P-8. Andrea Peer, Ying Lu, Tim Abke, Menachem Kimchi, and Wei Zhang “Deformation Behaviors of Subcritical Heat-affected Zone of Ultra-high Strength Steel Resistance Spot Welds.” in 9th International Seminar & Conference on Advances in Resistance Spot Welding. Miami, (3 2016). Paper No. 12.
Recently research at the Ohio State University is developing methods that combine the benefits of ultrasonic welding and resistance spot welding. Y. Lu and co-workersL-10 developed the ultrasonic plus resistance spot welding process (U+RSW). In this process thin aluminium sheet was joined with steel sheet via ultrasonic welding, followed by RSW between the aluminium side of previously sheet and aluminium sheet as shown in Figure 1. In this study they used 1-mm-thick AA6061-T6 to 0.9-mm-thick AISI 1008 steel with 0.4-mm-thick AA6061-T6 as the insert.
Figure 1: Schematic diagram of U + RSW process. VD is the sonotrode’s vibration direction for USW of intermediate joint.L-10
The U+RSW method showed improved mechanical properties (Figure 2), tensile shear strength and energy absorbed prior to failure. It has shown a relatively thin intermetallic layer.
Figure 2: Effect of welding current on tensile shear strength and fracture energy of welded dissimilar joints of AA6061 to AISI 1008 steel. The welding time and the electrode force for RSW were kept constant at 0.083 s and 3.56 kN, respectively.L-10
Another research group have developed ultrasonic resistance welding process (URW), that apply in situ ultrasonic waves during the resistance spot welding process.S-17 The schematics of the process is shown in the Figure 3. Al-6061T6 and electrogalvanized TRIP 780 with dimensions of 70Lx 25Wx 1.6T mm3 and 70Lx 25Wx 1.3T mm3 respectively were used in this study.
Figure 3: URW Setup (a) Schematic illustration; (b) Flowchart of the URW process.S-17
The URW process have shown improved mechanical properties and defect free interface compared to the RSW process. In situ ultrasonic vibration facilitated the breakdown of the surface oxide and contaminants, which modifies contact resistance and heat generation rate accordingly. If melting occurs, ultrasonic vibration promoted wetting of the molten aluminium over the steel interface and resulted in the formation of defect-free, fully bonded interface as shown in Figure 4. Figure 5 compares the mechanical properties between the RSW & URW process. Comparing URW with traditional RSW, up to 300% increase in strength and more than 150% increase in displacement to failure is reported. SEM images of the fractured surface revealed that ultrasonic waves eliminated the eggcrate morphology generally observed in the RSW welds fractured surface, which is a typical representative of solidification cracking.
Figure 4: EDS line Scan of Al-6061 & TRIP 780 across interface for RSW at 11.4 kA (a-b) & at 13.4 kA (e-f) and for URW at 11.4 kA (c-d) & at 13.4 kA (g-h).S-17
Figure 5: Tensile test results (a) Joint shear strength from 11.4 kA (30 cycles) & 13.4 kA (20 cycles); (b) Energy absorption calculated via area under load-displacement curve for 11.4 kA (30 cycles) & 13.4 kA (20 cycles); (c-d) load-displacement curve for 11.4.S-17
In order to reduce the thickness of brittle intermetallic compound (IMC) formed at Aluminium/Steel interface to improve the mechanical properties of resistance spot welding of Aluminium/Steel, different interlayers, such as Al-cladded steelS-16, O-3, Y-4, Al-Si alloyW-15, Al-Mg alloyI-6, pure Al W-16, Zn coating.M-10, U-4, A-21 Sun et al.S-16 has done resistance spot welding of 1.4-mm SAE 1008 mild steel with 2-mm 5182-O aluminium alloy using 1 mm/1.5 mm cold rolled aluminium-clad steel as a transition metal with Aluminium/Steel thickness ratio of 20/80 (thickness ratio was not optimized). The formation of IMC cannot be observed at the interface for cold rolled aluminium-clad steel. The electrodes used were Class 2 30-deg truncated cone with 8-mm surface diameter and 3-inch face radius on the aluminium side and 30-deg truncated cone with 8-mm flat surface diameter on the steel side. Two separate nuggets created the aluminium and steel sides with a final nugget diameters of 10.1 mm and 8.2 mm, on aluminium and steel sides respectively, at the end of the 3rd pulse (Figure 1). With increasing welding time from 1 pulse to 3 pulses, the intermetallic compound layer thickness increased from 0 µm to 8.5 µm. As a comparison, the IMC layer thickness was approximately 65 µm for resistance spot welding of 1-mm AA 5052 and 0.8-mm low carbon steel without transition metal. The static and dynamic strength of the RSW samples in cross-tension and coach peel test were comparable to those of the peak load of self-piercing rivets (SPR). However, lap shear tensile testing of RSW samples had lower energy absorption than dissimilar SPR samples due to different failure modes (interfacial fracture may occur). Fatigue strength of RSW samples were lower than those of SPR samples due to stress concentration and tensile residual stress at the notch tip.
