A Multi-Response Optimization of FSW process parameters on

International Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering IJMME-IJENS Vol:20 No:01 144

202601-4343-IJMME-IJENS © February 2020 IJENS I J E N S

A Multi-Response Optimization of FSW process

parameters on AA5052-H111 using Taguchi

Method

Rania Mostafa1*, Reham Al-Mahdy2, Ahmed El-Keran3

Production Engineering & Mechanical Design Dept., Faculty of Engineering, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt. 1 Lecturer, [email protected] [email protected], * The corresponding author

2 [email protected] 3 Assoc. Professor, [email protected]

Abstract-- In this study, Friction Stir Welding process is

applied to weld two plates of AA5052-H111 as a butt joint

using Stepped and Tapered pin profile tools. Design of

Experiment is planned by Minitab17 for the welding

conditions; Welding Speed (W.S), the Rotational Speed (R.S),

Tool Tilting Angle (T.A) and the tool design. Visual and

mechanical (Tensile UTS and microhardness VHN) tests are

carried out then the multi-response optimization based on

Taguchi-method is performed to identify the highest effect of

these parameters. At welding conditions; R.S 1600 rpm, W.S

17mm/min and T.A 2° using the stepped tool, the UTS and

VHN are optimum and extend to 90.5% and 150% of the base

material, respectively. By observing the resulted samples; the

usage of Stepped tool contributes to the smooth surface and

helps in the good appearance of the weld quality. Also, the

welded samples using the Tapered tool obtains higher

hardness.

Index Term-- Friction stir welding, Taguchi method, multi-

response optimization, Design of Experiment

1. INTRODUCTION

Friction stir welding (FSW) is an innovative welding

process commonly known as a solid-state welding process

invented by Wayne Thomas at TWI [1]. The core benefit of

FSW joint is to weld material without reaching the fusion

temperature. It enables welding almost all types of

aluminum alloys, even the ones classified as non-weld able

by fusion welding due to the hot cracking and poor

solidification microstructure in the fusion zone. FSW is particularly appropriate for the welding of high strength

alloys such as Aluminum 5052 and dissimilar material [2].

The benefits of FSW such as metallurgical, environments

and energy benefits are summarized in Ref. [3]. Aluminum

5052 has a wide variety of applications in transportation,

shipbuilding, marine and aircraft industries [4]. The welding

tool of FSW usually consists of a pin and a shoulder. Most

heat generation occurs as a result of the friction between the

tool and the material, particularly the tool shoulder and the

butt joint area of the work pieces. The tool pin mainly

breaks and shatters abutting work pieces and stirs the refined grains. A strong compaction or bonding of welded

regions filled with soft and shattered grains is induced by

both the tool shoulder and the under formed work pieces,

which surround the welded region [5, 6]. FSW parameters

such as down force, welding speed, tool rotation speed,

tilting angle and insertion depth of the tool pin must be

controlled. The effect of every parameter is shown in Table

1. The quality of friction stir welds depends on the use of an

optimum combination of these process parameters as shown

in Fig.1.

Table I

The effects of FSW parameters [2]

Parameter Effects

Rotational speed Frictional heat, “stirring”, oxide layer breaking and mixing of material.

Tilt angle The appearance of the weld, thinning.

Welding speed Appearance, heat control.

Down force Frictional heat, maintaining contact conditions.

mailto:[email protected]







Fig. 1. Process principle of friction stir welding [2]

The welding operation is simple with a high energy efficient

and eliminates the need for costly consumables. FSW

process does not require filler wires and shielding gas,

Special joint edge profiling is unnecessary and oxide

removal immediately prior to welding is also unnecessary.

