Minimising electrode wear in resistance spot

welding of aluminium alloys

R. R. Patil1, C. J. K. Anurag Tilak2, V. Srivastava2 and A. De*1
Rapid electrode wear due to localised random alloying between copper and aluminium at high
temperature is by far the greatest challenge for the resistance spot welding of aluminium alloys.
An effective recourse would be to enhance the overall electrical conductivity along the electrode/
sheet interface to reduce the resistive heating of copper electrode and to prohibit direct contact
between electrode and sheet during welding. We propose here the application of carbon black
paste in fluidic form as a barrier along the electrode/sheet interface both for the enhancement of
electrical conductivity and for the prohibition of direct electrode to sheet contact. Carbon black is
chemically inert to both copper and aluminium and in fluidic form allows the enhancement of
thermal and electrical conductance due to better conformability within a pressurised contact. The
present experimental study has shown a significant enhancement in electrode life in the presence
of the carbon black based barrier coating along the interface.
Keywords: Resistance spot welding, Aluminium alloys, Electrode wear, Interfacial barrier

Introduction Hicken suggested the formation of a diffusion controlled,

Resistance spot welding (RSW) involves the simulta-
neous application of high current and pressure between
two or more metallic sheets, which are held by a pair
of water cooled copper electrodes, for a small time
duration. The resistive heat generated at the sheet/sheet
interface results in localised melting that on solidifica-
tion forms the weld nugget. Although the RSW of
uncoated and even coated steel sheets is now well
established,1–7 the same has remained a challenge for
aluminium alloys due to the rapid electrode wear to the
extent that redressing of electrodes is needed only after a
very few spots. In contrast, a few thousand spots with
galvanised steels and even 10 000 spots with uncoated
steel are possible without electrode redressing.8,9 The
RSW of aluminium, because of its high thermal and
electrical conductivities, needs a very high amperage
current, which also leads to significant resistive heating
along the electrode/sheet (ES) interface. At high tem-
perature, chemical alloying between copper and alumi-
nium occurs followed by pitting and loss of material
from the electrode face.10,11 Although the mechanism of
electrode wear during the RSW of aluminium alloys is
studied extensively,12–23 methods to counter, mitigate or
eliminate the same remain unavailable.20
Ikeda et al. reported the formation of a localised
insulating layer of MgO on the electrode face and the
subsequent reduction in weld nugget volume within only
a few spots during the RSW of AA 5182.12 Dilthey and
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology,
Mumbai, India
2
Aditya Birla Science and Technology Company Limited, Mumbai, India
*Corresponding author, email de.amitava1967@gmail.com
brittle Cu–Al layer and its subsequent fracture in a ran-
dom manner as the primary reason for electrode wear.13
Fukumoto et al. confirmed a similar mechanism during
the RSW of AA 5182 and reported the maximum
electrode life between 400 and 900 spots.14–17 Chang
et al. noticed typical hole and ring types of electrode
pitting morphology during the RSW of AA 5182, with the
former being more detrimental.18,19 Rashid et al. suggested
that the spherical electrode face would be more susceptible
to ring type pitting.20 Precleaning of aluminium sheets and
application of protective surface lubricants respectively to
remove and to avoid the tenacious oxide layer on
aluminium alloys could enhance the electrode life.21,22
In summary, alloying of copper electrode with alu-
minium and subsequent pitting of the former during
RSW of aluminium alloys remain unstoppable. Because
the chemical alloying between copper and aluminium is
a strong function of interface temperature,13 enhance-
ment of the thermal and electrical conductivities of the
ES interface will be beneficial. The measured values of
electrical contact resistance along the ES interface are
reported to be in the range of 350–50 mV in a typical RSW
set-up for aluminium alloys.23–25 The lower values of
contact resistance were obtained either by prior extensive
cleaning of the sheet surface and at very high electrode
force.23–25 The simulated results reported in the pub-
lished literature indicate that the peak temperature
along the ES interface can reach 400–450uC for typical
welding currents of 20–25 kA commonly used for the
RSW of aluminium alloys.25,26 At such high peak tem-
perature, the chemical reaction between copper and
aluminium is likely.13
Here, we propose a recourse to counter the alloying
between copper and aluminium by introducing a carbon

