Science and Technology of Welding and Joining

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ystw20

Friction stir-based additive manufacturing

Rajiv S. Mishra, Ravi Sankar Haridas & Priyanshi Agrawal

To cite this article: Rajiv S. Mishra, Ravi Sankar Haridas & Priyanshi Agrawal (2022) Friction stir-
based additive manufacturing, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, 27:3, 141-165,
DOI: 10.1080/13621718.2022.2027663

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13621718.2022.2027663

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 18 Jan 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4804

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ystw20
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING
2022, VOL. 27, NO. 3, 141–165
https://doi.org/10.1080/13621718.2022.2027663

Friction stir-based additive manufacturing

Rajiv S. Mishra , Ravi Sankar Haridas and Priyanshi Agrawal
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Processes Institute, University of North Texas,
Denton, TX, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Additive manufacturing (AM) has completely altered the traditional component manufacturing Received 6 August 2021
and qualification paradigm. It provides unitisation and topological optimisation opportunities Revised 1 December 2021
simultaneously. Broadly, the additive manufacturing processes are classified as fusion-based Accepted 6 December 2021
or solid-state. The solid-state additive manufacturing processes are relatively nascent. Among KEYWORDS
these, friction stir-based processes involve intense shear deformation of material while build- Additive manufacturing;
ing. In this review, we focus on friction stir additive manufacturing (FSAM) and additive friction friction stir additive
stir deposition (AFSD). These friction stir welding derived techniques have ability to produce manufacturing; additive
microstructures that lead to better mechanical properties than the conventionally processed friction stir deposition;
parent alloys; in many cases overcoming the traditional strength-ductility tradeoff paradigm. strength-ductility tradeoff;
The best way to capture this advantage is to conduct materials selection for build which ben- alloy design
efit from the attributes of these processes. This review provides a systems approach framework
and a conceptual process model to guide researchers. A case is built that the best mechanical
properties can be obtained by alloy design for such disruptive and innovative manufacturing
processes. The intrinsic and extrinsic limitations are highlighted to guide researchers in the field
of FSAM and AFSD. While AFSD is readily applicable to lower melting temperature materials cur-
rently, applying it to high-temperature materials requires significant research and development
on tool materials. Examples of materials processed by FSAM/AFSD include aluminium alloys,
magnesium alloys, titanium alloys, steels and nickel-base superalloy. A physics-based process
modelling framework applicable to FSAM/AFSD is provided. To fully validate such models, it is
imperative to use machines with appropriate sensors that capture the machine parameters, tool
health, and workpiece temperature.

Introduction want to go deeper into friction stir-based AM processes

Additive manufacturing (AM) has emerged as one of
the most dynamic research areas in the recent years
and covers a vast range of activities; from design of
machines to multifaceted aspects of materials. The
unprecedented topological design and ability to print-
on-demand have motivated engineers and opened up
new opportunities. Even though the landscape of mate-
rials and technologies for AM are vast, there are some
organisational principles available for classification. Of
course, the materials can be easily classified in poly-
mers, metals, and ceramics, as broader categories. The
AM technologies very much depend on which class of
materials is of interest. In this review, we have focused
on metallic materials. For metallic materials, one can
organise the AM processes based on the state of alloys
during printing. This gives a simple list of three groups,
(a) solid-state processes, (b) liquid-based processes,
and (c) semi-solid processes. The friction stir-based
AM processes are a sub-set of solid-state AM processes.
Palanivel and Mishra [1] have reviewed the technolo-
gies for solid-state AM processes. In this review, we
and emphasise the importance of selecting the right
alloys for a specific AM process. Sankaran and Mishra
[2] have emphasised that the full potential of a pro-
cess can be best realised by co-design of alloys and
processes.
Fusion vs. plasticity-based solid-state AM
processes
The fusion-based AM involves melting and subse-
quent solidification whereas plasticity-based solid-state
AM processes utilise severe plastic deformation [1,3].
The most popular fusion-based AM techniques involve
melting of feed material; powder bed fusion (PBF) and
direct energy deposition (DED). In these processes, a
high energy laser or electron beam is used to selectively
melt the powder particles that are either fed through
the nozzle (DED) or pre-deposited on the bed (PBF)
[4,5]. Interaction of these high energy beams with pow-
der particles causes complex physical processes which
involves melting, melt flow, and rapid solidification

CONTACT Rajiv S. Mishra rajiv.mishra@unt.edu Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Advanced Materials and Manufacturing
Processes Institute, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76207, USA
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered,
transformed, or built upon in any way.
142 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
[6]. High cooling rates of the order of 103 –107 K s−1
during PBF and DED processes due to rapid solid-
ification [7] have the prominent impact of the final
microstructure [8]. These fusion-based processes have
their own pros and cons. Good to reasonable surface
finish, capability to print complex geometries, and flex-
ibility in part customisation are some of the advantages
of these processes [9]. However, incapability of process-
ing a wide range of non-weldable alloys, very high feed
material cost, presence of solidification defects due to
liquid–solid phase transformation, low production vol-
ume, and high cost of operation [10,11] currently limit
the wide acceptance of fusion-based AM. Furthermore,
these processes often result in highly textured colum-
nar grains with anisotropic mechanical properties. As
a substitute for fusion-based AM techniques, plasticity-
based solid-state AM processes are gaining prominence
as they can avoid/eliminate the concerns associated
with fusion-based AM techniques. Ultrasonic additive
manufacturing (UAM), friction stir additive manufac-
turing (FSAM), cold spray additive manufacturing [12]
and additive friction stir deposition (AFSD) are some of
the solid-state additive manufacturing processes [1,3].
In this review, we mainly focus on friction stir-based
additive manufacturing processes.
Friction stir-based AM processes have several
advantages over fusion-based AM processes. (1) Solid-
state process; Being a solid-state process, the peak tem-
perature achieved during processing generally varies
from 60% to 90% of the melting temperature [13]. Parts
produced from these processes do not suffer from the
issues related with solidification such as hot cracking,
high residual stresses, and porosity [4,14]. Addition-
ally, friction stir-based processes facilitates deposition
of non-weldable alloys such as high strength AA 2XXX
and AA 7XXX alloys. (2) Feed material; feed material
can be plates for FSAM and rods/consolidates for AFSD
which can be in either cast or wrought form. Compared
to this, the advanced fusion-based AM processes have
very restrictive requirements with powder size restric-
tions [15,16]. (3) Applicability; friction stir-based AM
techniques facilitate manufacturing of wide range of
alloys. Friction stir-based techniques also enable man-
ufacturing of dissimilar alloys in a graded fashion. Al
alloys, Ti alloys, Mg alloys, and Ni-based super alloys
are some of alloys that have been fabricated using this
process [3,13,17,18]. Metal matrix composites can also
be processed using AFSD which are very difficult to
process otherwise. Griffiths et al. [19] processed Al-
Mo composite which resulted in uniform distribution
of Mo particles in the Al matrix. (4) Microstructure;
Friction stir-based processes result in a homogenous
recrystallised microstructure. Microstructural features
of the fabricated parts are refined, equiaxed, and
isotropic [13]. (5) Build volume and speed; Volume
of the parts produced by these processes is not size
constrained as no vacuum or environment controlled
Figure 1. A comparison of typical build rates for different AM
techniques. The data used in this figure is a generic representa-
tion of literature information.
chamber is needed for the process. Parts with dimen-
sions as large as 1.5 m have been deposited. Produc-
tion rate achieved in AFSD is superior when compared
to PBF and DED; for Al alloys, it is 1000 cm3 h−1
[20]. Figure 1 shows the comparison of build rate
for friction stir-based processes to other AM pro-
cesses. Although, friction stir-based AM techniques
have superior microstructural and mechanical charac-
teristics, they do have limitations such as, (i) large scale
customisation flexibility limited by the bed size, (ii)
rate of production limited by the tool traverse speed,
(iii) size of features and overall geometrical shapes are
limited by the tool size and feedstock size, (iv) tool
wear and workpiece clamping issues, (v) necessity of
prior weld surface cleaning before the next run, and (vi)
presence of significant residual stresses in the build.
Introduction of friction stir-based AM
processes
Friction stir additive manufacturing (FSAM)
The potential of friction stir joining as an AM technol-
ogy was proposed by White in his patent in 1999 [21].
Lack of further research in this direction resulted in
sluggish progression in the following years until Dilip
et al. [22] used friction surfacing and friction weld-
ing as possible routes for AM. FSAM is a solid-state
AM technology which makes use of the principle of
friction stir welding (FSW) where multiple plates are
friction stir welded, one on the top of other. It was first
demonstrated by Airbus and Boeing [23,24] which was
proposed as a potential solid-state manufacturing alter-
native with the capability to achieve high throughput
at faster build rates with minimum material wastage.
Similar to FSW, FSAM makes use of a non-consumable
rotating tool introduced into the overlapping/abutting
metal sheets which is subsequently traversed along the
joint line to generate a weld. The heat generated due
 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 143

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of friction stir additive manufacturing (FSAM) of a stiffened panel. Four layers of build are used for this
illustration and note that the post-build machining would remove the unbonded side regions.

