Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Friction stir processing (FSP) is used locally to modify the microstructure and thus mechanical
properties of 5083-H321/5356 aluminum gas metal arc welds (GMAWs). Four specimen approaches
were examined: as-arc welded, weld toe FSP (with arc weld on either the advancing or the retreating
side of tool), and weld crown FSP. Microstructures within the fine-grained FSP region contained
smaller constituent particles, Mg2Si and Al6(Fe,Mn), than those particles found in the arc weld
nugget, heat-affected zone (HAZ), and base-metal (BM) locations. The FSP improved the monotonic
tensile strength, yield strength, and elongation of 5083-H321/5356 Al arc welds by 6 to 9 pct, 7 to
13 pct, and 46 to 80 pct, respectively. The addition of FSP produced a 30 pct increase in the load
necessary to reach 107 cycles during four-point bending fatigue. An analysis of strengthening mech-
anisms determined that solid-solution, grain-size, and precipitation strengthening made contributions
to the calculated yield strength of the BM, arc weld nugget, and FSP regions. In addition, the strength
mechanism analysis demonstrated that FSP increased the amount of grain-size strengthening and
precipitate strengthening by nearly 110 MPa, when compared to the arc weld nugget.
Alloy Mg Mn Si Fe Zn Ti Cu Cr Al
5083-H321 4.7 0.5 0.11 0.29 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.08 balance
5356 4.5 to 5.5 0.05 to 0.2 0.25 0.40 0.10 0.06 to 0.2 0.1 0.05 to 0.2 balance
Fig. 1—Schematic of FSP approaches in relation to arc weld nugget: (a) weld toe FSP with arc weld nugget on advancing side of tool, (b) weld toe FSP with
arc weld nugget on retreating side of tool, and (c) weld crown FSP.
Al6(Fe, Mn) precipitates produced by the weld toe FSP 23,200 6 4500 nm2 Figure 6(b), and weld crown FSP
approach (Figure 7(a)), occur in rod and spheroidal mor- regions, 8700 6 700 nm2 (Figure 7(a)). The mean aspect
phologies, while the Al6(Fe, Mn) precipitates produced by ratios show that the BM precipitates are the most asymmet-
the weld crown FSP approach have primarily spheroidal ric, aspect ratio of 2.51 6 0.15, followed by the weld toe
morphologies (Figure 7(b)). Two distinct spheroidal precip- FSP, aspect ratio of 1.70 6 0.04, and weld crown FSP,
itate morphologies were shown using TEM tilting experi- aspect ratio of 1.26 6 0.02.
ments. These morphologies are probably related, and not
the result of plate precipitates with changing orientations.
B. Mechanical Properties
No evidence of grain boundary precipitate-free zones was
detected. The TEM samples removed from the BM and arc 1. Tensile properties
weld regions away from the FSP region, i.e., not within the Table III presents transverse tensile property results of
HAZ, do not contain significant changes in the grain and 5083-H321 Al/5356 Al GMAW as a function of the FSP
precipitate morphologies, as compared to the as-received approach. As-welded 5083-H321/5356 Al had the lowest
GMAW samples (Figure 6). yield strength (117 MPa), tensile strength (259 MPa), and
To quantify differences between Al6(Fe, Mn) precipitates elongation (10.8 pct). Both FSP approaches were observed
present in the weld crown FSP, weld toe FSP, and BM to increase the yield strength, tensile strength, and elonga-
microstructural regions, TEM images (such as those in Fig- tion of GMAW 5083-H321/5356Al. The 5083-H321 Al BM
ures 6 and 7) were used to measure the average projected tensile properties[22] (Table III) are higher than any of the
area and aspect ratio of Al6(Fe,Mn) precipitates. Results are experimental strength data produced for this study. The
summarized in Table II. The weld toe FSP region has the strength differences are due to a reduction in strain hard-
largest mean projected area, 32,900 6 1500 nm2 ening as a result of thermal exposure produced from
Figure 7(b), followed by (in decreasing area) the BM, GMAW or FSP.
