Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Low Pressure Die Cast AM50 Magnesium Alloy

Article Preview

Abstract:

Compact AM50 alloy components were cast by Low Pressure Die Casting (LPDC) process. The microstructure and mechanical properties of cast components were investigated under as-cast and heat treated states. It was found that the microstructure of LPDC AM50 is composed of α-Mg and second phases - Mg17Al12 and Al8Mn5. Compared with Gravity die casting, LPDC AM50 alloy had much coarser grains and higher density, with smaller sizes and less content of second phases. The density of AM50 alloy by LPDC process was ρ=1.7836g/cm3, with increase of 0.45% based on Gravity die casting and much more increase compared with high pressure die casting. The as-cast mechanical properties by LPDC process were: σ0.2=57.8Mpa, σb=192.3Mpa, δ=8.7%. These of Gravity die casting were: σ0.2=53Mpa, σb=173.4Mpa, δ=8.1%. UTS in LPDC increased about 20MPa, with better YTS and Elongation. Compared with that of high pressure die cast AM50, the YTS of LPDC was much lower, with comparable UTS and Elongation. The mechanical properties of the heat treated AM50 alloy were still in the same level of as-cast state. AM50 alloy by LPDC process is not necessary subjected to tempering treatment.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Materials Science Forum (Volumes 546-549)

Pages:

167-170

Citation:

Online since:

May 2007

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2007 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] B.L. Mordike, T. Ebert: Mat. Sci. Eng. A, 302 (2001), pp.37-45.

Google Scholar

[2] I.M. Baghni, Wu Yin-shun, Li Jiu-qing, et al.: Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China, 2003 13 (6), pp.1253-1259.

Google Scholar

[3] Chadha Gurjeev, Allison John E., Jones J. Wayne, in: Alan A. Luo (Eds. ), Magnesium Technology 2004, TMS, 2004, pp.181-186.

Google Scholar

[4] Donlon W.T., Paige C., Morris C.J., Allison J.E., in: Proceedings of the TMS Materials Week'95 Symposium, Cleveland, OH, USA, Oct 29-Nov 2, (1995).

Google Scholar

[5] Mark Easton, Trevor Abbott, Carlos Caceres: Materials Science Forum, 2003(419-422), pp.147-152.

Google Scholar

[6] R. M. Wang, A. Eliezer, E. M. Gutman: Mat. Sci. Eng. A, 2003(355), pp.201-207.

Google Scholar

[7] H. Westengen, O. Holta: Foundry Trade Journal, 1989 (10), pp.738-742.

Google Scholar

[8] Gertsman Val Y., Li Jian, Xu Su, et al.: Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 2005(36), p.1989-(1997).

Google Scholar

[9] Hongtao Gao, Guohua Wu, Wenjiang Ding, et al: Journal of Materials Science, 39(2004), pp.6449-6456.

Google Scholar

[10] Nahed A., Mohamed A., Engenius Pokora, Friedrich Klein: Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 73(1998), pp.125-138.

Google Scholar

[11] L. ˇC´ıˇzeka, M. Gregera, L. Pawlicaa, et al.: Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 157-158 (2004), pp.466-471.

Google Scholar