Mechanical properties of friction stir processed AA5754 sheet metal

Mechanical properties of friction stir processed AA5754 sheet
metal at different elevated temperature and strain rates
Presented by
Saurabh Suman
Roll No. 11ME31019
Under the guidance of
Dr. S. K. Panda
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, India
Prof. S. K. Pal
June, 2016

Contents
 Introduction
 Review of literature
 Objectives
 Methodology
 Results and discussion
 Conclusions
 References
212/9/2016 Dept. of Mechanical Engg., IIT Kharagpur 2

Introduction
Importance of aluminium as automotive grade sheet metal
3
Fig: Application of aluminium alloy in
passenger cars [2]
Fig: Inner door panels of
automobiles made of AA5754 [4]
Fig: Aluminum body and structural component growth with year [1]
Designation
Major
alloying
elements
1xxx Pure Al
2xxx Cu
3xxx Mn
4xxx Si
5xxx Mg
6xxx Mg, Si
7xxx Zn
8xxx others
Table: Designation and major
alloying elements of wrought
aluminium alloys[3]
Non Heat treatable
Heat treatable
12/9/2016 Dept. of Mechanical Engg., IIT Kharagpur

Introduction (contd.)
4
Friction Stir Welding (FSW)
• Rotational speed of the tool (rpm), transverse speed (mm/min), plunge depth and tool
geometry are the Important FSW parameters.
• No shielding gas used and no gas emission from the process therefore it is eco-friendly
process but material wastage takes place as hole is left at last.
• FSW is widely used process for joining in automotive, Marine, Aerospace and Railway
industry
Figure 3: Friction stir welding process taking place [5]
Figure 5 : Various microstructural regions in the
transverse cross section of a friction stir welded
material [6]

Friction stir processing (FSP)
5
Friction stir processing (FSP) is a method of changing the properties of a metal through intense,
localized plastic deformation
Figure 6: Schematic of friction stir processing [7]
Figure : An illustration of the evolution of
microstructural features and its linkage to various
emerging friction stir processing technologies [8]
12/9/2016
Dept. of Mechanical Engg., IIT Kharagpur

Friction stir processing (FSP) Applications
6
FSP(Application)
Fig: FSP for casting modification(19)
Fig: FSP for surface composite(12) Fig: FSP for
superplasticity(19
Fig: FSP for superplasticity (9)
Fig: FSP for chanelling (10)
Fig: FSP for power processing(5)
Fig: FSP for casting modification(9) Fig: FSP for microforming (11)

Review of literature
7
Author Year Inferences
R. Mishra
et al.[12]
2001 The microhardness of the surface composite reinforced with 27vol.%SiC
of 0.7 μm average particle size was ∼173 HV, almost double of the
5083Al alloy substrate (85 HV)
Y. J Kwon et
al.[13]
2009 At 1000 rpm maximum tensile
Strength and elongation was
Achieved.(5052 Al alloy)

Review of literature (contd.)
8
F. C. Liu
et al.[14]
2008 Al–Mg–Sc alloy. Maximum
elongation of 2150% at 450°C
and a high strain rate of
1 × 10−1 s−1 was achieved.
Super-plascity with
fine grains was achieved.
F. Chai et
al. [15]
2013 SFSP(submerged FSP) has fine grains
And more % elongation.

9
Hong- Ying
et al.[16]
2013 The result showed that the flow stress predicted by the proposed model
agrees with the experimental results.(T-24)
• Dynamic recrystallization at lower strain rate and high temp

Objectives
I. Design and fabrication of FSP tool to successfully fabricate friction stir processed sheet
of AA5754 alloy using suitable process parameter.
II. Characterization of uniaxial tensile properties of both FSPed and base metal sheets in
terms of yield stress, ultimate stress and % elongation at different elevated temperature
and strain rate.
III. Development of Johnson Cook model to predict the flow stress incorporating the effect
of temperature, strain rate, strain hardening and plastic strain.
IV. Fractography of FSPed (friction stir processed) specimens to understand the failure
mechanism.

Methodology
11
Selection of sheet material and Tool material
Advantage of AA5754-H22 aluminum alloy
Advantage of Stainless steel316 as tool material
• High strength to weight ratio
• Excellent corrosion resistance
• Excellent corrosion resistance
• Good oxidation resistance up-to 900°C
• High creep strength at elevated temperatures
• Good heat resistance
• High hardness and strength.
Property Value
Hardness 79 BHN
UTS 580 Mpa
YTS 290 MPa
% Elongation 50%
Modulus of
elasticity
193 GPa
Specific heat
capacity
0.5J/g-°C
Melting Point 1400°C
Table: Engg Mechanical properties of
Stainless steel 316 [17]

Methodology (contd.)
12
Tool design and process parameters
Tool Dia.
(mm) [18]
Pin Dia.
(mm)
Pin length
(mm)
Plunge
depth(mm)
Tilt angle Tool rpm
[19][20]
Travel Vel.
(mm/min)
15 5 1.1 0.1 1° 900 125
Fig: Friction stir processing machine
Fig: FSPed sample without defects
Fig: FSPed sample at wrong parameters
Fig: Schematic of FSP in
isometric view

13
Macrostructure study and tool design
Fig: Diamond polishing
machine
Fig: Diamond polishing
machine
Fig: Stir zone depth and width is clearly visible
Fig: Stainless steel 316 tool
Fig: Tool schematicFig: Tool dimension in mm
Fig: Finally polished and etched
FSPed sample

14
Tensile testing at different elevated temperature and strain rate
• A total of 24 experiments were conducted each for base and FSPed material at three
different cross head velocity of 1mm/min, 100mm/min and 200mm/min and four
different temperature room temperature, 200°C, 300°C and 400°C.
Fig: Dimension of tensile specimen(in mm)
Fig: Engg stress vs strain _room temp _CHV200mm/min
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Enggstress
Engg strain
CHV= cross head velocity
Fig: UT-04-0050 ELECTRA 50 Hot
forming machine
Fig: Tensile sample before
and after tensile test at
400°C and CHV of 1mm/min
for base AA5754
The die for cutting tensile specimen

15
Formulation using Johnson Cook (JC) model
𝜎 = 𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛 1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀∗ 1 − 𝑇∗𝑚 , (1) Where σ =(Von Mises) flow stress,
• A = yield stress at reference temperature and reference strain rate,
• B =coefficient of strain hardening,
• n = strain hardening exponent,
• 𝜀 = plastic strain,
• 𝜀∗ = 𝜀/ 𝜀0 with 𝜀 being the strain rate and 𝜀0 the reference strain rate, and
• 𝑇∗
=
𝑇−𝑇 𝑟𝑒𝑓
𝑇 𝑚−𝑇 𝑟𝑒𝑓
, (2)
• C, m= The coefficient of strain rate hardening and thermal softening exponent, respectively.
Here 293 K is taken as reference temperature and 0.056 𝑠−1
is taken as the reference strain
rate. At reference temperature and reference strain rate, Eq. (1) will reduce to:
𝜎 = 𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛
(3)

16
Formulation using Johnson Cook (JC) model
• The value of A is calculated from the yield stress (i.e. the stress at 0.056 strain) of the flow
curve at 293 K and 0.056𝑠−1.
• Substituting the value of A in Eq. (3) and using the flow stress data at various strains for the
same flow curves, ln (𝜎 − 𝐴) vs. ln 𝜀 is plotted. B is calculated from the intercept of this plot
while n is obtained from the slope.
At reference temperature, there is no flow softening term as T* = 0. So, Eq. (1) can be expressed
as: 𝜎 = 𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛
1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀∗
• Using the flow stress data for a fixed strain at various strain rates, C is obtained from the
slope of { 𝜎 /(A + B𝜀 𝑛
)} vs. ln 𝜀∗ plot.
• The material constant m is obtained from this equation 𝜎 = 𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛
1 − 𝑇∗𝑚
∆=
1
𝑁 𝑖−1
𝑖=𝑁 𝜎 𝑒𝑥𝑝
𝑖 −𝜎 𝑝
𝑖
𝜎 𝑒𝑥𝑝
𝑖 × 100 𝑅 =
𝑖=1
𝑖=𝑁
(𝜎𝑒𝑥𝑝
𝑖
− 𝜎𝑒𝑥𝑝)(𝜎 𝑝
𝑖
− 𝜎 𝑝)
𝑖=1
𝑖=𝑁
(𝜎𝑒𝑥𝑝
𝑖
− 𝜎exp)2
𝑖=1
𝑖=𝑁
(𝜎 𝑝
𝑖
− 𝜎 𝑝)2

Results and discussion
Effect of temperature on Engg stress strain response for base material:
17
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain _ Base _ CHV 1mm/min
BASE_CHV_ROOM TEMP
Base15_CHV1_Temp400
Base7_CHV_Temp300
Base5_CHV_temp200
CHV=cross head velocity
Fig: Effect of temperature on engineering stress-strain response at 1mm/min cross head velocity rate for base material

Results and discussion (contd.)
Effect of temperature on Engg stress strain response for FSPed material:
18
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain _ FSP _ CHV 1mm/min
FSP15_CHV1_TEMP400
FSP6_CHV1_TEMP300
FSP3_CHV1_TEMP200
Fsp0_CHV1_ROOM TEMP
Figure 31: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response at 1mm/min crosshead velocity rate for FSPed
(friction stir processed) material

Effect of temperature on Engg stress strain response for base material:
19
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain _ Base _ CHV 200mm/min
BASE16_CHV200_TEMP400
Base13_CHV200_TEMP300
Base2_CHV200_Room temp
Fig: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response at 200mm/min crosshead velocity rate for base material

Effect of strain rate on Engg stress strain response on FSPed material:
20
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
EnggStress
Engg Strain
FSP11_CHV200_TEMP400
Fsp8_CHV200_temp300
Fsp4_CHV200_Temp200
Fsp2_CHV200_room temp
Figure 33: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response rate at 100mm/min crosshead velocity rate for FSPed
material

Effect of temperature and strain rate on mechanical properties:
21
(a) (b)
Figure 34: A figurative comparison of (a) Base sample at temperature 400°C before and after
tensile failure (b) FSP sample at temperature 400°C before and after tensile failure

Effect of temperature and strain rate on mechanical properties:
22
(a) (b)
Fig : A figurative comparison of (a) Base sample at room temperature before and after tensile
failure (b) FSP sample at room temperature before and after tensile failure

Table: Effect of temperature and strain rate on mechanical properties:
23
Sample
Specification
Temp
(°C)
Cross head
velocity(mm/mi
n)
% Elongation Yield Strength
(MPa)
Ultimate strength
(MPa)
1. Base0 20 1 10.72 185.40 246.611
2. Base1 20 100 13.14 211.59 239.45
3. Base2 20 200 12.25 223.45 256.47
4. FSP0 20 1 15.86 148.34 210.24
5. FSP1 20 100 21.27 160.28 208.50
6. FSP2 20 200 21.69 161.28 211.04
7. Base5 200 1 12.9 220.82 230.80
8. Base3 200 100 8.32 211.86 228.12
9. Base6 200 200 8.84 209.53 222.14
10. FSP3 200 1 34.7 153.29 184.86
11. FSP5 200 100 19.45 159.65 206.19
12. FSP6 200 200 21.27 157.98 199.8512/9/2016 Dept. of Mechanical Engg., IIT Kharagpur

Table: Effect of temperature and strain rate on mechanical properties:
24
Sample
Specification
Temp
(°C)
Cross head
velocity
(mm/min)
% Elongation Yield Strength
(MPa)
Ultimate strength
(MPa)
13. Base7 300 1 60.12 147.50 149.41
14. Base12 300 100 15.16 187.30 193.77
15. Base13 300 200 15.79 182.88 187.99
16. FSP6 300 1 59.97 131.62 139.43
17. FSP7 300 100 36.67 148.46 167.78
18. FSP8 300 200 32.4 145.45 166.53
19. Base15 400 1 144 39.72 45.49
20. Base14 400 100 82 93.45 95.52
21. Base13 400 200 75.42 93.42 96.47
22. FSP15 400 1 91.45 47.12 47.75
23. FSP10 400 100 61.45 101.81 104.28
24. FSP11 400 200 65.12 104.21 106.9312/9/2016 Dept. of Mechanical Engg., IIT Kharagpur

Effect of strain rate and temperature on true stress and true strain response :
25
Figure 36: Effect of temperature and strain rate on FSPAA5754 and base AA5754 (Room Temperature): true stress-strain
response
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Truestress
True strain
True stress vs strain _room temp
FSP0_CHV1_ROOM TEMP FSP1_CHV100_ROOM TEMP FSP2_CHV200_ROOM TEMP
BASE0_STR1_ROOM TEMP True Stress BASE2_STR200_ROOM TEMP BASE1_STR100_ROOM TEMP