ß 2011 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining

Published by Maney on behalf of the Institute
Received 9 March 2011; accepted 25 April 2011
DOI 10.1179/1362171811Y.0000000036 Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2011 VOL 16 NO 6 509

1 a dome type and b conical tip flat faced electrodes
used in present work
black paste in fluidic form as a barrier along the ES
interface with a common aim to enhance the thermal
and electrical conductivities and minimise direct elec-
trode to sheet contact during welding. Carbon is
chemically inert to both copper and aluminium, and
carbon black paste in fluidic form can remarkably
enhance the thermal and electrical conductances in a
pressurised contact.27–29 The present study with a typical
carbon black based ES interfacial coating has shown a
significant enhancement in electrode life during spot
welding of automotive aluminium alloys.
Experimental
The RSW of aluminium alloys AA 6061-T6 (1?0 mm) is
performed using a medium frequency direct current
pedestal RSW machine using dome and conical type flat
face Cu–Cr–Zr electrodes with face diameter of 6?0 mm.
Figure 1 schematically shows the electrodes that are
used in the present study. The electrode life tests are
carried out at a welding current of 20 kA, weld time of
100 ms and electrode force of 2?5 kN. Multiple spot
welds are performed both with and without the
application of the carbon black ES interface coating.
At regular intervals of 50 spots, the mushrooming of
electrode faces and the weld nugget quality are
monitored respectively through carbon paper imprints7
and shear–tensile strength of single spot joint. Figure 2
shows the typical weld coupon used for the actual
experiments before and after the welding. Two sheets,
each of width W 35 mm and length L 105 mm, are
overlapped by 35 mm, and the weld nugget is made at
the middle of the overlapping portion. These dimensions
are selected based on the guideline mentioned in the
standard ISO 14273:2000 for the preparation of tensile–
shear specimen in 1?0 mm thick sheets to evaluate the
weld joint strength. The carbon paste is applied on the
overlapping portion and only on one side of the sheets
that comes in contact with the electrodes. After the
2 Sample weld coupons before and after welding
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining
Patil et al. Minimising electrode wear in RSW of aluminium alloys
welding is over, the carbon black paste is removed
simply using a wet cotton to obtain a fairly clean surface
without any trace of carbon paste, as indicated in Fig. 2.
To check the variability of the measured results, the
mean and standard deviation of five repeated measure-
ments are considered. No prior conditioning of new
electrodes is performed to avoid the initial electrode
wear. The acceptable weld joint strength is considered as
1?4 kN (with a variation of ¡10–15%) for the type and
thickness of sheet materials used in the present study.30
Defining a unique criterion for electrode life, in par-
ticular, during spot welding of aluminium alloys appears
to be debatable. For example, heavy sticking of the sheet
to electrode and expulsion of metal either from ES or
from sheet/sheet interface are safety hazards and thus
can be considered as a suitable criterion for the end of
electrode life. Alternately, electrodes producing weld
joints at strength lower than a predefined level or with a
high variability can also be considered to have reached
at the end of life. Lastly, random and excessive pitting of
electrodes can also lead to reduced weld joint strength,
and redressing of such electrodes may become impos-
sible. An application with the possibility of intermediate
redressing of electrodes can thus consider the topogra-
phy of electrode face as a criterion to decide the fre-
quency of electrode redressing. The criterion for the end
of electrode life is thus necessary to be related to the
typical requirement. In the present work, the electrode
life is deemed to be over when the weld joint strength has
reached 50% of the original joint strength, i.e. around
0?7–0?8 kN. A similar trend, such as 30–50% reduction
in the initial joint strength, is also used in the open
literature for the characterisation of electrode life in spot
welding of galvanised steel.31
The carbon black paste utilised in this study com-
prises complex polyaromatics of C12 with the weight
percentage of carbon .93% and with very low sulphur
content. The paste is applied in the form of a viscous
liquid, which is evenly spread along the ES interface
using a brush before the spot welding trials. Because of
its low flash point temperature (70–95uC), the coating is
expected to undergo spontaneous pyrolysis in situ on
the application of welding current, leading to further
enhancement of thermal and electrical conductances
along the ES interface.
Results and discussion
Figure 3a and b shows the measured values of the single
spot joint strength respectively with and without the
application of carbon black interfacial paste with the
conical electrodes (Fig. 1b). Two points are worth
noting in Fig. 3a and b. First, the weld joint strength
reduced to 0?75 kN after 422 spots when the carbon
black interfacial paste was used, while with the bare ES
interface, the weld joint strength reduced to 0?74 kN
after 240 spots. It can, however, be pointed out that
frequent sticking between the top electrode and the sheet
is encountered after approximately 50 spots only in the
case of bare ES interface. However, no such sticking
between electrode and sheet was faced with the carbon
black interfacial past. Second, the variability in the
measured weld strength is higher in the case of bare ES
interface, indicating the greater extent of electrode wear
from the very early stage. The overall range of variations
in the joint strength is significantly less in the presence of
2011 VOL 16 NO 6 510
 Patil et al. Minimising electrode wear in RSW of aluminium alloys

