Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FSW Simulation Friction Simulation
FSW Simulation Friction Simulation
Friction Phenomena
Mokhtar Awang
Dissertation
Submitted to the College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at
West Virginia University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
Mechanical Engineering
Keywords: Friction Stir Spot Welding (FSSW), Adaptive Mesh, Friction Coefficient,
Contact Friction, Internal Friction, Heat Generation
Mokhtar Awang
Recently, friction stir spot welding (FSSW), a variant of “linear” friction stir welding (FSW) has
received considerable attention from automobile industries to replace electric resistance spot
welding with aluminum frames. Thus far, the FSSW process has been successfully developed
and applied in various cases, but the physics behind the process is not yet fully understood.
Effective and reliable computational models of the FSSW process would greatly enhance the
study of friction phenomena during the process as well as energy dissipation. Approaches for
the computational modeling of the FSSW process, however, are still under development and
much work is still needed, particularly the application of explicit finite element codes for a
verifiable simulation. The main objective of this dissertation research is aimed at describing the
friction phenomena and heat generation during FSSW process. To achieve this objective, a
three-dimensional fully coupled thermal-stress finite element (FE) model has been developed in
Abaqus/Explicit code. The simulation model utilizes the advantages offered by the arbitrary
Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) formulation in simulating severe element distortion using an
adaptive mesh scheme. Rate dependent Johnson-Cook material model is used for elastic plastic
work deformations. Since friction in FSSW cannot be effectively treated by a simple “friction
coefficient”, a friction coefficient, which is dependant on pressure, temperature and slip rate is
used with sliding Coulomb friction at the interface between the workpiece and the welding tool.
The simulation results include temperature, stress and strain distributions as well as frictional
dissipation energy, which are presented at the end of this dissertation. The peak temperature at
the tip of the pin and frictional dissipation energy are in close agreement with the experimental
work done by Gerlich et al. [1], which is about 5.1% different.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................ii
CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION................................................................................................. 1
iii
2.2 Friction Coefficient Used in the Numerical Study of FSW........................................ 20
(ALE) FORMULATIONS.......................................................................................................... 36
iv
5.3 Welding Parameters ...................................................................................................... 51
6.2.1 Heat Generation due to Friction Work at the Tool and Workpiece Interface ...... 64
6.2.2 Heat Generation due to Friction Work at the Top and Bottom Workpieces
Interface................................................................................................................................. 66
v
7.3 Friction at Top Workpiece and Bottom Workpiece Interface .................................. 89
7.5 Friction Coefficient between the Tool and the Workpiece ........................................ 91
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................... 106
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 1. 1: Schematic representation of the friction stir welding (FSW) [4]. ................................. 2
Fig. 1. 8: Examples of (a) FSSW equipment [17] and (b) welding tool [18]. .............................. 8
Fig. 1. 9: Cross section view of a typical friction stir spot welded [19]. ...................................... 9
Fig. 1. 10: SEM images show interface between two workpieces [19]...................................... 10
Fig. 1. 11: Bonding location of a welded aluminum alloy specimen (Courtesy of ORNL). ....... 10
Fig. 3. 6: Theoretical dependent of the rail steel friction coefficient on absolute temperature
[51]................................................................................................................................................ 33
Fig. 3. 7: Plot of friction coefficient versus temperature (oC) for a cast Inconel alloy pin sliding
vii
Fig. 3. 9: Plot of friction coefficient versus normal force for 440C stainless steel and Ni3Al
alloy [40]....................................................................................................................................... 35
Fig. 4. 3: 1-D example of Lagrangian, Eulerian, and ALE Mesh with material point motion
[54]................................................................................................................................................ 43
Fig. 5. 1: Mesh representation of two layers of work piece with a pin and an anvil. ................. 50
Fig. 6. 1: Three stages of friction between the tool and the workpiece. Left: Temperature
Fig. 6. 2: Frictional dissipation energy history at the tool and workpiece interface................... 65
Fig. 6. 3: Slip rate distribution on upper surface of the top workpiece. ..................................... 65
Fig. 6. 4: Frictional dissipation energy at the top and bottom workpiece interface. .................. 67
Fig. 6. 5: Slip rate distribution on lower surface of the top workpiece. ..................................... 67
Fig. 6. 6: Slip rate distribution on upper surface of the bottom workpiece. ............................... 68
viii
Fig. 6. 7: Plastic dissipation energy history. ............................................................................... 69
Fig. 6. 8: Frictional (dotted line) and plastic (solid line) dissipation energies history for various
Fig. 6. 12: Plot of temperatures versus distance away from the center of the tool..................... 81
Fig. 6. 13: Experimental versus FE simulation results of temperature history at the tip of
Fig. 6. 14: Plot of equivalent plastic strains versus distance away from the center of the tool.. 83
Fig. 7. 1: Schematic representation of friction between the tool and the workpiece.................. 87
Fig. 7. 2: Schematic representation relative velocity of the material and the tool (FN is the
normal force, Vmat is the material velocity, Vtool is the tool velocity). .......................................... 88
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5. 1: Temperature dependent material properties for Aluminum alloy 6061-T6 [31]...... 58
Table 6. 2: Summary of friction and plastic dissipation energies for different tool’s plunge rate.
....................................................................................................................................................... 74
Table 6. 3: Summary of frictional dissipation energy for different tool’s rotational speeds...... 76
x
Dedication To
My Family
xi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my research advisor, Prof.
Victor H. Mucino for his support, encouragement, and most importantly patience. His guidance
I am deeply grateful for having an exceptional doctoral committee and wish to thank
Professors Jacky Prucz, Bruce Kang, Ken means, and Powsiri Klinkhachorn for their support and
encouragement.
I also would like to thanks Dr. Stan David and Dr. Zhili Feng of Oak Ridge National
Laboratory for their supervision and help during my SURA/ORNL summer internship program.
The initial part of this research was done under their supervision.
I owe my loving thanks to my wife Ku Zilati Ku Shaari, my son Faris, and my daughters
Hureen and Hanna for their endless love and patience especially during our difficult times.
Without their encouragement and understanding, it would have been impossible for me to finish
this work. My special thanks are due to my mother, and my parents in-law for their unfailing
xii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
In 1991, a variation of the more common friction welding method called friction stir
welding (FSW) was invented and later patented by The Welding Institute (TWI) of United
Kingdom [2]. This relatively new welding method involves a solid state joining process that
uses a non-consumable tool to generate frictional heating and produce a plasticized region at a
welding zone, resulting in complex mixing of the material along a seam line. In FSW, the plates
to be joined are placed on a backing anvil and securely clamped to prevent relative motion
between parts. A specially shaped cylindrical tool rotates and slowly plunges into the joint line
between two pieces of the plate until a shoulder of the tool touches the plate surface.
When the shoulder contacts the work piece, it produces frictional heat around the point of
the weld, which drags the material around it and lowers its mechanical strength in a plastic
range. As the tool translates along the joint line, the friction from the rotating tool heats up the
material to the extent that it plastically deforms and flows from the front of the tool to the back,
where it subsequently cools and produces a weld. Simple FSW equipment can be constructed
using a conventional milling machine with a specially designed tool, made of a harder material
as compared to the workpiece [3]. Fig. 1. 1 and Fig. 1. 2 illustrate a schematic diagram of the
FSW and a real friction stir welding process, respectively, as applied to a butt joint of two plates.
1
Fig. 1. 1: Schematic representation of the friction stir welding (FSW) [4].
Normally, the tool is designed with a stepped shoulder and a threaded pin. The threads of
the pin assist in ensuring that the plastically deformed material flows around the pin. The length
of the pin is slightly shorter than the thickness of the plates to be welded. Fig. 1. 3 depicts a
2
typical FSW tool. Basically, different joint configurations use different tool geometries; for
instance, cone shaped probes are used for butt joints, and flared probes are used for lap joints, as
FSW was developed mainly for aluminum and its alloys [6]. In the recent years, this
method has been studied to join various other metals such as mild steel [7,8], aluminum alloy to
steel [3], magnesium alloy to aluminum alloy [9], and aluminum alloy to silver [10].
First, since the process occurs at a temperature below the melting point of the work piece
material, the problem with solidification cracking, liquation cracking, and porosity are
eliminated [11]. Second, due to the solid state nature of the process, FSW also has the potential
to avoid significant changes in microstructure and mechanical properties around the joint.
Consequently, FSW often exhibit improved mechanical properties relative to those of fusion
welds on the same material [12]. Third, because of a low temperature level compared to fusion
3
welding method, the residual stresses and the distortion in friction stir welds are typically lower
Another benefit of the FSW is that it has relatively fewer process parameters to control as
compared to fusion welding. In fusion welding, for instance, many process parameters such as
voltage and amperage, electrode feed, travel speed, shield gas, arc gap need to be controlled in
order to get a good quality weld. In FSW, however, there are only three process variables; i.e.,
rotational speed, transverse speed and pressure that need to be controlled. Therefore, due to the
excellence performance in welding technology as compared to fusion methods, FSW has been
successfully used in many applications such as aerospace, shipbuilding, aircraft, and automobile
industries.
base metal, an area where the material was far enough removed from the weld to be unaffected
by the process. Region II is a heat affected zone (HAZ), an area where material has experienced
affected zone (TMAZ), an area where material has been plastically deformed by the friction stir
welding tool. Region IV is a weld nugget, a region of a heavily deformed material that roughly
4
Fig. 1. 4: Friction stir welding (FSW) micrograph [14].
Recently, a variant of the “linear” FSW called friction stir spot welding (FSSW) has been
for aluminum. Mazda Motor Co., for instance, uses the FSSW technique for production of new
RX-8 sports car [15]. This welding technology involves a process similar to FSW, except that,
instead of moving the tool along the weld seam, the tool only indents the parts, which are placed
on top of each other as illustrated in Fig. 1. 5. The welding operation can be done remarkably
quickly since cycle times are within a few seconds, for example, cycle time for friction spot weld
During FSSW process, the pin experiences direct contact with the workpiece for longer
period as compared to the shoulder. As a result, the friction force between the pin and the
workpiece generates most of the heat energy. This characteristic make the FSSW process
5
Fig. 1. 5: Schematic representation of FSSW.
The FSSW process consists of three phases; plunging, stirring, and retraction as shown in
Fig. 1. 6. The process starts with spinning the tool with high rotational speed and plunging it
into a weld spot until the shoulder contacts the top surface of the workpiece. Then, the stirring
phase enables the materials of the two workpieces mix together with a present of a strong
compressive forging pressure. At this stage, the bonding occurs due to the pressure and
temperature that cause inter-diffusion of material across the interface at atomic level. Lastly,
once a predetermined penetration is reached, the process stops and the tool retracts from the
6
workpiece. Fig. 1. 7 shows a dent made by plunging and stirring processes during FSSW on a
FSSW equipment comprises four major components; a tool, a spindle, servomotor and an
anvil. The servomotor provides axial loads. Fig. 1. 8(a) illustrates a FSSW equipment
manufactured by Friction Stir Link, Inc. [17]. The tool can be fabricated using H13 tool steel
7
with heat treatment process. The tool can be with or without a shoulder. Fig. 1. 8(b) shows a
a) b)
Fig. 1. 8: Examples of (a) FSSW equipment [17] and (b) welding tool [18].
