Original article

Proc IMechE Part L:

J Materials: Design and Applications
Effect of D/TP ratio on stir zone 0(0) 1–12
! IMechE 2016
characteristics of friction stir-welded Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

high-strength low-alloy steel plates DOI: 10.1177/1464420716650914

pil.sagepub.com

S Ragu Nathan1, V Balasubramanian1, S Malarvizhi1

and AG Rao2

Abstract
In this study, the effect of tool shoulder diameter (D) to the plate thickness (Tp) ratio on tensile and impact toughness
properties of friction stir-welded naval grade high-strength low-alloy steel was investigated. A naval grade high-strength
low-alloy steel of 5 mm thick plates was welded with tool rotational speed of 600 r/min and welding speed of 30 mm/min
using tungsten-based alloy tools having D/Tp ratio varying from 4 to 6. Microstructural characteristics of the weld joints
were analyzed using optical microscopy and scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive spectroscopy along
with the evaluation of tensile properties. From this investigation, it was found that the joint fabricated using a D/Tp ratio
of 5 (25 mm shoulder diameter) exhibited superior mechanical properties compared to other joints.

Keywords
High-strength low-alloy steel, friction stir welding, tool profile, tensile properties, impact toughness, microstructure

Date received: 18 December 2015; accepted: 28 April 2016

method that reduces material waste and avoids radi-

Introduction
High-strength low-alloy (HSLA) steels demonstrate
unique properties such as high strength, excellent duc-
tility, good weldability, and also exhibit outstanding
low temperature impact toughness superior to that of
high yield strength steels.1 Presently, the micro-alloyed
or HSLA steels become an indispensable class of struc-
tural material for different applications like construc-
tion of pressure vessels, piping, storage tanks, etc.
In general, the fusion welding of HSLA steels results
in hydrogen-induced cracking at the heat affected zone
(HAZ) and only way to weld such steels is to use low
hydrogen ferritic steel filler wire.2 Charpy impact
toughness of HSLA steel was improved by intercritical
heat treatment which enhances the microstructure
through the formation of ferrite microstructure with
various morphologies, irregular martensite, and 75%
of microstructure with high angle grain boundaries.3
The resistance to hydrogen-induced cracking and
stress corrosion cracking was improved by coarse
grain HAZ which consists of martensite–austenite con-
stituents, and thus showing the importance of reduc-
tion in carbon content of these steels.4
Friction stir welding (FSW) is a novel solid state
joining technique that is presently attracting signifi-
cant attention on welding of hard metals such as
steel and titanium.5–7 FSW has appeared as an
simple, ecological, and promising productive welding
ation and harmful gas emissions, usually associated
with the fusion welding processes. Mechanical action
in the form of frictional stirring on the base material
has modified the microstructure from the coarse
grains to very fine grains due to plastic deformation
and fast cooling rate.8–10 Welding of steels is affected
by both the temperature and composition which
extensively affects the microstructure evolution.
FSW enables to control these factors and produce
superior joint strength.1 Much of the tool degradation
may be attributed to the high heat (temperature
around 1200  C) and the stresses generated during
FSW of these high strength materials. However, the
development of the wear resistant tool materials has
benefited the FSW process and paved way for the
rapid implementation of this process in the fabrica-
tion of high strength steel structures.11,12
Although the tool has the different portions (pin,
shoulder, and shank), shoulder diameter and pin
1
Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Centre for Materials
Joining & Research (CEMAJOR), Annamalai University, Annamalainagar,
India
2
Naval Materials Research Laboratory (NMRL), Mumbai, India
Corresponding author:
S Ragu Nathan, Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Annamalai
University, Annamalainagar 608 002, Tamil Nadu, India.
Email: ragucemajor@gmail.com

