Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Alloys and Compounds

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jalcom

Heterogeneous microstructure and deformation behavior of an

automotive grade aluminum alloy ]]
]]]]]]
]]

⁎ ⁎
S.S. Dash a, D.J. Li b, , X.Q. Zeng b, D.L. Chen a,
a
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario M5B 2K3, Canada
b
State Key Laboratory of Metal Matrix Composites, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 800 Dongchuan Road, Shanghai
200240, China

a r t i cl e i nfo a bstr ac t

Article history: Aluminum alloy is today considered as a prime selection for manufacturing lightweight structural com­
Received 2 January 2021 ponents in the automotive industry to increase fuel efficiency and reduce harmful emissions. The aim of this
Received in revised form 23 February 2021 study was to identify the effect of microstructure and strain rate on the tensile deformation behavior of a
Accepted 3 March 2021
high-pressure die-cast Silafont®-36 alloy, with special attention to strain hardening behavior and de­
Available online 5 March 2021
formation mechanisms. The alloy consisted of randomly oriented primary α-Al phase and Al–Si eutectic
structure in a form of heterogeneous microstructures, with Sr-modified Si particles exhibiting a coral-like
Keywords:
Cast aluminum alloy fibrous network. The local misorientations in most primary α-Al grains was below 1°, suggesting strain-free
Heterogeneous microstructure grains along with some extent of near-boundary residual strains due to the thermal mismatch between
Tensile properties aluminum and silicon. A superior strength-ductility combination was achieved, along with enhanced
Strain rate effect Young’s modulus and quality index owing to the unique heterogeneous microstructures. The cast alloy
Strain hardening behavior exhibited a smooth deformation characteristic with good coordination deformation and strong strain
hardening capacity. Strain hardening exponents evaluated via the equations proposed by Ludwik,
Hollomon, Swift, and Afrin et al., respectively, showed basically the absence of strain-rate effect from
1 × 10−5 to 1 × 10−2 s−1. During the tensile deformation, crack initiated from the sample surface and pro­
pagated through the alternate microconstituents of softer primary α-Al phase and harder eutectic structure.
© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Due to their lightweighting trait along with other advantages like
high specific strength, superior corrosion resistance, better ductility,
and high thermal and electrical conductivity, the application of
aluminum alloys in North American automobiles is expected to rise
12% by 2026, bringing the average aluminum content per vehicle
from 208 kg (2020) to 233 kg (2026) [1]. While both cast and
wrought aluminum alloys are used to manufacture a variety of au­
tomotive components, on the industrial scale cast Al alloys are more
popular due to lower production cost. Manufacturing processes such
as pressure die casting, permanent mold casting, thixocasting,
rheocasting, etc., are able to produce near-net-shape components at
a larger scale, which help reduce the production time and increase
efficiency [2–9]. However, the presence of some imperfections
during casting like the entrapment of oxides, gas and shrinkage
pores, facilitate the initiation of cracks in these alloys, leading to
⁎
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: lidejiang@sjtu.edu.cn (D.J. Li), dchen@ryerson.ca (D.L. Chen).
poor tensile and fatigue properties. High pressure die casting
(HPDC), along with several modifications to the design of die, gating
system, venting and vacuum systems, and die-lubrication, can ef­
fectively eliminate the critical gas entrapment in the casting process
of Al alloys [10–14]. Such die-cast Al alloys contain Si as a primary
alloying element, aiming to increase fluidity, ensure proper die
filling, and prevent mold wall sticking along with high machinability
and high-integrity. These Al–Si alloys are sometimes referred to as
“silumins”, with hypoeutectic and near-eutectic Al–Si alloys
(9–12.67 wt% Si) being preferred for producing major vehicle com­
ponents like engine blocks, wheels, main chassis, door panels and
frames, etc. Silafont®-36 Al–Si alloy containing very low Fe content,
developed by Rheinfelden Alloys GmbH, was one of the first HPDC
alloys which had higher elongation and superior tensile and fatigue
strength [11].
Mechanical properties of cast Al–Si alloys are dependent on the
as-cast microstructures involving the morphology of Si particles
(size, shape, and distribution), primary dendrite parameters, and
grain size [5]. These microstructural features change with processing
parameters, solidification rate, chemical modification, heat