It has been suggested by Mitlin et al. [19] that two microstructural zones are created
around the pin, namely, thermo-mechanically affected zone (TMAZ) and heat affected zone
(HAZ). The microstructural details of both zones, however, are yet to be fully elucidated in
8
stir spot welded specimen is shown in Fig. 1. 9. Region I and region II represent TMAZ and
HAZ, respectively.
Fig. 1. 9: Cross section view of a typical friction stir spot welded [19].
In the same paper, Mitlin et al. [19] also noticed that joint interface of a welded 6111-T4
aluminum alloy can be categorized into four areas. Looking towards the pin hole, the four
regions are defined as an area of no contact, a region of only mechanical bonding (“kissing
bond”), an interface of partially metallurgically bonded, and a zone with a full metallurgical
bond. Fig. 1. 10 illustrates the transition from no contact to “kissing bond” interface (A), the
transition from the “kissing bond” to partially metallurgically joined region (B), and nearly
perfect metallurgical bond (C). Bonding location of the FSSW specimen can be visualized in
Fig. 1. 11. The two specimens are bonded together in a circular shape around the hole left by the
tool.
9
Fig. 1. 10: SEM images show interface between two workpieces [19].
Fig. 1. 11: Bonding location of a welded aluminum alloy specimen (Courtesy of ORNL).
10
1.2.4 Advantages of FSSW
FSSW has several advantages over the electric resistance welding process in terms of
weld quality and process efficiency as reported by Hancock [15]. In car manufacturing, this new
process eliminates the need for the large electric current, coolant and compressed air as required
for conventional resistance welding. Furthermore, the FSSW has simplified the overall joining
systems, which in turn eliminates the need for specialized joining equipments and large-scale
electricity supply facility and is environmentally friendly as there are no fumes. Other benefits
of FSSW over traditional welding methods are similar to linear FSW as discussed in the previous
Friction phenomena is a very important aspect in FSSW since the process itself relies on
the heat generated from the frictional force between tool and workpiece to soften and join the
workpieces. Although this welding technique has been successfully developed and applied in
various cases in industries, the friction phenomena during the process is not yet fully understood.
Therefore, this dissertation addresses the friction phenomena between the tool and the workpiece
interface, between the plates interface as well as the internal friction in the material.
One of the unresolved issues in numerical study of FSW is the use of a “friction
coefficient”. Most of the FE element models of FSW oversimplified friction with the use of a
coefficient does not exist, but empirically it can be assumed to be a function of several variables.
11
In Abaqus/Eplicit code, the friction coefficient can be modeled as a function of slip rate, contact
pressure, and surface temperature. Based on the literature survey in Chapter 2, none of the
research works had used friction coefficient dependence of slip rate, contact pressure, and
surface temperature. Therefore, the FE models in this dissertation are directed at determining the
1.4 Objectives
Two objectives have been set forth in this work. The first objective aims to study the
friction phenomena at the tool and workpiece interface, between workpieces interface, as well as
inside the material of the workpieces. In addition, the intention is also to study the significance
and contribution to energy dissipation for each of them. The second goal is to determine the
friction coefficient as a function of slip rate, contact pressure, and surface temperature in order to
conduct simulations that are more realistic. To achieve these objectives, a fully coupled
The scope of the dissertation is focused on the FE simulation of friction stir spot welding
(FSSW) for thin aluminum alloy Al 6061-T6 while some limited access to original data is
available. The FE model uses Lagrangian adaptive mesh domain for the workpieces, thus, actual
12
material bonding between two workpieces is not addressed in this work. Since the tool and the
backing anvil are modeled using rigid body surfaces, mechanical responses for the tool and the
backing anvil are not available in this study. The two rigid body surfaces, however, have an
The friction model in the FE simulation uses Coulomb’s friction law for sliding friction
at the interfaces but the friction coefficient used is dependent on surface temperature, contact
pressure, and slip rate. In addition, the frictions at the interfaces are assumed to be isotropic
Coulomb frictions.
This work also tracks particles motion, but they are only the particles on the surface. Due
to the computer hard drive space limitations, the simulation time for modeling material flow is
only 0.08 seconds (full simulation takes 1.75 seconds), which consumes 2.5 gigabytes of space.
introduction to friction stir welding (FSW) as well as friction stir spot welding (FSSW). In
addition, this chapter also derives the problem statement, and defines the objective and scope of
dissertation.
Previous works of FSW and FSSW are reviewed in Chapter 2. Research in FSW can be
categorized into experimental, numerical and analytical works. Several numerical approaches to
solve FSW problems are briefly presented. The implementation of friction coefficient in
13
numerical works is also discussed. Lastly, research in FSSW is presented at the end of the
chapter.
Chapter 3 presents a discussion about friction. In the beginning of the chapter, basic
friction quantities are defined using classical Coulomb’s friction. The concepts of anisotropic
contact friction, with linear mathematical model of anisotropic friction are also discussed briefly.
Finally, the factors that affecting the friction behavior are listed at the end of the chapter.
Finite element formulations and the arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) concept used in
the finite element simulation are discussed in Chapter 4. In the early section of this chapter,
forward and central difference approximations are derived from Taylor series. Then, the chapter
presents how the mechanical and thermal analyses are formulated in the FE model. The
discussion in this chapter also includes adaptive mesh methodology used in Abaqus/Explicit.
The main subject of this dissertation, which is finite element simulation of FSSW
process, is discussed in Chapter 5. The discussions include model geometry and meshing
thermal contacts, and material model. The friction coefficient data used for the FE model are
Chapter 6 presents the simulation results. This chapter begins with a discussion of FE
model verification. The discussions in this chapter include energy dissipation, study of friction
coefficients, parametric study of plunge rate and rotational velocity, thermal and strain rate
14
The friction phenomena and heat generation during FSSW process is presented in
Chapter 7. In this chapter, the discussion of friction phenomena during FSSW process includes
many aspects such as friction mechanism, friction coefficient and friction heating.
Conclusions from the FE simulation results are presented in the last chapter, which is
Chapter 8. Contribution of the dissertation to the FSSW technology and future work are
15
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Since its invention in 1991, FSW has been an active research area. The following
paragraphs discuss the research area in FSW, which can be grouped into experimental, numerical
welding zone, so most studies measure responses near the welding zone. Experimental study on
the temperature distribution and the heat generation during FSW process has been reported by
many researchers. Tang et al., [20] was among the first to measure temperature history and
thermal profile in FSW butt-joined geometry. They observed that temperature distribution was
symmetric about the weld centerline and the peak temperature at the weld center of Al 6061-T6
specimen was about 4500C. They also concluded that the maximum temperature was about 80 %
less than the melting point for Al 6061-T6, which was about 5820C. Dickerson, et al. [21]
conducted a thermal experiment to measure heat profile specifically at the weld tool. They
found that using solid tools, the steady state heat loss into the tool was about 10 % of the total
heat generated. Chao et al. [22] have also conducted experimental studies on heat transfer in
FSW. They concluded that about 95 % of heat generated from the friction was transferred into
16
the workpiece and only 5 % flowed into the tool. Moreover, they also drew a conclusion that
Considerable numerical works of FSW have been reported in published literatures, which
are focused on heat transfer and material flow aspects. Several approaches have been used to
simulate the FSW process. To describe the heat transfer and the mixing action during FSW
process, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based simulations have been used. Colegrove
and Shercliff [23], for instance, developed a 2-D model of material flow around a welding tool
using CFD code, Fluent®. Hyoe et al. [24] also used Fluent® code in their models to the predict
hardness profile across a weld as well as thermal histories as a function of position in the weld
cross-section. The thermal history in their works was simulated by applying a uniform heat flux
over the contact surfaces and a prescribed power input, which is obtained from an experiment.
Another material flow study was done by Zhao [25] using LS-DYNA code. In the study, ALE
formulations have been used with a “moving mesh” in order to simulate the material flow around
the tool. The same methodology could be used to study the material flow in FSSW process.
To capture severe deformation during FSW process and particle movement, an arbitrary
Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) formulation adopted in Abaqus/Explict has been utilized by Schmidt
and Hattel [26]. The model in their works includes heat generation from friction between the
tool and the workpiece interface as well as plastic straining. This dissertation uses the same
17
commercial FE code to simulate FSSW process, but with some variations in the treatment of
friction.
FSW process can also be modeled using some other approaches. Askari et al. [27] used a
3-D CTH code (a finite difference hydrodynamics code) to capture the coupling between tool
geometry, heat generation, and plastic flow during FSW process. The CTH models are
sequentially coupled thermal and mechanical models, which are based on the finite volume and
Eulerian formulations. The CTH code has the advantage of treating the material as a solid rather
than a liquid as several other models do. Smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) approach has
also been used to model heat generation and material flow as done by Tartakovsky et al. [28].
SPH code is a Lagrangian particle method that can simulate the dynamics of interfaces, large
material deformations, void formations, and the material’s strain and temperature history of FSW
process, but no provisions are made to include energy release when particles slip and break away
Some of the previous efforts to model the thermal profiles in FSW are considered non
Newtonian flow for the mass. Ulysse [29] introduced a 3-D visco-plastic FE model for solving
the a coupled thermomechanical state during FSW. In his model, slip velocity is assumed at the
contact interface. The heat is mainly generated from the rotation of the shoulder and that of the
approach has also been done by Nandan et al. [30] to model 3-D heat transfer and plastic flow
during FSW. The slip between the shoulder and the workpiece was adjusted to achieve good
agreement between the calculated and the measured temperature. This approach makes it
18
In many FE models in the past, heat flux is an input in the model to describe thermal
behavior during FSW. Chao and Qi [31] have developed one of the earliest three-dimensional (3-
D) heat transfer model of FSW using a trial and error procedure in order to adjust the heat input
until all calculated temperatures matches with the measured values. They assumed a constant
heat flux input from a tool shoulder-workpiece interface. Frigaard et al. [32] assumed the heat
input from the tool shoulder to be a frictional heat in their two-dimensional (2-D) model of FSW.
Song and Kovacevic [33] introduced a moving coordinate system to ease modeling the moving
tool in their paper. They also included the heat input from the tool shoulder and the tool pin in
Analytical study of FSW has also been receiving a great deal of attention by some
researchers. Gould and Feng [34] developed a heat flow model based on the classical Rosenthal,
which describes a quasi-steady state temperature field due to a moving heat source of a constant
velocity. They assumed that two sources of heat generation during FSW process; friction at the
interface of the tool shoulder and the work piece, and the plastic deformation of the weld metal
around the pin. More recently, Schmidt et al. [35] established an analytical model for heat
generation based on different assumptions of the contact condition between the tool and the
workpiece. The assumptions that they used for contact condition between the tool and the
workpiece interface were sticking, sliding, and partial sticking/sliding conditions. In this
dissertation, sliding friction was assumed at the tool and the workpiece interface.
