DE-FC07-01ID13980 METALLIC REINFORCEMENT OF DIRECT SQUEEZE DIE CASTING ALUMINUM ALLOYS FOR IMPROVED STRENGTH AND FRACTURE RESISTANCE Final Report David Schwam John F. Wallace Yulong Zhu Jun-Wan Ki Case Western Reserve University October 2004 Work Performed Under Contract DE-FC07-01ID13980 For U.S Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Washington D.C.
131
Embed
METALLIC REINFORCEMENT OF DIRECT SQUEEZE DIE … · METALLIC REINFORCEMENT OF DIRECT SQUEEZE DIE CASTING ALUMINUM ALLOYS FOR IMPROVED STRENGTH AND FRACTURE RESISTANCE ... The methods
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
DE-FC07-01ID13980
METALLIC REINFORCEMENT OF DIRECT SQUEEZE
DIE CASTING ALUMINUM ALLOYS FOR IMPROVED
STRENGTH AND FRACTURE RESISTANCE
Final Report David Schwam John F. Wallace Yulong Zhu Jun-Wan Ki Case Western Reserve University October 2004 Work Performed Under Contract DE-FC07-01ID13980 For U.S Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Washington D.C.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ………..………….….…………………….…………...……i
LIST OF TABLES ……………….…………………………………...…………..……iv
LIST OF FIGURES …..……………...…………………………………………..……. v
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………….…………………….….. x
PART 1: EVALUATION OF REINFORCEMENT MATERIALS AND COATINGS
Table 3 – Density ρ and Molar Volume Mv Values of Important Phases in Fe-Si-Al System ……………………………………………………………………….24
Table 4 - Impurity/Alloying Effect on the Interatomic Interaction of Al and Fe Atoms in Fe0.95(Al1-nXn)0.05 Ternary System and the Change in Thickness of the Aluminized Diffusion Layer at T=800� for 1 at.% Concentration of X Element …………………………………………………………………....27
Table 5 – The Dimension of Discs …………………………………………………….34
Table 6 – Thermal Expansion Coefficients of Materials ………………...…………….35
Table 7 – Surface Treatments and Coatings of Discs ………………………………….37
Table 8 – Data of Stainless Steel Wire Meshes ………………………………………..40
Table 9 – Shear Test Results of Ni-resist Insert in the Small Casting …………………76
Table 10 – Data on Meshes and Impact Energy ……………..………………………...84
Table 11 – Impact Test Results ………………………………………………………...88
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – A squeeze cast piston with Ni-resist insert (a) …………………………..…..4 Figure 1 – The groove area with Ni-resist insert (b) ……………………………….……4
Figure 2 – Pictures of casting with stainless steel wire mesh …………………….……..5
Figure 3 – Phase diagram showing complete miscibility in the solid state (a) ………….9 Figure 3 – Phase diagram showing limited solid solubility (b) …………………………9 Figure 3 – Schematic illustration of a binary alloy system with the formation of
intermetallic compounds (c) ……………………………………………….10
Figure 4 – Interface zone between dissimilar metals showing solid solution and intermetallic compound formation …………………………………………10
Figure 5 – Configuration of a liquid sessile drop on a solid substrate ……………...….14
Figure 6 – Schematic diagrams to illustrate the growth of the ApBq layer between the elements A and B …………………………………………………………..18
Figure 7 – The methods to set discs in the mold ………………………………...……..38
Figure 8 – Sketch of multi-layer meshes (a) ……………………………………….…..41 Figure 8 – Picture of multi-layer meshes (b) ……………………………………..……41
Figure 9 – The schematic feature of mold and position of disc-inserts (a) ………….…43 Figure 9 – The picture of mold with discs (b) ……………………………………...….43
Figure 10 – Mold for small casting (a), (b), (c), (d) ………………………….………..44
Figure 11 – Sketch of mold and dimension of casting (a), (b) ………………….……..46
Figure 12 – Casting with metallic inserts and cutting line …………………………..…50
Figure 13 – Cross section of aluminum bronze insert (a) ……………………………...50 Figure 12 – Cross section of aluminum bronze insert with Cu electroplating (b) …..…51 Figure 12 – Cross section of aluminum bronze insert with heavy Ni
electroplating(c) …………………………………………………………..51 Figure 12 – Cross section of aluminum bronze insert with Cu/Ni electroplating (d) ….52 Figure 12 – Cross section of aluminum bronze insert with Zn electroplating (e) ……..52
Figure 14 – Cross section of cast iron insert ………………………………………...…53
Figure 15 – Phase diagram of Al-Cu binary system (a) ………………………………..54
v
Figure 14 – Phase diagram of Fe-Al binary system (b) ………………………………..54
Figure 16 – Optical microscope picture of interface between Al bronze and aluminum
alloy (a) …………………………………………………………………...55 Figure 15 – Optical microscope picture of interface between intermediate layer and