26
Figure 36: Effect of temperature and strain rate on FSPAA5754 and base AA5754 (Room Temperature): true stress-strain
response
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
TRUESTRESS
TRUE STRAIN
True stress vs strain _ TEMP200
FSP3_STR1_TEMP200 FSP4_STR200_TEMP200 FSP5_STR100_TEMP200
BASE5_STR1_TEMP200 BASE3_STR100_TEMP200 BASE6_STR200_TEMP200

27
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
Truestress
True Strain
True Stress vs Strain_temp300
Fsp6_CHV1_temp300 Fsp7_CHV100_Temp300 Fsp8_CHV200_Temp300
BASE7_CHV1_TEMPP300 BASE13_CHV200_TEMP300 Base12_CHV100_temp300
Fig: Effect of temperature and strain rate on FSPAA5754 and base AA5754 (300°C): engineering stress-strain response

Prediction of Johnson Cook model :
3
0
Evaluation of material constants of Johnson Cook model
Johnson cook equation , 𝜎 = 𝐴 + 𝐵𝜀 𝑛
1 + 𝐶 ln 𝜀∗ 1 − 𝑇∗𝑚
Parameter
A(MPa) B(MPa) n c m
Value 160 279 .3436 0.039137 1.6687
Table: Johnson Cook model parameter value for base material
Table 8: Johnson Cook model parameter value for FSPed material
Parameter A(MPa) B(MPa) n c m
Value 110 225 0.4051 -0.0068 2.487
Table: Johnson Cook model parameter value for FSPed material

Experimental vs predicted Stress for FSPed material
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Truestress
True Strain
True stress vs strain _ JC Model _ CHV 200mm/min _ FSP
Predicted stress Expeimental Stress
293 K
473 K
573 K
673 K
Fig: Comparison between experimental flow stress and predicted flow stress using Johnson Cook model in temperature
domain 293 K–673K of FSP for cross head velocity of 200mm/min

3
3
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Truestress
True strain
True stress vs strain_JC model_CHV100mm/min_FSP
Predicted stress Experimental stress
293 K
473 K
573 K
673 K

0
50
100
150
200
250
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
True strain
Johnson Cook Model _CHV1mm/min_FSP
Experimental stress Predicted stress
293 K
473 K
573 K
673 K
231

Fig: Experimental stress vs Predicted stress for FSPed AA5754
232
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Predictedstress
Experimental stress
Experimental vs Predicted Stress_FSP
R=0.919
Errror= 9.11
Std Dev=10.66

3
3
Experimental vs predicted Stress for base material
domain 293 K–673K of base for cross head velocity of 200mm/min
33
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
Truestress
True strain
True stress vs strain_Base_JC model_CHV200mm/min
predicted stress Experimental stress
293 k
473 k
573 k
673 k

3
3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Truestress
True strain
293 k
673k
473k
573k

3
3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09
Truestress
True strain
293 k
473 k
573 k
673 k

36
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
PredictedTruestress
Experimental true Stress
Experimental stress vs Predicted strain_Base
Error= 27.67 %
Std dev=47.389
R=0.9171
Fig: Experimental stress vs Predicted stress for base AA5754

Fractography:
Fractography of parent material at cross
head velocity of 100mm/min and at room temp
Fig: Fractography of parent material at cross
head velocity of 100mm/min and at 400° C
• As shown in figure by SEM analysis cup like depression known as dimple is shown which
confirm ductile failure. This type of failure is known as dimple rupture.

Fractography:
Fig: Fractography of FSPed material at 100 cross
head velocity and room temp
Fig: Fractography of FSPed material at 100 cross
head velocity and 400° C
In FSPed sample also cup like depression known as dimples are exhibited by SEM analysis
which confirm ductile failure. This type of situation arises due to severe stirring action causing
intense plastic deformation. As the temperature is more size of dimple is more.

Conclusions
Friction stir processing has been successfully used to modify mechanical properties of AA5754.
From this experimental study following conclusions can be made.
 A cylindrical tool of 15mm shoulder diameter and 5mm pin diameter with 1.1mm pin-length
was designed. Friction stir processed samples were successfully fabricated using 900rpm and
125mm/min travel speed.
 It was found that the %elongation increased from 15% to 92% for FSPed (friction stir
processed) when temperature was increased from room temperature to 400° C at a constant
cross head velocity of 1 mm/min and there was 77.28% decrease in ultimate tensile
strength. Similar observation was found in base material.
 The FSPed sample was found to be insensitive to strain rate when cross head velocity (CHV)
was changed from 1mm/min to 200mm/min at room temperature. However, significant
strain rate effect was observed for both parent and FSPed sample at 300° C and 400° C.

Conclusions (contd.)
 The Johnson Cook model was successfully developed after evaluating all the material
parameter for predicting flow strength of FSPed and base material at different elevated
temperature and strain rate. The predicted results were found to be reasonable match
with experimental data with regression coefficient (R-value) of 0.919 and 0.9171 for FSP
and base material respectively.
 All the base metal and FSPed sample failed after localized necking, and the fractograph
studies confirm ductile rupture of the samples.

References
[1] Miller, W. S., Zhuang, L., Bottema, J., Wittebrood, A., De Smet, P., Haszler, A., &Vieregge, A. (2000). Recent
development in aluminum alloys for the automotive industry. Materials science and engineering: A, 280(1), 37-
49.
[2] Worldwide, D. (2005). Aluminum content for light non-commercial vehicles assembled in North America, Japan
and the European Union in 2006. pdf. Available from the Automotive aluminum Inc. Website, http://www.
autoaluminum.
[3] Kalpakjian, S., & Schmid, S. (2009). Manufacturing, Engineering and Technology SI 6th Edition-Serope
Kalpakjian and Stephen Schmid: Manufacturing, Engineering and Technology. Digital Designs.
[4] Alumatter (last accessed 30-03-2016).
http://aluminium.matter.org.uk/content/html/eng/default.asp?catid=199&pageid=2144416956
[5] [5] Mishra, Rajiv S., and Z. Y. Ma. "Friction stir welding and processing."Materials Science and Engineering: R:
Reports 50.1 (2005): 1-78.
[6] [11] Pastor, A., and H. G. Svoboda. "Time-evolution of heat affected zone (HAZ) of friction stir welds of AA7075-
T651." Journal of Materials Physics and Chemistry 1.4 (2013): 58-64
[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction_stir_processing
[8] Mishra, Rajiv, et al. "Friction stir welding and processing." Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A: Physical
Metallurgy and Materials Science 41 (2001): 2507-2521
[9] Mishra, Rajiv Sharan, Partha Sarathi De, and Nilesh Kumar. Friction stir processing. Springer International
Publishing, 2014.
[10] Balasubramanian, N., R. S. Mishra, and K. Krishnamurthy. "Friction stir channeling: Characterization of the
channels." journal of materials processing technology 209.8 (2009): 3696-3704.
[11] Mohan, Saurav, and Rajiv S. Mishra. "Friction stir microforming of superplastic alloys." Microsystem
technologies 11.4-5 (2005): 226-229.
41

References
[12] Mishra, Rajiv S., Z. Y. Ma, and Indrajit Charit. "Friction stir processing: a novel technique for fabrication of surface
composite." Materials Science and Engineering: A 341.1 (2003): 307-310.
[13] Yong-Jai Kwon, Seong-Beom Shim, Dong-Hwan Park, Friction stir welding of 5052 aluminum alloy plates, Trans.
Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 19(2009) s23−s27.
[14] Liu, F. C., and Z. Y. Ma. "Achieving exceptionally high superplasticity at high strain rates in a micrograined Al–Mg–Sc
alloy produced by friction stir processing." Scripta Materialia 59.8 (2008): 882-885.
[15] Chai, Fang, et al. "High strain rate superplasticity of a fine-grained AZ91 magnesium alloy prepared by submerged
friction stir processing." Materials Science and Engineering: A 568 (2013): 40-48.
[16] Li, Hong–Ying, et al. "A modified Johnson Cook model for elevated temperature flow behavior of T24 steel." Materials
Science and Engineering: A 577 (2013): 138-146.
[17] AZO Materials (last accessed on 15-06-2016) http://www.azom.com/properties.aspx?ArticleID=863
[18] Rai, R., et al. "Review: friction stir welding tools." Science and Technology of welding and Joining 16.4 (2011): 325-342.
[19] Peel, M., et al. "Microstructure, mechanical properties and residual stresses as a function of welding speed in
aluminium AA5083 friction stir welds." Acta materialia 51.16 (2003): 4791-4801.
[20] Ericsson, Mats, and Rolf Sandström. "Influence of welding speed on the fatigue of friction stir welds, and comparison
with MIG and TIG."International Journal of Fatigue 25.12 (2003): 1379-1387.
42