Figure 1: Cross-sectional macrostructure of resistance spot welding of SAE1008/A5182-O with 3 pulses of 12 cycles and welding current of 13.6 kA.S-16
Oikawa et al.O-3 have done resistance spot welding of 0.4 mm-thick cold rolled steel with 0.6 mm-thick pure aluminium with 0.77 mm-thick aluminium-clad steel sheet as the insert metal. Fe-Al IMCs have not been noted at the Aluminium/Steel interface of aluminium-clad steel sheet and a peel strength of 32.1 N/mm can be achieved. IMC layer thickness was about 5 µm at Al/steel interface when aluminium alloy and steel was resistance spot welded with aluminium clad steel sheet as insert. However, the tensile shear strength (Figure 2) and U-tension strength (Figure 3) can be 3.6 kN and 1.5 kN which were similar to Al/Al resistance spot weld joint and were much higher than direct resistance spot welding of 2.4 kN and 0.6 kN. However, it should be noted that resistance spot welding with aluminium-clad steel added weight, and difficulties in hot rolled aluminium cladding process result in high cost. Thus, more investigations have been done recently on improving the cladding method and using thinner and lighter metals as interlayers.
Figure 2: Comparison of tensile shear strength of Al/steel joints by various methods (SP-spot welding; MC-mechanical clinching; RJ-rivet joining; AD-adhesion bonding).O-3
Figure 3: Comparison of U-tension strength of Al/steel joints by various methods (SP-spot welding; MC-mechanical clinching; RJ-rivet joining; AD-adhesion bonding).O-3
In order to reduce the IMC layer thickness, Zhang et al.W-15 used 4047 AlSi12 as an interlayer to suppress the IMC growth during resistance spot welding of 1 mm H22YD-Z100 Zn-coated high-strength steel sheets with 1.5 mm EN AW 6008-T66 aluminium alloy sheets. The effect of different interlayer thickness, i.e. 100 µm, 200 µm, 300 µm, 400 µm, on IMC growth behavior and mechanical properties were investigated. IMCs consisted of Fe2(Al,Si)5 and Fe4(Al,Si)13 and the thickness of IMCs reduced from 1.8 µm to 0.6 µm as the thickness of AlSi12 interlayer, increasing from 100 µm to 400 µm. But all were much thinner compared to 4 µm for spot welds without an interlayer. Nugget diameter reduced with increasing interlayer thickness and maximum tensile shear strength of 6.2 kN and pull-out failure mode were obtained with an interlayer thickness of 300 µm.
Figure 4: Fracture modes of H220YD high-strength steel/6008-T66 resistance spot weld joints (a) interfacial fracture without interlayer and (b) pull-out failure with 4047 AlSi12 interlayer thickness of 300 µm. W-15
Ibrahim et al.I-6 had investigated resistance spot welding of 2 mm A6061-T6 and 2 mm type 304 austenitic stainless steel with 80 µm thick Al-Mg alloy (80 wt % Al and 20 wt% Mg). Under the same welding condition, lap shear tensile strength was higher for welds with an Al-Mg interlayer than without the interlayer, and a peak strength of 8.4 kN can be obtained with welding current of 16.1 kA and welding force of 9.3 kN. A thin IMC layer of approximately 2 µm can be observed, which lead to a high strength. Fatigue strength of dissimilar RSW Aluminium/Steel samples were higher than Friction Stir Spot Welding samples. The failure mode depended on the load level. Pull-out failure occurred at high load (Pmax > 3 kN), shear fracture at 2.25 kN < Pmax <3 kN, upper Al sheet fracture at Pmax < 2.25 kN.
Figure 5: Relationship between peak load and number of cycles.I-6
Galvanized steel (GI) and Galvannealed steel (GA) are widely used in the automotive industry, and the presence of Zn layer may affect the weldability of Aluminium/Steel. Al-Zn eutectic liquid formed at Aluminium/Steel interface can efficiently remove oxide film and squeezed outside by electrode force. Thus, metallic surface of aluminium and steel can be revealed, and the Al-Fe IMC layer formed and a metallurgical bond was created.M-10, U-4 Arghavani et al.A-21 have investigated the resistance spot welding of 2 mm Al-5052 to 1 mm low carbon galvanized steel (ASTM A653 CS Type B-G60) (GI/Al) and compared that with the weldability of Al 5052 to uncoated steel DC01 (PS/Al). It showed the IMC layer at the GS/Al interface with the tongue-like layer of Fe2Al5 on the steel side and needle-like FeAl3 on the aluminium alloy side, as normally observed in Aluminium/Steel dissimilar welding (Figure 6).Z-3, U-4 GI/Al joints had thinner IMC layers at almost all the welding currents compared to PS/Al joints. And the IMC layer thickness in GI/Al increased initially with increasing welding current up to 12 kA and then decreased beyond it, which was due to heat consumption with Zn evaporation at higher welding current (I > 12 kA). Tensile shear strength of GI/Al welds were lower than PS/Al welds at welding current less than 12 kA since lower current led to incomplete nugget at GI/Al welds. However, tensile shear strength of GI/Al welds exceeded PS/Al welds at higher welding current since IMC layer thickness was over the critical value of approximately 5.5 µm for PS/Al joints at the higher welding current (Figure 7). Both GI/Al and PS/Al had an interfacial fracture mode with crack initiation at the peripheral regions of the weld and propagated through the IMCs layer/aluminium sheet.
Figure 6: SEM image of IMC layer in GS/Al specimen.A-21
Figure 7: (a) Ultimate tensile shear and cross-tension strength vs welding current; (b) schematics of load-displacement curve and fracture energy calculation for tensile shear testing; (c) Fracture energy vs welding current.A-21
L-10. Y. Lu, E. Mayton, H. Song, M. Kimchi, and W. Zhang, “Dissimilar metal joining of aluminum to steel by ultrasonic plus resistance spot welding – Microstructure and mechanical properties,” Mater. Des., Vol. 165, p. 107585, Mar. 2019.
Figure 1 shows a typical cross-section of a resistance spot weld (RSW) joint of 1 mm-thick H220 Zn-coated High-Strength Steel and 1.5 mm-thick 6008-T66 aluminium alloy. Based on resistance spot welding process simulation by ANSYS, the Al/Steel interface temperature is 1120 oC with welding current of 9 kA and welding time of 300 ms. The high interfacial temperature at the Al/Steel interface melts Al alloys and liquid Al alloy wet and spread on the solid steel surface which creates a special brazed joint.
Figure 1: Cross-sectional macrostructure of typical Al/Steel resistance spot welds.Z-4
The interaction of liquid Al alloy with solid steel results in the formation of Fe-Al intermetallics (IMCs), which are mainly composed of lath-like/tongue-like shaped η-Fe2Al5 on steel side and coarse/fine needle-like shaped θ-FeAl3/Fe4Al13 on Al alloy side. For the morphology shown in Figure 2, IMCs have higher hardness compared to the Al or steel base metal, with average hardness of approximately 8.7 and 6.5 GPa for Fe2Al5 and Fe4Al13 respectively, while the average hardness of Al and steel near to the interface were 1.1 and 2.1 GPa respectively.Z-2 The distribution of IMCs at the Al/steel interface is non-uniform, with the thickest IMCs at the center of the weld and a reduced IMCs thickness observed approaching the weld periphery.
The formation and growth of IMCs at the Al/Steel interface are mainly affected by the temperature at the Al/Steel interface and reactive diffusion time. With constant welding current of 9 kA, the thickness of the IMCs increase from 2.9 µm to 13 µm as welding time increases from 100 ms to 300 ms. With constant welding time of 250 ms, a rapid increase of the IMCs from 1.5 to 5.6 µm is observed as welding current increases from 5 to 9 kA. Thus, with increasing welding time and/or welding current, IMCs thickness increase due to the higher interfacial temperature and longer reaction time of liquid Al alloy with solid steel. Resistance spot welding of A6008 andH220 Zn-coated High-Strength Steel can achieve a peak strength of 3.3 kN at welding current of 9 kN and welding time of 250 ms with interfacial fracture at the Al/steel interface, since the crack initiates at the brittle IMC compound layer (Fe2Al5) and tends to propagate along the IMC layer.Z-3
Figure 2: SEM images of Al/Steel interface regions in previous figure. (a)-(d) corresponds to region A-D respectively.Z-4
Figure 3: Nanoindentation across H22YD GI high strength steel/A6008-T66 resistance spot weld: (a) Nanoindents; (b) Nanohardness profile.Z-4
The nugget diameter, IMC compound layer thickness and mechanical properties of Al/steel weld joints can be affected by electrode morphology. For resistance spot welding of A6008-T66 and H22YD galvanized High- Strength Steel, the optimized electrodes were a planar circular electrode with a surface diameter of 10 mm on steel side and a spherical tip with a spherical diameter of 70 mm on Al side.Z-4 Compared to the conventional F type electrode used in the reference studyZ-3, a flat Al/steel interface can be obtained with larger nugget diameter and less welding defects, including shrinkage void and cracks, as shown in Figure 4. A maximum nugget size of 10 mm can be obtained with the optimized electrode morphology with a reduced intermetallic compound thickness of 4 µm (Figure 5). A peak tensile shear strength of 5.4 kN can be achieved with a nugget pull-out failure mode (Figure 6).
Figure 4: Cross-sectional macrostructure of resistance spot weld Al/steel joint with an electrode spherical diameter of 100 mm on Al alloy side.Z-4
Figure 5: Effects of electrode spherical diameter on nugget diameter and indentation ratio of resistance spot weld joints.Z-4
Figure 6: Effects of electrode spherical diameter on tensile shear load of resistance spot weld joints.Z-4
Sigler et al., from General Motors, have shown considerable improvement in the Al/Steel RSW joints that includes multi step direct RSW welding and multi ring, domed-shaped electrodes.S-15, W-14 Welds were carried out using a medium frequency direct current (MFDC) RSW machine via two current pulses, i.e. pre heat pulse of 5 kA and main pulse of 13 kA, 14 kA and 15 kA at various times. Their methodology has shown an importance in the IMC layer thickness and aluminium nugget. Figure 7(a) shows the cross sections of the welds made at the various parameters. More indentation and larger Al nugget diameter are seen at higher times. Figure 7(b) shows that the hardness mapping and the softened region on the both sides of the nugget is observed due to excessive recrystallization. Figure 7(c) shows that the greater the aluminium nugget diameter in the center, the less is the aluminium thickness in the center. Also the IMC layer, as shown in Figure 12(d) increases with the longer weld times. Overall, it was found that the larger aluminium nugget diameter and thicker IMC layer is detrimental for Al/Steel joint integrity.
Figure 7: (a). Cross section micrographs of Al/steel RSWs generated by different welding schedules. ,(b) Microhardness contours of Al BM and Al sheets of Al/steel welds. ,(c) Comparison of Al/steel weld dimensions. & (d) Comparison between lap shear stress and average IMC thickness.S-15
Figure 8 shows the relationship between the IMC layer thickness and peak load failure. At 13 kA, 14 kA and 15 kA as indicated by Sample 1, Sample 2 and Sample 3, respectively, in Figure 8(a). Moreover, it is reported that the thinner IMC layer (<3 µm) resulted in bottom pullout failure. Figure 8(b) shows the governing parameters for interfacial or nugget pull out failure.
Figure 8: (a) Relationship between peak strength and IMC layer, (b) Model depicting the governing failure mode.S-15