Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Parametric optimization for friction stir welding with AA2024 and

AA6061 aluminium alloys by ANOVA and GRG
C. Chanakyan a,⇑, S. Sivasankar a, S.V. Alagarsamy b, S. Dinesh Kumar c, S. Sakthivelu d,
M. Meignanamoorthy e, M. Ravichandran f
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government College of Engineering, Thanjavur, Tamilnadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mahath Amma Institute of Engineering and Technology, Pudukkottai, Tamilnadu, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Chendhuran College of Engineering and Technology, Pudukkottai, Tamilnadu, India
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mount Zion College of Engineering and Technology, Pudukkottai, Tamilnadu, India
e
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mother Terasa College of Engineering and Technology, Pudukkottai, Tamilnadu, India
f
Department of Mechanical Engineering, K. Ramakrishnan College of Engineering, Trichy, Tamilnadu, India

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

Article history: Aluminium alloy AA2024 and AA6061 welding and its combinations have been consistently represented
Received 30 September 2019 a respectable challenge for creators and expertise. The alloys 2024 and 6061 composites, especially heat-
Received in revised form 6 November 2019 readable materials, are hard to bond by combination affixing systems. The different combination of weld-
Accepted 21 November 2019
ing, for example, AA2024 and AA6061 Alloy is a significant issue during FSW. In this article, the impact of
Available online xxxx
Rotation speed; Travel Speed; and Different Diameter of Tool Pins of 2024 and 6061 alloy through FSW
was examined by GRA (Grey Relational Analysis). The ANOVA was utilized to try out the preeminent sig-
Keywords:
nificant travel speed of welding and speed of tool rotation influencing the responses. The essential and
GRA
ANOVA
collaboration effect of data features on the ordinary responses are analyzed. The normal qualities and
FSW estimated qualities are truly close.
Aluminium Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Rank Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the First International
conference on Advanced Lightweight Materials and Structures.

1. Introduction
FSW-Friction Stir Welding technique might be a well built con-
dition variation of respectability procedure observation of frequent
perfections in the way of current days that were subjective and
valid at the securing foundation-TWI. It has pass around into a rea-
sonable creating of plated sheet and plain materials for request in
fluctuated businesses, in concert with area, car building and pro-
tection side. This difference in constancy strategy is strength,
affordable, environment well disposed and adaptable. Mainly, part
of high potency zone aluminum combinations and different plated
compounds that zone unit weakening to weld by regular arrange-
ment. During this approach a non consumable device (tool) is to be
plunged into the top layer of the plates with a turn and it moves
forward the mutual path for welds combination. The joints honesty
relies on the tool unmodified calculation character utilized in this
approach. The shoulder zone and the tool pin elements are valu-
able for the generation of heat and the material unifying by formu-
⇑ Corresponding author.
lating the joint. During this technique heat is formed contain by
recommending that of friction between the interface of the tool
of Sheet Metal. Post warming was emerged in plastic deformation.
The sheet metal character choosing the kind of progress of
integrity technique. The friction stir welding, that is believed to
be mechanical, opening difference in respectability method fill up
the void any place diverse difference in integrity procedure pro-
gresses toward becoming upsetting to actualize [1]. Two totally
unique arrangements aluminium alloys AA 5052 and AA6061
region component have done by the friction stir welded develop-
ment clear the tool mode and utilizing two varied optimized
parameters of welding are variable feed and consistent speed.
Given that combination attaching of dissimilar aluminum is
tedious, Friction Stir Welding technique is generally utilized for
affixing of different materials, any place the arrangement of sup-
porting component is missing given that the high temperature
worried through this technique was fit beneath the softening tem-
perature of support materials. Past investigations demonstrate the
ideal parameters for securing of different experiment runs has 13
composites, with tool rotational speed of 750–1200 rpm, and

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.257
2214-7853/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the First International conference on Advanced Lightweight Materials and Structures.

Please cite this article as: C. Chanakyan, et al., Parametric optimization for friction stir welding with AA2024 and AA6061 aluminium alloys by ANOVA and
GRG, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.257
2 C. Chanakyan et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
welding speed around 15–35 mm/min [2]. An existing associate of
FSW in an air well disposed strong condition change of respectabil-
ity strategy has to be low weight materials, particularly alloy and
its combinations are handled during this investigation [3]. Strong
state affixing forms zone unit in a perfect well-matched to securing
of dissimilar alloys. As a result of these systems does exclude
peaceful, the issue of weld action parting doesn’t develop. Essen-
tially, piquant condition affixing process beat a possibility of a vari-
ety of troubles in combination securing of alloys like isolation,
consistence, brittle in plated development, and heat influenced
zone liquation breaking [4]. In view of the fact that geometry of
tool assumes a significant job in divergent welds, entirely unex-
pected tool profiles are extensive receiving utilized recently [5–
10]. The triangular, square and rib shaped tool pin profiles are pro-
ficient to move the things from top to base of the joint by mixing
activity [11–16].
2. Welding material and tool design
The material of AA2024 and AA6061Al plates with the
[100 mm
50 mm
6 mm] of measurements were utilized for
this examination. The accompanying chemical composition of
AA2024 and AA6061 [in weight percentage]: 0.123 Si, 0.569 Mn,
1.684 Mg, 0.043 Zn, 0.08 Ti, 0.024 Cr, 0.281 Fe, 4.619 Cu, Al in bal-
ance and 0.70 Si, 0.12 Mn, 0.99 Mg, 0.088 Zn, 0.047 Ti, 0.6 Cr, 0.28
Fe, 0.21 Cu, Al in balalance respectively. Mechanical properties of
AA2024 and AA6061 having Tensile Strength (MPa) of 425.65,
315.34, Yield Strength (MPa) of 375.65, 281.22, Elongation (%) of
13.33, 16.00 and microhardness of 137, 107 respectively. FSW
machine was used to weld the material of AA2024 and AA6061
in butt joint arrangements. AA6061 was put on the propelling
(advancing side) and AA2024 on the withdrawing side (retreating
side). The welding tool utilized in this examination was comprised
of high carbon and high chromium die steel (HCHCr) to manufac-
tured the joints. The three conical tool pins with various measure-
ments (pin diameter: 5 mm, 6 mm and 7 mm) were utilized in this
investigation. The welding tool is gradually used into the work
piece awaiting the shoulder links the outside of the supporting
objects. A little descending power is connected to keep in touch
and it’s kept back for a small number of moments for created heat.
At that point the tool is constrained promote ended the 100 mm of
weld length in welding material. The three unrelated tool pins and
the welded specimen of dissimilar Alloy 2024 and 6061 shown in
Figs. 1 and 2.
Fig. 1. Three different pin profile of tool.
Please cite this article as: C. Chanakyan, et al., Parametric optimization for friction stir welding with AA2024 and AA6061 aluminium alloys by ANOVA and
GRG, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.257
Fig. 2. Welded specimen of AA2024 and AA6061.
3. Analysis of GRA and ANOVA
The ANOVA with method of Taguchi as in may possibly be a
measurable technique to find out the decode test information. Dur-
ing this examination, there are four essential controllable compo-
nents, for example three levels, for example, tool rotation speed
having 500, 1000 and 1500 rpm; traverse speed having 35, 50
and 65 mm/min and different conical tool pin diameter having 5,
6 and 7 mm respectively which are utilized for ANOVA and their
links might be recorded from the test data throughout the investi-
gation of multivariate. The FSW design parameters are displayed in
Table 1. During this survey, utilizing Taguchi systems and L9 array
exhibited and utilized for Tensile Strength (MPa) and Micro hard-
ness (Hv) and its represented in Table 2. The total DOF might be
determined [12] and The Taguchi’s proposed the higher proportion
for S-N for extreme tensile hardness value is the better [9].
In GRA (grey relational analysis), at first the test learning is
standardized. By utilizing this standardized information, grey rela-
tional coefficient are assessed, the GRG was acquired by averaging
the (Grey relational coefficients) GRC values identified with chosen
trial results. The favored quality attributes for tensile strength and
microhardness are Larger/ the/ better basis, and afterward it’s com-
municated with utilizing first equation.
yi ðkÞ  min yi ðkÞ
x i ðkÞ ¼ ð1Þ
max yi ðkÞ  min yi ðkÞ
where n = no. of components, (k = 1, 2, 3, . . . n); I = 1, . . . m; m = test
information; [maxyi ðkÞ] and [minyi ðkÞ] are the upper limit and lower
limit of yi ðkÞ, yi ðkÞ = unique sequence; x i ðkÞ esteem after Genera-
tion of Grey relational; separately. The standardized qualities are
appeared in Table 3. The count for Gray connection coefficient
was finished utilizing Equation (2).
Dmin þ wDmax
n i ðkÞ ¼ ð2Þ
D0i ðkÞ þ wDmax
where Grey relation coefficient is n i ðkÞ; D0i is variation among
yi  ðkÞ and x i  ðkÞ; sequence of perfect (reference) = yo*(k);
ðDmin Þ = least estimation and (Dmax Þ = most astounding estimation
of D0i ðkÞ. The Gray relational evaluations (n i ) are controlled by tak-
ing normal of the GRC identified with each perception as given in
Eq. (3).
X
H
Zj ¼ wi ni ðkÞ ð3Þ
k¼1
where H = entire amount of responses and n means the amount of
yield responses. Grey Relational Analysis Zj is point of affiliation
 C. Chanakyan et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 3

Table 1 4. Results and discussion

Process parameters control.

