Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

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

Technical Report

Friction stir welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys AA2219 to AA5083 Optimization of process parameters using Taguchi technique
M. Koilraj a,, V. Sundareswaran b, S. Vijayan c, S.R. Koteswara Rao d
a

Department of Mechanical Engineering, St. Josephs College of Engineering, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India Department of Mechanical Engineering, Anna University, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India c Department of Mechanical Engineering, SSN College of Engineering, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India d Tagore Engineering College, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
The joining of dissimilar AlCu alloy AA2219-T87 and AlMg alloy AA5083-H321 plates was carried out using friction stir welding (FSW) technique and the process parameters were optimized using Taguchi L16 orthogonal design of experiments. The rotational speed, transverse speed, tool geometry and ratio between tool shoulder diameter and pin diameter were the parameters taken into consideration. The optimum process parameters were determined with reference to tensile strength of the joint. The predicted optimal value of tensile strength was conrmed by conducting the conrmation run using optimum parameters. This study shows that defect free, high efciency welded joints can be produced using a wide range of process parameters and recommends parameters for producing best joint tensile properties. Analysis of variance showed that the ratio between tool shoulder diameter and pin diameter is the most dominant factor in deciding the joint soundness while pin geometry and welding speed also played signicant roles. Microstructural studies revealed that the material placed on the advancing side dominates the nugget region. Hardness studies revealed that the lowest hardness in the weldment occurred in the heat-affected zone on alloy of 5083 side, where tensile failures were observed to take place. 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Article history: Received 16 November 2011 Accepted 9 February 2012 Available online 18 February 2012

1. Introduction Fusion welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys is very challenging mainly due to the formation of low melting eutectics by the constituent elements resulting in weld solidication cracking (hot cracking). Solidication cracking in aluminum alloys is extremely sensitive to weld metal composition, which depends on the composition of the ller metal, composition of the base metal, and amount of dilution. Therefore, one must carefully choose the ller composition and/or welding parameters such that the resultant weld composition is not susceptible to solidication cracking. This can be done without much problem in the case of fusion welding of similar aluminum alloys. Guidelines for selection of ller metals exist for different classes and types of aluminum alloys. However, when it comes to fusion welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys, solidication cracking is not easy to deal with. For many dissimilar aluminum alloy combinations, there exist no ller metals that can produce crack-free welds. Even in cases where there is a reasonable ller metal option, one cannot achieve satisfactory joint efciency.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9444205234.

E-mail addresses: koil.stjosephs@gmail.com (M. Koilraj), (S. Vijayan). vijayans@ssn.edu.in

For these reasons, fusion welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys is generally avoided in the industry. Solid-state welding processes are ideally suited for welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys. Because these processes do not involve melting, the issue of weld solidication cracking does not arise. Similarly, solid-state welding processes overcome a variety of other problems in fusion welding of aluminum alloys such as porosity, segregation, brittle intermetallic formation, and heataffected zone liquation cracking. Among the solid-state welding processes, friction stir welding is very attractive for welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys as it is suitable for producing welds in a variety of joint congurations, including butt joints. FSW of dissimilar alloys/metals has attracted extensive research interest due to potential engineering importance and problems associated with conventional welding. Several different dissimilar aluminum alloy combinations have been successfully friction stir welded with excellent joint efciencies [16]. In most of these investigations, signicant mechanical mixing of the two alloys was noticed in the stir zone or weld nugget with complex vortex, whorl, and swirl features characteristic of chaoticdynamic mixing. Also, it has been shown that the locations of two dissimilar alloys exerted a signicant effect on material ow pattern and the resultant weld quality [7]. Many investigators reported that it is benecial to place the stronger of the two materials

0261-3069/$ - see front matter 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2012.02.016

M. Koilraj et al. / Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17

on the advancing side [1,8]. In their studies on FSW of cast aluminum alloy A356 to wrought aluminum alloy AA6061, Lee et al. [9] found that the stir zone predominantly consisted of the material that was placed on the retreating side. Whereas, Priya et al. [6], working on friction stir welding of AA2219 to AA6061, observed that the material placed on the advancing side dominated the stir zone. However, most of these studies focused on material ow visualization [7,8,11,12] and no optimum FSW parameters and tool geometry were identied in these systems. 1.1. FSW parameters A non-consumable rotating tool with a specially designed pin and shoulder is inserted into the abutting edges of sheets or plates to be joined and traversed along the line of joint. The tool serves two primary functions: (a) heating of work piece, and (b) moving the material to produce the joint. The heating is accomplished by friction between the tool and the work piece and plastic deformation of work piece. The localized heating softens the material around the pin and the combination of tool rotation and translation leads to movement of material from the front of the pin to the back of the pin. As a result of this process, a joint is produced in solid state. Because of various geometrical features of the tool, the material movement around the pin can be quite complex [13]. During FSW process, the material undergoes intense plastic deformation at elevated temperature, resulting in generation of ne and equiaxed recrystallized grains [915]. The ne microstructure in friction stir welds produces good mechanical properties. The tool geometry, welding parameters, joint designs are the signicant parameters affecting the material ow pattern and temperature distribution, thereby inuencing the micro structural evolution of the material [16]. The detailed list of FSW process parameters are given below: 1. Rotational speed of the tool (rpm). 2. Welding speed or transverse speed (mm/min). 3. Tool geometry. (a) Pin prole. (b) Tool shoulder diameter, D (mm). (c) Pin diameter, d (mm). (d) D/d ratio of tool. (e) Pin length (mm). (f) Tool inclination angle (). From the available literatures [1620] the friction stir welding process parameters such as tool rotational speed, transverse speed, and tool geometry signicantly inuence the process and play a major role in deciding the quality of the weld. It is reported that defect free weld in dissimilar materials of AA5052 to AA2017 are obtained when the transverse speed and rotational speed are at 60 mm/min and 1000 rpm respectively. Further, the rotational speed or welding speed increases the tensile strength to a maximum value and then decreases due the occurrence of void defect [2126]. The fracture is observed in weld nugget zone at lower welding speed due to signicant softening associated with these regions, and the presence of occasional, irregularly-shaped voids near the boundary between base metal and weld zone on advancing side. Moreover for high rotational speed weld defects are mostly observed. Baeslack III et al. [27], in their studies on friction stir welding of AA8009, found that for the high rotational speed of 1200 rpm the tensile strength value was 6070% of the base metal and for the lower rotational speed of 428 rpm it was found to be 90%. Park et al. [28], investigated that the proper mixing of material in the nugget region was observed when the stronger base material was placed on the advancing side. In contrast, a thinner weld nugget

and inadequate mixing occurred with weaker material on the advancing side. From the foregoing, the success in dissimilar friction stir welding requires careful judgment with respect to material placement, tool designing and process parameters depending on the properties of the materials to be joined. AlCu alloy AA2219 and AlMg alloy AA5083 are two widely used aluminum alloys especially in the aerospace industry. Fusion welding of these alloys is not possible as Cu and Mg brought together in liquid state would result in low melting eutectic and solidication cracking. A number of researchers have explored friction stir welding for welding of dissimilar metals and alloys. Several different dissimilar aluminum alloy combinations have been successfully friction stir welded with reasonably good joint efciencies. The main alloying element in the 5000 series is magnesium. A magnesium content of about 5% provides good strength and high corrosion resistance in sea water. Practically no information is available in open literature on friction stir welding of this particular material combination. Therefore, an attempt is made here to investigate friction stir welding of AA2219 to AA5083. In this investigation the four parameters such as rotational speed, transverse speed and tool pin geometry and D/d ratio are taken into consideration, the values and their symbols and levels are listed in Table 1. 1.2. Taguchi method Taguchi addresses quality in two main areas: off-line and online quality control [30]. The most important difference between a classical experimental design and a Taguchi-method-based robust design technique is that the former tends to focus solely on the mean of the quality characteristic while the later considers the minimization of the variance of the characteristic of interest. Although, the Taguchi method has drawn much criticism due to several major limitations, it has been able to solve single response problems effectively. The Taguchi method attempts to optimize a process or product design consists of three stages, as follows: 1. Concept design or system design. 2. Parameter design. 3. Tolerance design. The following are the steps to be followed for process parameter optimization [31]. Step Step Step Step 1: Determine the quality characteristic to be optimized. 2: Identify the noise factors and test conditions. 3: Identify the control factors and their alternative levels. 4: Design the matrix experiment and dene the data analysis procedure. Step 5: Conduct the matrix experiment. Step 6: Analyze the data and determine optimum levels for control factors. Step 7: Predict the performance at these levels. 1.3. Selection of orthogonal array (OA) The selection of which orthogonal array to use predominately depends on these items in order of priority: 1. The number of factors and interactions of interest. 2. The number of levels for the factors of interest. 3. The desired experimental resolution or cost limitations. As four levels and four factors are taken into consideration, L16 OA is used in this investigation. Only the main factor effects are taken into consideration and not the interactions. The degrees of

