val);
10 Exm = abs(log(xm./Mxm0));
11 contour(1./T_val,h_val,Exm,[0.1,0.1],’--k’,’linewidth’,2); hold on
12
13 Roval=1./T_val; hcym = 0.2*(1+(pi/(2*exp(1))*Roval.ˆ2).ˆ0.9405)

.ˆ(-1./0.9405);
14 plot(Roval,hcym,’-k’,’linewidth’,1); hold on
15 hcxm = 0.1.*((exp(1)./(Roval.ˆ2*pi)).ˆ(-1.296)+1).ˆ(-1./1.296)
16 plot(Roval,hcxm ,’--k’,’linewidth’,1); hold on
17
311
19 axis([-inf,inf,-inf,1])
20 xlabel(’Ro’)
21 ylabel(’hc’)
22 legend(’hcym’,’hcxm’,’hcymest’,’hcxmest’)
23 DefaultGca
312
Appendix D: Supplementary
materials for moving Gaussian heat
source model
D.1 Matlab codes for isotherm width under a mov-

ing Gaussian heat source in Chapter 6
D.1.1 Calculation of isotherms with two peaks under a mov-
ing Gaussian heat source
Listing D.1: Example of an isotherm with two peaks under a moving Gaussian heat
source.
1 clear;clc; close all
2 xv=[-40:1:-26,-25:0.1:-4,-3:-1]; yv=[9.5:0.01:10.5];
3 Ry=110;T0 =1./Ry; % 0.009 ;
4 sigma=4;
5 funT=@(x,y,s) 1/sqrt(2*pi)*integral(@(t) t.ˆ(-0.5)./(t+sˆ2).*exp(-((x+t)
.ˆ2+yˆ2)./(2*t+2*sˆ2)),0,inf);
6 [x,y]=meshgrid(xv,yv);
7 s=sigma*(x./x);
8 T2=arrayfun(@(x,y,s) funT(x,y,s),x,y,s);
9 xlabel(’x’);
10 ylabel(’y’);
11 text(-15,10.1,’Ry=110,sigma=4’); hold on
12 contour(xv,yv,T2,T0*[1,1],’k’,’linewidth’,2);
13 DefaultGca
14 % savefigures (1,’ gaussian_bipeak_example’)
Listing D.2: Calculation of isotherms with two peaks under a moving Gaussian heat
source.
2 % The start value of Ry and sigma, that two peak conditions exist
3 % If $d (X^2)/d(R^2) = 1$, two peaks exsits
313
4 % ∗IMPORTANT∗ , the varable x or r here is modified by X = X−\sigma^2, R =
sqrt((x−sigma^2)^2+y^2)
5 %% calculate the maximum value of $d (X^2)/d(R^2)$ for a given $\sigma$
6 tola=1e-20; tolb=1e-16;
7 funTstar=@(x,sigma) 1/sqrt(2*pi)*integral(@(t) t.ˆ(-1/2)./(t+sigma.ˆ2).*
exp(-0.5*(x.ˆ2+t.ˆ2+2.*t.*x)./(t+sigma.ˆ2)),0,inf,’RelTol’,1e-100,’
AbsTol’,1e-100);
8 funxm=@(sigma) fminsearch(@(x) -funTstar(x,sigma),-3,optimset(’TolFun’,1
e-80,’TolX’,1e-80,’MaxFunEvals’,10000,’MaxIter’,5000));
9 funtm=@(r,sigma) acos(min(sigma/sqrt(r),1));
10 funp=@(r,n,sigma) integral(@(t) cos(t).ˆn.*exp(-0.5*(r/sigma*cos(t)-
sigma./cos(t)).ˆ2),0,funtm(r,sigma),’RelTol’,tola,’AbsTol’,tolb)+
integral(@(t) cos(t).ˆn.*exp(-0.5*(r/sigma*cos(t)-sigma./cos(t)).ˆ2)
,funtm(r,sigma),pi/2,’RelTol’,tola,’AbsTol’,tolb);
11 % $d (X^2)/d(R^2)$
12 fundx2r2=@(r,sigma) sigmaˆ2*funp(r,0,sigma)./funp(r,2,sigma).*(funp(r,0,
sigma).*funp(r,4,sigma)./funp(r,2,sigma).ˆ2-1);
13 % minimal value of R =sqrt((x−sigma^2)^2+y^2), location of center maximum
temperature
14 funrmin = @(sigma) abs(funxm(sigma)-sigma.ˆ2);
15 %% minimal Ry has two peaks
16 fun_Rval_dx2dr2_Max=@(sigma) fminsearch(@(r) -fundx2r2(r,sigma),sigma+
abs(funxm(sigma)-sigma.ˆ2));
17 fval_dx2dr2_Max =@(sigma) fundx2r2(fun_Rval_dx2dr2_Max(sigma),sigma);
18 % find sigma $d (X^2)/d(R^2) = 0 $
19 [bipeak_min_sigma] = fzero(@(sigma) fval_dx2dr2_Max(sigma) -1,[2,5]);
20 R_bipeak_min_sigma= fun_Rval_dx2dr2_Max(bipeak_min_sigma);
21 [Tc_bipeak_min_sigma,xm_bipeak_min_sigma,ym_bipeak_min_sigma] = tm_rm(
bipeak_min_sigma,R_bipeak_min_sigma)
22 Ry_min_bipeak = 1./Tc_bipeak_min_sigma;
23 %% plot $d (X^2)/d(R^2)$ vs R
24 sigmalist = [1,2,bipeak_min_sigma,5,10];
25 for i = 1: max(size(sigmalist))
26 sigma = sigmalist(i);
27 rlist = abs(funxm(sigma)-sigma.ˆ2)*logspace(0,1,100);
28 dx2r2_list =arrayfun(@(r) fundx2r2(r,sigma),rlist);
29 semilogx(rlist,dx2r2_list,’k’,’linewidth’,2,’DisplayName’,num2str(
sigma)); hold on
30 end
31 plot([1,1e3],[1,1],’--k’,’linewidth’,1,’HandleVisibility’,’off’)
32 axis([1,1e3,0,1.2])
33 xlabel(’r’)
34 ylabel(’dx2r2’)
35 legend
36 DefaultGca
314
37 % savefigures (1,’ gaussian_bipeak_dX2dR2_R’)
38 % bipeak_min_sigma = 2.8931;
39 % Ry_min_bipeak = 58.2030;
40 %% Area of two peak existing
41 % rmin is the minimal vlaue of $R = sqrt((x−sigma^2)^2+y^2)$ for a given
$sigma$
42 % rmax is $R = sqrt((x−sigma^2)^2+y^2)$ for the maximum value of $d (X^2)/d(R
^2) = 1$
43 % r_root_1 and r_root_2 are the two roots of $ d (X^2)/d(R^2) = 1 $ for $sigma$
larger than bipeak_min_sigma
44 % Between r_root_1 and r_root_2, ymax decrease with R; and there are two peaks
45 Sigma = logspace(log10(bipeak_min_sigma),log10(500),1e3); Sigma = Sigma
(2:end);
46 Rmax = arrayfun(@(x) fun_Rval_dx2dr2_Max(x) ,Sigma);
47 Rmin = arrayfun(@(sigma) funrmin(sigma), Sigma) ;
48 for i=1:max(size(Sigma))
49 R_root_1(i)=fzero(@(x) fundx2r2(x,Sigma(i))-1,[Rmin(i), Rmax(i)],
optimset(’TolFun’,1e-80,’TolX’,1e-80,’MaxFunEvals’,10000,’MaxIter’
,5000));
50 R_root_2(i)=fzero(@(x) fundx2r2(x,Sigma(i))-1,[Rmax(i), 2*Rmax(i)],
optimset(’TolFun’,1e-200,’TolX’,1e-100,’MaxFunEvals’,10000,’MaxIter
’,5000));
51 [Tc_min_bipeak(i),˜,˜] = tm_rm(Sigma(i),R_root_1(i));
52 [Tc_max_bipeak(i),˜,˜] = tm_rm(Sigma(i),R_root_2(i));
53 end
54 figure
55 funSigmaMax=@(Ry) ((1.0140*Ry.ˆ(2/3)).ˆ-2.3975+(sqrt(pi/2)*Ry).ˆ-2.3975)
.ˆ(1/-2.3975);
56 plot(Sigma./funSigmaMax(1./Tc_min_bipeak),1./Tc_min_bipeak); hold on
57 plot(Sigma./funSigmaMax(1./Tc_max_bipeak),1./Tc_max_bipeak); hold on
58 axis([1e-3,1e0,1e-3,1e6])
59 xlabel(’sigma/sigmamax’)
60 ylabel(’Ry’)
62 DefaultGca
63 % savefigures (2,’ gaussian_bipeak_area’)
64 %%
65 save(’gaussian_bipeak.mat’,’R_root_1’, ’R_root_2’, ’Rmax’, ’Rmin’, ’
Sigma’, ’Tc_max_bipeak’, ’Tc_min_bipeak’, ’bipeak_min_sigma’, ’
Ry_min_bipeak’)
∗
D.1.2 Calculation of isotherm width ymax under a moving
Gaussian heat source
315
∗
Listing D.3: Calculation of ymax and x∗max under a moving Gaussian heat source.
1
3
4 sz1 = 1e3; sz2 = 900;