Process Parameters and its Control Code Control levels The ANOVA for the consequences of elasticity (tensile strength)
1 2 3 and microhardness in different FSW of AA224 and AA6061 alu-
minum combination correspond to Tables 4 and 5 provided the
Rotational speed of the tool (rpm) RST 500 1000 1200
Traverse Speed (mm/min) TRS 35 50 65 results of grey relational analysis in ANOVA process. The most pre-
Diameter of Tool Pin (mm) DTP 5 6 7 vailing contributing variables of the elasticity has 73.45% influ-
enced by rotational speed of tool and traverse speed has 18.21%,
RST – Rotational speed of the Tool; TRS – Traverse Speed; DTP- Diameter of Tool Pin.
though for these outcomes conflict with elasticity and Hardness
in friction welding of dissimilar alloys of aluminium. The numer-
Table 2 ous response investigations was essential to choose the great nat-
Welding procedure data in L9 Taguchi. ure of welded joints dependent on the best possible choice
Runs RST WTS DTP Response of FSW parameter in friction stir process (FSP). The improvement of the
Process parameters for the rigidity was finished by utilizing the grey rela-
Tensile Hv
tional analysis by the supporting of Taguchi. The evaluation
sequences, Grey Relational Coefficient of the responses, Grey Rela-
1 500 35 5 265 110
2 500 50 6 272 108
tional Grade, and its position (rank) for each analysis and also the
3 500 65 7 268 113 S-N ratios mean, GRG of mean is provided in Tables 6 and 7 respec-
4 1000 35 6 269 109 tively. The most extreme normal Grey Relational Grade evaluation
5 1000 50 7 288 112 gives the superior different accomplishment in different FSP which
6 1000 65 5 265 115
is nearer to the perfect reactions. From the Fig. 3 demonstrates the
7 1500 35 7 259 107
8 1500 50 5 252 105 GRG chart for every parameter of FSW at various levels individu-
9 1500 65 6 256 129 ally. It demonstrates that the average level of rotational speed of
tool, higher welding speed with the maximum pin profile diameter
are the optimized in FSW parameters of the unique butt joints and
the normal GRG evaluation for all the trial responses are appeared.
The verification analysis (confirmation) was directed for the
Table 3 level of optimum of the FSP parameters to develop the numerous
Standardized values in GRG. responses of the FSwelded joints was expressed in equation
Runs Standardized Values in GRG X
n
b ¼ bm þ ðb0  bm Þ ð4Þ
Tensile strength-[MPa] Micro hardness [Hv]
i¼1
1 0.361 0.208
2 0.556 0.125 where bm is the normalized GRG for every one of the responses, b0
3 0.444 0.333 optimum condition of GRA and N is the quantity of responses.
4 0.472 0.167 The correlations of real welding reactions and probable for var-
5 1.000 0.292
ious executions at condition of optimum are appeared in Table 8.
6 0.361 0.417
7 0.194 0.083
The probable reactions has improved by 0.021 Grey Relational
8 0.000 0.000 Analysis on RST3 TRS1 DTP2 levels contrasted and the underlying
9 0.111 1.000 levels RST2 TRS2 DTP3 and the optimum level of exploratory reac-
tion was nearer to the probable reactions at the level of optimum
was found and comparative examination prepared. It is obviously
clear from the various performance attributes in the Friction Stir
along with the suggestion or perfect arrangement and near group- welding procedure are enhanced through the GRA in Taguchi
ing. In the event that bigger GRG is acquired for the identical set review.
of system parameters contrasted with different sets and it’s consid-
ered as the most positive (optimal) ideal setting. 5. Conclusion
The process parameter determination is the primary part in the
FSW. The tool revolution outcomes ends in about mixing and join-  The Taguchi on GRA investigation was effectively functional to
ing together of objects in the order of the tool interpretation and advance the numerous responses in the FSW of dissimilar mate-
spinning pin moves the mixing of the material from all the side rial AA2024 and AA6061 aluminum composite joints.
of pin was finalized in this process. Thus the system structures  There is a notable perfection of 0.021 was revealed dependent
which are exploited to weld the material and enormous quality on the GRG at the level of optimal FSP parameters in dissimilar
of welded specimen can be attained dependent on the welding joints of Aluminium alloy.
parameters [17–20].

