Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Optics & Laser Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/optlastec

Laser beam welding of dissimilar ferritic/martensitic stainless steels

in a butt joint configuration
M.M.A. Khan n, L. Romoli, G. Dini
Department of Mechanical, Nuclear and Production Engineering, University of Pisa, Pisa 56126, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: This paper investigates laser beam welding of dissimilar AISI430F and AISI440C stainless steels.
Received 13 August 2012 A combined welding and pre-and-postweld treatment technique was developed and used successfully
Received in revised form to avoid micro-crack formation. This paper also examined the effects of laser welding parameters and
10 November 2012
line energy on weld bead geometry and tried to obtain an optimized laser-welded joint using a full
Accepted 17 December 2012
Available online 24 January 2013
factorial design of experiment technique. The models developed were used to find optimal parameters
for the desired geometric criteria. All the bead characteristics varied positively as laser power increased
Keywords: or welding speed decreased. Penetration size factor decreased rapidly due to keyhole formation for line
Laser-welding energy input in the range of 15–20 kJ/m. Laser power of 790–810 W and welding speed of 3.6–4.0
Steels
m/min were the optimal parameters providing an excellent welded component. Whatever the
Butt joint
optimization criteria, beam incident angle was around its limiting value of 151 to achieve optimal
geometrical features of the weld.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and procedure, cooling rate depends only on weld preheat

Laser welding with high power density, high degree of auto-
mation and high production rate is extremely advantageous in
industrial applications as stated in [1]. Joints between dissimilar
metals are particularly common in components used in the
automotive, power generation, chemical, petrochemical, nuclear
and electronics industries as described in [2]. The ability to use
different metals and alloys in a product provides the designer and
production engineer with greater flexibility, and often results in
technical and economic advantages over components manufac-
tured from a single material.
Welding of metals and alloys is an experienced subject,
dissimilar welding represents a major scientific and technical
challenge. Emerging new technologies increasingly require dis-
similar metals and alloys to be joined. Most metals and alloys are
very weldable either in conduction or keyhole modes. Two factors
most important to weldability are hardenability and susceptibil-
ity of the hardened structure to cracking. Hardenability is related
to the cooling rate of metals. The faster cooling rate tends to
produce higher hardness and hence, the hardened structure
becomes more susceptible to cracking. According to Kou [3], for
a constant mass of the metal and the particular welding process
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ39 502218137.
E-mail addresses: muhshin92@gmail.com,
muhshin92@yahoo.com (M.M.A. Khan).
temperature as it can modify the energy input used to make the
weld. It can also be changed to reduce the cooling rate. Fig. 1.1
shows effects of combined welding and pre-and-post-weld treat-
ment technique on mitigation of crack formation during welding.
Also, cracking may result from any of the following factor:
restraint, weld shape, and material composition. Restraint
is always present in any weld because as the weld solidifies it
acquires strength but continues to cool and shrink. It is the degree
of restraint that becomes critical. Restraint relates to the weld
design, the weldment design, and welding procedure. Khan et al.
[4,5] show that weld shape is also a function of the weld design,
weldment design and welding procedure. Welding procedure
relates to the placement of welds or beads in the weld, the shape
of the beads and the shape of the finished surface as stated in [6].
The third factor is the metal composition. Kou [7] describes that
segregation is important, however, since impurities such as sulfur
and phosphorus tend to form low-melting-point films between
solidifying grains of the metal. These impurities relate to weld
joint detail and the welding process, since they affect the amount
of dilution.
Besides, the predominant phase transformation in the mar-
tensitic AISI440C stainless steels is austenite-to-martensite that
occurs in the fusion zone and the as-welded hardness is usually
in the range of 35–55 HRC with greater cracking risk. Again,
the combined influence of grain size and precipitation behaviour
on weld metal and HAZ toughness and ductility is analogous
to the high-temperature embrittlement phenomenon, which is

0030-3992/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2012.12.025
126 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136

Fig. 1.1. butt welded surface (a) before and (b) after applying the combined preheat-and-postheat welding technique for the line energy, LE¼ 15 kJ/m.

the characteristic in medium chromium alloys like ferritic

AISI430F stainless steels. Postweld treatment is, therefore, almost
always required for welding dissimilar martensitic and ferritic
stainless steels and used primarily to temper the martensite that,
metallurgically, promotes transformation of martensite to ferrite
and very fine carbides as stated by Lippold and Kotecki [8]. This
transformation reduces strength but improves ductility and
toughness. Besides, as described in [9], postweld thermal treat-
ments acts to mitigate the high-temperature embrittlement effect
by promoting coarsening of the precipitates, thereby reduce their
negative influence.
The severe heating rate induced by a moving laser source on a
metal surface generates a thermal shock having a deep impact on
the change in weld microstructure as well as the formation of
defects particularly when dissimilar steels are welded. This is
because the material is brought to the melting and vaporization
state almost instantaneously along isotherms ruled by the so
called modified Bessel function of the second type and zero order
as reported in [10]. Besides, Huang and Sun [11] state that, as
compared to heating rate, cooling rates can be less dangerous for
the material integrity since temperature decreases with exponen-
tial laws offering lower gradients in the tail of the melt pool.
Therefore, the idea of the present paper is to generate combined
pre-and-post-heating areas in which the weld material experi-
ences less severe heating and cooling rates. This is obtained by Fig. 1.2. Schematic diagram to show the variation in incidence angle, A in a plane
using a non-vertical configuration (A: 151–301–451) of the laser tangential to the sample trajectory.
beam with respect to the material surface as schematically shown
in Fig. 1.2.
Laser welding is usually done with the aim of producing an
excellent joint at low cost. However, achieving such a weld no result has been reported yet in the literature on the laser butt
junction without optimization is impossible as stated in [12]. welding of these particular dissimilar ferritic AISI430F and mar-
Benyounis and Olabi [13] report that various optimization meth- tensitic AISI440C stainless steels or for similar industrial applica-
ods are applied to define the desired output variables through tions. Moreover, in this study, a novel combined laser welding and
developing mathematical models. In the last two decades, the use pre-and-postweld treatment technique is developed for over-
of factorial design of experiment (DOE) has grown rapidly and a coming the problems associated with laser welding of dissimilar
variety of industries have employed this technique to improve stainless steels and applied successfully to the fabrication of fuel
products or manufacturing processes as described in [14]. It is a injector. This paper, therefore, examines and optimizes the laser
powerful and effective technique to solve challenging quality welding of dissimilar martensitic/ferritic stainless steels in a
problems. In practice, as stated by Yang et al. [15], the factorial constrained butt joint configuration. This study is focused on:
design of experiment technique has been used quite successfully
in several industrial applications as in designing electrical/ ’ Combined welding and pre-and-postweld treatment concept
mechanical components or optimizing various manufacturing and its effects,
processes. ’ Effects of laser welding parameters such as laser power,
As seen in the above literatures, weldability is very complex welding speed and incidence angle of the beam, impinged
and all the welding factors are interrelated. To better understand tangentially in the direction of rotation as shown in Fig. 1.2, on
the weldability, it is necessary to study the weld joint and the geometrical features of the weld i.e., on weld width,
geometrical features determining the weld shape. The alloy resistance length, and penetration depth,
composition and pre-and-postweld processing must be consid- ’ Effects of line energy or energy per unit length on the same
ered when selecting the welding parameters due to the high weld geometrical features to understand the energy depen-
cooling and heating rates associated with laser welding. Besides, dent welding phenomena, and
 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136 127

