S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
121–127
STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI
430 AND 301 STAINLESS STEEL WELDED AT DIFFERENT
WELDING PARAMETERS
TRDNOST ZVARNIH SPOJEV MED NERJAVNIMA JEKLOMA
VRSTE AISI 430 IN 301 V ODVISNOSTI OD RAZLI^NIH
PARAMETROV VARJENJA
Sedat Aras
*
, Rukiye Ertan
Bursa Uludag University, Automotive Engineering Department, Bursa 16059, Turkey
Prejem rokopisa – received: 2023-12-03; sprejem za objavo – accepted for publication: 2024-01-16
doi:10.17222/mit.2023.1054
Investigating the best welding parameters for resistance spot welding joints between AISI 430 and AISI 301 stainless steels was
the primary focus of this study. This research involved welding samples of these stainless steel types using various welding pa-
rameters. Ferritic stainless steel (AISI 430) and austenitic stainless steel (AISI 301) were subjected to resistance spot welding,
and different welding conditions were applied to produce a range of samples. The study specifically analyzed the influence of
the welding current (2.5, 3.1 and 3.7) kA and welding time (40, 70 and 100) ms on the joining capability of these stainless
steels. To determine the best welding parameters, microhardness measurements and tensile-shear tests were performed on the
welded materials. The results indicated that increasing the welding current and welding time led to an increase in the tensile
load. The maximum tensile-shear load 2036 N was observed at 3.7 kA and 100 ms. However, after a salt spray test (48 and 96)
h, a serious decrease in the tensile load from 2036 N to 750 was observed at the high current 3.7 kA and time (70 and 100) ms.
At 3.1 kA and 70 ms before and after the salt test, its value remained relatively constant, and the corrosion resistance of the weld
joint was at the best level. The microhardness of the heat-affected zone increased, reaching its maximum point (for 3.1 kA and
70 ms: 347.3 HV and for 3.1 kA 100 ms: 369 HV) in the fusion zone. Moreover, the increase in the welding time and current
was associated with an increase in the nugget size. The maximum nugget size was 3.61 mm at 3.7 kA and 100 ms.
Keywords: stainless steel, resistance spot welding, corrosion resistance, mechanical properties, welding parameter
V ~lanku avtorja opisujeta vpliv parametrov uporovnega to~kovnega varjenja na lastnosti zvarnih spojev med feritnim nerjavnim
jeklom vrste AISI 430 in austenitnim nerjavnim jeklom vrste AISI 301. Za raziskavo sta izdelala ustrezne preizku{ance iz obeh
vrst jekla in jih medsebojno zvarila pri razli~nih parametrih uporovnega to~kovnega varjenja. V {tudiji sta avtorja analizirala
vpliv jakosti elektri~nega toka varjenja (2,5 kA, 3,1 kA in 3,7 kA) ter ~asa varjenja (40 ms, 70 ms in 100 ms) na sposobnost
spajanja dveh medsebojno mikrostrukturno razli~nih vrst nerjavnih jekel. Zato, da bi dolo~ila najbolj{e parametre varjenja sta
avtorja na zvarjenih preizku{ancih dolo~ila njihovo mikrotrdoto in natezno-stri`no trdnost. Rezultati meritev so pokazali, da z
nara{~ajo~o jakostjo elektri~nega toka in ~asa varjenja nara{~a tudi natezna trdnost oz. obremenitev potrebna za poru{itev
zvarnih spojev. Maksimalna natezno-stri`na obremenitev (2036 N) je bila dose`ana pri 3,7 kA in 100 ms. Vendar pa so nadaljni
korozijski preizkusi napr{evanja zvarov s slanico (48 in 96ur) pokazali mo~no zmanj{anje trdnosti teh spojev. Tako je natezna
obremenitev pri poru{itvi preizku{ancev padla z 2036 N na 750 N pri parametrih varjenja 3,7 kA in 100 ms. Pri parametrih
3,1 kA in 70 ms pa je obremenitev pri poru{itvi preizku{ancev pred in po testu napr{evanja s slanico ostala relativno nespre-
menjena. Mikrotrdota v toplotno vplivani coni je nara{~ala in dosegla svoj maksimum v coni taljenja; to je pri parametrih
varjenja 3,1 kA in 70 ms: 347,3 HV ter pri 3,1 kA in 100 ms: 369 HV. Nadalje je bilo pove~anje jakosti toka in ~asa varjenja
povezano tudi s pove~anjem velikosti zvarnih to~k (angl.: nugget size) . Maksimalna izmerjena velikost zvarnih to~k je bila
3,61 mm pri 3,7 kA in 100 ms.