Table 4
ANOVA evaluation of tensile response.

Source of Process Parameters SOS DoF Adj-M.Square F-Value Percentage involvement

RST 12.755 2 4.6675 28154.2 73.45
TRS 742.454 2 398.2242 2120852 18.21
DTP 66.121 2 35.1245 181454.1 8.2
Error 0.042 2 0.041900 495175.1 0.14
Total 821.372 8 100

SOS-sum of squares; M.square-Mean Square; DoF; Degree of freedom.

Please cite this article as: C. Chanakyan, et al., Parametric optimization for friction stir welding with AA2024 and AA6061 aluminium alloys by ANOVA and
GRG, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.257
4 C. Chanakyan et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 5
ANOVA evaluation of GRA response.

Source of Process Parameters SOS DoF Adj-M.Square F-Value Percentage involvement

RST 3.54785 2 1.82427 388.21 58.05%
WTS 0.28282 2 0.13775 32.66 8.25%
DTP 0.71403 2 0.34214 80.33 33.1%
Error 0.00812 2 0.00315 0.6%
Total 4.55282 8 100.00%

SOS-sum of squares; M.square-Mean Square; DoF; Degree of freedom.

Table 6
Evaluation sequence, GRC and GRG with ranking position.

Runs Evaluation Sequence Grey relational coefficient – GRC GRG Rank

Tensile Hv Tensile Hv
1 0.639 0.792 0.4390244 0.3870968 0.413061 7
2 0.444 0.875 0.5294118 0.3636364 0.446524 5
3 0.556 0.667 0.4736842 0.4285714 0.451128 3
4 0.528 0.833 0.4864865 0.375 0.430743 6
5 0.000 0.708 1 0.4137931 0.706897 1
6 0.639 0.583 0.4390244 0.4615385 0.450281 4
7 0.806 0.917 0.3829787 0.3529412 0.36796 8
8 1.000 1.000 0.3333333 0.3333333 0.333333 9
9 0.889 0.000 0.36 1 0.68 2

Table 7
S-N and GRG mean for parameter control.

Control of Parameters Mean of S/N Ratio Mean of GRG

RST WTS DTP RST WTS DTP
1 7.199 7.893 8.051 0.437 0.404 0.399
2 5.753 6.519 5.890 0.529 0.496 0.519
3 7.192 5.731 6.204 0.460 0.527 0.509
Delta 1.446 2.162 2.161 0.092 0.123 0.120
Rank 3 1 2 3 1 2

Table 8
Consequences of verification test using FSP in optimal.

Initial Processing Starting FSW parameters Ideal FSW parameters using

Parameters in Exploratory GRA-Predicted
Factor stage RST2 TRS2 DTP3 RST3 TRS1 DTP2
TS-MPa 288 289.25
MH-Hv 112 111
GRG 0.707 0.728

Development of GRG = 0.021.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-

cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.

Fig. 3. GRG chart for all FSW parameters. References

 The rotational speed of the tool is the predominant factor
headed for choose the great nature of the welded joints fol-
lowed traverse speed and different type of pin profile depen-
dent on the investigation of fluctuation on the Grey Relational
Grade.
 The optimal procedure setting demonstrated that the material
combination was appropriately completed because of the make
contact with between the welded surfaces of the source materi-
als and tool.
[1] W.M. Thomas, E.D. Nicholas, Frictions stir welding for the transportation
industries, Mater. Des. 18 (4–6) (1997) 269–273, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0261-3069(97)00062-9.
[2] M. Koilraj, V. Sundareswaran, S. Vijayan, S.R. Koteswara Rao, Friction stir
welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys AA2219 to AA5083 – optimization of
process parameters using Taguchi technique, Mater. Des. 42 (2012) 1–7,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.02.016.
[3] R.S. Mishra, Z.Y. Ma, Friction stir welding and processing, Mater. Sci. Eng.: R:
Reports 50 (1–2) (2005) 1–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2005.07.001.
[4] I. Shigematsu, Y.-J. Kwon, K. Suzuki, T. Imai, N. Saito, Joining of 5083 and 6061
aluminum alloys by friction stir welding, J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 22 (5) (2003) 353–
356.