’ Finally, determination of optimal range of laser welding
parameters, using the developed models with numerical
optimization, to minimize the weld width and maximize the
weld penetration depth.
2. Materials and experimental procedures
2.1. Materials
Two cylindrical shells made of ferritic AISI430F (cold drawn,
annealed and centerless ground) and martensitic AISI440C (pre-
hardened and tempered) stainless steels are welded circularly to
make a butt joint. This dissimilar joint is selected based on both
technical and economical aspects, because they can provide
satisfactory service performance and considerable savings. More-
over, in automotive industries, these materials are frequently
used in welded form for making different types of fuel injectors.
The chemical compositions of base metals available in as-received
condition and the weld seam characteristics are shown in Fig. 2.1
and Table 2.1, respectively. The inside diameter of the outer shell
and the outside diameter of the inner shell are machined to
Ø7.570.025 mm and Ø7.458 70.015 mm, respectively, to have a
clearance fit between them when the shells are assembled.
2.2. Experimental procedures
Specimens are welded circularly in a fillet joint configuration
using a 1.1 kW continuous wave Nd:YAG laser (Rofin DY011).
The optical system consisted of a 300 mm fiber and two lenses
of 200 mm focal and collimate lengths are used to deliver the
laser with a minimum focal spot diameter of 300 mm. A three-step
procedure is followed to locate the focal point. First, an excep-
tionally sharp-nosed tool of 200 mm in height is attached to laser
head mounted on Z motion stage. The laser head is then set
tangentially in the direction of rotation to an intended beam
incident angle. Finally, the positions of the X–Y–Z motion stages
are adjusted in such a way that pointed tool tip touches the
planned point of focus. Laser beam is focused on this located point
through the laser head at the specified angle, and the necessary
rotary motion is provided to the specimen through specimen
holder mounted on an X–Y motion stage. Computer control panel
is interfaced with the linear X–Y–Z as well as rotary motion
systems to regulate the aforesaid movements.
The experiment is initially planned based on statistical factorial
experimental design with full replication. During experimenta-
tion, laser power, (P), welding speed (S), and beam incident angle
(A) are selected as process input variables for laser welding.
Table 2.2 shows the experimental condition, laser welding input
variables, and design levels used at a glance. Each of the input
variables and its working range is selected based on industrially
recommended laser-welding parameters used in automotive
industries.
General Full Factorial Design is used as a statistical design of
experiment technique to develop statistical models relating the
welding input parameters to each of the two output responses
of the weld (weld width and penetration depth). The adequacies
of the models developed and their significant linear and interac-
tion model terms are measured by analyzing variance and other
adequacy measures. Finally, these mathematical models are used
to determine the optimal settings of welding parameters to
ensure the desired weld quality. In this study, the quality criteria
defined for the weld to determine the optimal settings of welding
parameters are the minimization of weld width and the
maximization of weld penetration depth.
Besides, the energy delivered per unit length of weld line is
referred to as line energy (LE), which is frequently used in various
laser-processing techniques and termed as a key-parameter when
continuous-wave laser is used. This term is calculated as the ratio

Ø9.56±0.03

AISI AISI
440C
440C 430F
430F Outer
Dp Shell
Rm

Inner
Shell
Inner Shell
Inner Shell Outer Shell
Outer Shell

Ø7.458±0.015

Fig. 2.1. Characterization of welding cross-section (W: Weld width, Dp: Weld penetration depth, Rm: Minimum crack-path).

Table 2.1
Chemical compositions of base metals of the weld.

Base metal Composition (in weight percent)

C Cr Ni Mn P S Si Mo Se Fe

AISI430F 0.12 16.0–18.0 0.75 1.0 0.04 0.03 1.00 – – Remainder

AISI440C 0.95–1.2 17.2 – 1.00 – 0.015 1.00 0.75 0.20 Remainder
128 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136

of laser power over the welding speed as shown in Eq. (1): 2.3. Weld bead characterization

P
Welding tests are carried out in a random order to avoid any

LE ¼ 0:06  kJ=m
S
where, LE is line energy; P is laser power in watt (W) describing
the thermal source; and S is welding speed in m/min determining
the irradiation time. According to the Eq. (1), the combinations of
laser power of 600–1000 W and welding speed of 2.0–4.0 m/min
resulted in nominal line energy input in the range of 9.0–30.0 kJ/m.
During experimentation, laser beam is focused on the point of
interface at a certain angle with the direction of rotation. Argon is
used as shielding gas with a constant flow rate of 29 l/min to
protect weld surface from oxidation and suppress the generation
of plasma during welding. A standard washing procedure, which
is practised in the automotive industries, is followed to clean, cool
and dry the specimens. The experimental set-up for the laser-
welding system is illustrated in Fig. 2.2.
ð1Þ systematic error in the experiment. After welding, transverse
sections are prepared by cutting the samples axially using
SampleMet II (Beuhler, IL) model abrasive cutter. The sectioned
samples are mounted, polished, and etched for mechanical
characterization. Software, Leica IM500, incorporated with an
optical microscope (Leica MZ125) is used to measure weld width,
penetration depth, and minimum crack path as shown in Fig. 1.
Each set of experiments is replicated three times to ensure
statistical accuracy. The mean value of each measured response
parameter is determined and recorded for further analysis.
Table 2.3 shows the average measured responses for various
laser-welding conditions.
The guidance on quality levels for imperfections given in ISO
13919-1:1996 is followed to assure the desired weld quality.
At this point, each welded specimen is visually inspected before

Table 2.2
Experimental conditions and response factors.

Process factors Symbols Actual values

Laser power (W) P 600 800 1000
Welding speed (m/min) S 2.0 3.0 4.0
Angle of incidence (1) A 15 30 45
Constant factors
Base material Outer shell AISI 430F
Inner shell AISI 440C
Laser source Continuous wave Nd:YAG laser
Shielding gas Type Argon
Flow rate 29 l/min
Response factors
Weld bead characteristics Weld width (W), weld penetration depth (Dp), and minimum crack-path (Rm)

Table 2.3
Design matrix with actual factors and measured mean responses.

Standard order Process factors Response factors

P (W) S (m/min) A (deg) W (mm) Rm (mm) Dp (mm)

Laser 1 600 2.0 15 930.7 532.5 599.9

Head 2 800 2-0 15 1050.3 832.8 956.6
3 1000 2.0 15 1021.9 1180.6 1234.5
4 600 3.0 15 639.6 397.9 438.5
5 800 3.0 15 712.5 822.1 833.8
Specimen 6 1000 3.0 15 851.5 1129.1 1148
7 600 4.0 15 584.6 292.3 301.7
Shielding
8 800 4.0 15 712.6 563.4 594
Gas Nozzle 9 1000 4.0 15 881.5 618.2 1043.9
10 600 2.0 30 1002.1 375.8 406.2
11 800 2.0 30 1146.8 524.9 593.5
12 1000 2.0 30 1217.7 799.4 959.7
Specimen 13 600 3.0 30 742.3 195.7 282.8
Holder 14 800 3.0 30 897.6 601 603.9
15 1000 3.0 30 899.5 669.2 1074.4
16 600 4.0 30 733.6 249.3 287.4
17 800 4.0 30 820.8 456.1 464.2
18 1000 4.0 30 848 510.7 819.2
19 600 2.0 45 912.8 166.8 256.3
20 800 2.0 45 1024.6 448.1 631.3
21 1000 2.0 45 1073.5 539 801.4
22 600 3.0 45 715.8 174.5 261.9
23 800 3.0 45 843.4 376.6 458
24 1000 3.0 45 933.5 486.1 643.6
25 600 4.0 45 643.3 146.2 205
26 800 4.0 45 707.9 298.2 306.4
27 1000 4.0 45 901.4 413.6 505.3
Fig. 2.2. Photographic view of Nd:YAG laser-welding system.
 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136
and after the cut using the optical microscope. Hermetic weld is
ensured by performing leak test in vacuum for each of welded
specimens. During leak test, nitrogen is inflated into the
assembled part at a pulsed pressure in the range 10–150 bar for
the expected life cycles. This method also guarantees that the
weld will not fail during its service life. In case of failure, the
internal cracks generated during the welding process propagate
up to the free surface and N2 leakage is detected by a loss of
vacuum into the chamber.
3. Results and discussion
Various weld profile characteristics are measured with axially
cut specimens using an optical microscope and are recorded for
further analyses described in the succeeding sections.
Perturbation plots are used to illustrate the effects of indivi-
dual process parameter such as laser power (P), welding speed (S),
and beam incident angle (A) on geometrical features of the weld
e.g., weld width, weld penetration depth, and minimum crack-
path. Contour plots are used to show the two-factor interaction
effects on the same weld bead geometry.
The line energy is plotted against weld width, weld penetra-
tion depth, and minimum crack-path with a view to demonstrate
GL Ta
Tm
GF
Ta Tv Melt pool
Spot
GL
Ta
GL
GF Melt pool Tv
Spot
GL
Fig. 3.1. Top views of melt pools and basic draft of thermal gradients (G) in
different directions with: (a) laser beam perpendicular to the surface (b) laser
beam inclined on the tangential plane.
ri
se
La
Fig. 3.2. (a) Top and cross sectional views of an instant during the welding process, (b) draft of the basic concept to obtain a less severe heating rate on the fresh material.
129
the effects of energy input on weld profile characteristics, and to
explain different laser welding phenomena as well.
3.1. Combined welding and pre-and-postweld treatment concept
and its effects
The main concept adopted to modify the experimental set up
has been described schematically in Fig. 3.1. When a moving laser
beam hits the surface of a metal in perpendicular direction, an
asymmetric melt pool is generated (Fig. 3.1(a)). Heat conduction
in the surroundings is not isotropic and generates different
thermal gradients in frontal (GF), lateral (GL) and back (GB)
directions. The entity of such difference can be calculated follow-
ing [10]. The lengths of the arrows represent a realistic proportion
among the modules of the thermal gradients considering
the jump between vaporization temperature TV and ambient
temperature TA, and the distance in which it is achieved [3].
The frontal gradient is extremely higher with respect to the back
due to the deformation of isotherms caused by the welding speed.
The basic idea is to reduce this shock by decreasing GF: this effect
is obtained displacing and widening the laser spot (dot line),
as reported in Fig. 3.2(b).
From the experimental point of view, this is obtained by
inclining the beam on the tangential plane while the specimen
moves against the inclined beam as shown in Fig. 3.2(b). For any
generic position of the butt specimen welded with an inclined
beam shown in Fig. 1.2, the cross sectional view of the melt pool
is found to be also asymmetric with respect to the beam axis as is
GB Ta reported in Fig. 3.2(a) [16]. This is because the portion of melt
pool surface exposed directly to the laser beam is depleted more
as compared to other portion of the keyhole surface.
The top view shows an elliptical print in which the left side is
wider than the right one thus generating a thermal gradient of
lower entity in the cross sectional plane. This phenomenon
causing the enlargement of the melt pool and the unsymmetrical
distribution of energy inside the print is adopted in the present
research to generate a preheating effect before fresh material
reaches the beam axis
GB During welding, the fresh material is first exposed to the laser
radiation in a region with positive defocus which determines the
reduction in the thermal gradient. It then reaches the highest
intensity zone of the laser beam. At the exit (right) side, the beam
acting on welded material results in slight postheat treatment
of the weld. No relevant changes occur in the lateral gradient.
The ultimate result is a welded seam due to continuous rotation
of the unsymmetrical weld pool over 3601 that reduces the
n
io
La
ct
se
re
rb
di
ea
m
e nt
id
Fo A
nc
pl cal
an
e
Melt pool
+ defocus
sample rot. speed -defocus
Solidified seam
AISI 430F
AISI 440C
130 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136

