Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full

Factorial Design
M. Prakash, A. Daniel Das
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Karpagam Academy of Higher Education, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 021, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Friction Stir Welding (FSW) is the solid state welding process, which is widely used in industrial applica-
Received 20 May 2020 tions. In this research work, Al 7075 and Al 6061 are selected as a base metal in a plate form. Tool speed
Accepted 24 May 2020 (rpm), Feed rate (mm/min), Displacement (mm/min) and welding time (min) are the four factors used in
Available online xxxx
this research investigation. There are sixteen experimental runs, with one block of base design has been
performed. The optimization section has been performed by using Full Factorial Design (FFD). The output
Keywords: parameter of this research investigation is impact strength (J). The quality of the welding joints is ana-
Full Factorial Design
lyzed and calculated using a Statistical Software.
Al7075
Al6061
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Impact strength Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
FSW ence on Newer Trends and Innovation in Mechanical Engineering: Materials Science

1. Introduction further extended the research by modifying the research method

Welding is the most vital technique used to join the metal as
per the respective design, used in industrial sectors widely. Solid
state welding process has various advantages compared with the
fusion welding process. Hence, it is widely used in joining dis-
similar metal joining process. According to the edge preparation
and tool geometry, the quality of the welding joints has been
analyzed by strength and metallurgical structures. Also the base
metals and metal flow has taken in to account investigated by
Cavaliere et al. [1]. The statistical technique used to analyze
the quality of the welding joints and the variance has been ana-
lyzed for identifying the contribution of process parameters.
Since FSW produces defect free weld joints identified by Nan-
saarng et al. [2–5]. Jayaraman extended his research in FSW,
by analyzing the base metal Al, which the researcher decides
to keep their input parameters as Tool rotational speed, plunge
depth and welding movement [6]. The maximum tensile
strength used in this research work as an output parameter
has achieved to 143 MPa. He performed his optimization part
by using neural networks[7–9]. Same research is extended by
Lakshminarayanan and he concluded that the most influencing
parameter is Tool rotational speed. Daniel Das et al (2015) has
E-mail addresses: prakash.m@kahedu.edu.in (M. Prakash), danieldas.a@kahedu.
edu.in (A. Daniel Das)
to join dissimilar metal of tube and tube plate. He concludes that
the most convincing parameter is gear rotational speed. He anal-
yse the quality of the joints by Taguchi and ANOVA[10–13].
Later, the research is extended by using RSM. Additionally, by
analyzing various literature surveys, the most convincing
parameter of FSW is Tool rotational speed. Hence, Al7075 is heat
treated and it is difficult to fabricate by using fusion welding
process. So this is the outcome of the research work. This
research work has extended by analyzing the impact strength
replacing tensile strength [14–16].
2. Methodology and base materials
In this research investigation, Al 6061 and Al 7075 are the base
material, the materials are cleaned and it performed edge prepara-
tion. The chemical composition are measured by using Optical
Emission Spectroscopy (OES) method and it is tabulated in Table 1
and Table 2.
The FSW has been performed for sixteen different samples and
the sample are bisected to required dimensions followed for tensile
strength. The dimension of the base metals is 80 mm X 160 mm.
The thickness of the base plate is about 6 mm. Fig. 1 shows the
welding of the sixteen samples. Further the impact strength values
are tabulated in Table 5.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Newer Trends and Innovation in Mechanical Engineering:
Materials Science

Please cite this article as: M. Prakash and A. Daniel Das, Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full Factorial Design, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
2 M. Prakash, A. Daniel Das / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 1 Table 3
Al 7075 material composition. Design summary of full factorial
design.
Alloy Si Fe Mn Cr Ti Mg Cu Zn Al
Factors 4
Wt % 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.17 0.4 2.4 1.6 5.5 Balance
Runs 16
Blocks 1
Base Design 4, 16
Table 2 Replicates 1
Al 6061 material composition. Center pts (total) 0
Alloy Si Ti Mn Cu Mg Zn Fe Cr Al
Wt % 0.6 0.1 0.03 0.6 0.9 0.2 0.4 0.25 Balance
Table 4
L16 levels for each factors of FFD.

3. Results and discussion Factors Low Level High Level

From this research investigation, the work is further proceeding
of Full Factorial Design. In this research work, there are sixteen dif-
ferent samples prepared and cleaned with the help of acetone solu-
tion. Further, the samples are washed with distilled water, allowed
to dry using blower. The experimental work has been performed
using DoE concept [15]. The design summary is tabulated in
Table 3. From Table 3, there are four factors and sixteen experi-
mental runs. But these research work has performed in single
block, and having single replication.
Table 4 shows the factors and level of the current investigation.
From Table 4, the low level for Tool speed is 700 rpm and highest
level is 900 rpm. The feed rate has two levels, the lowest level is
20 mm/min and highest level is 40 mm/min. Further, the lowest
level of displacement is 2 mm/min and highest level is
4 mm/min, followed by welding time has 2 min at the lower level
where the highest level is 3 min.
The impact strength is performed for sixteen samples and the
values are tabulated in Table 5. From Table 5, the impact strength
is the output parameter and it is measured by Joules. The optimum
impact strength has been identified as 23.7 J, when the input
parameters are 900 rpm tool speed, 20 mm/min feed rate,
2 mm/min displacement and 2 min welding time.
The tool speed 900 has higher level as per FFD in this research
investigation [17–20]. Hence, the generation of heat is higher com-
pared to 700 rpm. At lower speed, the heat generation is poor and
plastic deformation has not even good during metal bonding tech-
nique. The feed rate is 20 mm/min; it is low level parameter. Since,
the higher feed rate has higher impression on the plate, which
means the impact strength is low on the welding interface. The
Tool Speed (rpm) 700 900
Feed rate (mm/min) 20 40
Displacement (mm/min) 2 4
Welding time (min) 2 3
displacement of the welding is lower level is an optimum value,
because the higher displacement produces insecure welding joints
and dissipation of atoms get damaged. The welding time 2 min is
optimum, lower level is incurred, where the highest level of
welding time leads to metal removal [21–23].
Fig. 2 shows the pareto chart for the response value of impact
strength. From the figure, tool speed is the most influencing
parameter followed by the feed rate, displacement and welding
time. The optimum value has been achieved by the contribution
of parameter tool speed. For this response impact strength, the
lenth’s pseudo standard error has been calculated as 0.1125.
Fig. 3 shows the Fitted means for response impact strength. From
the figure, the tool speed should be maximum to achieve optimum
value. Followed by feed rate, displacement and welding time the
value should be minimum to achieve optimum value of the process
parameter [24].
Table 6 shows the response table of impact strength values with
certain limits. Fig. 4 shows the SN ratio graph for the impact
strength response values. From the table, tool speed is the best
ranking process compared with other three parameters. From the
graph plot, it is clearly explained that the maximum value will
be allotted for tool speed, followed by the feed rate, welding time
and displacement has minimum value.

Fig. 1. FSW samples of Al 6061 and Al 7075.

Please cite this article as: M. Prakash and A. Daniel Das, Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full Factorial Design, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
 M. Prakash, A. Daniel Das / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 3

Table 5 Table 6
Input and output parameter for L8 orthogonal array. Response table of impact strength SN ratio.

Ex. Input parameters Output Level Tool Speed Feed rate Displacement Welding time
No parameter (rpm) (mm/min) (mm/min) (min)
Tool Feed rate Displacement Welding Impact
1 24.96 26.11 26.03 25.91
Speed (mm/min) (mm/min) time (min) strength
2 26.69 25.53 25.61 25.74
(rpm) (J)
Delta 1.73 0.58 0.42 0.18
1 900 20 2 2 23.7 Rank 1 2 3 4
2 900 40 4 2 20.1
3 700 40 2 3 17.1
4 700 20 4 2 18.7
5 700 20 2 2 20.3 Fig. 5 shows the cubic plot for fitted means which the impact
6 700 20 4 3 17.8
strength has allotted as response. Fig. 6 shows the interaction plot
7 900 20 2 3 22.8
8 900 40 4 3 19.5 of the process parameters. The fitted mean value is calculated and
9 900 40 2 2 22 as per the delta variation, the interaction plot has been plotted
10 700 40 2 2 18.2 with certain data mean values.
11 700 40 4 3 16.2 Table 7 shows the model summary of this research investiga-
12 900 20 4 2 21.6
13 700 20 2 3 19.1
tion. From Table 7, the r-sq value is predicted as 97.89% and r-sq
14 900 40 2 3 20.5 value is 98.99%. Hence, the basic value has been calculated and it
15 700 40 4 2 16.8 is tabulated. The regression equation used in this research work
16 900 20 4 3 21 has shown in Equation (1).

