Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
In many applications right from house hold furniture to industrial
components steel is employed. Plain carbon and alloy steels other than
stainless steels are prone to various forms of corrosion when exposed to
external atmosphere. Processes like galvanizing, aluminizing and electro
plating of chromium and nickel are used to deposit coatings of zinc, Al
Cr, Nickel, Cadmium coating and phaspating are used to protect the
component from corrosion [1-15]. Aluminium deposited by the methods
discussed above under goes oxidation. The oxide layer is impervious to
external atmosphere and hence protects the steel from corrosion/
oxidation. Aluminium is used as sacrificial anode to protects ships,
submarine and other marine structures. Aluminium coating can be
obtained by numerous methods involving processes in liquid (hot
dipping) and solid state (pack aluminizing) [16]. However, these processes
tend to result in the formation of inter-metallics and grain growth of the
substrate. Solid state processes like friction surfacing that enable
deposition of a thin layer in solid state can offer a solution for the
deficiencies of the conventional processes discussed above. Solid state
1
welding processes are in vogue to weld those aluminium alloys that are
not weldable by fusion welding. In some of the applications groove
welding is called for. Hence the present study is planned to develop an
understanding on friction surfacing of mild steel and groove welding of
an aluminium alloy in solid state.
It is also
the
influence
of
individual
parameters
and
their
properties
Design and implement test for mechanical characterization of the
coatings to evaluate bond strength and ductility by appropriate
testing methodology
To investigate the influence of parameters and their interaction by
statistical analysis of data generated from experiments based on
statistical design of experiments.
4
Surface modification
processes
Fusion
based
Solid
state
Electro
plating
and
anodizing
Physical vapor
deposition
Vapor
deposition
Plasma spray
Carburising
Carbonitridin
g
Flame spray
Induction
hardening
Laser based
Flame
hardening
Electron
beam based
Friction
surfacing
Chemical vapor
vapor
Chemical
deposition
deposition
Galvanizin
gAluminizi
ng
Induction hardening
In this process the component is heated locally using high
frequency current and subjected to high cooling rate to get martensitic
structure that is hard to improve wear resistance [26].
Flame hardening
The surface of the steel component is heated
1.4.5. Electroplating
In these processes the component to be coated is employed as a
cathode and is dipped in to electrolyte containing the coating material.
Passage of current enables the material to be deposited on to the surface
of interest by the electrolysis of the electrolyte [32]. For example
10
1.4.6.
1.4.7.
Explosive cladding
In this process explosive energy is utilized to bond a sheet of
material on to a parent metal with the help of explosive energy [40, 41].
Roll bonding
In roll bonding a sheet of coating material is bonded on to a metal
plate of interest by passing both of them together through the roll gap of
a rolling mill. Bonding occurs between the sheet and the plate by the
thermo mechanical working involving plastic deformation [39].
Friction based processes for cladding and coating
11
Inert gas
welding
Arc
welding
Consumable arc
welding
Shielded metal arc
welding
Non-Consumable arc
welding
Gas tungsten arc welding
(GTAW)
Plasma arc welding
(PAW)
12
13
such
as
inhomogeneous
composition,
inhomogeneous
14
CHAPTER - 2
LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1. Introduction
In this chapter principles of friction surfacing and friction seam
welding are discussed. The contents include influence of parameters as
well as characterization techniques discussed as a review and as a part
15
16
of
worn
out
components
and
crack
sealing
[46],
18
control mode, although majority of the works are based on force control
mode of experimentation [88].
19
Substrate
material
Carbon steel
Coating material
Mild steel
Alloy steel : AISI 4140
Alloy steel : AISI 86280
Austenitic SS : AISI 304
Austenitic SS : AISI 310
Austenitic SS : AISI 316L
Austenitic SS : AISI 321
Martensitic SS : AISI 410
Martensitic SS : AISI 416
Martensitic SS : AISI 431
Martensitic SS : AISI 440
Tool steel : AISI O1
Tool steel : AISI D2
Tool steel : AISI H13
HSS : BM2, BT15, ASP30
Co-Cr based alloys : Satellite-6,12
Ni-Cr based alloys: Inconnel-600
Aluminium alloy: AA100
References
Gandra etal. [126]
Kramar de Macedo et al.[109]
Kramar de Macedo etal.[109]
Rafi et al.[116] Govardhan etal. [120]
Kramar de Macedo et al.[109],Rafi etal. [112]
Lambrineas and jews burry [65] Puli and Janaki Ram [129]
Lambrineas etal.[63], Liu et al. [98]
Puli et al. [119]
Vitanov et al [94]
Vitanov et al [105]
Puli and Janaki Ram [130]
Chandra sekaran et al. [77]
Rao et al.[125]
Rafi et al. [113,117]
Bedford et al. [88]
Rao et al. [124]
Chandra sekaran et al. [77]
Sugandhi and Ravishankar [132]
20
Report
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
Coating
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
successful
Stainless steel
Not successful
Not successful
Not successful
Not successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Table.2.1.[131].Details of steel substrates and coating materials combination investigated in friction surfacing.
Substrate
Aluminium
Magnesium
Coating material
Mild steel
Stainless steel : AISI 304
Aluminium : AA1100
Aluminium : AA6063
Aluminium : AA6082
Aluminium : AA5052
Titanium (Pure)
Copper(pure)
Mild steel
Aluminium :AA6063
Titanium (Pure)
Magnesium : AZ91
References
Chandra sekaran et al. [75] Rao et al. [124]
Chandra sekaran et al. [75]
Beyer et al. [93]
Rao et al. [124]
Gandra et al. [134] Ravi [127], Suhuddin et al. [137], Vilaca et al. [122]
Sakihama et al. [91] Tokisue et al. [96]
Rao et al. [123]
Rao et al. [124]
Rao et al. [124]
Rao et al. [124]
Rao et al. [123]
Nakama et al. [100]
21
Report
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Not successful
Not successful
Not successful
Coating successful
Copper
NiAl Bronze
Inconel
Titanium
Copper(pure)
Mild steel
Aluminium : AA6063
Titanium (Pure)
Copper(pure)
NiAl Bronze
Not successful
Coating successful
Not successful
Not successful
Coating successful
Coating successful
Mild steel
Aluminium : AA6063
Titanium (Pure)
Copper(pure)
Mild steel
Aluminium :AA2124
Aluminium :AA6063
Titanium (Pure)
Titanium : Ti-6Al-4V
Copper(pure)
Coating successful
Not successful
Not successful
Not successful
Not successful
Coating successful
Not successful
Not successful
Coating successful
Not successful
22
mechanism
of
frictional
contact,
via
plasticized
layer.
The
which
continually
introduces
new
ambient
temperature
substrate to the rotating consumable bar [94]. After the initial dynamic
contact by a rigid consumable and after traverse has been initiated, the
scouring action necessary to disperse the continuous intrusion of the
substrate oxide barrier is continued, not by the contact face of the
consumable, but by the plasticized layer produced from the consumable.
24
initial
contact
phase
(provided
the
axially
applied
force
is
maintained), it has been shown practically that the oxide dispersal will
continue during processing and will result in sound bonds [96].
The relative lateral movement between consumable and substrate
exposes the continually generated semicircular leading edge of the
deposit to the atmosphere [97]. This may introduce oxides into the
deposit and these may influence the quality of the deposit, especially for
the more reactive materials [100], which may require the use of a
suitable gas shield. Dispersal of the existing oxide into the deposit is
unlikely to be modified to any great extent by process conditions.
Nevertheless, sound deposits of good mechanical strength and adhesion
are produced.
25
2.2.2 Equipment
It has been reported that a wide variety of equipments are used for
friction surfacing. They are, conventional vertical milling machine, radial
drilling machine, CNC controlled dedicated machines and Plano millers.
