Review Welding

International Journal for Research in Engineering Application & Management (IJREAM)
ISSN : 2454-9150 Vol-05, Issue-02, May 2019
Comparative Study of Different Welding Processes

and Optimization Methods: A Review
Sudhir Kumar, M. Tech. Scholar, GJUS&T, Hisar, India, [email protected]
Rajender Singh, Assistant Professor, GJUS&T, Hisar, India, [email protected]
Dr. Puneet Katyal, Assistant Professor, GJUS&T, Hisar, India, [email protected]
Abstract- In the present paper, an attempt has been made to review the literature available on comparison of different
welding processes and optimization methods. The principal objective of this review paper is to figure out all the ways in
which comparison between different welding processes and optimization methods can be made. In the end, the
important findings of the researches have been summarized in a tabular format. From the literature surveyed, it was
observed that different welding processes can be evaluated and compared in terms of use of different filler materials in
a welding process, different optimization methods and on the basis of microstructure, mechanical properties, residual
stresses and corrosion resistance etc. of weld joints. Also, fusion welding processes have several problems associated
with them such as high heat input, slow cooling rate, wider and softened HAZ, phase transformation, multiple thermal
cycles etc. which are known for decreasing the mechanical properties of weldments. Solid state welding processes
provide joint properties comparable to base material and can be used to join advanced materials easily. Interestingly,
the concept of hybrid welding processes is gaining popularity now due to additional process capabilities providing
better weld properties.
Keywords - Comparison, hybrid, mechanical properties, microstructure, optimization, welding.
ABBREVIATIONS
AISI American Iron and Steel Institute GHGs Green House Gases
ANN Artificial Neural Network GMAW Gas Metal Arc Welding
ANOVA Analysis of Variance GRA Grey Relational Analysis
ASS Austenitic Stainless Steel GTAW Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials HAZ Heat Affected Zone
AWS American Welding Society HSLA High Strength Low Alloy
BPNN Back Propagation Neural Network LBW Laser Beam Welding
CCD Central Composite Design LOM Light Optical Microscope
CCGTAW Constant Current Gas Tungsten Arc Welding MRA Multiple Regression Analysis
CMT Cold Metal Transfer NGLW Narrow Gap Laser Welding
CPN Counter Propagation Network OM Optical Microscopy
DCEP Direct Current Electrode Positive PCA Principal Component Analysis
DoE Design of Experiment PCGTAW Pulsed Current Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
DSS Duplex Stainless Steel P-GMAW Pulsed Gas Metal Arc Welding
EBSD Electron Back-scattered Diffraction PWHT Post Weld Heat Treatment
EBW Electron Beam Welding RSM Response Surface Methodology
EDS Energy Dispersive Spectrometry SEM Scanning Electron Microscope
EDAX Energy Dispersive X-Ray Analysis SMAW Shielded Metal Arc Welding
EDX Energy Dispersive X-ray Detector SS Stainless Steel
EPMA Electron Probe Microanalysis TEM Transmission Electron Microscopy
FCAW Flux Cored Arc Welding TIG Tungsten Inert Gas
FE Finite Element ToFD Time of Flight Diffraction
FSS Ferritic Stainless Steel UTS Ultimate Tensile Strength
FSW Friction Stir Welding XRD X-ray Diffractometer
GA Genetic Algorithm XRF X-ray Fluorescence
405 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

I. INTRODUCTION
Welding can be defined as the joining of similar or attributed to filler metal [8]. Defect free welds are obtained
dissimilar metal pieces to make them one. It is a quick and in solid state welding processes since no filler metal is used
cost-effective process to join two materials permanently. It and it can have economic benefits as well.
provides flexibility in design [1] and simplifies the
The weld quality can be evaluated on the basis of bead
construction of large structures. It plays a key role in metal
geometry such as bead height, bead width, depth of
fabrication industry. Today, virtually all the metal products
penetration; mechanical properties such as UTS, elongation,
are welded [1]. Products like jet engines, pipelines,
yield strength, hardness, impact toughness and
automobiles, building construction, airplanes etc. could not
microstructure, corrosion resistance and fatigue strength
have materialized without welding [1], [2]. Welding has
etc. These weld characteristics are affected by several input
been classified into different types as shown in Fig. 1
process parameters. These parameters can be optimized to
below.
get a sound joint with superior properties using different
The concept of hybrid welding processes such as laser- methods available. Optimization of welding process is
GMAW, laser-GTAW, laser-FSW, laser-plasma welding, generally expensive and time-consuming exercise [9].
GMAW-plasma welding, GTAW-FSW etc. is gaining
The weldability of a material ensures that material is used
popularity these days as hybrid welding provides additional
frequently in the industry and is a deciding factor in
and enhanced process capabilities thereby improving weld
selecting the manufacturing process of a machine
properties [3]. Fusion welding uses large amount of heat to
component [5]. Today, there are over 90 welding processes
fuse the metal for welding which results in slow cooling
in use. The shipbuilding, space and nuclear industries
rate, wider and softened HAZ, phase transformation,
conduct constant research for new metals, which in turn
multiple thermal cycles and consequently decrease in
spurs research in welding [10]. Due to so many welding
mechanical properties of welds [4], [5]. In comparison to
options available, it becomes difficult for one to select the
fusion welding process, solid state welding processes use
best welding process for a particular material. Therefore, it
less heat energy and welding takes place in solid state. As a
is necessary to compare different welding processes and
result, the weld joint properties are comparable to that of
optimize their process parameters to select the best process
base metal. Also, advanced metals and dissimilar metal
and input parameters to get the defect free welds having
pairs can be welded using solid state processes which are
optimum weld properties. Various researchers have
usually difficult or impossible to join using fusion welding
compared different optimization methods, filler metals and
processes [6]. The choice of filler metal also has a decisive
welding processes on the basis of mechanical properties,
role in improving the weld joint properties. In case of
microstructure, residual stresses and corrosion resistance
dissimilar welds, filler metal should be selected such that
etc. of weld joints. In this paper, literature available on the
the joint properties are at least similar to metal having lower
comparison of different filler metals, optimization methods
properties [7]. Hydrogen induced porosity is generally
and welding processes has been reviewed.
Fig. 1. Classification of Welding Processes
II. LITERATURE REVIEW of AA6061 aluminium alloy weldments. The filler material
for GMAW and GTAW is AA4043 grade aluminium alloy
2.1 Comparison of different welding processes wire and rod respectively. Single pass square butt joints
were obtained using pure argon as shielding gas. The
A. K. Lakshminarayanan et. al. compared the GMAW,
parameters considered for GMAW and GTAW processes
GTAW and FSW processes on the basis of tensile strength
were gas flow rate (l/min), current (A), welding speed

(mm/min.), heat input (kJ/mm), voltage (V) while M. Ericsson et. al. studied the effect of welding speed on
parameters considered for FSW were welding speed fatigue strength of FSW welds and compared it with that of
(mm/min), pin diameter (mm), heat input (kJ/mm), tool TIG and MIG welds. The process used to analyze the
rotational speed (rpm), pin length (mm), axial force (kN). experiment proceeded with series of fatigue tests carried out
Various tensile properties were studied using UTM and the on a hydraulic testing machine. Al-Mg-Si 6082 alloy was
mean behaviour of the considered samples was compared. used as the base material. The parameters used for the
The experiment concluded that FSW weldments exhibited experiment were welding speed (mm/min) and depth of
higher strength as compared to MIG and TIG weldments. penetration (mm) in different types of joints. The
The research also proves the fact that two or more welding experiment concluded that fatigue strength of FSW welds is
techniques can be compared on basis of tensile strength of greater than TIG and MIG welds of same material [15].
weldments, irrespective of their symmetrical parametric
T. Mohandas et al. compared the SMAW and GTAW
behaviour [11].
weldments of 17 Cr FSS in terms of microstructure and
K. Shanmugam et al. compared the influence of SMAW, mechanical properties. The input process parameters used
GMAW and GTAW process parameters on tensile for both the welding processes were electrode diameter
properties, impact, hardness and microstructure of AISI (mm), welding speed (mm/min), arc voltage (V), current
409M FSS weldments. Single pass square butt joints were (A) and arc gap (mm). Gas flow rate was taken for GTAW
made by using AISI 308L ASS as filler metal. Ultrasonic only. Optical microscopy and ISI 100 SEM were used for
testing of weldments was done to check the defects. All the microstructural and fractographic studies respectively. The
tensile and impact test specimens were prepared based on experimental results showed that GTAW weldments having
ASTM E8M-04 and ASTM E23-04 guidelines respectively. equi-axed grain structure possessed better tensile and yield
SEM was used to study the fractured surface morphology of strength than SMAW weldments. Base metal in general
impact and tensile tested specimens. Experimental results showed higher ductility than weldments [16].
showed that GTAW weldments exhibited superior
S. M. Tabatabaeipour et al. compared the SMAW and
mechanical properties than SMAW and GMAW
GTAW weldments of AISI 316L using ToFD technique of
weldments. Microstructural analysis by LOM revealed that
ultrasonic testing. The parameters used for both the
the joints by all the three processes predominantly
processes were heat input (kJ/mm), voltage (V), welding
contained solidified dendritic structures of austenite [12].
speed (mm/s), current (A), and electrode diameter (mm).
V. Balasubramanian et al. compared the effect of SMAW, ER316L and ER316L-16 electrodes have been used as filler
GMAW and GTAW processes on the fatigue crack growth metal for GTAW and SMAW. The experiment concludes
behaviour. The base material used is AISI 409M FSS and that GTAW weldments are more isotropic than SMAW
filler metal used is AISI 2209 grade DSS. The input process weldments and positioning of probe is very crucial to detect
parameters used are arc voltage (V), welding speed (mm/s), diffracted echoes in using time-of-flight-diffraction
heat input (J/mm), current (A), electrode diameter (mm), technique [17]
polarity and shielding gas. Shielding gas used was pure
G. Karthik et al. compared the TIG and SMAW processes
argon. Weldments were examined using ultrasonic testing
on the basis of microstructure and mechanical properties of
to check the defects. The experimental results showed that
weldments such as tensile property, toughness and
GTAW weldments have higher fatigue strength than
microhardness. The base material used was AISI 304 SS
SMAW and GMAW weldments [13].
and electrode used in SMAW was SS E308L. The input
Dhananjay Kumar et. al. examined the effects of various process parameters used were welding current, arc voltage.
welding parameters of SMAW and TIG welding on The experimental results showed that TIG weldments have
distortion of weld joints in different configurations. Various higher tensile strength than SMAW weldments [18].
types of joint configurations were studied and welded using
Radha Raman Mishra et al. compared the MIG and TIG
above welding techniques. The approach used is statistical
welding on the basis of tensile strength of dissimilar joints
analysis of angle distortions of different specimens at
of different stainless-steel grades and mild steel. The
predefined parameters and joint configurations. The base
stainless-steel grades used were 202, 304, 310 and 316.
material used for the experiment is AISI 304L SS. The
Filler material used in both the processes was E309L rod
various parameters considered for SMAW were welding
having 2 mm diameter. The input process parameters
current (A), voltage (V), torch speed (mm/s), arc gap (mm)
considered were shielding gas, current (A), voltage (V),
and for TIG welding were gas flow rate (l/min.), welding
electrode type and filler rod. Pure CO2 and 98%Ar-2%CO2
voltage (V), arc gap (mm), torch speed (mm/s), current (A).
mixture were used as shielding gas in TIG and MIG
It was observed that TIG weld joints showed lower angular
welding process respectively. The experimental results
distortion while SMAW weld joints showed maximum
showed that dissimilar weldments of TIG welding have
angular distortion [14].
higher strength than that of MIG welding [19].

G. R. C. Pradeep et al. compared the three welding region is 30% and 50% in clad electrode and tubular wire
processes namely TIG welding, gas and arc welding respectively [23].
processes by studying the hard facing of AISI 1020 steel.
V. Balasubramanian et al. compared the SMAW and
The samples were prepared using the ASTM standards. To
FCAW processes on the basis of fatigue crack growth
study the nature of wear surface of weldments, SEM was
behaviour of ASTM 517 ‘F’ grade steel weldments. The
used. The results indicated that at low sliding velocities,
input process parameters considered were heat input
TIG weldment has better wear properties than the
(kJ/mm), voltage (V), welding speed (mm/s), current (A)
weldments of gas and arc welding but at higher sliding
and electrode diameter (mm). Cruciform joints having
velocities, gas and arc welding processes weldments have
improper penetration were formed with AWS E11018-M
better wear properties than TIG weldments [20].
and AWS E100T5K5 electrodes using SMAW and FCAW
Weiwei Yu et al. compared the SMAW and GTAW processes respectively. Results indicated that SMAW
weldments on the basis of their fracture toughness at base welded joints have better resistance to fatigue crack growth
metal, weld metal, HAZs and fusion zones. The base than FCAW welded joints [24].
material used was Z3CN20.09M primary coolant pipes. OK
S. Raghu Nathan et al. compared the microstructure and
Tigrod 316L + OK 63.25N and ER316L/ER316LSi were
mechanical properties of GMAW, SMAW and FSW
used as welding material for SMAW and GTAW
welded naval grade DMR-249 A HSLA steel joints. The
respectively. The pipes in both the processes were narrow
filler metal used in GMAW and SMAW processes was E-
gap multipass welded in butt joint configuration around the
8018-C1. FSW joints were prepared using tungsten based
circumference. In order to study the strain evolution in
alloy as a non-consumable rotating tool. The input process
each area and draw a comparison between tensile properties
parameters considered in GMAW and SMAW processes
of SMAW and GTAW weldments, uniaxial tensile tests
were current (A), voltage (V), filler diameter (mm),
coupled with a 3D DIC system were performed. The
welding speed (mm/min), heat input (kJ/mm) while
experiments conclude that in both the welding processes,
rotational speed (rpm), heat input (kJ/mm), welding speed
worst fracture toughness is seen at fusion zones as
(mm/min), tool shoulder diameter (mm), pin length (mm)
compared to other locations. Also, weld metal was wider in
and axial force (kN) were considered for FSW. ASTM
SMAW welds with more asymmetrical micro-hardness
guidelines were adhered to for preparing the test specimens.
distribution than in GTAW welds. Overall, GTAW
SEM and optical microscopy were used for fractographic
weldments performed better than SMAW weldments [21].
and microstructural analysis of impact and tensile tested
A. Benoit et al. studied and compared four welding specimens. The experimental results showed that FSW
processes namely MIG, pulsed MIG, cold metal transfer joints have superior mechanical properties than GMAW
MIG and TIG. The base material used was 6061 aluminium and SMAW joints. Also, use of FSW resulted in removal of
alloy and 5356 wire was used as filler metal. Shielding gas problems generally associated with fusion welding
used was pure argon. Before welding, plates were cleaned processes [25].
using acetone. Infrared thermography was used to study the
Jorge Carlos Ferreira Jorge et al. studied the effect of
characteristics of welding operations. Neutron diffraction
GMAW and SMAW method and PWHT on HSLA steel
and X-ray radiography were used to detect residual stress
joints and compared their mechanical properties. Specimens
and defects respectively. Experimental results showed that
were multipass welded at 200 °C preheat temperature. The
weld beads produced by puls-mix CMT process were better
input process parameters considered in both the processes
than other processes. Also, mechanical properties were
were current (A), deposition rate (kg/h), voltage (V),
damaged by TIG process the most [22].
welding energy (kJ/mm) and number of passes. Ar-CO2
Humberto N. Farneze et al. compared the SMAW and mixture in 4:1 was used as shielding gas in GMAW.
FCAW processes on the basis of microstructure and ER120S-G wire rods and E12018-M rods were used as
mechanical properties of ASTM A-36 steel weldments with filler metal for GMAW and SMAW respectively. Magnetic
and without PWHT. AWS E 110C-G and AWS E 11018M particle and ultra sound inspection tests were carried out to
electrodes were used as filler metal in FCAW and SMAW check the soundness of welded specimens. Optical
respectively. Specimens were multipass welded in flat microscopy, SEM and EBSD were used for metallographic
position. The input process parameters considered were and microstructural analysis. Thermo-calc software was
current (A), heat support (kJ/mm), voltage (V), arc time used to gauge the presence of carbides due to PWHT.
(sec), electrode diameter (mm) and number of passes. PWHT usually results in reduction in mechanical properties
Optical microscope and electron scan microscope were especially UTS. The results showed that GMAW has higher
used for metallographic analysis. Experimental analysis deposition rate as compared to SMAW. Thus, GMAW can
showed that lower impact resistance was observed in provide significant gain in productivity of HSLA steel
tubular wire process weldments as compared to clad welds [26].
electrode process. Also, it was observed that columnar