J. Park and S. Kim [7] considered the effect of rotation

speed (R.S) and welding speed (W.S) on the stirring action

and friction heat during FSW experiments on dissimilar Al

alloys AA5052-O and AA6061-T6. They used a range of

process parameters to determine the mechanical strength of

weld nugget of the dissimilar materials. They concluded that

the optimum conditions were 61 mm/min as W.S and 1600

rpm as R.S. Their observations of the weld surface finish and plastic flow behavior showed that the stirring effect

increased, and number of defects decreased when the

welding speed was decreased. N. T. Kumbhar and K.

Bhanumurthy [8] agreed to the same opinion that FSW of

dissimilar materials AA5052 and AA6061 were successfully

performed especially when high R.S and low W.S used. V.

RajKumar and et al. [9] also agreed with successful FSW of

these dissimilar alloys by studying the effect of cylindrical

threaded pin tool design. M. Venkateshkannan and et al.

[10] compared FSW of dissimilar AA5052 and AA2024

using five different tool pin profiles (Cylindrical, threaded,

squared, tapered and stepped pin profiles). The stepped profile pin gave the highest UTS and the cylindrical

threaded pin has produced defect-free welding with good

UTS at R.S 100 rpm and W.S 40 mm/min. Y. Kwon, S.

Beom and et al. [11] experimentally studied FSW of 5052-O

alloy mechanical properties (UTS and Hardness) and weld

defects in all selected tool rotation speeds ranging from 500

to 3000 rpm at a constant welding speed of 100 mm/min.

The stirred zone (SZ) shows higher average hardness than

the base metal, especially at 500 rpm, the average hardness

of the SZ reaches a level of 33% greater than that of the

base metal. The UTS of some samples reached the value of the base material at the rotational speed 500, 1000, 2000

rpm. In other conditions at the same alloy under R.S 1120

rpm and W.S 100 mm/min, it was found that the UTS could

be up to 90% of that of base material by N.T. Kumbhar and

et al. [12]. G. Çam, and S. Güçlüer and et al. [13]

experimentally studied FSW of Al-5086 H32 plates with a

thickness of 3 mm using different welding speeds (175, 200,

and 225 mm/min) at a constant tool rotational speed of 1600

rpm. HSS conical tool was employed in FSW samples. The

optimum combination of strength and ductility performances was obtained from the joint produced with

W.S 200 mm/min and R.S 1600 rpm. The most defects were

obtained at the samples welded with W.S 175 mm/min.

Most relevant previous research work was aimed for finding

the effect of welding parameters on the stir zone. Little work

has been done, however, on how to weld AA5052-H111

alloy in an attempt to optimize the process parameters. This work studies the effect of two different tool designs (stepped

& tapered), Rotational Speed at a range of (600-1600 rpm),

Welding Speed at a range of (17-200 mm/min) and Tool

Tilting Angle at a range of (0ᵒ-3ᵒ) on the mechanical

properties of two AA 5052-H111 plates using multi-

response optimization based Taguchi method.

2. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

In this paper, FSW process is used to weld two plates of

AA5052-H111. Tables 2, 3 represent the standard chemical

composition and the mechanical properties (standard and measured) of the used base material. The AA5052-H111

plates specimens with 150x100x5 mm in dimensions are

welded using conventional universal milling machine. A

non-consumable nitriding HSS tools - stepped tool (T.N1)

and tapered tool (T.N2) - are used and they are shown in

Fig.2 and 3, respectively. The tools pin diameter and

shoulder diameter are 5 mm and 15 mm, respectively while

the pin length is kept constant at 4.8mm. They were

designed and manufactured especially for this study by

Nouval Tools Company [14]. The samples must be rigidly

clamped to prevent weld metal breakout, Fig. 4. Figure 5 shows FSW sample with specific welding parameters. The

four welding parameters; Rotation Speed, Welding Speed,

Tool tilt angle and Tool type (profile of tool pin) are

experimentally designed using Taguchi Method by

Minitab17 software [15]. These parameters have the most



significant effect on the welding quality and the welding

appearance too [11, 12]. Table 4 represents the Design Of

Experiment (DOE) of the FSW process parameters. Figures

6, 7, 8, and 9 represent some experimental samples

according to the selected Rotational Speed (R.S).

