Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computational Materials Science

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

Computational fluid dynamics studies on heat generation during friction

stir welding of aluminum alloy
Gao-qiang Chen, Qing-yu Shi ⇑, Yu-jia Li, Yan-jun Sun, Qi-lei Dai, Jin-yao Jia, Yu-can Zhu, Jian-jun Wu
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, PR China

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) has proved to be a successful joining technology for aluminum alloys and
Received 3 February 2013 many other metallic materials. The severe plastic deformation of solid-state metal during FSW made it
Received in revised form 14 June 2013 a fully coupled thermo-mechanical process. In order to quantitatively study both the total heat genera-
Accepted 1 July 2013
tion and the spatial distribution of the heat flux, a thermo-mechanical coupled model based on compu-
Available online 3 August 2013
tational fluid dynamics was presented in this study. The heat generation, the temperature field and the
material flow pattern were simulated in a fully coupled way. The simulated temperature distribution
Keywords:
agreed well with the experimental results. The total heat generation was found to be proportional to
Friction stir welding
Heat generation
the 0.75 power of the tool rotating speed. The spatial distribution of the heat flux around the FSW tool
Numerical simulation was almost axisymmetric about the tool axis. A radial distribution function was defined to describe
Computational fluid dynamics the heat flux in different rotating rates. The radial distribution function in the shoulder region was fitted
Heat flux distribution to a parabolic function.
Ó 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Friction stir welding (FSW) is an advanced solid-state joining
technology invented at The Welding Institute (TWI) in 1991. It is
a very successful joining technology for aluminum alloys and many
other metallic materials [1,2]. Specifically, the process was carried
out by plunging a rotating FSW tool into the surface of rigidly
clamped sheets and traversed along the weld lines. Large amount
of heat was generated during the process, and significant plastic
flow was caused by the rotating tool. In result, dynamic recrystal-
lization was brought to occur. FSW joints were formed as a result
of the severe plastic deformation and dynamic recrystallization.
Key issues about FSW in the published researches included the
heat generation [2–6], material flow [1,2,7–10], microstructure
evolution [1,2,11–13] and defects formation [2,14–16] during the
process, the resulted properties[1,2,17–19] of the joint and the de-
sign of the FSW tool [1,2,20].
Heat generation during FSW was a fully-coupled thermo-
mechanical process [3]. The transient temperature distribution dur-
ing FSW was related to both the total amount and the distribution of
the heat generation. Meanwhile, the heat generation during plastic
deformation was also related to the mechanical property, i.e. the
flow stress of the metal, and the transient deformation rate
[3,21,22]. Note that the flow stress of aluminum alloy was
significantly temperature and strain rate dependent, the total heat
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 10 62784578; fax: +86 10 62773637.
E-mail address: shqy@tsinghua.edu.cn (Q.-y. Shi).
generation, the temperature distribution and the material flow pat-
tern were affected by each other in FSW. Since thermal modeling
was the basis of other models, evaluation of both total amount
and distribution of heat flux during FSW was required [4]. In order
to evaluate the heat generation in FSW, the underlying physics, such
as the material flow, should be included. This paper provided a first
quantitative investigation of the total amount and the distribution
of the heat flux by a fully coupled thermal–mechanical model.
In the published works, experimental methods and theoretical
analysis had been employed to estimate the heat input during
FSW. By using the experimental methods, Pew et al. [23] measured
the torque carried by the tool to estimate the heat input during
FSW. Based on the theoretical analysis, different theoretical heat
source models had been proposed to estimate the heat flux. In
these models, the heat flux was calculated based on the contact
shear stress on the tool/material boundary. Chao et al. [24] defined
the contact stress based on the Coulomb’s law to simulate the tem-
perature distribution. Shercliff et al. [25] set the contact shear
stress as 5% of the yield stress at room temperature. Schmidt
et al. [5,26] proposed to calculate the total heat generation and
its distribution analytically from the uniformly distributed contact
shear stress on the tool/material boundary. In Schmidt et al.’s stud-
ies [5,26], the contact shear stress was determined by the contact
state. Li et al. [27] provided an auto-adaptive heat source model
for FSW by assuming a temperature dependent contact state.
However, the material flow pattern was difficult to be taken into
consideration by using the experimental methods and theoretical
analysis.

0927-0256/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2013.07.004
 G.-q. Chen et al. / Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546
In recent years, numerical models based on Computational So-
lid Mechanics (CSM) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
had been established to simulate the material flow during FSW.
