Strain Rate Sensitivity, Work Hardening, and Fracture Behavior of an Al-Mg TiO2 Nanocomposite Prepared by Friction Stir Processing
- 377 Downloads
- 20 Citations
Abstract
Annealed and wrought AA5052 aluminum alloy was subjected to friction stir processing (FSP) without and with 3 vol pct TiO2 nanoparticles. Microstructural studies by electron backscattered diffraction and transmission electron microscopy showed the formation of an ultra-fine-grained structure with fine distribution of TiO2 nanoparticles in the metal matrix. Nanometric Al3Ti and MgO particles were also observed, revealing in-situ solid-state reactions between Al and Mg with TiO2. Tensile testing at different strain rates determined that FSP decreased the strain rate sensitivity and work hardening of annealed Al-Mg alloy without and with TiO2 nanoparticles, while opposite results were obtained for the wrought alloy. Fractographic studies exhibited that the presence of hard reinforcement particles changed the fracture mode from ductile rupture to ductile-brittle fracture. Notably, the failure mechanism was also altered from shear to tensile rupture as the strain rate increased. Consequently, the fracture surface contained hemispherical equiaxed dimples instead of parabolic ones.
Keywords
TiO2 Nanoparticles Strain Rate Sensitivity Friction Stir Processing Texture Component Al3TiNotes
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Dr. Frantisek Simančík, Institute of Materials and Machine Mechanics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, for useful discussions and help in performing the experiments.
References
- 1.T.W. Clyne and P.J. Withers: An Introduction to Metal Matrix Composites, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.T.S. Srivatsan, T.S. Sudarshan, and E.J. Lavernia: Progr. Mater Sci., 1995, vol. 39, pp. 317–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.C. Suryanarayana: J. Alloys Compd., 2011, vol. 509, pp. 229–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.C. Suryanarayana and N. Al-Aqeeli: Progr. Mater Sci., 2013, vol. 58, pp. 383–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.H. Asgharzadeh, A. Simchi, and H.S. Kim: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2010, vol. 527, pp. 4897–4905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.M. Krasnowski and T. Kulik: Scripta Mater., 2003, vol. 48, pp. 1489–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.H.X. Peng, D.Z. Wang, L. Geng, C.K. Yao, and J.F. Mao: Scripta Mater., 1997, vol. 37, pp. 199–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.H. Nasiri, J. Vahdati Khaki, and S.M. Zebarjad: J. Alloys Compd., 2011, vol. 509, pp. 5305–08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.B. Adamczyk-Cieślak, J. Mizera, and K.J. Kurzydłowski: Mater. Characterization, 2011, vol. 62, pp. 327–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.C.J. Hsu, C.Y. Chang, P.W. Kao, N.J. Ho, and C.P. Chang: Acta Mater., 2006, vol. 54, pp. 5241–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.C.J. Hsu, P.W. Kao, and N.J. Ho: Scripta Mater., 2005, vol. 53, pp. 341–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.I.S. Lee, P.W. Kao, and N.J. Ho: Intermetallics, 2008, vol. 16, pp. 1104–08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Q. Liu, L. Ke, F. Liu, C. Huang, and L. Xing: Mater. Des., 2013, vol. 45, pp. 343–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.M.A. Moghaddas and S.F. Kashani-Bozorg: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2013, vol. 559, pp. 187–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.J. Qian, J. Li, J. Xiong, F. Zhang, and X. Lin: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2012, vol. 550, pp. 279–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.M. Yang, C. Xu, C. Wu, K.C. Lin, Y.J. Chao, and L. An: J. Mater. Sci., 2010, vol. 45, pp. 4431–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Q. Zhang, B.L. Xiao, W.G. Wang, and Z.Y. Ma: Acta Mater., 2012, vol. 60, pp. 7090–7103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.R.S. Mishra, Z.Y. Ma, and I. Charit: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2003, vol. 341, pp. 307–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Q. Zhang, B.L. Xiao, D. Wang, and Z.Y. Ma: Mater. Chem. Phys., 2011, vol. 130, pp. 