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
2 Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 0(0)
diameter control the frictional heat generation during
welding. Of the two, shoulder diameter is the predom-
inant heat generating source since the contact area
between shoulder and surface of the base metal is
higher than the other contacting areas.10 Hence, in
this investigation, an attempt was made to study the
effect of tool shoulder diameter on microstructural
characteristics and mechanical properties of friction
stir-welded pressure vessel grade HSLA steel joints.
Experimental
The rolled plates of HSLA steel with thickness of 5 mm
were cut to the required dimensions (150 mm  300 mm)
by abrasive cutting to prepare the joint configurations as
shown in Figure 1. The chemical composition of parent
metal is presented in Table 1.
The microstructure of parent metal is shown in
Figure 2. It is composed of predominantly ferrite
grains with small amount of pearlite. Nonconsumable
tools made of tungsten base alloy were used to weld the
joints during FSW process. The tools were manufac-
tured through powder metallurgy route having various
shoulder diameters of 20, 22.5, 25, 27.5, and 30 mm
and a tapered pin, tapering from 12 mm at the shoulder
to 8 mm at the pin tip (Figure 3). Welding parameters
used to fabricate the joints are presented in Table 2.
Indigenously designed and developed computer
numeric controlled FSW machine (60 kN capacity)
was used to weld the HSLA steel plates. The welding
setup is shown in Figure 4. To measure the temperature
field, four K-type thermocouples of 1 mm diameter
were embedded on the advancing side of the plate at
a depth of approximately 0.5 mm from the surface.
Figure 1. Joint configuration for FSW of HSLA steel. FSW:
friction stir welding; HSLA: high-strength low-alloy.
Table 1. Chemical composition (wt. %) of parent metal.
C Mn N Si Mo
0.08 1.42 .015 0.19 0.02
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
Thermocouples were placed at 16 mm from the weld
center as shown in Figure 4. Six thermocouples were
connected to the first six channels of the data
acquisition system (DAQ) to collect temperature.
Thermocouples were attached to a DAQ system
which could measure the data at 15 Hz. Data collection
was done with DAQ system that was attached to the
computer running Lab VIEW software.
ASTM E8M-04 guidelines were followed for pre-
paring the tensile test specimens. Electromechanical
controlled universal testing machine (100 kN cap-
acity) was used to evaluate the tensile properties.
Charpy impact specimens were prepared to evaluate
the impact toughness of the weld metal and the notch
was placed (machined) in the weld center. Since the
plate thickness was small, subsize charpy specimens
were prepared. Impact testing was conducted on a
pendulum-type impact testing machine (300 J cap-
acity) at room temperature. The amount of energy
absorbed in fracture was recorded.
Vicker’s microhardness tester was used for measur-
ing the hardness distribution across the welded joint
along the mid-thickness region with a load of 0.5 N.
The specimen for metallographic examination was
sectioned to the required size from the joint compris-
ing weld metal, HAZ, and base metal regions, and
polished using different grades of emery papers.
Final polishing was done using the diamond com-
pound (particle size of 1 mm) on the disc polishing
machine. Specimens were etched with 2% of Nital
solution to reveal the microstructural features of the
joints. Microstructural examination was carried out
using an optical microscope incorporated with an
image analyzing software (Metal Vision).
Results
Peak temperature
Figure 5 displays the photographs of top surface of
the five welds made using five different tool shoulder
diameter. From the figure, it is evident that the width
of the stir zone (SZ) and HAZ increases with the
increase in tool shoulder diameter. However, there is
no evidence of surface defects. The temperature pro-
files of all the five joints fabricated using different tool
shoulder diameters are displayed in Figure 6.
The peak temperature recorded during welding
with different tool shoulder diameter like 20, 22.5,
25, 27.5, and 30 mm are 545, 610, 765, 920, and
976  C, respectively. Cooling rate of the correspond-
ing peak temperature is also calculated and displayed
Ti V Nb Ni Cu Al W
0.016 0.032 0.035 0.69 0.126 .032 0.04
Ragu Nathan 3

Figure 2. HSLA microstructure revealing ferrite and small amount of pearlite characterized using (a) optical microscopy and
(b) scanning electron microscope. HSLA: high-strength low-alloy.

Figure 3. Photograph showing tool profile used for welding HSLA steel. HSLA: high-strength low-alloy.
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
4 Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 0(0)

in Figure 6. From this observation, it is clear that

increase in tool shoulder diameter will increase the
peak temperature in the parent metal during FSW.

Cross-sectional macrographs
The cross-sectional macrographs of the welded
joints are displayed in Table 3. The cross-section of
FSW joint appears like ‘‘basin shape.’’ It comprises
of advancing side heat affected zone, advancing side
thermomechanically affected zone, SZ, retreating
side thermomechanically affected zone, and retreating
side heat affected zone. The joint fabricated using a
tool with the shoulder diameter of 25 mm (five times
the plate thickness) yielded defect-free sound joint.
Similarly, the joint fabricated using tool with the
shoulder diameter of 20 mm (four times plate thick-
ness) yielded tunnel defect at the advancing side of the
joint, whereas the joint fabricated using a tool with
the shoulder diameter of 22.5 mm (4.5 times plate
thickness) was not welded completely due to lack of
stirring. The other two joints fabricated using tool

Table 2. Welding parameters used during FSW of HSLA steel.

Process parameters Values

Rotational speed (r/min) 600

Welding speed (mm/min) 30
D/Tp ratio of tool 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, and 6
Tool shoulder diameter (mm) 20, 22.5, 25, 27.5, and 30
Pin length (mm) 4 Figure 5. Photographs of top surface of the FSW joints
showing the effect of tool shoulder diameter. The arrow indi-
Tool inclined angle ( ) 0
cates the width of the shoulder influenced region. FSW: friction
FSW: friction stir welding; HSLA: high-strength low-alloy. stir welding.

Figure 4. FSW experimental setup showing red hot tool, thermocouple wire, and clamps holding HSLA plates. FSW: friction stir
welding; HSLA: high-strength low-alloy.

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
Ragu Nathan
Figure 6. Temperature profile of the FSW joints showing the effect of tool shoulder diameter. FSW: friction stir welding.
with the shoulder diameter of 27.5 and 30 mm,
respectively, resulted with pinhole defect, kissing
bond, and excess flash formation.
Microstructure
Optical microscopy (OM). The cross-section of the all the
joints was analyzed using OM and displayed in Figure 7.
Figure 7(a) and (b) shows the microstructure of the SZ
of the joint fabricated using a tool with shoulder diam-
eter of 20 mm. Formation of volumetric defect in the
shoulder influenced region (Figure 7(a)) and banded
structure in the pin influenced region (Figure 7(b)) are
clearly visible. It clearly demonstrates that the high fric-
tional heat was generated in the shoulder influenced
region. The microstructure presented in Figure 7(c)
and (d) reveals the sudden change in grain orientation
due to the metal excavation from advancing side to
deposit in the retreating side with lot of tungsten tool
debris. Even though the pin influenced region shows the
defect-free joint, tool wear was observed in the shoulder
influenced region (Figure 7(c)). Similarly in Figure 7(g)
to (j), severe deformation of the material is observed
in the shoulder influenced region along with higher
tungsten particles in the pin influenced region.
Whereas, joint fabricated using a tool with shoulder
diameter of 25 mm achieved proper coalescence of the
parent metal without tool wear and it is evident from
Figure 7(e) and (f), which may be contributed by the
appropriate temperature required for thermomechanical
process during FSW.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Figure 8 presents the
SEM micrographs of SZ regions of all the joints.
Figure 8(a) represents the shoulder influenced region
microstructure of the joint welded using a tool with
shoulder diameter of 20 mm. The severe deformation
of the material is clearly evident from the figure.
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
5
The presence of volumetric defect with oxide forma-
tion in the cavity is visible in the backscattered image
(Figure 8(b)). The joint fabricated using a tool with
shoulder diameter of 22.5 mm contains the root defect
and it is confirmed by the high magnification image of
both pin and shoulder influenced region (Figure 8(c)
and (d)). The coupled effect of thermal and mechan-
ical forces is responsible for the grain orientation,
thereby resulting in severe plastic deformation and
more frictional stirring occurred in the pin influenced
region (Figure 8(e) and (f)). It consists of fine lath
ferrite microstructure normally termed as upper bai-
nite without tungsten inclusions in the SZ of the weld
joint fabricated using 25 mm shoulder diameter.
Turbulent flow of the material in the SZ is visible
from Figure 8(g) and presence of tungsten inclusions
observed in Figure 8(h). High heat generation causes
severe tool degradation and resulted in root defect due
to lack of penetration of the deformed tool pin
(Figure 8(i) and (j)). The joints with volumetric
defect and root defect yielded joints are excluded
from the electron diffraction spectroscopy (EDS)
and hence, joints fabricated using the tools with
shoulder diameter of 22.5, 25, and 27.5 mm were
taken for the EDS analysis.
EDS analysis. Figure 9 presents the EDS results of the
SZ of the joints fabricated using tools with shoulder
diameter of 22.5, 25, and 27.5 mm. From Figure 9(a)
and (e), occurrence of tool wear was confirmed with
the presence of tungsten particles. The distribution of
tungsten particles was identified through EDS map-
ping (Figure 9(b) and (f)). Figure 9(c) and (d) confirms
the joint made using a tool with shoulder diameter of
25 mm is free from volumetric defects and tungsten
inclusions. Hence, defect free with fine lath ferrite
microstructure (upper bainitic structure) in the SZ
of the weld joint fabricated using 25 mm shoulder
6 Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 0(0)

