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

net/publication/335683294

Characterization of the double oxide film content of liquid aluminum alloys by

computed tomography

Article  in  Materials Characterization · September 2019

DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

CITATIONS READS

15 828

4 authors:

Gábor Gyarmati György Fegyverneki

University of Miskolc University of Miskolc
24 PUBLICATIONS   35 CITATIONS    34 PUBLICATIONS   41 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Tamás Mende Monika Tokár

University of Miskolc University of Miskolc
26 PUBLICATIONS   37 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   38 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Effects of bifilms on the microstructural characteristics and structural defects of aluminum alloys View project

Mechanical properties of resin bonded sand cores used in the foundry industry View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gábor Gyarmati on 24 October 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Characterization of the Double Oxide Film Content of Liquid

Aluminum Alloys by Computed Tomography

Gábor Gyarmatia,*, György Fegyvernekia, Tamás Mendeb, Monika Tokára

a
Foundry Institute, University of Miskolc, 3515 Miskolc-Egyetemváros, Hungary
b
Institute of Physical Metallurgy, Metalforming and Nanotechnology, University of Miskolc,

3515 Miskolc-Egyetemváros, Hungary

*
Corresponding author. Ph.D. student, E-mail address: gygabor007@gmail.com, Tel.: +36 30 4293572

Abstract

The entrainment of the surface oxide layer of aluminum alloy melts is currently a mostly

inevitable process during the melt handling and processing techniques of the foundry industry.

As a consequence, a large number of double oxide films (bifilms) are often incorporated into

the melts, which bifilms can act as initiation sites for pore formation during the solidification

of the alloy. In this study, this relationship between bifilms and pores was examined in the

case of an Al-Si-Mg-Cu based alloy. The entrained oxide film content of the melts was

characterized by the analysis of the fracture surfaces of K-mold specimens, Bifilm-Index

measurement and X-ray computed tomography (CT) of reduced pressure test (RPT) samples,

which can be considered as a new method of melt quality characterization. It was found that

the number of oxide films found on the fracture surfaces of K-mold specimens is proportional

to the number density of pores found in RPT samples. Investigations with scanning electron

microscopy (SEM) revealed that oxide films can be found on the inner surface of the pores in

RPT samples, which confirms the theory, that pores and bifilms are interconnected

phenomenon. Based on the results, the bifilm content and so the quality of aluminum melts

can be characterized using CT analysis of RPT samples.

1
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Keywords: Aluminum alloy; Casting; Porosity; Bifilm; Computed tomography

1. Introduction

Aluminum casting alloys are widely used in automotive and aerospace industries for their

high strength to weight ratio, good castability and excellent corrosion resistance [1-3].

However, in order to ensure adequate mechanical properties (tensile strength, elongation,

fatigue life, etc.) of cast parts, the number of structural defects like porosity and inclusions

must be minimized [4-8]. Porosity is one of the most common defects, which can lead to

inadequate mechanical properties and premature failure of cast parts. In the case of aluminum

alloys, pore formation is mainly attributed to inadequate feeding of solidification shrinkage

and the rejection of dissolved hydrogen during the solidification of the alloy [9, 10]. However,

it was proposed by Campbell [11], that double oxide films (bifilms) take a central role in pore

formation as they can easily open up and inflate into pores due to hydrogen diffusion into

their inner atmosphere and pressure drop in the mushy zone caused by the volumetric

shrinkage during solidification (Fig. 1). This hypothesis is supported by experimental results

[12-19] and comprehensive theoretical calculations [20-24].

Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of pore formation initiated by a bifilm

2
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Bifilm formation during the melt handling and processing techniques of aluminum alloys is

mostly an unavoidable process as any disturbance of the melt surface leads to the entrainment

of the surface oxide layer. In this way, numerous bifilms are introduced to the melts during

common foundry activities like melting, alloying, fluxing and pouring [25-27]. In order to

produce high-quality castings, it is essential to assess and control the melt quality. The

determination of the bifilm content of melts is an important but especially hard task since

oxide films are usually extremely thin (often a few nanometers in thickness) [11, 26].