3. Fatigue behavior
Figure 8 presents four-point bending fatigue results for
the arc welded, weld crown FSP, and weld toe FSP with the
arc weld on the retreating side, where the number of cycles
to failure are plotted as a function of the maximum applied
load. All specimens were orientated such that the crown
surface was in tension. The as-arc welded approach has
the lowest four-point bending fatigue resistance. The addi-
tion of FSP improves the four-point bending fatigue resist-
ance with no significant difference in fatigue resistance as a
function of FSP approach. The as-arc welded sample
loaded to 60 kg failed after 6.7 3 105 cycles, but none of
the friction-stir-processed samples loaded to 60 kg failed,
even after 1.4 3 107 cycles. This fatigue improvement re-
presents greater than a 20 times improvement in fatigue
life. A runout specimen (no failure after 107 cycles) for
the as-arc welded condition was reached at 46 kg, while
the friction-stir-processed conditions produced runouts at
60 to 61 kg, a 30 pct increase in applied load.
IV. DISCUSSION
A. Microstructure
1. Effect of arc weld nugget location
Friction stir processing produces asymmetric material
movement around a friction stir tool, where material flows
from the advancing side to the retreating side of the tool.[23]
In the case of weld toe FSP, material either flows from the
arc weld nugget into the BM region or from the BM region
into the arc weld nugget, depending on the arc weld nugget
position relative to the FSP tool. If the arc weld nugget is
on the advancing side of the FSP tool, the latter will occur,
and if the arc weld nugget is on the retreating side of the
weld toe FSP tool, the former will take place. Material flow
in friction stir is partly governed by the elevated temper-
ature flow stress. Because both alloys are 5XXX series Al, a
significant difference in elevated temperature flow stress is
not expected. Thus, light microscopy does not show signifi-
cant differences between the two weld toe variants (Figure 3).
Vickers microhardness (Figure 9) was used to distinguish
between the two weld toe FSP variations. Both weld toe
FSP variations had the same hardness values, within exper-
imental scatter, in each of the three microstructural regions:
Fig. 4—SEM micrographs of the microstructure of the as-received 5083- arc weld nugget, FSP, and BM. However, a larger interfa-
H321/5356 Al arc weld showing the (a) arc weld nugget, (b) HAZ, and cial gradient between the FSP region and arc weld nugget
(c) BM regions. The numbered (1–3) arrows indicate the presence of (1) weld is observed for the advancing side variation than for the
porosity, (2) Mg2Si phase (particles with dark contrast), and (3) Al6(Mn,Fe) retreating side (20.4 and 3.0 kg mm1, respectively). The
phase (particles with light contrast).
gradient is directly related to the asymmetric material flow
in friction stir. A sharp interface forms on the advancing
2. Tensile properties of individual side between the FSP region and the BM, but a ‘‘softer’’
microstructural regions gradient interface forms on the retreating side. Currently, it
The mechanical properties of each microstructural region is unclear exactly how much the gradient would affect the
were determined with microtensile samples (Table IV) ex- weld mechanical properties, especially since the FSP region
tracted from the FSP, BM, and arc weld nugget regions is only ½ the plate thickness. To minimize the effect of this
contained within a plate subjected to weld crown FSP gradient, the FSP approach producing the smaller gradient
(boxes in Figure 3(d)). The coarse grain arc weld nugget (weld toe FSP with arc weld nugget on retreating side of
Fig. 6—Bright-field TEM micrographs of the (a) arc weld nugget and (b) BM regions, showing the precipitate distribution and dislocation structure.
Fig. 7—Bright-field TEM micrographs of the FSP region of (a) weld toe FSP approach with arc weld nugget on the advancing side and (b) weld crown FSP
approach, showing precipitate distribution and dislocation structure.
the tool) was selected for the mechanical property charac- has been observed in specimens subjected to thermal treat-
terization. ments,[24] but thermal treatment caused by arc welding
is too short to allow precipitate splitting. Friction stir is
2. Precipitate phases known to produce extreme deformation (effective strains
Precipitates in the BM consist of cubes (like those found in excess of 40[25]), providing sufficient energy to spheroid-
in the FSP regions) and rods with aspect ratios near 13. The ize the large rods into smaller precipitates or sufficient
large aspect ratio precipitates exist in an unstable morphol- deformation to fragment the large rods. A complete under-
ogy due to the high interfacial energy of long rods. If given standing of these phenomena requires detailed study that is
the opportunity, the BM rod precipitates would lower their not within the scope of this work.
interfacial energy by splitting into smaller rods or spheres. Precipitates in the FSP regions are the result of either
Transformation of rod precipitates into groups of spheroids fragmentation of arc weld HAZ precipitates, as discussed
B. Mechanical Properties
1. Tensile properties
All tensile samples failed within the arc weld nugget
region. In addition, the microtensile specimens confirm that
the arc weld nugget is the weakest microstructural region,
Fig. 8—Four-point bending fatigue results as a function of FSP approach. and FSP modification produced a 19 pct increase in yield
strength over the arc weld nugget. Therefore, addition of
FSP locally improves the strength of the arc weld nugget
previously, or precipitate nucleation, growth, and coarsen- region through grain refinement or porosity healing.
ing from a solid solution. Which process occurs depends on Evidence of porosity healing is observed in the tensile
the original location of the deformed material. Because specimen fractography. Fracture surfaces of the as-arc
weld toe FSP consists of material from the arc weld nugget welded samples reveal that the arc weld nugget contains
and BM, both processes are possible. However, material porosity throughout the weld cross section (Figure 10(a)).
Table V. Calculated Yield Strength vs Experimental Values pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi n 5 0.345 is the Poisson’s ratio of Al,
where [31]
r ¼
2=3 Æræ is the mean radius of a circular cross section in
Microstructural Dsss Dsgs Dsor sy Experimental a random plane for a spherical precipitate of radius r,[30]
Region (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) YS (MPa)
and l is the interprecipitate spacing. The interprecipitate
BM 108 48 52 219 189 6 14 spacing is calculated assuming that spherical precipitates
Arc weld nugget 99 33 7 150 162 6 5 are arranged on a cubic grid, which is valid for the low
FSP 99 86 64 260 193 6 1 precipitate volume fractions observed[32]:
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
p
However, specimens modified by FSP contain porosity only l 5 2 r 1 [2]
in microstructural regions untouched by FSP and not 4 VV
through the entire specimen cross section (Figure 10(b)).
Porosity within the FSP region is eliminated by the severe where the precipitate volume fraction (Vv) is calculated
deformation produced by the FSP tool, while porosity based on the method of microstructural observation. The
immediately below the FSP region is forged closed due to SEM images are used to determine the Vv of larger precip-
high local forces created during FSP. The ability of FSP to itates (areas . 0.1 mm2), which is equal to the areal frac-
heal porosity below the deformation region was shown in tion, sum of precipitate areas divided by image area. The
cast A356 Al,[29] where casting porosity was healed 1 to TEM images are used to calculate the Vv of smaller precip-
2 mm below the tool deformation region due to the high itates (areas , 0.1 mm2), assuming no overlap or truncation
normal forces applied by the FSP tool. effects, from[33]
2. Strengthening Mechanisms 4 ÆræA0
VV 5 [3]
Based on the microstructural examination conducted in 3 H
Sections III–A and IV–A, three strengthening mechanisms
are expected to occur: precipitation strengthening, grain
size strengthening, and solid-solution strengthening. Table The projected areal fraction, A9, was obtained for each
V compares the contribution from each strengthening mech- image by dividing the sum of the precipitate area by the
anism, and how the overall predicted strength compares to area of the entire image, and the foil thickness, H, was
the experimental yield strength measured from microtensile determined from extinction thickness fringes. The contri-
specimens. The strengthening contributions are calculated bution for precipitate strengthening is 52 MPa for the larger
assuming that the BM region contains 5083 Al, the arc precipitates and 38 MPa for the smaller precipitates within
weld nugget region contains 5356 Al, and the FSP region the FSP region; BM precipitate strengthening is 7 MPa for
contains 5356 Al. The FSP region contains an unknown per- the larger precipitates and 52 MPa for the smaller precip-
centage mixture of 5356 (majority component) and 5083 itates. Both groups of precipitate sizes would work in par-
(minority component) Al. Because the strengthening con- allel to inhibit dislocation motion. Thus, the combined
tribution calculation is a first-order approximation, assum- precipitate strengthening contribution
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi is calculated from
ing that the FSP region is made of 5356 Al is reasonable. Dsor ¼ Ds2orLarge 1 Ds2orSmall , producing Dsor values
Calculation of precipitation strengthening is accom- of 64 MPa for FSP, 52 MPa for BM, and 7 MPa for arc
plished with the Orowan stress, Dsor[30]: weld nugget (larger precipitates only).
The strengthening due to grain size, Dsgs, can be ap-
0:4Gb ln ð2 r= bÞ
D sor ¼ M pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi [1] proximated by a portion of the Hall–Petch relationship,
pl 1y for example,[34]
(.0.1 mm), while Al6(Fe, Mn) was observed in two and 35 pct of the FSP experimental values. Deviations
populations: large constituent particles (.0.1 mm) and between the calculated and experimental FSP yield
fine rod-shaped precipitates (,500 nm). Microstructures strength values were attributed to inaccuracies in solute
within the FSP region contained smaller constituent par- concentration that resulted in an overestimation of the
ticles and finer precipitates than those found in the other solid-solution strengthening.
microstructural regions. Therefore, FSP was effective in 5. Four-point bending fatigue measurements showed that
breaking up large constituent particles and spheroidizing the FSP of 5083-H321Al/5356 Al GMAW increased the
fine precipitates. load necessary to produce a runout specimen by 30 pct,
2. The FSP increased the monotonic tensile properties of and increased the fatigue life at a loading amplitude of
arc-welded 5083-H321/5356 Al. This is attributed to 60 kg by over 20 times. Both FSP approaches (weld toe
grain refinement of the arc weld nugget and porosity and weld crown FSP) produced improvements in fatigue
healing produced by FSP. resistance. In the case of weld toe FSP, fatigue resistance
3. Micromechanical tensile testing of individual micro- improvement was attributed to a change in fatigue frac-
structural regions showed that the coarse grain arc weld ture location, while fatigue resistance improvement in
nugget had the lowest yield strength, the fine grain FSP weld crown FSP was attributed to strengthening of the
region had the highest strength, and the BM region had specimen surface layer as well as defect elimination.
strength between the two.
4. Strengthening of the BM, arc weld nugget, and FSP mi-
crostructural regions was attributed to a combination of ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
solid-solution, grain-size, and precipitation strengthen-
ing. The addition of FSP resulted in an increase in the The authors acknowledge the financial support of
grain-size strengthening (due to grain refinement and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Hall–Petch relationship) and precipitate strengthening (DARPA), under Contract No. MDA972-02-C-0300, and
(due to breakup and formation of a higher volume frac- Dr. Leo Christodoulou, Program Manager. Special thanks
tion of precipitates), when compared to the arc-weld nug- are extended to Professor Rajiv Mishra (University of
get. The yield strength predictions computed from the Missouri at Rolla) for the manufacture and testing of
strengthening mechanisms were found to be within 20 pct micromechanical specimens. This document is approved
of the BM and arc weld nugget experimental values for public release, distribution unlimited.