Journal of Materials Processing Tech.

250 (2017) 25–34

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Materials Processing Tech.

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

Combined effects of MIG and TIG arcs on weld appearance and interface MARK
properties in Al/steel double-sided butt welding-brazing
⁎
Zheng Ye, Jihua Huang , Zhi Cheng, Wei Gao, Yufeng Zhang, Shuhai Chen, Jian Yang
School of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, 100083, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: AA5052 aluminum alloy and Q235 low-carbon steel of 3.0 mm thickness were butt joined without groove. The
Welding combined effects of the MIG-TIG double-sided arc on the weld appearance and interface properties were in-
Brazing vestigated in three aspects: weld appearance, interfacial properties and joint tensile strength. Form efficiency
Aluminum alloys was defined to evaluate the quality of the weld appearance. The strength of the whole joint and the brazed
Steel
interface were examined in the tensile tests of joints with and without excess weld metal, respectively. The weld
Interface
Double-sided arc welding
appearance can be well characterized by the form efficiency. The form efficiency is found to be most sensitive to
TIG current. Sensibility of the form efficiency to MIG voltage and welding speed is relatively low, indicating that
the TIG arc at the back of the weld is the key factor for the double-sided weld appearance. Double-sided weld
appearance can be achieved at a maximum welding speed of 2.2 cm/s because a part of welding energy is input
by TIG arc directly to the back weld. The interfacial properties of the joints are closely tied to the heat input ratio
of MIG and TIG. Proper input ratio (1.35–1.64) leads to uniform deformation of the base metals and suppresses
the initiation of the cracks in interfacial IMC layer. The differences between the interfacial strength and the
whole joint strength indicate that the optimum weld appearance with desirable excess weld metal provides extra
20 MPa strength for the whole joint. Benefitting from combined effects of the best weld appearance and toughest
interfacial IMC layer, the highest tensile strength of the joint exceeds 70% the tensile strength of 5052 alloy.

1. Introduction
Effective joining between Al alloy and steel has become the most
attractive issue in manufacturing industry. It is recognized that con-
ventional fusion welding is incapable for reliable Al/steel dissimilar
metals joining because of the huge differences in thermal-physical
properties between Al alloy and steel. Moreover, massive brittle Al-Fe
intermetallic compounds (IMCs) formed in the welding process may
badly impact the properties of Al alloy/steel joints. Most fracture failure
analyses of Al alloy/steel joints in relevant researches indicated that the
cracks initiate from the IMC layer at the Al/steel interface of the joint.
Yahiro et al. (1991) proposed that the bonding strength of Al/steel
interface was reduced when the thickness of IMCs layer increases to
10 μm or more for the first time. Bouche et al. (1998) found Fe2Al5 and
FeAl3 phases at the liquid aluminum/solid steel interface in the im-
mersion tests at a temperature range of 700–900 °C. And it was pro-
posed that the growth of these IMCs was controlled by a diffusion re-
gime. Then Kobayashi and Yakou (2002) further demonstrated that the
formation and growth of Fe/Al intermetallic compound layers are
controlled by the diffusion of Fe atoms into the intermetallic compound
layers and Fe2Al5 layer had high brittleness. To achieve high-quality
joining between aluminum and steel, therefore, many investigations
had been carried out to control and suppress the growth of the brittle
IMCs in the Al/steel joining. Cao et al. (2013) lap joined Al alloy and
Q235 mild steel by cold metal transfer welding-brazing process. The
thickness of the intermetallic compounds can be minimized by properly
controlling the heat input. Pulsed gas metal arc welding process has
been attempted by Yagati et al. (2014) to join aluminum alloy AA6061-
T6 to Interstitial Free steel. The thickness and morphology of the IMCs
at the interface are dependent on energy intensity and distribution. Qin
et al. (2014) lap joined aluminum alloy to galvanized steel plate
through positioning the leading laser as an auxiliary role and the
trailing arc as the main heat source. Gatzen et al. (2016), Wang et al.
(2016) and Windmann et al. (2015) conducted the laser welding-
brazing to join aluminum alloy and steel. The overall thickness of the
IMCs can be reduced to a non-critical value and the joint properties can
be improved at proper experimental parameters. Great progresses had
been achieved in the lap joining of Al/steel with different welding-
brazing processes.
As a more common joint configuration used in practical

⁎
Corresponding author at: 30 Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100083, PR China.
E-mail address: jhhuang62@sina.com (J. Huang).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.07.003
Received 22 March 2017; Received in revised form 2 July 2017; Accepted 5 July 2017
Available online 12 July 2017
0924-0136/ © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Z. Ye et al.
manufacturing, butt joint of Al/steel is much more arduous to be ob-
tained due to the necessaries of heat and oxidation protection at the
back of the weld. Song et al. (2009) firstly advocated dissimilar metals
TIG welding–brazing for the join of aluminum alloy/stainless steel and
indicated that the cracks derived from the brittle Fe2Al5 layer when its
thickness exceeded 10 μm in the Al alloy/stainless steel butt joint. With
the assistance of the beveling groove and shaped groove, sound joint
with good front and back weld formation was obtained. The thickness
of the interfacial layer was unequal, ranging from 5 μm to 35 μm. Lin
et al. (2010) employed the same method to join Al alloy/stainless steel
using Al–Cu6 filler metal. The average thickness of the whole IMC layer
was reduced to 10 μm. Beveling groove and shaped groove were still
necessary for the satisfactory weld formation on both sides. Sun et al.
(2016) investigated the effect of bevel angle on Al/steel butt joining
with laser welding-brazing process. The joint with bevel angle of 30°
had a thicker and more complex IMCs layer but a better weld appear-
ance. The mechanical strength of Al/steel butt joint was not simply
correlated to the IMC layer thickness but also depended on the bonding
area. Mei et al. (2013) join AA6061 aluminum alloy with AISI 304
stainless steel using laser–cold metal transfer hybrid welding-brazing
process. The average thickness of the IMC layer was limited to 3 μm
with the help of a beveling groove of 60°and a copper backing plate. In
order to improve the spread ability of filler metal, Qin et al. (2017)
proposed a modified flux for the pulsed MIG arc brazing-fusion of
galvanized steel and 5052 aluminum alloy. Butt joint without groove
was obtained, while a backing plate was still necessary. Butt joint
without any grooves or backing plates was also examined by Zhang
et al. (2013) and Li et al. (2015). Joint with sound weld appearance can
be achieved without groove when the sheet was thin. The maximum
thickness of the IMCs layer exceeded 10 μm.
In summary, butt welding-brazing of Al alloy and steel without any
grooves or backing plates is a great challenge, especially for the thick
sheets. Sound weld appearance on both sides and thin IMC layer are
hard to be achieved simultaneously. In our previous work (Zhang et al.,
2016 and Ye et al., 2017), MIG-TIG double-sided arc welding–brazing
(DSAWB) was established to join Al and steel without any grooves and
backing plates. The preliminarily study showed that the DSAWB ef-
fectively facilitated the back weld appearance and avoided the ex-
cessive growth of IMCs. Through the qualitative investigation, the es-
sential mechanism had been concluded as: the TIG torch in DSAWB
process provided welding heat input and gas shielding directly to the
back of the weld, on the one hand ensured good wetting and spreading
behavior of the liquid filler metal at the back of the weld, on the other
hand homogenized the heat absorption of the whole joint and reduced
total welding heat input needed for sound weld appearance. In present
paper, the combined effects of MIG and TIG double-sided arc, which are
the most distinct characteristic of the DSAWB process, were system-
atically studied and summarized. Form efficiency was proposed to
evaluate the standard of the weld appearance. Detailed relationships
among weld appearance, interfacial structure, mechanical property and
various process parameters were investigated. Combined with the
fracture failure analyses, the effects of each processing parameters on
the performance of the joint were revealed thoroughly. The advantages
of this processing technology in theory and practice were fully ex-
hibited, manifesting the potential capacity of DSAWB for dissimilar
metals welding.
2. Materials and experimental procedure
5052 aluminum alloy and Q235 mild steel were chosen as base
metals. The dimensions of aluminum alloy and steel were both
60 mm × 200 mm × 3 mm. The tensile strength of the 5052 Al alloy is
200 MPa. The filler metal was ER4043 (Al-Si5) with the diameter of
0.8 mm. Table 1 shows the nominal chemical compositions of alu-
minum alloy and Q235 mild steel, as well as the filler metal. The non-
corrosive flux used in the experiments is Nocolok flux, which is
26
Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34
composed of KAlF4.
The surfaces of aluminum alloy and mild steel were polished by
240# abrasive paper and cleaned with acetone before welding. The
Nocolok flux powder was dissolved in alcohol to prepare flux emulsion
(volume fraction 30%). The flux emulsion was coated onto the surfaces
of the aluminum alloy and mild steel sheets.
A direct-current MIG welding machine (Miller Invision™ 352 MPa
Auto-Line™) and an alternating-current TIG machine (Miller
SyncrowaveR 350LX) were employed in the DSAWB process. Butt
configuration was adopted. The schematic diagram and the actual as-
sembly figure were shown in Fig. 1. MIG and TIG welding torches were
placed on the top and bottom of the weld respectively. The tip of
tungsten electrode and the welding wire were maintained at the center
of the weld seam. The angle between the torches and the substrates was
kept at 90°. The distance of the MIG and TIG torch to the sheet was
8 mm and 5 mm, respectively. The base metal sheets were fastened on
the automatic operating platform by the assembly fixtures. The gap
between the two sheet samples was maintained at 0.8 mm.
At the beginning of the welding-brazing process, the MIG and TIG
power were started synchronously. The power of automatic operating
platform was turned on right after the arc striking of the MIG and TIG
torches. At the end of the welding-brazing process, the powers of the
MIG, TIG and automatic operating platform were cut off simulta-
neously.
The shielding gas used for MIG and TIG both was argon. The argon
flow rate in all the experimental groups was 15 L/min. The wire feeding
rate of the MIG machine was maintained at 10.5 m/min. The detailed
experimental parameters are listed in Table 2. In the experiments, MIG
voltage and TIG current were controllable parameters of the welding
machines. The MIG current was automatically matched with the MIG
voltage based on the wire feeding rate by MIG welding machine. The
TIG voltage was automatically matched with the TIG current based on
the distance between tungsten electrode and base metal by TIG welding
machine. Therefore, regulating the MIG voltage is equivalent to reg-
ulating the heat input of the MIG. Similarly, regulating the TIG current
is equivalent to regulating the heat input of the TIG. Thermal efficiency
coefficient used in welding heat input calculation is 0.8. Calculation
formula of the heat input (E) is as follow:
E = (MIG voltage*MIG current*0.8 + TIG voltage*TIG current*0.8)/
Welding speed (1)
Three variation parameters, which were identified as the most
crucial factors by orthogonal test, are MIG voltage, TIG current and
welding speed.
After welding, cross-sectional samples and tensile test samples were
prepared by wire cut electrical discharge machining process. The
samples were analyzed by Optical Microscope (OM), Scanning Electron
Microscope (SEM) with Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS). The
average thickness (δ) of the IMC layer was calculated as:
δ = A/L (2)
As shown in Fig. 2, in the Formula (2), A stands for the area of IMC
layer in the measurement zone, L presents the length of the measure-
ment zone.
The X-ray diffraction (XRD) was used to analyze the phase compo-
sition on the interface of the joints. Tensile strength of six sample joints
using the same values of welding parameters was tested at load speed of
1 mm/min. The tensile test was carried out according to ISO 4136
“Destructive tests on welds in metallic materials − Transverse tensile
test”. The three of the tensile test samples were tested with excess weld
metal on the front and back of the weld (illustrated in Fig. 3a), the other
three samples were tested without excess weld metal (illustrated in
Fig. 3b), and the average tensile strengths were recorded as σ1 and σ2,
respectively. Because of the different quantities of the excess weld
metal and complex morphologies of the fracture surface, cross sectional
Z. Ye et al. Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34