However, as revealed by Fox and Campbell [28, 29], reduced pressure test (RPT) can be an

effective tool in the assessment of melt quality. During solidification under reduced pressure,

the entrained air between the oxide layers is expanded [12]. Besides that, due to a lower

partial pressure, the solubility of hydrogen in the metal is lower and the H2 precipitation

process inside the bifilms is accelerated [30]. In this way, the bifilms inside RPT samples are

expanded and they can be more easily detected by X-ray radiography or quantitative image

analysis on a polished section [31]. Dispinar and Campbell [32] introduced a metric called the

Bifilm Index (BI) which can be used to quantify the bifilm content of the molten metal based

on the length of pores found on the polished section of RPT samples. However, the BI value

is only based on one section of the RPT sample, thus the spatial distribution of bifilms inside

the samples cannot be characterized with it. Besides that, the bifilm index values have a

significant degree of variation, therefore several RPT samples need to be analyzed to get

statistically representative results [5].

In order to address these issues, during our investigations, besides BI measurements, the

bifilm quantity of different melts was characterized by computed tomography (CT) of RPT

samples, which method can be used to characterize the full volume of the given sample

instead of only one section. The aim of this study was to investigate the described relationship

3
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

between bifilms and pores, as well as to get information about the possible utilization of it in

industrial melt quality assessment techniques.

2. Experimental

2.1 Materials

During our experiments, an Al-Si-Mg-Cu casting alloy was used, which is widely used in

the automotive industry for cylinder head castings (A356 alloy with an additional 0.5 % Cu).

The concentration ranges of the studied alloy can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1: Chemical composition of the studied aluminum alloy (wt. %)

Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Ti Sr
6.5 - 7.5 < 0.2 0.45 - 0.58 < 0.1 0.36 - 0.45 < 0.2 0.017 - 0.030

Melt treatments consisting of rotary degassing with N2 gas and flux addition were executed

on the alloy melts using two different fluxes (A and B), which are commercially available

granular fluxes. Based on previously made X-ray powder diffraction measurements, Flux A

mainly consists of NaCl, Na2SO4, and CaF2, the identified components of flux B are KCl,

CaF2, K2SiF6, and Ca3Al2(SiO4)3. Each flux was used in 3 treatment cycles. The quantity of

metal treated in one cycle was approximately 1000 kg. The metal was melted in a stack

smelter then transported by a transport ladle to a resistance heated holding furnace where the

melt treatments were performed (Fig. 2). The treatment parameters and the quantity of flux

added (400 g) were the same in each cycle. The N2 gas flow rate was 20 L/min; the rotor

revolution was 500 RPM during vortex formation and 250 RPM in the degassing phase. The

treatment time was 10 minutes in each case. The molten metal temperature in the holding

furnace was maintained between 740 °C and 750 °C.

4
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 2. The stages of melt preparation: (a) pouring from melting furnace, (b) melt transport to

holding furnace, and (c) melt processing

2.2 Methods

The bifilm content of the melts was investigated by the evaluation of K-mold specimens

and X-ray computed tomography (CT) of reduced pressure test (RPT) samples. The K-mold

specimen itself is a flat plate with four notches that act as fracture points (Fig. 3 (a)). The

fracture surface of samples (such as the ones in Fig. 3 (b) and (c)) can be examined either by

visual inspection or with a microscope.

Fig. 3. (a) K-mold sample, (b) fracture surfaces indicating good and (c) poor melt quality

Based on the number of inclusions found on the fracture surfaces, a K-value can be

determined which can be used for the quantitative characterization of the melt purity (Eq. 1).

5
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

𝑆
𝐾= (1)
𝑛

where 𝐾 is the K-mold value (dimensionless number), 𝑛 is the number of examined fracture

surfaces, and 𝑆 is the total number of inclusions found in 𝑛 pieces [33]. During each melt

preparation, specimens were cast two times. Samples were prepared from the melt in the

holding furnace before and after the melt treatment. At each sampling step, 5 K-mold and 1

RPT specimens were cast. The fracture surface of K-mold specimens was inspected with a

Zeiss Stemi 2000-C stereomicroscope at a magnification of 25X.

For the casting of RPT samples, steel cups preheated to 200 °C were used. The specimens

stayed in the vacuum chamber of the RPT machine at 80 mbar pressure for 6 minutes. The

porosity analysis of RPT samples was executed with computed tomography (CT). The

radiographic images were made with GE Seifert X-Cube Compact 225kV apparatus, the

acceleration voltage was 135 kV, the tube current was 0.8 mA. During one rotation of the

samples, 900 images were acquired. The image reconstruction and processing were conducted

with VGSTUDIO MAX 3.2 software. In Fig. 4, an example of the reconstructed 3-

dimensional geometry of an analyzed sample and three different sections of the same

specimen can be seen.