Table 3. Influence of tool shoulder diameter on stir zone (macro).

D/Tp ratio Macrostructure Observations

4 (20 mm) Tunnel defect at advancing

side (0.848 kJ/mm)

4.5 (22.5 mm) Lack of stirring at the

bottom side of the plates
(swirl zone) (0.954 kJ/mm)

5 (25 mm) No defect (1.050 kJ/mm)

5.5 (27.5 mm) Kissing bond at swirl zone,

pin hole at advancing
side (1.166 kJ/mm)

6 (30 mm) Excess flash formation

(1.272 kJ/mm)

diameter was taken for further evaluation of mechan-
ical properties.
Tensile and impact toughness properties
The tensile properties of the parent metal and welded
joints are presented in Table 4. The yield strength and
tensile strength of parent metal were 438 and 610 MPa,
respectively. But the yield strength and tensile strength of
FSW joint are 502 and 664 MPa, respectively. The joints
fabricated using shoulder diameter to the plate thickness
ratio of 5 (25 mm) by FSW process exhibited over-
matched strength values and ductility values compared
to parent metal due to refinement of microstructure.
Charpy impact toughness test results are presented
in Table 4. The impact toughness of parent metal is 78 J
at room temperature. When the weld metal is welded
by FSW process, it exhibits 48 J, which is 38% lower
than that of the parent metal. The lowest impact
strength is showed by the joint fabricated by FSW

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
Ragu Nathan
Figure 7. Optical micrographs of various regions of welded steel joints.
process compared to parent metal. FSW joint shows
higher yield and tensile strength, lower elongation,
and toughness.
Fracture surface analysis
The fractured surfaces of the tensile and impact tested
specimens of parent metal and welded joint were ana-
lyzed using a SEM. The fractographs of tensile and
impact specimens are displayed in Figures 10 and 11.
The modes of failure of the tensile tested parent metal
and welded joints are ductile with acceptable plastic
deformation and are evident from the fracture location
and fractured surface shown in Figure 10(a) to (d). No
brittle cleavage fracture was found in any of the tensile
tested fractographs presented at high magnification in
Figure 10(b) and (d). However, an appreciable differ-
ence in fracture pattern was found. Fine and secondary
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
7
dimples are the key features of superior tensile strength
of FSW joint compared to parent metal. A substantial
dissimilarity in size and alignment of the dimples in the
fracture surface of FSW joint (Figure 10(d)) is
observed with respect to parent metal.
Scanned images and fractographs of fracture sur-
face of charpy v-notch impact tested specimens are
shown in Figure 11(a) to (d). At higher magnification,
few secondary dimples can be observed at the lip of
the dimples. This could be the reason for high impact
strength of the parent metal (Figure 11(b)). Scanned
image of FSW joint depicts the type of brittle fracture.
However, fracture morphology consists of the dimple
in the fracture surface as shown in Figure 11(d). The
dimple size exhibits a directly proportional relation-
ship with the strength and ductility, i.e. if the dimple
size is finer, the strength and ductility of the respective
joint are higher and vice versa.12,13
8 Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 0(0)

Figure 8. Scanning electron micrographs of various regions of welded steel joints.

be catered by suitable tool design selected particularly

Microhardness
Figure 12 shows the hardness variations across the
weld. The hardness of the as-received parent metal
is approximately 270 HV. The hardness of SZ varies
from 300 to 410 HV, depending on the grain size and
phases sampled from each indentation. The failure
location of the welded joints is consistent with hard-
ness distribution profile. The failure occurred in the
joint along the lowest hardness distribution region.13
Discussion
In case of FSW, the material is thermomechanically
deformed due to the stirring action of the pin tool,
resulting in a fine grain recrystallized microstructure.
The favorable material flow around the tool pin can
by considering the parent metal properties. It may have
influence on tool life, weld quality, and cost of the tool
material too. The tool geometry in FSW process is very
important as it leads the plasticized material to root of
the weld without change in dimension/configuration of
the tool profile. The internal defects formation in the
weld such as voids, increase in HAZ width, and root
defects can be attributed due to insufficient material flow
around the tool. In fact, as pointed out by Thompson
and Babu, tool degradation during FSW of hard metals
is influenced by flow stresses and welding temperatures
that are generated during frictional stirring.6 The local
stress generated by increase in sticking torque which
could increase the stress concentration at the corners
of the tool pin and hence failure occurred. At the
same time, due to compression of vertical force and

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
Ragu Nathan 9

Figure 9. EDS analysis of various regions of welded steel joints. EDS: electron diffraction spectroscopy.

Table 4. Mechanical properties of the parent metal and defect-free FSW joint.

Tensile Elongation in Impact Hardness of

0.2% offset strength 25 mm gauge toughness @ weld metal @ Fracture
Joint yield strength (MPa) (MPa) length (%) RT (J) 0.5 N load (HV) location

PM 438 610 29 78 270 Center

FSW 502 664 19 48 410 ASHAZ
ASHAZ: advancing side heat affected zone; FSW: friction stir welding; PM: parent metal; RT: room temperature.

resultant forces from the parent metal are likely to
reduce the density of the matrix and crack propagates
through the matrix phase of tool material.
The weld metal microstructure of welded joint is
greatly influenced by the chemical composition and
the heat input of the process. In general, higher heat
input leads to slower cooling rate which results in the
formation of coarse grain microstructure in weld
metal.14 However, lower heat input leads to fast cooling
rate which results in the formation of fine grain micro-
structure. Although the lower heat input is preferred as
it can produce finer grains, the lower heat input also
lead to inadequate plasticized material flow around the
tool pin. This unplasticized material flow causes more
tool wear due to increased flow stress to the tool pin
(Figure 7(a) and (c)). At the same time, high heat input
caters the material to flow turbulently around the pin
which results in excess weld flash formation (Figure 7(g)
and (i)). Therefore, for defect-free weld, tool profile and
FSW welding parameter play an important role.
FSW of HSLA steel using a tool of shoulder diam-
eter of 25 mm generates lower heat input (1.05 kJ/mm)
in the weld region compared to other two larger shoul-
der diameters (Table 3). The microstructure consists of
fine acicular ferrite (upper bainite) in SZ as stated ear-
lier. The microstructure becomes coarser that is the fer-
rite size and also occurrence of grain boundary ferrite
was also observed using higher diameter shoulder.15,16
An acicular ferrite microstructure has the potential of
combining high strength and high toughness.17

Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
10 Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 0(0)

Figure 10. SEM fractographs of tensile specimens. SEM: scanning electron microscopy.

