Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Prediction of mechanical characteristics of friction welded dissimilar EN

10028P 355 GH steel and AISI 430 steel joint by fuzzy logic analysis
G. Senthilkumar a,⇑, T. Mayavan b, H. Manikandan c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Panimalar Institute of Technology, Chennai 600123, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Panimalar Engineering College, Chennai 600123, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, CMR Institute of Technology, Bangalore 560037, India

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

Article history: A solid state friction welding is one of the metal fastening processes is to produce defect free joints when
Available online 6 September 2022 compared to fusion welding techniques. The material EN 10028P 355 GH Steel and AISI 430 Steel find
extensive applications in heat exchanger tubes, pressure vessels, and pump shafts. In the present study,
Keywords: the artificial intelligence tool fuzzy logic analysis was utilized for earlier prediction of mechanical char-
Friction Welding acteristics like tensile strength, impact toughness and axial shrinkage of friction welded dissimilar joint.
Mathematical Model The necessary parameters considered in this process are rotational speed, forging pressure, friction pres-
Fuzzy Logic Analysis
sure, friction time, and forging time. The L27 based experimental plan is used to execute the experiment.
3D Surface Model
L27 Orthogonal Array
The Mamdani model and triangular membership function methods are adopted in the fuzzy logic anal-
ysis. The developed 3D surface model helps to analyze the variation of the parameter to attain the desired
properties. The forecasted values from the fuzzy model are compared with experimental values and
found that the fuzzy model is good as it yields a minimum percentage of error.
Copyright Ó 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 4th International Con-
ference on Advances in Mechanical Engineering (ICAME 2022).

1. Introduction
The friction welded joint is free from porosity, undercut, ther-
mal distortion, and poor depth of penetration which are defects
seen in fusion welding. The friction welded dissimilar EN
10028P355GH Steel and AISI 430 Steel find applications in auto-
mobile axle-hub assembly. The theoretical modeling of welded
joint properties is carried out by methods like regression analysis,
artificial neural network, response surface methodology, finite
element analysis, and fuzzy logic analysis. The fuzzy logic based
model is one of the artificial intelligence tools which produce
good results when compared to other mathematical model tools.
The data with scarcity and ambiguity can be modeled by fuzzy
which involves interpolation technique. A model for friction
welding of the UNS S31803 joint to predict peak temperature
and shortening of length by ANSYS software shows a good agree-
ment with experimental results [1]. The FEA modeling by
DEFORM-2D software for two tubes made up of alloy steel joined
by friction welding. Residual stress of welded joint found by hole
⇑ Corresponding author.
drilling method is compared with the model. The trend of the
model is well replicated with experimental results [2]. The heat
generation, peak temperature, flash formation, stress, and strain
of the friction welding method are forecast by the FEA model
using DEFORM software with consideration of coupled field anal-
ysis [3]. A model for TIG welding of Monel metal by ANSYS soft-
ware that can predict the heat flow pattern around the weld and
residual stress. The obtained residual stress is verified by the XRD
technique [3]. The FEA model was created for volumetric changes,
temperature changes, and material property changes of friction
welded chromium molybdenum alloy steel [4]. The distribution
of cooling and heating temperature of the rotary friction welded
joint of Al and C45 steel that is predicted by one dimensional
FEA method and it is compared with a practical thermocouple
which shows good agreement [5].The Fuzzy model is used to pre-
dict the thermal error in the machining center which has excel-
lent performance than the linear regression model and
engineering judgment model [6]. A 3D-FEA model was developed
for rotary friction welding by the maximum entropy production
principle. In this principle, equal entropy is considered in sliding
friction as well as shear friction for the heat generation mecha-
nism. Unequal heat distribution on the interfacial side predicted

