You are on page 1of 9

Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.

265 (2013) 186194

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.

journal homepage:

A robust simulation of Direct Drive Friction Welding with a modied

Carreau uid constitutive model
D. Schmicker , K. Naumenko, J. Strackeljan
Institute for Mechanics, Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 14 April 2013
Accepted 19 June 2013
Available online 13 July 2013
Welding simulation
Rotary Friction Welding
Non-Newtonian uid modeling
Carreau uid

a b s t r a c t
The subject of this paper is the presentation of a holistic, fully-temperature-coupled simulation of Direct
Drive Friction Welding (DDFW) based on the modied Carreau uid model. The main motivation therein is
the consistent and stable prediction of suitable process parameters, which is still the major problem in
adopting Rotary Friction Welding (RFW) processes to new pairs of weld partners at industrial applications.
The Carreau type uid constitutive equation is derived from a NortonBailey law wherein the temperature dependency is accounted for by a JohnsonCook power approach. Its main benet is the stable and
robust simulation of the process and the physical palpability of the utilized material parameters. Using a
special element formulation on the general axisymmetric frame in conjunction with an Augmented
Lagrange bulk viscosity term, a purely displacement based form of the numerical solution procedure is
applicable. A penalty contact approach together with a regularized friction law allow for an efcient determination of the interface pressure and friction forces. The models performance is demonstrated by means
of a test problem highlighting the potential of adopting it to industrial applications later on.
2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The process of Rotary Friction Welding (RFW) is a solid-state
fusing process allowing for combining a wide range of dissimilar
materials. Due to the fact that during the welding procedure the
materials melt temperature is not reached [18], the heat affected
zone of the weld is smaller than at conventional fusion welding.
Moreover, neither ller material nor any inert gas is needed for
joining providing a very efcient and uncontaminated fuse of the
weld. Benets are the high quality and symmetry of the joint, the
good potential for process automation and the short cycle times.
In contrasts to all these virtues the main problem is the identication of stable and suitable process parameters and effective feedback control algorithms. A perseverative problem, for instance, is
the identication of an optimal control of a position based friction
welding process, where for reasons of nish worked parent parts a
nal axial shortening during welding has to be achieved. Basic
necessity therefor is the revelation of the physical phenomena during the process. Hence, the demand of predictive tools in modeling
the transactions during RFW being able to understand and optimize the process is of crucial interest for industrial applications.
The main process parameters are illustrated in Fig. 1 being the
axial force F A , the torque T, the rotary speed n and the axial feed sf .
Therein the shaft A is the static part and shaft B is the rotating one
Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 391 67 12679; fax: +49 391 67 11379.
E-mail address: (D. Schmicker).
0045-7825/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

inducing the frictional heat on the contact surface. Basically, two

kinds of drives are used in RFW machines, either a y wheel serves
as an energy storage being referred to as Inertia Friction Welding
(IFW) or a continuously driven engine generates the power of
welding being known as Direct Drive Friction Welding (DDFW).
Concerning DDFW usually the rotary speed time line is given while
the axial force is feedback controlled in order to achieve the abovementioned nal shortening of the shafts lengths. In Fig. 2 qualitative runs of the process parameters are displayed [8]. The three
stages therein are the rubbing stage (I), the breaking stage (II)
and the forging stage (III).
Already in the 1970s the main driving physical phenomena of
this process have been identied being the heat generation, heat
conduction, plastic deformation, abrasion of the friction surfaces
and the diffusion of the weld partners, for instance [18]. In developing simulation models to cover all these effects rst attempts
can be dated back to the mid 90s.
In 1995, Stokes modeled the molten lm of friction welded
polymers by introducing a temperature and shear dependent viscosity [20]. Bendzsak tried to capture the ow regime of friction
welds by solving the NavierStokes equation directly [2]. Therein
the focus has been set on the ow traces within aluminium friction
welds. Moal et al. proposed a fully coupled viscoplastic model [14]
for the simulation of Inertia Friction Welding (IFW). While a Norton power law was used for the deviator stress calculation, a purely
velocity dependent friction law was implemented for contact force
and heat generation prediction. In order to map the isochoric,

D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194


Fig. 1. Parameters of the RFW process.

Fig. 2. Parameter runs of the Direct Drive Friction welding process.

plastic deformations, an augmented variational formulation was

used and the elements were formulated in the r2 -z space. Extensive
remeshing of the Lagrangian mesh allowed for a complete simulation of the process yielding plausible results of the ash evolution
and the process parameters. DAlvise et al. presented simulation
results of dissimilar weld parts [7]. The implemented friction law
has been adopted by Moal with the slight change, that a certain
temperature is introduced at which the friction law turns from a
classical Coulomb law into a thermo-dependent viscous one. In
2002 Ulysse suggested a Non-Newtonian uid law linked with a
SheppardWright viscosity approach1 for the simulation of Friction
Stir Welding (FSW) [21]. While the simulated temperature elds
tend to be over predicted, parametric studies like the inuence of
the tools speed on its forces have been successfully conducted with
this model. Wang made further suggestions for estimating the heat
input at IFW, one of which is known as Energy-Input-Based method
[22]. Here, the modeling of a frictional law is circumvented by
neglecting the twist deformation and implementing a thermodynamically consistent heat-source being ruled by the energy decay
of the y-wheel. The disadvantage of this approach is that the heat
source is rather an input than an output quantity of the model,
which means that it is not predictive. Another member of this class
of model has been pursuit by Grant [11]. Also here the process

parameters and properties cannot be predicted, but residual stresses

are able to be calculated which has been shown to be in good agreement with measurement results. In 2010 Hamilton published a
framework for mapping the FSW process [12] wherein a classic
plasticity law incorporating elastic deformations has been implemented as constitutive equation. In this context the temperature
dependency has been taken into account by a JohnsonCook power
approach [13]. More recently, Chiumenti proposed a model for the
simulation of FSW incorporating an Arbitrary-Lagrangian-Formulation
(ALE) in order to resolve the large plastic distortions [5]. A mixed
velocitypressure formulation being stabilized by the Orthogonal
Subgrid Scale (OSS) technique accounts for non-volumetric locking
while using lower order nite elements. A classical Norton
Hoff law and a SheppardWright model have been suggested as
the constitutive relation.
Basic ambition of our approach in modeling DDFW is to increase
the robustness and efciency of the simulation, and to express the
material parameters in a more palpable way. We believe that for
the sake of a robustness increase the material law needs to incorporate a steady transition from the Non-Newtonian solid to the
Newtonian liquid phase, which is not accounted for in prior models. Moreover, due to the lack of experimental data for the inelastic
material behavior in wide strain-rate and temperature ranges, the
simulation should predict the welding process parameters with
coarse values of material properties. Therefore, the constitutive
equation, the response functions of stress and temperature as well
as material parameters have to be formulated in an easy understandable and accessible way.
Our constitutive model is based upon a Carreau uid law featuring the solidliquid phase transition by means of a constant, Newtonian viscosity of the materials cast. It is derived from Nortons
power law [5,1416] and formulated in terms of the materials
yield limit. The temperature dependency of this measure is linked
to a JohnsonCook power law [12,13], enabling the pursued possibility of assessment of the plastic ow behavior even if hardly any
experimental data is at hand. A distinct time integration scheme
with adaptive step size regulation, in conjunction with remeshing
procedures of the Lagrangian formulated nite elements ensure a
very robust and smooth simulation of the DDFW process.
The structure of the paper is as follows: We start with the formulation of the constitutive model that reects the non-linear uid
behavior for a wide stress and temperature range. Then we present
the local and the weak forms of governing equations. Spatial discretization techniques including the nite element formulation
and the remeshing procedure are discussed. After outlining the utilized contact approach, the time marching scheme is depicted. A
benchmark example is introduced, demonstrating the performance
and capacities of the model. Finally the conclusions are drawn with
regard to efciency and accuracy of the proposed approaches.
1.1. A remark on notation

It shall be mentioned that the SheppardWright viscosity is technically speaking

a Garofalo uid law [9], with the difference that the material parameters therein are
dened in a slight different way.

