Materials Research.

Corrosion Behavior of Friction Stir Welded Lap Joints of AA6061-T6 Aluminum Alloy

Farhad Gharavia, Khamirul Amin Matoria,b*, Robiah Yunusa, Norinsan Kamil Othmanc

Materials Synthesis and Characterization Laboratory, Institute of Advanced Technology,

a

Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

b
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia,
43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
c
School of Applied Physics, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600
UKM Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

Received: August 13, 2013; Revised: January 15, 2014

In this work, the corrosion behaviors of friction-stir lap welding of 6061-T6 Al-alloy are studied.
The friction-stir lap welding was performed under different welding conditions (rotation speed and
welding speed). The corrosion behavior of the parent alloy, the weld nugget zone (WNZ), and the heat
affected zone (HAZ) of each welded sample working as an electrode, were investigated by the Tafel
polarization test in 3.5 wt. (%) NaCl at ambient temperature. The morphology of the corroded surface of
each region was analyzed by scanning electron microscopy together with energy dispersive spectroscopy
(SEM-EDS). The results showed that the corrosion resistance of the parent alloy was better than the
WNZ and the HAZ in both welding conditions. Localized pit dissolution and intergranular corrosion
were the dominant corrosion types observed in the parent alloy, WNZ, and HAZ. The parent alloy,
WNZ, and HAZ exhibited similar corrosion potentials (Ecorr) after T6 heat treatment. This treatment
had a better effect on the corrosion resistance of the welded regions than the parent alloy.

Keywords: friction stir lap welding, aluminum alloy, tafel polarization, intergranular corrosion,
localized pit dissolution