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.08.419
2214-7853/Copyright Ó 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 4th International Conference on Advances in Mechanical Engineering (ICAME 2022).
G. Senthilkumar, T. Mayavan and H. Manikandan Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188

the corona bond for maximum temperature over to the transition 2. Materials and methods
temperature [7]. A mathematical model for friction welding to
predict heat generation and temperature distribution by a friction In this present work, EN 10028 P355 GH Steel and AISI 430 Steel
coefficient using MATLAB and the same thing is validated by cor- rods were used to fabricate the sample. The material EN 10028
ona bond evolution in the experiment initiation [8].The grey rein- P355 GH Steel is carbon steel as it contains 0.3 % of chromium
forced second order response surface methodology model was whereas AISI 430 steel contains 16.39 % chromium. The specimen
developed to predict the friction welded EN 10028P355 GH Steel diameter 16 mm and these were cut into 100 mm lengths each
joint properties [9]. The axial shrinkage of friction welded ASTM A were used. The welding was carried out based on a design of exper-
516 Grade 70 Steel rods were modeled by regression analysis, iment procedure and five parameters of each 3 level. The process
finite element analysis, and fuzzy logic analysis and found that parameters and their levels are listed in Table 1. The levels and
fuzzy logic analysis was best among the other methods as fuzzy range of each parameter were fixed by pilot experiments and
model results yield very less error[10]. The linear regression anal- inspecting the joint by visual inspection of bonds without any
ysis is effectively used to model properties of solid state welded defects. Each parameter needs 2 degrees of freedom and 10
AISI 430 and AISI 410 Steel Joint [11]. The second order polyno- degrees of freedom are required for 5 parameters. The experimen-
mial equation establishes functionality between surface rough- tal strategy would therefore consist of a minimum of 10 degrees of
ness and wear of the tool. This model also enumerates the freedom. Hence L27 orthogonal array is created as an experimental
interaction effect of parameters [12]. The response surface model plan. The responses considered in this work are ultimate tensile
by backward selection technique was developed for laser cutting strength (UTS), impact toughness (IT), and axial shrinkage (AS) of
operation of the aluminium oxide composite to observe output friction welded joints. An experiment conducted in Numerical Con-
characteristics [13]. The fuzzy modeling of process parameters trol (NC) Friction Welding machine shown in Fig. 1 is manufac-
for machining titanium alloy to forecast tool wear, surface finish
& cutting pressure, and analysis is found to be the effect of
parameters on the responses and association with experimental
Table 1
results shows a fair agreement [14]. The fuzzy model to predict
Process Parameters and their Levels.
the corrosion behavior of insulated pipes is used in petrochemical
industries to reduce maintenance costs. The temperature of the S.No Parameters Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
fluid, insulation material, environmental behavior, and pipe mate- 1 Friction Pressure-FP (MPa) 60 70 80
rial are the input parameters and the rate of corrosion is the out- 2 Upset Pressure-UP (MPa) 70 90 110
3 Friction Time-FT (s) 3 5 7
put parameter. The fuzzy results and, significance are checked by
4 Upset Time-UT s) 3 5 7
the Kruskal Wallis test [15].An analytical model of heat genera- 5 Speed – S (Rpm) 800 1000 1200
tion & temperature distribution for friction welding based on
slide friction criteria. The analytical method yields a 6 % of error
when compared with experimental measurement [16]. An analyt-
ical model was developed which gives the relationship between
shear viscosity & dry friction to energy waste in the linear friction
welding process [17]. The modeling of upset and torque develop-
ment in friction welding by regression equations. This model con-
cluded that high upset value results in maximum torque
development [18]. A nonlinear model has been developed to
study friction welding of titanium, zirconium, nickel, and copper
rods for heat affected zone. The rate of viscous energy release
and coulomb friction is incorporated in the model [19]. Thermo
mechanical 2D FEA numerical model using MSc. Marc software
to simulate microstructure changes through the friction welding
process of super alloy material [20]. A 3D FEA model studies
the temperature distribution of friction welding of two different
materials and found that maximum temperature occurs at the
interface [21]. An FEA model was generated to address the
Fig. 1. Friction Welding Machine.
removal of oxides and dust particles from faying surfaces of
materials in rectangular friction welding. This study reveals that
the high forging pressure removes the surface impurities from
the interface [22]. The simulation for the friction welding process
of elastic and ceramic materials was carried out by ADINA soft-
ware. It provides a good understanding of the final shape of the
product, heat generation, and temperature distribution which
can be useful for the design of other materials [23]. The model
which has been developed by ANN is more accurate than the
model that has been developed by the regression equations for
GA optimization [24]. The theoretical modeling of solid state
welding is very scarce in previous literature and this present
work is focused on solid state friction welded dissimilar joint of
EN 10028P 355GH Steel and AISI 430 Steel joint properties are
modeled by fuzzy logic analysis and experimental results com-
pared with the theoretical one. The behavior of friction welding
process parameters is also analyzed with a Surface model gener- Fig. 2. Friction Welded dissimilar AISI 430 Steel and EN 10028 P355 GH Steel
ated by the fuzzy tool. Samples.