Table II

The Mechanical compositions of 5052 [16].

Chemical compositions of Al. alloy 5052

Mg Cr Cu Fe Mn Si Zn Other each Other total Al

2.2-2.8% 0.15-0.35% 0.1% 0.4% 0.1% 0.25% 0.1% 0.05% 0.15% Reminder

Table III

The Mechanical properties of 5052 [16]

Elements UTS (MPa) Upper Yield tensile strength

(MPa)

Lower Yield tensile

strength (MPa)

Hardness

(VHN)

Measured 221 204 197 63

Standard 195-290 40-78

Fig. 2. The stepped pin tool (T.N1)

Fig. 3. The stepped pin tool (T.N2)

Fig. 4. Specimen fixation on the machine Fig. 5. FSW Sample with specific welding parameters



Specimens

R.S

W.S

T.A

T.N Specimens

R.S

W.S

T.A

T.N

1600

25

2

2

1265

17

2

1

1600

25

0

2

1265

17

0

2

1600

25

2

1

1265

17

0

1

1600

25

0

1

1265

17

0

2

Fig. 6. Snapshot of samples at 1600 rpm Fig. 7. Snapshot of samples at 1265 rpm

Specimens

R.S

W.S

T.A

T.N Specimens

R.S

W.S

T.A

T.N

800

17

0

1

630

64

2

1

800

25

2

1

630

200

3

1

800

200

3

1

630

200

0

2

800

64

2

1

630 17 3 2

Fig. 8. Snapshot of samples at 800 rpm Fig. 9. Snapshot of samples at 630 rpm

Table IV

The DOE of FSW parameters by Minitab17 software using (Taguchi Method)

No. T.N* R.S W.S T.A No. T.N* R.S W.S T.A

1 1 630 17 0 17 2 630 17 3

2 1 630 25 1 18 2 630 25 2

3 1 630 64 2 19 2 630 64 1

4 1 630 200 3 20 2 630 200 0

5 1 800 17 0 21 2 800 17 3

6 1 800 25 1 22 2 800 25 2

7 1 800 64 2 23 2 800 64 1

8 1 800 200 3 24 2 800 200 0

9 1 1265 17 1 25 2 1265 17 2

10 1 1265 25 0 26 2 1265 25 3

11 1 1265 64 3 27 2 1265 64 0

12 1 1265 200 2 28 2 1265 200 1

13 1 1600 17 1 29 2 1600 17 2

14 1 1600 25 0 30 2 1600 25 3

15 1 1600 64 3 31 2 1600 64 0

16 1 1600 200 2 32 2 1600 200 1 * T.N means tool profile no. (1 is stepped tool profile pin & 2 is tapered tool profile pin)



3. MECHANICAL TESTING AND VISUAL INSPECTION

From the welded samples, cross-sections were extracted

from each specimen, which were prepared for tensile test

and Vickers micro-hardness measurements at different

zones of the welded joints.

3.1 Tensile Testing

Tensile testing specimens were cut and prepared using CNC milling machine according to the ASTM standards [17], as

shown in the Fig.10. The uniaxial tensile test was

accomplished by a Computer-Controlled Universal Tensile

and Compression testing machine model WES-1000B from

Beijing Sinofound Co., LTD, Fig.11. The specimen is fixed

in the machine jaws and the test starts according to the

machine testing procedure at the room temperature. The

machine reports the upper and lower yielding forces,

maximum force, upper and lower yield strength and the

Ultimate Tensile Strength.