1. Introduction
Aluminum and aluminum alloys are widely used in
various industries including structural, transportation,
shipbuilding, and aerospace. The main reasons for using this
material are the result of its favorable mechanical properties,
acceptable corrosion resistance, light weight, appropriate
weldability, and increased toughness1. Recently, aluminum
alloys have become very attractive materials for scientists
and engineers, and they have been studied extensively due
to their beneficial properties1. For example, the 6xxx series
aluminum alloy, which contains magnesium and silicon as
major alloying elements, is widely used in automotive and
aerospace structures because of its favorable extrudability,
weldability, and corrosion resistance2. Aluminum 6061
is a typical alloy of this series and includes Mg-Si-Cu
alloying elements. The high amount of alloy elements
added to increase the strength leads to the formation of
large constitute intermetallic precipitates during casting.
These precipitates are too large to be greatly affected by
subsequent thermomechanical processing2. Many reports
have demonstrated that coarse intermetallic precipitates
influence the corrosion behavior of aluminum alloys3-5.
The presence of these precipitates in the microstructure
could significantly diminish a material’s resistance to
localized corrosion. The corrosion behavior of intermetallic
precipitates depends mainly upon their redox potential with
respect to the matrix. Intermetallic precipitates more noble
*e-mail: khamirul@upm.edu.my
than the matrix serve as cathodes; therefore, the surrounding
matrix experiences anodic dissolution, and localized
corrosion would subsequently progress2.
As a part of the fabrication process, welding is one
of the most important manufacturing technologies used
in the aluminum alloy industry. Accordingly, the welding
of aluminum and its alloys has always represented a great
challenge for designers and technologists. As a matter
of fact, the main problem associated with this kind of
joint process can arise from the focus on heat-treatable
alloys because heat, generated by the welding process,
is responsible for the decay of mechanical properties by
causing phase transformations and inducing softening of
the alloy6,7. It has been shown that minor differences in
the composition and microstructure of the weldment can
create an electrochemical potential difference between
various regions of welded joints and, thus, generates
localized galvanic corrosion. It has been demonstrated
that the conventional fusion welding process would cause
less resistance to corrosion as a result of having many
defects on the edges such as high porosity, cracks, residual
stress, incorrectly selected filler, and an incorrect design7,8.
Elimination of these defects by using friction-stir welding
(FSW), which is a solid-state process, substantially increases
an alloy’s corrosion resistance8.
The corrosion of aluminum alloy friction-stir welds is
commonly investigated using methods such as immersion
tests, polarization techniques, electrochemical impedance
 Gharavi et al.
spectroscopy (EIS), stress corrosion cracking (SCC) tests,
and cyclic spray tests8-19. Accordingly, the corrosion behavior
of the FSW in different aluminum alloys has been examined
by a number of authors10-18. It should be emphasized that
most of these investigations of corrosion behavior are
performed on butt joints, and other configuration joints,
such as T-joints and lap joints, are rarely considered. In
one case, Paovani et al.10 reported that in the T-joints for
both FSW and LW—if the 6xxx aluminum alloy are chosen
correctly—it is possible to obtain welded joints such that
the galvanic couple established between the welded region
and the parent material results in a preferential attack of the
latter. In addition, recently, Astarita et al.11,12 have studied the
stress corrosion cracking of T-joints of dissimilar aluminum
alloys, and they report that the SCC tests provide evidence,
once again, of the critical issue related to the welding of
dissimilar heat treatable aluminum alloys. Furthermore, they
report that kissing bond defects emphasize such a problem,
promoting crevice corrosion in addition to the expected
galvanic issues. Indeed, with the exception of T-joints,
researchers have not yet focused on the corrosion behavior
in friction-stir welded lap joints.
In fact, the present work is the first report attempting to
evaluate the corrosion behavior of AA6061-T6 welded lap
joints by friction-stir lap welding (FSLW) at 3.5 wt.(%) NaCl
solution. For this reason, to study the corrosion behavior of
AA6061-T6 in a 3.5 wt. (%) NaCl aerated aqueous solution
(pH = 5.5) at ambient temperature, the corrosion attacks of
different positions of the weld zone in the friction-stir lap
welded 6061-T6 aluminum alloy have been investigated
using different welding parameters (rotation speed and
welding speed). Tafel polarization measurements and a
scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with energy
dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) were used in this study.
2. Experimental Details
2.1. Material
The parent alloy was a wrought 6061-T6 aluminum
alloy plate with a thickness of 5mm defined by the B0209-
04 ASTM standard20. Nominal composition of the materials
used in this study are given in Table 1.
2.2. Welding procedure
The friction-stir lap welding (FSLW) process and the
joint design that are used in this research are schematically
depicted in Figure 1. As shown in Figure 1, the dimensions
of each overlapping plate considered were up to 220 mm
in length and 140 mm in width so that they could be
longitudinally overlap welded parallel to the plate’s rolling
direction using an automatic CNC machine. The overlap
along the linear direction of the plate was 50 mm wide. A
welding fixture was designed to tightly clamp the lapped
parent alloy to be welded on the work table. A supporting
Table 1. Nominal composition of parent alloy used in the welding test (in wt. %).
Alloy Al Si Fe Cu
Al6061 97.45 0.66 0.3 0.27
Materials Research
plate of the same thickness was located underneath the upper
plate to help align and to stabilize the plates to be welded. A
single pass of FSLW was performed along the longitudinal
center line of the overlap. The designed tool conditions used
for welding in this work are given in Table 2. The welding
conditions are listed in Table 3. To improve weld joining,
