Optimisation of friction-stir welding process using vibro-acoustic signal analysis
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a mathematical model to predict the tensile strength (TS) of friction-stir welded (FSW) AA1050 aluminium alloy joint. This model has been obtained from the optimisation of the parameters of models developed from vibro-acoustic signals produced during the process. The multiple response method was used to obtain the optimisation model. During experimental development, the process parameters selected to be assessed were rotation speed (RS), travel speed, and tool profile (TP). The TS of the welded joint and the root mean square (RMS) value of the vibro-acoustic signal in the frequency range of 3·2–6·4 kHz were analysed as response variables. In order to validate the model, the optimal values of the factors and responses are presented, showing their agreement with the experimental values obtained. This model can be used to develop and optimise the parameters of the automatic control of the FSW process, based on the vibro-acoustic signal generated.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Welding Techniques Analysis · Electronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies · Aluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering. University of Oriente, Ave. Las Américas s/n; CP 90900, Santiago de Cuba, Cuba
Electrical Engineering Department, University of La Rioja, Spain
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of La Rioja, Spain
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Thomas WM, Nicholas ED, Needham JC, Murch MG, Temple-Smith P, Dawes CJ: U. S. Patent No. 5,460,317. 1995.
2. Dawes C, Thomas WM: TWI Bulletin 6, November/December 1995, 124.
3. Arbegast WJ: Proc. Friction Stir Welding and Processing IV, 3–18, 2007.
4. 10.1016/j.mser.2005.07.00110.1016/j.mser.2005.07.001 ↗
5. 10.1016/S0924-0136(03)00806-910.1016/S0924-0136(03)00806-9 ↗
6. 10.1179/1362171811Y.000000001110.1179/1362171811Y.0000000011 ↗
7. 10.1179/1362171811Y.000000009910.1179/1362171811Y.0000000099 ↗
8. 10.1179/174329312X1355995930369110.1179/174329312X13559959303691 ↗
9. 10.1179/1362171812Y.000000003910.1179/1362171812Y.0000000039 ↗
10. 10.1243/09544054JEM58610.1243/09544054JEM586 ↗
11. Suresha CN · Int. J. Rec. Trends Eng. · 2009 · 1 · 86
12. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2010.11.00710.1016/j.ymssp.2010.11.007 ↗
13. 10.1179/136217110X1266577834858810.1179/136217110X12665778348588 ↗
14. 10.1179/174329307X21388210.1179/174329307X213882 ↗
15. Orozco MS, Fernández JB, Macías EJ, de la Parte MP: Dyna, 2013, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10·6036/5326
16. Rajakumar S · Int. J. Microstruct. Mater. Prop. · 2011 · 6 · 132
17. 10.1007/s12540-009-0321-310.1007/s12540-009-0321-3 ↗
18. 10.1179/1362171812Y.000000004010.1179/1362171812Y.0000000040 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.05.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2008.05.001 ↗
20. 10.1023/A:102172612386410.1023/A:1021726123864 ↗
21. 10.1016/S0890-6955(03)00130-510.1016/S0890-6955(03)00130-5 ↗
22. Box GEP, Hunter WH, Hunter JS: ‘Statistics for Experimenters’, 2nd ed., 633; 2005, New Jersey, John Wiley Publications.
23. Montgomery DC: ‘Design and analysis of experiments’, 5th ed., 684; 2004, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.