Perturbation Perturbation
1220 1300

Weld Penetration Depth, µm

S
Weld Width, µm 1060 1025
P
P
A
900 750
S
S
A
740 P 475 S
A
A
P
580 200

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00 - 1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00
Deviation from Reference Point (Coded Units) Deviation from Reference Point (Coded Units)

Perturbation
1200
Minimum Crack Path, µm

925

A
650 P
S

S
375 A
P

100

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00

Deviation from Reference Point (Coded Units)

Fig. 3.3. Perturbation plot showing effect of all factors on (a) weld width, (b) weld penetration depth, (c) minimum crack path.

occurrence of crack formation as can be seen in Fig. 1.1. This 3.3. Effects of line energy
combined process also decreases the penetration depth of the
weld since welding with inclined laser beam causes reflection Fig 3.5(a)–(c) show the effects of line energy input on the weld
losses and a more complex heat transmission through refraction penetration depth (DP), minimum crack path (Rm), and weld
described by Snell’s law. width (W), respectively, whereas variation in penetration size
factor with line energy is illustrated in Fig 3.5(d).
For line energy in the range of 9.0–15 kJ/m, as illustrated in
3.2. Effects of process parameters Fig 3.5(c)–(d), there is a rapid growth in weld width (W) with
energy input, whereas change in penetration size factor (W/Dp) is
The Fig 3.3(a)–(c) show the perturbation plots to compare the insignificant. Slight negative variations in penetration size factor
effects of all the process parameters at the center point in the prove that the laser welding is mainly conduction limited. Since
design space. The results suggest that laser power has the most the melt pool geometry depends on energy intensity, uniform
significant positive impact on the weld width; weld penetration conduction occurring in all directions usually results in semi-
depth; and minimum crack-path. The opposite phenomena are circular weld profile. However, the heat conduction along the
observed for the welding speed. This is because higher laser beam axis becomes dominant with the increase in energy input
power and slower welding speed result in higher energy deposi- and weld shape changes from semi-circular to parabolic. Similar
tion on the weld area, and longer irradiation time for the parametric effects on the welding pool width at surface [17] and
deposited energy to diffuse into material. the upper width [18] are also observed for welding dissimilar low
These figures also illustrate that increase in beam incident carbon and austenitic stainless steels in a butt joint configuration
angle results in shallower weld penetration, and shorter mini- using the CO2 laser.
mum crack-path, whereas the larger beam incident angle causes Again, a small variation in weld width is observed for the line
the wider weld width. These are due to following consequences: energy input in the range of 15–20 kJ/m. Nonetheless, as shown
(i) the larger the angle of incidence, the higher the energy loss to in Fig 3.5(a) and (d), a sharp decrease (starting from 15 kJ/m) in
the surrounding through reflection; and (ii) dominance of uni- W/Dp demonstrates the fact that the weld penetration depth
form heat conduction in all directions over the z-preferential or increases at a faster rate than the weld width in this range and
axial heat conduction for the lower energy input to the materials establishes a keyhole formation regime. As a result, the weld bead
to be welded. becomes almost cylindrical. Penetration size factor increases with
The contour plots shown in Fig. 3.4(a)–(c) demonstrate the further increase in line energy. This is due to the creation of upper
facts that interactions of higher laser power and slower welding keyhole plasma plume that acts as a point heat source above weld
speed cause wider weld width; deeper weld penetration; and plane. This generated plasma plume acts in the keyhole and forms
longer minimum crack-path. a ‘chalice’ shaped weld bead profile when energy input is more
 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136 131

Weld Width, µm Weld Penetration Depth, µm

4.0 4.0

Welding Speed, m/min

Welding Speed, m/min

737
3.5 3.5
355
791

871 487 618 750

3.0 3.0

882
950
2.5 2.5
1030
1110

2.0 2.0
600 700 800 900 1000 600 700 800 900 1000
Laser Power, W Laser Power, W

Minimum Crack Path, µm

4.0
Welding Speed, m/min

3.5

307 504
406
3.0
603

2.5 701

2.0
600 700 800 900 1000
Laser Power, W

Fig. 3.4. Contour graphs to show the interaction effects of P and S on (a) weld width, (b) weld penetration depth, and (c) minimum crack path at A¼ 301.

