Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Gibbs, Gordon

Publications and source records attributed to Gibbs, Gordon.

Astigmatic electron beam propagation

An astigmatic electron beam with an ellipticity ratio of approximately 2:1 was examined using the Enhanced Modified Faraday Cup (EMFC) diagnostic to measure its properties and show how the power density distribution varies near the beam waist. Results show that the beam has two power density peaks, one on either side of the beam crossover point, resulting from different focal distances of the major and minor axes of the elliptical beam shape. Quantification of the beam properties was used to establish a depth-of-field where the beam diameter and peak power densities are relatively constant. For the 1 kW beam studied here, the depth-of-field measured approximately ±5 mm from the beam crossover point, illustrating how electron beam diagnostics can be used to identify process control limits for repeatable and reliable welds under non-ideal electron beam power density distribution conditions.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Power Density Distributions in Electron Beams

Measuring and controlling the power density distribution of electron beams used for welding is critical for producing repeatable welds and for transferring welding parameters between different machines. On any given machine, the power density distribution is controlled by defocusing the beam relative to its sharpest focused condition. However, measuring the power density distribution can be difficult due to the intense nature of welding beams and is further complicated by imperfect electron optics that can distort the beam, making it difficult to quantify. The enhanced modified Faraday cup (EMFC) diagnostic method was used here for beam analysis that utilizes computed tomography to reconstruct the beam’s power density distribution. These results were compared to the International Standards Organization (ISO) method for characterizing laser beams using a second-moment D4σ calculation. For ideal Gaussian-shaped beams, both methods would give the same result. However, for imperfect beams, the calculated D4σ diameter was shown to be about 25% larger relative to the FWe2 diameter measured by the EMFC due to the heavier weighting of data in the tails of the beam by D4σ. Finally, although both methods produce repeatable welds, it is important to understand the differences in the reported beam diameters, divergence angles, and beam parameter products when transferring parameters between machines.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