This article was downloaded by: [Selcuk Universitesi]

On: 20 January 2015, At: 09:41

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Materials and Manufacturing Processes

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lmmp20

Mechanical and Metallurgical Studies in Double

Shielded GMAW of Dissimilar Stainless Steels
a a a
Ramesh Kumar , Anirban Bhattacharya & Tarun Kumar Bera
a
Mechanical Engineering Department, Thapar University, Patiala, India
Accepted author version posted online: 16 Dec 2014.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Ramesh Kumar, Anirban Bhattacharya & Tarun Kumar Bera (2014): Mechanical and Metallurgical
Studies in Double Shielded GMAW of Dissimilar Stainless Steels, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, DOI:
10.1080/10426914.2014.994760

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2014.994760

Disclaimer: This is a version of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service
to authors and researchers we are providing this version of the accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting,
typesetting, and review of the resulting proof will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of
the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to this version also.

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Mechanical and Metallurgical Studies in Double Shielded GMAW of Dissimilar
Stainless Steels

Ramesh Kumar1, Anirban Bhattacharya1, Tarun Kumar Bera1

1
Mechanical Engineering Department, Thapar University, Patiala, India

Corresponding author: Anirban Bhattacharya, Assistant Professor, Department of

Mechanical Engineering, Thapar University, Patiala, Punjab, India E-mail:
abhattacharya@thapar.edu

ABSTRACT

In the present work, a simple arrangement is made to provide double layer shielding gas
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

supply in addition to primary shielding during gas metal arc welding (GMAW) of two

dissimilar stainless steels i.e., AISI 316 and Duplex 2205. Influences of double layer

shielding in addition to five more process parameters like welding current, voltage,

material of electrode wire, type of primary shielding gas and flow rate are studied on joint

tensile strength and fusion zone microhardness. Experimental design technique is used to

design the experimental conditions and results are analyzed to observe the influences of

each process parameter and their interactions. Tensile strength is more influenced by

electrode material and type of shielding whereas current, interaction between current ×

voltage and current × flow rate significantly influence microhardness. Welding voltage

influences both tensile strength and microhardness. Double layer shielding with CO2 as

outer shielding layer helps in controlling cooling rate which improves tensile strength and

microhardness. Microstructural observations by scanning electron microscopy reveal that

moderate to low heat input with single layer of shielding results poor joint strength,

severe damage or lack of fusion and Duplex 2205 filler gives the maximum joint strength

due to presence of ferrite structure.

1
 KEYWORDS: Dissimilar; Double-layer; GMAW; Microhardness; Microstructure;

Shielding; Stainless; Steel; Tensile.

INTRODUCTION

Gas metal arc welding is one of the most widely used arc welding process due to specific

advantages like high efficiency, no flux requirement, low defects, low cost, good

appearance and ease of mechanization [1]. Improved mechanization and maintaining

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

uniform gap help in uniform penetration and smooth joint [2]. Austenitic stainless steels

have mostly face-centered cubic austenite structure and offers excellent corrosion

resistance but inferior in mechanical strength. Ferritic stainless steel provides better

mechanical properties but lacks corrosion resistance due to low chromium and nickel

contents. Good balances between these two steels are available in duplex stainless steel

(generally 50-50 mixture of austenite and ferrite). Austenitic stainless steels AISI 304,

AISI 316 are the two most common steels for numerous engineering and medical

applications. Out of all the standard duplex stainless steels, Duplex 2205 is the most

widely used material. Joining of dissimilar stainless steel is a matter of concern in order

to achieve sound, defect free joint of desirable strength. Reddy et al. [3] investigated joint

mechanical property and microstructure for dissimilar stainless steel welding during

different types of welding processes. Tensile strength, percentage elongation and

toughness of tungsten inert gas welded joint of austenitic stainless steel were studied [4].

Along with the process parameters like current, voltage, welding speed, the shielding gas

type, gas flow rate controls the cooling rate which decides the joint property as well as

2
 metallurgical behavior. Effects of process parameters on penetration during gas metal arc

welding process have been analyzed in [5]. Ebrahimnia et al. [6] studied the effects of

four different shielding gas compositions on weld pool protection, arc stabilization and

joint quality during automatic GMAW. They observed that with increase of CO2 in

shielding gas (in Ar) inclusion and porosity decreases; toughness first increases and then

remains constant, however, hardness increases due to higher carbon present in shielding

gas. Addition of hydrogen in shielding gas increases penetration, tensile strength and

toughness while joining austenitic stainless steel (AISI 304) in GMAW [7]. Some
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

particular gas mixture helps in spray transfer mode due to increase in thermal

conductivity and in some cases, repelled transfer occurs due to active components in the

mixture. When shielding gas is used with ternary mixture spray and short circuit transfer

mode will occur. Also, increase in amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide in shielding gas

fume formation rate increases and leads to increase in arc temperature and instability [8].