19
2.2 Friction Coefficient Used in the Numerical Study of FSW
The friction coefficient between tool and workpiece is an input parameter in FE model
and used in heat generation formulations. A variety of friction coefficient values have been
found in literatures with the majority of them being a constant value. Song and Kovacevic [36]
and Xu et al. [37] used friction coefficient of 0.4 and 0.3, respectively for friction between
aluminum alloy 6061-T6 and tool steel. Chen and Kovacevic [38], also used a constant value of
the friction coefficient for friction between aluminum alloy 6061-T6 and tool steel, but they did
not report the value they used to verify the temperature history. Schmidt and Hattel [26]
assumed the friction coefficient equals to 0.3 in their thermomechanical model of welded
aluminum alloy 2024-T3. Song et al. [39], however, adopted a linear temperature dependent
coefficient in the model. In their model, the friction coefficient for aluminum is 0.5 at 300K and
linearly decreases to 0.3 at the melting point. Frigaard et al. [32] reported that they adjusted the
friction coefficient in their heat transfer model’s calculation to keep the thermal solution from
contact pressure, temperature, sliding velocity, type of sliding motion, surface films, system
stiffness, and vibrational interactions [40]. In addition, there is an “internal friction” inherent in
the material, which in reality more a tensor than it is a scalar. In this dissertation, a nonlinear
distributed friction coefficient will be used between welding tool and workpiece. The physical
data of friction coefficients dependence of slip rate, contact pressure, and surface temperature for
20
2.3 Research in FSSW
FSSW process as compared to FSW. Several works, however, have been discussed in symposia
and conferences. Lin et al. [41] investigated microstructures and failure mechanisms of FSSW
in aluminum 6111-T4 based on experimental observations. Feng et al. [42] reported about their
feasibility study of FSSW in advanced high-strength steels such as AHSS. Mitlin et al. [19]
T4 Aluminum. More recent works on FSSW include Pan et al. [16] on sheet aluminum joining
and Sakano et al. [43] on development of FSSW robot system for automobile industry.
Recently, some researchers studied the thermal and heat generation aspects of FSSW
process. Gerlich et al. [1] measured peak temperature in aluminum and magnesium alloys
friction stir spot welds. Two thermocouples were embedded in a welding tool assembly in the
experiment. They found out that the peak temperatures during FSSW of Al 5754 and Mg alloy
AZ91D were 565 oC and 462 oC, respectively. Energy utilization during FSSW process has been
studied by Su et al. [44]. The group reported that less than 4.03 % of the energy generated
during the FSSW was required for stir zone formation in Al 6111 welds. The study of Gerlich is
used in this dissertation as a reference in relation to the numerical results obtained in this work.
FE modeling has been developed to study the temperature and stress/strain distribution as
presented by Awang et al. [45]. In their work, Coulomb’s friction with temperature dependent
friction coefficient has been modeled at contact interface. A FE modeling of FSSW, which is
developed by Kakarla et al. [46] also, used Abaqus/Explicit to model the stress and the strain
21
responses of FSSW process. In their model, a constant friction coefficient of 0.64 was used and
the simulation time only for the initial part of plunge phase (0.75 seconds).
22
CHAPTER 3: FRICTION FUNDAMENTALS
Friction can be defined as a force that opposes the relative motion between two
contacting bodies parallel to a surface that separates them. The friction concept can be
visualized by sliding a block on a plate as shown in Fig. 3. 1. Block 1 will not move relative to
block 2 if applied force, F is less than the friction force Ff. On the other hand, if the applied
force, F is greater than the friction force, Ff, block 1 will slide on block 2. The figure also
illustrates that the friction coefficient can be a function of normal force, FN, temperature, T and
slip rate, v.
The classical approximation of the friction force known as Coulomb’s friction law
23
F f ≤ µFN 3.1
where µ is the coefficient of friction (sometimes it is called friction coefficient), FN is the force
normal to the contact surface, and Ff is the force exerted by friction. The classical laws of
friction that were published by French scientist, Guillaume Amontos and later verified by
Coulomb, states that the friction is directly proportional to the normal force and independent of
contact area.
In general, there are three types of friction, i.e., static friction, kinetic friction, and rolling
friction. Static friction is the force that opposes a stationary object from moving relative to the
contacting surface. When the two contacting surfaces move relative to each other, the force that
opposes the motion is referred as a kinetic friction. Rolling friction is the frictional force
associated with the rotational movement of a circular object along a surface. Generally, the
kinetic friction is smaller than the static friction, but larger than the rolling friction.
ratio of the force of friction between two bodies and the normal force. Friction coefficient can
be categorized based on the type of friction, i.e., static friction coefficient, µ s kinetic friction
In reality, friction originates when asperities of two surfaces are in contact. As the
normal force increases, the contact area increases and the asperity junctions grow. The growth
24
of the junctions stops when the reaction force distributed over an expanding contact area exactly
balances the applied normal pressure. Adhesive bonds form at the contact points. When the
contacting surfaces move relative to each other, a tangential force breaks the bonds and the force
needed to overcome the shear strength of the bonds produces the friction force. The bonding
between contacting asperities can be modeled as a small stiff spring as shown in Fig. 3. 2.
microscopical asperities in contact. Fig. 3. 3 shows friction at microscopic level. The asperities
each carry a part fi of the normal load FN. If we assume plastic deformation of the asperities
until the contact area of each junction has grown large enough to carry its part of the normal
fi
ai = 3.2
H
25
where, H is the hardness of the weakest bulk material of the bodies in contact. The total contact
FN
AT = 3.3
H
For each asperity contact, the tangential deformation is elastic until the applied shear pressure
exceeds the shear strength, τy of the surface materials, when it becomes plastic. In sliding, the
F f = τ y AT 3.4
Ff
µ= 3.5
FN
τ y AT τy
µ= = 3.6
AT H H
Therefore, the friction coefficient can be computed from the shear strength of asperity junctions
26
a) Asperities without load b) Asperities with load
As discussed previously, the material at the contact interface experiences elastic and
elastic hysteresis theory. Assumed that a material is subjected to a completely reversed stress
cycle as shown in stress – strain curve of Fig. 3. 4. The area underneath the “a-b” curve
represents the work done on the workpiece per unit volume, by straining forces. The area
underneath the “b-c” curve represents the work per unit volume done by the elastic restoring
force. The different between the work done by the straining forces and work done by the elastic
restoring force, which is represented by the area of “a-b-c”, is the dissipation energy. This
energy is in the form of heat. Therefore, the area of the loop “b-c-d-e” represents the energy loss
27
Fig. 3. 4: Hysteresis loop.
reality, however friction can be considered as anisotropic, in which its magnitude is directionally
dependent, acquiring a tensorial nature. The anisotropic friction is the friction whose properties
vary with the direction of sliding. Fig. 3. 5 depicts the concept of friction anisotropy in
composites.
roughness, which is defined as a structure in which highs and hollows in the surface are clearly
28
oriented. Therefore, the friction of two contacting surfaces that depends on the sliding direction
A linear model of anisotropic friction has been derived from the work of Zmitrowicz
Zmitrowicz [48], the friction force vector Ff can be a function of the slip velocity unit vector v
Ff = − FN f ( v ) 3.7
Let us assume k i (i=1,2) is an orthogonal unit vector basis in 2-D vector space S12 .
Ff = F fi k i 3.8
Then, let us assume ej (j=1,2) is an arbitrary unit vector basis in S 22 . Similarly, vector v can be
v = v je j 3.9
Ff = − FN M 1 v 3.10
M1 in equation 3.10 is a second order tensor, which belongs to vector space P 2 . Vector space
P 2 in this case is the tensor product of the vector spaces S12 and S 22 , which yields four tensor
basis elements k i ⊗ e j .
29
The tensor M1 can be expressed as a linear combination of tensor k i ⊗ e j as
M 1 = M ij k i ⊗ e j 3.11
Substituting equation 3.9 and equation 3.11 into equation 3.10, yields
( )(
Ff = − FN M ij k i ⊗ e j v j e j ) 3.12
Mij are four friction coefficients for dry friction model formulated by Amontons and Coulomb.
Therefore, the friction can be treated as a second order tensor, similar to other physical
30
Anisotropy of friction phenomenon not only occurs in contact friction, but also in internal
friction. The reason for anisotropy of internal friction is due to mechanical properties of single
deformation, slip occurs because of dislocations between grains. The force that resists the
motion of slip in crystal structure is called internal friction. Therefore, the internal friction also
Abaqus/Standard, which is another Abaqus solver for solving implicit finite element
analyses, is capable to model an anisotropic friction. The FE code allows for different friction
friction models available are based on isotropic friction, which assumes that the friction
The friction coefficient is believed to vary during the FSSW process. The detail of the
variation, however, is still not clear so far. Friction coefficient in Abaqus/Explicit can be defined
as a function of surface temperature, slip rate (relative velocity), and contact pressure. The
physical data that describe variable dependent friction coefficient for aluminum alloy 6061-T6
and the tool steel are not available. The friction coefficient data in this dissertation, therefore, is
31
3.4.1 Effects of Surface Temperature
Heat energy generated due to friction in a sliding interface affects the properties of the
materials in the vicinity of that interface. As the temperature of the material under a sliding
object elevates, the strength of the material decreases. Therefore, the resistance to sliding
offered by those materials will be changed if the properties of the materials change by the
heating.
Temperature dependent friction coefficient data for the friction between aluminum alloy
6061-T6 and tool steel are assumed based on previous works documented in the literature. Back
in 1965, Male and Cockcoft [50] published a friction coefficient and temperature relationship
using a ring compression test. They observed that the friction coefficient of most metals
temperature range, friction coefficient may increase or decrease with increasing temperature, or
The trend of friction coefficient versus temperature for some metals has been found in a
published paper of Popov et al. [51]. They proposed that the coefficient of friction between the
rail and the wheel is constant at temperature below 650 0C and gradually decreases as the
temperature increases above that level. Fig. 3. 6 shows friction coefficient temperature
dependent plot of the rail steel. A plot of friction coefficient versus temperature cited by Blau
Physically, this trend can be explained since higher friction coefficient directly relate to
the capacity of transforming motion energy into heat energy (braking). The higher the
32
temperature, the less capacity of transforming motion energy into heat, and thus, the less
Fig. 3. 6: Theoretical dependent of the rail steel friction coefficient on absolute temperature
[51].
Fig. 3. 7: Plot of friction coefficient versus temperature (oC) for a cast Inconel alloy pin sliding
on an M-10 tool steel disk [40].
33
3.4.2 Effects of Sliding Velocity
The friction force acting over a distance in a period of time generates energy per unit
P = Ff v 3.14
Most of the energy produced by the frictional contact is converted into heat. This heat
reduces the strength of the material. Consequently, the resistance of the material movement
decreases as the velocity increases. Fig. 3. 8 shows how the friction coefficient of various metals
decrease as velocity increases. This trend is the basis of the assumption made for coefficient
34
3.4.3 Effects of Contact Pressure
A friction experiment conducted by Blau [40] showed that the friction coefficient
decreases with increasing normal load as shown in Fig. 3. 9. This trend behavior can be
explained by considering two surfaces that are placed together under a normal load. Due to the
pressure distribution, the asperities of the two contacting surfaces will deform to support the
load. When sliding occurs, the shear force parallel to the surface causes asperity contacts to
stretch out and break up into small contact regions. As a result, the shear strength of solids may
be changed by increasing pressure and sliding motion. Therefore, the deformation of materials
during sliding may alter their near-surface crystallographic orientation to produce easier shear,
Fig. 3. 9: Plot of friction coefficient versus normal force for 440C stainless steel and Ni3Al
alloy [40].
35
CHAPTER 4: FINITE ELEMENT AND ARBITRARY LAGRANGIAN
4.1 Introduction
In this research work, a finite element analysis has been conducted using Abaqus/Explicit
codes. The main reason why the explicit formulation is chosen as opposed to implicit is that the
modeling of FSSW process required the solutions in a short simulation time efficiently. The
Abaqus/Explicit formulations are well-suited to solving high-speed dynamic events that require
many small increments to obtain a high-resolution solution [52]. Moreover, contact conditions
and other extremely discontinuous events are readily formulated in the explicit method and can
The term “explicit” in the FE method refers to the fact that the state at the end of the
beginning of the increment. Generally, the time increments in explicit formulation are quite
small in order to produce accurate results. Therefore, it requires a lot of increments so that the
accelerations during an increment are nearly constant. Even though it requires a lot of
increments in the analysis, each increment in explicit formulation is inexpensive since there are
no simultaneous equations need to be solved. Fig. 4. 1 depicts comparison between explicit and
implicit formulations.
36
Fig. 4. 1: Comparison between explicit and implicit methods [53].
The explicit forward difference and the explicit central difference integration rules can be
f"( x ) f ( n )( x ) n
f ( x + h ) = f ( x ) + hf ' ( x ) + + ... + h + Rn 4.1
2! n!
37
This is called forward difference approximation since it finds the derivative in the positive
(forward) direction of the profile from the point x. Similarly, if the Taylor series of f(x-h) is
f(x)− f(x − h)
f'( x)≅ 4.3
h
A more accurate representation of the first derivative can be computed from the difference
between Taylor series of f(x+h) and f(x-h) and is called central difference approximation.
In Abaqus/Explicit method, the heat transfer equations are formulated using an explicit
forward difference time integration rule, and the mechanical solution response is obtained using
an explicit central difference integration rule. Section 4.3.1 and section 4.3.2 discuss how the
In this dissertation, a fully coupled thermal-stress analysis was used to simulate both
thermal and mechanical responses of FSSW process. The FSSW process involves significant
heating due to contact friction and inelastic deformation of the material, which in turn, changes
the material properties. Therefore, in this analysis, the thermal and mechanical solutions must be
38
the stress analysis is dependent on the temperature distribution and the temperature distribution
motion such as
where ρ is the mass, c is the damping coefficient, k is the stiffness coefficient, F is the body
force, and &u& , u& , and u are the nodal acceleration, nodal velocity and nodal displacement,
&& + Cu& + Ku = F
Mu 4.6
where, M is the discrete mass matrix, C is the viscous damping matrix, K is the stiffness matrix,
Equation 4.6 can then be rewritten to obtain nodal acceleration in the beginning of time
increment as
&& i = M −1 (F − Cu& i − Ku i )
u 4.7
39
An explicit central difference scheme is used in the discretization of the control
equations. Fig. 4. 2 illustrates the finite difference scheme applied in the discrete equations.
u& i +1 / 2 − u& i −1 / 2
&& i =
u 4.8
(∆t i +1 + ∆t i ) / 2
Solving equation 4.8 for the velocity at the middle of current increment yields
∆t + ∆t i
u& i +1 / 2 = i +1 u&& i + u& i −1 / 2 4.9
2
Replacing the nodal acceleration term in the above equation from the previous nodal acceleration
∆t + ∆t i −1
u& i +1 / 2 = i +1 M ( F − Cu& i − Ku i ) + u& i −1 / 2 4.10
2
40
4.3.2 Thermal Analysis
The governing equation describing transient heat transfer process during FSSW can be
written as,
∂T ∂ ∂T ∂ ∂T ∂ ∂T
ρc p = kx + ky + kz +Q 4.11
∂t ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂z ∂z
where, ρ is the material density, cp is the material specific heat, k is heat conductivity (i.e., kx, ky,
and kz are the heat conductivity in x, y, and z directions), T is the temperature, t is the time and Q
is the heat generation. In finite element formulation, equation 5.11 can be discretized into
C ( t )T& + K ( t )T = Q( t ) 4.12
where, C(t) is the time dependent capacitance matrix, T is the nodal temperature vector, K(t) is
time (i.e., dT/dt), T is the nodal temperature vector and Q(t) is the time dependent heat vector.
Solving the nodal temperature rate from the above equation yields,
Applying a forward difference integration for the nodal temperature rate gives,
T − Ti
T&i = i + 1 4.14
∆t i +1
Ti +1 = ( ∆t i +1 )T&i + Ti 4.15
41
Thus, the final explicit expression for the nodal temperature rate can be written as,
Ti +1 = ( ∆t i +1 )C −1 ( F − KTi ) + Ti 4.16
Numerical problems in continuum mechanics are normally solved using two classical
description, which is mainly used in structural analysis allows the mesh and the material to move
together, making it easy to track surfaces and apply boundary conditions. Its weakness is
difficulty in convergence when the elements are subjected to severe distortion. Eulerian, in the
other hand allows the material move through the mesh and it is suitable for solving problem in
fluid dynamics. The disadvantage of this scheme is that the surfaces and boundary conditions
are difficult to track. The mesh distortion however, is not a problem because the mesh never
combine the advantages of Lagrangian and Eulerian algorithms, while minimizing their
respective drawbacks as far as possible. Fig. 4. 3 depicts three different types of material
description; grid lines represent mesh and shaded area represents the material.
42
a) Lagrangian material description
Fig. 4. 3: 1-D example of Lagrangian, Eulerian, and ALE Mesh with material point motion
[54].
43
4.4.1 Remeshing and Remapping Schemes in Abaqus/Explicit
FE simulation of FSSW process is very difficult to do without the use of adaptive feature
in Abaqus/Explicit. Adaptive mesh scheme enables a finite element model to maintain a high
quality mesh automatically even the model is subjected to severe deformations, by allowing the
mesh to move independently of the material. In Abaqus/Explicit, the feature uses a technique
called Arbitrary Lagrangian Euleraian (ALE), which combines pure Lagrangian and pure
In the remeshing process, a new mesh is created by sweeping iteratively over the
adaptive mesh domain and moving nodes to smooth the mesh at a specified frequency. During
each mesh sweep, nodes in the adaptive mesh domain are relocated based on the current
positions of neighboring nodes and elements. That means the boundary nodes remain on the
boundary while the interior nodes are moved in order to reduce element distortion.
According to Abaqus/Explicit [52], calculation of the new mesh is based on three basic
illustrated in Fig. 4. 4.
average of the element centers (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of the four surrounding elements.
Thus, it reduces element distortion by moving the node C away from element center C1,
44
b) Laplacian smoothing method relocates the node C by computing the average distance of
nodes M1, M2, M3, and M4 from node C. Thus, the positions of nodes M2 and M3 pull
weighted average of the positions of the node’s eight nearest neighbor nodes in 2-D
problem (18 nearest neighbor nodes in 3-D case). In this case, the new position on node
C is based on the position of nodes A1, A2, A3, A4, M1, M2, M3, and M4.
After the distorted mesh is smoothed, solution variables are remapped from the old mesh
to the new mesh through a process called an advection process. By the definition, the advection
process is the process that allows to use a Lagrangian small step to take place at the end of which
the strain field is mapped back to the original mesh prior to taking the next step. In
45
Abaqus/Explicit code, the formulations used for advecting solution variables to the new mesh are
consistent, monotonic and accurate to the second order. Moreover, the methods also conserve
The ALE formulations in Abaqus/Explicit introduces advective terms into the momentum
balance and mass conservation equations to account for independent mesh and material motion.
These modified equations can be solved using two ways, i.e., fully coupled method, and operator
split method. In direct method, the nonsymmetrical system of equations are solved directly,
whereas the operator split method decouples the Lagrangian material motion from the additional
mesh motion. The operator split method is used in Abaqus/Explicit because of its computational
efficiency. Moreover, this method is suitable in an explicit setting because small time
The advection method in Abaqus/Explicit must satisfy three conservation laws. The first
conservation law is conservation of mass, which states that the mass of any material body is
constant since there is no material flows through the boundaries of a material body. The
∂ρ ∂ν j
= −ρ 4.17
∂t ∂x j
where, ρ is the mass density, t is the time and ν is the material velocity.
46
The second conservation law is conservation of momentum, which states that the material time
derivative of the momentum is equal to the net force acting upon the object. The conservation
∂ν i ∂σ ij
ρ = + ρb i 4.18
∂t ∂x j
where ρ is the mass density, σji is the Cauchy stress, bi is the body force per unit volume.
The third conservation law is conservation of energy, which states that the rate of change
of the total energy in the body is equal to the work done by the external forces and rate of work
provided by heat flux and heat sources. The equation can be presented as
∂w int ∂q
ρ = D ji σ ji − i + ρs 4.19
∂t ∂x i
where, wint is the internal energy per unit volume, Dji is the rate of deformation, qi is the heat flux
per unit area and ρs is the heat source per unit volume.
47
CHAPTER 5: FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION OF FSSW PROCESS
5.1 Introduction
Understanding the real physics of the FSSW process depends to a great extent on the
success of the modeling efforts through numerical simulations. In this research, a commercial
finite element software code, Abaqus/Explicit version 6.5 is used to solve the thermo-mechanical
problem in FSSW process. One of the main reasons to use the Abaqus/Explicit software is that it
compared to solving an equivalent implicit problem. Not only less computational time, the
adaptive mesh feature enables the explicit solver to compute severe element deformation without
In this work, two thin aluminum alloy 6061-T6 plates are modeled as two separate
workpieces. The bonding of the workpieces and retracting phase, however, have not been
modeled. The FE analysis has been conducted by prescribing plunge rate and angular velocity of
memory for solving the 517902 unknowns. The CPU time is 14 days and 12 hours on a 3.60
GHz Intel Pentium 4 processor for the simulation time of 1.505 seconds. The sample of input
48
5.2 Mesh and Geometry
The FE model is comprised of three main parts, i.e., workpiece, tool and backing anvil as
depicted in Fig. 5. 1. It only includes a limited part of the workpieces to optimize the resolution
In the FE model, two workpieces are stacked on top of each other with a dimension of 25
hourglassing1 effect as depicted in Fig. 5. 2. The element size is approximately 0.1 mm in the
region surrounding the tool. A total of 132162 elements and 142816 nodes have been generated
in the model. The workpieces have been modeled using thermal coupled element C3D8RT.
This element type has 8-node tri-linear displacement and temperature degree of freedom and
Since this work is not intended to study the mechanical responses of the tool and backing
anvil, they are modeled as analytical rigid surfaces with prescribed motion at a reference node.
The rigid body surfaces, however carry thermal response, which are assumed isothermal. The
tool has a shoulder and an unthreaded pin as shown in Fig. 5. 3. The diameters of the shoulder
and the pin are 10 mm and 3 mm, respectively. The backing anvil has a diameter of 15 mm. The
reference node is defined for each rigid body that has translation, rotation, and thermal degree of
freedoms.
1
Hourglassing is an element deformation that does not cause any strains at integration points.
49
Fig. 5. 1: Mesh representation of two layers of work piece with a pin and an anvil.
50
Fig. 5. 3: Tool geometry.
In FE simulation of FSSW process, there are two parameters that can be controlled,
which are rotational speed and plunge rate. The rotational speed and the plunge rate are
simulated by prescribing constants angular velocity and downward velocity, respectively at the
reference point.
5.4 Assumptions
To model the actual physics phenomena of the FSSW process is rather complicated.
