91

CHAPTER 4

MECHANICAL TESTING AND

METALLURGICAL CHARACTERIZATION
OF THE FRICTION WELDED JOINTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

As the welded joints find applications in critical components

(whose failure results could lead to catastrophe), the acceptance standards are
continually rising. Acceptance standards represent the minimum weld quality
and are based upon test of welded specimens containing some discontinuities;
usually a safety factor, which was added to yield the final acceptance
standard. A good research effort is to correlate the discontinuities with the
performance.

Small imperfections, which cause a variation in the average

properties of the weld-metal are called discontinuities. When the discontinuity
is large enough to affect the function of the joint it is termed a defect (Khan,
2007).

Standard codes do permit a limited level of defects based on

principles of fracture mechanics, taking into consideration, the service
conditions of the fabrication. In spite of this, the fabricator must strive to
prevent the occurrence of weld defects in the first instance and to rectify them
if they do occur. There are many types of defects such as undercuts, cracks,
porosity, slag inclusions, lack of fusion and lack of penetration.
 92

All types of welded structures which experience high pressure are

expected to perform certain functions. The joints comprising these structures
must possess certain service-related capabilities. To test that the required
function will be met, different types of tests were conducted. The ideal test is
the observance of the structure in actual practice. This is usually not possible.
Therefore, some destructive tests and non-destructive tests were performed on
the standard specimens to assess the behavior of the structure in service.
Laboratory tests should be carried out with caution because the size,
configuration, environment, types of loading may not be identical to the
actual situation. When selecting a test, its function, time and cost factors
should be considered (Khan, 2007).

This chapter presents a brief description of various destructive and

non-destructive tests carried out on the friction-welded joints (as part of the
investigation) and metallurgical characterization.

As part of destructive testing, the following tests were carried out:

Tensile test;

Bend test;

Hardness test; and

Impact test.

Only radiography test was performed on the welded specimen

under the non-destructive tests. Further, metallographic examinations
(micrograph, macrograph and SEM) were carried out on the welded
specimens. Finally, XRD examination and Williamson Hall plot (WH plot)
were performed on the friction-welded specimens to observe the chemical
composition of the weld and the base metals and the strain developed at the
welded joint.
 93

The test standards specified for welded specimens with solid state
welding process were adopted for the tests on friction welded specimens to
assess quality and strength.

4.2 EVALUATION OF MECHANICAL STRENGTH THROUGH

DESTRUCTIVE TESTING

Any test which alters the shape, form, size, or structure of the
material being tested is termed a destructive test. These are service-
weldability tests that are designed to measure mechanical properties vital to
the satisfactory performance of the welded joint in service. Out of the various
service-weldability tests, transverse tensile test and bend test are found to be
more suitable. For all the mechanical tests, the specimen should be prepared
such that the welded joint is in the middle of the specimen.

4.2.1 Tensile Tests

Tensile tests were carried out to determine the ultimate tensile

strength on the weld section that is heterogeneous in nature, containing base
metal, weld metal and the welded joint. Various types of tensile tests carried
out to evaluate the weldment include, all-weld metal test, longitudinal butt-
weld test, transverse butt-weld test, transverse butt weld with notch test and
tension-shear test. The transverse tensile test is a standard test for procedure
qualification and is also used to indicate whether the weld strength equals that
of the base metal tensile strength or less (Anderson, 1988).

To find the tensile strength of the welded joint the samples were
prepared as per ASTM standards (AWS B4.0). Tensile test was carried out by
gripping one end of the specimen in a universal testing machine (UTM)
shown in Figure 4.1 and applying an increasing pull on to the specimen ends
till it fractures. During the test, the tensile load and the elongation of a
 94

previously-marked gauge length in the specimen were measured using the

load dial of the machine and extensometer, respectively. Interpretation of the
test results for the welded joint as a whole is complicated due to the different
strengths and ductility in the various regions of the joint. This lack of uniform
properties is particularly important with the transverse tensile test.