R. Bendikiene et al. compared the GMAW and SMAW Shrirang Kulkarni et al. compared the P-GMAW, GMAW
processes on the basis of microstructure and strength of and SMAW processes on the basis of mechanical,
non-alloy S235JR structural steel weld joints. Shielding gas metallurgical, fracture mechanics, corrosion properties and
used in GMAW was 82% Ar and 18% CO2 mixture. Two residual stresses of thick wall and 304LN SS pipe joints in
passes were used to weld the specimens. LOM was used for V-groove configuration. ER308-L ASS wire was used as
microstructural analysis. The experiment concludes that filler metal in GMAW and P-GMAW processes with DCEP
GMAW joints have 4-5 times more grains per cm as and 99.98% commercial argon gas while E 308L-15
compared to SMAW joints. Also, more the temperature, electrode was used as filler metal in SMAW process with
coarser the grains and in turn, less is the ductility. Joints DCEP. The input process parameters used in GMAW and
having finer grains are identified as possessing superior SMAW were electrode diameter (mm), welding current
mechanical properties [27]. (A), arc voltage (V) and welding speed (cm/min) while
pulsed current (A), mean current (A), base current (A),
Ramkishor Anant et al. compared the P-GMAW, SMAW
pulse time (ms), pulse off time (ms) and pulse frequency
and GTAW processes on the basis of thermal behaviour and
(Hz) were used as input parameters for P-GMAW process.
microstructure of dissimilar weld joints between AISI
ASTM guidelines were followed to prepare the test
304LN ASS and SAILMA- 350HI/SA-543 HSLA steel.
specimens. X-ray radiographic tests were performed to
The common input process parameters used were mean
check the surface or sub-surface weld defects. The
current (A), arc voltage (V), welding speed (cm/min) and
experimental results showed that use of P-GMAW process
heat input (kJ/cm). The pulsed input parameters used in P-
resulted in improvement in tensile properties, reduction in
GMAW were base current, base current duration (sec),
inclusion and porosity, residual stresses and increase in
frequency (Hz), pulsed current and pulse current duration
initiation fracture toughness as compared to that of SMAW
(sec). Shielding gas used in P-GMAW and GTAW
and GMAW processes [30].
processes was commercial argon. Optical microscope was
used for microstructural analysis. ASTM guidelines were A. K. Lakshminarayanan et al. compared the GMAW,
adhered to for preparing the test specimens. The SMAW and GTAW processes on the basis of tensile and
experimental results showed that P-GMAW process can impact properties, microstructure and microhardness of
provide joints with better mechanical properties and finer AISI 409M grade steel joints. Specimens were single pass
weld grain microstructure than SMAW and GTAW welded using AISI 2209 DSS consumables in square butt
processes [28]. joint configuration. Ultrasonic testing of specimens was
done to check their soundness. The common input process
Andrés R. Galvis E et al. compared the GMAW, SMAW
parameters used were arc voltage (V), heat input (J/mm),
and FCAW on the basis of mechanical properties,
welding current (A), welding speed (mm/s) and electrode
microstructure and failure mechanisms of AISI 304 SS
diameter (mm). Shielding gas used in GMAW and GTAW
joints. Optical emission spectroscopy was used to study the
was pure argon. The results showed that joints made using
chemical compositions and identify the ferrite numbers of
GTAW process have better tensile and impact properties
the welds. E308L-16, E308LT-1 and E308L-Si electrodes
than joints made using SMAW and GMAW processes [31]
were used in SMAW, FCAW and GMAW respectively.
The input process parameters considered were number of Amber Shrivastava et al. compared GMAW and FSW
passes, current (A), velocity (mm/s), voltage (V) and processes on the basis of energy consumption and their
average heat input (kJ/mm). Pure CO2 and 98% Ar with 2% effect on environment. Aluminium 6061-T6 was used as
O2 were used as shielding gas in FCAW and GMAW base material. Al 4043 and argon were used as filler metal
respectively. Fractographic analysis showed three types of and shielding gas in GMAW. Environmental impact was
fracture modes in the weldments. Also, FCAW joints were measured using life cycle assessment approach. Results
better than SMAW and GMAW joints in terms of fatigue showed that FSW process uses 42% less energy, 10% less
life performance [29]. material for specimens having similar tensile strength and
emits 31% less GHGs than GMAW process. FSW process
Giedrius Janušas et al. analysed the quality of GMAW and
uses less energy than any fusion welding as it is a solid state
SMAW welded structural steel S235JR joints using
process. In other words, workpiece does not melt and
destructive as well as non-destructive testing. Tensile tests
welding takes place in solid state which results in low
and holographic interferometry method were used for
distortion, few welding defects, excellent weld properties
studying tensile strength and fractures of small seams
and better health as compared to fusion welding processes
respectively. Two passes were used in making welds.
[32].
Shielding gas used in GMAW was 82% Ar and 18% CO2
mixture. The experiment concludes that GMAW joints have C. Yeni et al. compared MIG, TIG and FSW processes in
no or very few weld defects and showed superior terms of microstructure and mechanical properties of 6 mm
mechanical properties while opposite was seen in case of thick 7075 aluminium alloy welds. AA 5356 (Al-5% Mg)
SMAW joints [2]. and AA 4043 (Al-5%Si) were used as filler metal in MIG
and TIG welding respectively. Current (A), shielding gas

(argon), voltage (V), welding speed (mm/min) and gas flow that GMAW welds have slow cooling rate as compared to
rate (l/min) were used as input process parameters in both NGLW welds because the arc in GMAW process
MIG and TIG processes. MIG and TIG specimens were introduces more heat into the weld due to broader heating
preheated at approximately 150°C for better penetration. area than laser. Also, tensile properties of NGLW joint are
Microstructural examination by optical microscope superior than that of GMAW joint but opposite is true for
revealed recrystallized fine equiaxed grains in nugget zone impact toughness. Fractographic analysis of base metal and
of FSW welds whereas coarse grains were observed in weld welds showed dimples which confirmed that all the
and heat affected zone of MIG and TIG welds due to high specimens failed in a ductile manner [4].
heat input. Also, FSW joints possessed superior mechanical
A. Sik et al. compared the TIG and FSW processes in terms
properties than MIG and TIG joints [33].
of microstructure and mechanical properties of AZ31 Mg
E. Taban et al. compared MIG, TIG and FSW processes in alloy weldments. Specimens were butt welded using
terms of microstructure and mechanical properties of 6.5 AZ31D electrodes in TIG welding. Experimental results
mm thick 5086-H32 Al-Mg alloy welds. ER5356 AlMg5Cr showed that weld bead by FSW was much smoother than
(A) wire was used with 99.999% pure argon to weld MIG by TIG process but tensile strength of TIG welds was
and TIG specimens. All specimens were double sided butt higher than that of FSW welds. Distortion was observed in
welded. Microstructural examination was carried out using TIG welds due to high heat input as TIG welding is a fusion
LOM, TEM and EDX. Experimental results showed that welding. In FSW process, increasing the revolutions
FSW joints have lower distortion rate and better tensile resulted in high heat input being introduced into the
properties than MIG and TIG joints [34]. material and slow cooling rate thereby decreasing the
hardness [5].
Stefano Maggiolino et al. compared MIG and FSW
processes on the basis of corrosion resistance of aluminium A. S. Elmesalamy et al. compared TIG and NGLW
alloys AA6082T6 and AA6060T5. Morphological analysis processes on the basis of residual stresses and plastic strain
of welds surface with the help of LOM was used for in multipass welds of AISI 316L SS. Shielding gas used
studying the corrosion behaviour. Results showed that FSW was pure argon. Contour method was used to measure the
welds were more resistant to corrosion than MIG welds residual stresses and results were confirmed using X-ray
[35]. diffraction in some cases. Results showed that NGLW
welds have lower longitudinal tensile residual stresses and
Stephane Godin et al. compared the residual stresses in
plastic strain than GTAW welds. Also, distribution of
MCAW (a variant of GMAW) and FCAW welds of UNS
residual stresses about the weld centreline was almost
S41500 using three different filler metals namely
symmetrical [37]
E410NiMo, 309L and 13%Cr-6%Ni. Specimens were
multipass welded which generally results in subsurface HE Zhen-bo et al. compared TIG and FSW processes on
residual stresses. Contour method was used to measure the the basis of microstructure and mechanical properties of Al-
residual stresses. All the specimens were preheated at Mg-Mn-Sc-Zr alloy plates in hot rolled and cold rolled
100°C and then with an interpass temperature of 160°C. annealed condition. Al-Mg-Sc-Zr alloy wire along with
Current (A), voltage (V), welding speed (mm/min), argon shielding gas was used in TIG welding. TEM was
shielding gas and heat input (kJ/mm) were used as input used for microstructural characterization. Experimental
process parameters. Experimental results showed that the results showed that FSW joints have better tensile
selection of proper filler material was not clear for all properties and welding coefficient than TIG joints. Weld
loading and welding conditions; therefore, further research nugget zone of FSW welds has finer grains and more
was needed. Also, all the weldments had same HAZ [36]. hardness than TIG welds seam [38].
Wei Guo et al. compared GMAW and NGLW processes in A. Cabello Munoz et al. compared TIG and FSW
terms of microstructure and mechanical properties of processes on the basis of microstructure and mechanical
multipass butt welded S960 HSLA joints. Union X96 properties of Al-4.5Mg-0.26Sc alloy joints and examined
(ER120S-G) was used as filler metal. Argon and CO2 were the effect of PWHT on them. OM and TEM were used for
used as shielding gas in 4:1 in GMAW. LOM and SEM microstructural characterization. Current (A), welding
were used for macro- and micro-structural characterisation speed (mm/s), arc length (mm), shielding gas (argon), gas
of welds while fractographic analysis was carried out using flow rate (l/min) and SiO2 coating were used as input
SEM coupled with EDX detector. Heat input (kJ/mm), parameters in TIG welding. Experimental analysis showed
welding speed (m/min), wire feed rate (m/min), shielding that mechanical properties of FSW welds were superior
gas flow rate (l/min) and number of passes were common than TIG welds. Also, PWHT improved the strength of TIG
input parameters for both the welding processes. Input joints but it had no material effect on FSW joints properties
process parameters current (A), voltage (V) were used in [39].
GMAW only while power (kW) and focal position (mm)
Jau-Wen Lin et al. compared the TIG and FSW processes
were used in NGLW only. Experimental results revealed
on the basis of mechanical properties of pure copper joints.