Scalars are expressed using simple non-boldfaced letters like

r; J 2D and n, for instance. Tensorial expressions of higher order than


D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

zero are stated as boldfaced symbols like in x; er ; r and D. Their

components according to a vectorial basis as well as nodal values
and scalars being arranged to matrices are denoted by blackboard
bold symbols as in M; v; O and Acap . Domains are marked by calligraphic letters like Bt or B0 , for instance.
2. Constitutive modeling
2.1. Viscoplastic material model
The constitutive law is based on a NortonBailey potential of
the form


r0 e_ 0 rv M
n 1 r0

where r0 is the materials yield limit, e_ 0 the plastic strain rate corresponding to the yield limit r0 and n the Norton-exponent [15,16].
The law is a classic J2 -material law since the potential only depends
on the second invariant of the deviatoric part of the stress tensor,
that is to say on the von-Mises equivalent stresses

rv M
s  s 3J 2D

Consequently, the inelastic strain rate is

@W 3
e_ 0

rv M


rv M

where r is Cauchys stress tensor, s its deviatoric part

and 1 the second rank unit tensor. Inversion of (3) gives the more
common stressstrain relation

2 r0
3 e_ 0

e_ v M
e_ 0


with the von-Mises equivalent strain rate

e_ v M

devD   devD

The full stress tensor is then given by

r lB trD 1 2l devD:

r0 H e_ v M
3 e_ 0
e_ 0

r0 H


: 0;


e_ v M
e_ 0

!2 31n

5 l l l

m i

; H < HM

involving the room temperature HR , the melt temperature HM , the

yield limit at room temperature r0;R and the JohnsonCook exponent [13]. Alternatively also tabulated data gained from experiments could be used. The material parameters introduced so far


where r rv M is the uniaxial stress and e_ e_ v M is the strain rate

along the tensile axis. In Fig. 4 Eq. (11) is visualized. It is nicely
seen that the stressstrain rate relations is conned by the limit
functions r 3l0 e_ and r 3l1 e_ , respectively. Moreover, the
points marked within the plot visualize that the material
behavior is basically described by the reference point r0;R ; e_ 0 ,
the slope of the graphs matching the Norton exponent n, the
limit viscosities l0 and l1 , and the yield-limit temperature
In solving the equilibrium equations later on it is advantageous
to utilize the analytic expression of the tangential stiffness which
according to Eq. (7) is

3. Weak formulation of the governing equations



these singularities are resolved by means of some saturation viscosities l0 and l1 . While the rst one is rather a numerical measure,
the latter can be physically interpreted as the viscosity of the liquid
phase of the material. Even though in general they can be temperature dependent, to this end constant values l0 and l1 will be
assumed. In Fig. 3 the range of admissible viscosity values regarding
a concrete set of material parameters is displayed being bounded by
the viscosity-strain rate functions at room temperature and for the
liquid phase. Evaluating the material law at a one-dimensional
stress state yields the relation




r0 H
3e_ 0 l0

4 1 @l
l B 1  1 2l I  1  1
devD  devD
3 e_ v M @ e_ v M

The spherical part of r determines the pressure state of the material

which in our model is assessed by an Augmented Lagrange method
involving a bulk viscosity lB . The choice of this measure is basically
a trade-off between the strictness of keeping the volume constraint
and the condition corruption in solving the system of equations later on. The temperature dependency in Eq. (8) is now incorporated
by linking the yield limit r0 to a JohnsonCook power ansatz of the


le_ v M ; H 41

involving the abbreviation for the shear viscosity

le_ v M ; H

r 3le_ ; H e_

s devr r  trr1

are not all independent, meaning that the plastic strain rate e_ 0 is
rather a measure of dening the yield limits reference point.
Henceforth, it is assessed to e_ 0 1s1 . The main advantage of the
combination of a JohnsonCook ansatz with a NortonBailey law
is that for a coarse prediction of the material behavior only the yield
limit r0;R at room temperature HR and the melt temperature HM are
actually needed to be known, since the exponents m and n do not
vary in such big ranges from material to material. Usually the JohnsonCook exponent is assessed to m 0:5 . . . 1:5 [13] while the Norton exponent maybe temperature dependent ranging in between
n 3 . . . 10 [5]. The use of the shear viscosity dened by Eq. (8)
for the simulation involves some difculties at the limit cases
e_ v M ! 0; e_ v M ! 1 and H P HM . With the Carreau uid constitutive
assumption [4,10,17]