to friction between the tool and workpiece contact sur- Additive friction stir deposition (AFSD)
faces plasticises the material, which subsequently flows
AFSD is a solid-state AM process patented by the
circumferentially and axially around the rotating tool
US-based MELDTM Manufacturing Corporation [28].
to generate the weld. The process is repeated until the
Figure 3 shows the schematic of the AFSD technique
required build height is achieved. Figure 2 shows FSAM
where a metal feedstock or metal powder consolida-
for a stiffener-on-skin with very low buy-to-fly ratio
tion is fed through the AFSD tool. The feedstock is
(weight of raw material/weight of the final product)
subsequently plasticised at high temperatures by cou-
which is traditionally machined from a large block of
pled friction stir heating and plasticity-related adi-
metal in the aerospace industry. A potential applica-
abatic heating, enabling the material to flow as a
tion of multilayered stiffened panels is in aerospace
thick plasticised layer. This plasticised metal is then
and aviation sectors, where stiffeners/stringers can be
additively deposited on the substrate to produce the
manufactured by a combination of FSW/FSAM [25].
final geometry. Being a recently developed technol-
Interestingly, no research paper was published on
ogy, very limited literature is available on AFSD where
FSAM after the 2006 Aeromat presentation [23] until
successful AM of Al-based alloys, Cu, stainless steel,
the work of Palanivel et al. [3], where they successfully
INCONEL 718, and Ti–6Al–4V have been achieved.
implemented FSAM in Mg-WE43 alloy and Al 5083
Advantages such as equiaxed grain microstructure,
[25]. FSAM resulted in more uniform and homoge-
superior mechanical performance of the build, low
nous microstructure along the joints in multiple layers
final defect fraction, 100% dense final deposit, excep-
with enhanced mechanical properties compared to the
tionally high build rate, adaptability to large-scale
base material for these alloys. For example, FSAM of
customisation, and lower power per pound of build
an Mg–4Y–3Nd resulted in almost 13% improvement
can place AFSD in a superior spot among AM
in strength and a massive 600% increase in ductil-
technologies [20,29].
ity [3]. Similar improvement in mechanical properties
Table 1 lists various attributes of FSAM/AFSD and
has been achieved for FSAM in Al 5083, Al 7050,
their potential advantages.
Ti–6Al–4V, Ti6246 as well as P92 and MA956 grade
steels (as presented in later sections). The final build
height is a multiple of the individual sheet thickness
Friction stir heating + shear assisted extrusion
and hence, height control is linked to the sheet thick-
and deposition + friction welding = AFSD
ness. The use of sheets with different thickness is pos-
sible to achieve a reasonable geometric control, but this Compared to other friction stir-based processes such as
needs extra tooling and parametric optimisation. Some FSW, Friction stir processing (FSP), and FSAM, AFSD
potential applications of FSAM are graded material is a rather complex process which integrates multi-
manufacturing, microstructural refinement for end- ple concepts. To simplify the analogy, the entire AFSD
product customisation, surface composite manufactur- process can be divided into three phases as indicated
ing, and fabrication of stiffened structure for aerospace in Figure 4. The first phase involves heating up the
and other industries [25–27]. AFSD tool to the required temperature level before the
144 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
Figure 3. Schematic of additive friction stir deposition. While
there are similarities with the friction stir welding/processing,
the process has significant differences in material flow.
Table 1. Attributes and potential advantages of FSAM/AFSD.
Friction stir-based AM techniques (FSAM/AFSD)
• Ability to fabricate large components of simpler or limited geometrical
complexity.
• Faying surface contamination is not vital for most metallic systems.
• Ability to bond a variety of materials that are rendered difficult by fusion
welding (wide range of material selection). Good for multi-material or
dissimilar material printing.
• Weld formation is dictated by process forces and tool geometry.
• High degree of reproducibility.
• Excellent metallurgical property in joint area.
• Ability to produce variable microstructures for specific applications
(process flexibility).
• Judicious use of materials leading to low buy to fly ratio.
initiation of deposition. During this process, the tool is
moved in a downward direction towards the substrate
leaving a very small gap between the substrate and the
tool bottom surface. Once the axial position is achieved,
the actuator is engaged with the feed rod which is fed
at a very low feed rate which initiates the heating of
the tool and feed rod due to frictional and deforma-
tion/adibatic heating. The heating phase I itself can be
further divided into two stages. In the first stage of heat-
ing, heat is mostly generated due to contact friction
between the substrate and the feed rod. The rate of heat-
ing is rather low during this stage. Once the feed rod is
heated up reasonably well to initiate plastic flow of the
material, subsequent feeding of the rod results in extru-
sion of the material to fill the small gap between the
tool and the substrate which initiates the second stage
of rapid heating. Once the material is extruded to fill
the gap, heating is achieved by virtue of contact friction
between the tool surface and the extruded material as
well as between the substrate and the feed rod result-
ing in rapid heating of the tool and feed rod. Hence
phase I of AFSD basically involves friction stir heat-
ing to heat up the tool and the feed rod to the required
temperature.
Once phase I is completed and the required tem-
perature is achieved, the tool is raised to the preferred
height which defines the deposition layer thickness
and is subsequently traversed along a specified path
over the substrate, initiating phase II of the process.
Phase II involves extrusion of the feed rod material
beneath the tool, stirring of the extruded material due
to tool rotation, deposition of the sheared material, and
physical bonding of the deposited material to the sub-
strate which is usually the same material as the feed
rod. Unlike FSW, where the rotating tool is inserted
deep into the plates which subsequently gets welded
due to mechanical stirring and shearing of material
around the tool, the bonding achieved in AFSD can be
correlated to the principles of rotary friction welding
(RFW) [30] where bonding is achieved due to syner-
gistic activity of axial compressive force and frictional
heat between two rods/plates of similar material rubbed
against each other. However, there are significant dif-
ferences between RFW and AFSD. Primary difference
is that RFW is a welding technique whereas AFSD is
a deposition and manufacturing technique. Second, in
RFW the major surface of frictional heating and the
location of weld are the same; the weld is formed at the
location of primary heat generation. However, in AFSD
the major surface of heat generation is different from
the location of weld/bond. Heat is mostly generated at
the top surface of the layer where the tool contacts the
extruded material whereas the bonding is achieved at
the bottom layer of the deposit utilising the heat con-
ducted form the top layer and the axial compressive
force exerted by the tool and actuator. Hence mechani-
cal bonding in AFSD is achieved by ‘pseudo’ RFW (an
element of forge bonding).
Third phase of AFSD involves subsequent layer
deposition by retracting the tool in multiple steps and
traversing it along the specified path after completion
of each layer. During this process, the principle of heat-
ing, extrusion, shear assisted deposition, and bonding
are the same as explained in phase II of the process.
However, during deposition of subsequent layers the
bonding is achieved between the newly deposited lay-
ers and the penultimate layer rather that the substrate
and the deposited layer as in phase II. From the above
discussion AFSD process can be defined as follows:
AFSD is a solid state progressive AM technique where
the material to be deposited is heated to a high temper-
ature below its solidus temperature by virtue of fric-
tional heating beneath the rotating AFSD tool which
facilitates extrusion of the plasticized material through
the tool under an axial compressive force and subse-
quent shear assisted deposition as the tool traverses.
Bonding between multiple deposited layers is ensured
by pseudo FW.
Although heat generated in AFSD is comparable to
other friction stir-based processes, there are major dif-
ferences when thermal and plastic flow boundary con-
ditions are considered. In FSW/FSP, a rotating tool with
a shoulder and protruded pin is spun inside the material
(no new material), whereas in AFSD, the material (in
stir zone (SZ)) is constrained by the surrounding tool
 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 145

Figure 4. Various aspects of additive friction stir deposition including friction stir heating, material extrusion, mechanical stirring,
shear assisted deposition, and friction welding explained through three phases of the process.

Figure 5. Schematic illustration of mode of heat transfer from different surfaces/regions in FSW/P and AFSD.

material; majority of heat is dissipated from SZ by con-
duction as shown in Figure 5. Furthermore, the heat is
generated between the end surface of the hollow tool
shoulder-metal feedstock and the substrate or previ-
ously deposited layer. Also, unlike FSW the deposited
layer is not laterally constrained in AFSD and hence
the heat dissipation from the deposition zone can be by
conduction, free convection, and radiation, Figure 5.
Examples of applicability of FSAM and AFSD to
various alloys
This section highlights application of FSAM and AFSD
to various alloys. The purpose is to bring out guiding
principles for selection of alloys that are suitable for
these processes. Maximum benefit can be derived by
considering the attributes of these processes and cross
link with metallurgical aspects of the alloys.
Al alloys
Wrought aluminium alloys are classified into two broad
categories, (a) non-age hardenable (alloys in 1XXX,
3XXX, and 5XXX series), and (b) age hardenable
(2XXX, 6XXX and 7XXX series) [2]. Strengthening
mechanisms for non-age hardenable alloys include
grain size strengthening, solid solution strengthening
and dislocation density strengthening. Age hardenable
alloys have precipitation strengthening as the primary
mechanism. Efficacy of FSAM and AFSD depends on
the specific alloys. Palanivel et al. [25] successfully per-
formed FSAM on AA 5083-O alloy by successively
146 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.

Figure 6. (a) Macrograph of an AA5083 alloy fabricated using FSAM at 500 rev min−1 and 152 mm min−1 . The horizontal dashed
lines represent the plate interfaces, (b) microhardness profile along the centre line of the build where the dash-dot line represents
the hardness of the base material, and (c) engineering stress-strain response of the base material and the build [25].

welding four sheets at a tool rotational rate of 500 rev
min−1 and a tool traverse speed of 152 mm min−1 .
Note that AA 5083-O alloy only uses grain boundary
strengthening and solid solution strengthening mecha-
nisms. Macrograph of the weld, hardness profile along
the centre line and tensile property of the material
are shown in Figure 6. A substantial improvement in
hardness can be observed (improved by 18%) over the
entire layer thickness compared to the base material
(Figure 6(b)). The variation in hardness is attributed to
the microstructural variation in the layers due to ther-
mal and strain gradients. Tensile characteristics shown
in Figure 6(c) is consistent with hardness increase,
where the YS improved from 190 to 267 MPa and the
UTS improved from 336 to 362 MPa. However, there is
a knockdown in ductility of the material in the welded
region, implying a traditional tradeoff of the strength
and ductility in this alloy.
Later, Yuqing et al. [27] successfully applied FSAM
on AA 7075-O plates and obtained a stack of 9
metal layers at weld parameters of 600 rev min−1 and
60 mm min−1 . Note that unlike the AA 5083-O alloy,
the AA 7075 alloy is designed to take advantage of
precipitation strengthening. So, the temper selection
of initial material becomes an important criterion.
Microstructural analysis revealed a variation in grain
size and precipitate morphology along the weld thick-
ness. The top layer was characterised by the presence
of recrystallised equiaxed fine grains whereas the suc-
cessive bottom layers were characterised by slightly
coarser grains with subtle changes in grain morphol-
ogy at the transition layers. Similarly, a visible variation
in the morphology of the secondary phases (η and T
phases) was also observed at different locations of the
build. Locations subjected to tool shoulder heating were
characterised by the presence of coarser precipitates,
whereas finer precipitates decorated the SZ. The vari-
ation in secondary phase distribution in the weld is
attributed to local temperature and strain differences as
well as the thermal cycles through which each layer goes