5 VRy = logspace(-3,3,sz1);
6 Vmul = logspace(-3,log10(0.9),sz2);
7 [MRy,Mmul] = meshgrid(VRy,Vmul);
8 %% $\sigma_{max}$ and $\sigma$
9 % Temperature field function
10 fun_maxintegrand=@(x,y,sigma) acos(min([sigma.*((sigma.ˆ2-x).ˆ2+y.ˆ2)
.ˆ(-0.25),1]));
11 fun_T=@(x,y,sigma) 1/sqrt(2*pi)*2./sigma.* (integral(@(z) exp(-0.5*(cos(
z).ˆ2*(sigma.ˆ2+(x.ˆ2+y.ˆ2)./sigma.ˆ2-2*x)+sigma.ˆ2./(cos(z).ˆ2+1e
-100)+2.*x-2.*sigma.ˆ2)),0,fun_maxintegrand(x,y,sigma) ,’RelTol’,1e
-6,’AbsTol’,1e-21)+ ...
12 integral(@(z) exp(-0.5*(cos(z).ˆ2*(sigma.ˆ2+(x.ˆ2+y.ˆ2)./sigma.ˆ2-2*
x)+sigma.ˆ2./(cos(z).ˆ2+1e-100)+2.*x-2.*sigma.ˆ2)),
fun_maxintegrand(x,y,sigma),pi/2,’RelTol’,1e-6,’AbsTol’,1e-21));
13
14 % function maximum temperature and its location

15 fun_xm=@(sigma) fminbnd(@(x) -fun_T(x,0,sigma),5*max(-0.7650*sigma,-
sigma.ˆ2),0.2*max(-0.7650*sigma,-sigma.ˆ2) ,optimset(’MaxFunEvals’
,10000,’MaxIter’,5000));
16 fun_Tmaxcenter = @(sigma) fun_T(fun_xm(sigma),0,sigma);
17
18 % Rmin = sqrt((xmax_center−sigma^2)^2+0)
19 fun_rmin = @(sigma) abs(fun_xm(sigma)-sigma.ˆ2);
20
21 % maximum sigma for Ry

22 fun_Sigmamax_blending=@(Ry) ((1.0140*Ry.ˆ(2/3)).ˆ-2.3975+(sqrt(pi/2)*Ry)
.ˆ-2.3975).ˆ(1/-2.3975);
23 % fun_Sigmamax = @(Ry) fzero(@(sigma) fun_Tmaxcenter(sigma)−1./Ry,
fun_Sigmamax_blending(Ry),optimset(’MaxFunEvals’,1e5,’MaxIter’,5000));
24 Vsigmamax = arrayfun(@(Ry) fun_Sigmamax_blending(Ry),VRy);
25 [Msigmamax,˜] = meshgrid(Vsigmamax,Vmul);
26 Msigma = Msigmamax.*Mmul;
27
28 %% Calculation ymax and xmax

29 load(’gaussian_bipeak.mat’)
30 Mxmax = nan*MRy; Mymax = nan*MRy;
31 Mxb = nan*MRy; Mxf = nan*MRy;
32 parfor i=1:sz2
33 for j=1:sz1
316
34 % location of maximum temperature
35 xmax_center_loop = fun_xm(Msigma(i,j));
36 % leading and trailing length of isotherm
37 [Mxb(i,j),Mxf(i,j)]=fun_xbf(Msigma(i,j),xmax_center_loop,1./MRy(i
,j),fun_T);
38 % lower limit of R
39 r0_lim_loop=fun_rmin(Msigma(i,j));
40 % upper limit of R
41 r3_lim_loop = 3*abs(Mxb(i,j)-Msigma(i,j).ˆ2);
42
43 if Msigma(i,j) > bipeak_min_sigma

44 % range of T, two peak exists , for a sigma
45 TmaxBipeak = interp1(Sigma,Tc_max_bipeak,Msigma(i,j),’pchip’)
;
46 TminBipeak = interp1(Sigma,Tc_min_bipeak,Msigma(i,j),’pchip’)
;
47
48 if (1/MRy(i,j) < TmaxBipeak) && (1/MRy(i,j) > TminBipeak)

49 % intervals of r for two peak existing
50 r1_lim_loop=interp1(Sigma,R_root_1,Msigma(i,j),’pchip’);
51 r2_lim_loop=interp1(Sigma,R_root_2,Msigma(i,j),’pchip’);
52 % peak 1
53 r1_loop=fzero(@(r) tm_rm(Msigma(i,j),r)-1./MRy(i,j),[
r0_lim_loop,r1_lim_loop]);
54 [˜,xm1_loop,ym1_loop]=tm_rm(Msigma(i,j),r1_loop);
55 % peak 2
56 r2_loop=fzero(@(r) tm_rm(Msigma(i,j),r)-1./MRy(i,j),[
r2_lim_loop,r3_lim_loop]);
57 [˜,xm2_loop,ym2_loop]=tm_rm(Msigma(i,j),r2_loop);
58 % maximum width
59 Mymax(i,j) = max([ym1_loop,ym2_loop]);
60 Mxmax(i,j) = sum([xm1_loop,xm2_loop].*([ym1_loop,ym2_loop
]==Mymax(i,j)));
61 continue;
62 end
63 end
64 % one peak exists
65 r_loop=fzero(@(r) tm_rm(Msigma(i,j),r)-1./MRy(i,j),[r0_lim_loop,
r3_lim_loop]);
66 [˜,Mxmax(i,j),Mymax(i,j)]=tm_rm(Msigma(i,j),r_loop);
67 end
68 i
69 end
70 %%
71 ycal= fun_ymax_Gaussian(MRy,Msigma);
317
72 E= 100*log(ycal./Mymax);
73 max(max(abs(E)))
74 save gaussian_ymax
75
76
77
78 function [xb,xf]=fun_xbf(sigma,xmax_center,Tc,funTstar)
79 % calculate leading and trailing length xf and xb of isotherm
80
81 nmax=300;
82 % domain sorted : aa <xb<a<xmax_center<b<xf<bb
83 aa=xmax_center;
84 bb=xmax_center;
85 flaga=0;
86 flagb=0;
87 % search the domain contains xf&xb
88 for i=1:nmax
89 if flaga<0.5
90 faa=funTstar(aa,0,sigma);
91 aa=(10.*aa-1+xmax_center)*(faa>Tc)+(10.*aa-1+xmax_center)*(faa==
Tc)+aa*(faa<Tc);
92 flaga=1*(faa<=Tc);
93 end
94
95 if flagb<0.5
96 fbb=funTstar(bb,0,sigma);
97 bb=(bb-xmax_center+1)*(fbb>Tc)+(bb-xmax_center+1)*(fbb==Tc)+bb*(
fbb<Tc);
98 flagb=1*(fbb<=Tc);
99 end
100
101 if flaga && flagb

102 break
103 end
104 end
105 % bisection xb
106 if flaga>0.5
107 xb=fzero(@(x) funTstar(x,0,sigma)-Tc,[aa,(aa+1-xmax_center)./10],
optimset(’TolFun’,1e-18,’TolX’,1e-13));
108 else
109 xb= nan;
110 fprintf(’Fail to find xb\n’);
111 return;
112 end
113 % bisection xf
318
114 if flagb>0.5
115 xf=fzero(@(x) funTstar(x,0,sigma)-Tc,[bb-1+xmax_center,bb],optimset(
’TolFun’,1e-18,’TolX’,1e-13));
116 else
117 xf = nan;
118 fprint(’Fail to find xf\n’)
119 return;
120 end
121 end
1 function [Tc,xm,ym] = tm_rm(sigma,rm)