Fig. 4. CT section of an RPT sample in (a) the xy, (b) the xz and (c) the yz planes, (d) shows

the reconstructed 3D geometry of the sample

6
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

For the detection of pores, the VGDefX algorithm was used which is a part of the porosity

analysis module of the software. Based on the grey level of the voxels, which is proportional

to the local rate of attenuation of X-rays, the algorithm decides which voxels represent the

material and which of them corresponds to porosity defects. For each pore, a probability value

is determined which depends on the local contrast (the difference between the grey level of

voxels). During the analysis objects with a volume smaller than 0.05 mm3 and pores with a

probability value lower than 0.9 were ignored. The visual representation of the results of

porosity analysis conducted on the sample shown in Fig. 4 can be seen in Fig. 5. Based on the

results of the CT analysis, the volume fraction and total surface area of pores, as well as the

volumetric pore density (which is expressed in mm-3, and refers to the number of pores found

in one mm3 material) have been determined for each sample.

Fig. 5. (a-c) CT sections and (d) volumetric view of an RPT sample with the detected pores

After CT analysis, the samples were cut in half and were ground with SiC grinding papers

with a grit size of 80, 120, 180 and 240 (with average grain sizes of 201, 125, 82 and 58.5 μm,

respectively). A scanner was used to scan the cross-section of the samples at 600 dpi. After

contrast and brightness enhancement, the scans were converted to 8-bit greyscale images.

After that, image analysis was executed with MATLAB® Image Processing ToolboxTM

software. The segmentation of pores was realized based on the grey level of pixels. In order to

avoid the detection of noise and imperfections of the images, individual objects with an area

7
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

smaller than 0.05 mm2 were not considered. The sum of the maximum length of pores was

used for the calculation of the Bifilm Index (Eq. 2):

𝐵𝐼 = ∑ 𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 (2)

where 𝐵𝐼 is the Bifilm-Index [mm] and 𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum length (major axis length) of

pores [mm]. Besides BI, the areal number density of pores was also determined for each

sample. For this purpose, during another image analysis step, the cross-sectional area of the

RPT specimens was also determined. The inner surface of pores found in the RPT samples

was investigated with Zeiss EVO MA 10 scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with

energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) system.

3. Results and discussion

The results of the K-value evaluation are shown in Fig. 6, and some examples of inclusions

found on the fracture surfaces of the specimens are shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 6. Average K-values determined before and following the melt treatments

As can be seen in Fig. 6, each treatment resulted in the reduction of the K-values, however,

a significant amount of inclusions could be found on the fracture surfaces, even after melt

treatments, so the melt quality was far from optimal in each case. Melt processing conducted

with flux A resulted in considerably lower average K-values, which indicates that flux A is

more effective regarding inclusion removal.

8
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 7. Two sides of bifilm defects found on the fracture surfaces of the K-mold samples

In each case, crumpled, creased, film-like inclusions were found on the fracture surfaces.

Generally, the two distinct layers of the bifilm defects could be distinguished on the opposing

fracture surfaces (Fig.7), which confirms the theory that bifilms are the most common

inclusions of aluminum casting alloys [26].

Fig. 8. shows two examples of the reconstructed three-dimensional view of the RPT

samples before and following the melt treatments, including the pores found within them

during CT analysis. As seen in Fig. 8, the spatial- and size distribution of pores inside the

RPT samples is significantly different before and after the treatments. The RPT specimens

cast previously to melt processing have evenly distributed relatively moderate-sized pores,

while the samples made following the treatments, on the other hand, have one central, large-

sized pore and numerous other small-sized pores throughout the whole volume of the

samples. The mentioned large-sized pores are obviously the results of shrinkage, which -

based on the CT images- has a strong effect on pore growth in the RPT samples cast after

melt treatments.

9
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 8. Reconstructed CT image of RPT samples cast before and after melt treatments

The average pore number density and pore volume fraction results determined following

the porosity analysis of the CT images are shown in Fig. 9.

Fig. 9. (a) Average volumetric pore number density and (b) pore volume fraction results

Based on the pore formation mechanism proposed by Campbell [11], the number of pores

found in the samples is about the same as the number of bifilms which can act as pore

initiation sites during solidification. In this way, the volumetric pore density can be used to

quantify the bifilms suspended in the molten metal. This is supported by the fact, that the

results shown in Fig. 9 (a) are highly similar to the results of the K-value evaluation shown in

Fig. 6; the treatments executed with both fluxes resulted in the reduction of pore density
10
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

values and thus, the bifilm quantity of the melt. The application of flux A however, can be

considered more effective regarding bifilm removal, since it resulted in a greater reduction of

pore density values than the treatments executed with flux B. Pore volume fraction, on the

other hand, gives information about the total size of the pores and thus, the ability of pores to

grow during solidification. Based on the results shown in Fig. 9 (b), it can be said, that the

pore volume fraction values were significantly decreased during melt processing, which is

certainly the result of effective solute hydrogen removal during the rotary degassing

treatments. Due to lower solute hydrogen concentration, the pores inside the RPT samples

taken after melt processing are small-sized except the central large-sized pores, which are the

results of shrinkage. Fig. 10 (a) shows the average values of the total pore surface area

determined with CT analysis. Considering the fact, that bifilms are expanded during the

solidification of RPT specimens, the total surface area of pores can be used as a good

approximation of the total bifilm area and thus, the area of unbounded interfaces present in

the melt. These unbounded interfaces are the initiation sites of pores, hot tears, and cracks

[34], in this way they heavily influence mechanical properties of cast parts, thus the total pore

surface area inside an RPT sample can be considered as an important metric of liquid metal

quality. The total pore surface area and pore volume fraction results follow the same tendency

as it is showed by the linear regression in Fig. 10 (b). Despite the relationship between the

mentioned quantities, it should be mentioned, that pore surface area can be considered as a

more critical factor which can alter the mechanical properties of cast parts since pores which

have the same volume can reduce the properties at a different degree depending on the shape

of the pores and thus, the surface area of unbounded interfaces.

11
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 10. (a) Total pore surface area results and (b) the relationship between pore volume

fraction and pore surface area values

The results of image analysis of the cross-section of RPT samples are shown in Fig. 11,

and two examples of the scanned images of samples cast before and after melt processing are

shown in Fig. 12. Both BI (Fig. 11 (a)) and areal pore number density values (Fig. 11 (b))

were excessively reduced due to melt treatments. As seen in Fig. 12, the RPT samples cast

following melt processing contain only a few, rather small-sized pores in the cross-sectional

area, which resulted in low BI and pore density values. In the case of treatments with flux B,

the average BI value achieved an exceptionally low BI value of 8, which refers to a high-

quality melt according to Uludaǧ et al. [35]. This clearly contradicts the results of the K-value

evaluation and CT analysis which suggested that the application of flux B results in worse

melt quality than the treatments conducted with flux A.

Fig. 11. (a) Average BI values and (b) areal pore number density results

12
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 12. Examples of cross-sectional images of RPT samples cast before and after melt

treatments

As it was mentioned above, the average K-values and the volumetric pore density values

determined by CT analysis are following the same tendency. This relationship is visualized by

the linear regression line in Fig. 13 (a). As it is represented by large error bars in the graph, K-

values have a large degree of variation, which is most likely the result of the non-uniform

spatial distribution of bifilms inside the melt. Despite the low coefficient of determination

(R2) of the linear regression, the relationship between K-values and pore density values

indisputably indicates that bifilm quantity is proportional to the pore density values

determined by CT evaluation. On the other hand, it should be investigated in the future,

whether the results are influenced by the strong tendency to shrinkage driven pore growth in

the case of samples taken from a degassed melt (as can be seen in Fig. 8).

During BI measurement, one cross-sectional area is used for the quantitative

characterization of the bulk melt, which is obviously only an approximation. The accuracy of

this estimation can be determined from the comparison of areal and volumetric pore number

density values, which is shown in Fig. 13 (b). Based on the results, it can be said that the pore

13
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

number density values follow the linear tendency with a great extent of uncertainty (R2 value

of linear regression is only 0.57), which is the result of the non-uniform spatial distribution of

pores inside the RPT samples. In addition, characterization of the cross-sectional area can lead

to inaccurate results because of the fact that one pore can appear to be multiple separate pores

on a section.

Fig. 13. Comparison of (a) average K-values and volumetric pore number density results, (b)

the volumetric and areal pore number density values determined by CT and image analysis

According to Campbell [11], rotary degassing treatments are only effective in reducing the

solute hydrogen content and removing larger oxide film inclusions of aluminum alloy melts.