Figure 4.1 Universal Testing Machine

The five weld samples were prepared by using the optimized

friction welding parameter values as per the Table 3.7 (trials based on design
of experiments) of the chapter 3. The Friction-welded specimens were
prepared as per the specifications provided by AWS B4.0 standard (Figure
4.2).
 95

Figure 4.2 Friction welded transverse tensile test specimen

If the strength of the weld metal exceeds that of the base metal, a
resultant necking and failure will occur outside the weld area. When the weld
strength is considerably lower than that of the base metal, most of the plastic
strain occurs in the weld. The tensile test results are given in Table 4.1, which
indicates that the weld strength is slightly above the ultimate tensile strength
in the base material of the specimen. Failure in the base material of the
specimens in trials indicates that the weld joint is stronger than the base
material. The failure of specimen in the weld means that the weld is weaker
than the base material. This may be possibly due to the insufficient heating
time or pressure. From the tensile tests, it was observed that there was no
fracture in the weldment, because friction welds were conducted as per the
trials based on design of experiments.

Table 4.1 Results of tensile test on the friction-welded specimens

Specimen/ Specimen size U.T.S. in Position of

Material in mm MPa fracture
1 12.7 × 6.00 456 Base Metal
2 12.7 × 6.00 506 Base Metal
3 12.7 × 6.00 498 Base Metal
4 12.7 × 6.00 493 Base Metal
5 12.7 × 6.00 448 Base Metal
 96

4.2.2 Bend Tests

The bend test is a ductility test employed to evaluate the ability of

the weld to undergo plastic deformation in bending. The quality of the weld,
in terms of ductility of the weld metal as well as tests for opening defects,
particularly lack of side-wall fusion, root fusion and penetration of welded
joint are most frequently revealed by means of a bend test (Anderson, 1988).

-homogeneity of the joint, there is a tendency for free

bend test specimens to take-up an irregular shape. This defect is overcome in
guided bend test.

The top and bottom surfaces of a specimen are designed as the face
and root surface respectively. In face-bend test, face-side is under tension. To
be acceptable, a test piece must be capable of bending through 180 º with no
surface fissures. Bend test may be carried out on a universal testing machine
with the help of certain attachments. Any cracks of the metal indicate false
fusion or defective penetration. The stretching of the metal indicates its
ductility to some extent. Friction welding parameters are optimized to an
extent to have maximum penetration. Bend tests are used primarily to
determine the degree of weld penetration. In a bend test the specimen is
placed in the jig with the face or root down depending on whether it is face-
or root-bend test. The mandrel is depressed until the piece becomes U-shaped
in the die (Figure 4.3).The diameter of the mandrel is four times the thickness
of the specimen and angle of the bend is 180º.
 97

Figure 4.3 Bend test of friction-welded specimen

For conducting the bend tests, the five weld samples were prepared
by using the optimized friction welding parameter values as per the Table 3.7
(trials based on design of experiments) of the chapter 3. A specimen for bend
test prepared as per AWS 4.0 standard is shown in Figure 4.4. The results of
bend test are given in Table 4.2.

Figure 4.4 Friction-welded bend test specimen

 98

Table 4.2 Bend test results

Specimen Bend Test Remarks

1 No open discontinuity observed Passed

2 No open discontinuity observed Passed

3 1 mm open discontinuity observed Passed

4 No open discontinuity observed Passed

5 1 mm open discontinuity observed Passed

It was observed that all the specimens passed the bend tests and
showed no or 1 mm open discontinuity, respectively. Specimen failure in the
bend test implies an insufficient forging pressure or presence of impurities
due to improper cleaning. In this case, the failure of bend may be due to
excess melting of metal and increase of brittleness and hardness at the weld.
As the welds were prepared as per the trials based on design of experiments,
no failure was observed during bend tests.