2 %TM_RM Calculate Tm xm ym as a function of Rm
3 % xm,ym,zm are maximum width $\partial T/\partial x (xm,ym)=0$
4 % rm= \sqrt((xm−sigma^2)^2+ym^2)
5
6 tola=1e-16;tolb=1e-16;
7 tm=acos(min(sigma/sqrt(rm),1));
8 p=@(n) integral(@(t) cos(t).ˆn.*exp(-0.5*(rm/sigma*cos(t)-sigma./cos(t))
.ˆ2),0,tm,’RelTol’,tola,’AbsTol’,tolb)...
9 +integral(@(t) cos(t).ˆn.*exp(-0.5*(rm/sigma*cos(t)-sigma./cos(t))
.ˆ2),tm,pi/2,’RelTol’,tola,’AbsTol’,tolb);
10 Xm=-sigma.ˆ2.*p(0)./p(2);
11 Ym=sqrt(rm.ˆ2-Xm.ˆ2);
12 Tc=2/(sqrt(2*pi)*sigma)*exp(-Xm-rm).*p(0);
13 if nargout>1
14 xm=Xm+sigmaˆ2;ym=Ym;
15 end
16 end
D.1.3 Blending of isotherm width under a moving Gaussian

heat source
Listing D.4: Partial blending on side Regime II – VI.

2 path = pwd;
3 cd ../
4 load(’result.mat’,’Vmul’, ’VRy’, ’Mmul’, ’MRy’, ’Mymax’, ’Msigma’)
5 cd(path) ;
6 %% Blending Regime II − VI
7 X= Vmul;
8 Y = Mymax(:,1)./(MRy(:,1)); Y =Y’;
9 fun_f_II_VI = @(mul) interp1(X,Y,mul);
10 cfII=@(mul) 1.*mul./mul;
319
11 cfVI=@(mul) sqrt(2*pi).*mul .*sqrt(log(1./(mul)));
12 % method 1
13 % Blending_Equation=@(mul) @(p) ((1−mul).^p+ (sqrt(2∗pi).∗mul .∗sqrt(log(1./(
mul)))) .^p) .^(1./p) ;
14 % method 2
15 Blending_Equation=@(mul) @(p) ( (exp(p(2)*mul.ˆp(3))).ˆp(1)+ (sqrt(2*pi)
.*mul.*sqrt(log(1./(mul)))) .ˆp(1)) .ˆ(1./p(1));
16 %% blending
17 Bcf=Blending_Grid_size(fun_f_II_VI,Blending_Equation,1e-3,0.9,[4.1117
-1.5609 4.4647]);
18 Bcf.Pplot.x_label= ’mul’;
19 Bcf.Pplot.y_label= ’cf’;
20 Bcf.Pplot.figname= ’gaussian_side_partial_blending_VI_II’;
21 Bcf.funy1= cfII;
22 Bcf.funy2= cfVI;
23 Bcf.funmodify1= @(mul) exp( -1.5609*mul.ˆ 4.4647);
24 Bcf=Bcf.Blending;
25 Bcf=Bcf.FBlending(1000);
26 Bcf.funWrite(’gaussian_ymax_cf_partial_blending_II_VI_method2.tex’)
27 %%
28 figure(4)
29 plot(logspace(-3,log10(0.9),1e3),Bcf.BP.Result.estimation,’-k’,’
linewidth’,1)
30 axis([1e-3,1e0,1e-1,2])
31 %%
32 savefigures(1,’gaussian_ymax_cf_partial_blending_II_VI_method2’)
Listing D.5: Partial blending on side Regime V – VI.

2 path = pwd;
3 load(’gaussian_ymax_s_smax_1.mat’,’Vmul’, ’VRy’, ’Mmul’, ’MRy’, ’Mymax’,
’Msigma’)
4 %% Blending Regime V VI
5 X= VRy;
6 i=3;
7 Y = Mymax(i,:)./(Vmul(:,i).*sqrt(log(1./Vmul(:,i)))); %Y =Y’;
8 cfV=@(Ry) sqrt(3)*(sqrt(2/pi)*1.280)ˆ(2/3).*Ry.ˆ(2/3);
9 cfVI=@(Ry) sqrt(2*pi)*Ry;
10 % loglog(X,Y); hold on
11 % loglog(X,cfV(X)); hold on
12 % loglog(X,cfVI(X)); hold on
13 fun_f_V_VI = @(Ry) interp1(X,Y,Ry);
14 Blending_Equation=@(Ry) @(p) ((sqrt(3)*(sqrt(2/pi)*1.280)ˆ(2/3).*Ry
.ˆ(2/3)).ˆp+ (sqrt(2*pi)*Ry ) .ˆp) .ˆ(1./p);
320
15 %% blending
16 Bcf=Blending_Grid_size(fun_f_V_VI,Blending_Equation,1e-3,1e3,-1);
17 Bcf.Pplot.x_label= ’Ry’;
18 Bcf.Pplot.y_label= ’cf’;
19 Bcf.Pplot.figname= ’gaussian_side_partial_blending_v_vi’;
20 Bcf.funy1= cfV;
21 Bcf.funy2= cfVI;
22 % Bcf.funmodify1= @(mul) exp( −1.5609∗mul.^ 4.4647);
23 Bcf=Bcf.Blending;
24 Bcf=Bcf.FBlending(1000);
25 Bcf.funWrite(’gaussian_ymax_cf_partial_blending_V_VI.tex’)
26 %%
27 savefigures(1,’gaussian_ymax_cf_partial_blending_V_VI’)
∗
Listing D.6: 2-D blending of ymax under a moving Gaussian heat source.
2 load(’gaussian_ymax.mat’,’Vmul’, ’VRy’, ’Mmul’, ’MRy’, ’Mymax’, ’Msigma’
)
3 % Mymax(MRy>1e3) = nan;
4 % Vmul =Vmul(1:3:end);
5 % VRy =VRy(1:3:end);
6 % Mmul =Mmul(1:3:end,1:3:end);
7 % MRy =MRy(1:3:end,1:3:end);
8 % Mymax =Mymax(1:3:end,1:3:end);
9 % Msigma =Msigma(1:3:end,1:3:end);
10 n1=-2.398;
11 sigmax = ((1.014*MRy.ˆ(2/3)).ˆn1 + (sqrt(pi/2)*MRy).ˆn1).ˆ( 1/n1);
12 mul = Msigma ./ sigmax;
13 %%
14 format shortG
15 pseed = [ 3.7706 -0.56369 -0.80637 0.016902 -2.1993
-2.2414 -2.6528 -1.7954 4.5359 -3.5726 13.107 ]
16 for i = 1:5
17 error = @(p) log(blending_equation(MRy,Msigma,p)./Mymax);
18 max_error = @(p) max(max(abs(error(p))));
19 max_error(pseed)
20 opts = optimset(’MaxFunEvals’,1e8);
21 [pval,eval ] = fminsearch(@(p) max_error(p),pseed,opts)
22 pseed = pval;
23 pseed = round(pseed,4,’significant’)
24 end
25 %%
26 figure
27 E=error(pval);
321
28 surf(VRy,Vmul,error(pval));
29 axis([1e-3,1e3,1e-2,1,-inf,inf])
31 shading interp
32
33 %%
34 function y = blending_equation(Ry,sigma,p)
35 % n1=−2.398;
36 % n2= −1.731;
37 % pIIVI= [4.112 −1.560 4.463];
38 n1 = p(7);
39 n2 = p(8);
40 pIIVI = p(9:11);
41
42 B = sqrt(3)*(sqrt(2/pi)*1.280).ˆ(2/3)./(2*sqrt(pi/exp(1))) ;
43
44 sigmax = ((1.014*Ry.ˆ(2/3)).ˆn1 + (sqrt(pi/2)*Ry).ˆn1).ˆ( 1/n1);