than 20 kJ/m, which is quite similar to the result obtained from an The fit summary includes sequential model sum squares to select
experimental study conducted by Khan et al. [5]. the highest order polynomial where additional terms are signifi-
Besides, as illustrated in Fig 3.5(b), variation in minimum cant and the model is not aliased. In addition, model summary
crack-path with the line energy input shows the same trend as statistics of the fit summary focuses on the model that maximizes
the weld penetration depth. This is because of the existing linear, adjusted R-squared and predicted R-squared values. The sequen-
positive relationship between them as can be seen in Fig. 3.6. tial F-test is carried out using the same statistical software
package to check if the regression model is significant and find
out the significant model terms of the developed models as well.
3.4. Process parameter optimization
The step-wise regression method is also applied to eliminate the
insignificant model terms automatically.
The optimization part in Design-Expert software V7 searches
Suitable response models for the response factors are selected
for a combination of factor levels that simultaneously satisfy the
based on the fit summaries. From fit summary output of the
requirements placed (i.e., optimization criteria) on each of the
measured responses shown in Tables 3.1–3.4, it is evident that
responses and process input factors (i.e., multiple-response opti-
quadratic model is statistically significant for the weld width,
mization). Numerical and graphical optimization methods are
whereas for weld penetration depth; two-factor interaction (2FI)
used in this work by selecting the desired goals for each factor
models are statistically recommended for further analyses.
and response. As mentioned before, the numerical optimization
The test for significance of the regression models and the test
process involves combining the goals into an overall desirability
for significance on individual model coefficients are performed
function (D). The numerical optimization feature in the design-
using the same statistical package. By selecting the step-wise
expert package finds one point or more in the factors domain that
regression method that eliminates the insignificant model terms
maximizes this objective function. In this study, the objective is to
automatically, the resulting ANOVA Tables 3.5 and 3.6 for the
optimize the autogenous laser-welded joints subjected to mini-
selected models summarize the analysis of variance of each
mize the weld width and maximize weld penetration depth a
response and illustrate its significant model terms as well. The
characterizing factor that determines the minimum crack-path as
aforestated tables demonstrate that calculated Fisher’s ‘Model-F’
shown in Fig. 3.6. In order to achieve these objectives, mathema-
and ‘Model-P’ values are, respectively, 57.17 and o0.0001 for
tical models are developed to relate the aforesaid geometrical
weld width quadratic model; and 107.74 and o0.0001 for weld
features and the selected laser welding input variables.
penetration depth 2FI model. These ‘Model-F’ and ‘Model-P’
values imply that the selected models are highly significant and
3.4.1. Development of mathematical models there is only a less than 0.01% chance that these large ‘Model-F’
At this stage, the fit summary in the design-expert software is values could occur due to noise. The associated P value is also
used to select the models that best describe the response factors. used to estimate whether F is large enough to indicate statistical
132 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136

1400 1400

Weld Penetration Depth, Dp (µm)

Minimum Crack Path, Rm (µm)

1200 1200

1000 1000

800 800

600 600

400 400
15°
15° 15°
200 30°
30° 200 30°
45°
45° 45°
0 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Line Energy, LE (kJ/m) Line Energy, LE (kJ/m)

1300 3.5

Penetration Size Factor, W/D (a.u.)

1200 15°
3.0 30°
Weld Width, W (µm)

1100
2.5
1000
2.0
900
1.5
800
1.0
700
15°
600 30° 0.5
45°
500 0.0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Line Energy, LE (kJ/m) Line Energy, LE (kJ/m)

Fig. 3.5. Effect of line energy on (a) weld penetration depth, (b) minimum crack-path, (c) weld width, and (d) penetration size factor for different beam incident angle.

Table 3.1
900 Sequential model sum of squares for weld width model.

800 Source Sum of df Mean F p-value

squares square value prob4 F
Minimum Crack Path, Rm (µm)

700
Mean 4.372E þ 007 1 4.372Eþ 007
Linear 1.325E þ 006 3 4.417Eþ 005 29.28 o0.0001
600 2FI 3042.62 3 1014.21 0.059 0.9808
Quadratic 2.340E þ005 3 77994.39 13.15 0.0001 Suggested
500 Cubic 53388.46 7 7626.92 1.65 0.2363 Aliased
Residual 41493.34 9 4610.37
400 Total 4.538E þ 007 26 1.745Eþ 006

300

Table 3.2
200
30° Model summary statistics for weld width model.

100 Source Std. dev. R2 Adj R2 Pred R2 PRESS

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Weld Penetration Depth, Dp (µm) Linear 122.83 0.7997 0.7724 0.7298 4.477E þ005
2FI 131.56 0.8015 0.7389 0.6687 5.490Eþ 005
Quadratic 77.01 0.9427 0.9105 0.8369 2.702Eþ 005 Suggested
Fig. 3.6. Relationship between the minimum crack-path and weld penetration
Cubic 67.90 0.9750 0.9304 0.7707 3.799E þ005 Aliased
depth.