In this work, despite the fact, that fluxes were employed during melt treatments, it is evident

from the K-value and volumetric pore density results, that significant amount of bifilms

remained in the melts after the treatments, which could not be detected due to their small size

during the image analysis of the cross-section of RPT samples. As it was highlighted by

Riestra et al. [36], in the case of well-degassed melts, low BI values can be misleading, as, in

the absence of hydrogen, bifilms can only expand to a limited degree. In this way, because of

their small size, they cannot be detected during image analysis. This explains the relatively

low BI and areal pore number density values showed in Fig. 11 (a-b), which suggest that BI

measurement can give inaccurate results when the solute hydrogen concentration of the melt

is substantially low. Dispinar et al. [5, 37-39] carried out several comprehensive works about

14
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

the correlation between Bifilm Index and mechanical properties of cast parts, which clearly

prove that BI measurement is a valuable method of melt quality evaluation, which can aid in

the production of high-quality cast components. However, as reported in [5] and [32],

ultimate tensile strength and elongation to fracture results at lower BI values can scatter

significantly, which indicate that the sensitivity of the BI analysis to melt quality changes at

low bifilm concentrations can be limited.

The results of BI evaluation were compared with pore volume fraction and total pore

surface area results determined with computed tomography (Fig. 14 (a-b)).

Fig. 14. Comparison of BI values with (a) pore volume fraction and (b) total pore surface area

results

As can be seen in Fig. 14 (a), there is a strong relationship between BI and pore volume

fraction values. Uludaǧ et al. [35] also observed a direct correlation between BI and

volumetric porosity when the BI was higher than 50 mm. However, it is evident from the data

given in Fig. 14 (a), that the correlation is inaccurate at lower BI values. The same

interpretation can be made regarding the total pore surface area results, which are given in

Fig. 14 (b). This also suggests that at lower bifilm concentrations the accuracy of CT analysis

is better, than that of BI evaluation, as some presumably small-sized bifilms could be detected

with the aid of CT, and were taken into account during pore volume fraction and pore surface

area determination, but were not considered during BI analysis.

15
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Besides solute hydrogen concentration and pressure drop due to shrinkage, there is another

important factor which can alter the ease of bifilm unfurling and inflation. The flexibility of

the parts of the oxide films can be significantly different from each other due to the

differences in the time available for the thickening of the sections of the oxide layers during

the oxidation process. As a result, bifilms have parts which inflate more easily because of the

thinness and flexibility of the oxide film. In contrast, other parts of the bifilms cannot open

significantly due to hydrogen diffusion and/or shrinkage, as the thick oxide films which form

these parts are rigid [11, 20, 27, 40]. This phenomenon has a significant effect on the shape of

pores, as can be seen in Fig. 15; some parts of the bifilm were excessively inflated during

solidification, while other parts could not open and expand due to the rigidity of the local

oxide film section. The described difficulties in unfurling and inflation of bifilms may be

another reason why volumetric pore number density and bifilm content do not appear to

correlate more accurately in Fig. 13 (a).

Fig. 15. Partially opened bifilm in an RPT sample

Based on the pore formation mechanism illustrated in Fig. 1, it can be suggested that the

bifilms which act as pore initiation sites can be detected on the inner surface of the pores. This

is supported by the published experimental results [14-18] and the findings of the

investigations made by SEM during this research. Fig. 16 shows a pore found in the cross-

section of an RPT sample and the results of EDS analysis made in two separate areas. EDS

16
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

analysis was made on the base matrix of the alloy (Area 1) and on the inner surface of the

pore (Area 2). The oxygen concentration measured inside the pore is significantly higher,

which indicates that a relatively thick oxide layer covers the inner surface of the pore. The

oxygen concentration measured on Area 1 on the other hand, is substantially low, which

implies that only a thin oxide layer covers the base metal, which is the product of solid-state

oxidation.

Fig. 16. SEM image of pore found in an RPT sample and the results of EDS analysis

Besides higher oxygen concentration, at higher magnifications, wrinkles and creases could

be detected inside the investigated pores (as indicated by the arrows in Fig. 17), which are

additional signs of the presence of bifilms, as wrinkles and creases are common

morphological characteristics of the oxide films.