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.159413
0925-8388/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
Table 1
Chemical composition (wt%) of the present as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy.
Si Fe Cu Mn Mg Zn Ti Sr
10.34 0.091 0.0008 0.62 0.32 <0.0010 0.066 0.013
treatment, and thermomechanical processes [15]. Silafont®-36 alloy
contains ~10% of Si with other minor alloying elements like Mn and
Mg, which enhance the ductility and strength of the alloy. Si parti­
cles, being present in the eutectic structure, could be acicular,
elongated or spherical morphologies. These shapes affect the stress
field interaction during deformation, with a higher stress con­
centration being present for acicular and elongated shapes in com­
parison with spherical shapes [16]. The minute addition of Sr to even
ppm levels have been reported to lead to the modification of Si
morphology to more rounded-shapes, which increased the ductility
[17–21]. The addition of Mg in Al–Si alloys leads to the formation of
Mg2Si phase, which is known for its precipitation strengthening
effect in cast Al–Si–Mg alloys [22]. Zovi and Casarotto [10] studied
the effect of alloying elements on the mechanical properties of as-
cast and heat-treated Silafont®-36 alloy. Addition of Mn helped im­
prove the strength of the as-cast alloy, and reduce the sticking
tendencies. However, with increasing Mn content the elongation of
the alloy decreased due to the formation of Al–Mn–Fe–Si brittle
intermetallic phases [23]. The presence of needle-like Fe-containing
intermetallic compounds downgraded the tensile elongation and
strength by acting as sources of stress concentration and crack in­
itiation sites.
Some limited studies on the mechanical behavior of Silafont®-36
cast alloy have been conducted. Lee and Mishra [24,25] studied the
quantitative features of eutectic Si particles with varying cooling
rates in Silafont®-36 alloy, and observed that finer grains blocked
more dislocations produced around indentation deformation, re­
sulting in higher hardness values. Faster cooling rates also increased
the solubility of alloying elements in the primary α-Al phase due to a
higher extent of supersaturation, leading to stronger solid solution
strengthening. Refined eutectic Si particles in the case of Sr or
phenyl-TSP (trisilanol phenyl polyhedral silsesquioxane) modified
Al–10%Si–Mn–Mg cast alloy, resulted in a significant increase in
elongation [16]. Yuan et al. [26] studied the effect of solution time on
the tensile properties of a similar Al–10%Si–Mn–Mg HPDC alloy. The
available studies mainly involved the effect of casting parameters.
There has been no information about the quality index of the Sila­
font®-36 cast alloy (or how high the value should be for achieving
effective casting). It is also unclear how the strain hardening behaves
and if strain rate sensitivity is present in the Silafont®-36 alloy
especially with a heterogeneous microstructure. The objective of this
study is, therefore, to investigate the tensile deformation behavior of
Silafont®-36 alloy in relation to the as-cast heterogeneous
Fig. 1. (a) High-pressure die-casting mould used for the Silafont®-36 alloy [3], showing (i) rectangular and (ii) cylindrical samples positioned symmetrically, and (b) schematic
diagram for the specimen geometry and dimensions (in mm) for (i) and (ii).
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
microstructure, focusing on the strain hardening behavior and me­
chanisms along with the effect of strain rate.
Al
Balance 2. Material and experimental procedure
In the present study, Silafont®-36 alloy ingots were purchased
from a company in China authorized by Rheinfelden Alloys GmbH.
Molten Silafont®-36 alloy maintained at a temperature of 680 °C was
poured into a preheated mold at 180 °C at a pressure of 80 MPa. The
fast and slow ram speeds were kept constant at 2 m/s and 0.25 m/s,
respectively. A vacuum level of about 100–150 mbar was applied in
the die-casting process. The chemical composition of the alloy after
casting was determined via plasma mass spectrometry and is pre­
sented in Table 1. Being a low Fe-containing die-cast aluminum
alloy, it was designed to improve the elongation and strength with
subsequent Mn addition, comparable to other die-cast aluminum
alloys. The alloy contains 10.34% Si as a major alloying element,
making it a hypoeutectic Al–Si alloy. The dogbone-shaped rectan­
gular and cylindrical samples following ASTM E8 standards were
directly cast using a specifically designed mould, as shown in
Fig. 1(a) [3]. Fig. 1(b) shows the geometry and dimensions for the
standard specimens. The rectangular (Fig. 1(i)) dog-bone samples
were used for the microstructural characterization to facilitate the
sample orientations indicated, and the cylindrical samples (Fig. 1(ii))
for the tensile tests. Since the rectangular and cylindrical specimens
were positioned symmetrically in the mould (Fig. 1(a)), their mi­
crostructure and mechanical properties would be anticipated to be
equivalent.
Small pieces cut from the as-cast samples using a slow-speed
diamond cutter were manually ground with abrasive SiC papers (Grit
#320, #400, #600, #1200, #2000, and #4000), and then polished
using diamond paste and colloidal silica. The polished surfaces were
etched using Keller’s reagent (5 ml HNO3, 3 ml HCl, and 2 ml HF in
190 ml distilled water) for ~3 min. The same samples were then
deeply etched for 7 min to better observe the morphology of eutectic
phases. Microstructures were observed via JSM-6380LV scanning
electron microscope (SEM) attached with Oxford energy-dispersive
spectroscopy (EDS) detector. EDS was carried out on the sample
surfaces in both line scan and elemental mapping for the as-cast
microstructures. Electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) examina­
tions to identify the as-cast grain orientations and phases were also
conducted at a step-size of 0.1 µm. Image analysis software (ImageJ)
was used to determine the volume fraction of each phase. X-ray
diffraction was performed using a PANalytical X-ray diffractometer
(XRD) to identify the phases present in the as-cast Al–Si alloy. Cu Kα
X-ray radiation with a wavelength λ = 0.15406 nm with a setting of
45 kV and 40 mA was used. The diffraction angle (2θ) range was set
to vary from 20°–90° at a scanning rate of 0.05° s−1.
Tensile tests were performed according to ASTM E8M standards
at room temperature on a computerized United testing system. The
2
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
tests were conducted on cylindrical samples with a gauge length of
50 mm at four different strain rates of 1 × 10−5, 1 × 10−4, 1 × 10−3, and
1 × 10−2 s−1. At least two samples were tested at each strain rate, with
only mild grinding to remove the burrs after demolding. Yield
strength (YS), ultimate tensile strength (UTS), elongation (%EL),
quality index (Q), and strain hardening exponent (n) were evaluated
from the obtained stress-strain curves. Some typical fracture
surfaces were examined via SEM to identify the tensile fracture
mechanisms in this low-iron die-cast Al–Si alloy.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Microstructure
Fig. 2 shows typical microstructures of the as-cast Silafont®-36
alloy, which were viewed from the longitudinal direction (LD). Si­
milar microstructural features were also observed from the normal
direction (ND) and transverse direction (TD), which indicated no
obvious anisotropy along different directions. It should be noted
that both the rectangular and cylindrical specimens have a typical
die casting microstructure from the surface to center, i.e., a gradient
microstructure (ultra-fine grains in the skin and coarse grains in
the center). The features of primary α-Al and interlamellar Al–Si
eutectic structure become more visible with increasing magnifi­
cation, as seen from Fig. 2(a)-(c). The rod-shaped particles with
light-grey color represent eutectic Si, and the dark-grey patches in-
between Si particles stand for eutectic Al, as indicated in Fig. 2(c). It
should be noted that a longer etching time led to the removal of
some inclusions, whose imprints could be seen as the dark pore-
like spots on the micrographs. Fig. 2(d) shows a deep-etched mi­
crostructure of the alloy, where the localized corrosion of eutectic
Al phase in the eutectic structure revealed a coral-like structure of
eutectic Si particles, which was reported by some researchers to be
Fig. 2. SEM micrographs of the Silafont®-36 alloy with (a–c) normal etching, and (d) deep etching, observed in the longitudinal (sample length) direction (LD), at different
magnifications in the secondary electron imaging (SEI) mode.
3
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
beneficial for acquiring superior mechanical properties in the cast
alloys [26,27]. This kind of structural modification is due to the
presence of minute amount of strontium (Sr) in the alloy
[11,17,28–30]. The morphology of Si, which can be modified due to
the presence of alloying elements like Sr or other modifiers like Sc
or Na, plays an important part in shaping the mechanical properties
of die-cast alloys. As a result of such elongated Si particles, the
elongation of the alloys gets significantly reduced [26]. Some mi­
crostructures after deep-etching show the presence of externally
solidified crystals (ESCs), which denote the primary α-Al solidifi­
cation taking place in shot sleeve. As-cast microstructures could
also contain some minute content of β-Mg2Si phase sitting on the
Si eutectic particles [22,26,31,32], due to the stronger chemical
affinity between the atoms of Mg and Si [33].
Primary α-Al dendrites in the Silafont®-36 alloy that formed
through dendritic solidification during casting, do not have long
arms and are quite fragmented (Fig. 2). From (Fig. 2(d)), it can be
seen that the finer and fibrous structure of eutectic Si particles is due
to modification by the trace addition of 130 ppm of Sr. The Sr gets
absorbed onto the surface of Si, as verified by the EDS line scan
analysis shown in Fig. 3(a), where both Si and Sr demonstrated a
higher elemental distribution in the areas of eutectic structure while
other elements like Mg, Mn and Fe were absent. Similar findings
were also reported by Timpel et al. [20] who showed that the co-
segregation of Sr–Al–Si together can change the stacking fault en­
ergy. The presence of Sr can effectively slow down the growth rate of
eutectic Si particles relative to Al matrix. The mechanism involves
inducing stacking faults and twinning [18,34], due to which the
unidirectional growth of Si particles is prevented [19,27]. The poi­
soning of the Si growth sites at the advancing interface by Sr sug­
gests that the eutectic modification is controlled by a growth
mechanism – commonly known as the “twin plane re-entrant edge”
(TPRE) mechanism. The occurrence of poisoning retards the growth
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
Fig. 3. EDS line scan results obtained from (a) an etched sample surface across primary α-Al and eutectic structure, and (b) an unetched sample surface across the second phase
particles and base metal.
of Si and increases undercooling, thus forming finer particles
[17,20,21]. Vandersluis et al. [27] also observed a similar effect of Sr
on the Si particle morphology in as-cast A319 alloy with an average
aspect ratio of Si particles of 1.5–2 with Sr addition.
EDS analysis was also performed on an unetched specimen, as
shown in Fig. 3(b), which revealed the presence of Mn and Fe across
the white hexagon-like particles, i.e., inclusions in the as-cast Si­
lafont®-36 alloy. Mohammed et al. [3] also reported the presence of
Al8(Fe,Mn)2Si particles in a newly developed Al–5.5Mg–2.5­
Si–0.6Mn–0.2Fe cast aluminum alloy. However, the amount of such
Fe- and Mn-containing inclusions in the present alloy is scarce due
to a very low content of Fe (~0.09%, Table 1), since the presence of
excess Fe-rich intermetallic compound is known to result in a
higher stress concentration and cause early cracking and low
ductility. Addition of Mn (0.62%) in the alloy helps prevent sticking
between the mold wall and casting, but the presence of excess Mn-
rich inclusions can also lead to brittle fracture and decrease the
ductility, which will be discussed in the later section of tensile
properties.
3.2. EBSD analysis
EBSD results of the as-cast microstructure observed from the
normal direction (ND), provided some interesting features as shown
in Fig. 4(a–d). The color changes in Fig. 4(a) revealed random tex­
tures in the primary α-Al dendrites. The primary Al phase in an A413
cast aluminum alloy was also observed to exhibit varying orienta­
tions [35]. The grain boundary-like network of white-colored regions
in Fig. 4(a) included eutectic Si particles along with a small amount
of Mg2Si phase, as shown in Fig. 4(b). It should be noted that pseudo-
symmetric mis-indexing would be present due to the insufficient
resolution and the low quality of indexing in the fine lamellar eu­
tectic region. Similar EBSD analyses were conducted by Chankit­
munkong et al. [36] for an Al–12%Si–Cu alloy, where finer eutectic
structures were also difficult to index. Boundaries with misorienta­
tion angles between 2°–15° were considered as low angle grain
boundaries (LAGBs), whereas boundaries with misorientation angles
of >15° were considered as high angle grain boundaries (HAGBs)
4
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
(black lines in Fig. 4(a–d)). The absence of some obvious grain
boundaries was due to the overlapping with the eutectic structure.
Fig. 4(c) shows the phase distribution containing two major phases,
Al and Si, and some minor presence of Mg2Si phase. Si is basically
present in the inter-dendritic regions, confirming its existence in the
eutectic structure. Fig. 4(d) shows the local misorientation or Kernel
average misorientation (KAM) maps obtained for the Al phase in the
as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy. KAM maps depict the extent of strain
distribution inside a grain [37,38]. Local misorientations of <5° were
considered in this map, to avoid the effect of large misorientations
like the grain boundaries. Fig. 4(e) shows the frequency distribution
of the local misorientations, indicating that the maximum frequency
is below 1°. This suggests that the as-cast microstructure consists
mostly of strain-free regions, but with some extent of internal strain
mainly near the boundaries. This was likely due to the pretty large
thermal mismatch between the Al and Si during fast cooling after
casting (i.e., from the eutectic temperature of 577 °C to room tem­
perature) like the situation of particulate-reinforced metal matrix
composites, where the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) is
~23.6 × 10−6 °C−1 for Al, and ~2.6 × 10−6 °C−1 for Si with a large dif­
ference ΔCTE of ~21 × 10−6 °C−1. The presence of areas with high KAM
values inside some primary α-Al grains is most likely due to a certain
level of dislocations generated in the casting process, which follows
several mechanisms like merging dendritic grains, stress build-up at
particle-matrix interface, and thermal and shrinkage stresses
[37,39]. This also corroborates the fact that the KAM values are
usually high at the Si particle and Al matrix interface.
3.3. X-ray diffraction
X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern of the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy is
shown in Fig. 5. Distinct peaks of α-Al and Si in the eutectic structure
are observed, along with the presence of Mg2Si and AlFeMnSi
(Al9Fe0.84Mn2.16Si) phases as seen from the minor peaks. The pre­
sence of a small amount of Mg2Si corresponds well to the EBSD
analysis (Fig. 4(b and c)). Indeed, Mg2Si is one of the most commonly
observed intermetallic phases in many Al–Mg–Si alloys [3,22,39,40].
Since Mg2Si with a cubic lattice (Fm3m, 12 atoms/unit cell, lattice
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413

Fig. 4. EBSD orientation maps of (a) α-Al phase and (b) Si and Mg2Si in the eutectic structure, (c) EBSD phase distribution map of α-Al, Si and Mg2Si phases, (d) local misorientation
or KAM (Kernel Average Misorientation) map for Al-phase, with the corresponding (e) local misorientation distribution in the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy.

parameter a = 0.635–0.640 nm) has a melting temperature of
1087 °C, a density of 1.88 g/cm3, and a Vickers hardness of 4.5 GPa, it
can act as an effective lightweight strengthening phase, leading to
higher hardness, tensile strength and fatigue life of Al alloys
[3,39,41]. In an as-cast Al–Mg–Si alloy with a Mg-to-Si ratio of
roughly 2:1, Mg2Si phase was observed to be extensively present
with the microstructure containing nearly ideal eutectic layers of
Mg2Si [3]. As seen from Fig. 5, some weak peaks corresponding to an
AlFeMnSi (Al9Fe0.84Mn2.16Si) intermetallic compound could also be
observed. This intermetallic compound corresponds well to the Mn-
rich particles observed from the EDS analysis (Fig. 3(b)) and later
from the fracture surface. Similar intermetallic particles have also
been reported in several Al–Si–Mn alloys containing trace amounts
of Fe [42–44].
3.4. Tensile properties and enhanced Young’s modulus
Fig. 6(a) shows a typical engineering stress-strain curve of as-cast
Silafont®-36 alloy tested at a strain rate of 1 × 10−4 s−1. It exhibits a
typical smooth flow curve with gradual transition from elastic to
plastic deformation without the occurrence of yield-point phe­
nomenon. The Young’s modulus in the initial elastic deformation

5
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413

Fig. 5. X-ray diffraction pattern showing the phases and intermetallic compounds in the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy.

Fig. 6. (a) A typical engineering stress-strain curve tested at a strain rate of 1 × 10−4 s−1, and (b) the yield strength (YS), ultimate tensile strength (UTS), elongation (%EL), and
quality index (Q), along with (c) hardening capacity (Hc) and (d) strain hardening exponent (n) (evaluated using the equations of Ludwik [70], Hollomon [71], Swift [72], and Afrin
et al. [67]) for the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy as a function of strain rate.

6
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413

Table 2
Comparison of the tensile properties of the present as-cast Silafont®-36 (Al–10.34Si–0.62Mn–0.32Mg) alloy with those of other similar or common as-cast Al alloys.