4.2.3 Micro-Hardness Test

The term micro-hardness test usually refers to static indentations

made with loads not exceeding 0.5 kg. The indenter is either the Vickers
diamond pyramid or the Knoop elongated diamond pyramid. The procedure
for testing is very similar to that of the standard Vickers hardness test, except
that it is done on a microscopic scale with higher precision instruments. The
surface being tested generally requires a metallographic finish; the smaller the
load used, the better the surface finish required. Precision microscopes are
used to measure the indentations; these usually have a magnification of
around X500 and measure to an accuracy of +0.5µm. Also, with the same
 99

observer, differences of +0.2µm can usually be resolved. The equipment used

for measuring the micro-hardness of friction-welded specimen is as shown in
Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5 Vickers micro-hardness measuring instrument

The Vickers hardness test consists of indenting the friction-welded

test material with a diamond indenter, in the form of a right pyramid with a
square base and an angle of 136 degrees between opposite faces (Figure 4.6)
subjected to a load of 0.1 to 1 kg. The full-load is normally applied for 15
seconds. The two diagonals of the indentation left in the surface of the
material after removal of the load are measured using a microscope and the
average is calculated. The area of the sloping surface of the indentation is
calculated. The Vickers hardness is the ratio of load and the area of
indentation (Anderson, 1988).

136 o
2 F sin
2
HV
d2 (4.1)
 100

where F = Load in kg
d = Arithmetic mean of the two diagonals, d1 and d2 in mm
HV = Vickers hardness

HV = 1.854 (F/d2) approximately

When the mean diagonal of the indentation is determined the Vickers

hardness may be calculated.

Figure 4.6 Vickers hardness test

Preparation of the specimen for micro-hardness test involves the

following processes:

Cutting and burring;

Mounting of the specimen for handling during preparation;

Grinding;

Polishing; and

Etching.

When the specimens are mounted and polished, consideration

should be given to edge support if impressions are to be made near edges. If
 101

the edges are rounded off even slightly during metallographic preparation,
due to soft mounting compounds, the micro-hardness impressions will be
distorted. Figure 4.7 illustrates the micro-hardness levels at the interface of
the welds.

Figure 4.7 Micro-hardness measured along the weld-line

During the past decades, many efforts have been made to correlate
the tensile strength with microhardness. The relationship between the tensile
u

HV*3.33(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/vickers-hardness-test). Here, C is a constant.

By using this equation, tensile strengths were calculated and compared with
measured tensile strengths. Since the measured tensile strength values (456
MPa, 506 MPa, 498 MPa, 493 MPa and 448 MPa) were higher than the
calculated values (280.38 MPa, 263.07 MPa, 247.08 MPa, 272.06MPa and
258.07 MPa), the welds had good strength.

4.2.4 Charpy Impact Test

This is a dynamic test in which the friction-welded test-piece, v-

notched in the middle and supported at each end, is broken by a single blow
 102

of a freely swinging pendulum. The energy absorbed is a measure of the

impact strength of the material. The test is carried out at room temperature
(Nayar, 2005). The equipment used for charpy impact test of the friction-
welded specimen is shown in Figure 4.8.

Figure 4.8 Charpy impact test equipment

The standard test bar is 10 mm x5 mm x 55 mm as per AWS B.4. A

specimen for charpy impact test prepared as per AWS B.4 standard is shown
in Figure 4.9. The results obtained are presented in Table 4.3.

Figure 4.9 Specimen dimensions for charpy impact test

 103

Table 4.3 Impact test results

Energy absorbed
Specimen
(J)
1 29
2 29
3 31
4 30
5 31

The test results indicate variation of impact strength for base

material, welds with varying range of parameters. The impact toughness at 0º
was found to be nearly 24J or the base metal. The impact strengths for
specimens are 29, 29, 31, 30 and 31, respectively. It was observed that
specimen 3 and 5 yielded the highest impact strength. Since test standards are
not yet available for welded specimens with interlayer, the pass or failure of
specimen for impact test cannot be specified.

4.3 NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTING (NDT)

NDT is an examination of a component in any manner which does

not impair its future use.

Several objectives of NDT are:

Material sorting;
 104

Materials characterization;

Property monitoring( process control);

Thickness measurement;

Defect detection/location; and

Defect characterization.

The major task for NDT is to detect and identify the range of
defects ( Hellier, 2003).

4.3.1 Radiography Test

Radiography is one type of a non-destructive testing technique

which may be employed to examine the defects in friction welded joints.
Radiography is essentially a shadow pattern created when certain types of
radiations penetrate an object. The patterns may be different depending on
variations of thickness, density or chemical composition of the material. The
transmitted radiation is commonly registered on a photographic film to
provide a permanent record.

There are three common techniques used in radiography viz.

i) Single-wall exposure, single-view technique;

ii) Double-wall exposure, single-view technique; and

iii) Double-wall exposure, double-view technique.

For the friction welded specimens, the third technique of

radiography was employed (Figure 4.10).
 105

The third radiography technique requires the radiation to pass

through both the walls of the object and both walls are evaluated. In this
technique, the source of radiation may be positioned directly over the area of
interest, thus superimposing the top portion with the region directly under it.
As an alternative, the source may be offset by an angle of approximately 15 º
in order to observe both as the top and bottom walls. When the source is

technique.

Figure 4.10 Schematic representation of double-wall exposure, double-

view technique

Radiography test of welded specimens does not demand any

preparation. The weld region must be cleaned before test is performed.

The quality of the friction welded specimens is assessed using

radiography test. Radiography using X-ray is employed to identify and
analyze the defects at the friction welded joint. From the test results, it is
observed that there are only few pores at the weld joint which do not directly
affect the quality and is well within the acceptable limits.
 106

4.3.2 X-Ray Diffraction Technique

X-ray diffraction technique plays a vital role in determining the

grain size on the welded specimen both for the base metal as well as the weld
joint. Further, the chemical composition and strain can also be determined
from the results of the X-
helps in estimating the increase in strain at the weld metal as compared to the
base metal. X-rays are short wavelength electromagnetic radiations. The
wavelength range of X-rays is from 10 -5Å to 100 Å approximately.

The X-ray diffraction experiment requires the following: a

radiation, a sample and a detector for the reflected radiation. In each of these
cases, there can be several variations (Hebbar, 2007). For example, the
radiation can be of many kinds, a single monochromatic variable frequency
source. The sample for friction welding analysis consists of a solid piece. The
detector can be of several kinds, ranging from a simple photographic plate to
a sophisticated counter or an area detector.

Figure 4.11 X-ray diffraction machine

 107

For the friction welded specimen, a diffraction method called

diffractometer is employed, in which a convergent beam strikes the sample
and the intensity as a function of diffraction angle is measured. The position
of the diffraction peak and the intensity at this point are the two factors used
in the determination. From these results, the strain variation from the weld
metal to base metal can be estimated. The X-ray diffraction machine
employed for this study is shown in Figure 4.11.

If there is no inhomogeneous strain, the particle sized can be

estimated from the peak formula (Cullity, 1978).

K
cos (2 sin ) (4.2)
d

where is Full-width half maximum (FWHM) in radians

is the X-ray wavelength in Å (1.5406 Å)

is the strain induced on the particle

is the Bragg angle

K is a correction factor which was taken as unity and

d is the grain size in nm

X-ray diffraction patterns are obtained using Rigaku x-ray

diffractometer with CuK Å) w
with the
standard JCPDS (Joint committee powder diffraction standards) values. Semi-
quantitative analysis by scanning linescan EDX, was performed at the
central region of bonding interface and also at the ends. The results were very
similar with little variation in the diffusion layer between the main chemical
elements that make up the aluminum alloy and steel, like Al and Fe.
Figure 4.12 shows the interdiffusion between Fe and Al, characterizing the
 108

diffusion as the main bonding mechanism in the rotary friction welding

process according to Fukumoto et al. (1997, 1999), Fuji et al. (1997), Kimura
et al. (2003) and Ylbas et al. (1995). The Al diffused less in Fe than Fe in Al,
and a reason for this is the smallest diameter of Fe atom in relation to Al.
Another reason for the different distances from the diffusion zone is the
different concentrations of Fe and Al contained in each material. EDX
analysis confirmed that the particle-dispersed region (PD) comprised a
mixture of granular silver, Ag3Al, Al and Fe particles.