26
2.2.4. Applications
Anti-corrosion overlay
Cutting edges
Friction surfacing is used for manufacturing long-life cutting edges
on knives, scissors and similar tools. They may be used for cutting paper
and wood as well as plastics. Difficulty generally occurs at which point
existing tools lose their cutting edge, such that the paper is no longer cut
cleanly, or the surface of the wood is degraded. Any requirement to
change or redress tools can lead to a downtime for the production
equipment and consequent loss of production. Friction surfacing of
specific tool steels to carbon steel substrates has shown that blades can
be successfully produced with good cutting characteristics that offer an
alternative to conventional carbide cutting tips [51,73].
27
Reclamation
Friction surfacing has gained increasing interest in the area of
reclamation of worn components. They can be repaired by friction
surfacing by building up worn out material to match the original [46].
Friction surfacing has been proved to be successful in building up of
worn-out shafts.
Shell banding
The base of artillery shells requires a layer of soft material, known
as a driving band. It improves the shells rifling characteristics to provide
smoothness and accuracy at firing especially in defence industry [73].
Soft material is used as gilding metal for example, (copper-based alloy)
soft iron need to be deposited onto steel. Alternative friction welding
technologies have been examined for this application (e.g. radial friction
welding), but they are limited because they require specialized and
expensive equipment. Friction surfacing can be successfully employed as
a lower cost option, and excellent bond integrity can be achieved [51].
The friction-surfaced driving band must withstand the propellant thrust
and any forces experienced while cutting through the rifling of the gun
barrel. The band must also react to torque in so far as the rifling imparts
spin to the shell.
28
2.2.5. Advantages
The grain structure of the coating is finer than the starting coating
material
29
2.2.6. Disadvantages
30
Title
Material combination
Observations
Authors
A.W
Batchelor,
S. J.Mater.Pr
Jana, C.P.Koh and C.S oce.Tech.
Tan [19]
57 (1996)
PP.172-181
Study
of
the Stainless steel 304 and
interfacial
MS 1020 over AA5083
phenomena during
friction surfacing
of Al. watt steels.
Friction surfacing
of metal coatings
on
steel
and
Aluminium
substrate
31
source
J.Mater.Sci
.
32(1997)PP
.6055-62
M. Chandrasekharan, J.Mater.Pr
A.W.Batchelor
and oce.Tech.
S.Jana [75]
72 (1997)
PP.446-452
AA
Hiroshi
Tokisue,
Kazuyoshi,ToshikatsuA
shina
and
Toshio
Usiyama.[96]
Mater.Tran
s.
47(2006)
PP
874882
The Japan
Inst.
of
Light
metals
Micro
structural Austenitic
stainless Micro structural examination revealed that
evaluation during steel AISI 304 and MS
the coating exhibited fine grain micro
friction surfacing
structure as compared to that of the
of
austenitic
consumable rod material. The evaluation of
Stailess steel AISI
fine grain size is due to dynamic
304 on low carbon
recrystallization
resulting from sevior
steel
plastic deformation
Characterization of AISI
410
friction
surfaced consumable
martensitic
substrate
stainless steel
Ramesh
Puli,E. Trans.Ind.I
Nandhakumarand
nst.Met.
MS
G .D Janakiram [119]
(AISI410) coatings.
7.
Friction
H . Khalid Rafi,
64(2011)PP
41-45
G.D Proce.
of
austenitic SS MS as substrate
on Low carbon
steel: Studies on
the
effect
of
traverse speed
Transferring
AISI 321 consumable
Mechanism of the ans
MS1020
as
coating
rod
in substrate
friction surfacing
Mechanical
properties
of
a
friction
surfaced
5052
Aluminum
Alloy
HidekazuSakihama,Hir Mater.Tran
oshiTokisue
and s.Vol.44.No
Kazuyoshi Katoh [96].
.12(2003)P
P.26882694
10
Tool
steel
and Tool steel over Steel , The study is an attempt in the direction of
copper coatings by copper over steel and understanding the mechanism of bonding .It
friction surfacing; copper over copper.
is reported bonding is fessible when flow
K Prasad
Rao, A J.Mater.pr
Veerasreenu, h Khalid oc.
tech
Rafi,
Mnlibin, 212(2012)
June-30July.022010
33
11
12
a
thermography
study
PP.402-407
Microstructural
H13 tool steel on low
evolution
during carbon steel.
friction surfacing
of tool steel H13
Mater.Desi
gn (2010)
Characterization of Austenitic
stainless
austenitic stainless steel over low carbon
steel
friction steel
surfaced
deposit
over low carbon
steel.
D
govardhan,
ACS
Kumar, KGK Murthy
and
Madhusudhanreddy
[120]
Mater.Desi
gnVol.36.
(2012)PP.2
02-214
34
Doi:
10.1016/J
Formation
of Commercial aluminium
composite surface over Mild steel.
during
friction
surfacing of steel
with aluminium
14
Some
AZ91 as mectrode and Magnesium alloy AZ91 is coated on AZ31
characterization of AZ31 as substrate
using friction surfacing . The relation
AZ31/AZ91
between micro structure and mechanical
Dissimilar
properties of the coating obtained a different
Magnesium
alloy
surfacing conditions is reported. The deposit
deposit by Friction
is reported to exhibit fine grai structure with
surfacing
hardness higher than the substrate
material. The wear resistance with coating is
reported to be superior to that of the
substrate wit out coating.
Dai
Nakama,Kazuyoshikat
oh and hiroshiTokisue
[100].
Mater.Tran
s.
Vol.49,No5
(2008)
PP1137
-1141
15
Influence
J Gandra, D Pereira,
Proc.CIRP7
alloy
35
6082
is
coated
over
process
T6 as consumable and
parameters in the aluminium alloy 2024friction surfacing T3 as substrate
of aluminium alloy
6082-T6
over
aluminium
alloy
2024-T3
16
Under
water AISI 440C as coating
friction surfacing
rod (martensitic S-S),
SM50C as substrate
(low carbon steel).
17
Friction surfacing:
novel technique for
metal
matrix
composite coating
on Aluminium
Silicon alloy
Silicon
carbide
particle
reinforced
aluminium alloy composite is deposited on
A356 sil-aluminium alloy by friction
surfacing. With the coating in place the
wear resistance of the material is better
than that of the parent aluminium alloy
substrate material. The coating has also
been reported to be resistant to corrosion.
36
G
.Madhusudhan Surf.
Reddy, K srinivas and Engg.Vol.2
T Mohandas [106]
5.
PP.25-30.
18
Friction surfacing
of titanium alloy
with
aluminium
metal
matrix
composite
19
Studies on friction Coating materials: Al, The studies were conducted on radial
surfacing of steels
SS, MMC&Ni.
drilling
machine
to
understand
the
of
substrate
coating
Substrate
material: feasibility
combinations. it is reported that coatings of
MS,LCS,MCS & Ni
Al over MS, Ni over MS, SS over MS,MMC
over MS, SS over LCS & MCS and Ni over
MCS are feasible. The study is limited to
examination of micro structure and
hardness distribution across the interface.
20
Aluminium
metal
matrix as consumable
and
titanium
as
substrate.
P.Sreedhar
M. Tech Thesis
NIT, Warangal (20052007) [141]
37
-------------
Surf. Coat.
Tech.141
(2001)
PP.34-39
38
et
al.
[77]
in
their
study
on
interfacial
41
42
43
CHAPTER-3
EXPERIMENTAL WORK
3.1. Introduction
In this chapter experimental details consisting of design of
experiments to
and cleaned with acetone to obtain oxide free clean surface before
coating. Mechtrode and substrate chemical composition and mechanical
properties are presented in Table.3.1 and 3.2 respectively.
Fig.3.1.Mechtrode of AA6063
Material
Si
Fe
IS2062
0.1
7
Bal.
0.4
MS
AA6063
Cu
--
Mn
Mg
1.03 --
Cr
Zn
Ti
Al
--
--
--
--
0.21
0.02
0.016
--
---
---
Al
IS2062- MS
(MPa)
410
AA6063 Al
241
45
Elongation
Hardness
(%)
24
HV
180
12
83
46
48
E
Uniform deposition between
selected parameters levels
Poor deposition
at higher
traverse speed
Representation
Axial Force
Spindle speed
(Mechtrode rotation)
Table Speed
(Substrate traverse
speed)
Units
kN
rpm
Vx
mm/min
49
Minimum
(-)
Maximum
(+)
800
1000
600
800
-1
-1
-1
+1
-1
-1
-1
+1
-1
+1
+1
-1
properties and
-1
-1
+1
physical
50
+1
-1
+1
-1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
Mechanical
dimensions
Vx
Combination
kN
rpm
mm/min
PC
(X1)
(X2)
(X3)
800
600
800
600
1000
600
1000
600
800
800
800
800
1000
800
1000
800
51
3.2.5. Coating
In the present study the experiments were conducted in force
controlled mode. AA6063 aluminium alloy coatings were deposited over
a length of 100 mm on mild steel as per the experimental parameter
matrix details given in Table.3.5.
52
coatings
were
subjected
to
visual
examination,
and
mechanical
property
evaluation
comprising
samples were grounded on 120 and 220 grit SiC papers polished through
600, 800 and 1000 grit SiC papers and then wet polished by using
diamond paste on disc polishers through 9, 3 and 0.3 micron cloths
respectively. After proper polishing the specimens were etched with nital
solution (2 ml HNO3 and 98 ml alcohol) on mild steel surface and with
Kellers (1 ml HF, 1.5 ml HCl, 2.5 ml HNO 3, 95 ml distilled water ) reagent
on aluminium alloy. Macro and microstructures were obtained at various
magnifications
under
optical
microscope
(LEICA
make).
Sample
55
(EPMA).
Standard
metallographic
sample
preparation
Die
Ra
m
Fig.3.10. Ram tensile test attachment
For this the coating material was machined from the substrate as a
circular area to form an inner circle without the coating while retaining
the outer circular area to form an annular space consisting of coating
and substrate intact [120]. Outside the outer circle coating was
machined to facilitate supporting the substrate on a fixture such that on
57
loading the inner circular area, the area in the annular space is only
subjected to loading. The arrangement in the test was such that only the
coating is subjected to tensile load along the bond interface as per the
sketch shown in Figs.3.11.and 3.12 respectively.
specimen
58
Fig.3.17.
PC-3
61
Gil
AC)
controlled
electrochemical
cell.
Reference
63
speeds (400 mm/min, 600 mm/min and 800 mm/min) were studied.
64
For this the plates were beveled as shown in Fig.3.19 employing ram type
vertical milling machine.
450
300
600
Fig.3.19. AA 6063 metal plates with different bevels for friction seam welding
65
66
67
Tensile Testing
Tensile testing was carryout on a 10 Ton tensile testing machine at
a cross head speed of 5 mm / min. The specimen used for the tensile
testing machine is shown in Fig. 3.23. Ultimate tensile strength, yield
strength and percentage elongation are reported on a gauge length of 50
mm. The specimens employed for tensile test as per AWS standards.
400 mm /min
600 mm/min
800 mm/min
Fig.3.23. Tensile test specimens of friction seam welds at 400, 600 and
800 mm/min welding speeds.
68
Hardness
Hardness survey was conducted across the welds using Vickers hardness
tester at a load of 500 gm for 10 seconds.
Impact Testing
Charpy impact testing was carried out on a standard specimen
(Fig.3.24). The notch in the specimen was located at the centre of the
weld.
69
70
Materials
Mechtrode:
Aluminium (AA6063)
Substrate:
MS, Aluminium
(AA6063)
MS, Aluminium
(AA6063)
Friction surfacing
and Groove welding
Process
parameters:
Physical
dimensions:
Coating
width
Axial down
ward force
(kN)
Coating
thickness
Mechtrode
speed (rpm)
Mechanical
Properties
Hardness
Tensile
strength
Bend ductility
Impact
toughness
Substrate
linear
speeds
(mm/min)
71
Metallurgical
properties:
Micro
structure
72
CHAPTER-4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Introduction
In this section of the chapter, the effect of surfacing parameters on
physical
appearance
and
dimensions
of
the
coatings,
their
Visuals
of
the
coatings
obtained
at
different
parameter
Figs.4.3 -4.5. From these figures it is observed that, wider width results
in lower thickness. Increase in axial force leads to wider coating (Fig.4.3),
while spindle speed exhibit an opposite trend (Fig.4.4) and table speed
has similar influence as that of spindle speed(Fig.4.5)
4
1mm
Parameters
Combination
F ( X1)
N (X2)
Vx (X3)
(PC)
(kN)
(rpm)
(mm/min)
800
Response (Y)
Coating
Coating
width
thickness
(mm)
(mm)
600
13.38
1.58
800
600
15.42
1.20
1000
600
12.44
1.25
1000
600
13.17
1.26
75
800
800
15.95
1.20
800
800
16.09
1.30
1000
800
13.11
1.73
1000
800
14.16
1.90
76
77
78
PC-1
79
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
81
PC-6
PC-7
82
PC-8
(kN-rpm-mm/min)
PC-1
4-800-600
PC-2
is larger.
The interface is wavy; the amplitude of the wave is
6-800-600
PC-3
small.
The interface is wavy with lot of intermixing of
4-1000-600
larger.
PC-4
4-800-800
PC-5
6-1000-600
PC-6
6-800-800
PC-7
4-1000-800
PC-8
6-1000-800
wavy
with
saw
tooth
like
Interface with wavy nature with smaller wave lengths and saw tooth like
appearance exhibited better strength.
Electron probe micro analysis (EPMA)
The friction surfaced coatings were examined for composition
variation across the interface to find out the extent of reaction with the
substrate and consumable by employing electron probe micro analyzer.
Typical back scattered images and profiles showing the elemental
distribution across the interface of PC-3 and PC-6 are presented in
Figs.4.14 and 4.15 respectively. From the EPMA composition profiles
across the interface, it is observed that inter-diffusion of iron and
84
PC-3
PC-3
85
PC-6
PC-6
86
Process Parameters
Parameters
Response (Y)
Inter diffusion
Combination
F ( X1)
N (X2)
Vx (X3)
(PC)
(kN)
(rpm)
(mm/min)
800
600
1.99
800
600
2.02
1000
600
1.91
1000
600
2.10
800
800
2.01
800
800
1.87
1000
800
1.86
1000
800
2.08
87
zone width
(m)
88
PC-3
Substrat
e
Coating
PC-6
Substrat
e
Coating
89
220
180
160
Interface
Interface Hardness ( Hv )
200
140
120
100
Mild Steel
Substrat
e
Hardness (Hv) of
Parametric Combinations
PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
PC-6
PC-7
PC-8
Aluminium Alloy
Coating
80
60
-3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Distance from Interface ( MM )
(mm)
90
Parameters
Combination
Response (Y)
Process Parameters
F ( X1)
N (X2)
Vx (X3)
Interface
Tensile
Bend
kN
(rpm)
(mm/min)
Hardness
Strength
Ductility
(Hv)
(MPa)
( )%
(PC)
800
600
182
55
4.46
800
600
186
64
4.88
1000
600
197
147
11.40
1000
600
153
61
1.45
800
800
168
78
1.68
800
800
170
159
10.63
1000
800
197
66
1.55
1000
800
152
98
7.04
Coating
C
800
850
900
950
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
(%)
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Bend ductility
1000
92
100
100
Tensile strength
90
90
70
70
60
50
60
30
20
Bend ductility
40
10
50
40
30
20
0
4.0
4.5
5.0
(%)
80
Bend ductility
Tensile strength
(MPa)
80
5.5
6.0
10
0
6.5
93
100
Tensile strength
90
100
90
70
70
60
60
50
50
A&C : F,N kept constant at lower level
and Vx varied
B&D : F,N kept constant at higher level
and Vx varied
40
30
40
30
20
(%)
80
Bend ductility
80
20
Bend ductility
10
10
0
600
650
700
750
800
94
95
96
4.2.4.
on physical
97
Parameters
S.N
o
Vx
Torqu
e
Rp
m
MM/
min
Tz
Min
Min
Min
800
600
PC
F
kN
1
2
1
2
Responses
800
600
Ma
x
Ma
x
Max
N-m
Force
Fx
kN
Coatin
g
Coatin
g
Width
Responses trend
Bend
Tensile
Thick.