Based on CSM method, Schmidt et al. [28] established a material
flow model for FSW. The Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE)
formulation was adopted to avoid unacceptable element distor-
tion. The frictional force given by the Coulomb’s law of friction
was applied on the tool/material boundary. Heat was generated
from the sliding friction on the boundary and plastic deformation
in the model. Both the velocity and temperature could be simu-
lated. Similar models based on CSM were also provided by Zhang
et al. [29] and Grujicic et al. [30]. In these models, however, the
material flow pattern was obtained only when the tool penetrated
through the work pieces [6–8]. Because of the limitation in the
above geometric models, the physical processes represented by
models based on CSM were significantly different from real FSW.
The CFD method was another important approach employed to
simulate the material flow pattern in FSW. The work presented by
Colegrave et al. [9] was one of the earliest 3D thermal–mechanical-
coupled models of FSW based on CFD. In the study, the material
viscosity was considered as a function of strain rate and tempera-
ture. The material close to the tool was assumed to stick on the
tool. Heat was generated fully by viscous dissipation. Based on this
model, both the temperature and material flow pattern were sim-
ulated, but both the temperature and the size of the deformation
zone were over-predicted. Nandan et al. [10] calculated the heat
input from the contact stress in their material flow model based
on CFD. In their model, the 3D distributed heat generation from
viscous dissipation was taken as a small fraction of the total heat
generation. They reported that the asymmetric feature of the tem-
perature field would not be simulated if the small part of heat from
the viscous dissipation was ignored. Colegrave et al. [6] established
a 2D thermo-fluid model, coupling with a 3D thermal model to cal-
culate the heat generation from the axisymmetric flow pattern and
the material properties. In their model, the heat generation was
coupled with the material flow pattern.
Though lots of researches have been carried out to simulate the
material flow during FSW, quantitative analysis of the total
amount and the spatial distribution of the heat flux during FSW
has not been reported yet. This paper provides a first attempt to
investigate both the total amount and the distribution of the heat
flux by a fully coupled thermal–mechanical model based on CFD.
Different from the published researches, this paper improves the
constitutive equations in order to predict the flow stresses at high
temperatures more accurately. Based on the improved constitutive
model, the heat generation, material flow pattern and the temper-
ature distribution are simulated. The computed temperature distri-
bution is compared with a set of published measured data. Special
attention is paid to quantitative evaluation of the total heat gener-
ation and its spatial distribution. Simulations using different weld-
ing parameters are carried out to investigate the effect of welding
parameter on both the total heat generation and spatial distribu-
tion of the heat flux.
2. Simulation model
2.1. Governing equations
The conservation equations of mass, momentum and energy
were solved, using the commercial package, ANSYS Fluent [31].
The continuity equation and steady-state momentum conservation
equation for incompressible single-phase flow were given by:
vÞ ¼ 0
r  ðq~
v~
r  ðq~v Þ ¼ rp þ r  ðlðr~
v þ r~
v T ÞÞ
541
where q was the density, l was the non-Newtonian viscosity, p was
v was the velocity of material flow. The energy
the pressure and ~
conservation equation was given by:
v HÞ ¼ r  ðkrTÞ þ SV
r  ð~ ð3Þ
where H was the enthalpy, T was the temperature, k was the ther-
mal conductivity and SV was a spatial source term.
2.2. Geometric model
The geometric model was shown in Fig. 1. The geometric model
was obtained by subtracting the FSW tool from the work piece. The
size of the work piece was 60 mm  40 mm  3.1 mm. The tilt an-
gle and the concave shoulder were not employed. The FSW tool
was taken as a rigid body, and was not included in the geometric
model. The geometric model was meshed by hexagonal grids be-
fore simulation. The diameter of the tool shoulder was 12 mm,
and the pin diameter was 3 mm at the root. The pin length was
2.8 mm. The rotating direction and welding direction were shown
in the figure. The welding parameters were taken to be 920 rpm,
20 mm min1, the same as Ref. [32].
2.3. Material properties
Aluminum alloy 6061 was selected as the target material. The
density of AA6061 was assumed to be constant and was taken as
2700 kg m3. Temperature dependent thermal physical properties
were taken from Ref. [33]. The viscosity of the material was con-
sidered to be both temperature and strain rate dependent. The
viscosity was calculated based on the following formulation
[9,34]:
r
l¼ _ ð4Þ
3e
where r was the flow stress and e_ was the strain rate. The expres-
sion of flow stress was given by [35]:
"  1=n #
1 e_ Q
re ¼ sinh1 exp ð5Þ
a A RT
where A (=8.86  106 s1), a (=0.045 MPa1) and n (=3.55) were
material constants, Q (=145 kJ mol1) was the temperature-inde-
pendent activation energy, and R was the gas constant. The param-
eters in the above Eq. (5) were taken from Ref. [36].