Al

Ag3 Al

Ag3 Al

Ag

Fe

Figure 4.12 EDX showing the interdiffusion of the main elements of

aluminum alloy and steel

4.3.2.1 Williamson Hall Plot (WH PLOT)

The shift in X-ray diffraction peak position can also occur from the
strain induced in the unit cell. This effect of strain can be investigated using
Williamson Hall plot (Tan et al., 2005). The particle size and strain can be
obtained from the intercept at the Y axis and the slope, respectively. Figures
4.13 and 4.14 show the W-H plot of base metal and weld region, respectively.
 109

From the W-H plot (Figure 4.13), the strain at the base metal is about
0.00438.

0.000438

Figure 4.13 W-H plot for the base metal

Also, from the W-H plot (Figure 4.14), the strain at the weld region
is observed to be about 0.0054. There is an increase in the strain in the weld
region as compared to that in the base metal. This increase in the strain could
be due to significant shrinkage forces in the weld area as compared to those in
the base metal, as this portion is subjected to expansion and contraction due to
localized heating.
 110

Figure 4.14 W-H Plot for the weld region

is estimated from the line broadening of the X-ray diffraction peaks. The
maximum intensity peak occurs at 2 = 45º. To find the average particle size
(d) of the base metal and weld region and samples, the high intensity peak is

applying the X-ray diffraction line broadening. The average crystallite size
varies from 20 to 24 nm for the base metal. For weld metal the average
crystalline size varies from 19 to 22 nm.

4.4 METALLURGICAL ANALYSIS

The micrographic examination of grain size in base metal and the

weld region of friction welds consist of examining the polished surface of a
specimen which has been appropriately treated to reveal the grain boundaries
and estimating the grain size by comparison or measurement method. Image
analyzer was used to capture the macrographs of the friction-welded
specimens. Scanning electron microscope was used to capture the images of
the friction welded joints to analyze the fractured surface (if any) and to find
 111

the possible causes to the fracture. A few weld samples are completed by
using the optimized friction welding parameters as shown in Table 4.4,
according to the trials based on design of experiments for metallurgical
examination.

Table 4.4 Friction welded specimens with friction welding parameters

for metallurgical examination

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6

Specimen A:friction B:forging C:forging D:friction
E:thickness F:rotational
pressure pressure
time (sec) time (sec) (µm) speed (rpm)
(Mpa) (Mpa)
1 4 1.2 50 260 12 1500
2 4 1.2 50 260 8 1500
3 4 1.2 50 250 12 1500
4 4 1.5 60 260 8 1500
5 4.25 1 55 255 10 1500

From the extensive metallurgical examinations on the friction

welded specimens (Figure 4.15 to 4.29), the microstructure of the fusion zone
consisting of fine grained dendritic microstructure precipitates at the grain
boundaries is observed. The reason for the formation of this fine grain
microstructure in the FZ is the high solidification rates involved which helps
retaining the strength of the re-solidified aluminum. No solidification
cracking or liquation cracking occurred in the FZ or in the HAZ. A narrow
HAZ was formed and the coarsening of the strengthening precipitates in the
HAZ was not that pronounced. There was, however, some liquation at the
grain boundaries in the FZ and HAZ. Although grain boundary liquation was
detected in the FZ and HAZ, no liquation cracking was observed. The joints
were stronger than the aluminum parent metal with only a thin diffusion layer
at the interface.
 112

Another important observation to note is that the grain boundary

liquation becomes more pronounced as the amount of Si along the grain
boundaries increased. The overaging in the HAZ region of the welding leads
to a decrease in the strength of HAZ while the strength of the fusion zone is
restored to the level of the heat affected zone. The acceptable level of
cracking, debonding and porosity were determined in the joints produced.
However, no weld-defect formation took place in the weld regions of all the
joints produced.
 113

4.4.1 Metallurgical examination on Specimen 1

A:friction B:forging C:forging D:friction F:rotational

E:thickness
time time pressure pressure speed
(µm)
(sec) (sec) (Mpa) (Mpa) (rpm)
4 1.2 50 260 12 1500

100 µm

Figure 4.15 Fusion line of the friction welded specimen 1

100 µm

Figure 4.16 Weld interface of the friction welded specimen 1

100 µm

Figure 4.17 SEM micrograph of the friction welded specimen 1

 114

4.4.2 Metallurgical examination on Specimen 2

A:friction B:forging C:forging D:friction F:rotational

E:thickness
time time pressure pressure speed
(µm)
(sec) (sec) (Mpa) (Mpa) (rpm)
4 1.2 50 260 8 1500

100 µm

Figure 4.18 Fusion line of the friction welded specimen 2

100 µm

Figure 4.19 Weld interface of the friction welded specimen 2

100 µm

Figure 4.20 SEM micrograph of the friction welded specimen 2

 115

4.4.3 Metallurgical examination on specimen 3

A:friction B:forging C:forging D:friction F:rotational

time E:thickness
time pressure pressure speed
(µm)
(sec) (sec) (Mpa) (Mpa) (rpm)
4 1.2 50 250 12 1500

100 µm

Figure 4.21 Fusion line of the friction welded specimen 3

100 µm

Figure 4.22 Weld interface of the friction welded specimen 3

100 µm

Figure 4.23 SEM Micrograph of the friction welded specimen 3

 116

4.4.4 Metallurgical examination on Specimen 4

A:friction B:forging C:forging D:friction F:rotational

E:thicknes
time time pressure pressure speed
s (µm)
(sec) (sec) (Mpa) (Mpa) (rpm)
4 1.5 60 260 8 1500

100 µm

Figure 4.24 Fusion line of the friction welded specimen 4

100 µm

Figure 4.25 Weld interface of the friction welded specimen 4

100 µm

Figure 4.26 SEM micrograph of the friction welded specimen 4

 117

4.4.5 Metallurgical examination on Specimen 5

A:friction B:forging C:forging D:friction F:rotational

time E:thicknes
time pressure pressure speed
s (µm)
(sec) (sec) (Mpa) (Mpa) (rpm)
4.25 1 55 255 10 1500

100 µm

Figure 4.27 Fusion line of the friction welded specimen 5

100 µm

Figure 4.28 Weld interface of the friction welded specimen 5

100 µm

Figure 4.29 SEM micrograph of the friction welded specimen 5

 118

4.5 SUMMERIZING THE CHAPTER - MECHANICAL

TESTING AND METALLURGICAL CHARACTERIZATION

A few friction-welded specimens were prepared by using the

optimized friction welding parameters as per the trials based on the design of
experiments, which was discussed in the chapter 3 to conduct mechanical
testing which includes destructive testing & non-destructive testing and
examines the metallurgical charecterization. From the tensile test, it was
observed that there was no fracture in the weldment whereas fractures were
found in the base metals. In the bend tests, all the specimens passed the bend
tests and showed no or 1 mm open discontinuity. The micro-hardness test
showed the hardness in the aluminum alloy side is between 1350-1500 VHN
and the hardness in the stainless steel side was around 150-300 VHN. The
weld had good strength because the hardness in the weld zone was higher
than the hardness in base metal. The impact toughness at 0 º was found to be
nearly 24J. The impact strengths for specimens are 29, 29, 31, 30 and 31,
respectively.

Radiography test showed only few pores at the weld joint, which do
not directly affect the quality and they are within the acceptable limits. From
the X-ray diffraction test, it was noted that Al diffused was less in Fe than Fe
in Al, and a reason for this was the smallest diameter of Fe atom in relation to
Al. Another reason for the different distances from the diffusion zone was the
different concentrations of Fe and Al contained in each material. Williamson
Hall plot showed the average crystallite size varying from 20 to 24 nm for the
base metal and for weld metal, the average crystalline size varied from 19 to
22 nm.

From the metallurgical examinations, the acceptable level of

cracking, debonding and porosity were determined in the joints produced.
 119

However, no weld-defect formation took place in the weld regions of all the
joints produced.