Processing, Microstructure, and Residual Stress Effects

on Strength and Fatigue Crack Growth Properties

in Friction Stir Welding: A Review
ANDREW L. BIRO, BRENDAN F. CHENELLE, and DIANA A. LADOS

The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of friction stir welding
(FSW), as well as to introduce current research and applications involving this relatively new
process. FSW is a new, efficient way of joining metal alloys that are considered unsuitable for
welding via conventional fusion joining methods, and is capable of welding dissimilar metals
with ease. This process also has the benefit of being solid-state, which mitigates the need for
liquid filler metals that are common with conventional fusion welding techniques. This review
will examine different facets of the FSW process, exploring the resulting static and dynamic
properties and factors that influence these properties including weld zone boundaries, grain
refinement, residual stress, and addition of reinforcing particles. Highlights of current research
in this area and applications of this process in various industries will also be presented and
discussed.

DOI: 10.1007/s11663-012-9716-5
 The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society and ASM International 2012

I. INTRODUCTION Friction stir weld microstructures consist of four

FRICTION stir welding (FSW) is a solid-state
joining process invented by The Welding Institute in
1991. This process is capable of producing high quality
welds in both similar and dissimilar metals, includ-
ing many alloys deemed unsuitable for conventional
fusion welding, such as some magnesium and aluminum
alloys.[1] In addition, this process results in lower
temperatures, and therefore reduced thermal gradients
within the weld zone compared to many fusion welding
techniques. This is an important consideration for
welding alloys in an age-hardened state because degra-
dation of peak mechanical properties is a function
of maximum weld temperature.[1–3]
The FSW process uses a non-consumable cylindrical
or conical tool to provide both the frictional heating and
the stirring action required to join the metals. Figure 1
schematically illustrates the FSW process. During weld-
ing, the tool is plunged into a rigidly clamped workpiece
while rotating, and traverses the weld seam at a constant
velocity. As the tool travels, frictional heat is created
through the contact friction between the shoulder and
the workpiece, and due to the resulting plastic defor-
mation of the material in the stir zone (SZ). The high
strain and heat energies experienced by the base metal
during stirring causes dynamic recrystallization, which is
the formation of new grains in the weld zone.[3]
ANDREW L. BIRO and BRENDAN F. CHENELLE, Graduate
Students, and DIANA A. LADOS, Associate Professor, are with the
Integrative Materials Design Center, Worcester Polytechnic Institute,
100 Institute Road, Worcester, MA 01609. Contact email: andrew.
biro@wpi.edu
Manuscript submitted January 6, 2012.
Article published online September 6, 2012.
distinct zones. The dynamically recrystallized zone
(DXZ or nugget) is a region consisting of very fine,
equiaxed grains that were subjected to the high strain
and thermal energies from the weld pin. Just beyond the
nugget is the thermo-mechanically affected zone
(TMAZ), which is a zone unique to FSW. The grains
in TMAZ are highly elongated as a result of high strain
forces from the rotating pin, but do not experience
enough thermal energy for recrystallization to occur.
Next to the TMAZ is the heat affected zone (HAZ),
which is common to most welding operations. The size
of this zone is dependent on the heat input into the weld,
which is a function of the processing parameters. Plastic
deformation does not occur in the HAZ.[1] Beyond the
HAZ is the parent material, which was relatively
unaffected by either thermal or strain energies from
welding. A typical FSW microstructure can be seen in
Figure 2.
The FSW process also introduces residual stresses
into the material, like any other welding or joining
technology. The benefit of FSW is that it is able to easily
generate compressive residual stresses on the surface of
the weld, thereby improving properties of the weld,
specifically related to fatigue crack initiation and
growth. Processing parameters have a significant effect
on the residual stresses, and therefore play a critical role
in dictating the performance of the weld.
Developments in FSW led to the creation of a related
technology called Friction Stir Processing (FSP). FSP is
a solid-state process that was first proposed by Mishra
et al.[3,5] Unlike FSW, FSP is not used to join two
separate workpieces; rather it uses the same technology
to refine the grains in critical regions where compressive
residual stresses and improved strength would be
beneficial. The ability of FSP to produce zones of grain

