Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(11), pp. 83-91, 2012 Available online at http://www.cjasr.

com ISSN: 2251-9114, 2012 CJASR

Spot Weld Growth on 304L Austenitic Stainless Steel for Equal and Unequal Thicknesses
Nachimani Charde
Department of Mechanical, Material and Manufacturing Engineering, The University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus, Jalan Broga, 43500 Semenyih, Selangor Darul Ehsan , Malaysia nachi.charde@nottingham.edu.my The austenitic stainless steel (304L) is common material that used in spot welding research. It has been welded and analyzed for many types of conditions and also for many situations, previously. In this research, unequal and equal thicknesses were welded and also analyzed for tensile shear strength, hardness changes and macrograph views. Generally the weld nugget is determined by the process parameters such as welding current, weld time, electrode force and electrode tips. Noticeably the welding current is the main parameter which creates the heating effects between metal sheets and unites them together. The current flow is, however, allowed by sufficient weld time in the welding process. In this experiment, the welding current and weld time were varied for equal and unequal thicknesses. The results are showing different macro structures and also slightly different characteristics in terms of hardness and strength. Key words: Austenitic stainless steel, Stainless steel welding, Spot welding of stainless steel

1. INTRODUCTION Joining the similar materials with different thicknesses become common in spot welding. By joining the unequal thicknesses of base metals, the characteristic of welded region varies and also differs in certain characteristic (Dursun, 2011). In this experiment, the austenitic stainless steel of 1 and 2 mm thicknesses was used to analyze the changes that affect the weld growth after the welding process takes place. So the weld region is

separately analyzed for 1mm, 2mm and, of course for both; the mixed thicknesses. Basically the growth of weld nuggets is determined by the welding current, welding time, electrode force and electrode tips areas. The welding current and weld time were increased while the force and electrode tip remained constant throughout the experiments (Shamsul and Hisyam, 2007). 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fig.1: Test sample The test samples were prepared in rectangular shape (200mm x 25mm x 1&2mm) as shown in figure 1 and its chemical and mechanical properties are tabulated in table 1. A pair of water cooled copper electrodes with truncated tips (diameters of 5 mm) was used to join these base metals and it was simulated using Ansys 4.0 The melting temperature was found to be more than 1500C and the heat distributive pattern across the weld areas is shown in figure 2. It was calculated from the Joules law of heat that the heat was given by; Heat, Q=I2Rt; where R is the total resistance of base metals, I is the welding current and t is the welding time (Marashi et al., 2008). Thus, the well prepared base metals were initially placed on the top of lower electrode (static electrode) of the spot welder (75kVA) as overlaying 60mm on each other and then the initiating pedal was pressed. The weld process was started right after with squeezing cycles and; once the electrodes are well pressed the base metals according to preset force values; the welding current is released then. Thereafter the electrode pressing mechanism (pneumatic based) consumes

83

Charde Spot Weld Growth on 304L Austenitic Stainless Steel for Equal and Unequal Thicknesses

some time for cold work and returns to the home position of upper electrode. The basic process controlling parameters (the current and weld time) were set before the welding process starts with constant electrode pressing force (3kN) and round electrode tips (19.63m2). By varying the welding

current and weld time from lower to higher values or from poor welds to good welds and also beyond good welds; three sets of weld lobe curves were obtained for equal and unequal base metals (Pouranvari, 2008).

