4.7 Article

Effect of particle size and volume ratio of ceramic hollow spheres on the mechanical properties of bimodal composite metal foams

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.106152

关键词

Foams; Mechanical properties; Mechanical testing; Microstructural analysis

资金

  1. NRDI Fund (TKP2020 NC) of the Ministry for Innovation and Technology [BME-NC, TKP2020 IES, BME-IE-NAT]
  2. New National Excellence Program of the Ministry for Innovation and Technology from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund [UNKP-20-2, UNKP-20-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study focuses on the production of high performance bimodal composite metal foams by infiltrating EN-AW Al99.5 and EN-AC AlSi12 alloys into two sets of Al2O3 ceramic hollow spheres with different diameters. The mechanical properties of the BCMFs were found to be dependent on the filling rate, rather than the volume ratio of the spheres. The structural investigations showed proper infiltration and higher filling ratio compared to unimodal composite metal foams.
High performance bimodal composite metal foams (BCMFs) have been produced by low-pressure infiltration of EN-AW Al99.5 and EN-AC AlSi12 alloys into two sets of different nominal diameter (2.4 mm and 7.0 mm) Al2O3 ceramic hollow spheres (CHSs) in a total of five different volume ratios arranged in random closed packing distribution. The structure of the BCMFs has been studied by X-ray computer tomography and scanning electron microscopy. The mechanical properties were mapped by standardised quasi-static compressive tests. The structural investigations of the BCMFs showed proper infiltration and a higher filling ratio compared to unimodal composite metal foams. Given a specific matrix material, different volume ratios of the spheres do not have a substantial effect on the mechanical properties of the BCMFs. The mechanical properties were found to be predominantly filling rate (the volume fraction of the CHSs divided by the total volume of the sample) dependent.

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