Effect of Surface Tension Anisotropy and Welding

Parameters on Initial Instability Dynamics During

Solidification: A Phase-Field Study
FENGYI YU and YANHONG WEI

The effects of surface tension anisotropy and welding parameters on initial instability dynamics
during gas tungsten arc welding of an Al-alloy are investigated by a quantitative phase-field
model. The results show that the surface tension anisotropy and welding parameters affect the
initial instability dynamics in different ways during welding. The surface tension anisotropy does
not influence the solute diffusion process but does affect the stability of the solid/liquid interface
during solidification. The welding parameters affect the initial instability dynamics by varying
the growth rate and thermal gradient. The incubation time decreases, and the initial wavelength
remains stable as the welding speed increases. When welding power increases, the incubation
time increases and the initial wavelength slightly increases. Experiments were performed for the
same set of welding parameters used in modeling, and the results of the experiments and
simulations were in good agreement.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-018-4663-7
 The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society and ASM International 2018

I. INTRODUCTION solidification structures in the late stages.[7] Therefore, it

WELDING is an important joining method that is
widely used in many fields of the manufacturing
industry. The mechanical properties of weld joints
depend on the microstructures which result from the
weld solidification, which is a history-sensitive process.[1]
Investigating the solidification dynamics can provide a
theoretical basis for optimizing the welding process. In
the past few decades, the development of computational
materials science has advanced the understanding of
solidification behavior during welding.[2,3] However, it is
fundamentally challenging to integrate the whole weld-
ing process into one computational model in part due to
the complex transient conditions in a molten pool.[4] As
a compromise, most researchers begin microstructural
simulations from the beginning of cellular crystal
growth, regarding the simulated domain boundary as
one simple solid layer and artificially seeding the
nucleation.[5] These studies have typically ignored the
establishment of the solute boundary layer during the
initial stage of nucleation and growth, which affects the
final microstructures significantly.[6] Moreover, the pla-
nar instability in the early stage could determine the
FENGYI YU and YANHONG WEI are with the College of
Material Science and Technology, Nanjing University of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China. Contact e-mial:
nuaadw@126.com
Manuscript submitted November 27, 2017.
is important to investigate the initial instability dynam-
ics of the solidification process in a molten pool.
Theoretical modeling and numerical studies have been
carried out to predict the initial instability in the past
few decades. The theoretical analysis was developed
from the constitutional undercooling[8] theory, the
Mullins and Sekerka (MS)[9] theory, and the Warren
and Langer (WL)[10] theory. The WL theory provides a
method to predict the incubation time and the pertur-
bation frequency of the initial instability. The simulation
results from the WL model agreed well with the
experimental observations of real-time synchrotron
X-ray radiography,[11] but the detailed solid/liquid
(S/L) interface morphologies could not be directly
obtained. Wang et al.[12] developed an analytic model,
based on the WL theory, which combines the Fourier
synthesis method and the time-dependent linear stability
analysis to predict the interface structures. The model
was verified in the steady-state condition of directional
solidification.[13] The steady-state model was extended to
nonsteady-state by Dong el al.[14] The new model has
been used in the transient conditions found in a gas
tungsten arc welding (GTAW) process.[15] While there
has been significant research into making the initial
instability predictions, the effect of surface tension
anisotropy and welding parameters on the initial insta-
bility dynamics have not been considered. The surface
tension anisotropy and welding parameters have enor-
mous impacts on the S/L interface morphology evolu-
tion,[16] which could determine the final solidification
structures.[17] Herein, the surface tension anisotropy is

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

defined by the anisotropy strength and misalignment
angle. The misalignment angle is the angle between the
preferred crystalline orientation of the base metal and
the thermal gradient direction at the front of the
interface. The thermal gradient direction changes with
time during welding because of the heat source move-
ment. Moreover, the growth rate R and thermal
gradient G are determined by the actual welding
process, which both can change according to the
welding parameters used.[18] Therefore, it is essential to
investigate the effect mechanism of surface tension
anisotropy and welding parameters on the initial insta-
bility dynamics during welding.
Due to the mesoscale nature of solidification struc-
tures, the phase-field method is a suitable choice to
investigate the solidification dynamics.[19–21] Using a
thin-interface asymptotic analysis and the introduction
of an ‘‘anti-trapping current’’ term,[22] the phase-field
method predicted the dendritic arm spacing,[23] crystal
morphology evolution,[24,25] and equiaxial growth[26]
quantitatively. The simulation results are consistent with
the experimental observations of directional solidifica-
tion and welding processes. Thus, the quantitative
phase-field (QPF) model provides a superb tool to
investigate the effect of surface tension anisotropy and
welding parameters on the initial instability dynamics.
In this study, we used the QPF model to reproduce
the dynamic evolution process of initial instability in a
GTAW molten pool of Al-4 wt pct Cu alloy. Different
misalignment angles are used to reflect the different
surface tension anisotropies as the anisotropy strength is
constant for a specific material. The welding speed is
investigated by varying the speed while keeping the
welding power constant. Based on the simulation
results, the incubation time and average wavelength of
the initial instability are discussed in detail. The influ-
ences of the term G/R on the solidification mode and the
term G 9 R on the solidification structure size are
investigated. Phase-field simulations are performed with
different welding powers at the same welding speed to
confirm the effect mechanism of G/R and G 9 R.
Finally, experimental observations are made for the
Fig. 1—Diagram of a GTAW molten pool.
same set of welding parameters to verify the accuracy of
the simulation results.
II. MODELING AND EXPERIMENT
A. Phase-Field Model
The QPF model used in this paper was developed by
Echebarria et al.[27] for the directional solidification of a
binary dilute alloy and was modified by Zheng et al.[28]
to be used for the transient conditions in a welding
process. By neglecting the influence of latent heat and
convection, the so-called ‘‘frozen temperature approxi-
mation’’ is adopted:
 Z 
Tðz; tÞ ¼ T0 þ GðtÞ z  z0  Rðt0 Þdt0 ; ½1
where T0 = T(z0, t) is a reference temperature, and
G(t) is along the z-direction. The detailed derivations
and validations of the QPF model can be found in the
study by Echebarria et al.[27] In this study, we present
only the equations describing the evolutions of the
phase field and solute field. In the formulation, a sca-
lar variable /(r, t) is introduced to determine the phase
at a fixed point and time. The field / takes on the val-
ues of / =  1 in the liquid phase and / = 1 in the
solid phase, and / varies smoothly at the interface.
The solute concentration c(r, t) is characterized by a
generalized supersaturation field U(r, t), which is given
by Eq. [2]:
 
1 2kc=c1
U¼ 1 ; ½2
1  k 1  / þ kð1 þ /Þ
where k is the solute partition coefficient, and c¥ is the
solute concentration in the far-away field. For cubic
crystals such as in an Al-Cu alloy, the fourfold surface
energy anisotropy function in a 2D system is approxi-
mated by Eq. [3]:
 
_
a n  aðh þ h0 Þ ¼ 1 þ c4 cos 4ðh þ h0 Þ; ½3
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
where c B. Computational Procedure
4 is the anisotropy strength, h is the angle
between the interface normal and the axis z, and h0 is The growth rate and thermal gradient vary consider-
the misalignment angle. The governing equations of ably across the molten pool due to the movement of the
the phase field and the supersaturation field can be heat source during welding. To investigate the dynamic
expressed by Eqs. [4] and [5], respectively: evolution of the planar interface instability at the initial
" Rt # transient stage, the time-dependent R and G must be
 2 z  0 Rðt0 Þdt0 @/
_
s0 a n 1  ð1  kÞ obtained. The shape of a GTAW molten pool can be
lT @t regarded as the combination of two half ellipsoids. The
    crystals growth begins in the rear ellipsoid, as shown in
! 2!
¼ W2 r a n r / þ /  /3
_
½4 Figure 1.
" Rt # The blue region is the domain used for numerical
z  0 Rðt0 Þdt0 analysis, where al and bl are the depth and rear length of
 kgð/Þ U þ the molten pool, respectively. The value V represents the
lT
welding speed, and a is the angle between the directions
of V and G. The orientation of crystal growth is assumed
 
1þk 1k @U to be always perpendicular to the fusion line in the
 / initial stage. Thus, the relationship between R and V is
2 2 @t
0 1 given by R = VÆcosa. Using the elliptic equation and a
  ! point’s coordinate, the evolutions of R and G are
!B ! _ @/ r / C
¼ r @Dqð/Þr U þ a n W½1 þ ð1  kÞU  A ; expressed in terms of the heat input and welding
@t ! 
r / speed[28]:
1 @/
þ ½1 þ ð1  kÞU al V2 t
2 @t RðtÞ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

