Optimizing Friction Welding Parameters in AISI 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel and Commercial Copper Dissimilar Joints
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Experimental Work
2.1. Materials and Methods
2.2. Microstructure
2.3. Identification of Important Parameters
- Weakly bonded joints between the ASS and Cu alloy happened if indeed the friction pressure was lesser than 40MPa, and this was because of the inadequate pressure.
- The specimen exhibited significant deformation if indeed the friction pressure exceeded 80 MPa.
- The joints were only weakly bonded if somehow the forging pressure was less than 40 MPa, which results in minimal deformation of the material.
- If indeed the forging pressure exceeded 80 MPa, there was significant deformation, which lowers the strength.
- Forging might result in an unbounded region if indeed the forging time was lower than 2 s, which would result in an irregular forging effect.
- In the event that the forging time exceeded 6 s, the forging time was excessive and not only lowered output but also enhanced material consumption.
- The heating effect might become erratic, and an unbounded zone might arise if indeed the friction time was lesser than 2 s.
- If indeed the friction duration exceeded 6 s, it reduced productivity, increased material consumption, and also caused the grain to become coarser, which in turn decreased the strength of the weldment.
2.4. Designing of Experimental Matrix
3. Developing an Empirical Relationship
4. Optimization by Response Surface Methodology Approach
5. Results
5.1. Empirical Relationships to Predict Tensile Strength
5.2. Evaluating the Model’s Appropriateness
5.3. Optimizing Friction Welding Parameters
5.4. Analysis of Microstructure at an Optimized Condition
6. Conclusions
- The tensile strength of friction-welded AISI 304 austenitic stainless steel and commercial copper dissimilar joints was predicted empirically using process variables. At a 95% confidence level, the established relationship can reliably be utilized to estimate the tensile strength of the friction-welded dissimilar joints of Cu-ASS.
- The friction welding input variables were incorporated into response graphs and contour plots to create a list of the domains with the highest tensile strengths. The highest tensile strength of 489 MPa was discovered to be produced by friction welding under the following parameters: 60 MPa friction pressure, 60 MPa forging pressure, 4 s of friction time, and 4 s of forging time.
- Friction time, friction pressure, forging pressure, and forging time were determined to have the greatest impact on the tensile strength of the joints of the four process variables studied.
- Friction welding successfully joins the imperfect-free and leak-proof dissimilar materials of the Cu-ASS joints, making them acceptable for use in cryogenic heat exchanger applications.
- While there are noticeable microstructure changes on the Cu side close to the Cu-ASS weld contact, there are no noticeable changes on the SS side. The wide dynamic recrystallization zone and the partial dynamic recrystallization zone are the names mentioned to the microstructures on the Cu side.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Nomenclature
FW | Friction welding |
TS | tensile strength MPa |
A | Friction pressure MPa |
B | friction time, Sec |
C | forging pressure MPa |
D | forging time, Sec |
RSM | Response surface methodology |
FZ-HAZ | Fusion zone-Heat affected zone |
UTS | Ultimate tensile strength |
References
- Aritoshi, M.; Okita, K. Friction welding of dissimilar metals. Weld. Int. 2003, 17, 271–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehta, K.; Badheka, V.J. A Review on Dissimilar Friction Stir Welding of Copper to Aluminum: Process, Properties, and Variants. Mater. Manuf. Process. 2015, 31, 233–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehta, K.P. A review on friction-based joining of dissimilar aluminum–steel joints. J. Mater. Res. 2018, 34, 78–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Peng, H.; Chen, C.; Zhang, H.; Ran, X. Recent development of improved clinching process. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 110, 3169–3199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, P.; Zhang, Y.; Mehta, K.P. Metallurgical and Mechanical Properties of Al–Cu Joint by Friction Stir Spot Welding and Modified Friction Stir Clinching. Met. Mater. Int. 2020, 27, 3085–3094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shanjeevi, C.; Kumar, S.S.; Sathiya, P. Multi-objective optimization of friction welding parameters in AISI 304L austenitic stainless steel and copper joints. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2014, 230, 449–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahin, M. Joining of stainless steel and copper materials with friction welding. Ind. Lubr. Tribol. 2009, 61, 319–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Chen, C.; Yi, R.; Ouyang, Y. Review: Special brazing and soldering. J. Manuf. Process. 2020, 60, 608–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, J.; Paidar, M.; Vignesh, R.V.; Mehta, K.P.; Heidarzadeh, A.; Ojo, O.O. Effect of shoulder features during friction spot extrusion welding of 2024-T3 to 6061-T6 aluminium alloys. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2020, 20, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Özdemir, N. Investigation of the mechanical properties of friction-welded joints between AISI 304L and AISI 4340 steel as a function rotational speed. Mater. Lett. 2005, 59, 2504–2509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoon, H.-K.; Kong, Y.-S.; Kim, S.-J.; Kohyama, A. Mechanical properties of friction welds of RAFs (JLF-1) to SUS304 steels as measured by the acoustic emission technique. Fusion Eng. Des. 2006, 81, 945–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fabritsiev, S.A.; Pokrovsky, A.S.; Nakamichi, M.; Kawamura, H. Irradiation resistance of DS copper/stainless steel joints fabricated by friction welding methods. J. Nucl. Mater. 1998, 258, 2030–2035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yilbaş, B.S.; Şahin, A.Z.; Kahraman, N.; Al-Garni, A.Z. Friction welding of St-Al and Al-Cu materials. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1995, 49, 431–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalinin, G.; Gauster, W.; Matera, R.; Taqvassoli, A.F.; Rowcliffe, A.; Fabritsiev, S.; Kawamura, H. Structural materials for ITER in-vessel component design. J. Nucl. Mater 1996, 9, 233–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fabritsiev, S.A.; Pokrovsky, A.S.; Zinkle, S.J.; Edwards, D.J. Low-temperature radiation embrittlement of copper alloys. J. Nucl. Mater 1996, 513, 233–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fabritsiev, S.A.; Barabash, V.R.; Pokrovsky, A.S.; Chakin, V.P.; Grechanjuk, A.I.; Movchan Osokin, V.A. Effects of neutron irradiation on the properties of Cu-Mo dispersion strengthened alloy. Plasma Devices Oper. 2006, 4, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zinkle, S.J.; Fabritsiev, S.A. Copper Alloys for High Heat Flux Applications. Atomic and Plasma Materials Interaction Data for Fusion (Supplement to Nuclear Fusion). 1994; Volume 5, pp. 163–192. Available online: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/47760 (accessed on 27 November 2022).
- Mai, T.A.; Spowage, A.C. Characterisation of dissimilar joints in laser welding of steel–kovar, copper–steel and copper–aluminium. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2004, 374, 224–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, L.; Du, S.G. Effects of external electric field on microstructure and property of friction welded joint between copper and stainless steel. J. Mater. Sci. 2006, 41, 4137–4142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanzadeh Gharahshiran, M.R.; Khoshakhlagh, A.; Khalaj, G.; Bakhtiari, H.; Banihashemi, A.R. Effect of post weld heat treatment on interface mi-crostructure and metallurgical properties of explosively welded bronze–carbon steel. J. Cent. South Univ. 2018, 25, 1849–1861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shanjeevi, C.; Kumar, S.S.; Sathiya, P. Evaluation of Mechanical and Metallurgical Properties of Dissimilar Materials by Friction Welding. Procedia Eng. 2013, 64, 1514–1523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jayabharath, K.; Ashfaq, M.; Venugopal, P.; Achar, D. Investigations on the continuous drive friction welding of sintered powder metallurgical (P/M) steel and wrought copper parts. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2007, 454-455, 114–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kimura, M.; Kusaka, M.; Kaizu, K.; Fuji, A. Effect of post-weld heat treatment on joint properties of friction welded joint between brass and low carbon steel. Sci. Technol. Weld. Join. 2010, 15, 590–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jandaghi, M.R.; Saboori, A.; Khalaj, G.; Khanzadeh Ghareh Shiran, M. Mi-crostructural Evolutions and its Impact on the Corrosion Behaviour of Explosively Welded Al/Cu Bimetal. Metals 2020, 10, 634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ambroziak, A. Hydrogen damage in friction welded copper joints. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 3869–3874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeoh, C.K.; Jamaludin, S.B.; Ahmad, Z.A. The Effect of Varying Process Parameters on the Microhardness and Microstructure of Cu–Steel and Al–Al2O3 Friction Joints. J. Teknol. 2012, 41, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, Y.; Luo, J.; Wang, X.; Xu, X. Interfacial characterization of T3 copper/35CrMnSi steel dissimilar metal joints by inertia radial friction welding. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2013, 68, 1479–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, J.; Xiang, J.; Liu, D.; Li, F.; Xue, K. Radial friction welding interface between brass and high carbon steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2012, 212, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shargh, S.F.; Saadat, A.; Najafi, A.; Gharehshiran, M.R.; Khalaj, G. Investigating the effect of post weld heat treatment on corrosion properties of explosive bonded interface of AA5083/AA1050/SS 321 tubes. Mater. Res. Express 2020, 7, 036529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahin, A.Z.; Yibas, B.S.; Ahmed, M.; Nickel, J. Analysis of the friction welding process in relation to the welding of copper and steel bars. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1998, 82, 127–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinto, R.; Afzal, A.; D’Souza, L.; Ansari, Z.; Mohammed Samee, A.D. Computational Fluid Dynamics in Turbomachinery: A Review of State of the Art. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2017, 24, 467–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Afzal, A.; Ansari, Z.; Faizabadi, A.; Ramis, M. Parallelization Strategies for Computational Fluid Dynamics Software: State of the Art Review. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2017, 24, 337–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Afzal, A.; Aabid, A.; Khan, A.; Afghan, S.; Rajak, U.; Nath, T.; Kumar, R. Response Surface Analysis, Clustering, and Random Forest Regression of Pressure in Suddenly Expanded High-Speed Aerodynamic Flows. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2020, 107, 106318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajendran, P.R.; Duraisamy, T.; Seshadri, R.C.; Mohankumar, A.; Ranganathan, S.; Balachandran, G.; Murugan, K.; Renjith, L. Optimisation of HVOF Spray Process Parameters to Achieve Minimum Porosity and Maximum Hardness in WC-10Ni-5Cr Coatings. Coatings 2022, 12, 339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunaraj, V.; Murugan, N. Application of Response Surface Methodology for Predicting Weld Bead Quality in Sub merged Arc Welding of Pipes. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1999, 88, 266–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tien, C.L.; Lin, S.W. Optimization of Process Parameters of Titanium Dioxide Films by Response Surface Methodology. Opt. Commun. 2006, 266, 574–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Materials | C | Si | Fe | Cu | Mn | P | Ni | Cr | Al | O | Pb | B | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Austenitic stainless Steel (ASS) | 0.08 | 0.75 | Bal | - | 2.00 | 0.045 | 10 | 19 | - | - | - | - | 0.30 |
Copper (commercial grade) | - | - | 0.007 | Bal | - | - | - | - | 0.14 | 0.092 | 0.001 | 0.018 | <0.001 |
Materials | Ultimate Tensile Strength (MPa) | Elongation (%) | Notch Tensile Strength (MPa) | Notch Strength Ratio (NSR) | Impact Toughness @RT (J) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Copper (commercial grade) | 344 | 14 | 476 | 1.35 | 60 |
ASS | 460 | 30 | 575 | 1.25 | 50 |
No | Factor | Unit | Notation | Levels | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(−2) | (−1) | 0 | (+1) | (+2) | ||||
1 | Friction pressure | MPa | A | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 80 |
2 | Friction time | Sec | B | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
3 | Forging pressure | MPa | C | 40 | 50 | 60 | 70 | 80 |
4 | Forging time | Sec | D | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
Expt. | Coded Values | Original Values | Tensile | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No | Strength | ||||||||
A | B | C | D | A (MPa) | B (s) | C (MPa) | D(s) | (MPa) | |
1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 50 | 3 | 50 | 3 | 417 |
2 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 70 | 3 | 50 | 3 | 435 |
3 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 50 | 5 | 50 | 3 | 430 |
4 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 70 | 5 | 50 | 3 | 461 |
5 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 50 | 3 | 70 | 3 | 413 |
6 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 70 | 3 | 70 | 3 | 420 |
7 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 50 | 5 | 70 | 3 | 419 |
8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 70 | 5 | 70 | 3 | 433 |
9 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 50 | 3 | 50 | 5 | 403 |
10 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 70 | 3 | 50 | 5 | 409 |
11 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 50 | 5 | 50 | 5 | 415 |
12 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 70 | 5 | 50 | 5 | 438 |
13 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 50 | 3 | 70 | 5 | 444 |
14 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 70 | 3 | 70 | 5 | 420 |
15 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 50 | 5 | 70 | 5 | 448 |
16 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 70 | 5 | 70 | 5 | 442 |
17 | −2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 399 |
18 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 80 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 426 |
19 | 0 | −2 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 2 | 60 | 4 | 369 |
20 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 6 | 60 | 4 | 398 |
21 | 0 | 0 | −2 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 40 | 4 | 447 |
22 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 80 | 4 | 465 |
23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −2 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 2 | 463 |
24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 6 | 464 |
25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 486 |
26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 490 |
27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 480 |
28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 489 |
29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 495 |
30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 4 | 60 | 4 | 488 |
Factor | Estimated Coefficient |
---|---|
Intercept | 488 |
A-A | 5.125 |
B-B | 7.625 |
C-C | 2.791 |
D-D | −0.291 |
AB | 3.437 |
AC | −5.437 |
AD | −4.437 |
BC | −2.187 |
BD | 0.562 |
CD | 9.187 |
A2 | −19.031 |
B2 | −26.281 |
C2 | −8.156 |
D2 | −6.281 |
Source | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F-Value | p-Value Prob > F |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model | 30,283.88 | 14 | 2163.135 | 116.3323 | <0.0001 a |
A-A | 630.375 | 1 | 630.375 | 33.90125 | <0.0001 |
B-B | 1395.375 | 1 | 1395.375 | 75.04258 | <0.0001 |
C-C | 187.0417 | 1 | 187.0417 | 10.05901 | 0.0063 |
D-D | 2.041667 | 1 | 2.041667 | 0.1098 | 0.7450 |
AB | 189.0625 | 1 | 189.0625 | 10.16769 | 0.0061 |
AC | 473.0625 | 1 | 473.0625 | 25.44107 | 0.0001 |
AD | 315.0625 | 1 | 315.0625 | 16.9439 | 0.0009 |
BC | 76.5625 | 1 | 76.5625 | 4.117493 | 0.0606 |
BD | 5.0625 | 1 | 5.0625 | 0.272259 | 0.6094 |
CD | 1350.563 | 1 | 1350.563 | 72.63258 | <0.0001 |
A^2 | 9934.313 | 1 | 9934.313 | 534.2624 | <0.0001 |
B^2 | 18,945.03 | 1 | 18,945.03 | 1018.854 | <0.0001 |
C^2 | 1824.67 | 1 | 1824.67 | 98.12983 | <0.0001 |
D^2 | 1082.17 | 1 | 1082.17 | 58.19855 | <0.0001 |
Residual | 278.9167 | 15 | 18.59444 | ||
Lack of Fit | 156.9167 | 10 | 15.69167 | 0.643101 | 0.7420 b |
Pure Error | 122 | 5 | 24.4 | ||
Cor Total | 30,562.8 | 29 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Paventhan, R.; Thirumalaikumarasamy, D.; Kantumuchu, V.C.; Ahmed, O.S.; Abbas, M.; Alahmadi, A.A.; Alwetaishi, M.; Alzaed, A.N.; Ramachandran, C.S. Optimizing Friction Welding Parameters in AISI 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel and Commercial Copper Dissimilar Joints. Coatings 2023, 13, 261. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13020261
Paventhan R, Thirumalaikumarasamy D, Kantumuchu VC, Ahmed OS, Abbas M, Alahmadi AA, Alwetaishi M, Alzaed AN, Ramachandran CS. Optimizing Friction Welding Parameters in AISI 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel and Commercial Copper Dissimilar Joints. Coatings. 2023; 13(2):261. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13020261
Chicago/Turabian StylePaventhan, R., D. Thirumalaikumarasamy, Venkata Charan Kantumuchu, Omar Shabbir Ahmed, Mohamed Abbas, Ahmad Aziz Alahmadi, Mamdooh Alwetaishi, Ali Nasser Alzaed, and Chidambaram Seshadri Ramachandran. 2023. "Optimizing Friction Welding Parameters in AISI 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel and Commercial Copper Dissimilar Joints" Coatings 13, no. 2: 261. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings13020261