Table 1
Chemical compositions of materials (wt.%).

Materials Element

C Si Mn Cu Mg Zn Cr Fe Al

Q235b 0.12–0.20 0–0.030 0.30–0.70 0–0.30 – – 0−0.30 Bal. –

5052 – 0–0.25 – 0–0.1 2.2–2.8 0–0.1 0.15–0.33 – Bal.
ER4043 – 4.5–6.0 0–0.05 0–0.3 0–0.05 0–0.1 – 0–0.8 Bal.

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic diagram of the double-sided

arc welding-brazing process; (b) assembly of the
double-sided arc welding-brazing process.

Table 2
Welding parameters of the experimental groups.

Experimental MIG MIG TIG TIG Welding MIG/ Heat

group Voltage Current Voltage Current Speed TIG Input
(V) (A) (V) (A) (cm/s) input (J/
ratio cm)

1 11 85 13 70(AC) 2 1.03 738

2 12 90 13 70(AC) 2 1.19 796
3 13 95 13 70(AC) 2 1.35 858
4 14 100 13 70(AC) 2 1.53 924
5 15 105 13 70(AC) 2 1.73 994
6 13 95 12 50(AC) 2 2.05 734
7 13 95 12.5 60(AC) 2 1.64 794
8 13 95 13.5 80(AC) 2 1.14 926
9 13 95 14 90(AC) 2 0.98 998
10 13 95 13 70(AC) 1.6 1.35 1073
11 13 95 13 70(AC) 1.8 1.35 953
12 13 95 13 70(AC) 2.2 1.35 780 Fig. 3. (a) Schematic diagram of the tensile test sample with excess weld metal; (b)
13 13 95 13 70(AC) 2.4 1.35 715 schematic diagram of the tensile test sample without excess weld metal.

real load-bearing area in the tensile strength. For the joints with excess
weld metal, the real load-bearing area is the cross sectional area of the
fractured weld seam. As a result, the tensile strength σ1 reflected the
nominal tensile strength of the joints with excess weld metal. The
tensile strength σ2 reflected the real tensile strength of the joints
without excess weld metal. The tensile strength of the 5052 aluminum
alloy (T6) was denoted by σ0. The form efficiency was defined as fol-
lows:

F = (σ1-σ2)/σ0 × 100% (3)

3. Results and discussion

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of the interfacial IMC layer.
3.1. Weld appearance and seam geometry

area of base metal was considered as the load-bearing area in the cal-
The weld appearances and cross sections of the joints obtained with
culation of the two tensile strengths to reduce error. For the joints
different MIG voltages are shown in Fig. 4. The increase of the MIG
without excess weld metal, the cross sectional area of base metal is the
voltage led to an obvious improvement of the front weld appearance.

27
Z. Ye et al.
Combined with the cross sections, it can be seen that the front excess
weld metal was reduced to a more favorable range and the wetting
angle of the filler metal on the steel was decreased. As is well known,
the arc length and the arc heating area can be increased when the
welding voltage is enhanced. The welding heat input is also increased.
In the Al/steel welding-brazing process, large heating area and high
welding energy, which mean sufficient heating of the base metal and
high temperature of the filler metal, can finally lead to good fluidity
and spread ability of the filler metal. Naturally, the front weld ap-
pearance was improved with the increase of MIG voltage in the ex-
periments. While further observation indicates that the back weld ap-
pearance was also influenced by MIG voltage. Spread area of the filler
metal on the surface of steel increased before decreased. According to
the analysis about the filler metal temperature in the welding process, it
is not hard to infer that the enhanced MIG voltage facilitated the liquid
filler metal to spread on steel at the back of the weld as well. However,
increased heat input and liquid temperature may lead to drastic melting
of Al alloy and rapid oxidation of the filler metal. Mg element, existing
in the chemical composition 5052 Al alloy, may get into the liquid filler
metal and react with oxygen quickly. Excessive oxidation film may be
generated, impeding the spreading of the filler metal. The molten filler
metal flew to the back of the weld and became back excess weld metal
eventually. The back weld appearance endured the most impact of such
oxidation and became worse when the MIG voltage was excessively
high.
The influence of TIG current on the weld appearance is more
complex, as shown in Fig. 5. At the back of the weld, where TIG arc
stayed, the spread area of the filler metal reached a maximum value
when the TIG current was 70A (shown in Fig. 5c). Similar to the ana-
lyses about the relation between heat input and weld appearance
above, processes with lower TIG current provided less heat to the base
metal and resulted in small spread area of the filler metal on the steel
finally. On the other hand, arc pressure and temperature can be en-
hanced due to the increase of TIG current. Elevated temperature, which
is conducive to the wetting and spreading of the filler metal on the steel
surface. may damage the activity of the flux. And excessive TIG arc
pressure prevented the molten filler metal from flowing down to the
lower position of the weld. Therefore, the back weld appearance turned
bad when TIG current exceed 70A. Comparing Fig. 5(a–c), it can be
seen that the front weld appearance was improved (the wetting angle
was reduced and spread area was increased), indicating that the TIG arc
at the back also had an effect on the weld appearance at the front of the
28
Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34
Fig. 4. Appearances and cross sections of the
welding-brazing joints with different MIG voltage:
(a) 11 V, (b) 12 V, (c) 13 V, (d) 14 V, (e) 15 V.
weld. Obviously, enhancement of the total heat input, which was
caused by the increase of TIG current, led to such effect. The wetting
angle was also increased when the TIG current was enhanced, illu-
strated by Fig. 5(c–e). While the spread area of the filler metal at the
front of the weld was almost unchanged. As mentioned above, high arc
pressure of TIG prevented the liquid filler metal from flowing down to
the lower position of the weld. Plenty of the filler metal was trapped at
the front of the weld. While the voltage of MIG arc at the front of the
weld was not increased. The heating area of MIG arc was unchanged.
The molten filler metal cannot spread further. It solidified as excess
weld metal at the front of the weld finally, resulted in mass front excess
weld metal and large wetting angle.
According to the orthogonal experiment, the third major factor is
the welding speed. The main effect of the welding speed on the weld
appearance was the amount of the excess weld metal. Welds obtained at
a welding speed range of 1.6–2.2 cm/s had a similar spread area of the
filler metal on both sides of the weld, as shown in Fig. 6(a–d). In the
traditional single-side welding process, the welding energy is input only
from the front and transmitted to the back via heat conduction. Unlike
the single-side process, the welding energy was input at the both sides
of the weld by MIG torch and TIG torch synchronously (shown in Fig. 1)
and the heating process at any positions of the weld will not be delayed
by the heat conduction under a high welding speed. As a consequence,
DSAWB process exhibited a high welding efficiency in the Al/steel
welding-brazing. In these single factor experiments, same TIG and MIG
power were adopted. The total welding heat input decreased with the
increase of welding speed. Double-sided weld formation was still
achieved when the welding speed reached 2.2 cm/s (total welding heat
input was decreased to 780J/cm), as shown in Fig. 6d. When the
welding speed reached 2.4 cm/s, back weld formation failed (shown in
Fig. 6e). In the related literatures, such high welding speed had not
been adopted. It is probably due to the low heat conduction efficiency
in the single-side welding process. In the DSAWB process, this problem
has been greatly improved by the direct heating at the back of the weld.
In other words, the energy utilization rate is much higher in the double-
sided welding brazing process. The most direct and objective embodi-
ment is that double-sided weld formation was achieved with low
welding heat input but high welding speed.
3.2. Intermetallic compounds layer
Brazed interface on the steel side was observed by SEM, in order to
Z. Ye et al.
illustrate the microstructure evolution of the interfacial IMC layer,
which is the recognized weakness of the Al/steel joint. Because the
excess weld metal at the front and back of the weld would be removed
in the tests of tensile strength without excess weld metal, the tensile
strength without excess weld metal was related to the interfacial IMC
layer at the side wall of the weld. Therefore, interfacial IMC layer at the
middle of the weld was observed.
Fig. 7 shows the variations of the IMC layer with the increase of MIG
voltage. It is obvious that the thickness of the IMC layer at the interface
was increased with the enhancement of MIG voltage, as the average
thickness shown in Fig. 7f. As discussed above, higher MIG voltage
means higher droplets temperature and larger heat input. On the one
hand, the diffusion rate of the Fe element was dramatically enhanced
due to the increased temperature and larger MIG heat input. Therefore,
the growth rate of the Fe-Al IMC layer at the interface was increased, as
indicated by Kobayashi and Yakou (2002) and Cao et al. (2013). On the
other hand, higher temperature of the droplets led to a longer dwelling
time at the elevated temperature and a longer period of cooling process.
29
Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34
Fig. 5. Appearances and cross sections of the
welding-brazing joints with different TIG current: (a)
50A, (b) 60A, (c) 70A, (d) 80A, (e) 90A.
Growing period of the IMC layer was prolonged. High growth rate and
long growing period resulted in thicker IMC layer eventually.
Moreover, the morphology of the IMC layer was changed with the
increase of the MIG voltage. The interface between IMC and steel be-
came uneven. The whole IMC layer became irregular when the MIG
exceeded 13 V, as shown in Fig. 7d and e. According to Yagati et al.
(2014), the change of the IMC morphology is directly related to the heat
input and droplets temperature. Severe interfacial reaction caused by
the elevated temperature may be the main reason for the morphology
variation. Combined with the enlarged figure of the interfacial IMC
layer shown in Fig. 8, it can be seen that the interfacial IMC layer was
composed by two phases. According to the EDS results listed in Table 3,
the first layer next to steel may be Fe2Al5 while the second layer may be
FeAl3. The FeAl3 was needle-like and the Fe2Al5 was lamellar. Further
observation indicates that the thickness of Fe2Al5 was significantly in-
creased when the MIG voltage exceeded 13 V, as illustrated in Fig. 7d
and e. EDS results at point C, D and E (listed in Table 3) demonstrated
such phenomenon well. The Fe/Al atomic ratio at point D and E were
Fig. 6. Appearances and cross sections of the
welding-brazing joints with different welding speed:
(a) 1.6 cm/s, (b) 1.8 cm/s, (c) 2.0 cm/s, (d) 2.2 cm/s,
(e) 2.4 cm/s.
Z. Ye et al. Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34

Fig. 7. Microstructures at brazed interface of the welding-brazing joints with different MIG voltage: (a) 11 V, (b) 12 V, (c) 13 V, (d) 14 V, (e) 15 V and (f) average thickness of IMCs layer
in different joints.

both nearly to the composition of Fe2Al5. As Kobayashi and Yakou Table 3

(2002) declared in their experiments, Fe2Al5 IMC, which is an ex- EDS analysis results of marked points (at.%).
tremely brittle phase, mainly impacts the properties of Al/steel inter-
Position Element Possible phase
face. Therefore, excessive MIG heat input may damage the performance
of the joint. Al Si Fe
The variations of the IMC layer with the increase of TIG current are
A 71.08 05.25 23.67 FeAl3
shown in Fig. 9. As illustrated in the series of SEM images, the thickness
B 69.02 05.48 25.50 Fe2Al5
of the IMC layer was approximately constant at different TIG current. C 73.53 05.72 20.74 FeAl3
According to the analyses about the IMC layer above, the thickness of D 69.07 06.57 24.36 Fe2Al5
the layer can be mainly attributed to the dwelling time at the elevated E 67.61 06.04 26.35 Fe2Al5
temperature and the duration of cooling process of the weld. It can be F 69.52 03.38 27.10 Fe2Al5
G 72.71 02.84 24.45 FeAl3
inferred that the TIG arc had little influence on the temperature of the
droplets. In other words, the temperature of the droplets was primarily
depended on the MIG power. Thus, increasing TIG current will not
directly cause the increase of the IMC thickness. However, cracks were

Fig. 8. Enlarged figures of the interfacial IMC layer in the typical joint: (a)
joint of experiment No. 3, (b) joint of experiment No. 10.

30
Z. Ye et al.
Fig. 9. Microstructures at brazed interface of the welding-brazing joints with different TIG current: (a) 50A, (b) 60A, (c) 80A, (d) 90A.
found in the IMC layer in the joint obtained at TIG current of 50A and
80A (shown in Fig. 9a and c). As illustrated in Table 2, it can be found
that the MIG/TIG heat input ratio of experiments No. 6 and 8 was 2.05
and 1.14, respectively. Meanwhile, cracks were also found in the joint
of experiment No. 5, as shown in Fig. 7e. The MIG/TIG heat input ratio
of experiment No. 5 was 1.73. When the MIG/TIG heat input ratio was
maintained at a range of 1.35–1.64, as achieved in experiments No. 3, 4
and 7, no crack was found at the interface of the joints. The MIG/TIG
heat input ratio can reflect the proportion of welding energy distributed
at the front and back of the weld. As is well known, internal stress
generated by deformation in the welding process is one of the main
induction factors of cracks, especially for the crack in brittle IMC layer.
Obviously, such deformation results from thermal expansion and cold
shrinkage of the base metal. In the traditional butt welding, welding
energy was only input from the top of the weld. Therefore, serious
deformation of the weld can be found after welding in traditional
single-side welding process. That’s exactly why the conventional single-
side welding process has great difficulty to achieve the Al/steel dis-
similar metals join. The DSAWB process input the welding energy at the
top and the bottom symmetrically, via the MIG and TIG torch, respec-
tively. Local deformation at the top of the weld can be effectively
avoided by control and regulation of the MIG/TIG heat input ratio. It
can be inferred from the appearance of the crack mentioned above that
the acceptable range of MIG/TIG input ratio can be 1.35–1.64. In this
range, heat input at the front and the back of the weld was relatively
symmetric and the deformation was insufficient to induce cracks. When
the input ratio seriously deviated from the scope mentioned above,
cracks can be easily initiated in the IMC layer. It was verified by the
experiments No. 5 and 9, which employed the MIG/TIG heat input of
1.73 and 2.05 respectively. Cracks were found all over the weld, as
shown in Fig. 10c–f. As for the joint obtained in group No. 1, which
employed a MIG/TIG input ratio of 1.03, no crack was found in the
interfacial IMC layer. It can be attributed to the very low total heat
input (738 J/cm) and tiny deformation of the whole weld caused by the
heating.
The influence of the welding speed on the interfacial IMC layer was
distinct, as shown in Fig. 11. The total thickness of the IMC layer was
decreased with the increase of the welding speed. It can be also found
that the length of the needle-like FeAl3 was decreased with the increase
of the welding speed. Higher welding speed means lower heat input in
the experimental design. As listed in Table 2, the welding heat input of
group No.10-13 was reduced from 1073 J/cm to 715 J/cm. When other
factors were constant, the decrease of the welding heat input can sig-
nificantly shorten the elevated temperature dwelling time of the weld
metal and accelerate the weld cooling process. Therefore, reactions in
the molten filler metal were inhibited, so was the growth of the inter-
facial IMCs. As a consequence, the thickness of IMC layer and the length
of FeAl3 compounds were reduced.
31
Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34
3.3. Mechanical properties and fracture analysis
In order to evaluate the effect of weld appearance and interfacial
IMC layer on the mechanical property of the Al/steel dissimilar metals
joint, tensile tests of the joint with and without excess weld metal were
carried out. The tensile strength with excess weld metal represented the
combined effect of the weld appearance and IMC layer. The tensile
strength without excess weld metal eliminated the influence of the
excess weld metal. In the present work, all the tensile strength samples
without excess weld metal fractured at the interfacial IMC layer without
exception. Therefore, the tensile strength without excess weld metal
can stand for the strength of interfacial IMC layer. The form efficiency
was defined by Formula (3) in the materials and experimental proce-
dure section. It can be seen that the mathematical measurement of the
formula actually eliminated the effect of interfacial IMC on the joint
tensile strength. Thus, the form efficiency was proposed as the assess-
ment of the weld appearance. The variations of tensile strength and
form efficiency with the change of different parameters are shown in
Fig. 12.
Although the change rules of the interfacial IMC thickness with the
change of MIG voltage and TIG current were completely different in the
previous discussion, the effects of MIG voltage and TIG current on the
tensile strength without excess weld metal were similar. In other words,
variations of the interfacial strength in these joints were similar. So it
can be inferred that the thickness of IMC layer was not the unique factor
that affects the interfacial strength. As mentioned in the previous
paragraph, the huge residual stress caused by the asymmetrical de-
formation of the sheets, the morphology change of the IMC layer and
the composition of the IMC layer also affected the property of the in-
terfacial IMC layer. Further evidence was found in the changes of in-
terfacial strength with the welding speed, as shown in Fig. 12c. Com-
bined with the thickness of the IMC layer shown in Fig. 11, the
variation of the tensile strength without excess weld metal given in
Fig. 12c implied that the thinner IMC layer may not be better. Joint
with extremely thin IMC layer was usually obtained at a low welding
heat input. And it may result in insufficient interfacial reaction. As
shown in Fig. 13, a weld defect of solder false was found at the lower
corner of the joint obtained by experiment No. 13. In tensile tests, such
weld defects can easily induce fracture. Therefore, excessively thin IMC
layer, which was obtained at extremely low weld heat input, was un-
favorable to the Al/steel joints. It can be inferred in these experimental
groups that the optimal thickness of the IMC layer with the highest
tensile strength was achieved in the experiment No. 3.
The effects of the MIG voltage and welding speed on the form ef-
ficiency both contained a sharp decline, as shown in Fig. 12a and c.
Combined with the cross sections illustrated in Figs. 4 a and 6 e, it can
be seen that such decline was caused by the poor weld appearance,
especially the back weld appearance. Stress concentrated points
(marked by the red circle in Fig. 12) caused by incomplete brazing were
Z. Ye et al. Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34

Fig. 10. IMC layers at the front and back of the weld in joint obtained by
different experiment groups: (a) and (b) experiment No. 3, (c) and (d)
experiment No. 5, (e) and (f) experiment No. 9.

Fig. 11. Microstructures at brazed interface of the welding-brazing joints with different welding speed: (a) 1.6 cm/s, (b) 1.8 cm/s, (c) 2.2 cm/s, (d) 2.4 cm/s.

32
Z. Ye et al.
Fig. 12. Variations of tensile strength and form efficiency with the change of different parameters: (a) MIG voltage, (b) TIG current, (c) welding speed.
Fig. 13. Weld defect of solder false at the lower corner of the joint obtained in group No.
13.
found at the back of the corresponding joints. In the tensile test, these
stress concentrated points were typical initiations of cracks (shown in
Fig. 14a) and dramatically reduced the fracture resistance of the whole
joint. Furthermore, excessively high TIG current and excessively low
TIG current both resulted in sharp decline of the form efficiency (shown
in Fig. 12b). Similarly, it was in line with the observations of the weld
appearance in Section 3.1 and stress concentrated points were found in
the corresponding joints.
Comparing the three curves of the form efficiency in Fig. 12, it can
be evaluated that the weld appearance was most sensitive to the TIG
33
Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34
current. Excellent weld appearance, which was characterized by high
form efficiency, can bring a performance promotion to the joint, as
indicated by the red dashed area in Fig. 12. The highest strength en-
hancement provided by the excess weld metal in present experiments
was close to 20 MPa, as marked by the black dotted line in Fig. 12.
However, the form efficiency decreased dramatically when joint suf-
fered fatal weld defects such as incomplete brazing (highlighted by red
circles). Under such condition, the tensile strength of the joint with
excess weld metal was close to the tensile strength without excess weld
metal. In other words, the strength of the whole joint depended on the
strength of the brittle IMC layer completely. Obviously, poor weld ap-
pearance is a great threat to joint performance.
Further observation on fracture behaviors of these joints was carried
out by the SEM. Two kinds of typical fracture surfaces were found in the
test specimens for tensile strength with excess weld metal. One was
found at the brazed interface on steel side, as shown in Fig. 14d. And all
of the tensile strength specimens without excess weld metal were
characterized by this kind of fracture. Lamellar structure was observed,
indicating high brittleness of the fracture section. Typical XRD results of
the fracture surface at the brazed interface (given by our previous work
Ye et al., 2017) illustrated that this kind of fracture occurred in Fe2Al5
IMC layer. It was in good agreement with the cracks found in corre-
sponding SEM results (shown in Figs. 7 and 9). The other fracture oc-
curred at the excess weld metal of the joint. The microstructure of the
fracture contained plenty of fine dimples, as shown in Fig. 14c. Such
fracture showed a certain degree of ductile plasticity and stronger re-
sistance to the propagation of the cracks. That’s exactly why all the
tensile strength with excess weld metal was higher than the corre-
sponding tensile strength without excess weld metal in Fig. 12. There-
fore, excellent weld appearance, which exhibited an appropriate
amount of excess weld metal and large spreading area of the weld
metal, had great advantages in improving joint performance.
Z. Ye et al.
4. Conclusions
(1) Form efficiency quantitatively reflected the quality of weld ap-
pearance. It was most sensitive to the TIG current but well adapted
to high welding speed. Double-sided weld appearance was obtained
at a welding speed range of 1.6–2.2 cm/s.
(2) Higher MIG voltage resulted in thicker IMC layer while higher
welding speed led to thinner IMC layer. Strength of the interfacial
IMC layer depended on the welding speed and the heat input ratio
of MIG/TIG. Unsatisfactory MIG and TIG input ratio can induce
cracks in Fe2Al5 layer. The interface strength increased before de-
creased with the decline of the total heat input in the welding speed
range of 1.6–2.4 cm/s.
