Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Manufacturing Processes

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/manpro

Effect of laser beam welding parameters on morphology and strength of T

dissimilar AA2024/AA7075 T-joints
⁎
P.I. Oliveiraa,b, J.M. Costaa,b, A. Loureiroa,b,
a
CEMMPRE, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Coimbra, Portugal
b
Rua Luís Reis Santos, Pinhal de Marrocos, 3030-788, Coimbra, Portugal

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper investigates the effect of laser welding parameters, such as beam power, welding speed, incident
Laser welding beam angle, incident beam position and beam diameter, on the weld geometry, microstructure, porosity and
Welding parameters mechanical properties of successive double-sided laser beam welded AA2024-AA7075 T-joints using 4047 filler
Dissimilar T-joints wire. A change in the welding parameters influences the weld geometry and porosity, but does not cause sig-
Defects
nificant variations in the weld microstructures, though some liquation cracking was observed in the heat-af-
Mechanical properties
fected zone of alloys AA7075 and AA2024. The macroporosity occurs more in the second weld seam than in the
first one. The pull-out test results presented higher values than those obtained by other authors. The ultimate
tensile load in pull-out test is influenced by the laser power, laser beam diameter and incident beam position.
Macroporosity plays a relevant role in fracture initiation during pull-out tests. Porosity and liquation cracking
influenced the fracture mode of the pull-out test specimens, but they do not significantly affect the results.

1. Introduction
Some aircraft manufacturers are exploring the possibility of repla-
cing riveting by LBW as joining technology in manufacturing of alu-
minum alloy stiffened panels in lower fuselage [1]. The goal is to
achieve weight reduction and an increase in strength of the airplane’s
structure as well as time and cost reduction in aircraft production [2].
The aeronautical industry considers both, simultaneous and successive
double-sided LBW, as acceptable methods for joining skin-stringer T-
joints, since they can produce defect-free and symmetrical weld seams
[3].
Porosity is a common defect in aluminum alloys welded by fusion
techniques. The main reason for this is the rejection of hydrogen during
weld pool solidification due to the much higher hydrogen solubility in
molten aluminum than in solid aluminum [4]. Furthermore, the highest
cooling rate of LBW is harmful for weld degassing [5]; however, it also
reduces the nucleation and growth rates of hydrogen pores [6], gen-
erating microporosity. Micropores might be formed by vaporization of
alloying elements [7] as well. Another reason for porosity formation in
LBW is keyhole instability [6]. This type of porosity is characterized by
its large size, irregular shape and rough walls [8]. For bead-on-plate
weldments, Yu et al. [9] observed that susceptibility to macroporosity is
higher in laser welding with filler wire than in autogenous laser
welding when the keyhole does not penetrate the full thickness of the
plate. According to them, one of the reasons for this is the fluctuation in
wire feeding rate and/or position during the welding process which
leads to a fluctuation in laser energy that might cause keyhole in-
stability. Moreover, the gap between the skin and stringer plates that is
not covered by the weld bead affects the keyhole instability leading to
macropore formation in an autogenous single-sided laser welded T-joint
[10]. For a single-sided laser welded T-joint, Ventzke et al. [11] verified
that the macropores were formed mainly on the rear side of the T-joint.
This occurred because the solidification rate is higher in this region
than on the side where the laser irradiation occurs. Thus, the gas bubble
formed due to the collapse of the keyhole does not have enough time to
escape from the molten pool, it therefore becomes entrapped as a
macropore in the weld seam.
The porosity is significantly affected by the welding parameters.
Thus, Tao et al. [1] stress that the amount of porosity increases with the
wire feeding angle and it is higher when the filler metal is added in the
trailing direction than in the leading direction. The reduction of the
incident beam angle (from 25° to 11°), that is the angle formed by the
laser beam and the skin surface, also reduces the porosity significantly
[11]. Other authors report a narrower range (10° to 15°) of this angle to
obtain welds with reduced porosity in an autogenous one-sided T-joint
of AA6013-T4 [10]. Leo et al. [7] state that the microporosity caused by
magnesium vaporization increases with the laser power in butt joints of
AA5754-H111 welded by arc assisted fiber laser with ER5356 as filler

⁎
Corresponding author at: CEMMPRE, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Coimbra, Portugal.
E-mail address: altino.loureiro@dem.uc.pt (A. Loureiro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2018.08.003
Received 25 May 2018; Received in revised form 16 July 2018; Accepted 1 August 2018
1526-6125/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Society of Manufacturing Engineers.
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Nomenclature LBW laser beam welding

