Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Optimization of friction welding parameters on aluminium 7068 alloy

B. Elumalai a, U. Omsakthivel a, G. Yuvaraj a, K. Giridharan a,⇑, M.S. Vijayanand b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Easwari Engineering College, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Paavai Engineering College, Namakkal, Tamilnadu, India

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

Article history: In present scenario, the role of welding techniques was played an essential to any industrial applications.
Received 21 August 2020 The demands of most economical and high productive weld have been increased. It was satisfied by
Received in revised form 3 September 2020 Friction Welding (FW) technique. It was used to join ferrous and nonferrous metals. In the present work,
Accepted 5 September 2020
to discuss about friction welding of aluminium 7068 alloy. The tensile strength was measured with
Available online xxxx
respect to the input factors such as rotational speed, friction and forging pressure. The parametric effect
and best possible solutions were done by Response Surface Methodology (RSM). The intercept of factors
Keywords:
and its effects have been discussed through three dimensional surface plot analysis and variance test.
A17068
Friction welding
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Tensile strength Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
Forging pressure ence on Advances in Materials Research – 2019
Friction pressure

1. Introduction
The Friction welding was used in tubes and shafts. It was mostly
used in oil industries, marine and automobile applications. The
welding strength was developed in piston rod, truck rollers, valves,
drive line and gears. It has more advantages like as high weld
speed, no need of filler metals high heat generation and good weld
strength. The welding strength was depends on related to frictional
heat produced between the work pieces. During welding, coales-
cence was formed due to the sliding motion between the two rub-
bing surface.
The friction welding experiment was conducted on two dissim-
ilar materials such as aluminium and steel and its factors were
optimized by taguchi technique [1]. The friction welding technique
was applied in different type of steels such as austenitic, ferrite and
duplex [2]. The axial pressures and its effects on mechanical behav-
iors were investigated in AISI steels [3]. The friction welding char-
acterization and properties of AISI 1040 have been discussed [4].
The friction of welding aluminium with steel and its characteristics
was discussed [5]. The weld interface, plastic deformation and
axial force have been studied [6]. The mechanical behavior and
temperature circulation was investigated during welding of alu-
minium sheet [7]. The response surface plots were used to investi-
gate the weld factors of aluminium plates [8]. The maximum
ultimate strength was achieved through RSM using dissimilar
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: girimech4305@gmail.com (K. Giridharan).
aluminum alloys [9–10]. The friction welding and RSM optimiza-
tion were conducted on Al 6082 alloy. Through friction and forging
force, the maximum tensile strength was attained [11]. Mechanical
behaviours and its effects on friction weld strength of Al 6063 and
stainless steel [12]. The age-hardening and non hardening of
AA6082 sheets were joined by friction welding. The microstructure
and welded joints behaviours have been reported [13]. The high
strength aluminium alloy was welded and its applications were
discussed [14]. Non homogeneous microstructure was attained in
friction stir weld of 7075 aluminium alloy [15].
The present work describes the friction welding of aluminium
7068 alloy and its factors were optimized through response surface
methodology. The 3D surface plots were used to investigate the
factors.
2. Experimentation
The heat was generated between the two rubbing surface. The
welding was completed by heat and external pressure. The welding
joint was finished by thermo mechanical treatment which was
applied at two contact area. For this experimental work, FWT-
120 model welding machine was used. The specimen was prepared
with 20 mm diameter and 80 mm long. Before welding, the two
end of the work piece has involved into facing operation. The other
process factors were kept at constant such as forging time (4sec),
braking time (0.3sec), upset time (0.3sec) and feed (70–75%). The
size of the test specimen was 80 - 40  3mm.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.195
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Advances in Materials Research – 2019

Please cite this article as: B. Elumalai, U. Omsakthivel, G. Yuvaraj et al., Optimization of friction welding parameters on aluminium 7068 alloy, Materials
Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.195
B. Elumalai, U. Omsakthivel, G. Yuvaraj et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

3. Results and discussion
The experiment was run through design of expert 12 version.
For experimentation purpose, three level and three factors were
considered. The response of tensile strength was measured in ten-
sile testing machine according to their different combinations of
input factor such as rotational speed, frictional and forging pres-
sure. The experimental outcomes were listed in the table 1. The
effect of individual factors which affect the tensile strength was
investigated. From table 1, the tensile strength has been enhanced
due to the change of input factors. The tensile strength was devel-
oped due to rotational speed of the work piece. The tensile strength
of the welded joint has more than 250 N/mm2. The hardness and
density of the welded joints were 220 BHN and 7.2 g/cc
respectively.
The tensile strength of the welded joints has been improved
when increased the rotational speed. During this period, more
amount of coalescence was formed and rubbing action was also
rapidly increased. Hence, more amount heat was produced which
was used to complete the weld. Another important factor was forg-
ing pressure which was used to enhance the tensile strength. The
relation between rotational speed and tensile strength was shown
in Fig. 1. The strength was increased when increase of forging pres-
sure. It was provided the sufficient pressure to the welded joints.
The moderate tensile strength of 288 N/mm2 was obtained at the
rotational speed of 1400 rpm, frictional and forging pressure of
15 bars.
parametric effect such as AB, AC and BC were also mentioned in
the table. A, B, C was the input factors such as rotational speed fric-
tion and forging pressure respectively. The higher F-value was
obtained from rotational speed. Hence, the rotational speed was
the significant factor which affects the tensile strength.
The sequential model was shown on the table 3. From this table,
linear model was suggested. The corresponding F and P values
were 0.3218 and 0.8096 respectively. The linear model was used
to predict the response and it was improved the quality character-
istics through input factors.
The optimal strength of 224.282 N/mm2 was obtained at rota-
tional speed of 1275.570 rpm, frictional pressure of 12.193 bars
and forging pressure of 16.156 bars. The rotational speed was
decided the tensile strength. It was confirmed through variance
test. The optimal solution was shown in pie chart in Fig. 2. From
figure, rotational speed occupied the maximum area of the chart.
Hence, it was proved that the tensile strength was mainly depends
on the rotational speed of the work piece.
4.1. Three dimensional surface plot analysis
The 3D surface plot was shown in Fig. 3 (a-c). From Fig. 3 (a)
shown that the tensile strength has been increased with increase

4. Response surface methodology

The rotational speed, friction and forging pressure were opti-

mized through response surface methodology. The experiment
was designed as per RSM based central composite method. It
was used to correlate between the different variables and
responses. The optimal results were achieved through the progres-
sion of designed experiments. The design matrix was chosen and
twenty runs of experiments made by the various combinations of
input levels.
All experimental runs were allowed to evaluate linear, quadra-
tic and interaction between factors. After experimental runs, the
parametric effect and optimal solution was found. The model and
intercept was shown in the table 2. The combinations of Fig. 1. Relation between rotational speed and strength.

Table 1
Experimental outcomes for friction welding.

Runs A:Rotational speed (rpm) B:Friction pressure (bar) C:Forging pressure (bar) Tensile strength (N/mm2)
1 1200 15 25 175
2 1400 5 25 170
3 1300 10 20 166
4 1300 10 20 172
5 1200 10 20 171
6 1300 10 20 182
7 1200 5 25 180
8 1400 15 25 178
9 1300 10 20 201
10 1300 15 20 208
11 1300 10 25 230
12 1300 5 20 240
13 1300 10 20 236
14 1300 10 15 198
15 1400 5 15 210
16 1400 15 15 288
17 1400 10 20 265
18 1300 10 20 294
19 1200 5 15 239
20 1200 15 15 252

2
B. Elumalai, U. Omsakthivel, G. Yuvaraj et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 2
Intercept of factors for FW.

Intercept DF SS MS F Prob. > F

A:Rotational speed 2 16470.10 8235.04 2.722 0.15
B:Friction pressure 2 228.58 114.29 0.00089 0.96
C:Forging pressure 2 5052.08 2526.04 0.8352 0.48
AB 4 9035.60 2258.90 0.70008 0.59
AC 4 14140.70 3535.16 1.1689 0.42
BC 4 7491.99 1873 0.6027 0.66
Lack of fit 5 15122.20 3024.44 — ——

Table 3
Sequential model for FW.