Figure 7. Microhardness profile along the centre line of the weld in AA 7075 build, (b) corresponding tensile properties at different
locations of the build (adopted from data in [27]), and (c) tensile characteristics of AA 2050 material after FSAM (adopted from data
in [31]).
through, controlling the precipitate evolution at spe-
cific locations. Microhardness measurement along the
centre line of the weld indicated an increase in hard-
ness form bottom to top of the weld (Figure 7(a)). Such
variation in hardness is also reflected as an increase
in tensile strength of the weld compared to the base
material (Figure 7(b)). Although an increase in tensile
strength was observed post welding in AA 5083 and AA
7075 at the expense of tensile ductility, FSAM of cast AA
2050 and T3 tempered alloys indicated a knockdown in
tensile strength with an improved ductility (Figure 7(c))
[31]. The difference in mechanical properties in vari-
ous classes of Al alloys necessitates the requirement of
proper choice of material for FSAM and the need for a
systematic alloy selection and design strategies.
The first comprehensive work on AFSD of Al alloy
was published in 2018 by Rivera et al. [29]. They
correlated the processing-structure–property in a pre-
cipitation hardened AA 2219-T851 alloy. Significant
grain refinement was observed in the deposited mate-
rial as compared to the base material (Figure 8(a)).
Similar to the trend observed after FSAM of AA 2050
alloy [31], the microhardness along the deposit thick-
ness indicated a gradual increase from bottom to top
(Figure 8(a)), whereas the grain size remained more
or less similar (2.5 μm) through the build. The occur-
rence of dynamic recrystallisation was evidenced by
the presence of low angle grain boundaries in the
deposited
 microstructure.
 Additionally, the presence of
{111} 1̄1̄0 and 11̄1̄} 110  torsional type A texture was
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 147
observed at the top of the build whereas a combination
of type A and {001} 110  type C texture was observed
at the middle and bottom of the build (Figure 8(b)).
However, the tensile strength of the deposit was inferior
(57% reduction) when compared to the T851 tempered
alloy whereas the ductility improved by 130%. The loss
in strength was due to the dissolution of strengthening
θ’ precipitates in the microstructure.
Phillips et al. [18] studied the influence of pro-
cess parameters on the microstructural evolution in
AA 6061-T651 Al–Mg–Si alloy and developed a pro-
cess parameter window for obtaining defect-free runs.
Refined microstructures were obtained for both slower
and faster runs, but the hardness values of the deposit
were almost 20–35% lower than that of T651 tem-
pered alloy. Dissolution of β and β’ precipitates because
of high strain and temperature conditions that pre-
vail during deposition and re-precipitation as Mg–Si
rich clusters resulted in the loss of hardness/strength.
Further, Perry et al. [32] studied the microstructural
and morphological variations occurring at the inter-
face of successive deposits of AA 2024 and AA 6061
Al alloys. Microstructural analysis revealed a uni-
form distribution of fully recrystallised microstructure
throughout the AA 2024 build which indicates the con-
sistency of temperature and deformation during the
build. However, AA 6061 microstructure revealed par-
tially recrystallised regions and a non-uniformity in the
microstructure of the deposit. Avery et al. [33] studied
the influence of microstructure and grain refinement on
148 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.

Figure 8. (a) EBSD micrographs indicating the grain size of AA 2219 AFSD rod, deposited AA 2219 material, and microhardness
variation along the thickness of the deposit. (b) Microstructural texture at the top, middle and bottom of the deposit (adopted from
data in [29]).

Table 2. Successful parameters that produced defect-free FSAM on Ti64 sheets.

Alloy plates Layer Rotational speed Traverse speed Angle of tilt Observation
Ti64 on Ti64 First 250 rev min−1 50.8 mm min−1 2.5° No defect observed
Ti64 on Ti64 Second 400 rev min−1 50.8 mm min−1 2.5° No defect observed

fatigue properties of AFSD made AA 7075 alloy. The Ti alloys

fatigue specimens were machined along the build direc-
Titanium alloys possess higher absolute and specific
tion even though there is a hardness variation along
strength values at temperatures up to about 550°C and
the build axis of the deposit. A knockdown of ten-
they show excellent corrosion and oxidation resistance.
sile strength by 50% was observed, indicating a lack
Titanium alloys are classified as (a) α alloys, (b) α+β
of retention of strengthening mechanisms in this alloy
alloys, and (c) β alloys [2]. The primary strengthen-
after AFSD. The potential of AFSD as a repair process
ing mechanisms are solid solution strengthening and
[34] and an alternative for manufacturing of metal-
interfacial strengthening. Additive manufacturing of
matrix composites [19] were also demonstrated on Al
Ti alloys is of special interest due to their attractive
alloys. Furthermore, Jordon et al. [35] utilised com-
properties and broader applications, including interest
pacted machining chips of AA5083 alloy as the feed-
to increase buy-to-fly ratio for aerospace applications.
stock rod for AFSD and illustrated the possibility of
FSAM has been successfully demonstrated to form fully
AFSD as an efficient recycling technique which leads
dense, defect-free structures in α+β Ti–6Al–4V (Ti64)
to sustainable manufacturing, energy conservation, and
alloy and high strength near β Ti–6Al–2Sn–4Zr–6Mo
lower carbon footprints.
(Ti6246) alloy. Successful FSAM processing conditions
Above discussion on FSAM and AFSD of aluminium
for Ti64 are given in Table 2.
alloys reveals the importance of alloy selection for such
Three Ti64 sheets were successfully stacked and pro-
solid-state AM techniques. Studies revealed a knock-
cessed using FSAM resulting in two overlapping weld
down of tensile strength of the deposit compared to the
nuggets. Image of the successful three-stack produced
base material in precipitation strengthened aluminium
is shown in Figure 9(a) and the cross-section is shown
alloys due to dissolution of strengthening precipitates
in Figure 9(b) [36]. Tensile tests performed on mini-
during processing whereas an improvement in strength
tensile samples taken from the plane parallel to build
is observed in certain other class of alloys. Successful
direction indicated superior properties compared to the
demonstration of recycling capability of the AFSD pro-
base material (Figure 9(c) and Table 3). The fractograph
cess using aluminium metal chips also points towards a
obtained on the failure surface after the tests showed a
sustainable manufacturing pathway which satisfies the
dimpled ductile fracture.
demand for greener technologies.

Figure 9. (a) Additive manufacture of three sheets of Ti-6-4 over Ti-6-4 (b) cross-section of FSAM plates showing defect-free joints (c)
engineering stress-strain curve of FSAM Ti-6-4 from the nugget region (d) fractograph of the tensile samples from FSAM Ti-6-4 [36].
Table 3. FSAM of Ti64: Tensile properties of the samples at
different regions.
Sample Yield Strength Tensile Strength Ductility
Ti-6-4 over Ti-6-4 1105 MPa 1168 MPa 16.5%
Ti-6-4 Base 941 MPa 1014 MPa 21.1%
FSAM parameters used for Ti6246 were 250 rev
min−1 and 50.8 mm min−1 traverse speed. For this set
of parameters, the sheets were stacked with a 4 mm off-
set to produce a slant-ribbed structure. Baseplate used
for the build was Ti64 having a thickness of 3 mm.
Figure 10(a) shows the cross-section of the FSAM
build. Tensile samples obtained from a plane parallel
to build direction showed excellent mechanical prop-
erties (Figure 10(b)) indicating the absence of defects
in the build. Similar to Ti64 build, the fracture surface
of Ti6246 also indicated ductile fracture (Figure 10(c)).
A comprehensive study was also performed on
AFSD of Ti64. As-deposited material is shown in
Figure 11(a). Microstructural analysis was performed
on the strip taken out from the plane parallel to build
direction. Figure 11(b) shows backscattered images of
the as-printed sample. Microstructure consists of both
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 149
α and β phases with a variation in prior β grain size
from top to bottom as shown in Figure 11(b).
Ti alloys manufactured by FSAM and AFSD pro-
cesses showed an excellent combination of mechanical
properties as depicted above. Hence solid-state AM
can be a potential AM route for manufacturing high
performance Ti components.
Mg alloys
Research on Mg-based alloys is on a rise because
of interest in light-weight materials. Although sev-
eral work has been done to establish the possibil-
ity of FSW/FSP in Mg alloys [38–42], the poten-
tial of friction-stir-based process as an alternative
AM process in Mg alloys have been hardly explored,
except the work of Palanivel et al. [3]. They intro-
duced FSAM as a potential AM process for struc-
tural performance enhancement by successfully imple-
menting in Mg-based WE43 alloy (Mg–Nd–Y alloy).
The WE43 alloy uses solid solution strengthen-
ing, precipitation strengthening, and grain boundary
strengthening. The builds were made using two differ-
ent processing parameters, namely, 800 and 1400 rev
150 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
Figure 10. (a) FSAM nuggets in slanted ribbed structure showing fully dense, defect-free structure, (b) engineering stress-strain
curve of FSAM Ti-6246 from the nugget region, and (c) fractograph of the tensile samples from FSAM Ti-6246 [36].
min−1 /102 mm min−1 . Although the microhardness
exhibited inhomogeneous variation along the thick-
ness, an average hardness of 115 HV was obtained in
the as-built condition. The hardness further improved
to 135 HV upon aging at 160°C for 60 hr, and this
hardness value is comparable to AA 2XXX series Al
alloys (Figures 12(a,b)). The build made using param-
eters of 1400 rev min−1 /102 mm min−1 resulted in a
strength enhancement of 20% and ductility improve-
ment of a massive 430% (Figure 12(c)) compared
to the rolled plates. A closer look at the hard-
ness profile revealed that the lower hardness values
were associated with the interface regions and the
higher hardness values were associated with the SZ
regions. The microstructure was further analysed to
correlate the hardness with the precipitate evolution.
High strain, temperature, and multiple thermal cycles
resulted in different levels of precipitate dissolution,
coarsening and/or re-precipitation at different loca-
tions (Figure 13). The presence of intermetallics at the
interfaces revealed that the temperature and strain were
insufficient for their dissolution. The crown region of
the weld which was subjected to shoulder related heat-
ing and flow were characterised by coarser precipitates
due to higher heat input, whereas the pin dominated
flow region was characterised by intermetallic dissolu-
tion and grain boundary precipitation. The lack of liter-
ature on FSAM/AFSD of Mg alloys shows the immense
opportunities of advanced research potential on solid-
state AM of Mg alloys.
Steels
Steels have overwhelming dominance in the mate-
rials world because of their innumerable varieties
of microstructure and properties. The classification
of steels is more complicated than the aluminium,
titanium, and magnesium alloys. The strengthening
mechanisms, of course, depend on the specific steel
used. A number of studies have been published on