OAZ over-aged zone
a distance between weld toes P laser beam power
α incident beam angle PMZ partially melted zone
b weld penetration depth R feed rate of filler wire
BM base material s welding speed
c weld bead leg length SEM scanning electron microscope
d weld bead penetration width SkHAZ skin heat-affected zone
D laser beam diameter StBM stringer base material
δ incident beam position StHAZ stringer heat-affected zone
FL fusion line UTL ultimate tensile load
FZ fusion zone

wire. On the other hand, the porosity due to collapse of keyhole in butt
joints of AA5754-H111 welded by arc assisted fiber laser reduces with
the increase in laser power since the increase in vaporization of mag-
nesium raises the metal vapor pressure in the keyhole [12]. Moreover,
Ola and Doern [13] mention the use of Ar as being more effective in
minimizing porosity than He in the welding of AA7075-T651. Fur-
thermore, increasing the beam diameter is beneficial for degassing the
melted material due to the enlargement of the keyhole [3]. Ad-
ditionally, Yang et al. [14] state that supplying the filler wire and
shielding gas on the same plane as the laser beam stabilizes the welding
process, thereby reducing the keyhole-porosity.
The other welding parameters have influence on the weld strength
as well. The welding speed and the feed rate of the filler wire affect the
strength of the welds, because they influence the weld build up [15]
but, Cicalã et al. [16] mention that the second factor is more relevant
for the T-joint’s mechanical strength. Furthermore, weld penetration
can be reduced, and mechanical strength improved in T-joints, by using
AA4047 filler wire instead of AA5356 [17].
Solidification cracking was the main defect observed by Siqueira
et al. [18] in autogenous one-sided laser welded T-joints of AA6013
alloy. This difficulty can be avoided by using filler wire with a high
silicon content [19]. Nevertheless, cracks will arise even with this metal
filler if its feed rate is not enough to compensate the formation of cracks
during the solidification [16]. For autogenous welds, solidification
cracking can be avoided by decreasing the welding speed or enlarging
the diameter of the laser beam [20].
Aluminum alloys of 2xxx and 7xxx series have been widely used in
the manufacturing of riveted aeronautic structures due to their high
strength to weight ratio, but both are considered not easily weldable by
fusion welding [2], due to defect formation during welding. Apart from
the porosity caused by hydrogen during molten pool solidification [21],
one of the main defects observed during the laser and hybrid laser-arc
welding of these aluminum alloys was macro-porosity, caused by the
instability of the keyhole [22]. Besides this, 7xxx alloys have high hot
cracking susceptibility in welding, increasing significantly with the Cu
content [23]. In the same way, the AA2024 alloy is also susceptible to
hot cracking [21].
According to Tan et al. [24], the investigation in advanced struc-
tural engineering has given great attention to dissimilar joints of metals
with very different melting points, being the laser welding-brazing an
alternative joint technique for this kind of metal combination. In the
case of dissimilar joints of aluminium alloys, the majority of works
about laser beam welding have addressed weldable alloys such as the
Al-Mg-Si or Al-Cu-Li series [15] and special alloys which have their
weldability improved by modification of their chemical composition
[25]. On the other hand, few works have studied dissimilar laser
welded T-joints of 2xxx and 7xxx series but focus on single-sided LBW
[3] or on autogenous successive double-sided LBW [26].
Thus, the main objective of this study is to investigate the effect of
laser welding parameters, on the morphology, microstructure and me-
chanical properties of dissimilar AA2024-T3/AA7075-T6 T-joints per-
formed successively on both sides using a high-power disk laser and a
filler wire.
2. Materials and experimental methods
2.1. Base materials and filler wire
Dissimilar T-joints composed of AA2024-T3 skin and AA7075-T6
stringer materials were welded using a high Si content filler wire
AA4047 of 1 mm diameter, in order to prevent hot cracking [27]. The
skin and stringer sheets of 500 mm x 160 mm x 2 mm and 500 mm
x 40 mm x 2 mm, respectively, were removed perpendicular to the sheet
rolling direction. Table 1 shows the chemical composition of the alu-
minum alloys and filler wire used in this study and Table 2 shows the
mechanical properties of the base materials.
2.2. Experimental set-up and welding conditions
Before carrying out the welding, the oxide and contaminated layers
were removed from the work-piece surfaces by burnishing with a steel
brush and then the surfaces were cleaned with acetone. These proce-
dures were performed to minimize hydrogen porosity [28].
Then, the skin and stringer sheets were fastened as shown in Fig. 1.
The successive double-sided laser beam welded T-joint was performed
using a continuous wave disk laser TruDisk 16002 with a focusing optic
BEO D70. The maximum power of the laser equipment was 12 kW. The
wavelength of the laser beam was 1.030 μm. Moreover, the focal posi-
tion was on the stringer surface (0.0 mm) and the focal length was of
200 mm. Therefore, the enlargement of the laser beam’s diameter was
carried out by replacing the optical fiber for one with a larger diameter.
The shielding gas used was argon with a flow rate of 10 l/min. Fig. 2a
shows the incident beam position, and the incident beam angle α,
which is 5° lower than the angle formed by the skin’s surface and the
supply plane. The filler wire and the shielding gas were supplied on that
plane according to the scheme presented in Fig. 2b. This figure also

Table 1
Chemical composition of the base materials and filler wire (Wt. %).
Alloy Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Cr Zn Ti

AA2024 Max 0.50 Max 0.50 3.80 4.90 0.30 0.90 1.20 1.80 – Max 0.25 Max 0.15
AA7075 Max 0.40 Max 0.50 1.20 2.00 Max 0.30 2.10 2.90 0.18 0.28 5.10 6.10 Max 0.20
AA4047 11.00 13.00 Max 0.6 Max 0.30 Max 0.15 Max 0.10 – Max 0.20 Max 0.15

150
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Table 2
Mechanical properties of the base materials.
Ultimate stress (MPa) Yield stress (MPa) Young’s modulus (GPa) Strain at ultimate stress (%) Microhardness (HV0.2)

AA2024-T3 (longitudinal) 479 359 78.6 13.6 143

AA2024-T3 (transversal) 469 332 78.4 15.2 142
AA7075-T6 (longitudinal) 588 531 77.0 8.6 180
AA7075-T6 (transversal) 592 529 74.4 9.1 189

Table 3
Range of welding parameters studied.
P (kW) s (mm/s) R (m/min) α (º) δ (mm) D (μm)

2.3 – 3.5 35, 40, 45 3.8 – 4.8 10, 15, 20 0.0 – 0.6 400, 600

Table 4
Welding parameters used in the series studied.
Weld series D (μm) α (º) s (mm/s) R (m/min) P (kW) δ (mm)

1 600 10 40 4.3 3.4 0.0

2 600 10 40 4.3 2.9 0.3
3 600 15 40 4.3 3.4 0.0
4 600 15 35 3.8 3.0 0.0
5 600 15 35 3.8 2.9 0.2
6 600 20 40 4.3 3.1 0.2
7 400 20 40 4.3 2.5 0.0
8 400 20 40 4.3 2.4 0.2
9 400 15 35 3.8 2.4 0.0
Fig. 1. Experimental set-up for successive double-sided LBW of a T-joint. 10 400 15 35 3.8 2.3 0.2
11 400 15 40 4.3 2.4 0.2

shows that the gas nozzle was set behind the laser beam.
The welding parameters, such as the laser beam power, the welding
speed, the feed rate of the filler wire, the incident beam angle, the in-
cident beam position and the laser beam diameter, were varied ac-
cording to Table 3.
The welding parameters producing weld seams with the best visual
appearance and appropriate welding penetration depth in the skin were
chosen for this research. Table 4 presents the weld series chosen.

2.3. Morphological and microstructural analyses of the welds

Several features were considered for the morphological analyses of

the welds, such as their surface appearance, dimensional character-
istics, the presence of defects, in particular the porosity, and the mi-
crostructural analysis.
The cross sections of welded T-joints for the different weld series
were cut transversely to the welding direction, polished according to
standard metallographic procedures and etched with Keller’s reagent
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of main weld dimensions.
(2 ml HF, 3 ml HCl, 5 ml HNO3, 190 ml H2O). The relevant weld

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of T-joint welding.

151
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

dimensions were measured in the cross sections according to Fig. 3, Table 5.

using a stereo microscope equipped with micrometers in two perpen-
dicular directions. The microstructures were analyzed using a Leica 3.1.1. Effect of welding parameters on weld dimensions
DM4000 M LED microscope and an imaging software Leica application, The regression models of the weld dimensions are presented in
version 4.5.0. The metallographic analysis of welds revealed the pre- Figs. 8–10. According to Fig. 8, the welding parameters that sig-
sence of porosity, therefore samples of the welds were radiographed to nificantly affect the distance between weld toes are P and D. Taking into
complement the study, using an x-ray system, BOSELLO SRE HEX 40- account the regression coefficients presented in this figure, a increases
60. when P rises for the same D and it decreases when D enlarges for the
same P. The effect of P and D on a can be explained by the influence of
2.4. Mechanical testing the power density (4P/(πD2)) on the laser beam energy absorbed by the
work pieces [29]. Thus, both weld pool width and depth enlarge with
The micro-hardness profiles were measured along the cross section the increase in locally absorbed energy caused by an increase in P and/
of the skin and from the skin to stringer according to the scheme shown or decrease in D.
in Fig. 4. The indentations along the skin were made between 300 and The welding parameters that most affect b are P, D and s. According
500 μm below the skin surface, according to the welding penetration to the regression coefficients presented in Fig. 9, b increases with the
depth of each weld series. Meanwhile, the indentations from the skin to increase in P for the same D and s, it decreases with the increase in D for
stringer were made 500 μm on the right of the left stringer surface. In the same P and s and it decreases with the increase in s for the same P
both cases, the interval between indentations was 250 μm on the weld, and D. The influence of P and D on b is similar to their influence on a.
and 1 mm on the base material. The effect of s on b is related to the reduction in both weld pool width
Pull-out tests were carried out to assess the quality of the adhesion and depth caused by the increase in s [29].
of the stringer to the skin at the welded T-joints. As the load applied on The only welding parameter that significantly affects c is D, ac-
the stringer is perpendicular to the skin, the pull-out test specimens cording to Fig. 10. Thus, c increases with an increase in D. The influence
were manufactured according to Fig. 5a, in order to be fastened in the of D on c occurs because the small incident beam angles lead to more
clamping device shown in Fig. 5b. The loading direction is shown by the molten metal on the stringer plate.
arrow in the same figure. The pull-out tests were carried out with a Regarding the weld bead penetration width, no significant welding
tensile tester INSTRON model 4206, using an upper crosshead speed of parameter was found.
2.0 mm/min. Three specimens were tested for each weld series.
During the pull-out testing, the strain fields of the specimen were
3.1.2. Effect of welding parameters on porosity
obtained using an optical 3D extensometer with digital image correla-
The amounts of macro-porosity presented in Table 5 were obtained
tion, called ARAMIS from GOM. Furthermore, a scanning electron mi-
from macrographic and radiographic analyses. According to this table,
croscope Zeiss Merlin-61-50 was used to characterize the fracture sur-
only weld series 1, 2, 3 and 9 showed porosity lower than that pre-
faces of the specimens after the pull-out tests.
sented by Ola and Doern [13] for bead-on-plate of AA7075-T651 laser
welded with argon as the shielding gas.
2.5. Significance analyses of welding parameters
Fig. 7 shows that welds of series 1, 2 and 4 have practically no
porosity, while welds 6, 10 and 11 have some micropores (pore dia-
The influence of welding parameters on the results of the weld di-
meter < 0.2 mm) and welds 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9 have micro and macro-
mensions, macroporosity and pull-out test, as well as the influence of
pores. The figure also shows that the macropores are usually present in
the weld dimensions and macroporosity on the results of the pull-out
the second weld seam. This is because the macropores form at the root
tests were analyzed by means of multiple linear regression. In the first
of the first seam and the keyhole collapses during the second weld pass.
case, the independent variables were D, α, δ, s and P whilst the de-
The exceptions are series 6 and 8 (both series with α = 20° and
pendent variables were a, b, c, d, amount of macroporosity or UTL. In
d = 0.2 mm), which also contain macropores in the first layer. The
the second case, the independent variables were a, b, c, d and the
microporosity visible in the image is reduced and may be present in any
percentage of macroporosity and the dependent variable was the UTL.
of the layers. The hydrogen rejection that occurs when aluminum alloys
The significance of each independent variable was assessed by means of
are melted [6] and the instantaneous solidification that occurred near
the t test of its coefficient in the regression. Thus, the less significant
the FL [17] led to a high concentration of micropores in this region
independent variables were removed from the regression model until
because the hydrogen gas bubbles have no time to escape. Although this
all remaining coefficients had a P-value for t-statistic less than 0.05. The
high concentration of micropores near the FL is not noticed in the
data analysis was carried out using Microsoft Excel.
macrographs, it was observed on the fractured surfaces analyzed by
SEM, as shown below. As the macrographs only present very local cross
3. Experimental results and discussion
sections, a radiological analysis was also performed in the sections lo-
cated at the beginning, middle and end of the welds. X-radiography can
3.1. Morphology of welds
currently detect defects larger than 0.2 mm [6]. A specimen without
macropores is presented in Fig. 11a, while another with macropores
The weld series presented weld seam surfaces with an irregular
marked with arrows is presented in Fig. 11b.
appearance, with some tiny spatters and a few large spatters as well (see
the Fig. 6a and b). Furthermore, weld series 5 and 8 presented a few
superficial macropores along the first and the second weld seams, as
can be seen in Fig. 6c and d, respectively.
The T-joint macrographs of the weld series mentioned in Table 4 are
shown in Fig. 7. Series 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9 show macropores and series 5 is
the worst one, with a macropore of about 0.7 mm and some micropores.
On the other hand, weld series 1, 2, 4, 6, 10 and 11 presented some
micropores but weld series 4 is the only one with incomplete joint
penetration. Furthermore, the macrographs did not show any kind of
cracks. Fig. 7 also shows some differences in the size of the welds. The
relevant morphological results for each weld series are presented in Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of micro-hardness measurements.

152
P.I. Oliveira et al.
Fig. 5. a) Geometry of pull-out test specimens; b) Device for clamping specimen to perform pull-out testing.
For the successive double-sided laser welded T-joints studied in this
work, the macroporosity formation has the same mechanisms as those
reported in the literature [11]. However, the interaction between the
first and second weld seams leads to both a higher number and a greater
size of macropores in second seam than in the first one, because the
macropores at the first seam root are absorbed at the second seam.
Thus, the macropores in the second seam are formed by gas cavities
from the first seam and by gas bubbles formed due to keyhole collapses
that occurred during the second weld seam.
According to Fig. 12, the only welding parameter that significantly
affects the macro-porosity is α. Thus, the percentage of macroporosity
increases when α is increased. This occurs, according to Oliveira et al.
[10], because the gap between the skin and stringer plates affects the
instability of the process for high angles. Additionally, the data scatter
presented in Fig. 12 is associated to the variation of other welding
parameters that are not considered significant by the t-test. Therefore,
the highest scatter showed when the incident angle is equal to 15° is
related to the variation of laser power, incident beam position, laser
beam diameter and welding speed whilst the lowest scatter presented
for angle of 10° is linked only to the variation in the position of the
incident beam.
3.1.3. Observations concerning microstructures
The micrograph analyses showed the same microstructural patterns
for all the welding series analyzed in this work. The cross section of the
successive double-sided laser welded T-joint has distinct micro-
structures in the Skin Heat-Affected Zone, the Stringer Heat-Affected
Zone and the Fusion Zone, as illustrated in Fig. 13.
Both the SkHAZ and the StHAZ microstructures present a Partially
Melted Zone, where the maximum temperatures vary between the eu-
tectic and liquidus temperatures leading to liquation in grain bound-
aries near the fusion line [28], as illustrated in Fig. 13a and b.
Fig. 6. Weld appearance of the first and the second weld seams respectively of: a) and d) weld series 5; b) and c) weld series 8.
153
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160
According to Yang et al. [14] an Over-Aged Zone also exists, where both
second-phase particle size and number decrease with the distance from
the fusion line, but it is difficult to see in optical microscopy. As can be
seen in these figures, there is a chill zone near the fusion line between
the weld and the stringer base material, whereas there is no chill zone
near the fusion line between the weld and the skin base material.
Fig. 13c shows that the center of the fusion zone has a fine cellular
dendrite structure like the microstructure presented by Squillace and
Prisco [17] for simultaneously double-sided laser welded T-joints.
Fig. 13d shows the grain refinement of the previous structure of the first
seam, generating very fine equiaxed grain structure along the whole
fusion line between the weld seams.
Furthermore, scanning electron micrographs of the weld series
showed some liquation cracking in the StHAZ and little liquation in the
SkHAZ, as is illustrated in Fig. 14a and b respectively, for weld series
11. This can be explained by the high liquation cracking susceptibility
of 7xxx and 2xxx alloys during welding, as mentioned by Huang et al.
[30].
3.2. Mechanical testing
3.2.1. Microhardness profiles
The hardness distribution is important for laser welded joints made
with heat-treatable aluminium alloys because the loss of precipitation
hardening leads to the reduction in tensile strength. The microhardness
profiles along the skin and the stringer are similar for all the weld series
and are not affected by the changes in the welding parameters. Fig. 15a
and b illustrate these profiles for a weld in series 6. Considering all the
weld series, the microhardness in the FZ and in the valley in the SkHAZ
is, 115 ± 2 HV0.2 and 128 ± 6 HV0.2 , respectively. Thus, the FZ hardness is
about 81.5 ± 1.5% of the material hardness at the skin base. The re-
duction in hardness in the FZ is due not only to the dissolution of the
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Fig. 7. Macrographs of the weld beads considering each welding series.

Table 5
Relevant morphological results.
Weld Series a (mm) b (mm) c (mm) d (mm) Porosity (%)

1 7.17 0.94 2.28 1.77 0.05

2 6.25 0.45 2.34 1.36 0.12
3 7.03 0.84 2.34 1.79 0.05
4 6.36 0.68 2.48 0.81 0.18
5 6.14 0.81 2.20 1.81 0.41
6 6.56 0.60 2.12 1.78 0.47
7 6.38 0.79 1.76 1.44 0.50
8 5.65 0.73 1.86 2.05 0.35
9 6.35 0.78 1.93 1.88 0.14
10 6.33 0.65 2.00 1.61 0.32
11 6.21 0.59 1.90 2.05 0.20
Fig. 8. Relation between measured a, and a calculated by the regression.

hardening precipitates but also to the use of a filler metal (AA4047) Comparing these microhardness results with those obtained by Song
with less mechanical strength. Furthermore, the valley hardness in the et al. [31] for friction stir welded lap-joints of AA2024-T3/AA7075-T6,
SkHAZ is 89.5 ± 4.5% of the hardness of the skin base material and is it is possible to note that the minimum hardness value is 15 HV0.2 higher
currently attributed to the coarsening of the strengthening precipitates in laser beam welded T-joints.
[14].
As shown in Fig. 15b, the hardness profile through the stringer has
3.2.2. Pull-out testing
the lowest hardness at the FZ due to the same mechanisms mentioned
Table 6 shows the mean values of the maximum load required for
above. Furthermore, the SkHAZ hardness decreases rapidly near the FL
the rupture of the test pieces. The values of the mean ultimate tensile
while the StHAZ hardness increases rapidly from the FL until it reaches
stress obtained by dividing the load by the stringer cross-section are
the same hardness as the StBM. The causes involved in the variation of
also presented in the same table, in order to allow a comparison with
hardness are the same as those already mentioned; however, it is ob-
the results of other authors. These results are higher than the maximum
served that the stringer hardness is much higher than the skin.
stress of the pull-out tests obtained by Enz et al. [3] for single-sided and

154
P.I. Oliveira et al.
Fig. 9. Relation between measured b, and b calculated by the regression.
Fig. 10. Relation between c and D.
successive double-sided LBW of 2 mm thick AA2024-T351/AA7050-
T76 T-joints whose approximate values were 230 and 210 MPa, re-
spectively. In the same way, the present results are higher than the pull-
out test results obtained by Yang et al. [14] for a simultaneous double-
sided LBW of 1.8 mm thick AA6056-T4/AA6156-T6 T-joint whose mean
value was approximately 204 MPa. In all cases mentioned above the
AA4047 filler wire was used.
The welding parameters that significantly affect the UTL are D, P
and δ . Thus, the UTL increases when D enlarges, P decreases and δ
decreases considering that only one welding parameter is varied at a
time, as shown by the coefficients presented in Fig. 16. The UTL rises
with the increase in D because when this occurs, for the same welding
speed, the increase in laser interaction time (D/s) leads to a lower
cooling rate which reduces the susceptibility to cracking and hence
improves the mechanical strength of the welded joint [20]. Further-
more, the UTL decreases when P increases because the higher the laser
power, the higher the dissolution of precipitate phases in the material
[28], as well as the bigger keyhole size caused by the increase in P, the
higher the reduction in the UTL caused by the increase of the partici-
pation of the filler wire in the weld which has lower mechanical
strength than the base material. The pull-out results also decrease with
an increase in δ, because of the lower interaction of the laser beam with
the skin material. That is, the highest UTL occurred when δ was equal to
0.0 mm. This result is not in agreement with the results of Yang et al.
[14] for simultaneous double-sided LBW of a dissimilar AA6056-T4/
AA6156-T6 T-joint since, for them, the highest ultimate tensile stress
occurred when the incident beam position was 0.2 mm.
Among the weld dimensions mentioned in this work, only d has a
155
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160
Fig. 12. Relation between α and porosity.
strong influence on the UTL, as can be seen in Fig. 17. Thus, the UTL
decreases with an increase in d. Considering that the filler wire volume
per weld length is almost the same for all weld series, this effect cannot
be attributed mainly to filler feed rate, as observed by Cicalã et al. [16],
but to the parameters mentioned above.
The fractured specimens presented in Fig. 18 show the features of
the two different failure modes. In the first, the complete failure took
place mainly along the fusion boundary of the skin, as can be seen in the
Fig. 18a. In the second, the complete failure occurred mainly along the
fusion boundary of the stringer, as shown by Fig. 18b. Furthermore, for
all cases in which the second failure mode occurred, another crack
occurred with the same characteristics of the first failure mode, but
without leading to a complete failure of the specimen. The first failure
mode was more common than the second one, which occurred in some
specimens of weld series 2, 5 and 6 as well as in every one of weld series
4, as shown in Table 6.
No direct correlation between the pull-out test results and the level
of porosity was observed. However, the welds that display the second
fracture mode present many macropores on the fracture surface.
Furthermore, the crack initiation always occurred on the second weld
seam side, which has higher porosity than the first seam. These facts
suggest that macroporosity influences fracture initiation.
For any failure mode, the fractures always started at the second
weld seam. For failure mode 1, the crack initiation occurred at the lo-
cation with the highest strain concentration on the weld seam surface
causing the crack to start within the weld metal, as can be seen in
Fig. 19a and b. Thus, the crack initiation did not occur at the weld toe,
as expected. This can be explained by the high deformation in the thin
plate of skin during the pull-out test [3] and by the presence of mac-
ropores within the weld bead, resulting in higher deformations near the
weld seam surface. Then, after the crack initiation, the crack grew to-
wards the fusion boundary of the skin and propagated in this region
until the complete failure, as shown in Fig. 19c.
The crack initiation for failure mode 2 occurred in the following
way. A first crack initiated with the same mechanism of failure mode 1,
as can be observed in Fig. 20a and b. This crack grew until reaching a
macropore, which reduced the restraint for opening the first crack,
resulting in a high deformation at the region indicated by the arrow in
Fig. 20c. After that, a second crack initiated on the weld seam surface at
the region indicated in Fig. 20c. Thus, the second crack grew towards
the stringer FL and then it began to grow along the stringer fusion
boundary up to the full failure, as can be seen in Fig. 20d. Moreover, the
Fig. 11. X-ray radiographs a) without macro-
pores (weld series 1) and b) with plenty of
macropores (weld series 7).
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Fig. 13. Optical micrograph of weld series 10 showing: a) the boundary between FZ and StBM, b) the boundary between FZ and SkBM, c) the FZ center and d) the
transition between first and second layers in the FZ.

second crack always led to a complete fracture since the cross-section of
the area to resist the test load was smaller for the second crack than for
the first, as well the susceptibility of liquation cracking in the StHAZ is
higher than in the SkHAZ. These observations show that defects such as
porosity and liquation cracks play an important role in the failure mode
of the pull-out test specimens.
3.2.3. Fracture morphology
SEM fractographies show that the specimens with different failure
modes have different fracture morphologies. Furthermore, each

Fig. 14. Scanning electron micrographs of welding series 11 showing: a) the liquation cracking in the StHAZ and b) in the SkHAZ.

156
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Fig. 15. Microhardness profiles of welding series 6: a) along the skin and b) along the stringer.

Table 6
Average ultimate tensile load and stress in pull-out tests for each weld series.
Weld Average Ultimate Average Ultimate Pull-out Failure
Series Tensile Load (kN) Tensile Stress (MPa) Mode

1 11.7 343 1
2 12.5 367 1 and 2
3 11.5 337 1
4 13.5 397 2
5 12.5 366 1 and 2
6 12.1 355 1 and 2
7 12.6 370 1
8 10.7 314 1
9 12.1 355 1
10 11.9 350 1
Fig. 17. Relation between d and the UTL.
11 12.3 363 1

Fig. 16. Relation between the measured UTL and the UTL calculated by re-
gression.
fracture surface presents areas with different features. To identify the
location of each one of these areas more easily, Figs. 21 and 22 show a
macrograph of a fractured pull-out specimen. The fracture started at the
second weld seam in both cases, as can be observed.
For the first failure mode of a pull-out test specimen, the fracture
surface presents two different features. The part of the fracture surface
that occurred through the FZ presents zones of dimples (example
marked with the number 1 in the image) intercalated with zones of
quasi-cleavage appearance (example marked with the number 2), as
can be seen in Fig. 21a. At the other part of fracture surface, along the
skin fusion boundary, the fracture surface presents a mixture of both
brittle and ductile zones, since they show brittle fracture areas with flat
facets and ridges with dimples, both marked in the same way, as shown
in Fig. 21b. Furthermore, Fig. 21b shows a lot of micropores at the
fracture surface, marked with arrows.
For failure mode 2 of the pull-out test specimens, the fracture sur-
face presents three different regions. At the FZ, the fracture surface
presents a lot of dimples (example marked with the number 1 in the
image) intercalated with zones of quasi-cleavage appearance (example
marked with the number 2 in the image), as shown in Fig. 22a. Fur-
thermore, Fig. 22b shows the presence of macropores in the FZ, in-
dicated by arrows. Along of the stringer fusion boundary, the fracture
presents areas of flat facets (example marked with the number 1 in the
image) but also zones with plastic strain (example marked with the
number 2 in the image), as can be seen in Fig. 22c. At the junction of the
stringer fusion boundaries of the first and second weld seams, the

157
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Fig. 18. Macrograph of (a) the first and (b) the second pull-out failure modes.

Fig. 19. Strain fields during the crack initiation and propagation in failure mode 1: (a) before crack initiation, (b) after crack initiation and (c) at the complete
fracture.

Fig. 20. Strain fields during the crack initiation and propagation in failure mode 2: (a) before first crack initiation, (b) after first crack initiation, (c) before second
crack initiation and (d) at the complete fracture.

fracture surface presents areas with intergranular fractures suggesting significantly to this second mode of fracture.
the presence of liquation cracking, as can be observed in Fig. 22d.
Therefore, the presence of liquation cracking seems to contribute

158
P.I. Oliveira et al. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160

Fig. 21. SEM fracture surface images of failure mode 1: a) at the FZ and b) along the fusion boundary for the specimen 1 of weld series 8.

Fig. 22. SEM fracture surface images of failure mode 2: a) at the FZ, b) at the region with macropores in the FZ, c) along the fusion boundary of the stringer and d) at
the junction of the stringer fusion boundaries of the first and second weld seams for specimen 3 of weld series 4.

4. Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn based on the results pre-
sented in this study for the dissimilar successive double-sided Laser
Beam Welding of dissimilar T-joints:
(1) The weld geometry is mainly affected by the laser power, laser
beam diameter and welding speed;
(2) The porosity is more frequent in the second weld seam than in the
first one and increases with the increase of the incident beam angle;
(3) The microstructure of the welds is little influenced by the welding
parameters, but liquation cracking occurs in the heat-affected zone
of the stringer (AA7075) and skin (AA2024).
(4) The ultimate tensile load in the pull-out tests is affected by the laser
power, laser beam diameter and incident beam position but, the
fracture mode in this test is influenced by porosity and liquation