51
a) Workpieces are assumed to be made of a deformable material (Al 6061-T6) that has
c) The workpieces and pin are assumed to experience frictional sliding contact described by
d) The tool and the backing anvil are considered rigid body that has translation, rotation and
f) The friction coefficient, µ is assumed to be a function of slip rate, contact pressure, and
surface temperature.
g) Initial temperatures for both workpieces, pin and anvil are assumed at 22 0C.
h) It is assumed that 100% of the dissipated energy caused by friction is transformed into
52
5.5 Boundary Conditions
Boundary conditions that are imposed on the current FE model are described in the
following paragraphs. Fig. 5. 4 depicts a schematic diagram of the boundary conditions. The
edges of the top and the bottom workpieces are restrained in X direction. The tool can only have
translation and rotation in Y-direction. The backing anvil is fixed in all degree of freedoms to
Heat convection coefficients, h on the top surface of the upper workpiece and the bottom
surface of lower workpiece are 30 W/m2-0C as used in Chao and Qi’s paper [31], with the
ambient temperature of 22 0C. In this research, a contact thermal gap conductance of 100,000
W/m2-0C [55] is introduced at the top and bottom workpieces interface to simulate the heat loss
through conduction between the two workpieces. It is noted that there is no data or theory to
predict precisely the heat loss through the bottom surface of the upper workpiece and the top
53
Fig. 5. 4: Schematic diagram of boundary conditions.
A friction model is one of the key input boundary conditions in finite element simulations
of FSSW process and it plays an important role in controlling the accuracy of necessary output
results predicted. Among the various friction models, the definition of which one is of higher
accuracy is still unknown and controversial. In the current FE model, friction behavior is
modeled using a default model in Abaqus/Explicit, which is Coulomb friction model, but the
Coulomb’s friction is defined as a function of slip rate, contact pressure, and surface
temperature.
In this model, the curve of friction coefficients varies with slip rate, contact pressure, and
surface temperature have been assumed based on experimental values of some metal presented in
[50], [51], and [40]. The friction coefficients dependence on slip rate, contact pressure, and
surface temperature used in this work are shown in Fig. 5. 5, Fig. 5. 6, and Fig. 5. 7, respectively.
54
Slip Rate (mm/sec.) versus Friction Coefficient
0.35
0.3
0.25
Friction Coefficient
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Slip Rate (mm/sec.)
Fig. 5. 5: Plot of friction coefficient versus slip rate (mm/sec.).
55
Friction Coefficient versus Pressure (Mpa)
0.35
0.3
0.25
Friction Coefficient
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Pressure (MPa)
Fig. 5. 6: Plot of friction coefficient versus contact pressure (MPa).
56
Friction Coefficient versus Temperature
0.35
0.3
0.25
Friction Coefficient
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Temperature (deg. C)
Aluminum alloy 6061-T6 was chosen as a material for workpieces. The main chemical
properties for Al 6061-T6, taken from Chao and Qi [31] are listed in Table 5. 1. The thermal
conductivity property, however, was found incorrect in the paper. To simulate the workpieces
material behavior in the analysis, a temperature and strain rate dependent material law was used
57
ε& pl T − Tref
m
σ y = [A + B( ε ) ]1 + C ln 1 −
pl n
5.1
ε& 0 Tmelt − Tref
where σ y is the yield stress, ε pl is the effective plastic strain, ε& pl is the effective plastic strain
rate, ε& 0 is the normalizing strain rate (typically, 1.0 /s). A, B, C, n, Tmelt, and m are material
constants, which are listed in Table 5. 2. Tref is the ambient temperature, which is 22 0C in this
case. This material model is a type of Mises plasticity model with analytical forms of the
hardening law and rate dependence. Moreover, it is suitable for high-strain-rate deformation of
many materials. Fig. 5. 8 shows stress strain curves for Johnson-Cook hardening at various
temperatures.
Table 5. 1: Temperature dependent material properties for Aluminum alloy 6061-T6 [31].
0
Temperature C 37.8 93.3 148.9 204.4 260 315.6 371.1 426.7
Thermal Cond. W/m0C 162 177 184 192 201 207 217 223
Heat Capacity J/Kg0C 945 978 1004 1028 1052 1078 1104 1133
Density Kg/m3 2685 2685 2667 2657 2657 2630 2630 2602
Young’s
GPa 68.54 66.19 63.09 59.16 53.99 47.48 40.34 31.72
Modulus
Yield Strength MPa 274.4 264.6 248.2 218.6 159.7 66.2 34.5 17.9
Thermal Exp. 10-6/0C 23.45 24.61 25.67 26.60 27.56 28.53 29.57 30.71
58
Stress Strain Curves for Johnson-Cook Work Hardening
400
350
300
250 T=100 C
Stress (MPa)
T=200 C
T=300 C
200
T=400 C
T=500 C
150
100
50
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Strain
The simulation of FSSW process uses the advantage of adaptive meshing offered in
element sets. In this case, the whole workpieces mesh is considered the domain of the adaptive
mesh. The adaptive mesh domain has sliding boundary regions at the top and the bottom of both
workpieces. In sliding boundary regions, the mesh is constrained to move with the material in
59
the direction normal to the boundary region, but it is fully unconstrained in the directions
For the model presented in this work, the remeshing is made after 10 increments and each
remeshing algorithm includes 3 mesh sweeps for optimizing the node positions. The calculation
60
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
plastic dissipation history, thermal response, plastic strain and material flow. The geometry and
the mesh used in the FE models were kept the same throughout this work.
Friction between the tool and the workpiece occurs at three tool surfaces, i.e., tip of the
pin, vertical side of the pin and tool shoulder. Fig. 6. 1 (a-c) shows three phases of friction
between the tool and the workpiece. The figure on the left illustrates the temperature profile, and
the plot on the right shows the frictional dissipation energy history.
At the initial stage, when the tool slightly comes in contact with the upper plate while
spinning, it is seen that the high temperature concentrates around the tip of the tool and heat
generation starts to develop (Fig. 6. 1 (a)). The temperature profile is also distributed uniformly
due to the heat conduction from the first plate to the second plate.
While spinning, the tool also moves downward and the pressure exerted from the tool
causes the first plate to deform slightly, as shown in Fig. 6. 1(b). This leads to less heat
conduction from the top plate to the bottom plate, which results in higher temperature profile in
the top plate. At this stage, the heat generation increases as the welding process advances.
61
As the tool keeps pressing downward, its shoulder contacts the deformed top plate and
more heat is generated through the friction between the shoulder and the workpiece (Fig. 6.
1(c)). At this phase, more heat conduction occurs between the plates since the two plates come
in contact again and more uniform temperature profile can be seen. Since the tool is defined as
an isothermal surface, the temperature profile on the tool is constant through out the analysis.
a) Phase 1, t=0.245 s.
b) Phase 2, t=0.945 s.
62
c) Phase 3, t=1.365 s.
Fig. 6. 1: Three stages of friction between the tool and the workpiece. Left: Temperature
profile, Right: Friction dissipation energy history.
The FSSW technique relies on the heat generated during the process to join the
workpieces together. There are three possible heat sources generated during FSSW process, i.e.,
friction work at the tool and top workpiece interface, friction work at the interface of top and
bottom workpiece, and plastic deformation of the workpiece material. In this work, the friction
and plastic works have been investigated using frictional energy dissipation and plastic energy
dissipation histories, respectively. The angular velocity and plunge rate were 3000 rpm and 1
mm/s, respectively. Table 6. 1 shows the summary of energy dissipation during FSSW process.
In the experiment, rotational speed and plunge rate were set at 3000 rpm and 2.5 mm/s,
respectively. The average energy generated by 10 mm diameter tool with shoulder at five
different plunge depths was 1.964 kJ. Based on the FE results shown in Table 6. 1, the total
63
energy dissipation at plunge depth of 1.505 mm is 1.519 kJ. The discrepancy between the two
results is due to the different thickness of the workpiece and plunge rate.
6.2.1 Heat Generation due to Friction Work at the Tool and Workpiece Interface
The simulation results show that the friction work at the tool and top workpiece interface
contributes the most heat to the welding process. The frictional energy contributes 96.84 % of
the total energy as shown in Fig. 6. 2. This high percentage of energy generation is expected
due to the presence of high differential velocities (slip rate) on the workpiece surface that caused
by high rotational speed and pressure from the tool have created. The peak slip rate as shown in
Fig. 6. 2 also shows that the frictional dissipation energy increases drastically after the
time reaches 0.9450 seconds. The increase of frictional energy is due to the additional friction
from the interface of the shoulder of the tool and the surface of the top workpiece.
64
Fig. 6. 2: Frictional dissipation energy history at the tool and workpiece interface.
65
6.2.2 Heat Generation due to Friction Work at the Top and Bottom Workpieces Interface
Based on the results in Table 6. 1, about 0.02 % of the total energy is due to frictional
force at the interface between the top and bottom workpieces. Even though the amount of
energy generated at this interface is almost negligible, the interface is important in FSSW
because the actual welding occurs here. Consequently, it is relevant to trace how much energy is
used at the interface and how this is affected by the process parameters.
Fig. 6. 4 shows frictional dissipation energy history at the top and bottom workpieces
interface is about 0.000375 kJ (375 mJ) at 1.505 seconds. The friction work at the interface
between the top and bottom workpieces gives the least contribution to the total heat generation
because the interface has very small relative motion due to friction as shown in Fig. 6. 5 and Fig.
6. 6. The maximum slip rates are 3.375 mm/s and 0.3985 mm/s on lower surface of the top
workpiece (Fig. 6. 5) and upper surface of the bottom workpiece (Fig. 6. 6), respectively.
66
Fig. 6. 4: Frictional dissipation energy at the top and bottom workpiece interface.
67
Fig. 6. 6: Slip rate distribution on upper surface of the bottom workpiece.
As shown in Fig. 6. 7, plastic dissipation energy in the material is 47.8 kJoule, which is
about 3.14 % of the total energy dissipated. This energy is due to the presence of internal
friction forces, which tends to resist the motion of the material. As can be seen from the figure,
the plastic dissipation energy increases drastically after 1.3 seconds. This is because, in addition
to the plastic straining process due to the pin penetration, a large plastic deformation occurs
when the shoulder of the tool touches the surface of the workpiece at the end of the cycle time.
68
Fig. 6. 7: Plastic dissipation energy history.
The dependence of friction coefficient on surface temperature, slip rate, and contact
pressure are investigated. In this work, the same FE models were run with three different
friction coefficient dependencies by trial and error until the peak temperatures were obtained.
Rotational speed and plunge rate of the welding tool are set to be 3000 rpm and 1 mm/second,
respectively.
The frictional and plastic dissipation energy history curves are compared after 1.435
second as shown in Fig. 6. 8. The maximum frictional dissipation energy are about 1.27 kJ, 1.20
kJ, and 1.15 kJ for friction coefficient dependence of contact pressure, slip rate and temperature,
69
respectively, which are within 8.4 % difference. Appendix B-2 shows the temperature profiles
70
a) Contact pressure dependence b) Slip rate dependence c) Surface temperature dependence
Fig. 6. 8: Frictional (dotted line) and plastic (solid line) dissipation energies history for various friction coefficient dependences.
71
6.4 Effect of Welding Tool Plunge Rate
Parametric studies have been conducted to determine the effect of tool penetrating speed
on frictional and plastic dissipation energies. Three different tool speeds; 1 mm/s, 5 mm/s, and
10 mm/s, are modeled with contact pressure friction coefficient dependent. The welding tool
rotational speed was set at 3000 rpm. The targeted welding tool displacement was 1.505 mm.
