A Fatigue Model for Discontinuous Particulate-Reinforced Aluminum Alloy Composite: Influence of Microstructure

  • R. R. McCullough
  • J. B. Jordon
  • A. T. Brammer
  • K. Manigandan
  • T. S. Srivatsan
  • P. G. Allison
  • T. W. Rushing
Article

Abstract

In this paper, the use of a microstructure-sensitive fatigue model is put forth for the analysis of discontinuously reinforced aluminum alloy metal matrix composite. The fatigue model was used for a ceramic particle-reinforced aluminum alloy deformed under conditions of fully reversed strain control. Experimental results revealed the aluminum alloy to be strongly influenced by volume fraction of the particulate reinforcement phase under conditions of strain-controlled fatigue. The model safely characterizes the evolution of fatigue damage in this aluminum alloy composite into the distinct stages of crack initiation and crack growth culminating in failure. The model is able to capture the specific influence of particle volume fraction, particle size, and nearest neighbor distance in quantifying fatigue life. The model yields good results for correlation of the predicted results with the experimental test results on the fatigue behavior of the chosen aluminum alloy for two different percentages of the ceramic particle reinforcement. Further, the model illustrates that both particle size and volume fraction are key factors that govern fatigue lifetime. This conclusion is well supported by fractographic observations of the cyclically deformed and failed specimens.

Keywords

aluminum alloy 6061-T6 discontinuous reinforcement fatigue metal matrix composites microstructure modeling 

References

  1. 1.
    D. Miracle, Metal Matrix Composites—From Science to Technological Significance, Compos. Sci. Technol., 2005, 65, p 2526–2540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Singla, D. Dwivedi, L. Singh, and L.V. Chawla, Development of Aluminium Based Silicon Carbide Particulate Metal Matrix Composite, J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng., 2009, 8, p 455–467Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Velmurugan, R. Subramanian, S. Thirugnanam, and B. Anandavel, Investigation of Friction and Wear Behavior of Hybrid Aluminium Composites, Ind. Lubr. Tribol., 2012, 64, p 152–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    F.A. Girot, J.M. Quenisset, and R. Naslain, Discontinuously-Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composites, Compos. Sci. Technol., 1987, 30, p 155–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. Ceschini, G. Minak, and A. Morri, Tensile and Fatigue Properties of the A6061/20 vol.% Al2O3p and AA7005/10 vol.% Al2O3p Composites, Compos. Sci. Technol., 2006, 66, p 333–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Al Mehedi, Aluminium Matrix Composites in Automotive Applications, Int. Alum. J., 2011, 87, p 55Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Hadianfard and Y. Mai, Low Cycle Fatigue Behavior of Particulate Reinforced Metal Matrix Composites, J. Mater. Sci., 2000, 35, p 1715–1723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. Ceschini, A. Morri, R. Cocomazzi, and E. Troiani, Room and High Temperature Tensile Tests on the AA6061/10vol.%Al2O3p and AA7005/20vol.%Al2O3p Composites, Mater. Sci. Eng. Technol., 2003, 34, p 370Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Papakyriacou, H. Mayer, and E. Al, Fatigue Properties of Al2O3-Particle-Reinforced 6061 Aluminium Alloy in the High-Cycle Regime, Int. J. Fatigue, 1996, 18, p 475–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Leggoe, X. Hu, and M. Bush, Crack Tip Damage Development and Crack Growth Resistance in Particulate Reinforced Metal Matrix Composites, Eng. Fract. Mech., 1996, 53, p 873–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    N. Chawla and K.K. Chawla, Metal Matrix Composites, 1st ed., Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., New York, 2006Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Perng, J. Hwang, and J. Doong, High Strain Rate Tensile Properties of an (Al2O3 Particles)-(Al Alloy 6061-T6) Metal Matrix Composite, J. Mater. Sci. Eng., 1993, 171, p 213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Agrawal and C.T. Sun, Fracture in Metal-Ceramic Composites, Compos. Sci. Technol., 2004, 64, p 1167–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Z. Chen and K. Tokaj, Effects of Particle Size on Fatigue Crack Initiation and Small Crack Growth in SiC Particulate-Reinforced Aluminium Alloy Composites, Mater. Lett., 2004, 58, p 2314–2321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Perng, J. Hwang, and J. Doong, Elevated-Temperature, Low-Cycle Fatigue Behaviour of an Al2O3p/6061-T6 Aluminium Matrix Composite, Compos. Sci. Technol., 1993, 49, p 225–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Yadav, D. Chichil, and K. Ramesh, The Mechanical Response of a 6061-T6 A1/A12O3 Metal Matrix Composite at High Rates of Deformation, Acta Metall. et Mater., 1995, 43, p 4453–4464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Levin and B. Karlsson, Crack Initiation and Growth During Low-Cycle Fatigue of Discontinuously Reinforced Metal-Matrix Composites, Int. J. Fatigue, 1993, 15, p 377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    E. Hochreiter, M. Panzenböck, and F. Jeglitsch, Fatigue Properties of Particle-Reinforced Metal-Matrix Composites, Int. J. Fatigue, 1993, 15, p 493–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    B.G. Park, A.G. Crosky, and A.K. Hellier, Fracture toughness of microsphere Al2O3—Al particulate metal matrix composites, Compos. Part B, 2008, 39, p 1270–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    N.L. Han, Z.G. Wang, and G.D. Zhang, Effect of Reinforcement Size on the Elevated-Temperature Tensile Properties and Low-Cycle Fatigue Behavior of Particulate SiC/Al Composites, Compos. Sci. Technol., 1997, 57, p 1491–1499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Z. Xia, F. Ellyin, and G. Meijer, Mechanical Behavior of Al2O3-Particle-Reinforced 6061 Aluminum Alloy Under Uniaxial and Multiaxial Cyclic Loading, Compos. Sci. Technol., 1997, 57, p 237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Y.X. Gan Overfelt, Ruel A, Fatigue Property of Semisolid A357 Aluminum Alloy Under Different Heat Treatment Conditions. J. Mater. Sci., 2006, 41(22), p 7537–7544Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    T.S. Srivatsan, R. Auradkar, and A. Prakash, Cyclic Stress Response and Cyclic Fracture Behavior of Silicon Carbide Particulate Reinforced Aluminum Metal-Matrix Composite, Eng. Fract. Mech., 1991, 40(2), p 277–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    T.S. Srivatsan, The Low Cycle Fatigue Behavior of an Aluminum Alloy-Ceramic Particle Composite, Int. J. Fatigue, 1992, 14(3), p 173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    T.S. Srivatsan and R. Auradkar, The Effect of Silicon Carbide Particulate on Cyclic Plastic Strain Response Characteristics and Fracture of Aluminum Alloy Composites, Int. J. Fatigue, 1992, 14(6), p 355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    T.S. Srivatsan, A. Ravindra, J.M. Panchal, and A. Prakash, The Cyclic Fatigue and Fracture Behavior of Ceramic-Particle-Reinforced Tool Steel Metal-Matrix Composite, Compos. Part B, 1993, 3(4), p 329–347Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    V.A. Romanova, R.R. Balokhonov, and S. Schmauder, The Influence of the Reinforcing Particle Shape and Interface Strength on the Fracture Behavior of a Metal Matrix Composite, Acta Mater., 2009, 57, p 97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    H.J. Choi, J.H. Shin, and D.H. Bae, Grain Size Effect on the Strengthening Behavior of Aluminum-Based Composites Containing Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes, Compos. Sci. Technol., 2011, 71, p 1699–1705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Y. Li and K.T. Ramesh, Influence of Particle Volume Fraction, Shape, and Aspect Ratio on the Behavior of Particle-Reinforced Metal-Matrix Composites at High Rates of Strain, Acta Mater., 1998, 46, p 5633–5646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    L. Chingshen and F. Ellyin, Fatigue Damage and Its Localization in Particulate Metal Matrix Composites, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 1996, 214, p 115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    B.J. Weng, S.T. Chang, and J.S. Shiau, Microfracture Mechanisms of SiC-6061 Aluminum Composite After Hipping, Scr. Metallurg. et Mater., 1992, 27, p 1127–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    D. McDowell, K. Gall, M. Horstemeyer, and J. Fan, Microstructure-Based Fatigue Modeling of Cast A356-T6 Alloy, Eng. Fract. Mech., 2003, 70, p 49–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    H.-Z. Ding, O. Hartmann, H. Biermann, and H. Mughrabi, Modelling Low-Cycle Fatigue Life of Particulate-Reinforced Metal-Matrix Composites, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2002, 333, p 295–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    J.L. Lorca, Fatigue of Particle-and Whisker-Reinforced Metal-Matrix Composites, Prog. Mater. Sci., 2002, 47, p 283–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Y. Xue, D.L. McDowell, M.F. Horstemeyer, M.H. Dale, and J.B. Jordon, Microstructure-Based Multistage Fatigue Modeling of Aluminum Alloy 7075-T651, Eng. Fract. Mech., 2007, 74, p 2810–2823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    J.H. Rettberg, J.B. Jordon, M.F. Horstemeyer, and J.W. Jones, Low-Cycle Fatigue Behavior of Die-Cast Mg Alloys AZ91 and AM60, Metallurg. Mater. Trans. A, 2012, 43, p 2260–2274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    M.J. Couper, and M.J. Lee, Extruded Properties of Metal Matrix Composites. Australia, 1990Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    D. Lloyd, Composites: Process, Properties and Products, L. Arnberg, O. Lohne E. Nes, and N. Ryum, Ed., The Third International Conference on Aluminum Alloys (ICAA3), Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 1992Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    ASTM E-606-06: Standard Test Method for Strain Amplitude Testing of Materials. American Society for Testing Materials, Race Street, Philadelphia, PA, 1997Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    J.B. Jordon, J.B. Gibson, M.F. Horstemeyer, H.E. Kadiri, J.C. Baird, and A. Luo, Effect of Twinning, Slip, and Inclusions on the Fatigue Anisotropy of Extrusion-Textured AZ61 Magnesium Alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2011, 528, p 6860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    K. Gall, M. Horstemeyer, D.L. McDowell, and L. Fan, Finite Element Analysis of the Stress Distributions Near Damaged Si Particle Clusters in Cast Al-Si Alloys, Mech. Mater., 2000, 32, p 277–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    D.R. Hayhurst, F.A. Leckie, D.L. McDow, Damage Growth Under Nonproportional Loading, Multiaxial Fatigue—ASTM STP 853, American Society for Testing Materials, Race Street, Philadelphia, USA, 1985Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    D.W. Brown, A. Jain, S.R. Agnew, and B. Clausen, Twinning and Detwinning During Cyclic Deformation of Mg Alloy AZ31B, Mater. Sci. Forum, 2007, 539(543), p 3407–3413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    J.B. Jordon, M.F. Horstemeyer, N. Yang, J.F. Major, K. Gall, J. Fan, and D.L. McDowell, Microstructural Inclusion Influence on Fatigue of a Cast A356 Aluminum Alloy, Metallurg. Mater. Trans. A, 2010, 41, p 356–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    E.A. Starke, Jr., Aluminium Alloys of the 70s: Scientific Solutions to Engineering Problems. An Invited Review, Mater. Sci. Eng., 1977, 29, p 99–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    E.A. Starke Jr. Aluminum Alloys: Contemporary Research and Applications, A.K. Vasudevan, and R.D. Doherty Eds., Materials Science and Technology, Vol 31. New York, 1989Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    S. Kumai, J. King, and J. Knott, Short and Long Fatigue Crack Growth in a Sic Reinforced Aluminium Alloy, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., 1990, 13, p 511–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. R. McCullough
    • 1
  • J. B. Jordon
    • 1
  • A. T. Brammer
    • 1
  • K. Manigandan
    • 2
  • T. S. Srivatsan
    • 2
  • P. G. Allison
    • 3
  • T. W. Rushing
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of AkronAkronUSA
  3. 3.Geotechnical & Structures Laboratory, Engineer Research & Development CenterUS Army Corps of EngineersVicksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations