Advertisement

Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals

, Volume 72, Issue 11, pp 2971–2979 | Cite as

Characterisation of Friction Stir Weld Discontinuities by Non-destructive Evaluation

  • M. R. BhatEmail author
  • V. D. Ragupathy
Technical Paper
  • 46 Downloads

Abstract

Friction stir weld (FSW) is an advanced metal joining process recently practised in aerospace industries with application spanning across other engineering fields as well. Friction stir welding being solid-state joining process, the weld is characterised by superior weld properties with proper parameter setting. The morphology of FSWs varies from other welds due to the plastic state formation of the material as against the liquid state of fusion encountered in conventional welding process. The nature of the discontinuities in these joints is significantly different. The presence of discontinuities in the welds due to its unique weld formation process has made the failure pattern in these products also unique. Hence, a comprehensive non-destructive evaluation (NDE) assessment of FSWs is attempted with different techniques and their detecting capability has been discussed. Conventional NDE methods, namely radiography, ultrasonics and eddy current techniques used in FSW discontinuity detection are discussed and compared for each type of discontinuity.

Keywords

Non-destructive evaluation Friction stir welding Worm hole Tunnel defect 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Mishra R, and Mahoney M, Friction Stir Welding and Processing, ASM International (2007).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moles M, Lamarre A, and Dupuis O, in 16th World Conference on NDT (2004).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kumar K, and Kailas S, Mater Des 29 (2008a) 791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kumar K, and Kailas S V, Mater Sci Eng: A 485 (2008b) 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mazumder R, Bandyopadhyay N, and Sagar S P, J Non Destr Test Eval 10 (2012) 1.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Leonard A J, and Lockyer S A, in 4th International Symposium on Friction Stir Welding (2003).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ragupathy V D, Bhat M R, and Prasad M V N, Mater Eval (2017) 406.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhat N N, Kumari K, Dutta S, Pal S K, and Pal S, J Manuf Process 20 (2015) 274.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Khan N Z, Siddique A N, Khan Z A, and Shihab S K, J Alloys Compd (2015) 360.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Delrue S, Tabatabaeipour M, Hettler J, and Van Den Abeele K, Ultrasonics 68 (2016) 71.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    He C, Liu Y, Dong J, Wang Q, Wagner D, and Bathias C, Int J Fatigue 81 (2015) 171.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tabatabaeipour M, Hettler J, Delrue S, and Van Den Abeele K, NDT&E Int 80 (2016) 23.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ranjan R, Khan A R, Parikh C, Jain R, Mahto R P, Pal S, Pal S K, and Chakravarty D, J Manuf Process 22 (2016) 237.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Saravanan T, Lahiri B B, Arunmuthu K, Bagavathiappan S, Sekhar A S, Pillai V P M, Philip J, Rao B P C, and Jayakumar T, in 1st International Conference on Structural Integrity, ICONS-2014, p 469.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rummel WD, Todd, Jr., P H, Rathke R A, and Castner W L, Mater Eval 32 (1974) 205.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Indian Institute of Metals - IIM 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Aerospace EngineeringIndian Institute of ScienceBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Liquid Propulsion Systems CentreBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations