Materials and Manufacturing Processes

ISSN: 1042-6914 (Print) 1532-2475 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lmmp20

Issues and Strategies in Composite Fabrication via

Friction Stir Processing: A Review

Sandeep Rathee, Sachin Maheshwari & Arshad Noor Siddiquee

To cite this article: Sandeep Rathee, Sachin Maheshwari & Arshad Noor Siddiquee (2017): Issues
and Strategies in Composite Fabrication via Friction Stir Processing: A Review, Materials and
Manufacturing Processes, DOI: 10.1080/10426914.2017.1303162

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2017.1303162

Accepted author version posted online: 13

Mar 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lmmp20

Download by: [University of Newcastle, Australia] Date: 13 March 2017, At: 07:54
Issues and strategies in composite fabrication via friction stir processing: A Review

Sandeep Rathee1, Sachin Maheshwari1, Arshad Noor Siddiquee2

1
Division of Manufacturing Processes and Automation Engineering, Netaji Subhas
Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India, 2Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi, India

Corresponding Author: Sandeep Rathee, Email: rathee8@gmail.com

Received: 03 Jan 2017; Accepted: 22 Feb 2017.

Abstract

Friction stir processing (FSP) is an expeditiously emerging novel technique involving

exterior layers modification which enables one to successfully fabricate surface

composites (SCs) as well as bulk composites of metal matrix. SCs constitute an exclusive

class of composites which exhibit improved surface properties while retaining the bulk

properties unaltered. During initiative years, FSP was employed in development of SCs

of light metal alloys like aluminium. But, now a days, it has gained a shining role in the

field of SCs fabrication of various nonferrous alloys like aluminium, magnesium, copper

and even ferrous metals like steel etc. This article reviews the current trends, various

issues and strategies used to enhance the efficiency of the process in fabrication of SCs.

Factors involved in the process of SCs fabrication are discussed and classified with a new

approach. Also, variation of microstructural and mechanical characteristics with these

factors is reviewed. In addition to a brief presentation on the interaction between various

inputs and their effects on properties, a summary of literature on SCs fabrication for

different metals is tabulated with prominent results. Subsequently, shortfalls and future

perspectives of FSP on SCs fabrication domain are discussed.

1
KEYWORDS: Composites, friction, stir, processing, microstructure, mechanical,

properties, process, parameters.

INTRODUCTION

Increasing light weight requirements especially in industries like aircraft, automobile,

marine, etc. imposes need for optimizing product designs using low weight materials like

alloys of aluminium, magnesium, titanium, etc. These alloys are quite propitious for

various applications owing to their reduced weight density, enhanced strength- weight

ratios as well as higher corrosive resilience. However, stiffness and strength of these

alloys are not adequate for some structural purposes thereby necessitating requirement of

reinforcement. After reinforcement, metal matrix composites (MMCs) are found to

exhibit improved metallurgical, mechanical, and tribological characteristics [1-4].

Fabrication of MMCs is usually accomplished by dispersion of micro and nano-size

ceramic specks in metal matrix via various techniques like powder metallurgy [5], laser

technique [6, 7], electron beam irradiation technique [8], spray deposition techniques [9],

casting [10, 11], mechanical alloying [12], etc. Composite fabrication is done in liquid

phase at high temperatures which leads to the formation of intermetallic reactions and

undesirable phases between the metal substrate and reinforcement in almost all the

aforementioned techniques [13]. In view of the above shortcomings, employment of a

process for composite fabrication which can be conducted below melting points of the

metal matrix can go a long way to improve and consequently optimize the MMCs design

and fabrication issue. Friction stir processing (FSP) offers an excellent choice for surface

modification and development of surface as well as bulk composites of metal alloys.

2
FSP can be easily understood as a variant of friction stir welding (FSW) process. At The

Welding Institute (TWI), FSW was patented in 1991 [14] while the term FSP was

initially used in 1999 [15]. The working principle of FSP is similar to FSW except that

FSP is done on a single plate while FSW is utilized to join more than one plate. In its

simple operation, a rotating non-consumable tool having pin and shoulder of exclusive

design plummets a single plate. It is then required to traverse in the defined direction to

cover up the desired realm. Process schematic is presented in Fig. 1. Heat of friction

generated at the interface of rotating tool with workpiece results in softening and

plasticization of workpiece material [16, 17]. Desirable processed region is achieved

behind the tool owing to forging of material below the tool shoulder as soon as the tool

traverses in the desired direction. Grain refinement takes place during this phase owing to

dynamic recrystallization (refer Table 1) [18, 19]. During initial years, refinement of

grain size to achieve microstructural homogeneity and mechanical properties

enhancement for aluminium alloys was the major objective of FSP yet it has emerged as

an attractive process/route for fabricating the MMCs in the current times [13, 20].

Surface composites (SCs) fabrication using FSP is a landmark achievement. As, in SCs,

surface properties are considerably enhanced up to the desired depth by utilizing hard

phase of reinforcement particles (RPs). This results in improved surface properties while

retaining the bulk properties (especially ductility) unaltered. A typical arrangement of

RPs in bulk and SCs is shown in Fig. 2. In addition to composite fabrication and grain

refinement of metal alloys, the development of FSP has further led to its applications in

fields like modification in microstructures of MMCs [21], homogenization of alloys

3
produced via powder metallurgy route [16], dissolution of secondary particles [22] and

alleviation casting defects [23].

This article presents a critical review on the recent developments and trends of FSP in ex-

situ and in-situ composite fabrication domain of metal alloys. Factors involved in

composite fabrication are classified in a new manner followed by the discussion on the

discrete influence of these determinants on the properties of fabricated SCs. Also, a

comparative study based on extensive and exhaustive literature survey of these factors for

different types of metal alloys like aluminium alloys, copper, magnesium, and other

alloys is presented in tabular format for quick reference. Then, a detailed discussion on

the microstructural and mechanical characterization is provided. Subsequently, shortfalls

of the process are discussed in brief. In the last, paper is summarized with the future

trends and concluding summary.

FABRICATION OF SURFACE COMPOSITES VIA FSP

During FSP, softening and plasticization of workpiece material occur owing to frictional

heat generation between rotating tool and workpiece. The stirring action of tool in heated

state mixes the RPs with BM. As the rotating tool traverses, the material is forged

beneath the shoulder resulting in the processed region. Thus, the process of composite

fabrication completes. Using FSP, MMCs can be fabricated via two routes viz. Ex-situ

and In-situ. For ex-situ composites, RPs are preplaced in/over the base matrix before FSP

while in the case of in-situ composites, the reinforcement becomes inside during the

composite synthesis which needs certain reactions to be completed. The mechanism of

4
ex-situ composites is simpler and less time consuming as compared to in-situ composites.

In ex-situ route, first preplacement of RPs is done and then FSP is performed. Numerous

ways of preplacement of RPs are in practice which is discussed in detail in section

reinforcement strategy. In this article, first ex-situ composites (referred as composites or

SCs) are discussed along with factors involved and properties enhancement mechanisms

and then various trends and issues of in-situ composites are discussed.

Mishra et al. [13] presented the maiden work on ex-situ SCs fabrication of aluminium

alloys using FSP. In this work, silicon carbide reinforcement was mixed with some

volatile medium like methanol and then smeared over AA 5083 plate exteriors to deposit

light stratums of reinforcement over base matrix. These Al plates with SiC coatings were

then subjected to FSP. After single pass FSP, uniform dispersion of SiC particles in the

base matrix was observed. AA5083 metal matrix hardness increased from 85 HV to 173

HV in SCs. This work was a pioneer in the sense that it paved way for numerous

possibilities of accomplishing the reinforcement in the metal matrix for developing SCs

of different alloys. After that, numerous studies have been reported and are currently in

progress for fabrication of SCs using FSP. Initially, aluminium alloys were majorly used

for experimentations. This has been successfully extended to development of SCs of

other alloys like alloys of copper [24, 25], magnesium alloys [26], titanium alloys [27]

and even steel [28, 29]. A random study of research papers (cited in this work) is

accomplished and base materials used in the development of SCs using FSP are shown in

Fig. 3. It can be easily observed that the amount of research accomplished for aluminium

alloys is considerably higher in comparison to other materials.

5
 EFFECT OF FACTORS INVOLVED IN COMPOSITE FABRICATION

Microstructural changes and property enhancements in SCs solely depend on the

distribution of RPs in the metal matrix [30]. However, the distribution of RPs depends on

combinations of factors and strategies involved in composite fabrication. Fig. 4

schematically depicts various factors which are involved in composite fabrication

process. These can be tentatively classed into five groupings namely: machine specific,

tool specific, reinforcement specific, material property specific and other

variants/strategies. Contribution of each process parameter varies since some have a

higher contribution in properties enhancement than others as discussed in detail in this

section.

Machine Specific Variables

Machine specific variables are those parameters which can be altered by changing the

machine settings. Speed of rotation and travel speeds are the major machine variables

which affect the amount of heat generation and the rate of material movement during the

process. It has been established through literature that combination of higher rotational

speeds and lower travel speed increases heat input, material flow and consequently

improves particle distribution [31-33]. Also, reduction of torque with increased

temperatures and vice versa are observed with rise in tool rotation speed [34]. Despite the

fact based on experimental evidence that increasing speed of rotation amounts to

improved particle dispersion in metal matrix, few works have reported that a defect free

stir zone and best particulate dispersion was achieved at relatively lower speeds of

rotation [35]. However, no supporting explanation was provided for the latter results.

6
Other machine specific parameters are axial force [36], tool tilt angle and plunge depth

[37, 38]. An axial force is responsible for holding the tool and stirred material (during

material flow) against the workpiece. In addition to this, it also significantly affects the

particle distribution. Literature suggests that at low axial force the particle distribution is

less homogeneous and at high axial force particles are ejected out. So, an adequate axial

depth is to be selected for uniform powder distribution [39, 40].

The angle of tool tilt and plunge depth are highly interrelated to each other [41]. To

obtain desired contact area of tool with work, simultaneous optimization of tilt angle with

plunge depth is required. This can be stated as: if the tilt angle increases with constant

plunge depth, lesser surface of tool shoulder touches the workpiece amounting into

reduced heat generation. Counterbalancing reduced contact area and heat generation thus

requires higher penetration depth. According to a study conducted by Asadi et al. [42],

the optimum values of plunge depth required for tilt angles of 2.5˚, 3˚ and 3.5˚ were 0.22,

0.30 and 0.40mm respectively. Also, tilt angle affects the contact pressure between the

leading edge and the shoulder. Low tilt angle leads to the formation of voids even at

higher tool rotational to traverse speed ratios. Tilt angle generally varies from 0° to 3°

(see Table 2 and 3).

Tool Variables

Tool geometry plays a pivotal role in determining the heat generation, material drift

course, reinforcement distribution and properties of fabricated SCs in addition to

rotational and traverse tool motion [43]. The heat generation by rotating tool is mainly

7
due to twin reasons: 1) friction between workpiece and rotating tool. 2) Plastic

deformation which occurs when the workpiece material stirs, mechanically mix and forge

due to the stirring action of the tool [17]. Besides, stirring of surrounding material the

incorporation of strengthener particles into the metal matrix is also accomplished by the

tool [33]. Tool variables include two aspects of its shoulder and pin design. Designing a

shoulder mainly involves decision of tool diameter and angle of end surface of shoulder.

Tool pin design mainly consists of tool pin diameter, tool pin length, and shape of the

pin. The characteristics of these parameters related to tool design are discussed here:

Shoulder diameter is an important parameter as it generates most of the heat and is

responsible for forging of material under it. The heat input in FSW/P is a function of

friction coefficient between tool and workpiece, applied pressure/force, rotational speed

and third power to the radius of the shoulder [20, 44]. In addition to this, axial force can

also be defined as a function of radius of tool shoulder [45, 46] and is given by:

q0 4 / 3 2 µP R 3 (1)

Where, q0= resultant power; µ = coefficient of friction between base metal (BM) & tool;

P = pressure; ω = tool rotational speed; R = radius of tool shoulder.

Increasing shoulder diameter while maintaining remaining parameters constant leads to

higher heat generation. This can be accounted to higher exterior touch area of tool

shoulder with workpiece. But, there should be some optimum value of shoulder diameter

to obtain better properties. A lot of work has been done to predict the optimum shoulder

diameter for different types of metal alloys. A common approximation drawn from

8
experimental results is that tool shoulder diameter follows the straight line equation with

workpiece thickness having a slope of 2.2 and intercept value of 7.3 mm [47]. In addition

to shoulder diameter estimation, shoulder to pin diameter (D/d) ratio should also be

designed to achieve optimal properties. In FSW, the desirable weld properties were

achieved using most commonly utilized shoulder to pin diameter ratio of 3 [43, 48]. Same

types of results are proposed by Vijayavel et al. [49] during FSP. In their study, FSP was

performed on LM25AA-5% SiC composites in which D/d was varied from 2mm to 4mm

in steps of 0.5 mm. They reported that out of five ratios of D/d, samples with the ratio of

3 exhibited better microstructural and mechanical properties. In addition to shoulder

diameter the end surface angle of shoulder also affects the material flow. Shoulder end

can either have flatness, concavity and convexity. Out of which the flat surface have the

simplest design but in some cases it may cause excessive flash during FSP which can be

avoided using concave shoulder. In addition to end surface angle, the end surface may be

having different profiles such as scroll, spiral etc. to enhance the performance of tools

[50].

In tool pin design, the shape of the pin is most important aspect than others. Numerous

types of pin profiles are used in the literature reporting the characteristics of each profile.

The pin profiles mainly used are of cylindrical, circular, conical, triangular, square etc. In

addition to this, the pins can be threaded and having flutes on the surface. The tool pin

profile has a strong impact over movement of material and distribution of RPs which in

turn affects properties of fabricated SCs. In general, it is understood that a larger pin

surface area results in more favorable material flow since it leads to increased frictional

9
heat amounts, higher temperatures and reduced flow stress in stir zone [45]. However,

value of optimum D/d ratio limits the size of pin diameter. The different shapes of pins

are shown in Fig. 5.

Numerous studies have been reported in literature to explain the effect of tool pin shapes

on material flow, RPs dispersion and properties of fabricated SCs. Main outcomes of

these studies can be summarized as: The particle distribution was found more

homogeneous with a square pin as compared to circular and triangular pins in Al/SiC SCs

[51]. Similar results were reported by Elangovan and Balasubramanian [52, 53] in their

studies that flaw free welds exhibiting superior mechanical properties were achieved

using square tool pin as compared to other pin profiles. In addition to this, the square pin

profiles result in more grain refinement as compared to non-threaded circular pins. The

reason behind this may be the pulsating action of flat faces of a square pin [54].

In the case of columnar pins, it was reported that best powder distribution was achieved

with pin having threads on the surface as compared to plain shape or with flutes [31].

Threaded pin results in the generation of higher temperatures when compared to a

smoother surface pin of identical dimensions. This difference can basically be related to

the larger contact area of threads with the surrounding deformation zone. Further,

threaded pins possess inherent vertical material movement characteristics (refer Fig. 6).

On one hand, material tends to flow in the upward direction in the deformation zone

whereas on the other hand, tool shoulder forces the material to flow in the downward

direction nearness to pin. As a result, vertical vortex motion occurs resulting in better RPs

10
dispersion [55-57]. Fig. 7 shows that dispersion of RPs in A356 alloy using threaded pin

possesses higher homogeneity as compared to cylindrical and square pin. Also, owing to

threads on pin, the maximal velocity with which the material flows might be increased. In

a particular study, Yu et al. [58] proposed using computational fluid dynamics (CFD)

modelling during FSP of magnesium alloys that the maximum flow velocity of material

increased up to 30% in the threaded pin as compared to plain columnar pins.

Thus, a suitably designed tool results in sound SCs. In case of nonferrous metal

alloys, generally hot work steel (H-13) tool is in common practice (see Table 2 and 3)

while tungsten carbide is generally used in case of ferrous metals. Further, tool wear is

not a subject of matter in case of non-ferrous metal alloys. However, in case of FSP/W of

ferrous metals (like steel), severe tool wear takes place which needs consideration [28,

59-61].

Reinforcement Variables

The properties of SCs to be fabricated are strongly depends on the reinforcement

variables which include the following:

Types of RPs

Size and fractional volume of reinforcing particles and

Reinforcement strategy

Types Of Reinforcement Particles

11
Lot of work on SCs fabrication using FSP was reported using different types of RPs like

silicon carbide (SiC) [62], titanium carbide (TiC) [63] , boron carbide (B4C) [64, 65],

aluminium oxide (Al2O3) [66], silicon oxide (SiO2) [26], titanium oxide (TiO2), AIN [67],

Si3N4 [68], Titanium diboride (TiB2) [69, 70], zirconium diboride (ZrB2) [71], carbon

particles like graphite [72], carbon nano-tubes [73], nano-hydroxyapatite [74], etc. The

selection of suitable reinforcement is done depending upon the application of end-use

products and compatibility of reinforcement and metal matrix. For example, carbides like

B4C offers excellent thermal and wear properties [75, 76]. Al–B4C composites offer the

outstanding capability of absorbing neutrons, and these composites are utilized as main

neutron shield material [17]. Inspite of excellent mechanical properties of CNTs,

magnesium/ Al2O3 composites possess higher wear resistance than Mg/CNTs composites

[77]. Raaft et al. [78] reported the fabrication of A356/Al2O3 and A356/graphite mono

composites. The authors concluded that A356/Al2O3 composites exhibit better wear and

mechanical properties than A356/graphite composites. Also, a maximum enhancement of

82% in microhardness was achieved in Al2O3 based composites. For some reinforcements

like CNTs, care should be taken about the stability of RPs in multiple passes of FSP. As

CNTs dispersion in single FSP may be not uniform implies for multiple runs [79]. But, in

multiple passes, degradation of CNTs occurs [80]. Fig. 8 (a) indicates non-uniform CNTs

distribution at two pass FSP in Al 5059/ CNTs SCs which however becomes

homogeneous in three FSP passes (see Fig. 8b). At two FSP passes, numerous tubular

structures were observed thus confirming the survivability of CNTs after second FSP

pass (refer Fig. 8c). However, CNTs length decrease as compared to initial CNTs and

furthermore, few circular structures begin to appear (see Fig. 8d) [80]. Increasing FSP

12
pass count (3 passes) damages CNTs thereby resulting in transformation of new spherical

shaped structure, polyaromatic carbon as shown in Fig. 8 (f). CNTs structure disappeared

after 3 FSP pass (see Fig. 8e). Similar results (i.e. breakage of CNTs) were reported by

other researchers during multi FSP passes [81].

In addition to mono composites, several authors produced hybrid composites using more

than one type of RPs at different hybrid ratios [82-87]. Appreciable enhancement of

properties is exhibited by hybrid composites by virtue of combining benefits of each

reinforcement like softer phase particles are mixed with hard phase to achieve improved

tribological and mechanical properties simultaneously [88]. However, the strength of SCs

might be adversely affected due to soft phase nature of particles thereby necessitating the

selection of adequate hybrid ratio to achieve optimal properties [89]. Devraju et al. [90]

fabricated hybrid composites using combinations of SiC and graphite powder using

aluminium 6061 as base alloy. They investigated the effects of combinations of different

volume percentages of reinforcement and rotational speeds upon mechanical as well as

wear characteristics of hybrid SCs. They found that with increasing content of SiC

particles, mechanical properties improve owing to its hard phase and higher pinning

effect which in turn decreases with a higher volume percentage of graphite. Also, there is

a reduction of wear rate with increase in graphite volume percentage owing to soft phase

of graphite particles which act as a solid lubricant during wear. Identical research was

reported in case of AA6082/ (TiB2 + BN) hybrid composites [91]. They concluded that

hybrid composites demonstrate higher wear resistance in comparison to mono

13
composites. Thus, a suitable combination of multiple reinforcements renders adequate

properties to SCs.

Size And Fractional Volume Of Rps

Generally, RPs used in SCs fabrication are of micrometer or nanometer range. The size

and fractional volume of RPs has great impact on microstructural as well as mechanical

properties of fabricated SCs [92-94]. It is well known that the small sizes of RPs result in

better properties. This is in agreement with relation shown in Eqn-(2) in which inter-

particle spacing (λ) can be defined as space between adjacent particles, which varies

directly with size and inversely with volume fractions of reinforcing particle and can be

estimated mathematically as below [95]. Also, the inter-particle distance reduces with a

reduction in dimensions or having a higher volume fraction of reinforcement.

Interspacing distance (λ) is calculated by:

1 Vp / N L (2)

Where Vp – volume fraction of reinforcing material, NL- Intercepts number of particles

per unit length.

In accordance to Zener-Holoman parameter, increment in reinforcement volume fraction

(Vf) amounts to decreased grain size. This is partly due to pinning effect [96, 97]. Pinning

effect is phenomena of restriction of grain growth by RPs after recrystallization

phenomena which can be seen in Fig. 9 and Fig. 10. However, higher volume fraction of

RPs may results in agglomeration of RPs [98], thus, a suitable value of volume fraction is

14
to be chosen for optimum outputs. The estimation of grain size (Zener’s) is given by Eqn-

(3).

dz 4r / 3Vf (3)

Based on Zener-Holoman parameter, theoretical composite layer grain size is estimated

by Eqn-(3) which stipulates that reduction in radius or increase in RPs volume fraction

would result in reduction of granular size for given composite.

Rios et al. [100] predicted another model for calculation of critical grain radius (dR)

which is proposed to vary with radius (r) and fractional volume (Vf) of reinforcement.

Relationship between dR, r and Vf is presented in Eqn - (4).

dR r / 6Vf (4)

Where, dR is the critical grain radius.

Some works were reported in the literature in which average granular dimensions do not

agree with Zener’s limiting grain size. In the work of Shamsipur et al. [27], resulting

mean granular size agree closely to Rios model rather than Zener’s model.

Reinforcement Strategies

Reinforcement strategies refer to the method of pre-placing the RPs over the metal matrix

before FSP. SCs imperfections can, of course, be reduced by correct judgment of process

parameters. In addition to above-discussed process parameters, correct decision on

reinforcement strategy is also mandatory to obtain the defect free SCs. After the

invention of FSP as a composite fabrication technique several researchers investigated

15
different reinforcement strategies for fabricating the SCs. It was started with the maiden

work done by Mishra et al. [13] in which direct pasting (of RPs) technique was utilized.

Later, method of direct pasting or direct placing of RPs over metal matrix prior to FSP

was replaced by other methods which are mentioned ahead. The advent of these new

methods was broadly done to prevent the wastage of particles sputtered during the

process. Miranda et al. [101] investigated three strategies for AA5083-H111 alloy with

SiC and Al2O3 particles to produce functionally graded materials via FSP. It was

concluded that direct deposition of RPs on substrate is a quick process which does not

need additional work like tool preparation, groove or hole preparation. Alternatively,

preparing tool is required for consumable tool technique and produced thicker but less

homogeneous layers than others.

Different reinforcement strategies reported in the literature for the pre-placement of RPs

on the substrate before conducting FSP may be broadly classed under three heads as

shown in Fig. 11:

(i) Direct pasting of RPs on substrate metal after mixing with some volatile solvent [101,

102] or by spraying of reinforcement on substrate by a suitable technique like plasma

spray [103], high velocity oxy fuel spray etc. [104-106] etc.

(ii) Insertion of RPs in to metal matrix via grooves [107-109]/ profiles [110, 111]/ holes

of different geometries on substrate [40, 112, 113];

(iii) Using hollow tools and consumable tools with drilled holes [114].

16
It is now well accepted that the dispersion of RPs in a uniform manner in SCs is a crucial

and demanding work during FSP. The effect of various reinforcement strategies on

reinforcement dispersion along with their characteristics are discussed here.

In continuation to direct pasting, another strategy reported in literature was applying RPs

over the metal matrix by some spray technique and sub-sequent FSP. In this technique,

the distribution of RPs can be achieved into a wider region as the dispersion of particles

is governed by shoulder alone rather than tool pin. Zahmatkesh and Enayati [104]

achieved uniform dispersion of RPs in fabrication of AA2024/Al2O3 surface

nanocomposites using FSP. In this work, nano-sized Al2O3 particles were sprayed on the

workpiece via plasma spraying technique to deposit a coating of 200 µm thick. Then,

FSP was performed on the coated plates. The mean SCs layer thickness was estimated as

600µm in the composite zone. Maximum micro-hardness of 230 Hv was achieved which

is considerably higher as compared to AA2024 substrate hardness of 90 Hv. Mazaheri et

al. [106] utilized high velocity oxy-fuel spraying method for deposition of A356-5 vol. %

Al2O3 coating on to grit blasted A356-T6 plates to fabricate the A356/Al2O3 SCs.

Subsequently, FSP was performed on the plates that led to satisfactory consolidation of

composite layers with Al alloy substrate with negligible flaws. A typical arrangement of

high velocity oxy-fuel spray technique utilized by Mazaheri et al. [115] in fabricating

A356/Al2O3 composites is shown in Fig. 12. Hodder et al. [116] integrated cold spraying

with FSP. FSP was performed on AA6061 alloy covered with Al-Al2O3 powder mixture

done via cold spraying. Maximum Al2O3 volume fraction achieved was 48 wt. % and

17
hardness of this composite improved remarkably from 85HV to maximum hardness of

137 HV after post-FSP.

During the last decade, the most commonly used reinforcement technique (refer

Table 2) is the groove technique [85, 96, 117]. The schematic illustration of SCs

fabrication using groove technique is shown in Fig. 13. In this method, First of all, a

groove of suitable dimensions is machined on the base metal. Then, RPs are compacted

in the groove. A tool without probe is applied for closing groove opening to avoid

powder sputter during FSP. Finally, in the last step, FSP is carried out on the packed

groove with a tool having pin. Groove size, shape and total number of grooves are

variable for attainment of desirable volume fraction of RPs. In some studies, the step of

closing of groove opening via pinless tool was eliminated and the groove or drilled holes

were covered with a thin sheet to avoid RPs ejection [79, 118-121] as shown in Fig. 14

(a). Lim et al. [79] utilized AA6111 plate of 1.1 mm thickness as cover plate to fabricate

AA7075/multi-walled carbon nano-tubes composites. Along similar lines, Avett and

Fenoel et al. [118] utilized 0.2 mm thickness cover plate to fabricate Cu/Y2O3

composites. Apart from utilizing thin cover plates, Mahmoud et al. [120] used a 2mm

thick aluminium (Al) plate to cover the groove opening prior to FSP and found that the

use of cover plate is appropriate to prevent the loss of reinforcement during FSP. In an

another study, an aluminium tape was used in place of thin/thick sheet to cover the

groove before processing which also avoids pinless tool application [119]. However, the

mixing and bonding of the cover plate with the base matrix needs attention.