Figure 11. SEM fractographs of impact specimens. SEM: scanning electron microscopy.
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
Ragu Nathan
Figure 12. Microhardness survey across the cross-section of the welded joints.
The postweld microstructure of the SZ consists of
bainitic ferrite which could be the reason for higher
hardness values (Figure 7). The microhardness values
are less significant in affecting the mechanical proper-
ties because the inherent nature of the tool rotational
speed has more influencing factors over the hardness
values.9 Due to severe plastic deformation and mech-
anical stirring, the average grain size of parent metal
(15–19 mm approximately) (Figure 2(b)) was refined to
3–5 mm in the SZ as seen in Figure 8(e).
Table 4 clearly indicates that the strength of the
FSW specimen is 8% more than that of parent
metal. The increased strength is attributed to the
fine grain microstructure consisting of acicular ferrite
and upper bainite.18,19 The fractograph in Figures
10(d) and 11(d) shows the ductile dimple fracture fea-
tures in parent as well as FSW weld region; however,
the size of dimples in parent metal is smaller as com-
pared to FSW joint. This indicates the higher elong-
ation observed in parent metal.20,21
Charpy V-notch impact toughness of parent metal
is 78 J at room temperature, whereas the impact
toughness of FSW joint exhibits 48 J which is lower
than that of parent metal. The increased percentage of
bainite leads to an enhancement of tensile properties.
The presence of even small amount of tool materials
can lower the impact properties and it may be the
reason for lower impact property of FSW joint in
spite of having fine acicular ferrite. This could be
the reason for reduction in toughness of FSW joint
compared to the parent metal.
In FSW joint, the SZ is exposed to maximum tem-
perature with high strain rate. Subsequent fast cooling
rate leads to the formation of fine ferrite and upper
bainitic microstructure in the SZ. These two micro-
structures are the major contributors of the hardest
SZ in the FSW joint.22 Whereas in the HAZ and
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
11
parent metal interface region, due to absence of
dynamic recrystallization, the microstructure normally
consist of degenerated pearlite, the extent of which
increases away from the SZ. Therefore, the HAZ
region experiences low hardness as compared to SZ.14
The tool shoulder diameter is having a direct pro-
portional relationship with the heat generation due to
frictional stirring.9 If the shoulder diameter is large,
then heat generation due to friction will be high due to
large contact area and vice versa. In this investigation
it has been observed that the lower tool shoulder
diameter (<25 mm) has less contact area and fric-
tional force which leads to insufficient heat generation
(0.848 kJ/mm). Thus, the formation of defects is
observed in the SZ due to improper material flow
because of inadequate plasticization of the parent
metal in the SZ. It has also been observed that the
larger tool shoulder diameter (>25 mm) leads to wider
contact area and resulted in more frictional heat gen-
eration (1.272 kJ/mm) and hence the turbulent flow of
the plasticized material leads to excess weld flash for-
mation. Whereas, the higher grain refinement was
observed in the welds produced with the tool having
shoulder diameter of 25 mm (D/Tp ¼ 5) due to opti-
mum heat generation (1.05 kJ/mm). The higher
material dragged and proper consolidation of that
dragged material at the advancing side without any
interface gap was achieved in this 25 mm shoulder
diameter. Therefore, as compared with other tool
shoulder diameters, 25 mm shoulder diameter has
better stability at elevated temperature and can be
used for FSW of HSLA steel of 5 mm thickness.
Conclusions
In this investigation, an attempt was made to study the
effect of tool shoulder diameter on SZ characteristics of
12
friction stir-welded HSLA steel joints. From this inves-
tigation, the following important conclusions are
derived.
1. An optimum generation of heat energy was
obtained while using 25 mm diameter tool shoulder.
This led to the proper flow of plasticized material,
adequate stirring and consolidation of plasticized
material, sufficient cooling rate to form ideal micro-
structure (upper bainite) in the SZ.
2. Hence, the joint fabricated using a tool with the
D/Tp ratio of 5 (25 mm shoulder diameter) yielded
defect-free joint with improved (overmatched) ten-
sile properties but deteriorated (under match)
impact toughness.
Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to Dr. A.K. Lakshminarayanan,
Associate Professor, SSN College of Engineering, Chennai,
India for his valuable suggestions, guidance, and discussion
to carry out this investigation.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: The authors are grateful to The Director, Naval
Material Research Laboratory (NMRL), Ambernath for
financial support through CARS project No: G8/15250/
2011 dated 29 February 2012 and providing base material
for this investigation.
References
1. Fujii H, Cui L, Tsuji N, et al. Friction stir welding of
carbon steels. Mater Sci Eng A 2006; 429: 50–57.
2. Magudeeswaran G, Balasubramanian V, Madhusudhan
Reddy G, et al. Effect of welding processes and consum-
ables on tensile and impact properties of high strength
quenched and tempered steel joints. J Iron Steel Res Int
2008; 15: 87–94.
3. Kang J, Wang C and Wang GD. Microstructural charac-
teristics and impact fracture behavior of a high-strength
low-alloy steel treated by intercritical heat treatment.
Mater Sci Eng A 2012; 527: 96–104.
4. Lambert A, Drillet J, Gourgues AF, et al. Microstructure
of martensite – austenite constituents in heat affected
zones of high strength low alloy steel welds in relation
to toughness properties. Sci Technol Weld Joining 2000;
5: 168–173.
5. Lakshminarayanan AK and Balasubramanian V. An
assessment of microstructure, hardness, tensile and
impact strength of friction stir welded ferritic stainless
steel joints. Mater Des 2010; 31: 4592–4600.
Downloaded from pil.sagepub.com at Middle East Technical Univ on May 22, 2016
Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 0(0)
6. Thompson B and Babu SS. Tool degradation charac-
terization in the friction stir welding of hard metals.
Weld J 2010; 89: 256–261.
7. Galvao I, Leal RM and Loureiro A. Influence of tool
shoulder geometry on properties of friction stir welds
thin copper sheets. J Mater Process Technol 2013; 213:
129–135.
8. Zhu XK and Chao YJ. Numerical simulation of tran-
sient temperature and residual stresses in friction stir
welding of 304L stainless steel. J Mater Process
Technol 2004; 146: 263–272.
9. Park SHC, Sato YS and Kokawa H. Carbide formation
induced by pcBN tool wear in friction-stir welded stain-
less. Metall Mater Trans A 2009; 40A: 625–636.
10. Gan W, Li ZT and Khurana S. tool materials selection
for friction stir welding of L80 steel. Sci Technol Weld
Joining 2007; 12: 610–613.
11. Lienert TJ, Stellwag WL, Grimmett BB, et al. Friction
stir welding studies on mild steel. Weld J 2003; 89: 1s–9s.
12. Lakshminarayanan AK and Balasubramanian V.
Understanding the parameters controlling friction stir
welding of AISI 409M ferritic stainless steel. Metall
Mater Int 2011; 17: 969–981.
13. Malarvizhi S and Balasubramanian V. Influences of tool
shoulder diameter to plate thickness ratio (D/T) on stir
zone formation and tensile properties of friction stir
welded dissimilar joints of AA6061 aluminum–AZ31B
magnesium alloys. Mater Des 2012; 40: 453–460.
14. Zhang Y-Q, Zhang H-Q, Li J-F, et al. Effect of heat
input on microstructure and toughness of coarse grain
heat affected zone in Nb microalloyed HSLA steels.
J Iron Steel Res 2009; 16: 73–80.
15. Rajamanickam N, Balusamy V, Magudeeswaran G,
et al. Effect of process parameters on thermal history
and mechanical properties of friction stir welds. Mater
Des 2009; 30: 2726–2731.
16. Wan XL, Wei R and Wu. Effect of acicular ferrite for-
mation on grain refinement in the coarse-grained region
of heat affected zone. Mater Charact 2010; 61: 726–731.
17. Lee CH, Bhadeshia HKDH and Lee HC. Effect of plas-
tic deformation on the formation of accicular ferrite.
Mater Sci Eng A 2003; 360: 249–257.
18. Ghosh M, Kumar K and Mishra RS. Analysis of
microstructural evolution during friction stir welding
of ultrahigh-strength steel. Scripta Mater 2010; 63:
851–854.
19. Show BK, Veerababu R, Balamuralikrishnan R, et al.
Effect of vanadium and titanium modification on the
microstructure and mechanical properties of microal-
loyed HSLA steel. Mater Sci Eng A 2010; 527:
1595–1604.
20. Yayla P, Kaluc E and Ural K. Effect of welding pro-
cesses on the mechanical properties of HY 80 steel weld-
ments. Mater Des 2007; 28: 1898–1906.
21. Sun W, Wang G, Zhang J, et al. Microstructural char-
acterization of high heat input welding joint of HSLA
steel plate for oil storage construction. J Mater Sci
Technol 2009; 25: 857–860.
22. Brown IH. The role of microsegregation in centerline
cold cracking of high strength low alloy steel weld-
ments. Scripta Mater 2006; 54: 489–492.