2  ½6
½5 V2 t2 al  b2l þ b4l

where the function g(/) = (1  /2)2 is the double-well

function which ensures g( 1) = g(1) = 0, while q(/) = TP  TL
GðtÞ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; ½7
(1  /)/2 dictates that solute diffusivity is 0 in the solid, V t2 þ a2l 1V
2 2 t2
b2
D in the liquid, and varies across the interface. l

lT(t) = |m|c¥ (1  k) k1 G(t)1 is the thermal length,

and m is the liquidus slope. W and s0 are the interface
width and relaxation time, which are the length scale
and time scale, respectively. By neglecting the kinetic
effect, the phase-field parameters can be linked to the
physical quantities according to W = d0 k/a1 and
s0 = a2 k W2/D, respectively, where a1 = 0.8839 and
a2 = 0.6267 are the numerical constants, k is the
coupling constant, and d0 = C/|m|(1  k) c0l is the
capillary length. C = c0 TM/L is the Gibbs–Thomson
coefficient, where c0 is the isotropic part of the surface
tension, TM is the melting temperature of the pure
solvent, and L is the latent heat.
where TP and TL are the central temperatures of molten
pool and the liquidus temperature, respectively. The
values of al, bl, and TP are obtained by the finite element
simulation, then the evolutions of R and G with time are
obtained as input for the phase-field simulation. The
parameters for simulation under welding conditions by
varying speed and varying power are shown in Tables I
and II, respectively.
The welded material used is Al-Cu alloy 2A14 and its
chemical composition is shown in Table III. This
material can be considered to be a dilute Al-4.0 wt pct
Cu binary alloy. The physical properties of the material
and related parameters are summarized in Table IV.[29]

Table I. Parameters for Simulation Under Different Welding Speeds with Welding Power 3600 W

Symbol (Unit) V = 2.0 mm/s V = 2.5 mm/s V = 3.0 mm/s V = 3.5 mm/s
al (mm) 2.95 2.62 2.26 2.03
bl (mm) 4.52 4.37 4.28 4.12
TP  TL (K) 830 680 550 450

Table II. Parameters for Simulation Under Different Welding Powers with Welding Speed 2.5 mm/s

Symbol (Unit) P = 2000 W P = 3000 W P = 4000 W P = 5000 W

al (mm) 1.72 2.45 3.19 3.85
bl (mm) 2.92 4.08 5.67 6.36
TP  TL (K) 380 620 850 1050

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

The misalignment angles h0 were chosen to be 0, 15, 30
and 45 deg due to the four-fold symmetry of the
system’s cubic crystal structure.
The program coding was written in FORTRAN and
executed by the Institute for Cyber Science Advanced
Cyber Infrastructure (ICS-ACI) at the Pennsylvania
State University for this study. The most important
simulation parameter is the interface width W. With the
decrease of W, the calculation precision increases but
the computational cost increases dramatically.[30]
According to Reference 31 the W only needs to be one
order of magnitude smaller than the characteristic
length scale of the microstructures. The characteristic
field and the solute field. A time step size is chosen below
the threshold of numerical instability for the diffusion
equation in 2D system, i.e., Dt < (Dx)2/(4D). The initial
phase-field variable is set as /(z,0) = tanh(z/2) along
the normal to the planar interface, and the initial
supersaturation field U is set to a steady-state diffusion
profile along the normal to the interface.
To consider the infinitesimal fluctuations at the planar
interface in phase-field simulation, a fluctuating current
JU to induce concentration fluctuations is included in
the governing equation. Its components are random
variables obeying a Gaussian distribution with
variance[32]:
length is about 5 to 10 lm in the initial stage, so W was  m