Fig. 6. 9 shows frictional and plastic dissipation energy history for three different
welding speeds. Based on the curves, frictional and plastic dissipation energy increases as the
tool velocity decreases. The frictional dissipation energy of 5 mm/s plunge rate reduces to about
29 % of the 1 mm/second frictional dissipation energy. The same decreasing trend is observed
with 10 mm/s plunge rate (14 % decrement). This is because the slower the tool velocity, the
more time it spends to spin on the workpiece thus more energy is produced. The plastic
dissipation energy also follows the same trend of frictional dissipation energy curves. In short,
the slower the penetrate speed, the higher the plastic dissipation energy. Table 6. 2 summarizes
the frictional and plastic dissipation energy for different tool plunge rates.
72
Tool Frictional Dissipation Energy Plastic Dissipation Energy
Velocity
(mm/s)
1.0
5.0
10.0
73
Table 6. 2: Summary of friction and plastic dissipation energies for different tool’s plunge rate.
A parametric study has also been conducted for various rotational speeds. Three
different welding tool rotational speeds, which are 3000 rpm, 2500 rpm, and 2000 rpm, have
been run on the FE models in order to study the effect of welding tool’s rotational speed on heat
generation. Plunge rate was set to be 1 mm/s. The model used friction coefficient dependence
Fig. 6. 10(a-c) show frictional dissipation energy histories for 3000 rpm, 2500 rpm, and
2000 rpm welding tool rotational speed, respectively. Based on the results, the higher the
rotational speed is, the higher the dissipation energy. The frictional dissipation energy is
reduced by about 8.4 % when the rotational speed is reduced from 3000 rpm to 2500 rpm and
reduced by about 19.2 % when it is reduced from 3000 rpm to 2000 rpm. This is because higher
rotational speed will result in higher relative velocity of the material, consequently higher energy
will be produced. Table 6. 3 summarizes frictional dissipation energy for different tool’s
rotational speeds.
74
a) 3000 rpm b) 2500 rpm c) 2000 rpm
75
Table 6. 3: Summary of frictional dissipation energy for different tool’s rotational speeds.
(rpm) (kJ) %
Thermal response was studied using friction coefficient contact pressure dependent. Fig.
6. 11(a-g) shows the temperature fields at various times. Based on the results, the maximum
nodal temperature is 546.40C after 1.505 seconds when the welding tool penetrates 1.505 mm
into the workpieces. The peak temperature is consistent with the theory reported in Su, et al
[44], which suggested that the peak temperature is between 0.93Ts and 0.97Ts (Ts is the solidus
temperature of Al 6061-T6).
76
a) Time = 0.0 sec., nodal temperature = 22.000C.
77
d) Time = 0.525 sec., nodal temperature = 139.90C.
78
g) Time = 1.050 sec., nodal temperature = 264.90C.
79
j) Time = 1.505 sec., nodal temperature = 546.40C
measured perpendicular from the center of the workpiece to the edge. At the tip of the tool, the
temperatures of both plates are the same, which is about 485 0C. The peak temperature of the
top surface of the upper plate is almost constant at the interface of tool’s shoulder and
workpiece, which is within the radius between 1.5 mm and 5 mm away from the center of the
workpiece. Then, the temperature starts to decease to about 150 0C at the edge of the workpiece.
At the top surface of the bottom plate, lower peak temperature is observed due to
conduction heat transfer from the upper plate. Beginning from 6 mm away from the center of
the workpiece towards to the edge, the temperature of the top surface of the upper plate and the
80
Fig. 6. 12: Plot of temperatures versus distance away from the center of the tool.
Fig. 6. 13 shows the comparison of temperature history between the FE simulation results and
the experimental results, which reported by Su et al. [44]. Both analyses were performed on Al
6061-T6 material using 3000 rpm and 2.5 mm/s of rotational speed and plunge rate, respectively.
The tool geometry and the thickness of the workpiece, however, were different. Based on the
results, the FE simulation shows the maximum tool temperature is 514.3 0C and the experimental
shows peak temperature at the tip of the tool is about 542 0C and. From this, it can be concluded
that both results are fairly in agreement with each other, which is about 5.1 % different.
81
a) FE simulation result b) Experimental result [44]
Fig. 6. 13: Experimental versus FE simulation results of temperature history at the tip of welding tool.
82
6.7 Plastic Strain
Fig. 6. 14 shows an equivalent plastic strain as a function of distance from the center of
the tool. The equivalent plastic strain at the top surface of the upper plate shows an increasing
trend within 1.5 mm distance. This peak equivalent plastic strain region is the area under the
pin, where high pressure and torque generate tremendous heat and plasticize the materials.
Between the distance of 1.5 mm and 5 mm from the center of the workpiece, the equivalent
plastic strain drops drastically. This region is the area under the tool’s shoulder. The equivalent
plastic strain becomes zero at the distance of 5 mm from the center of the workpiece towards the
edge. The equivalent plastic strain at the top surface of the bottom plate is relatively small in the
region under the pin and becomes zero towards the edge.
225
200
175
PEEQ-TOP
Equivalent Plastic Strain
PEEQ-BOTT
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
-25
Distance from the Tool (mm)
Fig. 6. 14: Plot of equivalent plastic strains versus distance away from the center of the tool.
83
6.8 Material Flow
Material flow during FSSW process has been investigated. Due to disk space constraint
that requires a lot of spaces to store large output database (.odb) file, the simulation time has
been cut short to 0.8 seconds. The rotational speed and plunge rate for this study are 3000 rpm
Three tracer particles, which are set of nodes in the adaptive mesh domain, are defined in
the FE model as shown in Fig. 6. 15. Tracer particle “A” is set to be underneath the pin, tracer
particle “B” is located right below the shoulder and tracer particle “C" is located slightly away
Based on Fig. 6. 16, particle “A” moves in all directions. Particles “B” and “C”,
however, move quite significantly in Z direction, and very small displacement in X and Y
direction. Since a sliding boundary region has been defined on the top surface of the workpiece,
the material is constrained to move with the mesh in the direction normal to the boundary region.
The material, however, is completely unconstrained in the directions tangential to the boundary
region.
84
a) Tracer particle “A” b) Tracer particle “B” c) Tracer particle “C”
85
CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION OF FRICTION PHENOMENA AND HEAT
includes several aspects such as the friction mechanism, friction coefficient and friction heating.
7.1 Introduction
In general, two types of friction occur during FSSW process, namely contact friction and
internal friction. The former is considered more dominant in terms of energy consumption, since
the interface experiences large pressures of contact and sliding velocity from the tool motion.
Internal friction is less dominant in terms of energy consumption as shown in the simulation
results. Contact friction in FSSW takes place at the tool and the workpiece interface and the
The friction between the welding tool and the workpiece is very important during FSSW
process as it contributes most of the heat during the process. In FSSW, the friction between
rotating tool and deformable workpiece can be divided into three stages as depicted in Fig. 7. 1,
i.e., first stage, when the tip of the pin and workpiece come in contact; second phase, when the
86
pin penetrates into the workpiece; third phase, when the shoulder touches and spins on the
workpiece.
Fig. 7. 1: Schematic representation of friction between the tool and the workpiece.
Friction in FSSW process begins when the tool with high rotational speed plunges into
the workpiece. The load from the tool produces heat and contact pressure at the interface of the
tool and the workpiece, which in turn produces adhesive bonding between the contacting
surfaces. These adhesive bonds drag the surface of the workpiece, but relative sliding occurs at
the interface due to velocity differential. Fig. 7. 2 shows the direction of the friction force (Ff),
87
Fig. 7. 2: Schematic representation relative velocity of the material and the tool (FN is the
normal force, Vmat is the material velocity, Vtool is the tool velocity).
As the tool moves further down, the contact friction between the vertical pin surface and
the workpiece takes place. At this stage, the material around the pin becomes soft and the
bonding between material grains becomes loose due to heat. Consequently, the material moves
in a circular direction around the tool. As the material underneath the pin presses down, the
material around the pin moves up to the surface. This phase generates most of the energy
because the contact and the internal friction occur during the full cycle time.
Sliding friction takes place when the tool’s shoulder contacts the workpiece. Similar to
the friction between the tool tip and the workpiece, asperities at this interface deform because of
the pressure distribution from the shoulder. Although the shoulder has greatest radius, and thus
greatest velocity, the tendency to generate more heat is constrained by the short period of sliding
time. Therefore, the heat generated due to friction is relatively small since the shoulder only
comes in contact with the workpiece at the end of the welding cycle.
88
The temperature that develops due to friction works softens the material in proximity and
reduces the strength of the material. Consequently, the friction force between the tool and the
The friction at the interface of the top and the bottom workpieces is insignificant in terms
of heat generation, as compared to the friction at the tool and workpiece interface. This was
shown by the FE simulation results. Since both workpieces are clamped together, the presence
of tangential reaction force at this interface is relatively small. Sliding friction may occur at this
interface due to relative motion between the top and bottom surfaces of the joint. The interface,
however, is very important since the bonding of the materials occurs at this interface. When the
tool shoulder contacts the workpiece and penetrates slightly into the workpiece, a strong
compressive forging pressure is generated. As a result, a solid state bond is formed at the
Physically, when a solid material is strained, energy, associated with the work done by
the straining process is produced. This energy, in the form of heat is due to the presence of
internal friction forces, which tend to resist the motion of the material.
89
When the tool rotates under pressure on the workpiece, the bonding between the
workpiece material breaks and deforms plastically. Microscopically, this plastic deformation is a
consequence of dislocations. According to the dislocation theory, atoms in a grain boundary slip
when there is crystallographic defect that produces weak points in the bonds between atoms
within crystal structure. The forces that oppose the grains to slip are called internal friction.
Therefore, the work done by the internal friction dissipates energy in the form of heat. In
general, the heat generation due to plastic deformation in FSSW is relatively small as compared
to heat generation from the friction work between the tool and the workpiece. Fig. 7. 3 depicts
The internal friction in a solid can be measured using two methods, i.e., strain-stress
curve and decay of vibration wave. A quantity, known as damping capacity, which is a ratio of
90
the energy lost per cycle due to friction to the total strain energy of the material can be computed
from the strain-stress curve. In the second method, the energy loss can be measured by
Because of its simplicity, the Coulomb’s friction model is used to described sliding
friction between asperities surfaces. As shown in the FE simulation analysis, friction during
FSSW varies with contact pressure, slip rate and surface temperature. Contact pressure can
influence the near surface crystallographic orientation, which affects the mechanical properties
(like shear strength). This in turn promotes easier shear. When the material of the workpiece is
softened by the heat, the relative velocity (slip rate) increases and consequently, alters the shear
strength of the material. The shear strength of the workpiece depends on the temperature.
Therefore, the friction coefficient is expected to decrease as a function of contact pressure, slip
Heat generation and rising surface temperatures are generally associated with friction that
converts kinetic energy into thermal energy. The energy generated is the result of the tangential
reaction force acting over a distance. In general, the energy from friction work is expressed as
91
L
E = µ k ∫ FN ( x )dx 7.1
0
where, E is the energy, µk is the kinetic friction, FN is the friction force, and x is the distance of
an object moved. According to Blau [40], about 90-95% of the energy due to friction is
transformed into heat and about 5-10 % of the remaining energy is used to deform the material
In FSSW process, the mechanical interaction, which is due to velocity difference between
the rotating tool and the stationary workpiece, produces heat by friction work. Friction work at
the tool and the workpiece interface can be grouped into three categories based on tool geometry
as shown in Fig. 7. 4. Each contact surface experiences sliding friction during FSSW process.