18
Besides the use of cover plate, some investigators proposed the method of blind drilled

holes (refer Fig. 14b) in which the step of groove closing can be avoided [113, 122]. Li et

al. [122] demonstrated the elimination of step of groove closing (by pinless tool) by

rendering RPs via technique of drilled holes. Accommodation of reinforcing material was

enabled by drilling blind 1 mm diameter holes in base plates whose inward distance from

surface varied depth from 0.5-2 mm. The loss of RPs was restrained automatically

because half part of shoulder ahead of traversing pin seals the opening of the holes.

Akramifard et al. [113] investigated twin drilled holes arrays in Cu/SiC SCs fabrication.

Uniformity in reinforcement dispersion was registered by preventing SiC particles

agglomeration. In addition to the benefit of avoiding the reinforcement sputtering in both

of the techniques viz. groove method and blind hole method, it can be easily estimated

that each plate needs additional machining time for making grooves or blind holes. An

alternate approach was also proposed to reduce the machining time against each

workpiece by Huang et al. [114]. In this work, method of direct friction stir processing

process (DFSP) was introduced. Schematic arrangement of DFSP is shown in Fig. 14 (c).

In this method, a hollow tool without pin having a through 8 mm hole in tool centre was

utilized to fabricate AZ31/SiC composites. RPs were previously filled in tool which

oozed out to infiltrate the space confined between shoulder and deformation zone. These

RPs then squeezed into work piece as the rotating tool travels longitudinally. However,

higher depth of SCs layer needs extra efforts in this method.

From literature it can be concluded that numerous reinforcement strategies are in practice

and each reinforcement strategy results in difference in RPs dispersion and properties of

19
fabricated SCs. Rathee et al. [123] reported that direct pasting is a simpler technique but

possesses less homogenous SCs as compared to groove and blind hole technique. Further,

groove with tool offset technique exhibits more homogeneous SCs as compared to hole

technique. Thus, suitable reinforcement technique should be chosen to produce sound,

defect free and homogeneous SCs.

Material Properties

The properties of material like mechanical and thermal properties have a key contributing

role in selection of process parameters. Material’s mechanical properties affects shear

effects caused by the tool while material’s thermal conductivity affects amount of heat

generation. Material’s thickness along with its thermal properties also affects the cooling

rate and temperature gradients [124]. Thus, suitable process parameters should be chosen

based on type of BM. The detailed discussion of these issues is given in the excellent

review work of Mishra et al. [17]. The details of process parameters used for FSP of

different metal alloys are listed in Table 2 and Table 3.

Other Strategies

Additional to process parameters discussed above, some other strategies also affect the

efficiency of the composite fabrication process. These strategies mainly include:

FSP pass count

Changing direction of tool rotation between successive passes

Changing tool pin geometry between successive passes

20
As FSP have asymmetric material flow due to which the pattern of powder dispersion is

different in the processed region. With the tool movement in transverse direction, tool pin

impels material behind tool. There are two sides of workpiece processed zone, namely

advancing side (AS) and retreating side (RS) having varied microstructural and

reinforcement dispersion [125]. While towards AS, tool rotation velocity vector and tool

traverse velocity vector are having identical directions, these possess opposite directions

on RS. The material of RS initially goes to forging and then the deformed material is

extruded to the AS as the pin rotates and tool moves forward [126]. The temperature at

the AS is higher as compared to RS owing to which there is a difference in their grain

sizes also [127]. These differences result in higher dispersion of RPs at AS as compared

to RS side (refer Fig. 15) [38]. Directional changes in tool rotation in successive passes is

utilized to avoid this asymmetry as in the later pass the RS of the previous pass becomes

AS side and AS becomes the RS [125, 128, 129]. Other reasons for using multiple FSP

passes are included in subsequent section. Apart from changing the tool rotation

direction, it was reported that changing the tool pin geometry in successive passes

enhances particle distribution and mechanical properties of SCs [130]. In this study, it

was proposed that with the substitution of square pin in place of taper threaded pin in

second pass results in 7.7 % and 4% increase in UTS and elongation respectively.

Thus, thorough knowledge and adequate combination of all above discussed factors and

strategies would results in defect-free and homogeneously distributed SCs. The

individual effect of all of these factors is discussed in detail in this section. Combined

effect of these factors and their relative contributions upon the way in which particles are

21
distributed and also on the microstructural as well as mechanical properties is quite

interesting. This has been discussed in subsequent sections.

REINFORCEMENT PARTICLES DISTRIBUTION

FSP proves its utility in fabricating SCs with good particles bonding and uniform

dispersion of RPs [131, 132]. The operating parameters and various strategies used in

fabrication of SCs have a great impact on the dispersion of RPs in substrate metal as

discussed above. Several researchers investigated various aspects of FSP including the

type of material flow [133], tool design [134], FSP pass count [135], different ratios of

rotational to travelling speeds [108, 136], with an aim to understand the parametric

influence on particle distribution.

It is a now a matter of general understanding that tool rotation speed defines the amount

of stirring, plasticization and mixing of material. Increase in tool rotation and decrease in

traverse speed would lead to higher temperature, better stirring and material mixing

which results in uniform particle dispersion [31]. while lower rotational speeds results in

less heat generation which subsequently affects the material flow and restraining particle

dispersal implying requirement of higher FSP pass count for enhancing the particle

spread [137]. Besides ratio of rotational speed to travelling speed, there is a direct

correlation amid particle distribution and FSP pass count. Higher FSP pass count and

shift in directional rotation of tool between successive pass would lead to better

homogeneous dispersion of SiC particles in SCs (see Fig. 16) [56, 138]. Zarghani et al.

[99] and Lee et al. [139] also established that higher FSP pass count causes smaller

22
cluster size and dispersed reinforcing material more uniformly in metal matrix. While

Yang et al. [40] reported that uniformity in Al2O3 particles dispersion in AA6061metal

matrix was enhanced with increase in axial force and FSP pass count. In another study,

tool rotational speed was reported as the most influential process parameter in production

of AA6061/SiC nanocomposites via FSP with 43.7% contribution. While traverse speed

with (33.79 %) followed by tool probe profile (11.20%) [109]. We can thus safely

conclude that speed of rotation and traverse of tool are major influencing factors in

addition to FSP pass count for enhancement of RPs distribution during fabrication of

SCs.

MICROSTRUCTURAL CHARACTERIZATION

During FSP, the material is subjected to vigorous stirring and plastic deformation

succeeded by dynamic recrystallization (DRX) [144-146]. Since the material is

plastically deformed, and during DRX, the grain boundary with lower angles transform

into higher angle boundaries and nucleation of fresh grains at favorable sites initiates

resulting in creation of fine equiaxed granular structure. Additionally, recrystallization

enhances owing to the presence of reinforcing material through multiple heterogeneous

nucleation sites [147]. Fig. 17 clearly indicate reduction of granular size in BM after FSP

without addition of RPs (refer Fig. 17a and 17b). Grain size further decreases when FSP

was done with RPs (see Fig. 17b and 17c). In addition to this, the refinement of grains

further depends on RP specifications specially its type and size (refer Fig. 17c and 17d).

Thus, higher counts of initial recrystallized grains is directly proportional to finery in

ultimately achieved microstructure [148].

23
Another aspect related to grain size enhancement or reduction during FSP is the heat

input. As the dominant factors determining grain dimensions during FSP in absence of

reinforcement and with RPs are disparate. In the case of FSP without RPs, generation of

heat may facilitates grain growth [138]. While, there are two contributing effects in latter

case both of which have contradictory impacts on grain size. First, at elevated

temperature grains tend to grow [31, 158]. Second, RPs might behave like hurdles against

grain boundaries thereby restricting granular growth (pinning effect, see Fig. 9) [145]. A

broadly accepted fact in FSP is the dominance of pinning effect over heat effect in

MMCs, thus resulting in microstructural refinement owing to grain nucleation and

reinforcement pinning effect [75, 159]. Lots of work is listed in literature in which huge

grain size reduction of SZ of fabricated SCs as compared to BM is reported (see Table 1).

MECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION

Enhancement of mechanical properties can be attributed to various strengthening

mechanisms which individually or simultaneously come in to play during FSP process.

The strength of a metal depends on its deformation ability which is primarily the result of

movement of dislocations. Higher restrictions to movement of dislocations imply better

material strength. SCs also follow strengthening mechanisms of bulk MMCs. Various

researchers defined the strengthening mechanisms in their own way [4, 165, 166]. Lloyd

et al. [4] reported four strengthening mechanisms: Orowan, Hall-Petch relationship, work

hardening and different thermal expansion coefficients (CTE) of metal matrix and

reinforcement. Zhang et al. [167] evaluated strengthening mechanisms effects for metal

matrix nanocomposites (MMNCs) and reported that Orowan strengthening plays major

24
role in MMNCs as the size of nano-particles decreases. It increases to its maximum level

for critical particle size. Any further decrease in size of particle amounts to decreased

Orowan strengthening effect. Critical nano-particle size in the case of Mg/Al2O3 and

Ti/Y2O3 nanocomposites was found as 5.44 times the Burger vector or atomic diameter of

the matrix. Also, it was reported that critical particles size is independent of volume

fraction of RPs. However, impact of Hall-Petch strengthening has not been taken into

account in this approach.

Out of several available modelling methods for predicting the strength of MMCs, Zhang

and Chen approach are more reliable for MMNCs. Clyne approach can be trusted for

prediction of results closer to experimental ones for micro-composites. But, Hall-Petch

effect has not been considered by both Zhang and Chen method which may amount to

deviation in predicted results from actual ones [168]. In another study, Sanaty –Zadeh

and Rohatgi [168] considered four mechanisms: Orowan strengthening, Hall-Petch, load

bearing and CTE difference by following the Clyne method. Proposed model findings

were validated with experimental results on Mg nanocomposites using Al2O3 and Y2O3

reinforcement. They reported Hall-Petch relationship to be major strengthening

mechanisms for micro composites also. The major mechanical properties are

microhardness and ultimate tensile strength. Similarly, Zarghani et al. [97] considered

four strengthening mechanisms: Orowan strengthening, Hall-Petch, load bearing and

CTE difference in Ti/Al2O3 nanocomposites fabricated using FSP. They fabricated SCs at

three different groove widths of 0.8mm, 1.2 mm and 1.6mm. Two sizes of RPs viz. 80nm

and 20nm were used. Fig. 18 summarizes contribution of each strengthening mechanism

25
and indicates that Hall-Petch effect has highest contribution and load bearing effect has

minimum contribution towards strength enhancement. The contributing parameters

related to these properties are discussed in next subsections.

Microhardness

Contrary parameters are involved and require consideration for estimation of

microhardness of SCs. On one hand, FSP refines the grain size of SCs which results in

enhanced microhardness [131]. Contrary to this, temperature increases in FSP amounting

to annealing of material [17]. Dislocation density and residual compressive stresses

decrease with the annealing effect which results in reduced hardness values. Here, the

effect of annealing is dominated by grain refinement effect [107]. Consequently, fine

grains produced during FSP increases the hardness value. However, improvement in

hardness value due to secondary particle strengthening is also important. Thus, the

strengthening is combined effect of grain refinement and uniform dispersion of RPs

imposed by FSP [169]. Similarly, Dolatkhah et al. [107] reported that the change in

microhardness is a combined effect of: reduction of grain size, presence of hard phase

RPs and quench hardening effect which is because of different thermal contraction

coefficients of BM and RPs. Highest values of 97 and 107 HV were achieved for 5 µm

SiC particles with single pass and multi (four) FSP passes respectively. An associated

increase in the hardness value was measured as 116 Hv with 50 nm particle size.

Enhancement of micro-hardness values of various SCs obtained using FSP is shown in

Fig. 19.

26
Tensile Strength

The tensile strength of SCs is generally found lower especially in case of single FSP pass

and micro-sized RPs [177]. Reduced tensile strength of SCs can be accounted to:

agglomeration of hard micro-sized RPs, causing the reduction in elongation and existence

of dimples within the RPs. However, in case of nanocomposites and multi pass FSP, the

tensile strength increases. The main reason in increase of UTS is the presence of

uniformly distributed nano RPs and can be explained as: It is a matter of fact that grain

size undergoes appreciable refinement during FSP chiefly due to recrystallization and

pinning effect. Smaller sized RPs have a tendency to stop sliding of grain boundaries

(GBs), if the particles are resting on the GBs [178]. Additionally they restrict the

dislocation movement resulting in improved strength, if the particles are inside the grains

[179]. Presence of RPs at GBs and inside the grains can be observed from Fig. 20 (a)

where white particles shown are SiC particles and black lines are grain boundaries. Fig.

20 (b) and 20 (c) depict a strong bond and absence of gap between reinforcement and

base matrix. During tensile testing, dislocation develops a tendency to move inside grain

owing to increasing tensile stress. This slipping is restricted by RPs. Dislocation line

forms a loop around RPs resulting into increased dislocation density thereby necessitating

requirement of higher stresses to cause material deformation. Thus, uniform dispersion of

smaller RPs results in enhancement of tensile properties of SCs. The enhancement of

UTS of SCs of various metals along with their process parameters is listed in Table 4.

