Effect of Strontium Modification on Porosity Formation in A356 Alloy
Sr-modified Al–Si alloys are promising for automotive and aerospace industrial applications. However, Sr modifier increases the porosity level and deteriorates the performance of the castings, which has confused foundrymen for several decades. Many researchers have studied the phenomenon, but there is no unified explanation. In this study, two types of Sr modifier (50 ppm and 250 ppm) are applied to explore the effect of Sr modification on the surface oxide film and the porosity of the castings. The results of optical emission spectrometer and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) reveal that the surface oxide film has some degree of Sr segregation. Combining the high-resolution XPS spectrums with electron probe microanalysis–wavelength-dispersive spectroscopic (EPMA–WDS), it can be found that a small amount of SrO is distributed on the Al2O3 film. Further analyzing the surface oxide film by scanning electron microscopy and EPMA mapping, it can be concluded that the compact Al2O3 film is fractured by congregated SrO and then some new Al2O3 films and oxide inclusions are formed in the cracks. Those can cause the increase in the porosity. And the result of reduced pressure test (RPT) shows that the densities of RPT samples are decreasing with the increase in Sr content. It means that Sr modification dose increase the porosity of the A356 alloy castings.
KeywordsA356 alloy Sr modification oxide film porosity
We are grateful for the assistance from State Key Laboratory of Solidification Processing and Material Analysis and Testing Center of Shaanxi Province.
- 3.J. Campbell, Metal casting processes, metallurgy techniques and design complete, Casting Handbook, 2nd edn. (Elsevier Ltd, Amsterdam, 2011), pp. 269–300Google Scholar
- 4.A. Pacz, Alloy U.S. Patent No. 1, 387, 900 (1921)Google Scholar
- 6.F. Zu, X. Li, Functions and mechanism of modification elements in eutectic solidification of Al–Si alloys: a brief review. China Foundry 11(4), 287–295 (2014)Google Scholar
- 12.D. Argo, J.E. Gruzleski, Porosity in modified aluminum alloy castings. Trans. Am. Foundrym. Soc. 96, 65–74 (1988)Google Scholar
- 16.G.K. Sigworth, C. Wang, H. Huang, J.T. Berry, Porosity formation in modified and unmodified Al–Si alloy castings. Trans. Am. Foundrym. Soc. 102, 245–262 (1994)Google Scholar
- 18.J. Gruzleski, W. La Orchan, H. Mulazimoglu, New reduced pressure test quantifies hydrogen content. Mod. Cast. 85(9), 47–49 (1995)Google Scholar
- 20.M.H. Mulazimoglu, N. Handiak, Some observation on the reduced pressure test and hydrogen concertation of modified A356 alloy. Trans. Am. Foundrym. Soc. 97, 225–232 (1989)Google Scholar
- 24.K.J. Brondyke, P.D. Hess, Interpretation of vacuum gas test results for aluminum alloys. Trans. TMS-AIME 230, 1542–1546 (1964)Google Scholar
- 25.J.F. Moulder, W.F. Stickle, P.E. Sobol, K.D. Bomben, J. Chastain, in Handbook of X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy: A Reference Book of Standard Spectra for Identification and Interpretation of XPS Data, ed. by J. Chastain (Perkin-Elmer Corporation, Waltham, 1992), pp. 54–55Google Scholar
- 28.R. Bedworth, N. Pilling, The oxidation of metals at high temperatures. J. Inst. Metals 29(3), 529–582 (1923)Google Scholar