Materials and Design 54 (2014) 207–211

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

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

Technical Report

Mechanical and microstructural properties of robotic Cold Metal

Transfer (CMT) welded 5083-H111 and 6082-T651 aluminum alloys
Beytullah Gungor a,b, Erdinc Kaluc b,c, Emel Taban b,c,⇑, Aydin SIK Sß Sß d
a
TR Naval Forces, Kocaeli, Turkey
b
Kocaeli University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kocaeli, Turkey
c
Kocaeli University, Welding Techn. Research, Education and Training Center, Kocaeli, Turkey
d
Gazi University, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Industrial Design, Ankara, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: 5083-H111 and 6082-T651 aluminum alloys used particularly in shipbuilding industry especially for the
Received 19 June 2013 sake of their high corrosion resistance and moderate strength, were welded using Pulsed Robotic Cold
Accepted 5 August 2013 Metal Transfer (CMT)-Metal Inert Gas (MIG) technology. Joints were fabricated as both similar and dis-
Available online 14 August 2013
similar alloy welds using plates with a thickness of 6 mm. Non-destructive tests such as visual and radio-
logical examination were conducted before further destructive tests. Tensile, bend and fatigue tests were
applied to specimens extracted from welded joints. Fracture surfaces of fatigue samples were examined
by light optical microscopy (LOM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Also macro and microstruc-
tures of weld zones were investigated and micro hardness profiles were obtained. In accordance with
results, CMT-MIG provides good joint efficiency with high welding speed, and good tensile and fatigue
performance.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction industrial scale manufacture was invented in 2000 in Germany,

5083 aluminum–magnesium alloys are strain hardenable alloys
and have excellent corrosion resistance, toughness, weldability and
moderate strength. 6082 aluminum–magnesium–silicon alloys are
heat treatable types and have high corrosion resistance, excellent
extrudibility and moderate strength. Especially with their high cor-
rosion resistance and moderate strength these aluminum alloys
are widely used in shipbuilding industry. Single- or multiple-hull
high speed ferries employ several aluminum alloys, 5083, 5383
and 5454 as sheet and plate (along with 6082 extruded shapes)
with all-welded construction [1–3].
Aluminum welding was once considered limited due to the
problems associated with welding processes such as oxide removal
and reduced strength in the weld and heat affected zone (HAZ).
New aluminum welding techniques have been developed and
commercialized significantly over the past 30 years that solves
these problems [1,3]. Although MIG and Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG)
welding were invented in 1940s and used in many industries, there
were still some joint problems that reduced joint efficiency under
50% [1,4–6]. To improve weld performance, friction stir welding
(FSW) that is solid state welding and a milestone in aluminum
welding was invented in 1991 by TWI, laser beam-Gas Metal Arc
(GMA)-hybrid welding that is first hybrid method ever applied in
⇑ Corresponding author at: Kocaeli University, Faculty of Engineering, Dept. of
Mechanical Engineering, Kocaeli, Turkey. Tel./fax: +90 262 303 34 43.
E-mail addresses: emel.taban@yahoo.com, emelt@kocaeli.edu.tr (E. Taban).
and finally conventional Metal Inert Gas welding process equipped
with Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) technology was invented in 2004
and is likely to be a milestone in aluminum welding [7–9]. CMT
is completely new technology with respect to both welding appli-
cation and welding equipment. CMT is not only completely new
technology, but it also enhances MIG application areas, allowing
the arc joining of steel to aluminum in a reproducible manner for
the first time. CMT can be described as a Gas Metal Arc Welding
(GMAW) process where heat input is low compared to the conven-
tional dip arc process. The CMT-process is a dip arc process with a
completely new method of the droplet detachment from the wire.
In the conventional dip arc process the wire is moved forward until
a short circuit occurs. At that moment the welding current in-
creases, causing the short circuit to re-open, allowing the arc to
ignite again. There are two main features of the Metal Inert Gas/
Metal Active Gas (MIG/MAG) process: on the one hand the high
short circuit current corresponds to a high heat input. On the other
hand the short circuit opens in a rather uncontrolled manner,
resulting in lots of spatters in the conventional dip arc process.
In the CMT process the wire is not only pushed towards but also
drawn back from the work piece – an oscillating wire feeding with
an average oscillation frequency up to 70 Hz is used [9]. In CMT,
the term ‘‘cold’’ has to be understood in terms of a welding process,
but when set against the conventional MIG/MAG process, CMT is
still a cold process that constantly alternates between hot and cold
phases. During the arcing period, the filler metal is moved towards

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.08.018
208 B. Gungor et al. / Materials and Design 54 (2014) 207–211

Fig. 1. Phases of CMT process (a–d) [10].