3.1. The principle of virtual power

The motion of the continua is governed by the balance of linear

qx q

D2 x

qb divr


are the material accelerations, b is the mass specic inner

where x
body forces and r is the Cauchy stress tensor. The boundary of the
body B is subdivided into a dynamic part @Bt , where the stresses are
prescribed and a geometric part @Bv with given displacements.
Therewith the weak form, also known as principle of virtual power
[3], yields to

dPmass dPext  dPint




D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

Fig. 3. The range of admissible viscosity values of the Carreau uid law being
e_ 0 1 s1 ; n 10; m 1:3; Hmelt 1420 C, Hroom 20 C, l0 108 MPas, l1 102 MPas).






l0 and l1 . (r0;R 235 MPa,

Fig. 4. Uniaxial tensile test stresses in dependence of the strain rate and temperature (r0;R 235 MPa, e_ 0 1 s1 ; n 10; m 1:3; Hmelt 1420 C, Hroom 20 C,
l0 108 MPas, l1 102 MPas).

q dV
dv  x
dv  b q dV
dv  t dA and
dD  r dV


q jc gradH for x 2 B=@Bq [ @BH

Herein, dv is a testing function being zero on @Bv , while dD

states the abbreviation

dD symgraddv



involving the materials heat conductivity jc , while the heat ux on

@Bq is governed by convection and frictional heat r q to

q asurf H  H1 n r q n for x 2 @Bq


The surface heat transport coefcient asurf incorporates both

convective heat transport and thermal radiation by

3.2. The principle of virtual temperatures

The heat conduction is ruled by the rst law of thermodynamics

q c H_ qr  divq r  D

problem involves the division of the boundary in a part with prescribed temperatures @BH and a part with given heat ux @Bq .
The inner body heat ow is ruled by Fouriers heat conduction
law for isotropic continua


Here, H is the absolute temperature, c is the heat capacity, r a

mass specic heat source term, q the heat ux per unit area and
r  D the dissipated energy of inner stresses [3]. The stated

asurf aconv ei e1 rS H2 H21 H H1


where H1 is the temperature of the surrounding room, ei and e1

emission factors, rS the Boltzmann constant and aconv the convection coefcient. The weak form of Eqn. (17) conforms to

dAcap dAcon dAint dAext




D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

introducing the rst variation of temperature eld dH being zero on

@BH and using the abbreviations

O, the heat conduction matrix Acon , the internal heat source qint and
the external heat source due to heat ux across the boundary qext . In
calculating the introduced matrix and vector expressions the spatial
integration over the body is performed numerically by conducting a
six Gauss-point rule tabulated in [6]. The integration can be
considered as full integration, which in conjunction of the
proposed element formulation gives very good results even for
nearly incompressible materials [24]. The integration over the
boundaries of one element is performed by a standard two point
Gauss-quadrature rule. Further details in derivation of the system
matrices can be found in standard textbooks like [1,23,25].