M. Koilraj et al. / Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17 Table 1 Process parameters values and their four levels. Level A Tool pin geometry B Rotational speed (rpm) 400 550 700 800 C Transverse speed (mm/s) 15 30 45 60 D D/d ratio

Level Level Level Level

1 2 3 4

Straight cylinder (CS) Tapered cylinder (CT) Cylindrical threaded (TH) Tapered threaded (TT)

1.5 2 2.5 3

the designed matrix. The dimensions of tensile specimen are shown in Fig. 1. The prepared tensile specimens were subjected to tensile test and their ultimate tensile strengths were evaluated. The following Table 4 gives the values of designed experimental layout. Weld microstructures in as-welded condition were examined using optical microscope. Vickers microhardness measurements were made across the weldment using a load of 100 g applied for 15 s. 3. Results and discussion

Table 2 Chemical composition of the alloys (weight%). Material AA5083 AA2219 Mg 4.15 0.01 Mn 0.73 0.27 Fe 0.31 0.13 Si 0.13 0.01 Cu 0.025 6.7 Al Remaining Remaining

3.1. Signal to noise ratio The SN ratio is calculated based on the quality of the characteristics intended. The objective function described in this investigation is maximization of the tensile strength so; the larger the better SN ratio is to be calculated. The formula used for calculating the SN ratio is given below. 3.2. Larger the better

Table 3 Mechanical properties of the alloys. Base metal AA5083 AA2219 0.2% Proof strength (MPa) 255 387 Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) 303 471 % Elongation 28 20

S=N ratiog 10log10

n 1X 1 n i1 y2 i

freedom (dof) for each factor is 3 (No. of levels 1, i.e. 4 1 = 3) and therefore the total degrees of freedom will be 4 3 = 12. Generally the dof of the OA should be greater than the total dof of the factors. As the dof of L16 is 15 it would be suitable for the study. The chemical composition and mechanical properties of the plate are given in Tables 2 and 3. 2. Experimental procedure

The tensile strength of the friction stir welding joints values is analyzed to study the effects of the FSW process parameters. The experimental data are converted into mean and SN ratio. The calculated mean and SN ratio values are tabulated in Table 4. The average mean and SN ratio values of all levels are calculated and listed in Tables 5 and 6. The larger SN Ratio corresponds to the better quality characteristics [1821]. Based on mean and SN ratio values the optimal level setting is A3B3C1D4. 3.3. Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

The materials used in this study are 6 mm thick sheets of AlCu alloy AA2219-T87 and AlMg alloy AA5083-H321. The rolled plates were cut and machined into rectangular coupons (150 mm long and 65 mm wide for friction stir welding. Welding was carried out in butt joint conguration using friction stir welding machine. The butt joints were fabricated normal to the rolling direction. The experiments were conducted using parameters of the designed L16 OA. The process parameters are tool rotational speeds, tool transverse speeds, tool pin proles and the ratio of shoulder diameter to pin diameter (D/d). The tools made of H13 grade tool steel (pin length 5.7 mm and pin diameter 6 mm) of hardness 5055 VHN was employed for friction stir welding. The pin was positioned at the center of the joint line. Transverse tensile specimens with a gage length of 25 mm and a width of 6 mm (overall length: 100 mm) were prepared from the weld coupons in as-welded condition. Room-temperature tensile tests were conducted on three samples as per ASTM E8 [32] on a universal tensile testing machine. The wire cut EDM was used to cut the smooth prole tensile specimens. To minimize the machining error (noise) three specimens were prepared at each levels of

The purpose of ANOVA is to nd the signicant factor statistically. It gives a clear picture as to how far the process parameter affects the response and the level of signicance of the factor considered. The ANOVA table for mean and signal to noise ratio are calculated and listed in Tables 7 and 8. The main effects for mean and SN ratio are plotted in Fig. 2 and 3. The F test is being carried out to study the signicance of the process parameter. The high F value indicates that the factor is highly signicant in affecting the response of the process. In our investigation, D/d ratio is a highly signicant factor and plays a major role in affecting the tensile strength of the weld. 3.4. Predicted value of tensile strength Based on the experiments, the optimum level settings is A3B3C1D4. The additive model to evaluate the predicted tensile strength is taken from the literature [2426,41]. The average values of the factors at their levels are taken from Table 5 and the predicted value of the response is given below:

Fig. 1. Dimensions of tensile specimen.

M. Koilraj et al. / Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17

Table 4 Experimental layout L16 orthogonal array, mean value and SN ratio value. Sl. no 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A Tool pin geometry 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 B Rotational speed 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 C Transverse speed 1 2 3 4 2 1 4 3 3 4 1 2 4 3 2 1 D D/d ratio 1 2 3 4 3 4 1 2 4 3 2 1 2 1 4 3 Mean tensile strength (MPa) 105 239 247 158 203 262 104 115 288 278 276 126 298 101 290 246 SN ratio 40.4650 47.5698 47.8715 43.9951 46.1841 48.3826 40.3989 41.2404 49.2044 48.9059 48.8449 42.0212 49.4858 40.0950 49.2525 47.8258 Soundness of the weld Defective Defect Free Defect Free Defective Defect Free Defect Free Defective Defective Defect Free Defect Free Defect Free Defective Defect Free Defective Defect Free Defect Free

Table 5 Response table for means. Level 1 2 3 4 Delta Rank A 187.6 172.6 242.6 233.9 70.9 2 B 224.0 220.4 229.8 161.5 68.3 3 C 222.8 214.8 188.1 210.0 34.6 4 D 109.4 232.3 244.1 249.9 140.5 1

Table 8 Analysis of variance for signal to noise ratio. Source A B C D Residual error Total Dof 3 3 3 3 3 15 Seq SS 26.212 20.825 7.885 134.986 12.886 202.794 Adj MS 8.737333 6.941667 2.628333 44.99533 4.295333 F 0.50 0.40 0.39 6.76 % Contribution 12.92543 10.26904 3.888182 66.56311 6.354231 100

The optimal setting parameters based on mean A3B3C1D4.

Dof degrees of freedom, Seq SS sequencial sum of squares, Adj MS adjusted mean square, SS0 pure sum of squares, F sher ratio.

Table 6 Response table for signal to noise ratios. Level 1 2 3 4 Delta Rank A 44.98 44.05 47.24 46.66 3.18 2 B 46.33 46.24 46.59 43.77 2.82 3 C 46.38 46.26 44.60 45.70 1.78 4 D 40.75 46.79 47.70 47.71 6.96 1

set at their predicted optimum levels. The rotational speed, transverse speed, and D/d ratio were set at 700 rpm, 15 mm/min and 3 respectively. Three tensile specimens were subjected to tensile test and the average value of the friction stir welded AA2219 and AA5083 was 301 MPa. 3.6. Microstructure, hardness and tensile tests The microstructures of alloy 2219 and alloy 5083 base materials are shown in Fig. 4. Both the base materials in the current study contained a large number of undissolved second-phase intermetallic particles. The second-phase particles in alloy 2219 contained Al2Cu (h) eutectic particles, while alloy 5083 contained iron/manganese aluminides. Compared to alloy 2219, alloy 5083 contained fewer and ner second-phase particles. Three distinct microstructural zones stir zone or weld nugget (SZ), thermo-mechanically affected zone (TMAZ), and heat-affected zone (HAZ) were present in the weld. Fig. 5 shows that the microstructures of the weld, the TMAZ on the advancing side showed highly deformed grains, with a clearly discernible SZ/TMAZ and TMAZ/HAZ boundaries (Fig. 5a). However, on the retreating side, these interfaces were rather diffused, especially the latter (Fig. 5b). In the HAZ, on either side of the weld nugget, there were no noticeable changes in the grain structure compared to the respective unaffected base materials. Vickers microhardness tests were conducted across the weld (mid-section, 0.25 mm spacing) to ascertain possible microstructure/property variations among the various regions of the weldment. The results are pictorially shown in Fig. 6. As can be seen, on the advancing side, there was a signicant drop in hardness from the 2219 unaffected base material to the weld nugget boundary. The weld nugget hardness was considerably lower than that of the 2219 base material. On the retreating side, only slight drop in hardness was observed from the 5083 unaffected base material to

The optimal setting parameters based on SN ratio is A3B3C1D4.

Table 7 Analysis of variance for means. Source A B C D Residual error Total Dof 3 3 3 3 3 15 Seq SS 14419.3 12154.6 2639.0 53488.9 5695.2 88397.0 Adj MS 4806.433 4051.533 879.6667 17829.63 1898.4 F 0.70 0.59 0.25 4.97 % Contribution 16.31198 13.75001 2.985395 60.50986 6.442753 100

Tensile strength predicted A3 B3 C 1 D4 3T 242:6 229:8 222:8 249:9 3208:919 318:344 MPa 2

where A3 is the average mean value of tool geometry at 3rd level. B3 is average mean value of rotational speed at 3rd level. C1 is average mean value of transverse speed at 1st level. D4 is average mean value of D/d ratio at 4th level. T is the overall mean. 3.5. Conrmation run The conrmation experiments were carried out with cylindrically threaded pin prole and the other process parameters were

M. Koilraj et al. / Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17

Fig. 2. Main effects plot for mean.

Fig. 3. Main effects plot for SN ratio.

Fig. 4. Microstructures of base materials: (a) optical, alloy 221, and (b) optical, alloy 5083.

the weld nugget boundary. The weld nugget showed higher hardness compared to the 5083 base material. As can be expected, 2219

base material showed signicantly higher hardness compared to 5083 base material.

M. Koilraj et al. / Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17

Fig. 5. TMAZ microstructures: (a) advancing side, and (b) retreating side.

The results of weld transverse tensile tests are listed in Table 4. All the three weld specimens failed in the 5083-side HAZ. The tensile properties of the two base materials are also listed in Table 3. Typical failed tensile test specimens are shown in Fig. 7. Alloy 2219 is signicantly stronger compared to alloy 5083. The welded specimens showed slightly lower strength compared to 5083 base material specimens. The results of this investigation shows that friction stir welding can produce satisfactory butt welds between AA2219 and

Fig. 6. Microhardness prole across the weld.

AA5083 sheet materials, demonstrating the unique capabilities of the process in dealing with joining of dissimilar aluminum alloys. Though, friction stir welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys has been demonstrated in quite a few earlier investigations, one interesting aspect of the welds made in this study is the absence of signicant metal mixing. Shigematsu et al. [10] reported similar observations in friction stir welds between alloy 5083 and alloy 6061. In many of the earlier studies, the nugget region was found to be characterized by chaotic mixing of the two metals being welded [2,5]. Also, the two metals were shown to occur as alternating layers in the onion rings. Priya et al. [6] reported that the material placed on the advancing side is pulled into the nugget region signicantly more than that on the retreating side. It is known that during friction stir welding the combinations are such that the material placed on advancing side experiences higher temperatures and greater deformations than that on the retreating side [7,29]. While these factors can account for this observation, further work is necessary for attempting a detailed explanation in this regard. In any case it appears that one can achieve higher joint efciencies by placing the stronger of the two base materials on the advancing side. In dissimilar welding, a rule-of-thumb for qualication of welds is a fact that failure should occur in the weaker of the two base materials, away from the weld. Friction stir welding did not quiet meet this requirement in the current case, with all the failures occurring in the 5083-side HAZ, where the lowest hardness levels in the entire weldment were recorded. The weld specimens showed slightly lower strength compared to 5083-H321 base material specimens. Loss of cold work in the HAZ due to annealing effects can account for this. The joint efciency is around 90% (based on alloy AA5083) by using FSW, which is much higher than what can be achieved with conventional fusion welding processes.

4. Conclusions The friction stir welding process parameters were optimized with respect to tensile strength of the joint and the optimum level of settings were found out. The optimum levels of the rotational speed, transverse speed, and D/d ratio are 700 rpm, 15 mm/min and 3 respectively. The cylindrical threaded pin tool prole was found to be the best among the other tool proles considered. The D/d ratio plays a vital role and contributes 60% to the overall contribution. Friction stir welding can produce satisfactory butt welds between AA2219-T87and AA5083-H321 sheets with a joint efciency of around 90% (based on alloy AA5083). For this specic material combination, failures occur in the heat-affected zone of alloy 5083.

Fig. 7. Typical failed tensile test specimens.

M. Koilraj et al. / Materials and Design 42 (2012) 17

Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the nancial assistance extended by Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO), New Delhi, India, through Project No. ERIP/ER/0804452/ M/01/1192 to conduct the research work being published in this paper. They are also grateful to Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratories (DMRLs), Hyderabad for providing facilities to conduct welding trials.
[15] [16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

References
[1] Luijendijk T. Welding of dissimilar aluminium alloys. J Mater Process Technol 2000;103:2935. [2] Bala Srinivasan P, Dietzel W, Zettler R, dos Santos JF, Sivan V. Stress corrosion cracking susceptibility of friction stir welded AA7075AA6056 dissimilar joint. Mater Sci Eng A 2005;392:292300. [3] Amancio-Filho ST, Sheikhi S, dos Santos JF, Bolfarini C. Preliminary study on the microstructure and mechanical properties of dissimilar friction stir welds in aircraft aluminium alloys 2024-T351 and 6056-T4. J Mater Process Technol 2008;206:13242. [4] Khodir SA, Shibayanagi T. Friction stir welding of dissimilar AA2024 and AA7075 aluminum alloys. Mater Sci Eng B 2008;148:827. [5] Cavaliere P, De Santis A, Panella F, Squillace A. Effect of welding parameters on mechanical and microstructural properties of dissimilar AA6082AA2024 joints produced by friction stir welding. Mater Des 2009;30:60916. [6] Priya R, Subramanya Sarma V, Prasad Rao K. Effect of post weld heat treatment on the microstructure and tensile properties of dissimilar friction stir welded AA 2219 and AA 6061 alloys. Trans Indian Inst Met 2009;62:119. [7] Mishra RS, Ma ZY. Friction stir welding and processing. Mater Sci Eng R 2005;50:178. [8] Murr LE, Li Y, Flores RD, Trillo EA, McClure JC. Intercalation vortices and related microstructural features in the friction-stir welding of dissimilar metals. Mater Res Innovations 1998;2:15063. [9] Lee WB, Yeon YM, Jung SB. The joint properties of dissimilar formed Al alloys by friction stir welding according to the xed location of materials. Scripta Mater 2003;49:4238. [10] Shigematsu I, Kwon YJ, Suzuki K, Imai T, Satio N. Joining of 5083 and 6061 aluminum alloys by friction stir welding. J Mater Sci Lett 2003;22:3536. [11] Li Y, Murr LE, McClure JC. Flow visualization and residual microstructures with the friction-stir welding of 2024 aluminum to 6061 aluminum. Mater Sci Eng A 1999;271:21323. [12] Ouyang JH, Kovacevic R. Material ow during friction stir welding (FSW) of the same and dissimilar aluminum alloys. J Mater Eng Perform 2002;11(1):5163. [13] Cavaliere P, Panella F. Effect of tool position on the fatigue properties of dissimilar 20247075 sheets joined by friction stir welding. J Mater Process Technol 2008;206:24955. [14] London B, Mahoney M, Bingel B, Calabrese M, Waldron D. Experimental methods for determining material ow in friction stir welds. In: Proceedings of [20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25] [26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30] [31]