1622—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B


Fig. 1—Schematic representation of the FSW process; modified from
Ref. [3].
Fig. 2—Example of a typical friction stir weld from a 6061-T651
alloy.[4]
refinement with excellent dimensional accuracy allows
this process to be used in the final stages of manufac-
turing. Other uses of FSP include locally refining and
homogenizing alloys, eliminating porosity in parts
produced by powder metallurgy or casting, and refining
metal matrix composites.[3,5,6]
Many alloys used for FSW/FSP are light metals that
derive their strength from precipitation hardening.
Precipitation-hardened alloys gain strength via the
development of coherent secondary phases within the
matrix. Because the size of the precipitate particles is
dependent on temperature, the thermal history is critical
for controlling the strength of the material. High
temperatures of conventional fusion welding eliminate
the strengthening properties of these particles by allow-
ing them to overage and become incoherent, leaving the
joint with degraded mechanical properties.
Because the temperatures of FSW/FSP can be con-
trolled with varying process parameters, friction stir
welds can be altered to create super-saturated solid solu-
tions, which then benefit from post weld aging through
development of coherent precipitates.[2,7,8] In addition,
with the incorrect process parameters, friction stir welds
can also cause overaging of precipitates in the weld
zone, thereby weakening the material; thus, a careful
control of the process parameters is necessary.[3]
A. FSW vs Fusion Welding
Several drawbacks exist within conventional fusion
welding technologies that are addressed by FSW. Fusion
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
welding requires very high temperatures, which leads to
significant thermal gradients within the material, and
large thermally affected weld zones. While this is not
always a problem, this melting can result in several
issues, including overaging (in precipitation-strength-
ened alloys) and the introduction of significant residual
stresses. This can result in reduced strength, warping,
and cracking of the weld joint.[3,7–10]
High heat input via fusion welding can also be
detrimental to the microstructure in the weld zone.
Many high strength materials undergo unique process-
ing steps that can be both difficult and time consuming
in order to refine microstructures and optimize grain
size.[3] The microstructure of fusion welds is generally
dendritic, often resulting in weakened mechanical
properties compared with the refined microstructure
of the bulk, non-welded material. Precipitation hard-
ened metals are particularly susceptible to degradation
at high temperatures. Melting can trap foreign particles
and gasses in the weld zone, leading to defects, which
can degrade mechanical properties. In addition, iden-
tification of small defects in a finished joint is difficult.
This may result in defective parts being put into
service.[3,10]
Because FSW is able to be conducted at much lower
temperatures, no melting occurs (ideally), and the
overall heat energy in the system is significantly reduced.
The reduced heat not only lowers the thermal and
residual stresses, but also eliminates the dendritic
microstructure common to fusion welding. In addition,
solidification cracking is absent in FSW because it is
solid state.[1] FSW is also capable of welding alloys that
have been considered ‘‘unweldable’’ by traditional
methods, such as magnesium and aluminum-lithium
alloys.[3,10–14] This can be very beneficial to automotive
and aerospace industries, where dissimilar and light-
weight materials are used frequently. FSW is also a low
waste process. No shielding gas or weld filler is
necessary, thus eliminating the cost of these expendable
items and reducing wasted material.[1,3,15–18]
However, as with any process, FSW has some
drawbacks. While it is relatively tolerant of welding
parameters, it requires careful monitoring of the bond
quality and welding parameters to ensure complete and
consistent joining. If the rotation or transverse speed is
such that there is insufficient heat and stirring, the base
material may not be able to accommodate the extensive
plastic deformation, resulting in long voids in the weld.
In addition, if the heat input is insufficient, the two
surfaces may not form a continuous bond, resulting in a
weak joint that is difficult to detect. If the heat input is
too great, melting can occur in one or both of the
materials, resulting in poorer weld quality and reduced
weld strength.[19–22]
II. RELEVANT PROCESSING PARAMETERS
AND THEIR EFFECTS
Processing parameters in FSW influence temperature/
heat input, porosity, and overall weld quality and
efficiency; thus, controlling these parameters is critical
VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1623
for weld optimization. The main welding parameters,
which can be controlled in the FSW process for a given
tool, are the rotational speed of the tool, the traverse
speed of the tool, the axial force of the tool shoulder on
the workpiece, and the angle of contact between the tool
and the workpiece.
Zhang and Zhang[23] examined the effects of welding
parameters on the quality, temperature distribution, and
residual stress distribution in FSW parts, and deter-
mined that through careful process control, weld quality
could be accurately predicted and controlled by sample
size, fixture size, and most importantly the rotation
speed of the tool.[23] Effects of rotational speeds were
also studied by Zeng et al.[24] in magnesium alloys, and
by Kwon et al.[6,15] in aluminum alloys. These studies
focused on the importance of rotation speed and heat on
weld quality. Figure 3 illustrates that welding quality
generally improved at higher rotational and traverse
welding speeds.[24] It is important to note that this trend
is common to all alloys, however the exact speed and
feed rates are alloy specific.
In addition, Kwon et al.[6,15] concluded that a linear
correlation between rotational speed and maximum
temperature existed for constant transverse speeds in
aluminum alloys. The slope and intercept of this line was
dependent on the alloy, tool, and geometry of the part.
Lower rotational speeds were found to produce more
refined grain structure due to reduced thermal energy
for grain recrystallization. This was also concluded by
Benavides et al.,[20] who demonstrated that significant
grain refinement could be achieved by pre-cooling the
workpiece. This allowed temperature control while still
utilizing a high degree of stirring action. Minimizing the
energy for growth after recrystallization resulted in
smaller grain size and an increase in strength, as
predicted by the Hall-Petch equation,
k sometimes referred to as the DXZ because there is
ry ¼ ro þ pffiffiffi :
d sufficient thermal and strain energy for grain recrystal-
This was also concluded by Chowdhury et al.[25] The
smaller grain size resulted in increased strength (both
yield strength and tensile strength), and a significant loss
of ductility over the bulk material.[20,24]
Fig. 3—Effect of welding parameters on magnesium FSW joints;
modified from Ref. [24].
1624—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012
Peel et al.[26] determined that as the traverse speed
increased, there was less overall heat applied to the
system because the tool was moving more quickly
through the material, thereby reducing the amount of
frictional heating.[26] This study was conducted on 5083
aluminum alloys. In addition, it was concluded that if
the transverse speed was too high, large, tunnel-like
defects occurred that were difficult to detect with
conventional weld inspection methods.[3,20]
Weld pitch and thread orientation also play a critical
role in the overall weld quality, as shown by Chowdhury
et al.[25] This study was conducted with AZ31B-H24
magnesium alloys, and three parameters were adjusted
within this experiment: the thread orientation (left-
handed and right-handed), welding speed (5 to 30 mm/
seconds) and rotational speed (1000 to 2000 RPM). The
left-handed tool resulted in improved bonding because
material was forced down the pin to the bottom of the
weld, whereas the right-handed tool pulled material up
from the bottom, often creating voids at the base of the
weld.[25]
III. CHARACTERISTIC MICROSTRUCTURE
OF FSW JOINTS
The solid-state nature of the FSW process results in a
unique microstructure among welding processes. While
FSW shares some weld zones common to all welding
processes, there are also some specific to FSW. In FSW/
FSP, three distinct microstructural zones exist—the
nugget, TMAZ, and HAZ.
A. Weld Nugget (Dynamically Recrystallized Zone)
The weld nugget is the zone located where the tool pin
contacts the base material during welding. This region is
lization to occur. The microstructure consists of fine,
equiaxed grains, which are often one order of magnitude
smaller than those of the base material. The final grain
size in the nugget is primarily a function of the peak
temperature and the quenching rate from that temper-
ature.[1] This influence has been demonstrated in multi-
ple alloy systems, including aluminum, magnesium, and
titanium.[3,17,21,22,27] The DXZ is characteristic of FSW/
FSP, and does not occur in other welding processes.[3]
Figure 4 shows a typical micrograph of the weld nugget
microstructure.
Within the weld nugget, banded circular ‘‘sub-
regions’’ are often observed, a result of plastic flow
and recrystallization of the base material. These regions
take the form of concentric rings in the weld nugget, and
are commonly referred to as ‘‘onion rings’’ because they
resemble the sections of a halved onion. The nature of
these bands appears to be a difference in grain size and
particulate density caused by characteristic plastic flow
paths within the weld.[28] Band thickness and spacing
can be controlled by adjusting the welding parameters.
Figure 5 illustrates the appearance of these bands in a
weld nugget of a 6061-T651 alloy.[4]
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B