2183
G. Senthilkumar, T. Mayavan and H. Manikandan
Fig. 3. Proposed Fuzzy Model for AISI 430 Steel and EN 10028 P355GH steel FW Joint.
tured by RV Machine Tools Coimbatore, Tamilnadu, India. The fric-
tion welded sample is shown in Fig. 2.
3. Mathematical modeling
The earlier prediction of quantitative results of welded joints
much helpful to the selection and procurement of material for
any engineering applications. A statistical tool like simple regres-
sion analysis, multiple regression analysis, and response surface
methodology is used for theoretical modeling and artificial intelli-
gence tool like an artificial neural network, and fuzzy logic analysis
is utilized to carry out mathematical modeling. The fuzzy logic
analysis is an interpolation mathematics technique to model the
input and output parameters in any application due to simplicity
in data handling. Fuzzy logic is a very useful tool as it deals with
uncertain, imprecise, and incomplete data.
3.1. Fuzzy model for dissimilar AISI 430 steel and EN 10028 P355GH
steel FW joint
The input process parameters and the output responses consid-
ered in this work are added to the fuzzy logic toolbox in MATLAB
R2013a software as shown in Fig. 3. The hardware used is 4 GB
RAM, Intel i3 processor in 64 bit architecture.
The parameter rotational speed triangular membership func-
tion is defined in the name of low, med, and high for modeling of
friction welded AISI 430 Steel and EN 10028 P355GH steel Joint
which is shown in Fig. 4. The fuzzy rule set is framed based on
the numerical values of input and output concerning the member-
ship function already defined. The values of low, medium, and high
2184
Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188
are selected based on the minimum, mean, and maximum of input
and output respectively. The fuzzy rule set developed for trial 10 is
‘‘If (FP_(MPa) is med) and (UP_(MPa) is low) and (FT_(S) is low) and
(UT_(S) is low) and (SPEED_(Rpm) is low) then (UTS_(MPa) is high)
(Toughness_(J) is high) Axial_shortening_(mm) is low)”. The fuzzy
logic based output model is shown in Fig. 5.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Mathematical model analysis
The estimation of mechanical properties for friction welded
joints is important in performance evaluation and material pro-
curement. The experimental results and fuzzy based predicted
responses of friction welded EN 10028 P355GH Steel and AISI
430 Steel Joint is tabulated in Table 2. The comparison of experi-
mental values with fuzzy estimated values for the output
responses tensile strength, impact toughness, and axial shortening
is shown in Fig. 6, Fig. 7, and Fig. 8 respectively. The fuzzy output
values close in agreement with experimental readings as the differ-
ence between these values is much less. The percentage error
obtained for experimental readings with fuzzy results of tensile
strength was 2.01 %, impact toughness 4.8 %, and axial shortening
10.71 %. The range of the experimental values of axial shortening
itself is high, it could be the reason behind more percentage of
error. The root mean square error (RMSE) value for this model is
computed with equation (1) and found that 0.0751 for impact
toughness, 0.0386 for tensile strength, and 0.1596 for axial short-
ening. The RMSE values for all the responses are the least and this
shows the model is evidently relevant [10].
G. Senthilkumar, T. Mayavan and H. Manikandan Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188

Fig. 4. Implementation of Membership Function for AISI 430 Steel and EN 10028 P355GH Steel FW Joint.

Fig. 5. Fuzzy Based Output Model for EN 10028 P355GH STEEL FW Joint.

2185
G. Senthilkumar, T. Mayavan and H. Manikandan Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188

Table 2
Experimental results and Fuzzy predicted results of Friction Welded Dissimilar AISI 430 steel and EN 10028 P355GH Steel Joint.