Klju~ne besede: nerjavno jeklo, uporovno to~kovno varjenje, odpornost proti koroziji, mehanske lastnosti, parametri varjenja.
1 INTRODUCTION
In recent years, there has been a consistent rise in the
use of stainless steel across various industrial sectors, in-
cluding automotive sector, white goods, and medicine.
Stainless steels are particularly favored for their out-
standing corrosion resistance, appealing esthetics, com-
mendable toughness, satisfactory weldability and
formability. They exhibit superior corrosion resistance
and greater energy absorption than carbon steels. It is
noteworthy that the strength of stainless steels is rela-
tively modest in the annealed state, which poses a
limitation for certain applications.
1–3
Austenitic stainless steel is the most widely used
type, but its prevalence is hindered by the high cost of
Ni. In contrast, ferritic stainless steels, which are devoid
of Ni, present a cost-effective alternative with high ther-
mal conductivity and superior resistance to stress corro-
sion cracking. The integration of hybrid austenitic and
ferritic stainless steels provides a potential solution for
reducing the Ni usage. Achieving this hybrid structure
involves employing various joining processes for
austenitic and ferritic stainless steels. The intricate met-
allurgical reactions, stemming from the high proportion
of alloying elements in stainless steel, make the welding
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127 121
UDK 669.1:621.791.763:52-334.2 ISSN 1580-2949
Original scientific article/Izvirni znanstveni ~lanek MTAEC9, 58(2)121(2024)
*Corresponding author's e-mail:
arassdt@gmail.com (Sedat Aras),
ORCID number: 0000-0002-5651-3484

process more complex than that of carbon structural steel
counterparts. Forecasting the phase transformation of
stainless steel welds can be facilitated by examining con-
stitution diagrams, such as the Schaeffler diagram,
4,5
the
WRC-1992 diagram
6
and the Balmforth diagram.
7
Welded joints of ferritic and austenitic stainless steels are
widely used in industrial applications, including power
plants, energy conversion systems and nuclear domains.
The AISI 301 austenitic stainless steel, renowned for its
superior corrosion resistance, strength and ductility
serves as a structural material in diverse sectors such as
the chemical and aviation industries.
8,9
On the other
hand, among ferritic stainless steels, the AISI 430 type
with a 17 % chromium content is the most extensively
employed variant in various fields. Given these consider-
ations, delving into the welding of both austenitic and
ferritic stainless steel becomes paramount.
10,11
Resistance spot welding has emerged as the predomi-
nant method for joining sheet materials, and has found
extensive use in the welding of low-carbon steel, stain-
less steel and aluminum. Being particularly advanta-
geous in situations where disassembly is not required, re-
sistance spot welding is often the preferred choice over
mechanical fasteners. Its versatile application spans in-
dustrial sectors, maintenance fields, automobile manu-
facturing and the nuclear industry.
12–14
Distinguished by
its simplicity and suitability for automation, resistance
spot welding relies on relatively straightforward equip-
ment. Once best welding parameters are established, this
method becomes highly suitable for mass production
purposes.
15–17
The most important feature of stainless steels is their
resistance to corrosion. The corrosion resistance of com-
binations of stainless steels with different properties var-
ies. Dissimilar joints were also found to exhibit high cor-
rosion current density because of the effect of galvanic
corrosion. Because of the mixing of dissimilar metals, a
dissimilar joint with a chemical composition and micro-
structure that are significantly different from the base
metal was produced. The differences in the chemical
composition and microstructure may induce severe gal-
vanic corrosion, leading to accelerate corrosion damage.
It is also known that small weld defects, pores, cracks
and inclusions are easily attacked by an aggressive solu-
tion, causing an increasing corrosion susceptibility of a
joint.
5
Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the corro-
sion mechanism of dissimilar joints. Corrosion resistance
of stainless steels is evaluated with different corrosion
tests.