Fig. 4—Typical weld nugget microstructure with fine dynamically
recrystallized grains.[4]
Fig. 5—Weld nugget exhibiting the onion ring phenomenon in a
6061-T651 alloy.[4]
B. Thermo-Mechanically Affected Zone (TMAZ)
The next weld zone characteristic of the FSW process
is the TMAZ. This zone consists of severely deformed
grains of the base material, which have been exposed to
both heat and plastic deformation during welding. The
deformation is caused by the stirring action of the tool
and the force exerted by the tool shoulder. However,
unlike in the weld nugget, the temperature and strain
rate energies are insufficient for recrystallization. In
precipitation-hardened aluminum alloys, the precipi-
tates in this zone lose coherency as overaging occurs.[1,3]
The grains in this zone have also been shown to contain
a high percentage of subgrains compared to the sur-
rounding regions.[29]
Kwon et al.[15,30] characterized the structure of the
TMAZ for aluminum alloys by illustrating a sharp
transition between weld nugget and TMAZ on the
advancing side of the tool. On the retreating side,
however, the transition was gradual, with no defined
edge. This is due to a difference in plastic flow
characteristics between the two sides. These transitions
can be observed in Figure 6.[4]
C. Heat Affected Zone (HAZ)
HAZ is common to all conventional and FSW
processes. In FSW, the HAZ consists of base material
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 6—TMAZ in a 6061-T651 friction stir weld (etched with
Barkers reagent) on the advancing side (top) and the retreating side
(bottom).[4]
grains that have not been mechanically deformed by the
FSW process, but have been subjected to the heat of
welding. This results in overaging of the precipitates,
thereby causing a loss of coherency and reduced
mechanical properties. Unlike the TMAZ, the grains
are not affected by the stirring action of the FSW tool
and remain free of plastic deformation.[3,5]
If the thermal history in the HAZ is such that the
material is exposed to sufficiently high temperatures to
enable artificial aging, precipitate growth occurs. This
can result in overaging and a decrease in mechanical
properties. For age-hardenable aluminum alloys,
Mahoney et al.[9] defined the HAZ to be the region
exposed to more than 523 K (250 C). Heinz and
Skrotzki[11] took observations of the FSW HAZ in
6013Al, and found significant coarsening of the precip-
itates in this zone.
The location of the HAZ is especially difficult to
detect using a micrograph, however the HAZ is often
correlated to be near the minimum hardness value on a
microhardness plot across the weld.[1] It is important to
note that the minimum hardness value may not neces-
sarily be in the HAZ—it is a function of the thermo-
mechanical processing experienced by the nugget and
the resulting heat dissipation rates in the adjacent
regions.[1] Thus, the minimum hardness value can be
located in the HAZ, TMAZ, or along the interface
between the two.
Bussu and Irving took a microhardness profile of a
FSW butt joint in 2024-T351 aluminum alloy. The
results of this microhardness profile are similar to those
shown in Figure 7, in which the boundaries between the
TMAZ and HAZ can be observed to generally correlate
to the ‘‘valleys’’ in the W-shaped profile, which
was determined based on micrographs and pin
geometry.[1,31]
D. Bulk Material
The bulk metal is defined as the region that is far
enough away from the weld to not be affected by the
heat or plastic deformation from the tool. The distance
from the center of the nugget to the bulk material is not
clearly defined, and can best be identified using a
VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1625
microhardness profile, as shown in Figure 7. The HAZ
transitions into the bulk material very gradually; no sig-
nificant hardness change exists like in the HAZ/TMAZ
boundary.
E. Effects of Processing Parameters on FSW
Microstructure
Changes in processing parameters have a noticeable
effect on both the grain size and the band spacing in FSW,
as demonstrated by Chenelle and Lados[4] (Figure 8). In
this study, it was observed that as the rotational speed of
the tool increased from 1000 to 1500 RPM, the grain size
in the DXZ increased from 8 to 18 lm. An increase in
grain size from 8 to 17 lm was also observed when the
traverse speed was increased from 2.0 to 3.0 mm/seconds.
In both cases, the increases in grain size were attributed to
an increased stirring, which introduced additional fric-
tional heat input, and therefore, additional energy for
grain growth after recrystallization. Changes in band
spacing were also observed with the changes in rotational
and traverse speeds.[4] The band spacing is attributed to
how much the tool advances within the weld per rotation
of the tool. The higher traverse speed (3.0 mm/seconds)
created the largest band spacing (160 lm), while the
higher rotational speed (1500 RPM) created a narrower
band spacing (120 lm) compared to the baseline band
spacing (150 lm corresponding to 1000 RPM and
2.0 mm/seconds). The overall trend in which the highest
traverse rate correlated to the highest band spacing was
anticipated and observed.
Fig. 7—Microhardness profile of a FSW joint in a 6061-T651
alloy.[4]
Fig. 8—Effect of processing parameters on grain size and band spacing in 6061-T651 FSW for (a) 1000 RPM at 2.0 mm/s, (b) 1000 RPM at
3.0 mm/s, and (c) 1500 RPM at 2.0 mm/s.[4]
1626—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012
IV. CHARACTERISTIC RESIDUAL STRESS
PROFILES IN FSW JOINTS
Microstructural changes that occur during FSW are
accompanied by significant residual stress changes. Both
tensile and compressive residual stresses exist within the
weld. The maximum tensile stresses are located in the
HAZ, and the minimum compressive stresses are located
on the advancing side just beyond the weld zone.[3,32,33]
This change in residual stress is important for under-
standing the weld performance, particularly under
dynamic loading and fatigue and crack growth.
To determine the stress distribution in FSW samples,
Fratini et al.[32,33] employed the cut-compliance method
in the longitudinal direction. Using this method, the
HAZs surrounding the weld nugget were found to be in
compressive residual stress. The interior of the weld
nugget was in tensile stress. Figure 9 shows the stress
distribution revealed by the cut-compliance method.
The residual stress displayed in Figure 9 shows the
typical M-shaped stress field associated with friction stir
welds in the longitudinal direction.[33] Interestingly, the
main contributor to the residual stresses in FSW was
attributed to the localized heating and constrained
cooling. The rigid clamping of the part during the
welding process did not allow stress relief during the
differential cooling of the HAZ, which introduced a
residual stress field across the HAZ.
Fig. 9—Longitudinal stress distribution in a FSW joint; modified
from Refs. [32,33].
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
 Table I. Longitudinal Tensile Properties of FSW 7075-T651
Aluminum; Modified from Ref. [9]

UTS YS Elongation
Condition (MPa) (MPa) (pct)
Base metal, T651 622 571 14.5
As-FSW 525 365 15
Post weld age* 496 455 3.5
*PW aging = 394 K (121 C)/24 h.

Table II. Transverse Tensile Properties of FSW 7075-T651

Aluminum; Modified from Ref. [9]

Fig. 10—Surface residual stress perpendicular to the weld plotted
as a function of distance from weld centerline in Al 7050-T7451;
modified from Ref. [19].
Pouget and Reynolds[10] obtained a similar residual
stress distribution also using the cut-compliance meth-
od. Donne[34] used standard X-ray diffraction, high
energy synchrotron X-rays, and neutron diffraction to
measure the residual stress in a FSW joint. All testing
methods resulted in the characteristic longitudinal
M-shaped stress profile. To gauge the homogeneity of
the stress profile, readings were taken at various depths.
This revealed that variation of the residual stress profile
existed throughout the thickness of the sample, indicat-
ing that the stress profile changed from the shoulder of
the tool to the tip of the pin as a result of reduced heat
input at the tip of the tool.
Donne[34] determined that the residual stresses were
most often tensile in the direction parallel to the weld,
and compressive in the perpendicular direction. Addi-
tionally, the longitudinal stresses were always greater
than the compressive transverse stresses. This was also
determined by John et al.[19] Residual stresses were
measured at the top surface (shoulder contact plane)
and on the root surface (backing plate contact plane).
As illustrated in Figure 10, the transverse residual stress
was significantly lower than the reported 150 MPa
average residual stress measured in the weld parallel to
the welding direction (not shown). The highest residual
stresses were located in the HAZ, which was concluded
in several other studies too.[3,10,32,33] A study by Zhang
et al.[27] also concluded that the residual stresses in the
longitudinal direction were significantly greater than
those in the transverse direction. This change in the
residual stress profile is critical for modeling and
predicting the performance of the weld in various
applications, especially those that are fatigue critical.
V. EFFECTS OF MICROSTRUCTURE AND
RESIDUAL STRESS ON WELD PROPERTIES
A. Strength and Hardness in FSW
Microstructural changes and residual stresses that
result from FSW have a significant impact on the
UTS YS Elongation
Condition (MPa) (MPa) (pct)
Base metal, T651 622 571 14.5
As-FSW 468 312 7.5
Post weld age* 447 312 3.5
*PW aging = 394 K (121 C)/24 h.
mechanical properties of the weld. Properties such as
strength, ductility, and fatigue have been studied in
many aluminum alloys.[3] The strength of the nugget in
longitudinal and transverse directions in 7075-T651
aluminum alloys was studied by Mahoney et al.[9] The
longitudinal samples contained only nugget material,
whereas the transverse samples contained all four weld
zones (parent material, HAZ, TMAZ, and nugget). The
tensile strength, yield strength, and elongation were
measured and are shown in Table I (longitudinal
direction) and Table II (transverse direction).
Sato et al.[35] also studied the effect of post-weld (PW)
aging on the transverse strength characteristics of FSW
6063-T5 aluminum. The two PW aging cycles investi-
gated were: (1) PW aging [448 K (175 C)/12 hours] and
(2) PW solution heat treatment and aging [803 K
(530 C)/1 hours + 448 K (175 C)/12 hours]. It was
observed that the weld strength and elongation
improved with both aging cycles, however the solution-
izing cycle yielded higher strength and elongation than
only aging (Figure 11).
Aydin et al.[2] arrived at similar conclusions in 2024-
T4 FSW aluminum samples that were subjected to PW
aging and solution heat treatments. They determined
that the post weld heat treatments caused abnormal
grain growth in the nugget of the weld compared to the
base material, which resulted in a decrease in the
hardness of the weld.[2] It was concluded that the aging
temperature had a substantial effect on the mechanical
properties of the welds. Table III summarizes the results
of the study by Aydin et al.[2]
The results of PW aging can be explained by the
distribution and coherency of the precipitates in the
weld.[2,9,35,36] In an as-welded sample, the reduced
strength was attributed to the mitigation of coherent
precipitates due to overaging within the weld nugget.
However, after a PW solutionizing step, a solid solution
was formed. The aging process then lead to the
development of coherent precipitates, which resulted in