3 Single spot welded joint strength as function of number of spots a with and b without carbon black paste interfacial
coating with conical electrodes and c with and d without carbon paste interfacial coating with dome electrodes

the carbon black interfacial paste. Figure 3c and d
shows that the weld joint strength has reduced to
0?85 kN after 328 spots with carbon black ES interfacial
paste and to 0?73 kN after 135 spots only when no
carbon ES paste is applied with the dome type electrode
(Fig. 1a). The variability in the measured values of weld
strength has remained higher in the case of bare elec-
trodes. The reason for the greater electrode life with the
interfacial carbon black paste can be attributed to the
lesser alloying of electrode face during welding. The
greater life of the conical electrodes in comparison to the
dome type electrodes can be attributed to the higher rate
of heat dissipation in the former case due to the larger
electrode mass.
Figure 4a and b depicts the growth of the electrode
diameter with the number of spots respectively, with and
without the application of interfacial carbon black paste
with the conical electrodes (Fig. 1b). Figure 4a shows a
steady growth in the electrode face diameter with the
number of spots in the presence of the interfacial carbon
black paste as against a slightly random nature of
electrode mushrooming in the case of bare ES interface.
Similarly, Fig. 4c and d shows the electrode growth as a
function of the number of spots respectively with and
without the application of carbon black ES paste with
the dome type electrodes. The random mushrooming of
the bare electrodes with the progress of the spots is also
observed in the case of dome shaped electrodes. In both
cases, visual inspection of the electrodes at the end of life
test experiments does not reveal any pitting or alumi-
nium pick-up when the carbon black paste is applied
along the ES interface. Traces of carbon paste, however,
remained, which could be cleaned simply by wet cotton.
The bare electrode faces, on the other hand, have shown
appreciable extent of pitting and random build-up of
aluminium layers. To probe the pattern of electrode face
wear with and without the interfacial carbon black
paste, a scanning electron microscope characterisation
of the electrode faces is carried out subsequently.
Figure 5a and b shows the macroscopic view of the
electrode face after a number of welds. The electrode
damage is fairly localised in the case of bare ES interface
(Fig. 5b), while a more uniform topographical change of
the electrode face is observed in the presence of the
carbon paste interfacial barrier (Fig. 5a). Figure 5c and
d shows the higher magnification images of the damaged
area. With the bare ES interface, the presence of blocky
Al2Cu particles on the electrode face is apparent in
Fig. 5d. In the presence of carbon barrier coating,
similar blocky particles are absent even after 250 spots,
although sparse presence of some spherical particles is
observed on the ES interface (Fig. 5c). Energy dispersive
X-ray (EDX) analysis indicates these particles to be
predominantly aluminium that could not diffuse into
copper electrode possibly due to the carbon black
interfacial barrier. The EDX spectra are taken at a
depth of 100 mm from the top surface of the electrode
face and along its cross-section, as indicated in Fig. 6.