Impact Strength ðJ Þ ¼ 13:512

þ 0:016875 Tool Speed ðrpmÞ
 0:09125 Feed rate ðmm=minÞ
 0:7500 Displacement ðmm=minÞ
 0:925 Welding time ðminÞ ð1Þ
Fig. 7 shows the response optimizer graph for the maximum
value by criteria. Where the Y value is considering as 23.7, which
the impact value is optimum for the process parameters. From
the figure, the input values are 900 rpm speed, 20 mm/min feed
rate, 2 mm/min displacement and 2 min welding speed.

4. Conclusion

Fig. 2. In response with impact strength, the effects of pareto chart.

The Al 7075 and Al 6061 are the base metal used to weld FSW,
optimized by FFD and the following conclusions are identified.

Fig. 3. Fitted mean graph plot of input parameters.

Please cite this article as: M. Prakash and A. Daniel Das, Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full Factorial Design, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
4 M. Prakash, A. Daniel Das / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 4. Graph plot of SN ratio for FFD.

Fig. 5. Cubic plot for fitted means for impact strength as response.

Please cite this article as: M. Prakash and A. Daniel Das, Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full Factorial Design, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
 M. Prakash, A. Daniel Das / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 5

Fig. 6. Interaction plot for fitted means using FFD.

Table 7  From Pareto Chart, the most convincing parameter is Tool speed
Data summary, R-Sq, R-Sq predicted.
at the maximum level (+1).
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)  From Data means table, the most influencing parameter is Tool
0.257611 98.99% 98.62% 97.86% rotational speed as 900 rpm.
 From Regression data summary, the R-square value is predicted
as 97.89% and R-square value is 98.99%.
 By response optimizer graph plot, the Y value is 23.7 value as
 From FFD, the maximum impact strength has achieved by
impact strength, where 900 rpm speed, 20 mm/min feed rate,
900 rpm tool speed, 20 mm/min feed rate, 2 mm/min displace- 2 mm/min displacement and 2 min welding speed are consid-
ment and 2 min welding speed.
ered as input parameter.

Fig. 7. Response optimizer plot for impact strength with process parameters.