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1627

significant strength improvement. In these samples,
tensile failures occurred along the advancing side
interface between the weld and the parent material.[35]
The microhardness profile of the as-welded 6063-T5
sample was documented by Sato et al.,[35] and is shown
in Figure 12. The same W-shaped profile discussed in
Figure 7 was observed. TEM observation of the precip-
itates revealed that there were two primary types:
needle-like, coherent precipitates averaging 40 nm in
length, and incoherent rod shaped precipitates that were
200 nm in length. They reported that the microhardness
profile across the weld was more strongly affected by the
coherent precipitates distribution than grain size.[35]
B. Fatigue and Fatigue Crack Growth (FCG) in FSW
In addition to the static properties and microhardness
profiles in the weld, the microstructural changes and
residual stresses imparted to the workpiece during FSW
affect the dynamic behavior and FCG rates through and
across the welds.
Fig. 11—Tensile properties of FSW and aged 6063-T5: (a) yield and
tensile strengths and (b) elongation; modified from Ref. [35].
Table III. Tensile Properties of FSW 2024-T4 With and Without PW Heat Treatment; Modified from Ref. [2]
0.2 pct Proof
Sample ID Strength (MPa)
2024-T4 unwelded parent metal 351
As-welded joint 279
W temper (8 months) 289
T6 temper [373 K (100 C), 10 h] 248
T6 temper [463 K (190 C), 10 h] 345
O temper 105
1628—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012
1. Modeling FCG
There are two schools of thought on the modeling of
fatigue properties and designing for fatigue resistance.
The first approach, commonly referred to as the ‘‘fail-
safe’’ or stress-life approach, plots numbers of cycles to
failure (N) against applied stress amplitude (S). An S-N
curve is typically used to determine the number of cycles
that a part can withstand prior to failure at a given stress
(or conversely, the stress that can be applied to a
component in order to satisfy a given number of
required loading cycles). The stress-life approach is
most commonly utilized when a part is subjected to
mostly elastic strain.[36] While S-N curves are used to
predict the number of cycles to failure, they do not
provide detailed information on the crack growth
behavior, such as crack propagation threshold, crack
growth rates and stress intensity factors at various
stages, all of which are of critical importance in
understanding and predicting fatigue life of real mate-
rials that contain flaws and have a limited life before
these flaws become propagating cracks.[36] Thus, a
different approach must be considered. The second
method is called the ‘‘damage tolerant’’ approach, and
uses FCG rates to incorporate the materials’ properties
into life predictions and design. In this approach, crack
growth models are used to predict the growth of cracks
from initial flaws towards failure, using experimental
data and fracture mechanics principles. Figure 13 shows
a typical sigmoidal FCG curve, where crack growth rate
Fig. 12—Typical microhardness profile of FSW 6063-T5; modified
from Ref. [35].
Ultimate Tensile Elongation
Strength (MPa) (pct) Fracture Location
492 21.9 —
389 9 interface btw DXZ
and TMAZ, advancing side
402 12.1 FSW zone on advancing side
379 11.3 FSW zone on advancing side
430 6 FSW zone on advancing side
227 5.2 FSW zone on advancing side
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B

