Friction Stir Welding

Brno University of Technology
Institute of Aerospace Engineering Application of FSW in Aircraft Structures

Martin ruba 1

Abstract
Aluminium alloys series 2XXX and 7XXX are not normally considered
weldable by traditional methods. They are widely used as a part of aerospace
structures. The common practise joining technology is riveting. Emerging technology
of friction stir welding (FSW) has shown promising results in welding of these
alloys. In this thesis we have investigated application of FSW technology in aircraft
structures mainly as substitution of riveting on stringer reinforced panels.
Manufacturing process steps were determined and further optimisation procedures
were suggested. Knowledge base for setting basic welding parameters has been
created and comparison of a sample of riveting and FSW technologies on a simple
final element method model sample was examined in order to identify differences in
stress distribution character in the riveted and FS welded samples.

Keywords
friction stir welding, riveting substitution, 2024, 7075, FSW, welding parameters


Martin ruba 2

Abstrakt
Slitiny hlinku ad 2XXX a 7XXX nejsou shledvny jako svaiteln
s pouitm tradinch metod svaovn. Jsou vak iroce pouvny v leteckch a
kosmickch konstrukcch. Obvykl zpsob jejich spojovn je pomoc ntovn.
Nov vznikajc technologie linernho svaovn tenm rotujcm nstrojem
(Friction Stir Welding - FSW) ji ukzala slibn vsledky pi svaovn tchto slitin.
V tto prci jsme prozkoumali aplikace technologie FSW v leteckch konstrukcch
zejmna jako nhradu ntovn na panelech vyztuench stringery. Sestavili jsme
vrobn postup pro dan panel a navrhli dal kroky k jeho optimalizaci. Dle jsme
sestavili znalostn bzi zkladnch svaovacch parametr a porovnali jsme ntovn
a FSW na jednoduchm modelu vyuitm metody konench prvk a s clem
identifikovat rozdly v charakteru rozloen napt v tchto vzorcch.

Klov slova
svaovn tenm rotujcm nstrojem, nhrada ntovn, 2024, 7075, FSW,
parametry svaovn


Martin ruba 3

Bibliographical citation of this thesis
RUBA, M. Application of Friction Stir Welding in Aircraft Structures. Brno:
Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, 2009. 91 s.
Masters thesis supervisor doc. Ing. Josef Klement, CSc.

Bibliografick citace tto prce
RUBA, M. Aplikace svaovn tenm v leteckch konstrukcch. Brno: Vysok
uen technick v Brn, Fakulta strojnho inenrstv, 2009. 91 s. Vedouc diplomov
prce doc. Ing. Josef Klement, CSc.


Martin ruba 4

estn prohlen

Mstopsen prohlauji, e jsem byl seznmen s pedpisy pro vypracovn
diplomov prce a e jsem celou diplomovou prci, vetn ploh, vypracoval
samostatn s pouitm uveden literatury.

V Brn dne: .......................... .........................................
Martin ruba


Martin ruba 5

Acknowledgements
On a personal note, I would like to thank my parents for their continuous
support throughout my studies, for which I am extremely grateful. In addition, I
would like to thank my partner Alana for her permanent emotional support.
Also would like to thank all the professors at the Institute of Aerospace
Engineering and the institute head, prof. Ing. Antonn Ptk, CSc., for creating
a great learning atmosphere, which motivated me a lot during my study years there.
Foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor doc. Ing. Josef Klement, CSc.
for his support, valuable advices and the fact that he has always been exceptionally
helpful.


Martin ruba 6

Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................ 1
Keywords ..................................................................................................................... 1
Abstrakt ........................................................................................................................ 2
Klov slova ............................................................................................................... 2
Bibliographical citation of this thesis .......................................................................... 3
Bibliografick citace tto prce ................................................................................... 3
estn prohlen ......................................................................................................... 4
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... 5
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... 6
List of figures ............................................................................................................. 10
List of tables ............................................................................................................... 12
List of equations ......................................................................................................... 13
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 14
1.1 Benefits of FSW ........................................................................................... 14
1.2 FSW as riveting substitution ........................................................................ 15
1.3 Current use of FSW ...................................................................................... 15
2 Welding process and its parameters ................................................................... 16
2.1 Mechanical properties of welds ................................................................... 17
2.2 Fatigue properties ......................................................................................... 18
2.2.1 Crack propagation within the weld ...................................................... 18
2.3 Corrosion properties of welds ...................................................................... 19
2.4 Residual stresses........................................................................................... 19
2.5 Aging of friction stir welds .......................................................................... 20
3 FSW application ................................................................................................ 21
3.1 Joint configuration ....................................................................................... 21


Martin ruba 7

3.2 Tool geometry .............................................................................................. 21
3.3 Welding speed and tool rotational speed ..................................................... 23
3.3.1 Dependency of mechanical properties on welding speed .................... 24
3.3.2 Dependency of mechanical properties on welding speed .................... 25
3.3.3 Joint efficiency for optimised welding parameters .............................. 26
3.4 Welding forces ............................................................................................. 27
3.5 Machinery used ............................................................................................ 27
3.6 Material preparation ..................................................................................... 27
3.7 Heat treatment .............................................................................................. 28
3.7.1 Welding of heat treated material .......................................................... 28
3.7.2 Post-welding heat treatment ................................................................. 29
4 Economy of FSW ............................................................................................... 30
4.1 Speed ............................................................................................................ 30
4.2 Energy consumption ..................................................................................... 30
4.3 Machinery cost ............................................................................................. 31
4.4 Staff requirements ........................................................................................ 32
4.5 Work piece preparations costs ..................................................................... 32
5 Practical use of FSW .......................................................................................... 33
5.1 Typical machines and tools .......................................................................... 33
5.2 Current large users of FSW technology ....................................................... 34
5.2.1 Boeing Co., USA ................................................................................. 34
5.2.2 Marine Aluminium, Norway ................................................................ 34
5.2.3 EADS CRC/IS, France ........................................................................ 34
5.2.4 Eclipse Aviation ................................................................................... 34
6 FSW as riveting replacement on a fuselage panel ............................................. 35
6.1 Panel design ................................................................................................. 35


Martin ruba 8

6.1.1 Variant A Based on original construction ......................................... 36
6.1.2 Variant B Substitution of original stringers with T profiles ............. 36
6.1.3 Variant C Incorporating stringers into panel design ......................... 37
6.2 Theoretical mechanical properties of the panels .......................................... 38
6.2.1 Modulus of rupture .............................................................................. 38
6.2.2 Tensile strength .................................................................................... 42
6.3 New panel design ......................................................................................... 43
6.4 Comparison of mechanical properties and weight of the riveted and FS
welded panel ........................................................................................................... 43
6.4.1 FEM simulations .................................................................................. 43
6.4.2 Comparison of maximum stress and total deformation ....................... 63
6.5 Production process ....................................................................................... 64
6.6 Used tool ...................................................................................................... 65
6.7 Welding parameters ..................................................................................... 66
6.8 Machine used ............................................................................................... 66
6.9 Gripping equipment ..................................................................................... 67
6.10 Manufacturing steps ..................................................................................... 68
6.11 Time consumption ........................................................................................ 69
6.11.1 Tool approach time .............................................................................. 70
6.11.2 Welding time ........................................................................................ 70
6.11.3 Time for tool movement between the welds ........................................ 71
6.11.4 Tool return to base position time ......................................................... 71
6.11.5 Total time of welding process .............................................................. 71
7 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 72
7.1 Assessment of knowledge available in open literature ................................ 72
7.2 Substitutability of riveting by FSW and its application ............................... 72


Martin ruba 9

7.3 Evaluation of the use of FSW as rivet substitution on the stringer-reinforced
panel 74
8 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 75
9 References .......................................................................................................... 76
Symbols and units ...................................................................................................... 83
List of attachments ..................................................................................................... 85
Attachments ............................................................................................................... 86
Attachment 1 Examples of machinery used by industrial producers ......................... 87
FSW machinery used in Boeing Co. ....................................................................... 88
Attachment 2 Table of mechanical properties of FS welded materials ..................... 90
Table of mechanical properties of FS welded materials ......................................... 91


Martin ruba 10

List of figures
Figure 1: Schematic drawing of friction stir welding ........................................................................... 16
Figure 2: A typical macrograph showing various microstructural zones in FSP 7075Al-T651
(standard threaded pin, 400 rpm and 51 mm/min). .............................................................................. 17
Figure 3: Propagation of fatigue crack within a FS weld in 2024-T4 alloy ......................................... 18
Figure 4: Joint configurations for friction stir welding: (a) square butt, (b) edge butt, (c) T butt joint,
(d) lap joint, (e) multiple lap joint, (f) T lap joint, and (g) fillet joint. .................................................. 21
Figure 5: Basic FSW tool pin profiles .................................................................................................. 22
Figure 6: Advanced FSW tools developed at The Welding Institute, Cambridge ................................. 22
Figure 7: Dependency of material properties on welding speed and tool shape [10] .......................... 23
Figure 8 Dependency of elongation on welding speed and tool shape [10] ......................................... 24
Figure 9: Dependency of elongation on welding speed and tool shape [10] ....................................... 24
Figure 10: Dependency of elongation on rotational speed and tool shape [12] .................................. 25
Figure 11: Dependency of joint efficiency on rotational speed and tool shape [12] ............................ 26
Figure 12. Temperature ratio as a function of effective energy per weld length with linear regression
curve added. [30] .................................................................................................................................. 31
Figure 13: Schematic drawing of the construction of the riveted panel ............................................... 35
Figure 14: Scheme of Variant A joint design ........................................................................................ 36
Figure 15: Scheme of Variant B joint design ........................................................................................ 37
Figure 16: Scheme of Variant C joint design ....................................................................................... 37
Figure 17: Scheme of riveted stringer with dimensions ........................................................................ 39
Figure 18: Scheme of FS welded stringer with dimensions .................................................................. 41
Figure 19: Scheme of the placement of the sample used for FEM simulation ...................................... 43
Figure 20: Scheme of riveted FEM sample .......................................................................................... 44
Figure 21: Scheme of FS welded FEM sample ..................................................................................... 44
Figure 22: Meshing of the riveted panel sample used for FEM simulations ........................................ 45
Figure 23: Meshing of the FS welded panel sample used for FEM simulations .................................. 46
Figure 24: Frictionless contact region between the panel plate and the stringer; the other contact
regions are set as bonded. .................................................................................................................... 46
Figure 25: Contact region between the panel plate and the stringer was set as bonded ..................... 47
Figure 26: Constraints on riveted sample: 1. Fixed support, 2. Frictionless support, 3. plane
constraint .............................................................................................................................................. 48
Figure 27: Constraints on FS welded sample: 1. Fixed support, 2. Frictionless support, 3. Plane
constraint .............................................................................................................................................. 49
Figure 28: Loading of the panel in direction of the positive Z-axis...................................................... 50
Figure 29: Loading of the panel in direction of the negative Z-axis .................................................... 50
Figure 30: Scheme of the panel plate part used in FEM simulations ................................................... 52
Figure 31: Load placement on the riveted panel FEM sample ............................................................. 54


Martin ruba 11

Figure 32: Load placement on the FS welded FEM sample ................................................................. 55
Figure 33: FEM simulation result for riveted panel and loading in positive axis Z direction
(deformation scale magnitude 29x) ...................................................................................................... 57
Figure 34: Detailed equivalent stress distribution in the middle cross section of the rivet joint for
loading in positive axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude 150x) ............................................ 58
Figure 35: FEM simulation result for FS welded panel and loading in positive axis Z direction
Figure 36: Detailed equivalent stress distribution in the middle cross section of the FS welded joint
for loading in positive axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude 150x) ...................................... 60
Figure 37: FEM simulation result for riveted panel and loading in negative axis Z direction
Figure 38: Detailed equivalent stress distribution in the middle cross section of the rivet joint for
loading in negative axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude 150x) ........................................... 61
Figure 39: FEM simulation result for FS welded panel and loading in negative axis Z direction
Figure 40: Detailed equivalent stress distribution in the middle cross section of the FS welded joint
for loading in negative axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude 150x) ..................................... 63
Figure 41: Maximal total deformation of the samples under the positive Z-axis loading .................... 63
Figure 42: Maximal total deformation of the samples under the negative Z-axis loading ................... 64
Figure 43: Welding process scheme ..................................................................................................... 65
Figure 44: Griping device scheme: 1. Clamped beams holding the weld pieces, 2. Stringer holders
attached to the main desk, 3. Corner stop, 4. Side stops, 5 Stringer stop ............................................ 68
Figure 45: Scheme of welding with distances travelled by the tool nomenclature ............................... 70
Figure 46: Calculation of tool approach time ...................................................................................... 70
Figure 47: Calculation of welding time ................................................................................................ 70
Figure 48: Calculation of the time for tool movement between the welds ............................................ 71
Figure 49: Calculation of the tool return to base position time ........................................................... 71
Figure 50: Calculation of total welding process time .......................................................................... 71


Martin ruba 12

List of tables
Table 1: Comparison of heat treatment effects on FS weld mechanical properties.............................. 28
Table 2: Comparison of properties of riveted and FS welded panel .................................................... 42
Table 3: Comparison of maximal total deformation and weight of the samples ................................... 64


Martin ruba 13

List of equations
Equation 1: Calculation of the modulus of rupture of the stringer of riveted construction panel ........ 40
Equation 2:Calculation of modulus of rupture of the stringer of the FSW panel ................................. 40
Equation 3: Comparison of modulus of rupture of FSW and riveted panel .......................................... 41
Equation 4: Calculation of the minimal height of the stringer of the FSW panel ................................. 41
Equation 5: Calculation of the force applied on the FEM model samples ........................................... 51
Equation 6: Calculation of the force applied on the tested panels ....................................................... 51
Equation 7: Calculation of the moment caused by the loading force in the plane of symetry .............. 51
Equation 8: Calculation of the moment introduced into the FEM model samples ............................... 51
Equation 9: Modulus of rupture of the sample panel part .................................................................... 52
Equation 10: Moment carried by the stringer of riveted panel construction sample............................ 52
Equation 11: Moment carried by the panel plate of riveted panel construction sample ...................... 53
Equation 12: Force carried by the stringer of riveted panel construction sample ............................... 53
Equation 13: Force carried by the panel plate of riveted panel construction sample .......................... 53
Equation 14: Moment carried by the stringer of FSW panel construction sample ............................... 54
Equation 15: Moment carried by the panel plate of FSW panel construction sample .......................... 54
Equation 16: Force carried by the stringer of FSW panel construction sample .................................. 55
Equation 17: Force carried by the panel plate of FSW panel construction sample ............................. 55


Martin ruba 14

1 Introduction
Friction stir welding (FSW) [1] is an emerging technology invented in 1991 at
The Welding Institute, Cambridge. Since then, it has developed from an
experimental joining procedure to a technology used commercially. The potential of
this technology has not been used fully as there is not enough practical information
about it in open literature.
Aeronautical engineering can make use of FSW at many fronts. It can be used
to weld items that are not possible to be welded by conventional fusion welding such
as aluminium alloys of 2XXX and 7XXX series [2] and serve as a riveting
replacement [3]. It can also replace conventional TIG and MIG welds to provide
significantly better corrosion resistance [4, 5] and fatigue properties [6, 7].
In the Czech Republic research on FSW is conducted in Aeronautical Research
and Test Institute in Prague as a part of progressive joining technologies research [8].
In this thesis, we focused on friction stir welds of aluminium alloys of 2XXX
and 7XXX series and provided guidelines to the practical application of FSW on
aircraft structures.
1.1 Benefits of FSW
FSW brings many benefits when comparing to traditional fusion welding and
other joining methods commonly used on aircraft structures. Mishra [9] names many
benefits of FSW. The most crucial of them for application in aircraft industry are:
- Low distortion of work piece
- Good dimensional stability and repeatability
- Absence of cracking
From production technology point of view Mishra [9] states these benefits:
- No shielding gas required
- No surface cleaning required
- Eliminate grinding waste
- Eliminate solvents required for degreasing
- Improved material use
- Low energy needed for weld creation (compared to fusion welding)


Martin ruba 15

It also generally offers better mechanical properties when compared to fusion
welds, however, the resulting properties strongly depend on welding process
parameters such as welding tool shape [10-15], tool revolutions [12, 16-18] and
welding speed [16, 19, 20].
1.2 FSW as riveting substitution
FSW is a very promising technology in the field of riveting substitution on the
aircraft structures. Using riveting technology in current aircraft design limits the
productivity levels manufacturers can reach for the aluminium aircraft structures.
Use of the rivets also introduces unwanted stress concentrators and can induce
crevice and fretting corrosion.
1.3 Current use of FSW
Today, the FSW technology is used mainly in aerospace industry where its
benefits can be utilized fully. The technology brings significant weight savings into
aluminium fuselage construction where riveting is usually the main mean of joining.
Generally, FSW is well suited mainly for long straight welds, like the ones on
stringer-reinforced panels, which are a vital part of todays most common aluminium
fuselage, wing and other constructions in aerospace industry.
Automotive industry can also take advantage of FSW. Wider use of aluminium
alloys and together with FSW joining techniques helps to create lighter and more
economical car construction [21].


Martin ruba 16

2 Welding process and its parameters
The basic concept of FSW is simple. Non-consumable rotational tool with pin
and shoulder shaped to provide required weld properties is inserted in between
abutted edges of plates to be joined and traverse along the joint line. Joint is created
by stirring the material of the two pieces by the tool pin [1]; plastic deformation
caused by the pin and friction between the base material and tool shoulder creates
heat that softens the basic material, thus easies the stirring process. There is no
melting of the base material involved. [9, 22] The main source of heat in the weld is
the friction between shoulder and base material [9]. The principle is illustrated on the
schematic drawing (Figure 1) [23].

Figure 1: Schematic drawing of friction stir welding
The main process parameters are (a) tool geometry, (b) welding speed and (c)
tool revolutions. Their influence on resulting properties of the weld are discussed
later.
Typical friction stir weld in its cross-section (Figure 2) consists of three main
zones [9]: (a) Nugget, stirred zone, (b) thermo-mechanically affected zone (TMAZ)
and (c)heat affected zone (HAZ). The three zones pose distinct mechanical properties
[9, 24-27] and nugget and TMAZ has been often documented as being the weakest
part of the joint [26, 28]. The weld is not symmetrical due to the rotational movement
of the tool, thus moving material from advancing side to retreating side.


Martin ruba 17

Figure 2: A typical macrograph showing various microstructural zones in FSP
7075Al-T651 (standard threaded pin, 400 rpm and 51 mm/min).
The asymmetry of the weld can be used to improve mechanical properties of
the weld of dissimilar alloys. A study showed that placement of the tool axis out of
the joint axis by 0.5 to 1 mm improved mechanical properties of the weld [29].
According to [9, 20] temperatures in the weld do not reach melting point of
alloys. Higher rotational speed of the tool lowers friction between the tool and base
material which is reflected in lower heat production [30] and this prevents material
from being melted within reasonable welding process parameters. Obviously welding
affects structure of precipitates in nugget area as well as in both TMAZ and HAZ
[31, 32].
2.1 Mechanical properties of welds
FSW can be used for welding of virtually any metal. In this thesis, we focused
on 2XXX and 7XXX aluminium alloy series. Literature provides broad range of data
for 2024 [2, 19, 22, 26, 29, 32-51], 2219 [10, 12, 52-55] and 7075 [49, 56, 57] as
well as for dissimilar weld 2024-7075 [2, 29]. These aluminium alloys are
considered as non-weldable by traditional fusion techniques. Unfortunately, not
many resources provide detailed information about the conditions under which the
mechanical properties were gained, reducing the usefulness of the data.
For the 2219-T6 Xu et al showed that the joint efficiency of the welds under
optimized welding parameters varies from 71 to 80 % [58]. Another study done by
Zadpoor et al showed very good results for 2024-T3 where the joint efficiency varied
between 89 to 99 % [49], for 7075 was 90 % [49].


Martin ruba 18

Generally, the optimized welding parameters can create a weld reaching joint
efficiency of 70 % and higher. This is a good result, as these alloys are considered as
non-weldable by traditional welding techniques [9].
2.2 Fatigue properties
Although FSW provides generally better fatigue properties than traditional
fusion welding methods [7], fatigue properties are still significantly lower than of the
base material. Several methods have been developed to prolong fatigue life of
friction stir welds. A few of them have proven capable of improving fatigue
properties of the weld. The technique of root flaw removal [51] and application of
oxide array removal [50] appear to be effective. The fatigue characteristics of the
alloy 2024-T3 weld exhibited improvement of up to 100 % [50, 51].
Studies on using of laser and shot peening on materials 2195 and 7075 [59, 60]
did not show improvement of fatigue properties and crack growth speed as the
residual stresses after FSW are already much lower than after welding by a
traditional technology, which involves material melting.
2.2.1 Crack propagation within the weld
Propagation of cracks within the weld are most likely to start at so called
zigzag defect of the weld. The defect is always initiated within the root of the weld
and spreads through the nugget.
Zigzag defect is an inherent feature of the weld [35] and is considered as the
main cause of the reduced fatigue life of FS welds in comparison to the base
material. The typical zigzag defect is shown on Figure 3.

Figure 3: Propagation of fatigue crack within a FS weld in 2024-T4 alloy


Martin ruba 19

2.3 Corrosion properties of welds
Several studies have been conducted on corrosion behaviour of friction stir
welds [4, 40, 61]. Detailed study of corrosion behaviour of 2024-T351 alloy
[40] showed that nugget and HAZ areas are both sensitised and susceptible to
intergranular corrosion. Whereas study on 7108-T79 [4] has shown that this material
is most sensitive in TMAZ and the character of the corrosion is also intergranular.
Dependence of corrosion behaviour on rotational speed of the welding tool was
observed [40] and can be used as an explanation of the aforementioned difference in
the observation of corrosion sensitivity of different part of the weld. For the lower
rotational speeds of the tool, localised intergranular attack was observed in the
nugget region; for the higher rotational speeds, attack occurred predominantly in
HAZ.
Generally, sensitization of the microstructure that occurs during welding
process is responsible for the corrosion susceptibility of HAZ region of the welds
[61]. It was shown as well that the most of localized corrosion and environmental
cracking in FS welds of aluminum alloys is of an intergranular-type [61].
The method how to improve corrosion resistance of the weld was proposed to
be a short-term post-weld heat treatments with timetemperature exposures similar to
that during the welding, as it would rehomogenize the sensitized microstructure of
the welds [61].
2.4 Residual stresses
Due to complex thermo-mechanical process during FSW, residual stresses
appear. It is believed that FSW produces lower residual stresses due to lower
temperatures involved. Several studies were conducted on residual stresses in 2XXX
and 7XXX alloys [36, 43, 62-64] and have shown that longitudinal stresses are
generally higher than transverse ones not depending on pin diameter, tool revolutions
or welding speed. Several methods have been developed to eliminate residual
stresses by tensioning material during welding [43, 65]. It shows to be effective for
longitudinal stresses whereas effect of transverse stresses on fatigue life can be
eliminated by peening [33, 66].


