See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/274322373

Mechanics in frictional penetration with a blind rivet

Article in Journal of Materials Processing Technology · August 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2015.02.011

CITATIONS READS

22 741

5 authors, including:

Junying Min Yongqiang Li

Tongji University Carbon, Inc.
124 PUBLICATIONS 1,969 CITATIONS 28 PUBLICATIONS 613 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jingjing Li Blair E. Carlson

Pennsylvania State University General Motors Company
91 PUBLICATIONS 1,998 CITATIONS 192 PUBLICATIONS 4,432 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

FSW of thin aluminium alloy sheets View project

Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) Spot Welding of Lightweight Materials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jingjing Li on 17 October 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Materials Processing Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmatprotec

Mechanics in frictional penetration with a blind rivet

Junying Min a,∗ , Yongqiang Li b , Jingjing Li a , Blair E. Carlson b , Jianping Lin c,∗∗
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2540 Dole Street, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
b
Manufacturing Systems Research Lab, General Motors Global R&D, 30500 Mound Road, Warren, MI 48090, USA
c
School of Mechanical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The mechanics of frictional penetration driven by a blind rivet to sheet metals is analyzed for a friction stir
Received 15 November 2014 blind riveting process. Analytic models are deduced to calculate the material removal rate, penetration
Received in revised form 5 February 2015 force and torque during the frictional penetration process. Frictional penetration tests with modified
Accepted 7 February 2015
rivets and an Al alloy sheet were carried out at various rotation speed–feed rate combinations, where the
Available online 18 March 2015
penetration force and torque were recorded with a data acquisition system. An analysis of the contact
condition between the rivet tip and the work material based upon the assumption of pure sliding contact
Keywords:
in the initial penetration to partial sticking contact beyond a critical penetration depth of the rivet is
Friction stir
Penetration
completed, and the results are discussed based on the comparison of the analytically calculated and
Blind rivet experimentally measured torque–force ratios.
Material removal rate © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction resistance spot welding. Lathabai et al. (2011) investigated the

effect of blind rivet design for FSBR of Al alloys to Mg AZ31. Min et al.
Friction stir blind riveting (FSBR) as reported by Gao et al. (2009) (2014) joined cast Mg alloy AM60 to Al alloy sheets by FSBR and con-
and Lathabai et al. (2011) is a novel mechanical joining method and cluded that the FSBR joints carried greater tensile loads than joints
is being developed, which combines the advantages of FSW and fabricated using the conventional blind riveting method. Analyt-
the blind riveting. In FSBR (Fig. 1), a blind rivet is driven toward ical and numerical modeling studies have focused on the FSW
the work materials with a high-speed rotating tool (e.g. 3000 rpm process, and in particular included thermal, thermo-mechanical,
or above). The rotating rivet generates frictional heat when engag- and friction models. Schmidt and Hattel (2008) reported basic
ing the work materials. The elevated temperature can significantly thermal equations for friction stir welding and clarified several
reduce the yield strength of the work materials. This allows the uncertainties regarding the different mechanisms of heat gener-
blind rivet to penetrate through the workpieces with reduced forces ation. Kuykendall et al. (2013) modeled the FSW process and found
as compared to self-piercing riveting which occurs at room tem- that the selection of constitutive law has a significant effect on the
perature. Herein lies the advantage of FSBR to achieve single sided prediction of the temperature profile, the peak strain as well as
joining. Once the blind rivet is fully seated, the internal mandrel is the peak strain rate. Schmidt et al. (2004) developed an analytic
pulled upward to mechanically fasten the work materials, and the model for the heat generation in FSW with several assumptions
mandrel is broken to create a friction stir blind riveted joint. FSBR of contact conditions between the friction tool and the workpiece.
is capable of joining a variety of materials, e.g. dissimilar metals Mishra and Ma (2005) showed that the frictional condition between
such as Mg alloy to Al alloy by Min et al. (2014a) and Al alloy to the tool and the workpiece (2024Al-T3 alloy) changed from “stick”
composites by Min et al. (2014b). at lower rotation speeds (<400 rpm) to “stick/slip” at higher rota-
Most existing studies on FSBR or FSR are experimental investi- tion speeds of the tool. Chen and Kovacevic (2003) established a
gations aimed at demonstrating its feasibility for joining dissimilar 3-D finite element model incorporating the frictional heat source
sheet metals. For example, Gao et al. (2009) joined AA5052 sheets between work materials and the tool to study the thermal history
by FSBR and found that the FSBR joints carried higher tensile loads and thermo-mechanical process in FSW of AA6061 alloys.
and exhibited greater fatigue resistance than joints produced by To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there has been no pub-
lished research on the mechanical modeling of the relatively new
joining process, FSBR. The mechanical analysis will not only provide
∗ Corresponding author at: Lehrstuhl für Productions systeme, Ruhr-Universität understanding of the FSBR process, but also other friction stir pro-
Bochum, Bochum 44780, Germany. Tel.: +49 15738011709. cesses, such as friction stir drilling. The objective of this work is
∗∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 13901719457. to analyze the mechanics of frictional penetration with a blind
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. Min), [email protected] (J. Lin). rivet. The upsetting step is not analyzed here and will be covered
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2015.02.011
0924-0136/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279 269

