ravity Die Casting based analysis of aluminum alloy with AC4B Nano-composite

Materials Today: Proceedings 33 (2020) 2555–2558
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr
Gravity Die Casting based analysis of aluminum alloy with AC4B
Nano-composite
T. Sathish a,⇑, S. Karthick b
a
b
Saveetha School of Engineering, SIMATS, Chennai - 602 105, Tamil Nadu, India
Research & Development, Apporya Technologies, Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu, India
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 29 November 2019
Accepted 11 December 2019
Available online 16 January 2020
Keywords:
Aluminum alloys
Scanning electron microscope
Gravity Die Casting
B4C
Nano-composite
a b s t r a c t
The main aim of manufacturers is to cast the aluminum alloys without any defects. Hence, in this work
we present the casting of aluminum alloy LM25 to manufacture intricate automobile components and
compared it with AC4B Nano-composite Alloy through the process of Gravity Die Casting. The mechanical
properties of these alloys are characterized by implementing tensile test, hardness test and compressive
test. The Scanning Electron Microscope is used further to test the microstructure investigations. The
quantitative results of microstructural study shows the presence of grain refinement, uniform distribution and less number of pores in nano-composite specimen. Further, the addition of B4C Nanocomposite in the aluminum alloys increases the mechanical properties like yield strength, hardness
and ultimate strength. Such improvement in mechanical properties is due to the usage of particle size
and fabrication process.
Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Nanotechnology: Ideas, Innovation and Industries.
1. Introduction
Metal matrix composites is an innovation in advanced material
development that finds its application in the field of aerospace,
marine and automobiles [1]. In recent past, the Metal Matrix Composites formed using aluminum draws the attention of researchers
to change its metallurgical, physical and mechanical properties by
altering the phases of filler [2]. The metal matrix composites has
two components, where the initial components is matrix or continuous phase and the second component is discontinuous phase [3].
The former component has magnesium and aluminium, and the
later components has whiskers, fibers or fillers or particles called
reinforcement [4]. To meet the demand and to reduce the production cost, [5] the aluminum alloys are used in main phase and reinforcement materials are used in filler phase, since it has isotropic
properties [6].
The addition of reinforcement with aluminum increases the
strength with higher strength matrices [7]. The aluminum alloy
LM25 is used to increase the strength of a material [8]. It provides
higher resistance against corrosion and weldability [9]. It provides
⇑ Corresponding author.
good mould and casting characteristics. It is used in various applications like food, automobiles and marine [10].
This aluminum based metal matrix composites is reinforced
with various carbides, oxides, nitrides and borides [11]. The second
phase material is selected based on size, type and shape of these
material [12]. The AC4B Nano-composite [13] is used as matrix
alloy due to its low density and hardness, which is lesser than
Boron Carbide [14]. It also possess improved chemical inertness
and thermal stability, [15] which acts as a strengthening agent
for aluminum composites [16]. The reinforcement of aluminum
with matrix alloy requires better sophisticated technique for
proper distribution, since it has poor wettability [17]. Increasing
the wettability of ceramic particles improves the melting behavior
of aluminum [18]. This is usually done by coating it with wettability salts [19]. The effect of reinforcing Al with AC4B Nanocomposite has higher tensile properties than Al-B4C [20].
Conventional methods uses stir casting to melt the aluminum
with matrix alloys that leads to micro porosities, reinforcement
particle segregation and poor adhesion [21]. To achieve this we
use casting process, [22] which is an attractive process that provides wide material selection and processing [23]. This is usually
done using gravity die-casting process (Fig. 1), [24] where the
casting quality is improves the mechanical properties through
E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Sathish).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.12.084
2214-7853/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Nanotechnology: Ideas, Innovation and Industries.
