Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127 – 136

Analysis of the friction welding process in relation to the welding

of copper and steel bars
Ahmet Z. Sahin a,*, Bekir S. Yibaş a, M. Ahmed b, J. Nickel b
a
Mechanical Engineering Department, King Fahd Uni6ersity of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
b
Center for Applied Physical Sciences of the Research Institute, King Fahd Uni6ersity of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia

Received 23 March 1997

Abstract

The heat-transfer mechanism initiating the friction welding process is examined and a transient two-dimensional heat-conduc-
tion model for the welding of two dissimilar cylindrical metal bars is introduced. The bar materials consist of copper and steel.
To relate the theoretical predictions with the resulting welds, experiments are conducted under different welding conditions by
means of which metallurgical and microprobe analysis of the weld cross-sections are carried out. This provides a visualization of
the melted zones and of the diffusion depths. A statistical analysis is carried out for the affecting parameters on the mechanical
properties of the resulting welds. The factors affecting the weld include the speed of rotation, the weld duration (burn-off time),
and the friction load, whilst the mechanical properties include the tensile strength, the yield strength, the ultimate yield strength
and the micro hardness of the weld cross-sections. © 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Friction welding; Heat transfer analysis; Mechanical properties; Metallurgical properties; Microprobe analysis

1. Introduction
Friction welding finds widespread industrial use as a
mass-production process for the joining of materials.
The parameters affecting friction welding have been
studied previously [1]. In the welding process, the join-
ing surface of the samples are heated to the desired
temperature through frictional heat and then a forging
pressure is introduced to weld the parts.
Many ferrous and non-ferrous alloys can be friction
welded. Friction welding can be used to join metals of
widely differing thermal and mechanical properties. Of-
ten combinations that can be friction welded cannot be
joined by other welding techniques because of the for-
mation of brittle phases which make the joint poor in
mechanical properties. The sub-melting temperatures
and short weld times of friction welding allow many
combinations of work metals to be joined.
Vill [2] analyzed the energy distribution in the fric-
tion welding of steel bars. Gel’dman et al. [3] did a
* Corresponding author. Fax: +966 3 860 2949; e-mail:
sahin@ccse.kfupm.edu.sa
similar analysis when welding large size steel pipes. The
transient temperature distribution during friction weld-
ing of two similar materials (AISI 4140 alloy steel) in
tubular form was obtained by Cheng [4]. He considered
variable thermal properties, time-dependent heat inputs
and phase change during welding in his analysis. He
also investigated the transient temperature distribution
during the friction welding of dissimilar materials in
tubular form [5]. The temperature distribution is given
in the axial direction in the vicinity of the interface. The
transient temperature distribution in the inertial weld-
ing of steels was reported by Wang and Nagappan [6].
Duffin and Bahrani [7] carried out a series of experi-
ments on the friction welding of mild steel tubular
specimens to study the variations in resisting torque,
axial force, and axial shortening when the angular
speed and axial force are varied. Petrucci [8] reported
the spatial temperature variations occurring in the fric-
tion welding of 12.5 mm diameter mild steel bars.
Thermocouples were placed on the surface of the non-
rotating workpiece at a distance of 5 mm from the
interface of the two workpieces.

0924-0136/98/$19.00 © 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.