4 Growth of electrode face with number of spots a with and b without carbon black paste interfacial coating with conical
electrodes and c with and d without carbon paste interfacial coating with dome electrodes

Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2011 VOL 16 NO 6 511

 Patil et al. Minimising electrode wear in RSW of aluminium alloys

5 a macro- and c microstructural view of conical electrode face with carbon black ES interfacial coating after 250 spots and
b macro- and d microstructural view of conical electrode face without carbon black ES interfacial coating after 100 spots

Figure 6a shows that the interfacial build-up on the
electrode face is , 150 mm after 250 spots in the
presence of carbon black barrier paste. The interfacial
build-up primarily constitutes Cu (93?97 wt-%, 85?13
at-%) followed by Al (4?67 wt-%, 9?96 at-%) and O
(1?37 wt-%, 4?92 at-%). In contrast, the interfacial build-
up on the electrode face is almost 500 mm thick when no
carbon black barrier paste is applied (Fig. 6b). The
interfacial build-up in the absence of carbon black ES
paste predominantly constitutes Al (61?98 wt-%,
72?95 at-%) followed by Cu (32?60 wt-%, 16?29 at-%)
and O (5?42 wt-%, 10?76 at-%). The damage of copper
electrode by aluminium concentration is, therefore,
significantly lessened by the presence of the carbon
black ES barrier layer, confirming that the barrier layer
inhibits the interaction of aluminium and copper
possibly both through lowering the ES interface
resistance and acting as a physical diffusion barrier.
A promising methodology to reduce electrode wear
during spot welding of aluminium alloys is presented
based on the application of a carbon black paste based ES
interfacial barrier that can reduce or possibly eliminate
direct electrode to sheet contact. A reasonable enhance-
ment of the thermal and electrical conductances along
the ES interface is imperative due to the possibility of in
situ pyrolysis of the carbon black based barrier coating.
The present experimental investigation with two com-
monly used spot welding electrodes has promised
significant enhancement of electrode life in the presence
of the interfacial coating. Further work is in progress to

6 Cross-sectional view of conical electrodes a with and b without carbon black interfacial coating: inset shows EDX
spectra at depth of 100 mm from surface for each case