aluminum alloy (b) ……………………………………………………….56 Figure 15 – Optical microscope picture of interface between Al bronze and intermediate
layer (c) …………………………………………………..……………….56
Figure 17 – Cross section of cast iron insert …………………………………………...61
Figure 18 – Optical microscope picture of the interface between cast iron and Al alloy ……………………………………………………………………61
Figure 19 – Result of micro hardness test across the interface between Al alloy and cast iron insert with Zn coating (a) ……………………………………….62
Figure 21 – Micro hardness across the interface between Al alloy and cast iron insert (b) ………………………………………………………...62
Figure 20 – SEM picture of interface between A354 Al alloy and cast iron with Cu coating (a) ……………………………………………………………...63
Figure 19 – Compositional profile across the interface between A354 Al alloy and cast iron with Cu coating (b) ……………………………………………...64
Figure 21 – Phase diagram of Al-Si binary system ……………………………………65
Figure 22 – Interface of A354 aluminum cast alloy and cast iron with carbon nitriding ……………………………………………………………66
Figure 23 – Interface of A354 Al alloy and cast iron after aluminizing (a) …………...66 Figure 23 – Interface of A354 Al alloy and cast iron with electroplated
Cu coating (b) ……………………………………………………………..67 Figure 23 – Interface of A354 Al alloy and cast iron with electroplated
Cu/Ni coating (c) ………………………………………………………….67 Figure 23 – Interface of A354 Al alloy and cast iron with electroplated
Ni/Cr coating (d) …………………………………………………………..68 Figure 23 – Interface of A354 Al alloy and cast iron with electroplated
Zn coating (e) ……………………………………………………………...68
Figure 24 – The thickness of intermediate layer of aluminum alloy and cast iron interface ………………………………………………………………..69
Figure 25 – Interface between A354 Al alloy and cast iron after Kolene process with Cu coating (a) ……………………………………………………………..70
Figure 25 – Interface between A354 Al alloy and cast iron after Kolene process with
vi
Cu/Ni coating (b) ………………………………………………………….70
Figure 26 – Cast iron insert utilized in the aluminum casting (a) ……………….……..71 Figure 26 – Degrading of the interface by different thermal contraction of A354 Al alloy
and cast iron insert (b) …………………………………………...……..71
Figure 27 – Crack in the intermediate layer (a) ………………………………………..72 Figure 27 – Crack in the Al alloy (b) ………………….……………………………….72
Figure 28 - Interface between A354 and cast iron with Cu/Ni coating after heat treatment (a) ……...……………………………………………….73
Figure 26 – Interface between A354 and cast iron with Zn coating after heat treatment (b) …………………………………………………………73
Figure 29 – The interface between A354 Al alloy and Ni-resist insert ………………..74
Figure 30 – The interface between A354 Al alloy and Ni-resist insert with Al coating ………………………………………………………………….74
Figure 31 – Small casting with Ni-resist insert (a) ……………….……………..……..75 Figure 31 – Shear test specimens (b) …………………………………………………..75
Figure 3(c): Schematic illustration of a binary alloy system with the formation of intermetallic compounds
Figure 4 Interface zone between dissimilar metals showing solid solution and intermetallic compound formation
11
dissimilar metals, becomes an interfacial zone having multiple interfaces, which include
intermetallic compounds, solid solutions, and so on (Fig. 4). In such a case, not only the
compositional parameter and processing parameters (time and temperature), but also
other parameters (microstructure and mechanical, physical, chemical, and thermal
characteristics of different phases present in the interfacial zone) are needed to
characterize the interfacial zone. Some controlled amount of reaction at the interface may
be desirable for obtaining strong bonding between dissimilar materials. The intermetallic
compound layer forms a metallurgical bond between both materials. However too thick
an interaction zone will adversely affect the bonding properties. Therefore the control of
formation and evolution of an intermediate layers in bonding two different materials is
metallurgically very important. The successful application of dissimilar materials
depends on the physical and mechanical properties of the intermetallic compounds
formed at the interface
1.2.2.1 Wetting
Wetting is one of the most important phenomena in joining process. The
mechanical strength of the bond after solidification can be approximately evaluated from
in liquid state [3]. Wetting phenomena depends on temperature and the chemical aW
12
composition of the phases. Wetting becomes more pronounced with increased
temperature.
Figure 5 illustrates a drop of liquid placed on the surfaces of a solid. The
relationship between the contact angle and the interfacial energies at interfaces is
expressed by Equation 1.
LVSLSV γγγθ /)(cos −= (1)
Where LVγ , SVγ , and SLγ are the liquid-vapor, solid-vapor, and solid-liquid interfacial
energy, respectively. The interfacial energy LVγ and contact angle θ determine the
energy needed to form a new interface from the two surfaces, known as the work of
adhesion ( ) defined as WaW SLLVSVa γγγ −+= . Their relationship is described by
Equation 2 (Young-Dupre equation):
)cos1( θγ += LVaW (2)
The contact angle influences the magnitude of the interfacial bonding. For example, as
the contact angle decreases the work of adhesion increases resulting in increasing bond
strength. This is often achieved with increasing temperature.
13
Generally the boundary between wetting and non-wetting is .
Theoretically, represents conditions of wetting. In practice, good wetting can be
obtained with a much smaller angle, e.g. .
ο90=θ
ο90<θ
ο15<θ
It should be noted that the Equation 1 and Equation 2 are valid for weakly
reacting systems. However in reactive systems chemical reactions occur at the interfaces,
and may greatly influence wetting. The driving force for wetting is provided by the sum
of the contribution of the reactions between the substrate and liquid and the contribution
of the surface energies. Therefore Equation 2 has to be modified so it takes into account
the reaction as expressed in Equation 3 [4].
οGCW RLVa ∆−++= γθγ )cos1( (3)
Where Rγ is the interfacial energy between the solid and the reacting interfacial layer,
is the Gibbs free energy of the formation of the new interfacial compound, and C is
a constant. The driving force for wetting comes from the contribution of the reaction and
the contribution of the surface energies.
οG∆
14
Figu
re 5
Con
figur
atio
n of
a li
quid
sess
ile d
rop
on a
solid
subs
trat
e
15
1.2.2.2 Diffusion and Chemical Reactions
The formation and growth characteristics of the diffusion layer depend on
several factors such as the crystal structure, the range of solid solubility, the magnitude
and sign of interatomic interaction potentials between the atoms of mutually interacting
elements and also their interdiffusion coefficient. However, the observed kinetics can be
governed either by the rate of diffusion across the product phase(s), diffusion control, or
by the process(es) taking place at the interfaces, interface or reaction control, or more
generally by a combination of both [5].
The characteristics of diffusion with chemical reactions are different from that of
non-reactive diffusion. There are number of discrepancies between conventional
diffusion theory and the experimental data. Therefore “diffusion” theory is not
necessarily valid for reaction diffusion. The main discrepancies are the following [6]:
1. According to the “diffusion” theory, there is no restriction on the number of
compound layers growing simultaneously in a given couple. However no reports
show the simultaneous growth of five or six compound layers between the couples in
16
which up to ten compounds exist in a certain range of temperatures. The usual
number of layers has been reported are one to three and rarely four [7, 8].
2. The layer growth is often non-parabolic, especially in those cases where two or more
compound layers grow simultaneously. In the initial stage the process is always non-
parabolic, the layer thickness time relationship being linear [7,8,9].
3. According to the “diffusion” theory once formed a layer cannot disappear since the
smaller the thickness the greater is the layer growth rate. [7,10, 11]. However
experimental data do not prove this case.
The neglect of a chemical reaction appears to be the main source of discrepancies
between the theory and experiment.
Dybkov[6] proposed the physicochemical theory of heterogeneous kinetics in
binary systems. Evans’equation[12] and Arkharov’s concept of the reaction
diffusion[13,14] reveal the role of diffusion and that of chemical reactions in determining
the compound layer-growth kinetics. The theory is based on the following assumptions:
1. The concentrations of components A and B in the layer at boundaries 1 and 2 are equal
to the limits of the ApBq homogeneity range;
17
2. A change in concentration with distance within the ApBq layer is linear;
3. During growth, both boundary concentrations behave as a linear concentration
distribution that remains almost unchanged.
In case of a single layer of the chemical compound ApBq, p and q being positive integers,
grows between the elements A and B as illustrated in Fig. 6. A general equation
describing the ApBq layer growth between the A and B phases is expressed by Equation 4.
)/(1)/(1 2120
20
1110
10
AA
A
BB
B
kxkk
kxkk
dtdx
++
+= (4)
where x is the thickness of the ApBq layer; t the time; k0B1, k1B1, k0A2, and k1A2 the rate
constants of the layer growth under conditions of reaction control. The three digits in the
subscript indicates regime of the layer growth, 0 and 1 indicate reaction and diffusional
regime of the layer growth, atoms which diffuse towards the reaction site, and the
interface where chemical reactions take place. If the contributions of both components to
the layer growth are equal (k0B1=k0A2 and k1B1=k1A2) then
)/(12
1110
10
BB
B
kxkk
dtdx
+= (5)
and
1011
2
24 BB kx
kxt += (6)
18
CB1
CB2 CB2
CB1
t=t1+dt
ApBq
CB(A)
CB(B)
BA
21 x dxB1 dxB2t=t1
ApBq
21 x
CB(A)
CB(B)
BA
t=0
Distance0
CB(A)
CB(B)
BA
T1
T2
A ApBq B
T
Distance Distance0 0
Figure 6: Schematic diagrams to illustrate the growth of the ApBq layer between the
elements A and B
19
For small x,
tkx B102= , (7)
whereas for large x
tkx 2 4= B11 . (8)
1.2.3 Residual Stresses and Mechanical Bonding
Normally, dissimilar materials have different thermal expansion coefficients.
When joined, cooling dissimilar materials from high temperature can result in increased
residual stress at the interface. These residual stresses affect the quality and integrity of
the bonding. In particular, tensile residual stresses have an adverse effect on bonding.
Controlling residual stress is therefore very important. Generally, the use of suitable filler
materials can be expected to produce a joint area with a thermal expansion coefficient
between the two base materials that is sufficient to provide plastic deformation
capabilities [1].
Residual stresses do not always effect the bonding adversely. An example is the
mechanical gripping that occurs when one material is surrounded by another material
with higher thermal expansion coefficient at the high temperature. After cooling, the
20
different thermal contraction results in gripping of the inside material by the surrounding
material. Residual stresses can therefore provide a strong mechanical bonding.
21
1.3 Diffusion and Reactions between Fe and Al-Si Alloy
The reaction between aluminum and iron is extremely rapid and accompanied by
a diffusion process leading to formation of a continuous layer of Fe-Al intermetallic
compounds, which are hard and brittle [15-19]. The growth of the intermetallic layers
would be diffusion controlled and diffusion is the rate-limiting step for the growth of the
interfacial reaction products [20, 21].
Table 1[22] and Table 2[23] show phases in Fe-Al and Fe-Al-Si system,
respectively. Also Table 3 shows density and molar volume of Al, Fe, Si and some Fe-Al
and Fe-Al-Si intermetallic compounds. Base on this data, the formation of intermetallic
compounds leads to negative volume change. Not only do these volume change but also
the brittle characteristics of intermetallic compounds make it harder to have a good
bonding at the Fe-Al interface.
Fe + 3Al = FeAl3 ∆V = -1.98 cm3/mol
2Fe + 5Al = Fe2Al5 ∆V = -4.19 cm3/mol
2Fe + Si + 8Al = Fe2SiAl8 ∆V = -8.01 cm3/mol
22
Table 1 Fe-Al System Phases
Phase Stoichiometry Crystal structure
α-FeAl bcc
β1 Fe3Al Cubic
β FeAl Disordered, bcc
β2 FeAl Ordered, bcc
ζ FeAl2 Monoclinic
(47%-50wt %)
η Fe2Al5 Orthorhombic
(52-54 wt %)
θ FeAl3 Monoclinic
(57-62 wt %)
Al-Fe Fcc
Solubility of Fe in Al 700ºC ~ 2.5 wt % 600ºC~ 0.1 wt %
23
Si
6-12
12-1
5
49.1
16.9
57-6
7
Al
55-6
5
55-6
8
25.5
49.2
6-8
Com
posi
tion,
wt %
Fe
30-3
3
20-3
0
25.4
33.9
27-3
5
Cry
stal
stru
ctur
e
Hex
agon
al
Mon
oclin
ic
Tetra
gona
l
c-fa
ce c
ente
red
Mon
oclin
ic
Stoi
chio
met
ry
Fe2S
iAl 8
FeSi
Al 5
FeSi
2Al 4
FeSi
Al 3
Fe2S
iAl 9 Ta
ble
2 Fe
-Al-S
i Pha
ses
Nom
encl
atur
e
α β δ γ
Unn
amed
24
Mv,
cm3 m
ol-1
35.1
1
59.9
9
98.2
3
10.0
0
7.09
12.0
6
ρ, g
cm-3
3.90
4.11
3.62
2.70
7.87
2.33
Tabl
e 3
Den
sity
ρ a
nd M
olar
Vol
ume
Mv Va
lues
of
Impo
rtan
t Pha
ses i
n Fe
-Si-A
l Sys
tem
Phas
e
θ-Fe
Al 3
η-Fe
2Al 5
α-Fe
2SiA
l 8
Al
Fe
Si
25
1.3.1.1 Effect of Alloying Elements
Time and temperature are the two main parameters of reaction diffusion.
However, alloying element additions may affect the rate of diffusion and the
characteristics of the chemical reaction. An alloying element reduces the diffusion rate of
iron or that of aluminum by formation of solid solutions or new phases. The thickness of
the alloy layer can be reduced [21,24-26]. For example, addition of silicon results in the
formation of a layer of FexSiyAlz, which acts as a diffusion barrier and restricts the Fe-Al
compounds formation. Oxygen and nitrogen may reduce the thickness of the alloying
layer by the formation of a ceramic oxy-nitride phase, which acts as a diffusion barrier
[27]. A copper addition reduces the thickness by reducing the rate of nucleation of the
intermetallic compounds [28]. On the other hand, Mg addition, which has high
diffusional mobility, results in the rapid growth of intermetallic phases [29].
Akdaniz et al. [30] proposed that alloying elements affect the activity
coefficients of the diffusing species in the intermetallic layers, which can be determined
from the Eq. 9 and Eq. 10 [31].
26
iexcessi RT γµ ln= (9)
jjiii c)(lnln εγγ Σ+= ο (10)
Where is a constant which is independent of concentration of constituent elements
in the intermetallic layers,
οiγln
iγ is the activity coefficient of element i , is the
interatomic interaction parameters of the element i due to the element
)( jiε
j , and c is the
concentration of the element
j
j in the intermetallic layers. Table 4[30] shows
impurity/alloying effect on the interatomic interaction of Al and Fe atoms in Fe0.95(Al1-
nXn)0.05 ternary system and the change in thickness of the aluminized diffusion layer at
T=800oC for 1 at.% concentration of X element. Based upon these data, alloying
elements can be classified into two groups [30]:
(1) I-group : XI=Si, Ti, Ge, Sb, Mg, Cu, Ca, Ag, Cd or Cr, these impurites decrease the
activity coefficient of Al atoms in α-Fe so as to reduce the thickness of intermetallic
layer at the interface.
(2) II-group : XII=Co, Zn, Mn, Ni, Pb or Bi. The addition of these impurities tends to
increase the activity coefficient, which leads to thickening of the aluminized diffusion
layer at the Fe-Al interface.
27
Table 4 Impurity/Alloying Effect on the Interatomic Interaction of Al and Fe Atoms in Fe0.95(Al1-nXn)0.05 Ternary System and the Change in Thickness of the Aluminized Diffusion Layer at T=800� for 1 at.% Concentration of X Element.
Impurities γ Al/γ˚Al Thickness change
(Experiment)
Si ↓ ↓
Ti ↓ ↓
Ge ↓ ↓
Sb ↓ ↓
Mg ↓ ↓
Cu ↓ ↓
Ca ↓ ↓
Ag ↓ ↓
Cd ↓ ↓
Cr ↓ ↓
Co ↑ ↑
Zn ↑ ↑
Mn ↑ ↑
Ni ↑ ↑
Bi ↑ ↑
Pb ↑ ↑
28
1.4 Toughening Mechanisms of Composites
1.4.1 Toughening Mechanisms of Continuous Fiber Composites
In ductile metal matrix composites cracks initiate in the fiber/matrix interface,
which is a brittle reaction layer. In brittle matrix composites, the critical flaw size is
usually smaller than the fiber spacing, and cracks initiate in the matrix. Toughening of
these composites involves increasing the energy absorbed in crack growth.
Composite toughening mechanisms are based on microcrack branching in the
matrix and on debonding at the fiber/matrix interface [32]. The interface strength,
frictional load transfer, and fiber pull-out stresses should not be too high. Fibers provide
crack bridging behind the crack front either by pull-out or by ductile deformation [33,34].
Ductile fibers are used to toughen a brittle matrix. It has been suggested that for ceramic
matrix composites, a dual fiber coating is required with an inner coating controlling the
fiber/matrix debonding and an outer coating controlling the matrix interactions.
29
1.4.2 Toughening Mechanisms of Crack Arrester Type Laminated Metal
Composites (LMC)
• Crack deflection
In many laminate systems, layer delamination can occur ahead of an advancing
crack or as the result of a crack encountering an interface. These local delaminations can
result in crack deflection, which can significantly reduce the mode � component of the
local stress intensity because of the large deviations in crack path.
• Crack blunting
When the advancing crack encounters the ductile layer, the crack is deflected
and blunted. It is important that the crack deflection and blunting mechanisms are
independent of volume fraction, which implies that the fracture toughness should be
independent of volume fraction.
• Crack bridging
Unbroken individual layers span the wake of a crack. Growth of the crack
requires stretching of these bridging ligaments. It is important to recognize that for crack
bridging to occur, the bridging ligaments must have sufficient ductility to avoid fracture
30
at or ahead of the advancing crack tip. Thus crack bridging occurs when ductility or
toughness differences exist between the component layers.
• Stress redistribution
Delamination can provide toughening by reducing the stresses in the layers
ahead of the advancing crack. delamination was found to be more effective than slip in
reducing the stress ahead of the crack.
31
1.5 Role of Electroplated Coating
Electroplated coatings play an important role in metal joining processes such as
soldering, brazing and welding. Yardy[35] classifies coating for brazing and welding
applications into three main types:
1) Active coatings melt and then wet surfaces prior to joining components together
on solidification.
2) Passive coatings are pressed out of the joint on melting, expose and clean the
surface, thus allowing solid state bonding reactions to occur.
3) Barrier coatings neither melt nor are pressed out of the joint clearance. These
coatings form a physical barrier, which protects the substrate from combining
with molten solder or brazing alloy.
Electroplated coatings can be justified in the present investigation with two
different arguments: first, electroplated coatings can improve wetting characteristics at
the interface between metal insert and molten metal. Also, electroplated coatings can
protect inserts or act as a barrier to restrict the reaction between\n insert and molten metal.
Reinforced with Soft Punched Stainless Steel Sheet
Reinforced with Stainless Steel Wire Mesh
Fig.53: Typical load-deformation plot of castings made with 17,000 psi pressurewith/without Reinforcement (As Cast)
110
Fig.54: Effect of SS304 wire reinforcement on failure energy
(Load * Displacement) produced at 7,600 psi (as-cast)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Reinforced Not Reinforced
Are
a(10
00 L
bs X
Inc
h)
Figure 55: Effect of reinforcement on energy(area) of dome-shaped squeeze casting produced with 17,000 psi pressure (as-cast)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1 2 3 4
Ener
gy(K
ip*I
n.)
Without Reinforcement Stainless Wire Mesh Reinforcement
Soft Punched Stainless Sheet Reinforcement
Hard PunchedStainless Sheet Reinforcement
Average=5.0KiP*Inch
Average=6.5KiP*Inch Average=6.4KiP*Inch
Average=4.6KiP*Inch
111
Fig.56: Failure mode of casting produced with 7600 psi pressuretested with piston pressure
112
Fig.57: Effect of mesh area fraction in cross sections of stainless mesh
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Total Mesh Wire Area Fraction in Cross Section(%)
0.25 in. Diameter Stainless Bar Reinforced
Stainless Mesh Reinforced
reinforced A354 on CVN impact strengthIm
pact
Str
engt
h of
C-V
-N(f
t-lb
)
113
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akdeniz, M.V.; Mekhrabov, A.O. “The effect of substitutional impurities on the evolution of Fe-Al diffusion layer,” Acta mater., 46 [4] (1998) 1185-1192. 30 Akdeniz, M.V.; Mekhrabov, A.O., in The 4th European Conference on Advanced Materials and Processes: EUROMAT 95, Padua/Venice, Conf, Proc., Vol. 4. Associatione Italiana Di Metallurgica, Italy, 1995, p. 487 20 Akdeniz, M.V.; Mekhrabov, A.O.; Yilmaz, T. “Interfacial interaction in Fe-Al diffusion layer,” Scripta Metallurgica et Materialia, 31 [12] (1994) 1723-1728. 21 Almond, E.A.; Embury, J.D.; Wright, E.S. “Fracture in Laminated Materials,” Interfaces in Composites, ASTM STP 452, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1969, 107-129. Anik, S.; Dorn, L. “Metallo-Physical Processes Involved in Welding Different Materials--Materials Fundamentals and Joints Between Heterogeneous Steels,” Schweissen und Schneiden, 44 [3] (1992) 148-152. 2 Arkharov, V.I., Okisleniye Metallov pri Visokikh Temperaturakh, Sverdlivsk, Metallurgizdat, 1945. 13 Arkharov, V.I.; Balaneeva, N.A.; Bogoslovskii, V.N.; Stafeva, N.M. “Mechanism of chemical diffusion in solids and its application to oxidation,” Oxid. Metals, 3 (1971) 251. 14 Bahadur, A. “Aluminum coatings for steel,” Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 11 [2] (1996) 225-232. 36 Bedford, G.M.; Boustead, J. “The Influence of Oxygen and Nitrogen on the Growth of Intermediate Phases During the Bonding of Iron to Aluminum,” Journal of Materials Science, 13 (1978) 253-260. 27 Chawla, K.K. Composite materials: science and engineering, Springer-Verlag, New York,
114
1987. Cooper, G.A.; Kelly, A. “Role of the Interface in the Fracture of Fiber-Composite Materials,” Interfaces in Composites, ASTM STP 452, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1969, 90-106. Dini, J.W. “The role of electroplated coatings in metal joining,” Welding Journal, 75 [5] (1996) 47-49. Dini, J.W. “Use of Electrodeposition to Provide Coatings for Solid-State Bonding,” Welding Journal, 61 [11] (1982) 33-39. Dunkerton, S.B. “Diffusion Bonding--Process and Applications,” Welding and Metal Fabrication, 59 [3] (1991) 100-104. Dybkov, V.I. “Reaction diffusion in heterogeneous binary systems-Part 1 Growth of the chemical compound layers at the interface between two elementary substances: one compound layer,” Journal of Materials Science, 21 (1986) 3078-3084 6 Evans, U.R., The corrosion and Oxidation of Metals, Edward Arnold, London, 1960. 12 Gopal, S.; Lakare, A.; Shivpuri, R. “Soldering in die casting: aluminum alloy and die steel interactions,” Die Casting Engineer, 44 [3] (2000) 70-81. Guo, H.; Steinhauer, E.; Chene, J.J. “Solid state diffusion bonding for structural joining with similar and dissimilar materials,” Welding in the World, 37 [3] (1996) 107-113. Gupta, V.; Argon, A.S.; Counie, J.A. “Interfaces With Controlled Toughness as Mechanical Fuses to Isolate Fibers From Damage,” J. Mater. Sci., 24 [6] (1989) 2031-2040. 32 Hauffe, K., Reactionen in und an festen Stoffen, Springer, Berlin, 1955. 7 Hayhurst, D.R.; Lechie, F.A.; Evans, A. G. “Component Design-Based Model for Deformation and Rupture of Tough Fibre-Reinforced Ceramic Matrix Composites,” Proc. R. Soc., 434 [1891] (1991) 369-381. 33
115
Hillert, M. “Diffusion and Interface Control of Reactions in Alloys,” Metal. Trans. A, 6A [1] (1975) 5. 5 Ip, S.W.; Sridhar, R.; Toguri, J.M.; Stephenson, T. F.; Warner, A. E. M. “Wettability of nickel coated graphite by aluminum,” Materials Science and Engineering A (Switzerland), 244 [1] (1998) 31-38. Jost, W., Diffusion in Solids Liquids, Gases, Academic Press, New York, 1960. 11 Karlsson, L. “Welding of dissimilar metals,” Welding in the World, 36 (1995) 125-132. Knibloe, R.; Wright, R. N.; Trybus, C. L.; Sikka, V. K. “Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Fe sub 3 Al Alloys With Chromium,” J. Mater. Sci., 28 [8] (1993) 2040 18 Kofstad, P., High-Temperature Oxidation of Metals, Wiley, New York, 1968. 8 Kopylov, N.; Lantsmar., P. “Electron-Microscope Investigation of Cold-Welded Steel/Al Joints,” Russian J. Svar. Proiz, 20 [2] (1973) 15. 29 Kotani, K.; Ikeuchi, K.; Matsuda, F. “Behavior of interfacial oxide during diffusion bonding of aluminum alloys and its influence on joint strength,” Transactions of JWRI, 26 [2] (1997) 13-22. Kotani, K.; Jung, J.; Ikeuchi, K.; Matsuda, F. “Interfacial oxide in diffusion-bonded joints of Al-binary alloys by transmission electron microscopy,” Transactions of JWRI, 28 [2] (1999) 27-37. Layner, K.I.; Kurakin, A.K., Fiz. Metal. Metaloved., 1964, 18(1), 145 25 Lesuer, D.R.; Syn, C.K.; Sherby, O.D.; Wadsworth, J.; Lewandowski, J.J.; Hunt, Jr., W.H. “Mechanical behavior of laminated metal composites,” International Materials Reviews (USA), 41 [5] (1996) 169-197. Loehman, R.E. Joining engineering ceramics, Technical Report SAND-90-0966C, CA. USA. 1990. 4
116
Mekhrabov, A.O.; Akdeniz, M. V.; Aktürk, I., in Stability of Material, ed. A Gonis, P. E. A. Turchi and J. Kudrnovsky. Plenum Press, New York, 1996, p. 681 24 Mekhrabov, A.O.; Akdeniz, M.V. “Effect of ternary alloying elements addition on atomic ordering characteristics of Fe-Al intermetallics,” Acta mater., 47 [7] (1999) 2067-2075. Mondolfo, L.F., Aluninum alloys, structure and properties, London, Butterworths, 1976. 23 Noone, M.J.; Feingold, E.; Sutton, W. H. “The Importance of Coatings in the Preparation of Al2O3 Filament/Metal-Matrix Composites,” Interfaces in composites, ASTM STP 452, American Society for testing and Materials, 1969, 59-89. Omar, A.A. “Effects of welding parameters on hard zone formation at dissimilar metal welds,” Welding Journal, 77 [2] (1998) 86s-93s. Parker, R.H., An Introduction to Chemical Metallurgy, 2nd Edn, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1978. 10 Partridge, P.G.; Ward-Close, C.M. “Processing of Advanced Continuous Fibre Composites: Current Practice and Potential Developments,” International Materials Reviews (USA), 38 [1] (1993) 1-24. Richards, R.W.; Jones, R.D.; Clements, P.D.; Clarke, H. “Metallurgy of continuous hot dip aluminizing,” International Materials Reviews (UK), 39 [5] (1994) 191-212. Rivlin, V.G.; Raynor, G. V. “Phase Equilibria in Iron Ternary Alloys. Pt. 4. Critical Evaluation of Constitution of Aluminum -- Iron -- Silicon System,” Int. Met. Rev., 26 [3] (1981) 133-152. 22 Ryabov, R., Protective Coating on Metals, Vol. 3, Consultant Bureau, New York, 1971, 96. 15 Ryabov, R.; Yumatova, V.I.; Grabin, V.F.; Butnik, A.P., Protective Coating on Metals, Vol. 4, Consultant Bureau, New York, 1971, 98. 17
117
Savov, L.; Heller, H.P.; Janke, D. “Wettability of solids by molten metals and alloys,” Metallwissenschaft und Technik, 51 [9] (1997) 475-485. 3 Shankar, S.; Apelian, D. “Effect of variation of aluminum-alloy chemistry (titanium and strontium additions) on die/molten metal interface interactions,” 5th International AFS Conference on Molten Aluminium Processing Proceedings (USA), Nov. 1998, 211-230. Shankar, S.; Apelian, D. “Role of aluminum alloy chemistry and die material on die soldering,” World of Die Casting: 1999 Transactions (USA) 285-293. Sibata, K.; Morodzani, S.; Koda, S., J. Japan Inst. Metals, 30 (1966) 382. 16 Sun, Z.; Karppi, R., Joining of Dissimilar Materials. A Review, Technical Research Centre of Finland. Research Notes, 1994. 1 Thouless, M.D.; Evans, A.G. “Effects of Pull-Out on the Mechanical Properties of Ceramic-Matrix Composites,” Acta Metall., 36 [3] (1988) 517-522. 34 Tretyakov, U.D., Tverdofazniye Reactsii, Khimiya, Moscow, 1978. 9 Trutnev, V.; Sharsharov, M.K. “Diffusion welding of austenitic steel to aluminum and aluminum alloys,” Weld Produc., 14 [10] (1967) 18. 28 Wagner C., Thermodynamics of Alloys, Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley, 1952. 31 Wright, J.K.; Wright, R.N.; Moore, G. A. “Combustion Synthesized Iron Aluminide Coatings and Joints,” Scripta Metallurgica et Materialia, 28 (1993) 501 19 Yang, L.; Hosoda, N.; Suga, T. “Investigations on the interface microstructure of stainless steel /aluminum joints created by the surface activated bonding method,” Interface Science, 5 [4] (1997) 279-286. Yardy, J.W. The Role of Protective Coatings in Metal Joining, ASM International (United States), 1992, 607-615. 35 Yilmaz, T.; Akdeniz, M. V., in EUROMAT 94: 15th Conference on Materials Testing in
118
Metallrugy, Conf. Proc., Vol. 4, ed. B. Vorsatz and E. Szöke). Federation of European Materials Societies (FEMS), Balantonszeplak, Jungary, 1994, p. 1192 26