It could be found from Fig. 2 that large discrepancy existed be-
tween the predicted flow stress by Eq. (5) and the measured yield
stress. In this paper, the expression of flow stress in Eq. (5) was
modified by multiplying a temperature dependent factor. Fig. 2
showed that the modified flow stress agreed well with the yield
stress especially at high temperatures. Similar modifications of
ð1Þ
ð2Þ Fig. 1. Geometric model in the simulation. (0, 0, 0) was the origin of coordinates.
542 G.-q. Chen et al. / Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546
Fig. 2. Comparison between the experimental yield stress and flow stress in the
model. The experimental yield stress was from Ref. [38].
flow stress or viscosity had been adopted by other researchers
[6,37].
2.4. Heat generation model
Heat during FSW could be generated by sliding friction and
plastic deformation. It was assumed that all of the heat was gener-
ated from plastic deformation in this research. This assumption
might lead to some error, because the frictional heat generation
due to the potential sliding at the interface between tool and mate-
rial was ignored. Though recent researches [5,39] suggest the con-
tact condition must be stick or combination of sliding and sticking,
the extent of sliding at the interface was being debated up to now.
As plastic deformation occurred in the material close to the tool,
the friction stress at the interface was close to the shear yield stress
due to the equilibrium between driving force and deformation
resistance. Therefore, the extent of sliding at the interface would
not significantly affect the total amount of the heat generation,
but the spatial distribution of the heat flux might be affected more
or less. The source term in Eq. (3), representing the heat generation
by plastic deformation, was given by [21,22]:
SV ¼ g  r  e_
where r was the flow stress, g was a coefficient. g ¼ 0:80 [2] was
assumed in this paper, which meant that 80% of plastic work was
dissipated into heat, and e_ was the effective strain rate.
2.5. Boundary conditions
The boundary conditions described in this part were set to ap-
ply the welding direction and the thermal conditions. As shown
in Fig. 1, a mass flow at the welding speed was defined to enter
the computation domain from the velocity inlet. Pressure p was
set to be a constant value, 0 Pa, in the pressure outlet in the model.
At the boundary between the tool and material, the velocity vector
was defined as the same as the tool in order to simulate tool rotat-
ing. The wall velocity was set to be the opposite speed of welding
speed on the back surface and two sides. The bottom and side work
piece were contact with the fixtures, hence heat was transferred to
the fixtures. In the model, the contact heat transfer coefficient was
defined to simulate the heat transferred to the fixtures. The contact
pressure on the back surface under the tool was much higher than
other area, thus the contact heat transfer was defined to be
15,000 W (m2 K)1 under the tool and 800 W (m2 K)1 in other
area.
3. Simulation results
Based on the above model, the material flow pattern, tempera-
ture distribution and the spatial distributed volumetric heat flux in
steady state were simulated. In order to analyze the material flow
and the related thermal–mechanical process under different weld-
ing conditions, FSW processes employing different tool rotating
rates, ranging from 400 rpm to 1600 rpm, were simulated.
3.1. Material flow pattern
The material velocity in the work piece was simulated. The
snapshot of the simulated velocity field was shown in Fig. 3. It
was clear that the material flowed circulating the tool in the vicin-
ity of the tool. The velocity magnitude near the edge of shoulder
was much higher than that close to the pin and the maximum
velocity appeared at the periphery of the shoulder. This was be-
cause the tool shoulder had much higher linear velocity and had
maximum velocity at the periphery. It could be found that the
material velocity in the vicinity of the tool increased as the rotating
rate. The material velocity decreased rapidly as the distance from
the tool increased.
3.2. Temperature distribution
The simulated temperature distribution with different welding
parameters was shown in Fig. 4a and b. The maximum tempera-
ture of about 400 °C existed under the tool shoulder. The existence
of the high temperature in the vicinity of the tool was caused by
the heat generated from the high rate deformation close to the tool.
