See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338840667

Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on the tensile strength of

dissimilar aluminum alloy AA2024-T3 and AA7075-T6 joints

Article  in  Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik · January 2020

DOI: 10.1002/mawe.201800184

CITATIONS READS

0 26

3 authors, including:

Padmanaban Ramasamy Vaira Vignesh Ramalingam

Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham
82 PUBLICATIONS   222 CITATIONS    75 PUBLICATIONS   127 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Micro & Nano Technology Books: Advanced Nanomaterials Series (Elsevier) View project

Optimization of joining and processing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Vaira Vignesh Ramalingam on 27 January 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27 DOI 10.1002/mawe.201800184 17

1
2
Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on
3 the tensile strength of dissimilar aluminum alloy
4
5 AA2024-T3 and AA7075-T6 joints
6
7
Einfluss des Rührreibschweißprozesses auf die Zugfestigkeit
8
9 von Schweißverbindungen aus verschiedenen
10 Aluminiumlegierungen (AA2024-T3 und AA7075-T6)
11
12
13 R. Padmanaban1, V. Balusamy2, R. Vaira Vignesh3
14
15 This work investigates the influence of friction stir welding parameters on the me-
16 chanical properties of the dissimilar joint between AA2024-T3 and AA7075-T6. Ex-
17 periments are conducted consistent with the three-level face-centered composite
18 design. Response surface methodology is used to develop the regression model
19 for predicting the tensile strength of the joints. The analysis of variance technique
20 is used to access the adequacy of the developed model. The model is used to
21 study the effect of key operating process parameters namely, tool rotation speed,
22
welding speed and shoulder diameter on the tensile strength of the joints. The re-
sults indicate that friction stir welding of aluminum alloys at a tool rotation speed of
23
1050 min 1, welding speed of 40 mm/min and a shoulder diameter of 17.5 mm
24
would produce defect less joint with high tensile strength.
25
26 Keywords: Friction stir welding / tensile strength / design of experiments / analysis of
27 variance / response surface methodology / optimization
28
29 Schlüsselwörter: Rührreibschweißen / Zugfestigkeit / Versuchsplanung / Analyse
30 der Varianz / Antwortflächenmethode / Optimierung
31
32
33 1 Introduction ing, plasma arc welding, air-acetylene welding,
34 oxygen-acetylene welding, oxygen-hydrogen weld-
35 Aluminum alloy with copper as a primary alloying ing etc. Even with extensive applications, joining
36 element (2xxx) and aluminum alloy with zinc as these dissimilar alloys by conventional welding
37 primary alloying (7xxx series) element has a high process results in poor weldments, owing to their
38 strength to weight ratio and good fatigue resistance rapid oxidation rate [3, 4]. During the conventional
39 [1, 2]. Hence, these alloys are widely used in air- welding process, the region around the weldments
40 craft structures, especially in wing and fuselage. develops metallurgical conditions favorable for the
41 Some of the conventional welding techniques in- induction of intergranular micro-cracks. These in-
42 clude gas tungsten arc welding, gas metal arc weld-
43
1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amrita Corresponding author: R. Padmanaban, Department
44
45 School of Engineering, Coimbatore, Amrita Vishwa of Mechanical Engineering, Amrita School of Engi-
46
Vidyapeetham, INDIA neering, Coimbatore, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham,
2 Department of Metallurgical Engineering, PSG Col- INDIA,
47
lege of Technology, Coimbatore, INDIA E-Mail: dr_padmanaban@cb.amrita.edu
48 3 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amrita
49 School of Engineering, Coimbatore, Amrita Vishwa
50 Vidyapeetham, INDIA