45 mul = sigma ./ sigmax;
46
47 y = Ry.*...
48 (1+(sqrt(2./(exp(1).*Ry))).ˆn2 ) .ˆ(1./n2).*...
49 ( (exp(pIIVI(2)*mul.ˆpIIVI(3))).ˆpIIVI(1)+ (sqrt(2*pi).*mul.*sqrt(
log(1./(mul)))) .ˆpIIVI(1)) .ˆ(1./pIIVI(1)) .*...
50 (1 + ((B*Ry.ˆ(1/6) -1 ).*(1+p(1).*Ry.ˆp(2)).ˆ(p(3)).*(1+p(4).*(mul)
.ˆp(5)).ˆ(p(6)))) ;
51 end
322
100
ymax
∗
/Ry
10-1
10-3 10-2 10-1 100
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
∗ ∗
Figure D.1: Partial blending of ymax in side Regime II – VI. ymax /Ry changes with
∗ ∗
σ /σmax .
0.3
0.2
Error( %)
0.1
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
10-3 10-2 10-1 100
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
∗
Figure D.2: Error of partial blending in Side Regime II – VI for ymax (Equation 6.26)
∗ ∗
when a = −1.560, b = 4.463, n = 4.112 for σ /σmax ≤ 0.9.
323
∗
D.2 Supporting figures for partial blending of ymax
D.2.1 Supporting figures for partial blending in side Regime
II – VI
D.2.2 Supporting figures for partial blending in side Regime
V – VI
102
∗
ln max
σ∗
σ
rmax
yb∗
σmax
σ∗
100
∗
10-2
10-2 100 102

Ry
q
∗ σmax
∗
Figure D.3: Partial blending of ∗
ymax in side Regime V – VI. ∗+
ybmax / σσ∗ ln σ ∗
max
changes with Ry.
324
0.4
0.2
Error (%)
-0.2
-0.4
10-2 100 102
Ry
∗
Figure D.4: Error of partial blending of ymax in side Regime V – VI (Equation 6.27)
when n = −3.055.
325
5
Maximum error (%) n = −3.055

3
0
-3.5 -3 -2.5
n
Figure D.5: Maximum error changes with blending parameter n for partial blending
∗
of ymax in side Regime V – VI.
326
Appendix E: Catchment efficiency
of Gaussian distributed powder
cloud under moving Gaussian heat
source
E.1 Engineering expression

This appendix illustrated the catchment efficiency of Gaussian distributed powder
cloud of diameter σp under moving the temperature field σh . The temperature field
is assumed not affected by powder. Two catchment efficiencies factor are studied in
this appendix, the catchment efficiency wl representing portion of powder deposited
in the melt pool, and the catchment efficiency ws representing the portion of powder
deposited ahead of the melt pool.
For an isotherm with thermal features isotherm width ymax (studied in Chapter 6),
location of width xmax , trailing length xb and leading length xf , the catchment effi-
ciencies can be calculated with
Z xf Z yi 2
1 x + y2
wl = dx dy exp − (E.1)
xb −yi 2πσp2 2σp2
r Z xf
π 1 x2 yi
= dx exp − 2 erf √ (E.2)
2 πσp xb 2σp 2σp
and
Z xmax Z ymax 2
1 x + y2
ws = 2 dx dy exp − (E.3)
∞ yi 2πσp2 2σp2
r Z xmax
π 1 x2 ymax yi
= dx exp − 2 erf √ − erf √ (E.4)
2 πσp ∞ 2σp 2σp 2σp
Where yi is a function of x representing the shape of isotherm.
When the distribution size of heat source equals it of powder cloud, the catchment
efficiencies can be further investigated. Similar to the analysis of isotherm width in
Chapter 6, the catchment efficiencies depend on two dimensionless groups, the Ry
number and σ ∗ /σmax
∗
.
This appendix attempts to develop engineering expressions of catchment efficien-
cies for typical laser cladding processes, not 2-D blending for the whole domain. It
generates more practical expressions of more simplicity by curve fitting and does not
involve asymptotic analysis. However, it only covers part of the domain for certain
327
processes, lacking of generality to extend to all possible cases. For typical cases of
laser cladding, the Ry is between 5 ∼ 100. For the given range of Ry numbers, the
catchment efficiencies are in a band as illustrated in the shadow area of Figure E.1
and E.2. The catchment efficiencies change with σ ∗ /σmax∗
. The engineering expres-
sions can be achieved by curve fitting. For catchment efficiency of the melt pool wl ,
the engineering expression for 5 ≤ Ry ≤ 100 is:
" −6.155 #−0.1591
σ∗
wbl = 1 + 0.1322 1 − ∗+ (E.5)
bmax
σ
as illustrated in Figure E.1.