Alloy Yield Ultimate tensile Elongation, % Strain hardening Hardening capacity (Hc)
stress, MPa strength, MPa exponent (n)

Al–10.34Si–0.62Mn–0.32Mg (present study) 169 ± 6 314 ± 3 6.2 ± 1.8 0.26 ± 0.01 0.86 ± 0.06
A319 [56] 130 235 2.5 – 0.81
A380 [57] 160 325 3.5 – 1.03
Al–Mg–Si–Mn [57] 183 324 8.3 – 0.77
Al–5.5Mg–2.5Si–0.6Mn–0.2Fe [3] 185 304 6.3 0.25 0.72
A356 [58] 90 185 8 – –
Al–11.6Si [59] – 180 2 – –
Al–5Si [60] – 209 ± 10.1 4.5 ± 1.2 – –
Al–8Si [60] – 276 ± 4.5 6.0 ± 0.4 – –
Al–18Si [60] – 249 ± 8.3 2.2 ± 0.2 – –
Al–8.94Si–0.93Fe–3.24Cu [61] 114 135 1.52 – –

(EA) could be estimated via the following upper (u) and lower (l)
bound expressions of rule of mixtures,
EA (u) = EAl × VAl + ESi × VSi,
EAl × ESi
EA (l) = , and Casarotto [10] studied the effect of Mn amount on the mechanical
VAl × ESi + VSi × EAl
where VAl and VSi are the volume fraction of pure Al and Si (VAl + VSi = 1),
and EAl and ESi are the Young’s modulus of Al and Si, respectively. The
average value of VSi is ~0.22 via image analysis. Using the EAl as 69 GPa
and ESi as 162 GPa [45], the Young’s modulus of the alloy obtained from
Eqs. (1) and (2) lies in-between ~78 and ~88 GPa. The average value
estimated from the linear region of tensile stress-strain curves was
~77 GPa, which is close to the lower bound calculated via the rule of
mixtures. This suggests superior bonding between Si particles and Al
matrix in the present as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy due to the application
of a high pressure (80 MPa) during casting. Several recent studies have
shown that the increase of Si as an alloying element from 7% to 12% in
cast Al alloys leads to an increase of Young’s modulus from 73 to
77 GPa, as the higher Si content results in the formation of more
covalent bonds. This phenomenon is present in many hypo- and hyper-
eutectic alloys [46–48]. Mandal and Makhlouf [49] also showed the
beneficial effect of HPDC process, along with the presence of Mg2Si
phase, in increasing the Young’s modulus of a hypereutectic Al–Si alloy.
Fig. 6(b) shows the values of YS, UTS, quality index (Q), and %EL,
respectively, as a function of strain rate. It is seen that a YS of
160–180 MPa and UTS of 310–320 MPa are achieved in the present
as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy, which are higher than the specified
YS = 120–150 MPa and UTS = 250–290 MPa, while the obtained %EL
of 5–10% also meets the specified range of 5–11%. The strain rate
sensitivity is seen to be basically absent, since the obtained YS, UTS
and %EL values are roughly the same at the applied strain rates
ranging from 1 × 10−5 s−1 to 1 × 10−2 s−1 within the experimental
scatter. Similarly, Zhang et al. [50] studied the strain rate de­
pendency of tensile properties of an Al–5%Mg–0.6%Mn alloy, and
also observed almost no changes in the YS and UTS. The enhanced
mechanical properties of the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy would be
directly related to the composite-like heterogeneous micro­
structures as seen from Fig. 2 and also reported in [51,52], along with
the presence of some well-dispersed β-Mg2Si and Al9Fe0.84Mn2.16Si
particles (Figs. 3(b), 4 and 5). The unique heterogeneity of this alloy
is hence attributed to the presence of intermetallic particles and Si in
the dendritic structure and can also be compared to several auto­
motive Al alloys and particulate-reinforced Al-based composites
[53–55]. A combined role of the optimal process control with a
proper addition of alloying elements, mainly 10.34% Si, 0.32% Mg,
0.62% Mn and 0.091% Fe (Table 1), leads to such a synergic effect.
Industrial components with high operating stresses against impact
have a Mg content at levels of 0.24–0.35% which help improve the
strength [10,11]. The larger elongation obtained in the cast alloy
without heat treatment is mainly due to a lower amount of Fe
(Table 1, as mentioned earlier) along with an optimized composition
of Mn. Wu et al. [7] observed the deterioration of tensile properties
(1)
with increase in Mg content beyond 0.45%, that helped in stabilising
the Fe-based intermetallic in Al–7%Si–Mg alloy microstructure. Zovi
(2)
properties of Silafont®-36 alloy, and found that at about 0.5–0.8% Mn
content produces an elongation more than 8%. Table 2 summarizes
the tensile properties of several common automotive Al alloys in the
as-cast condition [3,56–61]. It is seen that the present as-cast Sila­
font®-36 alloy lies at the high end of as-cast Al alloys with a superior
combination of YS, UTS and %EL.
A parameter known as quality index (Q, in MPa) by considering
both UTS and elongation has been used to reflect the quality of as-
cast alloys. It is defined as follows [62],
Q = UTS (inMPa) + log(Elongation (in %)), (3)
where δ was taken to be a constant (=150 MPa) for the original
Al–7Si–0.4Mg alloy and assumed to be the same for the current alloy
as well. The parameter was proposed to show a compromise of the
UTS and ductility of the cast alloys and assess the optimal conditions
for castings. The calculated Q values versus strain rates are shown in
Fig. 6(b), lying in-between 400 and 470 MPa and reflecting the
uniformity of the present as-cast alloy with respect to the quality of
casting. The obtained Q values are higher than that (~300 MPa) of an
as-cast Al–10.8%Si alloy reported by Mohamed et al. [63]. Several
other cast Al alloys developed without using HPDC process [64–66]
exhibited relatively lower Q values than the present alloy, which
demonstrates the efficiency of this process in manufacturing high-
end automotive components.
3.5. Strain hardening behavior
As seen from Fig. 6(a), the strain hardening of the present as-cast
Silafont®-36 alloy after yielding is pretty smooth and uniform, which
could be better characterized using hardening capacity, hardening
exponent, and hardening rate. The hardening capacity (Hc) can be
defined as the following normalized ratio between the UTS (σUTS)
and YS (σy) [67],
UTS y UTS
HC = = 1.
y y (4)
The evaluated hardening capacity as a function of strain rate for
the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy is shown in Fig. 6(c). It is seen that like
YS, UTS, and %EL in Fig. 6(b), the hardening capacity of this alloy is
also nearly independent of the applied strain rate. The hardening
capacity of this alloy is observed to be higher than several other Al
alloys (Table 2), except for A380 alloy [57]. This is likely due to the
lower YS of A380 alloy which leads to a higher dislocation storage
capacity during plastic deformation and hence a higher hardening

