Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762
DOI 10.1007/s00170-012-4214-0
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Friction surfacing on nonferrous substrates:
a feasibility study
K. Prasad Rao & Arun Sankar & H. Khalid Rafi &
G. D. Janaki Ram & G. Madhusudhan Reddy
Received: 24 November 2011 / Accepted: 1 May 2012 / Published online: 22 May 2012
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012
Abstract This work reports a feasibility study on producing
friction surfaced coatings on nonferrous substrates. Commer-
cially pure aluminum, copper, magnesium (ZM21), Inconel
800, and titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4 V) were chosen as the
substrates. Low carbon steel, aluminum alloy (AA6063),
commercially pure copper and titanium were chosen as the
consumable rods. Friction surfacing was attempted with all
consumable rods on every substrate. In some cases metallur-
gically bonded coating was obtained readily over the substrate
and in some other cases coating was obtained with a start-up
plate. However, for certain combination of parameters, no
coating could be obtained. The coatings obtained were analyzed
for their microstructural features and interfacial characteristics
using optical and scanning electron microscopy. The results
showed that co-efficient of friction, material properties like
thermal conductivity, and stability at high temperature influ-
enced the formation of a coating. Coatings obtained exhibited
fine grained microstructure with properties better than the
original parent material. Dynamic recrystalization as a result
of severe plastic deformation accounts for grain refinement.
K. P. Rao : A. Sankar : H. K. Rafi (*) : G. D. J. Ram
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai 600-036, India
e-mail: khalidrafi@gmail.com
G. M. Reddy
Metal Joining Group,
Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory (DMRL),
Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad 500-058, India
Present Address:
H. K. Rafi
Department of Industrial Engineering, Speed School of Engineering,
University of Louisville,
Louisville, KY 40292, USA
Keywords Nonferrous metals . Coatings . Friction surfacing
1 Introduction
Friction surfacing is an emerging technology for producing
solid-state coatings over a variety of substrates, owing to its
capability to produce coatings with minimal dilution and
good metallurgical bonding. The solid-state nature of the
process helps to avoid melting of the coating material and
hence free from most of the problems associated with con-
ventional hardfacing techniques. In friction surfacing, the
material to be coated is taken in rod form and rotated against
the substrate under an axial load. Friction heat generated by
the violent rubbing between rod and substrate softens the
rod end and brings it to viscoplastic state. The material in
visco-plastic state gets coated over the substrate as the
substrate moves against the rubbing surface of the rod.
The process is described in detail by Chatopadyay [14]. A
schematic of friction surfacing process is shown in Fig. 1.
Friction surfacing of few dissimilar combinations was
already attempted. Among the reported works, friction sur-
facing of alloy steels on low carbon steel was mostly studied.
Friction-surfaced steel coatings are now under active consid-
eration for different commercial applications [1]. Process
parameter optimization and process modeling were studied
for steel combinations by Voutchkov et al. [15], Vitanov et al.
[16, 17], Rafi et al. [6], and Liu et al. [8, 9]. These studies
established the feasibility of producing different alloy steel
coatings for wear and corrosion applications using optimized
parameters. Studies on interfacial characteristics of the coating
showed that the coatings are metallurgically bonded to the
substrate without any dilution, which is the highlight of this
technique. Metallurgical bonding was obtained by bringing
together the two nascent surfaces, formed by the removal of
756
Fig. 1 Schematic of friction surfacing process
oxide layers due to violent rubbing under compressive force.
Friction surfacing of dissimilar metal combinations was
reported by Chandrasekaran et al. [2, 3]. They attempted
surfacing of aluminum and Inconel 800 over mild steel and
found that aluminum was difficult to coat over mild steel
under normal conditions where as Inconel 800 can be readily
coated. This discrepancy was attributed to the difference in
thermal stability of both the materials at elevated temperatures.
In open literature, reports on friction surfaced coatings on
nonferrous substrates are limited. Reddy et al. [11, 12] success-
fully carried out friction surfacing of aluminum metal matrix
composite over cast aluminum substrate and titanium substrate.
Because of the poor response of some nonferrous materials to
higher loads and higher temperatures, it is of great interest to
know the feasibility of producing friction-surfaced coatings on
different nonferrous substrate with a variety of consumable
materials. In this work, an attempt was made to coat materials
such as low carbon steel, commercially pure aluminum, titani-
um, and copper over the nonferrous substrates like aluminum,
magnesium, copper, and Inconel 800. These combinations are
of interest in producing bimetallic strips for different industrial
applications. Successful coatings are further characterized to
study microstructural features and interfacial characteristics.
2 Experimental procedure
A custom-made friction-surfacing machine was used to
carry out the current work. The machine was capable to
deliver 10 kN axial load, with a maximum spindle speed of
3,000 rpm. Substrate plates used for this study were com-
mercially pure (CP) copper, CP aluminum, magnesium
(ZM21), Inconel 800, and titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4 V). All
the plates were of dimension 150×200×10 mm. Precautions
were taken to avoid entrapment of any artifacts during
surfacing. Both the plate and rubbing end of the rods were
thoroughly cleaned with acetone prior to surfacing.
Standard metallographic procedures were followed to
prepare samples for optical microscopy (OM) and scanning
electron microscopy (SEM). OM was carried out by Lieca
optical microscope and for SEM, FEI QUANTA 200
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762
scanning microscope equipped with EDAX was used. Vick-
ers microhardness measurements were carried out with
100 g load and 15 s dwell time.
Shear test was carried out based on ASTM A264 by
using a Universal testing machine (make, FIE; capacity,
50 kN) having special attachment for shear test. Shear test
gives the interfacial bond strength between the coating and
the substrate. Although this standard is originally meant for
assessing the bond integrity for stainless steel cladding over
steel substrates, it was used as a representative test in this case.
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Feasibility study on different nonferrous substrates
Details showing the substrate, the coating, the possibility
for coating formation, reasons for good or bad coating with
corresponding images are given in Table 1. Continuous
coating was obtained with steel consumable rods over
copper and Inconel 800 substrates. As expected, due to
the wide differences in strength and thermal properties,
getting coating was difficult in other cases. For instance,
in the case of aluminum and magnesium substrates, their
strength at high temperature is too low to withstand the
torque generated by the rotation of consumable rod. For
titanium substrate, apart from its low strength at elevated
temperature, oxidation during the process limited the for-
mation of coating. In few cases, discontinuous coatings
(some portions sticking to the substrate) were obtained.
3.2 Surfacing of steel on copper substrate
In contrast to the wider process parameter window observed
for friction surfacing between ferrous systems [6], the
parameter window is too narrow to get a successful coating
of steel over copper substrate. The heat generation at the
consumable rod–substrate interface is mainly a function of
parameters such as rotational speed and traverse speed. A
combination of higher rotational speed and lower traverse
speed results in maximum heat generation. Unlike steels,
copper cannot withstand a larger heating range at elevated
temperatures as it softens very fast. Therefore, it is required
to strike a balance between the mechanical stability and the
maximum temperature copper can withstand during defor-
mation. While carrying out the experiments, it was observed
that small variations from the optimum parameters resulted
in irregular coatings. But for friction surfacing between
ferrous materials, deviations from the optimum parameters
resulted only in variation of the width or thickness of the
coatings [6]. The parameter set which resulted in successful
steel coating over copper substrate was; rotational speed,
2,400 rpm; traverse speed, 2 mm/s; and axial load, 8 kN.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762 757