Trial Process Parameters Experimental Responses Fuzzy Predicted Responses

FP (MPa) UP (MPa) FT (s) UT (s) S (Rpm) UTS (MPa) IT (J) AS (mm) UTS (MPa) IT (J) AS (mm)
1 60 70 3 3 800 444.5 15 8.65 465 16.3 11.6
2 60 70 5 5 1000 461.2 19 14.8 465 16.3 16.8
3 60 70 7 7 1200 514.15 19 20.92 507 18.7 16.8
4 60 90 3 5 1200 485.7 17 14.98 506 18.5 16.5
5 60 90 5 7 800 508.55 16 20.78 506 18.5 16.5
6 60 90 7 3 1000 524.55 17 14.38 507 16.3 16.8
7 60 110 3 7 1000 553.5 18 21.35 548 18.7 22.1
8 60 110 5 3 1200 501.4 18 18.28 507 18.7 16.8
9 60 110 7 5 800 537.8 20 20.5 548 21 22.1
10 70 70 3 3 800 546.25 20 10.5 548 21 11.6
11 70 70 5 5 1000 546.25 17 17.5 548 16.3 16.8
12 70 70 7 7 1200 560.25 19 21.65 548 21 22.1
13 70 90 3 5 1200 542.15 21 20.56 548 21 16.8
14 70 90 5 7 800 536.1 18 20.15 548 18.7 16.8
15 70 90 7 3 1000 548.15 19 22.41 548 18.7 22.1
16 70 110 3 7 1000 530.1 21 23.21 548 21 22.1
17 70 110 5 3 1200 508.15 21 18.56 507 21 16.8
18 70 110 7 5 800 510.1 20 20.76 507 21 16.8
19 80 70 3 3 800 542.1 16 14.56 548 16.3 16.8
20 80 70 5 5 1000 563.15 19 20.85 548 18.7 16.8
21 80 70 7 7 1200 560.25 20 24.36 548 21 22.1
22 80 90 3 5 1200 518.25 18 21.80 507 18.7 22.1
23 80 90 5 7 800 567.2 16 21.6 507 18.7 22.1
24 80 90 7 3 1000 555.41 17 22.52 548 16.3 22.1
25 80 110 3 7 1000 556.95 19 20.56 548 18.7 16.8
26 80 110 5 3 1200 566.15 21 21.62 548 21 22.1
27 80 110 7 5 800 540.4 21 22.16 548 21 22.1

Fig. 6. Comparison of Experimental Values with fuzzy Predicted Values of Ultimate Tensile Strength.

" #1=2
1X n
2
sure and upset pressure on toughness, & speed of rotation, and
RMSE ¼ ðYpredicted  YexperimentalÞ ð1Þ upset pressure on axial shortening are discussed here.
n i¼1

4.2.1. Three dimensional fuzzy logic surface model of tensile strength,

4.2. Surface model analysis
The surface model analysis is helpful to find out the effect of
input parameters on output responses. The effect of speed of rota-
tion and upset pressure on ultimate tensile strength, friction pres-
2186
impact toughness, and axial shortening of AISI 430 steel & EN 10028
P355GH steel joint
The parameter upset pressure 70 MPa, 90 MPa, and 110 MPa
were maintained as low, medium, and high respectively, and the
rotational speed 800 rpm, 1000 rpm, and 1200 rpm were main-
tained as low, medium, and high respectively fed into the fuzzy
G. Senthilkumar, T. Mayavan and H. Manikandan Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188

Fig. 7. Comparison of Experimental Values with fuzzy Predicted Values of Impact Toughness.

Fig. 8. Comparison of Experimental Values with fuzzy Predicted Values of Axial Shortening.

model. The output response tensile strength (MPa) behavior con-
cerning upset pressure and speed of rotation is shown in Fig. 9.
The high tensile strength is obtained at a medium speed of rota-
tion. The high speed of rotation that creates more softness at the
interface could be the reason.
The friction pressure 60 MPa, 70 MPa, and 80 MPa were main-
tained as low, medium, and high respectively, and the upset pres-
sure 70 MPa, 90 MPa, and 110 MPa were maintained as low,
medium, and high respectively are fed into the fuzzy model.
Fig. 10 shows the output response Impact Toughness (J) behavior
concerning friction pressure and upset pressure. High upset pres-
sure and friction pressure give good impact toughness of the fric-

Fig. 9. The Fuzzy Developed Surface Model of Tensile Strength of Friction Welded Fig. 10. The Fuzzy Developed Surface Model of Impact Toughness of Friction
AISI 430 Steel and EN 10028 P355GH Steel Joint. Welded AISI 430 Steel and EN 10028 P355GH Steel Joint.