chosen to be 0.11 lm in the simulation. The Eqs. [4] to JU ð~ r0 ; t0 Þ ¼ 2Dqð/ÞFU dmn dð~
r; tÞJnU ð~ r0 Þdðt  t0 Þ ½8
r ~
[5] are solved by an explicit finite difference method with
a fixed grid size of dx = 0.8 W. The Neumann bound- The fluctuating current depends explicitly on the
ary conditions with zero-flux are used for both the phase phase field via the solute diffusivity Dq(/) that is equal
to 0 in the solid and D in the liquid. The magnitude of
FU = F0U[1 + (1  k)U] can be defined by the relation
Table III. Chemical Composition of Al-Cu Alloy 2A14 of Reference 33:
(Weight Percent)
D E
Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Zn Ti Al
D E ðdcÞ2 FU
ðdUÞ2 ¼ 2
 ; ½9
0.6 to 1.2 0.7 4.4 0.4 to 1.0 0.4 to 0.8 0.3 0.15 bal. ðDc0 Þ DV

where the constant noise magnitude

FU = kv0 (1  k)2 N1 A c0
1
is the value of FU for a
reference planar interface at temperature T0(U = 0).
Table IV. Physical Properties of Al–4.0 Wt Pct Cu and
Related Parameters The value Dc0 = c¥(1/k  1) is the concentration jump
across the interface, v0 is the molar volume of the solvent
Symbol Value Unit atoms, and NA is the Avogadro constant.
Liquidus temperature, TL 922.9 K
Alloy composition, c¥ 4.0 wt pct C. Experimental Design
Liquid diffusion coefficient, D 3.0 9 109 m2/s
Liquidus slope, m  2.6 K/wt pct
The experimental observations for the same set of
Anisotropy of surface energy, e0 0.01 welding parameters were carried out to verify the
Equilibrium partition coefficient, k 0.14 phase-field simulations. The base metal was Al-Cu alloy
Gibbs–Thomson coefficient, C 2.4 9 107 Km 2A14, and the dimensions of the plates were