7
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
capacity, compared to Silafont®-36 alloy [67]. Similar results on a
weak strain-rate dependent hardening capacity were also reported
for magnesium alloys in [68,69].
Strain hardening behavior could further be characterized via
strain hardening exponent. Several equations related to the strain
hardening exponent have been proposed. The first equation pro­
posed by Ludwik [70] can be expressed as follows,
n1,
= y + K1
where n1 is the strain hardening exponent, K1 is the strength coef­
ficient that represents a strength increment corresponding to ε = 1, σy
is the yield strength, and σ and ε are the true stress and true strain,
respectively. A simplified equation proposed by Hollomon [71] is,
= K n,
where n is the strain hardening exponent and K is the strength
coefficient. Later, Swift [72] proposed the following modified
equation,
= KS ( + n
y ) S,
where nS and KS are strain hardening exponent and strength coef­
ficient, respectively, and εy is the yield strain. Afrin et al. [67] further
modified the strain hardening exponent related equation by con­
sidering net flow stress and net plastic strain of a material after
yielding as follows,
n* ,
y = K* ( y)
where n* is the strain hardening exponent and K* is the strength
coefficient which reflects a strength increment corresponding to
(ε – εy) = 1. Fig. 6(d) presents the strain hardening exponents
evaluated via the above four equations, using the identical set of
stress-strain data for each sample in the uniform plastic deformation
region in-between YS and UTS. It is seen that Ludwik’s equation
gives the highest strain hardening exponent, while Hollomon’s
equation gives the lowest. The equations by Afrin et al. and Swift lie
in-between the two strain hardening exponent values. Similar re­
sults on the relative positioning of these strain hardening exponent
values evaluated on the basis of Eqs. (5)–(8) were also reported in
[68,69]. These strain hardening exponent values do not vary much
with strain rate, hence it could also be concluded that the strain rate
sensitivity of the Silafont®-36 alloy is basically absent based on this
point, as in the case of AZ91D cast magnesium alloys [69]. As seen
from Fig. 2, the Silafont®-36 alloy consisted of heterogeneous mi­
crostructure with primary α-Al as the matrix phase, similar to the
microstructure in a ferrite-martensite dual-phase steel [73]. Mate­
rials with heterogeneous microstructures, also known as hetero-
structure materials, exhibit a strength-ductility synergy due to the
coordination deformation of hard and soft phases in the micro­
structures in different patterns [51,74], which involves the genera­
tion of geometrically necessary dislocations (GNDs) in the soft phase
in the vicinity of phase boundaries (Fig. 4(d)). Deformation in these
materials occurs in three stages, where the soft and hard phases
interact differently at different strains [51]. Strain hardening of
materials in the uniform plastic deformation region depends on the
density of dislocation. Dislocation strain field interactions result in
an increasing net flow stress of metals and are related in the form of
the following expression [68,75],
y ,
where ρ is the dislocation density inside the material. During plastic
deformation, there is an increase in the number of dislocations
stemming from the dislocation multiplication along with the for­
mation of new dislocations. This results in a decrease in the spacing
between the dislocations, thereby leading to repulsive interactions.
As a result, the motion of other dislocations becomes impeded and a
higher stress following Eq. (9) is required to continue deformation.
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
Extending this mechanism to a heterogeneous material, in order to
accommodate the strain difference between the softer phase (Al)
and the harder phase (eutectic Si), GNDs are generated making the
softer phase stronger and globally increasing the yield strength of
the material. Generation of back stress due to the presence of GNDs
results in an enhancement of the strength-ductility of these alloys.
Eq. (9) could be further modified as follows by including the terms of
dislocation density caused by statistically stored dislocations (ρS)
(5)
and GNDs (ρG) [51],
y S + G . (10)
The hardening effect due to the involvement of GND back-stress
has been coined as hetero-deformation induced (HDI) strengthening
(6) in the heterogeneous microstructures. Some recent studies on the
eutectic multi-principal elemental alloys (EMPEAs), nanocrystalline
and ultra-fine grained structured alloys have also shown the benefits
of designing the alloys based on heterogeneous micro­
structures [76–79].
(7)
3.6. Fractography
Typical fracture surfaces of the specimens tested at high and
low strain rates are shown in Fig. 7(a)–(d). The fractographs at
lower magnifications in Fig. 7(a) and (c) show crack initiation from
the specimen surface and typical crack flow/propagation patterns
(8)
that led to the fracture of the specimens. It is seen that strain rate
did not have a significant effect on the fracture surface char­
acteristics, corroborating the results shown in Fig. 6. Fig. 7(b) and
(d) shows a magnified view of crack propagation region boxed in
Fig. 7(a) and (c), respectively, where the Al–Si eutectic structure
and primary α-Al phase are visible. The eutectic structure exhibits
finer brittle-fracture facets arising from the broken Si particles,
whereas the primary α-Al phase shows more ductile character­
istics with tear ridges. Purcek et al. [80] described the underlying
mechanism of crack development in an as-cast Al–Si alloy
showing brittle fracture. Fig. 8(a) and (b) shows a cross-sectional
view of the fractured surface at different magnifications in order
to understand the underlying crack propagation mechanism. Since
Si particles are more brittle than the α-Al phase, the cracking oc­
curs easier at low strains. As the deformation progresses, stress
concentration occurs at the tip of the Si particles or between Si
particles and α-Al phase, resulting in the formation of a crack that
first propagates through the Si-rich eutectic structure area. Then
the crack grows into the primary α-Al phase with tear ridges
(Fig. 8(a)) until reaching its boundary adjacent to next eutectic
structure area, then gets into this eutectic structure to continue
propagation in the heterogeneous microstructures of the Sila­
font®-36 aluminum alloy (Fig. 2). Most of the eutectic Si particles
get fractured in the process and result in a river-bed like feature on
the fractographs. Such a quasi-periodic propagation mechanism in
the alternate microconstituents of relatively harder eutectic
structure regions and relatively softer primary α-Al regions, as
schematically shown Fig. 8(c), leads to the final failure of this alloy
under increasing tensile loading, with the fractured Si particles
creating some cleavage-like facets (Fig. 8(b)). A similar mechanism
was also observed by Jiang et al. [14], which led to superior duc­
tility in the Al–Si cast alloy. The fracture surface did not contain
(9)
any debris of Si or intermetallic particles, suggesting that the
formation of cracks due to voids around Si particles did not occur
in this alloy, as noted in [81,82]. Also, the AlFeMnSi particles could
be identified by EDS on the fracture surface, as characterized by
cleavage facets with hexagon-like shapes (Fig. 7(d)), corre­
sponding nicely to the Al9Fe0.84Mn2.16Si particles detected by the
earlier EDS and XRD analyses (Figs. 3 and 5). The superior strength
(YS = 169 MPa and UTS = 314 MPa, Table 2) along with 5–10%
8
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
Fig. 7. Typical fracture surfaces of the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy after the tensile tests at (a and b) a higher strain rate of 1 × 10−2 s−1, and (c and d) a lower strain rate of 1 × 10−5 s−1.