Science and Technology of Welding and Joining 2011 VOL 16 NO 6 512


characterise the nature of electrode wear and contact
resistance variation in the presence of such ES interfacial
coating.
Conclusions
An improved methodology to reduce electrode wear by
applying a carbon black based barrier liquid coating
along the ES interface is proposed during the RSW of
aluminium alloys. The experimental results have shown
an enhancement in electrode life by nearly two times for
two commonly used electrodes when the carbon black
paste is applied along the ES interface in comparison to
the bare electrodes. A thick ES interfacial build-up
containing predominantly aluminium is observed when
the spot welding of aluminium is performed without
applying the carbon black interfacial barrier. In
contrast, a very thin ES interfacial build-up constituting
very little aluminium is observed when the spot welding
of aluminium is performed using the carbon black
interfacial barrier paste. Furthermore, no localised
pitting of electrode face is observed when spot welding
is carried out using the carbon black interfacial paste.
The carbon black based coating has appeared to
undergo a spontaneous pyrolysis in situ on the applica-
tion of welding current, leading to the enhancement of
ES interface electrical conductivity and the prohibition
of direct electrode to sheet contact. A more controlled
and mechanised application of similar coating can
possibly enhance the electrode life further.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support
provided by the Department of Science and Technology,
Government of India (grant no. SR/S3/MERC-080/2007)
and the Aditya Birla Science and Technology Co. Ltd to
carry out this research study. The authors also acknowl-
edge the contribution of Mr A. Giri in carrying out
micrographic characterisation of the electrode face.
References
1. S. A. Gedeon and T. W. Eagar: Metall. Trans. B, 1986, 17B, (4),
887–901.
2. J. E. Gould and W. A. Peterson: SAE paper no. 880279, SAE
International, Warrendale, PA, USA, 1988, 119–136.
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining
Patil et al. Minimising electrode wear in RSW of aluminium alloys
3. P. Howe and S. C. Kelly: SAE paper no. 880280, SAE
International, Warrendale, PA, USA, 1988, 138–152.
4. P. Howe and S. C. Kelly: Weld. J., 1988, 67, (12), s271–s280.
5. R. Holliday, J. D. Parkar and N. T. Willams: Weld. World, 1995,
35, (3), 160–164.
6. R. Holliday, J. D. Parkar and N. T. Willams: Weld. World, 1996,
37, (4), 186–193.
7. A. De, L. Dorn and O. P. Gupta: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 2000, 5,
(1), 49–57.
8. L. Dorn and S. Baker: Schweissen Schneiden, 2002, 54, (1), 20–24.
9. D. J. Spinella, J. R. Brockenbrough and J. M. Fridy: Weld. J.,
2005, 84, (1), 34–40.
10. E. P. Patrick, J. R. Auhl and T. S. Sun: SAE paper no. 840291,
SAE International, Warrendale, PA, USA, 1984, 1–14.
11. J. R. Auhl and E. P. Patrick: SAE paper no. 940160, SAE
International, Warrendale, PA, USA, 1994, 36–48.
12. R. Ikeda, K. Yasuda and K. Hashiguchi: Weld. World, 1998, 41,
(6), 492–498.
13. U. Dilthey and S. Hicken: Schweissen Schneiden, 1998, 50, (1), 34–
38.
14. S. Fukumoto, I. Lum and E. Biro: Weld. J., 2003, 82, (11), s307–
s312.
15. Y. Zhou, S. Fukumoto and J. Peng: Mater. Sci. Technol., 2004, 20,
(10), 1226–1232.
16. I. Lum, S. Fukumoto and E. Biro: Metall. Trans. A, 2004, 35A, (1),
217–226.
17. J. Peng, S. Fukumoto, L. Brown and N. Zhou: Sci. Technol. Weld.
Join., 2004, 9, (4), 331–336.
18. B. H. Chang, Y. Zhou and I. Lum: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 2005,
10, (1), 61–66.
19. B. H. Chang, D. Du and Q. Chen: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 2007,
12, (1), 67–72.
20. M. Rashid, J. B. Medley and Y. Zhou: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join.,
2009, 14, (4), 295–304.
21. Z. Li, C. Hao, J. Zhang and H. Zhang: Weld. J., 2007, 86, (4), s81–
s89.
22. M. Rashid, S. Fukumoto, J. M. Medley, J. Villafuerte and Y.
Zhou: Weld. J., 2007, 86, (3), s62–s70.
23. P. H. Thornton, A. R. Krause and R. G. Davies: Weld. J., 1996, 75,
(12), s403–s412.
24. P. S. James, H. W. Chandler, J. T. Evans, J. Wen, D. J. Browne
and C. J. Newton: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 1997, A230, 194–201.
25. M. J. Greitmann and K. Rother: in ‘Mathematical modelling of
weld phenomena 4’, (ed. H. Cerjak), 531–544; 1998, London, IoM
Communications.
26. A. De: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 2002, 7, (2), 119–124.
27. C. K. Leong and D. D. L. Chung: Carbon, 2003, 41, (3), 2459–2469.
28. C. K. Leong and D. D. L. Chung: J. Electron. Mater., 2004, 33, (3),
203–206.
29. C. K. Leong and D. D. L. Chung: Carbon, 2006, 44, (3), 435–440.
30. The Aluminum Association: ‘Aluminum for automotive body sheet
panels’, Publication AT3, source no. JPL/2M/12-98/1, 1998, http://
www.aluminum.org.
31. A. De, L. Dorn and O. P. Gupta: Sci. Technol. Weld. Join., 2000, 5,
(1), 49–57.
2011 VOL 16 NO 6 513