In addition to the development of SCs, a lot of work on functionally graded composites

(FGCs) was reported in the literature using FSP [185-190]. FGCs are the class of

27
composites in which compositional gradient of reinforcement may take place which can

be demonstrated as shown in Fig. 21. Salehi et al. [189] fabricated bulk Al 6061-SiC

functionally graded nano-composites. In this work, a groove was made on a plate. SiC

particles were used to fill this groove. After this, the plate was subjected to multi (four)

FSP passes. Subsequently, another groove was machined on the composite and FSP run

was performed with a shorter pin of 3.2 mm in length. In this way, five layers were

fabricated in which composition of reinforcement ranging from 0% to 18% SiC. Out of

these five layers, layer I, III and V exhibited constant concentration while compositional

gradient existed in layers II and IV. Thus, FSP can be successfully utilized in developing

FGCs for specific applications.

IN-SITU COMPOSITES

In this route, reinforcing particles chemically react with metal matrix or metal powder for

production of In-situ MMCs. This leads to formation of extremely fine and stable

reinforcing phase in the base matrix [191]. In-situ MMCs offer various advantages over

their Ex-situ counterparts. These include higher wetting, improved bonding strength and

higher compatibility between reinforcements and the matrix [192-195]. Among the stated

benefits of in-situ composites, these composites suffer from a major drawback of

segregation of inbuilt reinforcing particles along the grain boundaries during the process.

This problem was difficult to avoid in the conventional fabrication processes [196, 197].

However, several approaches like extrusion, holding the composite at temperature higher

than its melting point and rolling etc. were used to reduce the agglomeration of these

particles and to enhance their dispersion [198-200]. But, it was proposed that it is difficult

28
to fragment these agglomerates using such processes. Moreover, these secondary

processes like rolling tend to fail the composite in place of improving the particle

distribution [201].

Thus, it was imperative to evolve a suitable process or method which can be used to

enhance the particle dispersion in in-situ MMCs. FSP, a newly developed process, is

effectively employed for fabrication of uniformly dispersed in situ composites in solid

state. Hsu et al. [202] detailed pioneer results of in-situ Al-Al2Cu composites formation

via FSP. In this work, initial materials utilized were pure aluminium and copper

powders. A billet of powders mixture was prepared by pressing and sintering processes.

It was reported that on increasing sintering temperature from 500˚C to 530˚C, reaction

between aluminium and copper increased significantly. Subsequently, FSP was applied

on the sintered billet. Uniform distribution of Al2Cu particles in metal matrix was

exhibited after two FSP passes, which was initially in agglomeration form in as-sintered

condition (see Fig. 22). It was proposed that FSP can be successfully utilized to fabricate

ultra-fine-grained in-situ composites with enhanced mechanical characteristics.

There is a restraint in choice of reinforcement in case of in-situ composites as compared

to ex-situ composites as in the former case the selection of reinforcement depends on

certain parameters like melting temperature, density, thermal stability, young’s modulus

and strength. Several in situ composites fabrication like Al/Al3Ti+Al2O3 using Al and

TiO2 powders [203], in situ Cu/SiC composites using Cu plate and SiC powder [204]

were reported in FSP literature. A similar concept of sintering and subsequent FSP was

29
utilized by Lee et al. [205] and Chen et al. [206] to fabricate Al-Fe and Al-5 mol% CeO2

in situ composites respectively.

Recently, Anvari et al. [105] fabricated in situ Al-Cr-O hybrid composites using

atmospheric plasma spray (APS) technique and subsequent FSP. In this work, Cr2O3

powder was sprayed using APS on Al 6061 plate and a suitable thick layer was deposited

on the base metal. Then FSP was utilized to fabricate hybrid composites. During FSP,

Cr2O3 powder was reduced and Al-Cr reaction was induced. After multiple passes of six

numbers, the nanocomposite has Al2O3, Al13Cr2, Cr2O3 and Cr in Al matrix. Results

depict uniformly distributed nano composites with improvement in wear resistance

because of presence of hard RPs. In another study, Al/Al2O3 in situ composites were

prepared using Al-SiO2 powders [207]. In this work, a billet of powders was sintered and

cold compacted at 225 MPa. Formation of Al2O3 particles at the Al/SiO2 interface and

their dispersion in form of clusters of nanosized (about 20 nm) particles occurs during

FSP. Rate of Al-SiO2 reaction was found to increase with increased of speed of rotation

and decreased travel speed. Tensile strength and tensile modulus achieved were 319 MPa

and 80 GPa respectively at optimum processing conditions.

FSP was also utilized to develop intermetallic alloys. Zhang et al. [193] utilized FSP

integrated with vacuum hot pressing for fabrication of in situ Al3Ti/Al. Al and Ti

powders were utilized as initial materials. Cold compaction of these powders after mixing

in a rotary mixer was used to form a billet. Samples were prepared by hot pressing and

extrusion before FSP. 640˚C temperature at 3 hours holding time was found optimum

30
under which almost all Ti particles react with Al to form Al3Ti 0.5-3µm. With the similar

lines, Zhang et al. [208] fabricated Al3Ti /Al-5.5 Cu in situ composites using Al powder,

Ti powder and Cu powders as starting materials. They observed that adding Cu particles

speeds up the rate of Al3Ti formation during hot pressing.

In addition to compaction and sintering of initial powders, AZ31 rolled billet of 1mm

thickness was mixed up with pure Zn and aluminium foils of 0.125 millimeters and 0.2

millimeters thickness respectively at desired portions using FSP to fabricate multiple

elements Magnesium-Aluminium-Zinc intermetallic alloys [209]. They performed FSP

with/without liquid N2 cooling at 1500 rpm rotational speed, and 20mm/min tool traverse

speed. Results showed that increase in FSP pass count and fractional contribution of Al

and Zn resulted in significantly refined grains. Maximum microhardness of 400 Hv was

achieved by them which was much higher than as received metal having microhardness

of 60 Hv.

As FSP produces adequate thermal exposure and large plastic strain (~ 40), resulting in

shearing of metal powders breaking of oxide film and material mixing which cause

intimate contact between metal powders [210]. But, in some cases due to low-

temperature exposure in FSP, it might be possible of formation of incomplete reactions

and some constituents remains unreacted and this issue can be resolved by combining

FSP with heat treatment methods [211, 212]. Thus, FSP can be successfully utilized in

developing SCs and intermetallic alloys via in-situ route.

31
 CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND SHORTFALLS

Significant amount of research work in the field of SC fabrication using FSP has been

published in literature by various researchers. Reported work is chiefly related to aspects

like: optimization of various process parameters, use of different strategies and analysis

of different RPs in SCs fabrication. This review work draws critical inferences related to

uniform dispersion of RPs and enhancement in various properties of SCs. Various

strategies to achieve uniformly distributed SCs with enhanced mechanical and surface

properties are discussed. It is found that multi FSP passes are an effective step in this

direction. However, distributing RPs uniformly during single pass FSP is still a challenge

to accomplish. This can mainly be attributed to asymmetric material flow in FSP. A

concrete step taken in direction of making the material flow symmetric during single pass

FSP is utilization of tool offset technique which opens altogether new perspectives

towards better distribution of RPs [120, 213]. Still, there is potential of lot of

improvement in the direction of single pass FSP. Suitable design of a tooling system or

process variants in FSP needs further investigation which can address aforementioned

research issues thereby make FSP more effective technique by saving time and energy.

Another interesting research aspect is difficulty encountered in uniform dispersion of

nano-sized RPs when compared to micro-sized RPs [214]. Tool wear and its variation

with RPs type as well as process parameters during SC fabrication using FSP has not

been investigated till now. Despite a multitude of relevant research, a few aspects like

material flow aspects has not been fully understood.

FUTURE TRENDS

32
Previous sections of this review article elaborate various aspects of current research status

in field of SCs fabrication by FSP. It can be easily concluded that FSP is now a well-

established technique for development of MMCs. Owing to its solid-state nature, FSP has

vast scope in development of polymer matrix composites (PMCs). Some works of PMCs

have been reported in the literature using improved tooling system as compared to

conventional FSP [215-218]. But, it is still in its growing phase in development of PMCs

and more efforts are required to make it a reliable technique for PMCs fabrication. In

addition to fabrication of composites, FSP is gaining a shining role in the development of

metallic foams. Few studies on development of metallic foams are reported in the

literature [219-221]. However, further research efforts are needed to develop highly

porous materials using FSP. Also, progressive research in the development of

functionally graded metallic foams using FSP can yield encouraging results.

FSP can be utilized in developing magnetostrictive composites. Authors envision that

FSP has huge scope in developing multifunctional materials like piezoelectric ceramic

composites (metal matrix/ polymer matrix), magnetic ceramic composites, etc. In

addition to this, FSP can be effectively utilized in electronic industries especially in

developing sensors like noise sensors, humidity sensors, etc. FSP can be successfully

applied to develop heat exchangers. In addition to these, FSP has huge potential in

manufacturing of functional materials with improved properties. This can be fulfilled by

coupling FSP with modern manufacturing processes like friction stir additive

manufacturing, ultrasonic assisted friction stir processing, etc. resulting in landmark

accomplishments towards the goal of innovative and modern manufacturing engineering

33
applications. Friction stir additive manufacturing can be effectively utilized to develop

structural metals. Ultrasonic assisted friction stir processing can be utilized to increase

the FSP speeds without altering the microstructure and properties of SCs and

simultaneously the ultrasonic vibrations have positive effect on the properties of

processed material. Also, being a surface modification process, FSP can additionally be

efficiently utilized for mechanical alloying.

CONCLUDING SUMMARY

FSP has opportunely emerged as the current trend in synthesizing MMCs. FSP

applications have grown leaps and bounds in aerospace, marine and automobile industries

owing to its inherent capability to produce superior surface and mechanical properties.

Corresponding to an elaborate and extensive literature review of published work on ex-

situ and in-situ composite fabrication, remarkable inferences drawn are listed below:

Numerous researchers have reported appreciable improvements in

microstructural, mechanical and tribological properties of composites synthesis using

FSP.

FSP variables (rotational and traversing speed of the tool, inclination of tool, size

of shoulder and pin, pin shape), reinforcement (types, size and volume fraction) and

reinforcement strategies play a significant role in process efficiency enhancement and

surface characteristics improvement for composite produced surfaces.

Surface composite fabrication with nanosized powders is a cutting edge FSP

accomplishment which has rendered an altogether new perspective to this technology.

SCs with nano sized RPs amount to huge microstructural refinement as compared with

34
micro-sized particles, amounting to significant improvement in overall material

properties reflecting into greater strength, enhanced microhardness and better tribological

properties.

Optimal FSP variables choice is of utmost value in sound composite layers

synthesis.

Research on development of PMCs and functionally graded surfaces using FSP

has been recently started and encouraging results have been reported.

Despite encouraging results, industrial applications of FSP are fewer. Basic issues

of this newer development, including material flow are still not well understood. Future

efforts of researchers in this direction with improved knowledge of complexities involved

can carve paths of commercial success of this technology. These issues require

emphasized investigations before this process is well accepted commercially by the

industry.

REFERENCES

1. Cavaliere, P., Mechanical properties of Friction Stir Processed 2618/Al2O3/20p

metal matrix composite. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 2005.

36(12): p. 1657-1665.

2. Joseph, S., High temperature metal matrix composites for future aerospace

systems, in 24th Joint Propulsion Conference1988, American Institute of Aeronautics and

Astronautics.

3. Miracle, D.B., Metal matrix composites – From science to technological

significance. Composites Science and Technology, 2005. 65(15–16): p. 2526-2540.

35
4. Lloyd, D.J., Particle reinforced aluminium and magnesium matrix composites.

International Materials Reviews, 1994. 39(1): p. 1-23.

5. Bains, P.S., S.S. Sidhu, and H.S. Payal, Fabrication and Machining of Metal

Matrix Composites: A Review. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2016. 31(5): p.

553-573.

6. Mabhali, L.A.B., S.L. Pityana, and N. Sacks, Laser Surface Alloying of Aluminum

(AA1200) with Ni and SiC Powders. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2010.

25(12): p. 1397-1403.

7. Quazi, M.M., et al., Laser-based Surface Modifications of Aluminum and its

Alloys. Critical Reviews in Solid State and Materials Sciences, 2016. 41(2): p. 106-131.

8. Choo, S.-H., S. Lee, and S.-J. Kwon, Surface hardening of a gray cast iron used

for a diesel engine cylinder block using high-energy electron beam irradiation.

Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 1999. 30(5): p. 1211-1221.

9. Shi, J.L., et al., Preparation of a Functionally Gradient Aluminum Alloy Metal

Matrix Composite Using the Technique of Spray Deposition. Materials and

Manufacturing Processes, 2011. 26(10): p. 1236-1241.

10. Sajjadi, S.A., H.R. Ezatpour, and M. Torabi Parizi, Comparison of microstructure

and mechanical properties of A356 aluminum alloy/Al2O3 composites fabricated by stir

and compo-casting processes. Materials & Design, 2012. 34(0): p. 106-111.

11. Lu, Y., et al., The Fabrication and Properties of the Squeeze-Cast TiN/Al

Composites. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2016. 31(10): p. 1306-1310.

12. Banhart, J., Manufacture, characterisation and application of cellular metals and

metal foams. Progress in Materials Science, 2001. 46(6): p. 559-632.

36
13. Mishra, R.S., Z.Y. Ma, and I. Charit, Friction stir processing: a novel technique

for fabrication of surface composite. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2003. 341(1–

2): p. 307-310.

14. W.M. Thomas, N.E., Needham JC, Nurch MG, Temple-Smith P, Dawes C,

Friction stir butt welding. G.B., 1991: USA.

15. Mishra, R.S., et al., High strain rate superplasticity in a friction stir processed

7075 Al alloy. Scripta Materialia, 1999. 42(2): p. 163-168.

16. Berbon, P.B., et al., Friction stir processing: a tool to homogenize nanocomposite

aluminum alloys. Scripta Materialia, 2001. 44(1): p. 61-66.

17. Mishra, R.S. and Z.Y. Ma, Friction stir welding and processing. Materials

Science and Engineering: R: Reports, 2005. 50(1–2): p. 1-78.

18. McNelley, T.R., S. Swaminathan, and J.Q. Su, Recrystallization mechanisms

during friction stir welding/processing of aluminum alloys. Scripta Materialia, 2008.

58(5): p. 349-354.

19. Patel, V.V., V. Badheka, and A. Kumar, Influence of Friction Stir Processed

Parameters on Superplasticity of Al-Zn-Mg-Cu Alloy. Materials and Manufacturing

Processes, 2016. 31(12): p. 1573-1582.

20. Mishra R. S., M.M.W., Friction Stir Welding and Processing2007: ASM

International.

21. Gan, Y., D. Solomon, and M. Reinbolt, Friction Stir Processing of Particle

Reinforced Composite Materials. Materials, 2010. 3(1): p. 329.

22. Argade, G.R., et al., Corrosion behavior of a friction stir processed rare-earth

added magnesium alloy. Corrosion Science, 2012. 58: p. 321-326.

37
23. Sun, N. and D. Apelian, Friction stir processing of aluminum cast alloys for high

performance applications. JOM, 2011. 63(11): p. 44-50.

24. Barmouz, M., M.K. Besharati Givi, and J. Seyfi, On the role of processing

parameters in producing Cu/SiC metal matrix composites via friction stir processing:

Investigating microstructure, microhardness, wear and tensile behavior. Materials

Characterization, 2011. 62(1): p. 108-117.

25. Dehghani, K. and M. Mazinani, Forming Nanocrystalline Surface Layers in

Copper Using Friction Stir Processing. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2011.

26(7): p. 922-925.

26. Dadashpour, M., et al., Effect of process parameter on mechanical properties and

fracture behavior of AZ91C/SiO2 composite fabricated by FSP. Materials Science and

Engineering: A, 2016. 655: p. 379-387.

27. Shamsipur, A., S.F. Kashani-Bozorg, and A. Zarei-Hanzaki, The effects of

friction-stir process parameters on the fabrication of Ti/SiC nano-composite surface

layer. Surface and Coatings Technology, 2011. 206(6): p. 1372-1381.

28. Ghasemi-Kahrizsangi, A. and S.F. Kashani-Bozorg, Microstructure and

mechanical properties of steel/TiC nano-composite surface layer produced by friction stir

processing. Surface and Coatings Technology, 2012. 209(0): p. 15-22.

29. Ghasemi-Kahrizsangi, A., et al., Friction Stir Processing of Mild Steel/Al2O3

Nanocomposite: Modeling and Experimental Studies. Metallography, Microstructure, and

Analysis, 2015. 4(2): p. 122-130.

38
30. Hashemi, R. and G. Hussain, Wear performance of Al/TiN dispersion

strengthened surface composite produced through friction stir process: A comparison of

tool geometries and number of passes. Wear, 2015. 324–325: p. 45-54.

31. Azizieh, M., A.H. Kokabi, and P. Abachi, Effect of rotational speed and probe

profile on microstructure and hardness of AZ31/Al2O3 nanocomposites fabricated by

friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2011. 32(4): p. 2034-2041.

32. Morisada, Y., et al., Effect of friction stir processing with SiC particles on

microstructure and hardness of AZ31. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2006.

433(1–2): p. 50-54.

33. Rathee, S., et al., Analysis of Microstructural Changes in Enhancement of Surface

Properties in Sheet Forming of Al alloys via Friction Stir Processing. Materials Today:

Proceedings, 2016. In press.

34. Węglowski, M.S. and S. Dymek, Relationship between friction stir processing

parameters and torque, temperature and the penetration depth of the tool. Archives of

Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 2013. 13(2): p. 186-191.

35. Mahmoud, E.R.I., et al., Effect of friction stir processing tool probe on fabrication

of SiC particle reinforced composite on aluminium surface. Science and Technology of

Welding and Joining, 2009. 14(5): p. 413-425.

36. Langlade, C., et al., Formation of a Tribologically Transformed Surface (TTS) on

AISI 1045 Steel by Friction Stir Processing. Materials and Manufacturing Processes,

2016. 31(12): p. 1565-1572.

39
37. Rathee, S., et al., Process parameters optimization for enhanced microhardness of

AA 6061/ SiC surface composites fabricated via Friction Stir Processing (FSP). Materials

Today: Proceedings, 2016. 3(10, Part B): p. 4151-4156.

38. Rathee, S., et al., Effect of tool plunge depth on reinforcement particles

distribution in surface composite fabrication via friction stir processing. Defence

Technology.

39. Wang, W., et al., A novel way to produce bulk SiCp reinforced aluminum metal

matrix composites by friction stir processing. Journal of Materials Processing

Technology, 2009. 209(4): p. 2099-2103.

40. Yang, M., et al., Fabrication of AA6061/Al2O3 nano ceramic particle reinforced

composite coating by using friction stir processing. Journal of Materials Science, 2010.

45(16): p. 4431-4438.

41. Mehta, K.P. and V.J. Badheka, Effects of Tilt Angle on the Properties of

Dissimilar Friction Stir Welding Copper to Aluminum. Materials and Manufacturing

Processes, 2016. 31(3): p. 255-263.

42. Asadi, P., G. Faraji, and M. Besharati, Producing of AZ91/SiC composite by

friction stir processing (FSP). The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing

Technology, 2010. 51(1-4): p. 247-260.

43. Chen, X.G., et al., Microstructure and mechanical properties of friction stir

welded AA6063–B4C metal matrix composites. Materials Science and Engineering: A,

2009. 518(1–2): p. 174-184.

44. M. Iordachescu, E.S.a.D.I., Fundamentals of the process and tools design: friction

stir processing of materials. Welding Equipment and Technology, 2006. 17: p. 63–72.

40
45. Nandan, R., T. DebRoy, and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, Recent advances in friction-

stir welding – Process, weldment structure and properties. Progress in Materials Science,

2008. 53(6): p. 980-1023.

46. Dacheux, L.D.a.P., Design and properties of FSW tools: a literature review. Proc.

6th Int. Symp. on ‘Friction stir welding', 2006. 52(4).

47. Tang, A.P.R.a.W., Alloy, tool geometry, and process parameter effects on friction

stir weld energies and resultant FSW joint properties. Friction stir welding and

processing, ed. M.W.M. K.K.Jata, R.S.Mishra, S.L.Semiatin and D.P.Field2001: TMS.

48. Prado, R.A., et al., Tool wear in the friction-stir welding of aluminum alloy

6061+20% Al2O3: a preliminary study. Scripta Materialia, 2001. 45(1): p. 75-80.

49. Vijayavel, P., V. Balasubramanian, and S. Sundaram, Effect of shoulder diameter

to pin diameter (D/d) ratio on tensile strength and ductility of friction stir processed

LM25AA-5% SiCp metal matrix composites. Materials & Design, 2014. 57(0): p. 1-9.

50. Zhang, Y.N., et al., Review of tools for friction stir welding and processing.

Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly, 2012. 51(3): p. 250-261.

51. Mahmoud, E.R.I., et al., Wear characteristics of surface-hybrid-MMCs layer

fabricated on aluminum plate by friction stir processing. Wear, 2010. 268(9–10): p.

1111-1121.

52. Elangovan, K. and V. Balasubramanian, Influences of tool pin profile and tool

shoulder diameter on the formation of friction stir processing zone in AA6061 aluminium

alloy. Materials & Design, 2008. 29(2): p. 362-373.

41
53. Elangovan, K. and V. Balasubramanian, Influences of tool pin profile and welding

speed on the formation of friction stir processing zone in AA2219 aluminium alloy.

Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2008. 200(1–3): p. 163-175.

54. Eftekharinia, H., et al., Microstructure and wear behavior of AA6061/SiC surface

composite fabricated via friction stir processing with different pins and passes. Rare

Metals, 2016: p. 1-7.

55. Guerra, M., et al., Flow patterns during friction stir welding. Materials

Characterization, 2002. 49(2): p. 95-101.

56. Shojaeefard, M.H., et al., Effect of tool pin profile on distribution of reinforcement

particles during friction stir processing of B4C/aluminum composites. Proceedings of the

Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials: Design and

Applications. 0(0): p. 1464420716642471.

57. Shojaeefard, M.H., et al., The effect of reinforcement type on the microstructure,

mechanical properties, and wear resistance of A356 matrix composites produced by FSP.

The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2016: p. 1-17.

58. Yu, Z., et al., Transient Heat and Material Flow Modeling of Friction Stir

Processing of Magnesium Alloy using Threaded Tool. Metallurgical and Materials

Transactions A, 2012. 43(2): p. 724-737.

59. Siddiquee, A.N. and S. Pandey, Experimental investigation on deformation and

wear of WC tool during friction stir welding (FSW) of stainless steel. The International

Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2014. 73(1): p. 479-486.

60. Rai, R., et al., Review: friction stir welding tools. Science and Technology of

Welding and Joining, 2011. 16(4): p. 325-342.

42
61. Çam, G., Friction stir welded structural materials: beyond Al-alloys. International

Materials Reviews, 2011. 56(1): p. 1-48.

62. NAJAFI, M., A.M. NASIRI, and A.H. KOKABI, MICROSTRUCTURE AND

HARDNESS OF FRICTION STIR PROCESSED AZ31 WITH SiCP. International Journal

of Modern Physics B, 2008. 22(18n19): p. 2879-2885.

63. Yuvaraj, N., S. Aravindan, and Vipin, Wear Characteristics of Al5083 Surface

Hybrid Nano-composites by Friction Stir Processing. Transactions of the Indian Institute

of Metals, 2016: p. 1-19.

64. Rejil, C.M., et al., Microstructure and sliding wear behavior of AA6360/(TiC +

B4C) hybrid surface composite layer synthesized by friction stir processing on aluminum

substrate. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2012. 552: p. 336-344.

65. Sathiskumar, R., et al., Characterization of boron carbide particulate reinforced

in situ copper surface composites synthesized using friction stir processing. Materials

Characterization, 2013. 84(0): p. 16-27.

66. Du, Z., et al., Fabrication of a new Al-Al2O3-CNTs composite using friction stir

processing (FSP). Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2016. 667: p. 125-131.

67. Kashani-Bozorg, S.F., M. Samiee, and A. Honarbakhsh-Raouf, Fabrication of

Al/AlN nano-composite layers by friction stir processing of 6061 Al-T6 substrate. Surface

and Interface Analysis, 2015. 47(2): p. 227-238.

68. Moghaddas, M.A. and S.F. Kashani-Bozorg, Effects of thermal conditions on

microstructure in nanocomposite of Al/Si3N4 produced by friction stir processing.

Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2013. 559: p. 187-193.

43
69. Eskandari, H., R. Taheri, and F. Khodabakhshi, Friction-stir processing of an

AA8026-TiB2-Al2O3 hybrid nanocomposite: Microstructural developments and

mechanical properties. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2016. 660: p. 84-96.

70. Narimani, M., B. Lotfi, and Z. Sadeghian, Investigating the microstructure and

mechanical properties of Al-TiB2 composite fabricated by Friction Stir Processing

(FSP). Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2016. 673: p. 436-442.

71. Zhao, Y., et al., Effects of friction stir processing on the microstructure and

superplasticity of in situ nano-ZrB2/2024Al composite. Progress in Natural Science:

Materials International, 2016. 26(1): p. 69-77.

72. Thapliyal, S. and D.K. Dwivedi, Microstructure evolution and tribological

behavior of the solid lubricant based surface composite of cast nickel aluminum bronze

developed by friction stir processing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2016.

238: p. 30-38.

73. Lucie, B.J., et al., Survivability of single-walled carbon nanotubes during friction

stir processing. Nanotechnology, 2006. 17(12): p. 3081.

74. Farnoush, H., et al., An innovative fabrication of nano-HA coatings on Ti-CaP

nanocomposite layer using a combination of friction stir processing and electrophoretic

deposition. Ceramics International, 2013. 39(2): p. 1477-1483.

75. Izadi, H. in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Trends in

Welding

Research. 2012. ASM.

44
76. Dinaharan, I., R. Sathiskumar, and N. Murugan, Effect of ceramic particulate type

on microstructure and properties of copper matrix composites synthesized by friction stir

processing. Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 2016. 5(4): p. 302-316.

77. Lu, D., Y. Jiang, and R. Zhou, Wear performance of nano-Al2O3 particles and

CNTs reinforced magnesium matrix composites by friction stir processing. Wear, 2013.

305(1–2): p. 286-290.

78. Raaft, M., et al., Microstructural, mechanical and wear behavior of

A390/graphite and A390/Al2O3 surface composites fabricated using FSP. Materials

Science and Engineering: A, 2011. 528(18): p. 5741-5746.

79. Lim, D.K., T. Shibayanagi, and A.P. Gerlich, Synthesis of multi-walled CNT

reinforced aluminium alloy composite via friction stir processing. Materials Science and

Engineering: A, 2009. 507(1–2): p. 194-199.

80. Izadi, H. and A.P. Gerlich, Distribution and stability of carbon nanotubes during

multi-pass friction stir processing of carbon nanotube/aluminum composites. Carbon,

2012. 50(12): p. 4744-4749.

81. Liu, Q., et al., Microstructure and mechanical property of multi-walled carbon

nanotubes reinforced aluminum matrix composites fabricated by friction stir processing.

Materials & Design, 2013. 45: p. 343-348.

82. Aruri, D., et al., Wear and mechanical properties of 6061-T6 aluminum alloy

surface hybrid composites [(SiC + Gr) and (SiC + Al2O3)]

fabricated by friction stir processing. Journal of Materials Research and Technology,

2013. 2(4): p. 362-369.

45
83. Devaraju, A., A. Kumar, and B. Kotiveerachari, Influence of addition of

Grp/Al2O3p with SiCp on wear properties of aluminum alloy 6061-T6 hybrid composites

via friction stir processing. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 2013.

23(5): p. 1275-1280.

84. Devaraju, A., A. Kumar, and B. Kotiveerachari, Influence of rotational speed and

reinforcements on wear and mechanical properties of aluminum hybrid composites via

friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2013. 45(0): p. 576-585.

85. Devaraju, A., et al., Influence of reinforcements (SiC and Al2O3) and rotational

speed on wear and mechanical properties of aluminum alloy 6061-T6 based surface

hybrid composites produced via friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2013. 51(0):

p. 331-341.

86. Mostafapour Asl, A. and S.T. Khandani, Role of hybrid ratio in microstructural,

mechanical and sliding wear properties of the Al5083/Graphitep/Al2O3p a surface

hybrid nanocomposite fabricated via friction stir processing method. Materials Science

and Engineering: A, 2013. 559: p. 549-557.

87. Narimani, M., B. Lotfi, and Z. Sadeghian, Evaluation of the microstructure and

wear behaviour of AA6063-B4C/TiB2 mono and hybrid composite layers produced by

friction stir processing. Surface and Coatings Technology, 2016. 285: p. 1-10.

88. Basavarajappa, S., et al., Influence of sliding speed on the dry sliding wear

behaviour and the subsurface deformation on hybrid metal matrix composite. Wear,

2007. 262(7–8): p. 1007-1012.

46
89. Suresha, S. and B.K. Sridhara, Effect of silicon carbide particulates on wear

resistance of graphitic aluminium matrix composites. Materials & Design, 2010. 31(9): p.

4470-4477.

90. Devaraju A., K.A., Kotiveerachari B., Influence of rotational speed and

reinforcements on wear and mechanical properties of aluminum hybrid composites via

friction stir processing. Materials and Design, 2013. 45: p. 576-585.

91. Palanivel, R., et al., Influence of boron nitride nanoparticles on microstructure

and wear behavior of AA6082/TiB2 hybrid aluminum composites synthesized by friction

stir processing. Materials & Design, 2016. 106: p. 195-204.

92. El-Kady, O. and A. Fathy, Effect of SiC particle size on the physical and

mechanical properties of extruded Al matrix nanocomposites. Materials & Design, 2014.

54: p. 348-353.

93. Thangarasu, A., et al., Synthesis and characterization of titanium carbide

particulate reinforced AA6082 aluminium alloy composites via friction stir processing.

Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, (0).

94. Sahraeinejad, S., et al., Fabrication of metal matrix composites by friction stir

processing with different Particles and processing parameters. Materials Science and

Engineering: A, 2015. 626(0): p. 505-513.

95. Kouzeli, M. and A. Mortensen, Size dependent strengthening in particle

reinforced aluminium. Acta Materialia, 2002. 50(1): p. 39-51.

96. Asadi, P., et al., Experimental Investigation of Magnesium-Base Nanocomposite

Produced by Friction Stir Processing: Effects of Particle Types and Number of Friction

47
Stir Processing Passes. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2011. 42(9): p.

2820-2832.

97. Shafiei-Zarghani, A., S.F. Kashani-Bozorg, and A.P. Gerlich, Strengthening

analyses and mechanical assessment of Ti/Al2O3 nano-composites produced by friction

stir processing. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2015. 631: p. 75-85.

98. Rathee, S., et al., Investigating effects of groove dimensions on microstructure

and mechanical properties of AA6063/SiC surface composites produced by friction stir

processing. Transactions of Indian Institute of Metals, 2017. accepted for publication.

99. Shafiei-Zarghani, A., S.F. Kashani-Bozorg, and A. Zarei-Hanzaki,

Microstructures and mechanical properties of Al/Al2O3 surface nano-composite layer

produced by friction stir processing. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2009. 500(1–

2): p. 84-91.

100. Rios, P.R., Overview no. 62. Acta Metallurgica, 1987. 35(12): p. 2805-2814.

101. Miranda, R.M., et al., Reinforcement strategies for producing functionally graded

materials by friction stir processing in aluminium alloys. Journal of Materials Processing

Technology, 2013. 213(9): p. 1609-1615.

102. Kurt, A., I. Uygur, and E. Cete, Surface modification of aluminium by friction stir

processing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2011. 211(3): p. 313-317.

103. Li, C., et al., Preparation of Al2O3/TiO2 particle-reinforced copper through

plasma spraying and friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2016. 90: p. 922-930.

104. Zahmatkesh, B. and M.H. Enayati, A novel approach for development of surface

nanocomposite by friction stir processing. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2010.

527(24–25): p. 6734-6740.

48
105. Anvari, S.R., F. Karimzadeh, and M.H. Enayati, A novel route for development of

Al–Cr–O surface nano-composite by friction stir processing. Journal of Alloys and

Compounds, 2013. 562(0): p. 48-55.

106. Mazaheri, Y., F. Karimzadeh, and M.H. Enayati, A novel technique for

development of A356/Al2O3 surface nanocomposite by friction stir processing. Journal of

Materials Processing Technology, 2011. 211(10): p. 1614-1619.

107. Dolatkhah, A., et al., Investigating effects of process parameters on

microstructural and mechanical properties of Al5052/SiC metal matrix composite

fabricated via friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2012. 37(0): p. 458-464.

108. Sharifitabar, M., et al., Fabrication of 5052Al/Al2O3 nanoceramic particle

reinforced composite via friction stir processing route. Materials & Design, 2011. 32(8–

9): p. 4164-4172.

109. Salehi, M., M. Saadatmand, and J. Aghazadeh Mohandesi, Optimization of

process parameters for producing AA6061/SiC nanocomposites by friction stir

processing. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 2012. 22(5): p. 1055-

1063.

110. Bahrami, M., et al., On the role of pin geometry in microstructure and mechanical

properties of AA7075/SiC nano-composite fabricated by friction stir welding technique.

Materials & Design, 2014. 53(0): p. 519-527.

111. Bahrami, M., K. Dehghani, and M.K. Besharati Givi, A novel approach to

develop aluminum matrix nano-composite employing friction stir welding technique.

Materials & Design, 2014. 53(0): p. 217-225.

49
112. Arora, H.S., et al., Some Investigations on Friction Stir Processed Zone of AZ91

Alloy. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, 2012. 65(6): p. 735-739.

113. Akramifard, H.R., et al., Microstructure and mechanical properties of Cu/SiC

metal matrix composite fabricated via friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2014.

54(0): p. 838-844.

114. Huang, Y., et al., Microstructure and surface mechanical property of AZ31

Mg/SiCp surface composite fabricated by Direct Friction Stir Processing. Materials &

Design, 2014. 59(0): p. 274-278.

115. Mazaheri, Y., F. Karimzadeh, and M.H. Enayati, Tribological Behavior of

A356/Al2O3 Surface Nanocomposite Prepared by Friction Stir Processing. Metallurgical

and Materials Transactions A, 2014. 45(4): p. 2250-2259.

116. Hodder, K.J., et al., Fabrication of aluminum–alumina metal matrix composites

via cold gas dynamic spraying at low pressure followed by friction stir processing.

Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2012. 556(0): p. 114-121.

117. Shafiei-Zarghani, A., S.F. Kashani-Bozorg, and A.Z. Hanzaki, Wear assessment

of Al/Al2O3 nano-composite surface layer produced using friction stir processing. Wear,

2011. 270(5–6): p. 403-412.

118. Avettand-Fènoël, M.N., et al., Characterization of oxide dispersion strengthened

copper based materials developed by friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2014.

60: p. 343-357.

119. Choi, D.-H., et al., Microstructure and mechanical property of A356 based

composite by friction stir processing. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of

China, 2013. 23(2): p. 335-340.

50
120. Mahmoud, E.R.I., K. Ikeuchi, and M. Takahashi, Fabrication of SiC particle

reinforced composite on aluminium surface by friction stir processing. Science and

Technology of Welding and Joining, 2008. 13(7): p. 607-618.

121. Sharma, V., et al., Friction Stir Processing Strategies for Uniform Distribution of

Reinforcement in a Surface Composite. Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2016.

31(10): p. 1384-1392.

122. Li, B., et al., Fabrication of TiCp/Ti–6Al–4V surface composite via friction stir

processing (FSP): Process optimization, particle dispersion-refinement behavior and

hardening mechanism. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2013. 574(0): p. 75-85.

123. Rathee, S., et al., Distribution of reinforcement particles in surface composite

fabrication via friction stir processing: Suitable strategy. Materials and Manufacturing

Processes, 2017. Under consideration.

124. N. Dialami, M.C., M. Cervera and C. Agelet de Saracibar, Challenges in

Thermo-mechanical Analysis of Friction Stir Welding Processes. Arch Computat

Methods Eng, 2016.

125. Heydarian, A., K. Dehghani, and T. Slamkish, Optimizing Powder Distribution in

Production of Surface Nano-Composite via Friction Stir Processing. Metallurgical and

Materials Transactions B, 2014. 45(3): p. 821-826.

126. Reynolds, A.P., Flow visualization and simulation in FSW. Scripta Materialia,

2008. 58(5): p. 338-342.

127. Hwang, Y.-M., et al., Experimental study on temperature distributions within the

workpiece during friction stir welding of aluminum alloys. International Journal of

Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2008. 48(7–8): p. 778-787.

51
128. Zohoor, M., M.K. Besharati Givi, and P. Salami, Effect of processing parameters

on fabrication of Al–Mg/Cu composites via friction stir processing. Materials & Design,

2012. 39: p. 358-365.

129. Asadi, P., et al., On the role of cooling and tool rotational direction on

microstructure and mechanical properties of friction stir processed AZ91. The

International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2012. 63(9-12): p. 987-

997.

130. Bahrami, M., M. Farahmand Nikoo, and M.K. Besharati Givi, Microstructural

and mechanical behaviors of nano-SiC-reinforced AA7075-O FSW joints prepared

through two passes. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2015. 626(0): p. 220-228.

131. Ma, Z.Y., Friction Stir Processing Technology: A Review. Metallurgical and

Materials Transactions A, 2008. 39(3): p. 642-658.

132. Feng, A.H., B.L. Xiao, and Z.Y. Ma, Effect of microstructural evolution on

mechanical properties of friction stir welded AA2009/SiCp composite. Composites

Science and Technology, 2008. 68(9): p. 2141-2148.

133. Colligan, K., Material Flow Behavior during Friction Stir Welding of Aluminum.

Weld. J. Suppl., , 1999. vol 78 ,((No. 7)): p. p 229s-237s.

134. Lorrain, O., et al., Understanding the material flow path of friction stir welding

process using unthreaded tools. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2010.

210(4): p. 603-609.

135. Khayyamin, D., A. Mostafapour, and R. Keshmiri, The effect of process

parameters on microstructural characteristics of AZ91/SiO2 composite fabricated by

FSP. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2013. 559(0): p. 217-221.

52
136. Abbasi Gharacheh, M., et al., The influence of the ratio of “rotational

speed/traverse speed” (ω/v) on mechanical properties of AZ31 friction stir welds, in

International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture2006. p. 1983-1987.

137. Chang CI, W.Y., Pei HR, Lee CJ, Du XH, Huang JC, Microstructure and

Mechanical Properties of Nano-ZrO2 and Nano-SiO2 Particulate Reinforced AZ31-Mg

Based Composites Fabricated by Friction Stir Processing. Key Engineering Materials,

2007(351): p. 114-119.

138. Faraji, G. and P. Asadi, Characterization of AZ91/alumina nanocomposite

produced by FSP. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2011. 528(6): p. 2431-2440.

139. Lee, C.J., J.C. Huang, and P.J. Hsieh, Mg based nano-composites fabricated by

friction stir processing. Scripta Materialia, 2006. 54(7): p. 1415-1420.

140. Ratna Sunil, B., et al., Nano-hydroxyapatite reinforced AZ31 magnesium alloy by

friction stir processing: a solid state processing for biodegradable metal matrix

composites. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, 2013. 25(4): p. 975-988.

141. Hussain, G., et al., An experimental study on multi-pass friction stir processing of

Al/TiN composite: some microstructural, mechanical, and wear characteristics. The

International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015. 84(1): p. 533-546.

142. Prakash, T., S. Sivasankaran, and P. Sasikumar, Mechanical and Tribological

Behaviour of Friction-Stir-Processed Al 6061 Aluminium Sheet Metal Reinforced with

Al2 O3 / 0.5 Gr Hybrid Surface Nanocomposite. Arabian Journal for Science and

Engineering, 2015. 40(2): p. 559-569.

53
143. Asadi, P., G. Faraji, and M.K. Besharati, Producing of AZ91/SiC composite by

friction stir processing (FSP). The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing

Technology, 2010. 51(1): p. 247-260.

144. Morisada, Y., et al., MWCNTs/AZ31 surface composites fabricated by friction stir

processing. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2006. 419(1–2): p. 344-348.

145. El-Rayes, M.M. and E.A. El-Danaf, The influence of multi-pass friction stir

processing on the microstructural and mechanical properties of Aluminum Alloy 6082.

Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2012. 212(5): p. 1157-1168.

146. Karthikeyan, L., V.S. Senthilkumar, and K.A. Padmanabhan, On the role of

process variables in the friction stir processing of cast aluminum A319 alloy. Materials &

Design, 2010. 31(2): p. 761-771.

147. Alavi Nia, A. and S.H. Nourbakhsh, Microstructure and Mechanical Properties

of AZ31/SiC and AZ31/CNT Composites Produced by Friction Stir Processing.

Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, 2016. 69(7): p. 1435-1442.

148. Barmouz, M., et al., Investigation of mechanical properties of Cu/SiC composite

fabricated by FSP: Effect of SiC particles’ size and volume fraction. Materials Science

and Engineering: A, 2011. 528(3): p. 1740-1749.

149. Puviyarasan, M. and V.S.S. Kumar, Optimization of friction stir process

parameters in fabricating AA6061/SiCp composites. Procedia Engineering, 2012. 38(0):

p. 1094-1103.

150. Qu, J., et al., Improving the tribological characteristics of aluminum 6061 alloy

by surface compositing with sub-micro-size ceramic particles via friction stir processing.

Wear, 2011. 271(9–10): p. 1940-1945.

54
151. Rathee Sandeep , M.S., Siddiquee A.N. , Srivastava Manu Fabrication of AA

6063/SiC Surface Composites via Friction Stir Processing. in India International Science

Festival- Young Scientists’ Meet Department of Science and Technology, Government of

India. 2015. New Delhi.

152. Shahraki, S., et al., Producing of AA5083/ZrO2 Nanocomposite by Friction Stir

Processing (FSP). Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, 2013. 44(6): p. 1546-

1553.

153. Sarkari Khorrami, M., M. Kazeminezhad, and A.H. Kokabi, The effect of SiC

nanoparticles on the friction stir processing of severely deformed aluminum. Materials

Science and Engineering: A, 2014. 602(0): p. 110-118.

154. Soleymani, S., A. Abdollah-zadeh, and S.A. Alidokht, Microstructural and

tribological properties of Al5083 based surface hybrid composite produced by friction

stir processing. Wear, 2012. 278–279(0): p. 41-47.

155. Zohoor, M., M.K. Besharati Givi, and P. Salami, Effect of processing parameters

on fabrication of Al–Mg/Cu composites via friction stir processing. Materials & Design,

2012. 39(0): p. 358-365.

156. Alidokht, S.A., et al., Microstructure and tribological performance of an

aluminium alloy based hybrid composite produced by friction stir processing. Materials

& Design, 2011. 32(5): p. 2727-2733.

157. Choi, K., et al., Mechanical properties of aluminum-based nanocomposite

reinforced with fullerenes. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 2014.

24, Supplement 1(0): p. s47-s52.

55
158. Abbasi Gharacheh, M., et al., The influence of the ratio of “rotational

speed/traverse speed” (ω/v) on mechanical properties of AZ31 friction stir welds.

International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2006. 46(15): p. 1983-1987.

159. Morisada, Y., et al., Fullerene/A5083 composites fabricated by material flow

during friction stir processing. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing,

2007. 38(10): p. 2097-2101.

160. Abbasi, M., et al., The effect of FSP on mechanical, tribological, and corrosion

behavior of composite layer developed on magnesium AZ91 alloy surface. The

International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015. 77(9): p. 2051-

2058.

161. Khosravi, J., et al., Microstructural, mechanical, and thermophysical

characterization of Cu/WC composite layers fabricated via friction stir processing. The

International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2014: p. 1-10.

162. Sathiskumar, R., et al., Prediction of mechanical and wear properties of copper

surface composites fabricated using friction stir processing. Materials & Design, 2014.

55(0): p. 224-234.

163. Sarmadi, H., A.H. Kokabi, and S.M. Seyed Reihani, Friction and wear

performance of copper–graphite surface composites fabricated by friction stir processing

(FSP). Wear, 2013. 304(1–2): p. 1-12.

164. Sharifitabar, M., M. Kashefi, and S. Khorshahian, Effect of friction stir processing

pass sequence on properties of Mg–ZrSiO4–Al2O3 surface hybrid micro/nano-

composites. Materials & Design, 2016. 108: p. 1-7.

56
165. Kim, C.-S., et al., Prediction models for the yield strength of particle-reinforced

unimodal pure magnesium (Mg) metal matrix nanocomposites (MMNCs). Journal of

Materials Science, 2013. 48(12): p. 4191-4204.

166. Zhang, Z. and D.L. Chen, Contribution of Orowan strengthening effect in

particulate-reinforced metal matrix nanocomposites. Materials Science and Engineering:

A, 2008. 483–484(0): p. 148-152.

167. Zhang, Z. and D.L. Chen, Contribution of Orowan strengthening effect in

particulate-reinforced metal matrix nanocomposites. Materials Science and Engineering:

A, 2008. 483–484: p. 148-152.

168. Sanaty-Zadeh, A., Comparison between current models for the strength of

particulate-reinforced metal matrix nanocomposites with emphasis on consideration of

Hall–Petch effect. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2012. 531: p. 112-118.

169. Hossein Izadi, R.S., Adrian P. Gerlich, Grain Growth Behavior and Hall–Petch

Strengthening in Friction Stir Processed Al 5059. Metallurgical and Materials

Transactions A, 2014 Volume 45(Issue 12): p. pp 5635-5644.

170. Sun, K., et al., Microstructure and mechanical property of nano-SiCp reinforced

high strength Mg bulk composites produced by friction stir processing. Materials Science

and Engineering: A, 2012. 547(0): p. 32-37.

171. Guo, J.F., et al., Effects of nano-Al2O3 particle addition on grain structure

evolution and mechanical behaviour of friction-stir-processed Al. Materials Science and

Engineering: A, 2014. 602(0): p. 143-149.

57
172. Yuvaraj, N., S. Aravindan, and Vipin, Fabrication of Al5083/B4C surface

composite by friction stir processing and its tribological characterization. Journal of

Materials Research and Technology, 2015. 4(4): p. 398-410.

173. Navazani, M. and K. Dehghani, Fabrication of Mg-ZrO2 surface layer

composites by friction stir processing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2016.

229: p. 439-449.

174. Faraji, G., O. Dastani, and S.A.A.A. Mousavi, Effect of Process Parameters on

Microstructure and Micro-hardness of AZ91/Al2O3 Surface Composite Produced by

FSP. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 2011. 20(9): p. 1583-1590.

175. Zhao, Y., et al., Effect of friction stir processing with B4C particles on the

microstructure and mechanical properties of 6061 aluminum alloy. The International

Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015: p. 1-7.

176. Jafari, J., M.K.B. Givi, and M. Barmouz, Mechanical and microstructural

characterization of Cu/CNT nanocomposite layers fabricated via friction stir processing.

The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015. 78(1): p. 199-

209.

177. Mohammadzadeh Jamalian, H., et al., Processing–structure–property correlation

in nano-SiC-reinforced friction stir welded aluminum joints. Journal of Manufacturing

Processes, 2016. 21: p. 180-189.

178. B.T. Balakrishna, V.S.A. 1980. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Eng. Sci.).

179. Ibrahim, I.A., F.A. Mohamed, and E.J. Lavernia, Particulate reinforced metal

matrix composites — a review. Journal of Materials Science, 1991. 26(5): p. 1137-1156.

58
180. Bauri, R., et al., Tungsten particle reinforced Al 5083 composite with high

strength and ductility. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 2015. 620: p. 67-75.

181. Liu, P., Q.-y. Shi, and Y.-b. Zhang, Microstructural evaluation and corrosion

properties of aluminium matrix surface composite adding Al-based amorphous fabricated

by friction stir processing. Composites Part B: Engineering, 2013. 52(0): p. 137-143.

182. Amra, M., K. Ranjbar, and R. Dehmolaei, Mechanical Properties and Corrosion

Behavior of CeO2 and SiC Incorporated Al5083 Alloy Surface Composites. Journal of

Materials Engineering and Performance, 2015. 24(8): p. 3169-3179.

183. Dinaharan, I., Influence of ceramic particulate type on microstructure and tensile

strength of aluminum matrix composites produced using friction stir processing. Journal

of Asian Ceramic Societies, 2016. 4(2): p. 209-218.

184. Hosseini, S.A., et al., Fabrication of Al5083 surface composites reinforced by

CNTs and cerium oxide nano particles via friction stir processing. Journal of Alloys and

Compounds, 2015. 622: p. 725-733.

185. Salehi, M., et al., Improvement of Mechanical Properties in the Functionally

Graded Aluminum Matrix Nanocomposites Fabricated via a Novel Multistep Friction Stir

Processing. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B, 2014. 46(1): p. 20-29.

186. Saadatmand, M. and J.A. Mohandesi, Modeling Tensile Strength of Al–SiC

Functionally Graded Composite Produced Using Friction Stir Processing (FSP).

Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, 2014: p. 1-7.

187. Saadatmand, M. and J. Aghazadeh Mohandesi, Optimization of Mechanical and

Wear Properties of Functionally Graded Al6061/SiC Nanocomposites Produced by

59
Friction Stir Processing (FSP). Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), 2015. 28(5):

p. 584-590.

188. Gandra, J., et al., Wear characterization of functionally graded Al–SiC composite

coatings produced by Friction Surfacing. Materials & Design, 2013. 52: p. 373-383.

189. Salehi, M., H. Farnoush, and J.A. Mohandesi, Fabrication and characterization of

functionally graded Al–SiC nanocomposite by using a novel multistep friction stir

processing. Materials & Design, 2014. 63(0): p. 419-426.

190. Gandra, J., et al., Functionally graded materials produced by friction stir

processing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2011. 211(11): p. 1659-1668.

191. Rosso, M., Ceramic and metal matrix composites: Routes and properties. Journal

of Materials Processing Technology, 2006. 175(1–3): p. 364-375.

192. Tjong, S.C. and Z.Y. Ma, Microstructural and mechanical characteristics of in

situ metal matrix composites. Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports, 2000.

29(3–4): p. 49-113.

193. Zhang, Q., et al., Formation mechanism of in situ Al3Ti in Al matrix during hot

pressing and subsequent friction stir processing. Materials Chemistry and Physics, 2011.

130(3): p. 1109-1117.

194. Hsu, C.J., et al., Al–Al3Ti nanocomposites produced in situ by friction stir

processing. Acta Materialia, 2006. 54(19): p. 5241-5249.

195. Chen, Y. and D.D.L. Chung, In situ Al-TiB composite obtained by stir casting.

Journal of Materials Science. 31(2): p. 311-315.

60
196. Tong, X.C. and H.S. Fang, Al-TiC composites In Situ-processed by ingot

metallurgy and rapid solidification technology: Part I. Microstructural evolution.

Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A. 29(3): p. 875-891.

197. Birol, Y., In situ synthesis of Al–TiCp composites by reacting K2TiF6 and

particulate graphite in molten aluminium. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2008.

454(1–2): p. 110-117.

198. Feng, C.F. and L. Froyen, Microstructures of in situ Al/TiB2 MMCs prepared by a

casting route. Journal of Materials Science. 35(4): p. 837-850.

199. Tee, K.L., L. Lu, and M.O. Lai, Synthesis of in situ Al–TiB2 composites using stir

cast route. Composite Structures, 1999. 47(1–4): p. 589-593.

200. Watson, I.G., et al., Investigation of the clustering behaviour of titanium diboride

particles in aluminium. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 2005.

36(9): p. 1177-1187.

201. Herbert, A.M., et al., Microstructural Evolution, Hardness, and Alligatoring in

the Mushy State Rolled Cast Al-4.5Cu Alloy and In-Situ Al4.5Cu-5TiB2 Composite.

Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2007. 38(9): p. 2110-2126.

202. Hsu, C.J., P.W. Kao, and N.J. Ho, Ultrafine-grained Al–Al2Cu composite

produced in situ by friction stir processing. Scripta Materialia, 2005. 53(3): p. 341-345.

203. Zhang, Q., et al., In situ Al3Ti and Al2O3 nanoparticles reinforced Al composites

produced by friction stir processing in an Al-TiO2 system. Materials Letters, 2011.

65(13): p. 2070-2072.

204. Barmouz, M. and M.K.B. Givi, Fabrication of in situ Cu/SiC composites using

multi-pass friction stir processing: Evaluation of microstructural, porosity, mechanical

61
and electrical behavior. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 2011.

42(10): p. 1445-1453.

205. Lee, I.S., P.W. Kao, and N.J. Ho, Microstructure and mechanical properties of

Al–Fe in situ nanocomposite produced by friction stir processing. Intermetallics, 2008.

16(9): p. 1104-1108.

206. Chen, C.F., et al., Effect of Processing Parameters on Microstructure and

Mechanical Properties of an Al-Al11Ce3-Al2O3 In-Situ Composite Produced by Friction

Stir Processing. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2010. 41(2): p. 513-522.

207. You, G.L., N.J. Ho, and P.W. Kao, In-situ formation of Al2O3 nanoparticles

during friction stir processing of AlSiO2 composite. Materials Characterization, 2013.

80(0): p. 1-8.

208. Zhang, Q., et al., Microstructural evolution and mechanical properties of

ultrafine grained Al3Ti/Al–5.5Cu composites produced via hot pressing and subsequent

friction stir processing. Materials Chemistry and Physics, 2012. 134(1): p. 294-301.

209. Chuang, C.H., J.C. Huang, and P.J. Hsieh, Using friction stir processing to

fabricate MgAlZn intermetallic alloys. Scripta Materialia, 2005. 53(12): p. 1455-1460.

210. Heurtier P, D.C., Montheillet F., A Thermomechanical Analysis of the Friction

Stir Welding Process, in Materials Science Forum, 20022002. p. 1537-1542.

211. Ke, L., et al., Al–Ni intermetallic composites produced in situ by friction stir

processing. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2010. 503(2): p. 494-499.

212. Khodabakhshi, F., et al., Effects of post-annealing on the microstructure and

mechanical properties of friction stir processed Al–Mg–TiO2 nanocomposites. Materials

& Design, 2014. 63: p. 30-41.

62
213. Tutunchilar, S., et al., Simulation of material flow in friction stir processing of a

cast Al–Si alloy. Materials & Design, 2012. 40(0): p. 415-426.

214. Tjong, S.C., Novel Nanoparticle-Reinforced Metal Matrix Composites with

Enhanced Mechanical Properties. Advanced Engineering Materials, 2007. 9(8): p. 639-

652.

215. Barmouz, M., et al., A novel approach for producing polymer nanocomposites by

in-situ dispersion of clay particles via friction stir processing. Materials Science and

Engineering: A, 2011. 528(6): p. 3003-3006.

216. Azarsa, E. and A. Mostafapour, On the feasibility of producing polymer–metal

composites via novel variant of friction stir processing. Journal of Manufacturing

Processes, 2013. 15(4): p. 682-688.

217. Farshbaf Zinati, R., M.R. Razfar, and H. Nazockdast, Numerical and

experimental investigation of FSP of PA 6/MWCNT composite. Journal of Materials

Processing Technology, 2014. 214(11): p. 2300-2315.

218. Farshbaf Zinati, R., Experimental evaluation of ultrasonic-assisted friction stir

process effect on in situ dispersion of multi-walled carbon nanotubes throughout

polyamide 6. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015.

81(9): p. 2087-2098.

219. Hangai, Y. and T. Utsunomiya, Fabrication of Porous Aluminum by Friction Stir

Processing. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2009. 40(2): p. 275-277.

220. Hangai, Y., et al., Fabrication of Aluminum Foam/Dense Steel Composite by

Friction Stir Welding. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2010. 41(9): p. 2184-

2186.

63
221. Hangai, Y., T. Utsunomiya, and M. Hasegawa, Effect of tool rotating rate on

foaming properties of porous aluminum fabricated by using friction stir processing.

Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2010. 210(2): p. 288-292.

64
Table1. Grain size reduction in stir zone of fabricated surface composites

Base metal Reinforcement Grain Size, B.M Reduced Grain Size, References

used (µm) SZ (µm)

Al 5052 Al2O3 25 0.94 [108]

AZ31 Al2O3 70 2.2 [31]

AZ61 SiO2 75 0.8 [139]

AZ31 SiC 16.57 1.24 [114]

AZ31 nHA 54 2 [140]

Al7075 TiN 78 1.4 [141]

AA6061 Al2O3, 100 10 [142]

Graphite

Al6082 Al2O3 120 0.3 [117]

AZ91 SiC 150 7.17 [143]

Al5052 SiC 243 0.9 [107]

65
Table 2. Summary of tool materials, tool geometries, processing variables and strategies used in fabrication of surface composites of

several aluminium alloys*

Author’s Base, Tool design Operating Reinforcement Reinforcement Remarks

Name Tool parameters Parameters techniques
Material (mm)
Puviyarasan Al 6061, SD.-18 1200,1500 SiC, 3µm, 99.9 Groove Rotational speed has largest
and Senthil HSS PD – 6 &1800 rpm % impact (48.46 %) then traverses
[149] PL – 5.9 36,58, 72 speed (43.52 %) and then tilt
PS – TC mm/min; 1˚, angle (5.78 %) on properties of
2˚, 3˚ fabricated SCs.
Qu et al. Al 6061, SD-19.05 1000–1800 Al2O3- 200 nm Dimples and Fabricated a thick (>1 mm),
[150] PD– 6.35 rpm; 6 - 60 and SiC -300 nm grooves high-particle-concentration
PL – 4 mm/min. (more than 20 vol.%) composite
surface layer.
Rathee et al. Al 6063, SD-20 1120 rpm, 30, SiC- 10µm Groove Traverse speed has strong effect
[151] H-13 PD-6 40, 50 on the pattern of material flow.
PS-threaded mm/min, 2˚
Palanivel et Al 6082, SD- 18 1600 rpm, 60 TiB2 (20 μm) + Groove Wear rate of hybrid composites
al. [91] HcHcr PD- 6 mm/min BN ( 200 nm) decreased to minimum value of
PL- 5.5 13 × 10−5mm3/Nm as compared

66
 to BM (23.75 × 10−5 mm3/Nm).
Shahraki et al. Al 5083, SD.- 18 800, 1000, and ZrO2, 10 to 15 Groove An increment of 10% in tensile
[152] 2436 steel PD– 6 1250 rpm; 40- nm strength with enhanced
alloy PL – 3.3 160 mm/min; microhardness of 134 HV was
3˚ reported.
Khorrami et Al 1050 SD.- 12 1200 rpm; SiC, 45–65 nm Groove After 3 passes of FSP, the
al. [153] PD – 3 50 mm/min; microhardness increases by
PL – 2.1 3˚ 118.8% to that of FSPed without
any particles.
Soleymani et Al5083, SD.- 20 1250 rpm; SiC + MoS2, 5 Groove Hardness order:- SiC composite
al. [154] H-13 steel PL – 2.8 50 mm/min; μm > hybrid composite > MoS2 >
3˚ FSPed > as-received
wear resistance :-Hybrid > MoS2
> SiC composite > FSPed > as-
received
Zohoor et al. Al5083, SD.- 16 750 and 1900 Cu, 20 µm and Groove Grain size of SCs reduced up to
[155] H-13 steel PD – 6 rpm; 40 nm 1.52 µm while base metal had 60
PL – 3.2 25 mm/min; µm. Also, enhanced UTS and
3˚ microhardness were achieved
with nano-sized RPs.

67
Alidokht et al. cast SD.- 20 1600 rpm; SiCp 30 µm, Groove Hybrid composite displays
[156] A356, H- PD – 6 50 mm/min; MoS2, 5 µm higher hardness and wear
13 tool PL– 3.7 3˚ resistance as compared with the
PS- T BM and monocomposites.
Mazaheri et A356, H- SD.- 18 1600 rpm; A356 chips, µm, Coating via Surface nanocomposite had
al. [115] 13 steel PD – 3.6 200 mm/min; Al2O3, µm and HVOF spraying better wear resistance and
PL– 4 2˚ nm microhardness than composite
containing µ-Al2O3;
Choi et al. A356, H- PS- threaded 1800 rpm; SiC, 4 µm Groove Higher hardness of ~ 60 to 85 Hv
[157] 13 steel 127 mm/min was achieved in SZ while base
metal had 50 to 65Hv.
*SD: Shoulder diameter; PD: pin diameter; PL: length of tool pin; PS: pin shape; ω/υ ratio: rotational to traverse speed ratio; T;

threaded; SZ: stir zone; UTS: ultimate tensile strength.

68
Table 3 Tool materials, tool geometries, processing variables and strategies used in fabrication of surface composites of other than

aluminium alloys*

Author’ Base Tool design Operating Reinforcem Reinforcement Findings/Remarks

s Material, parameters Parameter ent techniques

Name/Y Tool s

ear Material

Abbasi AZ91, H- SD- 15mm 730-1800 SiC, Groove Composites having SiC reinforcement have

et al. 13 steel SS- C rpm, 80 Al2O3, higher mechanical and corrosion as

[160] PD – 4mm mm/min 30nm compared to Al2O3 and base metal.

PL– 2.5mm

Khosrav Copper, SD- 20mm 800 and WC, 5µm Groove Increase in rotational speed and FSP pass

i et al. hot PD – 7 mm 1,250 count lead to more uniform particle

[161] working PL–2.5 mm rpm; 20 distribution, reduction in grain size and

steel 2344 m/min; higher hardness than pure copper

2.5’

69
Sathisk Copper, PS- C 800 - 1200 SiC, TiC, Groove Groove dimensions and type of RPs did not

umar et H-13 rpm; 20 – B4C, WC, have significant effect on particle

al. [162] steel 60 & Al2O3 distribution. Composites reinforced with

mm/min B4C exhibited higher microhardness and

wear properties.

Sarmadi Pure Cu, SD- 20mm 1600 rpm; Graphite, 5 Groove Wear and friction coefficient of SCs (at 22

et al. H-13tool PD- 6.5 mm 20 mm/ μm vol% of graphite) decreased up to 65% and

[163] steel PL - 3mm min; 79% respectively as compared to base

PS- SC, TC, 1.5’ matrix.

S, TR

Nia et AZ31 SD- 18mm 1000rpm, SiC, 50nm Groove Dispersion of SiC particles are more

al. [147] PD- 7 mm 28 CNTs (20- homogeneous as CNTs after 4 FSP pass

PL - 4mm mm/min, 50nm) counts.

PS-threaded

70
Sharifit Pure SD-13.6mm 400-1000 ZrSiO4(1- Groove Temperature of SZ varies with the FSP pass

abar et magnesiu PD-5mm rpm, 20- 5µm) + count and passes sequence

al. [164] m PL-3.7mm 100 Al2O3

mm/min, (nm)

1.5˚-3˚

*SD: shoulder diameter; SS: shoulder shape; PD: pin diameter; PL: pin length; PS: pin shape; TT: threaded taper; TR: triangular; ω/υ:

rotational speed to traverse speed ratio; S: square; C- cylindrical, SC: straight cylindrical: UTS: ultimate tensile strength.

71
Table 4. Showing improvement in UTS in SCs as compared to base matrix

Material SD PD S1 S2 FSP pass Reinforcement Vol (%) Highes (%) Refere

(mm) (mm) count t UTS enhanc nces
(MPA) ement
Al 1016 26.8 12 950 30 5 CNTs 6 190.2 Double [81]
Al 5083 15 4 1200 24 1 W 14.2 404 - [180]
Al 5A06 18 4 500- 40- 1 Al84.2Ni10La2.1 - 410 44.1% [181]
1000 150
Al 5083 18 6 800/ 35/ 3 CeO2+ SiC - 332 20% [182]
600 45
Al 6082 18 5 1600 60 1 SiC(8µm), Al2O3(1µm) - 286 12% [183]
TiC(2µm), B4C(4µm) WC(5µm) 297 17%
326 28%
315 24%
283 11%
Al 5083 18 6 700 40 3 CNTs+ CeO2 7.5+2.5 396 42% [184]
*SD: Shoulder diameter; PD: pin diameter; S1: rotational speed of tool; S2: traverse speed of the tool.

72
Figure 1. Schematic Illustration of FSP Process

73
Figure 2. Schematic arrangement of reinforcement particles in (a) bulk composites and

(b) surface composites

74
Figure 3. Base material used in fabrication of SCs using FSP

75
Figure 4. Classification of variables involved in SCs fabrication

76
Figure 5. Outer and end surface features of pin profiles

77
Figure 6. Simulated material flow using threaded pin profile showing vertical material

flow [57]

78
Figure 7. Macroscopic images of A356/B4C surface composites: (a) cylindrical pin; (b)

square pin; (c) threaded pin [57].

79
Figure 8. Images of Al5059/CNTs composites; (a) macrograph after two pass FSP; (b)

macrograph after three pass FSP; (c) and (d) TEM images after 2 passes; (e) and (f)

HRTEM images after 3 FSP passes [79].

80
Figure 9. Pinning effect: (a) nucleation of new grains at grain boundaries; (b) hindrance
of the grain growth by reinforcement particles in MMCs after recrystallization.

81
Figure 10. TEM images of C P-Ti/ Al2O3 nano-composites: (a) a typical deformation

twin in the Ti–20n–0.8 sample; and (b) pinning of grain boundary by two nano-particles

[96].

82
Figure 11. Classification of reinforcement strategies

83
Figure 12. Procedure used in HVOF spraying reinforcement technique [113]

84
Figure 13. Steps in SCs fabrication using groove technique [38]

85
Figure 14. Schematic presentation of: (a) groove covered with thin cover plate; (b) typical

pattern of drilled holes in plate and (c) incorporation of reinforcement via hollow tool

[112].

86
Figure 15. Macrographic image of AA6063/SiC surface composite showing difference in

reinforcement dispersion at AS and RS [38].

87
Figure 16. Distribution of RPs after; (a) single FSP pass; (b) four FSP passes without

change in tool rotation direction; (c) four FSP passes with change in tool rotation

direction [56].

88
Figure 17. Microscopic images showing grain sizes of: (a) base material; (b) after four

pass FSP without RPs; (c) with RPs (4 % CNTs); (d) with RPs (4 % SiC) [144]

89
Figure 18. Relative effect of each strengthening mechanism in Ti/Al2O3 composite

samples towards strength enhancement [96].

90
Figure 19. Improvement in microhardness of SCs as compared with base matrix of

different metal alloys [24, 72, 158-165].

91
Figure 20. Microscopic images of AZ63/SiC nano composites, (a) position of RPs inside

and on the GBs; (b) interface between SiC and base matrix; (c) bonding between SiC and

base matrix [169].

92
Figure 21. Functionally graded composites

93
Figure 22. Distribution of Al2Cu/Cu particles: (a) as-sintered condition; (b) sintered and

subsequent FSP passes (two) [200].

94