M. H. Bina et al.
15
investigated the effect of the weld-
ing time on resistance spot welded dissimilar stainless
steels and concluded that the tensile shear load of the
welded samples increased with the welding time. In ad-
dition, as the welding time was increased the nugget di-
ameter increased on both sides. C. Wang et al.
8
explored
the corrosion behavior of dissimilar 304 and 430 stain-
less steel welded joints. They concluded that the corro-
sion resistance of the welded joints first decreased with
an increasing fusion ratio of AISI 304, and later in-
creased with further increase in AISI 304. During the
former stage, the reduced anti-corrosive property of the
weld is due to the formation of larger portions of
martensite and phase boundaries; during the latter stage,
an increased Cr content and decreased fraction of the
phase boundary are responsible for the improvement in
the anti-corrosive property of the welded joint. Y. Zanga
et al.
4
investigated the mechanical and microstructural
properties of resistance spot welding joints between fer-
ritic AISI 430 and austenitic AISI 304 stainless steel.
They reported that the microhardness of the nugget of
304 and 430 is higher than that of the base metals. This
is due to the generation of martensite in the nugget.
With the research, we determined the best welding
time and welding current for resistance spot welding
joints between AISI 430 and AISI 301 stainless steel. In
this scope, the mechanical properties of the weld joint
were evaluated with a tensile-shear test, microstructure
analysis and salt spray test. The salt spray test was ap-
plied to evaluate the corrosion resistance of the joint af-
ter welding, which was also evaluated with the ten-
sile-shear test after the salt spray test.
2 EXPERIMENTAL PART
2.1 Materials and methods
In this investigation, AISI 430 ferritic stainless steel
and AISI 301 austenitic stainless steel were selected as
the base metals, each with a thickness of 0.4 mm. De-
tailed information regarding the chemical compositions
of these steels is provided in Table 1.
Table 2: Constant welding parameters
Electrode type
Wirbalit B CuCoBe
(D16×20)
Electrode pressure 3 bar
Current tolerance ± 2.5
Pressure tolerance ± 5
Diode temperature 34 °C
Switch-of temperature 150 °C
Resistance spot welds were created using various
welding parameters, including welding currents of (2.5,
S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
122 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127
Table 1: Chemical compositions of AISI 430 ferritic stainless steel and AISI 301 austenitic stainless steel (w/%)
Fe Cr Ni Mn Si C P S
AISI 430 Bal. 17.5 0.141 0.769 0.471 0.12 – 0.01
AISI 301 Bal. 16.71 6.89 1.16 0.54 0.08 0.02 0.003

3.1 and 3.7) kA, and welding times of (40, 70 and
100) ms. Throughout the welding process, the electrode
pressure was maintained at 3 bar while other parameters
were kept constant. They are shown in Table 2. The
welding operations were performed using Bosch Rexroth
PRC7300 equipment with Wirbalit B CuCoBe (D16×20)
electrodes.
2.2 Test procedure
Tensile-shear tests were performed using a Zwick
Roell Z020 machine in accordance with EN ISO 6892,
with a test speed of 0.0067 1/s. Welded parts, prepared
based on the guidelines of DIN EN ISO 14273, had stan-
dard dimensions of 105 mm in length and 45 mm in
width, with a joint overlap of 35 mm.
Tensile-shear tests were performed before and after
the salt spray corrosion test of the weld joints. Salt spray
tests, performed in accordance with ISO 9227, involved
exposure for 48 h and 96 h.
The weld-nugget size of the weld joints was mea-
sured using a caliper before the tensile-shear test.
Vickers microhardness tests were carried out on the
welded samples using a Struers Duramin hardness tester.
The loading applied during the measurements was set at
200 g for a duration of 5 s. The schematic representation
in Figure 1 shows the hardness measurement points and
the direction of the weld joint.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1 Nugget-diameter changes
Resistance spot welding is influenced by various cru-
cial factors that impact the weld quality, including the
surface view of the nugget, its strength, ductility, size,
penetration, sheet separation and internal discontinu-
ities.
8–12
Ideally, a spot weld should exhibit a relatively
smooth, round, or oval surface, especially in contoured
work, and should be free from surface fusion, electrode
deposit pits, cracks and deep electrode indentation. Fig-
ure 2 shows the nugget surface appearance for different
welding currents (2.5, 3.1, 3.7) kA and times (40, 70,
100) ms, along with the corresponding diameter of each
nugget for welded dissimilar materials. These findings
indicate that the weld-nugget size increases with a higher
welding current and longer welding time. Specifically,
the samples produced at 3.7 kA and 100 ms show the
largest nugget diameter. However, there is a limit to the
increase in the nugget diameter. Further increments in
the welding current beyond this limit reduces the nugget
diameter due to excessive metal melting and splashing in
the interlayer.
3.2. Tensile-shear test results
Before the salt-spray test, the outcomes of the welded
joints indicated that the tensile-shear peak loads of the
welded samples increased with the welding current and
time. The maximum peak load for the joints was ob-
served at the welding current of 3.7 kA and welding time
of 100 ms, reaching a value of 2036 N.
The most important feature of stainless steel is its su-
perior corrosion resistance. Therefore, this study investi-
gated the corrosion resistance of dissimilar stainless-steel
welds, specifically a combination of austenitic and ferrit-
ic steels. Tensile-shear tests were performed after 48 h
and 96 h of the salt-spray tests, and the results are shown
in Figures 3 and 4.
In this research, all the welded samples were ten-
sile-shear tested in order to evaluate the weld quality.
Based on the results of the tensile-shear tests, the
salt-spray test was applied to the joints welded at the
welding currents, resulting in high tensile-shear
peak-load values. The focus was on the best results ob-
tained under the welding tensile load at the welding cur-
S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127 123
Figure 2: Nugget surface appearance for 2.5, 3.1 and 3.7 kA and the
diameters of the nuggets of the welded dissimilar materials related to
the welding current and time
Figure 1: Hardness points and measurement direction of the welded
joint
Figure 3: Tensile-shear test results before and after the salt spray test
for 48 h and 96 h of the joints related to the welding current and time

rents of (3.1 and 3.7) kA and welding times of (40, 70
and 100) ms.
At 2.5 kA and 40 ms, 70 ms and 100 ms, the results
were lower than at other parameter values, as shown in
Table 3 and highlighted in purple. Separation-type
breaking was seen, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. A frag-
ile interfacial failure occurred and the breaking force was
very low. The joint was not fully formed and the welding
time and current were insufficient, so due to the low
welding current and time, there was a low heat input. For
this reason, these values were not used in further tests,
including salt spray tests. The values of 3.1 kA and
70 ms and 3.1 kA ms and 100 ms were selected for the
microhardness analyses as the resulting peak-load reduc-
tions were lower than in other cases.
The spot-welded sheets were exposed to a salt spray
for 48 h and 96 h, followed by tensile-shear tests. The re-
sults indicated significant decreases in the peak load af-
ter the salt-spray test, which were especially high at the
welding current of 3.7 kA.
A high welding current and welding time may cause
defects in a weld nugget; internal discontinuities include
cracks, porosity, big cavities and metallic inclusions.
These internal defects in a spot weld may also be caused
by any other conditions that produce excessive weld
heat.
15–18
Due to high thermal expansion, high welding
shrinkage strains can be responsible for these internal de-
fects. In this research, the salt-spray test may have
caused the tensile-shear load to decrease significantly at
the high current and high time values due to these inter-
nal defects.
If the welding current was high and consequently the
thermal stresses were high, the pitting that appeared on
the surface was more intense and so was the corrosion
rate. So, an increased welding current of resistance spot
welding leads to increased pitting and corrosion rate.
19
The microstructure of the HAZ and fusion zone becomes
coarser and dendritic with an increasing welding-heat in-
put. The corrosion rate of welded joints increases with an
increasing heat input.
20
For these reasons, it is believed that there is a de-
crease in the tensile-shear load after the salt test at high
current and time values: 3.7 kA and (40, 70 and 100) ms
and also 3.1 kA and 100 ms.
S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
124 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127
Figure 4: Tensile-shear load-displacement results for the AISI 430-AISI 301 welded samples before and after the salt spray test: a) 3.1 kA and 70
ms, b) 3.1 kA and 100 ms, c) 3.7 kA and 70 ms, d) 3.7 kA and 100 ms
Table 3: Tensile-shear test results
Welding cur-
rent (kA)
40 ms 70 ms 100 ms
40ms–48h
salt spray
70ms–48h
salt spray
100ms–48h
salt spray
40ms–96h
salt spray
70ms–96h
salt spray
100ms–96h
salt spray
2,5 1201 N 1338 N 1355 N––––––
3,1 1486 N 1710 N 1757 N 1480 N 1685 N 1658 N 1465 N 1672 N 1371 N
3,7 1813 N 1930 N 2036 N 1278 N 1522 N 1303 N 852 N 766 N 750 N

From Figures 3 and 4, it is evident that the welding
current of 3.7 kA is sufficiently high to substantially di-
minish the corrosion resistance and load-carrying capac-
ity of the welded stainless steel joints. A decrease was
also observed at the welding current of 3.1 kA and weld-
ing time of 100 ms.
As explained above, there was a decrease in the ten-
sile-shear load after the salt test at high current and time
values. But the tensile-shear load remained relatively
constant after the salt spray test at the current of 3.1 kA
and welding time of 70 ms. These results are shown in
Table 3 where the results for 3.1 kA and 70 ms are high-
lighted in blue as the best parameter values.
Figure 5 shows that the failure is initiated on the fer-
ritic stainless-steel side of each joint, and it is generally
expected that failure occurs in the softer region of a spot
weld during the tensile-shear test.
Three types of fractures were observed after the ten-
sile-shear test: separation, knotting and tearing. Figures
5 and 6 show photos of examples with different frac-
tures.
In the case of the separation-type fracture, a fragile
interfacial failure occurred and the breaking force was
very low. The joint between AISI 430 and AISI 301 was
not fully formed as the welding time and current were in-
sufficient. Due to the low welding current and time, a
low heat input was created. In the case of separation, an
insufficient weld core diameter and insufficient weld
zone occurred.
In the case of the knotting-type fracture, a sudden
break due to a button pullout was observed, showing that
the welding parameters were not suitable. The heat input
increased with the welding time and welding current, the
weld-core diameter and weld zone increased, and the
tensile shear load also increased.
In the case of the tearing-type fracture, a tear in the
material propagated until it became a sharp fracture in
the welded area. It is observed at the circumference of
the molten zone.
3.3 Microhardness measurements
The tensile-test results of the welded samples sub-
jected to salt spray were evaluated, and it was deter-
mined that, considering the tensile forces before and af-
ter the salt test, the best results were seen at 3.1 kA. That
is why we focused on this value for microhardness.
Therefore, microhardness measurements were taken on
the samples welded at the 3.1 kA welding current and 70
ms and 100 ms welding times. On Figure 7, it can be
seen that the hardness of the nuggets of all the samples is
higher than that of the base metals. The increase in the
welding time and current resulted in the coarsening of
the microstructure of the weld nugget and also of the
HAZ. This shows that martensite may have formed in the
weld nugget.
4,15,21
For the joints of austenitic and ferritic
stainless steel, the microhardness distribution was almost
the same at different welding times (70 ms and 100 ms).
The microhardness measurement was carried out on
the weld nugget – the fusion zone (FZ), heat affected
zone (HAZ) and base material (BM), as shown in Figure
S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127 125
Figure 5: Views of samples AISI 430-AISI 301 before and after the
tensile-shear test: a) 2.5 kA, 40 ms, 70 ms, 100 ms, b) 3.1 kA, 40 ms,
70 ms, 100 ms, c) 3.7 kA, 40 ms, 70 ms, 100 ms
Figure 6: Examples of tensile-shear test samples with fractures: a) 2.5 kA and 70 ms, b) 3.1 kA and 70 ms, c) 3.7 kA and 70 ms

7. This shows that the microhardness of the nuggets of
all the samples is higher than that of the base metals,
which may be due to the formation of martensite in the
weld nugget.
4–15
4 CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study was to determine the best
resistance spot welding parameters, focusing specifically
on variable parameters such as the welding current and
welding time, for dissimilar steels, AISI 301 and AISI
430.
Various properties of resistance spot welds of dissim-
ilar steels obtained at different welding parameters were
systematically investigated. The principal conclusions
derived from this study are summarized as follows:
The findings indicated that at values of 2.5 kA and
(40, 70 and 100) ms the results were lower than at other
parameter values. So, the focus was on the values, at
which the welding tensile load gave the best results, i.e.,
the welding currents of (3.1 and 3.7) kA and welding
times of (40, 70 and 100) ms. The tensile-shear load of
the welded samples increased with the welding current,
but significant drops in the tensile strength were ob-
served at the current value of 3.7 kA and welding-time
values of (40, 70 and 100) ms after the salt-spray test. A
decrease was also observed at the current of 3.1 kA and
welding time of 100 ms, especially after 96 h. At the cur-
rent of 3.1 kA and welding time of 70 ms, the ten-
sile-shear load remained constant after the salt-spray test.
In accordance with the tensile-shear test results be-
fore and after (96 h) the salt-spray test, the following
data can be recorded:
3.1 kA, 40 ms  Before: 1486 N – After: 1465 N
3.1 kA, 70 ms  Before: 1710 N – After: 1672 N
3.1 kA, 100 ms Before: 1757 N – After: 1371 N
3.7 kA, 40 ms  Before: 1813 N – After: 852 N
3.7 kA, 70 ms  Before: 1930 N – After: 766 N
3.7 kA, 100 ms Before: 2036 N – After: 750 N
The microhardness of the sample nuggets is higher
than that of the base metals. According to the ten-
sile-shear test results (before and after the salt-spray test)
the parameter values of 3.1 kA and 70 ms and 3.1 kA
and 100 ms were selected for the microhardness analy-
ses.
The microhardness of the heat-affected zone in-
creased, reaching its maximum values in the fusion zone,
at 3.1 kA and 70 ms: 347.3 HV and at 3.1 kA and
100 ms: 369 HV.
The results indicated a positive correlation between
the increasing welding current and time and an increase
in the nugget size, attributed to the heightened heat in-
put. The observed types of fracture of the welded sam-
ples included separation, knotting and tearing. With the
low welding current 2.5 kA and (40, 70 and 100) ms,
separation was observed; with the higher welding cur-
rents and welding times, tearing (3.7 kA and 40, 70,
100) ms and knotting 3.1 kA and (40, 70, 100) ms were
observed.
Based on the test results, the optimum welding cur-
rent and time in resistance spot welding of AISI 430 and
AISI 301 stainless steel, in terms of mechanical proper-
ties, were 3.1 kA and 70 ms.
5 REFERENCES
1
D. Ozyurek, An effect of weld current and weld atmosphere on the
resistance spot weldability of 304L austenitic stainless steel, Mater.
Design, 29 (2008) 3, 597–603, doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2007.03.008
2
A. E. Reiter, B. Brunner, M. Ante, J. Rechberger, Investigation of
several PVD coatings for blind hole tapping in austenitic stainless
steel, Surf. Coat. Tech., 200 (2006) 18–19, 5532–5541,
doi:10.1016/j.surfcoat.2005.07.100
3
H. B Carry, Modern Welding Technology, 2
nd
Edition, American
Welding Society, Prentice Hall 1981
4
Y. Zhanga, J. Guob, Y. Li, Z. Luo, X. Zhang, A comparative study
between the mechanical and microstructural properties of resistance
spot welding joints among ferritic AISI 430 and austenitic AISI 304
stainless steel, J. Mater. Res. Tech., 9 (2020) 1, 574–583,
doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2019.10.086
5
J. Verma, R. V. Taiwade, Effect of welding processes and conditions
on the microstructure, mechanical properties and corrosion resistance
of duplex stainless steel weldments—A review, J. Manuf. Process.,
25 (2017), 134–152, doi:10.1016/j.jmapro.2016.11.003
6
D. J. Kotecki, T. A. Siewert, WRC-1992 Constitution Diagram for
Stainless Steel Weld Metals: A modification of the WRC-1988 Dia-
gram, Welding Research Supplement, 71 (1992) 5, 171–178
7
M. C. Balmforth, J. C. Lippold, A New Ferritic-Martensitic Stainless
Steel Constitution Diagram, Supplement to The Welding Journal, 79
(2000) 12, 339–345
8
C. Wang, Y. Yu, J. Yu, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhao, Q. Yuan, Microstructure
evolution and corrosion behavior of dissimilar 304/430 stainless steel
welded joints, J. Manuf. Process., 50 (2020), 183–191,
doi:10.1016/j.jmapro.2019.12.015
9
M. Sireesha, V. Shankar, Microstructural Features of Dissimilar
Welds between 316LN Austenitic Stainless Steel and Alloy 800, Ma-
ter. Sci. Eng., 292 (2000) 1, 74–82, doi:10.1016/S0921-
5093(00)00969-2
10
M. S. Khorrami, M. A. Mostafaei, H. Pouraliakbar, A. H. Kokabi,
Study on Microstructure and Mechanical Characteristics of Low Car-
S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
126 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127
Figure 7: Microhardness change with 70 ms and 100 ms welding
times and 3.1 kA welding current for AISI 430-AISI 301 welded
joints

bon Steel and Ferritic Stainless Steel Joints, Mater. Sci. Eng., 608
(2014), 35–45, doi:10.1016/j.msea.2014.04.065
11
G. Senthilkumar, V. Vinodkumar, T. Mayavan, G. Rathinasabapathi,
A. G. David, Optimization of process parameters for a solid-state-
welded AISI 430 steel joint with the GRG reinforced response sur-
face methodology, Mater. Tech., 57 (2023) 5, 485–494,
doi:10.17222/mit.2023.873
12
S. B. Jamaludin, M. Hisyam, Study of spot welding of austenitic
stainless steel type 304, J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3 (2007) 11, 1494–1499,
doi:10.13140/2.1.4207.0400
13
M. Vural, A. Akkus, On the Resistance Spot Weldability of Galva-
nized Interstitial Free Steel Sheets with Austenitic Stainless Steel
Sheets, J. Mat. Process. Tech., 153–154 (2004), 1-6, doi:10.1016/
j.jmatprotec.2004.04.063
14
E. Bayraktar, D. Kaplan, M. Grumbach, Application of impact ten-
sile testing to spot welded sheets, J. Mat. Process. Tech., 153–154
(2004), 80–86, doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.04.020
15
M. H. Bina, M. Jamali, M. Shamanian, H. Sabet, Effect of Welding
Time in the Resistance Spot Welded Dissimilar Stainless Steels,
Trans. Indian. Inst. Met., 68 (2015) 2, 247–255, doi:10.1007/
s12666-014-0452-1
16
M. Alizadeh-Sh, S. P. H. Marashi, M. Pouranvari, Resistance spot
welding of AISI 430 ferritic stainless steel: Phase transformations
and mechanical properties, Mater. Design, 56 (2014), 258–263,
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2013.11.022
17
S. Aslanlar, A. Ogur, U. Ozsarac, E. Ilhan, Welding time effect on
mechanical properties of automotive sheets in electrical resistance
spot welding, Mater. Design, 29 (2008) 7, 1427–1431, doi:10.1016/
j.matdes.2007.09.004
18
B. Kocabekir, R. Kacar, S. Gunduz, F. Hayat, An effect of heat input,
weld atmosphere and weld cooling conditions on the resistance spot
weldability of 316L austenitic stainless steel, J. Mater. Proc. Tech.,
195 (2008) 1, 327–335, doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.026
19
S. M. Hassoni, O. S. Barrak, M. I. Ismail, S. K. Hussein, Effect of
Welding Parameters of Resistance Spot Welding on Mechanical
Properties and Corrosion Resistance of 316L, Mat. Res., 25 (2022)2,
doi:10.1590/1980-5373-mr-2021-0117
20
S. P. Ambade, A. Sharma, A. P. Patil, Y. M. Puri, Effect of welding
processes and heat input on corrosion behaviour of Ferritic stainless
steel 409M, Mat. Proc., 41 (2021) 5, 1018–1023, doi:10.1016/
j.matpr.2020.06.251
21
H. G. Mohammed, T. L. Ginta, M. Mustapha, The investigation of
microstructure and mechanical properties of resistance spot welded
AISI 316L austenitic stainless steel, Mat. Proc., 46 (2021)4 ,
1640–1644, doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2020.07.258
S. ARAS, R. ERTAN: STUDYING THE STRENGTH OF DISSIMILAR JOINTS OF AISI 430 AND 301 STAINLESS ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 58 (2024) 2, 121–127 127