Please cite this article as: C. Chanakyan, et al., Parametric optimization for friction stir welding with AA2024 and AA6061 aluminium alloys by ANOVA and
GRG, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.257
 C. Chanakyan et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
[5] N.T. Kumbhar, S.K. Sahoo, I. Samajdar, G.K. Dey, K. Bhanumurthy,
Microstructure and microtextural studies of friction stir welded aluminium
alloy 5052, Mater. Des. 32 (3) (2011) 1657–1666, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matdes.2010.10.010.
[6] P. Xue, D.R. Ni, D. Wang, B.L. Xiao, Z.Y. Ma, Effect of friction stir welding
parameters on the microstructure and mechanical properties of the dissimilar
Al–Cu joints, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 528 (13–14) (2011) 4683–4689, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.msea.2011.02.067.
[7] G. Padmanaban, V. Balasubramanian, Selection of FSW tool pin profile,
shoulder diameter and material for joining AZ31B magnesium alloy – an
experimental approach, Mater. Des. 30 (7) (2009) 2647–2656, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matdes.2008.10.021.
[8] Y.J. Kwon, I. Shigematsu, N. Saito, Dissimilar friction stir welding between
magnesium and aluminum alloys, Mater. Lett. 62 (23) (2008) 3827–3829.
[9] N. Logothetis, Managing for Total Quality: From Deming to Taguchi and SPC,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA, 1992.
[10] C.-H. Chien, W.-B. Lin, T. Chen, Optimal FSW process parameters for aluminum
alloys AA5083, J. Chin. Inst. Eng. 34 (1) (2011) 99–105, https://doi.org/
10.1080/02533839.2011.553024.
[11] S.P.S.S. Sivam, M. Gopal, S. Venkatasamy, S. Singh, An experimental
investigation and optimisation of ecological machining parameters on
aluminium 6063 in its annealed and unannealed form, J. Chem.
Pharmaceutical Sci. 9 (Special Issue) (2015) 46–53.
[12] S.P.S.S. Sivam, M. Gopal, S. Venkatasamy, S. Singh, Application of forming limit
diagram and yield surface diagram to study anisotropic mechanical properties
Please cite this article as: C. Chanakyan, et al., Parametric optimization for friction stir welding with AA2024 and AA6061 aluminium alloys by ANOVA and
GRG, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.257
5
of annealed and unannealed SPRC 440E steels, J. Chem. Pharmaceutical Sci. 9
(Special Issue) (2015) 15–22.
[13] S.P.S.S. Sivam, A. Lakshman Kumar, K. Sathiya Moorthy, R. Kumar,
Investigation exploration outcome of heat treatment on corrosion resistance
of AA 5083 in marine application, Int. J. Chem. Sc. 14 (S2) (2016) 453–460.
[14] S.P.S.S. Sivam, V.G. Uma Sekar, A. Mishra, A. Mondal, S. Mishra, Orbital cold
forming technology – combining high quality forming with cost effectiveness
– a review, Indian J. Sci. Technol. 9 (38) (2016) 1–7, https://doi.org/10.17485/
ijst/2016/v9i38/91426.
[15] S.P.S.S. Sivam, V.G. Uma Sekar, K. Saravanan, S. RajendraKumar, P. Karthikeyan,
K. Sathiya Moorthy, Frequently used anisotropic yield criteria for sheet metal
applications: a review, Indian J. Sci. Technol. 9 (47) (2016), https://doi.org/
10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i1/92107.
[16] S.P.S.S. Sivam, S.M. Karuppaiah, B.K. Yedida, J.R. Atluri, S. Mathur, Multi
response optimization of setting input variables for getting better product
quality in machining of magnesium AM60 by grey relation analysis and
ANOVA, Periodica Polytechnica Mech. Eng. 62 (2) (2018) 118–125, https://doi.
org/10.3311/PPme. 11034.
[17] K. Palani, C. Elanchezhian, B.V. Ramnath, G.B. Bhaskar, J.S. Jagadeesh, G.M.
Kumar, Int. J.Res. App. Sci. Eng. Tech. 5 (2017) 437–442.
[18] K. Palani, C. Elanchezhian, Appl. Mech. Mater 813 (2015) 446–450.
[19] G. Rajyalakshmi, G. Venkata Ramaiah, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 69 (5–8)
(2013) 1249–1262.
[20] S. Datta, A. Bandyopadhyay, P.K. Pal, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 39 (11–12)
(2008) 1136–1143.