The total heat produced due to friction work at the tool and the workpiece interface is the
summation of the heat generated at the contact interface of the shoulder, the tip of the pin as well
as the side of the pin. For simplicity in the formulations, the shoulder and the tip of the pin are
assumed flat.
First, let us consider heat generation at the shoulder. The heat generation can be
computed from torque formula. The total torque at the shoulder interface can be expressed as
Ro Ro
M s = ∫ dM = ∫ ( τ contact r )( 2πr )dr
Ri Ri 7.2
where, Ms is the torque at the shoulder interface, τ contact is the contact shear stress, r is the
distance from the tool axis, and Ro and Ri is the radii of the shoulder and the pin, respectively.
92
2
Ms = πτ contact ( Ro3 − Ri3 ) 7.3
3
P = Mω 7.4
where, ω = 2πn , n is the angular velocity of the tool (radians per second).
Substituting equation 7.3 and ω = 2πn into equation 7.4, the heat rate at the shoulder, P1 can be
written as
4 2
Ps = π τ contact n( Ro3 − Ri3 ) 7.5
3
The heat generated by the friction work at the tip of the pin and the workpiece interface, Pp can
4 2
Pp = π τ contact nRi3 7.6
3
L
M v = ∫ ( τ contact Ri )( 2πRi )dy
0 7.7
M v = 2τ contact πLRi2
7.8
93
Substituting equation 7.8 into equation 7.4 and ω = 2πn , the heat rate at vertical pin surface, Pv
is obtained as
4 2 4
P= π τ contact n( Ro3 − Ri3 ) + π 2τ contact nRi3 + 4π 2τ contact nLRi2 7.10
3 3
4 2
P= π τ contact n( Ro3 + 3 LRi2 ) 7.11
3
4 2
P= π µσn( Ro3 + 3 LRi2 ) 7.12
3
In FSSW process, the heat rate equation due to plastic deformation can be expresses as
where, Ppl is the heat rate due to plastic deformation, τ is the shear stress, and ε& pl is the plastic
straining rate.
94
Fig. 7. 4: Schematic representation of tool interfaces that generate heat.
95
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
8.1 Conclusions
developed using an Abaqus/Explicit code. The following conclusions can be drawn from this
work.
a) The trend of friction coefficients as a function of contact pressure, slip rate, and surface
temperature has been predicted. The simulation results show that the frictional
dissipation energies for the three friction coefficient dependencies are very close, which
b) The peak temperature obtained from the simulation, which is equivalent to 0.95Ts (Ts is
solidous temperature of Al 6061-T6) is consistent with the theory as reported by Su, et al.
[1].
c) The affect of plunge rate on frictional dissipation energy is also noted. The results
indicate that the lower the plunge rate, the higher the energy. The frictional dissipation
energy for a plunge rate of 5 mm/s reduces to about 29 % of the 1 mm/s frictional
dissipation energy. The same decreasing trend is observed with 10 mm/s plunge rate (14
% decrement).
d) The simulation results also show a significant affect of welding tool’s rotational speed on
frictional dissipation energy. In general, lower rotational speed yields lower frictional
96
dissipation energy. The frictional dissipation energy is reduced by about 8.4 % when the
rotational speed is reduced from 3000 rpm to 2500 rpm and reduced by about 19.2 %
e) Friction work at the interface of the tool and the workpiece generates the most energy,
which is about 96.84 %, for the FSSW process. The rest of the energies come from the
friction work between the plates (0.02 %) and the plastic deformation (3.14 %).
f) The temperature underneath the tool is almost constant at 514.3 0C and gradually
g) The plastic strain is at the highest point underneath the tool surface and zero at the
h) The material particles can be traced in the adaptive mesh domain. In general, the particle
underneath the pin move more vigorously as compared the particle at the interface with
friction in FSSW can be divided into two categories, i.e., contact pressure and material internal
friction. The contact friction occurs at two interfaces, which are the interface of the tool and the
workpiece and the top and the bottom workpieces interface. The former experiences the most
friction, which is indicated by the most heat generation during the welding process.
97
According to the FE simulation results, the heat generation due to frictional energy is
about 96.84 % of the total energy produced. Based on the parametric studies on rotational
speeds and plunge rates, the results also show that higher rotational speed and slower plunge rate
yield higher generated heat. Therefore, by choosing the right rotational speed and plunge rate,
A literature survey has been conducted on friction coefficient used to assess friction
between the tool and the workpiece. The friction coefficients, which depend on contact pressure,
temperature and slip rate have been assumed and applied to the same FE model. The FE results
show that the temperature history for friction coefficient temperature dependent is about 5.1 %
different compared to the experimental study done by Gerlich et al. [1]. The dissipation energy
history curves for different friction coefficient (slip rate, contact pressure and temperature
dependant) produce almost the same results. Therefore, the assumed friction coefficient curves
Although the contact friction between the workpieces interface is insignificant in terms of
heat generation, the interface is very important because the physical bonding between the two
across the interface at atomic level, which is due to heat and pressure distributions. Therefore,
the research area in FE simulation of FSSW can be extended in a subject of material flow at the
bonding interface.
98
A FE code, namely LS DYNA is capable of simulating the material flow. The
methodology, which uses LS-DYNA has been developed by Zhao [25] in her Ph.D dissertation.
In her work, a “moving mesh” scheme has been deployed with ALE formulations in order to
99
NOMENCLATURES
D ji Rate of deformation
E Energy
F Applied force
Ff Friction force
FN Normal force
H Material hardness
M Moment
P Power
100
Pp Power generated at the pin
Q Heat generation
T Temperature
c damping coefficient
101
cp Material specific heat
k stiffness coefficient
u displacement
v Velocity
102
Ff Friction force vector
K Stiffness matrix
M Mass matrix
&
T Derivative of temperature
u
&& Nodal acceleration vector
u displacement vector
σ Contact pressure
σ ij Cauchy stress
103
σy Yield stress
ε pl
Effective plastic strain
µ Friction coefficient
ρ Mass density
τ Shear stress
τy Shear strength
∆t Time increment
∆V Relative velocity
104
ABBREVIATIONS
FE Finite element
105
REFERENCES
[1] Gerlich, A., Su, P., and North, T., 2005, “Peak Temperatures and Microstructures in
Aluminum and Magnesium Alloy Friction Stir Spot Welds”, Science and Technology of
[2] Thomas, M., Nicholas, J., Needham, J., Murch, M., Templesmith, P., and Dawes, C.,
1991, Friction Stir Welding, GB Patent Application No. 9125978.8 Dec. 1991, US Patent
No. 5460317.
[3] Kimapong, K., and Watanabe, T., 2004, “Friction Stir Welding of Aluminum Alloy to
[5] Thomas, W., and Dolby, R., 2002, “Friction Stir Welding Developments”, Proceeding of
the 6th International Trends in Welding Research Conference Proceeding, Pine Mountain,
GA.
[6] Campbell, G., and Stotler, T., 1999, “Friction Stir Welding of Armor Grade Aluminum
[7] Lienert, T., Stellwag, W., Grimmett, B., and Warke, R., 2003, “Friction Stir Welding
[8] Reynolds, A., Tang, W., Posada, M., and DeLoach, J., 2003, “Friction Stir Welding of
DH36 Steel”, Science and Technology of Welding and Joining, vol. 8, p. 455-460.
106
[9] McLean, A., Powell, G., Brown, I., and Linton, V., 2003, “Friction Stir Welding of
[ 1 0 ] Li, Y., Trillo, E., and Murr, L., 2000, “Friction Stir Welding of Aluminum Alloy 2024 to
[ 1 1 ] Dawes, J., and Thomas, M., 1996, “Friction Stir Process Welds Aluminum Alloys”,
[ 1 2 ] Cederqvist, L. and Reynolds, A., 2001, “Factors Affecting the Properties of Friction Stir
Welded Aluminum Lap Joints”, Welding Journal Research Supplement, vol. 80, p. 281-
287.
[ 1 3 ] Donne, C., Lima, E., Wegener, J., Pyzalla,A., and Buslaps, T., 2001, “Investigation on
Residual Stresses in Friction Stir Welds”, Proceeding of the 3rd International Symposium
[ 1 4 ] Feng, Z., and David, S., 2004, “Overview Friction Stir Welding & Processing R&D at
[ 1 5 ] Hancock, R., 2004, "Friction welding of Aluminum Cuts Energy Cost by 99%," Welding
[ 1 6 ] Pan, T., Joaquin, A., Wilkosz, E., Reatherford, L., Nicholson, J., Feng, Z., and Santella,
M., 2004, “Spot Friction Welding for Sheet Aluminum Joining”, 5th International
Symposium on Friction Stir Welding, P. Threadgill, ed., The Welding Institute, Metz,
107
[ 1 7 ] Retrieved from http://www.frictionstirlink.com.
[ 1 9 ] Mitlin, D., Radmilovic, V., Pan, T., Feng, Z., Santella, M., 2005, “Structure-Properties
Relations in Spot Friction Welded 6111 T4 Aluminum”, TMS 2005 Annual Meeeting,
San Francisco.
[ 2 0 ] Tang, W., Guo, X., McClure, J., and Murr, L., 1998, “Heat Input and Temperature
[ 2 1 ] Dickerson, T., Shi, Q., and Shercliff, H., 2003, “Heat Flow into Friction Stir Welding
Tools”, Proceeding of the 4th International Symposium on Friction Stir Welding, Park
City, Utah.
[ 2 2 ] Chao, Y., Qi, X., and Tang, W., 2003, “Heat Transfer in Friction Stir Welding-
Experimental and Numerical Studies”, Transactions of the ASME, vol. 125, p. 138-145.
[ 2 3 ] Colegrove, P., and Shercliff, H., 2003, “2-Dimensional CFD Modeling of Flow Round
[ 2 4 ] Hyoe, T., Colegrove, P., and Shercliff, H., 2003, “Thermal and Microstructure Modeling
in Thick Plate Aluminum Alloy 7075 Friction Stir Welds”, Friction Stir Welding and
Processing, p. 33-41.
[ 2 5 ] Zhao, H., 2005, “Friction Stir Welding (FSW) Simulation using an Arbitrary Lagrangian-
Eulerian (ALE) Moving Mesh Approach”, PhD Dissertation, West Virginia University.
108
[ 2 6 ] Schmidt, H., and Hattel, J., 2005, “A Local Model for the Thermomechanical Conditions
Engineering, p. 77-93.
[ 2 7 ] Askari, A., Silling, S., London, B., and Mahoney, M., 2001, “Modeling and Analysis of
Friction Stir Welding Processes”, Friction Stir Welding and Processing, p. 43-54.