3.2 Vickers Micro-hardness Testing

Testing by Vickers hardness is better for micro-hardness

measuring in this study. SMTMF-DHT micro hardness

device model VHN-1000 is used to test the samples, the

device is shown in Fig.12.The test samples are ground and

polished before testing. The test is performed under a load

2.94 N and the duration time is 10s.

3.3 Visual inspection

Visual examination here means the inspection of the welded

samples using the naked eye and the tactile sense of the

welding surface. The welded surface defects can observe

directly if any. This inspection helps in the recommendation

of tool tilt angle and the tool profile.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Ultimate Tensile Strength and Micro-hardness of

welded zone

Table 5 illustrates the thirty-two samples that resulted from

DOE according to Taguchi Method. The UTS of all samples is measured and its percentage to the UTS of the base

material is calculated. The measured UTS in table 5 are

analyzed statistically using Taguchi design analysis and

predicted regression. A boxplot in Fig.13 shows the upper,

lower and mean of UTS results. Histogram of tensile test

results is plotted as shown in Fig.14. The value of UTS that

approaches to 155 and 165 MPa has the highest frequency

where it had appeared seven times.

Fig. 10. The tensile test specimen

Fig. 11. The tensile test machine Fig. 12. Micro hardness device



Fig. 13. A boxplot of UTS Fig. 14. The Histogram of UTS

Table V

The result of tensile and hardness tests

Sample

No.

UTS

(Mpa)

UTS%

to the

Base

material

Hardness

VHN

VH% to

the Base

material

Sample

No.

UTS

(Mpa)

UTS%

to the

Base

material

Hardness

VHN

VH % to

the Base

material

1 148.5 67.19% 76.1 120.79% 17 180 81.45% 102 161.90%

2 180 81.45% 93.8 148.89% 18 195.02 88.24% 109.4 173.65%

3 170 76.92% 82.7 131.27% 19 169.63 76.76% 85.9 136.35%

4 163.33 73.90% 80.8 128.25% 20 146.66 66.36% 88 139.68%

5 185 83.71% 90 142.86% 21 160 72.40% 90 142.86%

6 206.5 93.44% 85.2 135.24% 22 150.38 68.05% 86.3 136.98%

7 163 73.76% 83.8 133.02% 23 147 66.52% 85.9 136.35%

8 155 70.14% 78 123.81% 24 180 81.45% 88 139.68%

9 190 85.97% 92.6 146.98% 25 206.7 93.53% 85.2 135.24%

10 145 65.61% 82 130.16% 26 200 90.50% 77.9 123.65%

11 163.5 73.98% 82.3 130.63% 27 180 81.45% 95.6 151.75%

12 143 64.71% 75.6 120.00% 28 160 72.40% 80 126.98%

13 213 96.38% 95 150.79% 29 204 92.31% 82 130.16%

14 210 95.02% 91.9 145.87% 30 145 65.61% 78.3 124.29%

15 180 81.45% 95 150.79% 31 163 73.76% 75.5 119.84%

16 182.12 82.41% 77.4 122.86% 32 130 58.82% 70.2 111.43%

When studying the results in table 5, it is found that the

sample 13 has the maximum UTS of 213MPa. The welding

parameters of this specimen are rotation speed 1600 rpm,

welding speed 17 mm/min and tilting angle 1ᵒ using the

stepped tool profile. Samples 12 and 32 have the lowest

UTS 143MPa and 130MPa respectively. Sample 12 is

welded at R.S 1265 rpm, W.S 200 mm/min, T.A 2ᵒ using

stepped tool profile and sample 32 has welding parameters

1600 rpm, 200 mm/min, 0ᵒ tilting angle with tapered profile

tool. These results lead to an important outcome; that the

higher rotation speed with lower welding speed the higher UTS, while the higher welding speed produces low quality

weld. The quality of welding zone is affected also by the

tool tilting angle. The stepped profile tool has better

influence on welding process than the tapered one.

Table V also shows the Vickers micro hardness (VHN) of

the all designed samples. The Vickers hardness was

measured in the middle of the stir zone. Figures 15 and 16

represent the boxplot and the histogram of the hardness test

values. Hardness histogram demonstrates that the Vickers

micro hardness close to 80 VHN has the highest frequency.

It had appeared eight times and it is about 1.26 of the VHN

of the base material. By investigating the data in table 5 and

notifying the VHN-Histogram, it denotes that the VHN of

the stirred specimens may exceed double the base material

hardness. The hardness of samples 13 which has the optimal UTS achieves more than one and half of the base material

hardness 95 VHN. The sample 32 which was stir welded by

the tapered profile tool at tilting angle 1ᵒ and R.S 1600 rpm

220

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

UT

S(M

pa)

Boxplot of UTS(Mpa)

2001 801 601 40

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

UTS(Mpa)

Fre

qu

en

cy

Histogram of UTS(Mpa)



and W.S 200 mm/min had the lowest VHN value of all samples.

Fig. 15. A boxplot of VHN Fig. 16. The Histogram of VHN

4.2. Optimal welding parameters of the multi-responses

Response optimization helps to identify the combination of

variable settings that jointly optimize a single response or a

set of responses. This is useful when it is necessary to

evaluate the impact of multiple variables on a response and

study the highest effect of the input parameters [18].

Figure 17 shows the main effects plot of the four welding

parameters for 32 samples on UTS and VHN responses.

Figures 18 and 19 represent the relationship between the parameters and both of UTS and hardness, respectively. By

observing the three figures, it found that the W.S is the most

effective parameter which affects the response of UTS and

VHN whereas the R.S comes second in terms of

effectiveness Also, the most effective T.A on UTS is 2ᵒ

although the T.A has weak effect on hardness as a general.

The regression equations that relate the welding parameters

with UTS and VHN of the welded zone are predicted in

Minitab17 software. The equations 1 and 2 illustrate the

predicted regression equations of UTS according to the tool type.

For T.N1 UTS (Mpa) = 174.3 + 0.01011 R.S -

0.1329 W.S - 0.10 T.A (1)

For T.N2 UTS (Mpa) = 169.3 + 0.01011 R.S -

0.1329 W.S - 0.10 T.A (2)

The equations 3 and 4 illustrate the predicted regression

equations of VHN according to the tool type.

For T.N1 VHN = 95.73 - 0.00610 R.S - 0.0492 W.S -

0.18 T.A (3)

For T.N2 VHN = 96.85 - 0.00610 R.S - 0.0492 W.S -

0.18 T.A (4)

As shown in the previous equations (1, 2, 3, 4), the W.S has the largest weighting factor in the all equations followed by

the R.S in the effect.



a. Ultimate Tensile Strength Test UTS b. Micro-Hardness HV

Fig. 17. Plot of the main effects of the welding parameters for 32 samples on UTS and VHN

Fig. 18. The relationship between the different welding parameters and UTS

The mechanical properties such as the UTS and the hardness of the FSW joint are very important quality factors. These

properties are of ‘larger is the better’ sort and their

maximum values are required concurrently. The aim of this

search is to obtain the optimal welding parameters for

maximum UTS and hardness. But when they are predicted

individually as a single response in the Minitab software, it

was found that the predicted results of mechanical properties (UTS and VHN) are small once it compared to

the measured properties for some samples; also, the sample

that has the optimal UTS totally different than the sample of

optimal VHN. So, the authors decided to study the multi-

response optimization technique for obtaining the optimal

welding parameters that lead to the maximum UTS and

VHN.

Figure 20 represents the predicted optimal welding parameters for the multi-response (UTS and VHN). By

studying that figure, the maximum UTS is about 189 MPa

while the VHN is about 85 at the welding parameters R.S

1600 rpm, W.S 17 mm/min, T.A 0ᵒ with the stepped tool

T.N1.

