See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/223693358

Effect of melt overheating, cooling and solidification rates on Al–16wt.%Si

alloy structure

Article  in  Materials Science and Engineering A · July 2002

DOI: 10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01864-0

CITATIONS READS

95 940

4 authors, including:

K. V. Nikitin
Samara State Technical University
44 PUBLICATIONS   178 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Influence of a pulse-magnetic processing on structure and properties of silumins View project

APPLICATION OF ELECTRIC ARC SURFACING IN MANUFACTURE OF THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECTS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by K. V. Nikitin on 26 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Materials Science and Engineering A332 (2002) 371– 374
www.elsevier.com/locate/msea

Effect of melt overheating, cooling and solidification rates on

Al–16wt.%Si alloy structure
Peijie Li a, V.I. Nikitin b, E.G. Kandalova b,*, K.V. Nikitin b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tsinghua Uni6ersity, Beijing 100084, China
b
Physical and Technological Department, Samara State Technical Uni6ersity, Molodog6ardeiskaya 244, Samara 443100, Russia

Received 15 May 2001; received in revised form 19 October 2001

Abstract

Al–16wt.%Si alloy, cast into sand and metal molds, was remelted and cast again into sand and metal molds, respectively,
modeling different solidification rates. The structures of the alloy, overheated during the remelting in the temperature range from
720 to 1050 °C and cooled with 60–70 and 150–200 K s − 1 to pouring temperature, were investigated. Increasing the melt
overheating temperature resulted in less sensitivity of the alloy microstructure to cooling and solidification rates. At 1050 °C the
structure was well modified at all cooling and solidification rates without any addition of modifying elements. © 2002 Elsevier
Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Melt treatment; Modification; Primary silicon

1. Introduction to a pouring temperature significantly modify the mi-

The molten state of metal plays an important role in
the production of castings. It is well known that liquid
metals are characterized by heterogeneities that are
greatly affected by melt treatment. The treatment may
cause dissolution of these heterogeneities or their
growth or the formation of new ones. This can be used
for the control of the microstructure and the properties
in the solid state [1]. The practice of melt treatment can
be divided into three basic methods: thermal (heating to
high temperatures, cooling, holding), physical and me-
chanical (using vacuum, vibration, electromagnetic
fields, stirring, etc.), and chemical methods (introduc-
tion of various additions such as modifiers, grain refin-
ers) [2].
Properties of liquid metal were shown to depend on
its temperature, and melt overheating resulted in signifi-
cant changes in its properties and structure [1 – 9]. It has
been reported that melt overheating and quick cooling
* Corresponding author. Tel/fax: + 7-8462-422268.
E-mail address: kandal@mail.ru, tlp@sstu.samara.ru (E.G. Kan-
dalova).
crostructure of Al –Si alloys without addition of modi-
fying elements [8–11]. This treatment is believed to
induce the dissolution of heterogeneities in the Al melt
that affect the microstructure and properties of the
solidified alloy. Accordingly, the present study focuses
on the influence of melt overheating, cooling and so-
lidification rates on the microstructure of solidified
Al –16wt.%Si alloy.
2. Experimental details
The initial Al –16wt.%Si alloys were prepared in an
electrical resistance furnace by remelting and diluting
an Al –20wt.%Si master alloy with aluminum (99.999%
pure), and then casting into sand (S samples) and metal
(M samples) molds. The S and M cast samples were
separately remelted and overheated to 720, 880, 960
and 1050 °C, air-cooled in crucibles at 60–70 K s − 1 to
720 °C1 and cast into sand (samples S1, S2, S3 and S4)
and metal (samples M1, M2, M3 and M4) molds. The
initial M sample was also remelted and overheated to
1
Except for S1 and M1 samples.

0921-5093/02/$ - see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 1 - 5 0 9 3 ( 0 1 ) 0 1 8 6 4 - 0
372 P. Li et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A332 (2002) 371–374

Fig. 1. Micrographs of Al –16wt.%Si alloy air-cooled and cast into sand mold with increasing the melt overheating temperature (S1 – S4 samples).
(a) S1-720 °C; (b) S2-880 °C; (c) S3-960 °C; (d) S4-1050 °C.

the same temperatures, but cooled at 150– 200 K s − 1 to The comparison of the samples S1–S4 and M1 – M4
720 °C and cast into metal molds (samples MC1, MC2, overheated to the similar temperatures shows the finer
MC3 and MC4). The higher cooling rate was achieved microstructure in samples M1–M4 at higher solidifi-
by adding solid pieces of M samples into the melt that cation rate. The higher the overheating temperature,
also affects nucleation. Table 1 gives the details of the less the difference between the size of eutectic and
remelting and casting parameters of initial S and M primary Si in samples S1–S4 and M1–M4. This is
samples. The microstructure of the resultant samples
was examined under a Neophot 32 optical microscope. Table 1
Si particle size was measured with the linear intercept Details of remelting and casting of initial samples
technique. The scatter in measurement was about 10%.
Sample Mold Overheating Melt cooling rate
temperature (°C) (K s−1)

3. Results and discussion S1 Sand 720 60–70

S2 Sand 880 60–70
Three experiments (S, M, MC) were carried out in S3 Sand 960 60–70
S4 Sand 1050 60–70
order to study the effect of melt overheating M1 Metal 720 60–70
temperature, its cooling and solidification rates on the M2 Metal 880 60–70
structure of Al–16wt.%Si alloy. Figs. 1 and 2 show M3 Metal 960 60–70
micrographs of samples S1 – S4 and M1– M4, and a M4 Metal 1050 60–70
continued decrease in primary Si particle size can be MC1 Metal 720 150–200
MC2 Metal 880 150–200
easily observed as well a change in Si morphology to a MC3 Metal 960 150–200
blocky form and more homogeneous distribution of MC4 Metal 1050 150–200
particles as the overheating temperature increases.
 P. Li et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A332 (2002) 371–374 373

Fig. 2. Micrographs of Al – 16wt.%Si alloy air-cooled and cast into metal mold with increasing the melt overheating temperature (M1 –M4
samples). (a) M1-720 °C; (b) M2-880 °C; (c) M3-960 °C; (d) M4-1050 °C.

Fig. 3. Micrographs of Al –16wt.%Si cooled at 150 –200 K s − 1 and cast into metal mold with increasing the melt overheating temperature
(MC1– MC4 samples). (a) MC1-720 °C; (b) MC2-880 °C; (c) MC3-960 °C; (d) MC4-1050 °C.
374 P. Li et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A332 (2002) 371–374
Fig. 4. Comparison of the effect of the melt overheating temperature
on Si particle size of Al –16wt.%Si alloy at different cooling and
solidification rates. S, samples cooled at 60 – 70 K s − 1 and cast into
sand mold; M, samples cooled at 60 –70 K s − 1 and cast into metal
mold; MC, samples cooled at 150 –200 K s − 1 and cast into metal
mold.
clearly evident at 1050 °C in Fig. 1(d) and Fig. 2(d).
The effect of the overheating temperature could be
related to changes occurring in the melt at different
temperatures. The melt structure seems to become more
homogeneous with the increase in the overheating tem-
perature, the reducing difference between the melt
structure obtained from the initial S and M samples. A
melt structure with fewer heterogeneities is inherited by
the solidified metal, resulting in a decrease in the effect
of the solidification rate (sand and metal molds).
Fig. 3 shows the combined effect of the higher cool-
ing rate and overheating temperature on the Al–
16wt.%Si alloy microstructure (samples MC1– MC4).
Similar changes in the structure can be easily seen with
the increase in the overheating temperature. However,
the high cooling rate (increased melt undercooling) in
these samples leads to more effective nucleation of
primary Si, that results in the formation of the finer
microstructure in comparison with samples M1– M4.
The highest overheating temperature (1050 °C) nullifies
the effect of the cooling rate, and the Si particle size is
similar in samples M4 and MC4 in Fig. 2(d) and Fig.
3(d).
View publication stats
Fig. 4 shows the effect of the overheating tempera-
ture on the secondary Si particle size for samples S1–
S4, M1–M4 and MC1 –MC4. The higher overheating
results in fewer heterogeneities; hence, the smaller dif-
ference in Si particle size between samples observed at
1050 °C. The overheating leads to the formation of
similar structures for different conditions of melt cool-
ing and solidification. Thus, the melt overheating is a
strong factor for modifying the structure of Al–
16wt.%Si.
4. Conclusions
At lower melt overheating temperatures, cooling and
solidification rates play an important role in the forma-
tion of the solidified microstructure of Al– 16wt.%Si. In
this case, heterogeneities can be preserved and affect
the microstructure of the solidified alloy. At higher
overheating temperatures, the heterogeneities are re-
moved, and so the microstructure is less sensitive to
variation of the effect of cooling and solidification
rates.
References
[1] G.S. Ershov, L.A. Poznyak Microheterogeneity of metals and
alloys (Rus.), Metallurgy, Moscow, 1985, p. 214.
[2] V.I. Nikitin, Heredity in cast alloys (Rus.), SamSTU, Samara,
1995, p. 254.
[3] F. Lihl, A. Schwaiger, Z. Metallkd. 58 (1967) 777.
[4] F. Lihl, A. Schwaiger, Z. Metallkd. 59 (1968) 213.
[5] I.A. Novokhatsky, V.I. Arkharov, Rep. Acad. Sci. USSR (Rus.)
208 (1973) 334.
[6] V.M. Zamiatin, B.A. Baum, Melts (Rus.) 1 (1989) 16.
[7] V.P. Manov, S.I. Popel, P.I. Buler, A.B. Manukhin, D.G. Kom-
lev, Mater. Sci. Eng. A133 (1991) 535.
[8] X. Bian, J. Ma, Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 5 (1992) 176.
[9] X. Bian, W. Wang, Mater. Lett. 44 (2000) 54.
[10] K. Kristiakova, P. Svec, J. Kristiak, P. Duhaj, O. Sausa, Mater.
Sci. Eng. A226 – 228 (1997) 321.
[11] H. Chiriac, F. Vinai, Marilena Tomut, A. Stantero, E. Ferarra,
J. Non-Crystall. Solids 250 – 252 (1999) 709.