The high temperature contours were nearly circular due the slow
welding speed of 20 mm min1, but the temperature under the
tool shoulder was not symmetrically distributed about the tool
axis. It was clear in Fig. 4 that the temperature on the advancing
side was slightly higher than that on the retreating side. The tem-
perature gradient was much steeper in front of the tool than be-
hind the tool. The material before welding was about 20 °C, and
the temperature behind the tool was over 180 °C in the end of
the work piece. The peak temperatures at different distances from
the welding center line were obtained from the simulation results
and compared to a set of published temperature data [32]. As
shown in Fig. 5, the simulated peak temperature agreed well with
ð6Þ the measured results.
3.3. Heat generation
Both the total amount and the distribution of the heat flux were
critical for understanding of the FSW process. As the tool rotating
contributed much more to the material flow in FSW than the weld-
ing speed, the heat generation rate was found to be influenced lar-
gely by the rotating rate [2]. In order to investigate how the heat
generation varied with the welding parameters, simulations were
carried out using different rotating rates. The total heat generation
and the heat flux distribution were discussed in this part.
3.3.1. Total heat generation
The total heat generation was obtained by integrating the spa-
tially distributed heat flux over the entire computing domain. Fig. 6
showed the total heat generation and the highest temperature in
different welding parameters. The total heat generation increased
greatly with the tool rotating rate. It was clear that the total heat
generation increased with the rotating rate. As shown in Fig. 6,
the total heat generation was found to be proportional to x0.75 in
magnitude, given as,
Q total ¼ Q C  x0:75 ð7Þ
 G.-q. Chen et al. / Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546 543

Fig. 3. The simulated material velocity with different welding parameters.

Fig. 4. The simulated temperature with different welding parameters. (a) Temperature distribution of the entire workpiece, (b) Temperature distribution on the traverse
section.

Fig. 5. Comparison between the simulated peak temperature and the measured
peak temperature at the mid-thickness plane. The measured temperature data was
taken from Ref. [32]. Fig. 6. The simulated total heat generation with different rotating rates.

the tool axis. No significant difference could be found between

where x was the rotating rate in rpm and QC was a proportional
coefficient. The fitted value of QC in Eq. (7) was 6.51.
3.3.2. Distribution of heat generation
The contour plots of the simulated volumetric heat flux inside
the work piece in different welding conditions were provided in
Fig. 7. The heat generation rate was almost axis symmetric about
the advancing side and the retreating side. In an ellipsoid shaped
zone under the tool shoulder, the volumetric heat flux was over
1  106 W/m3, about 0.001% of the maximum heat flux. This ellip-
soid shaped zone expanded as the rotating rate increased. In the
vicinity of the pin, the volumetric heat flux increased with the dis-
tance from the upper surface. In the area under the shoulder, the
volumetric heat flux increased with the distance from the tool axis.
544 G.-q. Chen et al. / Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546
Fig. 7. The simulated volumetric heat flux inside the work piece with different welding parameters.
In this paragraph, the simulation result in 920 rpm,
20 mm min1 was taken as an example to analyze the simulated
distribution of the volumetric heat flux, strain rate and flow stress,
as shown in Fig. 8. It could be found that the simulated distribution
of the volumetric heat flux, strain rate and flow stress were shown
in Fig. 8. The volumetric heat flux exceeded 1  1010 W/m3 in the
following two areas. One of the areas was located under the shoul-
der periphery. In this area, the strain rate was extremely high, as
shown in Fig. 8b, resulting in the high flow stress (Fig. 8c) despite
the high temperature (Fig. 4). Thus the highest volumetric heat flux
was obtained. The other area was around the pin tip. In this area,
the temperature (Fig. 4) was relatively low due to the heat trans-
ferred into the back plate, thus the flow stress was as high as more
than 50 MPa (Fig. 8c). Besides, the strain rate in this area (Fig. 8b)
Fig. 8. The simulated distribution of the volumetric heat flux, strain rate and flow
stress on the traverse section (920 rpm, 20 mm min1). (a) Volumetric heat flux, (b)
Stain rate, (c) Flow stress.
was relatively high. So the second highest volumetric heat flux was
obtained. It could be found from Fig. 8a that the heat flux in the
area around the corner between the shoulder and the pin was rel-
atively low, because the strain rate and the flow stress were rela-
tively low in this area (Fig. 8b and c).