Table 1: Chemical and mechanical properties

304L (2B) Austenitic Stainless Steel 1mm Element Weight % C 0.048 Cr 18.12 Ni 8.11 Mn 1.166 Si 0.501 S 0.006 N 0.053 P 0.030 Hardness 81.7 (HRB) 2mm Weight % 0.046 18.14 8.13 1.205 0.506 0.004 0.051 0.030 86.2 (HRB)

Fig. 2: Simulation of welding process

Fig. 3(a): Weld lobe of 1&1mm base metals

84

Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(11), pp. 83-91, 2012

Fig. 3(b): Weld lobe of 1&2mm base metals

Fig. 3(c): Weld lobe of 2&2mm base metals Figure 3 (a, b and c) show the 1&1mm, 1&2mm, and 2&2mm sample thicknesses weld lobe curves. An acceptable region of weld nuggets are joined using lines in the weld lobe curve and the combination of colors represent the quality of welded areas. The green color boxes that encapsulated with black color represent moderate good welds; the full green color boxes represent very good welds; the red color boxes that encapsulated with green color represent light expulsion welds; the red color boxes represent heavy expulsion welds and the black color boxes represent poor welds joints. Based on the weld lobe curves values; a weld schedule (table2) was developed to avoid poor and expulsion welds. So the combinations of the nine (9) weld schedules were developed for the current and weld time variations within reasonable good welds region. Every weld schedule is accomplished of seven welded pairs. The first five samples were used for tensile test-averaging; the sixth sample was used for hardness measurement. The last welded sample was cut at the line of its diameter and mounted using resin powder on hot press mount. The mounted samples (figure 4) were roughly polished using silicon papers 1200/800p and 600/200p and also continuously further polished using Metadi polishing cloth with suspension liquid of 0.05 micron. This polishing process has been conducted about thirty minutes to one hour on each sample until the shining surface was seen. At last the ferric chloride (500ml) was used to saturate these well prepared (shining surface) samples in a pot about 30-45 minutes. After that the samples were rinsed off using plain water; dried using air blower; applied anti-corrosion liquid; and kept in vacuum chamber.

85

Charde Spot Weld Growth on 304L Austenitic Stainless Steel for Equal and Unequal Thicknesses

Table 2: Weld schedule

Sample No Weld Schedule Thickness (mm) Electrode Tip Diameter (mm) 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Force (kN) Time (cycle) Current (kA)

1-7 8-14 15-21 22-28 29-35 36-42 43-49 50-56 57-63

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2 1&1, 1&2, 2&2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

10 10 10 15 15 15 20 20 20

6 7 8 6 7 8 6 7 8

a) 1&1 mm b) 1&2 mm c) 2&2 mm Fig. 4: Hot pressed-cross sectional area of welded samples 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1. Tensile shear results 3.2. Failure modes The tensile test was conducted using 100kN tensile machine. The ultimate tensile strength was taken at the final value of pulling force at which the fracture begins. Five samples were used to average weld strength of a weld schedule. When the welding current was increased from 6 to 7 and 7 to 8 kA; more heat was developed across the weld areas and resulting diameter increments regardless of thicknesses (Jamasri et al., 2008). So the nugget diameters increment has caused strong bounding between base metals and also requires high tensile force to break the joints. Similar increment is noticed when the weld time was increased from 10 to 15 and 15 to 20 cycles. Figure 5 shows the tensile strength of all; 1&1mm, 1&2mm and 2&2mm. Although the strength incremental pattern seemed to be almost same for all the samples, the required breaking strength varies. The 2&2mm thickness sheets require the pull-to-break force from 12.5 to 19.5kN. The 1&2mm mixedThe failed tensile-shear test pieces showed three main fracture modes. Poor welds (low fracture force and small nugget diameter) were characterised by interfacial fracture (IF) fracture through the nugget in the junction plane between the faying sheets. Moderate to good welds showed tearing on either side of the nugget in the base metal (partial-tearing-failure - PF). Very good welds were strongly bonded to both sheets and therefore it tears on both sides (TF) or a perfect button pull out will results (Martn, 2009). Figure 6 indicates the common failure modes and the corresponding tensile strength curve. These types of curves were seen for base metals fracture during tensile test regardless of thicknesses. Moreover the equal thicknesses (1&1 mm or 2&2 mm) weld fractures seemed to be well balanced on the joint areas. However the unequal thickness weld samples were always broken at 1mm sheet sides rather than 2mm sheet sides. thickness sheets require 7 to 9.5kN while 1&1mm thickness sheets require 6.7 to 9kN.