Fig. 13—Fracture mechanics approach to FCG, da/dN vs DK curve.
(da/dN) is plotted as a function of stress intensity factor
range (DK).
Using this method allows for determination of impor-
tant parameters that the S-N curve does not account for,
such as initial vs critical flaw sizes, crack propagation
thresholds, crack growth rates over time, and stress
intensities on the crack at different stages during FCG.
Careful monitoring of these parameters can allow flawed
parts to remain in service, thereby reducing maintenance
and unnecessary replacement part costs. This method
also allows for designing components for FCG resis-
tance. Evaluation of crack growth rates on parts in
service is generally conducted using the Paris-Erdogen
relationship describing the stable crack growth in
Region II:
da
¼ CðDKÞm
dN
where a is the length of the crack, N is the number of
cycles, DK is the cyclic stress intensity factor range,
and C and m are material constants dependent on the
environment, test conditions, and material properties.
The stress intensity factor is strongly dependent on the
flaw size, a, geometry of the flaw, and the applied
stress, r, through the relationship:
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
DK ¼ YDr pa
where Y is a factor that describes the location and
geometry of the flaw present and the sample geometry.
The applied stress in a fatigue test is cyclic, and as
such has minimum and maximum values. The ratio of
the minimum applied stress to the maximum applied
stress is commonly referred to as the stress ratio, R.
rmin
R¼
rmax
Also identified in the fracture mechanics model is the
FCG threshold, DKth, which describes the minimum
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
stress intensity required for crack growth to occur. This
parameter is affected by both microstructure and resid-
ual stress. The last point in Region III of the damage
tolerant model represents part failure, and is denoted as
DKFT, representing the fracture toughness of the mate-
rial; DKFT is commonly associated with KIC when the
material does not have excessive plasticity (otherwise,
plasticity corrections need to be applied to determine the
correct DKFT from a FCG test).
2. Role of microstructure on FCG in FSW
Microstructural changes that result from FSW affect
the crack propagation rates through the weld. Lemmen
et al.[37,38] demonstrated this effect by propagating
cracks through welds at different orientations relative
to the welding direction (0, 90, and 45 deg from the
welding direction), and observing the microstructural
damage after failure. It was determined that crack
growth through the weld was primarily Mode I (tensile),
however several examples of Mode II (shear) failure
were present in the 7075 aluminum alloy oriented at
45 deg to the weld. It was also noted that crack growth
through the nugget was dominated by the presence of
brittle secondary phases that were moved into patterns
by the stirring action of the tool. The FCG in the nugget
was dependent on the fatigue initiation location and the
direction of crack growth. Studies illustrated that when
cracking was initiated within the nugget, the banded
structure did not affect crack growth.[38] After exiting
the SZ, the cracking changed direction to grow parallel
to the welding direction. This illustrated the significance
of the microstructural/grain size changes between the
HAZ and the nugget.
The significance of microstructure refinement on FCG
was also investigated by Tra et al.[39] in 6063-T5
aluminum. They concluded that the grain refinement
from welding was the single most influential factor in
determining crack propagation rates. These tests were
conducted at R = 0.1 and 25 Hz in laboratory atmo-
sphere at both room temperature and at 473 K (200 C).
It was observed that the refined microstructures of the
nugget, and advancing and retreating interfaces resulted
in higher propagation rates than the bulk material. The
changes in DK were correlated to changes observed in
fatigue fracture modes—low DK cracks propagated via
an intergranular mode in the nugget, with more trans-
granular paths observed beyond this zone.[39] However,
at high DK values the fracture path switched to fully
transgranular within the nugget. Kim et al.[40] observed
that the crack growth rates were higher in the bulk
material than the recrystallized nugget due to high
residual stresses in the welds. Similar results were
observed by John et al.[19]
Chenelle and Lados[4] conducted several FCG studies
along the DXZ of FSW 6061-T651 in order to study the
effect of banding on the crack growth rate and mech-
anisms (Figure 14). They concluded that crack growth
at low DK was not affected by the banding in the DXZ
(Figure 14(a)). However, at increased DK levels, the
crack exhibited a unique ‘‘sawtooth’’ growth pattern
(Figure 14(b)). The DK transition to the sawtooth
growth pattern was correlated to Kmax, the band
VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1629
Fig. 14—Effect of band spacing and orientation on the FCG mechanisms at various stages of crack growth: (a) low Region II
(DK < 6.6 MPaÆm), (b) high Region II (DK ~ 6.6 MPaÆm), and (c) high Region III (DK > 6.6 MPaÆm).[4]
spacing, the angle between the banding and the crack
growth direction, and the plastic zone ahead of the crack
tip. The sawtooth effect was not observed, even at high
DK levels, when the bands were perpendicular to the
crack growth direction. At very high DK, tearing was
observed and the crack was less affected by the
individual band spacing (Figure 14(c)).
3. Role of residual stress on FCG in FSW
Crack growth is significantly affected by the stresses
surrounding the crack tip, which include residual
stresses from heat and stirring forces exerted from the
FSW process, and from machining processes. For
propagation to occur, the culmination of these stresses
must be greater than the energy needed for crack
surfaces to form. Typically, a crack propagating in a
compressive stress field will grow more slowly. This can
be explained by the crack closure phenomenon. Effec-
tively, the changes in residual stress alter the R-ratio of
the fatigue load during cyclic testing. Compressive
residual stresses reduce the amount of tensile stress at
the crack tip, thereby requiring a higher applied stress
for propagation to occur. Therefore, at the right
locations, compressive stress fields can beneficially
contribute to crack retardation and better fatigue
life.[19,31,32,34]
Conversely, tensile residual stresses have the effect of
opening the crack tip, adding to the damaging effect of
an applied force. Given that in a static workpiece
residual stresses exist in a state of equilibrium, each
region of beneficial compressive stress is balanced by a
region of detrimental tensile stress. These effects have
strong implications on the fatigue behavior of the part;
the stress field can either hinder or accelerate crack
advance, depending on the location of crack initiation
with respect to the stress field.[19,31,32,34] Thus, under-
standing residual stress magnitudes and distributions in
friction stir welds allows the designer to accurately select
application regions and loading conditions.
The majority of fatigue evaluation in FSW is con-
ducted using the damage tolerant approach and FCG
testing. Most of these studies focused on the relationship
between residual stresses and the crack growth rate in
different zones of the friction stir weld. Fratini et al.[32,33]
studied compact tension, C(T), specimens containing the
1630—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012
weld nugget, oriented such that the crack advanced
perpendicular to the weld line and entered the weld
nugget. Cracks were propagated through the sample at
constant stress intensity, comparing the growth rates
through the various weld zones, and highlighted the
effects of microstructure and residual stress on crack
growth. In a purely homogeneous material, the crack
growth rate in a constant stress intensity test is expected
to be constant. Therefore, the observed deviations in
crack growth rates from the homogenous case were due
to residual stresses and microstructural changes.
As expected, crack growth was slowest in the HAZ
due to compressive residual stress. In the weld nugget,
increased hardness and refined microstructure became
the dominant contributors to the crack propagation,
offsetting the effects of the tensile stress. In fact, the
zone exhibiting the highest growth rate was at the
TMAZ, which had neither the shielding of compressive
residual stresses nor the microstructural refinements
that enabled the weld nugget to resist crack propaga-
tion. After conducting the same tests on a stress-relieved
sample, Fratini et al.[32,33] determined that the crack
growth in the HAZ increased substantially when the
compressive residual stresses were removed, confirming
that the decrease in crack growth rate originally
observed in the HAZ was primarily due to the residual
compressive stress, rather than a metallurgical change
(Figure 15(b)).
Similar results were obtained by Bussu and Irving,[31]
who also performed FCG and residual stress measure-
ment studies, both orthogonal and parallel to the weld
direction using surface crack and C(T) specimens.
Constant amplitude crack propagation tests were per-
formed at 15 Hz, with an R ratio of 0.1. The same
experiment was repeated in samples that had been
plastically yielded. Results showed that the microhard-
ness profile and observable microstructure remained the
same as non-yielded samples. This indicated that the
only effect of the plastic yield was the removal of
residual stresses.
The crack growth rates in the nugget in Fratini et al.’s
experiments[32,33] remained unchanged from the non-
stress relieved samples, indicating that the crack growth
in this region was controlled by the inherent micro-
structure. By conducting these tests, Fratini et al. were
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 15—Crack growth rate vs distance from the weld centerline for samples (a) with residual stress and (b) with and without residual stresses;
modified from Ref. [32].
able to isolate the effects of residual stress from
microstructure effects on crack growth. The importance
of microstructure was also studied by Tra et al.,[39]
whose samples were very low in residual stresses. Bussu
and Irving[31] also found that without residual stress
gradients, the crack growth rate throughout the joint
approached that of the parent material. In addition,
Bussu and Irving[31] noted that tensile residual stresses
above a threshold value had negligible impact on crack
growth, and suggested that this threshold is the mini-
mum amount required to open the crack. Stresses above
this minimum value were not expected to increase
propagation rates.
The residual stresses introduced by FSW resulted in
different FCG rates for the base material and different weld
regions. John et al.[19] conducted a study on the effects of
residual stresses in the near threshold regime in 7050-T7451
aluminum. At low stress ratios (R = 0.05), the FCG
threshold of the FSW region was significantly higher than
that of the parent material (DKth ~ 5.2 MPaÆm vs
2.2 MPaÆm). However, at higher stress ratios, the thresh-
old of the weld sample decreased significantly, and was
much closer to that of the parent material
(DKth ~ 1.6 MPaÆm). Results proved that even low con-
stant residual stresses (~5 MPa) generated a residual stress
intensity factor Kres > 2 MPaÆm, which was on the same
order of magnitude as the DKth of the material. Thus, even
low residual stresses played a significant role in the FCG
through the weld region. Kim et al.[40] also observed more
significant changes in crack growth rates between parent
material and SZ due to the high residual stresses measured
in their samples. Figure 16 illustrates the variation of Kres
with the crack length for various wrought aluminum
alloys.[19]
Chenelle et al.[41] also studied the effect of residual
stress on FCG rates in FSW 6061-T651 aluminum
alloys, and observed crack deceleration/acceleration in
compressive/tensile residual stress fields, respectively. In
this study, Chenelle and Lados also evaluated residual
stress on C(T) specimen geometries using two different
methods: the crack-compliance method and the contour
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 16—Computed variation of Kres as a function of crack length;
modified from Ref. [19].
method. In the crack compliance method, the residual
stress was calculated from the experimentally deter-
mined Kres using a weighing function; while in the
contour method it was calculated using strains (exper-
imentally obtained roughness measurements were trans-
lated into displacements, which were then converted into
strains). It was found that the two methods showed the
same trends and gave similar results in the tensile
dominated sample shown in Figure 17(a). However, in
the compressive dominated sample (Figure 17(b)), the
sudden changes in residual stress as the crack passed
through the HAZ, TMAZ, and nugget were not as
accurately detected by the contour method. This indi-
cated that both methods were able to provide the correct
trends, but the contour method was less sensitive to
detecting sudden and drastic changes in residual stress.
Pouget and Reynolds[10] attempted to predict the
crack growth behavior in both the weld and parent
material using a mathematical model. They calculated a
stress intensity factor, Kres, which the crack experiences
due to the residual stress, similarly to John et al.[19]
Next, using constant applied DK, they attempted to
predict the crack growth rate using fatigue data gathered
from the base material. They found a strong correlation
between the measured residual stress profile and the
VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1631
 20 30 40 50
Crack Length (mm)
2.0x10-4 0 20 40
60
8 Residual Stress, Compliance
4 Residual Stress, Contour
1.6x10-4
40

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)
da/dN (mm/cycle)

Kres (MPa m)
4
1.2x10-4
0 20

8.0x10-5 0 0

-4

-5
4.0x10 -20

Kres versus crack length -4

Growth rate versus crack length

0
0.0x10 -8 -40
20 30 40 50 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

Crack Length (mm) Crack Length (in)

(a)
Crack Length (mm)
20 30 40 50
2x10-4 0 20 40
Kres versus crack length 60
8
Growth rate versus crack length 4
-4
2x10
40

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)
da/dN (mm/cycle)

Kres (MPa m)
4
-4
1x10
0 20

8x10-5 0 0

-4

4x10-5 -20

-4
Residual Stress, Contour
Residual Stress, Compliance
0x100 -8 -40
20 30 40 50 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

Crack Length (mm) Crack Length (in.)