Copper plates were preheated in arc welding to avoid microscope was used to check the weld defects. Grain
distortion and fast cooling due to its high thermal structure was analysed using EBSD while distribution of
diffusivity. V-notched specimens were two passes TIG alloying element was analysed using back scatter electron
welded. Current (A), voltage (V), welding speed (mm/min), imaging of SEM and EPMA. Experimental analysis showed
shielding gas (argon), gas flow rate (l/min), electrode that laser welds have higher UTS and lower elongation than
diameter, preheat and post-weld temperature (°C) were TIG welds. Grain structure in fusion zone of both welds is
used as input process parameters in TIG welding. LOM and equiaxed dendritic but laser welds have finer grains than
SEM were used for microstructural and fractographic TIG welds. Also, fusion zone of laser welds is narrower
analysis respectively. Surface structure was observed using than TIG welds due to lower heat input and higher energy
XRD. Experimental results concluded that tensile strength density [41].
and hardness of FSW welds is higher than TIG welds.
T. Pasang et al. compared the LBW, EBW and GTAW
Microstructural examination showed that base metal has
processes on the basis of microstructure and mechanical
coarse grains whereas FSW welds have fine and isometric
properties of Ti-5Al-5V5Mo-3Cr welds. Specimens were
stir zone and elongated grains were observed in TIG welds
full penetration butt welded without any filler metal.
[40].
Microstructural analysis was carried out using an optical
Liang Zhang et al. compared the TIG and laser welding microscope. Fracture surface morphological analysis
processes on the basis of microstructure and mechanical studied using SEM revealed that all the specimens failed in
properties of Al-Zn-Mg-Cu alloy joints. Al-Mg alloy filler the weld metal region in a ductile manner. All welds had
wire was used in TIG welding. Specimens were butt lower strength than base metal. GTAW welds had wider
welded. Welding speed (mm/min), argon gas flow rate weld zones as compared to EBW and LBW welds due to
(l/min) were common input parameters in both the welding high heat input supplied to specimens during GTAW
processes, Current (A), voltage (V), wire feed rate process [42].
(mm/min) were used as input parameters in TIG welding
The main points of above discussion on comparison of
only whereas laser power (kW) was used in laser welding
different welding processes have also been summarized in
only. XRF was used for analysing chemical composition.
Table 1.
X-ray radiography followed by analysis using stereoscopic
Table 1. Studies on comparison with hybrid welding process
Sr. No. Researchers Base Material Description Important Remarks

1. A. K. Lakshminarayanan AA6061 aluminium Compared the GMAW, GTAW and FSW FSW weldments exhibited higher strength
et al. (2009) [11] alloy processes on the basis of tensile strength of as compared to MIG and TIG weldments.
weldments
2. K. Shanmugam et al. AISI 409M FSS Compared the SMAW, GMAW and GTAW weldments exhibited superior
(2009) [12] GTAW processes on the basis of mechanical properties than SMAW and
microstructure and mechanical properties GMAW weldments.
of weldments
3. S. M. Tabatabaeipour et AISI 316L wrought Compared the SMAW and GTAW GTAW weldments were more isotropic
al. (2010) [17] ASS weldments using time of-flight-diffraction than SMAW weldments.
technique of ultrasonic testing
4. Radha Raman Mishra et 202, 304, 310 and Compared the MIG and TIG welding Dissimilar weldments of TIG welding
al. (2014) [19] 316 grades SS, mild processes on the basis of tensile strength of exhibited higher strength than that of MIG
steel dissimilar joints welding
5. G. R. C. Pradeep et al. AISI 1020 steel Compared the TIG welding, gas and arc At low sliding velocities, TIG weldments
(2013) [20] welding processes by studying the hard exhibited better wear properties than
facing of AISI 1020 steel weldments of gas and arc welding but
opposite was true at high sliding
velocities.
6. Weiwei Yu et al. (2018) Z3CN20.09M Compared the SMAW and GTAW Overall performance of GTAW
[21] primary coolant pipes weldments on the basis of their fracture weldments was better than SMAW
toughness weldments.
7. A. Benoit et al. (2015) 6061 aluminium Compared four welding processes namely Weld beads produced by puls-mix cold
[22] Alloy MIG, pulsed MIG, cold metal transfer MIG metal transfer process were better than
and TIG other MIG processes.
8. Humberto N. Farneze et ASTM A-36 steel Compared the SMAW and FCAW Lower impact resistance was observed in
al. (2010) [23] processes on the basis of microstructure tubular wire process weldments as
and mechanical properties of weldments compared to clad electrode process.
with and without PWHT
9. V. Balasubramanian et al. ASTM 517 ‘F’ grade Compared the SMAW and FCAW SMAW welded joints had better
(1999) [24] steel processes in terms of fatigue crack growth resistance to fatigue crack growth than
behaviour of weldments FCAW welded joints.

10. S. Raghu Nathan et al. Naval grade DMR- Compared the GMAW, SMAW and FSW FSW joints had better mechanical
(2015) [25] 249 A HSLA processes on the basis of microstructure properties than GMAW and SMAW
Steel and mechanical properties of weld joints joints.
11. Jorge Carlos Ferreira ASTM A 36 HSLA Studied the effect of GMAW. SMAW GMAW process had higher deposition
Jorge et al. (2018) [26] steel plates processes and PWHT on weld joints and rate as compared to SMAW process.
compared their mechanical properties
12. R. Bendikiene et al. (2015) Non-alloy S235JR Compared the GMAW and SMAW GMAW joints had 4-5 times more grains
[27] structural steel processes on the basis of microstructure per cm as compared to SMAW joints.
and strength of weld joints
13. Ramkishor Anant et al. AISI 304LN ASS Compared the P-GMAW, SMAW and P-GMAW process can provide joints with
(2018) [28] and SAILMA- GTAW processes on the basis of thermal better mechanical properties and finer
350HI/SA-543 behaviour and microstructure of dissimilar weld grain microstructure than SMAW
HSLA steel weld joints and GTAW processes.
14. Andrés R. Galvis E et al. AISI 304 SS Compared the GMAW, SMAW and FCAW joints were better than SMAW
(2011) [29] FCAW process in terms of microstructure, and GMAW joints in terms of fatigue life
mechanical properties and failure performance.
mechanisms of weld joints
15. Giedrius Janušas et al. Structural steel Compared the quality of GMAW and GMAW joints had superior mechanical
(2012) [2] S235JR SMAW joints using destructive as well as properties than SMAW joints.
non-destructive testing
16. Shrirang Kulkarni et al. 304LN SS pipe Compared the GMAW, P-GMAW and P-GMAW process resulted in
(2008) [30] SMAW processes on the basis of improvement in tensile properties,
mechanical, metallurgical, fracture reduction in inclusion and porosity,
mechanics, corrosion properties and residual stresses and increase in initiation
residual stresses of welds joints fracture toughness as compared to that of
GMAW and SMAW processes
17. Stefano Maggiolino et al. AA6082T6 and Compared MIG and FSW processes on the FSW welds were more resistant to
(2008) [35] AA6060T5 basis of corrosion resistance corrosion than MIG welds.
18. Stephane Godin et al. UNS S41500 Compared the residual stresses in MCAW The selection of proper filler material was
(2014) [36] and FCAW welds using three different not clear for all loading and welding
filler metals conditions. Hence further research is
needed.
19. Wei Guo et al. (1999) [4] S960 HSLA Compared GMAW and NGLW in terms of Tensile properties of NGLW joint were
microstructure and mechanical properties superior than that of GMAW joint but
of joints opposite was true for impact toughness.
20. A. Sik et al. (2017) [5] AZ31 Mg alloy Compared the TIG and FSW processes on Weld bead by FSW was much smoother
the basis of microstructure and mechanical than by TIG process but tensile strength of
properties of joints TIG welds was higher than FSW welds.
21. A. S. Elmesalamy et al. AISI 316L SS Compared TIG and NGLW processes on NGLW welds had lower longitudinal
(2014) [37] the basis of residual stresses and plastic tensile residual stresses and plastic strain
strain than GTAW welds.
22. A. Cabello Munoz et al. Al-4.5Mg-0.26Sc Compared TIG and FSW processes on the Mechanical properties of FSW welds were
(2008) [39] alloy basis of microstructure and mechanical superior than TIG welds. PWHT
properties of joints and examined the effect improved the strength of TIG joints but it
of PWHT on them had no material effect on FSW joints
properties.
23. Jau-Wen Lin et al. (2013) Pure copper Compared the TIG and FSW processes in Copper plates need to preheated in arc
[40] terms of mechanical properties of joints welding to avoid distortion and fast
cooling due to its high thermal diffusivity.
Tensile strength and hardness of FSW
welds were higher than TIG welds.
24. Liang Zhang et al. (2016) Al–Zn–Mg–Cu alloy Compared the TIG and laser welding Laser welds showed higher UTS and
[41] processes on the basis of microstructure lower elongation than TIG welds. Laser
and mechanical properties of joints welds had finer grains in fusion zone than
TIG welds but grain structure in fusion
zone of both welds was equiaxed
dendritic.
25. T. Pasang et al. (2013) Ti-5Al-5V-5Mo-3Cr Compared the LBW, EBW and GTAW GTAW welds had wider weld zones as
[42] processes on the basis of microstructure compared to EBW and LBW welds due to
and mechanical properties of welds high heat input supplied to specimens
during GTAW process. All welds had
lower strength than base metal.
2.2 Comparison of a welding with its hybrid welding focal radius (mm), beam parameter product (mm-rad).
Groove angle was kept constant during the experiments.
Zhao Jiang et. al. studied double sided hybrid laser-MIG The experiment concludes that hybrid laser-MIG welding
welding and MIG welding. The base material used is 30 process is better than conventional MIG welding [43].
mm thick Al 5083 alloy and ER5183 is used as filler wire.
The laser beam parameters used were wavelength (mm), Ruifeng Li et al. compared the LBW with hybrid laser-
MIG welding on the basis of microstructure and mechanical

properties of Ti-Al-Zr-Fe titanium alloy weldments made and mechanical properties of Invar36 alloy joints. The
using TA-10 filler wire. For this, optical microscope chemical composition, phases and microstructure were
observations were taken, microhardness and mechanical observed using XRF, XRD and LOM respectively while
tests were performed. The input process parameters used fracture surface morphology and chemical composition of
for LBW were side assist gas flow rate (l/min), welding precipitates were studied using SEM and EDS respectively.
speed (m/min), power (kW) and focal position (mm) while The common input process parameters used are laser power
parameters used for hybrid laser-MIG welding were laser (kW), welding speed (m/min), focal length (mm) and
arc distance (mm), welding speed (m/min), wire feed rate defocused length (mm) while current (A) and voltage (V)
(m/min), arc voltage (V), power (kW), clearance (mm), were used in hybrid welding only. Experimental analysis
MIG gas flow rate (l/min), side assist gas flow rate (l/min) concluded that laser-arc hybrid welds have better tensile
and focal position (mm). The experiment concluded that out properties and higher coefficient of thermal expansion than
of both the welding processes, laser-MIG hybrid welding laser welds. The average grain size of hybrid welds is
was better in terms of both strength and ductility and thus smaller than that of laser welds despite the high heat input
feasible for joining joints Ti- Al-Zr-Fe sheets [44]. involved in hybrid welding as compared to laser welding
[46].
Xiaohong Zhan et al. compared the MIG and laser-MIG
hybrid welding considering welding efficiency, deformation Pritesh Prajapati et al. compared the FCAW-GMAW
and welding material consumption in Invar36 alloy joints. hybrid welding with conventional GMAW and FCAW
Current (A), welding speed (mm/s) and number of passes welding processes on the basis of microstructure, hardness,
were common input process parameters in both the welding impact and tensile properties of SA516 Gr70 carbon steel
processes. Voltage (V) and laser power (W) were also welds. The V-grooved specimens were welded in flat
considered as input parameters in MIG and hybrid laser- position using current (A), shielding gas, shielding gas flow
MIG welding respectively. FE software MSC. Marc was rate (l/min), voltage (V), travel speed (mm/min) and
used for simulation purpose in hybrid welding. electrode extension (mm) as input process parameters. Ar-
Experimental analysis concluded that laser-MIG hybrid CO2 mixture in 9:1 was used as shielding gas. Experimental
welding is way better than MIG welding in all the aspects results showed that GMAW-FCAW hybrid welds have
considered for the comparison purpose. Also, laser-MIG superior tensile properties while FCAW-FCAW welds have
welds have higher penetration depth to weld width ratio highest hardness [3].
than MIG welds. Weld seam was affected appreciably by
The above discussion given on comparison of a welding
laser-MIG hybrid welding as heat input in hybrid welding is
with its hybrid welding process has also been summarized
more concentrated than that of MIG welding [45].
in Table 2.
G. Li et al. compared laser and laser-arc hybrid welding on
the basis of microstructure, coefficient of thermal expansion
Table 2. Studies on comparison with hybrid welding process
1. Zhao Jiang et al. (2018) 5083 aluminium Compared double sided laser-MIG hybrid Hybrid laser-MIG welding process was
[43] alloy welding and MIG welding better than conventional MIG welding.
2. Ruifeng Li et al. (2011) Ti-Al-Zr-Fe titanium Compared the laser beam welding with the Hybrid laser-MIG welds had better tensile
[44] alloy laser-MIG hybrid welding on the basis of properties than laser beam welds.
microstructure and mechanical properties
of welds
3. Xiaohong Zhan et al. Invar 36 alloy Compared the MIG and laser-MIG hybrid Hybrid laser-MIG welding was better than
(2016) [45] welding on the basis of welding efficiency, MIG welding in all the aspects considered
deformation and welding material for the comparison purpose.
consumption
4. G. Li et al. (2014) [46] Invar36 alloy Compared laser and laser-arc hybrid Laser-arc hybrid welds had better tensile
welding on the basis of microstructure, properties and higher coefficient of
coefficient of thermal expansion and thermal expansion than laser welds.
mechanical properties of joints
5. Pritesh Prajapati et al. SA516 Gr70 carbon Compared the FCAW and GMAW hybrid GMAW-FCAW hybrid welds had
(2018) [3] steel welds with that of conventional FCAW and superior tensile properties while FCAW-
GMAW welds in terms of microstructure FCAW welds had highest hardness.
and mechanical properties
2.3 Comparison of two variants of a welding process Xiaohong Zhan et al. compared the continuous and pulsed
MIG welding process in terms of morphology,
microstructure of weld seam and mechanical properties of

Invar36 alloy weld joints. The filler wire used was M39. used was ER70S-6 wire. High speed videography was used
The input process parameters used in both the processes to measure the arc length and images were analyzed using
were current (A), welding speed (mm/s) and voltage (V). LabVIEW software. Experimental data revealed that at the
The experimental result concluded that for Invar36 alloy, same energy input, resistivity remains the same in both the
pulsed MIG is superior than continuous MIG welding welding processes [49].
within the rational parameters. Pulsed MIG weldments have
R. Garcia et.al. conducted experiments on the comparative
more microhardness and tensile strength as compared to
analysis of MIG welding on composites using different
continuous MIG weldments. Also, the size of weld seam
electric arc processes. The process used for comparative
differs significantly in weldments of both the welding
analysis can be achieved by both direct electric arc (DEA)
processes [47].
and indirect electric arc (IEA) with micro structure
A. Mathivanan et al. compared the pulsed current and dual exploration of weld with the help of optical microscopy and
pulse GMAW processes on the basis of mechanical and scanning electron microscopy attached to an energy
metallurgical properties of AA6061 aluminium alloy sheet dispersive X-ray spectroscopy system. The parameter used
weldments. Square butt joints were obtained using ER 4043 for analysis in both IEA and DEA were argon flow rate
filler wire. The input parameters used were travel speed (l/min), current (A), preheated temp (0C), voltage (V),
(cm/min), wire feed rate (m/min), arc voltage (V), mean travel speed (mm/sec.), heat input (kJ/s). The material used
current (A) and heat input (kJ/cm). Shielding gas used was is a metal matrix composite (MMC) of aluminium
pure argon. ASTM E8M and ASTM EA370 standards were fabricated by use of capillary infiltration technique with
followed to prepare the tensile and microhardness test chemical composition of Al-1010 with TiC and data
specimens. X-ray radiographic tests were carried out to acquisition technique is used to monitor process parameters.
check the soundness of weld joints. Microstructural analysis The experiment concludes that indirect electric arc yields
by LOM showed finer dendrites in both the weldments. uniform welds while broadening was observed in the upper
Experimental analysis showed that superior mechanical and parts in direct electric arc. Mechanical strength in indirect
metallurgical properties were obtained in dual pulsed electric arc welds was uniform irrespective of the presumed
GMAW process than in pulsed current GMAW process pre-heating condition and depends only on consumable.
[48]. Also, they concluded that use of IEA is much more
beneficial than DEA for joining Al-based composites,
Z. Bingul et al. compared the pulsed and constant current
independent of reinforcement content [50].
GMAW process using mild steel as base material. The input
parameters considered were peak current (A), contact tube The above discussion given on comparison of two variants
work distance (mm) and duty cycle (%). A mixture of 98% of a welding process has also been summarized in Table 3.
Ar and 2% O2 was used as shielding gas. The filler metal
Table 3. Studies on comparison of two variants of a welding process
1. Xiaohong Zhan et al. Invar36 alloy Compared pulsed and continuous MIG Pulsed MIG weldments exhibited better
(2017) [47] welding processes on the basis of mechanical properties compared to
microstructure and mechanical properties continuous MIG weldments.
of joints
2. A. Mathivanan et al. AA6061 aluminium Compared the pulsed current and dual Superior mechanical and metallurgical
(2014) [48] alloy sheet pulse GMAW processes in terms of properties were obtained in dual pulsed
mechanical and metallurgical properties of GMAW process than in pulsed current
weldments GMAW process.
3. Z. Bingul et al. (2003) Mild steel Compared the constant current and pulsed At the same energy input, resistivity
[49] GMAW process remained the same in both the welding
processes.
4. R. Garcia et al. (2003) Metal matrix Compared the MIG welding using direct Use of indirect electric arc was much
[50] composite of Al- and indirect electric arcs more beneficial than direct electric arc for
1010 with TiC joining Al-based composites, independent
of reinforcement content.
2.4 Comparison of different filler metals in a welding position. The input process parameters considered were
current (A), contact tip workpiece distance (mm), shielding
Jaime Casanova Soeiro Junior et al. compared the gas, arc voltage (V), arc power (W), wire feed rate (m/min).
deposition rate and deposition efficiency of ER70S-6 and Shielding gases used were pure CO2 and Ar-CO2 mixture in
E71T-1C filler wires in MIG-MAG and FCAW processes 3:1. Experimental results showed that drop diameter and
respectively. ASTM A36 steel plates were welded in flat frequency of detachment depend on the type of shielding

gas used. Also, electric current is the most influential no effect on spatters. Solid wire welds had higher UTS but
parameter responsible for increasing the deposition rate. lower oxygen content than flux cored filler wire welds [53].
Deposition rate and deposition efficiency of ER70S-6 filler
H. T. Lee et al. compared the two filler metals namely I-82
wire is more than that of E71T-1C filler wire [51].
and I-52 on the basis of microstructure and mechanical
Jiang Qinglei et al. studied the effect of three different properties of GTA welded Inconel alloy 690 joints. LOM
filler wires namely ER50-6, MK-G60 and MK-G60-1 on was used for microstructural characterization of fusion and
microstructure and mechanical properties of gas shielded heat affected zone while SEM was used for fracture surface
arc weld joints of Q550 steel. Current (A), voltage (V), morphology. Surface and sub-surface defects were checked
welding speed (cm/min) and gas flow rate (l/min) were using radiography. Current (A), voltage (V), welding speed
used as input process parameters. Argon and CO2 were used (mm/s), heat input (kJ/mm), total heat input (kJ/mm) and
as shielding gas in 4:1. Microstructural examination was number of passes were considered as input process
carried out using LOM, TEM and EDS while EPMA was parameters. Results showed that I-52 filler metal has better
used for fracture surface morphology. The experimental weldability as compared to I-82 filler metal. Also, welds by
data reveal that joints produced by MK-G60-1 filler wire I-52 filler metal have greater impact toughness but lower
showed better tensile properties than joints produced by tensile strength and elongation than welds by I-82 filler
ER50-6 and MK-G60 filler wires. Fractographic analysis metal. Microstructural analysis showed that fusion zone
and microstructural examination showed that fine acicular centreline of I-52 welds have columnar dendrite structure
ferrite structure is helpful to keep crack propagation in whereas that of I-82 welds have equiaxed dendritic
check and increase toughness of weld joints [52]. structure [54].
L. H. Shah et al. compared the influence of aluminium K. Devendranath Ramkumar et al. investigated the effect
filler ER5356 and SS filler E308LSi on the basis of of different filler metals namely ER2553, ERNiCu-7 and
microstructure and mechanical properties of MIG welded different welding processes CCGTAW and PCGTAW on
dissimilar joints of aluminium alloy AA6061 and SS microstructure and mechanical properties of dissimilar
SUS304. The choice of filler metal has a decisive role in joints of Inconel 718 and AISI 316L ASS. Specimens were
improving the weld joint properties. Welding and welded in single V-groove butt joint configuration. Peak
microstructural examination of dissimilar metals is difficult current (A), voltage (V), filler wire diameter (mm),
due to different physical properties and requirement of shielding gas flow rate (l/min) and number of passes were
different etching solutions for dissimilar metals. common input process parameters in both the processes
Experimental results showed that welds made using while back ground current (A), pulse time, frequency (Hz)
aluminium filler wire have superior tensile strength but and duty cycle were used as input parameters in PCGTAW
lower hardness than SS filler welds [1]. only. Gamma ray radiography was used to check the micro-
and macro- weld defects. LOM and SEM were used for
M. T. Liao et al. compared the use of ER308L solid wire
microstructural characterization of welds. Experimental
and E308LT-1 flux cored filler wire with different
analysis concluded that PCGTAW joints using ERNiCu-7
composition of shielding gases on the basis of spatter rate,
filler metal showed superior mechanical and metallurgical
tensile properties and chemical composition in GMAW
properties. ERNiCu-7 welds fractured in a ductile manner
process. AISI 304 SS plates having V-shaped groove were
while ER2553 welds fractured in a brittle manner. Also,
multipass GMA welded using a constant voltage power
different metals in dissimilar welds make PWHT of
source. Fractographic and chemical analysis were carried
dissimilar welds difficult due to different chemical
out using SEM and SEM coupled with EDAX detector
composition of base materials [55].
respectively. Results showed that spatter rates are less in
case of flux cored filler wire welds as compared to solid The above discussion given on comparison of different
wire welds because flux changes the mode of metal filler metals in a welding process has also been summarized
transfer, reduces the size of droplets thereby causing the in Table 4.
spatters to reduce. Also, composition of shielding gas has
Table 4. Studies on comparison of different filler metals
1. Jaime Casanova Soeiro ASTM A36 steel Compared the deposition rate and Deposition rate and deposition efficiency
Junior et al. (2017) [51] deposition efficiency of ER70S-6 and of ER70S-6 filler wire was more than that
E71T-1C filler wires in MIG-MAG and of E71T-1C filler wire.
FCAW processes respectively
2. Jiang Qinglei et al. (2011) Q550 steel Studied the effect of three different filler Joints produced by MK-G60-1 filler wire
[52] wires on microstructure and mechanical showed better tensile properties than
properties of gas shielded arc weld joints joints produced by ER50-6 and MK-G60
filler wires.

3. L. H. Shah et al. (2013) Aluminium alloy Compared the influence of aluminium and Aluminium filler 5356 joints showed
[1] AA6061 and SS SS fillers on microstructure and better tensile properties than SS filler
SUS304 mechanical properties of MIG welded ER308LSi joints.
joints
4. M. T. Liao et al. (1999) AISI 304 SS Compared the use of ER308L and Composition of shielding gases affected
[53] E308LT-1 filler wires with different the weld properties remarkably in case of
composition of shielding gases in GMAW ER308L wire but slightly in case of
process E308LT-1 wire. Spatter rates were less in
E308LT-1 wire joints as compared to
ER308L wire joints.
5. H. T. Lee et al. (1999) Inconel alloy 690 Compared the two filler metals in terms of I-52 filler metal had better weldability as
[54] microstructure and mechanical properties compared to I-82 filler metal. Welds by I-
of GTAW joints 52 filler metal had greater impact
toughness but lower tensile strength and
elongation than welds by I-82 filler metal.
6. K. Devendranath Inconel 718 and AISI Investigated the effect of different filler PCGTAW joints using ERNiCu-7 filler
Ramkumar et al. (2014) 316L ASS metals and different welding processes metal showed superior mechanical and
[55] CCGTAW and PCGTAW on metallurgical properties.
microstructure and mechanical properties
of dissimilar joints
2.5 Comparison of different optimization methods mixture in 4:1 as used as shielding gas. Experimental
analysis showed that BPNN model is better than MRA
Abhijit Sarkar et al. compared the mathematical models model in predicting the top bead height of welds [57].
developed for predicting the weld bead geometry and HAZ
width using MRA and BPNN. AISI 1015 mild steel plates Nitin Kumar Sahu et al. compared the hybrid PCA and
were submerged arc welded using copper coated mild steel GRA based Taguchi optimization methods. IS 2062 mild
electrode with wire feed rate (mm/min), stick out (mm) and steel plates were MIG welded using copper coated ER 70S-
traverse speed (m/min) as input process parameters. 6 wire with current (A), voltage (V) and plate thickness
Voltage was kept constant. Taguchi’s orthogonal array was (mm) as input parameters. Ar and CO2 mixture in 3:1 was
used for DoE purpose. Experimental analysis showed that used as shielding gas. Tensile strength and bead geometry
BPNN model is better than MRA since BPNN model is were considered as output parameters. Taguchi’s
non-linear while MRA model is linear [56]. orthogonal array was used for DoE purpose. Optimum
parameters were same using both the optimization methods.
Davi Sampaio Correia et al. compared the GA and RSM Both the methods are easy to apply and do not need special
optimization methods. Mild steel plates having square skills. ANOVA showed that plate thickness is the most
groove butt joint were GMAW welded using ER 70S-6 significant factor affecting the welds quality [58].
filler wire with voltage (V), wire feed rate (m/min) and
welding speed (cm/min) as input parameters. Pure CO2 was S. C. Juang et al. compared the two variants of ANN
used as shielding gas. In RSM, design matrix is based on methods namely back propagation and counter propagation.
CCD. Deposition efficiency (%) and bead geometry i.e. BPN is the widely used ANN whereas CPN is a relatively
reinforcement (mm), bead width (mm), and penetration new ANN. Pure 1100 aluminium plates were single pass
depth (mm) were considered as output parameters. TIG welded using AWS A5-10 wire and argon shielding
Experimental analysis showed that RSM is better than GA gas. Welding speed (cm/min), wire feed rate (mm/min),
[9]. cleaning (%), arc gap (mm) and current (A) were used as
input parameters whereas front and back width (mm) and
I. S. Kim et al. compared the MRA and BPNN models height (mm) of weld beads were taken as output
correlating the GMAW input parameters and top bead parameters. Experimental results showed that generalization
height. MATLAB and SAS statistical software were used ability of BPN is better while learning ability of CPN is
for developing BPNN and MRA models respectively. better [59].
Current (A), voltage (V) welding speed (cm/min) and
number of passes were selected as input parameters. BV- The above discussion given on comparison of different
AH32 steel plates were used as base material. Ar and CO2 optimization methods has also been summarized in Table 5.
Table 5. Studies on comparison of different optimization methods
1. Abhijit Sarkar et al. (2016) AISI 1015 mild steel Compared the MRA and BPNN BPNN model is better than MRA since
mathematical models developed for BPNN model is non-linear while MRA

[56] predicting the weld bead geometry and model is linear.

HAZ width
2. Davi Sampaio Correia et Mild steel Compared the GA and RSM optimization RSM is better than GA.
al. (2005) [9] methods
3. I. S. Kim et al. (2003) [57] BV-AH32 steel Compared the MRA and BPNN models BPNN model is better than MRA model
correlating the GMAW input parameters in predicting the top bead height of welds.
and top bead height
4. Nitin Kumar Sahu et al. IS 2062 mild steel Compared the hybrid PCA and GRA based Optimum parameters were same using
(2017) [58] Taguchi optimization methods both the optimization methods. ANOVA
showed that plate thickness is the most
significant factor affecting the welds
quality.
5. S. C. Juang et al. (1998) Pure 1100 aluminium Compared the two variants of ANN Generalization ability of BPN is better
[59] methods namely back propagation and while learning ability of CPN is better.
counter propagation
III. CONCLUSION [2] Giedrius Janušas, Audrius Jutas, Arvydas Palevičius, Darius Žižys,
Arvydas Barila. Static and vibrational analysis of the GMAW and
Today, due to the development of advanced materials and SMAW joints quality. Journal of Vibroengineering. 2012; 14:1220-
1226. https://www.jvejournals.com/article/10677/pdf
so many welding options available, comparison of different [3] Pritesh Prajapati, Vishvesh J Badheka, Kush Mehta. An outlook on
welding processes has become a necessity. Various comparison of hybrid welds of different root pass and filler pass of
optimization methods are available to get the optimum FCAW and GMAW with classical welds of similar root pass and
filler pass. Sādhanā. 2018 ; 43 : 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-
process parameters for better and efficient output results. 018-0869-z
From the above literature survey, following conclusions [4] Wei Guo, Lin Li, Shiyun Dong, Dave Crowther, Alan Thompson.
have been drawn: Comparison of microstructure and mechanical properties of ultra-
narrow gap laser and gas-metal-arc welded S960 high strength steel.
1.Different welding processes can be evaluated and Optics and Lasers in Engineering. 2017; 91:1-15.
compared on the basis of microstructure, mechanical https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlaseng.2016.11.011
[5] A. Sık. Comparison between microstructure characteristics and joint
properties, residual stresses and corrosion resistance etc. of performance of AZ31 magnesium alloy welded by TIG and friction
weldments. stir welding (FSW) processes. Kovové materiály - Metallic
Materials. 2013; 51(3):197-203.
2. Same welding process can be compared in terms of use http://www.kovmat.sav.sk/full.php?rr=51&cc=3&ss=197
of different filler materials and changing the nature of input [6] Cai W, Daehn G, Vivek A, et al. A state-of-the-art review on solid-
parameter(s) like pulsed or continuous. state metal joining. ASME. International Manufacturing Science and
Engineering Conference, Volume 2: Materials; Joint MSEC-
3. A welding process can be compared with its hybrid NAMRC-Manufacturing USA (): V002T04A044.
welding using some other process. doi:10.1115/MSEC2018-6683
[7] Sajjad Gholami SHIRI, Mohsen NAZARZADEH, Mahmood
4. Different optimization methods can be compared on the SHARIFITABAR, Mehdi Shafiee AFARANI. Gas tungsten arc
basis of prediction of output parameters. welding of CP-copper to 304 stainless steel using different filler
materials. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China. 2012;
5. Fusion welding processes have several problems 22(12):2937-2942. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(11)61553-7
associated with them such as high heat input, slow cooling [8] A. El-Batahgy and M. Kutsuna. Laser beam welding of AA5052,
AA5083, and AA6061 aluminium alloys. Advances in Materials
rate, wider and softened HAZ, phase transformation, Science and Engineering, vol. 2009, Article ID 974182, 9 pages,
multiple thermal cycles etc. responsible for decrease in 2009. https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/974182
mechanical properties of welds. [9] Davi Sampaio Correia, Cristiene Vasconcelos Gonçalves, Sebastião
Simões da Cunha Jr, Valtair Antonio Ferraresi. Comparison between
6. Solid state welding processes provide joint properties genetic algorithms and response surface methodology in GMAW
comparable to base material and can be used to join welding optimization. Journal of Materials Processing Technology.
2005; 160(1):70–76.
advanced materials easily.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.04.243
7. The concept of hybrid welding processes is gaining [10] Edward R. Bohnart (2014) Welding Principles and Practices, Fourth
Edition. Published by McGraw-Hill Education (India) Pvt. Ltd.
popularity now due to additional process capabilities
ISBN-10: 93-392-0401-8
providing better weld properties. [11] A. K. Lakshminarayanan, V. Balasubramanian, K. Elangovan. Effect
of welding process on tensile properties of AA6061 aluminium alloy
REFERENCES joints. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology.
2009; 40(3-4):286-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1325-0
[1] L. H. Shah, Z. Akhtar, M. Ishak. Investigation of aluminium-stainless [12] K. Shanmugam, A. K. Lakshminarayanan, V. Balasubramanian.
steel dissimilar weld quality using different filler metals. Effect of welding processes on tensile, impact, hardness and
International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering microstructure of joints made of AISI 409M FSS base metal and
(IJAME). 2013; 8:1121-1131. AISI 308L ASS filler metals. Ironmaking & Steelmaking. 2009;
http://dx.doi.org/10.15282/ijame.8.2013.3.0091 36(1):75-80. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328108X378224

[13] V. Balasubramanian, A. K. Lakshminarayanan, K. Shanmugam. metal arc welded joints. Mechanika. 2015; 21(4): 323-328.
Effect of welding processes on fatigue crack growth behaviour of http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.mech.21.3.9861
AISI 409M ferritic stainless steel joints fabricated using duplex [28] Ramkishor Anant, Jag Parvesh Dahiya, B P Agrawal, P K Ghosh,
stainless steel fillers. Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Ravindra Kumar, Sudhir Kumar, Kaushal Kumar. SMA, GTA and P-
Structures. 2009; 32(8):656-664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460- GMA dissimilar weld joints of 304LN stainless steel to HSLA steel;
2695.2009.01371.x Part-1: thermal and microstructure characteristics. Materials
[14] Dhananjay Kumar, Dharamvir Mangal. Study and analysis of the Research Express. 2018; 5(9). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-
effect of welding process on distortion with 304l stainless steel weld 1591/aad403
joints. International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research [29] Andrés R. Galvis E, W. Hormaza. Characterization of failure modes
Technology, February. 2017; 6(2):212-216. for different welding processes of AISI/SAE 304 stainless steels.
http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.290145 Engineering Failure Analysis. 2011; 18(7):1791-1799.
[15] M. Ericsson, R. Sandstrom. Influence of welding speed on the fatigue https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2011.04.008
of friction stir welds and comparison with MIG and TIG. [30] Shrirang Kulkarni, Prakriti Kumar Ghosh and S. Ray. Improvement
International Journal of Fatigue. 2003; 25(12):1379-1387. of weld characteristics by variation in welding processes and
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-1123(03)00059-8 parameters in joining of thick wall 304LN stainless steel pipe. 2008;
[16] T. Mohandas, G. Madhusudhan Reddy, Mohammad Naveed. A 48(11):1560-1569. https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.48.1560
comparative evaluation of gas tungsten and shielded metal arc welds [31] A K Lakshminarayanan, K. Shanmugam, V. Balasubramanian. Effect
of a ferritic stainless steel. Journal of Materials Processing of welding processes on tensile and impact properties, hardness and
Technology. 1999; 94 (2-3) -133-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924- microstructure of AISI 409M ferritic stainless joints fabricated by
0136(99)00092-8 duplex stainless steel filler metal. Journal of Iron and Steel Research
[17] S.M. Tabatabaeipour, F. Honarvar. A comparative evaluation of International. 2009; 16(5): 66-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1006-
ultrasonic testing of AISI 316L welds made by shielded metal arc 706X(10)60013-1
welding and gas tungsten arc welding processes. Journal of Materials [32] Amber Shrivastava, Manuela Krones, Frank E. Pfefferkorn.
Processing Technology. 2010; 210(8):1043-1050. Comparison of energy consumption and environmental impact of
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.02.013 friction stir welding and gas metal arc welding for aluminium. CIRP
[18] G. Karthik, P. Karuppuswamy, V. Amarnath. Comparative Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology. 2015; 9:159-168.
evaluation of mechanical properties and micro structural https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2014.10.001
characteristics of 304 stainless steel weldments in TIG and SMAW [33] C. Yeni, S. Sayer, M. Pakdil. Comparison of mechanical and
welding processes. International Conference on Advances in
microstructural behaviour of TIG, MIG and friction stir welded 7075
Mechanical Sciences 2014, International Journal of Current
aluminium alloy. Kovové materiály - Metallic Materials. 2009;
Engineering and Technology. 2014; Special Issue-2: 200-206.
47(5):341-347.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14741/ijcet/spl.2.2014.36
[19] Radha Raman Mishra, Visnu Kumar Tiwari, Rajesha S. A study of http://www.kovmat.sav.sk/full.php?rr=47&cc=5&ss=341
tensile strength of MIG and TIG welded dissimilar joints of mild [34] E. Taban, E. Kaluc. Comparison between microstructure
steel and stainless steel. International Journal of Advances in characteristics and joint performance of 5086-H32 aluminium alloy
Materials Science and Engineering (IJAMSE). 2014; 3(2):23-32. welded by MIG, TIG and friction stir welding processes. Kovové
DOI : 10.14810/ijamse.2014.3203 materiály - Metallic Materials. 2007; 45(5):241-248.
[20] G.R.C. Pradeep, Dr. A. Ramesh, Dr. B. Durga Prasad. Comparative http://www.kovmat.sav.sk/full.php?rr=45&cc=5&ss=241
study of hard facing of AISI 1020 steel by three different welding [35] Stefano Maggiolino, Chiara Schmid. Corrosion resistance in FSW
processes. Global Journal of Researches in Engineering Mechanical and in MIG welding techniques of AA6XXX. Journal of Materials
and Mechanics Engineering. 2013; 4(1): 11-16. Processing Technology. 2008; 197(1-3):237-240.
https://engineeringresearch.org/index.php/GJRE/article/view/760/692 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.06.034
[21] Weiwei Yu, Minyu Fan, Jinhua Shi, Fei Xue, Xu Chen, Hui Liu. A [36] Stéphane Godin, Denis Thibault, Jean-Benoît Lévesque. An
comparison between fracture toughness at different locations of experimental comparison of weld-induced residual stresses using
SMAW and GTAW welded joints of primary coolant piping. different stainless steel filler metals commonly used for hydraulic
Engineering Fracture Mechanics. 2018; 202:135-146.
turbines manufacturing and repair. Materials Science Forum. 2014;
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.09.021
768-769:628-635.
[22] A. Benoit, P. Paillard, T. Baudin, V. Klosek, J.-B. Mottin.
https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.768-769.628
Comparison of four arc welding processes used for aluminium alloy
cladding. Science and Technology of Welding and Joining. 2015; [37] A. S. Elmesalamy, J. A. Francis, L. Li. A comparison of residual
20(1):75-81. https://doi.org/10.1179/1362171814Y.0000000257 stresses in multi pass narrow gap laser welds and gas-tungsten arc
[23] Humberto N. Farneze, Jorge Carlos F. Jorge, Luís Felipe G. de welds in AISI 316L stainless steel. International Journal of Pressure
Souza, Ivaní de S. Bott. Comparative study of high-strength steel Vessels and Piping. 2014; 113:49-59.
weld metals obtained by the SMAW and FCAW processes for https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2013.11.002
offshore applications and mooring chains. Welding International. [38] HE Zhen-bo, PENG Yong-yi, YIN Zhi-min, LEI Xue-feng.
2010; 24(12):903-910. Comparison of FSW and TIG welded joints in Al-Mg-Mn-Sc-Zr
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09507110903568943 alloy plates. 2011; 21(8):1685-1691. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-
[24] V. Balasubramanian, B. Guha. Effect of welding process on fatigue 6326(11)60915-1
crack growth behaviour of ASTM 517 ‘F’ grade steel weld metals. [39] A. Cabello Munoz, G. Ruckert, B. Huneau, X. Sauvage, S. Marya.
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining. 1999; 4(4):233- Comparison of TIG welded and friction stir welded Al–4.5Mg–
239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/136217199101537833 0.26Sc alloy. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 2008;
[25] S. Raghu Nathan, V. Balasubramanian, S. Malarvizhi, A. G. Rao.
197(1-3): 337–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.06.035
Effect of welding processes on mechanical and microstructural
[40] Jau-Wen Lin, Hsi-Cherng Chang, Ming-Hsiu Wu. Comparison of
characteristics of high strength low alloy naval grade steel joints.
mechanical properties friction of pure copper welded using stir
Defence Technology. 2015; 11(3):308-317.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2015.06.001 welding and tungsten inert gas welding. Journal of Manufacturing
[26] Jorge Carlos Ferreira Jorge, Joel Lemos Dias Monteiro, Antonio José Processes. 2014; 16(2):296-304.
de Carvalho Gomesa, Ivani de Souza Bott, Luís Felipe Guimarães de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2013.09.006
Souzaa, Matheus Campolina Mendesa, Leonardo Sales Araújo. [41] Liang Zhang, Xiaoyan Li, Zuoren Nie, Hui Huang, Lanqiang Niu.
Influence of welding procedure and PWHT on HSLA steel weld Comparison of microstructure and mechanical properties of TIG and
metals. Journal of Materials Research and Technology. 2018. laser welding joints of a new Al–Zn–Mg–Cu alloy. Materials and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2018.05.007 Design. 2016; 92:880-887.
[27] R. Bendikiene, G. Janušas, D. Žižys. Comparative analysis of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.12.117
microstructure and quality of gas metal arc welded and shielded

[42] T. Pasang, J. M. Sánchez Amaya, Y. Tao, M.R. Amaya-Vazquez, F. [57] I. S. Kim, S. H. Lee, P. K. D. V. Yarlagadda. Comparison of multiple
J. Botana, J. C Sabol, W. Z. Misiolek, O. Kamiya. Comparison of Ti- regression and back propagation neural network approaches in
5Al-5V-5Mo-3Cr welds performed by laser beam, electron beam and modelling top bead height of multipass gas metal arc welds. Science
gas tungsten arc welding. Procedia Engineering. 2013; 63:397-404. and Technology of Welding and Joining. 2003; 8(5): 347-352.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.08.202 https://doi.org/10.1179/136217103225010998
[43] Zhao Jiang, Xueming Hua, Lijin Huang, Dongsheng Wu, Fang Li, [58] Nitin Kumar Sahoo, Atul Kumar Sahoo, Anoop Kumar Sahoo.
Yuelong Zhang. Double-sided hybrid laser-MIG welding plus MIG Optimization of weld bead geometry of MS plate (Grade: IS 2062) in
welding of 30-mm-thick aluminium alloy. The International Journal the context of welding: a comparative analysis of GRA and PCA–
of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2018; 97(1-4):903-913. Taguchi approaches. Sadhna. 2017; 42(2):321-244. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-1997-7 10.1007/s12046-016-0589-1
[44] Ruifeng Li, Zhuguo Li, Yanyan Zhu, Lei Rong. A comparative study [59] S. C. Juang, Y. S. Tarng, H.R. Lii. A comparison between the back-
of laser beam welding and laser–MIG hybrid welding of Ti–Al–Zr–
propagation and counter-propagation networks in the modelling of
Fe titanium alloy. Materials Science and Engineering A. 2011;
the TIG welding process. Journal of Materials Processing
528(3): 1138-1142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2010.09.084
Technology. 1998; 75(1-3):54-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-
[45] Xiaohong Zhan, Yubo Li, Wenmin Ou, Fengyi Yu, Jie Chen,
0136(97)00292-6
Yanhong Wei. Comparison between hybrid laser-MIG welding and
MIG welding for the invar36 alloy. Optics & Laser Technology.
2016; 85:75-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2016.06.001
[46] G. Li, M. Gao, C. Chen, C. Zhang and X. Y. Zeng. Characterisation
comparison of laser and laser–arc hybrid welding of Invar 36 alloy.
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining. 2013; 19(1):30-37.
https://doi.org/10.1179/1362171813Y.0000000159
[47] Xiaohong Zhan, Yao Meng, DongdongGu, Huimin Wang. A
comparative study between pulsed metal inert gas welding and
continuous metal inert gas welding on thin Invar alloy. Proceedings
of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of
Engineering Manufacture. 2017; 233(2):527–538.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0954405417748186
[48] A. Mathivanan, K. Devakumaran, A. Senthil Kumar. Comparative
study on mechanical and metallurgical properties of AA6061
aluminium alloy sheet weld by pulsed current and dual pulse gas
metal arc welding processes. Materials and Manufacturing Processes.
2014; 29(8):941-947.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2014.912314
[49] Z. Bingul, G. E. Cook, A. M. Strauss. Comparison of constant
current and pulsed gas metal arc welding processes on basis of
electrode resistive dissipation. Science and Technology of Welding
and Joining. 2003; 8(1):19-28.
https://doi.org/10.1179/136217103225008865
[50] R. Garcia, V. H. Lopez, E. Bedolla. A comparative study of the MIG
welding of AI/TiC composites using direct and indirect electric arc
processes. Journal of Materials Science. 2003; 38(12):2771-2779.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024471610718
[51] Jaime Casanova Soeiro Junior, Mauro Apolinário da Luz, Sérgio
Duarte Brandi. Comparison of deposition rate and deposition
efficiency between ER70S-6 and E71T-1C consumables. Welding
International. 2017; 31(2):79-89.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09507116.2016.1218602
[52] Jiang Qinglei, Li Yajiang, Wang Juan, Zhang Lei. Characterization
on strength and toughness of welded joint for Q550 steel. Bulletin of
Materials Science. 2011; 34(1):161-167.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12034-011-0039-y
[53] M. T. Liao, W. J. Chen. A comparison of gas metal arc welding with
flux-cored wires and solid wires using shielding gas. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 1999;
15:49–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700050038
[54] H.T. Lee, T. Y. Kuo. Analysis of microstructure and mechanical
properties in alloy 690 weldments using filler metals I-82 and I-52,
Science and Technology of Welding and Joining. 1999; 4(2):94-103.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/136217199101537626
[55] K. Devendranath Ramkumar, Siddharth D. Patel, S. Sri Praveen, Dip
Joy Choudhury, P. Prabaharan, N. Arivazhagan, M. Anthony Xavior.
Influence of filler metals and welding techniques on the structure–
property relationships of Inconel 718 and AISI 316L dissimilar
weldments. Materials and Design. 2014; 62:175-188.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.05.019
[56] Abhijit Sarkar, Prasenjit Dey, R. N. Rai, Subhash Chandra Saha. A
comparative study of multiple regression analysis and back
propagation neural network approaches on plain carbon steel in
submerged-arc welding. Sadhna. 2016; 41(5):549-559. DOI:
10.1007/s12046-016-0494-7

Review Welding

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review Welding

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review Welding

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal for Research in Engineering Application & Management (IJREAM)

ISSN : 2454-9150 Vol-05, Issue-02, May 2019

Comparative Study of Different Welding Processes

Keywords - Comparison, hybrid, mechanical properties, microstructure, optimization, welding.

405 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Fig. 1. Classification of Welding Processes

406 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

407 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

408 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

409 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

410 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Sr. No. Researchers Base Material Description Important Remarks

411 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

412 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Sr. No. Researchers Base Material Description Important Remarks

413 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Sr. No. Researchers Base Material Description Important Remarks

414 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Sr. No. Researchers Base Material Description Important Remarks

415 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

Sr. No. Researchers Base Material Description Important Remarks

416 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

[56] predicting the weld bead geometry and model is linear.

417 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

418 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

419 | IJREAMV05I0250149 DOI : 10.35291/2454-9150.2019.0066 © 2019, IJREAM All Rights Reserved.

You might also like