Best parametric combination for sound welding with high efficiency was proposed

adopting neuro-GA optimization approach during pulsed metal inert gas welding [9].

Wang et al. [10] investigated for mechanical behavior and microstructure of duplex

stainless steel composite plate (SAF2205/16MnR) joints welded by shielded metal arc

welding. Tensile strength of joint and microhardness during joining ferritic stainless steel

with low-carbon steel by synergic pulsed GMAW was studied in [11].

In the present study, an arrangement is made for providing additional shielding gas

peripherally supplied to the arc region circumscribing the primary gas shielding layer.

Effects of six different process parameters on joint are investigated during dissimilar

3
 welding. The influence of this double layer shielding along with five process parameters

namely current, voltage, filler wire, primary shielding gas type and flow rate on the weld

joint tensile strength and microhardness has been investigated during gas metal arc

welding of austenitic stainless steel (AISI 316) with duplex stainless steel (Duplex 2205).

After joining the plates, samples are prepared as per ASTM standard for tensile testing

and microhardness of fusion zone. Additionally, microstructural observations are carried

out by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in order to investigate the metallurgical

behavior of the joints.

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Austenitic stainless steel AISI 316 and duplex stainless steel Duplex 2205 are used as

workpiece for dissimilar joining. Compositions of workpiece materials as obtained by

optical emission spectroscopy analysis (Spectroscopy Foundry Master, Make: WAS,

Germany) are given in Table 1.

The workpieces are ground/ filed for edge preparation (single-v joint) and cleaned with

acetone to remove surface contaminants. Welding is carried out using MIG/MAG semi-

automatic welding machine (Torando 350, Make: Ador, India) as shown in Fig. 1(a). In

the present work, effects of double gas shielding along with other five process parameters

are studied on dissimilar joining of stainless steels during GMAW. Figure 1(b) shows the

nozzle tip with double shielding arrangement wherein additional supply of CO2 (passed

through heater) is supplied peripherally along with the primary shielding gas. The schema

is shown in Fig. 1(c). Welding current, voltage, shielding gas type, gas flow rate, type of

4
 shielding— single or double layer and filler wire are varied to study the influence of

process parameters and their interactions on joint tensile strength and microhardness.

Levels of factors are selected based on the pilot studies and the final selected levels of

each process parameter are given in Table 2. Selecting six factors each varied at three

levels, each factor has two degrees of freedom (dof) and total dof becomes twelve.

Following standard Taguchi’s fractional factorial design for three level factors, L27

orthogonal array (OA) is selected. L27 OA has 27 experimental trials (26 dof) with 13

columns where seven factors and three interactions are possible to study. In the present
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

case, six factors are assigned in such a way that along with the individual effects, three

interaction effects between current × voltage, current × flow rate and voltage × flow rate,

are studied. Two unassigned dof helps to identify error contribution that may be involved

during experimental work. Final form of experimental design with conditions for each 27

experiments is given in Table 3. After joining the workpieces as per conditions (Table 3),

samples are cut and prepared for tensile testing following the ASTM E8/E8M-09

standard and the sample dimensions are shown in Fig. 1(d). Uni-axial tension test is

carried out on all specimens for tensile strength using an UTM (HEICO Ltd., New Delhi,

India) of 60 kN capacity. All fractured samples after tensile testing are shown in Fig.

1(e).

Samples are cut, grinded (on belt grinder) and polished with emery papers of different

sizes for microhardness and metallurgical studies. Microhardness of the samples (at

fusion zone) are measured by a microhardness tester (make: Mitutoyo, Japan) applying

500 g load with dwell time of 20 s. For metallurgical studies, polished samples are etched

5
 and scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JEOL) is used to observe the micrographs of

selected samples.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Results of tensile strength and fusion zone microhardness for all experiments are noted

and are shown in Table 3 along with the trial conditions for each experiment. The results

are analyzed using statistical tool Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to identify the relative

influence of each process parameter and interactions on responses.

