The solidification cracking susceptibility of aluminium alloys 2024, 2219, 6061 and 7075 was evaluated recently by the transverse motion weldability test (the lower sheet moved in the transverse direction of lap welding to cause cracking). The tested welds were analysed in the present study. Their transverse cross-sections showed wide backfilled cracks in 2219 (least susceptible) and narrow open cracks in 6061 (most susceptible). Their fracture surfaces showed continuous eutectic in 2219 and discontinuous eutectic in 6061, consistent with the less backfilling in 6061. T was plotted against (fS)1/2 (T: temperature; fS: fraction solid) to explain the differences. The critical local strain rate near the crack was estimated, significantly lower in 6061 than 2219 and consistent with the higher crack susceptibility of 6061.
Maxal.com. Maxal guide for aluminum welding. Maxal International, Inc.; 2012. p. 43.
17.
LiuK, KouS.Susceptibility of magnesium alloys to solidification cracking. Sci Technol Weld Joining. 2019. doi: 10.1080/13621718.2019.1681160
18.
SoysalT, KouS.A simple test for solidification cracking susceptibility and filler metal effect. Weld J. 2017; 96(10):389-s–401-s.
19.
SoysalT, KouS.A simple test for assessing solidification cracking susceptibility and checking validity of susceptibility prediction. Acta Mater. 2018; 143:181–197. doi: 10.1016/j.actamat.2017.09.065
20.
SoysalT, KouS.Effect of filler metals on solidification cracking susceptibility of Al alloys 2024 and 6061. J Mater Process Technol. 2019; 266:421–428. doi: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.11.022
21.
SavageWF, LundinCD.The Varestraint test. Weld J. 1965; 44(10):433-s–442-s.
22.
Pandat – Phase Diagram Calculation software package for Multicomponent Systems. Computherm LLC, Madison, WI 53719, 2013.
23.
PanAluminium – Thermodynamic database for Commercial Aluminum Alloys. Computherm LLC, Madison, WI 53719, 2013.
24.
MatsudaF, NakagawaH, NakataK, Quantitative evaluation of solidification brittleness of weld metal during solidification by means of in-situ observation and measurement (report I): development of the MISO technique (materials, metallurgy & weldability). Trans JWRI1983; 12(1):65–72.
25.
MatsudaF, NakagawaH, TomitaS.Quantitative evaluation of solidification brittleness of weld metal during solidification by in-situ observation and measurement (Report III): effect of strain rate on minimum ductility required for solidification crack initiation in carbon steels, stainless steels and inconel alloy (materials, metallurgy & weldability). Trans JWRI1986; 15(2):297–305.
26.
MatsudaF, NakagawaH, TomitaS.Quantitative evaluation of solidification brittleness of weld metal during solidification by in-situ observation and measurement (report IV). Trans JWRI. 1987; 16(2):317–323.
27.
MatsudaF, NakagawaH, TomitaS.Quantitative evaluation of solidification brittleness of weld metal during solidification by in-situ observation and measurement (report V): correlation between critical strain rate and critical deformation rate required for solidification crack initiation (materials, metallugy & weldability). Trans JWRI. 1990; 19(1):93–98.
28.
KadoiK, FujinagaA, YamamotoM, The effect of welding conditions on solidification cracking susceptibility of type 310S stainless steel during laser welding using an in-situ observation technique. Weld World. 2013; 57(3):383–390.
29.
BakirN, GumenyukA, RethmeierM.Investigation of solidification cracking susceptibility during laser beam welding using an in-situ observation technique. Sci Technol Weld Joining. 2018; 23(3):234–240. doi:10.1080/13621718.2017.1367550.
30.
BakirN, PavlovV, ZavjalovS, Development of a novel optical measurement technique to investigate the hot cracking susceptibility during laser beam welding. Weld World. 2019; 63(2):435–441. doi: 10.1007/s40194-018-0665-8