significance. If P value is lower than 0.05, it indicates that the Again, the ANOVA table for the weld width model shows that
model is statistically significant as stated by Zulkali et al. [19]. there is a quadratic relationship between weld width and welding
The same tables also show other adequacy measures e.g., parameters. The linear terms of laser power (P) and welding speed
R-squared, adjusted R-squared, and predicted R-squared values. All (S); and the quadratic terms of welding speed and incident angle are
the adequacy measures are in logical agreement and indicate the significant model terms associated with the weld width. How-
significant relationships. Moreover, adequate precision compares ever, linear term of beam incident angle is added to support hierarchy
range of predicted value at the design points to average prediction of weld width model. For the weld penetration depth model, ANOVA
error. The adequate precision ratios in all cases are dramatically table demonstrates that all three linear terms i.e., laser power (P),
greater than 4 indicating adequate models discrimination. welding speed (S) and beam incident angle; and two-factor
 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136 133

interactions (2FI) of laser power-welding speed (P–S), are the sig- Normality of residual data and amount of residuals in predic-
nificant model terms. tion are then checked to ensure statistical validation of the
From the results shown in Tables 3.1–3.6, it is, therefore, developed models. The normality of data is verified by plotting
apparent that the developed statistical models for predicting weld the normal probability plot (NPP) of residuals. The residual is the
width and penetration depth are fairly accurate and can be of difference between observed and predicted values (or fitted
following forms: value) obtained from the regression model. The data set is
normally distributed if the points on the plot fall fairly close to
(i) Weld width the straight line. The normal probability plots of residual values
for weld width, and penetration depth are illustrated in Fig
ðWÞ1:06 ¼ 2163:33 þ0:76P1154:6S þ 36:97A
3.7(a)–(b), respectively. The experimental points are reasonably
þ154:87S2 0:58006A2 aligned with predicted or fitted points suggesting the normality of
data. This is an implication that empirical distribution of residual
(ii) Weld penetration depth data is well-compared with a normal distribution having the
same mean and variance
Dp ¼ 446:02 þ2:16 P106:24 S þ 7:674 A0:024 P x A
Fig 3.8(a)–(b) are showing the relationships between the
actual and predicted values of weld width and penetration depth.
Since the points plotted are close to and around the diagonal line,
Table 3.3 the difference between the predicted and actual value for each
Sequential model sum of squares for weld penetration depth model. point can be considered to be minimal. It is also an indication that
the statistical models for prediction are adequate and predicted
Source Sum of df Mean F p-value
results are in good agreement with the measured data.
squares square value prob4 F

Mean 9.442E þ006 1 9.442E þ 006 3.4.2. Numerical optimization

Linear 2.046Eþ 006 3 6.821E þ 005 95.30 o0.0001 Two criteria are introduced in this numerical optimization.
2FI 61301.75 3 20433.92 4.04 0.0223 Suggested
The first set of criteria is to maximize weld penetration depth
Quadratic 8834.15 3 2944.72 0.54 0.6620
Cubic 50208.79 7 7172.68 1.74 0.2158 Aliased with no limitation on either process parameters or weld width. In
Residual 37119.61 9 4124.40 this case, all the process parameters and weld width (first
Total 1.165E þ007 26 4.479E þ 005
response) are set within a specified range. Furthermore, lowering
the laser power and increasing the welding speed are the most
common techniques used in automotive industries to produce
relatively low-cost and excellent weld joints. Taking these cost
Table 3.4 and quality aspects into account, second set of criteria for process
Model summary statistics for weld penetration depth model.
parameter optimization is fixed to maximize weld penetration
Source Std. dev. R2 Adj R2 Pred R2 PRESS depth and welding speed, and minimize the laser power and weld
width. Table 3.7 summarizes these two criteria, lower and upper
Linear 84.60 0.9285 0.9188 0.8994 2.216E þ 005 limits as well as importance for each input and response factor.
2FI 71.14 0.9564 0.9426 0.9240 1.674E þ 005 Suggested
Tables 3.8 and 3.9 show the optimal solution based on the two
Quadratic 73.88 0.9604 0.9381 0.9006 2.191E þ 005
Cubic 64.22 0.9832 0.9532 0.8310 3.725E þ 005 Aliased
optimization criteria as determined by design-expert software.
The optimization results clearly demonstrate that, whatever the

Table 3.5
ANOVA table for weld width quadratic model.

Source Sum of squares df Mean square F value p-value prob 4F

Model 1.549E þ006 5 3.097E þ005 57.17 o 0.0001 Significant

P 3.876E þ005 1 3.876E þ 005 71.54 o 0.0001
S 8.518E þ005 1 8.518E þ 005 157.24 o 0.0001
A 19093.30 1 19093.30 3.52 0.0751
S2 1.405E þ005 1 1.405E þ005 25.93 o 0.0001
A2 93119.36 1 93119.36 17.19 0.0005
Residual 1.083E þ005 20 5417.49

Cor total 1.657E þ006 25

R2 ¼0.9346 Adj R2 ¼ 0.9183 Pred R2 ¼ 0.8889 Adeq Precision¼ 25.958

Table 3.6
ANOVA table for weld penetration depth 2FI model.

Source Sum of squares df Mean square F value p-value prob 4F

Model 2.101E þ006 4 5.254E þ 005 107.74 o 0.0001 Significant

P 1.388E þ006 1 1.388E þ 006 284.74 o 0.0001
S 1.885E þ005 1 1.885E þ 005 38.65 o 0.0001
A 4.895E þ005 1 4.895E þ 005 100.38 o 0.0001
P–A 55065.56 1 55065.56 11.29 0.0030
Residual 1.024E þ005 21 4876.13

Cor total 2.204E þ006 25

R2 ¼0.9535 Adj R2 ¼ 0.9447 PredR2 ¼0.9324 Adeq Precision¼ 36.953
134 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136

Normal Plot of Residuals Normal Plot of Residuals

99 99

95 95

Normal % Probability
Normal % Probability
90 90
80 80
70 70
50 50
30 30
20 20
10 10
5 5

1 1

-1.70 -0.82 0.07 0.95 1.84 -1.98 -0.85 0.27 1.40 2.53
Studentized Residuals Studentized Residuals

Fig. 3.7. Normal probability plot for weld (a) width, and (b) penetration depth.