159
P.I. Oliveira et al.
cracking.
(5) The most significant loss of hardness in welds is independent of the
welding parameters used, but lower than those reported in litera-
ture for friction stir welding in the same materials.
Acknowledgments
This research is sponsored by FEDER funds through the program
COMPETE – Programa Operacional Factores de Competitividade – and by
national funds through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia –,
under the project UID/EMS/00285/2013. The first author, Pedro I. P.
Oliveira, is supported by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific
and Technological Development (CNPq).
References
[1] Tao W, Yang Z, Chen Y, Li L, Jiang Z, Zhang Y. Double-sided fiber laser beam
welding process of T-joints for aluminum aircraft fuselage panels: filler wire melting
behavior, process stability, and their effects on porosity defects. Opt Laser Technol
2013;52:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2013.04.003.
[2] Dittrich D, Standfuss J, Liebscher J, Brenner B, Beyer E. Laser beam welding of hard
to weld Al alloys for a regional aircraft fuselage design- first results. Phys Procedia
2011;12:113–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2011.03.015.
[3] Enz J, Khomenko V, Riekehr S, Ventzke V, Huber N, Kashaev N. Single-sided laser
beam welding of a dissimilar AA2024-AA7050 T-joint. Mater Des 2015;76:110–6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.03.049.
[4] Zhao H, White DR, DebRoy T. Current issues and problems in laser welding of
automotive aluminium alloys. Int Mater Rev 1999;44:238–66. https://doi.org/10.
1179/095066099101528298.
[5] Moon DW, Metzbower EA. Laser beam welding on aluminum alloy 5456. Weld J
1983;62:53s–8s.
[6] Pastor M, Zhao H, Martukanitz RP, Debroy T. Porosity, underfill and magnesium
loss during continuous wave Nd: YAG laser welding of thin plates of aluminum
alloys 5182 and 5754. Weld J Incl Weld Res Suppl 1999;78:207s–16s.
[7] Leo P, Renna G, Casalino G, Olabi AG. Effect of power distribution on the weld
quality during hybrid laser welding of an Al – Mg alloy. Opt Laser Technol
2015;73:118–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2015.04.021.
[8] Yang J, Li XY, Gong SL, Chen L, Xu F. Typical joint defects in laser welded alumi-
nium-lithium alloy. Laser Eng 2011;22:337–50.
[9] Yu Y, Wang C, Hu X, Wang J, Yu S. Porosity in fiber laser formation of 5A06 alu-
minum alloy. J Mech Sci Technol 2010;24:1077–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12206-010-0309-4.
[10] Oliveira AC, Siqueira RHM, Riva R, Lima MSF. One-sided laser beam welding of
autogenous T-joints for 6013-T4 aluminium alloy. Mater Des 2015;65:726–36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.09.055.
[11] Ventzke V, Riekehr S, Horstmann M, Haack P, Kashaev N. One-sided Nd:YAG laser
beam welding for the manufacture of T-joints made of aluminium alloys for aicraft
construction. Weld Cut 2014;13:245–9.
[12] Casalino G, Mortello M, Leo P, Benyounis KY, Olabi AG. Study on arc and laser
powers in the hybrid welding of AA5754 Al-alloy. Mater Des 2014;61:191–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.04.060.
[13] Ola OT, Doern FE. Fusion weldability studies in aerospace AA7075-T651 using
high-power continuous wave laser beam techniques. Mater Des 2015;77:50–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.03.064.
[14] Yang ZB, Tao W, Li LQ, Chen YB, Li FZ, Zhang YL. Double-sided laser beam welded
T-joints for aluminum aircraft fuselage panels: process, microstructure, and
160
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 35 (2018) 149–160
mechanical properties. Mater Des 2012;33:652–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2011.07.059.
[15] Prisco A, Acerra F, Squillace A, Giorleo G, Pirozzi C, Prisco U, et al. LBW of Similar
and Dissimilar Skin-Stringer Joints. Part I: Process Optimization and Mechanical
Characterization. Adv Mater Res 2008;38:306–19. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.
scientific.net/AMR.38.306.
[16] Cicala E, Duffet G, Andrzejewski H, Grevey D. Continuous welding of Al-Mg-Si al-
loys with Nd:YAG laser irradiation: tensile properties optimization of T-joint seams.
Lasers Eng 2010;20:195–211.
[17] Squillace A, Prisco U. Influence of filler material on micro- and macro-mechanical
behaviour of laser-beam-welded T-joint for aerospace applications. Proc Inst Mech
Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl 2009;223:103–15. https://doi.org/10.1243/
14644207JMDA259.
[18] Siqueira RHM, Oliveira AC, Riva R, Abdalla AJ, CARP Baptista, Lima MSF.
Mechanical and microstructural characterization of laser-welded joints of 6013-T4
aluminum alloy. J Braz. Soc Mech Sci Eng 2014;37:133–40. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s40430-014-0175-6.
[19] Enz J, Riekehr S, Ventzke V, Kashaev N. Influence of the local chemical composition
on the mechanical properties of laser beam welded Al-Li alloys. Phys Procedia
2012;39:51–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2012.10.013.
[20] Riva R, Siqueira RHM, Lima MSF. Crack-free autogeneous one-sided laser welding
of a 6013 aluminum alloy T-joint for aircraft applications. 2015https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/279977837_Crack-free_autogeneous_one-sided_laser_
welding_of_a_6013_aluminum_alloy_T-joint_for_aircraft_applications.
[21] Ghaini FM, Sheikhi M, Torkamany MJ, Sabbaghzadeh J. The relation between li-
quation and solidification cracks in pulsed laser welding of 2024 aluminium alloy.
Mater Sci Eng A 2009;519:167–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2009.04.056.
[22] Ola OT, Doern FE. Keyhole-induced porosity in laser-arc hybrid welded aluminum.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2015:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-6987-4.
[23] Zhang L, Li X, Nie Z, Huang H, Sun J. Microstructure and mechanical properties of a
new Al-Zn-Mg-Cu alloy joints welded by laser beam. Mater Des 2015;83:451–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.070.
[24] Tan C, Yang J, Zhao X, Zhang K, Song X, Chen B, et al. Influence of Ni coating on
interfacial reactions and mechanical properties in laser welding-brazing of Mg/Ti
butted joint. J Alloys Compd 2018;764:186–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jallcom.2018.06.039.
[25] Badini C, Pavese M, Fino P, Biamino S. Laser beam welding of dissimilar aluminium
alloys of 2000 and 7000 series: effect of post-welding thermal treatments on T joint
strength. Sci Technol Weld Join 2009;14:484–92. https://doi.org/10.1179/
136217108X372559.
[26] Janasekaran S, Jamaludin MF, Muhamad MR, Yusof F, Abdul Shukor MH.
Autogenous double-sided T-joint welding on aluminum alloys using low power fiber
laser. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2017;90:3497–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00170-016-9677-y.
[27] Braun R. Nd: YAG laser butt welding of AA6013 using silicon a nd magnesium
containing filler powders. Mater Sci Eng A 2006;426:250–62. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.msea.2006.04.033.
[28] Cao X, Wallace W, Immarigeon JP, Poon C. Research and progress in laser welding
of wrought aluminum alloys. II. Metallurgical microstructures, defects, and me-
chanical properties. Mater Manuf Process 2003;18:23–49. https://doi.org/10.
1081/AMP-120017587.
[29] Zhao H, DebRoy T. Macroporosity free aluminum alloy weldments through nu-
merical simulation of keyhole mode laser welding. J Appl Phys 2003;93:10089–96.
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1573732.
[30] Huang C, Cao G, Kou S. Liquation cracking in aluminum welds. Mater Sci Forum
2007;539–543:4036–41. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.539-
543.4036.
[31] Song Y, Yang X, Cui L, Hou X, Shen Z, Xu Y. Defect features and mechanical
properties of friction stir lap welded dissimilar AA2024-AA7075 aluminum alloy
sheets. Mater Des 2014;55:9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.09.062.