(b)
Fig. 17—Residual stress evaluations using the crack-compliance and contour methods in (a) tensile dominated and (b) compressive dominated
samples; FCG rates for the two cases are also given.[41]

crack growth rate. This prediction proved to be accurate

in the HAZ, but the correlation broke down within the
weld nugget. In the weld nugget, the mathematical
prediction consistently underestimated the experimental
crack growth.[10] For greater accuracy in the mathemat-
ical model, the problem was treated as a piecewise
solution of two problems. Outside the weld, the base
material properties were adequate to predict growth,
however in the nugget the weld properties needed to be
used.[10]

4. Fatigue crack propagation trends in FSW

Another phenomenon noticeable in several fatigue
experiments was the tendency for the crack to follow the
ridges of welding flash on the surface. This was reported
by Pouget and Reynolds,[10] John et al.,[19] and Lemmen
et al.[37,38] Figure 18 shows an example of a deviated
crack path that followed the weld flow-lines in a C(T)
specimen.[10]
Lemmen et al.[37,38] evaluated the fatigue crack Fig. 18—Schematic of crack deviation at the friction stir weld in a
propagation direction in aluminum 2024-T3 FSW joints. C(T) specimen; modified from Ref. [10].
It was noted that FSW resulted in significant residual
stresses in the longitudinal direction, with minimal
stresses in the transverse direction, as illustrated in than those that initiated in the nugget and TMAZ zones,
Figure 19. Cracks that started in compressive residual which was attributed to plasticity and closure effects at
stress fields from the HAZ yielded longer fatigue life the crack tip.[38] These results were in agreement with

1632—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B


Fig. 19—Longitudinal vs transverse FSW residual stresses; modified
from Ref. [38].
Fig. 20—Schematic of the crack deviation in notched specimen
based on welding direction; modified from Ref. [38].
those from John et al.,[19] who also studied the effect of
residual stress on crack propagation.
In addition, welding direction had a significant effect
on crack propagation direction, as shown in Figure 20.
For crack propagation in samples tested at 45 deg to the
welding direction, it was shown that after propagating
through the weld along a weld band (as shown), the
direction of crack growth through the parent material
on the other side of the weld was based on the welding
direction. This was also observed in the study by
Lemmen et al.[38]
The crack was observed to follow the banding
structure that resulted from the stirring of the tool.
Investigation into this phenomenon revealed that within
the band regions, there existed areas of increased
intermetallic particle densities. This banded structure
provided reduced local crack growth resistance, thus
providing a path of low crack growth resistance through
the weld. The crack growth direction of a FSW was
found to be asymmetric due to the different flow
patterns within the nugget and to the TMAZ size
difference between the advancing and retreating sides of
the weld.[37] The HAZ showed fully symmetrical behav-
ior because it is only affected by heat, and not the
directional stirring forces.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
In addition, the change in crack growth direction can
be attributed to the non-proportional loading attributed
to the loading direction and residual stresses not being
aligned for the 45 deg specimen. Recent research by
Pettit et al.[42] was focused on modeling this phenom-
enon. Given the significant contributions of both micro-
structure and residual stress on crack growth in FSW, it
is anticipated that future studies will pursue this topic in
order to fundamentally understand and quantify their
combined effects, as well as partition individual
contributions.
VI. APPLICATIONS OF FRICTION STIR
WELDING/PROCESSING IN INDUSTRY
The unique properties of FSW/FSP are attractive to
many areas of industry including aerospace, nuclear,
transportation, and military applications.
A. Uses in Ground Transportation
and Aerospace Industries
FSW is a very attractive alternative to using fasteners
and rivets due to its ease of manufacture, reduced part
complexity, weight savings and cost reduction up to
30 pct.[35,43–45] FSW is applicable to nearly every type of
aluminum alloy used in the automotive industry. A list
of such alloys is presented in Table IV.
FSW has been successfully used by numerous
automotive companies, including BMW, Ford, and
General Motors. The three piece suspension arm on
the BMW 5 series are friction stir welded in order to
reduce road noise and weight by eliminating the use of
fasteners and bolts.[35] In 2003, Tower Automotive
successfully produced aluminum suspension links for
Ford Motor Company utilizing the FSW process,
which was the first time the technology had been used
on an automotive component in the United States.[44]
Additionally, Hydro Aluminum in Norway utilized
FSW in their inner wheel rim, an example of the ability
of FSW to be used in cast products in addition to
wrought alloys.[44]
FSW is also used extensively in the train, aero, and
marine fields, particularly in joining sheet metal.
Alstom LHB and Hitachi of Japan use FSW on floor
and wall panels on their commuter trains.[45] According
to Lockheed Martin, FSW is extensively used in the
production line of the space shuttle external tanks
using 2219/2195 aluminum alloys for butt welding
sheets ranging from 0.32 to 0.65 in. in thickness. These
same alloys were also butt welded using FSW to
develop the full scale prototype Space Launch Initia-
tive (SLI).[43] Lockheed Martin also has many appli-
cations for FSW under development, including using
7075 and 2297 aluminum alloys for the wing box on
the fighter aircraft. The C-130 freight aircraft uses
FSW on 7249 aluminum alloys for the cargo bay
floors.[43] Additional information on the extended use
of FSW in aircraft technology at Lockheed Martin is
listed in Table V.
VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1633
 Table IV. Applications and Types of Aluminum Where FSW has been Used in Auto Industry; Modified from Ref. [44]

Aluminum in the Auto Industry

Inner and outer body panels 2008, 2010, 2036, 3004, 5052, 5192, 5754, 6009, 6010, 6016, 6022, 6111
General structural components 6005, 6005A, 6009, 6061
Extrusions 6063, 6082, 7005
Luggage racks, air deflectors 6463
Spare tire carrier parts 6061
Bumper components
Ace bars 5052, 6009
Reinforcements 6009, 6061, 7003, 7004, 7021, 7029
Brackets 6009, 7021
Seats
Shells 7036, 6010
Headrest bars 7116, 7129
Tracks 6010, 5182, 5754, 6009
Load floors 2036, 5182, 5754, 6009
Wheels 5454, 6061, A356.0
Suspension components 6061 (forging)
Drive shaft 6061 (tube), aluminum metal matrix composites
Engine mounts 5454, 5754
Sub-frames & engine cradles 5454, 5754, 6061, 6063
Radiator tubes & fins 3003, 3005
Condenser tubes 3102
Condenser fins 7072

Table V. Applications of FSW in Aerospace Industry; Modified from Ref. [43]

Y-Chord HIMARS Circular Weld C-130 Cargo

Name Demonstration Sponson Door Fighter Wing Box Demonstration Floors
Alloy Al2014 Al5052 Al7075 and Al2297 Al2195 and Al2297 Al7249
Joint 0.250¢¢ butt 0.100 to 0.125¢¢ 0.125¢¢ butt, L-T 0.200 to 0.280¢¢ butt 0.090 to 0.150¢¢ butt
configuration T-joint and lap-joints
Size 2¢ 9 2¢ 2¢ 9 4¢ 4¢ 9 4¢ up to 12¢¢ diameter 16¢ length
Status development development development development development

B. Uses in the Nuclear Industry
1. FSW of high strength metals
In addition to low density alloys in the transportation
industry, FSW has been increasingly used on high
strength steels and advanced alloys in the nuclear and
military industries.[46] For example, Austenetic 304L
stainless steels were FSW with a polycrystalline cubic
boron nitride (PCBN) FSW tool spinning at 500 RPM
with a traverse speed of 1.5 mm/seconds. It was discov-
ered that the microstructure of the FSW 304 steel
consisted of fine, equiaxed recrystallized grains, and
typical bands were observed inside the nugget.[47]
Reynolds et al.[47] studied the effects of using different
rotational speeds of 300 and 500 RPM. Both cases
exhibited higher yield strengths than the base material,
with the 300 RPM having the highest strength. This was
attributed to the effects of grain refinement in the weld
nugget. The base, 500, and 300 RPM welds had grain
sizes of 15, 13, and 7.6 lm respectively. Thus, the metal
with the smallest grain size exhibited the highest
strength, as predicted. It should be noted that the
smaller grains present in the 300 RPM case were due to
a lower peak temperature as recorded during welding.
Ductility in the weld nugget was found to be excellent,
with elongation to fracture greater than 50 pct.
A study conducted by Ishikawa et al.[48] reported
similar results on 304 stainless steel. In this study, welds
were produced at 600 RPM for various transverse
speeds from 1 to 20 mm/seconds. The mechanical
properties of the weld nugget were found to be better
than those of the base material, which is in agreement
with the study by Reynolds et al.[47]
In addition to steels, FSW technology has been utilized
on Inconel 600, a nickel-based superalloy commonly used
in applications where its high strength, corrosion resis-
tance, and elevated temperature properties are attractive,
such as chemical plants and jet engines. Song et al.[49]
successfully joined Inconel 600 plates at an optimized
speed of 400 RPM and 150 to 200 mm/min using a WC-
Co tool. A reduction in grain size from 19 lm in the
parent material to 3.4 lm in the nugget was reported. In
addition, significant improvements in hardness (163 to
245 HV) and in tensile strength (683 to 721 MPa) from
parent material to nugget were reported.
Similar results were reported from Sato et al.[50] on
friction stir welded Inconel 600. The nugget material

1634—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B

outperformed the base material in both yield and
ultimate tensile strengths, without a significant decrease
in ductility.
FSW has also been implemented in titanium alloys
including CP titanium, Ti-6AL-4V, and Ti-15V-3Cr-
3Al-3Sn.[1,46] In a study by Lienert et al., Ti-6Al-4V was
welded, with surface temperatures approaching 1373 K
(1100 C). Microstructural evaluation of the weld
revealed that temperatures exceeded the b-transus tem-
perature, resulting in a microstructure of acicular a in
b.[1,46] Microhardness profiles illustrated that a hardness
increase occurred in the HAZ, a result of the phase
changes from a to b, and due to straining and cold
working upon cooling.[1] By contrast, Cam reported
several findings whereby the hardness in the weld zone
varied—some results indicated that the hardness in the
HAZ were lower than that of the SZ, while others
indicated that the hardness increased. This variation was
attributed to different tool materials, and varying
processing parameters for FSW of Ti-6Al-4V, both of
which affected the thermal history of the weld.[46]
2. Corrosion resistance considerations
Another material parameter that is vital to the nuclear
industry is corrosion resistance. Conditions inside a
reactor are extremely detrimental to the material, and
any increase in corrosion resistance is critical. Chrome is
often alloyed in metals for corrosion protection due to
its ability to readily form chromium (III) oxide, a
passive layer that forms on the surface of the metal that
protects the metal from oxidation. However, traditional
fusion welding often results in lowering corrosion
resistance due to sensitization, which occurs when Cr
diffuses to the grain boundaries and forms Cr-rich
carbides. These carbides pull Cr out of the metal,
thereby reducing the ability of the Cr to act as a
protecting agent. This process occurs at temperatures
from 773 K to 1073 K (500 C to 800 C) in most
stainless steels. Since the FSW process involves a much
lower temperature than conventional fusion welding, it
results in less sensitization of the welded joint.[51,52]
Park et al.[53] examined the microstructure of FSW
304 stainless steel. The dynamically recrystallized nugget
was found to have a non-homogenous distribution of
the detrimental Cr-rich intermetallics (sigma phase).
This phase formed preferentially on the grain bound-
aries of the advancing side, which increased the sensi-
tization in this region. The SZ of the weld as a whole
was shown to have much better corrosion resistance
than even the base material, and much better than that
of gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) (Figure 21).
However, the advancing side was shown to have a
much lower performance than the retreating side, due to
the Cr depletion caused by the formation of the sigma
phase. This particular study did not focus on the effects
of welding parameters on corrosion resistance; all welds
were done at 550 RPM and 1.33 mm/seconds.
Another study conducted by Ishikawa et al.[48]
attempted to isolate the effects of different welding
parameters on the corrosion resistance of the 304
stainless steel welds. Keeping the rotation speed con-
stant at 600 RPM, welds were produced with transverse
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
Fig. 21—Reactivation current ratios for different regions in FSW
and GTAW; modified from Ref. [53].
speeds from 1 to 20 mm/seconds. Each weld was
examined for microstructural defects and then subjected
to a salt spray test to determine the corrosion resistance.
Welds produced up to 20 mm/seconds were defect free,
with tunnel voids forming at 20 mm/seconds due to lack
of heat input to the weld. Corrosion resistance of the
welds was found to be highly dependent on the welding
parameters, with increasing transverse speeds resulting
in better corrosion resistance. This is due to the lower
peak temperature reached during a high transverse
speed weld, thus lowering the fraction of sigma phases
that deplete the weld of chromium.[48–50]
FSW is also very well suited to the construction of
hermetic seals and tanks, which are of vital importance
to the nuclear industry. The low porosity and high
strength allow the welds to withstand pressure and
pressure cycling associated with this application. Swe-
den recently undertook a reliability study of the FSW
process for the construction of its nuclear waste con-
tainment tasks. The critical nature of this weld calls for
stringent guidelines for weld performance and repeat-
ability. The FSW process was found to satisfy all the
requirements, producing an excellent weld suitable for
the containment of hazardous substances.[54] Likewise,
FSW was studied for the production of liquid rocket
combustion chamber liners. This is another critical
location where non-optimized parameters would result
in catastrophic failure. FSW was applied to GRCop-84,
which is a copper-chromium-niobium alloy, producing
welds of controllable and repeatable quality.[55]
VII. CONCLUSIONS
FSW is a technology with enormous growth potential
due to its inherent benefits. The goal of this review was
to provide a comprehensive introduction into the FSW
process, discuss the effects of processing parameters,
microstructural changes, and residual stresses on
mechanical properties, as well as review current and
VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1635
potential applications of this process. Some important
conclusions that drawn from this review are:
 FSW is a solid-state process that is capable of welding
both similar and dissimilar metals.
 Careful control of processing parameters is required
to obtain optimized welds/properties.
 All metals require different parameters for optimal
welds.
 FSW can weld alloys considered conventionally
unweldable.
 FSWs can have better mechanical properties com-
pared to fusion welds.
 FSW refines the grain structure in the weld nugget.
 FSW imparts compressive residual stresses on the
weld surface.
 Residual stresses can be measured in FSW using both
destructive and non-destructive techniques.
 Crack growth rates and directions in FSW are
dependent on alloy, welding direction, and micro-
structural characteristics.
 FSW has many applications in various industries
including aerospace, nuclear, transportation, and
defense.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the consortium
members of the Integrative Materials Design Center
and Worcester Polytechnic Institute for their support
of this work.
REFERENCES
1. R.S. Mishra and M.W. Mahoney: Friction Stir Welding and Pro-
cessing, ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 2007, p. 359.
2. H. Aydın, A. Bayram, and I. _ Durgun: Mater. Des., 2010, vol. 31
(5), pp. 2568–77.
3. R.S. Mishra and Z.Y. Ma: Mater. Sci. Eng. R: Rep., 2005, vol. 50
(1–2), pp. 1–78.
4. B.F. Chenelle and D.A. Lados: ‘‘Friction Stir Welding in 6061
Aluminum Alloys: Microstructure, Residual Stress and Fatigue
Crack Growth Mechanisms,’’ Integrative Materials Design Center
Internal Report, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, June 2010.
5. R.S. Mishra, M.W. Mahoney, and S.X. McFadden: Scripta
Mater., 1999, vol. 42 (2), pp. 163–68.
6. Y.J. Kwon, N. Saito, and I. Shigematsu: J. Mater. Sci. Lett., 2002,
vol. 21 (19), pp. 1473–76.
7. B. Mansoor, S. Mukherjee, and A. Ghosh: Mater. Sci. Eng. A,
2009, vol. 512 (1–2), pp. 10–18.
8. W. Woo, H. Choo, and D.W. Brown: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2006,
vol. 437 (1), pp. 64–69.
9. M. Mahoney, C. Rhodes, and J. Flintoff: Metall. Mater. Trans. A,
1998, vol. 29A, pp. 1955–64.
10. G. Pouget and A.P. Reynolds: Int. J. Fatigue, 2008, vol. 30 (3),
pp. 463–72.
11. B. Heinz and B. Skrotzki: Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 2002, vol. 33B,
pp. 489–98.
12. M.B. Prime: Eng. Fract. Mech., 2010, vol. 77 (10), pp. 1552–66.
13. H.E. Boyer, T.L. Gall, and American Society for Metals: Metals
Handbook, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH,
Chap. 8, 1989.
14. G. Liu, L.E. Murr, and C. Niou: Scripta Mater., 1997, vol. 37 (3),
pp. 355–61.
1636—VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012
15. Y.J. Kwon, I. Shigematsu, and N. Saito: Scripta Mater., 2003,
vol. 49 (8), pp. 785–89.
16. S.W. Williams: Air Space Europe, 2001, vol. 3 (3–4), pp. 64–66.
17. J. Su, T.W. Nelson, and R. Mishra: Acta Mater., 2003, vol. 51 (3),
pp. 713–29.
18. A. Kostka, R.S. Coelho, and J. dos Santos: Scripta Mater., 2009,
vol. 60 (11), pp. 953–56.
19. R. John, K.V. Jata, and K. Sadananda: Int. J. Fatigue, 2003,
vol. 25 (9–11), pp. 939–48.
20. S. Benavides, Y. Li, and L.E. Murr: Scripta Mater., 1999, vol. 41
(8), pp. 809–15.
21. L. Commin, M. Dumont, and J. Masse: Acta Mater., 2009, vol. 57
(2), pp. 326–34.
22. X. Cao and M. Jahazi: Mater. Des., 2009, vol. 30 (6),
pp. 2033–42.
23. Z. Zhang and H.W. Zhang: J. Mater. Process. Technol., 2009,
vol. 209 (1), pp. 241–70.
24. R. Zeng, J. Chen, and W. Dietzel: Corros. Sci., 2009, vol. 51 (8),
pp. 1738–46.
25. S.M. Chowdhury, D.L. Chen, and S.D. Bholea: Mater. Sci. Eng.
A, 2012, vol. 527 (21–22), pp. 6064–75.
26. M. Peel, A. Steuwer, and M. Preuss: Acta Mater., 2003, vol. 51
(16), pp. 4791–4801.
27. Y. Zhang, Y.S. Sato, and H. Kokawa: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2008,
vol. 485 (1–2), pp. 448–55.
28. M.A. Sutton, B. Yang, and A.P. Reynolds: Mater. Sci. Eng. A,
2002, vol. 323 (1–2), pp. 160–66.
29. Y.S. Sato, H. Kokawa, and M. Enomoto: Metall. Mater. Trans. A,
1999, vol. 30A, pp. 2429–37.
30. Y.J. Kwon, I. Shigematsu, and N. Saito: Mater. Lett., 2008,
vol. 62 (23), pp. 3827–29.
31. G. Bussu and P.E. Irving: Int. J. Fatigue, 2003, vol. 25 (1), pp. 77–
88.
32. L. Fratini, S. Pasta, and A.P. Reynolds: Int. J. Fatigue, 2009,
vol. 31 (3), pp. 495–500.
33. L. Fratini and B. Zuccarello: Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 2006,
vol. 46 (6), pp. 611–19.
34. C. Dalle Donne: in Investigations on Residual Stresses in Friction
Stir Welds, 3rd International Symposium on Friction Stir Weld-
ing, Kobe, Japan, 2001.
35. Y.S. Sato, M. Enomoto, and R. Kato: ‘‘Application of Aluminum
Extrusions to Suspension Arms,’’ SAE International, SAE Tech-
nical Paper 982331, 1998.
36. M. Meyers and K. Chawla: Mechanical Behavior of Materials,
Cambridge University Press, New York, 2009.
37. H.J.K. Lemmen, R.C. Alderliesten, and R. Benedictus: Eng. Fract.
Mech., 2011, vol. 78 (6), pp. 930–43.
38. H.J.K. Lemmen, R.C. Alderliesten, and R. Benedictus: Int. J.
Fatigue, 2011, vol. 33 (3), pp. 466–76.
39. T.H. Tra, M. Okazaki, and K. Suzuki: Int. J. Fatigue, 2012,
vol. 43, pp. 23–29.
40. S. Kim, C.G. Lee, and S. Kim: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2008, vol. 478
(1–2), pp. 56–64.
41. B.F. Chenelle, D.A. Lados, and C. Leising: ‘‘Residual Stress
Evaluation in Friction Stir Welds: Analytical, Experimental,
and Computational Methods,’’ Integrative Materials Design
Center Internal Report, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, June,
2010.
42. R. Pettit, B. Annigeri, and W. Owen: ‘‘Next Generation 3D Mixed
Mode Fracture Propagation Theory Including HCF-LCF Inter-
action,’’ Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, U.S. Air Force Report
#AFRL-RX-WP-TP-2010-4048, 2010.
43. Lockheed Martin Corporation: ‘‘Friction Stir Welding Experi-
ence,’’ accessed May 2011 from http://www.lockheedmartin.com/
products/frictionstirwelding/experience.html, 2010.
44. B. Irving: Weld. J., 2000, vol. 79 (11), pp. 63–68.
45. ESAB Welding Automation: Friction Stir Welding Handbook,
LAZA, Sweden, Chap. SE 695-81, 2009.
46. G. Cam: Int. Mater. Rev., 2011, vol. 56 (1), pp. 1–48.
47. A.P. Reynolds, W. Tang, and T. Gnaupel-Herold: Scripta Mater.,
2003, vol. 48 (9), pp. 1289–94.
48. T. Ishikawa, H. Fujii, and K. Genchi: ISIJ Int., 2009, vol. 49 (6),
pp. 897–901.
49. K.H. Song, H. Fujii, and K. Nakata: Mater. Des., 2009, vol. 30
(10), pp. 3972–78.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B
50. Y.S. Sato, P. Arkom, and H. Kokawa: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2008,
vol. 477 (1–2), pp. 250–58.
51. B.T. Timofeev, G.P. Karzov, and A.A. Gorbakony: Int. J. Press.
Vessel. Pip., 1999, vol. 76 (5), pp. 299–307.
52. S.H.C. Park, Y.S. Sato, and H. Kokawa: Scripta Mater., 2004,
vol. 51 (2), pp. 101–05.
53. S.H.C. Park, Y.S. Sato, and H. Kokawa: Scripta Mater., 2003,
vol. 49 (12), pp. 1175–80.
54. L. Cederqvist and T. Öberg: Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 2008, vol. 93
(10), pp. 1491–99.
55. C.K. Russell, R. Carter, and D.L. Ellis: J. Propul. Power, 2007,
vol. 23, pp. 756–62.

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS B VOLUME 43B, DECEMBER 2012—1637