Predicted vs. Actual Predicted vs. Actual

1900 1300

1625 1000
Predicted

Predicted

1350 700

1075 400

800 100

856 1108 1360 1613 1865 124.7 407.6 690.5 973.4 1256.3
Actual Actual

Fig. 3.8. Scatter diagrams of weld (a) width, and (b) penetration depth.

Table 3.7 Table 3.8

Optimization criteria used in this study. Optimal solutions as obtained based on first criterion.

Parameters or Limits Importance Criterion Soln no. P (W) S (m/min) F (lm) DP (lm) W (lm)
responses
Lower Upper First Second 1 998.6 2.02 15.2 1248.1 1084.6
2 999.3 2.16 15.1 1235.9 1039.7
P (W) 600 1000 3 Is in range Minimize 3 998.9 2.03 15 1250 1078.5
S (m/min) 2.0 4.0 3 Is in range Maximize 4 997.9 2.00 15 1251.7 1088.6
A (1) 15 45 3 Is in range Is in range 5 999 2.02 15.5 1243.8 1088
W (mm) 584 1218 5 Is in range Minimize 6 999.5 2.04 15.6 1240.4 1082.3
DP (mm) 206 1235 5 Maximize Maximize 7 998.9 2.03 15.2 1247.4 1081.1
8 998.5 2.14 15.2 1235.3 1048.7
9 999.6 2.18 15 1236 1033.9
optimization criteria, the beam incident angle has to be its 10 999.7 2.01 15.8 1240.8 1095
limiting value of 151 to achieve maximum weld penetration
depth and minimum weld width. This result also supports the
discussion made earlier on the effect of beam incident angle on In this case, as shown in Table 3.9, the weld width and penetration
the geometrical features of the weld. depth would be of 665 mm and 706 mm, respectively, which are
Again, Table 3.8 demonstrating the optimal welding conditions much higher than the prerequisite values for the weld. These results
according to the first criterion, it is found that maximum weld also indicate the fact that laser welding ought to be conduction-
penetration depth of 1250 mm is obtained when laser power and limited for this particular joint type and laser-material combinations
welding speed are set to their respective highest and lowest limits. in order to obtain the optimal geometrical features of the weld.
However, with acceptable weld penetration depth, the laser power Since optimal range of laser power and welding speed selected
can be minimized to around 790 W and the highest limit of the based on second criterion is, respectively, much lower and higher
welding speed can be used instead of its lowest limit of 2 m/min. than that obtained for first set of criterion, any combination of process
 M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136 135

parameters of the second optimal set would cause less energy input formation of cracks, blow holes, and spatter with a consequent
to constrained butt joints to be made. This reduced energy input to improve in the weld quality. The results given in Table 3.10 also
weld materials would, ultimately, result in less distortion, and support the improvement of weld quality at lower laser power and
higher welding speed.
Table 3.9
Optimal solutions as obtained based on second criterion.
4. Weld microstructure and microhardness
Soln no. P (W) S (m/min) F (lm) DP (lm) W (lm)

1 792.7 3.95 15.00 676.3 705.4

This study is carried out to investigate the various micro-
2 794.9 3.94 15.00 681.3 706.1 structures typically formed at the weld zone and various locations
3 790.1 3.98 15.00 668.5 705.5 close to both base metals for a line input of 12.0 kJ/m.
4 795.9 3.99 15.00 678.2 708.7 The particular sample selected for the metallurgical study is one
5 789.2 4.00 15.00 664.6 706.2
of those samples that provide the weld with designed geometry.
6 797.2 3.73 15.00 707.6 702.8
7 826.3 3.99 15.00 731.9 723.9 Fig 4.1(a) shows the micrograph of the weld made of AISI440C
8 816.9 3.78 15.00 737.6 712.6 and AISI430F stainless steels.
9 789.5 3.66 15.00 700.9 699.5 As shown in Fig 4.1(b) and (c), the microstructures at the inner
10 810.9 3.63 15.00 742.8 710.3
shell are cellular dendritic, whereas columnar dendritic structures
form at the outer shell. These microstructures are a result of
Table 3.10 solidification behavior and subsequent solid-phase transforma-
Visual inspection of weld quality. tion controlled by melting ration of two materials to be joined
and weld cooling rate [17]. Since base metals consist of marten-
Process parameters Visual check
sitic AISI440C and ferritic AISI430F stainless steels, the micro-
P (W) S (m/min) A (1) Cracks Blow holes Spatter
structures that form in the fusion zone must contain a variety of
complex martensite-ferrite structures. Moreover, as shown in
600 2.0 15 0 0 1 Fig (c), the intra-granular Cr23C6 carbide formation is evident in
800 2.0 15 1 0 2 the microstructures forming near the fusion zone boundary. As a
1000 2.0 15 0 0 2
result, at the outer shell, average microhardness of the fusion
600 3.0 15 1 0 1
800 3.0 15 1 0 1 zone is found to be much higher than that of both the heat
1000 3.0 15 1 0 2 affected zone and the base metal as can be seen in Fig. 4.2.
600 4.0 15 0 0 0 Fig. 4.1(b) shows the microstructures of base metal and HAZ of
800 4.0 15 0 0 0
the inner shell, which is pre-hardened and-tempered. Both
1000 4.0 15 0 0 1
microstructures contain partly spherodized primary carbide par-
0¼ no defect, 1¼ exist but acceptable, 2–3 ¼ not acceptable. ticles in a tempered martensitic matrix. However, microstructures