Please cite this article as: M. Prakash and A. Daniel Das, Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full Factorial Design, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
6 M. Prakash, A. Daniel Das / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] P. Cavaliere, G. Campanile, F. Panella, A. Squillace, Effect of welding parameters
on mechanical and microstructural properties of AA6056 joints produced by
friction stir welding, J. Mater. Process Technol. 180 (2006) 263–270.
[2] V.D. Yadhav, S.G. Bhatwadekar, Friction stir welding of dissimilar aluminium
alloys AA1100 to AA6101-T6, Int. J. Res. Aeronaut. Mech. Eng. 3 (2015) 1–6.
[3] S.M. Bayazid, H. Farhangi, A. Ghahramani, Investigation of friction stir welding
parameters of 6063–7075 aluminum alloys by Taguchi method, Procedia
Mater. Sci. 11 (2015) 6–11.
[4] V. Balasubramanian, A.K. Lakshminarayanan, The mechanical properties of the
GMAW, GTAW and FSW joints of the RDE-40 aluminium alloy, Int. J.
Microstruct. Mater. Prop. 3 (2008) 837–853.
[5] D. Paramaguru, S.R. Pedapati, M. Awang, Mohebbi H. Mathematical Model to
Predict Tensile Strength of Underwater Friction Stir Welded (UFSW) on 5052
Aluminium Alloys ASME 2018 Int. Mech. Eng. Congr. Expo., American Society
of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection 2018
[6] N. Jayaraman, P.S. Prevéy, M. Mahoney. Fatigue Life Improvement of an
Aluminum Alloy FSW with Low Plasticity Burnishing. Proc. 132nd TMS Annu.
Meet. San Diego, CA, Citeseer 2003
[7] C.B. Fuller, M.W. Mahoney, M. Calabrese, L. Micona, Evolution of
microstructure and mechanical properties in naturally aged 7050 and 7075
Al friction stir welds, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527 (2010) 2233–2240.
[8] P.H. Shah, V. Badheka, An experimental investigation of temperature
distribution and joint properties of Al 7075 T651 friction stir welded
aluminium alloys, Procedia Technol. 23 (2016) 543–550.
[9] S.-K. Jang, J.-I. Jeon, Weldability of Al 7075 alloy according to different tools
and welding conditions by FSW, J. Korean Soc. Mar. Eng. 30 (2006) 30–41.
[10] A.D. Das, S. Senthil Kumaran. FWTPET Investigation on SA213 Tube to SA387
Tube Plate. Appl. Mech. Mater., vol. 852, Trans Tech Publ; 2016, p. 355–61.
[11] S.S. Kumaran, A.D. Das, An examination of seamless ferritic tube and austenitic
alloy tube plate joining by friction welding process, Mater. Today Proc. 5
(2018) 8539–8546.
[12] S.S. Kumaran, A.D. Das, An investigation of boiler grade tube and tube plate
without block by using friction welding process, Mater. Today Proc. 5 (2018)
8567–8576.
Please cite this article as: M. Prakash and A. Daniel Das, Investigation on effect of FSW parameters of aluminium alloy using Full Factorial Design, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.05.622
[13] S.S. Kumaran, A.D. Das, Friction welding joints of SA 213 tube to SA 387 tube
plate boiler grade materials by using clearance and interference fit method,
Mater. Today Proc. 5 (2018) 8557–8566.
[14] A.D. Das, Effect of GTAW Welding Parameters on Mechanical Properties of
Aluminium Six-Series Welded Samples, J Adv Res Dyn Control Syst 11 (2019)
1112–1118, https://doi.org/10.5373/JARDCS/V11SP12/20193317.
[15] R. Karuppasamy, Das A. Daniel, Investigations on Mechanical Properties of
Squeeze Casted Al MMC Reinforced with TIC and BN, J Adv Res Dyn Control
Syst 11 (2019) 1086–1092, https://doi.org/10.5373/JARDCS/V11SP12/
20193313.
[16] A.D. Das, Effect of TIG welding parameters on mechanical properties of Al6063
welded samples, J Adv Res Dyn Control Syst 11 (2019), https://doi.org/
10.5373/JARDCS/V11SP12/20193318.
[17] V. Kavimani, K.S. Prakash, T. Thankachan, S. Nagaraja, A.K. Jeevanantham, J.P.
Jhon, WEDM Parameter Optimization for Silicon@r-GO/Magneisum Composite
Using Taguchi Based GRA Coupled PCA, Silicon 12 (2020) 1161–1175, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12633-019-00205-6.
[18] V. Kavimani, K.S. Prakash, Tribological behaviour predictions of r-GO
reinforced Mg composite using ANN coupled Taguchi approach, J Phys Chem
Solids 110 (2017) 409–419, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpcs.2017.06.028.
[19] V. Kavimani, K. Soorya Prakash, T. Thankachan, Multi-objective optimization in
WEDM process of graphene – SiC-magnesium composite through hybrid
techniques, Meas J Int Meas Confed 145 (2019) 335–349, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.measurement.2019.04.076.
[20] V. Kavimani, K.S. Prakash, T. Thankachan, Experimental investigations on wear
and friction behaviour of SiC@r-GO reinforced Mg matrix composites produced
through solvent-based powder metallurgy, Compos Part B Eng 162 (2019)
508–521, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.01.009.
[21] V. Kavimani, K. Soorya Prakash, T. Thankachan, Surface characterization and
specific wear rate prediction of r-GO/AZ31 composite under dry sliding wear
condition, Surfaces and Interfaces 6 (2017) 143–153, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.surfin.2017.01.004.
[22] V. Kavimani, K.S. Prakash, Doping Effect of SiC over Graphene on Dry Sliding
Wear Behaviour of Mg/SiC@r-GO MMCs and its Surface Characterization,
Silicon 10 (2018) 2829–2843, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-018-9823-2.
[23] V. Kavimani, K.S. Prakash, T. Thankachan, Influence of machining parameters
on wire electrical discharge machining performance of reduced graphene
oxide/magnesium composite and its surface integrity characteristics, Compos
Part B Eng 167 (2019) 621–630, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.compositesb.2019.03.031.
[24] A. Daniel Das, K. Thirunavukkarasu, Multi Criteria Decision Making
Investigation on Friction Welded Samples of Boiler Grade Materials using
Topsis Method, Test Eng Manag 83 (2020) 15293–15299.