Fig. 2—The evolutions of (a) incubation time and (b) the average wavelength with the misalignment angle h0 for different welding speeds.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Fig. 3—Dynamic evolutions of the planar instability with different misalignment angles: (a) h0 = 0 deg, (b) h0 = 15 deg, (c) h0 = 30 deg, (d)
h0 = 45 deg (the time interval between successive lines is 0.09 s).
200 mm 9 120 mm 9 8 mm. To investigate the effect of
welding speed, welding speeds of 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and
3.5 mm/s were used with a constant welding power of
3600 W. For studying the effect of welding power, the
welding powers of 2000, 3000, 4000, and 5000 were used
at the welding speed of 2.5 mm/s. Optical metallography
was performed on the longitudinal section of the
welding beads to observe the microstructures near the
fusion line.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Effect of Surface Tension Anisotropy
Due to the transient behavior of the interface, it is
difficult to distinguish the instantaneous critical inter-
face velocity of the initial instability by experimental
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
observations or by numerical simulations. According to
Reference 14 the incubation time and average wave-
length can reveal the effect of surface tension anisotropy
on the initial instability. The evolutions of these two
criteria with misalignment angle for different welding
speeds are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2 shows that for a given welding speed, the
incubation time and average wavelength increase
slightly with the increase of h0. These increases result
from the stabilizing effect of the surface tension
anisotropy on the planar interface evolution. Based on
the local equilibrium, the one-sided model of solidifica-
tion, and with consideration of the surface tension
anisotropy, the free boundary conditions can be
expressed as[13]:
@cL
Vtip ðcL  cS Þ ¼ D ½10
@z
Fig. 4—The evolutions of (a) interface velocity and (b) solute concentration with misalignment angles h0 (P = 3600 W, V = 2.0 mm/s).
Fig. 5—The evolutions of (a) interface velocity and (b) solute concentration with different welding speeds.
TI ¼ TM þ mcL  jC½1  15c4 cos 4ðh þ h0 Þ;
where Vtip is the instantaneous interface velocity, cL and
cS are the concentrations at the liquid side and solid side
of the interface, respectively. TI is the temperature at the
interface, j is the interface curvature, and c4 is the
anisotropy strength. The term [1  15c4cos4(h + h0)] in
Eq. [11] can be simplified to [1  15c4cos(4h0)], as the
value of h is infinitesimal in the initial stage. Then the
surface tension stiffness can be expressed as
c0[1  15c4cos(4h0)], which is positively correlated with
h0. The stiffness reflects the stabilizing effect of the
surface tension anisotropy, i.e., the times for the planar
interface and the larger initial wavelength increase with
the increasing interface stiffness. This conclusion from
the analytic model is consistent with the results in
Figure 2.
½11 To demonstrate the different morphologies between
the misalignment angles clearly, the dynamic evolutions
of the interface structures with different h0 values are
shown in Figure 3.
It can be seen that as h0 increases from 0 to 45 deg,
the planar interface remains intact longer and the initial
wavelength becomes larger. The growth orientations of
the crystals are along the preferred crystalline orienta-
tion but not the thermal gradient direction. This occurs
since the existing base metal grains at the fusion line act
as the substrate, and growth occurs by arranging atoms
from the liquid metal upon the substrate grains without
altering their preferred crystalline orientations.[34]
To get a more thorough understanding of the effect of
surface tension anisotropy on the S/L interface during
its evolution, the time-dependent characteristic param-
eters need to be investigated. The interface velocity and
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
Fig. 6—The evolutions of (a) incubation time and (b) initial wavelength with welding speeds.
Fig. 7—The evolutions of (a) growth rate R and (b) thermal gradient G with different welding speeds.
solute concentration in front of interface with different
h0 are presented in Figure 4, where the welding condi-
tion was P = 3600 W and V = 2.0 mm/s.
Figure 4(a) shows that the evolutions of interface
velocity with different h0 in the initial transient stage. The
velocity increases with time and reaches its peak around
the incubation time and then decreases. In the solidifi-
cation process during welding, the total undercooling
consists of the thermal undercooling dominated by R
and G, and the constitutional undercooling caused by
solute trapping at the S/L interface. In the initial stage,
the interface is planar and advances slowly towards the
liquid region. The growth rate and the solute aggregation
ahead of the S/L interface increase as time progresses,
and eventually, the planar interface loses its stability and
develops into cellular crystals. A small spacing cell has a