in a separate paper. Frictional penetration tests in single AA6022-

Nomenclature T4 sheets were conducted. Analytic models for material removal
rate, penetration force and torque were established. Particularly, a
A the slope of FZ1 –MRR1 curve torque–force ratio is proposed to evaluate the contact conditions
B the slope of MZ1 –MRR1 curve between the rivet tip and the Al alloy sheet.
f the feed rate
FZ , FZ1 and FZ2 the penetration forces on the rivet mandrel
2. Mechanical analysis
tip
FZ1 max the peak penetration force
Through analyses of a large number of FSBR experiments incor-
Fd the driving force applied on the rivet mandrel by the
porating several designs of blind rivets, Lathabai et al. (2011)
spindle fixture
concluded that blind rivets with hollow mandrel heads require sig-
Fs the force on the shank head applied by the spindle
nificantly lower penetration force than those with solid mandrel
fixture
heads.
h the height difference between the surfaces of the
Illustrated in Fig. 2a is a blind rivet including a mandrel body,
penetrated and non-penetrated areas of the work-
a hollow mandrel head, shank body, shank head, and break notch.
piece
In FSBR, the mandrel body is held with a spindle fixture rotating
H the heat generation rate
around the Z-axis at a rotational speed (ω) and fed along the Z-
Mz , Mz1 and Mz2 the torques on the rivet mandrel tip
axis at a feed rate (f), as shown in Fig. 2b. The mandrel head is first
MZ1 max the peak torque
brought into contact with the upper workpiece of a lap joint, and
Md the driving torque applied on the rivet mandrel by
as it penetrates through the workpieces, the shank head eventually
the spindle fixture
comes into contact with the top workpiece. Assuming that there
Ms the torque on the shank head applied by the spindle
is no slippage between the spindle fixture and the mandrel body,
fixture
according to the force and torque equilibrium conditions, Eqs. (1)
MRR1 and MRR2 the material removal rates
and (2) can be obtained
P1 and P2 the pressures acting normal to the rivet shear plane
Q the frictional heat FZ = Fd + Fs (1)
R the ratio of the penetration force to torque
S1 and S2 the shear stresses between the rivet shear planes MZ = Md + Ms (2)
and the work material where FZ and MZ are the penetration force and torque acting on the
St1 and St2 the shear stresses tangential to the rotational rivet tip due to its interaction with the workpiece during frictional
motion penetration; Fd and Md are the holding force and torque on the
Sp1 and Sp2 the shear stresses along the shear planes mandrel body applied by the spindle fixture; and Fs and Ms are the
t1 and t2 the wall thicknesses of the rivet tip force and torque on the shank head applied by the spindle fixture,
twork the thickness of the workpiece which are subtle and difficult to measure since they are due to static
T the time friction between the spindle fixture and the shank head and are also
v1 and v2 the motions of the rivet shear planes relative to the dependent on Fd and Md . The analysis of overall force and torque
work material equilibrium is beneficial for avoiding quality issues of friction stir
vt1 and vt2 the motions tangential to the rotational motion blind riveting joints, e.g. intrusion of the mandrel head into the
vp1 and vp2 the motions along the shear planes shank during frictional penetration (refer to Min et al. (2015) for
vt work the speed of work material tangential to the rota- details).
tional motion The following focuses on the interaction between the rivet tip
V1 and V2 the volumes of work material removed by the rivet and the workpiece. Fig. 3a illustrates the axial symmetrical force
tip analysis between the mandrel tip and the workpiece when the pen-
Z the penetration depth of the rivet tip etration depth is Z. For simplicity, only one layer of workpiece is
ZF=max the rivet travel distance corresponding to FZ1 max considered in the detailed mechanical analysis. Further, the man-
ZM=max the rivet travel distance corresponding to MZ1 max drel tip has a simple sharp shape with two shear planes. With
ZF=0 the rivet travel distance corresponding to FZ1 = 0 respect to the Z-axis as shown in Fig. 3a, the inner and outer shear
ZM=0 the rivet travel distance corresponding to MZ1 = 0 planes have angles of ˛1 and ˛2 respectively. Hereinafter “1” and
ZH=max the rivet travel distance corresponding to the peak “2” indicate the inner and outer shear plane with respect to the axis
heat generation rate of rotation and the radius of curvature where the two shear planes
ZR–c the rivet travel distance corresponding to the critical intersect is considered to be 0. During the feeding of the mandrel
R tip, there are pressures (P1 and P2 ) acting perpendicular to the shear
˛1 and ˛2 the rivet tip angles planes. The rotation of the mandrel tip results in two tangential
ı the ratio of  work to P1 shear stresses (St1 and St2 ), and the feeding motion of the mandrel
 a state parameter tip leads to two shear stresses (Sp1 and Sp2 ) along the shear planes.
 the friction coefficient between the rivet shear plane The mandrel tip in Fig. 3a can be separated into two simpler cases:
and the work material a mandrel tip with only an inner shear plane as shown in Fig. 3b and
 the distance between the point on the rivet tip and a mandrel tip with only an outer shear plane in Fig. 3c. Based upon
the rotational axis this breakdown, the effects of the inner and outer shear planes will
 work the yield tensile stress of the work material be discussed and compared, while the experimental validation in
 work the yield shear stress of the work material this work will focus solely on the case described in Fig. 3b.
ω the rotational speed.
Subscripts 2.1. Calculations of material removal rates
1, 2 indicate the inner and outer shear plane with
respect to the axis of rotation, respectively. The rotating rivet during the frictional penetration portion of
the FSBR process displaces the workpiece material which is very
270 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279

Fig. 1. Illustration of the FSBR process. (a) The rotating blind rivet is approaching the workpieces, (b) frictional penetration of the rivet, (c) pulling out the mandrel, and (d)
completion (Min et al., 2015).

Fig. 2. (a) A typical blind rivet with a hollow mandrel head, and (b) schematic illustration of the frictional penetration process.

similar to the machining (e.g. milling and drilling) process. The outer radius of the rivet in the case of Fig. 3b. Similarly, V1 (T + dT)
material removal rate (MRR), which is defined as the material vol- is deduced as
ume removed by the tool per unit time, has a significant effect on  r1
FZ , as reported by Bayoumi et al. (1994). V1 (T + dT ) = 2 · [ − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1
As shown in Fig. 4, for a feed rate (f) and rotation speed (ω), the r1 −(Z+f ·dT )·tan ˛1
mandrel tip has a displacement of f · dT in the Z direction for an
− f · dT · tan ˛1 )] · cot ˛1 · d (4)
infinitesimal time, dT. The volume of work material (dV1 ) removed
by the rivet tip, indicated in the dotted red region, is the difference
between the removed volume V1 (T) at T and the removed volume
Then dV1 is calculated as
V1 (T + dT) at T + dT. Appendix A details the calculation of the V1 (T),
which is expressed by Eq. (3) dV1 = V1 (T + dT ) − V1 (T )
 r1 1
V1 (T ) = 2 · [ − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )] · cot ˛1 · d (3) = f [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 + (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )
3
r1 −Z·tan ˛1
× (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 − f · dT · tan ˛1 )
where  is the distance between the point on the rivet tip and the 2

rotational axis, Z is the penetration depth of the rivet tip, r1 is the + (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 − f · dT · tan ˛1 ) ] · dT (5)
 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279 271

Fig. 3. (a) Stresses acting on the mandrel tip. (b) and (c) are two simplified cases of the mandrel tip based upon their geometry.

