4.7 Article

Compressive properties of Al-Si-SiC composite foams at elevated temperatures

Journal

JOURNAL OF ALLOYS AND COMPOUNDS
Volume 676, Issue -, Pages 239-244

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.03.076

Keywords

Metal matrix composites; Metal foams; Ceramic particle; High temperature; Compressive behaviors

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51201068, 51201158]
  2. Science and Technology Development Projects of Jilin Province [201201032]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities (Jilin University) [2013ZY04]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the closed-cell Al-Si-SiC composite foams were fabricated. The compressive tests were carried out from room temperature (25 degrees C) to elevated temperature (200 and 400 degrees C) for the composite foams. The failure mechanisms of the composite foams at different temperatures were investigated. The effects of testing temperature and porosity on the compressive behavior and energy absorption characteristic were studied. The experimental results show that Al-Si-SiC composite foams exhibit the brittle compressive behavior at room temperature and elevated temperatures. Fracture of cell wall is the dominant failure mechanism. There was brittle-type fracture mode at room temperature, but when the testing temperature increased up to 400 degrees C, the ductile-type fracture mode occurred. This indicates that the soften effect of temperature on foam matrix. As a consequence, the compressive strengths of the composite foams decrease with increasing testing temperature and porosity. In addition, Al-Si-SiC composite foams exhibit decreasing energy absorption capacities with increasing testing temperature and porosity. But the peak value of energy absorption efficiency is close to or larger than 80% at room temperature and elevated temperatures. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available