g gradH and dg graddH

4.3. Remeshing procedure


_ q dV
dH cH H



jc H dg  g dV
dH r q dV


dH r  D dV and

dH aH1  H r q dA



4. Spatial discretization
4.1. Formulation in cylindrical coordinates
So far all quantities have been dened in symbolical form
without introducing a vectorial basis. Since the process of DDFW
involves a general axial symmetry,2 cylindrical coordinates will be
employed, enabling to make use of the problems symmetry by
cutting down the spatial dependency of the eld variables to a
two-dimensional domain. For reasons of being able to apply lower
order quadrature formulas for integrating the element matrices, instead of conventional cylindrical coordinates a r  z coordinate system is employed being discussed by Yu [24] and used by Moal [14],
for instance.3 In reference with cartesian coordinates, they are dened as

r cos u
y r sin u



The large plastic deformations can even for very simple friction
welds not be handled with one static mesh. It is rather observed
that material at the contact interface is transported into the ash,
which results in complex ow situations in the work pieces. The
procedures meshing is based on a Delaunay-triangulation. The
middle-points of the triangles are placed such, that the elements
are non-distorted in the r-z space. The mesh distortion is monitored by calculating the largest eigenvalue of the mass matrix

Mv  kI v 0


at regular intervals. With comparison of this eigenvalue kmax with

the one of the reference mesh kmax;ref , the function

kkmax  kmax;ref k
kkmax;ref k


acts as a trigger for remeshing corresponding to a certain threshold

value e. In our simulation the threshold value was chosen to be
e 0:5, yielding reasonable results on the remeshing time instances. In transferring the state variables from one mesh to the
other the element shape functions are used for interpolation.

The position of a material element is now

r er u z ez


which is described by the functions r n; g; zn; g and un; g. The

coordinates n and g refer to a material point in the r -z frame indicating the implemented Lagrangian-description of motion. Moreover, the general axis-symmetry is imposed by assuming that the
functions r; z and u do not depend on an angular coordinate f, for
4.2. Finite element formulation

The realistic simulation of the DDFW process inevitably depends

on the implementation of the contact and friction model. For the
sake of reasonable computation times a simple penalty contact
approach has been utilized in our model, being illustrated in
Fig. 5. Therein the two weld partners as well as the self-contact
of the ash with the workpiece are allowed to penetrate each
other. Hence, the pressure p at the surface Gauss-points is
governed by the intersection depth s according to the function

The nite element being employed for the current model has
originally been proposed by Yu in [24]. It is a 6-noded, quadratic,
triangular element. In general axisymmetric analysis using r-z
coordinate systems it is able to map nearly incompressible material deformation. With the approximation of the eld quantities
by interpolation of the nodal parameters and the stepwise variation of the likewise approximated test function elds dv and dH
the spatially discretized forms of (13) and (17) derive to

_ ffic v; v
_  fint v;
_ O
v fext t; v; v
0 M
_ O qext v; v;
_ O
0 Acap O  Acon O qint v;

5. Contact modeling

ap s2 ; s P 0



with the mass matrix M, the position parameter vector v, the external force vector fext , the ctitious forces ffic , the internal stress forces
fint , the heat capacity matrix Acap , the temperature parameter vector
General axisymmetry is also often referred to as 2.5D model, since the domain of
denition is two-dimensional while the function values possess three dimensions.
The transformation to conventional cylindrical coordinates is performed by
r r 2 .

Fig. 5. Penalty contact approach.


D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

The penalty term ap can be chosen in regard to the dimension of

the workpiece and the to be expected contact pressures. For
instance when saying that a penetration of 0:1 mm is acceptable
and typical contact pressures are about 60 MPa, then a good choice
for ap is 6000 MPa=mm2 . The tangential stresses szu obey an
Coulomb friction law of the form


Dv u > 0
< gp Dv u 0


where Dv u is the relative velocity difference of the contact interfaces of the two workpieces and g is a temperature dependent friction coefcient. Since, Eq. (30) involves a strong singularity at the
transition from slipping to sticking condition the regularized

Dv u




involving a regularization factor areg is used instead. In fact, the simulation results reveal that during the friction phase the sticking condition is basically never met, hence the regularization is more of
formal nature, not really entering the model. The heat source at
the contact interface of workpiece A and B is then given by

szu Dv u aAB HB  HA and
aA aB

szu Dv u aAB HA  HB
aA aB



0 fext t 0 ; v0 ; v_ 0 ffic v0 ; v_ 0  fint v_ 0 ; O0

and aB
qA cA
qB cB

is solved in terms of v_ 0 and the conguration at the end of the time

step t t 1 is calculated by a forward Euler difference

v1 v_ 0 Dt v0


involving the time step size Dt t 1  t 0 . Secondly, the thermodynamic subproblem is solved implicitly by a backward Euler strategy.
Thus, with putting


v1  v0

_  O1  O 0 ;

v  v1

and O  O1


In this section the model will be demonstrated in simulating the

welding process of a forge part being illustrated in Figs. 6 and 7.
Therein, the focus lies on the qualitative demonstration of the

6. Temporal discretization
Since elastic wave propagation phenomena are of subordinate
nature at the process of RFW, inertia effects can be neglected.
Hence, the problem will be treated in a quasi static way. Fictitious
forces, following from the formulation of the governing equation
using cylindrical coordinates, are able to be accounted for nevertheless. The coupled to be solved differential equation takes the


_ ffic v; v
_  fint v;
_ O
fext t; v; v
_  Acon O qint v;
_ O qext v; v;
_ O
Acap O


into (34)2 and solving the equation in terms of O1 the temperatures

at the end of the time step are obtained. The time step size Dt of this
procedure is adaptively controlled by a standard step size regulation algorithm being described in [19], resulting in a very robust
and stable temporal discretization scheme for the simulation of
the process.

are used for portioning the frictional heat onto the two weld partners following the suggestions of Chiumenti [5]. The heat ux between the two surfaces is incorporated by the heat transmission
coefcient aAB .

ft; z; z_ 0


7. Simulation results

Here, the thermal diffusity parameters


the state variables at the proceeding time step both equations can be
handled separately according to their individual best suiting time
marching scheme, without the necessity of implementing a loop
between the two subproblems (cf. [5]). Let us assume that at a
certain time t 0 the conguration is given by the state variables v0
and O0 . Then rstly, the mechanic subproblem is integrated explicitly. Therefore the nodal force balance evaluated at t 0


Fig. 6. Friction weld sample serving as a simulation example.

involving the state vector z v; O , consisting of the nodal location and temperature values. The system is solved by dividing problem (34) into its mechanic and thermodynamic subproblem. Since,
the sensitivity of the temperatures on the nodal force balance is
comparatively low, a decoupled treatment of the two subproblems
on the time step level is conductible.4 That is to say, that for gaining
The temperatures enter the linear momentum balance only due to the temperature-dependent viscosity of the viscoplastic material law. Since for usual materials
this dependency is of very steady nature exhibiting no singularities (see Eq. (9) for
instance), the impact of the extent of temperature change during one time step on the
solution of the mechanic subproblem is rather marginal. Hence, an isothermal
treatment of the nodal force balance is employable. When the velocities and
displacements at the end of the time step can be determined only by means of the
rst sub problem at constant temperature, they can be regarded as given when
solving the thermodynamic subproblem. Hence, at the time step stage both
subproblems can be treated separately.

Fig. 7. Observed friction welding problem.


D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

potentials and the performance of the model without claiming

quantitative exactness of the material properties and boundary
conditions. The simulation is performed on basis of a self-written
nite element code within MATLAB. The employed material constants are comprehended in Table 1. The considered process consists of only one rubbing stage at p 40N/mm2 and
n 800 min1 for a friction time tr 7 s. The weld partners are
similar, offering the possibility of cutting the computational effort
to the half by modeling only one side. However, one has to keep in
mind that this step is only admissible if inertia forces including the
ctitious ones are neglected and the heat transport coefcient asurf
is assumed to be independent of the rotary speed. The present
computation example conforms these requirements, hence the
behavior of the rotary side is mapped by a symmetry boundary

Table 1
Utilized parameters of the simulation example.




e_ 0

235 N/mm2
1 s1


1420 C
7.85 g/cm3
460 J/kgK
50 W/mK
100 W/m2K




108 MPas
102 MPas
20 C


Fig. 8. Comparison of the ash formation between model and experiment.

1200 C 1300 C
1100 C


1000 C
z [mm]


condition. The meshing of the stationary side is performed with an

average element size of de 0.4 mm at the contact surface. The
augmented Lagrange bulk viscosity is assessed to 1:175  106 Ns/
mm2 being a suited compromise between satisfying the volume
constraint and keeping the system of equations well conditioned.
The penalty parameter for the calculation of the contact forces is
ap 1000 N/mm4. For regularization of the friction shear stresses
a factor of areg 200 mm/s is taken into account. During the simulation 103 remeshing steps have been performed. Therein, the
average amount of elements was about 600 resulting in approximately 4000 displacement- and 1300 temperature degrees of freedom. In Fig. 8 the deformation shape at the end of the process at
t 8 s is compared with the actual ash formation. A qualitative
agreement between the ashes can be identied. In Fig. 9 the temperature eld at the end of the rubbing stage at t 7 s is displayed.
It is found out that the materials melt temperature is not reached
at no time during the simulation. In fact, it can be easily reasoned
that during the process of RFW the melt temperature is very unlikely to be reached or exceeded neither in simulation nor in practice. The explanation therefor is that in the vicinity of the melt
point the material is owing and not able to transmit shear stresses anymore.5 Hence, once the temperature gets as high as the melt
point the rubbing surfaces will stick and frictional heating will suspend avoiding the temperature to exceed the melt point. Looking
closer at the contact pressure condition in Fig. 10 it can be seen that
at the beginning the axial force is distributed evenly across the cross-


950 C

700 C

600 C

500 C


Temperature [C]



r [mm]



Fig. 9. Temperatures immediately after the rubbing stage at t 7 s.


D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

section. However, as soon as the material starts to ow a distinct

pressure prole develops reaching its maximum in the middle of
the cross section at r  17 mm. Comparison of this prole with the
temperatures over the contact surface in Fig. 9 reveals that the maxima of temperature and pressure do not coincide. Whereas the pressure is highest near the inner diameter at r  17 mm, the maximum
temperature is reached at r  22 mm. The unsteadiness of the contour lines in Fig. 10 is due to the remeshing time instances during
the simulation which slightly alters the contact force distribution.
Fig. 11 displays the nal twist of the material. It is clearly seen that
the largest plastic deformations during the process do not lie within

the r  zplane but in tangential direction. Hence, they should not

be neglected in modeling RFW. In Fig. 12 the power input and output
during the process is contrasted with each other. When the weld
starts twisting an increasing part of heat power is generated by plastic dissipation. The loss of energy due to thermal emission and convection reaches its maximum at the end of the rubbing stage. In
Fig. 13 the process parameter runs are shown. Since at this example
the process is force controlled, the left two diagrams namely the axial force and the rotary speed are input quantities, whereas the right
two diagrams are simulation results. The nal upset of the welded

Fig. 10. Contact interface pressure evolution during the process.

Fig. 11. Twist of the weld at t 8 s.

Plastic dissipation work

P [kW]

Friction work


Convection and radiation heat


t [s]

Fig. 12. Energy prole of the process.


D. Schmicker et al. / Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 265 (2013) 186194

T [Nm]

n [min-1 ]


t [s]


t [s]

t [s]

s [mm]

FA [kN]


t [s]


Fig. 13. Process parameter runs of the simulation.

part is 12.8 mm which is about the shortening of the reference

8. Conclusions
In the current paper a holistic model approach based on a Carreau type uid constitutive model for the simulation of Direct
Drive Friction Welding (DDFW) is presented. The advantage of
the proposed material law is the formulation in terms of the yield
limit such that its material parameters can be easily identied.
Having in mind that in practical applications experimental data
are usually available for narrow stress and temperature ranges,
the current model is able to give qualitative predictions by means
of quite fundamental parameters like the melt temperature and
the yield limit at room temperature, for instance. Moreover, the
paper summarizes a framework for a stable, efcient and robust
simulation of the friction welding process, featuring a steady transition from solid to liquid material behavior when passing the melt
temperature. With the implemented time integration and nite
element procedure, the whole process can be simulated in less
than one hour on a usual personal computer as the presented test
problem reveals. As a next step it is planned to extend the model to
dissimilar welds, which broadens the effort in contact mapping.
Moreover, a coupling of the model with the diffusion differential
equation is pursued. Parallel to these model extensions we work
on a quantitative validation of the model and determination guidelines for the involved material constants in the friction welding
process itself. Their results will be communicated in a forthcoming
[1] K.J. Bathe, Finite Element Procedures in Engineering Analysis, Prentice Hall,
[2] G.J. Bendzsak, T.H. North, Z. Li, Numerical model for steady-state ow in
friction welding, Acta Mater. 45 (4) (1997) 17351745.
[3] A. Bertram, Elasticity and Plasticity of Large Deformations An Introduction,
Springer-Verlag, 2005.
[4] P.J. Carreau, Rheological equations from molecular network theories, Trans.
Soc. Rheol. 16 (1) (1972) 99127.

[5] M. Chiumenti, M. Cervera, C.A. Saracibar, N. Dialami, Numerical modeling of

friction stir welding processes, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 1 (2012)
[6] G.R. Cowper, Gaussian quadrature formulas for triangles, Int. J. Numer.
Methods Engrg. 7 (3) (1973) 405408.
[7] L. DAlvise, E. Massoni, S.J. Walloe, Finite element modelling of the inertia
friction welding process between dissimilar materials, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 125126 (2002) 387391.
[8] DIN EN ISO 15620, Reibschweien von metallischen Werkstoffen, Deutsches
Institut fr Normung, 2000.
[9] F. Garofalo, Fundamentals of Creep and Creep-rupture, Macmillan, New York,
[10] H. Giesekus, Phnomenologische Rheologie Eine Einfhrung, SpringerVerlag, 1994.
[11] B. Grant, M. Preuss, P.J. Withers, G. Baxter, M. Rowlson, Finite element process
modelling of inertia friction welding advanced nickel-based superalloy, Mater.
Sci. Engrg.: A 513514 (2009) 366375.
[12] R. Hamilton, D. MacKenzie, H. Li, Multi-physics simulation of friction stir
welding process, Engrg. Comput. 27 (2010) 967985.
[13] G.R. Johnson, W.H. Cook, A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to
large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures, in: Proceedings of the
7th International Symposium on Ballistics, 1983, pp. 541547.
[14] A. Moal, E. Massoni, Finite element simulation of the inertia welding of two
similar parts, Engrg. Comput. 12 (1995) 497512.
[15] K. Naumenko, Modeling of Creep for Structural Analysis, Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, 2007.
[16] F.H. Norton, The Creep of Steel at High Temperature, McGraw-Hill Book
Company Inc., 1924.
[17] M. Rappaz, M. Bellet, M. Deville, Continuous media, in: Numerical Modeling in
Materials Science and Engineering, Springer Series in Computational
Mathematics, vol. 32, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2003, pp. 145.
[18] G. Schfer, A. Dietzel, D. Schober, S. Buchholz, Handbuch Reibschweiszen, VVB
Getriebe und Kupplungen, 1976.
[19] J. Stoer, R. Bulirsch, Numerische Mathematik II, Springer Verlag, 2005.
[20] V.K. Stokes, A.J. Poslinski, Effects of variable viscosity on the steady melting of
thermoplastics during spin welding, Polym. Engrg. Sci. 35 (5) (1995) 441459.
[21] P. Ulysse, Three-dimensional modeling of the friction stir-welding process, Int.
J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 42 (2002) 15491557.
[22] L. Wang, M. Preuss, P.J. Withers, G. Baxter, P. Wilson, Energy-input-based
nite-element process modeling of inertia welding, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 36
(2005) 513523.
[23] P. Wriggers, Nonlinear Finite Element Methods, Springer-Verlag, 2008.
[24] H.S. Yu, G.T. Houlsby, H.J. Burd, A novel isoparametric nite element
incompressible materials, Int. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. 36 (14) (1993)
[25] O.C. Zienkiewicz, R.L. Taylor, The Finite Element Method The Basis,
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000.