86

Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(11), pp. 83-91, 2012

Fig. 5: Tensile-shear test results

Fig. 6: The common failure modes

Fig. 7: Macrograph of stainless steel fractures 3.3. Diameter of Weld Nuggets A simulation of welding process was carried out using Ansys 4.0 for stainless steels of various thicknesses. Figure 8 shows the simulation images during the complete molten stages of welding process. The molten and heat affected areas are clearly visualized for all the thicknesses without electrodes appearance (Yang et al., 2011).

87

Charde Spot Weld Growth on 304L Austenitic Stainless Steel for Equal and Unequal Thicknesses

a) 1&1 mm b) 1&2 mm c) 2&2 mm Fig. 8: Simulation results of austenitic stainless steel (Electrodes deleted) Having considered the real macro graph of welds for current increment (figure 9, 10 and 11); three noticeable regions are existed after the completion solidification process[7]. Firstly the fusion zone (FZ) undergoes complete melting during welding process and solidify once the welding process is over. It was appeared with coarse grains and the distance expanded horizontally in all direction is the exact width (diameter) of the weld joint. The upper electrode that pressing the welding region has created the micro indentation during the molten metals expansion. The heat affected zone (HAZ) is existed due to the heat expansion in all direction from the fusion zones while heating process is going on. This leads to the slight alteration of grain sizes when solidification happens. It is seen with finer coarse grain as compare to fusion zone. It starts from the outer border of exact fusion zone and spreads outwards in all direction to certain extends. The base metal (BM) is not affected during the welding process as the microstructures remain unchanged (Fukumoto, 2008). Figure 12 shows the width (diameter) and height (indentation) that obtained for current increments.

a) 6kA

b) 7kA c) 8kA Fig. 9: Macrograph of 1&1 mm austenitic stainless steel

a) 6kA

b) 7kA c) 8kA Fig. 10: Macrograph of 1&2 mm austenitic stainless steel

a) 6kA

b) 7kA c) 8kA Fig. 11: Macrograph of 2&2 mm austenitic stainless steel

88

Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(11), pp. 83-91, 2012

Fig. 12: Nugget size of all the thickness When the current was increased from 6 to 7 and 7 to 8 kA, the width (diameter) was increased and the height was decreased accordingly. This phenomenon was noticed for all the thicknesses of base metals. However the 2&2mm sheets have higher thicknesses and therefore the indentations were seen to be slightly higher than the 1&1mm and 1&2mm sheets. Moreover higher the welding current then easier the porous existed within the fusion zones. 3.4. Hardness test results The hardness test was carried out for all the thicknesses weld joints (Aravinthan et al., 2011). The hardness was measured from left hand sides through the heat affected zones; then fusion zones; again the other side heat affected zones and ended with the right hand side of base metals. The hardness of welded areas seemed to be noticeably increased but slightly varied from one thickness to another. Thus: when the 1mm base metals are concerned then the unwelded areas (BM) seemed to be an average hardness of 81.5 (HRB) but the welded areas seemed to be about 92 (HRB). Furthermore the hardness of heat affected zones (HAZ) was lower than the fusion zones but higher than the base metals about 87 (HRB). Figure 13 shows the hardness distribution of 1mm weld joints.

Fig. 13: Hardness of 1&1mm thickness sheets Similar pattern of hardness distribution was seen for the other two thicknesses of weld joints. Figure 14 and 15 show the hardness distribution of 1&2mm and 2&2mm sheets, respectively.