Ductlt
y
Streng
th
Micro
Hardn
ess
mm
mm
E %
MPa
Hv
1.576
4.46
55
182
8.63
0.659
4
13.35
8.55
0.582
7
15.42
1.195
4.88
64
186
100
0
800
4.49
0.013
6
13.11
1.724
1.55
66
170
100
800
4.39
0.016
14.16
1.884
7.05
98
197
98
Tz
B
D
T
S
Hv
W t
5
6
7
8
3
5
4
6
Var
y
Ma
x
Min
100
0
600
100
0
600
Var
y
Min
Max
800
800
800
800
6.41
0.646
9
12.44
6.54
0.203
7
15.95
1.205
1.68
78
168
4.32
0.129
4
13.17
1.258
1.45
61
153
6.5
0.653
3
16.09
1.251
1.299
11.04
10.63
147
159
197
170
Table.4.4. Interaction effect of axial force with other parameters on physical dimensions and mechanical
properties
99
100
220
Hardness (Hv)
200
b
180
d
e
160
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
on coating hardness
on tensile strength
101
Spindle speed
The influence of spindle speed with different combination of axial
force and table traverse speed on physical dimensions and mechanical
propeties are presented in Table 4.5 and Figs 4.29-4.33. From the data
presented in table and figures it may be noted that high strength and
high bend ductility are observed at maximum spindle speed-minimum
axial force-minimum table traverse speed as well as for the parameters
combinations minimum spindle speed-maximum table speed maximum
axial force. This observation similar to that reported by Rafi et al.[112]
coating of austenitic stainless steel on low carbon steel. Which implies
102
high and low spindle speeds are conducive for strenghth and bend
ductility. The coating width is observed to decrease with increase in
spindle speed only when axial force and table speed are kept constant,
while for other parameter combinations coating width increases. It has
been reported by Rafi et al. [113],that coating width decreases with
increase in spindle speed, in respect of coating of H13 tool steel over
mild steel. It may be noted that their observations are based on single
parameter effect keeping the other parametrs at constant level. In our
study also the observations are in conformity with that reported by them
when table speed and axial force are kept at constant level.
103
Table.4.5. Interaction effect of spindle speed with other parameters on physical dimensions and
S.N
o
PC
Parameters
N
Vx
Torqu
e
Rp
m
MM/
min
Tz
Min
Min
Min
800
600
100
0
600
Ma
x
Ma
x
Max
F
kN
1
2
1
3
Responses
N-m
Force
Fx
kN
Coatin
g
Coatin
g
Width
Responses trend
Bend
Tensile
Thick.
Ductil
ity
Streng
th
Micro
Hardn
ess
mm
mm
MPa
Hv
1.576
4.46
55
182
8.63
0.659
4
13.38
6.41
0.646
9
12.44
1.251
11.04
147
197
800
800
6.5
0.653
3
16.09
1.299
10.63
159
170
100
800
4.39
0.016
14.16
1.882
7.04
98
152
104
Tz
B
D
T
S
Hv
W t
5
6
7
8
2
5
4
7
Ma
x
Var
y
Min
800
600
100
0
600
Min
Var
y
Max
800
800
100
0
800
8.55
0.582
7
15.42
6.54
0.203
7
15.95
1.205
1.68
78
168
4.32
0.129
4
13.17
1.258
1.45
61
153
4.49
0.013
6
13.11
1.195
1.724
mechanical properties
105
4.88
1.55
64
66
186
197
on coating thickness
on coating width
220
210
Hardness (Hv)
200
190
180
170
160
150
c
800
850
900
950
1000
106
108
S.N
o
PC
Parameters
N
Vx
Torqu
e
Rp
m
MM/
min
Tz
Min
Min
Min
800
600
F
kN
1
2
3
4
1
4
5
8
Responses
800
800
Ma
x
Ma
x
Max
100
0
600
100
0
800
N-m
Force
Fx
kN
Coatin
g
Coatin
g
Width
Responses trend
Bend
Tensile
Thick.
Ductil
ity
Streng
th
Micro
Hardn
ess
Mm
mm
MPa
Hv
1.576
4.46
55
182
8.63
0.659
4
13.38
4.32
0.129
4
13.17
1.258
1.45
61
153
6.54
0.203
7
15.95
1.205
1.68
78
168
4.39
0.016
2
14.16
1.882
109
7.04
98
152
Tz
B
D
T
S
Hv
W t
5
6
7
8
Ma
x
Min
Vary
800
600
2
6
800
800
Min
Ma
x
Vary
100
0
600
100
0
3
7
800
8.55
0.582
7
15.42
6.5
0.653
3
16.09
1.299
10.63
159
170
6.41
0.646
9
12.44
1.251
11.40
147
197
4.49
0.013
6
13.11
1.195
1.724
4.88
1.55
54
66
186
197
Table.4.6. Interaction effect of table speed with other parameters on physical dimensions and mechanical
properties
110
on coating width
on coating thickness
Hardness(Hv)
225
220
215
210
205
200
195
190
185
180
175
170
165
160
155
150
e
c
600
650
700
750
800
on coating hardness
on tensile strength
111
112
113
114
115
Substrate
metal
coating metal
Response (Y)
Process Parameters
Material
F (X1)
(kN)
N (X2)
PC-1 coating
800
600
1.5768
-682.43
PC-2 coating
800
600
1.1950
-713.25
PC-3 coating
1000
600
1.2511
-699.02
(rpm)
Vx (X3)
Coating
Critical pitting
Potential (mV)
PC-4 coating
1000
600
1.2582
-699.02
PC-5 coating
800
800
1.2054
-688.61
PC-6coating
800
800
1.2996
-694.54
PC-7 coating
1000
800
1.7248
-688.61
PC-8 coating
1000
800
1.8820
-700.47
Substrate
-620
Mechtrode
-820
would control the quality of the deposit. For the deposit to be adherent to
the substrate, the substrate material also should get adequately heated.
The parameter combinations govern the quantity of heat generated. In
order to explain the influence of parmeters on the properties of the
coatings, heat input is calculated using the follwing formula [71] :
Heat input/unit length = Power input/Table speed,Vx
Power input = Torque x Spindle speed
The
calculated
heat
input
for
the
experimental
parameter
119
Response (Y)
Process Parameters
Paramete
rs
Combinat
Vx
Torque
Input
Power
(Watts)
P=2NT/60
Coefficient
of
Friction
k = F/N
Heat
Input
(J/mm)
Q=P/Vx
ion
(X1)
(X2)
(X3)
(PC)
(kN)
(rpm)
(mm/min)
Nm
800
600
8.63
722.98
0.2838
72.29
800
600
8.55
716.28
0.2923
71.62
1000
600
6.41
671.25
0.3744
67.1
1000
600
4.32
452.16
0.3657
27.14
800
800
6.54
547.61
0.1834
51.36
800
800
6.50
544.26
1000
800
4.49
470.79
0.2761
35.26
1000
800
4.39
459.71
0.2710
34.47
120
0.3676
54.45
121
welded coupons with 300 groove angle contain un-bonded areas and
under filled areas. These effects are observed to decrease with an
increase in the groove angle.
a
b
C
Fig.4.49. Influence of groove angle on the quality welds in friction seam
welding a) 30 b) 45 c) 60
Microstructure
122
100
m
100
m
4.3.2.
123
Hardness (Hv)
on
Groove angle
Tensile
Impact
strength(MPa)
toughness(J)
Groove angle
Groove angle
(degrees)
(degrees)
30
45
60
30
45
60
30
45
60
Weld
83
86
87
20
30
38
30
50
57
HAZ
71
72
71
Parent
65
65
65
Metal
124
90
Weld centre
At 30
0
At 45
0
At 60
Hardness (Hv)
85
80
75
HAZ
70
65
Parent metal
10
12
14
16
18
20
40
38
Tensilestrength
36
34
32
30
28
T
e
n
s
i
l
e
s
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
(
M
P
a
)
26
24
2
20
18
Weld
30 35 40 45 50 5 60
o
125
60
Toughness
55
Toughness (J)
50
45
40
35
30
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
From the visuals presented in Fig.4.54 it is observed that the welds are
free from defects.