17
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 17. Wrinkled oxide films found in pores

4. Conclusion

In this study, the relationship between double oxide films and pore formation was

investigated in the case of an aluminum casting alloy. Based on the results, the following

conclusions can be drawn:

• Computed tomography aided porosity analysis of RPT samples can be used for the

quantitative characterization of melt quality, as volumetric pore density is proportional to

the quantity of entrained bifilms within the melt. Pore volume fraction, on the other hand,

gives information about the ability of bifilms to inflate into pores, while pore surface area

may be utilized in the determination of the total area of unbounded interfaces present in the

melts.

• In the case of well-degassed melts, Bifilm-Index and areal pore density determinations can

give inaccurate results, because at low solute hydrogen concentrations, small-sized bifilms,

which usually remain suspended in the melts after degassing treatments, cannot inflate to

sizes at which they can be easily detected during the image analysis of the cross-section of

RPT samples.

• With the aid of SEM, oxide films could be detected on the inner surface of pores within

RPT samples, which confirms the theory of bifilm initiated pore formation.

18
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

• K-values have a large degree of variation; therefore, a large number of specimens is

needed for reliable results.

19
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Acknowledgments

The described study was carried out as part of the EFOP-3.6.1-16-2016-00011 “Younger and

Renewing University – Innovative Knowledge City – institutional development of the

University of Miskolc aiming at intelligent specialization” project implemented in the

framework of the Szechenyi 2020 program. The realization of this project is supported by the

European Union, co-financed by the European Social Fund.

Data availability statement

The raw/processed data required to reproduce these findings cannot be shared at this time due

to technical or time limitations.

20
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

References

[1] F.C. Robles-Hernandez, J.M.H. Ramírez, R. Mackay, Al-Si Alloys, Springer International

Publishing AG, 2017. pp. 161-169. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-58380-8.

[2] I. Polmear, D. StJohn, J. Nie, M. Qian, Light Alloys, Elsevier Ltd., 2017. pp. 7-11.

DOI:10.1016/B978-0-08-099431-4.00001-4.

[3] M. Javidani, D. Larouche, Application of Cast Al–Si Alloys in Internal Combustion

Engine Components, Int. Mater. Rev. 59 (2014) 132–158.

DOI:10.1179/1743280413y.0000000027.

[4] J.G. Kaufman, E.L. Rooy, The Influence and Control of Porosity and Inclusions in

Aluminum Castings, in: E.L.R. J. G. Kaufman (Ed.), Alum. Alloy Cast. Prop. Process.

Appl., ASM International, 2004: pp. 47–54. DOI:10.1361/aacp2004p047.

[5] D. Dispinar, J. Campbell, Porosity, Hydrogen and Bifilm content in Al alloy castings,

Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 528 (2011) 3860–3865. DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2011.01.084.

[6] G. Eisaabadi Bozchaloei, N. Varahram, P. Davami, S.K. Kim, Effect of Oxide Bifilms on

the Mechanical Properties of Cast Al-7Si-0.3Mg Alloy and The Role of Runner Height

After Filter on Their Formation, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 548 (2012) 99–105.

DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2012.03.097.

[7] M.A. El-Sayed, W.D. Griffiths, Hydrogen, Bifilms and Mechanical properties of Al

Castings, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 27 (2014) 282–287.

DOI:10.1179/1743133614Y.0000000113.

[8] Q.G. Wang, C.J. Davidson, J.R. Griffiths, P.N. Crepeau, Oxide Films, Pores and the

Fatigue Lives of Cast Aluminum Alloys, Metall. Mater. Trans. B. Sci. 37 (2006) 887–

895. DOI:10.1007/BF02735010.

[9] Q. Han, Shrinkage Porosity and Gas Porosity, in: ASM Handbook. Vol. 15, Casting, ASM

International, 2008: pp. 370–374. DOI:10.31399/asm.hb.v15.a0005222.

21
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

[10] D.M. Stefanescu, Science and Engineering of Casting Solidification, Springer

International Publishing Switzerland, 2015. pp. 263-281. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-15693-

4.

[11] Campbell, J., Complete Casting Handbook. Elsevier, Oxford. 2015. pp. 3-90., 341-415.,

779-783. DOI:10.1016/B978-0-444-63509-9.00007-8

[12] D. Dispinar, J. Campbell, Critical Assessment of Reduced Pressure Test. Part 1: Porosity

Phenomena, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 17 (2004) 280–286.

doi:10.1179/136404604225020704.