large interface curvature which can promote the solute
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
diffusion from the tip position to both sides of the
interface. Hence the interface velocity increases sharply
(Figure 4(a)) and the solute segregation decreases
(Figure 4(b)) at the beginning of the cellular crystal
growth. After this critical time, the interface velocity
reaches its peak and then decreases as the cellular crystal
tip and the solute concentration break down. That is to
say, the inflection points of the curves correspond to the
critical times for instability. As shown in Figure 4, the
curves completely overlap with each other before the
instability time is reached, revealing that the surface
tension anisotropy does not affect the interface velocity
or solute diffusion during solidification. This conclusion
is consistent with Eqs. [10] to [11], indicating that the
surface tension anisotropy influences the stability of the
planar interface by changing the boundary conditions of
the free boundary problem.
Fig. 8—The evolutions of (a) G/R and (b) G 9 R with different welding speeds.
Nevertheless, the capillary effect in Eq. [11] with a
small surface tension anisotropy (c4 = 0.01) had only a
15 pct deviation from the isotropic case, indicating that
the surface tension anisotropy has only a small influence
on the initial instability dynamics. Meanwhile, the
differences between the curves in Figures 2(a) and (b)
indicate that the effect of h0 is negligibly small compared
to that of the welding speed. In practice, the weld metal
is polycrystalline material where the misalignment angle
is a random variable. The property of the surface
tension anisotropy in practical applications should be
almost constant. Therefore, we can focus on the effects
of welding parameters on the initial instability dynamics
for the remaining portion of this study, using the
misalignment angle h0 = 0 deg.
B. Effect of Welding Speeds
In the simulations, four different welding speeds, 2.0,
2.5, 3.00, and 3.50 mm/s, were used with the constant
welding power of 3600 W. The evolutions of interface
velocity and solute concentration in the front of
interface with different welding speeds are presented in
Figure 5.
As shown in Figure 5(a), the interface velocity varies
greatly under different welding speeds. The maximum
interface velocity increases as welding speed increases,
and the time before the peak decreases as the welding
speed increases. As the heat input decreases when the
welding speed increases, the solidification time is short-
ened which causes this increase of the interface velocity.
Figure 5(b) shows the evolutions of the solute concen-
tration with time for different welding speeds. The solute
concentrations maximums decrease with increasing
welding speed since the increasing welding speed reduces
the molten pool size and can limit the solute diffusion
process. Another cause of the decreasing solute
concentration is that the increased interface velocity
also increases the degree of solute segregation.
Figure 6 shows the evolutions of incubation time and
initial average wavelength of planar instability with time
for different welding speeds. This illustrates that the
incubation time decreases, and the wavelength remains
stable when the welding speed is increased.
The deterministic parameters of solidification are the
growth rate R and the thermal gradient G for different
welding conditions. By solving Eqs. [6] to [7], the
evolutions of R and G with time for different welding
speeds are obtained and shown in Figure 7.
It can be seen that the growth rate increases with
increasing welding speed. The thermal gradient
decreases with increasing welding speed. The values of
R and G will both strongly influence the solidification
dynamics during welding.[34] The ratio of G to R could
determine the solidification mode, i.e., whether growth is
planar crystal, cellular crystal, columnar dendritic crys-
tal, or equiaxed dendritic crystal. The cellular crystal
will appear earlier as the ratio G/R, decreases. The term
G 9 R influences the microstructure size with the
microstructure size decreasing with the increase of
G 9 R. Based on Eqs. [6] to [7], the evolutions of G/R
and G 9 R were calculated for different welding speeds
and are shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8(a) shows that the G/R gradually decreases
with the time which reveals that the interface morphology
changes from planar, to cellular, and to dendrite during
welding. The colored dots in the inset of Figure 8(a)
corresponds to the incubation times of instability, which
indicate that the incubation time decreases as the welding
speed increases. As the G/R decreases with the increasing
welding speed, the cellular crystal growth will appear
earlier with smaller G/R values. As shown in Figure 8(b),
the G 9 R increases with time in the initial transient
stage. The colored dots in the inset correspond to the
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
Fig. 9—The microstructures near the fusion line with different welding speeds: (a) V = 2.0 mm/s, (b) V = 2.5 mm/s, (c) V = 3.0 mm/s, (d)
V = 3.5 mm/s.