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

18 R. Padmanaban et al. Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27

1 tergranular micro-cracks develop eventually, during ometry (shoulder profile, pin profile, shoulder and
2 the service period of the components. pin diameters, pin height) and axial force affect the
3 The development of intergranular cracks leads heat generation, material flow, and microstructural
4 to unpredictable failure of the components. Besides, evolution [17–20]. Friction stir welding process
5 conventional methods of welding make these alloys progressively fetches attention to join the structural
6 susceptible to stress corrosion cracking, which is members made of aluminum alloys, as the aero-
7 not immediately detectable after the welding proc- space and automotive applications necessitate the
8 ess. Cumulatively, intergranular microcracking and joining of aluminum structural sheets with reliable
9 stress corrosion cracking make conventional weld- mechanical properties. As 2xxx and 7xxx alumi-
10 ing of these alloys inexpedient. The chemistry and num alloy sheets are chiefly used in the structural
11 hot cracking phenomenon of these alloys hinder members, joining of 2xxx and 7xxx aluminum al-
12 welding by fusion welding processes like gas tung- loys is an imperative need.
13 sten arc welding and gas metal arc welding process. The primary objective of the study is to produce
14 Friction stir welding is widely considered for a sound joint between aluminum alloys AA2024-
15 joining high-performance structural applications, as T3 and AA7075-T6. The study aims to explore the
16 it has demonstrated less distortion and low residual influence of tool rotation speed, welding speed, and
17 stress in the weldments than the conventional weld- shoulder diameter on the evolution of micro-
18 ing process [3, 5–8]. The friction stir welding tool structure and mechanical properties of the joints.
19 has a unique profile with probe length slightly The process parameters were related to the re-
20 smaller than the thickness of the joining plate and sponse (tensile strength) using a statistical re-
21 probe diameter approximately equal to the thick- gression model. The regression model was used to
22 ness of the joining plate. During the friction stir generate the contour plots, which were used to
23 welding process, the tool is plunged and traversed study the influence of process parameters on the
24 along the joint line under the influence of an axial tensile strength.
25 load [3, 7]. This simultaneously delivers strain and
26 heat at the joint interface, which plasticizes the ma-
27 terial and joins them. 2 Materials and methods
28 The two sides of the joints have three distinctive
29 zone features viz. nugget zone, thermo-mechan- 2.1 Materials
30 ically affected zone, and externally heat affected
31 zone. Earlier research work confirmed that con- The chemical composition of the AA2024-T3 and
32 tinuous dynamic recovery and recrystallization re- AA7076-T6 alloys is confirmed in Table 1. The mi-
33 fine the microstructure of the weldments during the crohardness and tensile properties of the AA2024-
34 course of the friction stir welding process [9–16]. T3 and AA7075-T6 alloys are obtained from the
35 Briefly, friction stir welding eliminates the solid- standard tests, Table 2. The rolled plates of
36 ification microstructure, reduces and disperses the AA2024-T3 and AA7075-T6 were cut to the re-
37 brittle phases (secondary, intermetallic phases, in- quired sizes (150 mm × 75 mm) by milling.
38 ter-dendritic phases). The fine-grained micro-
39 structure with dispersed hard phases in the weld
40 nugget zone ensures considerably good mechanical 2.2 Friction stir welding
41 strength and ductility.
42 The friction stir welding process parameters The plates were friction stir welded using a vertical
43 namely tool rotation speed, welding speed, tool ge- milling center (Make: Lakshmi Machine Works,
44
45
46 Table 1. Composition of AA2024-T3 and AA7075-T6.
47
Alloy Cu Mg Mn Cr Fe Si Ti Zn Al
48
49 AA2024-T3 4.50 1.60 0.83 0.06 0.42 0.38 0.12 0.18 91.94
AA7075-T6 1.70 2.31 0.22 0.22 0.38 0.32 0.18 5.42 89.30
50

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

 Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27 Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on the tensile strength 19

