2016 - 10 Influence of Al Interlayer Thickness On Laser Welding of Mg-Steel
2016 - 10 Influence of Al Interlayer Thickness On Laser Welding of Mg-Steel
WELDING RESEARCH
C. W. TAN ([email protected]), B. CHEN, X. G. SONG ([email protected]), L. ZHOU, and S. H. MENG are with the Shandong Provin
cial Key Laboratory of Special Welding Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology at Weihai, Weihai, China. TAN, L. Q. LI, and J. C. FENG are
with the State Key Laboratory of Advanced Welding and Joining, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China.
WELDING RESEARCH
A A
C
Fig. 1 — Schematic of laser welding and the testing specimen:
A — Laser welding process of Mg to steel; B — tensileshear test
specimen.
WELDING RESEARCH
A B C
D E F
Fig. 3 — Cross sections of Mg/steel joints produced with different thicknesses of Al interlayers: A — 0.1 mm; B — 0.2 mm; C — 0.3 mm;
D — 0.4 mm; E — 0.5 mm; and F — 0.7 mm.
WELDING RESEARCH
A B
C D
Fig. 4 — Microstructure morphologies of interfacial reaction layers with different thicknesses of Al interlayers: A — 0.1 mm; B — 0.3 mm;
C — 0.5 mm; and D — 0.7 mm.
steel sheet. The laser beam was irradi- interface between the fusion zone and (STEM) mode. A Vickers hardness
ated on the surface of the AZ31B Mg steel were observed using scanning measurement was performed across
alloy vertically. Argon shielding gas electron microscopy (SEM) in back- the fusion zone-steel interface and fu-
was provided at a flow rate of 20 L/ scattered electron (BSE) mode. sion zone adjacent to the interface, re-
min to prevent oxidation. The laser A transmission electron microscopy spectively. A test load of 0.1 Kgf and a
beam was defocused to irradiate a (TEM) foil of the bonded region was dwell time of 10 s were utilized. The
large area. The process parameters em- prepared using the focused ion beam tensile-shear tests were performed at
ployed in the study were as follows: (FIB) technique. The preparation for room temperature using an Instron
laser power 800 W, welding speed 0.3 the FIB-TEM specimen was made us- 5569 at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/
m/min, and defocused distance +20 ing an in-situ lift out method. The min.
mm. TEM with a Tecnai-G2 F30 operating Shims were clamped to each end of
After laser welding, typical cross at a nominal voltage of 300 kV was the specimens to ensure shear loads in
sections of the welded specimens were used to characterize the microstruc- the lap joint while minimizing bending
cut and mounted in epoxy resin. Stan- ture in detail. or torque of the specimens. Joint
dard grinding and polishing prepara- Phase identification was investigat- strength was calculated via the tensile
tion procedures were then utilized. ed by selected-area electron diffraction testing of at least three specimens, and
The appearances and cross sections (SAED) combined with energy-disper- the average was reported with the stan-
were observed using an optical micro- sive spectroscopy (EDS) in scanning dard deviation provided via error bars.
scope (OM). The reaction layer at the transmission electron microscopy
WELDING RESEARCH
Microstructural Analysis
Figure 4 shows microstructure mor-
phologies along the fusion zone-steel
interface with different thicknesses of
the Al interlayer. Formation of the in-
terfacial reaction layer was observed
from all the joints, confirming metal-
B lurgical bonding of the immiscible Mg
and Fe was realized by adding the Al
interlayer.
In addition, the thickness of the Fe-
Al reaction layer formed at the inter-
face was found to increase with the in-
creasing Al interlayer. When the thick-
ness of the Al interlayer was 0.1 mm,
no obvious reaction layer was noticed,
even at higher magnification as shown
in Fig. 4A, suggesting most of the Al
interlayer melted and was mixed with
the molten Mg fusion zone immedi-
C ately near the interface. The reaction
layer was evidently observed when in-
creasing the thickness of the Al inter-
layer to 0.3 mm. These reaction prod-
ucts exhibited nonuniform and faceted
morphology. With a further increase
of the Al interlayer to 0.7 mm, the re-
action layer grew dramatically, reach-
ing its thickness of more than 10 m.
The crack was evidently observed at
a higher magnification indicated in the
inset of Fig. 4D, which deteriorated
Fig. 5 — EDS line scan results of Mg, Al, Fe, and Mn across the fusion zonesteel interface joint strength. The results were in ac-
at different thicknesses of the Al interlayer: A — 0.1 mm; B — 0.2 mm; and C — 0.3 mm. cordance with the previous report that
cracking may easily occur if the thick-
Results and Discussion From the cross-sectional views ness of the Fe-Al intermetallic layers
shown in Fig. 3, the Al foil was not ob- exceeded 10 m, which was detrimen-
served as a separate layer along the in- tal to mechanical properties (Ref. 33).
Joint Appearances terface after the process, indicating it EDS line scanning analyses were
entirely melted and was dissolved into performed to obtain concentration
Figure 2 shows the joint appearances the Mg liquid adjacent to the interface. profiles of the main alloying elements
with different Al interlayer thicknesses. The opening was observed at the edge across the interface between the Mg
No spatter or obvious defect was evi- of the fusion zone close to the steel in- fusion zone and steel. Figure 5 shows
denced in the figure because of suitable terface due to the bad wetting-spread- the corresponding line scan results.
heat input employed in the present ing ability of Mg and steel. The open- The Mg element decreased gradually
work. However, a nonuniform and ing defect was improved with the addi- from the fusion zone to the steel side,
rough surface was first observed when tion of Al foil. With an increasing while the Fe content was varied in an
the interlayer was thin, as shown in Fig. thickness of the interlayer, the joint opposite way. Note that an apparent
2A and 2B. It was mainly attributed to width became larger due to good wet- Al concentration peaked at the inter-
the instability of the Mg molten pool at ting of Al and steel. It was believed face in all joints, indicating an occur-
the action of laser energy. With the in- that the affinity of Al and Fe was much rence of atomic diffusion or dissolu-
crease of Al thickness, the joint surface stronger than that of Mg and Fe. Thus, tion of the Al element, which there-
was improved, obtaining a smooth and the thin Al liquid adhering to the steel after induced interfacial reaction. Ad-
uniform appearance indicated in Fig. 2C interface reduced the difficulty of the ditionally, the diffusion distance be-
and 2D. Mg molten pool spreading on the steel came longer with the increasing Al
WELDING RESEARCH
Phase Identification
Fig. 6 — Effect of Al interlayer with different thicknesses on the microstructure in the Transmission electron microscopy
fusion side near the interface of Mg/steel: A — 0.1 mm; B — 0.3 mm; C — 0.5 mm; and analysis was performed to further
D — 0.7 mm. identify the composition and structure
of the reaction layers formed between
A B the fusion zone and steel.
Figure 7 shows a typical bright field
TEM image of the fusion zone-steel in-
terface when the thickness of the reac-
tion layer was not more than 2 m. A
TEM foil was prepared at the interface,
as shown in Fig. 7A. A noncontinuous,
ultra-thin reaction layer was found to
exist between the Mg fusion zone and
steel substrate indicated in Fig. 7B. The
elemental composition at different posi-
tions indicated in Fig. 7B are listed in
Table 1 based on STEM-EDS results.
Location P2 contained 13.0 at-%
Mn, which was much higher than the
Fig. 7 — Overview of TEM images and base metals. Location P3 contained
STEMEDS analysis result: A — TEM spec
C 5.5 at-% Al and 94.5 at-% Fe. As
imen; B — TEM image of the reaction shown in Fig. 7C, a relatively long dif-
layer with its thickness of less than 2 m; fusion distance (a depth of about 550
and C — STEMEDS line scan result. nm) of Al element into the steel side
was observed from the STEM-EDS line
thickness, which caused formation of scan result. Meanwhile, the Mn ele-
more Fe-Al reaction layers. ment was enriched at the interface
Figure 6 shows the microstructure close to the Mg fusion zone side. Con-
variation adjacent to the fusion zone- sequently, the Al-Mn phase and Fe-Al
steel interface with the different thick- reaction layer was expected to form at
nesses of the Al interlayer. The Al in- the interface.
terlayer was heated and melted by pool close to the interface. Mutual dif- Figure 8 shows a TEM micrograph
laser irradiation during the process. fusion of Mg-Al atoms then took place with SAED patterns corresponding to
Part of the molten Al interlayer was in a fast rate due to their liquid state. Fig. 7. The ultra-thin reaction prod-
dissolved into the upper Mg molten Mg-Al intermetallic compounds would ucts consisted of two different phases,
WELDING RESEARCH
Mechanical Properties
WELDING RESEARCH
A B C
Fig. 9 — Diffraction patterns of the FeAl phase at different locations of 0, 100, and 2000 nm with the point indicated in Fig. 8.
WELDING RESEARCH
Conclusion
Fig. 11 — Hardness distribution profile: A — Across the interface of Mg/steel; B — near the 1) With the addition of the Al inter-
interface with the different thicknesses of the Al interlayer. layer, successful joining of Mg to steel
was realized by laser welding. A visually
acceptable and uniform joint was
A B achieved with the assistance of a good
affinity of Al and steel. The best joint
quality was obtained using the following
process parameters: 800-W laser power,
0.3-m/min welding speed, +20-mm de-
focused distance, and 0.3-mm-thickness
of Al interlayer.
2) Al interlayer was dissolved into
the Mg fusion zone and mutual diffu-
sion with steel, causing metallurgical
bonding of Mg and steel at the inter-
face, and more precipitation of the Mg-
Fig. 12 — Tensileshear fracture load of the laser welded magnesiumsteel joints: A — Al compounds. A reaction layer formed
Fracture load and thickness of the reaction layer with the variation of thicknesses of the Al along the interface of the fusion zone-
interlayer; B — fracture load with a function of the thickness of the reaction layer. steel joint. The thickness increased with
an increasing thickness of the Al inter-
with the addition of the Al interlayer face was saturated inducing crystalliza- layer. Cracking was observed between
was elucidated. tion of Fe(Al) when the Al interlayer the reaction products and steel sub-
Figure 14 shows the schematic dia- was very thin, as indicated in Fig. 14C. A strate when the thickness was larger
gram of the joining mechanism. First, thin layer of Fe(Al) formed first from than 10 m. Precipitation of the Mg-Al
melting of the Mg sheet and Al inter- the liquid by solid-state diffusion of Al intermetallic compounds was noticed at
layer occurred simultaneously when atoms in the liquid filler metal into the the fusion zone close to the interface.
suffering the laser beam irradiation, as steel. Upon further cooling, some Mn The quantity of the compounds in-
shown in Fig. 14B. The liquid Mg atoms diffusing from the steel substrate creased with the increase of the Al inter-
atoms and Al atoms dissolved into were then bonded with Al atoms, giving layer. The excessive precipitation caused
each other. At the same time, some Al rise to the Al8Mn5 phase under the tem- the brittleness of the fusion zone and
atoms close to the liquid/solid inter- perature of 680ºC (Ref. 37). decreased the fracture load.
face diffused into the steel surface. The phase nucleated and grew on 3) Two different reaction layers were
Because of the laser irradiation, the the first precipitated Fe(Al) surface, as identified by TEM analysis. When the
atoms in the steel adjacent to the in- shown in Fig. 14D. Part of the Mn thickness of the reaction layer was less
terface were also activated at a high atoms were replaced by the Fe atoms than 2 m, the phases close to the steel
temperature and slightly dissolved due to their similar atomic radius and substrate were the Fe(Al) solid solution
into the liquid. The diffusion distance metallurgical characteristics. When and Al8(Mn, Fe)5 phase on the Fe(Al)
was relatively short due to fast ther- the temperature decreased to 650ºC or surface, while the Al6Fe phase formed
mal cycle during laser welding. As a re- below, -Mg first precipitated from when the reaction layer was more than
sult, different percents of the main al- the remaining liquid. 2 m.
loying elements Mg, Al, and steel were Finally, a eutectic reaction occurred 4) Three different fracture modes
mixed from fusion zone to the in the liquid, producing a eutectic were distinguished from all the joints
liquid/solid interface. The different structure ( – Mg + Mg17Al12). In the produced with different thicknesses of
precipitation modes were distin- case of the thick Al interlayer, more Al the Al interlayers, which was closely as-
guished with the variation of thethick- atoms segregated at the front of liq- sociated with the interfacial reaction.
ness of the Al interlayer. uid/solid interface. Therefore, differ- Insufficient atomic diffusion caused in-
Upon cooling, as the temperature de- ent Fe-Al phases formed depending on terfacial failure with the fracture at the
creased to about 1000ºC, the solid solu- the ratio of Al and Fe atoms. The con- faying surface of the Mg and steel sheet.
bility of Al in Fe at the solid/liquid inter- tent of Al and Fe reached the stoichio- The suitable interfacial reaction oc-
WELDING RESEARCH
WELDING RESEARCH