23. - 25. 10.

2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

EFFECTS OF POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT ON ALUMINUM ALLOY 7075 IN GAS METAL ARC WELDING Prachya PEASURA
Department of Production Technology Education, Faculty of Industrial Education and Technology King Mongkuts University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok , Thailand, prachya.pea@kmutt.ac.th

Abstract The heat-treatable alloys Al-Zn-Mg-Cu develop their properties by solution heat treating and quenching, followed by either natural or artificial aging. The heat-treatable alloy may also be annealed to attain maximum ductility. This research was the study in post weld heat treatment (PWHT) that affected to mechanical 3 properties and microstructure. The material in testing is aluminum alloy 7075 grade. The 2 factorial design 0 applied in to experiment. The samples will be solutionized at 200 and 250 C in induction furnace and then air 0 0 cooled. Post weld heat treatment temperatures were set at 110 C and 80 C and Post weld heat treatment times were controlled at 20 and 24 hours. The welded specimens were tested by tensile testing according to JIS Z 2241-1998 and hardness testing according to JIS Z 2245-1998 The results showed that the PWHT temperature and PWHT time has affected to tensile strength and hardness in weld metal at P-value > 0.05. 0 The factors affecting the tensile strength and hardness are the most solution temp 200 C, PWHT temperature 0 110 C at PWHT time 24 hour is the factor that induced the tensile strength to 143.83 N/mm and hardness of 121.03 HV. As long PWHT time was used, the grain size also increased. This can result in decreased of hardness. These results can use as data information in furfure for improve post weld heat treatment properties. Keywords: Aluminum alloy 7075, Gas metal arc welding, Post weld heat treatment, 2 Factorial Design 1. INTRODUCTION
3

7000 series alloys such as 7075 are often used in transport applications, including marine, automotive and aviation applications, due to their high strength-to-density ratio. Its strength and light weight are also desirable in other fields. Rock climbing equipment, bicycle components, and hang glider airframes are commonly made from 7075 aluminium alloy. The heat-treatable alloys develop their properties by solution heat treating and quenching, followed by either natural or artificial aging. The heat-treatable alloy may also be annealed to attain maximum ductility.[1] During fusion welding, the heat affected zone will be exposed to sufficiently high temperatures to overage heat-treat metal. As result, this zone will be softened to some extent. [2] Alloy 7075 aluminum are mainly zinc-magnesium alloy systems. They both have low copper content and process good weldability. These alloys are fabricated in to such product as sporting good, military bridge and automobile bumper. There are several alloys in the series that are product especially for their high toughness. [3] Welding parameter such current, voltage wire feed rate are the principal parameter of gas metal arc welding (GMAW) Voltage or the arc length determines the arc force. A short arc focuses the available force on a small area of the weld pool thus giving deeper penetration and narrower welds. Wire feed rate is also a contributing factor in determining penetration and weld shape. The electrode feed rate is adjusted to obtain the desired voltage for good fusion and penetration. Post-weld heat treatments (PWHT) are generally applied to homogenize the as-welded microstructure, to relieve the residual welding stresses, and also to restrengthen the welds of precipitation hardening type of alloys. Development of suitable PWHT, however, depends primarily upon the initial microstructure of fusion and heat affected zones, and, a proper understanding of them is essential[4]

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

The optimum value variables by factorial design. Many experiments involve the study of the effects of two factor is an interaction between the factors. The advantage of factorial design can be easily illustrated. [5] The factors used in the study of the solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT time can be due to two factors that have an interaction on the mechanical properties.

2. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Materials and Methods The work material used as the test specimen was aluminium alloy 7075 grade. Plates of specimens 10 mm. thickness were used for the tests. Details of the material chemical composition are given in Table 1

Table 1 Chemical Composition of aluminium alloy 7075 grade by weight (%) Zn 6.21 Mg 2.83 Cu 2.01 Fe 0.54 Si 0.37 Mn 0.38 Cr 0.28 Ti 0.22

The Alloy 7075 samples were welded by using GMAW. Voltage was set 24 V and direct current electrode positive (DCEP). The electrode feed rate was set 200 mm/sec and welding travel speeds was at 12 mm/sec. Electrode (ER5356) diameter of 1.2 mm. was used in this study. Argon (99.99%) was selected as a shielding gas with the flow rate of 19 litters / minute. After welding, the specimens were PWHT. The samples will be 0 solutionized at 200 and 250 C in induction furnace and then air cooled. PWHT Temperatures were set at 80 0 and 110 C and PWHT times were controlled at 20 and 24 hours. Each heat treatment condition will be made and tested randomly. Each condition consisted of 3 replicates. Welded samples were sectioned transversely to the weld and micro hardness testing using JIS Z 3101: 1990 [6] standard micro hardness (HV). The applied load was set at 500 g. The welding sample was tensile strength by JIS Z 3121: 1993. [7]

2.2 Experimental Design Experiments to study the main effects (Main effect), and influences together (Interaction) that affect the 3 hardness and tensile strength. Use the experimental design is a 2 factorial design to be the main factors effectors affecting significantly (P-value <0.05). The study was determining the optimal conditions. The factors used in the study are as follows. Hypothesis of experimental H0 ;()ij =0 is Solution Temp, PWTH Temperature and PWTH Time no interaction Tensile strength H1; ()ij 0 is Solution Temp, PWTH Temperature and PWTH Time interaction Tensile strength and H0 ;()ij =0 is Solution Temp, PWTH Temperature and PWTH Time no interaction Hardness H1; ()ij 0 is Solution Temp, PWTH Temperature and PWTH Time interaction Hardness Table 2 Experimental factor and two levels Symbol Level Low(-1) High (1) 1. Solution Temp A 200 250 2. Temperature PWTH B 80 110 3. Time PWTH C 20 24 Factor Unit C o C hr.
o

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

Std.Order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3.

Run Order 3 9 8 14 1 19 21 7 20 10 18 2 13 6 17 12 23 5 16 11 24 22 4 15

Table 3 Design of experimental A B C Hardness (HV) -1 -1 -1 67.5 -1 -1 -1 64.2 -1 -1 -1 65.3 1 -1 -1 71.9 1 -1 -1 69.1 1 -1 -1 78.3 -1 1 -1 97.4 -1 1 -1 95.3 -1 1 -1 99.5 1 1 -1 80.5 1 1 -1 84.7 1 1 -1 86.2 -1 -1 1 75.7 -1 -1 1 71.3 -1 -1 1 73.2 1 -1 1 72.7 1 -1 1 69.8 1 -1 1 76.1 -1 1 1 120.0 -1 1 1 117.8 -1 1 1 125.3 1 1 1 84.5 1 1 1 88.4 1 1 1 86.3

Tensile Strength 2 (N/mm ) 74.2 75.5 73.8 83.4 85.8 80.8 135.9 137.4 133.8 94.3 97.6 98.3 86.1 87.9 84.5 98.4 105.6 103.8 143.3 145.4 142.8 140.3 139.4 138.6

EXPERIMENTAL RESULT

3.1 Result of Hardness in Weld Metal Mechanical property test, hardness of penetration by micro vicker hardness at weld metal, 5 points was determined from the average of 24 samples
Normal Probability Plot of the Standardized Effects
(response is Hardness, Alpha = .05)
99 Effect Type Not Significant Significant B C BC ABC AC A AB
F actor A B C N ame S olution Temp P WHT Time P WHT

95 90 80

Percent

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5

-10

-5

0 5 10 Standardized Effect

15

20

25

Fig. 1 Normal probability plot of the standardized effects for hardness

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

All this factors interaction which were represented as a square were significant at = 0.05 show in Fig.1 while the effect represented by a circle were not significant
Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects
(response is Hardness, Alpha = .05) 2.12 B AB A
Term
F actor A B C N ame S olution Temp P WHT Time P WHT

C AC BC ABC 0 5 10 15 Standardized Effect 20

Fig. 2 Pareto chart of the standardized effects for hardness Fig.2 showed in pareto chart of the standardized effects at = 0.05. T he value the presented an absolute value higher than 2.12( = 0.05), which were located at right of the line, were significant. The absolute standardized value of the effect of each factor and its interaction appeared at the right of each bar. Table 4 General linear model: Hardness versus Solution, PWHT Temp and PWHT Time Term Effect Coef SE Coef T P Constant Solution Temp
Temp PWHT Time PWHT Solution*Temp PWHT Solution*Time PWHT 84.208 -10.333 25.900 8.433 -13.783 -7.250 -5.167 12.950 4.217 -6.892 -3.625 0.6111 0.6111 0.6111 0.6111 0.6111 0.6111 0.6111 0.6111 137.81 -8.46 21.19 6.90 -11.28 -5.93 3.83 -2.67 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.017

Temp PWHT*Time 4.683 2.342 PWHT Solution*Temp -3.267 -1.633 PWHT*Time PWHT S = 2.99353 R-Sq = 97.92% R-Sq(adj) 97.01%

As shown Table 4, General linear model of the hardness versus solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT time. Found that the solution, temp PWHT and time PWHT interaction hardness at the level of confidence 95% (PValue <0.05). Performance analysis of the results of the main factor is tree factors. Factors could explain the variability of the response hardness at 95.92%

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

Interaction Plot (data means) for Hardness

80 110 20 24 110

Solution

90

Solution 200 250

70 110

T emp P WH T

90

Temp PW HT 80 110

70

T ime P WH T

Fig.3 Interaction plot for hardness As shown Fig.4, interaction plot of hardness. Found that the solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT time o interaction hardness. The factors result showed that hardness most solution temp 200 C, PWHT temp 110 o C and PWHT time 24 hr cycle at the hardness of 121.03 HV.

B
o

Fig.4 Microstructure of weld metal with optical microscope for specimens A. solution temp 200 C, PWHT o o o temp 80 C and PWHT time 20 hr., B. solution temp 200 C, PWHT temp 110 C and PWHT time 24 hr. In the sample, the trend is reversed because hardness shows a lower in the solution temp 200 C, PWHT o temp 80 C and PWHT time 20 hr at 121.04 HV show in Fig 4 A and maximum values in the solution temp o o 200 C, PWHT temp 110 C and PWHT time 24 hr at 65.66 HV show in Fig 4 B. In order to explain this trend we should consider precipitation and particle type and their distribution. The strong difference in grain shape and size of the two samples is surely important. The Aluminum 7075 in Fig 4 A, precipitates intensity be
o

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

Mg32 (Al,Zn)49 or Mg(Zn2,AlCu) or even MgZn2 according to [8]. As the sample result showed that in maximum hardness.

3.2 Result of Tensile Strength Tensile strength was the test on mechanical property of weld for measuring tensile strength which using 30 sample for each testing according to JIS Z 3121: 1993.

Normal Probability Plot of the Standardized Effects

(response is Tensile Strength, Alpha = .05)
99 Effect Type Not Significant Significant B C AC ABC BC A AB
F actor A B C N ame S olution Temp P WHT Time P WHT

95 90 80

Percent

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 5

-20

-10

10 20 30 Standardized Effect

40

50

Fig. 5 Normal probability plot of the standardized effects for tensile strength All this factors interaction which were represented as a square were significant at = 0.05 show in Fig.5 while the effect represented by a circle were not significant

Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects

(response is Tensile Strength, Alpha = .05) 2.12 B C AB
Term
F actor A B C N ame S olution Temp P WHT Time P WHT

AC ABC BC A 0 10 20 30 Standardized Effect 40 50

Fig. 6 Pareto chart of the standardized effects for tensile strength

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

Fig.6 showed in pareto chart of the standardized effects at = 0.05. All the standardized effects were in absolute values. All the value the presented an absolute value higher than 2.12( = 0.05), whic h were located at right of the line, were significant. The absolute standardized value of the effect of each factor and its interaction appeared at the right of each bar. Table 5 General linear model: Tensile strength versus solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT time Term Effect Coef SE Coef T P Constant Solution Temp PWHT Time PWHT Solution*Temp PWHT Solution*Time PWHT 107.788 -2.263 21.138 10.221 -8.579 5.271 0.4235 0.4235 0.4235 0.4235 0.4235 0.4235 254.51 -5.34 49.91 24.13 -20.26 12.45 5.87 7.96 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

-4.525 42.275 20.442 -17.158 10.542

Temp PWHT*Time 4.975 2.488 0.4235 PWHT Solution*Temp 6.742 3.371 0.4235 PWHT*Time PWHT S = 2.07475 R-Sq = 99.58% R-Sq(adj) = 99.39%

As shown Table 5, General linear model of the tensile strength versus solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT time. Found that solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT time interaction tensile strength at the level of confidence 95% (P-Value <0.05). Performance analysis of the results of the main factor is tree factors. Factors could explain the variability of the response tensile strength at 99.39%

Interaction Plot (data means) for Tensile Strength

80 110 20 24 150

120 Solution 90 150

Solution 200 250

120 T emp P WH T 90

Temp PWHT 80 110

T ime P WH T

Fig.7 Interaction plot for tensile strength As shown Fig.7, interaction plot of tensile strength. Found that the solution temp, PWHT temp and PWHT o time interaction tensile strength. The factors result showed that hardness most solution temp 200 C, PWHT o 2 temp 110 C and PWHT time 24 hr cycle at the hardness of 143.83 N/mm .

23. - 25. 10. 2012, Brno, Czech Republic, EU

3. CONCLUSIONS The effect of PWHT on mechanical properties and microstructure of aluminum alloy 7075 welds was studied. 0 The samples were solutionized at 200 and 250 C in induction furnace and then air cooled. Various PWHT 0 0 temperatures of 80 C and 110 C were investigated. PWHT times were controlled at 20 and 24 hours. The results showed that the PWHT temperature and PWHT time has affected to tensile strength and hardness in weld metal at P-value > 0.05. The factors affecting the tensile strength and hardness are the most solution 0 0 temp 200 C, PWHT temperature 110 C at PWHT time 24 hour is the factor that induced the tensile strength to 143.83 N/mm and hardness of 121.03 HV. As long PWHT time was used, the grain size also increased. This can result in decreased of hardness. These results can use as data information in furfure for improve post weld heat treatment properties. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The present study has been implemented Department of Production Technology Education and King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi for technical support and advices. LITERATURE
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] William R. Oates, Welding Handbook Eighth Edition Volume 3, American Welding Society, USA. 1996. N.R. Mandal, Aluminium Welding, Narosa Publishing House, India, 2005. R. L. OBrien, Welding Handbook Eighth Edition Volume 2, Welding Process American Welding Society, USA, 1991. W.H. Kearns, Welding Handbook Seven Edition Volumes 4, Welding Process American Welding Society, USA. 1981. J. Douglas C. Montgomery, Design and analysis of experiments, John Wiley and son, 1991. Japanese Industrial Standard, Testing method of maximum hardness in weld heat-affected zone, Japanese Standards Association, JIS Z 3101: 1990, Japan,1999. Japanese Industrial Standard, Methods of tensile test for butt welded joints, Japanese Standards Association, JIS Z 3121: 1993, Japan, 1999. C.G.Rhodes, M. W. Mahoney, W.H.Bingel, R.A.Spurling, C.C. Bampton, Scripta Mater vol.36(1997) 69-75