1 Table 2. Mechanical properties of base metal.

2
Alloy Yield strength, (MPa) Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) Elongation (%) Microhardness (HV)
3
4 AA2024-T3 324 469 19 137
AA7075-T6 503 572 11 175
5
6
7
8 Model: KODI 40). Friction stir welding tools made ing speed of 60 mm/min. As the forces on the
9 of high-speed steel tools had tapered cylindrical ge- tool were higher at a welding speed of 60 mm/
10 ometry with a threaded pin of the diameter of 5 mm min, the tool failed eventually.
11 and height 4.65 mm. The tools (shoulder diameter * Friction stir welding of the workpieces using a

12 of 15 mm, 17.5 mm and 20 mm) used for friction tool with a shoulder diameter of 15 mm, resulted
13 stir welding trials, Figure 1. The plates were fric- in insufficient heat generation, which caused
14 tion stir welded in the butt configuration with the visible defects from the weldments. Flash and
15 welding direction perpendicular to the rolling direc- wormhole were observed in the weldments of the
16 tion. After a small dwell period of 30 seconds, the workpieces joined using a tool with a shoulder
17 tool is moved forward along the weld line. diameter of 20 mm.
18 The working limits of the friction stir welding
19 process parameters are identified for joining
20 Identifying the working limit of process parameters AA2024-T3 and AA7075-T6 aluminum alloys, Ta-
21 ble 3. In this study, the face-centered central com-
22 Friction stir welding trials were conducted to de- posite design was utilized to prepare the design ma-
23 termine the feasible working limits of friction stir trix, Table 4.
24 welding process parameters for joiningAA2024-T3
25 and AA7075-T6 aluminum alloys. The working
26 limits of the process parameters were decided based 2.3 Microstructure
27 on the appearance of the weld and visible defects.
28 The experimental observations were as follows: Specimens for microstructure observation were ma-
* In the workpieces joined at tool rotation speed chined from the friction stir welded plates and were
29
30 lower than 900 min 1, insufficient heat gen- mounted using the cold setting compound. The
31 eration caused poor-quality welds. The weldment specimens were etched with Keller’s reagent (1 ml
32 of workpieces joined at a tool rotation speed HydroFluoric acid, 1.5 ml Hydro Chloric acid,
33 higher than 1200 min 1 had nugget collapse and 2.5 ml Nitric acid and 95 ml distilled water) for 20
34 flash. seconds and the microstructure of the specimens
* When the welding speed was lower than 20 mm/ was observed in an optical microscope (Make: Carl
35
36 min, surface defects occurred. The experimental Zeiss, Model: Axiovert 25).
37 setup developed vibratory conditions and the ta-
38 ble movement was intermittent beyond the weld-
39 2.4 Tensile strength and fractography
40
41 The friction stir welded plates were machined to
42 obtain three tensile specimens as per the directions
43
44 Table 3. Friction stir welding parameters and levels.
45
46 Sl. Parameter Low Medium High
( 1) (0) (+ 1)
47
48 1. Tool rotation speed (min 1) 900 1050 1200
49 Figure 1. Friction stir welding tools with shoulder diameter 2. Welding speed (mm/min) 20 40 60
of (a) 15 mm; (b) 17.5 mm; (c) 20 mm. 3. Shoulder diameter (mm) 15 17.5 20
50