In order to investigate the radial distribution of heat generation,
a global heat flux, qglobal , at different distances from tool axis was
calculated. The heat flux was defined as
dQ total
qglobal ¼ ð8Þ
2pr  dr
where r denoted the distance from the tool axis. The global heat flux
described the heat generation as a function of r. The plot of the heat
flux was provided in Fig. 9. In the plot of the radial distribution of
the global heat flux, it could be easily found that the heat input in-
creased with the rotating rate. There were two peaks in the plotted
curve. One corresponded to the heat generation from the pin side,
and another corresponded to the heat generation at the periphery
of the shoulder. As shown in Fig. 9, the curve could be departed into
three regions, which were the pin-bottom region, the pin-side re-
gion and the shoulder region. In the pin-bottom region and the
shoulder region, the heat flux increased gradually as the distance
increased. Due to the plastic deformation caused by the pin side,
the heat flux was very high at the distance corresponding to the
pin radius. In addition, the heat flux decayed rapidly when the dis-
tance exceeded the shoulder periphery.
Different distribution functions describing the distribution of
the heat flux in welding process had been proposed for fusion
welding, such as Gaussian distribution function [40] and double
ellipsoid [41]. Note that the global distributions in different weld-
ing parameters were similar to each other (Fig. 9). We defined a
Fig. 9. The global heat flux in different welding parameters.
 G.-q. Chen et al. / Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546
distribution function and expressed the heat flux as the following
expression,
qglobal ðrÞ ¼ Q total  1ðrÞ ¼ Q C  x0:75  1ðrÞ ð9Þ
where Qtotal was the total heat generation and 1(r) denoted the ra-
dial distribution function of the heat flux.
The global heat flux divided by the total heat generation in dif-
ferent welding parameters was shown in Fig. 10a. It was clear that
the distribution function in different welding parameters were al-
most identical. We fitted the curve in the shoulder region into a
parabolic expression, yðrÞ ¼ ar 2 þ br. The fitted value were
a ¼ 1:05  105 and b ¼ 1:43  104 in magnitude. It was worth
noting that the heat distribution coefficient in the pin-bottom re-
gion agreed well with the fitted curve. As shown in Eq. (9), the glo-
bal heat flux could be related directly with the rotating rate. The
global heat flux divided by Q C  x0:75 was shown in Fig. 10b. The re-
sulted curves were also almost identical, so the global heat flux
was possible to be expressed as a function of the welding
parameter.
It was demonstrated in the above discussion that the total heat
generation could be expressed as a function of the rotating rate,
and that the radial distribution of the heat input could be ex-
pressed as the total heat generation multiplying a distribution
function, which was independent of the welding parameter and
the total heat generation. In this way, the distribution of heat flux
during FSW could be expressed in an analytical function. However,
Fig. 10. The radial distribution function of heat generation in different welding
parameters. (a) The global heat flux divided by the total heat generation. (b) The
global heat flux divided by QC  x0.75.
545
proper form of the analytical function had not been established
based on the research in this stage.
4. Conclusions
The heat generation during FSW was studied by thermo-
mechanical coupled numerical simulation. The numerical models
were established to simulate the material flow pattern and the
heat generation during FSW. The total heat generation and the dis-
tribution of the heat flux were investigated. The follow conclusions
could be drawn.
(1) The total heat generation was found to be proportional to
x0.75, where x was the rotating rate.
(2) The distribution of the heat flux in FSW was almost axisym-
metric about the tool axis.
(3) In order to describe the heat flux, a radial distribution func-
tion was defined. The distribution function in different rotat-
ing rates was found to be almost identical. The radial
distribution function in the shoulder region was fitted to a
parabolic function.
(4) The simulated temperature was slightly higher on the
advancing side than the retreating side. The simulated peak
temperature in different distances from the welding center
line agreed well with the experimental results.
Acknowledgements
The research work was supported by the National Science and
Technology Major Project of the Ministry of Science and Technol-
ogy of China under the Project No. 2012ZX04012-011.
References
[1] R.S. Mishra, Z.Y. Ma, Mater. Sci. Eng. R 50 (2005) 1–78.
[2] R.S. Nandan, T. DebRoy, H.K.D.H. Bhadeshiab, Prog. Mater. Sci. 53 (2008) 980–
1023.
[3] K.J. Colligan, R.S. Mishra, Scripta Mater. 58 (2008) 327–331.
[4] H.B. Schmidt, J.H. Hattel, Scripta Mater. 58 (2008) 332–337.
[5] H. Schmidt, J. Hattel, J. Wert, Modell. Simulat. Mater. Sci. Eng. 12 (2004) 143–
157.
[6] P.A. Colegrove, H.R. Shercliff, R. Zettler, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joi. 12 (2007) 284–
297.
[7] Y. Li, L.E. Murr, J.C. McClure, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 271 (1999) 213–223.