89

Charde Spot Weld Growth on 304L Austenitic Stainless Steel for Equal and Unequal Thicknesses

Fig. 14: Hardness of 1&2mm thickness sheets

Fig. 15: Hardness of 2&2mm thickness sheets The unwelded areas (BM) of 2mm thickness was measured to be an average hardness of 86 (HRB) but the welded areas seemed to be about 96 (HRB). Meanwhile the hardness of heat affected zones (HAZ) was lower than the fusion zones but higher than the base metals about 88 (HRB) as how the 1mm thickness welds joint resulted. Moreover the average hardness of dissimilar thickness welded zone was about 96 (HRB) approximately. The heat affected zones was resulted an average of 89 (HRB) in the dissimilar weld joints. In overall the hardness of welded zones are slightly increased regardless of thicknesses due to the solidification process (Aravinthan et al., 2011). 4. CONCLUSION This paper looks into the spot weld growth on 304L (2B) austenitic stainless steel with various thicknesses and; it concludes that

1. Increase in welding current and welding time within the welding lobe have resulted increment of weld nuggets width but simultaneously reduced the height of weld nuggets regardless of thicknesses. 2. The increments of tensile strength were observed due to the enlargement of welded areas within the welding lobe regions. 3. The failure modes of tensile tested samples were seen to be as normal as other materials failures except dissimilar thicknesses weld joints. The dissimilar thicknesses were fractured at the lower thicknesses sheets sides, always. 4. The common three failure modes were seen as poor weld produces interfacial fracture (IF); medium weld produces tear form one side (PF); and a good weld produces button pullout or tear from both sides (TF). 5. The simulation and experimental weld bead shapes were almost same to one another except the intersecting lines in the weld nuggets.

90

Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 1(11), pp. 83-91, 2012

6. The hardness values of welded areas were slightly increased due to the cold work of stainless steel. However the hardness distributions along the welded areas were seen to be fluctuating regardless of thicknesses. Furthermore the increase in welding current or welding time does not influence the changes in hardness distribution along the welded areas. 7. Macro structure exhibits the coarsened grains at fusion zone, refined grains at heat affected zone and unchanged grains at base metal; obviously regardless of thicknesses. REFERENCES Aravinthan A, Nachimani C (2011). Analysis of Spot Weld Growth on Mild and Stainless Steel. Welding Journal, 143-147. Aravinthan A, Nachimani C (2011). Metallurgical Study of Spot Weld Growth on Mild Steel with 1mm and 2mm Thicknesses. Journal The Institution of Engineers, Malaysia, 72 (4): 46-54. Dursun O (2008). An Effect of Weld Current and Weld Atmosphere on the Resistance Spot Weld Ability of 304L Austenitic Stainless Steel. Materials and Design 29: 597-603. Fukumoto S, Fujiwara K, Toji S, Yamamoto A (2008). Small Scale Resistance Spot Welding of Austenitic Stainless Steels. Materials Science and Engineering A, 492: 243-249.

Jamasri MN, Ilman R, Soekrisno , Triyono (2011). Corrosion Fatique Behaviour of RSW Dissimilar Metal Welds Between Carbon Steel and Austenitic Stainless Steel with Different Thickness. Procedia Engineering, 10: 649-654. Marashi P, Pouranvari M, Amirabdollahian S, Abedi A, Goodarzi M (2008). Microstructure and Failure Behavior of Dissimilar Resistance Spot Welds between Low Carbon Galvanized and Austenitic Stainless Steels. Materials Science and Engineering, A: 175-180. Martn O, Tiedra PD, Lopez M, Juan MS, Garca C, Martn F, Blanco Y (2009). Quality Prediction of Resistance Spot Welding Joints of 304 Austenitic Stainless Steel. Materials and Design, 30: 68-77. Pouranvari M (2011). Effect of Welding Current on the Mechanical Response of Resistance Spot Welds of Unequal Thickness Steel Sheets in Tensile-Shear Loading Condition. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Sciences and Engineering, 2(6): 178-189. Shamsul JB, Hisyam M M (2007). Study of Spot Welding of Austenitic Stainless Steel Type 304. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 3(11): 1494-1499. Yang Y, Qu X, Luo Y, Yang A (2011). Effect of Resistance Spot Welding Parameters on the Austenitic Stainless Steel 304 Grade by Using 23 Factorial Designs. Advanced Materials Research, 216: 666-670.

91