Figure 11. (a) Image of additive friction stir deposited Ti64, and (b) backscattered images of Ti64 from the plane parallel to build
direction [37].
FSP/FSW of steels. FSAM was performed for P92 grade
steel (9Cr–2W) and MA956 steel (oxide dispersion
strengthened steel) with the goal of creating a synergis-
tically designed creep-resistant component/structure
[43]. Polycrystalline cubic boron nitride (PCBN) tool
was used for processing of P92 steel and the parameters
used for processing were tool rotation speed of 500 rev
min−1 and linear traverse speed of 1 inch per minute
(denoted as 500/1). Three P92 steel plates were joined
with a total height of 12 mm, shown in Figures 14(a,b).
A clearly defined nugget and heat-affected zone (HAZ)
were observed in the as-built P92 steel (Figure 15(a)).
Figures 15(b,c) shows a magnified view of the nugget
region. The microstructure of the nugget region is char-
acterised by refined grain structure with a very fine lath
structure inside the grains.
Stress–strain curves of specimens from the nugget
region, tested at a strain rate of 10−3 s−1 at room tem-
perature and 500°C, are shown in Figure 16(a). The
yield strength of the processed region was roughly two
times (1235 MPa) the base material (610 MPa) (Fig-
ures 16(a,b)) while retaining similar ductility; therefore
overcoming the traditional strength-ductility trade-
off. The high strength achieved after processing is
attributed to microstructural refinement as well as the
presence of fine lath structures. A similar increase was
observed in microhardness (Figure 16(c)), i.e. hardness
values obtained in the nugget are roughly two times
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 151
that of the base material. This is a critical observa-
tion! FSAM can produce a microstructural condition
that can significantly outperform conventionally pro-
cessed alloy. It opens a strategy of designing compo-
nents where layers can be added by FSAM in critical
areas needing high performance. Such an approach
can provide design flexibility without changing the
composition of alloy and lead to very high structural
efficiency.
Recently, successful AFSD of SS316 has been
achieved using a Lanthanated Tungsten tool on a
MELD machine. A 10 mm high hollow cylinder of
SS316 was deposited using MELD (Figure 17(I)). Fig-
ures 17(a), (b), and (c) show inverse pole figure (IPF),
image quality (IQ), and misorientation angle distribu-
tion, respectively, for SS316 base material. Microstruc-
ture of the base material consisted of equiaxed grains of
austenitic phase with an average grain size of ∼ 50 μm
and a high density of annealing twins was observed in
the base material. Grain structure of the base mate-
rial was dominated by high angle boundaries (90%).
Figures 17(d), (e), and (f) are inverse pole figure,
image quality map, and misorientation angle distribu-
tion, respectively, for MELD deposited SS316. Average
grain size in MELD deposited SS316 was reduced to
∼ 8 μm and the misorientation angle was changed to
a low angle boundary fraction of 45%. Twin boundary
fraction was reduced in MELD deposited SS316 as twin
152 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
Figure 12. Microhardness profile along the centre line of the weld for (a) 800 rev min−1 and 102 mm min−1 , (b) 1400 rev min−1 and
102 mm min−1 and, and (c) stress-strain distribution of the material before and after AM [3].
boundaries disintegrate due to severe plastic deforma-
tion and recrystallisation [44,45]. Similar observations
were made for the friction stir processed SS316 [46].
Ni-based alloys
Ni-based superalloys are used in aerospace, marine, and
chemical industries which demand high-temperature
mechanical stability, including strength, ductility, and
creep resistance. The primary strengthening mecha-
nisms include precipitate strengthening (coherent γ ’
precipitates) and solid solution strengthening. AM
using fusion-based processes of Ni-based superalloys
have been widely reported [48–50] and there are a few
studies available on AFSD as well. Rivera et al. [13]
reported successful AFSD of INCONEL 625 (Figures
18(a,b)). Significant grain refinement was observed in
the case of the AFSD samples. Also, EBSD microstruc-
ture (Figure 18(c)) revealed the presence of equiaxed
and finer grains in the deposit and the grain refine-
ment was superior at the interface. Tensile testing of
AFSD INCONEL 625 showed that the AFSD process
resulted in higher YS and UTS for INCONEL 625 when
compared to fusion-based AM, cast, and wrought data
reported in the literature. Difference in grain mor-
phology and microstructure between the AFSD IN625
and other AM processed INCONEL 625 contribute to
the difference in the mechanical properties. Table 4
presents the YS and UTS of INCONEL 625 built using
different manufacturing processes. Again, a significant
increase in strength with very good ductility is noted for
AFSD specimens. INCONEL 625 alloy uses only grain
boundary strengthening and solid solution strengthen-
ing. It shows the potential of overcoming traditional
strength-ductility tradeoff!
Fatigue tests were reported for AFSD INCONEL
625 samples (Figure 19) [51]. Fatigue results revealed
the advantage of higher strength-ductility combina-
tion. The as-deposited INCONEL 625 material exhib-
ited improved fatigue properties compared to the
feedstock material. However, for some of the speci-
mens, delamination of interface layers might have ini-
tiated fatigue cracks resulting in a lower number of
cycles to failure. As deposited INCONEL 625 shows
higher crack growth resistance which is attributed
to the refined microstructure with abundant grain
 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 153

Figure 13. BSE images showing distribution of precipitates in (a) layer 4, (b) layer 3–4 interface, (c) two-pass region in layer 3, and
(d) one pass region in layer 3. (The examined regions have been annotated in the schematic at the center of the figure (adapted from
data in [3]).

Table 4. Comparison of INCONEL 625 microstructure, yield strength and ultimate tensile
strength of different manufacturing processes [13].
Grain Yield Strength Ultimate tensile
Condition morphology (MPa) Strength (MPa) Elongation (%)
Cast 350 710 48
Wrought 490 965 30–50
AFSD Equiaxed 730 1072 32
Electron beam melting Columnar 410 750 44
Selective laser melting Dendritic 380 900 58
Friction stir welding Equiaxed – 1152 35

boundaries, non-preferred crystallographic orienta-
tion, and refined carbides. Clearly, further improve-
ment in AFSD has the potential to push the fatigue
properties higher and eliminate the premature crack
nucleation at the layer interfaces.
Compilation of all the AFSD data
Table 5 lists alloys deposited via AFSD till date along
with the process parameters used, mechanical prop-
erties, and microstructure. It provides a quick assess-
ment of the progress made with this new technology
in a short time with only a few group of researchers
working.
Process variable-microstructure-strength
correlations
Framework of a systems approach for AFSD
AFSD is a disruptive manufacturing technology. As
highlighted in Section 4 of this paper, AFSD uses mul-
tiple concepts and has some unique process attributes.
Sankaran and Mishra [2] have highlighted the need
154 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
Figure 14. (a) Three P92 plates stacked by FSAM measuring
12 mm thick, and (b) final FSAM structure with a total seam
measuring 280 mm [43].
to select material appropriately for advanced manu-
facturing processes. In particular, they have pointed
to the need for new alloy development for taking the
fullest advantage of the capabilities of new manufac-
turing processes. As demonstrated through the P92
steel example in FSAM, the improvements in per-
formance can be extraordinary! Olson’s [55] system
approach creates a good processing-microstructure-
properties-performance framework. This is slightly
modified in Figure 20 to explicitly include the ‘alloy
Figure 15. (a) The etched steel sample showing the nugget, heat affected zone and the base regions, (b) refined grain structure with
a fine interior lath structure, and (c) unaltered base microstructure with finely tempered martensite [43].
chemistry’ column. The suitability of alloys for AFSD
and FSAM depends on what happens to the alloying
effect during processing. For example, will the HAZ
in between two AFSD layers be weaker because of
adverse microstructural features? For conventional pre-
cipitation strengthened alloys (2XXX or 7XXX) in T6
or T8 temper, that would be the case because of dis-
solution/coarsening of strengthening precipitates. So,
designing aluminium alloys that have coarsening resis-
tance at the AFSD processing temperature would be
one way to avoid the knockdown in properties in
the HAZ. In general, designing alloys that improve
properties due to intense shear deformation and con-
trolled thermal cycle would provide very high struc-
tural efficiency in components built by AFSD and
FSAM.
Microstructural control framework for AFSD and
FSAM
Friction stir-based AM techniques such as FSAM and
AFSD involve the synergistic activities of high tem-
perature, strain rate and plastic flow of material to
obtain a sound weld between multiple layers [1,56].
Each of the above-mentioned process variables depends
on external factors such as rate of tool rotation, tool
traverse speed, as well as the tool material and design
[56]. In the case of AFSD, the metal rod feed rate
is an additional factor [20]. The influence of process
 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 155

Figure 16. (a) Stress-strain curves of P92 FSAM structures at room temperature as well as 500°C, (b) summary of tensile test results,
and (c) hardness mapping of P92 steel [43].

parameters on the weld microstructure and mechanical Process modelling driven parametric
properties in FSW/FSP for different classes of materials optimisation
has been very-well studied before [57,58]. Additionally,
In FSAM/AFSD, an alloy undergoes microstructural
for FSAM/AFSD of alloys prone to oxidation (e.g. Ti-
modification in the SZ as well as the HAZ by means of
based alloys), provision of an inert gas supply is desired
plastic flow at high temperatures achieved by frictional
to eliminate oxide layer formation at interfaces. Pro-
heating [59]. Specific modifications in the microstruc-
cess parametric optimisation is the method by which
ture such as grain refinement, evolution of secondary
optimum combination of process parameters, tool
phases and precipitates improve the mechanical prop-
material and tool design are developed for a specific
erties in SZ and HAZ in certain alloys (e.g. Ti-based
material to obtain a defect-free weld with a desired
alloys [60]) whereas they deteriorate the mechanical
microstructure and enhanced mechanical properties,
properties in some other alloy groups (e.g. precipitation
while minimising microstructural contamination from
hardened Al-alloys [61]). Mechanical properties of the
external atmosphere and tool. For process paramet-
post-processed alloy heavily depend on the thermal
ric optimisation, a process variable-microstructure-
and plastic flow cycles, which directly relates to the
strength correlation is required. Figure 21 shows the
initial microstructure of the alloy, friction stir process
flow diagram for the microstructural design framework
parameters, tool geometry as well as the method of heat
aimed to achieve a process variable-microstructure-
extraction from SZ [59]. Process parameters and rate of
mechanical performance correlation for friction stir-
heat extraction must be optimised for each material to
based AM techniques.
achieve a defect-free build and maximise performance.
156 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.