Table 1 Details of coating feasibility with respect to different substrate/consumable rod combinations
758 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762

Fig. 2 Low carbon steel friction surfaced over copper substrate (top
view)

A friction-surfaced coating of low carbon steel over copper

substrate is shown in Fig. 2. The coating is regular and free
from any discontinuities. At the starting region, some amount
of deformation can be observed in the substrate which gets
subsided as the coating advances. The entire coating process
can be divided into two phases; dwell phase where the sub-
strate is stationary and the deposition phase where the sub-
strate is moving. During dwell phase, the heat generation
occurs by the friction due to direct contact between the rod
and the substrate. The frictional heat generated during the
initial period cause a localized softening on copper substrate,
which is evident from the displacement of material on either
side. However, as the rubbing proceeds, heat concentration
occurring at the interface results in preferential heating of the
steel rod due to the dimensional difference and difference in
thermal conductivity between the copper plate and the steel
rod. Thus, the rubbing end of the steel rod gets severely
plasticized and the viscoplastic material gets transferred to
the copper substrate to form a coating.
During the deposition phase, the substrate moves at a
constant rate. At this stage, a plasticized layer forms Fig.3 Low carbon steel friction surfaced over copper substrate—inter-
mixing at the interface a OM and b SEM-SE image
between the rod and substrate which eventually forms the
coating. Therefore, at this stage, there is no direct interaction
of the steel rod to copper substrate. Rather, the contact is It is known that there is a wide disparity in the physical and
between the already deposited coating and the deformed mechanical properties between steel and copper. This makes it
steel rod as observed by Bedford et al. [1]. This results in difficult to consider fusion based techniques for joining these
the formation of a regular coating with minimal deformation two materials. Even for solid-state-based joining process, the
on copper substrate during the deposition phase. difference in properties is a matter of concern. In friction
Characterization of the coating/substrate interface
reveals a defect-free continuous interface. The physical
mixing of steel and copper observed at the interface
indicates the microdeformation experienced by copper
substrate during deposition phase (Fig. 3). However, the
interface did not show any indications of formation of
undesirable phases. Microhardness survey taken across
the interface shows an increase in coating hardness when
compared to the original base material (Fig. 4). This is
because of grain refinement due to dynamic recrystaliza-
tion [7]. An increase in substrate hardness near to the
interface was also noticed, which could be due to the Fig. 4 Low carbon steel friction surfaced over copper substrate—
large strain experienced by thermal cycling. microhardness survey across the interface
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762 759