Acknowledgement
 Dr. A. K. Nandy
 Mr. C. Mondal
 Dr. K. Bandyopadhyay
 Mr. S. Basak
 Mr. S. S. Panicker
 Mr. K. S. Prasad
 Mr. N. Reynolds
 Mr. R. P. Mahto
 Miss. K. Kumari
4312/9/2016
Dept. of Mechanical Engg., IIT Kharagpur

THANK YOU

Application and challenges of AA5754 in Automobile
• Extensively used in automotive body structure such as interior body panel in automobile.
• Poor formability at room temperature.
• Serrated stress-strain response at room temperature.
45
Interior car gate panel made up of AA5754[2]

Effect of temperature and strain rate on Engg stress strain response of base material:
47
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg Stress vs Strain _ BASE _CHV 100mm/min
Base14_CHV100_Temp400
Fig: Effect of Temperature and strain rate on engineering stress-strain response at 100mm/min crosshead velocity rate.

Effect of temperature and strain rate on Engg stress strain response of FSP material:
48
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Enggstress
Engg strain
Fsp10_CHV100_temp400
Fsp7_CHV100_TEMP300
Fsp5_CHV100_Temp200
FSP1_CHV100_ROOM TEMP
CHV= cross head velocity
Fig: Effect of Temperature and strain rate on engineering stress-strain response at 100mm/min crosshead velocity rate

Effect of temperature and strain rate on True stress vs strain response
49
Fig: Effect of Temperature and strain rate on engineering stress-strain response at 100mm/min crosshead velocity rate.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Truestress
True strain
True stress vs strain _ Temp 400° C
Base15_CHV1_temp400 BASE14_CHV100_TEMP400 FSP15_CHV1_TEMP400
FSP11_CHV200_TEMP400 Fsp10_CHV100_Temp400 Base 12_CHV200_TEMP400

Results and discussions (contd.)
50
Microstructure study of stir zone
Fig: Microstructures of the SZ(Stir Zone) observed on AA5754 aluminum alloy sheets
joined by FSP with tool rotation speed 900 rpm and tool travel speed 125 mm/min

Effect of strain rate on Engg stress strain response of FSP material:
51
Fig: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response for FSP material at room temperature
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
ENGGSTRESS
ENGG STRAIN
Engg stress vs strain_FSP_Room Temp
Fsp1_CHV100_Room temp
Fsp2_CHV200_Room temp
Fsp0_CHV1_Room temp

Effect of strain rate on Engg stress strain response of base material:
52
Fig: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response for base material at room temperature
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
EnggStress
Engg strain
Base_room temp_different strain rate
Base0_Str1_room temp

53
Fig: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response for FSP material at 200°C
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain_FSP_ TEMP200°C
FSP3_CHV1_TEMP200
FSP5_CHV100_TEMP200
FSP4_CHV200_TEMP200

54
Fig: Effect of Temperature on engineering stress-strain response for base material at 200° C
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain_Base_Temp200
BASE5_CHV1_TEMP200

55
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain_FSP_Temp300°C
FSP6_CHV1_TEMP300
FSP7_CHV100_TEMP300
FSP8_CHV200_TEMP300

56
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
EnggStress
Engg strain
BASE Engg stress vs Strain temp300
Base7_CHV1_Temp300

57
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain_FSP_Temp400°C
FSP15_CHV1_TEMP400

58
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Enggstress
Engg strain
Engg stress vs strain_Base_Temp400°C
Base15_CHV1_temp400

Mechanical properties of friction stir processed AA5754 sheet metal

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Mechanical properties of friction stir processed AA5754 sheet metal

Similar to Mechanical properties of friction stir processed AA5754 sheet metal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Mechanical properties of friction stir processed AA5754 sheet metal

Editor's Notes