Figure 17. AFSD of SS316 (I) Image of SS316 deposit, (a) IPF map, (b) IQ map, and (c) misorientation angle distribution of SS316 base
material and corresponding (d) IPF map, (e) IQ map, and (f) misorientation distribution of the deposited material [47].

Development of a successful process model demands Table 6. AFSD tool specifications and process parameters used
understanding of the interplay between multiple pro- for deposition of SS 316.
cess parameters during FSAM and AFSD. Since FSAM Tool material Lanthanated Tungsten
is based on the principle of FSW, the conceptual model Tool diameter 25.4 mm
proposed by Colligan and Mishra [62] provides the Tool contact face features None
Feed rate of feed rod 25.4 mm min−1
right direction to understand the influence of multi- Tool rotational speed 400, 600, and 800 rev min−1
ple process parameters on FSAM. Although AFSD is Tool travel speed 254.0 mm min−1
based on the principles of friction stir heating and
plastic deformation, the process differs from FSAM
in terms of heat transfer and mode of operation. An
additional parameter, namely, feed rate of feed rod a conceptual model shown in Figure 23. In the figure,
has a prominent influence on obtaining a successful the upward influence of a process parameter on a per-
deposit. A case study has been carried out for AFSD formance variable is indicated by a solid black arrow
of SS 316 using a Lanthanated Tungsten tool hav- and downward influence of a process parameter on
ing specifications provided in Table 6. Actuator force a performance variable is indicated by a solid grey
and spindle torque were recorded during the runs arrow. A black dashed line indicates a neutral influ-
and Figure 22 shows the variation of actuator force, ence.
spindle torque, power, and specific energy as a func- Following inferences can be drawn from the concep-
tion of tool rotational rate. Both actuator force (force tual model.
required to push the feed rod downward through the
tool) and spindle torque were observed to reduce with 1. Figure 22 illustrates that the spindle torque reduces
spindle rotation rate for a constant feed rate of feed with an increase in spindle rotation rate whereas
rod and tool traverse speed. However, power and spe- the power and specific energy reduce accordingly.
cific energy monotonously increased with an increase Hence, the conceptual model specifies the spindle
in spindle rotation rate. Observations in Figure 22 torque to have a downward influence on power and
were correlated with the process parameters through specific energy.

Figure 18. Optical micrograph comparing the microstructure between (A) as-received INCONEL 625 filler material, (B) as-build AFS
INCONEL 625, and (C) Euler EBSD maps of 5 locations along build direction, all images are at the same magnification and same location
in the corresponding axis [13].
Figure 19. Stress-life fatigue results comparing as-deposited
INCONEL 625 to the feedstock, cast, and laser consolidation
materials [51].
2. Additional inference from Figure 22 is the increase
in power and specific energy as a function of spin-
dle rotation rate for a constant feed rate of feed
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 157
rod and traverse speed. Hence Figure 23 con-
ceptualises the upward influence of spindle rota-
tion rate on power and specific energy. With an
increase in power and specific energy, an increase
in peak temperature and overall temperature dis-
tribution in the deposit is expected since the ther-
mal boundary conditions and the mode of heat
transfer remain the same. However, experimen-
tal validation of temperature during deposition is
lacking.
3. The model further envisages that an increase in
the overall temperature of the deposited layer
exerts a downward trend on flow stress of the
deposited layer and the coefficient of friction
between contact face of the tool and the deposited
layer. Microstructural variations in the deposits are
expected due to change in temperature and plastic
flow conditions of the material.
4. Apart from frictional heating, adiabatic heating
also contributes to the thermal softening of the
feed rod. Increasing spindle rotation rate therefore
158 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.

Table 5. List of alloys deposited by AFSD available in the literature till date.
Rotational Travel speed Yield Strength
Material rate (RPM) (inch min−1 ) Microstructure Hardness (HV) (MPa) Ductility (%) Reference
Al-Mg-Si 200 1 Fine-grained structure with an average 45.4 – – [52]
grain size of 10 μm and LABs fraction of
32.2%.
600 1 Fine flattened elongated grains observed, 53.3 – –
with average grain size of 16 μm.
600 3 Fine flattened elongated grains observed, 67.3 – –
with much coarser grains.
Cu 300 1 Equiaxed grains with heterogeneous grain 72.7 – [52]
structure, large grains intermixed with
smaller grains
600 1 Equiaxed heterogeneous grain structure 59.6 – –
with peak grain size of 10 μm.
600 3 Wide grain size distribution and shows 38 – –
high grain size as compared to base
material
Al-2024 300 4.7 Equiaxed grains with an average grain size – – – [32]
of 4.7 μm
AA-7075 250 3.4 Fine equiaxed grains with average grain 180 477 8.2 [53]
size of 3.5 ± 1 μm
Al-SiC – – Fully dense crack or pore free deposit with – – – [19]
uniform distribution of reinforcement
particles.
Al 6061-Mo – – Fully dense crack or pore free deposit with – – – [19]
uniform distribution of reinforcement
particles.
Al 6061-W – – Fully dense crack or pore free deposit with – – – [19]
uniform distribution of reinforcement
particles.
IN 625 – – Fine equiaxed grains with average grain – 730 32 [13]
size of 0.5 μm.
AA-2219 – – Fine equiaxed grains with average grain 80 159 25 [29]
size of 2.5 μm, reducing from top to
bottom along the build direction.
Al-Si-Mg 300 5 93% reduction in grain size observed 73.6 ± 3.2 – – [18]
compared to feed material, nanoscale
Mg-Si clusters observed.
300 9 Fine equiaxed grains with size 15 ± 4 μm 91.0 ± 7.0 – –
and 5 nm Mg-Si clusters observed.
AA-7050 225 2 S – phase particles at the grain boundary ∼ 155–55 ∼ 225 – [54]
and centre, precipitate size is smaller at
final layers as compared to initial layers
of the deposit
AA-5083 – – Fine equiaxed grains with grain size 1.5 μm 57.7 ± 6 170.4 ± 7.5 18 [35]
AA 7075 225 2 Zn-Mg-Cu precipitates at the grain ∼ 105–60 140 16 [33]
boundaries and centre in the Al matrix
with average grain size of 4.77 μm.
SS316 – – Fine equiaxed grains with grain size 8 μm 225 ± 2 520 40 To be published
and a high fraction of low angle grain
boundaries.
Ti64 – – Fine equiaxed prior β grains with grain 335 ± 5 1050 ± 25 7±1 [37]
boundary α and lamellar α/β colonies
inside

provides additional deformation induced heating of deformation-induced heating on flow stress

and contributes to a downward influence on flow
stress and coefficient of friction. Another aspect
of increasing the spindle rotation rate is related to
strain rate of deformation. Since AFSD is a shear
assisted process, an increase in spindle rotation
rate increases the strain rate of shear deformation
and subsequent increase in the flow stress which
counteracts the effect of adiabatic heating. How-
ever, the strain rate factor is dependent on how
rate sensitive the material of deposition is. Addi-
tionally, it has been shown previously in FSP that
the spindle torque monotonously reduces with an
increase in spindle rotation rate even beyond the
point where a significant temperature rise is not
observed which suggests rather stronger influence
than strain rate effects.
5. The model also predicts that the contact friction
increases with an increase in the feed rate of the
feed rod when other process parameters are kept
constant. With an increase in feed rate, the axial
compressive force, as well as the transverse force
increase as more energy is needed to shear the
material resulting in an upward influence on the
contact friction. With a variation in spindle rota-
tion rate, the influence of compressive force on
contact friction counteracts the decrease in contact
friction at higher spindle rotation rate. Addition-
ally, the provision of features on contact surface
of the tool directly influences the contact friction
between the tool surface and deposited layer.
 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 159

Figure 20. A systems approach that includes the alloy chemistry, which can effectively incorporate the integrated computational
material engineering (ICME) framework for alloy design or alloy selection for additive friction stir deposition.

Figure 21. Microstructural design framework guiding high-temperature structural performance by FSAM/AFSD.