2187
G. Senthilkumar, T. Mayavan and H. Manikandan
Fig. 11. The Fuzzy Developed Surface Model of Axial Shortening of Friction Welded
AISI 430 and EN 10028 P355GH Steel Joint.
tion welded joint. The process parameters friction pressure, upset
pressure, and rotational speed highly influence the output
responses like ultimate tensile strength, Impact toughness, and
axial shortening in the friction welded steel joint [9].
The rotational speed 800 rpm, 1000 rpm, and 1200 rpm were
maintained as low, medium, and high respectively, and the upset
pressure 80 MPa, 100 MPa, and 120 MPa were maintained as
low, medium, and high respectively are fed into the fuzzy model.
Fig. 11 shows the output response axial shortening (mm) behavior
to friction pressure and forging pressure. The medium speed of
rotation and low upset pressure is to provide high axial shortening.
5. Conclusion
1. The solid state friction welded dissimilar EN 10028P 355 GH
Steel and AISI 430 Steel joint was successfully fabricated.
2. The model for joint properties has been developed by fuzzy
logic using a triangular membership function.
3. The surface model shows that the medium speed of rotation
tends to make high ultimate tensile strength of friction welded
joint. The high upset pressure and friction pressure give good
impact toughness of the friction welded joint. The medium speed
of rotation and low upset pressure is to provide high axial
shortening.
4. The percentage error was obtained for experimental results
with fuzzy results of ultimate tensile strength 2.01 %, impact
toughness 4.8 %, and axial shortening 10.71 %.
5. The least value of RMSE was obtained for all the responses, so
it makes the fuzzy logic model meaningful.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
G. Senthilkumar: Data curation, Investigation, Methodology,
Writing – original draft. T. Mayavan: Software, Validation, Writing
– review & editing. H. Manikandan: Conceptualization, Supervi-
sion, Writing – review & editing.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
2188
Materials Today: Proceedings 68 (2022) 2182–2188
Acknowledgments
The authors would wish to extend their sincere gratitude to the
facilities offered by CEMAJOR LAB, Department of Manufacturing
Engineering, Annamalai University, Tamilnadu, India to carry out
the Investigation.
References
[1] M.M. Asif, K.A. Shrikrishana, P. Sathiya, Finite element modeling and
characterization of friction welding on UNS S31803 duplex stainless steel
joints, Eng. Sci. Technol.-Int. J. 18 (4) (2015) 704–712.
[2] Bennett, C., (2015). Finite element modeling of the inertia friction welding of
CrMoV alloy steel including the effects of solid-state phase transformations.
Journal of Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 18, pp.84-91.
[3] L. Fu, L.Y. Duan, S.G. Du, Numerical simulation of inertia friction welding
process by finite element method, Weld. J.-New York- 82 (3) (2003) pp. 65-S.
[4] Y. Balram, B.S. Babu, T.V. Vardhan, G.V. Ramana, G.B.P. Chakradhar, Residual
stress analysis of dissimilar tungsten inert gas weldments of AISI 304 and
Monel 400 by numerical simulation and experimentation, Mater. Today:. Proc.
19 (2019) 478–483.
[5] O. Iracheta, C.J. Bennett, W. Sun, A sensitivity study of parameters affecting
residual stress predictions in finite element modeling of the inertia friction
welding process, Int. J. Solids Struct. 71 (2015) 180–193.
[6] H. Seli, A.I.M. Ismail, E. Rachman, Z.A. Ahmad, Mechanical evaluation and
thermal modeling of friction welding of mild steel and aluminium, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 210 (9) (2010) 1209–1216.
[7] J.H. Lee, J.H. Lee, S.H. Yang, Thermal error modeling of a horizontal machining