[13] D. Dispinar, J. Campbell, Critical Assessment of Reduced Pressure Test. Part 2:

Quantification, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 17 (2004) 287–294.

DOI:10.1179/136404604225020704.

[14] M. Tiryakioğlu, P. Yousefian, P.D. Eason, Quantification of Entrainment Damage in

A356 Aluminum Alloy Castings, Metall. Mater. Trans. A. 49 (2018) 5815–5822.

DOI:10.1007/s11661-018-4865-z.

[15] B. Farhoodi, R. Raiszadeh, M.H. Ghanaatian, Role of Double Oxide Film Defects in the

Formation of Gas Porosity in Commercial Purity and Sr-containing Al Alloys, J. Mater.

Sci. Technol. 30 (2014) 154–162. DOI:10.1016/j.jmst.2013.09.001.

[16] M.A. El-Sayed, H. Hassanin, K. Essa, Bifilm Defects and Porosity in Al Cast Alloys, Int.

J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 86 (2016) 1173–1179. DOI:10.1007/s00170-015-8240-6.

[17] A. Shafaei, R. Raiszadeh, Reduced Pressure Test Verification of Healing of Double

Oxide Film Defects in Al-Mg Alloys, Metall. Mater. Trans. B. 45 (2014) 2486–2494.

DOI:10.1007/s11663-014-0135-7.

[18] A.M. Samuel, F.H. Samuel, H.W. Doty, S. Valtierra, Influence of Oxides on Porosity

Formation in Sr-treated Alloys, Int. J. Met. 11 (2017) 729–742. DOI:10.1007/s40962-

016-0118-3.

22
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

[19] X.G. Chen, J.E. Gruzleski, Influence of Melt Cleanliness on Pore Formation in

Aluminium-Silicon Alloys, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 9 (1996) 17–26.

DOI:10.1080/13640461.1996.11819640.

[20] P. Yousefian, M. Tiryakioğlu, Pore Formation During Solidification of Aluminum:

Reconciliation of Experimental Observations, Modeling Assumptions, and Classical

Nucleation Theory, Metall. Mater. Trans. A. 49 (2018) 563–575. DOI:10.1007/s11661-

017-4438-6.

[21] E. Erzi, M. Tiryakioğlu, On the Fracture Pressure of Liquid Metals, Mater. Sci. Technol.

(2019). DOI:10.1080/02670836.2019.1646010.

[22] M. Tiryakioǧlu, On the Intrinsic Fracture Pressure of Liquid and Solid Aluminum

Around Its Melting Temperature, Metall. Mater. Trans. A. 49 (2018) 5953–5955.

DOI:10.1007/s11661-018-4969-5.

[23] M. Tiryakioǧlu, On Intrinsic and Extrinsic Feeding Distance Calculations for Aluminium

Alloys, Mater. Sci. Technol. 35 (2019) 738–741.DOI:10.1080/02670836.2019.1584423.

[24] M. Tiryakioǧlu, The Myth of Hydrogen Pores in Aluminum Castings, in: M. Tiryakioǧlu,

W. Griffiths, M. Jolly (Eds.), Shape Casting, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society,

2019: pp. 143–150. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-06034-3_14.

[25] J. Campbell, Stop Pouring, Start Casting, Int. J. Met. 6 (2012) 7–18.

DOI:10.1007/BF03355529

[26] J. Campbell, Entrainment defects, Mater. Sci. Technol. 22 (2006) 127–145.

DOI:10.1179/174328406X74248.

[27] R. Gopalan, N.K. Prabhu, Oxide Bifilms in Aluminium Alloy Castings a Review, Mater.

Sci. Technol. 27 (2011) 1757–1769. DOI:10.1179/1743284711Y.0000000033.

[28] S. Fox, J. Campbell, Liquid Metal Quality, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 14 (2002) 335–340.

DOI:10.1080/13640461.2002.11819451.

23
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

[29] S. Fox, J. Campbell, Visualisation of Oxide Film Defects During Solidification of

Aluminium Alloys, Scr. Mater. 43 (2000) 881–886. DOI:10.1016/S1359-6462(00)00506-

6.

[30] R. DasGupta, Approaches to Measurement of Metal Quality, in: ASM Handbook Vol.

15, Casting, ASM International, 2008. pp. 1167–1173.

DOI:10.31399/asm.hb.v15.a0005340.

[31] D. Dispinar, J. Campbell, A Comparison of Methods Used to Assess Aluminium Melt

Quality, in: P. N. Crepeau, M. Tiryakioǧlu and J. Campbell (Ed.), Shape Cast. 2nd Int.

Symp., TMS (The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society), 2007: pp. 11–18.

[32] D. Dispinar, J. Campbell, Use of Bifilm Index as an Assessment of Liquid Metal Quality,

Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 19 (2006) 5–17. DOI:10.1179/136404606225023300.

[33] S.W. Hudson, D. Apelian, Inclusion Detection in Molten Aluminum: Current Art and

New Avenues for In Situ Analysis, Int. J. Met. 10 (2016) 315–321. DOI:10.1007/s40962-

016-0030-x.

[34] J. Campbell, The Origin of Griffith Cracks, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 42 (2011) 1091–

1097. DOI:10.1007/s11663-011-9575-5.

[35] M. Uludağ, R. Çetin, D. Dişpinar, M. Tiryakioğlu, On the Interpretation of Melt Quality

Assessment of A356 Aluminum Alloy by the Reduced Pressure Test: The Bifilm Index

and Its Physical Meaning, Int. J. Met. 12 (2018) 853–860. DOI:10.1007/s40962-018-

0217-4.

[36] M. Riestra, A. Bjurenstedt, T. Bogdanoff, E. Ghassemali, S. Seifeddine, Complexities in

the Assessment of Melt Quality, Int. J. Met. 12 (2018) 441–448. DOI:10.1007/s40962-

017-0179-y.

24
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

[37] D. Dispinar, S. Akhtar, A. Nordmark, M. Di Sabatino, L. Arnberg, Degassing, Hydrogen

and Porosity Phenomena in A356, Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 527 (2010) 3719–3725.

DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2010.01.088.

[38] D. Dispinar, S. Akhtar, A. Nordmark, F. Syvertsen, M. Di Sabatino, L. Arnberg,

Correlation Between Mechanical Properties and Porosity Distribution of A356 in Gravity

Die Casting and Low Pressure Die Casting, Adv. Mater. Res. 445 (2012) 283–288.

DOI:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.445.283.

[39] T. Tunçay, S. Tekeli, D. Özyürek, D. Dişpinar, Microstructure–Bifilm Interaction and Its

Relation with Mechanical Properties in A356, Int. J. Cast Met. Res. 30 (2017) 20–29.

DOI:10.1080/13640461.2016.1192826.

[40] Campbell, J., Mini Casting Handbook. Aspect Design, 2018.

25
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Figure Captions

Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of pore formation initiated by a bifilm

Fig. 2. The stages of melt preparation: (a) pouring from melting furnace, (b) melt transport to

holding furnace, and (c) melt processing

Fig. 3. (a) K-mold sample, (b) fracture surfaces indicating good and (c) poor melt quality

Fig. 4. CT section of an RPT sample in (a) the xy, (b) the xz and (c) the yz planes, (d) shows

the reconstructed 3D geometry of the sample

Fig. 5. (a-c) CT sections and (d) volumetric view of an RPT sample with the detected pores

Fig. 6. Average K-values determined before and following the melt treatments

Fig. 7. Two sides of bifilm defects found on the fracture surfaces of the K-mold samples

Fig. 8. Reconstructed CT image of RPT samples cast before and after melt treatments

Fig. 9. (a) Average volumetric pore number density and (b) pore volume fraction results

Fig. 10. (a) Average pore surface area results and (b) the relationship between pore volume

fraction and pore surface area values

Fig. 11. (a) Average BI values and (b) areal pore number density results

Fig. 12. Examples of cross-sectional images of RPT samples cast before and after melt

treatments

Fig. 13. Comparison of (a) average K-values and volumetric pore number density results, (b)

the volumetric and areal pore number density values determined by CT and image

analysis

Fig. 14. Comparison of BI values with (a) pore volume fraction and (b) total pore surface area

results

26
 Materials Characterization Vol. 157. 2019. 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2019.109925

Fig. 15. Partially opened bifilm in an RPT sample

Fig. 16. SEM image of pore found in an RPT sample and the results of EDS analysis

Fig. 17. Wrinkled oxide films found in pores

Table Captions

Table 1: Chemical composition of the studied aluminum alloy (wt. %)

27

View publication stats