(3) Optimal joints possessed highest form efficiency and toughest in-
terfacial IMC layer. Optimum parameters were as follows: MIG
voltage = 13 V, TIG current = 70 A, ratio of MIG/TIG
input = 1.35 and welding speed = 2 cm/s. The weld appearance
and brazed interface significantly impact the final strength of the
Al/steel dissimilar metals joint.
References
Bouche, K., Barbier, F., Coulet, A., 1998. Intermetallic compound layer growth between
solid iron and molten aluminium. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 249 (1), 167–175.
Cao, R., Yu, G., Chen, J.H., Wang, P.C., 2013. Cold metal transfer joining aluminum
alloys-to-galvanized mild steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 213 (10), 1753–1763.
Gatzen, M., Radel, T., Thomy, C., Vollertsen, F., 2016. Wetting and solidification char-
acteristics of aluminium on zinc coated steel in laser welding and brazing. J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 238, 352–360.
Kobayashi, S., Yakou, T., 2002. Control of intermetallic compound layers at interface
between steel and aluminum by diffusion-treatment. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 338 (1),
44–53.
34
Journal of Materials Processing Tech. 250 (2017) 25–34
Fig. 14. Typical fracture modes of the different joints: (a) joint with a
defect of incomplete brazing, (b) joint with double-sided weld appearance,
and typical fracture morphology at the different position: (c) fracture at
the excess weld metal, (d) fracture at the brazed interface.
Li, C.L., Fan, D., Wang, B., 2015. Characteristics of TIG arc-assisted laser welding–brazing
joint of aluminum to galvanized steel with preset filler powder. Rare. Metals. 34 (9),
650–656.
Lin, S.B., Song, J.L., Yang, C.L., Fan, C.L., Zhang, D.W., 2010. Brazability of dissimilar
metals tungsten inert gas butt welding–brazing between aluminum alloy and stainless
steel with Al–Cu filler metal. Mater. Des. 31 (5), 2637–2642.
Mei, S.W., Gao, M., Yan, J., Zhang, C., Li, G., Zeng, X.Y., 2013. Interface properties and
thermodynamic analysis of laser–arc hybrid welded Al/steel joint. Sci. Technol. Weld.
Join. 18 (4), 293–300.
Qin, G., Ji, Y., Ma, H., Ao, Z., 2017. Effect of modified flux on MIG arc brazing-fusion
welding of aluminum alloy to steel butt joint. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 245,
115–121.
Song, J.L., Lin, S.B., Yang, C.L., Ma, G.C., Liu, H., 2009. Spreading behavior and micro-
structure characteristics of dissimilar metals TIG welding–brazing of aluminum alloy
to stainless steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 509 (1), 31–40.
Sun, J., Yan, Q., Li, Z., Huang, J., 2016. Effect of bevel angle on microstructure and
mechanical property of Al/steel butt joint using laser welding-brazing method. Mater.
Des. 90, 468–477.
Wang, D., Wang, H., Cui, H., He, G., 2016. Enhancement of the laser welded AA6061-
carbon steel joints by using Al5Si intermediate layer. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 237,
277–285.
Windmann, M., Röttger, A., Kügler, H., Theisen, W., Vollertsen, F., 2015. Laser beam
welding of aluminum to Al-base coated high-strength steel 22MnB5. J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 217, 88–95.
Yagati, K.P., Bathe, R.N., Rajulapati, K.V., Rao, K.B.S., Padmanabham, G., 2014. Fluxless
arc weld-brazing of aluminium alloy to steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 214 (12),
2949–2959.
Yahiro, A., Masui, T., Yoshida, T., Doi, D., 1991. Development of nonferrous clad plate
and sheet by warm rolling with different temperature of materials. ISIJ Int. 31 (6),
647–654.
Ye, Z., Huang, J.H., Gao, W., Zhang, Y.F., Cheng, Z., Chen, S.H., Yang, J., 2017.
Microstructure and mechanical properties of 5052 aluminum alloy/mild steel butt
joint achieved by mig-tig double-sided arc welding-brazing. Mater. Des. 123, 69–79.
Zhang, M.J., Chen, G.Y., Zhang, Y., Wu, K.R., 2013. Research on microstructure and
mechanical properties of laser keyhole welding–brazing of automotive galvanized
steel to aluminum alloy. Mater. Des. 45, 24–30.
Zhang, Y., Huang, J., Cheng, Z., Ye, Z., Chi, H., Peng, L., Chen, S., 2016. Study on MIG-
TIG double-sided arc welding-brazing of aluminum and stainless steel. Mater. Lett.
172, 146–148.