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

20 R. Padmanaban et al. Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27

1 Table 4. Experimental layout and tensile test results.

2
Sl. Specimen code Tool rotation Welding speed Shoulder diameter Tensile strength Predicted tensile
3 speed strength
4 (min 1) (mm/min) (mm) (MPa) (MPa)
5
1 FSW01 900 20 15 153 153.40
6 2 FSW02 1200 20 15 205 206.50
7 3 FSW03 900 60 15 147 145.82
8 4 FSW04 1200 60 15 182 182.28
9 5 FSW05 900 20 20 173 171.32
10 6 FSW06 1200 20 20 193 193.10
7 FSW07 900 60 20 180 178.14
11
8 FSW08 1200 60 20 185 183.28
12 9 FSW09 900 40 17.5 219 222.74
13 10 FSW10 1200 40 17.5 252 251.85
14 11 FSW11 1050 20 17.5 223 222.28
15 12 FSW12 1050 60 17.5 210 213.58
16 13 FSW13 1050 40 15 255 254.29
14 FSW14 1050 40 20 259 263.75
17
15 FSW15 1050 40 17.5 273 268.76
18 16 FSW16 1050 40 17.5 272 268.76
19 17 FSW17 1050 40 17.5 267 268.76
20 18 FSW18 1050 40 17.5 268 268.76
21 19 FSW19 1050 40 17.5 269 268.76
22 20 FSW20 1050 40 17.5 271 268.76
23
24
of the standard ASTM E8M-04. Tensile testing was Tensile strength¼ bo þ b1 � TRS þ b2 � WS
25
26 carried out using a computerized tensile testing ma- þ b3 � SD þ b11 � TRS2 þ b22 � WS2
27 chine (Make: Tinius Olsen). The tensile test speci-
þb33 � SD2 þ b12 � TRS � WS þ b13 � TRS
28 mens were elongated at a crosshead speed of
29 0.01 mm/min. The fractured surface of the tensile- �SD þ b23 � WS � SD (2)
30 tested specimens was observed using a scanning
ðTRS ¼ tool rotation speed;
31 electron microscope.
32 WS ¼ welding speed;
33 SD ¼ shoulder diameterÞ
34 2.5 Response surface methodology
35
36 Details about response surface methodology proce- 3 Results and discussions
37 dure, design matrix and estimation of the co-
38 efficients could be found elsewhere [21–23]. Sec- 3.1 Microstructure
39 ond order regression equation (polynomial) that
40 represents the response surface ‘η’ is given as by Optical microstructures were obtained from the tra-
41 equation (1) [21, 24]. verse cross-section of the specimen. The micro-
42 X X X structure of AA2024-T3 had an elongated grain
43 h ¼ bo þ bi x i þ bii xi 2 þ bij xi xj (1) structure and a higher concentration of second
44 phase particles than AA7075-T6 alloy, Figure 2a.
45 The input variables are tool rotation speed, The AA7075-T6 base material exhibited elongated
46 welding speed, and shoulder diameter. The general matrix grain morphology along the rolling direction
47 regression equation for predicting the tensile with a random distribution of second phase par-
48 strength using the input variables is given by equa- ticles, Figure 2 b. The typical microstructures of the
49 tion (2). friction stir welded specimen FSW15 (1050 min 1,
50

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

 Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27 Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on the tensile strength 21

