| Literature DB >> 30388757 |
Su-Seong Ahn1, Sharief Pathan2, Jar-Myung Koo3, Chang-Hyun Baeg4, Chan-Uk Jeong5, Hyoen-Taek Son6, Yong-Ho Kim7, Kap-Ho Lee8, Soon-Jik Hong9.
Abstract
In this research, various processing conditions were implemented to enhance the mechanical properties of Al-Si alloys. The silicon content was varied from hypoeutectic (Si-10 wt.%) to eutectic (Si-12.6 wt.%) and hypereutectic (Si-14 wt.%) for the preparation of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.5Fe-0.6 Mg (X = 10⁻14%) alloys using die casting. Subsequently, these alloys were hot-extruded with an optimum extrusion ratio (17:1) at 400 °C to match the output extruded bar to the compressor size. An analysis of the microstructural features along with a chemical compositional analysis were carried out using scanning electron microscope along with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy and transmission electron microscope. The SEM micrographs of the extruded samples displayed cracks in primary Si, and the intermetallic (β-Al₅FeSi) phase was fragmented accordingly. In addition, the silicon phase was homogenously distributed, and the size remained constant. The mechanical properties of the extruded samples were enhanced by the increase of silicon content, and consequently the ductility decreased. By implementing proper T6 heat treatment parameters, coherent Al₂Cu phases were formed in the Al matrix, and the Si phase was gradually increased along with the silicon content. Therefore, high tensile strength was achieved, reaching values for the Al-XSi-3Cu-0.5Fe-0.6Mg (X = 10⁻14%) alloys of 366 MPa, 388 MPa, and 420 MPa, respectively.Entities:
Keywords: Al-Si alloy; T6 heat treatment; extrusion; microstructure; silicon content
Year: 2018 PMID: 30388757 PMCID: PMC6266997 DOI: 10.3390/ma11112150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Optical micrographs and particle size analysis of silicon in both casting and extruded Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (alloy A): 10; (alloy B): 12.6; (alloy C): 14] alloys.
Figure 2SEM Micrographs of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (a): 10; (b): 12.6; (c): 14] extruded alloys; (d) β-Al5FeSi intermetallic compound phase and (e) primary silicon in Al-Si extruded bars.
Nominal chemical composition of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (a): 10 (Alloy A), (b): 12.6 (Alloy B), (c): 14 (Alloy C)] cast alloys.
| Alloy | Composition (wt.%) | Density of Casting Alloy (g/cm3) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Si | Cu | Mg | Fe | Al | ||
| 4007A | 9.0~10.5 | 2.5~3.5 | 0.5~0.7 | <0.5 | Bal. | - |
| Alloy A | 10 | 3 | 0.6 | 0.5 | Bal. | 2.715 |
| Alloy B | 12.6 | 3 | 0.6 | 0.5 | Bal. | 2.701 |
| Alloy C | 14 | 3 | 0.6 | 0.5 | Bal. | 2.688 |
Figure 3HV1 values of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (A): 10; (B): 12.6; (C): 14] extruded alloys with and without T6 heat treatment.
Figure 4Comparison of tensile strength between the extruded Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (A): 10, (B): 12.6, (C): 14] alloys before heat treatment.
Figure 5(a) Schematic diagram of the fracture mechanism in the tensile test of specimens of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = 10, 12.6, 14] extruded alloy; (b–d) show low-magnification images and (e–g) show high-magnification images of the fracture surface at the boundary of the specimens; (h–j) show low-magnification images and (k–m) show high-magnification images of the fracture surface at the center of the specimens.
Figure 6XRD patterns of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (a): 10; (b): 12.6; (c): 14] extruded bars after T6 treatment.
Figure 7Comparison of tensile strength between the Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (a): 10, (b): 12.6, (c): 14] extruded alloys after T6 heat treatment.
Figure 8Transmission electron microscope (TEM) image of Al-XSi-3Cu-0.6Mg-0.5Fe [X = (a): 10, (b): 12.6; (c): 14] T6 heat-treated extruded bars; (d) high-resolution TEM (HRTEM) image of θ′-Al2Cu phase. Fast Fourier transform pattern of the (e) white and (f) red circles displayed in the HRTEM image shown in (d).