By ignoring the second and higher order terms of dT in Eq. (5), expressed by Eq. (7) and Z is limited to the range from 0 to twork ,
dV1 becomes and MRR1 = 0 when Z > twork since the material beneath the rivet is
cut off when the rivet tip penetrates through the workpiece. When
dV1 = f [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 ] · dT (6) twork ≥ t1 · cot ˛1 , MRR1 is a piecewise function
⎧
At last, the material removal rate MRR1 is expressed by ⎪ f [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 ] 0 ≤ Z ≤ t1 · cot ˛1
⎨
MRR1 = f [r12 − (r1 − t1 )2 ] t1 · cot ˛1 ≤ Z ≤ twork (8)
MRR1 =
dV1
= f [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 ] (7) ⎪
⎩
dT 0 Z > twork
It is worth to note that MRR1 is dependent on the comparison The second expression on the right of Eq. (8) indicates that
between the depth of the mandrel tip with shear plane, t1 · cot˛1 MRR1 is a constant when the whole rivet tip with shear plane is
(here t1 is the wall thickness of the rivet in Fig. 3b), and the embedded in the middle of the workpiece thickness. Similarly, the
workpiece thickness (twork ), i.e., when twork < t1 · cot ˛1 , MRR1 is material removal rate (MRR2 ) for the case in Fig. 3c is deduced as
(see Appendix B):when twork < t2 · cot ˛2 ,
⎧
⎪ f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] 0 ≤ Z ≤ twork
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − t 2
work · tan ˛2 ) ] twork < Z ≤ t2 · cot ˛2
MRR2 = (9)
⎪
⎪ f [(r2 + t2 )2 − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 )2 ] t2 · cot ˛2 < Z ≤ twork + t2 · cot ˛2
⎪
⎪
⎩
0 Z > twork + t2 · cot ˛2

when twork ≥ t2 · cot ˛2

⎧
⎪ f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] 0 ≤ Z ≤ t2 · cot ˛2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ f [(r2 + t2 )2 − r 2 ]
2
t2 · cot ˛2 < Z ≤ twork
MRR2 = (10)
⎪
⎪ f [(r2 + t2 )2 − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 )2 ] twork < Z ≤ twork + t2 · cot ˛2
⎪
⎪
⎩
0 Z > twork + t2 · cot ˛2
272 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279

Fig. 6. Illustration of the contact between an element in the work material and a
rivet element.

equilibrium of the vertical forces on the shear planes by ignoring

Sp1 and Sp2

FZ1 = a1 · P1 · sin ˛1 (16)

Fig. 4. Illustration for the calculation of MRR in frictional penetration. FZ2 = a2 · P2 · sin ˛2 (17)

where a1 and a2 are the areas of contacting shear planes “1” and
2.2. Force and torque calculations “2”, respectively, and are calculated as

Before establishing force equilibrium conditions for the rivet tip, r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2
the shear stresses on the shear plane are analyzed in detail first. a1 = (18)
sin ˛1
Fig. 5 is a view normal to the shear plane, which illustrates the
motion of the shear plane relative (v1 ) to the work material and the (r1 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r12
a2 = (19)
shear stress (S1 ). S1 has two components, Sp1 and St1 , which are also sin ˛2
shown in Fig. 3b and correspond to the components of the motion
When developing analytic models for the torque in the frictional
(v1 ), vp1 and vt1 , respectively. Sp1 , St1 , vp1 and vt1 are expressed by
penetration process of a rivet, the contact condition between the
Sp1 = S1 sin 1 (11) workpiece and the rotating rivet is the most critical (Schmidt et al.,
2004). According to Schmidt et al. (2004), the contact condition
St1 = S1 cos 1 (12) between the tool and the workpiece could be: (1) pure sliding, (2)
pure sticking or (3) mixed sliding and sticking in the friction stir
f
vp1 = v1 sin 1 = (13) welding process. As regards to Contact (1), the Coulomb’s law of
cos ˛1
friction can be applied to describe the shear stress between the
vt1 = v1 cos 1 = ω (14) rotating rivet and work material,
where  is the distance from the point on the rivet shear plane to St1 |Slide ≈ S1 |Slide =  · P1 (20)
the rotation axis; 1 is the angle between v1 and vt1 ,
St2 |Slide ≈ S2 |Slide =  · P2 (21)
vp1 Sp1
1 = arctan = arctan (15) where  is the friction coefficient between the rivet shear plane
vt1 St1
and the work material and is a function of temperature, velocity
vp1 is far less than vt1 in the actual friction penetration pro- and choice of workpiece materials.
cess, e.g. considering f = 780 mm/min, ˛1 = 30◦ , ω = 2␲ × 6000/min When the pressure between the rivet shear plane and the work
and  = 2 mm (Min et al., 2015), then vp1 = 9.01 × 102 mm/min and material is sufficiently high and St |Slide calculated from Eqs. (20)
vt1 = 7.54 × 104 mm/min. As a result, 1 is a very small value close and (21) exceeds the yield shear stress ( work ) of the work material
to 0 based on Eq. (15). Hence, St1 ∼ S1 , and Sp1 is close to 0 and is contacting with rivet shear plane, the sticking contact condition,
ignored in the following analysis. i.e. Contact condition (2), is then satisfied. In this case, the work
As shown in Fig. 3b and c, the penetration forces acting on the material closest to the shear plane sticks to the rivet shear plane
two shear planes of the mandrel tip can be calculated from the and is accelerated by the rotating rivet until an equilibrium state is
achieved between the tangential shear stress and  work ; finally, the
speed of the work material closest to the rivet shear plane (vt work ) is
equal to the speed on the rotating rivet shear plane (vt1 ) as shown
in Fig. 6. As a result, a sticking affected zone (SAZ) exists, where
the speed of work material decreases to zero as the distance (ϕ)
from the rivet shear plane increases. In the Contact condition (3)
(also the mixing or partial sticking condition), the material closest
to the rivet shear plane still rotates with the rivet, however vt work
is smaller than vt rivet . Therefore, relative sliding as well as sticking
exists between the rivet shear plane and the work material. The fol-
lowing analyses on the torque are based on the above three contact
conditions.
In the pure sliding contact condition (Contact (1)), the torque is
essentially a result of the tangential shear stress in the tangential
Fig. 5. Shear stresses on the rivet shear plane (enlarged normal view from the direction (St1 |Slide and St2 |Slide ) on the contact surfaces of the rivet
axisymmetric axis of an infinitesimal section of the shear plane). shear planes and the work material, and St1 |Slide and St2 |Slide are
 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279 273