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Figure 2. Optical micrographs aluminum alloy (a) AA2024-T3; (b) AA7075-T6.
14
15
16 40 mm/min, and 17.5 mm) had nugget zone with welds failed in the heat-affected zone, while the de-
17 equiaxed fine-grains, Figure 3. fective specimens failed in the weld nugget zone.
18 The nugget zone in the weldment of the friction Most of the dissimilar friction stir welded joints
19 stir welded specimen adjacent to AA7075-T6 ex- fractured at the heat-affected zone of the AA2024-
20 hibits equiaxed fine grains, Figure 3c. The nugget T3 side, which is attributed to the lower strength of
21 zone in the weldment of the friction stir welded the AA2024-T3alloy.
22 specimen adjacent to AA7075-T6 exhibits equiaxed
23 fine grains, Figure 3f. During the friction stir weld-
24 ing process, the simultaneous input of heat and 3.3 Fractography
25 strain initiated the dynamic recovery and dynamic
26 recrystallization phenomenon, which recrystallized The fractography of the specimens revealed that the
27 the elongated grains to equiaxed fine-grains. Fric- defective specimens failed in the stir zone. Most of
28 tion stir welding resulted in the formation of the el- the specimens fractured at the thermo-mechanically
29 liptical onion ring structure in the nugget of the affected zone in the advancing side (AA7076-T6),
30 weld, which had fine recrystallized grains, Fig- while macroscopic defects were not observed in the
31 ure 4. retreating side (AA2024-T3). This is attributed to
32 The region adjacent to the nugget zone i. e. de- the lower Strength of AA2024-T3. The morphology
33 formed grains in the thermo-mechanically affected of the fractured specimens indicated the combined
34 zone near AA7075-T6, Figure 3b. The region ad- ductile-brittle fracture regions, Figure 5. A dis-
35 jacent to the nugget zone i. e. deformed grains in persed array of microvoids was observed on the
36 the thermo-mechanically affected zone near fractured surface of the specimens. The coalescence
37 AA2024-T3, Figure 3e. The grains were deformed of the microvoids governs the failure of the tensile-
38 severely but recrystallization phenomenon was not tested specimens. The fractography revealed that
39 observed. The grains were bent, less equiaxed and the specimens fractured along the brittle and inter-
40 were of larger dimensions than those closer to the metallic layers.
41 weld center and no recrystallization occurred in
42 heat affected zone of AA7075-T6 and AA2024-T3,
43 Figure 3a, d. 3.4 Regression modeling of tensile strength
44
45 The regression equation representing the tensile
46 3.2 Tensile strength strength of the joints in coded variables is given by
47 equation (3).
48 The average tensile strength and percentage elonga-
49 tion of the friction stir welded specimens are ob-
50 tained from the tensile test, Table 4. The defect-free

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

22 R. Padmanaban et al. Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41 Figure 3. Optical micrographs of friction stir welded joint (a) Heat affected zone on AA7075-T6 side; (b) Thermo-me-
42 chanically affected zone on AA 7075-T6 side; (c) Nugget on AA7075-T6 side; (d) Heat affected zone on AA2024-T3 side; (e)
43 Thermo-mechanically affected zone on AA2024-T3 side; (f) Nugget on AA2024-T3 side.
44
45 Tensile strength ¼ 268:763 14:56 � TRS
46 The developed regression model was used to es-
47
4:350 � WS þ 4:734 � SD 31:465 � TRS2
timate the tensile strength of friction stir welded
(3) dissimilar AA2024-T3 – AA7075-T6 aluminum al-
48 50:822 � WS2 9:740 � SD2 4:166 � TRS
49 loy joints for different tool rotation speed, welding
�WS 7:832 � TRS � SD þ 3:600 � WS � SD speed, and shoulder diameter. The predicted results
50

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

 Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27 Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on the tensile strength 23

1 The analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the de-

2 veloped statistical regression model indicates the
3 effectiveness of the developed model, Table 5. The
4 residual sum of squares with 10 degrees of freedom
5 was used for the analysis. The residual sum of
6 squares was partitioned into pure error and lack of
7 fit components. The lack of fit test examines the ef-
8 ficiency of the quadratic model. The p-value for
9 that test was large, which indicated the adequacy of
10 the developed model. The p values for linear, quad-
11 ratic, and interaction terms were less than 0.0001,
12 which showed that those terms significantly influ-
13 ence the response variable (tensile strength).
Figure 4. Elliptical onion ring structure observed in the nug-
14 get of the weldment in the specimen FSW15 (1050 min 1,
15 40 mm/min, and 17.5 mm).
16 3.5 Effect of friction stir welding process
17 parameters on the tensile strength
18 are plotted as multi-line and surface graphs, which
19 are effectively used to understand the effect of tool 3.5.1 Effect of tool rotation speed
20 rotation speed, welding speed, and shoulder diame-
21 ter on the tensile strength of the joints. The effect of tool rotation speed and welding speed
22 on the tensile strength of friction stir welded
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50 Figure 5. Fractography of the specimen FSW15 (1050 min 1, 40 mm/min, and 17.5 mm).