ductility obtained in the as-cast Silafont®-36 alloy can be attrib­
uted to the presence of such a heterogeneous composite-like
structure (Fig. 2) along with the formation of tear ridges in the
primary Al phase (Figs. 7 and 8).
4. Conclusions
1) The primary equiaxed α-Al grains and Al–Si eutectic structure
were present in a form of heterogeneous microstructures in the
HPDC Silafont®-36 cast aluminum alloy, with Sr-modified Si
particles exhibiting a coral-like network.
2) EBSD analysis showed the as-cast microstructure with random
orientations and the presence of Mg2Si phase along with alu­
minum and silicon. The local misorientations in the primary α-Al
grains was below 1°, suggesting strain-free grains along with
some extent of near-boundary residual strains arising from the
thermal mismatch between aluminum and silicon during cooling
from the eutectic temperature to room temperature like a par­
ticulate-reinforced metal matrix composite.
3) A superior combination of mechanical properties was attained,
including enhanced Young’s modulus and quality index due to
the unique heterogeneous microstructures and good bonding
between Si particles and aluminum matrix owing to high pres­
sure during casting. The addition of a proper amount of Mn and
Mg alloying elements along with a low Fe content helped achieve
a YS of 169 MPa, a UTS of 314 MPa and a %EL of 5–10% in the as-
cast condition.
4) This cast aluminum alloy exhibited a smooth deformation char­
acteristic with superior coordination deformation and high strain
hardening capacity. Strain hardening exponents determined
9
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
using the equations proposed by Ludwik, Hollomon, Swift and
Afrin et al., respectively, showed basically no effect of strain rate
in the applied range from 1 × 10−5 to 1 × 10−2 s−1.
5) Crack initiation was observed to occur from the sample surface
and crack propagated through the alternate microconstituents
of relatively harder eutectic structure and softer primary α-Al
phase.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
S.S. Dash: Methodology, Investigation, Data curation, Formal ana­
lysis, Validation, Writing - original draft. D.J. Li: Conceptualization,
Methodology, Resources, Writing - review & editing. X.Q. Zeng:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Funding acquisition. D.L.
Chen: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Writing
- review & editing.
Data availability
The raw/processed data required to reproduce these findings
cannot be shared at this time as the data also forms part of an on­
going study.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing fi­
nancial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
Fig. 8. (a and b) Cross-sectional fracture surfaces showing the crack and its propagation at different magnifications, and (c) schematic representation of crack propagation through
the heterogeneous primary and eutectic structures during tensile deformation of Silafont®-36 alloy.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51825101) in the form of
international research collaboration. D.J.L. and X.Q.Z. would like to
thank the National Key Research and Development Program (No.
2016YFB0101704) supported by the Ministry of Science and
Technology of China and the Shanghai Science and Technology
Committee (No. 18511109302). The authors would also like to thank
Messrs. S.M.A.K. Mohammed, A. Machin, and Q. Li for their assis­
tance and easy access to the laboratory facilities of Ryerson
University and their assistance in the experiments.
References
[1] Abraham A., Schultz R., Rakoto B., Murphy J., Ling L., Merta M., et al. 2020 North
America Light Vehicle Aluminum Content and Outlook: Final Report Summary.
2020.
[2] J.Y. Song, J.C. Park, B.H. Jeong, Y.S. Ahn, Fatigue behaviour of A356 aluminium
alloy for automotive wheels, Int J. Cast Met. Res. 25 (2012) 26–30, https://doi.
org/10.1179/1743133611Y.0000000009
[3] S.M.A.K. Mohammed, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng, D.L. Chen, Low-cycle fatigue behavior of a
newly developed cast aluminum alloy for automotive applications, Fatigue Fract.
Eng. Mater. Struct. 42 (2019) 1912–1926, https://doi.org/10.1111/ffe.13035
[4] W. Jiang, Z. Fan, D. Liu, D. Liao, X. Dong, X. Zong, Correlation of microstructure
with mechanical properties and fracture behavior of A356-T6 aluminum alloy
fabricated by expendable pattern shell casting with vacuum and low-pressure,
gravity casting and lost foam casting, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 560 (2013) 396–403,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2012.09.084
10
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
[5] A.R. Emami, S. Begum, D.L. Chen, T. Skszek, X.P. Niu, Y. Zhang, F. Gabbianelli,
Cyclic deformation behavior of a cast aluminum alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
516 (2009) 31–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2009.04.037
[6] Y.H. Zhang, C.Y. Ye, Y.P. Shen, W. Chang, D.H. StJohn, G. Wang, Q.J. Zhai, Grain
refinement of hypoeutectic Al-7wt%Si alloy induced by an Al-V-B master alloy,
J. Alloy. Compd. 812 (2020) 152022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.
152022
[7] X. Wu, H. Zhang, Z. Ma, T. Tao, J. Gui, W. Song, B. Yang, H. Zhang,
Interactions between Fe-rich intermetallics and Mg-Si phase in Al-7Si-xMg al­
loys, J. Alloy. Compd. 786 (2019) 205–214, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.
01.352
[8] W. Jiang, Z. Fan, X. Chen, B. Wang, H. Wu, Combined effects of mechanical vi­
bration and wall thickness on microstructure and mechanical properties of A356
aluminum alloy produced by expendable pattern shell casting, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
619 (2014) 228–237, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2014.09.102
[9] J. Zhu, W. Jiang, G. Li, F. Guan, Y. Yu, Z. Fan, Microstructure and mechanical
properties of SiCnp/Al6082 aluminum matrix composites prepared by squeeze
casting combined with stir casting, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 283 (2020) 116699,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.116699
[10] A. Zovi, F. Casarotto, Silafont-36, the low iron ductile die casting alloy develop­
ment and applications, Metall. Ital. 99 (2007) 33–38.
[11] Rheinhfelden, Primary Aluminium, Alloys for High Pressure Die Casting, CAR DS-
Mould Des, 2015, pp. 1–68.
[12] J.S. Shin, S.H. Ko, K.T. Kim, Development and characterization of low-silicon cast
aluminum alloys for thermal dissipation, J. Alloy. Compd. 644 (2015) 673–686,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2015.04.230
[13] X. Dong, H. Yang, X. Zhu, S. Ji, High strength and ductility aluminium alloy
processed by high pressure die casting, J. Alloy. Compd. 773 (2019) 86–96,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.09.260
[14] W. Jiang, Z. Fan, Y. Dai, C. Li, Effects of rare earth elements addition on micro­
structures, tensile properties and fractography of A357 alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
597 (2014) 237–244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2014.01.009
[15] M. Kalka, J. Adamiec, Complex procedure for the quantitative description of an
Al–Si cast alloy microstructure, Mater. Charact. 56 (2006) 373–378, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.matchar.2006.01.017
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
[16] Y. Lu, L.A. Godlewski, J.W. Zindel, A. Lee, Use of reactive nanostructured che­
micals for refinement of Si eutectic in an aluminum casting alloy, J. Mater. Sci.
54 (2019) 12818–12832, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-019-03799-9
[17] İ. Öztürk, G. Hapçı Ağaoğlu, E. Erzi, D. Dispinar, G. Orhan, Effects of strontium
addition on the microstructure and corrosion behavior of A356 aluminum alloy, J.
Alloy. Compd. 763 (2018) 384–391, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.05.341