surfacing, flow stress at elevated temperature play a crucial

role. When higher temperature and higher loads are applied
simultaneously, the weaker among the couple is supposed to
deform faster as observed in friction welding of dissimilar
combinations by Maalekian [13]. In this case, though copper
substrate is weaker than steel at higher temperature, steel con-
sumable rod underwent plastic deformation and got deposited
over copper substrate. This is because of the difference in
dimensions between the copper plate and the steel rod. Higher
thermal conductivity and the larger surface area of copper plate
cause faster heat dissipation when compared to the consumable
steel rod. Therefore, major part of the heat generated gets
concentrated to the rubbing surface of the rod, causing a surge
in temperature. This leads to severe plastic deformation of the
steel consumable rod. The coating integrity assessed using
shear test (ASTM A264) showed interfacial bond strength of
105 MPa.
3.3 Surfacing of steel on Inconel 800 substrate

High temperature strength of Inconel 800 makes it a suitable

material for friction surfacing as consumable and substrate.
Earlier studies performed by Chandrasekaran et al. [4] showed
feasibility of coating Inconel 800 over steel substrate. In this
work, low carbon steel was coated over Inconel 800 substrate.
The parameter selection was more flexible as compared to
steel coating over copper substrate. This can be attributed to
the high temperature stability of both inconel and steel. The
parameter set used for this coating was; rotational speed,
1,600 rpm; traverse speed, 2 mm/s; and axial load, 10 kN.
Coatings were also produced with different parameter sets by
varying rotational speed between 800 and 2,000 rpm, and
traverse speed between 1.6 and 3.6 mm/s. In the entire cases,
axial load was kept constant at 10 kN.
Figure 5 shows a typical friction-surfaced coating of low Fig. 6 Interface microstructure of friction surfaced coating of steel
over Inconel 800 substrate a OM and b SEM secondary electron image
carbon steel over Inconel 800 substrate. The interface
micrograph showed good bond integrity between steel coating
and Inconel 800 substrate (Fig. 6). No intermixing was no- temperatures. The interfacial bond strength of the coating
ticed between the coating and the substrate. Unlike copper was found to be 144 MPa from the shear test. Higher interfa-
substrate, no deformation in the Inconel 800 substrate was cial bond strength indicates a good metallurgical bonding
observed due to its resistance to deformation at elevated between the two materials.
Although friction surfacing was possible on copper and
Inconel 800 substrates, aluminum and magnesium sub-
strates did not respond positively to surfacing because of
differences in thermomechanical properties. In the case
of commercially pure aluminum substrate, except AA
6063, all other consumable rods produced a cavity on
the substrate. The rubbing surface of the consumable
rods remained undeformed indicating that the frictional
heat developed was very minimal. Coating was obtained
for AA6063 consumable rods. This is because of the
similar properties and relatively high co-efficient of
Fig. 5 Low carbon steel friction surfaced over Inconel 800 substrate friction between aluminum. Similar was the case with
(top view) magnesium substrate where no coating was obtained
760
Fig. 7 Start-up plate arrangement for friction surfacing
with none of the consumable rods. Surfacing on softer
substrate can be made possible by using a start-up plate.
By using a steel start-up plate, the materials that can be
surfaced over steel can be surfaced over other difficult
to coat substrates. To demonstrate this, steel was sur-
faced over aluminum substrate using a start-up plate.
3.4 Surfacing of steel on aluminum substrate using start-up
plate
A steel start-up plate of same thickness was kept close to
aluminum substrate and clamped so that both the plates
together form a continuous surface. A schematic of the
set-up is shown in Fig. 7. The consumable rod was first
touched with the steel start-up plate and allowed to rotate till
sufficient amount of plasticized material was formed (dwell
phase). The table was then allowed to traverse against the
consumable rod. By the time the steel rod approaches
Fig. 8 a Low carbon steel friction surfaced over aluminum substrate
with start-up plate (top view) b OM at the interface
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762
aluminum substrate, the process attains a steady state by
forming a sufficiently thick plasticized layer (deposition
phase). Once a thick layer of material starts forming, then
the contact is between the consumable rod and already depos-
ited coating. Therefore, when the rotating consumable rod
enters into aluminum substrate, there would not be any direct
interference between the rod and aluminum substrate. Here,
the coating is formed by the simultaneous action of forward
motion of the viscoplastic material due to relative motion
between the consumable rod and the substrate, and spreading
of plasticized material over the substrate due to rotational
effect of the consumable rod. Consolidation of the coating
occurs due to the continuous action of axial load. Figure 8a
shows a steel coating produced over aluminum substrate using
start-up plate. Optical image of steel coating-aluminum sub-
strate interface is shown in Fig. 8b. A regular bead was
obtained without any discontinuity. The interface character-
ization using SEM-energy dispersive spectroscopy shows a
clear interface without any voids or unbonded regions (Fig. 9).
However, an unbonded region on either edge was observed,
Fig. 9 Low carbon steel friction surfaced over aluminum substrate
with start-up plate. a SEM secondary electron image at the interface
and b line scan across the interface
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762 761