6. Drop in flow stress and frictional force with an
increase in spindle rotation rate reduces the spin-
dle torque as evident from Figure 22. The model
conceptualises this effect by indicating an upward
trend on spindle torque with an increase in fric-
tion and flow stress. Additionally, spindle torque is
expected to increase with an increase in tool tra-
verse speed which is indicated by an upward trend
in the model. Since AFSD is a material deposi-
tion technique, volume deposited per rotation of
the tool directly influences the spindle torque. For
a constant feed rate of the feed rod, the mate-
rial volume deposited per rotation decreases which
further reduces the spindle torque as indicated in
Figure 23.
At present, an Edisonian approach is used to
optimise the friction stir process parameters, which
is tedious, time-consuming, expensive, and energy-
inefficient, all at once. Necessity of such numerous
runs can be minimised by developing and using an
appropriate process model, where a synergistic combi-
nation of physics-based thermomechanical-plastic flow
model and thermodynamic model can predict the final
microstructure and mechanical properties of the post-
processed alloy.
Extensive research has been performed in FSW/FSP
by developing numerical models and analytical models
to analyse the thermal cycle, material flow, and resid-
ual stresses developed during welding/processing. He
et al. [63] have reviewed various numerical analysis
160 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
Figure 22. Variation of spindle torque, power, actuator force,
and specific energy as a function of spindle rotation rate for
AFSD of SS316 using a Lanthanated Tungsten tool.
techniques performed in FSW to analyse various pro-
cess aspects. Nourani et al. [64] have also briefly
reviewed the thermomechanical models developed
for FSW to analyse the thermal variables during
FSW/FSP. Frigaard et al. [65] were one of the fron-
trunners to develop a process model to estimate
the heat flow and temperature development in an
FSP/FSW process. Later, Schmidt and Hattel [66]
developed an analytical model to predict the tem-
perature during FSP based on the contact condition
between the tool and the workpiece. Various aspects
Figure 23. A conceptual model indicating the interplay between multiple variables as a function of spindle rotation rate in AFSD.
of FSW/FSP were captured by other numerical mod-
els. Key examples are strain and residual stresses dur-
ing the process analysed by computational mechan-
ics models [67–70], temperature and heat genera-
tion captured by thermal models [71,72] and mate-
rial flow around the tool modelled using CFD [73,74],
microstructural evolution analysis using kinetic mod-
els, and multi variable analysis by multi-physics
models [75–77].
Figure 24 gives an overview of the process mod-
elling framework applicable to FSAM/AFSD with an
intention to obtain parametric optimisation for maxi-
mum mechanical performance and desired microstruc-
ture. Different aspects of the process can be captured
using multiple models. The thermal cycle and heat-
ing/cooling rates during the process can be achieved by
a thermal model which considers the thermal proper-
ties of the tool and the material as well as the plastic
flow properties of the material. Similarly, tool geom-
etry optimisation can be achieved by a proper plas-
tic flow model. The outputs from the thermal model
such as temperature distribution and heating/cooling
rates are inputs to the kinetic/thermodynamic model
along with the initial microstructure to predict the
final microstructure, phase evolution, as well as precip-
itate evolution existing during the process. Thus, the
process model framework can be utilised to develop
a process parameter-property-microstructure correla-
tion map once validated by experimental runs. Such
a process model involving a systematic methodol-
ogy enables the process parametric optimisation of

Figure 24. Process modelling framework for FSAM/AFSD to achieve process parametric optimisation with minimal experimental
runs. The choice of computational packages/tools are included for illustrative purposes only.
FSAM/AFSD, reducing the requirement of vast experi-
mental runs.
Application of machine learning towards process
optimisation
Recently, the adaptation of machine learning (ML) in
advanced manufacturing has become more common as
the processes need optimisation of multiple parame-
ters in synergy. ML is a way of implementing artificial
intelligence (AI) which uses an algorithm for the com-
puter to learn from a large set of experimental data
thereby enabling it to predict the outcome based on pro-
cessing of big data set. Ample work has been carried
out in FSW and friction stir spot welding (FSSW) for
parametric optimisation using various ML techniques
such as artificial neural network (ANN), Regression
model (RSM), Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference Sys-
tem (ANFIS), and Support Vector Machine (SVM).
One of the pioneering works on application of ML on
FSW was carried out by Okuyucu et al. [78] where
FSW parametric prediction was achieved for tensile
strength, yield strength, hardness, and elongation of
the aluminium weld material using ANN. Later Fratini
et al. [79] coupled ANN with finite element data to
predict the average grain size of the welded material
of butt, lap, and T-joints. Multiple attempts were made
using ANN which empowered the computer to predict
the values of mechanical properties of the weld such as
tensile strength, hardness, shear strength of lap joint,
impact strength, fracture strength, presence of worm
hole defect, and microstructure [80–86]. Similarly, the
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 161
ANFIS learning model was also successfully applied
to FSW for obtaining outputs such as tensile strength,
yield strength, and hardness of the weld as well as for
determining the weld quality using input parameters
such as tool rotational rate, weld speed, tool geom-
etry, tool tilt angle, axial force [87–90], etc. Further,
regression models such as response surface method-
ology (RSM) were also used for prediction of FSW
parameters using minimal experimental data [91–94].
Successful implementation of ML techniques for
FSW paves the way for similar ML implementation
in FSAM and AFSD. Achieving predictive capabilities
in friction stir-based AM methods using ML tech-
niques will enable selection of the process parameters
and other influential process variables beforehand in
order to achieve a desired build quality and microstruc-
ture. Such smart innovation in advanced manufactur-
ing techniques will minimise experimental cost, mate-
rial cost, as well as intricacies in tool selection, material
selection, and process parameter selection for a desired
process outcome. AFSD being a new technique, adapta-
tion of ML in its early research stage will facilitate rapid
expansion, establishment, and its widespread industrial
acceptance.
Challenges in solid-state AM processes
Despite all the advantages over fusion-based AM, fric-
tion stir-based AM processes have multiple challenges
to overcome before its commercialisation. Friction stir-
based AM processes are relatively new technologies
162 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
which demand innovation and optimisation. Major
challenges associated with these processes are:
(a) Intricate shape fabrication: unlike fusion-based
AM techniques which enable manufacturing of
net-shaped complex geometries AFSD requires
special fixtures for fabrication of intricate shapes.
(b) In plane resolution: minimum feature size that can
be printed using powder bed fusion is ∼ 0.5 mm
whereas in case of additive friction stir deposition
it is in the order of ∼ 10 mm [20]. In plane res-
olution can be improved by reducing the size of
tooling and feed material. Currently, the MELD
machines for AFSD have fixed feed rod size.
(c) Mechanical stability of the components: fabrication
of high aspect ratio components using additive
friction stir deposition sometimes causes buck-
ling. Thermal cycling during the process results in
compliance gradient in the material that reduces
the critical height – diameter ratio which can be
printed without buckling.
(d) Post process: post-process machining of the edges is
required to compensate for the stepwise transition
at the edge of each layer. The side-by-side printing
in AFSD has not been explored properly yet. This
would also have the issue on proper bonding near
the edge.
(e) Capital cost: to fabricate complex shapes, spe-
cial clamps and custom-built fixtures are required
which will add to the cost of the component.
(f) Tool wear: performance of friction stir-based addi-
tive manufacturing process mainly depends on
how effectively tool is stirring the material. Tool
health and lifetime is of utmost concern. Process-
ing of soft materials such Al and Mg will not
affect the tool health much, but processing of high
strength materials requires tool materials with high
strength, high wear resistance, and high fatigue
resistance. Currently, the tool is the limiting factor
for expanding AFSD to high-temperature materi-
als. The PCBN and W-Re tools are quite suitable
for most of materials that are of interest for FSAM.
Friction stir-based additive manufacturing processes
lack quantitative relationships between process con-
trols and resulting microstructure and properties. For
AFSD, these knowledge gaps in process controls rela-
tionships are largely due to a lack of process monitor-
ing with feedback control capable of monitoring the
forces applied and the resulting temperature generated
in the build during deposition. A fully instrumented
machine equipped with in-situ sensors, e.g. the layer-
by-layer thermal images, spatial–temporal temperature
information, actuator force, and spindle torque, can
provide a real-time dynamic feedback that can obvi-
ously be used for process monitoring and control of the
deposition. Machine health and tool health can also be
monitored through the feedback data from the sensors
in the machine.
Friction stir-based additive manufacturing pro-
cesses are at the initial stage of its development.
Improvisation of these technologies for troubleshoot-
ing above mentioned technological challenges will be
immensely significant in improving the understand-
ing of these game-changing additive manufacturing
processes. Researchers should focus their attention on
developing friction stir-based additive manufacturing
processes to come up with the innovative approaches to
eliminate the above-mentioned limitations and expand
the research from coupons to component-level design
and manufacturing!
Acknowledgements
RSM is grateful to Professor Sundeep Mukherjee for the
collaborative work on FSAM of titanium alloys and steels.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by Army Research Laboratory:
[Grant Numbers W911NF-18-2-0067 and W911NF-19-2-
0011].
ORCID
Rajiv S. Mishra http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1699-0614
References
[1] Palanivel S, Mishra RS. Building without melting: a
short review of friction-based additive manufactur-
ing techniques. Int J Addit Subtractive Mater Manuf.
2017;1:82, doi:10.1504/IJASMM.2017.082991.
[2] Sankaran KK, Mishra RS. Metallurgy and design
of alloys with heirarchical microstructures. Elsevier,
Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom; 2017.
doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-812068-2.01001-8.
[3] Palanivel S, Nelaturu P, Glass B, et al. Friction stir
additive manufacturing for high structural performance
through microstructural control in an Mg based WE43
alloy. Mater Des. 2015;65:934–952. doi:10.1016/j.matde
s.2014.09.082.
[4] DebRoy T, Wei HL, Zuback JS, et al. Additive man-
ufacturing of metallic components – process, struc-
ture and properties. Prog Mater Sci. 2018;92:112–224.
doi:10.1016/J.PMATSCI.2017.10.001.
[5] Agrawal P, Thapliyal S, Nene SS, et al. Excellent
strength-ductility synergy in metastable high entropy
alloy by laser powder bed additive manufacturing.
Addit Manuf. 2020;32:101098, doi:10.1016/J.ADDMA.
2020.101098.
[6] Raghavan N, Dehoff R, Pannala S, et al. Numerical
modeling of heat-transfer and the influence of process
parameters on tailoring the grain morphology of IN718
in electron beam additive manufacturing. Acta Mater.
2016;112:303–314. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2016.03.063.

[7] Vilaro T, Colin C, Bartout JD, et al. Microstructural
and mechanical approaches of the selective laser melt-
ing process applied to a nickel-base superalloy. Mater
Sci Eng A. 2012;534:446–451. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2011.
11.092.
[8] Gorsse S, Hutchinson C, Gouné M, et al. Additive man-
ufacturing of metals: a brief review of the character-
istic microstructures and properties of steels, Ti-6Al-
4V and high-entropy alloys. Sci Technol Adv Mater.
2017;18:584–610. doi:10.1080/14686996.2017.1361305.
[9] Paoletti I. Mass customization with additive man-
ufacturing: new perspectives for multi performa-
tive Building components in architecture. Procedia
Eng. 2017;180:1150–1159. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.
04.275.
[10] Everton SK, Hirsch M, Stavroulakis PI, et al. Review
of in-situ process monitoring and in-situ metrol-
ogy for metal additive manufacturing. Mater Des.
2016;95:431–445. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2016.01.099.
[11] Srivastava M, Rathee S, Maheshwari S, et al. A review
on recent progress in solid state friction based metal
additive manufacturing: friction stir additive tech-
niques. Crit Rev Solid State Mater Sci. 2019;44:345–377.
doi:10.1080/10408436.2018.1490250.
[12] Yin S, Cavaliere P, Aldwell B, et al. Cold spray additive
manufacturing and repair: fundamentals and applica-
tions. Addit Manuf. 2018;21:628–650. doi:10.1016/j.ad
dma.2018.04.017.
[13] Rivera OG, Allison PG, Jordon JB, et al. Microstruc-
tures and mechanical behavior of Inconel 625 fabricated
by solid-state additive manufacturing. Mater Sci Eng A.
2017;694:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2017.03.105.
[14] Frazier WE. Metal additive manufacturing: a review.
J Mater Eng Perform. 2014;23:1917–1928. doi:10.1007/
s11665-014-0958-z.
[15] Slotwinski JA, Garboczi EJ, Stutzman PE, et al. Charac-
terization of metal powders used for additive manufac-
turing. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol. 2014;119:460–493.
doi:10.6028/jres.119.018.
[16] Gibson I, Rosen D, Stucker B. Additive manufac-
turing technologies: 3D printing, rapid prototyping,
and direct digital manufacturing, second edition.
Addit Manuf Technol 3D Printing, Rapid Prototyp-
ing, Direct Digit Manuf Second Ed. 2015: 1–498.
doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2113-3.
[17] MELDTM . MELD manufacturing corporation. Chris-
tiansburg (VA): 200 Technology Drive; n.d.;
24073.
[18] Phillips BJ, Avery DZ, Liu T, et al. Microstructure-
deformation relationship of additive friction stir-
deposition Al–Mg–Si. Materialia. 2019;7:100387, doi:10
.1016/j.mtla.2019.100387.
[19] Griffiths RJ, Perry MEJ, Sietins JM, et al. A perspec-
tive on solid-state additive manufacturing of aluminum
matrix composites using MELD. J Mater Eng Perform.
2019;28:648–656. doi:10.1007/s11665-018-3649-3.
[20] Yu HZ, Jones ME, Brady GW, et al. Non-beam-
based metal additive manufacturing enabled by additive
friction stir deposition. Scr Mater. 2018;153:122–130.
doi:10.1016/J.SCRIPTAMAT.2018.03.025.
[21] White D. 78. Object consolidation employing friction
joining. United States Pat. 1999;1, https://patents.google
.com/patent/US6457629B1/en.
[22] Dilip JJS, Ram GDJ, Stucker BE. Additive manufactur-
ing with friction welding and friction deposition pro-
cesses. Int J Rapid Manuf. 2012;3:56. doi:10.1504/ijrapid
m.2012.046574.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 163
[23] Lequeu PH, Muzzolini R, Ehrstro JC, et al. Powerpoint
presentation on: high performance friction stir welded
structures using advanced alloys. WA: Aeromat Conf.
Seattle; 2006.
[24] Baumann JA. Production of energy efficient preform
structures (PEEPS), 2012. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/
1042703.
[25] Palanivel S, Sidhar H, Mishra RS. Friction stir additive
manufacturing: route to high structural performance.
JOM. 2015;67:616–621. doi:10.1007/s11837-014-
1271-x.
[26] Mishra R, Ma Z, Charit I. Friction stir processing: a
novel technique for fabrication of surface composite.
Mater Sci Eng A. 2003;341:307–310. doi:10.1016/S0921-
5093(02)00199-5.
[27] Yuqing M, Liming K, Chunping H, et al. Formation
characteristic, microstructure, and mechanical perfor-
mances of aluminum-based components by friction
stir additive manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol.
2016;83:1637–1647. doi:10.1007/s00170-015-76
95-9.
[28] Kandasamy K. Solid state joining using additive friction
stir processing (United States Patent, Assignee: MELD
Manufacturing Corporation). 2016; US9511445B2.
[29] Rivera OG, Allison PG, Brewer LN, et al. Influence of
texture and grain refinement on the mechanical behav-
ior of AA2219 fabricated by high shear solid state mate-
rial deposition. Mater Sci Eng A. 2018;724:547–558.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2018.03.088.
[30] Maalekian M. Friction welding – critical assessment
of literature. Sci Technol Weld Join. 2007;12:738–759.
doi:10.1179/174329307X249333.
[31] Lu I. Friction stir additive manufacturing (FSAM) of
2050 Al-Cu-Li alloy (MS Thesis). University of South
Carolina, Columbia, USA; 2019.
[32] Perry MEJ, Griffiths RJ, Garcia D, et al. Morphologi-
cal and microstructural investigation of the non-planar
interface formed in solid-state metal additive manufac-
turing by additive friction stir deposition. Addit Manuf.
2020;35:101293, doi:10.1016/j.addma.2020.101293.
[33] Avery DZ, Phillips BJ, Mason CJT, et al. Influence of
grain refinement and microstructure on fatigue behav-
ior for solid-state additively manufactured Al-Zn-Mg-
Cu alloy. Metall Mater Trans A Phys Metall Mater Sci.
2020;51:2778–2795. doi:10.1007/s11661-020-05746-9.
[34] Joey Griffiths R, Petersen DT, Garcia D, et al. Additive
friction stir-enabled solid-state additive manufacturing
for the repair of 7075 aluminum alloy. Appl Sci. 2019;9;
doi:10.3390/app9173486.
[35] Jordon JB, Allison PG, Phillips BJ, et al. Direct recycling
of machine chips through a novel solid-state additive
manufacturing process. Mater Des. 2020;193:108850),
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108850.
[36] Ayyagari A, Mukherjee S, Mishra RS. (2018). Friction
stir additive manufacturing of Titanium alloys (unpub-
lished research).
[37] Agrawal P, Haridas RS, Yadav S, et al. Processing-
structure-property correlation in additive friction stir
deposited Ti-6Al-4V alloy from recycled metal chips.
Addit Manuf. 2021; 47:102259. doi:10.1016/j.addma.
2021.102259.
[38] Yuan W, Mishra RS. Grain size and texture effects on
deformation behavior of AZ31 magnesium alloy. Mater
Sci Eng A. 2012;558:716–724. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2012.
08.080.
[39] Yuan W, Mishra RS, Carlson B, et al. Material flow
and microstructural evolution during friction stir spot
164 R. S. MISHRA ET AL.
welding of AZ31 magnesium alloy. Mater Sci Eng A.
2012;543:200–209. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2012.02.075.
[40] Darras BM, Khraisheh MK, Abu-Farha FK, et al.
Friction stir processing of commercial AZ31 magne-
sium alloy. J Mater Process Technol. 2007;191:77–81.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.03.045.
[41] Wang W, Han P, Peng P, et al. Friction stir processing
of magnesium alloys: a review. Acta Metall Sin (English
Lett). 2020;33:43–57. doi:10.1007/s40195-019-00971-7.
[42] Bhargava G, Yuan W, Webb SS, et al. Influence of tex-
ture on mechanical behavior of friction-stir-processed
magnesium alloy. Metall Mater Trans A. 2010;41:13–17.
doi:10.1007/s11661-009-0079-8.
[43] Ayyagari A, Mukherjee S, Mishra RS. Friction stir addi-
tive manufacturing for gradient structures for small
modular reactors (unpublished research), n.d.
[44] Sato YS, Nelson TW, Sterling CJ. Recrystallization in
type 304L stainless steel during friction stirring. Acta
Mater. 2005;53:637–645. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2004.
10.017.
[45] Saeid T, Abdollah-zadeh A, Shibayanagi T, et al. On
the formation of grain structure during friction stir
welding of duplex stainless steel. Mater Sci Eng A.
2010;527:6484–6488. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2010.07.011.
[46] Hajian M, Abdollah-zadeh A, Rezaei-Nejad SS, et al.
Microstructure and mechanical properties of friction
stir processed AISI 316L stainless steel. Mater Des.
2015;67:82–94. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2014.10.082.
[47] Agrawal P, Haridas RS, Mishra RS. (2020). Additive
friction stir deposition of SS316 (unpublished work).
[48] Wang Z, Denlinger E, Michaleris P, et al. Residual
stress mapping in Inconel 625 fabricated through addi-
tive manufacturing: method for neutron diffraction
measurements to validate thermomechanical model
predictions. Mater Des. 2017;113:169–177. doi:10.1016/
j.matdes.2016.10.003.
[49] Pleass C, Jothi S. Influence of powder characteristics
and additive manufacturing process parameters on the
microstructure and mechanical behaviour of Inconel
625 fabricated by selective laser melting. Addit Manuf.
2018;24:419–431. doi:10.1016/j.addma.2018.09.023.
[50] Yangfan W, Xizhang C, Chuanchu S. Microstructure
and mechanical properties of Inconel 625 fabricated by
wire-arc additive manufacturing. Surf Coatings Tech-
nol. 2019;374:116–123. doi:10.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.
05.079.
[51] Avery DZ, Rivera OG, Mason CJT, et al. Fatigue Behav-
ior of solid-state additive manufactured Inconel 625.
JOM. 2018;70:2475–2484. doi:10.1007/s11837-018-
3114-7.
[52] Griffiths RJ, Garcia D, Song J, et al. Solid-state additive
manufacturing of aluminum and copper using additive
friction stir deposition: process-microstructure link-
ages. Materialia. 2021;15:100967. doi:10.1016/j.mtla.20
20.100967.
[53] Yoder JK, Griffiths RJ, Yu HZ. Deformation-based addi-
tive manufacturing of 7075 aluminum with wrought-
like mechanical properties. Mater Des. 2021;198:2020–
2022. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109288.
[54] Mason CJT, Rodriguez RI, Avery DZ, et al. Process-
structure-property relations for as-deposited solid-state
additively manufactured high-strength aluminum alloy.
Addit Manuf. 2021;40:101879), doi:10.1016/j.addma.20
21.101879.
[55] Olson GB. Computational design of hierarchically
structured materials. Science. 1997;277(80-.):1237 LP–
1231242. doi:10.1126/science.277.5330.1237.
[56] Mishra RS, Ma ZY. Friction stir welding and pro-
cessing. Mater Sci Eng R Reports. 2005;50:1–78.
doi:10.1016/j.mser.2005.07.001.
[57] Buffa G, Campanile G, Fratini L, et al. Friction stir weld-
ing of lap joints: influence of process parameters on the
metallurgical and mechanical properties. Mater Sci Eng
A. 2009;519:19–26. doi:10.1016/j.msea.2009.04.046.
[58] Carlone P, Palazzo GS. Influence of process parame-
ters on microstructure and mechanical properties in
AA2024-T3 friction stir welding. Metallogr Microstruct
Anal. 2013;2:213–222. doi:10.1007/s13632-013-00
78-4.
[59] Mishra RS, De PS, Kumar N. Friction stir welding and
processing. Cham: Springer International Publishing;
2014.
[60] Su J, Wang J, Mishra RS, et al. Microstructure and
mechanical properties of a friction stir processed
Ti–6Al–4 V alloy. Mater Sci Eng A. 2013;573:67–74.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2013.02.025.
[61] Dixit M, Mishra RS, Sankaran KK. Structure–property
correlations in Al 7050 and Al 7055 high-strength alu-
minum alloys. Mater Sci Eng A. 2008;478:163–172.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2007.05.116.
[62] Colligan KJ, Mishra RS. A conceptual model for the
process variables related to heat generation in friction
stir welding of aluminum. Scr Mater. 2008;58:327–331.
doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.10.015.
[63] He X, Gu F, Ball A. A review of numerical analysis
of friction stir welding. Prog Mater Sci. 2014;65:1–66.
doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2014.03.003.
[64] Nourani M, Milani AS, Yannacopoulos S. A review on
thermomechanical models of friction stir welding. Adv
Mater Res. 2014;922:553–559. doi:10.4028/www.scienti
fic.net/AMR.922.553.
[65] Frigaard G, Midling OT. A process model for friction
stir welding of age hardening aluminum alloys. Metall
Mater Trans A Phys Metall Mater Sci. 2001;32:1189–
1200. doi:10.1007/s11661-001-0128-4.
[66] Schmidt H, Hattel J, Wert J. An analytical model for the
heat generation in friction stir welding. Model Simul
Mater Sci Eng. 2004;12:143–157. doi:10.1088/0965-039
3/12/1/013.
[67] CHAO YJ, QI X. Thermal and thermo-mechanical
modeling of friction stir welding of aluminum alloy
6061-T6. J Mater Process Manuf Sci. 1998;7:215–233.
doi:10.1106/LTKR-JFBM-RGMV-WVCF.
[68] Zhu X, Chao Y. Numerical simulation of transient tem-
perature and residual stresses in friction stir weld-
ing of 304L stainless steel. J Mater Process Tech-
nol. 2004;146:263–272. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2003.
10.025.
[69] Heurtier P, Jones MJ, Desrayaud C, et al. Mechanical and
thermal modelling of friction stir welding. J Mater Pro-
cess Technol. 2006;171:348–357. doi:10.1016/j.jmatprot
ec.2005.07.014.
[70] Kumar N, Mishra RS, Baumann JA. Residual stresses in
friction stir welding. Elsevier, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5
1GB, UK; 2014. doi:10.1016/C2013-0-09884-2.
[71] Schmidt HB, Hattel JH. Thermal modelling of friction
stir welding. Scr Mater. 2008;58:332–337. doi:10.1016/j.
scriptamat.2007.10.008.
[72] Hamilton C, Dymek S, Sommers A. A thermal model
of friction stir welding in aluminum alloys. Int J Mach
Tools Manuf. 2008;48:1120–1130. doi:10.1016/j.ijmacht
ools.2008.02.001.
[73] Nandan R, Roy GG, Lienert TJ, et al. Numerical mod-
elling of 3D plastic flow and heat transfer during friction