Source Sum of squares DF Mean square F-value P-value

Mean and Total 9.053E + 05 1 9.053E + 05
Linear and Mean 5895.60 3 1965.20 1.24 0.3281 Suggested
2FI and Linear 1753.00 3 584.33 0.3218 0.8096
Quadratic and 2FI 238.77 3 79.59 0.0341 0.9910
Cubic and Quadratic 11213.40 4 2803.35 1.38 0.3434
Residual 12156.98 6 2026.16
Total 9.365E + 05 20 46825.45

From Fig. 3(c), the tensile strength has been increased at frictional
pressure of 10 bars. The variations have been noticed between fric-
tional pressure and tensile strength.

5. Conclusions

Based on the experimental work and experimental outcomes,

the following points were concluded.

 The two pieces of aluminium 7068 plates were joined through

Fig. 2. Optimal solution for tensile strength.
of rotational speed. The moderate tensile strength was attained at
medium rotational speed. Fig. 3(b) shown that tensile strength has
been increased at initial stage of forging pressure. The fluctuations
have been observed between forging pressure and tensile strength.
friction welding process.
 The parametric optimization and best possible solutions were
achieved through Response Surface Methodology. The optimal
strength of 224.282 N/mm2 was attained.
 The rotational speed was produced maximum effect on welding
strength.
 The parametric interactions were studied through three dimen-
sional surface plots.

3
B. Elumalai, U. Omsakthivel, G. Yuvaraj et al. Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 3. (a-c). Three dimensional surface plot analysis.

4
B. Elumalai, U. Omsakthivel, G. Yuvaraj et al.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
B. Elumalai: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation,
Writing - original draft preparation. U. Omsakthivel: Data cura-
tion, Software. G. Yuvaraj: Visualization, Validation, Writing -
review & editing. K. Giridharan: Data curation, Formal analysis.
M.S. Vijayanand: Formal analysis.
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] M. Rajesh, P. Sarathkumar, T. Kumaresan, S. Bharath, K.R. Mathevanan, V.P.
Hari Haran, Yokeshram, Int. J. Pure Appl. Math. 118 (20) (2018) 1573–1579.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
[2] G. Madhusudan Reddy, K. Srinivasa Rao, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 45(2009)
875-881.
[3] Amit Handa, Vikas Chawla, Cogent Eng. 1 (2014) 936–942.
[4] M. Sahin, H.E. Akata, T. Gulmez, Mater. Charact. 58 (2007) 1033–1038.
[5] Andrzej Ambroziak, Marcin Korzeniowski, Paweł Kustroń, Marcin Winnicki,
Paweł Sokołowski, Ewa Harapińska, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1 (2014) 1–15.
[6] Deep Barua, Torgeir Welo, Geir Ringen, Jyhwen Wang, Procedia Manuf. 41
(2019) 1149–1155.
[7] S. Sattari, H. Bisadi, M. Sajed, Int. J. Mech. Appl. 2 (191) (2012) 1–6.
[8] S. Shanavas, J. Edwin Raja Dhas, Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. 27 (11) (2017)
2334–2344.
[9] R. Palanivel, P. Koshy Mathews, N. Murugan, J. Central South Univ., 20(2013)
2929–2938.
[10] J.H. Ouyang, R. Kovacevic, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 11 (1) (2002) 51–63.
[11] R. Paventhan, P.R. Lakshminarayanan, V. Balasubramanian, Trans. Nonferrous
Met. Soc. 21 (7) (2011) 1480–1485.
[12] P. Sammaiah, Arjula Suresh, G.R.N. Tagore, J. Mater. Sci. 45 (2010)
5512–5552.
[13] Marcello Cabibbo, Archimede Forcellese, Eleonora Santecchia, Chiara Paoletti,
Stefano Spigarelli, Michela Simoncini, Metals 10 (2) (2020) 233–240.
[14] G. Wang, Y. Zhao, Y. Hao, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 34 (2018) 73–91.
[15] Y. Mao, L. Ke, Y. Chen, F. Liu, L. Xing, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 34 (2018) 228–236.