Journal of

ELSEVIER

Journal of Materials ProcessingTechnology49 (1995)431-443

Materials Processing Technology

Friction welding of St-A1 and A1-Cu materials

Bekir S. Yilba~ a'*, Ahmet Z. $ahin a, Nafiz K a h r a m a n b, A h m e d Z. A1-Garni a
aKing Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Mechanical Engineering Department, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia b Erciyes University. Engineering Faculty, Kayseri, Turkey

Received 26 May 1993;accepted 19 April 1994

Industrial Summary The present study investigates the mechanical and metallurgical properties of friction-welded steel-aluminium and aluminium-copper bars, a friction welder having been designed and built for this purpose. The effects of the three main parameters: speed of rotation; friction load; and duration of welding; on the metallurgical and mechanical properties of the weld such as the yield, tensile and breaking strengths, are studied experimentally and statistically. The metallurgical properties of the weld are examined using electron and optical microscopy.

1. Introduction Friction welding is classified as a solid-state welding process, in which joining occurs at a temperature below the melting point of the work metal. When melting occurs there is little evidence in the resulting welded end-product. Heat is generated by direct conversion of mechanical energy into thermal energy at the interface of the workpieces during the welding process. Friction welds are made by holding a nonrotating workpiece in contact with a rotating workpiece under gradually increasing pressure until the interface reaches the welding temperature, and then stopping rotation to complete the weld. The heat developed at the interface raises the temperature of the workpieces rapidly over a very short axial distance, to values approaching the melting range, welding occurring under the influence of the pressure that is applied when the heated zone is in the plastic temperature range. Friction welding can be achieved at high production rates and therefore is economical in operation, in applications where friction welding has replaced other joining processes, the production rate having been increased substantially [1]. Savings in material can be realized also by the use of friction welding, this being especially true *Corresponding author. 0924-0136/95/$09.50 ~(3 1995 ElsevierScienceS.A. All rights reserved. SSDI 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 9 4 ) 0 1 3 4 9 - 6

432

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

when joining large-diameter rotor bodies or other rotating members, or joining the components of valve systems I-2]. When welding dissimilar metals by friction welding, problems arise not only from the different hardnesses and melting points of the materials, but also from the possibility of interaction producing either brittle intermetallic phases or low meltingpoint eutectics [3]. In the aluminium/steel system, intermetallic compounds are a major problem, in general the formation of intermetallic phases being considered undesirable. Dawes [4] has introduced a relationship between the properties of joints and dissimilar materials which form brittle intermetallic compounds, and the time available for the formation of the compounds, concluding that satisfactory welds could be made if the welding conditions were such that the incubation period was longer than the weld time. However, the existence of an incubation period for intermetallic formation is questionable and control should be based on limiting the intermetallic thickness rather than on using an incubation period. The present study investigates the properties of friction welds for steel-aluminium and copper-aluminium bars, a friction welder having been designed and manufactured for this purpose. A temperature sensor is employed in the system to monitor the heating time and provide feed-back to the electronic controller. The number of parameters involved in friction welding is quite large, so that a statistical approach based on one-factor-at-a-time is tedious and unsatisfactory. Therefore, statistical design of the experiment based on factorial analysis is necessary. In the light of previous studies [5,6], the present work is extended to include the statistical analysis of the factors affecting the friction-welding process, these factors including speed of rotation, forging load and welding time. To achieve a complete block analysis, three levels of each factor have been selected. To investigate the mechanical properties of the dissimilar friction welds, tensile and micro-hardness testing of the resultant welds are carried out, metallurgical changes in the welding zone being studied also using SEM and optical microscopy.

2. Experimental
The rotating workpiece is driven by a 10 kW electric motor with a variable rotational speed of upto 3500 rpm maximum. In all tests the friction period is determined by a temperature rise in the welding zone, a controlling device activating the forging load and setting the duration when the temperature of the welding zone reaches the required value. Fig. 1 shows the experimental set-up employing the purpose-built friction welder [7]. In initial trials, a wide range of machine settings was explored, while maintaining many other parameters, i.e the cleanliness of the surfaces of the samples and the duration of the welding. It should be noted that each sample was cleaned before welding using acetone which ensure grease- and dirt-free surfaces. The aim was to explore the effects of different combinations of rotational speed, frictional load and temperature rise in the weld zone. A combination of the machine settings resulting in reproducible mechanical properties was selected for the remaining part of the study.

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

Stabilizer Rotary jaw

433

! ~ I
Stationary

H y d r a r e u t c u i lr n
1~ Hydraulic ilh
r~

]~

n nl
Hydraulic Accumu ator (~ Gear pump

Tank

rllllllllllllllllllllllJlllllllllllllllllllllllllllJ f111111111
Fig. 1. Experimental set-up.

lllllllllllll

Friction Phase

Stopping Phase

Forge Phase

: :
, I
I

rce/
\
i

FrictionS~d : App,i Foroo

sp~ --/
I I

F ctionForc V
I I

I ~

:'\
I I

',
i

iq

Friction Time

', i
IIPI 1I
I

I I

i
I I

forge Time
ID

Stopping Time Fig. 2. Forge load characteristics.

The characteristics of the friction and the forge load are shown in Fig. 2. The factors explored, i.e. the speed of rotation, the friction and forge load and the duration of the welding process, and their levels, are given in Table. 1. To minimize the effect of organic contamination in the welding zone, the ends of the samples were cleaned prior to the welding operation. To investigate the metallurgical changes in the welding zone, samples were cut from different sections and mounted in perspex. SEM and Optical microscopy were used to analyze the metallurgical changes at the interface. Tensile testing and microhardness measurements of weld cross-sections are carried out to examine the mechanical properties of the resulting welds.

434

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

Table 1 Weldingparameters and their levels Level 1 Speed of rotation (rpm) Applied load (kg) Weldingduration (s) 2000 5-12.74 4 Level2 Level 3

2500 2800 6.37 17.83 7.64-22.93 7 10

3. Factorial analysis
To investigate the effects of factors governing the friction welding process on the resultant weld properties, it was necessary to employ factorial analysis based on a statistical approach. In this case, the influence of each factor could be examined individually, together with that of their interactions. This required a complete factorial design, in which the selected factors were varied at appropriately selected levels. A mathematical model relevant to the present analysis is given in Appendix A. The responses considered in the factorial analysis included yield strength, tensile strength and breaking strength.

4. Discussion
The welding parameters of applied load for developing friction, speed of rotation and welding duration determine the thermal phenomenon occurring during the welding process. The cleanliness of the samples may be considered as secondary importance. Increased friction load secures a slight reduction of weld-zone temperature, with the consequent production of less intermetallic compound at the interface, whilst the forging load becomes important only when considering consolidation at the interface. When examining the effect of parameters on the resulting weld properties, it is observed that increasing the speed of rotation and the level of friction load during the heating period, gives deformation conditions that activate the contacting surfaces whilst also limiting the temperature/time conditions for joint heating, and consequently minimize the formation of intermetallics. There is no significant effect observed on the recorded parameters by changing the surface finish. Reduced surface cleanliness in terms of contaminants, especially grease, reduces the quality of the welded joint, consistent with the findings of earlier-reported work [8]. Discussions based on the resultant weld properties will be presented under two sub-headings, as follows.
4.1. Steel-aluminium welds

Tensile test results are shown in Fig. 3. Some of the welds show poor strength, which may occur due to some accumulation of alloying elements at the interface as

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431~43

1400
A

435

==
.C O~ C

1300

1200

Load applied
1100 5-12.74 kg 6.37-1783 kg 7.64-22.93 kg 1000 1800
I I I I

"0 0

>.

I
2800 3000

2000

2200

2400

2600

Speed (rpm)
1700 E 1600 1500 C

1400-

Load Applied
1300
e

5-12.74 kg 6.37-1783 kg 7.64-22.93 kg

1200
C

I-

1100 1800 1300

I
2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000

Speed (rpm)

==

1200 -

1100 Load Applied

e.