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

24 R. Padmanaban et al. Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27

1 Table 5. Analysis of variance (ANOVA).

2
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P
3
4 Regression 9 36007.4 36007.4 4000.8 384.43 0.000
Linear terms 3 2532.0 2532.0 844.0 81.10 0.000
5
TRS 1 2119.1 2119.1 2119.1 203.62 0.000
6 WS 1 188.8 188.8 188.8 18.14 0.002
7 SD 1 224.1 224.1 224.1 21.54 0.001
8 Square terms 3 32742.4 32742.4 10914.1 1048.72 0.000
9 TRS*TRS 1 22985.7 2722.7 2722.7 261.62 0.000
10 WS*WS 1 9495.7 7102.8 7102.8 682.49 0.000
SD*SD 1 260.9 260.9 260.9 25.07 0.001
11
Interaction 3 733.1 733.1 244.4 23.48 0.000
12 terms
13 TRS*WS 1 138.8 138.8 138.8 13.34 0.004
14 TRS*SD 1 490.7 490.7 490.7 47.15 0.000
15 WS*SD 1 103.6 103.6 103.6 9.95 0.010
16 Residual error 10 104.1 104.1 10.4
Lack of fit 5 72.8 72.8 14.6 2.33 0.187
17
Pure error 5 31.3 6.3
18 Total 19 36111.5
19
S = 3.22600; PRESS = 492.820 ; R2 = 0.9971; R2 (predicted) = 0.9864; R2 (adj) = 0.9945.
20
21
22
23 AA2024-T3–AA7075-T6 dissimilar aluminum al- mixing of the materials. Therefore, the tensile
24 loy joined with a constant shoulder diameter of strength was low. On the other hand, high tool rota-
25 17.5 mm, Figure 6a. The tensile strength of all the tion speed increases the heat input to the joint and
26 joints is found to be lower than that of the base ma- stirring effect of the pin produces tunnel defects
27 terials. When the tool rotation speed was increased [18]. At a tool rotation speed of 900 min 1, material
28 from 900 min 1, the tensile strength also increased mixing was poor and huge voids were developed.
29 until a tool rotation speed of 1050 min 1. However, The high tool rotation speed caused a considerable
30 a further increase in tool rotation speed decreased increase in turbulence in the weld zone, which af-
31 the tensile strength. The joint made at a tool rota- fected regular metal flow. High heat input leads to
32 tion speed of 1050 min 1 yielded a maximum ten- a rise in temperature, which increased the grain
33 sile strength. At low tool rotation speed, the heat growth. This resulted in lower tensile strength at
34 generation was not sufficient to soften the material. higher tool rotation speed. The variation pattern of
35 Hence, the stirring was not sufficient for efficient the tensile strength with tool rotation speed remains
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50 Figure 6. Effect of tool rotation speed and welding speed on the tensile strength (a) Multiline plot; (b) Surface plot.

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

 Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27 Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on the tensile strength 25