Martin ruba 20

A study on 7075-T651 alloy showed that the residual stresses associated with
the weld nugget decreased, while those associated with HAZ increased with
time [62].
For alloys 2024 and 7075 a study showed that unlike traditional welded joints,
where the maximum residual stresses values occur close to the surface of a FSW
joint, which is near the tool shoulder border of advancing side of the joint, the
residual stresses are of negative values on the surface and become positive in the
joint. Surface residual stresses vary from -15 to -40 MPa and increase with depth up
to tensional 50 to 150 MPa [64].
2.5 Aging of friction stir welds
As the FSW process introduces heat into the aluminium alloy structure,
changes in the microstructure occur [9]. Material has to return to the desired
metastable state (with higher density of metastable precipitates) by natural or
artificial aging. Natural aging is more commonly used as it does not require
additional heating. Studies reported reaching metastable state (metastable
precipitates) of the material after 7 [45] or up to 45 days [49] of natural aging for
materials 2024 and 7075 depending on the thickness of the material and the welding
parameters.
Study conducted by Linton [62] on 7075-T651 alloy has shown that residual
stresses change during natural aging of welded material. Welding stresses associated
with the nugget decrease, whereas the ones associated with HAZ increase.
Mechanical properties in all areas of the weld increased with the time.


Martin ruba 21

3 FSW application
3.1 Joint configuration
FSW allows the use of virtually any joint configuration as we know them from
traditional fusion welding. The only limitation is the tool shoulder, which makes
fillet joints more problematic than flat ones [9]. Typical FSW joints are shown
(Figure 4).

Figure 4: Joint configurations for friction stir welding: (a) square butt, (b) edge butt,
(c) T butt joint, (d) lap joint, (e) multiple lap joint, (f) T lap joint, and (g) fillet joint.
The most commonly used types of joint are the butt joints, in particular, square
butt joint.
3.2 Tool geometry
Tool geometry has a great influence on resulting mechanical properties of the
weld [10-14]. It provides in-situ heating, stirs base material, and thus creates weld.
There has been variety of tool shapes used. FSW can be performed with tool of a
simple geometry (Figure 5) yet having good mechanical properties [10]. Advanced
tool design (Figure 6) provides intensified material flow in the stirred zone and better
weld quality [23]
Figure 5 and Figure 6 provide basic overview on the basic and advanced types
of FSW tools.


Martin ruba 22

Figure 5: Basic FSW tool pin profiles

Figure 6: Advanced FSW tools developed at The Welding Institute, Cambridge
Experiments performed by Elangovan on tools with simple geometry [10]
showed remarkable influence on mechanical properties of the weld as illustrated in
the Figure 7 [10]. The best results were produced using tool with square cross-
section pin that assured best stirring of the material in the weld area.


Martin ruba 23

Figure 7: Dependency of material properties on welding speed and tool shape [10]
The Figure 7 shows that the mechanical properties of the weld strongly depend
on the volume of material stirred by the tool. The more material the tool stirs,
comparing to its volume, the better the quality of the joint [23]. This is also the
reason why tool producers try to create specially tapered and threaded tools to raise
the ratio [23].
3.3 Welding speed and tool rotational speed
These two parameters of the welding process are the most important ones and
determine overall mechanical properties of the welds.
A comprehensive study investigating dependency of mechanical properties of
the weld on the welding and rotational speed was done by Elangovan et al [10, 12].
Figures below show the obtained results.


Martin ruba 24

3.3.1 Dependency of mechanical properties on welding speed
Figure 8 and Figure 9 show the dependency of mechanical properties on
welding speed as measured by Elangovan et al [10].

Figure 8 Dependency of elongation on welding speed and tool shape [10]

Figure 9: Dependency of elongation on welding speed and tool shape [10]


Martin ruba 25

Even thought the number of different welding speed measurements is quite
low, we can expect that there always is an optimal welding speed for the given
material, rotational speed and tool shape. Optimal welding speed in the cases shown
on the figures above does not strongly depend on the tool shape and optimal value of
the welding speed for the given other parameters considering elongation and joint
efficiency lies between 0.8 and 1 mm.s
-1
.
3.3.2 Dependency of mechanical properties on welding speed
Figure 10 and Figure 11 show the dependency as measured by Elangovan et al
[12].

Figure 10: Dependency of elongation on rotational speed and tool shape [12]


Martin ruba 26

Figure 11: Dependency of joint efficiency on rotational speed and tool shape [12]
In this case, the dependency of the value of elongation and joint efficiency on
the tool shape is more significant than their dependency on rotational speed.
The joint efficiency graph in Figure 11 exhibits a peak around the rotational
speed value of 1600 min
-1
, whereas elongation values grow with raising rotational
speed throughout the measured range. The author does not specify aging time of the
welds, so it is possible that higher values of elongation are caused by higher weld
temperature at higher rotational speed of the tool. This could have lead to creation of
unstable microstructure with higher elongation and would return to the metastable
state with lower elongation and higher joint efficiency after aging.
3.3.3 Joint efficiency for optimised welding parameters
Attachment 2 summarises mechanical properties of butt welds done with
optimised welding parameters from different source. The joint efficiency of yield
strength is generally high, varies from 75 to 99 %. The table can be used as a base for
setting welding parameters for FSW of 2024 and 7075 alloys. Unfortunately the
detailed information about specific welding parameters resulting in specific


Martin ruba 27

mechanical properties are rare in open literature thus, the statistical base of the table
is limited.
3.4 Welding forces
Welding forces are important for choosing appropriate machinery and tool
design. Hattingh et al studied forces applied to variety of tools during friction stir
welding [14]. At welding speed of 150 mm.min
-1
and spindle speed 500 rpm the
maximum radial forces never exceeded 6 kN. Maximal axial force varied from 4 to
14 kN for different tools.
The axial, also called vertical down force, is crucial for creation of sound weld,
as it assures proper contact of the tool with welded work pieces and together with
rotational speed induces release of frictional heat from the tool shoulder which is the
main source of heat for the weld [9].
3.5 Machinery used
FSW is not demanding in regard of machinery requirements. There is no
special welding machine necessary and utilisation of standard workshop equipment
such as milling machines [67] is possible. Although specialised machines provide
higher levels of productivity especially in the respect to the ease of gripping work
pieces, welding speed (maximum speed around 2 m.min
-1
for standard FSW
machines [68]) and also number of welding heads allowing to work on multiple parts
of the work piece at the same time.
Most of the currently used machinery is tailor made for the customers by
several specialised producers that provide wide range of machine parameters suitable
to customer needs.
3.6 Material preparation
Thanks to the principle of FSW there is no special preparation of welded pieces
needed. The only requirement is degreasing [69] which prevents introduction of
particles that would lower mechanical properties of the weld.


Martin ruba 28

3.7 Heat treatment
3.7.1 Welding of heat treated material
Alloy 2024 with different heat treatment variants was by Aydin et al [70].
Results are summarised in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Comparison of heat treatment effects on FS weld mechanical properties
Sample
Base material Joint
J
o
i
n
t

e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

0.2% proof
strength
Ultimate
tensile
strength
Enlongation
0.2% proof
strength
Ultimate
tensile
strength
Enlongation
R
p0.2
[Mpa] Rm [Mpa] A [%] R
p0.2
[Mpa] Rm [Mpa] A [%]
2024-W 171 336 28.4 165 318 5.0 0.95
2024-T4 351 492 21.9 279 389 9.0 0.79
2024-T6a
(100 C 10 h)
293 451 25.5 220 346 7.1 0.77
2024-T6b
(190 C 10 h)
403 496 8.6 341 416 5.1 0.84
2024-O 126 289 17.6 126 289 12.8 1.00

The best tensile properties were obtained for heat treatment T6a (aging at
190C for 10 hours); for annealing the tensile strength of the weld reached the same
level as the base material although the maximal elongation was lower. Strength
efficiency of the welds made of heat-treated materials varied from 77 to 84 % and
elongation efficiency from 28 to 60 %.
Generally, FSW of heat-treated materials does not encounter big problems as
the temperatures during the welding process are relatively low.


Martin ruba 29

3.7.2 Post-welding heat treatment
A study done by Paglia et al found that 25 minute at 180C heat treatment
after FS welding, shows a significant increase in the localized corrosion
resistance [71].
On the other hand a study on precipitate microstructure of welded 2024-T351
with post weld heat treatment T6 (10 hours at 190C) showed mixed results in
different zones depending on their distance from the weld centre. Far from the weld
line, the post-welding treatment increased the hardness of the 2024-T351 FS weld up
to the one of the hardness of 2024-T6 alloy. However, at the TMAZ, at 4 mm from
the weld centre, the hardness declines sharply after the post-welding heat
treatment [37].
Generally, post-welding treatment cannot be recommended without detailed
investigation of resulting mechanical properties of the weld after the heat treatment.


Martin ruba 30

4 Economy of FSW
As the matter of fact, FSW is very efficient welding technology. The main
reason is that it does not reach the melting point of the material during the process of
welding, thus heat and energy delivery into weld is much lower in comparison with
any other welding technology, where melting point of the material is reached due to
absence of melting heat.
Other aspect of FSW economy is high speed of welding reachable on modern
machines assuring high productivity and low production time. Easy gripping and
modern CNC machinery keeps staff skill requirements low as well.
4.1 Speed
Speed of FSW can be generally higher than the ones in conventional welding.
Modern machines allow welding speed up to 2 m.min
-1
and some studies showed
[72] that higher welding speeds produces welds with better mechanical properties.
Although optimal welding speed has to be determined with regard to the shape of the
tool as well as rotational speed with regard to material used.
4.2 Energy consumption
Energy consumed by FSW process has three main components [30].
1. Stirring the material (deformation energy) of the work pieces being joined
2. Production of heat due to friction between the welding tool and the work
pieces
3. Energy consumed by machine/work piece movement
Points 1 and 2 are closely connected and take the major part of the FSW energy
requirements. As the energy in point 3 can be considered as roughly equal with the
energy used for the same purpose in conventional welding the energy saving can be
determined by investigating and comparing energy in points 1 and 2.
Studies conducted on material 7050 showed that energy consumptions vary
from 800 to 2800 J.mm
-1
[30] depending on used welding properties, mainly axial
force applied to the tool. It is apparent that the most of the heat is delivered through
the tool wear, as also other studies have shown [9].


Martin ruba 31

There was a statistically significant correlation between the ration maximum
weld temperature to solidus temperature and energy needed for one millimetre of the
weld as shown in Figure 12. The correlation is valid for different materials

Figure 12. Temperature ratio as a function of effective energy per weld length with
linear regression curve added. [30]
4.3 Machinery cost
Machinery used for FSW process does not require the use of any new or very
advanced technology. The technology level is comparable to standard CNC milling
machines. There is very little information available about the costs of the machinery.
Due to technological compatibility with milling machines, it can be presumed that
the prices are also comparable.
There is a wide range of different types of FSW machines. The main
differences lie in the gripping equipment and the maximum size of the work pieces
and number of welding heads and their power output. Most of the current machines
are armed with CNC unit allowing automated welding.
A study by Minton showed a possibility of utilizing usual milling machine as a
FSW machine [67] with good results. Many companies are equipped with universal
welding machines that can be easily transformed into FSW machines at very low


Martin ruba 32

costs. The main issue is to figure out FSW tool gripping. Bearing load capacity,
machine stiffness and power unit performance are usually above standard FSW
requirements. Nevertheless using adapted machines lowers machine productivity in
comparison with its original purpose and does not allow high productivity levels of
FSW to be reached either. Adapting of milling machines is preferably recommended
for technology testing purpose only.
4.4 Staff requirements
FSW is a process with high possible level of automation and does not require
special staff training or certification for running the welding machines. The level of
skills and knowledge of worker is comparable to the one needed for running CNC
milling machines. Specific required knowledge varies with complexity of the
machinery i.e. degrees of freedom of welding heads and gripping equipment.
Complexity of programming of CNC programs is also on the similar level of
difficulty as for milling machines.
4.5 Work piece preparations costs
As mentioned before, one of the advantages of FSW lies in the fact that there is
no need for special preparation treatment of work piece surfaces that are being
connected. The only requirement is making sure the surfaces are grease free [69]
which usually does not require any special treatment or only a simple degreasing
procedure with alcohol or acetone being required.
Low sensibility of FSW technology to corrosion spots and other particles other
than the base material significantly lower the costs of work piece preparation, and
thus reduce overall costs of application of FSW technology overall.


Martin ruba 33

5 Practical use of FSW
FSW technology is being widely used in high-tech aerospace, maritime,
automotive and railway industry and its users benefit mainly from the possibility of
welding materials that cannot be welded by means of any other welding technology
without compromising on the side of mechanical properties of the weld.
5.1 Typical machines and tools
There is several major FSW machinery producers throughout the world. The
main ones are [73]:
- ESAB
- Crawford-Swift
- Transformation Technologies
- Friction Stir Link, Inc
All the manufacturers provide variety of highly customisable models of
welding machines. Starting with basic models allowing only one axis welding tool
movement to the six-axes FSW robots.
The situation with the commonly used tool is complicated by the fact that there
is not much detailed information about produced tools available in open literature.
TWI produces its series of tools Whorl, Triflute [74] and Trivex [75] but does not
provide specifications needed for the appropriate welding parameters to its non-
customers.
However, the basic parameters of a simple design tools are available [11, 13,
14, 76, 77]. For the FSW of aluminum alloys tool material of usual tool steel or W-
Co steel is sufficient [78], so there is enough information available to produce
customized design tool according to the manufacturer needs if needed.


Martin ruba 34

5.2 Current large users of FSW technology
5.2.1 Boeing Co., USA
Boeing was one of the early adopters of FSW technology and has been
utilizing its benefits mainly in their spacecraft division.
- A longitudinal welding machine, plus handling equipment for welding
of fuel tanks for the Delta II programme of space rockets. [69]
- A complete plant designed for circumferential welding of fuel tanks,
also including a friction plug welding unit. [69]
- A complete plant designed for circumferential welding of fuel tanks,
also including a friction plug welding unit. [69]
Attachment 1 provides photographs of the machinery.
5.2.2 Marine Aluminium, Norway
FSW technology has users also in non-aerospace industries.
- A plant for production of flat panels, 16x6 meters, freezing blocks,
coolers, railway wagon parts, H-beams, road signs and barriers, as well
as the production of complex extrusions. [69]
5.2.3 EADS CRC/IS, France
EADS and its division Airbus are also early adopters of the technology and
conduct a wide research in the area as well.
- FSW welds on fuselage panels of Airbus A380 [79] saving on stringer-
to-panel joint 0.18 kg per meter of weld and 0.8 kg per meter of weld
on panel-to-panel joint [79].
5.2.4 Eclipse Aviation
Eclipse aviation is one of the first aircraft producers introducing the FSW
technology on large scale into smaller aircraft design.
- Welds of construction of Eclipse 500 airplane. [80]


Martin ruba 35

6 FSW as riveting replacement on a fuselage panel
FSW replaced traditional riveting on an example of an outer fuselage panel.
Usual design of fuselage outer panels consists of stringers riveted onto the panel
surface. Riveting is a well known and widely used technology however its usage on
the outer panels brings problems with impermeability.
Expected improvements lie mainly in productivity and speed of production,
better tensile properties of the joint, better fatigue properties and corrosion
properties.
6.1 Panel design
Usual panel design consists of aluminium plate made of material 2024, which
is reinforced by L shape stringer made of the same material. The design is
illustrated in Figure 13 below.

Figure 13: Schematic drawing of the construction of the riveted panel


Martin ruba 36

Because of the use of the different technology for joint creation between
stringers and the panel plate, changes of the design should be considered. Applying
design that would utilize FSW technology benefits fully can improve mechanical
properties of the panel, while reducing its weight. Further in this thesis, three options
(Variants A, B and C) for the design changes were considered and their benefits were
assessed.
6.1.1 Variant A Based on original construction
In this variant (Figure 14) the all the design would be kept and only the
technology of welding would differ. That would bring following benefits:
- No need for change of part documentation
- Easy fitting panel with improved design into the current construction
- Keeping tested and reliable construction
It would also take disadvantages:
- Not using potential of FSW technology fully
- Design not suitable for FSW technology
- Complicated gripping equipment needed

Figure 14: Scheme of Variant A joint design
6.1.2 Variant B Substitution of original stringers with T profiles
In this variant original L-profile stringers would be substituted with T-profile
stringers connected to the other parts by butt welds creating together panel surface as
shown in Figure 15.


Martin ruba 37

Figure 15: Scheme of Variant B joint design
This variant would have several benefits
- Reducing weight while keeping mechanical properties
- Easy work piece gripping and welding
- FSW butt joint connection well investigated and tested

and some disadvantages as well
- Two welds needed for welding of one stringer
- Lower productivity and more expensive
- More residual stress introduced
- Higher chance of crack growth
6.1.3 Variant C Incorporating stringers into panel design
In this variant simple plate shape stringers would be welded onto the base
panel plate as shown in Figure 16.

Figure 16: Scheme of Variant C joint design


Martin ruba 38

This variant would posses following advantages
- Low weight and good mechanical properties
- Productive use of FSW technology
and disadvantages
- Gripping and welding tool positioning demanding higher accuracy

The variant C provides good mechanical properties, lowest weight and at the
same time requires low number of welds. All the variants provide the joint with
impermeability that would be needed in case of need of fuselage pressurisation or
using the panel as a part of an integrated tank. At the same time, we can presume
lower manufacturing costs and higher production speed in all cases when FSW is
substituting riveting. This point is discussed later to determine the economy of
production related benefits.
All the FS welded variants are likely to suffer from post-welding residual
stresses and eventual deformation of the panel caused by them, which are an inherent
feature of FSW. The residual stresses introduced by FSW are much lower than the
ones caused by traditional welding methods, so we do not expect significant
deformation to occur. The real influence of the residual stresses has to be assessed
after the welding of the first panel and measures have to be taken to limit their
influence on the part.
Due to the aforementioned benefits, only the Variant C was taken into account
in further calculations and was compared to the basic design of the panel with
stringers connected to the panel by riveting.
6.2 Theoretical mechanical properties of the panels
6.2.1 Modulus of rupture
To assure sufficient mechanical properties of the re-designed panel modulus of
rupture of the original panel was calculated and was compared to the modulus of
rupture of the FS welded panel.
The calculation carries inaccuracy caused by the fact that rivet joint does not
carry the load the same way as monolithic structure of the welded panel. Later in this
thesis simulation done using finite element methods (FEM) was used to determine


Martin ruba 39

more accurate value of mechanical properties of riveted and FS welded panel and
allowed better comparison.
This calculation was used to determine dimensions of the stringers used on FS
welded panel.
6.2.1.1 Stringer modulus of rupture comparison
The changes in the panel design lie in the change of stringer shape, dimensions
and the joint type. We compared the modulus of rupture of stringers used for riveted
construction and FS welded construction in order to keep the mechanical properties
of the panel overall the same. This calculation cannot be taken as a proof of
equivalent mechanical properties of the riveted and FS welded panel design because
it does not take in consideration other types of loading than X-axis bending (as
shown on Figure 17) and different character of the joint. Further comparison of
mechanical properties was performed using FEM simulation involving the influence
of the different joint type.
6.2.1.2 Modulus of rupture of riveted stringer
The modulus of rupture was calculated by dividing the stringer area into 3
parts, calculating the modulus for each of the parts and adding the values together. In
the part 3 only the modulus towards the X-axis was calculated as its inner modulus is
negligible in comparison.

Figure 17: Scheme of riveted stringer with dimensions


Martin ruba 40

( )
( )
( )
( )
, ,1 ,2 ,3
3
2 2
3
2
,
3
2 2
3
2
,
4
,
12 2 12 2
3 25 4
25 3 3 25
25 3 25 3 4 25 3 3
12 2 12 2
31101
x R x x x
x R
x R
x R
J J J J
t a w
a t t a
J a t a t w a t r
J
J mm
= + +

= + + + +

= + + + +

=

Equation 1: Calculation of the modulus of rupture of the stringer of riveted
construction panel
6.2.1.3 Dimension design of FS welded stringers
The modulus of rupture of the FS welded stringers must not be lower the
original one, thus
, , x R x FSW
J J
Modulus of rupture of the FS welded stringers can be calculated by Equation 2.
2
3
,
' ' '
' '
12 2
x FSW
t a a
J t a

= +

Equation 2:Calculation of modulus of rupture of the stringer of the FSW panel
For the design we fixed the width of the stringer to assure stability of the
stringer as a plane under compressing stress. The width t was fixed to the value of 4
mm,
t = 4 mm
same as on the stringer used in the riveted construction, even though there is no
reinforcing extension, and after getting the needed value of the stringer height a,
stability properties of the stringer was checked.


Martin ruba 41

Figure 18: Scheme of FS welded stringer with dimensions
We compared the value of modulus of rupture of the FS welded stringer with
the value for the riveted stringer
2
3
, ,
' ' '
' '
12 2
x FSW x R
t a a
J t a J

= +

Equation 3: Comparison of modulus of rupture of FSW and riveted panel
And from Equation 3 we got the value of minimal stringer height a, so we can
write
,
3
3
3
'
'
31101 3
'
4
' 28, 57
x R
J
a
t
a
a mm

Equation 4: Calculation of the minimal height of the stringer of the FSW panel
We choose the height of the stringer
a = 29 mm


Martin ruba 42

6.2.1.4 Comparison of properties of riveted and FS welded panel
We calculated modulus of rupture for the FS welded stringer by Equation 3; in
addition, we calculated cross section area of both stringers and compared their values
in Table 1.

Table 2: Comparison of properties of riveted and FS welded panel
Riveted panel
stringer
FS welded panel
stringer
FSW/Riveted
ratio
Cross section area
(representing
relative weight
comparison)
[mm
2
]
191,3 116 0,61
Modulus of rupture
[mm
4
]
31101 32519 1,05

The comparison shows that the FS welded stringer is lighter by almost 40 %
comparing with the riveted one providing even better static mechanical properties.
Translated into weight saving that would mean, considering material 2024 density
[81],
2024
= 2770 kg.m
-3

that, for every meter of stringer used on the construction, we would save 208 grams
of material. As a rough estimate, the change of technology from riveting to FSW
would save more than 3 kg on one panel.
6.2.2 Tensile strength
Tensile properties were not compared as the panel plate dimensions remain the
same and the stringers are not supposed to carry tensional load. Stringer riveting is
also not capable of the full transfer of the tension from the panel plate to the
stringers.


Martin ruba 43

6.3 New panel design
The new panel keeps all the outer dimensions of the riveted panel, only the
construction of the stringer reinforcement has been changed. Details of the new panel
design are in Attachment 3.
6.4 Comparison of mechanical properties and weight of the
riveted and FS welded panel
6.4.1 FEM simulations
FEM simulation in program Ansys Workbench 10 were performed to
determine the differences in mechanical properties of the riveted and FS welded
panel. The simulations take in account differences in the joint character of riveted
and FS welded joint.
6.4.1.1 FEM model
To reduce computational time and complexity a simplified models of the
panels were used. The aim of the simulation was to determine difference in
mechanical properties of the joint between the stringer and the panel. Thus, the
simulation was performed on a sample of the panel and attached stringer. The part of
the panel where the simulation was performed is shown on Figure 19.

Figure 19: Scheme of the placement of the sample used for FEM simulation


Martin ruba 44

As shown, the investigated part is from the centre of the panel where use the
benefit of symmetry which simplifies the computations. The asymmetry caused by
the cut-outs placed in different distance from the axis of symmetry can be neglected,
because they do not significantly influence the stress and deformation distribution in
the examined area.
6.4.1.1.1 Riveted sample dimensions
Figure 20 shows the dimensions and rivet placement of the riveted sample used
for simulation. The stringers bending axis is coincident with the axis of the panel
plate sample.

Figure 20: Scheme of riveted FEM sample
6.4.1.1.2 FS welded sample dimensions
Figure 21 shows dimensions and weld location for the FS welded sample.

Figure 21: Scheme of FS welded FEM sample


Martin ruba 45

6.4.1.1.3 Mesh creation parameters for riveted panel
Meshing parameters were chosen in order to assure sufficient fidelity in load
transfer between the rivets and the stringer. As the rivet joint was the focal point of
our interest, each of the rivet models has over 800 elements and appropriate contact
surface constrains on the panel plate and stringer. The panel plate is modelled by
elements with lower density and there are no rapid changes in stress and strain are
expected.
With respect to the set parameters of the mesh, we can expect that, in the area
close to the rivets with dense meshing, the simulation showed where stress
concentration peaks appeared on the real part. However the meshing is not detailed
enough to figure out the value of the stress peaks with a level of certainty needed for
conclusions about the fatigue life of the real part. Meshing is shown on Figure 22.

Figure 22: Meshing of the riveted panel sample used for FEM simulations
6.4.1.1.4 Mesh creation parameters for FS welded panel
Meshing on the FS welded panel is much simpler as the welded joint is
simulated as a fixed bond between the panel plate and stringer. The simulation of the
joint properties does not involve heat introduced and structural change introduced
residual stresses after welding as well as the fact that the surface of the stringer
touching the panel would not be fully welded throughout its width. Thus, the
simulation would not reveal stress concentration points in the joint area. The meshing
is shown on Figure 23.


Martin ruba 46

Figure 23: Meshing of the FS welded panel sample used for FEM simulations
6.4.1.1.5 Contact surfaces of riveted panel
All the contact surfaces between the panel, stringer and the rivets are set as
bonded, which means that the neighbouring elements share the same position after
deformation. To simulate the rivet joint between the stringer and the panel plate with
higher fidelity the contact surface between them was modelled as frictionless (Figure
24). We did not choose the frictional type of the contact region because it would
raise the computational requirements dramatically and the friction has negligible
influence on the resulting stress and strain.

Figure 24: Frictionless contact region between the panel plate and the stringer; the
other contact regions are set as bonded.


Martin ruba 47

6.4.1.1.6 Contact surfaces of FS welded panel
There is only one contact region in the model of the FS welded panel (Figure
25). To simulate the FS weld the contact region properties were set as bonded. The
more sophisticated simulation of the weld joint could not be used because we did not
have more detailed FEM model of the weld zone and the TMAZ available. The
accuracy of the currently used model is sufficient for the intended purpose of
comparing the mechanical properties of the two distinct joining methods.

Figure 25: Contact region between the panel plate and the stringer was set as
bonded
6.4.1.1.7 Riveted panel sample constrains
The constraints were chosen to assure the behaviour of the sample to be the
same as if it was still a part of the whole panel.
Constraint 1 was set as fixed support, which means that all the nodes on the
selected surface of the stringer always remain in their initial position. This constraint
can be used as the surface lies in the plane of symmetry of the riveted panel.
The Constraint 2, frictionless support allowing points in the surface to move
only within the plane they belong in undeformed stage, was assigned to the surfaces
shown on Figure 26. The surface laying the plane of symmetry could be also
assigned the fixed support constraint but using the frictionless support allowed us to


Martin ruba 48

take the potential instability of the thin plate into account in the simulation. The
outer surfaces with the constraint 2 belong to the plane of symmetry between
stringers. There is an inaccuracy introduced by this presumption because the
stringers, due to their L shape, do not create perfectly symmetrical pattern but for this
purpose, we considered the middle line between the bend axes of the stringers as the
line in the plane of symmetry allowing us to use frictionless support to constraint
these surfaces.
The constraint 3 keeps the nodes of the stringer and the panel plate in the same
plane where the loads are applied perpendicular to the neutral plane.

Figure 26: Constraints on riveted sample: 1. Fixed support, 2. Frictionless support,
3. plane constraint
6.4.1.1.8 FS welded sample constraints
The constraints for the FS welded panel sample are set in the same way as
described for the riveted panel sample and shown in Figure 27. However, in this case
there is the symmetry of the stringers existing thus, the constraints simulate the real
panel sample environment better.
1
3
2


Martin ruba 49

Figure 27: Constraints on FS welded sample: 1. Fixed support, 2. Frictionless
support, 3. Plane constraint
6.4.1.2 Loading
Loading of the panel samples was chosen to simulate bending loading. The
typical loading of the panel on a real construction would be tensional or
compression/buckling. However, thanks to the low dimension of the sample in the
longitudinal direction stability features of compression/buckling loading would not
appear on the sample in correct way. The applied loading approximates buckling
load by introducing the bending moment into the sample. The simulation was not
designed to reveal the stability threshold.
On these samples, we investigated bending loading of the panel as shown on
Figure 28 for the loading in the direction of positive Z-axis, which simulates loading
where the panel plate carries tensional stress and stringers carry compression. Due to
the dimensions of the sample is unlikely that the simulation would reveal buckling of
the stringer.
The residual stresses after welding were not introduced as a part of loading of
the sample, because we did not have enough data about its distribution for the given
type of FS welded joint.
1
3
2


Martin ruba 50

Figure 28: Loading of the panel in direction of the positive Z-axis
Figure 29 shows the case of loading in the negative Z-axis direction. In this
case, the panel plate is compressed and we expect tendency towards buckling and
stringers carry tensional load.

Figure 29: Loading of the panel in direction of the negative Z-axis
For the purpose of further calculation, we considered the plane, the surface of
the panel plate (where the stringers are attached), as the neutral plane for both cases
of bending. Asymmetry caused by the slightly asymmetrical cut-outs in the panel
plate is neglected, as their influence towards the deformation and stress distribution
in the observed area is not significant.
The values of the bending loads are the same for the both cases only the
directions are opposite.
The value of the loading q is chosen to be


Martin ruba 51

q = 0.44 N.mm
-1

The loading force for the investigated width of the panel w
s
= 250 mm thus, is
250 0.44 110
s s
F w q N = = =

Equation 5: Calculation of the force applied on the FEM model samples
that would equal total force, applied to the full-scale panel of width w
p
= 1926 mm,
which is
1926 0.44 847.44
T p
F w q N = = =

Equation 6: Calculation of the force applied on the tested panels
The moment caused by the force in the investigated plane of symmetry for the
panel sample would be
,
2461
110 135355 .
2 2
p
s c s
l
M F N mm = = =

Equation 7: Calculation of the moment caused by the loading force in the plane of
symetry

where l
p
is the length of the full scale panel.
We did not introduce the moment into the plane of symmetry of the panel but
into the surface that lies in the distance
l
s
= 60 mm
from the plane of symmetry thus, the moment we introduced into the sample is
2461
60 110 128370 .
2 2
p
s s s
l
M l F N mm

= = =

Equation 8: Calculation of the moment introduced into the FEM model samples
The gained value of the moment cannot be introduced directly into the tested
sample. The used FEM simulation program, Ansys Workbench 10, distributes the
load equally according the surface area of selected part surfaces. However, the
moment has to be distributed according to the modulus of rupture towards the bend


Martin ruba 52

axis. Herein below, we showed how we calculated the modulus of rupture for
respective riveted and FS welded panel sample
6.4.1.2.1 Riveted panel sample loading
The total values of the load introduced into the sample are
128370 .
s
M N mm =
F
s
= 110 N
The moment distribution depends on the modulus of rupture of the stringer and
the panel plate sample. We have already calculated the modulus of rupture of the
riveted panel stringer
4
,
31101
x R
J mm =
We have to calculate the modulus of the part of the panel plate involved in the
simulation. Figure 30 shows the dimensions of the panel plate.

Figure 30: Scheme of the panel plate part used in FEM simulations
Modulus of rupture of the sample panel part is
3
3
,
250 3 3
3 250 2250 .
12 2 12 2
s p p
x p p s
w t t
J t w N mm

= + = + =

Equation 9: Modulus of rupture of the sample panel part
6.4.1.2.1.1 Moment load distribution between stringer and the panel plate
The moment M
s
is distributed proportionally to the modulus of rupture value
between the stringer and the panel plate. Thus, moment carried by the stringer is
,
,
, ,
31101
128370 119710 .
31101 2250
x R
st R s
x R x p
J
M M N mm
J J
= = =
+ +

Equation 10: Moment carried by the stringer of riveted panel construction sample
and the moment carried by the panel plate part is


Martin ruba 53

,
,
, ,
2250
128370 8660 .
31101 2250
x p
p R s
x R x p
J
M M N mm
J J
= = =
+ +

Equation 11: Moment carried by the panel plate of riveted panel construction sample
6.4.1.2.1.2 Shear force load distribution between stringer and the panel plate
The force is distributed proportionally to the surface area values. Thus, for the
stringer we can write
,
, ,
,
191.3
110 22.4
191.3 250 3
R st
s R st s
R st s p
S
F F N
S w t
= = =
+ +

Equation 12: Force carried by the stringer of riveted panel construction sample

and for the panel plate
, ,
,
250 3
110 87.6
191.3 250 3
s p
s R p s
R st s p
w t
F F N
S w t

= = =
+ +

Equation 13: Force carried by the panel plate of riveted panel construction sample
where S
R,st
is the cross section area of the stringer for the riveted panel calculated
previously.
6.4.1.2.1.3 Sample loading
The forces are distributed automatically and evenly on surface area of the
selected surfaces, we can apply the calculated loads on the FEM model as shown in
Figure 31.


Martin ruba 54

Figure 31: Load placement on the riveted panel FEM sample
6.4.1.2.2 FS welded panel sample loading
Similar calculations were performed for the FS welded panel sample. The
modulus of rupture of the panel plate sample is the same as for the riveted sample.
6.4.1.2.2.1 Moment load distribution between stringer and the panel plate
To calculate the moment carried by the stringer we used adapted Equation 10
and thus,
,
,
, ,
32519
128370 120063 .
32519 2250
x FSW
st FSW s
x FSW x p
J
M M N mm
J J
= = =
+ +

Equation 14: Moment carried by the stringer of FSW panel construction sample
and the moment carried by the panel plate from the adapted Equation 11 is
,
,
, ,
2250
128370 8307 .
32519 2250
x p
p R s
x FSW x p
J
M M N mm
J J
= = =
+ +

Equation 15: Moment carried by the panel plate of FSW panel construction sample
6.4.1.2.2.2 Shear force load distribution between stringer and the panel plate
The force is distributed proportionally to the surface area values. Thus, for the
stringer we can write


Martin ruba 55

,
, ,
,
116
110 14.7
116 250 3
FSW st
s FSW st s
FSW st s p
S
F F N
S w t
= = =
+ +

Equation 16: Force carried by the stringer of FSW panel construction sample

and for the panel plate
, ,
,
250 3
110 95.3
116 250 3
s p
s FSW p s
FSW st s p
w t
F F N
S w t

= = =
+ +

Equation 17: Force carried by the panel plate of FSW panel construction sample
where S
R,st
is the cross section area of the stringer for the riveted panel calculated
previously.
6.4.1.2.2.3 Sample loading
Again the force introduced into the sample is in total F
S
= 110 N and is
automatically distributed on the cross section surfaces of the stringer and the panel
plate as shown in Equation 16 and Equation 17. The moment is distributed as shown
in Equation 14 and Equation 15. All the loads are shown in Figure 31.

Figure 32: Load placement on the FS welded FEM sample
6.4.1.3 Material characteristics used
Values of Poissons ration and Elastic modulus were taken from [81] and
values of material strength were taken from Ansys material library which together


Martin ruba 56

with generic set of aluminium alloy properties created the material model used in the
simulation.
Material Aluminum 2024-T3
Poisson's ratio 0.33
Elastic modulus 73100 MPa
Tensile yield strength 285 MPa
Tensile ultimate strength 42 MPa
Compressive yield strength 285 MPa
6.4.1.4 Result evaluation
Four result sets were obtained for two load sets and two different samples. The
resulting equivalent stress and deformation was evaluated. The FEM simulation on
this level of detail does not provide sufficiently reliable date accurate stress analysis
but provides a good representation of the different character of stress and
deformation distribution between the riveted and FS welded construction.
6.4.1.4.1 Evaluation and comparison of results for positive Z axis direction
loading
Figure 33 shows the distribution of the equivalent stress and deformation
throughout the sample. On this scale, the results are in a good agreement with
expected distribution for the bent sample. The stress peaks in the corners of the
sample are caused by the effect of applied constraints on the mesh with relatively
large size of elements in those areas. We can see light buckling of the panel plate.