For catchment efficiency of ahead of the melt pool ws , the engineering expression
for 5 ≤ Ry ≤ 100 is:
" ∗ −0.6428 −0.3731 #−2.824
σ σ∗
cs = 0.9015
w + 0.3040 1 − ∗+ (E.6)
bmax
σ ∗+ bmax
σ
as illustrated in Figure E.2.
0.8
0.6
wl
0.4
0.2
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
σ ∗ /σmax
∗
σ∗
Figure E.1: The catchment efficiency of melt pool wl change with σmax
∗ for 5 ≤ Ry ≤
100.
328
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
ws
0.1
0.05
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
∗ ∗
σ /σmax
σ∗
Figure E.2: The catchment efficiency ahead of melt pool ws change with σmax
∗ for
5 ≤ Ry ≤ 100.
E.2 Matlab code
Listing E.1: Calculation of numerical values of catchment efficiencies wl and ws .

2 warning off
3 Ry=[1:1:19,20:10:100]; mul=[0.1:0.05:0.9,0.91:0.01:1];
4 szmul=max(size(mul));
5 sigmam= ((((2*1.2798)./(sqrt(2*pi))*Ry).ˆ(2/3)).ˆ(-2.3975)+(sqrt(pi/2)*
Ry).ˆ(-2.3975)).ˆ(-1./2.3975);
6 [Ry,˜]=meshgrid(Ry,ones(1,szmul-1));
7 sigma=bsxfun(@times,sigmam,mul(1:end-1)’);
8 [sz1,sz2]=size(Ry);
9 Ry=reshape(Ry,1,sz1*sz2);
10 sigma=reshape(sigma,1,sz1*sz2);
11 wL=Ry*nan;
12 wS=Ry*nan;
13 parfor i=1:sz1*sz2
14 try
15 wL(i) = funEtaDualGaussian(Ry(i),sigma(i),sigma(i));
16 wS(i) = funEtaDualGaussianS(Ry(i),sigma(i),sigma(i));
17 catch
329
18 end
19 disp([’Loop ’,’ ’,num2str(i)])
20 end
21
22 %%
23 wL=reshape(wL,sz1,sz2);
24 wS=reshape(wS,sz1,sz2);
25 Ry=reshape(Ry,sz1,sz2);
26 sigma=reshape(sigma,sz1,sz2);
27 close all
28 figure
29 surf(Ry(1,:),mul(1:end-1),wL)
30 figure
31 surf(Ry(1,:),sigma,wS)
32
33 %%
34 save res.mat
Listing E.2: Function to calculate catchment efficiency wl .

1 function [eta] = funEtaDualGaussian(Ry,sigmah,sigmap)
2 %FUNETADUALGAUSSIAN Summary of this function goes here
3 % Detailed explanation goes here
4 [Tmax,xmax] = fun_Tmax_sigma(sigmah);
5 if 1/Ry>Tmax
6 disp(’The maximum temperature does not reach required temperature’)
7 eta=0;
8 return
9 end
10 [xb,xf]=fun_xbf(sigmah,xmax,1/Ry);
11 yc =@(x)arrayfun(@(x) fym(sigmah,1/Ry,x,xb,xf),x);
12 eta=sqrt(pi/2)/(pi*sigmap)*integral(@(x) exp(-x.ˆ2./(2*sigmap.ˆ2)).*erf(
yc(x)./(sqrt(2)*sigmap)),xb,xf);
13
14 end
Listing E.3: Function to calculate catchment efficiency ws .

1 function [eta] = funEtaDualGaussianS(Ry,sigmah,sigmap)
2 %FUNETADUALGAUSSIAN Catchment effciency for Gaussian cloud on
3 %Gaussian heat source
4 [Tmax,xmax] = fun_Tmax_sigma(sigmah);
5 if 1/Ry>Tmax
6 disp(’The maximum temperature does not reach required temperature’)
7 eta=0;
8 return
330
9 end
10 [xb,xf]=fun_xbf(sigmah,xmax,1/Ry);
11 [ym,Tm,xm] = fun_width(sigmah,Ry);
12 yc =@(x)arrayfun(@(x) fym(sigmah,1/Ry,x,xb,xf),x);
13 eta=1/(pi*sigmap.ˆ2)*(integral(@(x) sqrt(pi/2)*sigmap .*exp(-x.ˆ2./(2*
sigmah.ˆ2)).*(erf(ym./(sqrt(2)*sigmah))-erf(yc(x)./(sqrt(2)*sigmah))
),xm,xf)...
14 +integral(@(x) sqrt(pi/2)*sigmap .*exp(-x.ˆ2./(2*sigmah.ˆ2)).*(erf(
ym./(sqrt(2)*sigmah))-erf(0)),xf,inf));
15
16 end
Listing E.4: Function to calculate maximum centerline temperature and its location.
1 function [Tmax,xm] = fun_Tmax_sigma(sigma)
2 %FUN_TMAX_SIGMA calculating the maximum temperature for certain sigma
3 % sigma is the half width of Gaussian distributed heat source
4 % Tmax is the corresponding maximum temperature
5 % xm is the location of maximum temperature
6
7 Tstar=@(x,o) 1/sqrt(2*pi)*integral(@(t) t.ˆ(-1/2)./(t+o.ˆ2).*exp(-0.5*(x

