Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133

Joining of titanium/stainless steel by explosive welding and

effect on interface
Nizamettin Kahraman a , Behçet Gülenç a , Fehim Findik b,∗
aZ.K.U. Karabuk Technical Education Faculty, Karabuk, Turkey
b Sakarya University, Technical Education Faculty, Sakarya, Turkey

Received 19 May 2004; received in revised form 14 December 2004; accepted 15 June 2005

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to produce composite plates through explosive welding process widely used in developed countries and is of
great importance to produce such plates and unfortunately currently its use in our country is not common. In this study, stainless steel–titanium
plates were joined explosively employing oblique geometry route at different explosive ratios. The bonding was investigated using optical
and scanning electron microscopy and tensile-shearing, bending, hardness and corrosion tests were carried out. Optical and scanning electron
microscopy examinations showed that a transition was observed from smooth bonding interface to a wavy one with increasing explosive ratio.
It was also observed that grains near the interface were elongated parallel to the explosion direction. No shearing within the interface was
seen from the tensile-shear tests and fracture took place within the low strength material. The bended specimens showed that defects such
as separation and tearing were not observed. Hardness was increased with increasing explosive ratio and the highest hardness values were
obtained near the bonding interface. Weight increase due to formation of a stable oxide layer on the welded stainless steel–titanium plates was
seen from corrosion tests while weight loss was seen from the other specimens and this loss was increased with increasing explosive ratio.
© 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Explosive welding; Titanium–stainless steel; Explosive ratio; Corrosion; Interface

1. Introduction pleted without any interlayer. Nevertheless, depending upon

Dissimilar joints to bind two discrete materials with com-
pletely various physical and mechanical features can be pro-
duced by either fusion or solid state welding [1]. General
occupied dissimilar joining processes are roll bonding, pres-
sure welding, friction welding, explosive welding, ultrasonic
welding, diffusion bonding and laser forming. The explosive
welding of two different kinds of metallic sheet is accom-
plished by the exhaustive deformation owing to high pressure
and high temperature created at the collision place. Vast stud-
ies on explosive welding have been concentration on the
morphological changes at the interface between the vari-
ous types of metals [2–5] and the influence of lower plate
or flyer plate on the wave morphology in welded interfaces
[6]. Particular explosive welding operations have been com-
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 264 6147766; fax: +90 264 6147788.
E-mail address: findik@sakarya.edu.tr (F. Findik).
the material couples, the third material was presented as an
interlayer [7,8].
Lately, Acarer et al. [9–11] published three papers about
explosively joined of steel/steel plates. In those studies, two
chemically identical steel plates were explosively welded
and then the microstructure, microhardness and tensile-shear
strength were investigated in original and heat-treated sam-
ples. In that welding, different parameters (explosive rate,
anvil and stand-off distance) were used and various inter-
faces (straight, wavy and continuously melted and solidified)
were obtained and tensile-shear and bending tests of those
joints were performed and fracture samples were examined.
Kacar and Acarer [12] also reported a paper about
microstructure–property relationship in explosively welded
duplex stainless steel–steel. In this work, the 2205 grade
duplex stainless steel was cladded to vessel steel by explosive.
In addition, toughness of cladded materials was determined
and the fracture surface of test sample was also evaluated.

0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.06.045
128 N. Kahraman et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133

The multi-plates with AA5083/AA1050 (interlayer) Al

alloys/SS41 steel sequence were also manufactured by the
explosive welding method, and variations of the interface
morphology and the shear properties with thickness of the
AA1050 Al alloy interlayer were investigated by Han et al.
[13].
On the other hand, titanium is one of the most impor-
tant non-ferrous metals and finds extensive application in
aerospace industry, because of its light weight, excellent
corrosion resistance, high strength level, attractive fracture
behaviour and high melting point [14]. ␣-␤ Ti alloys present
good formability and cold strength at temperatures under
Fig. 1. Geometry for experimental set-up in explosive welding process.
300 ◦ C. In this group, Ti–6Al–4V has been the main alloy
for mechanical components [15]. This alloy having excellent
specific tensile and fatigue strengths and corrosion resis- TNT) was chosen as explosive material which was supplied
tance have been mainly used for aircraft structural and engine by M.K.E. Barutsan Company, Turkey. The detonation veloc-
parts [16]. Titanium clad carbon steel and other clad corro- ity of the explosive material is 3500–3800 m s−1 . The density
sion resistant materials are beginning to be used in some of of explosive material is 0.75 g cm−3 . The explosion rate was
the more aggressive environments. The cost of providing a set up (R = 1.2/3) prior to detonation. Welding assembly was
component whose full thickness is completely comprised of placed on a steel anvil. Explosion was carried out in a sand
titanium or some other extensive metal is strictly cost pro- pool. A rubber layer with a thickness of 6 mm was placed
hibitive. With the advent of new, efficient methods of cladding onto anvil to protect it. Detonation was started with a mag-
used titanium, stainless steel, high nickel and inconel type netic remote system.
materials, processes such as roll bonding, explosive welding
and weld overlay are gaining rapid acceptance and use [17].
Recently, dissimilar joints produced by solid state pro- 2.2. Microstructural work
cesses like explosive and friction welding are characterised
and evaluated by Mudali et al. [18] for applications in severely All samples were ground and polished to 1 ␮m finish. As
corrosive nitric acid conditions employed in reprocessing the etching agent, 5 g picric acid + 95 ml methanol and 45 ml
plants. HCl, 15 ml HF, 15 ml nitric acid and 25 ml distilled water
The microstructural characteristics and mechanical prop- were used to etch the stainless steel and titanium, respectively.
erties of the explosively welded various metals and their The metallographic examinations of samples were carried out
alloys have been studied by several investigators [12]. How- using optical microscope and scanning electron microscope
ever, there is lack of information about explosively welded (SEM, Jeol JSM 5600). Energy-dispersive X-ray spectrome-
Ti–6Al–4V to steel and their corrosion behaviour. Therefore, try (EDS) analysis was also done.
the goal of this survey is to examine the metallurgical prop-
erties of joining interfaces of explosively welded titanium Table 1
and stainless steel plates using various amount of explosive The chemical composition (wt.%) of stainless steel and titanium
material. Material
Stainless steel
C 0.0237
2. Experimental procedure Mn 1.46
Si 0.299
Cr 17.99
2.1. Materials and explosive joining Ni 9.78
Cu 0.022
To see the effect of explosive ratio on bonding interface, Mo 0.261
different explosive ratios and 5◦ oblique geometry were used Co 0.191
for experimental group for explosive welding as schemati- Fe Rest
cally revealed in Fig. 1. Due to the mechanical and corrosion Titanium
properties of titanium and stainless steel were chosen as C 0.08
Al 5.5–6.5
overlay plate (flyer plate) and base plate, respectively. The
V 3.5–4.5
chemical compositions of the flyer and base plates are given Fe 0.25
in Table 1. Flyer and base plates were designed with dimen- N Maximum 0.03
sion of 100 mm × 150 mm × 1.5 mm. The surface of the base O Maximum 0.13
and flyer plates was used as received. The ELBAR 5 (ammo- H Maximum 0.012
Ti Rest
nium nitrate 92%, minimum 5% fuel-oil and minimum 3%
 N. Kahraman et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133
2.3. Mechanical test
Microhardness testing was carried out on a Zwick machine
(3212002/00) using a 200 g load. For each sample, five dif-
ferent measurements were taken in the distance of 150, 800
and 1350 ␮m from the interface and the average values are
reported.
Three samples were cut from each of samples for tensile-
shearing test. Samples were cut parallel to the detonation
propagation and prepared in accordance with ASTM D 3165-
95 [18] by machining. (This standard requires the sample with
the dimension of 25.4 mm × 12.7 mm × 1.62 mm.) Samples
were prepared and tested with given dimension. Additional
tensile-shear tests were performed on the specimens whose
width is equal to the thickness of coating material in accor-
dance with literature [19]. Explosively welded samples were
prepared in accordance with the ASTM D 3165-95 then sub-
jected to a tensile-shear test in 1 mm s−1 tensile speed using
Instron-1185 tensile machine. Three measurements were car-
ried out from each identical sample.
Bending tests were also carried out on the same Instron-
1185 instrument. In the bending test, three samples were
tested for each weld. The microstructure, microhardness,
shear and bending specimens were investigated for both tita-
nium and stainless steel.
2.4. Corrosion test
Corrosion test was done by holding the 15 mm × 15 mm
samples in 3.5% NaCl–water solution for 672, 1344 and
2016 h. Weight variation of the samples was checked with
scale, which has 1/10,000 precision.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Morphology of welding
The optical figures of titanium and stainless steel are
shown in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. The view of titanium alloy (Ti–6Al–4V) and stainless steel in optical microscope.
129
It is seen from Fig. 2a that titanium alloy (Ti–6Al–4V)
shows a and b titanium (black area shows b) and grains are
equiaxed in this figure. Also, Fig. 2b illustrates austenitic
stainless steel. This steel contains high nickel content (9.78%)
and therefore it keeps the austenitic structure even after the
ageing at high temperature. Therefore, this is an austenitic
structure and it also has got equiaxed grains. Fig. 3 illus-
trates the optical figures of stainless steel/titanium joints for
different explosive loads.
It is seen from Fig. 3 that interface is flat in case of
lower explosive loads (R = 1.2 and 1.5). After applying
higher explosive loads (R = 2/3), wavy interface are clearly
seen in Fig. 3, and wavelength and also amplitude of the
waves are getting bigger with the increment of explosive
loads. For the lower explosive load (R = 2), wavelength was
measured in the range of 100–110 ␮m and amplitude was
10–15 ␮m. For higher explosive load (R = 3), wavelength
was measured in the range of 100–110 ␮m and ampli-
tude was 10–15 ␮m. For higher explosive load (R = 3),
wavelength was obtained as 200–220 ␮m and amplitude
25–30 ␮m. These results are consistent with the early work
[20].
In addition, explosively joined plates were investigated
by SEM and the related figures were shown in Fig. 4. It is
seen from Fig. 4 that no joining fault was formed in inter-
face, and also no melting voids and intermetallic compounds
were observed. This confirms that joining is successful in the
present study. Similar results were reported by Yang et al.
[21]. They noted that grains were elongated in the explosive
direction in interface due to plastic deformation during the
explosion. The present results are consistent with the early
work [21].
3.2. Tensile-shear test issue
Tensile strength of original materials and explosively
welded plates are shown in Tables 2 and 3.
It is seen from Table 3 that tensile-shear strength increased
with the increment of explosive load. This is consistent with
the previous work [22]. In the tensile-shear test, separation
130 N. Kahraman et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133