1 5001 2501 000750500

220

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

R.S

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs R.S with Fitted Line

2001 501 00500

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

1 20

W.S

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs W.S with Fitted Line

3.02.52.01 .51 .00.50.0

220

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

T.A

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs T.A with Fitted Line

2.01 .81 .61 .41 .21 .0

220

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

T.N

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs T.N with Fitted Line



Fig. 19. The relationship between the different parameters and HV values

The optimal result of this study was relatively small because

there are four parameters affect the predicted equation,

although there are two parameters - tool type and tilt angle -

have very low effect as shown in Fig. 20. So, DOE will be

redesigned with the more effective parameters (R.S and

W.S) while the two other parameters (T.A and T.N) will be

specified as T.A is 2° and T.N is stepped tool. Table (6)

shows the 16 samples of the new DOE and the measured

UTS and VHN. The results of the redesigned DOE show

that the welding speed has the more effectiveness on the multi-responses (UTS and VHN). Figure 21 illustrates that

the W.S 17 mm/min and R.S 1600 rpm have the best results

for multi- response (UTS and VHN).

By determining the most effective welding parameters

during the process, the optimal results will have increased in

value. Figure 22 represents the optimal results of UTS and

VHN that are calculated in Minitab software while the

optimal parameters are R.S 1600 rpm, W.S 17 mm/min, T.A

0ᵒ and T.N 2. The calculated response of UTS (about 200

MPa) and hardness (about 95 VHN) are seemed to be less

than the actual measured results because of the variation

caused by factors and the program calculates the mean of

means.

4-3 Visual inspection results

By observing the welded samples in Figs. 6,7,8 and 9, it

found that the tilting angle has a clear impact on the welded

surface appearance and the smoothness of it. The samples

which are welded under condition of T.A 2ᵒ have no

appearance defects and the surface slightly smooth. Also, the tool profile has some effects on the surface

quality. It is clearly that the Stepped Tool profile has a good

effect on the welded surface quality. This may happen due

to the high breaking and mixing of the oxide layer and more

efficient heat generation.

Finally, the rotational and the welding speeds have also an

effect on the goodness of the welded surface. The higher

rotational speed with some lower welding speed gets a

wonderful result of the surface smoothness.

1 5001 2501 000750500

220

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

R.S

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs R.S with Fitted Line

2001 501 00500

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

1 20

W.S

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs W.S with Fitted Line

3.02.52.01 .51 .00.50.0

220

21 0

200

1 90

1 80

1 70

1 60

1 50

1 40

1 30

T.A

UT

S(M

pa)

Plot of UTS(Mpa) vs T.A with Fitted Line



Table VI

The result of UTS and VHN tests of the 2nd step of DOE (16 samples)

Sample

No. R.S W.S

UTS

(Mpa)

Hardness

VHN

Sample

No. R.S W.S

UTS

(Mpa)

Hardness

VHN

1 630 17 185 79.00 9 1265 17 195 94.80

2 630 25 180 86.00 10 1265 25 190 96.40

3 630 64 172 82.70 11 1265 64 188 87.90

4 630 200 181 77.50 12 1265 200 145 75.60

5 800 17 185 88.00 13 1600 17 210 96.50

6 800 25 180 84.70 14 1600 25 204 91.90

7 800 64 163 83.80 15 1600 64 198 93.45

8 800 200 170 69.90 16 1600 200 182 77.40

Fig. 20. The optimal welding variables and the optimal UTS & VHN (multi-response optimization)

Fig. 21. Plot of the main effects for means of the welding parameters

for new DOE Fig. 22. Optimal welding variables for the optimal UTS and VHN



5. CONCLUSIONS Friction stir welding of AA5052-H111 using different pin

tool profiles was successfully performed in this research. It

observes that the welding speed and the rotation speed are

the most effective parameters on the measured mechanical

properties (UTS and VHN), the lower the welding speed

and the higher the rotational speed the best of the UTS and

VHN. At the single response for maximizing the UTS; the

optimal welding parameters are 1600 rpm as R.S,

17mm/min as W.S, and the T.A equal to 0° using the stepped pin profile tool. At those conditions, UTS is about

85.3% and HV is about 135% of the base material. But

when reducing the parameters and use the multi-response

technique the optimal results are increased to about 90.5%

for UTS and about 151.5% of the base material at R.S 1600

rpm, W.S 17 mm/min, and T.A 2 ° with using the stepped

pin profile tool.