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

To find out the significance of various factors on tensile strength and microhardness,

ANOVA is performed and the summary of ANOVA is provided in Table 4. From Fischer

F-test it may be observed that (Table 4) voltage, filler wire, single or double layer

shielding and interaction of current × voltage are statistically significant parameters that

affect the tensile strength. Figure 2(a) shows the main effect plot to show the influence of

process parameters on joints tensile strength wherein x-axis shows levels of each process

parameters and y-axis shows the tensile strength with mean line. Figure 2(a) shows that

tensile strength increases with increase in voltage as voltage increases heat input and

deeper penetration. Filler wire of Duplex 2205 shows more tensile strength as compared

to AISI 316 or AISI 304 since solidification of duplex is more resistant to hot cracking

due to good thermal conductivity and lower thermal expansion. Tensile strength of

material also increases by using CO2 as an outer shielding (upto flow rate of 8 L/min)

because by using CO2 as an outer shielding it would not allow the inner layer of shielding

gas to contaminate with air due to which thermal conductivity of inner shielding gas is

6
 maintained and results in good tensile strength. Figure 2(b) shows the interaction between

factors on tensile strength and indicates the interaction between current and voltage to

influence tensile strength. With increase in current and voltage, tensile strength increases

because with increase in these parameters spray transfer of filler metal into the base metal

takes place resulting in more uniform and deeper penetration. It is also noted that more

heat input results in more diffusion of base material with filler material and this leads to

high tensile strength. But too much increase in current results in spatter, improper fusion

of base metal and filler wire.

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

Similarly, F-values (Table 4) indicate that current, voltage, filler wire, gas type and

interaction between current × voltage, current × flow rate are statistically the most

significant parameters that affect the microhardness. Microhardness variation is attributed

to the microstructural change that occurs due to weld thermal cycles that the material

undergoes during welding. Degree of fineness/coarseness of microstructure is

predominantly governed by thermal gradients and solidification growth rate which in turn

allows a fine dendritic weld microstructure for the weld zone with low heat input and

high cooling rate, and vice versa (high heat input resulting into slower cooling rate that

results into coarse dendritic weld microstructure). Figure 2(c) shows the influence of

process parameters on microhardness and Fig. 2(d) shows the interaction effect between

factors on microhardness of weld fusion zone. From Fig. 2(c) and (d) it is seen that

increase in current and voltage increase the microhardness. The interactions between

current × voltage, current × flow rate significantly influence microhardness because with

increase in current and voltage grain nucleation and growth of austenite can lead to

7
 reduce the dislocations of grains and work hardening compared to its elementary

condition. Among the shielding gas mixture, 70% Ar + 30% He results comparatively

higher hardness. The sample welded using 70% Ar + 30% He, microstructure is mainly

austenite and in small area adjacent to the boundary ferrite structure is formed. As a result

of the formation of primarily austenitic structures which present the nucleation of very

fine grain size and low inter granular spacing, maximum hardness value is achieved.

Filler wire of Duplex 2205 shows more hardness compared to AISI 304 due to more

resistance to hot cracking, good thermal conductivity and less thermal expansion
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

coefficient. Microhardness of material also increases using CO2 as an outer shielding

with flow rate of 8 L/min. Use of double shielding gas increases the cooling rate

compared to single layer shielding and relatively higher cooling rate may lead to some

retention of ferrite phase. Figure 3 shows the comparison between single and double layer

shielding (with two different flow rates of outer shielding gas CO2) for tensile strength

and microhardness of the welded joint at different welding voltages. It can be seen from

Fig. 3(a) that the double layer shielding with outer layer CO2 at a flow rate of 8 L/min

significantly enhances the welded joint tensile strength as compared to single layer

shielding. Also, the effect of double layer shielding is more distinct at higher voltage

setting of 18 V or 20 V. A similar effect for microhardness can also be seen in Fig. 3(b).

Microstructural observations of the weld fusion zone and HAZ for some of the samples

carried out by SEM are shown in Fig. 4. Figure 4 shows the SEM images at the two

interfaces i.e., between fusion zone & AISI 316 and fusion zone & Duplex 2205. In

welding metallurgy of AISI 316, α-ferrite describes the low temperature ferrite and δ-

8
 ferrite refers to high temperature ferrite whereas σ-phase denotes low temperature

equilibrium phase present in Duplex 2205 only (hard, brittle phase and undesirable).