1000

/ dJ d

~ ~

5-12.74kg 6.37-1783 kg 7.64-22.93 kg

I

an

900 1800

I
3000

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

Speed (rpm) Fig. 3. Tensile-test results (St-A1).

a result of temperature rise and the existence of intermetallic layers such as FeA1. An intermetallic thickness of 0.1-1 ktm is acceptable for the sound welds, above this value welds with low strength being produced. In the latter case, it is noted that the intermetallic layer is thick in the mid-radius of the weld, and thin at the center and

436

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processino Technolooy 49 (1995) 431-443

400

I
Interface

"rW

A >

300

200

G) r=

lU

St 1 O0

]g~AI

-2

-1

Distance

(mm)

Fig. 4. Microhardness-test results (St-AI).

periphery of the weld, the relative absence of intermetallic layer at the center being consistent with the low relative velocity in this region. Microhardness test results are shown in Fig. 4, decrease in microhardness being noted in the steel zone. The width of the heat-affected zone is very small as compared to that for other thermal-welding processes. Microphotographs of the interface zone are shown in Fig. 5, in which it is observed that heavy deformation occurs at the interface. In this case, it is most probable that the aluminium oxide film is broken up, allowing the exposure of unaffected surface. As aluminium is relatively soft, this results in a large amount of deformation, so that surface contact at the interface should not be a significant problem. However, the stable aluminium oxide presents a barrier to bond formation, and consequently the times and temperatures required in diffusion is conductive to the formation and growth of intermetallics. It is found from Table 2 that the main effects of all the parameters on yield, tensile and breaking strengths are not significant. On the other hand, first-order interactions of these parameters have a significant effect on the tensile properties of the resulting welds. This may indicate that each factor has little individual effect on the tensile properties, but the coupling of friction load, speed of rotation and welding time has significant effect on these properties. In this case, it is difficult to make an assesment as to which parameter has a greater effect than the others on these properties.

4.2. Aluminium-copper welds

Tensile test results are shown in Fig. 6. Some joints failed due to the lack of bonding (i.e. very little bonding of aluminium on to the fracture faces of the copper) and the copper fracture faces show a pale grey aluminium layer, which may contain a considerable amount of intermetallic compound at the interface. When the speed of

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

437

Fig. 5. Microphotography of the welding zone (St-A1).

438

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

Table 2 Statistical effectsof weld parameters on mechanical properties for steel-aluminium welds Parameters Steel-aluminium Yield strength n P t
nxP nxt Pxt

Tensile strength 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 <

Breaking strength 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 >

0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 <

rotation increases, micropores at the interface decrease, resulting in a homogeneous bond. In Fig. 7 microhardness test results are shown. Small changes occur in microhardness in the copper zone, which m a y be due to the comparatively high heat-transfer coefficient of copper. In Fig. 8, the microphotography of the Al-copper zone is shown, in which a resolved layer of intermetallic c o m p o u n d is seen to occur along the interface. A c o m p o u n d layer develops at the interface, the depth of which layer increases when the rotational speed increases and the friction load reduces. An increase in the c o m p o u n d layer results in p o o r mechanical properties. The smoothness of the copper face gives a good indication on bond integrity, since the bulk deformation is confined to the aluminium. Some defects occur at the interface and large particles of copper are embedded in the aluminium, showing the evidence of swirl flow in the aluminium. Statistical analysis show similar results to those obtained for steel-aluminium welds. Again, it is difficult to distinguish the effect of each individual parameter in the process. Coupling effects of friction load, speed of rotation and welding time on the tensile properties are significant. Table 3 shows the results of the statistical analysis.

5. Conclusions
The conclusions derived from the present work may be listed as follow.
5.1. S t e e l - a l u m i n i u m welds

1. Tensile properties improve for steel-aluminium welds when the intermetallic thickness extends only to 0.2-1 lam, above this value welds with poor strengths being produced. The intermetallic layer thickens at the mid-radius and becomes thin at the center and periphery of the weld.

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

900
E

439

800
v

700
tJ

600 500 1 800

I

7.84-22.93 kg
I I ' I ' I

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

Speed lOO0
E t,b
v

(rpm)

9OO 8OO 7OO 6OO

J:

E~

} I--

500 1800
I 1

7.64-22.93 kg
I ' I I ' I '

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

Speed 900
E

(rpm)

800
v ..C

700

CB C

600

5-12.74 kg &37-1783 kg 7.64-22.93 kg

! I I I

"~

500 1 800

'

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

Speed

(rpm)

Fig. 6. Tensile-test results (AI Cu).

440

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431~143

80

I
Interface

-r >

70

J
1> AI
I

60

5O

Distance (mm)
Fig. 7. Microhardness-test results (AI-Cu).