[18] J. Wang, Z. Guo, J.L. Song, W.X. Hu, J.C. Li, S.M. Xiong, Morphology transition of
the primary silicon particles in a hypereutectic A390 alloy in high pressure die
casting, Sci. Rep. 7 (2017) 14994, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15223-w
[19] G.K. Sigworth, The modification of Al–Si casting alloys: important practical and
theoretical aspects, Int. J. Metalcasting 2 (2008) 19–40, https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF03355425
[20] M. Timpel, N. Wanderka, R. Schlesiger, T. Yamamoto, N. Lazarev, D. Isheim,
G. Schmitz, S. Matsumura, J. Banhart, The role of strontium in modifying alu­
minium-silicon alloys, Acta Mater. 60 (2012) 3920–3928, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.actamat.2012.03.031
[21] M. Zamani, S. Seifeddine, Determination of optimum Sr level for eutectic Si
modification in Al–Si cast alloys using thermal analysis and tensile properties,
Int J. Metalcasting 10 (2016) 457–465, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40962-016-
0032-8
[22] G. Asghar, L. Peng, P. Fu, L. Yuan, Y. Liu, Role of Mg2Si precipitates size in de­
termining the ductility of A357 cast alloy, Mater. Des. 186 (2020) 108280,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108280
[23] G. Sha, K. O’Reilly, B. Cantor, J. Worth, R. Hamerton, Growth related metastable
phase selection in a 6xxx series wrought Al alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 304–306
(2001) 612–616, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(00)01545-8
[24] E. Lee, B. Mishra, Effect of cooling rate on the mechanical properties of AA365
aluminum alloy heat-treated under T4, T5, and T6 conditions, Int J. Metalcasting
12 (2018) 449–456, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40962-017-0195-y
[25] E. Lee, B. Mishra, Effect of solidification cooling rate on mechanical properties
and microstructure of Al–Si-Mn-Mg alloy, Mater. Trans. 58 (2017) 1624–1627,
https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.M2017170
[26] Z. Yuan, Z. Guo, S. Xiong, Microstructure evolution of modified die-cast
AlSi10MnMg alloy during solution treatment and its effect on mechanical
properties, Trans. Nonferrous Met Soc. China 29 (2019) 919–930, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S1003-6326(19)65001-6
[27] E. Vandersluis, A. Lombardi, C. Ravindran, A. Bois-Brochu, F. Chiesa, R. MacKay,
Factors influencing thermal conductivity and mechanical properties in 319 Al
alloy cylinder heads, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 648 (2015) 401–411, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.msea.2015.09.091
[28] M. Zuo, D. Zhao, X. Teng, H. Geng, Z. Zhang, Effect of P and Sr complex mod­
ification on Si phase in hypereutectic Al-30Si alloys, Mater. Des. 47 (2013)
857–864, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.12.054
[29] Y.H. Cho, H.-C. Lee, K.H. Oh, A.K. Dahle, Effect of strontium and phosphorus on
eutectic Al–Si nucleation and formation of β-Al5FeSi in hypoeutectic Al–Si
foundry alloys, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 39 (2008) 2435–2448, https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11661-008-9580-8
[30] F. Casarotto, A.J. Franke, R. Franke, High-pressure die-cast (HPDC) aluminium
alloys for automotive applications. Adv Mater Automot Eng, 2012, 109–149,
https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857095466.109
[31] L. Hengcheng, S. Yu, S. Guoxiong, Restraining effect of strontium on the crys­
tallization of Mg 2Si phase during solidification in Al–Si-Mg casting alloys and
mechanisms, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 358 (2003) 164–170, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0921-5093(03)00276-4
[32] A. Assadiki, V.A. Esin, M. Bruno, R. Martinez, Stabilizing effect of alloying elements
on metastable phases in cast aluminum alloys by CALPHAD calculations, Comput.
Mater. Sci. 145 (2018) 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2017.12.056
[33] E. Mohammadi Mazraeshahi, B. Nami, S.M. Miresmaeili, S.M. Tabatabaei, Effect
of Si on the creep properties of AZ61 cast magnesium alloy, Mater. Des. 76 (2015)
64–70, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.03.021
[34] S. Qu, A. Feng, L. Geng, J. Shen, D. Chen, Silicon nitride whisker-reinforced alu­
minum matrix composites: twinning and precipitation behavior, Metals 10
(2020) 420, https://doi.org/10.3390/met10030420
[35] M. Shamanian, H. Mostaan, M. Safari, J.A. Szpunar, EBSD study on grain
boundary and microtexture evolutions during friction stir processing of A413
cast aluminum alloy, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 25 (2016) 2824–2835, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11665-016-2141-1
[36] S. Chankitmunkong, D.G. Eskin, C. Limmaneevichitr, Constitutive behavior of an
AA4032 piston alloy with Cu and Er additions upon high-temperature com­
pressive deformation, Met. Mater. Trans. A 51 (2020) 467–481, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11661-019-05482-9
[37] I.N.A. Oguocha, A.A. Tiamiyu, M. Rezaei, A.G. Odeshi, J.A. Szpunar, Experimental
investigation of the dynamic impact responses of as-cast and homogenized
A535 aluminum alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 771 (2020) 138536, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.msea.2019.138536
[38] P.L. Niu, W.Y. Li, A. Vairis, D.L. Chen, Cyclic deformation behavior of friction-stir-
welded dissimilar AA5083-to-AA2024 joints: effect of microstructure and
loading history, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 744 (2019) 145–153, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
msea.2018.12.014
[39] M.V. Glazoff, A. Khvan, V.S. Zolotorevsky, N.A. Belov, A. Dinsdale, Casting
Aluminum Alloys: Their Physical and Mechanical Metallurgy, Butterworth-
Heinemann, 2018.
[40] S. Roy, L.F. Allard, A. Rodriguez, T.R. Watkins, A. Shyam, Comparative evaluation
of cast aluminum alloys for automotive cylinder heads: part I-microstructure
evolution, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 48 (2017) 2529–2542, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11661-017-3985-1
11
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
[41] C. Li, Y. Wu, H. Li, X. Liu, Microstructural formation in hypereutectic Al-Mg2Si
with extra Si, J. Alloy. Compd. 477 (2009) 212–216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jallcom.2008.10.061
[42] S. Kores, M. Vončina, B. Kosec, J. Medved, Formation of AlFeSi phase in AlSi12
alloy with Ce addition, Metalurgija 51 (2012) 216–220.
[43] M.R. Jandaghi, H. Pouraliakbar, G. Khalaj, M.-J. Khalaj, A. Heidarzadeh, Study on
the post-rolling direction of severely plastic deformed aluminum-manganese-
silicon alloy, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 16 (2016) 876–887, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
acme.2016.06.005
[44] Q. Wang, H. Chen, Z. Zhu, P. Qiu, Y. Cui, A characterization of microstructure and
mechanical properties of A6N01S-T5 aluminum alloy hybrid fiber laser-MIG
welded joint, Int J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 86 (2016) 1375–1384, https://doi.org/10.
1007/s00170-015-8280-y
[45] M. Bauccio, ASM Engineered Materials Reference Book, CRC, 1994.
[46] S. Amirkhanlou, S. Ji, Casting lightweight stiff aluminum alloys: a review, Crit.
Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci. 45 (2020) 171–186, https://doi.org/10.1080/10408436.
2018.1549975
[47] F. Lasagni, H.P. Degischer, Enhanced Young’s Modulus of Al–Si alloys and re­
inforced matrices by co-continuous structures, J. Compos. Mater. 44 (2010)
739–755, https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998309347649
[48] M. Sahoo, R.W. Smith, Mechanical properties of unidirectionally solidified AI-Si
eutectic alloys, Met. Sci. 9 (1975) 217–222, https://doi.org/10.1179/
030634575790444874
[49] A. Mandal, M.M. Makhlouf. Improving Aluminum Casting Alloy and Process