Fig.4.54. Friction seam welded coupons of 6mm thick plates with 90 groove angle
showing the influence of welding speed a ) 400 mm/min. b) 600 mm/min c) 800 mm/min
Microstructure
It is observed that continuity is maintained between the weld and
parent metal (Fig.4.55). The microstructures of the welds are free from
such defects which were observed at smaller groove angles during the
course of feasibility studies to investigate the influence of groove angle.
The possible changes during friction seam welding are that the weld zone
is likely to contain fine grain size and would be free from porosity and
segregation problem as the welding is carried out in solid state.
127
Weldment
Base
metal
Base
metal
Weldment
100
m
100
m
Mechanical properties
The role of welding speed (table speed) on hardness, tensile strength
and impact toughness of the seam welds are presented in Table.4.10. It
may be noted that welding speed does not influence hardness, however,
marginal improvement in tensile strength and toughness are indicated
with increasing welding speed (Figs.4.56-4.58). The improvement in
strength and toughness is thought to be due to better utilization of heat
energy (Table.4.11), as a consequence of reduction in heat loss by way of
conduction in to the surrounding parent metal. This condition would
enable better mixing of the metal in the weld region which would result
in welds, relatively free from defects.
Table .4.10. Influence of table speed on the mechanical properties
128
Locati
on
Hardess (Hv)
Tensile strength
(MPa)
Impact toughness
(J)
Table speed
(mm/min.)
Table speed
(mm/min.)
Table speed
(mm/min.)
400
600
800
400
600
800
400
600
800
Weld
92
92
93
55
56
57
83
86
93
HAZ
82
82
83
Parent
Metal
65
65
65
Weld bead
95
A : 400 mm/min
B : 600 mm/min
C : 800 mm/min
90
HAZ
HAZ
Hardness (Hv)
85
80
75
70
65
60
Parent metal
Parent metal
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
129
Tensile strength
57.0
56.5
56.0
55.5
55.0
400
500
600
700
800
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
130
Thickness
Table speed
(0)
(mm)
(rpm)
Location
Hardness
(Hv)
Toughness
(J)
Tensile
strength
30
45
60
90
10
400
600
800
83
86
87
93
87
93
92
92
93
30
50
57
93
57
93
83
86
93
20
30
38
57
38
57
55
56
57
(MPa)
4.3.4. Discussion
The observed lower properties of friction seam welds at lower
groove angle are due to the blunting of mechtrode during the progress of
seam welding. Wider groove angle enables full coverage of the mechtrode
in to the groove even after it gets blunt. For this reason, the seam welds
at wider groove angles exhibit better properties. Reduction in the
thickness of the plate, results in shallow weld groove, that enables
accommodation of mechtrode fully in to the groove, even after blunting.
Therefore the welds in thinner plates are relatively free from defects and
thus exhibit better strength and toughness.
131
strength and bond strength are obtained when the coatings are wide and
thin. Out of eight
properties
be
could
obtained
only
for
two
sets
of
parametric
133
CHAPTER - 5
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF FRICTION SURFACING DATA
5.1. Introduction
The data on physical characteristics and mechanical properties of
the friction surfaced coating have been subjected to statistical analysis,
based on Yatess technique, to understand the influence of parameter as
well as their inter-active affects. Detailed analysis of the results and
observations are furnished in this chapter.
135
1
2
PC
1
X1
3
X2
4
X1X2
5
X3
6
X1X3
7
X2X3
8
X1X2X3
Mean=14.266
Response
Column-
(Y)
Column-2
Column-3
TSS
F ratio=
Significant
(Z)
(Z2 /8)
TSS/MSS
factors (Z/8)
13.358
15.424
28.782
25.624
54.406
59.728
114.134
4.386
1628.32
2.404
7.9292
0.0117
(coefficients)
14.266 bo
0.548 b1
12.447
13.177
15.956
16.031
13.113
14.628
31.987
27.741
2.066
0.73
0.075
1.515
2.796
1.59
-3.158
-4.246
-1.336
1.44
-7.404
0.104
5.322
-1.206
-1.088
2.776
6.852
0.001352
3.540
0.181
0.147
0.9637
0.03336
0.0000065836
0.01723
0.00088139
0.0007158
0.004692
-0.9255 b2
0.013 b12
0.6652 b3
-0.15075 b13
0.136 b23
0.347 b123
136
After the test of significance eliminating the least important terms (less
significant) the equation can be re-written as
Y
In the table the constant b0 and the coefficients b1, b2, b3, b12, etc. for
the above regression equation, are presented in the last column of the
table. From the values presented in table, it may be noted that
coefficients b2 and b13 show a negative trend (decreasing coating width),
while all other coefficients indicate a positive trend (increasing coating
width). It implies that increasing spindle speed and the combination of
axial force and table traverse speed result in reduction width. It may also
be noted that the combination of x1x2 has least significant contribution
on coating width. The trends on coating width at minimum and
maximum values of x1, x2, x3 and x1x2x3 are presented in Fig.5.1. From
which the observations discussed above are evident.
137
15.0
14.8
15.5
Factor- X1 effect
14.814
15.0
14.4
mm
14.6
Coating width
Factor-X2 effect
15.191
14.2
14.0
13.8
13.718
13.6
13.4
14.5
14.0
13.5
13.341
13.2
13.0
13.0
X1 min
X2 min
X1 max
X2 max
Factor- X2
Factor-1 effect
15.0
15.0
Factor-X3 effect
14.931
14.8
14.6
14.4
14.2
14.0
13.8
13.6
14.814
14.6
Coating width (mm)
14.8
14.4
14.2
14.0
13.8
13.601
13.718
13.4
X3 Min
13.6
X3 Max
X1X2X3 Min
Factor-X3
X1X2X3 Max
Factors X1X2X3
= 0.0623
X1:
Axial force,
X2:
X3
The
regression
equation
for
coating
thickness
after
substituting
140
PC
Response
Column-
(Y)
Column-2
Column-3
TSS
F ratio=
Significant
(Z)
(Z2 /8)
TSS/MSS
factors(Z/8)
(coefficients)
1
2
1
X1
3
X2
4
X1X2
5
X3
6
X1X3
7
X2X3
8
X1X2X3
Mean=1.423
1.576
1.195
2.771
2.509
5.28
6.155
11.435
0.626
16.3449
0.0489
7.8238
0.00234
1.4293 bo
0.0993 b1
1.251
1.258
1.205
1.299
1.724
1.882
2.549
3.606
-0.381
0.007
0.094
0.158
0.374
0.252
-0.262
1.057
-0.388
0.064
0.795
-0.324
0.875
-0.122
1.319
0.452
0.079
0.0131
0.0957
0.0018605
0.2174
0.0255
0.0378
0.00627
0.0458
0.0008905
0.1040
0.012206
0.0993 b2
-0.0405 b12
0.10937b3
-0.0152 b13
0.1648 b23
0.0565 b123
141
The influence of parameters x1, x2, x3, x2x3 and x1x2x3 at their
minimum and maximum values on coating thickness are presented in
Fig.5.2. From the figure it is observed that the coating thickness
increases with increasing the value of the enumerated parameters. This
observation is in conformity with the values for the respective
coefficients.
mm
1.58
Factor- X1 effect
Factor-X2 effect
1.60
1.568
1.56
1.589
Coating thickness (mm)
Coating thickness
1.54
1.52
1.50
1.48
1.46
1.44
1.55
1.50
1.45
1.42
1.40
1.412
1.40
X1 Min
1.391
X1 Max
X2 Min
Factor X1
X2 Max
Factor X2
2.0
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.55
1.50
1.45
1.40
1.251
1.381
X1X2X3 Min
1.35
X1X2X3 Max
X3 Min
Factors X1X2X3
1.65
1.60
1.55
1.50
1.45
1.40
1.35
1.30
X3 Max
Factor X3
1.70
1.599
1.93
1.8
1.2
Factor-X3 effect
1.60
1.326
X1X2 Min
X1X2 Max
Factor X1X2
142
X1:
Axial force,
X2:
X3:
143
After the test of significance eliminating the least important terms (less
significant) the equation can be re-written as
From the above regression equation the influence of x 3, x1x3 and x1x2x3
at their minimum and maximum values are presented in Fig.5.3. From
the figure it is evident that the combination of axial force and table speed
does not influence hardness. However increasing axial force, spindle
speed and table traverse speed increase in hardness. It may be noted
from the experimental data the maximum hardness of 197Hv is observed
atPC-7.