2. The aluminium oxide film may be broken up, allowing the exposure of unaffected surface, which in turn results in increased deformation at the interface: this is the case which occurs at high friction loads and high speeds of rotation. On the other hand, the formation of an oxide layer causes a barrier and prevents diffusion. 3. The presence of contaminants at the interface of the metals the weld reduces joint quality, but there is no significant effect observed on weld properties by changing the surface finish. 4. The main effects of friction load, speed of rotation and welding duration are not significant when weld properties are concerned, but their interactions have a significant effect on these properties: this indicate strong coupling effects of these parameters on the resulting weld properties.

5.2. Aluminium-copper welds

1. A grey aluminium layer can be seen on the fracture faces of the samples, this layer containing a considerable amount of intermetallic compound at the interface. 2. The tensile properties improve for a particular thickness of intermetallic layer, the thickness of the intermetallic layer increases with speed of rotation and reduces with friction load. Further increase in the thickness of the intermetallic layer reduces the tensile properties. 3. When the speed of rotation increases, micropores at the interface decrease, which in turn results in a homogeneous bond. The smoothness of the copper face gives a good indication of bond integrity. 4. The effects of the main parameters, i.e. speed of rotation, friction load and duration of welding, are found to be less significant on the strength properties. However, the interactions of these parameters have a significant effect on these properties, which indicates that the effects of these parameters on the strength properties are coupled.

B.S. Y ilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

441

Fig. 8. Microphotography of the welding zone (A1-Cu).

442

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

Table 3 Statistical effects of weld parameters on mechanical properties for a l u m i n i u m - c o p p e r welds Parameters Aluminium-copper Yield strength n P t nx P nx t Pxt 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 > > > < < < Tensile strength 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.1 > 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < Breaking strength 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 > > > < < <

Appendix A. Mathematical modelling

The mathematical model governing the experimental analysis can be expressed as:
Xi, j, k = F i - -

ni

-- T k -- Fin j -- FiT k -

njT k -

ti, j , k ,

(A.1)

where xi, j,k is the response, ti, j,k is a common effect, Fi, nj, T k a r e the main effects of applied load, speed of rotation and welding time, F~nj, FiTk, njTk are the first-order interactions of relevant factors and t represents random error in the experiment, whilst i, j, k are the levels of applied load, speed of rotation and welding time, respectively. It should be noted that:
F i x n~ = n j x Fi,

(A.2)

this being valid for all interactions. To calculate the main effects of each factor and the effects of interaction, it is necessary to determine the mean corrected sum of squares of response at all levels of all factors. Noting that the sum of squares of each factor and the square of grand total should be calculated first. Due to the lengthy arguments, further mathematical analysis is not given here, but previous work [9] can be referred to. The significance levels of the effect of factors and interactions are obtained using an F-test.

References
I-1] T.J. Jessop and W.O. Dinsdale, Friction welding dissimilar metals, Proc. Conf. Advances in Welding Processes, Harrogate, 1978, The Welding Institute, paper 49. [2] R.A. Black, Friction welding cryogenic components for the JET project, Metal Construction, 15 (9) (1983) 574 576. I-3] N.I. Fomichev, The friction welding of new high-speed tool steels to structural steels, Svar Proiz, 27 (4) (1980) 26-28.

B.S. Yilba~ et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 49 (1995) 431-443

443

1-4] C.J. Dawes, Micro-friction welding aluminium studs to mild steel plates, Metal Construction, 9 (5) (1977) 196-197. [5] K.G.K. Murti and S. Surdaresan, Parameter optimisation in friction welding dissimilar materials, Metal Construction, 15 (6) (1983) 331-335. [6] A.S.C. Ehrenberg, Data Reduction, Analysis and Interpreting Statistical Data, Wiley, London, 1975. I-7] N. Kahraman, Friction welding dissimilar metals and effects of weld parameters on friction welding, Ph.D. Thesis, Erciyes University, Turkey, 1992. [8] A.R. Laudern and P.L. Hurricks, Interaction of lubricants and materials, Trans. I. Marine Eng., 85 (1973) 1-7. [9] B.S. Yilbas, Study of affecting parameters in laser hole drilling of sheet metals, J. Eng. Mats. and Tech., 109 (1987) 282-287.