PII S0924-0136(98)00032-6
128 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136
Fig. 1. Modelling of friction welding.
Several mathematical models were developed by
Francis [9] that describe the various phases of the
friction stage during friction welding, in particular of
the softened layer which develops close to the weld
interface. A one-dimensional computational model was
presented by Hansson and Kristensen [10] for the tem-
perature distribution across the interface during the
friction welding of uniform bars having a constant,
cross-sectional area. A mathematical treatment of heat
flow was developed by Na et al. [11] with a view to
selecting the most realistic possible boundary condi-
tions and including the heat input in the calculations
when calculating the temperature distribution in fric-
tion welds between dissimilar materials.
Friction welding was modelled using finite-element
analysis to represent the workpiece and the surface
contact conditions by Sluzalec [12]. Using this model,
temperature distributions, thermal expansion and ther-
moplastic stresses were determined. Kleiber and Sluza-
lec [13] modelled the non-linear transient problem of
axisymmetric friction welding, in which the dimensions
Fig. 2. Experimental set-up.
Fig. 3. Forging-load characteristics.
of the two bars may not be uniform in size. Tempera-
ture-dependent thermal properties were used in their
finite-element model. One-dimensional temperature dis-
tribution (axial) in friction welding was studied by
Sluzalec and Sluzalec [14] analytically, experimentally
and numerically in a comparative way.
Aliul et al. [15] studied the modelling of the process
parameters of a pneumatically-operated friction weld-
ing unit. They used mild steel bars as samples and
showed that the upset-length was affected considerably
by speed and welding time. Mathematical modelling of
thermal processes and viscous creep in friction welding
was studied by Lebedev et al. [16]. They investigated
the plastic deformation of the hot material in the weld
zone during the friction welding of tubular samples.
Vakulenko [17] studied the heat processes in friction
welding, including the welding of composite materials.
A model was developed for the dynamic and thermal
processes occurring during the quasi-stationary phase
in the friction welding of thin-walled pipes.
 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136 129

Table 1
Welding parameters and their levels

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Speed of rotation (rpm) 2000 2500 2800

Applied load (kg) 500–1274 637–1783 764– 2293
Welding duration (s) 4 7 10

One of the applications of friction welding is in

joining of dissimilar metals such as copper to steel.
Although problems exist due to high thermal conduc-
tivity, large differences in forging temperatures and the
formation of brittle intermetallic compounds, welding is
possible within the limited range of the welding condi-
tions. To obtain sound welds and to determine the
limits of the welding conditions, the analysis of the
heat-transfer mechanism taking place during welding
becomes necessary. Consequently, in the light of previ-
ous studies, [1,18,19], the present study examines the
heat-transfer mechanism and introduces a mathematical
model governing this mechanism. In the model, a tran-
sient two-dimensional heat-conduction equation for the
welding of two dissimilar cylindrical metallic bars is
introduced. The finite-difference method is employed in
solving the resulting heat-transfer equations. To relate
the theoretical predictions to the resulting welds, exper-
iments are conducted under different welding condi-
tions. In the experimental study, the weld joints are
mounted and metallurgical and microprobe analysis of
the weld cross-sections are carried out. This provides a
visualization of the melted zones and of the diffusion
depths. A statistical analysis is carried out for the
parameters affecting the mechanical properties of the
resulting welds. The factors affecting the weld include
the speed of rotation, the weld duration (burn-off time),
and the friction load, whilst the mechanical properties
include the tensile strength, the yield strength, the ulti-
mate yield strength and the micro hardness of the weld
cross-sections.
Fig. 5. Axial temperature variation in domain I, Cu side, at t = 4.6 s.
2. Heat-transfer model
In order to develop a heat-transfer model, it is im-
portant to state the phases of the friction-welding pro-
cess. In the initial phase of the welding process, the heat
that is required for the welding is generated by the
rubbing action of one part against the other under an
applied load. In the second phase of the welding pro-
cess, the heat generated increases the temperature of the
parts around the interface region to a particular level
after which the rubbing action is stopped and an addi-
tional load (forging load) is applied to join the parts.
Consequently, the process involves transient heating, so
that a transient heat-conduction model is required. Due
to axial symmetry, a two-dimensional heat-transfer
model is adequate for the present case.
Consider two cylindrical bars with radius R to be
welded, as shown in Fig. 1. The bars are assumed to be
semi-infinite in the z direction. Bar II is rotating with
an angular velocity v, while bar I is stationary. At the

Fig. 6. Axial temperature variation in domain II, steel side, at t = 4.6

Fig. 4. Temperature variation over the interface. s.
130 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136

Fig. 8. Microhardness-test results.

This is a two-domain problem. Henceforth, bar I will

be referred to as domain I and bar II will be referred to
as domain II.
Using the non-dimensional parameter: t=a1t/R 2;
r= r/R; z= z/R; ra = a2/a1; rk = k2/k1; B1 = h1R/k1;

   n
and B2 = h2R/k2; the formulation of the problem is:
(u 1 ( (u ( 2u
= r + 2 (1)
(t r (r (r (z
(f
= ra
   n
1 (
r
(f ( 2f
+ 2 (2)
(t r (r (r (z
u(r, z, 0)= 0; f=(r, z, 0)=0 (3)
(u (f
(r, , t)= 0; (r, − , t)= 0 (4)
(z (z
(u (f
(0, z, t)= 0; (0, z, t)= 0 (5)
(r (r
(u
(1, z, t)− B1u(1, z, t)=0;
(r
(f
(1, z, t)− B2f(1, z, t)=0 (6)
(r
u(r, 0, t)=f(r, 0, t) (7)

Table 2
Fig. 7. Tensile-test results. Statistical effect of weld parameters on the mechanical properties for
copper — steel welds

Copper – steel

Parameters Yield strength Tensile strength Ultimate tensile

surface of the intersection of the two bars, the coeffi- strength
cient of friction m and the pressure p are assumed to be
constant and uniform throughout the surface. The ther- n 0.1\ 0.1\ 0.1\
mal diffusivities are given by a1 and a2 for bar I and bar P 0.1\ 0.1\ 0.1\
t 0.1\ 0.1\ 0.1\
II respectively. Likewise, the thermal conductivities and
n×P 0.01B 0.01B 0.1B
the heat-transfer coefficients are given by k1, h1 and k2, n×t 0.01B 0.01B 0.1B
h2 respectively. Axial symmetry is also assumed to be P×t 0.01B 0.01B 0.1B
satisfied.
 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136 131

where ui, j% indicates the temperatures of node (i, j ) at

time t+ Dt.
In domain II it is more convenient to use z%= −z
axis instead of z. Thus, the formulation becomes identi-
cal with that for domain I with the new set of thermo-
physical properties. If the same non-dimensionalized
parameters as employed in Domain I are to be used,
then the ratios of the thermophysical properties need to


be employed in the formulation, i.e.:

f %i, j = 1− 4
ra Dt n
fi, j

  
(Dr)2
ra Dt 1
+ fi − 1, j + 1− fi, j − 1

 
2
(Dr) 2( j− 1)

+ 1+
1
fi, j + 1 + fi + 1, j
n
2( j− 1)
i= 2, 3,…, m j= 2, 3,…, n (10)
The interface temperature variation is of particular
interest in friction welding. Therefore, the finite-differ-
ence equation that gives the interface temperature in-
cludes the diffusivities and conductivities of both


domains, which are given by means of ratios ra and rk :

U%=
j 1− 2(1+ rk )
2 ra Dt
U
n
ra + rk (Dr)2 j

+
2 ra Dt 
u + rkf1, j
ra + rk (Dr)2 1, j

+
1+rk
1−
 1
U

2( j− 1) j − 1
 
2
Fig. 9. Microphotographs of the welding zone.
1+rk 1
+ 1+ U
(u mpvR 2 (f 2 2( j− 1) j + 1
− (r, 0, t)+ r = −rk (r, 0, t) =0
(z k1 (z
(8)
+
mpvR 2
( j− 1)(Dr)2
n j= 2, 3,…, n (11)
where u= T1 −T is the temperature in domain I and k1
f =T2 − T is the temperature in domain II.

4. Stability criteria
3. Solution for the temperature profile
The stability of this explicit scheme is ensured by:
An analytical solution for the above problem is ex- ra Dt
tremely difficult. Therefore a finite-difference technique 1− 4 ]0 (12)
(Dr)2
is used to obtain the solution within a desired accuracy.
or:
Assuming that Dz =Dr (Dz =Dr), the following ex-
plicit form of finite-difference formulation is obtained ra Dt
5 0.25 (13)
for a general node in domain I: (Dr)2

u %i, j = 1−4
Dt
u
n or:
(Dr)2 i, j
  
(Dr)2
ra Dt 5 (14)
Dt 1 4
+ u + 1− u
(Dr)2 i − 1, j 2( j− 1) i, j − 1 for any ra \ 1. If ra B 1 then:

+ 1+
 1
u
 +ui + 1, j
n Dt5
(Dr)2
(15)
2( j− 1) i, j + 1 4
i = 2, 3,…, m j= 2, 3,…, n (9) must be satisfied.
132 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136
Fig. 10. A typical PIXE energy spectrum of the weld zone obtained with the scanning proton microprobe.
5. Experimental
The experimental apparatus is shown in Fig. 2 whilst
Fig. 3 shows a typical force – time curve.
A friction welder capable of operating at 120 kN
maximum load was designed and manufactured to
carry out the experiments. The welder motor had vari-
able speed up to 3500 rpm. The speed, friction pressure,
friction time, forging pressure, feed rate, brake delay
time, upset delay time and upsetting time were con-
trolled by a computer.
Two kinds of steel and one kind of copper were used
as workpieces, prepared as 10 mm diameter rods. The
steel samples were H21 (DIN-X 30 W Cr V 93) and
1015 (DIN-1141) whilst the copper samples were 98%
pure commercial copper.
In the initial trials of the experiments, a wide range
of machine settings were explored. This enabled the
determination of the optimal combination of the rota-
tional speed, frictional load and burn-off time for given
welding materials. As a result of these initial tests, a
combination of the machine settings resulting in repro-
ducible mechanical properties was selected for the re-
maining part of the study.
Once the resulting welds were obtained, tests were
carried out in two parts to determine the metallurgical
characteristics. In the first part, metallurgical changes
of the weld cross-sections were examined using SEM
and optical microscopy techniques, whilst in the second
part a microbeam PIXE analysis was carried out to
measure elemental distributions across and along the
interface line to check for any melting or diffusion
process.
To determine the mechanical properties of the result-
ing welds, tensile testing and microhardness of the weld
cross-sections were carried out.
The scanning nuclear microprobe facility on the
Tandetron accelerator of King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals [20] was used with the particle
induced X-ray emission (PIXE) technique to detect any
diffusion mixing of either Cu or Fe across the weld
interface. In the present experiment, a 2.5 MeV proton
microbeam of about 5 mm resolution was used to
generate Cu and Fe distribution maps from each 540
mm× 540 mm area centred on the welding interface. A
distance of 270 mm on either side of the interface line
was thus investigated and a total length of about 6 mm
from the centre to the edge along the interface line of a
circular shaped sample was covered by a series of such
measurements.
6. Statistical analysis
The mathematical model representing the present
analysis is in the form of:
xi, j,k = s+Pi + nj + tk + P× ni, j + n×tj,k + P× ti,k
+ ei, j,k (16)
A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136 133

Fig. 11. Microprobe results of the welding zone.

134 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136
where xi, j,k represents the response (value given to the
measured variable), s is a common effect, Pi is the main
effect of applied pressure, nj is the main effects of the
speed of rotation and tk is the main effects of burn-off
time. P × ni, j, n× tj,k and P ×ti,k are the first-order
interactions of applied pressure and speed of rotation,
speed of rotation and burn-off time, and applied pres-
sure and welding duration, respectively.  i, j,k Repre-
sents the random error in the experiment. i, j, k are the
levels of applied pressure, speed of rotation and burn-
off time, respectively. The affecting parameters and
their levels are shown in Table 1. The further mathe-
matics of this analysis are not included here due to the
lengthy arguments involved, but if required, refer to
[21]. Since there are no repeat determinations and no
independent estimates of the error variance, it is neces-
sary to use the remainder (second-order interaction)
variance as an error variance. Hence it is relegated to
the error term by making the assumption that the
interaction is equivalent to the remainder.
The significance of each effect is tested by the initial
hypothesis that the mean squares of the effects are from
the same population as the error mean squares. Since
the mathematical model for this analysis is a fixed and
not random model, the expected mean squares for the
main effects are all estimates of the error mean vari-
ance. Hence, the mean squares for the main effects can
be compared with the error mean square to test the
respective hypothesis by means of an F test. The levels
of significance in the present experiment are 5, 1 and
0.1%, giving results that are significant, very significant,
and most significant, respectively. The variance ratio is:
Mean sum of squares
Fp,q = (17)
Error mean sum of squares
where p and q are the degrees of freedom of the mean
sum of the squares and the error mean sum of the
squares, respectively.
7. Discussion
With ferrous materials, friction welding is very toler-
ant of the pre-weld interface conditions. This may be
due to the long rotational phase, in this case the
rotational phase initially scouring the weld interface
and removing impurities. As the rotational phase con-
tinues, irregularities in the two faces are smoothed out
by frictional contact and pressure. When the heat gen-
erated at the interface increases, the materials become
plastic and a condition of full-face intimate contact is
achieved. However, with a short rotational phase, any
interface impurities such as surface oxides, grease or oil,
can remain trapped and, hence, do not permit the close
interface contact necessary to give full bonding. Even
small oxide contamination reduces the weld quality.
The speed of rotation affects the intermetallic layer
thickness such that a low speed of rotation results in
less intermetallic layer thickness. Varying the speed of
rotation and the rate of axial deformation during heat-
ing gives deformation conditions that activate the con-
tracting surfaces and limit the temperature/time
conditions, which in turn minimizes the formation of
intermetallics. When compared to other dissimilar fric-
tion welds, copper and steel friction welds show toler-
ance to variations of speed and arrest time [22].
To facilitate the numerical solution of the thermal
problem, heat-transfer coefficients need to be deter-
mined. Domain I, being stationary, experiences free
convection with a Grashoff number, based on an aver-
age temperature of 600 K, given by:
bgDTD 3
Gr=
n2
estimated to be about 6000 under the present experi-
mental conditions. Under these conditions, the Nusselt
number for domain I is given to be [23]:
hD
NuF = = 0.85(GrPr)0.188 = 4.056
k
where h( F = 19 W m − 2 K − 1.
On the other hand, the Reynolds number for domain
II, based on the peripheral velocity, is estimated to be
250. Since the Re number is relatively small (Gr0.5
Re2) it is appropriate to consider both free and forced
convection due to the rotation simultaneously. The
Nusselt number due to the rotation is given as [24]:
Nurot = 0.095 Re2/3 = 3.74
and the combined effect of free and forced convection
due to the rotation on the Nusselt number is given by
[23]:
Nur = (Nu3F + Nu3rot)1/3 = 4.92
which yields h( R = 23 W m − 2 K − 1 due to uncertainties,
especially in the variation of the surface temperature in
the axial direction, h( R = 20 W m − 2 K − 1 for the sta-
tionary part (i.e. domain I) and h( R = 25 W m − 2 K − 1
for the rotating part (i.e. domain II) are employed in
this study.
The maximum temperature during the welding pro-
cess occurs away from the centre, close to surface, but
not at the surface. This is because of the convection
cooling that takes place from the surface during the
rotational process, which reduces the surface tempera-
ture. The temperature decreases rapidly in the z direc-
tion in both domains, the sharpness of this decay
depending on the thermal properties (conductivity and
diffusivity) of the individual domains. The duration of
the welding process is very short (5–10 s) and the heat
generation increases the temperature in the narrow
zone at the interface. The temperature around the
 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136