incubation time of instability, from which it is seen that yellow dotted line in the inset of Figure 8(b) emphasizes
the values of G 9 R under different welding speeds are this point. Because the G 9 R influences the microstruc-
almost the same regardless of the incubation time. The ture size, the similar values of G 9 R at the incubation

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

time will result in cellular crystals that have the similar
spacing. This conclusion is consistent with the results
shown in Figure 6(b).
From the above discussions, it is seen that the
increasing welding speed could promote the initial
instability while having limited influence on the initial
wavelength. Figure 9 shows the optical metallography
of the microstructures near the fusion line under
different welding speeds.
The micrographs in Figure 9 are located at the
bottom of the molten pool. The red dotted line in these
images highlights the fusion line. The wavelength varies
with welding speeds and ranges from approximately 8.0
to 11.0 lm. The average wavelength was calculated by
counting the number of cellular crystals near the fusion
line, including the eliminated cellular crystals and the
Fig. 10—Comparison of the initial wavelengths obtained by
phase-field simulations and experimental observations, respectively,
with different welding speeds.
Fig. 11—The evolutions of G/R with different welding powers.
survived dendrites. Figure 10 shows the comparison of
the initial average wavelength obtained by the experi-
mental observations and the phase-field simulations
with different welding speeds.
The comparisons between the phase-field simulations
and experimental observations are in general agreement
as both show that the initial wavelength remains
stable for the different welding speeds. Furthermore,
this agrees well with the previous discussion regarding
the G 9 R term remaining consistent regardless of the
incubation time.
C. Effects of Welding Powers
In the simulation experiments, four different welding
powers of 2000, 3000, 4000, and 5000 W are used at the
constant welding speed of 2.5 mm/s.
Fig. 12—The evolutions of incubation time with welding power.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
Fig. 13—The evolutions of G 9 R with different welding powers.
From Section III–B, the G/R term controls the
solidification mode, and the G 9 R term determines
the microstructure size. By solving Eqs. [6] to [7], the
evolutions of G/R with time for different welding powers
were obtained and are presented in Figure 11.
Figure 11 shows the values of G/R increase with
increasing welding power. From the discussion in
Section III–B, cellular crystal growth appears earlier as
the G/R decreases. This means that the planar interface
lasts longer as the welding power increases. To verify
this conclusion, the evolution of the incubation time
with the welding power from phase-field simulations is
shown in Figure 12.
The results from phase-field simulation in Figure 12
illustrate that the incubation time indeed becomes
longer as the welding power increases. This is consistent
with the discussed influence mechanism of G/R.
To predict the change of the microstructure size with
the welding power, the evolutions of G 9 R with time
were calculated and are presented in Figure 13.
The colored dots in the inset of Figure 13 correspond
to the incubation time of planar instability. From these
markers, it is seen that the G 9 R decreases slightly as
welding power increases at the incubation time. Conse-
quently, the initial wavelength should increase slightly as
welding power increases. Based on the discussion in
Section III–B, increasing welding power makes the
planar growth process last longer and makes the initial
average wavelength to be slightly larger. The optical
metallography of the microstructures near the fusion
lines for different welding powers is shown in Figure 14.
The microstructures shown in Figure 14 are located at
the bottom of the molten pool. Note that the red dotted
line shows the fusion line. The wavelength ranges from
approximately 8.0 to 12.0 lm for different welding
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
powers used. The average wavelength was obtained by
counting the number of cellular crystals near the fusion
line. Figure 15 shows the comparison of the initial
wavelength from the experiments and the phase-field
simulations for different welding powers.
The results from the phase-field simulations and
experimental observations generally agree and show
that the initial wavelength increases slightly as welding
power increases. This result is consistent with the
previous discussion in this section.
The wavelength from the experimental results (from
9.0 to 12.0 lm) is a little larger than that from the
phase-field simulations (from 6.0 to 8.0 lm). The
difference may result from the following reasons. First,
the phase-field simulations are done in a 2D system,
while the experimental results are 3D. Second, the flow
field was not considered in the phase-field model used
here. Also, the strong nonlinearity of the thermal
gradients during welding may not be fully realized in
the simulation. As the average initial wavelengths from
the simulation results and experimental observations are
within an order of magnitude, the phase-field model can
be regarded as a quantitative model.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The effects of surface tension anisotropy and welding
parameters on the initial instability dynamics during the
GTAW of an Al-alloy were investigated by a QPF
model. The simulation results reveal that the surface
tension anisotropy and welding parameters affect the
interface instability evolution process. The following
conclusions are drawn based on the simulation and
experimental results:
Fig. 14—The solidification microstructures near the fusion line with different welding powers: (a) P = 2000 W, (b) P = 3000 W, (c)
P = 4000 W, (d) P = 5000 W.

