4.7 Article

Effect of solution time in T6 heat treatment on microstructure and hardness of a directionally solidified Al-Si-Cu alloy

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLOYS AND COMPOUNDS
卷 683, 期 -, 页码 485-494

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.05.099

关键词

Al-Si-Cu alloy; Solidification; Heat treatment; Microstructure; Hardness

资金

  1. IFPA (Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Para)
  2. FAPESP - Sao Paulo Research Foundation, Brazil [2013/09267-0, 2013/23396-7, 2014/50502-5]
  3. CNPq (The Brazilian Research Council)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An experimental investigation on the role of solution time during the T6 heat treatment on the scale of the secondary dendrite arm spacing (lambda(2)), morphology and distribution of Si particles and Al2Cu intermetallics and the resulting effect on microhardness of Al-5.5 wt% Si-3.0 wt% Cu alloy samples is performed. A directionally solidified (DS) casting was previously obtained using a water-cooled apparatus, which permitted a wide range of cooling rates ((T) over dot) to be associated with samples having quite different microstructural parametric features. An experimental growth law relating lambda(2) to (T) over dot is proposed. The T6 heat treatment was then carried out on the DS samples for different solution times: 8 h and 5 h at 490 +/- 2 degrees C, followed by quenching in warm water (60 +/- 2 degrees C), ageing for 5 h at 155 +/- 2 degrees C and air-cooling. The microstructure characterization (optical and scanning electron microscopies) has shown that lambda(2) was only affected (when compared with those of the DS casting samples) when the solution time increased from 5 h to 8 h. In contrast, significant influences on the morphology and distribution of both Si and Al2Cu particles are shown to occur. The highest hardness is shown to be associated with a sample subjected to the 5 h treatment, having lowest lambda(2) and appropriate modification of Si and Al2Cu particles. (C) 2016 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