1 the same at all welding speed, Figure 6b. However, 3.5.3 Effect of shoulder diameter
2 the tensile strength increased for all tool rotation
3 speed at a welding speed of 40 mm/min. When the The tool shoulder determines the size of the nugget
4 welding speed is further increased to 60 mm/min, zone and location of the heat affected zone and
5 the tensile strength of the joints decreased. At high- hence affects the tensile strength of the friction stir
6 er welding speed the weld area is exposed to fric- welded joints. At a lower tool rotation speed of
7 tion heating for a shorter time, resulting in in- 900 min 1, an increase in shoulder diameter in-
8 sufficient heating and poor plastic flow of the creased the tensile strength of the joints, Figure 8a.
9 metal. Therefore, high welding speed resulted in At a tool rotation speed of 1050 min 1, the tensile
10 void defects in the joints. strength of joints made with 20 mm shoulder diam-
11 eter tool was lesser than the joint made with
12 17.5 mm shoulder diameter tool but higher than the
13 3.5.2 Effect of welding speed tensile strength of the joints made with 15 mm
14 shoulder diameter tool. At tool rotation speed of
15 The tensile strength of the joints increased with in- 1200 min 1, the tensile strength of the joints made
16 crease in shoulder diameter from 15 mm to with 20 mm shoulder diameter tool was observed to
17 17.5 mm, Figure 7a. At a shoulder diameter of be the lowest. Increasing both the tool rotation
18 15 mm, the tensile strength of the joints increased speed and shoulder diameter resulted in a large
19 with an increase in welding speed from 20 mm/min amount of heat generation. Due to the high tool ro-
20 to 40 mm/min. With further increase in welding tation speed and temperature of the weld area, tur-
21 speed to 60 mm/min, the tensile strength of the bulence was generated in the weld zone. The weld-
22 joints decreased to a value less than that produced ment material flows out of the weld zone and flash
23 at a welding speed of 20 mm/min. The same pattern defect and voids were formed. This resulted in re-
24 of variation is observed for the joints made with duced tensile strength of the joints. Analysis of the
25 17.5 mm and 20 mm shoulder diameter tools. The plots revealed that better friction stir welded joints
26 strength of the joints made with a 20 mm shoulder between AA2024-T3 – AA7075-T6 joints can be
27 diameter tool was lesser than the joint made with a obtained when the tool rotation speed is within
28 17.5 mm shoulder diameter tool, Figure 7b. For all 1075 to1125 min 1 and shoulder diameter is within
29 the three shoulder diameter, joints produced at a 17.25 mm to 18.25 mm, Figure 8b. From the analy-
30 welding speed of 40 mm/min had higher tensile sis of the interaction plots, surface plots, we found
31 strength. When the welding speed is either very that the joints made with 17.5 mm shoulder diame-
32 low or very high, defects occurred. ter tool, at a tool rotation speed of 1050 min 1 and
33 a welding speed of 40 mm yielded superior tensile
34 strength.
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50 Figure 7. Effect of welding speed and shoulder diameter on the tensile strength (a) Multiline plot; (b) Surface plot.

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

26 R. Padmanaban et al. Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Figure 8. Effect of tool rotation speed and shoulder diameter on the tensile strength (a) Multiline plot; (b) Surface plot.
14
15
16 4 Conclusion Hence, the optimum friction stir welding parame-
17 ters for maximizing the tensile strength is de-
18 Dissimilar aluminum alloys AA2024-T3-T3 and duced as a shoulder diameter of 17.5 mm, the
19 AA7075-T6 were successfully joined by friction tool rotation speed of 1050 min 1, and a welding
20 stir welding process. A statistical regression model speed of 40 mm/min.
21 was developed to explore the effect of tool rotation
22 speed, welding speed, and tool shoulder diameter
23 on the tensile strength of the joints. The results es- 5 References
24 tablished the following:
* The simultaneous input of heat and strain ini- [1] K. Jata, S. Semiatin, Continuous dynamic re-
25
26 tiated the dynamic recovery and dynamic re- crystallization during friction stir welding of
27 crystallization phenomenon in the weld nugget high strength aluminum alloys, Air Force Re-
28 zone, which recrystallized the elongated grains to search Lab Wright-Patterson AFB OH Materi-
29 equiaxed fine-grains in the aluminum alloys. In als and Manufacturing Directorate, Ohio
30 the thermo-mechanically affected zone, the 2000.
31 grains were deformed severely but recrystalliza- [2] I. Charit, R.S. Mishra, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
32 tion phenomenon was not observed. In the heat 2003, 359, 290.
33 affected zone, the grains were less equiaxed and [3] R.S. Mishra, Z. Ma, Mater. Sci. Eng. R 2005,
34 were of larger dimensions, which clearly in- 50, 1.
35 dicates the absence of recrystallization phenom-
[4] R.V. Vignesh, R. Padmanaban, M. Arivarasu,
36 enon.
* The friction stir welding parameters significantly
S. Thirumalini, J. Gokulachandran, M.S.S.S.
37
Ram, IOP Conference Series: Materials Sci-
38 influence the evolution of microstructure and the
ence and Engineering 2016, 149, 012208.
39 tensile strength of the joints. The tensile strength
of the joints exhibited a parabolic crest trend [5] P. Cavaliere, E. Cerri, A. Squillace, J. Mater.
40
with an increase in tool rotation speed, tool tra- Sci. 2005, 40, 3669.
41
42 verse speed, and shoulder diameter. The turbu- [6] S.A. Khodir, T. Shibayanagi, Mater. Sci. Eng.
43 lent material flow at high tool rotation speed, im- B 2008, 148, 1928.
44 proper material flow at high welding speed, high [7] R.S. Mishra, P.S. De, N. Kumar, Friction stir
45 heat input at high tool rotation speed, low weld- welding and processing: science and engineer-
46 ing speed, and high shoulder diameter resulted in ing, Springer, Newyork 2014.
47 inefficient joints. [8] Y. Song, X. Yang, L. Cui, X. Hou, Z. Shen,
48 * Friction stir welding of the aluminum alloys at Y. Xu, Mater. Des. 2014, 55, 9.
49 mid-level of process parameters resulted in an [9] S.A. Khodir and T. Shibayanagi, Mater.
50 average maximum tensile strength of 270 MPa. Trans. 2007, 48, 82.

