4.7 Article

Microstructure and mechanical properties of AZ61 alloys with large cross-sectional size fabricated by multi-pass ECAP

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2012.09.092

关键词

AZ61 alloys; Equal-channel angular pressing; Mechanical properties; Microstructure

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51075099]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of the Hei longjiang Province [E201038]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [HIT.NSRIF.2013007]
  4. Harbin City Young Scientists Foundation [2011RFQXG010]
  5. Specially Postdoctoral Science Foundation of Hei Longjiang Province [LBH-T1102]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As-cast AZ61 alloys were processed by equal-channel angular pressing (ECAP) using various process parameters. The microstructure and mechanical properties of ECAP-ed and as-cast AZ61 alloys were examined. The results showed that the microstructure of as-cast AZ61 alloys was refined well by ECAP due to dynamic recrystallization caused by ECAP. The mechanical properties of ECAP-ed AZ61 alloys were significantly improved due to the refined microstructure. Fine-grained alloys with large cross-sectional size of 58.2 mm and enhanced mechanical properties were fabricated successfully by ECAP. Extrusion temperature and processing route had an essential effect on the microstructure and mechanical properties. The highest mechanical properties including YS of (218 +/- 9) MPa, UTS of (330 +/- 10.8) MPa and elongation of (26.9 +/- 2.2)% were obtained at 290 degrees C using processing route B-C. Forty-five-degree tensile fracture was found in ECAP-ed AZ61 alloys, which was different from the horizontal fracture occurred in as-cast AZ61 alloys. The fracture of ECAP-ed AZ61 alloys was characterized by ductile fracture due to existence of a large number of dimples as compared to brittle cleavage fracture of as-cast specimens, which was beneficial to enhance the mechanical properties. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据