the tool was tilted 3 degrees from the normal direction of
the plate toward the trailing side of the tool during welding.
Additionally, a clockwise rotational direction was selected.
2.3. Heat treatment process
Finally, to determine the effect of heat treatment on the
corrosion behavior, T6 heat treatment based on the ASM
standard21 was carried out on some samples. The heat
treatment cycle is shown in Figure 2.
2.4. Structural characterization measurement
After the welding process, the electro spark wire-
electrode cutting machine was used to cut off all samples
from the welded plates in cross-sections perpendicular to
the welding direction for microstructural examination and
corrosion studies. As a result, the test samples consisted of
the parent alloy (PA), the weld nugget zone (WNZ), and
the heat affected zone (HAZ). The samples were used in
the flat type after they were carefully prepared by applying
standard metallographic techniques including wet-grinding
operation with water using emery paper of SiC with different
grit number sequences of 400, 600, 800, and 1200, followed
by polishing with 1µm non-aqueous diamond past, decreased
by acetone, washed with double distilled water, and dried.
Samples were etched by immersion in a suitable etchant
solution composed of 5 ml (HNO3), 3 ml (HCl), 2 ml (HF),
and 100 ml (H2O). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and
energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) techniques were used
to analyze the microstructures of samples after the welding
process and corrosion tests.
Figure 1. Schematic of friction stir lap welding process and joint
design used in this research.
Mn Mg Cr Ti Zn
0.07 1.0 0.18 0.02 0.05
 Corrosion Behavior of Friction Stir Welded Lap Joints of AA6061-T6 Aluminum Alloy
Table 2. Welding tool geometry and feature.
Feature
Tool Material Cylindrical of H13 Hardened Steel With 50HRC Hardness
Shoulder Cylindrical
Pin Cylindrical Shape With a Sub-Conical Head Pin Having Left-Hand Threads
Table 3. Welding conditions used in this study.
Joint symbol Rotation Welding Tool tilt
speed speed
(rpm) (mm/min)
FSLW1 1000 60 3°
FSLW2 900 40 3°
Figure 2. T6 heat treatment cycle carried out on the FSLW samples.
2.5. Electrochemical testing
To compare the corrosion behavior of the test samples,
Tafel polarization curves were plotted by a PARSTAT 2273
machine equipped with power suit software according to
the ASM standard22 in 3.5 wt. (%) NaCl aerated aqueous
solution (pH = 5.5) at ambient temperature. Before putting
test samples in the open glass vessel used as a corrosion
cell containing the test solution, they were embedded in
cold-setting resins to expose only a single surface to the test
solution, and they were electrically connected with a copper
wire after being set in a polyethylene tube. Immediately prior
to each experiment, the surface of the sample was dipped in
concentrated HNO3 for 30 s. Electrochemical measurements
consisted of a standard three electrode with the sample as
a working electrode including the PA, WNZ, and HAZ
regions (1cm2), a saturated calomel electrode SCE (0.242 V
vs. SHE) as a reference electrode, and a graphite rod as the
counter electrode. Measurements for the Tafel polarization
curves were recorded in the potential range of –0.25 mV to
+0.75 mV with respect to the OCP and at the scan rate of
1mVs–1 after allowing a steady-state potential to develop for
30 min. Corrosion potentials (Ecorr) and corrosion current
densities (Icorr) were calculated by the Tafel extrapolation
methods. All the experiments in this study were repeated
at least twice to ensure reproducibility.
Geometry
Diameter: 20 mm
Diameter: 20 mm
Diameter: 20 mm; Length: 8 mm
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Results of metallographic observation
The micrographs in Figure 3 show the microstructures
of different zones of both samples welded with a FSLW
process with 1000 rpm-60 mm/min as a FSLW 1 and
900 rpm‑40 mm/min as a FSLW 2. Generally speaking,
during friction-stir welding, the weld zone is divided into four
regions: either an unaffected material or a parent alloy (PA),
the HAZ, the TMAZ, and the WNZ. According to Figure 3,
the parent alloy exhibits an elongated grain structure formed
by mechanical work, which is identified as the bonding
structure. Furthermore, the presence of intermetallic
particles and precipitations is dominant. Moreover, the HAZ
area has a smaller elongated grain structure than the PA;
however, due to the heat concentrated in the weld nugget
zone, the HAZ is hardly visible as it resembles the parent
alloy8. In addition, it depicts the microstructure of the weld
nugget zone. These figures reveal that the WNZ has a fine
equiaxed grain structure, in contrast to the HAZ and PA,
due to dynamic recrystallization. Moreover, the TMAZ is
the transition zone between the HAZ and the WNZ, as a
result of string during the welding process, characterized by
a highly deformed structure. The optical microscopy does
not indicate the grain properly. Instead, it reveals a banded
structure, and there is no recrystallization in this region23.
It is important to note that the stripe of the TMAZ was not
clearly observed because the TMAZ region, in comparison
with the weld nugget zone, was very small and narrow. The
preparation of special electrodes from this area was difficult;
the weld nugget zone, the HAZ, and the parent alloy were
chosen and cut as the working electrodes for electrochemical
investigations. Grain size of the parent alloy, HAZ, and WNZ
for FSLW 1 and FSLW 2 were calculated and are shown in
Table 4. This Table illustrates the average grain size in the
WNZ with respect to the HAZ and to the parent alloy for
FSLW 1 and FSLW 2.
It demonstrates that the mechanical force operation
during the welding process causes both refinement and re-
alignment of the matrix grains, and it should be beneficial
with respect to various mechanical properties. This is due
to the temperature differences between the tool’s shoulder
side and base side and the tool’s centerline and the edge of
the weld nugget, which generates grain size variations24.
3.2. Identification of the intermetallic precipitate
phases
SEM micrographs of the intermetallic precipitates in a
parent alloy and weld zones are also shown in Figure 4. By
comparing the SEM micrographs, it can be seen that some
intermetallic precipitates commonly occur in the parent
 Gharavi et al. Materials Research

Figure 3. Optical microstructure of different zones of (a) FSLW 1, and (b) FSLW 2.

Table 4. Average of grain size (µm) in parent alloy and weld regions 3.3. Electrochemical behavior
of welding conditions.
Based on the electrochemical reactions of aluminum
Parent alloy 120 and its alloys in a natural chloride containing environment,
WNZ HAZ the following anodic reaction for anodic polarization of
FSLW1 30.7 87.1 aluminum is proposed23:
FSLW2 32.8 92.9 Al + 3H2O Al (OH) 3 + 3H+ + 3e- (1)

Because the pitting potential of the alloy is coincident

to the resting potential, the formation of the pit leads to the
alloy and the weld zones. FSW is essentially considered dissolution of aluminum, which causes the migration of
a hot working process, and the temperature during this chloride ions into the pit and the formation of aluminum
process rises to approximately 0.8 Tm; hence, some chloride inside the pit, according to the following reaction23:
intermetallic precipitates dissolve in the matrix, and the
string action results in a finer and more uniform distribution Al Al+3 + 3e- (2)
of precipitates (Figure 4).
According to the SEM results, which are summarized Al+3 + 3Cl- AlCl3 (3)
in Figure 4, the intermetallic precipitates in the parent
alloy and the weld zone include two types of intermetallic Conversely, the following electrochemical reaction is
precipitates. The globular particles that appear as a dark proposed for the cathodic polarization of aluminum23:
point are Si-rich precipitates, and the platelet precipitates
O2 + 2H2O + 4e- 4OH- (4)
that appear as transparent points are Fe-rich precipitates. It is
demonstrated that the secondary phases play an effective role
in the corrosion behavior of the weldment2. EDS analyses, 2H2O + 2e- 2OH- + H2 (5)
which are summarized in Table 5, confirmed the presence
Figure 5 depicts the typical Tafel polarization curves
of Fe-rich and Si-rich particles in the parent alloy and weld
of a parent alloy and weld zone such as the WNZ and the
zone. According to this Table, it is obvious that the value of
HAZ in both welding conditions. Based on these results, it
average composition (wt. %) of Si-rich and Fe-rich particles
can be readily observed that the corrosion behavior of the
are decreasing from the parent alloy to the weld nugget
parent alloy significantly varies from that of the welded
zone (WNZ) for both joints, but it is important to note that
joint region; while in many previous reports, FSW has
the values of the Si-rich and Fe-rich particle composition
similar and sometimes a better corrosion resistance than
in the FSLW 1 joint, are lower than those in the FSLW 2
that of the parent alloy9,25. This can be attributed to the
joint. Thus, it can be expected that the sensitivity of the
heterogeneity of the microstructure in weld regions rather
FSLW 2 joint to localized corrosion is higher than that in the
than parent alloys. Furthermore, the WNZ and HAZ have
FSLW 1 joint. Lastly, it is demonstrated that the secondary
smaller corrosion resistances than the parent alloy in both
phases play an effective role in the corrosion behavior of
conditions; however, the FSLW 1 has a better corrosion
the weldment2.
 Corrosion Behavior of Friction Stir Welded Lap Joints of AA6061-T6 Aluminum Alloy

Figure 4. SEM micrographs of (a) parent alloy, (b) HAZ-FSLW 1, (c) WNZ-FSLW 1, (d) HAZ-FSLW 2, and (e) WNZ-FSLW 2.
 Gharavi et al. Materials Research

Table 5. EDS analysis (wt. %) of different intermetallic precipitates highlighted in weld regions and parent alloy shown in Figure 4.
Location Point Composition (wt. %)
Al Mg Si Fe Cu Cr
Parent alloy A 90.46 0.66 1.75 6.80 0.21 0.12
B 89.58 0.18 9.83 0.41 - -
FSLW 1- HAZ C 91.84 0.61 1.54 5.60 0.18 0.23
D 92 0.12 7.50 0.38 - -
FSLW 1-WNZ E 93.40 0.68 1.13 4.50 0.11 0.18
F 94.11 - 5.60 0.26 - -
FSLW 2- HAZ G 90.24 0.85 1.86 6.41 0.28 0.36
H 89.98 0.16 9.31 0.55 - -
FSLW 2-WNZ I 91.69 0.76 1.31 5.80 0.18 0.26
J 90.99 0.11 8.50 0.40 - -

As can be seen in the small passive region in Figure 5,

Figure 5. Tafel polarization diagrams of parent alloy, weld nugget
zone (WNZ), and heat affected zone (HAZ) in FSLW 1 and FSLW 2.
resistance than the FSLW 2. Nevertheless, the corrosion
resistance of the parent alloy was better than that of the
weld nugget zone and the HAZ of FSLW 1. Alternatively,
it is conceivable that the corrosion potentials of the weld
nugget zone in FSLW 1 and FSLW 2 were higher than those
in the HAZ in FSLW 1 and FSLW 2, meaning that the weld
nugget zone acted as a cathodic area rather than the HAZ.
Therefore, the values of the corrosion potential (Ecorr) for
the parent alloy compared with the WNZ and the HAZ in
both welding conditions exhibit a significant shift toward
the anodic side. This shift was confirmed in the reduction of
the corrosion current density (Icorr) to 0.68 µAcm-2. The Ecorr
of the parent alloy toward the anodic side and the reduction
in icorr may be the result of a higher anodic to cathodic area
distribution23. It is evident from the Tafel polarization curves
that all regions in FSW 1 and FSW 2 showed cathodic
control reactions because they have higher cathodic, rather
than anodic, Tafel slopes23. The predominance of the
cathodic Tafel slope is related to the presence of intermetallic
precipitates in a matrix of aluminum. Both the WNZ and
HAZ in FSLW1 and FSLW 2 displayed a shift in corrosion
potential toward the cathodic (negative) side increasing
the immersion time, as is evident from Figure 5. This shift
indicates that corrosion of these regions proceeds via a
cathodic dissolution mechanism26.
a pitting behavior was observed from the anodic side in the
HAZ region of the welded sample; while in the parent alloy,
no significant pitting occurred. It can be reasoned that, in
FSW, small grains formed in the weld regions increase the
grain boundaries, which are thermodynamically susceptible
to corrosion, and cause poorer corrosion behavior than the
parent alloy27, 28. The susceptibility to corrosion observed
from the finer grained alloys could be related to an increased
grain boundary density that will likely enhance the overall
surface reactivity29. The corrosion potential of the secondary
phase is not the same as the parent alloy phases. This
difference creates the formation of a galvanic cell. Fe-
rich and Si-rich precipitates are obvious examples. Their
potential differences within the matrix cause the formation
of a corrosion cell. Higher quantities of these precipitates
cause more cathodic reactions to take place8.
Table 6 compares the results of the Tafel polarization
tests of the welded samples in both welding conditions at
test solution. It is evident from Table 6 that the parent alloy
exhibited a corrosion potential (Ecorr) of approximately
–710 mV vs. SCE and that of WNZ, and the HAZ were
in the range -828 mV and –868 mV vs. SCE, respectively,
in FSLW 1 as well as –857 mV and –894 mV vs. SCE,
respectively, in FSLW2. In addition, the corrosion current
density (Icorr) value determined for the parent alloy was
0.68 µAcm–2 against 1.5 µAcm–2 and 2.4 µAcm–2 for the
WNZ and the HAZ, respectively, in the FSLW 1 as well as
1.95 µAcm–2 and 3.3 µAcm–2 in the FSLW 2. The corrosion
rate of FSLW 2 in both regions was higher than that of FSLW
1 in both regions. The corrosion potential (Ecorr) of FSLW
2 in both regions is relatively more negative than that of
FSLW 1 in both regions, which indicates that the corrosion
rate of FSLW 2 in both regions is more than that FSLW 1
in both regions, in full agreement with Figure 5. Indeed,
the corrosion current density of the WNZ and the HAZ
was increased in both welding conditions compared with
the parent alloy. It is remarkable that the higher corrosion
current density results in sensitive susceptibility of the WNZ
and the HAZ to localized corrosion. Thus, the localized
corrosion of the HAZ was more severe than that of the WNZ
in both welding conditions, and the lowest current density
was observed in the parent alloy. It should be emphasized
 Corrosion Behavior of Friction Stir Welded Lap Joints of AA6061-T6 Aluminum Alloy

that the corrosion resistance of the HAZ in both welding exceeds that which is required for the formation of Mg2Si,
conditions is decreased with respect to the WNZ due to the sensitivity to intergranular corrosion increases as a result
changing of chemical properties during FSW in this region. of the cathodic insoluble silicon constituents30-32 (Figure 7).
Secondly, it is demonstrated that intergranular corrosion
3.4. Observation of corrosion morphology will occur only when the following three conditions are
The micrograph of a parent alloy´s surface after a simultaneously met33:
polarization test was illustrated in Figure 6. It is obvious that • Presence of a corrosive medium;
the parent alloy is susceptible to localized corrosion. The • Difference in potential on the order of 100 mV
morphology of the surface confirmed that localized pitting between the intermetallic and the matrix;
dissolution combined with intergranular corrosion was the • Continuous network of the intermetallic at the
type of corrosion observed in the parent alloy following grain boundaries such that intergranular cracks can
exposure to the testing solution. It is clear that localized pit propagate (Figure 7).
dissolution was a dominant corrosion type observed in the In the present parent alloy, all the above conditions
parent alloy; however, intergranular corrosion resulted in are affected by the generation of intergranular corrosion.
relatively broad grooves in the surface of the parent alloy. As shown in Figure 7, the microstructure of the parent
The presence of intergranular attacks in the parent alloy displays grain boundary phases and intermetallic
alloy can be attributed to two conditions. First, as a matter precipitates, which are rich by silicon; thus, the presence
of fact, Al-Mg-Si alloys usually exhibit good corrosion of small grain boundary phases (observed as dark points)
resistance that is not appreciably affected by the alloying was caused by the generation of the intergranular attack in
elements except for copper. They could be susceptible to the parent alloy. Furthermore, it is obvious that localized
pitting in combination with intergranular corrosion. The pit dissolution has mostly taken place in the vicinity of
intergranular attack is minor for alloys with a balanced the intermetallic precipitates that are rich in iron (Fe).
magnesium-silicon composition. When the amount of silicon Additionally, EDS analysis of corroded areas confirms the
presence of Fe-rich precipitates in these areas such that the
galvanic corrosion occurred between Al matrix and Fe-rich
Table 6. Effect of welding conditions on variations of corrosion precipitates.
potential, current density, and corrosion rate. Figure 8 compares the morphology of the surface of the
Material/process E(mv) vs. SCE Icorrosion C.R corroded WNZ and HAZ regions in both welding conditions.
(µAcm–2 ) (mpy) According to Figure 8, it is clear that the corrosion attacks
Parent alloy (PA) –710 0.68 0.353 in the HAZ region have significant differences in both
welding conditions. In the HAZ area of FSLW 2, severe
FSLW 1-WNZ –828 1.50 0.671
localized pit dissolution that was combined with large
FSLW 1-HAZ –868 2.40 0.833
amounts of intergranular corrosion was observed whereas
FSLW 2-WNZ –857 1.95 0.778
in the HAZ region of FSLW 1, localized pit dissolution
FSLW 2-HAZ –894 3.30 0.982 that was combined with a few of intergranular corrosion

Figure 6. SEM examination of parent alloy (PA) surface after the corrosion test.
 Gharavi et al.
occurred. This can be attributed to the higher heat input
in FSLW 2, compared with FSLW 1, during the welding
process. The high generation heat input sensitizes the grain
boundaries in the HAZ region during the welding process
Figure 7. SEM micrograph of small grain boundary phases in
parent alloy (PA).
Figure 8. SEM examination of (a) WNZ surface of FSLW 1, (b) HAZ surface of FSLW 1, (c) WNZ surface of FSLW 2, and (d) HAZ
surface of FSLW 2 after the corrosion test.
Materials Research
over time. Similarly, the thermal transients experienced
during FSLW changed both the grain boundary chemistry
and the chemistry in the grain near the boundary selectively
sensitizing the grain boundary region to varying degrees15.
By contrast, in the WNZ region in FSLW 1 and FSLW 2,
no intergranular attacks were observed; however, in the
WNZ (Figure 8), more severe localized pit dissolution took
place in FSLW 2 than in FSLW 1. In this case, the diameter
of the pits and their depth in the WNZ of FSLW 2 were more
than those in the WNZ of FSLW 1, which can be attributed
to the exposure of this part of FSLW 2 to high temperature
during the welding process causing modifications in the
microchemistry and microstructure of the WNZ in FSLW 2.
3.5. Corrosion behavior after heat treatment
Figure 9 and Table 7 illustrate the results of the Tafel
polarization test of the parent alloy and the weld zone
including the WNZ and the HAZ after heat treatment. It is
evident that there is no significant difference between their
polarization curves. It is clear that the corrosion potential
of the parent alloy is close to the corrosion potential of
 Corrosion Behavior of Friction Stir Welded Lap Joints of AA6061-T6 Aluminum Alloy
Figure 9. The effect of T6 heat treatment on Tafel polarization
diagrams of parent alloy, weld nugget zone (WNZ), and heat
affected zone (HAZ) in FSLW 1 and FSLW 2.
Table 7. Effect of heat treatment on variations of corrosion potential,
current density, and corrosion rate.
Material/process E(mv) vs. SCE Icorrosion C.R
(µAcm–2 ) (mpy)
Parent alloy (PA) –710 0.68 0.353
FSLW 1-T6-WNZ –708 0.51 0.326
FSLW 1-T6-HAZ –712 0.74 0.416
FSLW 2-T6-WNZ –712 0.72 0.356
FSLW 2-T6-HAZ –728 1.60 0.507
the WNZ and the HAZ in both welding conditions. This
means that the corrosion potential values in both welding
conditions were shifted to the more anodic direction, from
the HAZ to the WNZ; however, the values of the corrosion
potential for weld regions such as the WNZ and the HAZ in
FSW 1 are higher than those in FSLW 2. The approximate
similarity of the corrosion potentials of the parent alloy, as
opposed to the weld nugget zone, and the HAZ indicates
the existence of similar corrosion mechanisms with a
desirable current density reduction effect8. Moreover, as
shown in Figure 9, the anodic branches of the polarization
curve show that the anodic dissolution is under activation
control, that the cathodic branch, up to -1000 mv, is under the
control of oxygen diffusion, and that beyond this potential
the cathodic reaction is under activation control of a water
reduction reaction23.
In addition, the anodic branch of the Tafel polarization
curves immediately after OCP show the anodic dissolution is
under activation control. This means that the current density
experiences strong increases in the anodic polarization
direction with no significant passivation area beyond
the corrosion potential in all samples, and then it keeps
increasing very slightly with the rise-up potential.
The electrochemical behavior of the microstructure has
a significant effect on the corrosion potential. This effect
directly relates to the nature and quantity of the present
phases. Intermetallic precipitation phases, enriched from
iron and silicon, lead to dilution of the matrix from these
alloying elements. The classification of solid solubility of
various elements in the aluminum matrix is as follows:
Mg > Si > Fe[2]. In addition, Si and Fe have higher (less
negative) dissolution potentials than the aluminum matrix.
Thus, it seems that the dilution of the matrix from Si
and Fe is the main reason for the anodic behavior of the
non-heat-treated welded samples (FSLW 1 and FSLW
2). During the artificial aging process, fine precipitates of
Mg2Si would form and disperse throughout the matrix2.
These fine precipitates are slightly more anodic than the
aluminum matrix2. In this case, dilution of the matrix from
iron and silicon would enhance the corrosion potential of the
remainder matrix. This can be attributed to the increment of
the corrosion potential in the heat-treated welded samples
such as FSLW 1 and FSLW 2.
4. Conclusion
In the present work, the corrosion behavior of different
zones of AA6061-T6 welded plates by friction-stir lap
welding (FSLW) was investigated by a Tafel polarization cell
using a 3.5 wt. (%) NaCl solution. For each FSLW sample,
such as FSLW 1 and FSLW 2, two zones were selected
including the WNZ and the HAZ.
• The corrosion resistance of FSW1 in all regions was
better than FSLW 2. This is due to the decreased
average grain size in all regions of FSLW 1 compared
with FSLW 2;
• Fe-rich and Si-rich precipitates were two kinds
of precipitates that were observed in AA6061-T6
aluminum alloy;
• Corrosion resistances of the weld nugget zone and the
heat affected zone in both welding conditions were
observed to be poorer than the parent alloy in 3.5 wt.
(% ) NaCl solution;
• The corrosion potential (Ecorr) of the parent alloy is
more noble than the weld regions of both welds (i.e.
FSLW 1 and FSLW 2);
• The parent alloy was more susceptible to localized
pit dissolution and intergranular corrosion;
• The heat affected zone in FSLW 2 had similar
corrosion behavior compared with the parent alloy,
but it was more susceptible to localized corrosion than
the parent alloy;
• The localized pit dissolution was a dominant corrosion
type in the weld nugget zone of the welded samples;
however, the amount of localized pit dissolution in the
WNZ of FSLW 2 was higher than that of FSLW 1;
• Heat treatment increased the corrosion resistance of
FSLW 1 and FSLW 2 close to the corrosion resistance
value of the parent alloy.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to place sincere special thanks to Dr.
Mohd Khairol Anuar Mohd Ariffin Head of Department of
Mechanical and Manufacturing, Faculty of Engineering,
Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) for his technical supports.
Also, the authors are grateful to Prof. Abdul Razak Daud
from the School of Applied Physics, Faculty of Science and
Technology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) for his
help and guidance to do this research.
 Gharavi et al.
References
1. Eltai E, Mahdi E and Alfantazi A. The effect of gas tungsten
arch welding on the corrosion and mechanical properties
of AA6061 T6. International Journal of Electrochemical
Science. 2013; 8:7004-7015.
2. Nikseresht Z, Karimzadeh F, Golozar MA and Heidarbeigy
M. Effect of heat treatment on microstructure and corrosion
behavior of Al6061 alloy weldment. Material and
Design. 2010; 31(5):2643-2648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Matdes.2009.12.001
3. Ambat R, Davenport AJ, Scamans MG and Afseth A. Effect
of iron-containing intermetallic particles on the corrosion
behavior of aluminum. Corrosion Science. 2006; 48(11):3455-
3471. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Corsci.2006.01.005
4. Szklarska-Smialowska Z. Pitting corrosion of aluminum.
Corrosion Science. 1999; 41(9):1743-1767. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/ S0010-938X(99)00012-8
5. Guillaumin V and Mankowski G. Localized corrosion
of 6056 T6 aluminum alloy in chloride media. Corrosion
Science. 2000; 42(1):105-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
S0010-938X(99)00053-0
6. Squillance A, De Fenzo A, Giorleo G and Bellucci F. A
comparison between FSW and TIG welding techniques:
modification of microstructure and pitting corrosion resistance
in AA2024-T3 butt joints. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology. 2004; 152(1):97-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Jmatprotec.2004.03.022
7. Velotti C, Astarita A, Squillace A, Ciliberto S, Villano MG,
Giuliani M et al. On the critical technological issues of friction
stir welding lap joints of dissimilar aluminum alloys. Surface
and Interface Analaysis. 2013; 45(10):1643-1648. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1002/sia.5277
8. Fahimpour V, Sadrnezhaad SK and Karimzadeh F. Corrosion
behavior of aluminum 6061 alloy joined by friction stir
welding and gas tungsten arc welding methods. Materials
and Design. 2012; 39:329-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Matdes.2012.02.043
9. Weifeng X, Jnhe L and Hongqiang Zh. Pitting corrosion of
friction stir welded aluminum alloy thick plate in alkaline
chloride solution. Electrochimica Acta. 2010; 55(8):2918-
2923. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Electacta.2009.12.083
10. Paglia CS and Buchheit RG. A look in the corrosion of aluminum
alloy friction stir welds. Scripta Materialia. 2008; 58(5):383-
387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Scriptamat.2007.10.043
11. Astarita A, Squillace A, Scala A and Prisco A. on the
critical technology issue of friction stir welding T-joint
of dissimilar aluminum alloys. Journal of Materials
Engineering Performance. 2012; 21(8):1763-1771. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11665-011-0073-3
12. Ciliberto S, Astarita A and Squillace A. FSW of T joints overlap
configuration: process optimization in joining dissimilar
aluminum alloys for the aeronautic application. Surface and
Interface Analaysis. 2013; 45(10):1631-1637. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1002/sia.5214
13. L u m s d e n J B , M a h o n e y M W, R h o d e s C G a n d
P o l l o c k G A . C o r r o s i o n b e h av i o r o f F S W   7 0 5 0 -
T7651. Corrosion. 2003; 59:212-219. http://dx.doi.
org/10.5006/1.3277553
14. Astarita A, Bitondo C, Squillace A, Arentani E and Bellucci
F. Stress corrosion cracking behavior of conventional and
innovative aluminum alloys for aeronautic applications. Surface
and Interface Analaysis. 2013; 45(10):1610-1618. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1002/sia.5234
15. Lumsden JB, Mahoney MW, Pollock GA and Rhodes CG.
Intergranular corrosion following friction stir welding of
aluminum alloy 7075-T651. Corrosion. 1999; 55(12):1127-
1135. http://dx.doi.org/0010-9312/99/000249/0
16. Hu W and Meletis EI. Corrosion and environment-assisted
cracking behavior of friction stir welded Al2195 and Al2219
Materials Research
alloys. Materials Science Forum. 2000; 331-337:1683-1688.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.331-
337.1683
17. Frankel GS and Xia Z. Localized corrosion and stress corrosion
cracking resistance of friction stir welded aluminum alloy 5454.
Corrosion. 1999; 55(2):139-150.
18. Corral J, Trillo EA, Li Y and Murr LE. Corrosion of friction
stir welded aluminum alloys 2024 and 2195. Journal of
Materials Science Letters. 2000; 19:2117-2122. http://dx.doi.
org/ 10.1023/A:1026710422951
19. Zucchi F, Trabanelli G and Grassi V. Pitting and stress
corrosion cracking resistance of friction stir welded AA5083.
Materials and Corrosion. 2001; 52(11):853-859. http://dx.doi.
org/ 10.1002/1521-4176
20. American Society for Testing and Materials - ASTM.
ASTM B0209M-04 Standard: specification for aluminum
and aluminum-alloy sheet and plate. West Conshohocken:
American Society for Testing and Materials; 2005.
21. American Society of Materials - ASM. ASM Handbook: Heat
Treating: heat treating of aluminum alloys. Metals Park: ASM
International; 1998. v. 4.
22. American Society of Materials - ASM. ASM Handbook:
Corrosion. Metals Park: ASM International Committee; 1987.
v. 13.
23. Amini M, Kazemzade F and Moayed MH. An approach to
predict galvanic corrosion using identical couple electrodes;
investigation of weld zone and parent alloy in Aa6xxx welded
through FSW technique. In: Proceedings of Iran International
Aluminum Conference (IIAC2009); 2009; Tehran, Iran. Tehran:
IIAC; 2009.
24. Bradley GR and James MN. Geometry and microstructure of
metal inert gas and friction stir welded aluminum alloy 5383-
H321. [Dissertation]. England: Department of Mechanical and
Marine Engineering, University of Plymouth; 2000.
25. Zeng RC, Chen J, Dietzel W, Settler R, Dos Santos JF,
Nascimento ML et al. Corrosion of friction stir welded
magnesium alloy AM50. Corrosion Science. 2009; 51(8):1738-
1746. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Corsci.2009.04.031
26. Venkatasubramanian G, Mideen AS and Jha AK.
Corrosion behavior of aluminum alloy AA2219-T87
welded plates in sea water. Indian Journal of Science and
Technology. 2012; 5(11):3578-3583.
27. Kim SH, Erb U and Aust KT. Grain boundary character
distribution and intergranular corrosion behavior in high purity
aluminum. Scripta Materialia. 2001; 44(5):835-839. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S1359-6462(00)00682-5
28. Song D, Ma A, Jiang J, Lin P, Yang D and Fan J. Corrosion
behavior of equal-channel-angular-pressed pure magnesium in
NaCl aqueous solution. Corrosion Science. 2010; 52(2):481-
490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Corsci.2009.10.004
29. Proton V, Alexis J, Andrieu E, Delfosse J, Lafont MC and
Blanc C. Characterization and understanding of the corrosion
behavior of the nugget in a 2050 aluminum alloy friction stir
welding joint. Corrosion Science. 2013; 73:130-142. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Corsci.2013.04.001
30. Hatch JE, editor. Aluminum: properties and physical metallurgy.
Metals Park: American Society for Metals; 1984.
31. Summerson TJ and Sprowls DO. Corrosion behavior of
aluminum alloys. In: Stark EA and Sanders TH, editors.
Aluminum alloy: their physical and mechanical properties.
EMAS: Cradley Heath; 1986. p. 1575.
32. Braun R. Effect of thermal exposure on the microstructure,
tensile properties and the corrosion behavior of 6061 aluminum
alloy sheet. Materials and Corrosion. 2005; 56(3):159-165.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/maco.200403825
33. Vargel C, Jacques M and Schmidt MP. Corrosion of aluminum.
Boston: Elsevier; 2004. p. 125.