Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 41, Issue 18, pp 5958–5965 | Cite as

“The implication of rheological principles for characterization of semi-solid Al–Si cast billets”

  • Omid Lashkari
  • Reza Ghomashchi
Article

Abstract

The main parameter required to characterize the rheological behavior of semi-solid metal, SSM, slurries is the “viscosity”. Since the viscosity depends on the microstructural characteristics of the SSM slurries and it is also a measure of their rheological behavior, viscometry may be employed to study the rheology and structure of SSM alloys. This is much faster and less expensive microstructural characterization method than quantitative metallography which is a time consuming operation and requires a highly skilled operator. Furthermore, it may be used as an on-line quality check in production of rheo-billets used as feedstock for near net shape manufacturing routes. Al-Si 356 foundry alloy with different morphologies of primary α-Al particles was tested at different initial applied pressures of 5–11 KPa, using parallel plate compression viscometery. The resulting strain–time graphs were further treated mathematically to calculate the viscosity of SSM billets. The viscosity was then attributed to the microstructure and primary phase flow during compression. It was shown that the dendritic primary α-Al structure has the highest viscosity number which is almost three orders of magnitude greater than those for a globular morphology. Such difference reduces to one order of magnitude when the rosette morphology is compared to that of globular structure.

This study has shown the validity and reliability of the “parallel plate compression viscometry” method in characterizing the microstructural evolution of rheocast SSM billets and highlights the correlation between the viscosity numbers and the resulting microstructures cast at different pouring temperatures.

Keywords

Shear Rate Rheological Behavior Mold Wall Globular Structure Time Graph 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge financial support from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, ALCAN International Limited, Centre Québécois de recherche et de développement de l’aluminium (CQRDA), la Fondation de l’UQAC and the endowment fund of UQAC. This research is carried out under NSERC-ALCAN-UQAC industrial research chair (R.G.).

References

  1. 1.
    Nafisi S, Lashkari O, Ghomashchi R, Charette A (2004) Effect of different fraction solids on the fluidity of rheocast 356 Al–Si Alloy”, multi phase phenomena and CFD modeling and solidification in materials processes, TMS publication, North Carolina, 14–18 March, pp 119–128Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Assar A, El-Mahllawy N, Taha MA (1981) Aluminum 57(12):807Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goodwin JW, Hughes RW (2000) Rheology for chemists, an introduction. Royal society of chemistry Pub., UKGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suéry M (2002) Mise en Forme des alliages métalliques a l’état semi solide, LAVOISIER Pub Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zehe R (1999) Light Metal Age 57(9)62Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yang X, Jing Y, Liu J (2002) J Mater Proc Technol 130–131:569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beaulieu A, Azzi L, Ajersch F, Turenne S (2001) Numerical modeling and experimental analysis of die cast semi-solid A356 Alloy, Proceeding of Flemings MC, TMS, pp 261–265Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Flemings MC, Riek RG, Young KP (1976) Int Cast Metal J 1(3):11Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brissing K, Young K (2000) Die Cast Eng 44(6):34Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shibata R, Kaneuchi T, Souda T, Yamane H, “Formation of Spherical Solid Phase in Die Casting Shot Sleeve Without Any Agitation”, 5th International Conference on Semi-Solid Processing of Alloys and Composites, June 23-25, 1998, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado, USA, 1998, pp.465-469 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang H, Davidson CJ, Taylor JA, StJohn DH (2002) Mater Sci Forum 396–402:143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mao W, Cui C, Zhao A, Yang J, Zhong X (2001) J Mater Sci Technol 17(6):615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Midson S, Young K (1998) Impact of casting temperature on the quality of components semi-solid metal cast form alloys 319 and 356’, 5th AFS International Conference of Molten Aluminum, pp 409–422 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lashkari O, Nafisi Sh, Ghomashchi R (2005) J Mater Sci. Eng A, accepted for publication, March 2006 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Laxmanan V, Flemings MC (1980) Metal Trans A 11A(DEC):1927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Surey M, Flemings MC (1982) Metal Trans A 13A(October):1809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Azzi L, Ajersch F (2002) Development of aluminum-base alloys for forming in semi solid state, TransAl conference, June Lyon, France, pp 23–33Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dienes GH, Klemm HF (1946) J Appl Phys 17:458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gearhart WM, Kennedy WD (1949) High temperature evaluation of plasticizers by the parallel plate plastomer, Ind Eng Chem, April pp 695–701Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lashkari O, Ghomashchi R (2004) Fabrication of a simple compression parallel plate test machine to study the rheological behavior of SSM slugs prepared by SEED, Industrial report, ALCAN Inter., August Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yurko JA, Flemings MC (2002) Metal Trans A 33A(Aug):2737CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for University Research on Aluminum, CURALUniversity of Quebec at ChicoutimiChicoutimiCanada

Personalised recommendations