1109–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Q. Zhang, B.L. Xiao, Q.Z. Wang, and Z.Y. Ma: Mater. Lett., 2011, vol. 65, pp. 2070–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.L. Ke, C. Huang, L. Xing, and K. Huang: J. Alloys Compd., 2010, vol. 503, pp. 494–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.X. Feng, H. Liu, and S. Suresh Babu: Scripta Mater., 2011, vol. 65, pp. 1057–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.F. Iida, T. Suzuki, E. Kuramoto, and S. Takeuchi: Acta Metall., 1979, vol. 27, pp. 637–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.R. Korla and A.H. Chokshi: Scripta Mater., 2010, vol. 63, pp. 913–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.F. Li: Scripta Metall. Mater., 1995, vol. 32, pp. 463–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.A.C. Magee and L. Ladani: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2013, vol. 582, pp. 276–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.E. Romhanji, M. Dudukovska, and D. Glišić: J. Mater. Process. Technol., 2002, vols. 125–126, pp. 193–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.K.C. Chan and G.Q. Tong: Mater. Lett., 2001, vol. 51, pp. 389–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.M.O. Lai, L. Lu, and B.Y. Chung: Compos. Struct., 2002, vol. 57, pp. 183-187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.ASTM Standard E8M: Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 1998.Google Scholar
- 31.M.M.Z. Ahmed, B.P. Wynne, W.M. Rainforth, and P.L. Threadgill: Scripta Mater., 2011, vol. 64, pp. 45–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.M.M.Z. Ahmed, B.P. Wynne, W.M. Rainforth, and P.L. Threadgill: Mater. Characterization, 2012, vol. 64, pp. 107–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.U.F.H.R. Suhuddin, S. Mironov, Y.S. Sato and H. Kokawa: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2010, vol. 527, pp. 1962–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.S. Mironov, K. Masaki, Y.S. Sato, and H. Kokawa: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2013, vol. 44A, pp. 1153–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.W.F. Hosford: The Mechanics of Crystals and Textured Polycrystals, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1993.Google Scholar
- 36.K.K. Chawla and M.A. Meyers: in Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology (Third Edition), Robert A. Meyers, ed., Academic Press, New York, NY, 2003, pp. 467–84.Google Scholar
- 37.T.R. McNelley, S. Swaminathan, and J.Q. Su: Scripta Mater., 2008, vol. 58, pp. 349–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.L.P. Troeger and E.A. Starke, Jr.: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2000, vol. 293, pp. 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.C.I. Chang, C.J. Lee, and J.C. Huang: Scripta Mater., 2004, vol. 51, pp. 509–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.W. Woo, H. Choo, D.W. Brown, S.C. Vogel, P.K. Liaw, and Z. Feng: Acta Mater., 2006, vol. 54, pp. 3871–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.T. Shibayanagi, A.P. Gerlich, K. Kashihara, and T.H. North: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2009, vol. 40A, pp. 920–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.D.P. Field, T.W. Nelson, Y. Hovanski, and K.V. Jata: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2001, vol. 32A, pp. 2869–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 43.E.O. Hall: Yield Point Phenomena in Metals and Alloys, Plenum Press, New York, NY, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Y. Huang, W. Zheng, and J. Shen: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2012, vol. 43A, pp. 5202–08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.S. Ig Hong: Mater. Sci. Eng., 1986, vol. 82, pp. 175–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.V.A. Romanova, R.R. Balokhonov, and S. Schmauder: Acta Mater., 2009, vol. 57, pp. 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.V.M. Segal: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2005, vol. 406, pp. 205–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.K. Manigandan, T.S. Srivatsan, D. Tammana, B. Poorganji, and V.K. Vasudevan: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2014, vol. 601, pp. 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar