| Literature DB >> 30577554 |
Ding Tang1,2, Wenli Fang3,4, Xiaohui Fan5,6, Tianxia Zou7,8, Zihan Li9,10, Huamiao Wang11,12, Dayong Li13,14, Yinghong Peng15,16, Peidong Wu17.
Abstract
Microchannel tube (MCT) is widely employed in industry due to its excellent efficiency in heat transfer. An MCT is commonly produced through extrusion within a porthole die, where severe plastic deformation is inevitably involved. Moreover, the plastic deformation, which dramatically affects the final property of the MCT, varies significantly from location to location. In order to understand the development of the microstructure and its effect on the final property of the MCT, the viscoplastic self-consistent (VPSC) model, together with the finite element analysis and the flow line model, is employed in the current study. The flow line model is used to reproduce the local velocity gradient within the complex porthole die, while VPSC model is employed to predict the evolution of the microstructure accordingly. In addition, electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) measurement and mechanical tests are used to characterize the evolution of the microstructure and the property of the MCT. The simulation results agree well with the corresponding experimental ones. The influence of the material's flow line on the evolution of the orientation and morphology of the grains, and the property of the produced MCT are discussed in detail.Entities:
Keywords: VPSC model; extrusion; flow line model; microchannel tube (MCT); microstructure evolution; porthole die
Year: 2018 PMID: 30577554 PMCID: PMC6337609 DOI: 10.3390/ma12010016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Chemical composition of the aluminum alloy (AA1100).
| AA1100 | Al | Si | Fe | Cu | Mn | Zn | Others |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| wt. % | 99.39 | 0.09 | 0.23 | 0.18 | 0.0005 | 0.0035 | 0.106 |
Figure 1Schematic representations of (a) the regular die, (b) the porthole die, and (c) the mandrel structure and tube section.
Figure 2The observation section of the metal flow: (a) longitudinal section, and (b) cross section.
Figure 3The finite element model generated by Deform 3D.
Billet material property and processing parameters in extrusion process.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Container inner diameter (mm) | 40 |
| Extrusion ratio | 150 |
| Ram speed (mm/s) | 5 |
| Billet temperature (°C) | 480 |
| Die temperature (°C) | 450 |
| Force on dummy block (kN) | 460 |
Figure 4FE simulation results: (a) velocity field and (b) effective strain field.
Figure 5Flow lines of the aluminum alloy under extrusion within the porthole die: (a) FE simulation; (b) extracted flow lines and polynomial fitting.
Polynomial coefficients of the flow lines shown in Equation (8).
| Flow Line | Zone | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| upper line | [0, 19.7] | 13.6 | 2.4 × 10−3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| [19.7, 27.3] | 804.1 | −141.9 | 9.5 | −2.8 × 10−1 | 3.1 × 10−3 | |
| [27.3, 31.7] | 13,405 | 1799 | 90.3 | −2 | 1.7 × 10−2 | |
| [31.7, 32.8] | 1264.8 | −77 | 1.2 | 0 | 0 | |
| middle line | [0, 8.1] | 9.3002 | 0.207 | −0.019 | 0.001 | −3 × 10−5 |
| [8.1, 18.4] | 10.2 | −5 × 10−3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| [18.4, 30.0] | 3.9 | 0.5 | 5 × 10−3 | −7.4 × 10−4 | 0 | |
| [30.0, 32.4] | −5388.8 | 521.7 | −16.8 | 1.8 × 10−1 | 0 | |
| lower line | [0, 6.4] | 2.2 | 0.76 | 8 × 10−2 | −1.4 × 10−2 | 0 |
| [6.4, 19.3] | 6.7 | −4.8 × 10−3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| [19.3, 30.1] | 8.3 | −0.36 | 3.1 × 10−2 | −8.82214 × 10−4 | 0 | |
| [30.1, 32.6] | −6006.2 | 581.5 | −18.7 | 0.2 | 0 |
Figure 6Microstructure evolution in the longitudinal section along the flow line A characterized by EBSD.
Figure 7Microstructure evolution in the cross section (ND-TD plane) characterized by EBSD: (a) point A2; (b) point A4; (c) point A6.
Figure 8Initial textures obtained by EBSD at the beginning of the three flow lines.
Figure 9Experimental and simulated stress strain curves at different strain rates under compression.
Voce hardening parameters.
| n | R | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 5.9 | 39 | 0 | 8.5 | 5 |
Figure 10Experimental and Simulated {001} and {111} pole figures along the flow line A.
Figure 11Experimental and Simulated {001} and {111} pole figures along the flow line B.
Figure 12Experimental and Simulated {001} and {111} pole figures along the flow line C.
Figure 13Experiment and simulation of the grain morphology in terms of grain size and aspect ratio associated with the (a) flow line A; (b) flow line B; and (c) flow line C.
Figure 14Tensile tests on specimens at different flow lines: (a) sampling position; (b) engineering stress-strain curves; and (c) ultimate strength.