.ˆ2+t.ˆ2+2.*t.*x)./(t+o.ˆ2)),0,inf,’RelTol’,1e-100,’AbsTol’,1e-100);
8
9 xm1=-0.7650*sigma; xm2=-sigma.ˆ2;
10 seed=[10*min(xm1,xm2),0.1*max(xm1,xm2)];
11
12 [xm,Tmax]=fminbnd(@(x) -Tstar(x,sigma),seed(1),seed(2),optimset(’TolFun’
,1e-80,’TolX’,1e-80,’MaxFunEvals’,10000,’MaxIter’,5000));
13 Tmax=-Tmax;
14 end
Listing E.5: Function to calculate trailing and leading length.

1 function [xb,xf]=fun_xbf(sigmma,Xm,T)
2 % calculate xf and xb of pool
3 %%
4 nmax=300;
5 % domain sorted : aa <xb<a<xmid<b<xf<bb
6 aa=Xm;
7 bb=Xm;
8 flaga=0;
9 flagb=0;
10 % search the domain contains xf&xb
11 for i=1:nmax
12 if flaga<0.5
13 faa=Tstar(aa,0,sigmma);
331
14 aa=(10.*aa-1+Xm)*(faa>T)+(10.*aa-1+Xm)*(faa==T)+aa*(faa<T);
15 flaga=1*(faa<=T);
16 end
17
18 if flagb<0.5
19 fbb=Tstar(bb,0,sigmma);
20 bb=(bb-Xm+1)*(fbb>T)+(bb-Xm+1)*(fbb==T)+bb*(fbb<T);
21 flagb=1*(fbb<=T); %yaojia
22 end
23
24 if flaga && flagb

25 break
26 end
27 end
28 % bisection xb
29
30 if flaga>0.5
31 xb=fzero(@(x) Tstar(x,0,sigmma)-T,[aa,(aa+1-Xm)./10],optimset(’
TolFun’,1e-20,’TolX’,1e-20));
32 else
33 fprintf(’didnot find interval\n’);
34 return;
35 end
36 %bisection xf
37 if flagb>0.5
38 xf=fzero(@(x) Tstar(x,0,sigmma)-T,[bb-1+Xm,bb],optimset(’TolFun’
,1e-20,’TolX’,1e-20));
39 else
40 fprint(’didnot find interval\n’)
41 return;
42 end
43 end
Listing E.6: Function to calculate isotherm width and its location.

1 function [ym,Tm,xm] = fun_width(SIGMA,RY)
2 %FUN_WIDTH calculating dimensionless value of the half width and maximum
temperature
3 % SIGMA and RY are dimensionless
4 % Half width
5 TC=1./RY; ym=nan;Tm=nan;xm=nan;
6 if RY< 0.0172
7 disp(’If Ry<0.0172, there might be two peaks. TODO on that’);
8 end
9
332
10 [Tmax_centerline,xmax_centerline]=fun_Tmax_sigma(SIGMA);
11 r0=abs(xmax_centerline-SIGMA.ˆ2);
12
13 list=[0,logspace(-5,50,56)];temp_T=list-list;
14
15 for i=1:size(list,2)
16 temp_T(i)=tm_rm(SIGMA,r0+list(i));
17 end
18 rm_range=r0+[0,list(temp_T==min(temp_T))];
19 if TC<=min(temp_T)
20 disp(’the range of rm should be reset’)
21 end
22 %%
23 options=optimset(’TolX’,1e-30);
24 if Tmax_centerline>=TC
25 if temp_T>TC
26 disp(’pick right range for R’)
27 else
28 rm=fzero(@(r) tm_rm(SIGMA,r)-TC,rm_range,options);
29 [t,xm,ym]=tm_rm(SIGMA,rm);
30 if ˜isreal(ym)
31 disp(’error in calcuation’);
32 end
33 end
34 else
35 disp(’The set maximum temperature is higher than maximum temeprature
of sigma’)
36 end
37 Tm=Tmax_centerline;
38
39 % max_temperature=preheat+(Tmax_centerline∗heat_input∗velocity)./(4∗pi∗
conductivity∗ diffusitivity ) ;
40 % width=2∗2∗ diffusitivity ∗ym/velocity ;
41 % disp ([’ Maximum temperature is’,num2str(max_temperature)])
42 % disp ([’ width is ’, num2str(width) ])
43
44 end
Listing E.7: Curve fitting of catchment efficiency wl .

2 load(’res.mat’)
3 wL=wL(1:end-1,5:28);
4 wS=wS(:,5:28);
5 Ry=Ry(:,5:28);
333
6 minwL=min(wL’);
7 maxwL=max(wL’);
8 minwS=min(wS’);
9 maxwS=max(wS’);
10
11 %%
12 figure
13 fill([(mul(1:end-2)),fliplr((mul(1:end-2)))],[minwL,fliplr(maxwL)],[.9
.9 .9],’linestyle’,’none’); hold on
14 XL=[(1-mul(1:17))]; YL=[wL(1:17,16)];
15 xval = mul(1:end-2)’;
16 xval= xval*ones(1,24);
17
18 [xData, yData] = prepareCurveData( xval, wL );

19
20 ft = fittype( ’(1+a*(1-x).ˆb).ˆn’, ’independent’, ’x’, ’dependent’, ’y’

);
21 opts = fitoptions( ’Method’, ’NonlinearLeastSquares’ );
22 opts.Display = ’Off’;
23 opts.StartPoint = [0.0790611899385143 -1 -1];
24 [fitresult, gof] = fit( xData, yData, ft, opts )
25
26 plot(xval,(1+ 0.1322*(1-xval).ˆ -6.1550).ˆ -0.1591,’-k’,’linewidth’,1)

27 xlabel(’mul’)
28 ylabel(’wL’)
29 axis([0.1,1,0,1])
30 DefaultGca
Listing E.8: Curve fitting of catchment efficiency ws .

2 load(’res.mat’)
3 wL=wL(1:end-1,5:28);
4 wS=wS(1:end-1,5:28);
5 Ry=Ry(:,5:28);
6 minwL=min(wL’);
7 maxwL=max(wL’);
8 minwS=min(wS’);
9 maxwS=max(wS’);
10
11 %%
12 figure
13 fill([(mul(1:end-2)),fliplr((mul(1:end-2)))],[minwS,fliplr(maxwS)],[.9
.9 .9],’linestyle’,’none’); hold on
14
334
15 xval = mul(1:end-2)’;
16 xval= xval*ones(1,24);
17
18
19
20 [xData, yData] = prepareCurveData( xval, wS );

21 ft = fittype( ’((a1*x.ˆb1)+(a2*(1-x).ˆb2)).ˆ(n)’, ’independent’, ’x’, ’
dependent’, ’y’ );
22 opts = fitoptions( ’Method’, ’NonlinearLeastSquares’ );
23 opts.Display = ’Off’;
24 opts.Lower = [0 0 -inf -Inf -Inf];
25 opts.StartPoint = [0.5 -0.5 0.5 -0.5 -0.5];
26 opts.Upper = [Inf Inf 0 0 0];
27 [fitresult, gof] = fit( xData, yData, ft, opts );
28 % figure ( ’Name’, ’ untitled fit 1’ ) ;
29 % h = plot( fitresult , xData, yData );
30 % legend( h, ’wS vs. xval ’, ’ untitled fit 1’, ’ Location ’, ’NorthEast ’, ’
Interpreter ’, ’none’ ) ;
31 xlabel( ’xval’, ’Interpreter’, ’none’ );
32 ylabel( ’wS’, ’Interpreter’, ’none’ );
33 grid on
34
35
36 figure(1)
37 plot(xval,((0.9015*xval.ˆ-0.6428 )+( 0.304*(1-xval).ˆ-0.3731 ) ).ˆ(
-2.824 ),’-k’)
38 xlabel(’mul’)
39 ylabel(’wS’)
40 axis([0.1,1,0,0.3])
41 DefaultGca
335

0ff961df-0aef-4a94-a5cc-813d659e6975

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

0ff961df-0aef-4a94-a5cc-813d659e6975

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

0ff961df-0aef-4a94-a5cc-813d659e6975

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Systematic Methodology to Develop Scaling Laws for Thermal

Features of Temperature Field Induced by a Moving Heat Source

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering

A systematic methodology is developed to formulate scaling laws in closed-form for

2 Width of thermal features induced by a 2-D moving heat source 31

3 Characteristic values of a two-dimensional point moving heat source 77

4 Cooling rate in moving-heat-source manufacturing processes with

5 Width of thermal features induced by a moving heat source on a

6 Isotherm half-width of Gaussian moving heat sources on a thick

7 Conclusions and future work 228

Appendix A: Matlab codes for blending 254

Appendix B: Supplementary materials for the moving line heat source

Appendix C: Supplementary materials for the moving line heat source

Appendix D: Supplementary materials for moving Gaussian heat source

Appendix E: Catchment efficiency of Gaussian distributed powder cloud

2.1 Variables used in Chapter 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.1 Variables used in Chapter 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

4.1 Variables used in Chapter 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

5.1 Variables used in Chapter 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

6.1 Variables used in Chapter 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

1.1 Schematic of moving heat source. The isotherm of interest can be

2.1 Isotherms for a 2-D point heat source of intensity q on a substrate of

3.1 Characteristic values of isotherm T = Tc for moving heat source prob-

changes with h∗ for Ro = 0.1, 1, 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

changes with h∗ for Ro = 0.1, 1, 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

5.1 Isotherms for a point heat source of intensity q on a thin substrate of

B.1 Location of isotherm width x∗max changes with Ro number. . . . . . . 287

changes with Ry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324

This dissertation conducts a systematic research on important thermal features re-

Moving heat source Isotherm of interest Substrate

1.1.2 Knowledge gap

There is a significant lack of practical, reliable, and general engineering expressions

This dissertation is to propose a systematic approach to establish a set of practi-

Characteristic Value = Ideal Solution × Correction Factor×

Correction Factor × . . . (1.3)

1.2 Literature review

Surface heat source

Volumetric heat source

• Modify Churchill-Usagi 1-D blending equation systematic to extend its scope of

• Develop predictive engineering expressions for characteristics related to isotherms

• Propose a systematic 2-D blending methodology that generates explicit scal-

• Validate the proposed predictive formulae by comparing with data collected

1.4 Thesis outline

This dissertation includes chapters as follows:

• Chapter 2 proposes the modified 1-D blending methodology by introducing ex-

• Chapter 5 proposes a systematic approach to achieve 2-D blending and presents

Width of thermal features induced

Variables Unit Description

Ac m2 Cross sectional area of melt

Variables Unit Description

Variables Unit Description

LBW Laser beam welding

2.3 Governing equation

with the following boundary conditions:

2.4 Normalization and dimensional analysis

2.5 Limitations of idealized model

2.5.1 Effect of finite heat source

where q”max = q/(2πσ 2 ) and σ is the standard deviation of Gaussian distribution.

2.5.2 Effect of substrate thickness