this work is in confirmation with a previous work carried

out by Chandrasekaran et al. [2, 3].
Although in start-up plate method the friction surfacing is
initiated on a steel surface by a steel consumable rod, proper
parameter selection is required since the coating proceeds to a
softer substrate. In this case, axial load is more important. As the
coating enters to the soft aluminum substrate from the start-up
plate, the consumable rod may dig into the aluminum substrate.
Therefore, an axial force which can provide the minimum
required thrust for surfacing need to be used. Hence, an axial
force of 6 kN was used in this case. The rotational speed and
traverse speed used was 2,000 rpm and 2 mm/s, respectively.

3.5 Microstructural characterization of the steel coating

over aluminum substrate

A comparison between the microstructure of as-received low

carbon steel and low carbon steel coating is shown in Fig. 10.
Similar microstructural characteristics were obtained for steel
coatings in all the three substrates. Figure 10b, c corresponds to
the regions “a” and “b” in Fig. 8b. The coating microstructures
are finer near to the top surface owing to the higher cooling
rates. However, coarse grains can be observed in the region near
to the interface. The coating microstructure predominantly con-
sists of acicular ferrite and Widmanstatten ferrite. Acicular
ferrite microstructure improves strength and toughness of the
steel coating. This is because the plates of acicular ferrite
nucleates intergranularly on nonmetallic inclusions with in
austenitic grains, and then radiated in different orientations from
those inclusions while maintaining an orientation relationship
with the austenite [10]. Figure 11 shows SEM secondary elec-
tron image of the acicular ferrite formed in the steel coating.

Fig. 10 OM of a low carbon steel consumable rod b region

corresponding to a in Fig. 8b, c region corresponding to b in Fig. 8b

which is an inherent characteristic of friction surfacing. The

line scan across the interface did not show any indications of
material transfer/physical mix-up between the coating and the
substrate. Interfacial bond strength between coating and sub- Fig. 11 SEM secondary electron image of the steel coating over
strate was found to be 112 MPa. The result obtained in aluminum substrate showing acicular ferrite
762
Formation of acicular ferrite requires a temperature range
of 350–400°C. During friction surfacing, frictional heat
generated is sufficiently high to reach an autenizing temper-
ature range of 1,150–1,250°C [8]. Higher temperature and
higher strain rates involved in the process create the situation
for dynamic recrystalization of austenitic phase. Grain growth
may not be expected after dynamic recrystalization since the
time spent by the plasticized metal at elevated temperature is
quite low. Though the top surface of the coating cools at
much faster rates as it is exposed to the atmosphere, the
cooling rates of subsurfaces are relatively slow. This is be-
cause of the heat conduction from the moving consumable
rod towards the already deposited coating. Therefore, the
coating subsurface experiences a temperature within the
range of acicular ferrite transformation temperature and ini-
tiates the formation of acicular ferrite.
n summary, friction surfacing is a promising technique to
produce solid-state dissimilar metallic coatings on variety of
metallic substrates. Developing procedures for producing
coatings over difficult to coat substrates can make this process
more attractive. Such an attempt is made in this work. Steel
coatings were successfully deposited over copper, inconel,
and aluminum substrates (For depositing steel over aluminum
substrates, steel start-up plates was used). To enhance the
value of friction surfacing as a surface coating process for
wear and corrosion protection, it is required to produce mul-
titrack and multilayered coatings. Efforts are being taken in
this direction [5]. Larger area coverage is made by generating
a complete layer from multiple overlapping tracks of friction
surfaced material, which is subsequently shaped as required
using computer numerical control machining. The most crit-
ical aspect in multitracking is getting satisfactory bonding
between individual tracks. This can be achieved by using a
fully integrated friction surfacing machine capable of precise-
ly controlling material deposition.
4 Conclusions
(a) This study demonstrated the feasibility of producing
friction surfaced coatings on nonferrous substrates.
(b) Process parameter selection as a function of material
properties is a key factor in getting successful coatings
(c) Low carbon steel could be coated with ease over copper
and Inconel 800 substrates. For steel coating over copper,
defect-free interface was noticed with physical mixing of
steel and copper without any indications of formation of
undesirable phases. No intermixing was noticed between
low carbon steel coating and Inconel 800 substrate.
(d) Low carbon steel could not be coated over magnesium
and titanium substrates. However, steel coatings could
be produced over aluminum substrate using steel start-
up plate.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2013) 65:755–762
(e) Copper and CP titanium coatings could not be depos-
ited on any substrate material.
(f) AA 6063 aluminum alloy could be deposited on CP
aluminum substrate alone.
Acknowledgments Authors gratefully acknowledge Naval Research
Board, DRDO, Govt. of India for funding this project.
References
1. Bedford GM, Vitanov VI, Voutchkov II (2001) On the thermo-
mechanical events during friction surfacing of high speed steels.
Surf Coat Technol 141:34–39
2. Chandrasekaran M, Batchelor AW, Jana S (1997) Friction surfacing
of metal coatings on steel and aluminum substrate. J Mater Process
Technol 72:446–452
3. Chandrasekaran M, Batchelor AW, Jana S (1997) Study of the
interfacial phenomena during friction surfacing of aluminium with
steels. J Mater Sci 32:6055–6062
4. Chandrasekaran M, Batchelor AW, Jana S (1998) Study of the
interfacial phenomena during friction surfacing of mild steel with
tool steel and inconel. J Mater Sci 33:2709–2717
5. Dilip JJS, Babu S, Varadha Rajan S, Rafi H, Janaki Ram GD, Stucker
Brent (2012) Use of friction surfacing for additive manufacturing.
Mater Manuf Process. doi:10.1080/10426914.2012.677912
6. Khalid Rafi H, Janaki Ram GD, Phanikumar G, Prasad RK (2010)
Friction surfaced tool steel (H13) coatings on low carbon steel—a
study on the effects of process parameters on coating character-
istics and integrity. Surf Coat Technol 205:232–242
7. Khalid Rafi H, Janaki Ram GD, Phanikumar G, Prasad Rao K
(2011) Microstructural evolution during friction surfacing of tool
steel H13. Mater Des 32:82–87
8. Liu XM, Zou ZD, Zhang YH, Qu SY, Wang XH (2008) Transfer-
ring mechanism of the coating rod in friction surfacing. Surf Coat
Technol 202:1889–1894
9. Liu X, Yao J, Wang X, Zou Z, Shiyao Qu (2009) Finite difference
modeling on the temperature field of consumable-rod in friction
surfacing. J Mater Process Technol 209:1392–1399
10. Lee CH, Bhadeshia HKDH, Lee HC (2003) Effect of plastic deforma-
tion on the formation of acicular ferrite. Mater Sci Eng A 360:249–257
11. Reddy GM, Rao KS, Mohandas T (2009) Friction surfacing: novel
technique for metal matrix composite coating on aluminium–silicon
alloy. Surf Eng 25:25–30
12. Reddy GM, Satya Prasad K, Rao KS, Mohandas T (2011) Friction
surfacing of titanium alloy with aluminum metal matrix composite.
Surf Eng 27:92–98
13. Maalekian M (2007) Friction welding—critical assessment of
literature. Sci Technol Weld Joining 12:738–759
14. Chatopadyay R (2004) Advance thermally assisted surface engi-
neering process. Kluwer, New York
15. Voutchkov I, Jaworski B, Vitanov VI, Bedford GM (2001) An
integrated approach to friction surfacing process optimization. Surf
CoatTechnol 141:26–33
16. Vitanov VI, Voutchkov II, Bedford GM (2000) Decision support
system to optimise the Frictec (friction surfacing) process. J Mater
Process Technol 107:236–242
17. Vitanov VI, Voutchkov II (2005) Process parameters selection for
friction surfacing applications using intelligent decision support. J
Mater Process Technol 159:27–32