Martin ruba 57

Figure 33: FEM simulation result for riveted panel and loading in positive axis Z
direction (deformation scale magnitude 29x)
The detailed examination of the riveted area in the cross section plane going
through the rivets axes (Figure 34) shows stress concentration areas around the rivet
holes. The value of stress for the given loading does not appear to be dangerous but
for the higher loading levels, it could lead to crack initiation and spread. In addition,
cracks can nucleate easily on the edges of drilled holes and this can increase fatigue
risk further.
In addition, we can see slight separation of the contact surface between the
stringer and the panel plate, which can initiate fretting, and lead to further easier
crack initiation.
Also the stress distribution shows that our estimate of placing the neutral plane
into the contact surface between the stringer and the panel plate was reasonable.


Martin ruba 58

Figure 34: Detailed equivalent stress distribution in the middle cross section of the
rivet joint for loading in positive axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude
150x)
The FS welded sample (Figure 35) shows similar stress and deformation
distribution which is also in agreement with our expectations. The stress peaks are
again caused by the effect of applied constraints on the mesh with relatively large
size of elements in those areas. As seen previously, loading causes light buckling of
the panel plate.


Martin ruba 59

Figure 35: FEM simulation result for FS welded panel and loading in positive axis Z
The detailed view into the weld area (Figure 36) shows stress distribution
without peaks. The stress distribution in the panel plate can carry inaccuracy because
only there is only one element used on throughout the thickness of the material. The
change in stress distribution on the left side of the sample is caused by the meshing
pattern.
It is important to note that the critical part of the weld, its root, is never
exposed to the highest stress values, so eventual crack initiation is less likely to
happen there.


Martin ruba 60

FS welded joint for loading in positive axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude
150x)
6.4.1.4.2 Stress distribution comparison
The detailed view into the joint area shows the difference in the stress
distribution character. In the case of the riveted panel, the critical points of the
construction are the rivet holes where initiation of crack is likely at higher stress
levels. In the case of FS welded sample, the critical place is the outer surface of the
panel plate where the highest tensional stress occurs. In addition, eventual weld
defects and irregularities could lead to stress concentration and crack initiation.
6.4.1.4.3 Evaluation and comparison of results for negative Z axis direction
loading
The stress distribution on this sample (Figure 37) does not show unexpected
stress of deformation features. The stress peak close to the fixed support constraint is
again cause by relatively large element size in the area. Again, light buckling of the
panel plate occurs.


Martin ruba 61

Figure 37: FEM simulation result for riveted panel and loading in negative axis Z
Detailed image of the cross section (Figure 38) shows again stress
concentration peak in the rivet area, however, this is the case of compression stress
which does not induce higher risk of crack initiation and growth.

rivet joint for loading in negative axis Z direction (deformation scale magnitude
150x)


Martin ruba 62

The FS welded sample (Figure 39) shows the expected stress distribution with
peaks caused by the effect of applied constraints on the mesh with relatively large
size of elements in those areas.

Figure 39: FEM simulation result for FS welded panel and loading in negative axis
Z direction (deformation scale magnitude 29x)
The detailed view into the weld area (Figure 40) shows stress distribution with
no sudden peaks. As mentioned previously, the stress distribution in the panel plate
can carry inaccuracy because only there was only one element used on throughout
the thickness of the material. The change in stress distribution on the left side of the
sample was caused by the meshing pattern.


Martin ruba 63

FS welded joint for loading in negative axis Z direction (deformation scale
magnitude 150x)
6.4.1.4.4 Stress distribution comparison
In this case of loading, the joint, both riveted and FS welded, are not in the
dangerous areas as the predominant stress is compression. The critical zones are the
top parts of the stringers.
6.4.2 Comparison of maximum stress and total deformation
The values of the maximal total deformation of the samples (Figure 41 and
Figure 42) and their weight, were gained from the results of the FEM simulation in
program Ansys.

Figure 41: Maximal total deformation of the samples under the positive Z-axis
loading


Martin ruba 64

Figure 42: Maximal total deformation of the samples under the negative Z-axis
loading
The results produced are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Comparison of maximal total deformation and weight of the samples
Sample type
Loading FSW/Riveted ratio
Negative
Z-axis
Positive
Z-axis
Negative
Z-axis
Positive
Z-axis
Max total
deformation
[mm]
Riveted
panel
0.15511 0.15874
0.94 0.91
FS welded
panel
0.14536 0.14498
Sample
weight
[kg]
Riveted
panel
0.163
0.93
FS welded
panel
0.152

We can see that the FS welded sample has lower maximal deformation in the
both cases of the loading and at the same time lower weight. This shows that the FS
welded construction uses the material more efficiently.
6.5 Production process
The stringers are held in the gripping device and the panel plate will be put on
them. Positioning parts of the gripping device will assure correct position of the
panel plate. This all will be gripped down to the workbench by 3 rods using clamps a
shown on the scheme below.


Martin ruba 65

Due to deviations from the steady welding state in the first and last 20 mm of
the weld [22] the work piece has 20 mm allowance on the both sides as the approach
and drifting area. After the welding has been performed the allowance will be cut off.
The movement of the welding tool was designed in order to assure highest
possible productivity as shown on Figure 43.

Figure 43: Welding process scheme
6.6 Used tool
As the known tools produced by TWI are suitable for welding of aluminium
plates thicker than 6 mm, the custom made tool was chosen to be used. The basic
parameters based on the tools used on similar jobs in Attachment 2 are following:
- Tool type Conical threaded
- Pin diameter 1 5 mm
- Pin diameter 2 3 mm
- Pin length 4 mm
- Shoulder diameter 15 mm
- Tool material W-Co tool steel
Detailed design of the tool is not within the scope of this thesis and would
require more detailed analysis.


Martin ruba 66

6.7 Welding parameters
Determination and optimization of the welding parameters is a process
requiring testing on the actual samples of the material, machine and the tool used.
The parameters used as the starting point in the welding parameters optimization
process is based on the welding parameters of similar welds as in Attachment 2.
- Rotational speed 1400 min
-1

-
Welding speed 110 mm.min
-1
- Tool tilt 2.5
- Vertical down force 3.5 kN
Before introducing a serial production, the welding parameters have to be
optimized. The proposed optimization would consist of a series of experiments for
welding speeds in range of 100 to 150 mm.min
-1
by step of 10 mm.min
-1
and
rotational speed in range of 1200 to 1600 by step of 200 min
-1
. For each of the
combinations 5 samples should be done and their tensile strength in the axis
perpendicular to the stringer plane would be evaluated. Also the joint would be
examined visually for presence of cracks and examination of overall weld quality.
These optimization steps are vital for successful and efficient application of the
technology on the panel and further investigation like fatigue tests might be needed
to comply with certification requirements.
6.8 Machine used
The welding machine chosen is ESAB FSW SuperStir, which allows welding
of large work pieces. Parameters of the machine are following [82].
- Maximum work piece dimensions 2500 x 4000 mm
- Maximum welding speed 2000 mm.min
-1

- Maximum vertical down force 12.5 kN
- Maximum revolutions of the tool 2500 min
-1

- Maximum welding depth 6 mm
The machine parameters are sufficient for the expected range of welding
parameters.


Martin ruba 67

6.9 Gripping equipment
Gripping equipment was designed to assure the correct positioning of panel
plate and the stringers as well as stiffness of the whole work piece needed for the
welding process involving high welding forces.
Figure 44 shows the scheme of the welding device. Stringer holders together
with the stringer stop assure the appropriate position of the stringers. Corner and side
stops guarantee the right position of the panel plate with the 20 mm allowance on the
both sides towards the stringers. The panel plate together with the stringers are
clamped down using the beams.
The low distance between the stringer holders together with the fact that the
welded stringer always carries the vertical down force initiated by the tool, should
assure low deformation of the work pieces during the welding process. Further
examination of the deformation of the work pieces under effect of welding process
should be done before introducing the gripping device as a part of serial production.
The full welding force should not be applied in the first and the last 20 mm of
the weld, as stringer do not support the welded panel plate in that area. The time
behaviour of the vertical down force, induced by the welding tool, during the first
and last 20 mm of the weld should be a part of the further optimization of the
welding process.
Attachment 4 contains the system drawing of the gripping device.


Martin ruba 68

Figure 44: Griping device scheme: 1. Clamped beams holding the weld pieces,
2. Stringer holders attached to the main desk, 3. Corner stop, 4. Side stops,
5 Stringer stop
6.10 Manufacturing steps
The process of manufacturing the reinforced panel has following steps:
- Cutting of panel plate work piece
- Cutting stringer work pieces
- Clamping down the gripping device to the welding machine workbench
- Positioning the stringers into the device
- Positioning the panel plate into the device
- Clamping the work pieces down to the machine work bench using the
beams
- Defining the work piece position towards the tool in the known base
position for given CNC welding program (in serial production for the
first piece only)
- Automated welding program execution
- Removing the clamping beams
1
2
3
4
5


Martin ruba 69

- Removing the weldment from the griping device
- Basic visual control of the weld
- Cutting the 20 mm material allowance off
- Cutting the side U shaped notches into the panel
6.11 Time consumption
Time consumed by the welding process has these components
- Tool approach time (from the base position)
- Welding time
- Time for tool movement between the welds
- Tool return to base position time
Other time consumed related to the welding process consists of
- Material preparation time
- Gripping time
- Tool exchange time
- Manipulation time
- Times of other related steps mentioned in 6.10
Herein below we calculated the time taken by the welding process not by the
related processes, as we do not have enough specific information to determine their
value.
Figure 45 shows the distances travelled by the FSW tool. Note that while the
tool is travelling vertically, it also travels horizontally at the same time. In all the
other cases the tool travels horizontally only.


Martin ruba 70

Figure 45: Scheme of welding with distances travelled by the tool nomenclature
6.11.1 Tool approach time
Tool approach time can be calculated as division of the tool approach distance
by the speed of the fast feed of the welding head.
1000
0.33 min 20 sec
3000
ta
ta
ta
s
t
v
= = = =

Figure 46: Calculation of tool approach time
6.11.2 Welding time
Welding time can be calculated dividing the total length where the welding
head travels at the welding speed consisting of twice work piece approach and drift
distance, twice allowance assuring the stable weld environment in the area of the
stringers and the length of the weld, by the welding speed.
,
2 2
2 10 2 20 2461
6 137.5 min
110
a d al w
w w
w
s s s
t n
v
+ +
+ +
= = =

Figure 47: Calculation of welding time


Martin ruba 71

6.11.3 Time for tool movement between the welds
Tool approach time can be calculated as division of the total distance travelled
by the tool head in the direction perpendicular to the stringers by the speed of the fast
feed of the welding head.
1476
0.49 min
3000
tm
tm
ff
s
t
v
= = =

Figure 48: Calculation of the time for tool movement between the welds
6.11.4 Tool return to base position time
Tool return to base position time can be calculated as division of the tool return
to base position distance by the speed of the fast feed of the welding head.
2150
0.72 min
3000
bpr
bpr
ff
s
t
v
= = =

Figure 49: Calculation of the tool return to base position time
6.11.5 Total time of welding process
The total welding process time is a summation of all the time periods
calculated before.
0.33 137.5 0.49 0.72 139.04 min
t ta w tm bpr
t t t t t = + + + = + + + =

Figure 50: Calculation of total welding process time
The total time of welding process is roughly comparable with the time
consumed by manufacturing of the riveted panel, however, the process of FSW can
be fully automated.


Martin ruba 72

7 Discussion
7.1 Assessment of knowledge available in open literature
FSW, as a relatively new technology, has not yet gained standardised
procedures for setting basic welding parameters and tool selection for given types of
joints and materials. Open literature provides a wide range of information about
microstructure of FS welds, mechanical, fatigue and corrosion properties of welds
manufactured under a low range of specific welding parameters for a low selection of
materials. Availability of specific information about welding tool design is very
limited. In addition, paper presenting results of testing of mechanical properties
present used tool detailed characteristics in an incomplete way. All these facts
together cause that the value of the information in open literature for setting welding
parameters and deciding about effectiveness of FSW implementation into the
manufacturing processes of aircraft producers is low. It makes adoption of FSW
technology more expensive, because optimisation of welding parameters requires
further detailed investigation by the adopting manufacturers.
The lack of standardisation in the area of FSW can bring additional obstacles
into the certification process of the aircraft, which uses FS welds in its construction,
because no standardised calculation of fatigue life which can be used as a proof of
the lifespan of the welded part. In addition, the effect of corrosion and residuals
stresses in the welded area and their influence on the fatigue life have not yet been
fully understood.
Generally, there are significant gaps in the literature leaving the field open for
larger scale research allowing easier setting of welding parameters and making
assessment of benefits of FSW technology implementation less problematic and
more accurate.
7.2 Substitutability of riveting by FSW and its application
Riveting is a technology substitutable by FSW if the specifics of the
technology are respected and preferably design changes are executed. However,
there are some areas where riveting technology could be used more conveniently.


Martin ruba 73

The design changes in the transition from the riveted construction to FS welded
construction are the vital part of adoption of FSW technology ensuring its
effectiveness. Changes in design utilizing the FSW technology benefits make the
resulting lighter and possibly stiffer than the original construction.
The main benefit of FSW in comparison with riveting lies in the fatigue life
field. Riveting introduces many stress concentrators into the construction and thus,
raises risk of crack initiation. In contrary, FSW technology does not create additional
stress concentrators. The only risk factors towards the fatigue life introduced by FSW
are residual stresses and crack in the non-optimised welds.
The bending test performed on the FEM modelled samples of riveted and FS
welded panels showed that, for the construction of this type, FSW variant could bear
the same load as the riveted construction with 6 to 9 % less deformation, depending
on loading direction, and weight 7 % less than riveted construction. Switch from
riveted to FSW technology saved 3 kg per panel of this size, again, comparing with
riveted construction.
Economical benefits of introducing the FSW technology as riveting substitute
lay mainly in the possibility of higher automation of manufacturing process and
requirement of less skilled labour. For the example of FS welded panel the time
consumption of the welding process is nearly 140 min, which is comparable with
time consumed by production of riveted construction design. However, the FSW
technology is fully automated, not requiring labour during the welding process.
Comparison of energy requirements would need detailed investigation of riveting
process requirements, which is not in the scope of this thesis.
The area of substitution of riveting by FSW requires further investigation. We
suggest to perform examination of real samples of riveted and FS welded
construction with accent on the static mechanical properties and mainly fatigue life
of FS welded structures.


Martin ruba 74

7.3 Evaluation of the use of FSW as rivet substitution on the
stringer-reinforced panel
The substitution of riveting on the stringer-reinforced panel can be considered
as successful. The FS welded panel demonstrates higher stiffness and weights
approximately 3 kg less than its riveted version, which gives promise of further
significant weight savings on other parts of the fuselage if FSW technology is used.
Fatigue and corrosion resistance properties of the used FS welds require further
investigation and high cycle fatigue mechanical testing in order to allow aircraft
certification.
From the technological point of view, the set welding parameters require
further optimisation and experimental confirmation to acquire the ideal welding and
rotational speed of the tool. Another set of experiments would be required to
determine ideal shape of the welding tool, alternatively paid consultation with some
of FSW tools and machines manufacturers can fasten and ease the process of
determining the ideal welding parameters.
Used technology provides possibility of full automation of the welding process,
thus, improving production efficiency.


Martin ruba 75

8 Conclusion
FSW technology brings substantial advantage to the area of joining of
aluminium alloys series 2XXX and 7XXX compared to riveting technology. Design
changes in the riveted construction have to be done in order to use FSW as a direct
substitute of riveting technology. The changes in design have to respect different
character of the joint. Fatigue tests might be required to allow certification of the
construction.
Availability of data required for design of FSW technology processes in open
literature is limited but provides sufficient base to estimate roughly possible benefits
of the usage of the technology or eventual switch from riveting joining technology to
FSW. Information about basic welding parameters is sufficient to be used as starting
values for optimisation process on the real construction, materials and tools. This
causes higher financial requirements for new adopters of the technology.
Production of the stringer-reinforced panel using technology of FSW provides
possibility of improvement of mechanical properties of the panel, reducing weight of
the plane construction, introduction of fully automated production into the
manufacturing process and raising its efficiency. Further investigation is needed,
however, to determine fatigue properties of FS welds in order to allow certification
of the aircraft structure.


Martin ruba 76

9 References
1. Wayne M. Thomas, E.D.N., James C. Needham, Michael G. Murch,
Peter Temple-Smith, Christopher J. Dawes, Friction welding. 1991.
2. Cavaliere, P., et al., Mechanical and microstructural behaviour of
2024-7075 aluminium alloy sheets joined by friction stir welding.
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2006.
46(6): p. 588-594.
3. Brian J. Dracup, W.J.A., Friction stir welding as a rivet replacement
technology. 2003: United States of America.
4. Wadeson, D.A., et al., Corrosion behaviour of friction stir welded
AA7108 T79 aluminium alloy. Corrosion Science, 2006. 48(4): p.
887-897.
5. Maggiolino, S. and C. Schmid, Corrosion resistance in FSW and in
MIG welding techniques of AA6XXX. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 2008. 197(1-3): p. 237-240.
6. Wang, X., et al., Comparison of fatigue property between friction stir
and TIG welds. Journal of University of Science and Technology
Beijing, Mineral, Metallurgy, Material, 2008. 15(3): p. 280-284.
7. Moreira, P.M.G.P., M.A.V. de Figueiredo, and P.M.S.T. de Castro,
Fatigue behaviour of FSW and MIG weldments for two aluminium
alloys. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2007. 48(2): p.
169-177.
8. Blsk, I.P., Friction Stir Welding of Aircraft structures. Czech
Aerospace Proceedings, 2002. 2/2002: p. 15-17.
9. Mishra, R.S. and Z.Y. Ma, Friction stir welding and processing.
Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports, 2005. 50(1-2): p. 1-
78.
10. Elangovan, K. and V. Balasubramanian, Influences of tool pin profile
and welding speed on the formation of friction stir processing zone in
AA2219 aluminium alloy. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 2008. 200(1-3): p. 163-175.
11. Elangovan, K. and V. Balasubramanian, Influences of tool pin profile
and tool shoulder diameter on the formation of friction stir
processing zone in AA6061 aluminium alloy. Materials & Design,
2008. 29(2): p. 362-373.
12. Elangovan, K. and V. Balasubramanian, Influences of pin profile and
rotational speed of the tool on the formation of friction stir
processing zone in AA2219 aluminium alloy. Materials Science and
Engineering: A, 2007. 459(1-2): p. 7-18.
13. Fujii, H., et al., Effect of tool shape on mechanical properties and
microstructure of friction stir welded aluminum alloys. Materials
Science and Engineering: A, 2006. 419(1-2): p. 25-31.


Martin ruba 77

14. Hattingh, D.G., et al., Characterization of the influences of FSW tool
geometry on welding forces and weld tensile strength using an
instrumented tool. Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
2008. 203(1-3): p. 46-57.
15. Zeng, W.M., H.L. Wu, and J. Zhang, EFFECT OF TOOL WEAR ON
MICROSTRUCTURE, MECHANICAL PROPERTIES AND ACOUSTIC
EMISSION OF FRICTION STIR WELDED 6061 Al ALLOY. Acta
Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), 2006. 19(1): p. 9-19.
16. Abbasi Gharacheh, M., et al., The influence of the ratio of "rotational
speed/traverse speed" ([omega]/v) on mechanical properties of AZ31
friction stir welds. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture, 2006. 46(15): p. 1983-1987.
17. Ren, S.R., Z.Y. Ma, and L.Q. Chen, Effect of welding parameters on
tensile properties and fracture behavior of friction stir welded Al-Mg-
Si alloy. Scripta Materialia, 2007. 56(1): p. 69-72.
18. Squillace, A., et al., Optimization of friction stir welds of aluminium
alloys, in Intelligent Production Machines and Systems. 2006,
Elsevier Science Ltd: Oxford. p. 247-252.
19. Amancio-Filho, S.T., et al., Preliminary study on the microstructure
and mechanical properties of dissimilar friction stir welds in aircraft
aluminium alloys 2024-T351 and 6056-T4. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 2008. 206(1-3): p. 132-142.
20. Cavaliere, P., A. Squillace, and F. Panella, Effect of welding
parameters on mechanical and microstructural properties of AA6082
joints produced by friction stir welding. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, 2008. 200(1-3): p. 364-372.
21. Ing. Petr Blsk, L. Kolak, and M. Vlov, Inovative Welding
Technologies for Joining Al Alloy 6082-T6. Czech Aerospace
Proceedings, 2008. 2/2008: p. 2-5.
22. Srivatsan, T.S., S. Vasudevan, and L. Park, The tensile deformation
and fracture behavior of friction stir welded aluminum alloy 2024.
Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2007. 466(1-2): p. 235-245.
23. Nandan, R., T. DebRoy, and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, Recent advances in
friction-stir welding - Process, weldment structure and properties.
Progress in Materials Science, 2008. 53(6): p. 980-1023.
24. Leitao, C., et al., Mechanical behaviour of similar and dissimilar
AA5182-H111 and AA6016-T4 thin friction stir welds. Materials &
Design, 2009. 30(1): p. 101-108.
25. Pirondi, A., L. Collini, and D. Fersini, Fracture and fatigue crack
growth behaviour of PMMC friction stir welded butt joints.
Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008. 75(15): p. 4333-4342.


Martin ruba 78

26. Nielsen, K.L., Ductile damage development in friction stir welded
aluminum (AA2024) joints. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008.
75(10): p. 2795-2811.
27. Lombard, H., et al., Optimising FSW process parameters to minimise
defects and maximise fatigue life in 5083-H321 aluminium alloy.
Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2008. 75(3-4): p. 341-354.
28. Fratini, L., S. Pasta, and A.P. Reynolds, Fatigue crack growth in 2024-
T351 friction stir welded joints: Longitudinal residual stress and
microstructural effects. International Journal of Fatigue, 2009.
31(3): p. 495-500.
29. Cavaliere, P. and F. Panella, Effect of tool position on the fatigue
properties of dissimilar 2024-7075 sheets joined by friction stir
welding. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2008. 206(1-
3): p. 249-255.
30. Hamilton, C., S. Dymek, and A. Sommers, A thermal model of friction
stir welding in aluminum alloys. International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture, 2008. 48(10): p. 1120-1130.
31. Sauvage, X., et al., Precipitate stability and recrystallisation in the
weld nuggets of friction stir welded Al-Mg-Si and Al-Mg-Sc alloys.
32. Jones, M.J., et al., Correlation between microstructure and
microhardness in a friction stir welded 2024 aluminium alloy. Scripta
Materialia, 2005. 52(8): p. 693-697.
33. Ali, A., et al., The effect of controlled shot peening on the fatigue
behaviour of 2024-T3 aluminium friction stir welds. International
Journal of Fatigue, 2007. 29(8): p. 1531-1545.
34. Ali, A., M.W. Brown, and C.A. Rodopoulos, Modelling of crack
coalescence in 2024-T351 Al alloy friction stir welded joints.
International Journal of Fatigue, 2008. 30(10-11): p. 2030-2043.
35. Di, S., et al., Comparative study on fatigue properties between
AA2024-T4 friction stir welds and base materials. Materials Science
and Engineering: A, 2006. 435-436: p. 389-395.
36. Fratini, L., S. Pasta, and A.P. Reynolds, Fatigue crack growth in 2024-
T351 friction stir welded joints: Longitudinal residual stress and
microstructural effects. International Journal of Fatigue, 2008. In
Press, Corrected Proof.
37. Genevois, C., et al., Quantitative investigation of precipitation and
mechanical behaviour for AA2024 friction stir welds. Acta Materialia,
2005. 53(8): p. 2447-2458.
38. Genevois, C., A. Deschamps, and P. Vacher, Comparative study on
local and global mechanical properties of 2024 T351, 2024 T6 and
5251 O friction stir welds. Materials Science and Engineering: A,
2006. 415(1-2): p. 162-170.


Martin ruba 79

39. Genevois, C., et al., On the coupling between precipitation and plastic
deformation in relation with friction stir welding of AA2024 T3
aluminium alloy. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2006.
441(1-2): p. 39-48.
40. Jariyaboon, M., et al., The effect of welding parameters on the
corrosion behaviour of friction stir welded AA2024-T351. Corrosion
Science, 2007. 49(2): p. 877-909.
41. Khandkar, M.Z.H., et al., Predicting residual thermal stresses in
friction stir welded metals. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 2006. 174(1-3): p. 195-203.
42. Mandal, S., J. Rice, and A.A. Elmustafa, Experimental and numerical
investigation of the plunge stage in friction stir welding. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 2008. 203(1-3): p. 411-419.
43. Richards, D.G., et al., Global mechanical tensioning for the
management of residual stresses in welds. Materials Science and
Engineering: A, 2008. 489(1-2): p. 351-362.
44. Schmidt, H.N.B., T.L. Dickerson, and J.H. Hattel, Material flow in butt
friction stir welds in AA2024-T3. Acta Materialia, 2006. 54(4): p.
1199-1209.
45. Scialpi, A., et al., Mechanical analysis of ultra-thin friction stir
welding joined sheets with dissimilar and similar materials.
Materials & Design, 2008. 29(5): p. 928-936.
46. Squillace, A., et al., A comparison between FSW and TIG welding
techniques: modifications of microstructure and pitting corrosion
resistance in AA 2024-T3 butt joints. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 2004. 152(1): p. 97-105.
47. Yan, J., M.A. Sutton, and A.P. Reynolds, Notch tensile response of
mini-regions in AA2024 and AA2524 friction stir welds. Materials
48. Yang, Y., et al., Automatic gap detection in friction stir butt welding
operations. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture, 2008. 48(10): p. 1161-1169.
49. Zadpoor, A.A., et al., Mechanical properties and microstructure of
friction stir welded tailor-made blanks. Materials Science and
Engineering: A, 2008. 494(1-2): p. 281-290.
50. Zhou, C., X. Yang, and G. Luan, Effect of oxide array on the fatigue
property of friction stir welds. Scripta Materialia, 2006. 54(8): p.
1515-1520.
51. Zhou, C., X. Yang, and G. Luan, Effect of root flaws on the fatigue
property of friction stir welds in 2024-T3 aluminum alloys. Materials


Martin ruba 80

52. Chen, Y., H. Liu, and J. Feng, Friction stir welding characteristics of
different heat-treated-state 2219 aluminum alloy plates. Materials
53. Chen, Y.C., J.C. Feng, and H.J. Liu, Stability of the grain structure in
2219-O aluminum alloy friction stir welds during solution treatment.
Materials Characterization, 2007. 58(2): p. 174-178.
54. Paglia, C.S. and R.G. Buchheit, Microstructure, microchemistry and
environmental cracking susceptibility of friction stir welded 2219-
T87. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2006. 429(1-2): p. 107-
114.
55. Prasad Rao, K., G.D. Janaki Ram, and B.E. Stucker, Improvement in
corrosion resistance of friction stir welded aluminum alloys with
micro arc oxidation coatings. Scripta Materialia, 2008. 58(11): p.
998-1001.
56. Su, J.-Q., T.W. Nelson, and C.J. Sterling, Microstructure evolution
during FSW/FSP of high strength aluminum alloys. Materials Science
and Engineering: A, 2005. 405(1-2): p. 277-286.
57. Di, S., et al., The influence of zigzag-curve defect on the fatigue
properties of friction stir welds in 7075-T6 Al alloy. Materials
Chemistry and Physics, 2007. 104(2-3): p. 244-248.
58. Xu, W., et al., Microstructure and mechanical properties of friction
stir welded joints in 2219-T6 aluminum alloy. Materials & Design. In
Press, Corrected Proof.
59. Hatamleh, O., A comprehensive investigation on the effects of laser
and shot peening on fatigue crack growth in friction stir welded AA
2195 joints. International Journal of Fatigue, 2009. 31(5): p. 974-
988.
60. Hatamleh, O., P.M. Singh, and H. Garmestani, Corrosion susceptibility
of peened friction stir welded 7075 aluminum alloy joints. Corrosion
Science, 2009. 51(1): p. 135-143.
61. Paglia, C.S. and R.G. Buchheit, A look in the corrosion of aluminum
alloy friction stir welds. Scripta Materialia, 2008. 58(5): p. 383-387.
62. Linton, V.M. and M.I. Ripley, Influence of time on residual stresses in
friction stir welds in agehardenable 7xxx aluminium alloys. Acta
Materialia, 2008. 56(16): p. 4319-4327.
63. Pouget, G. and A.P. Reynolds, Residual stress and microstructure
effects on fatigue crack growth in AA2050 friction stir welds.
International Journal of Fatigue, 2008. 30(3): p. 463-472.
64. Fratini, L. and B. Zuccarello, An analysis of through-thickness
residual stresses in aluminium FSW butt joints. International Journal
of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2006. 46(6): p. 611-619.


Martin ruba 81

65. Altenkirch, J., et al., The effect of tensioning and sectioning on
residual stresses in aluminium AA7749 friction stir welds. Materials
66. Hatamleh, O., Effects of peening on mechanical properties in friction
stir welded 2195 aluminum alloy joints. Materials Science and
Engineering: A, 2008. 492(1-2): p. 168-176.
67. Minton, T. and D.J. Mynors, Utilisation of engineering workshop
equipment for friction stir welding. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 2006. 177(1-3): p. 336-339.
68. ESAB LEGIOTM A modular Friction Stir Welding system.
69. ESAB - Friction Stir Welding.
70. AydIn, H., et al., Tensile properties of friction stir welded joints of
2024 aluminum alloys in different heat-treated-state. Materials &
Design, 2009. 30(6): p. 2211-2221.
71. Paglia, C.S. and R.G. Buchheit, The time-temperature-corrosion
susceptibility in a 7050-T7451 friction stir weld. Materials Science
and Engineering: A, 2008. 492(1-2): p. 250-254.
72. Simar, A., et al., Microstructure, local and global mechanical
properties of friction stir welds in aluminium alloy 6005A-T6.
73. Institute, T.W. Friction Stir Welding - Equipment. 2009; Available
from: http://www.twi.co.uk/content/fswequip.html.
74. TWI. Tool technology - the heart of friction stir welding. 2009;
Available from: http://www.twi.co.uk/content/c1073a.html.
75. Threadgill, P.A.C.a.P.L. Development of the Trivex Friction Stir
Welding Tool. 2003; Available from:
http://www.twi.co.uk/content/sppacfeb2003.html.
76. Scialpi, A., L.A.C. De Filippis, and P. Cavaliere, Influence of shoulder
geometry on microstructure and mechanical properties of friction
stir welded 6082 aluminium alloy. Materials & Design, 2007. 28(4):
p. 1124-1129.
77. Zhao, Y.-h., et al., The influence of pin geometry on bonding and
mechanical properties in friction stir weld 2014 Al alloy. Materials
Letters, 2005. 59(23): p. 2948-2952.
78. Rajiv S. Mishra, M.W.M., Friction Stir Welding and Processing. 2007:
ASM International.
79. M. Pacchione and J. Telgkamp, Challenges of the Metalic Fuselage, in
25th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences. 2006:
Hamburg, Germany.
80. Aviation, E. Inovations at Eclipse Aviation. 2009 [cited 2009 April
23rd]; Available from:
http://www.eclipseaviation.com/company/about/innovations.php
.


Martin ruba 82

81. Boyden, E. Conversion Factors, Material Properties and Physical
Constants. Available from: http://edboyden.org/constants.html.
82. ESAB. SuperStir Systems. Available from:
http://products.esabna.com/EN/home/friction_stir/q/display_id.i
d4370a867c84ca9.46984409/path.friction_stir_superstir_systems.


Martin ruba 83

Symbols and units
J
x,R
mm
4
Modulus of rupture of the stringer used in riveted construction
J
x,i
mm
4
Modulus of rupture of respective sub-areas of stringers
a mm Width and height of riveted stringer
t mm Thickness of bottom part of riveted stringer
w mm Width of the upper part of riveted stringer
r mm Diameter of riveted stringer reinforcing extension
a mm Height of stringer joined by welding
t mm Thickness of stringer joined by welding
J
x,FSW
mm
4
Modulus of rupture of the stringer used in FS welded
construction
2024
kg.m
-3
Density of 2024 material
w
p
mm Width of the both riveted and FS welded panels
w
s
mm Width of the panel sample used for FEM simulation
F
s
N Force applied to the panel sample
F
T
N Total equivalent force applied to the full-scale panel
M
s,c
N.mm Moment introduced into the symmetry plane of the panel
sample
M
s
N.mm Moment introduced into the the panel sample
l
p
mm Length of the both riveted and FS welded full-scale panels
l
s
mm Length of the both of the panel samples used for FEM
simulations
t
p
mm Panel plate thickness
J
x,p
mm
4
Modulus of rupture of the part of the panel plate used in FEM
simulations
M
st,R
N.mm Moment carried by the stringer sample of riveted construction
panel in the FEM simulation
M
p,R
N.mm Moment carried by the panel plate sample of riveted
construction panel in the FEM simulation
M
st,FSW
N.mm Moment carried by the stringer sample of FS welded


Martin ruba 84

M
p,FSW
N.mm Moment carried by the panel plate sample of FS welded
S
R,st
mm
2
Cross section surface area of the stringer for riveted panel
S
FSW,st
mm
2
Cross section surface area of the stringer for FS welded panel
F
s,R,st
N Shear force introduced into the stringer of the riveted panel
F
s,R,p
N Shear force introduced into the panel plate of the riveted panel
F
s,FSW,st
N Shear force introduced into the stringer of the FS welded panel
F
s,FSW,p
N Shear force introduced into the panel plate of the FS welded
panel
t
a
sec Tool approach time
s
ta
mm Tool approach distance
v
ff
mm.min
-1
Fast feed speed
t
w
sec Welding time
n
w
- Number of welds on stringers
s
a,d
mm Slow approach/drifting to/out of the work piece distance
s
al
mm Material allowance length
s
w
mm Weld length
v
w
mm.min
-1
Welding speed
t
tm
sec Time for tool movement between the welds
s
tm
mm Overall distance travelled between the welds
t
brp
sec Tool return to base position time
s
bpr
mm Distance from the last weld to the tool base position
t
t
sec Total time of welding process
q N.mm
-1
Value of loading applied on the panel in FEM simulation


Martin ruba 85

List of attachments
1. Examples of machinery used by industrial producers
2. Table of mechanical properties of FS welded materials
3. Drawing Stringer Reinforced Panel
4. Drawing Gripping device system


Martin ruba 86

Attachments


Martin ruba 87

Attachment 1
Examples of machinery used by industrial producers


Martin ruba 88

FSW machinery used in Boeing Co.

A longitudinal welding machine, plus handling equipment for welding of fuel tanks
for the Delta II programme of space rockets. [69]

A complete plant designed for circumferential welding of fuel tanks, also including a
friction plug welding unit. [69]


Martin ruba 89

A complete plant designed for circumferential welding of fuel tanks, also including a
friction plug welding unit. [69]


Martin ruba 90

Attachment 2
Table of mechanical properties of FS welded materials

Friction Stir Welding

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

Friction Stir Welding

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brno University of Technology

Institute of Aerospace Engineering Application of FSW in Aircraft Structures

You might also like