1. The surface tension anisotropy does not influence
the solute diffusion process but does influence the
stability of S/L interface during the solidification of
welding. Moreover, as the stiffness of the interface
increases (i.e., larger h0 values), then both the planar
interfaces remain intact longer and a larger initial
wavelength can be obtained.
2. The welding parameters affect the initial instability
dynamics by varying the growth rate and thermal
gradient. The G/R term determines the solidification

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A


Fig. 15—Comparison of the initial wavelengths from phase-field
simulations and experimental observations, respectively, with
different welding powers.
mode and the G 9 R determines the microstruc-
ture’s size. Specifically, the incubation time
decreases, and the initial wavelength remains
stable as the welding speed increases. As the welding
power increases, the incubation time increases, and
the initial wavelength increases.
3. The simulation results are consistent with experi-
mental observations for the same set of welding
parameters. This verified the accuracy of the sim-
ulation results.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The study is supported by the Priority Academic
Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education
Institutions (PAPD) and the financial aid for the pro-
ject from the Fundamental Research Funds for the
Central Universities NP2016204. The authors acknowl-
edge Long-Qing Chen and Xiaoxing Cheng at Penn-
sylvania State University for their help in the
development of the phase-field code.
REFERENCES
1. F. Yu, Y. Wei, Y. Ji, and L.-Q. Chen: J. Mater. Process. Technol.,
2018, vol. 255, pp. 285–93.
2. H.L. Wei, J.W. Elmer, and T. DebRoy: Acta Mater., 2016,
vol. 115, pp. 123–31.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
3. L. Wang, Y. Wei, X. Zhan, F. Yu, X. Cao, C. Gu, and W. Ou: J.
Mater. Process. Technol., 2017, vol. 246, pp. 22–29.
4. H. Bhadeshia and L. Svensson: Math. Model. Weld Phenom., 1993,
vol. 1, pp. 109–82.
5. C. Gu, Y. Wei, F. Yu, X. Liu, and L. She: Metall. Mater. Trans. A,
2017, vol. 48A, pp. 4314–23.
6. W.J. Boettinger, S.R. Coriell, A.L. Greer, A. Karma, W. Kurz, M.
Rappaz, and R. Trivedi: Acta Mater., 2000, vol. 48, pp. 43–70.
7. W. Losert, B.Q. Shi, and H.Z. Cummins: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.,
1998, vol. 95, pp. 439–42.
8. W.A. Tiller, K.A. Jackson, J.W. Rutter, and B. Chalmers: Acta
Metall., 1953, vol. 1, pp. 428–37.
9. W.W. Mullins and R.F. Sekerka: J. Appl. Phys., 1964, vol. 35,
pp. 444–51.
10. J.A. Warren and J.S. Langer: Phys. Rev. E, 1993, vol. 47,
pp. 2702–12.
11. Y. Chen, A.-A. Bogno, N.M. Xiao, B. Billia, X.H. Kang, H.
Nguyen-Thi, X.H. Luo, and D.Z. Li: Acta Mater., 2012, vol. 60,
pp. 199–207.
12. Z. Wang, J. Wang, and G. Yang: Appl. Phys. Lett., 2009, vol. 94,
p. 061920.
13. Z. Wang, J. Wang, and G. Yang: Phys. Rev. E, 2009, vol. 80,
p. 052603.
14. Z. Dong, W. Zheng, Y. Wei, and K. Song: Phys. Rev. E, 2014,
vol. 89, p. 062403.
15. W. Zheng, Z. Dong, Y. Wei, and K. Song: J. Cryst. Growth, 2014,
vol. 402, pp. 203–09.
16. H. Xing, L. Zhang, K. Song, H. Chen, and K. Jin: Int. J. Heat
Mass Transf., 2017, vol. 104, pp. 607–14.
17. J.J. Hoyt, M. Asta, and A. Karma: Mater. Sci. Eng. R, 2003,
vol. 41, pp. 121–63.
18. A. Sánchez Osio, S. Liu, and D.L. Olson: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 1996,
vol. 221, pp. 122–33.
19. L.-Q. Chen: Annu. Rev. Mater. Res., 2002, vol. 32, pp. 113–40.
20. W.J. Boettinger, J.A. Warren, C. Beckermann, and A. Karma:
Annu. Rev. Mater. Res., 2002, vol. 32, pp. 163–94.
21. L. Gránásy, L. Rátkai, A. Szállás, B. Korbuly, G.I. Tóth, L.
Környei, and T. Pusztai: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2014, vol. 45A,
pp. 1694–719.
22. A. Karma: Phys. Rev. Lett., 2001, vol. 87, p. 115701.
23. L. Wang, Y. Wei, and F. Yu: Mater. Sci. Technol., 2017, vol. 33,
pp. 846–53.
24. M. Wei, Y. Tang, L. Zhang, W. Sun, and Y. Du: Metall. Mater.
Trans. A, 2015, vol. 46A, pp. 3182–91.
25. E. Miyoshi, T. Takaki, M. Ohno, Y. Shibuta, S. Sakane, T.
Shimokawabe, and T. Aoki: NPJ Comput. Mater., 2017, vol. 3, p. 25.
26. G. Demange, H. Zapolsky, R. Patte, and M. Brunel: NPJ Comput.
Mater., 2017, vol. 3, p. 15.
27. B. Echebarria, R. Folch, A. Karma, and M. Plapp: Phys. Rev. E,
2004, vol. 70, p. 061604.
28. W.J. Zheng, Z.B. Dong, Y.H. Wei, K.J. Song, J.L. Guo, and Y.
Wang: Comput. Mater. Sci., 2014, vol. 82, pp. 525–30.
29. A.J. Clarke, D. Tourret, Y. Song, S.D. Imhoff, P.J. Gibbs, J.W.
Gibbs, K. Fezzaa, and A. Karma: Acta Mater., 2017, vol. 129,
pp. 203–16.
30. A. Karma and W.-J. Rappel: Phys. Rev. E, 1998, vol. 57,
pp. 4323–49.
31. H. Xing, X. Dong, H. Wu, G. Hao, J. Wang, C. Chen, and K. Jin:
Sci. Rep., 2016, vol. 6, p. 26625.
32. B. Echebarria, A. Karma, and S. Gurevich: Phys. Rev. E, 2010,
vol. 81, p. 021608.
33. M. Asta, J.J. Hoyt, and A. Karma: Phys. Rev. B, 2002, vol. 66,
p. 100101.
34. S Kou: Welding Metallurgy, Wiley, New York, 2003, pp. 166–67.