144
S.No.
PC
X1
3
4
5
6
7
8
X2
X1X2
X3
X1X3
X2X3
X1X2X3
Interface
Hardness
(Hv)
182
186
Column-1
Column-2
Column-3
TSS
F ratio=
Significant
(Z)
(Z2 /8)
TSS/MSS
factors (Z/8)
368
718
1405
246753.125
7.928
(coefficients)
175.625 bo
350
687
6.125
0.0001968
0.875 b1
0.0001968
0.0001004
0.0003859
0.03040
0.0003377
0.03326
-0.875 b2
-0.625 b12
-3.875 b3
10.875 b13
3.625 b23
11.375 b123
197
338
-40
153
349
47
168
4
-18
170
44
11
197
2
-48
152
45
43
Table.5.3. Regression equation coefficients
145
-7
6.125
-5
3.125
-31
120.125
87
946.125
29
105.125
91
1035.125
for hardness (response)
Mean :175.625
MSS (Mean Sum of Squares) : 31121.875
146
192
180
179
Factor-X3 effect
179.50
190
190.37
Hardness (Hv)
177
176
175
174
188
186
184
173
172
182
171.75
171
X3 Min
180
X1X3 Min
X3 Max
X1X3 Max
Factors X1X3
Factor X3
200
Factors - X1X2X3 effect
197.25
195
Hardness (Hv)
Hardness (Hv)
178
190
185
180
175
174.5
X1X2X3 Min
X1X2X3 Max
Factors X1X2X3
147
10
148
After the test of significance eliminating the least important terms (less
significant) the equation can be re-written as
YTS =91+4.5x1+ 9.25x3 - 18x1x2 + 23.75x1x3 20.25x2x3+ 5.75x1x2x3
12
149
Significant
S.
Interaction
Response
Column-1
No.
Coefficient
(Y)
1
X1
55
119
64
147
61
78
159
66
98
3
X2
4
X1X2
5
X3
6
X1X3
7
X2X3
8
X1X2X3
Mean = 91
Column-2
Colum-3
TSS
2
F ratio=
factors (Z/8)
(Z)
(Z /8)
TSS/MSS
327
728
66248
6.8142
91bo
208
401
36
162
0.01666
4.5b1
237
164
09
-86
81
32
-77
113
89
-73
-95
-49
16
-144
74
190
-162
46
32
2592
684.5
4512.5
3280.5
264.5
0.003291
0.2666
0.0704
0.4641
0.3373
0.0272
2b2
-18b12
9.25b3
23.75b13
-20.25b23
5.75b123
150
( coefficients)
that increase in
axial force , table speed, higher axial force-higher spindle speed, higher
axial force- higher table speed, higher spindle speed higher table speed
and higher axial force-higher spindle speed-higher table speed lead to
higher tensile strength.
Factor-X1 effect
100
95.5
94
96
92
90
88
100.25
95
90
85
86.5
86
Factor-X3 effect
81.75
80
X1 Min
X1 Max
X3 Min
X3 Max
Factor X1
Factor X3
Factors-X1X2 effect
78
130
77.5
128.5
125
Tensile strength (MPa)
76
74
72
70
68.5
68
120
115
110
105
100
X1X2 Min
X1X2 Max
101
X1X3 Min
Factors X1X2
X1X3 Max
Factor X1X3
100
80
96
90
80
70
60
75
70
65
57
61.5
60
50
X1X2X3 Min
X2X3 Min
X1X2X3 Max
X2X3 Max
Factors X2X3
Factor X1X2X3
151
13
X1: Axial force, X2: Spindle speed and X3 : Table traverse speed
and b0 is average of the bend ductility and b1,b2 etc. coefficients for the
parameters.]
152
S.No.
PC
Response
Column-1
Column-2
(Y)
Column-3
TSS
F ratio=
Significant
(Z)
(Z2 /8)
TSS/MSS
factors (Z/8)
4.467
9.34
22.19
43.09
232.093
5.403
(coefficients)
5.386 bo
X1
4.88
12.85
20.90
4.91
3.013
0.07014
0.9887 b1
3
4
5
6
7
8
X2
11.40
12.31
-9,53
-0.21
0.0055125 0.00012834
X1X2
1.45
8.59
14.44
-13.83
1.728
0.0402
X3
1.68
0.42
3.51
-1.29
0.208
0.0048427
X1X3
10.63
-9.95
-3.72
23.97
71.820
1.6721
X2X3
1.55
8.95
-10.37
-7.23
6.534
0.1521
X1X2X3
7.04
5.44
-3.46
-13.83
23.908
0.5566
Table.5.5. Regression equation coefficients for coating bend ductility (response)
153
-0.02625 b2
-1.7287 b12
-0.16125 b3
2.99625 b13
0.90375 b23
1.72875 b123
Mean : 5.387
MSS (Mean Sum of Squares) : 42.951
154
14
After the test of significance eliminating the least important terms (less
significant) the equation can be re-written as
Y
BD
15
and
X1X2X3
155
5.0
Factors-X1X2 effect
Factors-X1X3 effect
9.5
4.74
9.47
4.5
9.0
4.0
3.5
8.5
8.0
3.0
7.5
2.77
7.49
2.5
X1X2 Min
X1X3 Min
X1X2 Max
X1X3 Max
Factors X1X3
Factors X1X2
9.0
8.5
8.0
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
5.02
4.5
X1X2X3 Min
X1X2X3 Max
Factors X1X2X3
156
The effects of axial force, spindle speed and table speed with one
parameter variation at a time and their multiple combinations on
physical dimensions and mechanical properties are summarized in Table
5.6. From the data presented in the table it is observed that single
parameter effects are different from those of multiple parameter effects.
For example the width of the coating increases with increase in axial
force and table traverse speed, while it decreases with increasing spindle
speed. Two parameter combinations namely
X1X2, X2X3
and
X1X3
do not
X1X2X3
in respect of tensile strength and bend ductility are different for single
parameter effect from those of multiple parameter effect. Thus, it may be
noted that the influence of single parameter effects are different from
those of multiple parameter effects.
157
Table. 5.6. Physical dimensions and mechanical properties calculated from the respective regression
equations at minimum and maximum levels of factors in individual and interaction effect.