A B

Fig. 4.1. (a) typical micrograph of laser welding of AISI440C and AISI430F stainless steels, and base metal (BM), heat affected zone (HAZ) and Fusion zone (FZ) of (b) inner
shell and (c) outer shell.
136
600
Vicker's Hardness Number
Intersection
500 Line
400
AISI
440C
300
200 HAZ
BM FZ Welding Pool
Boundary
Fig. 4.2. Vicker’s local microhardness profile along the line shown in Fig. 4.1(a).
formed in HAZ are finer and contain secondary carbide particles
too. Formation of these microstructures can be attributed to
combined effects of dissolution of base metal carbide into the
solution in the austenite due to sufficiently high temperature that
prevails in HAZ and repeated hardening due to self-quenching,
which occurs inherently during laser welding. As a result, inner
shell HAZ becomes fully martensitic on cooling, and peak weld
hardness occurs in this region as shown in Fig. 4.2. The carbides
formed in this HAZ are normally of M23C6 types, where the ‘M’ is
predominantly of Cr and Fe.
5. Conclusions
Using the laser machine and within the limits of the laser
parameters considered in this study the following points can be
concluded:
’ The developed combined welding and pre-and-postweld
treatment technique is able to overcome the crack formation
problem associated with laser welding of dissimilar stainless
steels.
’ Laser power and welding speed are the most significant laser
welding input factors and have opposite effects.
’ For welding dissimilar stainless steels in a butt joint config-
uration, weld penetration depth determines the minimum
crack-path of the weld.
’ Formation of keyhole results in rapid change in the weld
geometrical features within a certain range of energy input. After
the upper limiting value, formation of upper keyhole plasma
plume only contributes to the change in shape of the weld bead.
’ Various, complex martensite–ferrite microstructures develop
in the fusion zone. As a consequence, average microhardness
of the fusion zone becomes much higher than that of base
metal of the outer shell and lower than that of base metal of
the inner shell.
’ By means of design of experiment inspired by full factorial
design, it is possible to achieve the best operating parameter
window.
M.M.A. Khan et al. / Optics & Laser Technology 49 (2013) 125–136
’ For these particular joint type and laser-material combinations:
Local Microhardness | A laser power of 790–810 W and a welding speed of 3.6–4.0
m/min are the optimal input parameters to obtain an excellent
weld.
| Whatever the optimization criteria, the beam incident angle
has to be around its limiting value of 151.
’ Efficient and low-cost weld joints could be achieved using the
AISI welding conditions drawn from the numerical optimization
430F
Acknowledgements
HAZ Authors would like to acknowledge Continental ‘‘Cleanliness
and Material Lab’’ for its support while cutting and preparing the
samples for analysis. Thanks are due to M. Fiaschi and F. Sarri,
FZ BM
Boundary Industrial Engineering Department for their kind assistance at
various stages of this research. The help extended by V. Colombini
and C. Fierro during experimental investigation is also sincerely
acknowledged.
References
[1] Dawes C. Laser welding. New York, USA: Abington Publishing; 1992.
[2] Sun Z, Ion JC. Review: laser welding of dissimilar metal combinations. Journal
of Materials Science 1995;30:4205–14.
[3] Kou S. Welding metallurgy. 2nd ed. NJ, USA: John Willey & Sons Inc.; 2002 pp.
199–209.
[4] Khan MMA, Romoli L, Fiaschi M, Dini G, Sarri F. Experimental investigation on
laser beam welding of martensitic stainless steels in a constrained overlap
joint configuration. Journal of Material Processing Technology 2010;210:
1340–53.
[5] Khan MMA, Romoli L, Fiaschi M, Dini G, Sarri F. Laser beam welding of
dissimilar stainless steels in a fillet joint configuration. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 2012;212:856–67.
[6] EN ISO 15609-4:2009, Specification and qualification of welding procedures
for metallic materials-welding procedure specification-Part 4: laser beam
welding, pp 1–13.
[7] Kou S. Solidification and liquation cracking issues in welding. Journal of the
Minerals, metals, and Materials Society 2003:37–42.
[8] Lippold JC, Kotecki DJ. Welding metallurgy and weldability of stainless steel.
1st ed. NJ, USA: John Willey & Sons; 2005 pp. 71–80.
[9] Lippold JC, Kotecki DJ. Welding metallurgy and weldability of stainless steel.
1st ed. NJ, USA: John Willey & Sons; 2005 pp. 116–119.
[10] Lankalapally KN, Tuy JF, Gartner M. A model for estimating penetration depth
of laser welding processes. Journal of Physics. D: Applied Physics
1996;29:1831–41.
[11] Huang H, Su F, Sun Y. Thermal shock of semi-infinite body with multi-pulsed
intense laser radiation. Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica 2010;23(2):175–80.
[12] Benyounis KY, Olabi AG, Hashmi MSJ. Optimizing the laser-welded butt joints
of medium carbon steel using RSM. Journal of Materials Processing Technol-
ogy 2005;164–165:986–9.
[13] Benyounis KY, Olabi. AG. Optimization of different welding processes using
statistical and numerical approaches—a reference guide. Advances in Engi-
neering Software 2008;39:483–96.
[14] Montgomery DC. Design and analysis of experiments. 6th ed. New York: John
Wiley and Sons, Inc.; 2004.
[15] Yang YK, Chuang MT, Lin SS. Optimization of dry machining parameters for
high-purity graphite in end milling process via design of experiments
methods. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2009;209:4395–400.
[16] Liao Y-C, Yu M-H. Effects of laser beam energy and incident angle on the
pulse laser welding of stainless steel thin sheet. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 2007;190:102–8.
[17] Anawa EM, Olabi AG. Optimization of tensile strength of ferritic/austenitic
laser-welded components. Optics and Lasers in Engineering 2008;46:571–7.
[18] Ruggiero A, Tricarico L, Olabi AG, Benyounis KY. Weld-bead profile and costs
optimization of the CO2 dissimilar laser welding process of low carbon steel
and austenitic steel AISI316. Optical Laser Technology 2011;43:82–90.
[19] Zulkali MMD, Ahmad AL, Norulakmal NH. Oryza sativa L. husk as heavy metal
adsorbent: optimization with lead as model solution. Bioresour. Technol
2006;97:21–5.