centre of the bar is low since the relative motion is slow
(low wear) and therefore the heat generation becomes
less. This is also shown in Fig. 4 where the temperature
variation along the interface is given for three different
heating times.
Figs. 5 and 6 show the axial temperature variation at
different radial positions in the stationary part and in
the rotating part, respectively. In general the tempera-
ture decreases with increasing axial distance from the
interface. After studying the temperature gradients and
the magnitude of the temperature, the presence of
heat-effected zones can easily be predicted from these
figures.
The tensile test results are given in Fig. 7. Although
the thermophysical properties of the two parts are quite
different the tensile strengths of welds close to those of
the individual parts are obtained. Although the present
solution provides sufficient accuracy, the welding of
parts with similar thermophysical properties, such as
thermal conductivity and melting temperature, can be
achieved more successfully.
Fig. 8 shows the microhardness test results. It can be
seen that at around the interface, the hardness of the
copper increases slightly. However, slight decrease in the
hardness of the steel is observed. This is due to the steel
reaching the annealing temperature during the welding
process, which in turn reduces hardness on the steel side.
On the other hand, copper exhibits hardening due to its
high thermal conductivity and fast cooling behaviour.
Table 2 shows the statistical analysis results. The
main effect of each parameter is less significant. This
may indicate that the speed of rotation, the applied
pressure and the burn-off time do not have significant
effect on the weld properties. However, the first-order
interaction of these parameters has a significant effect
on the resulting properties. Therefore, there may be a
coupling effect of these parameters on the properties.
This suggests that it is rather difficult to develop a
simple empirical equation which represents the relation-
ship between the resultant weld quality and these
parameters.
Microphotographs of the weld zone are shown in Fig.
9. The temperature developed in the outer region close
to the free surface of the sample is higher than that
corresponds to the central region of the sample, during
welding process. This results in relatively large melting
and heat-affected zones developing in this region. Small
grains in the copper side indicate hardening, whilst no
significant variation is observed in the grain size on the
steel side.
Fig. 10 shows a typical PIXE spectrum identifying the
average elemental composition of the scanned area of
the weld zone. Fig. 11 shows a composite two-dimen-
sional map of Fe distributions across the weld line (270
mm on either side) from the centre to the edge (  6
mm), measured in steps of 540 mm. It can be seen from
135
the map that a maximum mixing of Fe into the Cu
region occurs not at the centre of the specimen, but at
nearly half-way from the centre to the edge. The temper-
ature profile analysis for the friction-welding process
also shows that maximum heat is generated at this
point, which may cause melting of Cu thus allowing Fe
to physically mix more easily in this region.
It is evident from the microphotography and mi-
croprobe results that the intermetallic layer was thickest
in the mid-radius position of the weld, and thinnest at
the centre and periphery of the weld. The absence of an
intermetallic layer at the centre is consistent with the
low relative velocity in that region. It should be noted
that when friction welding, it is highly probable that the
copper oxide film is broken up, allowing the exposure of
uncontaminated surfaces, as a result large amounts of
deformation at the interface occurring.
8. Conclusions
The welding of two dissimilar metals, as Cu and Fe,
has been studied both analytically and experimentally.
The temperature variation at the interface in the radial
direction plays a key role on the diffusion process and
the development of a heat-affected zone, which in turn
affects the quality of the weld.
The temperature attains its maximum value far from
the centre but not at the free surface, noting that the
heat-transfer coefficient determines the distance of the
location of this maximum from the surface. On the
other hand, the width of the heat-affected zone is
affected by the temperature variation both in the radial
and axial directions. The heat-affected zone is wider in
the case of a higher thermal diffusivity region than that
corresponding to a lower thermal diffusivity region.
Diffusion takes place as a result of local melting and
physical mixing and it is greater around the region
where higher temperatures are obtained.
Metals with different thermophysical properties can
be joined by friction welding, and sound weld can be
achieved. Some degree of softening may occur during
the welding process.
9. Nomenclature
B Biot number
D diameter of rod (m)
F variance ratio
g gravitational acceleration (m s−2)
Gr Grasshoff number
h heat-transfer coefficient (W m−2 K−1)
k thermal conductivity (W m−1 K−1)
n speed of rotation (1 s−1)
Nu Nusselt number
136 A.Z. Sahin et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 82 (1998) 127–136

p pressure (N m−2) [3] A.E. Gel’dman, M.P. Sander, Power and heating in the friction
Pr Prandtl number welding of thick walled steel pipes, Weld Prod. 10 (1959) 53–62.
[4] C.J. Cheng, Transient temperature distribution during friction
r independent variable welding of two similar materials in tubular form, Weld. J. (Res.
R radius of rod (m) Suppl.) 41 (12) (1962) 524s – 550s.
Re Reynolds number [5] C.J. Cheng, Transient temperature distribution during friction
ra ratio of thermal diffusivities welding of two similar materials in tubular form, Weld. J. (Res.
rk ratio of thermal conductivities Suppl.) 41 (12) (1963) 233s – 240s.
[6] K.K. Wang, P. Nagappan, Transient temperature distribution in
t time (s) inertial welding of steels, Weld. J. 49 (7) (1970) 419 – 426.
T temperature (K) [7] F.D. Duffin, A.S. Bahrani, The mechanics of friction welding,
x measured variable Metal Constr. 8 (1976) 267 – 271.
z independent variable [8] L.G. Petrucci, Temperature distribution in friction welding, Gen.
Engr. 8 – 9 (1978) 179 – 185.
Greek letters [9] Francis, A., Mathematical models for friction welding, PhD
a thermal diffusivity (m2 s−1) thesis, University of Southampton, UK, 1983.
b thermal expansion coefficient (1 K−1) [10] Hansson, I.L.H., Kristensen, J.K., Temperature distribution and
thermal cycle in friction welding, Int. Conf. on the Joining of
m coefficient of friction Materials, Helsingor, Denmark, 15 – 18 April 1984.
n dynamic viscosity (m2 s−1) [11] S.J. Na, J. Ruge, K. Thomas, Temperature determination during
v angular speed (1 s−1) the friction welding of dissimilar materials in cylindrical form-
f temperature at domain II (K) Measurement and calculation, Schweiss. Schneid. 36 (3) (1984)
r dimensionless variable E43 – E45.
[12] A. Sluzalec, Thermal effects in friction welding, Int. J. Mech. Sci.
s common effect 32 (6) (1990) 467 – 478.
t dimensionless time [13] M. Kleiber, A. Sluzalec, Finite element analysis of heat flow in
u temperature at domain I (K) friction welding, Rozpr. Inz. 32 (1) (1984) 107 – 113 (English
U temperature along the interface (K) translation).
z dimensionless variable [14] A. Sluzalec, A. Sluzalec, Solutions of thermal problems in fric-
tion welding — comparative study, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 36
Subscript (6) (1993) 1583 – 1587.
1 domain I [15] Aliul, S. Rizvi, H., Khan, S.A., On modelling of process parame-
ters of pneumatically operated fricton welding system, Int. Conf.
2 domain II on the Joining of Materials, Helsingor, Denmark, 5–7 April
ambient 1993.
c centre [16] V.K. Lebedev, Y.A. Mirgorod, S.A. Vakulenko, Mathematical
F free modelling of thermal processes and viscous creep in friction
R rotation welding, Avtom. Svarka 1 (1987) 3 – 6.
[17] Vakulenko, S.A., Calculation of heat processes in friction weld-
s surface ing and welding of composite materials, Int. Weld. Conf., New
rot rotational Delhi, 12 – 14 January 1987.
[18] B.S. Yilbas, A.Z. Sahin, A. Coban, B.J. Abdulaleem, Investiga-
tion into properties of friction welding of aluminium bars, J.
Acknowledgements Mater. Process. Technol. 54 (1995) 76 – 81.
[19] A.Z. Sahin, B.S. Yilbas, A.Z. Al-Garni, Friction welding of
Al – Al, Al – steel, and steel – steel samples, J. Mater. Eng. Per-
The authors would like to acknowledge the support form. 5 (1) (1996) 89 – 99.
of the Center for Applied Physical Sciences of the [20] M. Ahmed, J. Nickel, A.B. Hallak, et al., The KFUPM scanning
Research Institute, King Fahd University of Petroleum nuclear microprobe facility, Nucl. Instr. Methods B82 (1993)
and Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia for this study. 584 – 588.
[21] Dawies, O.L., The Design and Analysis of Industrial Experi-
ments, Longman, London, 1978.
[22] Kahraman, N., Farkli metallerin surtunme kaynagi ile kaynak
References islemi ve kaynak parametrelerinin surtunme kaynagi uzerine
etkisi, PhD thesis, Erciyes University, Turkey, 1992.
[1] B.S. Yilbas, A.Z. Sahin, N. Kahraman, A.Z. Al-Garni, Friction [23] Incropera, F.P., Dewitt, D.P., Introduction to Heat Transfer,
welding of Steel – Al and Al–Cu materials, J. Mater. Process. Wiley, New York, 1985.
Technol. 49 (1995) 431–443. [24] W.M. Kays, I.S. Bjorklund, Heat transfer from a rotating cylin-
[2] V.I. Vill, Energy distribution in friction welding of steel bars, der with and without crossfow, Trans. ASME 80 (1) (1958)
Weld. Prod. 10 (1959) 31–41. 70 – 78.