Competitiveness. ACRC Rep 2007.
[50] P. Zhang, Z. Li, B. Liu, W. Ding, Tensile properties and deformation behaviors of a
new aluminum alloy for high pressure die casting, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 33
(2017) 367–378, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2016.02.013
[51] X. Wu, Y. Zhu, Heterogeneous materials: a new class of materials with un­
precedented mechanical properties, Mater. Res Lett. 5 (2017) 527–532, https://
doi.org/10.1080/21663831.2017.1343208
[52] X. Jiang, L. Zhang, L. Zhang, T. Huang, G. Wu, X. Huang, O.V. Mishin,
Heterogeneous microstructure and enhanced mechanical properties in annealed
multilayered IF steel, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 759 (2019) 262–271, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.msea.2019.05.034
[53] A. Hazrati, Multi-scale analysis of nonlinear fatigue damage behaviour of a quad-
core sandwich panel with heterogeneous aluminium sheets, Theor. Appl. Fract.
Mech. 99 (2019) 79–94, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2018.11.003
[54] Y. Jiao, Y. Zhang, S. Ma, D. Sang, Y. Zhang, J. Zhao, S. Wu, Y. Liu, S. Yang, Effects of
microstructural heterogeneity on fatigue properties of cast aluminum alloys, J.
Cent. South Univ. 27 (2020) 674–697, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-020-
4323-0
[55] Y.N. Zan, Y.T. Zhou, Z.Y. Liu, G.N. Ma, D. Wang, Q.Z. Wang, W.G. Wang, B.L. Xiao,
Z.Y. Ma, Enhancing strength and ductility synergy through heterogeneous
structure design in nanoscale Al2O3 particulate reinforced Al composites, Mater.
Des. 166 (2019) 107629, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107629
[56] J.R. Davis, et al., Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys, ASM international, 1993.
[57] Z. Hu, L. Wan, S. Wu, H. Wu, X. Liu, Microstructure and mechanical properties of
high strength die-casting Al-Mg-Si-Mn alloy, Mater. Des. 46 (2013) 451–456.
[58] M. Kutz, Handbook of Materials Selection, John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
[59] H. Liao, Y. Sun, G. Sun, Correlation between mechanical properties and amount
of dendritic α-Al phase in as-cast near-eutectic Al-11.6% Si alloys modified with
strontium, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 335 (2002) 62–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-
5093(01)01949-9
[60] X.P. Niu, B.H. Hu, I. Pinwill, H. Li, Vacuum assisted high pressure die casting of
aluminium alloys, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 105 (2000) 119–127, https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00545-8
[61] C.F. Ferrarini, C. Bolfarini, C.S. Kiminami, F.W.J. Botta, Microstructure and me­
chanical properties of spray deposited hypoeutectic Al–Si alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
375–377 (2004) 577–580, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2003.10.062
[62] M. Tiryakioğlu, J. Campbell, N.D. Alexopoulos, Quality indices for aluminum alloy
castings: a critical review, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 40 (2009) 802–811, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11663-009-9304-5
[63] A.M.A. Mohamed, A.M. Samuel, F.H. Samuel, H.W. Doty, Influence of additives on
the microstructure and tensile properties of near-eutectic Al-10.8%Si cast alloy,
Mater. Des. 30 (2009) 3943–3957, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.05.042
[64] E. Czekaj, J. Zych, Z. Kwak, A. Garbacz-Klempka, Quality index of the AlSi7Mg0.3
aluminium casting alloy depending on the heat treatment parameters, Arch.
Foundry Eng. 16 (2016) 25–28, https://doi.org/10.1515/afe-2016-0043
[65] F. Khomamizadeh, A. Ghasemi, Evaluation of quality index of A-356 aluminum
alloy by microstructural analysis, Sci. Iran. 11 (2004) 386–391.
[66] E. Erzi, O. Gursoy, C. Yuksel, M. Colak, D. Dispinar, Determination of acceptable
quality limit for casting of A356 aluminium alloy: supplier’s quality index (SQI),
Metals 9 (2019) 957, https://doi.org/10.3390/met9090957
[67] N. Afrin, D.L. Chen, X. Cao, M. Jahazi, Strain hardening behavior of a friction stir
welded magnesium alloy, Scr. Mater. 57 (2007) 1004–1007, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.scriptamat.2007.08.001
[68] S.M. Chowdhury, D.L. Chen, S.D. Bhole, X. Cao, E. Powidajko, D.C. Weckman,
Y. Zhou, Tensile properties and strain-hardening behavior of double-sided arc
welded and friction stir welded AZ31B magnesium alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527
(2010) 2951–2961, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2010.01.031
[69] N. Tahreen, D.L. Chen, M. Nouri, D.Y. Li, Effects of aluminum content and strain rate
on strain hardening behavior of cast magnesium alloys during compression, Mater.
Sci. Eng. A 594 (2014) 235–245, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2013.11.078
[70] P. Ludwik, Elemente der Technologischen Mechanik, Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
Berlin, Heidelberg, 1909, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-40293-1
S.S. Dash, D.J. Li, X.Q. Zeng et al.
[71] H. Hollomon, Tensile deformation, AIME Trans. (1945).
[72] H.W. Swift, Plastic instability under plane stress, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 1 (1952)
1–18, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(52)90002-1
[73] C. Ren, W. Dan, Y. Xu, W. Zhang, Effects of heterogeneous microstructures on the
strain hardening behaviors of ferrite-martensite dual phase steel, Metals 8
(2018) 824, https://doi.org/10.3390/met8100824
[74] P. Sathiyamoorthi, H.S. Kim, High-entropy alloys with heterogeneous micro­
structure: processing and mechanical properties, Prog. Mater. Sci. (2020)
100709, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2020.100709
[75] J.A. del Valle, F. Carreño, O.A. Ruano, Influence of texture and grain size on work
hardening and ductility in magnesium-based alloys processed by ECAP and
rolling, Acta Mater. 54 (2006) 4247–4259, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.
2006.05.018
[76] X. Wu, M. Yang, F. Yuan, G. Wu, Y. Wei, X. Huang, Y. Zhu, Heterogeneous lamella
structure unites ultrafine-grain strength with coarse-grain ductility, Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112 (2015) 14501–14505, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517193112
[77] T. Bhattacharjee, I.S. Wani, S. Sheikh, I.T. Clark, T. Okawa, S. Guo,
P.P. Bhattacharjee, N. Tsuji, Simultaneous strength-ductility enhancement of a
12
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159413
nano-lamellar AlCoCrFeNi2.1 eutectic high entropy alloy by cryo-rolling and
annealing, Sci. Rep. 8 (2018) 3276, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21385-y
[78] P. Shi, W. Ren, T. Zheng, Z. Ren, X. Hou, J. Peng, P. Hu, Y. Gao, Y. Zhong, P.K. Liaw,
Enhanced strength-ductility synergy in ultrafine-grained eutectic high-entropy
alloys by inheriting microstructural lamellae, Nat. Commun. 10 (2019) 489,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08460-2
[79] T. Xiong, S. Zheng, J. Pang, X. Ma, High-strength and high-ductility AlCoCrFeNi2.1
eutectic high-entropy alloy achieved via precipitation strengthening in a het­
erogeneous structure, Scr. Mater. 186 (2020) 336–340, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scriptamat.2020.04.035
[80] G. Purcek, O. Saray, O. Kul, Microstructural evolution and mechanical properties
of severely deformed Al-12Si casting alloy by equal-channel angular extrusion,
Met. Mater. Int. 16 (2010) 145–154, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12540-010-0145-1
[81] Z. Ma, A.M. Samuel, H.W. Doty, F.H. Samuel, On the fractography of impact-
tested samples of Al–Si alloys for automotive alloys, Fract. Mech. Patterns Behav.
(2016) 27–59.
[82] M.F. Hafiz, T. Kobayashi, A study on the microstructure -fracture behavior rela­
tions in Al–Si casting alloys, Scr. Metall. Mater. 30 (1994) 475–480.