Table 1
Process parameters in the frictional penetration tests.

Rotation speed [rpm] 3000 9000 9000

Feed rate [mm/min] 120 120 780

Replacing da1 from Eq. (22) into Eq. (27) and integrating dz from
0 to Z, then the torque (Mz1 |Stick ) can be deduced as
2work 3
Mz1 |Stick = [r − (r1 − z · tan ˛1 )3 ] (28)
3 sin ˛1 1
Similarly, the torque (Mz2 |Stick ) in the sticking contact condition
in Fig. 3c is expressed as
2work
Mz2 |Stick = [(r2 + z · tan ˛2 )3 − r23 ] (29)
3 sin ˛2
A state parameter, , is introduced to describe the portion of
sticking in the mixed sliding/sticking contact between the work
material and the rotating rivet. The mixed contact is assumed to
be a linear combination of the sliding contact and sticking contact,
Fig. 7. Illustration for calculation of torque in the frictional penetration process. namely, the tangential shear stress (St |mix ) on the contact surface
between the work material and the rivet shear plane is

calculated based on Coulomb’s law as expressed in Eqs. (20) and St |mix =  · St |stick + (1 − ) · St |Slide (30)
(21), respectively. Based on the previous deduction in Section 2.2, the following
Assume the rivet penetration depth is Z and the infinitesimal equation can also be obtained.
displacement of the rivet tip is dz. The distance from the rivet shear
plane to the rotation axis is calculated as r1 − Z · tan˛1 , refer to Fig. 7, |mix =  · |stick + (1 − ) · |Slide (31)
and then the corresponding infinitesimal area on the rivet shear can be either of St1 , St2 , MZ1 and MZ2 .
plane, da1 , is computed as Eq. (22) by ignoring the higher order At last, for a general case where the rivet has a tip shown in
terms of dz Fig. 3a, the penetration force and torque are computed per Eqs.
(32) and (33), respectively.
(r1 − z · tan ˛1 )2 [r1 − (z + dz) · tan ˛1 ]2
da1 = −
sin ˛1 sin ˛1 FZ = FZ1 |mix + FZ2 |mix (32)
2 (r1 − z · tan ˛1 ) MZ = MZ1 |mix + MZ2 |mix (33)
= dz (22)
cos ˛1
It is easy to understand that the cases where  = 0 and  = 1 indi-
cate pure sliding contact and pure sticking contact, respectively.
The infinitesimal change in torque (dMz1 |Slide ) based on the
Consequently, Eqs. (31)–(33) cover all three contact conditions.
infinitesimal area (da1 ) and the tangential shear stress (St1 |Slide ) is
expressed as Eq. (23).
3. Details of frictional penetration tests
dMz1 |Slide = St1 |Slide · (r1 − z · tan ˛1 ) · da1 (23)
The work material used in the frictional penetration tests was
Replacing da1 from Eq. (22) into Eq. (23) and integrating dz from AA6022-T4 sheet with a gage thickness of 1.2 mm, and the dimen-
0 to Z, the torque (Mz1 |Slide ) in the frictional penetration process is sions of the workpieces were 38 mm in width by 127 mm in length.
obtained. Rivets with tips as shown in Fig. 3b and ˛1 = 30◦ were fabricated
by machining commercial blind rivets (Advel SSPV-08-06), which
2P1 3
Mz1 |Slide = [r − (r1 − z · tan ˛1 )3 ] (24) had a shank diameter of 6.4 mm. The detailed dimensions of the
3 sin ˛1 1 machined rivets are presented in Fig. 8a. The frictional penetration
tests were performed on a Makino A99 CNC machine. In the tests, a
Similarly, the torque in the case of Fig. 3c is deduced as
single workpiece was clamped on a backing plate with a Ф 10 mm
2P2 hole to allow for penetration of the rivet. Furthermore, the CNC
Mz2 |Slide = [(r2 + z · tan ˛2 )3 − r23 ] (25)
3 sin ˛2 machine was equipped with a dynamometer, as shown in Fig. 8b
and finally, the rivet mandrel was held by a spindle fixture. The
When the pure sticking condition is fulfilled, the tangential rotation speeds and feed rates are listed in Table 1. The displace-
shear stress, St1 |stick (or St2 |stick ), is equivalent to the yield shear ment of the rivet from the top surface of the workpiece was set to
stress of the work material,  work , which is supposed to be Eq. (26) 5 mm in all tests, i.e. only part of the mandrel head penetrated the
as reported by Schmidt et al. (2004). AA6022 workpiece. Use of a dynamometer and a data acquisition
work system allowed for measurements of both the penetration force
work = √ (26) and torque during the frictional penetration tests.
3

where  work is the yield tensile stress of the work material, and 4. Results
 work is independent of the pressure. Then the infinitesimal torque
(dMz1 |Stick ) in the case of the sticking contact condition is expressed 4.1. Force and torque results
as
The force and torque curves in the frictional penetration tests
dMz1 |Stick = St1 |Stick · (r1 − z · tan ˛1 ) · da1 (27) are presented in Fig. 9a and b, respectively. FZ1 increased with rivet
274 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279

Fig. 8. (a) Dimensions of the rivet modified from the blind rivet SSPV-08-06, and (b) the fixture used in the frictional penetration tests.

travel distance (Z) to the peak value (FZ1 max ) at ZF=max . The depth 4.2. Heat generation
at which the peak value was achieved is a function of the fric-
tional heat input thus, a slower feed rate provided greater heat The previous study by Min et al. (2015) on the FSBR of Al alloys
input for a given depth and resulted in both a lower peak force and showed that over 95% of the input energy was consumed by the
a shorter ZF=max . Once the peak force was achieved, FZ1 gradually torque, and that this proportion increased as rotation increases
decreased to 0 at ∼1.6 mm (ZF=0 ), where the rivet tip penetrated and/or feed rate decreased. Thus for this body of work, the heat
thorough the workpiece. Similar evolution of MZ1 with Z was also generated by the penetration force was neglected with respect
observed. It is noted that both ZF=0 and ZM=0 were larger than the to analyzing the frictional penetration process. Furthermore, it is
thickness of the workpiece, which was attributed to the material assumed that the work done by the rotation of the rivet was com-
crown at the bottom of the workpiece formed by the frictional pen- pletely converted into heat. Hence, the heat generation rate (H) is
etration of the rivet as reported by Min et al. (2014c). At a fixed expressed as Eq. (34).
feed rate of f = 120 mm/min and as the rotation speed increased
from 3000 to 9000 rpm, FZ1 max decreased from 0.38 to 0.18 kN,
H = MZ · ω (34)
and MZ1 max decreased from 1.72 to 0.90 N m. Again, this reduc-
tion was attributed to a greater amount of frictional heat input.
Likewise, at fixed ω = 9000 rpm, when the feed rate increased from Then the heat (Q) generated in the frictional penetration process
120 to 780 mm/min, FZ1 max increased from 0.18 to 0.45 kN, and is calculated as
MZ1 max increased from 0.90 to 1.47 N m. It is interesting to observe
that ZF=max increased as rotation speed decreased and feed rate  T
increased; however, ZM=max showed little dependence on the pro-
Q (T ) = MZ (t) · ω dt (35)
cess parameters, which kept at ∼0.64 mm. 0

Fig. 9. (a) FZ1 vs. Z curves and (b) MZ1 vs. Z curves of the frictional penetration tests at various rotation speed-feed rate combinations.
 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279 275

Fig. 10. Heat generation (Q) and heat generation rate (H) in the frictional penetration
tests.
Fig. 11. Calculated material removal rates (MRR). To calculate MRR2 , twork and t2 in
where T is time and a function of the penetration depth (Z) and the Eq. (10) are assumed as 3 mm and 1 mm, respectively.
feed rate, namely,
Z MRR1 (refer to Fig. 3b) is always larger than MRR2 (refer to Fig. 3c),
T= (36) and that MRR1 increases faster and then slower than MRR2 as Z
f
increases until both reach the same maximum value, as shown by
Q is then rewritten as Eq. (37) by substituting Eq. (36) into Eq. the long-dashed lines in Fig. 11. With a larger rivet tip angle, MRR1
(35). increases much faster, and it requires a shorter penetration depth
 Z/f to reach the maximum value.
MZ (t) · ω
Q (Z) = dt (37)
0
f 4.4. Contact conditions
The evolution of heat generation rate (dashed lines) and cumu-
lative heat generation (solid lines) in the frictional penetration It is difficult to determine the exact contact condition between
tests are shown in Fig. 10. Irrespective of the process parameters, the rotating rivet and the work material in the frictional penetration
the heat generation rate H increased as Z increased and reached a process. However, it is possible to estimate the contact condition
peak at ZH=max ∼0.64 mm, and then decreased as Z increased fur- by comparing the theoretically calculated and experimentally mea-
ther. In the three frictional penetration tests, H was the largest sured ratios of torque to penetration force (R).
when ω = 9000 rpm and f = 780 mm/min and it was the lowest when For pure sliding contact, the ratio of the torque to the penetra-
ω = 3000 rpm and f = 120 mm/min. As shown in Eq. (37), the heat tion force is obtained from Eqs. (16) and (24)
generation (Q) or the energy input to the frictional penetration 2 · [r13 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )3 ]
MZ1 |Slide
process, was affected positively by the rotation speed and nega- R|Slide = = (38)
tively by the feed rate. As a result, the test run at ω = 9000 rpm and
FZ1 3 sin ˛1 · [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 ]
f = 120 mm/min generated the most frictional heat, and the test run As regard to the pure sticking contact, the ratio of the torque to
at ω = 9000 rpm and f = 780 mm/min generated the least frictional the penetration force can be calculated from Eqs. (16) and (28)
heat, and the former is ∼3.7 times more than the latter.
MZ1 |Stick 2ı · [r13 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )3 ]
R|Stick = =
4.3. Material removal rates FZ1 3 sin ˛1 · [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 ]

It is easy to understand that the feed rate has a positive effect on ı

= · R|Slide (39)
the material removal rate as shown in Eqs. (7)–(10). To investigate 
the effect of the rivet tip angle (˛1 ) on MRR, the wall thickness of the where ı = work /P1 . Since  work is larger than P1 as mentioned
rivets in Fig. 3b (t1 ) was assumed to be 1.0 mm, and the outer diam- above, ı >  and R|Stick > R|Slide . Similarly, the torque–force ratio in
eter of the rivets was assumed to be the same as that of SSPV-06-08 the mixing contact condition is deduced as Eq. (40)
(refer to Fig. 8a), 6.1 mm, viz. r1 = 3.05 mm in Fig. 3b. In order to com-
pare the material removal rate for the rivet geometries presented in MZ1 |mix 2[ · ı + (1 − )] · [r13 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )3 ]
R|mix = =
Fig. 3b and c, namely, MRR1 and MRR2 , ˛1 and ˛2 were set to 30◦ , t2 FZ1 3 sin ˛1 · [r12 − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )2 ]
was assumed to be equal to t1 , and the outer diameter of the rivet in
Fig. 3c was also 3.05 mm, i.e. r2 + t2 = 3.05 mm. In the calculation of ı
= · + (1 − ) · R|Slide (40)
both MRR1 and MRR2 , the feed rate was fixed as 120 mm/min, and 
the thickness of the workpiece (twork ) was assumed to be larger
than t1 · cot˛1 or t2 · cot˛2 , namely, Eqs. (8) and (10) were used. As shown in Eq. (38), for the case of pure sliding contact, R|Slide is
Fig. 11 compares the calculated material removal rates, MRR1 dependent on the friction coefficient, the geometrical parameters
and MRR2 , for the cases of the rivet geometries presented in Fig. 3b of the rivet, as well as the penetration depth. The dimensions of the
and c, respectively, when ˛1 = ˛2 = 30◦ . Fig. 11 also includes plots rivet used in the frictional penetration tests are shown in Fig. 7a.
of material removal rate, MRR1 , as a function of the rivet tip angle. The friction coefficient  is set to 0.4 as suggested by Schmidt et al.
Here no deformation on the bottom of the workpiece was assumed, (2004), which was used in a friction evaluation of the friction stir
which will be further discussed in Section 5. As shown in Eqs. (8) and welding process between a steel tool and an aluminum workpiece.
(10), the maximum achievable MRR is dependent on the feed rate The theoretically calculated R|Slide and R-values in the FSBR tests are
and rivet geometry, and the maximum MRR are equivalent in the compared in Fig. 12. The theoretically calculated R|Slide decreases
case of the rivet geometries presented in Fig. 3b and c. However, slightly as Z increases, i.e. at Z = 0.001 mm, R|Slide = 2.38 × 10−3 mm
before the MRR reaches the maximum value, it can be seen that and at Z = 1.0 mm, R|Slide = 2.18 × 10−3 mm. However, as regards the
276 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279

Fig. 12. Comparison of experimental R-values and the theoretically calculated R|Slide .

Table 2 Fig. 13. Optical micrographs of frictionally penetrated AA6022 sheets by the modi-
Dependence of ZR–c on the process parameters. fied rivets with penetration depth of (a) Z = 0.6 mm, (b) Z = 0.8 mm and (c) Z = 1.0 mm
at ω = 9000 rpm and f = 120 mm/min.
Process parameters ZR–c [mm]

Rotation speed [rpm] Feed rate [mm/min]

i.e. h ∼ 0. When Z = 0.8 mm, plastic deformation was observed and
3000 120 0.3
9000 120 0.15 h ∼ 0.08 mm, which increased to 0.25 mm at Z = 1.0 mm as illus-
9000 780 0.4 trated in Fig. 13. After the rivet penetrates through the workpiece,
a material crown was then formed (Min et al., 2014c).
In the theoretical calculations of the material removal rates in
experimental R-value, there was a threshold of the rivet penetration Section 4.3, it was assumed that there was no plastic deformation
depth, ZR–c as listed in Table 2. When 0 < Z < ZR–c , R-values changed on the bottom of the workpiece. Obviously, this plastic deformation
little with Z and were comparable to the calculated R|Slide , which resulted in a decrease of the actual material removal rate during the
indicates that the contact condition in this phase was probably pure frictional penetration process, especially, when Z > 0.6 mm.
sliding. Beyond ZR–c , the R-value increased first slowly and then As mentioned previously, the material removal rate has a sig-
quickly as Z increased, and saturated when the rivet was approa- nificant effect on the penetration force (Bayoumi et al., 1994).
ching the end of the frictional penetration process. However, it is Fig. 14 presents the FZ1 vs. MRR1 curve when ω = 9000 rpm and
still difficult to determine whether the contact condition was pure f = 120 mm/min. It is seen that the penetration force reached its
sticking or not when the rivet reached the bottom surface of the peak at ZF−max = 0.35 mm, although MRR1 increased continuously
AA6022 specimen (Z = 1.0 mm), since  work was unknown in this during the frictional penetration process. We noted the negative
work and was significantly dependent on the temperature of the effect of plastic deformation upon the workpiece bottom on MRR1 ;
work material closest to the rivet shear plane, which varied during however, this negative effect occurred when Z > 0.6 mm. Thus, the
the frictional penetration process. decrease of FZ1 beyond Z = 0.35 mm could not be attributed to
the plastic deformation upon the workpiece bottom. As shown
5. Discussion in Fig. 10, the input energy, which was converted to heat and
transferred to the rivet tip and workpiece, continuously increased
In the actual frictional penetration process with a rivet, the throughout the frictional penetration process. As a result, the tem-
material displaced by the rivet will flow out along the shear plane peratures of both the rivet and remaining work material increased.
as indicated by the open arrow in Fig. 13a, which shows the cross Apparently, softening due to a temperature increase of the work
section of a frictionally penetrated AA6022 sheet interrupted at material played an important role in reducing FZ1 during the
Z = 0.6 mm where the displaced material produced flash. This mate- frictional penetration process. Therefore, the trend of FZ1 during
rial flash may lead to an increase of the contact area between the friction penetration is affected by both the increasing MRR1 and the
workpiece and the rivet shear plane, which has an effect on the
actual material removal rate, penetration force, and torque. How-
ever, as the rivet tip penetrated further into the work material,
the size of the material flash on the penetrated workpieces did not
change significantly during the penetration process as seen by com-
paring Fig. 13a–c. Thus, it appears that the flash is generated during
the first portion of the rivet insertion and that as the rivet contin-
ued to penetrate, the rivet pushed out material on the bottom side
of the workpiece. Based upon this, flash generation is neglected in
this work when calculating the material removal rate, penetration
force and torque. Furthermore, as the rivet nears the bottom side
of the workpiece, a plastic shear deformation (as indicated by the
arrows in Fig. 13c) occurs on the remaining material. For example,
at Z = 0.6 mm, there was no plastic deformation on the bottom of the
penetrated workpiece, namely, there was no height difference (h)
between the surfaces of the penetrated and non-penetrated areas Fig. 14. FZ1 vs. MRR1 and Z vs. MRR1 curves when ω = 9000 rpm and f = 120 mm/min.
 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279 277

Fig. 15. (a) FZ1 vs. MRR1 curves and (b) MZ1 vs. MRR1 curves with various rotation speed–feed fate combinations.

Table 3 The fitted A and B values by the least squares method were listed
Dependences of A and B values on the process parameters.
in Table 3. According to Fig. 15 and Table 3, the rotation speed
Process parameters A B exhibits little influence on the FZ1 vs. MRR1 and MZ1 vs. MRR1 curves,
while the feed rate shows a significant effect. At a higher feed rate,
Rotation speed Feed rate (FZ1 = A·MRR1 ) (MZ1 = B·MRR1 )
[rpm] [mm/min] FZ1 and MZ1 increased with a lower rate as MRR1 increased.
3000 120 3.65 × 10−2 8.32 × 10−2
9000 120 3.58 × 10−2 7.95 × 10−2
6. Conclusions
9000 780 6.90 × 10−3 1.62 × 10−2

The mechanics of frictional penetration by a blind rivet in fric-

tion stir blind riveting process is analyzed, and analytic models are
increasing temperature of the remaining work material. The two proposed to calculate the material removal rate, penetration force
aspects have opposing effects on FZ1 and the competition of these and torque. Frictional penetration tests were performed on AA6022
two opposing effects led to the peak of the penetration force. Mate- sheets with modified blind rivets, and conclusions are drawn as
rial softening also affects the contact condition, since the yield shear follows:
stress,  work , decreases as a function of increasing temperature of
the work material. At the beginning of the frictional penetration
(1) Analytic models for the material removal rate are proposed for
process, the input energy was not enough to result in sufficient
the frictional penetration process by a blind rivet having a sharp
softening of the work material, and  work was much higher than
tip with inner and outer shear planes.
the tangential shear stress computed by Eq. (20). Hence, it was
(2) Analytic expressions for the torque in the frictional penetration
pure sliding between the rivet shear plane and the work material
process are deduced based on pure sliding, pure sticking and
as shown in Section 4.4 when Z < ZR–c . According to the analysis in
mixed contact conditions between the rivet tip and the work
Section 4.4, the R-value is the lowest for the pure sliding contact
material.
compared to the other two contact conditions. When Z > ZR–c , the
(3) The ratio of torque to penetration force is proposed to deter-
experimental R-values are larger than the calculated R|Slide , which
mine the contact condition in the frictional penetration tests
indicates that the contact condition developed from pure sliding to
by rivets. The initial frictional penetration of the rivet was pure
mixing contact or pure sticking contact. Once  work or ı is known,
sliding contact which developed to mixed contact (i.e. partial
the state parameter indicating the portion of sticking in the mix-
sticking) beyond a critical penetration depth, which is depend-
ing contact, , can be computed from Eq. (40). As Z increased two
ent on the process parameters as listed in Table 2.
things happened; (1) more energy was input generating additional
(4) In the pure sliding condition, the material removal rate exhibits
heat which transferred to the work material and (2)  work contin-
a linear effect on the penetration force and torque, and this
ued to decrease. However, as long as  work was larger than St1 by
effect is independent of the rotation speed but significantly
Eq. (20), the contact condition was mixing contact and  > 0; only
depends upon the feed rate.
when  work decreased to be comparable with St1 , would it lead to a
(5) During the frictional penetration of an AA6022 sheet, the pene-
pure sticking contact.
tration force and torque increased to a peak and then decreased
The effects of process parameters on the FZ1 –MRR1 and
to zero as the penetration depth increased.
MZ1 –MRR1 relationships are presented in Fig. 15a and b, respec-
tively. Here, note that only the data corresponding to the
penetration depth smaller than ZR–c (namely, in pure sliding con- Acknowledgements
tact condition) were considered so as to exclude the sticking effect
and the effect of a considerable temperature increase of the work The authors would like to thank Mark Hull from GM R&D for
material. It is observed that MRR1 has a linear effect on both FZ1 and machining the rivet tip, and Anthony J. Blaszyk and John S. Agapiou
MZ1 irrespective of rotation speed–feed rate combination, i.e. from GM R&D for their help in the FSBR tests. Financial support for
this research was provided by the U.S. National Science Foundation
FZ1 = A · MRR1 (41) Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation grant No. 1363468
and the China National Natural Science Foundation under grant No.
MZ1 = B · MRR1 (42) 51375346.
278 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279

Fig. B2. Case (2): the rivet tip penetrates through the workpiece but the end of shear
plane has not penetrated into the workpiece yet, i.e. twork < Z ≤ t2 · cot ˛2 .

Fig. A1. Illustration for calculation of V1 (T).

Appendix A. Deduction of V1 (T)

The volume of removed material at time T, e.g. V1 (T), is limited

to the dashed area as illustrated in Fig. A1. Suppose there is an
infinitesimal zone with a thickness of d shown by the shadow
region, and its distance to the rotation axis is . Then the volume
of the infinitesimal zone dV1 (T) is,

dV1 (T ) = 2 · [ − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )] · cot ˛1 · d (A1)

Integrate the Eq. (A1), V1 (T) can be obtained as

 r1
V1 (T ) = 2 · [ − (r1 − Z · tan ˛1 )] · cot ˛1 · d (A2)
r1 −Z·tan ˛1
Fig. B3. Case (3): the end of shear plane penetrates into the workpiece, i.e. t2 ·
cot ˛2 < Z ≤ twork + t2 · cot ˛2 .
Appendix B. Deduction of MRR2

in Figs. B1–B3. For the Case (1) in Fig. B1, i.e., 0 ≤ Z ≤ twork , similar
For the case in Fig. 3c, the deduction of the material removal rate
as the deduction of dV1 , dV2 |(1) is expressed as
(MRR2 ) is more complicated and described as follows.When twork <
t2 · cot ˛2 , MRR2 is calculated based on the three cases illustrated dV2 |(1) = f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] · dT (B1)

For the Case (2) in Fig. B2, i.e., twork < Z ≤ t2 · cot ˛2 , dV2 |(2) +
dV2 is expressed as

dV2 |(2) + dV2 = f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] · dT (B2)

where

dV2 = f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] · dT (B3)

Then

dV2 |(2) = f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2

− (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 )2 ] · dT (B4)

For the Case (3) in Fig. B3, i.e., t2 · cot ˛2 < Z ≤ twork + t2 · cot ˛2 ,
dV2 |(3) + dV2 + dV2 is expressed as

dV2 |(3) + dV2 + dV2 = f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] · dT (B5)

where

Fig. B1. Case (1): only the rivet tip penetrates into the workpiece, i.e. 0 ≤ Z ≤ twork . dV2 = f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − (r2 + t2 )2 ] · dT (B6)
 J. Min et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 222 (2015) 268–279 279

Then

dV2 |(3) = f [(r2 + t2 )2 − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 )2 ] · dT (B7)

Following the definition of the material removal rate, namely,

dV2
MRR2 = (B8)
dT
MRR2 is expressed as a piecewise function by Eq. (B9)
⎧
⎪ f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] 0 ≤ Z ≤ twork
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − t 2
work · tan ˛2 ) ] twork < Z ≤ t2 · cot ˛2
MRR2 = (B9)
⎪
⎪ f [(r2 + t2 )2 − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 )2 ] t2 · cot ˛2 < Z ≤ twork + t2 · cot ˛2
⎪
⎪
⎩
0 Z > twork + t2 · cot ˛2

When twork ≥ t2 · cot ˛2 , besides the cases in Figs. B1 and B3, it

is easy to understand that when t2 · cot ˛2 ≤ Z ≤ twork , MRR2 is a
constant similar as the second expression on the right hand side of
Eq. (8) and expressed as

MRR2 = f [(r2 + t2 )2 − r22 ] (B10)

Consequently, MRR2 is also a piecewise function as expressed

by Eq. (B11)
⎧
⎪ f [(r2 + Z · tan ˛2 )2 − r22 ] 0 ≤ Z ≤ t2 · cot ˛2
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ f [(r2 + t2 )2 − r 2 ]
2
t2 · cot ˛2 < Z ≤ twork
MRR2 = (B11)
⎪
⎪ 2 2
f [(r2 + t2 ) − (r2 + Z · tan ˛2 − twork · tan ˛2 ) ] twork < Z ≤ twork + t2 · cot ˛2
⎪
⎪
⎩
0 Z > twork + t2 · cot ˛2

Min, J.Y., Li, J.J., Carlson, B.E., Li, Y.Q., Quinn, J., Lin, J.P., Wang, W.M., 2014a. Friction
References stir blind riveting for dissimilar cast Mg AM60 and Al alloy sheets. In: ASME
2014 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference (MSEC),
Bayoumi, A.E., Yücesan, G., Hutton, D.V., 1994. On the closed form mechanistic Paper No. MSEC2014-4061, pp. V002T02A078.
modeling of milling: specific cutting energy, torque, and power. J. Mater. Eng. Min, J.Y., Li, Y.Q., Li, J.J., Carlson, B.E., Lin, J.P., 2015. Friction stir blind riveting of
Perform. 3, 151–158. carbon fiber reinforced polymer composite and aluminum alloy sheets. Int. J.
Chen, C.M., Kovacevic, R., 2003. Finite element modeling of friction stir welding- Adv. Manuf. Technol. 76, 1403–1410.
thermal and thermomechanical analysis. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 43, Min, J.Y., Li, J.J., Carlson, B.E., Li, Y.Q., Lin, J.P., 2014c. Mechanical property and
1319–1326. microstructural evolution of Al alloy joints by friction stir blind riveting. In:
Gao, D., Ersoy, U., Stevenson, R., Wang, P.C., 2009. A new one-sided joining process General Motors Internal Report. CL-2014/259/MSR.
for aluminum alloys: friction stir blind riveting. ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 131, Min, J.Y., Li, J.J., Li, Y.Q., Carlson, B.E., Lin, J.P., Wang, W.M., 2015. Friction stir blind
061002-1-12. riveting of aluminum alloy sheets. J. Mater. Proc. Technol. 215, 20–29.
Kuykendall, K., Nelson, T., Sorensen, C., 2013. On the selection of constitutive Mishra, R.S., Ma, Z.Y., 2005. Friction stir welding and processing. Mater. Sci. Eng. R
laws used in modeling friction stir welding. Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 74, 50, 1–78.
74–85. Schmidt, H.B., Hattel, J.H., 2008. Thermal modelling of friction stir welding. Scripta
Lathabai, S., Tyagi, V., Ritchie, D., Kearney, T., Finnin, B., 2011. Friction Stir Blind Mater. 58, 332–337.
Riveting: A Novel Joining Process For Automotive Light Alloys. SAE2011-01- Schmidt, H., Hattel, J., Wert, J., 2004. An analytical model for the heat generation in
0477. friction stir welding. Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 12, 143–157.

View publication stats