When Cr > 24 % and heat input rate is more than 2.6 kJ, σ-phase is formed. Also lower

Cr/Ni ratio promotes austenite formation and higher Cr/Ni ratio promotes ferrite

formation. From the composition of the present AISI 316 workpiece material, values of

Creq (= Cr + 1.5Si + Mo + 0.5Cb) and Nieq (= Ni + 0.5Mn + 30C + 30N) are obtained as

18.34 and 11.3, respectively. Subsequently it is observed that there is zero content of δ

ferrite (δ = 3(Creq – 0.93Nieq – 6.7)). Also, the ratio of Cr to Ni percentage is calculated as

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

1.98 which promotes mostly austenite formation whereas a high value of Cr/Ni ratio (=

4.69) in case of Duplex 2205 promotes ferrite formation.

There are four possible solidification and solid-state transformations for austenitic

stainless steel weld metals. These reactions are related to the Fe-Cr-Ni phase diagram.

Type A solidification is completely austenite formation. AF solidification modes are

associated with austenite as primary and first phase upon solidification with some ferrite

forms at the end of the primary austenite solidification process via a eutectic reaction.

This occurs if sufficient ferrite-promoting elements (primarily Cr and Mo) separate the

solidification sub grain boundaries during solidification and lead to formation of ferrite as

terminal solidification product. This is thought to occur by a eutectic reaction and is

represented by the three-phase triangular region of the phase. The ferrite that forms along

the boundary is relatively stable and resists transformation to austenite during weld

cooling since it is already enriched in ferrite-promoting elements. Figure 4 shows the

dependence of the dendritic microstructure on welding heat input and process parameters.

9
 Dendrite size and inter dendritic spacing is relatively fine at lower heat input rates of 1.6

kJ/mm and 1.8 kJ/mm in trial 7 and 18 ( Fig. 4 (b) and (e)) due to faster cooling rates as

well as retained ferrite available from Duplex 2205 filler. In trial 18, gas flow rate of 16

L/min and double shielding causes a faster cooling due to which some ferrite structure is

present as end solidification product and additional ferrite from the Duplex 2205 filler

gives maximum tensile strength of the joint. Similarly, some extent of type AF

solidification and major ferrite from filler wire result in improved tensile strength and

microhardness. A relatively low tensile strength is obtained in trial 2 (Fig 4 (a)), with
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

very low heat input rate of 1.28 kJ/mm, relatively lighter shielding gas (He) and AISI 316

filler. In trial 10 (Fig. 4(c)), heat input rate of 1.44 kJ/mm is applied but it results in worst

tensile strength. It may be due to porosity in the fusion zone and improper fusion as

shown in Fig. 4(c) with lower gas flow rate of shielding gas (12 L/min) and Ar + He as

shielding gas. It is clearly seen from Fig. 4(d) that in single layer shielding, the interface

with fusion zone is badly damaged with low tensile strength of the joint. Conversely,

coarse dendritic microstructure is possessed as shown in Fig. 4(f) (trial 27) by the weld

zone corresponding to higher welding heat input, as relatively slower cooling rate

provides these dendrites with sufficient time to grow and the solidification kinetics exists

locally. In trial 27, heat input is more i.e., 2 kJ/mm leads to formation of coarse grain size

in fusion zone and results in poor tensile strength. This observation is based upon the

theory of solidification which states that high welding heat input into the joint would

result into high heat accumulation, thus resulting into low temperature gradient and slow

growth rate, consequently leading to a significant increase in the dendrite arm spacing.

Conversely, low heat input causes steep temperature gradient with rapid growth rate in

10
 the joint and thus, it results in small dendrite arm spacing. As observed from the photo-

micrographs of the heat affected zones (HAZs) of these weldments shown in Fig. 4(f)

(trial 27), grain coarsening effect which tends to weaken HAZ zone of the joint is induced

and thus could affect the functional performance of the weld joint in actual service. It is

seen that the extent of grain coarsening with higher heat input in this zone is relatively

higher, whereas low heat input, by virtue of subjecting this zone to steeper thermal

gradients, helps in inhibiting the grain growth.

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the detailed experiments conducted at different process conditions and the

microstructural observation by SEM, the following conclusions are drawn:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Authors sincerely acknowledge the partial financial support received under the aegis of

Technical Education Quality Improvement Program – Phase II (TEQIP-II).

Double layer shielding with CO2 as outer shielding layer helps in controlling cooling rate
and improves joint tensile strength and microhardness as compared to single layer
shielding.
Welding voltage, electrode filler wire material and type of shielding are found most
significant factors that influence tensile strength. Duplex 2205 gives the maximum joint
strength and double layer shielding improves joint strength.
Current, voltage, interaction between current × voltage and current × flow rate are found
significant in controlling microhardness.
Increase in current or voltage increases tensile strength and microhardness but very high
values of current and voltage (as combined effect) leads to poor joint strength due to more
amount of spatter.

11
 Use of Duplex 2205 filler in austenitic-duplex steel joining leads to the significant
improvement in tensile strength due to presence of ferrite structure. Ferrites are observed
as end solidification product at relatively higher heat input.

REFERENCES

1. Bhattacharya, A.; Bera, T.K. Development of automatic GMAW setup for process
improvements: experimental and modelling approach. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes 2014, 29, 988–995.
2. Bhattacharya, A.; Bera, T.K.; Suri, V.K. Influence of heat input in automatic GMAW:
penetration prediction and microstructural observation. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes 2014, available online, DOI:10.1080/10426914.2014.930889.
3. Reddy, G.M.; Mohandas, T.; Rao, A.S.; Satyanarayana, V.V. Influence of welding processes
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

on microstructure and mechanical properties of dissimilar austenitic-ferritic stainless steel

welds. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2005, 20 (2), 147–173.
4. Kumar, S.; Shahi, A.S. On the influence of welding stainless steel on microstructural
development and mechanical performance. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2014, 29
(8), 894–902.
5. Karadeniz, E.; Ozsarac, U.; Yildiz, C. The effect of process parameters on penetration in gas
metal arc welding processes. Materials and Design 2007, 28, 649–656.
6. Ebrahimnia, M.; Goodarzi, M.; Nouri, M.; Sheikhi M. Study of the effect of shielding gas
composition on the mechanical weld properties of steel ST 37-2 in gas metal arc welding.
Materials and Design 2009, 30, 3891–3895.
7. Gulnec, B.; Develi, K.; Kahraman, N.; Durgutlu, A. Experimental study of the effect of
hydrogen in argon as a shielding gas in GMAW welding of austenitic stainless steel.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2005, 30, 1475–1481.
8. Pires, I.; Quintino, L.; Miranda, R.M. Analysis of the influence of shielding gas mixtures on
the gas metal arc welding metal transfer modes and fume formation rate. Materials and
Design 2007, 28, 1623–1631.
9. Pal, S.; Pal, S.K.; Samantaray, A.K. Determination of optimal pulse metal inert gas welding
parameters with a neuro-GA technique. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2010, 25 (7),
606–615.
10. Wang, S.G.; Dong, G.P.; Ma, Q.H. Welding of duplex stainless steel composite plate:
Influence on microstructural development. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2010, 25
(7), 606–615.
11. Teker, T; Kursun, T. Weldability of AISI 430/AISI 1030 steel couples via the synergic
controlled pulsed (GMAW-P) and manual gas metal arc (GMAW) welding techniques.
Materials and Manufacturing Processes 2011, 26 (7), 926–932.

12
 Table 1.― Compositions of AISI 316 and Duplex 2205 workpiece

Material Compositions in percentage

C Mn Si Cr Ni S P Mo Cu N Fe

AISI 0.07 0.36 0.29 17. 9.0 0.00 0.06 0.00 1.42 0 70.86

316 9 2 9 5 6

Duplex 0.1 1.46 0.32 23. 4.9 0.00 0.02 3.26 0.19 0.1 66.45

2205 7 1 2 5 0 8 6
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

13
 Table 2.― Levels of each process parameters selected for the study

S. Parameter Symbol Units Levels

No 1 2 3

1. Welding current A A 160 180 200

2. Welding voltage B V 16 18 20

3. Shielding gas C - Ar He 70% Ar + 30%

He
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

4. Gas flow rate D L/min 10 12 14

5. Filler wire E - AISI 304 AISI 316 Duplex 2205

6. Single or double F L/min Single Double layer Double layer

layer shielding layer (CO2)1 (CO2)2

((CO2)1: double layer shielding with CO2 gas flow rate of 8 L/min, (CO2)2: double layer

shielding with CO2 gas flow rate of 12 L/min)

14
 Table 3.― L27 orthogonal array of experimental design with tensile strength and microhardness results

Flow rate Tensile strength Microhardness

Exp. No. Current (A) Voltage (V) Filler wire Shielding gas type Single or double layer
(L/min) (MPa) (VHN)

1 160 16 12 AISI 304 Ar Single Layer 480.80 291.614

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

2 160 16 14 AISI 316 He (CO2)1 388.80 302.663

3 160 16 16 Duplex 2205 70% Ar + 30% He (CO2)2 333.76 297.138
4 160 18 12 AISI 316 He (CO2)2 299.04 299.901
5 160 18 14 Duplex 2205 70% Ar + 30% He Single Layer 377.60 305.577
6 160 18 16 AISI 304 Ar (CO2)1 494.88 280.564
7 160 20 12 Duplex 2205 70% Ar + 30% He (CO2)1 780.96 304.197
8 160 20 14 AISI 304 Ar (CO2)2 423.04 279.200
9 160 20 16 AISI 316 He Single Layer 268.16 272.951
10 180 16 12 AISI 316 70% Ar + 30% He (CO2)1 139.04 274.260
11 180 16 14 Duplex 2205 Ar (CO2)2 316.80 272.951
12 180 16 16 AISI 304 He Single Layer 371.28 271.642
13 180 18 12 Duplex 2205 Ar Single Layer 425.76 285.630
14 180 18 14 AISI 304 He (CO2)1 538.72 294.781
15 180 18 16 AISI 316 70% Ar + 30% He (CO2)2 380.16 317.919
16 180 20 12 AISI 304 He (CO2)2 661.40 329.488

15
 17 180 20 14 AISI 316 70% Ar + 30% He Single Layer 527.04 341.058
18 180 20 16 Duplex 2205 Ar (CO2)1 856.64 364.196
19 200 16 12 Duplex 2205 He (CO2)2 388.32 351.965
20 200 16 14 AISI 304 70% Ar + 30% He Single Layer 305.76 339.734
21 200 16 16 AISI 316 Ar (CO2)1 223.20 342.792
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

22 200 18 12 AISI 304 70% Ar + 30% He (CO2)1 750.72 315.273

23 200 18 14 AISI 316 Ar (CO2)2 302.40 313.465
24 200 18 16 Duplex 2205 He Single Layer 453.60 311.658
25 200 20 12 AISI 316 Ar Single Layer 421.44 312.863
26 200 20 14 Duplex 2205 He (CO2)1 656.80 311.658
27 200 20 16 AISI 304 70% Ar + 30% He (CO2)2 468.64 310.453
((CO2)1: double layer shielding having outer shielding of CO2 at flow rate of 8 L/min, (CO2)2: double layer shielding having outer

shielding of CO2 at flow rate of 12 L/min)

16
 Table 4.― Summary of ANOVA results for tensile strength and microhardness

Source Symbol dof Tensile strength Microhardness

SS Variance F- SS Variance F-

value value

Current (A) A 2 7874 3937 0.81 4263.1 2131.54 348.01

Voltage (V) B 2 248853 124427 25.65 639.7 319.84 52.22

Flow rate C 2 18814 9407 1.94 3.8 1.88 0.31

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

(L/min)

Filler wire D 2 188584 94292 19.44 499.3 249.63 40.76

Gas E 2 818 409 0.08 272.9 136.43 22.27

Single or F 2 111754 55877 11.52 193.5 96.77 15.80

double layer

Current × A×B 4 101254 25314 5.22 9633.6 2408.41 393.21

Voltage

Current × A×C 4 76386 19097 3.94 1158.3 289.58 47.28

Flow rate

Voltage × B×C 4 9207 2302 0.47 84.2 21.04 3.44

Flow rate

Residual 2 9702 4851 12.2 6.12

Error

Total 26 773247 16760.5

(dof: degree of freedom, SS: sum of squares)

17
 Figure 1. ― Schematic illustration of GMAW arrangement and tensile specimens
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

18
 Figure 2. ― (a) Main effect, (b) interaction plot to show influence of process parameters

on joint tensile strength and (c) main effect, (d) interaction plot for microhardness
Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

19
 Figure 3. ― Comparison between single versus double layer shielding for (a) tensile

strength and (b) microhardness at different welding voltages

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

20
 Figure 4. ― Microstructural observations by SEM at interfaces between (i) AISI 316 and

fusion zone, (ii) Duplex 2205 and fusion zone

Downloaded by [Selcuk Universitesi] at 09:41 20 January 2015

21