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

 Materialwiss. Werkstofftech. 2020, 51, 17–27 Effect of friction stir welding process parameters on the tensile strength 27

1 [10] M. Dixit, R. Mishra, K. Sankaran, Mater. Sci. [19] A.K. Lakshminarayanan, V. Balasubramanian,
2 Eng. A 2008, 478, 163. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of
3 [11] K. Elangovan, V. Balasubramanian, S. Babu, China 2009, 19, 9.
4 Mater. Des. 2009, 30, 188. [20] S. Rajakumar, C. Muralidharan, V. Balasu-
5 [12] P. Bahemmat, M. Haghpanahi, M. Besharati, bramanian, Proceedings of the Institution of
6 S. Ahsanizadeh, H. Rezaei, Proceedings of the Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of En-
7 Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: gineering Manufacture 2010, 224, 1175.
8 Journal of Engineering Manufacture 2010, [21] R.H. Myers, C. Douglas, A.C. Montgomery,
9 224, 1854. Christine, Response Surface Methodology:
10 [13] A. Da Silva, E. Arruti, G. Janeiro, E. Alda- Process and Product Optimization Using De-
11 nondo, P. Alvarez, A. Echeverria, Mater. Des. signed Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, New
12 2011, 32, 2021. Jersey, USA 2001.
13
[14] P. Bahemmat, M. Haghpanahi, M.K.B. Givi, [22] R.F. Gunst, Response surface methodology:
14
K.R. Seighalani, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. process and product optimization using de-
15
2012, 59, 939. signed experiments, Taylor & Francis, Milton,
16
[15] R.V. Vignesh, R. Padmanaban, presented at England 1996.
17
ISCO’17, Coimbatore, India, January 5–Jan- [23] D.C. Montgomery, Design and analysis of ex-
18
uary 6, 2017, pp.449-456. periments, John wiley & sons, New Jersey,
19
[16] R.V. Vignesh, R. Padmanaban, International USA 2017.
20
21
Journal of Vehicle Structures & Systems [24] Douglas C. Montgomery, Design and Analy-
22
2018, 10, 1. sis of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, New
23
[17] K. Elangovan, V. Balasubramanian, Mater. Jersey, USA 2006.
24 Des. 2008, 29, 92.
25 [18] K. Elangovan, V. Balasubramanian, Journal
26 of Materials Processing Technology 2008,
27 200, 1. Received in final form: March 6th 2019
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

© 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & CO. KGaA, Weinheim www.wiley-vch.de/home/muw

View publication stats