[8] T.U. Seidel, A.P. Reynolds, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 32 (2008) 2879–2884.
[9] P.A. Colegrove, H.R. Shercliff, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 169 (2005) 320–327.
[10] R. Nandan, G.G. Roy, T.J. Lienert, T. Debroy, Acta Mater. 55 (2007) 883–895.
[11] J.Q. Su, T.W. Nelson, R.S. Mishra, M. Mahoney, Acta Mater. 51 (2003) 713–729.
[12] P.B. Prangnell, C.P. Heason, Acta Mater. 53 (2005) 3179–3192.
[13] W. Woo, Z. Feng, X.L. Wang, K. An, B. Clausen, T.A. Sisneros, J.S. Jeonng, Mater.
Lett. 85 (2012) 29–32.
[14] Y.G. Kim, H. Fujii, T. Tsumura, T. Komazaki, K. Nakata, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 415
(2006) 250–254.
[15] W.J. Arbegast, Scripta Mater. 58 (2008) 372–376.
[16] R. Crawford, G.E. Cook, A.M. Strauss, D.A. Hartman, M.A. Stremler, Sci. Technol.
Weld. Joi. 11 (2006) 657–665.
[17] M.W. Mahoney, C.G. Rhodes, J.G. Flintoff, R.A. Spurling, W.H. Bingel, Metall.
Mater. Trans. A 29 (1998) 1955–1964.
[18] M. Peel, A. Steuwer, M. Preuss, P.J. Withers, Acta Mater. 51 (2003) 4791–4801.
[19] A.P. Reynolds, W. Tang, T. Gnaupel-Herold, H. Prask, Scripta Mater. 48 (2003)
1289–1294.
[20] R. Rai, A. De, H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, T. DebRoy, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joi. 16 (2011)
325–342.
[21] M. Zhou, M.P. Clode, Mech. Mater. 27 (1998) 63–76.
[22] R.L. Goetz, S.L. Semiatin, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 10 (2001) 710–717.
[23] J.W. Pew, T.W. Nelson, C.D. Sorensen, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joi. 12 (2007) 341–
347.
[24] Y.J. Chao, X. Qi, Heat transfer and thermomechanical analysis of friction stir
joining of AA6061-T6 plates, in: 1st Int. Symp. On Friction Stir Welding, CA,
USA, 1999.
[25] H.R. Shercliff, P.A. Colegrove, Math. Model. Weld. Phenom. 6 (2002) 927–974.
[26] H. Schmidt, J. Hattel, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joining 10 (2005) 176–186.
[27] H.K. Li, Q.Y. Shi, T. Li, W. Wang, Mater. Sci. Forum 580–582 (2008) 267–270.
[28] H. Schmidt, J. Hattel, Model. Simulat. Mater. Sci. Eng. 13 (2005) 77–93.
546 G.-q. Chen et al. / Computational Materials Science 79 (2013) 540–546
[29] Z. Zhang, J.T. Chen, J. Mater. Sci. 43 (2008) 222–232.
[30] M. Grujicic, G. Arakere, B. Panduangan, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 20 (2011) 1097–
1108.
[31] FLUENT, Release 6.3.26, Fluent Inc., Lebanon, NH, 2006.
[32] Y.M. Hwang, Z.W. Kang, Y.C. Chiou, H.H. Hsu, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 48
(2008) 778–787.
[33] K.C. Mill, Recommended Values of Thermophysical Properties for Selected
Commercial Alloys, Woodhead Publishing Ltd and ASM International,
Cambridge, 2002.
[34] O.C. Zienkiewicz, I.C. Cormeau, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 8 (1974) 821–845.
[35] T. Sheppard, D.S. Wright, Metal. Technol. 6 (1979) 215–223.
[36] T. Sheppard, A. Jackson, Mater. Sci. Technol. 13 (1997) 203–209.
[37] T.U. Seidel, A.P. Reynolds, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joining 8 (2003) 175–183.
[38] J.R. Davis, ASM Specialty Handbook – Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys,
Materials Park, OH, 1993.
[39] J.W. Qian, J.L. Li, J.T. Xiong, F.S. Zhang, W.Y. Li, X. Lin, Sci. Technol. Weld. Joining
17 (2012) 338–341.
[40] V. Pavelic, R. Tanbakuchi, O.A. Uyehara, P.S. Myers, Weld. Joining 48 (1969)
295s–305s.
[41] J. Goldak, A. Chakravarti, M. Bibby, Metall. Trans. B 15B (1984) 299–305.