Fig. 3. Stainless steel/titanium joints applied for various explosive loads. (a) R = 1.2, (b) R = 1.5, (c) R = 2.0, (d) R = 2.5 and (e) R = 3.0 in optical microscope.

was not occurred in interface, but breaking-off was only microhardness profiles for the joints are shown in Table 4
resulted in the titanium side. The strength of all welded parts and Fig. 5.
were bigger than the original materials. It is seen from Fig. 5 that the entire hardness values of
welded plates are bigger than the original materials. For
3.3. Hardness alteration
Table 3
Tensile-shear strength (MPa) of explosively welded stainless steel/titanium
Microhardness measurements are made across the tita- joints for various explosive loads
nium/stainless steel interface of both the joints at three inter-
Original Ti 705
vals of 200, 750 and 1300 ␮m using a load of 200 g. The Original SS 870
R=1 –
Table 2 R = 1.2 710 ± 5
Tensile strength of original materials R = 1.5 717 ± 5
R=2 719 ± 5
Materials Tensile strength (MPa)
R = 2.5 721 ± 5
Titanium 705 R=3 726 ± 5
Stainless steel 870 Broken material Titanium
 N. Kahraman et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133 131

Fig. 4. Stainless steel/titanium joints used for different loads. (a) R = 1.2, (b) R = 1.5, (c) R = 2.0, (d) R = 2.5 and (e) R = 3.0 in SEM.

example, the original hardness of titanium was 210 HV, and
using the lowest explosive load for welding, higher hard-
ness values were obtained as 255.4, 225.9 and 244.6 HV
for the distance from interface in 200, 750 and 1300 ␮m,
respectively. Similarly, hardness values increased with the
increment of explosive loads in stainless steel side of welded
plates.
The maximum hardness was obtained near the welding
interface. It means that the surface of both metals was exposed
to maximum deformation during the collision while explosive
welding was carried out. The lowest hardness was obtained
at the centre of both metals. Because, during the explosion,
the outer surface of titanium was collided with base plate and
stainless steel was also exposed to maximum pressure as an

Table 4
Hardness values of stainless steel/titanium joints
Material Distance from interface (␮m) Hardness (HV0.2 )

R = 1.2 R = 1.5 R=2 R = 2.5 R=3

Stainless steel, 280 HV 1300 379.8 383.7 389 398.6 408.1
750 358 361.2 366.4 370.1 373
200 395.3 397.9 400.1 404.3 412.6
Titanium, 210 HV 200 255.4 256.4 256.6 257.7 261.5
750 225.9 227.5 228.8 229.1 230.9
1300 244.6 245.1 250.4 253.1 259.8
132 N. Kahraman et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133
Fig. 5. Distance from interface vs. hardness variation of stainless
steel/titanium joints for different explosive loads.
upper plate. Therefore, the both metals’ outer surface showed
higher hardness due to higher deformation. This is consistent
with the previous work [23].
3.4. Bending formation
Bending test was carried out according to ASTM A 263-
94a standard and the view of bent samples are shown in Fig. 6.
The samples were bent till to 180◦ and no separation,
tearing or fracture was observed in all samples. This shows
that titanium–stainless steel welding was safely applicable in
service even in bent form. Furthermore, there was no inter-
metallic compound in the interface (Fig. 4) and this result
also confirm the bending results consisting the early work
[24].
3.5. Corrosion performance
The mass changing of stainless steel–titanium couple in
corrosion atmosphere was shown in Fig. 7 for various explo-
sive loads in three different times, namely 672, 1344 and
2016 h.
It is seen from Fig. 7 that mass increased with the incre-
ment of experimental time for the entire original and welded
plates. However, mass of original titanium increased more
than the original stainless steel. Because, the affinity of tita-
nium to oxygen is higher than stainless steel. A stable and
Fig. 6. Bending sample of stainless steel–titanium materials.
Fig. 7. The mass changing of stainless steel–titanium couple in corrosion
atmosphere for different explosive loads.
coherent oxide layer occurs on the surface of both metals and
as a result, mass of both metals was increased. In addition,
mass increment of welded plates was risen very quickly up to
1344 h and the speed of mass increment was getting slower
in the last stage (between 1344 and 2016 h). The reason is
that the surface of both metals was very clean at the begin-
ning of corrosion test, therefore oxide layer occurred rapidly
at the earlier time of corrosion. Long time later, due to pre-
occurred iron and titanium oxide, an extra oxide layer was
slowly formed.
On the other hand, the reason of the mass increment of
joined plates with the increasing of explosive loads is that
cold deformation in both surfaces of metals due to explosion.
This deformation increased with the increment of explosion
loads and hence more oxide layer formed and bigger mass
increment was obtained. This result is consistent with the pre-
vious studies [25,26]. Finally, it can be noted that explosively
welded stainless steel–titanium plates can be safely used in
corrosion atmosphere such as seawater.
4. Conclusion
(a) In the tensile-shear test, separation was not occurred in
interface. The strength of all welded parts were bigger
than the original materials.
(b) Welding interface was flat in case of using lower explo-
sive loads. After applying higher explosive loads, wavy
interface were clearly seen in the interface. Wavelength
and amplitude of the waves were getting bigger with the
increment of explosive loads.
(c) Grains were elongated in the explosive direction in inter-
face due to plastic deformation during the explosion.
(d) The specimens were bent till to 180◦ and no separation,
tearing or fracture was observed in all samples. This
shows that titanium–stainless steel welding was safely
used in industry even in bent form.
(e) In SEM study, no joining fault was formed in inter-
face, and also no melting voids and intermetallic com-
pounds were observed. This confirms that the joining of
titanium–stainless steel is successful by means of explo-
sive welding.
 N. Kahraman et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 127–133
(f) The entire hardness values of welded plates were bigger
than the original materials due to deformation hardening
during the explosion and collision of both materials to
each other.
(g) In corrosion test, corrosion rate of the specimens was
comparatively great at the initial stage of the test, and
then it steadily decreased.
References
[1] ASM Handbook on Welding, Brazing and Soldering, vol.6, American
Society for Materials, Materials Park, Ohio, USA, 1993.
[2] S.J. Kim, S.H. Paik, M.Y. Huh, Explosive welding applications, J.
Korean Inst. Met. Mater. 32 (1994) 1558.
[3] D.G. Brasher, D.J. Butler, Explosive welding: principles and poten-
tials, Adv. Mater. Processes 3 (1995) 37.
[4] M.H. Nishida, A. Chibia, Y. Honda, J. Hirazumi, K. Horikiri, Elec-
tron microscopy studies of bonding interface in explosively welded
Ti/steel clads, ISIJ Int. 35 (1995) 217.
[5] S. Yano, H. Matsui, S. Morozumi, Structural observations of the
interface of explosion bonded Mo/Cu system, J. Mater. Sci. 33 (1998)
4857.
[6] D. Jaramillov, O.T. Inal, A. Szecket, On the transition from a wave-
less to wavy interface in explosive welding, Mater. Sci. Eng. 2 (1987)
217–222.
[7] E.S. Ege, O.T. Inal, C.A. Zimmerly, Response surface study on
production of explosively welded aluminium–titanium laminates, J.
Mater. Sci. 33 (1998) 5327.
[8] K. Hokamoto, T. Izuma, M. Fujita, New explosive welding technique
to weld aluminium alloy and stainless steel plates using a stainless
steel intermediate plate, Metal. Trans. 24A (1993) 2289.
[9] M. Acarer, B. Gülenç, F. Findik, The influence of some factors
on steel/steel bonding quality on there characteristics of explosive
welding joints, J. Mater. Sci. 39 (2004) 6457–6466.
[10] M. Acarer, B. Gülenç, F. Findik, Examination of cracks and frac-
ture on interfaces of explosive welded metals by using tensile shear
and bending test, in: Fifth International Fracture Conference, Firat
University, Elazig, Turkey, 2001, pp. 301–309.
[11] M. Acarer, B. Gülenç, F. Findik, Investigationm of explosive welding
parameters and their effects on microhardness and shear strength,
Mater. Des. 24 (December (8)) (2003) 659–664.
133
[12] R. Kacar, M. Acarer, Microstructure–property relationship in explo-
sively welded duplex stainless steel–steel, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 363
(December (1–2)) (2003) 290–296.
[13] J.H. Han, J.P. Ahn, M.C. Shin, Effect of interlayer thickness on
shear deformation behaviour of AA5083 Al alloy/SS41 steel plates
manufactured by explosive welding, J. Mater. Sci. 38 (2003) 13–
18.
[14] F.J. Lancaster, Metallurgy of Welding, vol. 6, Abington Publishing,
Cambridge, 1999, pp. 25–50.
[15] B. Wronka, The influence of base plate thickness and anvil on
the characteristics of explosive welded joints, Insight 41 (6) (1999)
383–387.
[16] T.Z. Blazinski, Explosive Welding, Forming and Compaction, Else-
vier Science Publ., Applied Science, New York, 1983, pp. 402–404.
[17] B. Crossland, Explosive Welding of Metals and Its Application,
Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1982, pp. 233–234.
[18] U.K. Mudali, B.M.A. Rao, K. Shanmugam, R. Natarajan, B. Raj,
Corrosion and microstructural aspects of dissimilar joints of tita-
nium and type 304L stainless steel, J. Nucl. Mater. 321 (2003) 40–
48.
[19] ASTM Designation D 3165-95, Standard Test Method for Strength
Properties of Adhesives in Shear by Tension Loading of Single-Lap-
Joint Laminated Assemblies, ASTM Standard, 1995, pp. 199–202
(November).
[20] V. Balasubramanian, M. Rathinasabapathi, K. Raghukandan, Mod-
elling of process parameters in explosive cladding of mildsteel and
aluminium, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 63 (1–3) (1997) 83–88.
[21] Y. Yang, Z. Xinming, L. Zhenghua, L. Qingyun, Adiabatic shear
band on the titanium side in the Ti/mild steel explosive cladding
interface, Acta Mater. 44 (2) (1996) 561–565.
[22] E.S. Kayalı, C. ve Ensari, Metallere Plastik Şekil Verme İlke
ve Uygulamaları, İTÜ Kimya-Metalurji Fakültesi, Ofset Atölyesi,
İstanbul, 2000, pp. 94–96.
[23] A. Durgutlu, B. Gülenç, F. Findik, Examination of copper/stainless
steel joints formed by explosive welding, Mater. Des. 26 (6) (2005)
497–507.
[24] B. Crossland, J.D. Williams, Explosive welding, the metals and met-
allurgy trust, metallurgical reviews, Review 144 (1970) 79–100.
[25] M. Türker, The Effect of High Temperature Exposure on the Struc-
ture and Properties of Ferritic Oxide Dispersion Strengthened Alloys,
Ph.D. Thesis, School of Materials, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK,
1993, 112–113.
[26] M. Türker, A.T. Hughes, Oxidation behavior of three commercial
ODS alloys at 1200◦ C, Oxid. Met. 44 (5–6) (1995) 505–525.