[ 2 8 ] Tartakovsky, A., Grant, G., Sun, X., and Khalel, M., 2006, “Modeling of Friction Stir
[ 2 9 ] Ulysse, P., 2002, “Three-Dimensional Modeling of the Friction Stir Welding Process”,
[ 3 0 ] Nandan, R., Roy, G., and Debroy, T., 2006, “Numerical Simulation of Three-
Dimensional Heat Transfer and Plastic Flow During Friction Stir Welding”,
[ 3 1 ] Chao, Y., and Qi, X., 1998, “Thermal and Thermo-Mechanical Modeling of Friction Stir
[ 3 2 ] Frigaard, Ø., Grong, Ø., and Midling, O., 1998 “Modelling of Heat Flow Phenomena in
[ 3 3 ] Song, M., and Kovacevic, R., 2003, “Thermal Modeling of Friction Stir Welding in a
Moving Coordinate System and Its Validation”, International Journal of Machine Tools
109
[ 3 4 ] Gould, J., and Feng, Z., 1998, “Heat Flow Model for Friction Stir Welding of Aluminum
[ 3 5 ] Schmidt, H., Hattel, J., and Wert, J., 2004, “An Analytical Model for the Heat Generation
Engineering, p. 143-157.
[ 3 6 ] Song, M., and Kovacevic, R., 2003, “Numerical and Experimental Study of the Heat
Transfer Process in Friction Stir Welding”, Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, vol. 217, p. 73-85.
[ 3 7 ] Xu, S., Deng, X., Reynolds, P., and Seidel, T., 2001, “Finite Element Simulation of
Material Flow in Friction Stir Welding”, Science and Technology of Welding and
[ 3 8 ] Chen, C., and Kovacevic, R., 2003, “Finite Element Modeling of Friction Stir Welding –
Manufacture, p. 1319-1326.
[ 3 9 ] Song, M., Kovacevic, R., Ouyang, J., and Valant, M., 2002, “A Detailed Three-
Dimensional Transient Heat Transfer Model for Friction Stir Welding”, Proceeding of
the 6th International Trends in Welding Research Conference Proceeding, Pine Mountain,
GA.
[ 4 0 ] Blau, P., 1996, Friction Science and Technology, Marcel Dekker, Inc.
[ 4 1 ] Lin, P., Lin, S., Pan J., Pan, T., Nicholson, L., and Garman, M., 2004, “Microstructures
110
[ 4 2 ] Feng, Z., Santella, M., David, S., Steel, R., Packer, S., Pan, T., Kuo, M., and Bhatnagar,
R., 2005, “Friction Stir Spot Welding of Advanced High-Strength Steels-A Feasibility
[ 4 3 ] Sakano, R., Murakami, K., Yamashita, K., Hyoe, T., Fujimoto, M., Inuzuka, M., Nagao,
Y., and Kashiki, H., 2001, “Development of Spot FSW Robot System for Automobile
[ 4 4 ] Su, P., Gerlich, A., North, T., and Bendzsak, G., 2006, “Energy Utilization and
Generation during Friction Stir Spot Welding”, Science and Technology of Welding and
Joining, p. 163-169.
[ 4 5 ] Awang, M., Mucino, V., Feng, Z., and David, S., 2006, “Thermo-Mechanical Modeling
of Friction Stir Spot Welding (FSSW)” Proceeding of the 2006 SAE World Congress,
Michigan.
[ 4 6 ] Kakarla, S., Muci-Kuchler, K., Arbegast, W., and Allen, C., 2005, “Three- Dimensional
Finite Element Model of the Friction Stir Welding Process”, Proceeding of Friction Stir
Constitutive Equations for Friction, Wear and Frictional Heat”, Wear, vol. 114, p. 199-
221.
111
[ 4 9 ] Zmitrowicz, A., 2006, “Models of kinematics dependent anisotropic and heterogeneous
[ 5 0 ] Male, A., and Cockcroft, M., 1945, “A Method for the Determination of the Coefficient
[ 5 1 ] Popov, V., Psakhie, S., Shilko, E., Dmitriev, A., Knothe, K., Bucher, F., and Ertz, M.,
[ 5 2 ] Abaqus/Explicit User’s Manual, 2004, Hibbit, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc., version 6.5.
[ 5 3 ] Getting Started with Abaqus/Explicit, 2004, Hibbit, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc., version
6.5.
[ 5 4 ] Belytschko, T., Liu, W., and Moran, B., 2000, Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua
[ 5 5 ] Khandkar, M., Khan, J., and Reynolds, A., 2002, “Input Torque Based Thermal Model of
Friction Stir Welding of Al-6061”, Proceeding of the 6th International Trends in Welding
[ 5 6 ] Johnson, G., and Cook, W., 1983, “A Constitutive Model and Data for Metals Subjected
to Large Strains, High Strain Rates and High Temperatures”, Proceeding of the 7th Int.
[ 5 7 ] Adibi-Sedeh, A., Madhavan, V., and Bahr, B., 2003, “Extension of Oxley’s Analysis of
112
APPENDIX A
Others Other
Weight % Al Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Cr Zn Ti
each s total
Bal 0.40- 0.70 0.15- 0.15 0.80- 0.04- 0.25 0.15 0.05 0.15
6061
0.80 max 0.40 1.20 0.35 max max max
113
APPENDIX B
This appendix lists the Abaqus/Explicit input file used throughout this dissertation. Some lines
such as list of nodes and elements have been taken out due to space constraint.
*Heading
*Part, name=anvil
*End Part
*Part, name=pin
*End Part
*Part, name=workpiece-bot
*End Part
*Part, name=workpiece-top
*End Part
**
114
** ASSEMBLY
**
*Assembly, name=Assembly
**
*Node
*Element, type=C3D8RT
115
.
1, 64736, 1
1, 55098, 1
1, 55098, 1
** Section: wp1
1.,
*End Instance
**
116
*Node
*Element, type=C3D8RT
1, 64736, 1
1, 55098, 1
117
** Region: (wp2:Picked), (Controls:EC-1)
1, 55098, 1
** Section: wp2
1.,
*End Instance
**
0., 1., 0.
** Region: (capacitance:Picked)
1, 1
1000.,
*Node
118
1, 0., 0., 0.
1,
LINE, 0., 5.
LINE, 5., 5.
LINE, 5., 2.
*End Instance
**
119
*Instance, name=anvil-1, part=anvil
0., -1., 0.
** Region: (capacitance:Picked)
1, 1
1000.,
*Node
1, 0., 0., 0.
1,
START, 0., 0.
LINE, 6.75, 0.
120
*Rigid Body, ref node=anvil-1-RefPt_, analytical surface=sur-anvil, isothermal=YES
*End Instance
1,
1, 64736, 1
1, 64736, 1
1, 55098, 1
1, 55098, 1
1,
121
.
19724, 19725, 19726, 19727, 19728, 19729, 19730, 19731, 19732, 19733, 19734, 19735, 19736
50838, 50839, 50840, 50841, 50842, 50843, 50844, 50845, 50846, 50847, 50848, 50849, 50850
55011, 55012, 55013, 55014, 55015, 55016, 55017, 55018, 55019, 55020, 55021, 55022, 55023
19724, 19725, 19726, 19727, 19728, 19729, 19730, 19731, 19732, 19733, 19734, 19735, 19736
122
*Elset, elset=edge-top, instance=workpiece-top-1
50838, 50839, 50840, 50841, 50842, 50843, 50844, 50845, 50846, 50847, 50848, 50849, 50850
55011, 55012, 55013, 55014, 55015, 55016, 55017, 55018, 55019, 55020, 55021, 55022, 55023
42296, 50754, 1
54375, 55098, 1
_wpwp-bottom_S1, S1
_wpwp-bottom_S2, S2
1, 8459, 1
123
50755, 51478, 1
_wpconv-bot_S2, S2
_wpconv-bot_S1, S1
42296, 50754, 1
54375, 55098, 1
_wpconv-top_S1, S1
_wpconv-top_S2, S2
50854, 50855, 50856, 50857, 50858, 50859, 50860, 50861, 50862, 50863, 50864, 50865, 50866
124
55012, 55013, 55014, 55015, 55016, 55017, 55018, 55019, 55020, 55021, 55022, 55023
50838, 50839, 50840, 50841, 50842, 50843, 50844, 50845, 50846, 50847, 50848, 50849, 50850
54996, 54997, 54998, 54999, 55000, 55001, 55002, 55003, 55004, 55005, 55006, 55007, 55008
_bot-edge_S5, S5
_bot-edge_S4, S4
50854, 50855, 50856, 50857, 50858, 50859, 50860, 50861, 50862, 50863, 50864, 50865, 50866
55012, 55013, 55014, 55015, 55016, 55017, 55018, 55019, 55020, 55021, 55022, 55023
125
*Elset, elset=_top-edge_S4, internal, instance=workpiece-top-1
50838, 50839, 50840, 50841, 50842, 50843, 50844, 50845, 50846, 50847, 50848, 50849, 50850
54996, 54997, 54998, 54999, 55000, 55001, 55002, 55003, 55004, 55005, 55006, 55007, 55008
_top-edge_S5, S5
_top-edge_S4, S4
1, 8459, 1
50755, 51478, 1
_wpwp-top_S2, S2
_wpwp-top_S1, S1
126
*End Assembly
1, 1, 1
0., 1, 1.425, 1.
*Material, name=Material-wp
*Conductivity
162, -17.8
223, 426.7
127
*Density
2.713e-09, -17.8
2.602e-09, 426.7
*Elastic
*Expansion, zero=22
2.194e-05, -17.8
128
.
3.071e-05, 426.7
0.9,
*Plastic,Hardening=Johnson Cook
0.002 , 1
*Specific Heat
9.04e+08, -17.8
1.133e+09, 426.7
**
*Boundary
129
anvil-ref, ENCASTRE
*Boundary
pin-ref, 1, 1
pin-ref, 2, 2
pin-ref, 3, 3
pin-ref, 4, 4
pin-ref, 5, 5
pin-ref, 6, 6
edge-top,1,1
edge-bot,1,1
workpiece-bot-1.wp-bot, 22.
workpiece-top-1.wp-top, 22.
pin-ref,22
anvil-ref,22
130
*Step, name=Step-1
, 1.425
*Bulk Viscosity
0.06, 1.2
*Boundary, op=NEW
anvil-ref, ENCASTRE
pin-ref, 1, 1
pin-ref, 3, 3
pin-ref, 4, 4
pin-ref, 6, 6
edge-top,1,1
edge-bot,1,1
131
**boundary,op=new,amplitude=constant
**pin-ref,11,11,22
**anvil-ref,11,11,22
pin-ref, 2, 2, 1.
pin-ref, 5, 5, 1.
predictor=PREVIOUS
1,0, 0.
** INTERACTION PROPERTIES
**
*Friction
132
.
*Gap Conductance
1000, 0
0,0.3
1.,0.9
*Gap Conductance
1000, 0
0,0.3
*friction
0.42
1., 0.9
133
*Contact Pair,interaction=contact-wpwp,mechanical constraint=kinematic
wpwp-top, wpwp-bottom
anvil-1.sur-anvil, wpconv-bot
pin-1.sur-pin, wpconv-top
*Sfilm, amplitude=constant,op=new
wpconv-top, f, 22,0.03
wpconv-bot, f, 22,0.03
top-edge,f,22,0.03
bot-edge,f,22,0.03
*cfilm, amplitude=constant,op=new
pin-ref,1,22,0.03
anvil-ref,1,22,0.03
**
** OUTPUT REQUESTS
134
**
*Node Output
*Contact Output
CSTRESS, cforce,fslip,fslipr
*Output, history
RM2, RM3
*End Step
135