stir welding of stainless steel. Sci Technol Weld Join.
2006;11:526–537. doi:10.1179/174329306X107692.
[74] Roy BS, Medhi T, Saha SC. Material flow modeling in
friction stir welding of AA6061-T6 alloy and study of
the effect of process parameters. 2015;9:641–649.
[75] Hamilton C, Kopyściański M, Senkov O, et al. A coupled
thermal/material flow model of friction stir welding
applied to Sc-modified aluminum alloys. Metall Mater
Trans A. 2013;44:1730–1740. doi:10.1007/s11661-012-
1512-y.
[76] Schmidt HB, Hattel JH. Thermal and material flow
modelling of friction stir welding using comsol, in:
COMSOL Conf., Inproceedings, Hannover. 2008.
[77] Nourani M, Milani AS, Yannacopoulos S, et al. An inte-
grated multiphysics model for friction stir welding of
6061 aluminum alloy. Int J Multiphys. 2014;8:29–48.
doi:10.1260/1750-9548.8.1.29.
[78] Okuyucu H, Kurt A, Arcaklioglu E. Artificial neu-
ral network application to the friction stir weld-
ing of aluminum plates. Mater Des. 2007;28:78–84.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2005.06.003.
[79] Fratini L, Buffa G, Palmeri D. Using a neural network
for predicting the average grain size in friction stir
welding processes. Comput Struct. 2009;87:1166–1174.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2009.04.008.
[80] Jayaraman M, Sivasubramanian R, Balasubramanian V,
et al. Prediction of tensile strength of friction stir welded
A356 cast aluminium alloy using response surface
methodology and artificial neural network. J Manuf Sci
Prod. 2008;9:45–60. doi:10.1515/IJMSP.2008.9.1-2.45.
[81] Tansel IN, Demetgul M, Okuyucu H, et al. Optimiza-
tions of friction stir welding of aluminum alloy by using
genetically optimized neural network. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol. 2010;48:95–101. doi:10.1007/s00170-009-
2266-6.
[82] Boldsaikhan E, Corwin EM, Logar AM, et al. The use
of neural network and discrete Fourier transform for
real-time evaluation of friction stir welding. Appl Soft
Comput. 2011;11:4839–4846. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2011.
06.017.
[83] Buffa G, Fratini L, Micari F. Mechanical and microstruc-
tural properties prediction by artificial neural networks
in FSW processes of dual phase titanium alloys. J Manuf
Process. 2012;14:289–296. doi:10.1016/j.jmapro.2011.
10.007.
[84] Manvatkar VD, Arora A, De A, et al. Neural net-
work models of peak temperature, torque, traverse
force, bending stress and maximum shear stress dur-
ing friction stir welding. Sci Technol Weld Join.
2012;17:460–466. doi:10.1179/1362171812Y.000000
0035.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF WELDING AND JOINING 165
[85] Shojaeefard MH, Akbari M, Asadi P. Multi objec-
tive optimization of friction stir welding parameters
using FEM and neural network. Int J Precis Eng
Manuf. 2014;15:2351–2356. doi:10.1007/s12541-014-
0600-x.
[86] Wakchaure KN, Thakur AG, Gadakh V, et al. Multi-
objective optimization of friction stir welding of alu-
minium alloy 6082-T6 using hybrid Taguchi-grey
relation analysis-ANN method. Mater Today Proc.
2018;5:7150–7159. doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2017.
11.380.
[87] Shanavas S, Dhas JER. Quality prediction of fric-
tion stir weld joints on AA 5052 H32 aluminium
alloy using fuzzy logic technique. Mater Today Proc.
2018;5:12124–12132. doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2018.02.
190.
[88] Barath VR, Vignesh RV, Padmanaban R. Analysing the
strength of friction stir welded dissimilar aluminium
alloys using Sugeno fuzzy model. IOP Conf Ser Mater
Sci Eng. 2018;310:12043, doi:10.1088/1757-899x/310/1/
012043.
[89] Dewan MW, Huggett DJ, Warren Liao T, et al. Pre-
diction of tensile strength of friction stir weld joints
with adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS)
and neural network. Mater Des. 2016;92:288–299.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.005.
[90] Babajanzade Roshan S, Behboodi Jooibari M, Teimouri
R, et al. Optimization of friction stir welding pro-
cess of AA7075 aluminum alloy to achieve desirable
mechanical properties using ANFIS models and sim-
ulated annealing algorithm. Int J Adv Manuf Technol.
2013;69:1803–1818. doi:10.1007/s00170-013-5131-6.
[91] Jenarthanan MP, Varun Varma C, Krishna Manohar V.
Impact of friction stir welding (FSW) process param-
eters on tensile strength during dissimilar welds of
AA2014 and AA6061. Mater Today Proc. 2018;5:14384–
14391. doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2018.03.023.
[92] Kadaganchi R, Gankidi MR, Gokhale H. Optimization
of process parameters of aluminum alloy AA 2014-T6
friction stir welds by response surface methodology.
Def Technol. 2015;11:209–219. doi:10.1016/j.dt.2015.
03.003.
[93] Elatharasan G, Kumar VSS. An experimental analysis
and optimization of process parameter on friction stir
welding of AA 6061-T6 aluminum alloy using RSM.
Procedia Eng. 2013;64:1227–1234. doi:10.1016/j.proeng
.2013.09.202.
[94] Srinivasa Rao M, Ramanaiah N. Optimization of Pro-
cess parameters for FSW of Al-Mg-Mn-Sc-Zr alloy
using CCD and RSM. Strojnícky Cas. – J Mech. Eng.
2018;68:195–224. doi:10.2478/scjme-2018-0035.