Table 1
Chemical composition and mechanical properties of base metals.

Aluminum alloy Chemical composition (in wt.%)

Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Cr Ni Zn Ti Al
5083 0.076 0.13 0.032 0.63 4.34 0.064 0.003 0.035 0.055 94.6
6082 1.02 0.23 0.052 0.63 0.69 0.066 0.002 0.033 0.048 97.2
Mechanical properties
Rp0.2 (MPa) Rm (MPa) Elongation (%)
5083 239 331 16.4
6082 321 329 11.1

the weld pool (Fig. 1a, hot phase). When the filler metal dips into
the weld-pool, the arc is extinguished and the welding current is
lowered (Fig. 1b, cold phase). The backward movement of the wire
assists droplet detachment during the short circuit and the short
circuit current is kept small (Fig. 1c, cold phase). Finally, the wire
motion is reversed and the process begins all over again (Fig. 1d,
hot phase) [10].
Since CMT is relatively a recent technology, there are few stud-
ies about CMT welding of aluminum alloys. All studies are inter-
ested in welding success of thin plates of aluminum and
magnesium alloys. In some studies, 1–3 mm thin plates of Al–Mg
dissimilar joints were successfully made by CMT-MIG [11–13].
Feng et al. [14] successfully welded pure aluminum with no-spat-
ter and low heat input that promotes the gap bridging ability.

Fig. 2. LOM images of weld zone cross sections.

 B. Gungor et al. / Materials and Design 54 (2014) 207–211
Fig. 3. Macrograph and SEM photos of fracture surfaces of (a) M55, (b) M56 and (c)
M66 fatigue specimens.
Fig. 4. Microhardness profiles of CMT Pulse welded joints (a) M55, (b) M56 and (c)
M66.
209
Fig. 5. Comparison of average tensile properties of the base metal with welded
joints.
Packin and Young [15] has successfully welded 3 mm thick AA
6111 aluminum alloys and founded CMT welding process highly
competitive for automated welding of aluminum parts. Hence, this
study aims investigating microstructure and mechanical behavior
of 6 mm thick 5083-H111 and 6082-T651 aluminum alloys as sim-
ilar (joints called as M55, M66 referring to welded joints of 5083 to
5083 and 6082 to 6082 respectively) and dissimilar (M56 referring
to welding of 5083 to 6082 alloys) joints.
2. Materials and experimental procedure
In this study, 5083-H111 and 6082-T651 aluminum alloys were
used as base metals. Chemical composition data obtained by glow
discharge optical emission spectroscopy (GDOES) and mechanical
properties obtained by tensile test are given in Table 1.
Aluminum alloy plates were cut into coupons with
150  330  6 mm3 dimensions with 30° level of each plate to pro-
vide 60° groove angle for V-groove butt joint geometry. ER5183
with 1.2 mm diameter was used as filler metal. Welding parame-
ters for Robotic CMT-MIG were implied as 194 ± 5 A welding cur-
rent, 19.5 ± 1 V welding voltage, 0.4 m min 1 welding speed and
11 ± 0.2 m min 1 wire feed rate.
Visual and radiographical examination was performed in order
to detect possible surface and inner errors after welding. Test sam-
ples were obtained in accordance with TS EN ISO 17637 for visual
examination before further destructive tests. According to test
plan, test samples suitable for TS EN ISO 15614-2 were extracted
from weld plates which had past visual and radiological examina-
tion. Tensile test specimens were prepared according to TS EN ISO
4136:2012, bending test specimens were prepared according to TS
EN ISO 5173, fatigue test specimens were prepared according to
Fig. 6. Fatigue test results of base metals and welded joints.
210 B. Gungor et al. / Materials and Design 54 (2014) 207–211
DIN EN 50142. In order to determine microstructural properties of
these joints, the specimens were cross-sectioned perpendicular to
the weld interface. The cross-section of these joints were grinded,
polished and etched with Keller etchant. After microstructural
examinations, these specimens were used for detailed microhard-
ness (HV0,2) assessment under 200 g load. For further examination
of microstructure, fracture surfaces of fatigue test specimens were
analyzed with scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
3. Results and discussion
The microstructural behavior of aluminum alloys joined by CMT
Pulse welding was studied by LOM. Images of weld zone cross sec-
tion are outlined in Fig. 2. In robotic CMT welded joint M55, the
base metal will have a fine-grained structure composed of a matrix
of a solid solution of magnesium in aluminum. Although it was ex-
pected that Mg2Al3 would be formed which could begin to coalesce
and coarsen in the HAZ where the temperature raised to around
250 °C further, there were no coalescence or coarsening in the far
HAZ. Nevertheless, fine grain microstructures were produced by
processes which involved static recrystallization in HAZ close to fu-
sion line [1,3]. In robotic CMT welded joint M66, partial melting of
the grain boundaries has resulted in coalescence and coarsening
with weld metal in the fusion line because of solution treatment
resulted in aging after welding [3]. In robotic CMT welded joint
M56, grain structure showed same results as M55 and M66
depending on their base metal side.
For further microstructure analysis, fractured surface of fatigue
test specimens were examined by SEM (Fig. 3a–c). Porosities in frac-
tured surfaces were little [19,20]. Evaluated with tensile test results,
these porosities had no significant negative effect on joint strength.
Porosity levels were 2% and ‘‘B’’ quality for M55, 3% and ‘‘C’’ quality
for M56 and M66 according to ISO 10042:2005(E) standard.
Microhardness measurements were completed under 200 g
load (Fig. 4). Although results were similar to characteristic hard-
ness traverse across weldments [1], hardness drops were slightly
close to the base metal. While hardness drops were around 22–
35% in previous studies [21,26,28], hardness drops were maximum
18% level in this study. 5083 similar alloy weld joint (M55) microh-
ardness values were measured between 77 and 92 HV0,2 and hard-
ness drops with minimum hardness value were just in the weld
zone as expected. 6082 similar alloy weld joint (M66) microhard-
ness data were measured between 79 and 96 HV0,2, hardness in-
crease in weld zone were measured around 96 HV0,2, while
hardness decrease at the HAZ were measured 79 HV0,2. 6082 base
metal hardness were measured around 82 HV0,2. 5083 and 6082
dissimilar alloy weld joint (M56) microhardness data were mea-
sured between 76 and 96 HV0,2. HAZ’s of M56 joint are similar to
that of M66 and M55 for same material as seen on Fig. 6. Differ-
ently, weld zone of M56 showed somewhat higher hardness val-
ues. Microhardness rise in close HAZ of 6082 were because of the
partially solution-treated zone where some of the precipitates
were taken into solution, enabling some post-weld hardening to
occur, but those not dissolved were coarsened. Microhardness
drops in precipitation hardened 6082 in far HAZ of M56 and M66
were results of overaged zone where precipitate coarsening has ta-
ken place [3].
Tensile properties for base material and cross-welds were given
in Fig. 5. Average yield and tensile strengths of three measure-
ments for each sample in the figure were 244 and 272.3 N/mm2
for M55, for M56 216 and 230 N/mm2, and for M66 216.3 and
22.3 N/mm2 respectively,
Tensile test results for all welded joints were above the charac-
teristic strength values of weld metal data according to EN 1999-
1-1:2007 (E) and also above the results seen from previous studies
in the literature [16–24,29–35]. Welded joint performances were
83% for M55, 67% for M66 and 70% for M56 according to average
maximum strength of base metals 5083 and 6082. Failures of
M55 tensile test specimens occurred at the weld metal. This was
due to the recrystalization process accounted for majority strength
loss in weldments in cold worked aluminum alloys [1]. In contra-
distinction to M55 joint, M56 and M66 tensile test specimens were
fractured at the HAZ of 6082 base metal side. While welding of
6082 alloy, HAZ microhardness drops occured at the over-aged
zone where precipitate coarsening took place. These over-aged
zones were the weakest parts of welded 6082 HAZ [1,3]. Yield
stress results of all welded joints were surprisingly higher from
previous studies for all welding type [19–21,25–28].
Fatigue test results of joints were given in Fig. 6. According to
the fatigue tests results, CMT Pulse welded 5083 (M55) joint exhib-
ited better fatigue data from other welded joint types, parallel with
tensile stress data and gas porosity level. Besides having close fati-
gue limits, M66 showed better fatigue limit than M56. Fatigue test
was conducted under yield stresses. It was concluded that gas
porosity levels of the joints had significant effect on fatigue limit,
because of being an important crack initiation points.
4. Conclusions
In this study, 6 mm thick 5083 and 6082 aluminum alloys were
welded successfully with CMT Pulse welding technique as similar
and different joints. CMT’s low heat input with high wire melting
coefficient when compared with the pulsed MIG process provided
high welding speed (400 mm min 1) and negligible distortion on
welded plates.
Although microhardness results for all welded joints were sim-
ilar to characteristic hardness traverse across weldments, hardness
drops were slightly close to the base metal.
Tensile testing of the weld joints and base metal produced ade-
quate tensile strength values. Although conventional GMA welding
method showed lower mechanical test results compared with Gas
Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) or FSW, CMT Pulse showed results
close to FSW due to the robotic application of the process which
means higher welding speed and very low heat input and surpris-
ingly higher yield strength values than any other welding methods
previously reported in the literature.
5083 similar weld joint (M55) showed best fatigue perfor-
mance, then respectively 6082 similar weld joint (M66), and
5083&6082 dissimilar weld joint (M56). These results were paral-
lel with porosity and yield stress values of the related joints.
Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank to the technical support of the fol-
lowing industrial companies: Fronius TR, Assan Aluminum, End
Denetim.
References
[1] Totten GE, Mackenzie S. Handbook of aluminum. vol 1. Physical metallurgy
and processes. Marcel Dekker Inc: USA; 2003.
[2] Kaufman JG. Introduction to aluminum alloys and tempers. ASM International;
2003.
[3] Mathers G. The welding of aluminium and its alloys. Cambridge, UK:
Woodhead Publishing Limited; 2002.
[4] Anik S, Dikicioglu A, Vural M. Koruyucu Gaz Altında Kaynak ve Aluminyum
MIG Kaynagi. Istanbul: Teknisyenler Matbaası; 1994 [in Turkish].
[5] Kaluc E. Kaynak Teknolojisi El Kitabı Cilt-1: Ergitme Esaslı Kaynak
Yöntemleri. Kocaeli: Makine Mühendisleri Odası Yayını; 2004 [in Turkish].
[6] Taban E, Kaluc E. Comparison between microstructure characteristics and joint
performance of 5086-H32 aluminium alloy welded by MIG, TIG and friction
stir welding processes. Kovove Mater 2007;45:241–8.
[7] Springer handbook of mechanical engineering. Springer Science Business
Media: USA; 2008.
 B. Gungor et al. / Materials and Design 54 (2014) 207–211
[8] Mishra RS, Mahoney MW. Friction stir welding and processing. ASM
International; 2007.
[9] Rosado T, Almeida P, Pires I, Miranda R, Quintino L. Innovation in arc welding,
2. Congresso de Engenharia de Moçambique, Maputo, Septembro 2–4; 2008.
[REF: 44A004].
[10] http://www.fronius.com/cps/rde/xchg/SID-07987558-10776492/
fronius_international/hs.xsl/68_21697_eng_HTML.htm [visited in May 2013].
[11] Cao R, Wen BF, Chen JH, Chungwang P. Cold metal transfer joining of
magnesium AZ31B-to-aluminum A6061-T6. Mater Sci Eng A 2012;560:
256–66.
[12] Shang J, Wang K, Zhou Q, Zhang D, Huang J, Li G. Microstructure characteristics
and mechanical properties of cold metal transfer welding Mg/Al dissimilar
metals. Mater Des 2012;34:559–65.
[13] Wang J, Feng JC, Wang YX. Microstructure of Al–Mg dissimilar weld made by
cold metal transfer MIG welding. Mater Sci Technol 2008;24(7):827–31.
[14] Feng J, Zhang H, He P. The CMT short-circuiting metal transfer process and its
use in thin aluminium sheets welding. Mater Des 2009;30:1850–2.
[15] Pickin CG, Young K. Evaluation of cold metal transfer (CMT) process for
welding aluminium alloy. Sci Technol Weld Joining 2006;11(5):583–5.
[16] Welding handbook. Materials and applications – Part 1. vol. 3. 8th ed. AWS:
USA; 1993.
_
[17] Tulbentci K. MIG/MAG Gazaltı Kaynak Yöntemi, Arctech Yayın No: 2, Istanbul;
1996.
[18] Sik A, Onder M. Comparison between mechanical properties and joint
performance of AA 2024-O aluminium alloy welded by friction stir welding
and TIG processes. Kovove Mater 2010;50:131–7.
[19] Liu Y, Wang W, Xie J, Sun S, Wang L, Qian Y, et al. Microstructure and
mechanical properties of aluminum 5083 weldments by gas tungsten arc and
gas metal arc welding. Mater Sci Eng A 2012;549:7–13.
[20] Moreira PMGP, De Figueiredo MAV, De Castro PMST. Fatigue behaviour of FSW
and MIG weldments for two aluminium alloys. Theoret Appl Fract Mech 2007;
48:169–77.
[21] Ericsson M, Sandstrom R. Influence of welding speed on the fatigue of friction
stir welds, and comparison with MIG and TIG. Int J Fatigue 2003;25:1379–87.
211
[22] Adamowski J, Szkodo M. Friction stir welds (FSW) of aluminium alloy
AW6082-T6. J Achiev Mater Manuf Eng 2007;20(1–2):403–6.
[23] Cavaliere P, Squillace A, Panella F. Effect of welding parameters on mechanical
and microstructural properties of AA6082 joints produced by friction stir
welding. J Mater Process Technol 2008;200:364–72.
[24] Moreira PMGP, De Jesus AMP, Ribeiro AS, De Castro PMST. Fatigue crack
growth in friction stir welds of 6082-T6 and 6061-T6 aluminium alloys: a
comparison. Theoret Appl Fract Mech 2008;50:81–91.
[25] Kumar R, Dilthey U, Dwivedi DK, Ghosh PK. Thin sheet welding of Al 6082 alloy
by AC Pulse-GMA and AC Wave Pulse-GMA welding. Mater Des 2009;30:
306–13.
[26] Moreira PMGP, Santos T, Tavares SMO, RichterTrummer V, Vilaca P, De Castro
PMST. Mechanical and metallurgical characterization of friction stir welding
joints of AA6061-T6 with AA6082-T6. Mater Des 2009;30:180–7.
[27] Geoffroy N, Vittecoq E, Birr A, De Mestral F, Martin JM. Fatigue behaviour of an
arc welded Al–Si–Mg alloy. Scripta Mater 2007;57:349–52.
[28] Taban E, Kaluc E. Microstructural and mechanical properties of double-sided
MIG, TIG and friction stir welded 5083-H321 aluminium alloy. Kovove Mater
2005;44:25.
[29] ISO 10042:2005(E). Welding-arc-welded joints in aluminium and its alloys –
quality levels for imperfections. International Organization for
Standardization; 2009.
[30] TS EN ISO 17637. Non-destructive testing of welds – visual testing of fusion-
welded joints. Turkish Standards Institution; 2011.
[31] TS EN ISO 15614-2. Specification and qualification of welding procedures for
metallic materials – welding procedure test – part 2: arc welding of
aluminium and its alloys. Turkish Standards Institution; 2007.
[32] TS EN ISO 4136:2012. Destructive tests on welds in metallic materials –
transverse tensile test. Turkish Standards Institution; 2013.
[33] TS EN ISO 5173. Destructive tests on welds in metallic materials – bend tests.
Turkish Standards Institution; 2010.
[34] DIN EN 50142. Testing of metallic materials. Flat bending fatigue test.
Deutsches Institut für Normung; 1982.
[35] EN 1999–1-1:2007 (E). Eurocode 9: design of aluminium structures – Part 1–1:
General structural rules. European Standard; 2009.