Results of using stepped pin profile tool for UTS are better

than the tapered one. Also, the stepped pin profile tool gives

the best visual results and free-defect. But the tapered pin

profile tool is better than the stepped one in the hardness test results. So, Authors recommend the usage of stepped tool in

the applications that require high tensile strength and the

tapered tool in the applications require higher hardness.

REFERENCES [1] W. M. Thomas, E. D. Nicholas, J. C. Needham, M. G. Murch,

P. Temple-Smith and C. J. Dawes: International Patent

Application PCT/GB92/02203 and GB Patent Application

9125978.8, UK Patent Office, London, (1991).

[2] S. S. Mandeep, S. C. Sukhpal, Friction Stir Welding – Process

and its variables: A Review, International Journal of Emerging

Technology and Advanced Engineering, 2, (12), (2012), 275-

279.

[3] R.S. Mishra, Z.Y. Maba, Friction stir welding and processing,

Materials Science and Engineering, (2005), 1-78.

[4] http://assets.esab.com/asset-bank/assetfile/12296.pdf

[5] R. Rai, A. D., H. K. D. H. Bhadeshi and T. DebRoy, Review:

friction stir welding tools, Science and Technology of Welding

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

[6] P. Prashant, S. Kumar, S. Prakash, A study of process

parameters of friction stir welded AA 6061 Aluminum alloy,

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,

Engineering and Technology, 2, (6), (2013), 2304- 2309.

[7] J. C. Park and S. J. Kim, The Effect of Traveling and Rotation

Speeds on Mechanical Properties During Friction Stir Welding

of Dissimilar Al Alloys, Defect and Diffusion Forum, 297-301,

(2010), 590-595.

[8] N.T. Kumbhar and K. Bhanumurthy, Friction Stir Welding of

Al 5052 with Al 6061 Alloys, Hindawi Publishing Corporation,

Journal of Metallurgy, 2012, (2012), 1-7.

[9] R. Kumar., V. Kannan, P. Sadeesh, and et al., Studies on effect

of tool design and welding parameters on the friction stir

welding of dissimilar aluminum alloys AA 5052 – AA 6061,

Procedia Engineering, 75, (2014), 93-97.

[10] V. kannan, R. kumar, and et al., Influences of tool geometry on

metallurgical and mechanical properties of friction stir welded

dissimilar AA2024 and AA5052, Science Direct, 75, (2014),

154-158.

[11] Y. Kwon, S. Shim, and et al., Friction stir welding of 5052

aluminum alloy plates, Transactions of Nonferrous Metals

Society of China, 19, (2009), 23-27.

[12] N.T. Kumbhar, G.K. Dey and K. Bhanumurthy, Friction Stir

Welding of Aluminum Alloys BARC NEWSLETTER, (321),

(2011), 11-17.

[13] G. Çam, S. Güçlüer, et al., Mechanical properties of friction stir

butt-welded Al-5086 H32 plate, Journal of Achievements in

Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, 30, (2), (2008), 151-

156.

[14] https://www.facebook.com/Nouval-Tools-190993044299400/

[15] http://www.minitab.com/en-us/

[16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5052_aluminium_alloy.

[17] ASTM, ‘Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical

Testing of Steel Products’

[18] J. Kundu and H. Singh, Friction stir welding: multi-response

optimisation using Taguchi-based GRA, Advances in

mechanical engineering, 4, (1), (2016), 228-241.

http://assets.esab.com/asset-bank/assetfile/12296.pdf

https://www.facebook.com/Nouval-Tools-190993044299400/

http://www.minitab.com/en-us/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5052_aluminium_alloy

Documents

A Multi-Response Optimization of FSW process parameters on