| Literature DB >> 32024304 |
Zichen Zhang1, Qingfeng Zhao1, Lihua Liu2, Xingchuan Xia1,3, Cheng Zheng1, Liwei Quan1, Jian Ding1, Xueguang Chen1, Xudong Luo4, Lisheng Wang2, Kaihong Song1, Chong Li3, Yongchang Liu3.
Abstract
Due to its excellent comprehensive performances, Al-Si-Mg alloy i widely used in automotive, transportation and other fields. In this work, tensile performances and fracture behavior of Al-Si-Mg alloy modified by dilute Sc and Sr elements (Al-7.12Si-0.36Mg-0.2Sc-0.005Sr) were investigated at the temperature of -60-200 °C for the first time, aiming to obtain a satisfactory thermal stability within a certain temperature range. The results showed that the new designed Al-Si-Mg alloy possessed a completely stable yield strength and a higher-level elongation under the present conditions. Fracture morphology analysis, fracture profile observation and strengthening mechanism analysis were applied to elucidate the evolution mechanisms of yield strength and elongation of the alloy. The fracture modes were significantly distinct in different temperature sections, and the reasons were discussed. In addition, the interaction among the nano precipitate phase particles, the deformation substructure and the dislocations were responsible for the thermal stability of the alloy within a certain temperature range.Entities:
Keywords: Al-Si-Mg alloy; heat treatment; mechanical performance; precipitation behavior
Year: 2020 PMID: 32024304 PMCID: PMC7040805 DOI: 10.3390/ma13030665
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Engineering stress-strain curves of the alloy at different temperatures (a) and mechanical performance statistic results (b).
Figure 2Fracture morphologies of the untreated alloy (a) [1] and Sc-Sr composite modified alloy under different temperatures: (b) 20 °C, (c) 100 °C, (d) 200 °C, (e) 0 °C, (f) −20 °C, (g) −40 °C, (h) −60 °C.
Figure 3Fracture profiles microstructure of the untreated alloy (a) [1] and Sc-Sr composite modified alloy at different temperatures: (b) and (e) −60 °C, (c) and (f) 20 °C, (d) and (g) 200 °C.
Figure 4TEM photographs and phase determination of the specimens tested at different temperatures: (a,b) −60 °C, (c,d) 20 °C, (e–j) 200 °C.
Figure 5A comparison of the theoretical model and the experimental data at different temperatures.