center using fuzzy logic strategy, J. Manuf. Processes 3 (2) (2001) 120–127.
[8] X. Nan, J. Xiong, F. Jin, X. Li, Z. Liao, F. Zhang, J. Li, Modeling of rotary friction
welding process based on maximum entropy production principle, J. Manuf.
Processes 37 (2019) 21–27.
[9] F. Jin, J. Li, P. Liu, X. Nan, X. Li, J. Xiong, F. Zhang, Friction coefficient model and
joint formation in rotary friction welding, J. Manuf. Processes 46 (2019) 286–
297.
[10] G. Senthilkumar, R. Ramakrishnan, Design of optimal parameter for solid state
welding of EN 10028–P355 GH steel using grey incidence reinforced surface
response methodology, Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 46 (2021) 2613–2628.
[11] G.Senthilkumar., R.Ramakrishnan.,(2021).A comparative study of predicting
burn off length in continuous drive solid state friction welding for ASTM A516
Steel by regression analysis, fuzzy logic analysis, and finite element analysis.
Journal Applied Science and Engineering, vol.24, No 3, pp 359-366.
[12] G.Senthilkumar., R.Ramakrishnan.,(2021). A Study of Individual and
Interaction effect of Process Parameters friction welded on AISI 410 and AISI
430 Joint. Materials Today Proceedings.Vol. 46, No. 9, 2021, Page 3233-3239.
[13] M. Santhanakumar, R. Adalarasan, S. Siddharth, A. Velayudham, An
investigation on surface finish and flank wear in hard machining of solution
treated and aged 18% Ni maraging steel, J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 39 (6)
(2017) 2071–2084.
[14] R. Adalarasan, M. Santhanakumar, S. Thileepan, Selection of optimal
machining parameters in pulsed CO 2 laser cutting of Al6061/Al 2 O 3
composite using Taguchi-based response surface methodology (T-RSM), Int. J.
Adv. Manuf. Technol. 93 (1–4) (2016) 305–317.
[15] S. Ramesh, L. Karunamoorthy, K. Palanikumar, Fuzzy modeling and analysis of
machining parameters in machining titanium alloy, Mater. Manuf. Processes
23 (4) (2008) 439–447.
[16] K.M. Mohsin, A.A. Mokhtar, W.T. Peter, A fuzzy logic method: Predicting
corrosion under the insulation of piping systems with modeling of CUI 3D
surfaces, Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 175 (2019) 103929.
[17] P. Li, J. Li, H. Dong, C. Ji, Metallurgical and mechanical properties of continuous
drive friction welded copper/alumina dissimilar joints, Mater. Des. 127 (2016)
311–319.
[18] R.K. Gazizov, N.H. Ibragimov, O.V. Rudenko, Effect of resonant absorption in
viscous and dry vibrating contact: mathematical models and theory connected
with slow dynamics and friction welding, Commun. Non-linear Sci. Numer.
Simul. 19 (2) (2014) 337–344.
[19] M. Kessler, S. Suenger, M. Haubold, M.F. Zaeh, Modeling of an upset and
torsional moment during inertia friction welding, J. Mater. Process. Technol.
227 (2016) 34–40.
[20] D. Makhanlall, G. Wang, J. Shen, Thermodynamic optimum friction welding of
glassy rods, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 213 (9) (2013) 1635–1639.
[21] L. Nie, L. Zhang, Z. Zhu, W. Xu, Microstructure evolution modeling of FGH96
superalloy during inertia friction welding process, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 80
(2014) 63–68.
[22] A.Z. Sahin, A 3D Numerical study of heat conduction in the friction welding
process, Math. Comput. Appl 1 (2) (1996) 111–116.
[23] McAndrew, A.R., Colegrove, P.A., Addison, A.C., Flipo, B.C. and Russell, M.J.,
(2015). Modeling the influence of the process inputs on the removal of surface
contaminants from Ti–6Al–4V linear friction welds. Materials & Design (1980-
2015), Vol. 66, pp.183-195.
[24] J. Zimmerman, W. Wlosinski, Z.R. Lindemann, Thermo-mechanical and
diffusion modeling in the process of ceramic–metal friction welding, J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 209 (4) (2009) 1644–1653.