[32]

the third international symposium on friction stir welding, Kobe, Japan; September 2728, 2001. Rhodes CG, Mahoney MW, Bingel WH, Spurling RA, Bampton CC. Effects of FSW on microstructure of 7075 aluminum. Scripta Mater 1997;36:69. Fujii H, Cui L, Maeda M, Nogi K. Effect of tool shape on mechanical properties and microstructure of friction stir welded aluminum alloys. Mater Sci Eng A 2006;419:2531. Kim Weon-Kyong, Goo Byeong-Choon, Won Si-Tae. Optimal design of friction stir welding process to improve tensile force of the joint of A6005 extrusion. Mater Manuf Process 2010;25(7):63764424. Lakshminarayanan K, Balasubramanian V. Process parameters optimization for friction stir welding of RDE-40 aluminum alloy using Taguchi technique. Trans Non Ferr Met Soc China 2008;18:54854. Vijayan S, Raju R, Subbaiah K, Sridhar N, Rao SRK. Friction stir welding of Al Mg alloy-optimization of process parameters using Taguchi method. Exp Tech 2010;34(5):3744. Vijayan S, Raju R, Rao SRK. Multi-objective optimization of friction stir welding process parameters on aluminum alloy AA 5083 using Taguchi based grey relation analysis. Accept Mater Manuf Process 2010;25(11):120612. DUrso G, Giardini C. The inuence of process parameters and tool geometry on mechanical properties of friction stir welded aluminium lap joints. Int J Mater Form 2010;3(Suppl 1):10114. Chen T, Lin WB. Optimal FSW process parameters for interface and welded zone toughness of dissimilar aluminiumsteel joint. Sci Technol Weld Join 2010;15:27985. Cavaliere P, De Santis A, Panella F, Squillace A. Effect of welding parameters on mechanical and microstructural properties of dissimilar AA6082AA2024 joints produced by friction stir welding. Mater Des 2009;30:60916. Elangovan K, Balasubramanian V, Valliappan M. Inuences of tool pin prole and axial force on the formation of friction stir processing zone in AA6061 aluminium alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2008;38:28595. Chen Thaiping. Process parameters study on FSW joint of dissimilar metals for aluminumsteel. J Mater Sci 2009;44:257380. Karthikeyan R, Balasubramanian V. Predictions of the optimized friction stir spot welding process parameters for joining AA2024 aluminum alloy using RSM. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2010;51:17383. Baeslack III WA, Jata KV, Lienert TJ. Structure, properties and fracture of friction stir welds in a high-temperature Al-8.5Fe-1.3V-1.7Si alloy (AA-8009). J Mater Sci 2006;41:293951. Park SK, Hong ST, Park JH, Park KY, Kwon YJ, Son HJ. The effect of material locations on the properties of friction stir welding joints of dissimilar aluminium alloys. Sci Technol Weld Join 2010;15:3316. Nandan R, DebRoy T, Bhadeshia HKDH. Recent advances in friction-stir welding process, weldment structure and properties. Prog Mater Sci 2008;53:9801023. Ross PJ. Taguchi techniques for quality engineering. Singapore: McGraw-Hill; 1996. Datta S, Bandyaopadhyay A, Pal PK. Application of Taguchi philosophy for parametric optimization of bead geometry and HAZ width in submerged arc welding using a mixture of fresh ux and fused ux. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2008;36:68998. ASTM E8/E8M-09. Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic materials1. ASTM International; 3 July 2010.