Factors
X1-Min
X1- Max
X2-Min
X2- Max
X3-Min
X3- Max
X1X2-Min
X1X2- Max
X1X3-Min
X1X3- Max
X2X3-Min
X2X3- Max
X1X2X3-Min
X1X2X3- Max
Width
Thickness
Responses
Hardness
Strength
(mm)
13.718
14.814
15.191
13.341
13.601
14.931
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
13.601
14.931
(MPa)
1.412
1.566
1.391
1.589
1.381
1.599
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
1.326
1.654
0.923
1.93
(Hv)
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
185.875
185.875
Insignificant
Insignificant
174.50
197.25
158
(MPa)
86.5
95.5
Insignificant
Insignificant
81.75
100.25
68.5
77.5
101.0
128.5
61.5
80.0
57
96
Bend ductility
(%)
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
Insignificant
3.75
3.75
8.483
8.483
6.39
6.39
Insignificant
Insignificant
Properties
bo
b1
b2
b3
b12
b13
b23
b123
Coating Width
14.266
6.548
-0.925
0.6652
0.013
-.0.150
0.136
0.347
Coating Thickness
1.4293
0.078
0.099
0.109
-0.040
-0.015
0.164
0.565
Coating Hardness
175.625
0.875
-0.825
-3.875
-0.625
10.875
3.625
11.375
Tensile Strength
91
4.5
9.25
-18
23.75
-20.25
5.75
Bend Ductility
5.386
0.988
-0.026
-0.161
-1.728
2.996
0.903
1.728
159
Table.5.8. Comparison of experimental results and theoretical results (from regression equation)
Parametric
Experimental Values
combinations
PC-1
Theoretical Values
Coating
Thickne
Hardn
Tensile
Bend
Width
ss
ess
strength
Ductility
13.38
1.5768
182
55
4.46
160
Y(w)
Y(T)
Y(HV)
Y(TS)
Y(BD)
13.631
1.251
175.125
57
5.93
4-800-600
PC-2
6-800-600
PC-3
4-1000-600
PC-4
4-800-800
PC-5
6-1000-600
PC-6
6-800-800
PC-7
4-1000-800
PC-8
6-1000-800
15.42
1.1950
186
64
4.88
12.44
1.2511
197
147
11.40
13.17
1.2582
153
61
15.95
1.2054
168
16.09
1.2996
13.11
14.16
15.421
1.2394
176.125
66
6.85
14.325
0.9525
197.875
145
11.036
1.45
14.727
0.9978
153.375
59
-1.868
78
1.68
15.655
0.9721
176.125
80
1.588
170
159
10.63
14.207
1.0174
175.125
161
7.58
1.7248
197
66
1.55
13.111
1.3865
153.375
64
3.394
1.8820
152
98
7.04
14.901
1.655
197.875
96
9.386
161
Parameters effect
X1
(F)
X2
(N)
X3
(Vx)
X12
(FN)
X13
(FVx)
X23
(NVx)
X123
(FNVx)
Width
Thickness
Hardness
Strength
Ductility
Parameters
X3, X1X3
and
X1X2X3
Higher table speed and higher values of axial force and spindle speed
result in lower hardness, while higher values of the combination of
factors axial force- spindle speed result in higher hardness.Three factors
and their combined effects namely, axial force, table speed, axial forcetable speed, spindle speed- table speed and combination of all the three
163
CHAPTER - 6
CONCLUSIONS
6.1. Introduction
In this chapter, the salient observations on the experimental results
obtained. In respect of friction surfacing of aluminium alloy AA6063 over
mild steel and friction seam welding of AA6063 are summarized. These
include observations on the influence of parameters on physical
dimensions and mechanical properties of the coatings as well as micro
structure and mechanical properties of friction seam welds
164
ductility.
The influence of single parameter on various properties is different
165
Hv
BD
exhibits
maximum influence
on
coating width,
while
166
observed.
Potentio dynamic pitting corrosion studies show that friction
surfacing by aluminium improves the pitting corrosion resistance
of mild steel substrate.
table speed.
The welds were characterized for micro structure, hardness, impact
toughness and tensile strength. The observations on the influence
of groove angle, plate thickness and table speed on mechanical
thickness.
Inferior quality and low strength of welds at higher thickness is
observed to be due to blunting of the mechtrode, resulting in
inability of the mechtrode to reach the root of the groove. For the
same reason the welds at smaller groove angle contained defects
toughness.
Decrease in plate thickness leads to improved strength, as the
welds are relatively free from defects, since mechtrode can
approach the root of the groove as the groove is shallow, when the
thickness of the plate is low.
of welds,
These welds contained un-bonded areas. This has been observed
to be mainly due to change in taper of the consumable rod as the
welding progressed.
This deficiency needs to be addressed by finding out suitable
solutions to retain the shape of the tip of the electrode during the
process of welding. This probably can be achieved by an online
machining of the electrode for which a suitable mechanisms needs
to be developed.
Studies in force control and position control mode involving
investigation on the influence of different parameters and their
169
interactive
effects
can
throw
more
insight
and
better
170
REFERENCES
1.
Coatings:
Fundamentals,
2.
ASM
Handbook,
Volume
13A,
Corrosion:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Sato
Zinc
Plating,
ASM
Hand
book,
Volume
5,
Surface
10.
11.
Reginald K. Asher, Sr, Tin alloy plating ASM Hand book, Volume
5, Surface Engineering 1994, pp (879-890).
12.
Nabil Zaki, Frederick Zinc Alloy Plating. ASM Hand book, Volume
5, Surface Engineering 1994, Pp895-899
13.
14.
Painting ASM
Bogdan
Szczygie,
Magorzata
Koodziej
Composite
formation
of
surface
layers
18.
19.
A.Batchelor, A.W., Jana, S., Koh, C.P., Tan, C.S., 1996. The effect of
metal type and multi-layering on friction surfacing. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 57,(172181).
20.
172
Mesomechanics, Volume
14,
21.
PP (1773-1783 )
22.
23.
24.
Cassava
Leaves,Materials
and
Betts,
Manufacturing
Joseph
Buhagiar:
corrosion
study,Surface and
Coatings
26.
low-energy
Surface and
27.
steel
by flamehardening.Surface
and
173
Coatings
28.
29.
30.
of
LIU,
Wen-shao
16,
WANG,
Issue
1,
Guo-quan
Raquel
Fiz,
Sanjay
Mathur,Giorgio,Sberveglieri.
chemical
vapor
59-64.
A.Bouyelfane,
alternative
to
A.
Zerga:
use
Ni/Cu
instead
of
electroplating,
Ag
screen-printed
worthwhile
front
side
UNS
34.
GTAW
Electron
BeamWelding.Fusion
36.
Marita
L.
Coatings
Berndt,
ASM
Christopher
C.
Berndt,
Handbook,
Volume
Thermal
13A,
Spray
Corrosion:
38.
39.
40.
175
41.
Archives
43.
44.
Vander
Stelt,
Adrianus Anton,
Friction
Surface
Cladding:
process
for
bulk
materialsdevelopment
of
the
47.
48.
Zhang,
Aidang
Shan,
Journal of Materials
176
small-
49.
50.
Zakson, R.I., Turukin, F.G., 1965. Friction welding and hard facing
of agricultural machine parts. AvestaSvarka3, (4850).
51.
Nogik, N.V., 1970. Friction hard facing steel with Stellite V3D.
SvarochnoeProizvod-stvo8, (1617).
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
friction
surfacing.
In:
International
Tribology
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
Nicholas, E.D., 1993. Friction surfacing. In: Olson, D., Siewert, T.,
Liu, S., Edwards,G. (Eds.), ASM HandbookWelding Brazing and
Soldering. ASM International, Ohio, United States of America, pp.
(321323).
67.
68.
matrix
composites
produced
by
Osprey
process.
Surface
70.
71.
72.
73.
Shinoda, T., Okamoto, S., Take moto, S., Kato, Y., Shimizu, T.,
1996. Deposition of hard surfacing layer by friction surfacing.
Welding International 10, (288294),
74.
Zhang, Z.R., Xiao, X.T., Liu, Y.F., Xue, K.M., 1997. Coupled
thermo-mechanical
FEM
analysis
of
twist-compression
179
76.
Shinoda, T., Li, J.Q., Katoh, Y., Yashiro, T., 1998. Effect of process
parameters during friction coating on properties of non-dilution
coating layers. Surface Engineering14, (211216).
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
180
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
Bedford, G.M., Vitanov, V.I., Voutchkov, I.I., 2001. On the thermomechanical events during friction surfacing of high speed steels.
Surface and Coatings Technology141, (3439).
89.
90.
181
91.
92.
93.
Beyer, M., Resende, A., Santos, J.F.d., 2003. Friction surfacing for
multi-sectorial applications FRICSURF, Institute for Materials
Research, GKSS Forschungszentrum Geesthacht GmbH, Technical
report.
94.
95.
Mishra, R.S., Ma, Z.Y., 2005. Friction stir welding and process-ing.
Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports 50, (178).
96.
Tokisue, H., Katoh, K., Asahina, T., Usiyama, T., 2006. Mechanical
properties of5052/2017 dissimilar aluminum alloys deposit by
friction surfacing. Materials Transactions 47, (874882).
97.
98.
Liu, X.M., Zou, Z.D., Zhang, Y.H., Qu, S.Y., Wang, X.H., 2008.
Transferring mechanism of the coating rod in friction surfacing.
Surface and Coatings Technology 202,(18891894).
182
99.
100. Nakama, D., Katoh, K., Tokisue, H., 2008. Some characteristics of
AZ31/AZ91 dis-similar magnesium alloy deposit
by friction
183
106. Reddy, G.M., Rao, K.S., Mohandas, T., 2009. Friction surfacing:
novel technique for metal matrix composite coating on aluminium
silicon alloy. Surface Engineering25, (2530).
107. Vitanov, V.I., Javaid, N., Stephenson, D.J., 2010. Application of
response surface methodology for the optimization of micro friction
sur-facing process. Surface and Coatings Technology 204, (3501
3508).
108. Krohn, H., (Master Thesis) 2010. Temperature management des
Reibauf-tragschweiens.
Technische
Universitt
Hamburg-
Harburg.
109. Kramer de Macedo, M.L., Pinheiro, G.A., dos Santos, J.F.,
Strohaecker, T.R., 2010.Deposit by friction surfacing and its
applications. Welding International24,(422431).
110. Hanlon, T., Fritz, J.B., Bernath, J.J., Channell, A.B., Blank, J.P.,
Kalabekov, S.E., Hoot-man, J.R., Trapp, T.J., 2010. Apparatus and
method for friction surfacing using a consumable pin tool, US
Patent No. 8,056,793 B2.
111. InTech,Rijeka, Croatia.Vitanov, V.I., Javaid, N., 2010. Investigation
of the thermal field in micro friction surfacing. Surface and
Coatings Technology 204, (26242631).
112. Rafi, H.K., Ram, G.D.J., Phanikumar, G., Rao, K.P., 2010. Friction
surfacing of austenitic stainless steel on low carbon steel: studies
on the effects of traverse speed. In: World Congress on Engineering
2010, London.
184
113. Rafi, H.K., Ram, G.D.J., Phanikumar, G., Rao, K.P., 2010. Friction
surfaced tool steel(H13) coatings on low carbon steel: a study on
the effects of process parameters on coating characteristics and
integrity. Surface and Coatings Technology 205,(232242).
114. Hanke, S., Fischer, A., Beyer, M., dos Santos, J., 2011. Cavitation
erosion of NiAl-bronze layers generated by friction surfacing. Wear
273, (3237).
115. Macedo, M.L.K., (Ph.D. thesis) 2011. Caracterizac o de depsitos
realizados Nakama,
116. Rafi, H.K., Phanikumar, G., Prasad Rao, K., 2011. Material flow
visualization during friction surfacing. Metallurgical and Materials
Transactions A 42, (937939).
117. Rafi, H.K., Ram, G.D.J., Phanikumar, G., Rao, K.P., 2011.
Microstructural evolution during friction surfacing of tool steel
H13. Materials and Design 32, (8287).
118. Rafi, H.K., Balasubramaniam, K., Phanikumar, G., Rao, K.P.,
2011. Thermal profiling using infrared thermography in friction
surfacing. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 42, (3425
3429).
119. Puli, R., Kumar, E.N., Ram, G.D.J., 2011. Characterization of
friction surfaced martensitic stainless steel (AISI 410) coatings.
Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals 64, (4145).
120. Govardhan, D., Kumar, A.C.S., Murti, K.G.K., Madhusudhan
Reddy, G.,2012. Characterization of austenitic stainless steel
185
128. Reddy, G.M., Prasad, K.S., Rao, K.S., Mohandas, T., 2011. Friction
surfacing
of
titanium
alloy
with
aluminium
metal
matrix
187
135. Bishop, E., 1960 Friction Welding in the Soviet Union. Welding and
Metal Fabrication 28 (10), (408-410).
136. Dunkerton, S.B., Thomas, W.M., 1984. Repair by Friction Welding.
Repair and Reclamation, London.
137. Suhuddin, U., Mironov,S., Krohn,H., Beyer,Y., Dos santos,J.F.,
Microstructural evoluation during friction surfacing of dissimilar
aluminium alloys, Metallurgical and Material Transactions A, 43A
(2012) pp.5224-5231.
138. Bedford, G.M., Richards, P.J., 1985. On the absence of dilution in
friction surfacing and later friction welding. In: 1st International
Conference on Surface Engineering, Brighton, pp (27929.
139. Nicholas ED. Friction surfacing, ASM hand book: Vol. 6. ASM
International; 1993; pp (321-323).
140. Bob Iriving, Welding Journal, May 1993 pp.37-40.Sparks begin to
fly in conventional friction welding and surfacing,
141. Studies on friction surfacing of steels, P.Sreedhar, M. Tech
Thesis,NIT, Warangal (2005-2007)
142. S. Janakiraman, and K Uday Bhat; Formation of composite surface
during
friction
surfacing
of
steel
with
aluminium:
188
APPENDIX
189
while
keeping
the
others
constant,
will
be
tedious
and
the
optimum conditions.
Basics of approach
The basis of approach is the assumption of the simplified linear
model for the optimization parameters given by
Y
x where
2 3
b 0+b1x 1+ b2x
+ b123x 1x
: Table traverse
190
191
factorial design where the factors have been considered at two levels
each.
The values obtained for the response function Y in each of these
23experiments
regression
are
then
coefficients
statistically
and
fitting
analyzed
prediction
for
estimating
equation
for
the
the
optimization parameters.
The procedure for finding out the coefficients in the regression
equation is provided in the following table.
Table .A1. Calculation of coefficients from F- ratio
s.
no
PC
Resp
onse
Y
Column1
Column2
Column3
(C)
(T)
(Z)
F- Ratio=
TSS
(Z2/8)
TSS/MS
S
(F)
Significant
factors= (Z/8)
(b0 coefficients)
R1
C1
T1
Z1
TSS1
F1
Z1/8 = b0
X1
R2
C2
T2
Z2
TSS2
F2
Z2/8 = b1
X2
R3
C3
T3
Z3
TSS3
F3
Z3/8 = b2
X1 X2
R4
C4
T4
Z4
TSS4
F4
Z4/8 = b12
X3
R5
C5
T5
Z5
TSS5
F5
Z5/8 = b3
X1 X3
R6
C6
T6
Z6
TSS6
F6
Z6/8 = b13
X2 X3
R7
C7
T7
Z7
TSS7
F7
Z7/8 = b23
X1 X2 X3
R8
C8
T8
Z8
TSS8
F8
Z8/8 = b123
192
TSS
(R12+R22+R32++R82 ) /8
TSS1 =
Z12/8
F - Ratio = TSS/MSS
F1
[(Z12/)/8]/MSS
Following the procedure out lined above the contents of the table for
coating width showing the influence of various parameters and their
interactive effects is given in Table. A.2
194
Effect of
Response
Column-1
Column-2
Column-3
TSS
factors
1
2
1
X1
3
X2
4
X1X2
5
X3
6
X1X3
7
X2X3
8
X1X2X3
Mean=14.266
F ratio=
Significant
TSS/MSS
factors (Z/8 )
C1
Z2 /8
(b0 coefficients)
13.358
15.424
28.782
25.624
54.406
59.728
114.134
4.386
1628.32
2.404
7.9292
0.0117
14.266 bo
0.548 b1
12.447
13.177
15.956
16.031
13.113
14.628
31.987
27.741
2.066
0.73
0.075
1.515
2.796
1.59
-3.158
-4.246
-1.336
1.44
-7.404
0.104
5.322
-1.206
-1.088
2.776
6.852
0.001352
3.540
0.181
0.147
0.9637
0.03336
0.0000065836
0.01723
0.00088139
0.0007158
0.004692
-0.9255 b2
0.013 b12
0.6652 b3
-0.15075 b13
0.1366 b23
0.347 b123
195
196
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
A) International Journals:
198