2556
T. Sathish, S. Karthick / Materials Today: Proceedings 33 (2020) 2555–2558
2.1.1. Aluminum alloy (LM25)
The tensile properties of LM25 at elevated temperatures is
influenced mainly by the heat reaction condition of the gravity
die casting [38]. The alloy after heat treatment has higher resistance against attack either by marine atmosphere or salt water
[39]. Hence, it is considered to exhibit better machining properties
[40].
2.1.2. Aluminum oxide (or) alumina
The Al2O3 is formed of a chemical mixture of oxygen and aluminum and this is said to exhibits high thermal conducting using
its ceramic properties [41]. The hardness properties of Al2O3
increases the hardness properties, [42] which is used for abrasive
and can be used as cutting tool [43]. The properties of Al2O3 Compositions is given in Table.1 [44].
2.2. Properties of metals and matrix material
Fig. 1. Gravity Die Casting Machine.
solidification [25]. This process increases the characteristics of diecasting of Al alloys [26].
In this paper, we propose casting of aluminum alloy LM25 to
manufacture intricate automobile components and compared it
with AC4B Nano-composite Alloy through the process of Gravity
Die Casting [27]. The mechanical properties of these alloys are
characterized by implementing tensile test, hardness test and compressive test [28]. The Scanning Electron Microscope is used further to test the microstructure investigations.
2. Experimental procedure
The present work reinforces aluminum (Fig. 2(a)) with AC4B
nano-composite (Fig. 2(b)) with a density of 2.66 g/cm3 [29]. The
reinforcement nano-composite particles possess good fluidity with
excellent pressure tightness, [30] good hot tear resistance, [31]
good machinability, [32] high corrosion resistance, [33] good castability, [34] and high specific strength [35]. It further provides various other properties like high strength, low density, neutron
absorption capability, good chemical stability, extremely high
hardness and chemical composition, where the chemical composition analysis was carried out using optical emission spectrometer
[36].
The Al alloys are melted in furnace with crucible dish made of
graphite. At the time of charging, the melting losses are considered by the furnace [45]. The test rachlotne structure is used to
degasificate the molten alloy [46]. The motel metal is now
allowed to cool below its melting point to convert it from molten
state to solid state [47]. Then the liquid melt is added with preheated (400 °C) matrix material [48]. Manual stirring of molten
alumina (Al2O3) and B4C takes place in the crucible dish and it
is thoroughly stirred [49]. After the stirring process, the semisolid molten metal is reheated to liquid state inside the furnace
and then automatic stirring takes place in the material about 10
times at the speed of 550 rpm, which uniformly distributes the
additives [50]. The grain size refinement is affirmed by linear
intercept method to be in transverse nature and its SEM analysis
result is given in Fig. 2.
The ultimate tensile strength, yield strength, percentage elongation is given in Fig. 3. As the alloy density level increases, the
strength of the material increases, as both the parameters are
directly proportional to each other.
Table 1
Properties of Al2O3 Compositions.
2.1. Material composition
The materials alloy used in the present study are LM25 aluminum alloy and AC4B nano-composite particles [37].
Fig. 2. SEM analysis (a) LM25; (b) AC4B.
Properties
Al2O3
Theoretical density
Thermal expansion
Thermal conductivity (298 K)
Grain size
Flexural strength
Young’s modulus
Fracture toughness (KIC)
Hardness
Fracture threshold (KI0)
3.98 g/cm3
9.8106/°C
36 W/mK
1.7 lm
630 MPa
407 GPa
p
3.2 MPa m
20 GPa
p
2.4 MPa m
T. Sathish, S. Karthick / Materials Today: Proceedings 33 (2020) 2555–2558
2557
3. Results and discussion
The results of various structural parameters like metallurgical
structure, hardness test, tensile strength, and elongation are analysis in for the proposed composite. The results of which is given
below:
3.1. Metallurgy structure
In microstructural analysis, the most important element is the
grain size that plays a major role in metallurgical structure.
The gravity die casting microstructure LM25 alloy sample is shown
in Fig. 4 and gravity die casting microstructure AC4B nanocomposite alloy is shown in Fig. 5. The size of the structure of
grains are desirable that leads to improvement of tear resistance,
mechanical properties and pressure tightness. In LM25 alloys, the
grains are packed loosely using Scanning Electron Microscope
(SEM). The grains that are loosely packets leads to shrinkage
defects or porosity.
The aluminum alloy (AC4B) has 3–5% grains and that acts as a
grain refiners in order to grow more. The C4B in AC4B alloy enables
the grains to closely occur with each other in the form of a refiner,
which is given below:
Fig. 4. Metallurgical structure of LM25.
Al þ C4B ! a - Al alloy solid solution
The availability of defects is not seen in AC4B alloy due to good
grain structure and closed packet grains. The LM25 alloy performs
with lesser optimal mechanical properties than AC4B alloy. The
porosity seen in the microstructure is not seen in the alloy surface,
which is located in minimal quantity at the time of gravity die
casting.
Additionally, the yield strength in nano-composite material
increases and this is examined through SEM. Further, the ultimate
strength increases with the addition of C4B through the
microstructure analysis. The results obtained from the Ultimate
tensile strength, Yield strength, elongation is given in Table 2.
The samples are tested using Brinell hardness test. This test
uses a ball shaped indenter, which is made of hardened tungsten
with a diameter of 5 mm and applied load is given as 250 Kef.
The result shows that AC4B alloy has maximum hardness in all
trails. Increasing the hardness with C4B samples, 5% volume composite content of C4B performs minor hardness than sample of 2%
volume. This is due to existence of porous region with high level of
C4B.
The percentage of elongation measures the ability of a compound to expand its breaking point. The proposed method uses
measures the elongation of LM25 and this is lesser than grain
Fig. 5. Metallurgical structure of AC4B.
refinement and ductile property [51]. The C4B nanocomposite is
then tested and it confirms the LM25 addition with C4B nanocomposite for improving the elongation property. The bonding element
Fig. 3. Strength Analysis (a) Ultimate Tensile Strength; (b) Yield Strength.
2558
T. Sathish, S. Karthick / Materials Today: Proceedings 33 (2020) 2555–2558
Table 2
Tensile Strength Parameter.
Test Parameters
Aluminum
Alloy (LM25)
Nano Composite
Particle (AC4B)
Ultimate Tensile strength
Yield Strength
Elongation
281
220
6
286
222
2.5
between the LM25 alloys is not broken by stir casting. Additionally,
the electromagnetic bonding in C4B increases the percentage of
elongation and C4B during this time acts as an elastic component
with Al. The proposed design is tested finally in a 3 point flexural
testing machine in order to measure the flexural test and this is
tested against ASTM:E290 Standard with the cut specimen. The
result shows that proposed design performs well than LM25.
4. Conclusion
In this paper we reinforce AC4B nanocomposite in aluminum
alloy LM25, which is fabricated using AC4B through the process
of Gravity Die Casting. The study visualizes the changes associated
with alloys at each stage and the values of ultimate tensile
strength, yield strength and hardness is noted. It is seen that the
present study significantly improves the mechanical properties of
aluminum alloy LM25 due to reinforcement of AC4B nanocomposite. There are other tests carried out to check the possible extent of
enhancement in LM25 mechanical properties. The results shows
that proposed nanocomposites obtained improved enhancement
in its mechanical properties. In future, the LM25 alloy can be reinforced with polymer nanocomposites and its mechanical strength
can be tested.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] B. Radha Krishnan, V. Vijayan, T. Parameshwaran Pillai, T. Sathish, Trans.
Canadian Soc. Mech. Eng. 43 (2019) 509–514.
[2] G.K. Nagesha, V. Dhinakaran, M. Varsha Shree, K.P. Manoj Kumar, Damodar
Chalawadi, T. Sathish, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 916–919, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matpr.2019.08.158.
[3] K. Gurusami, D. Chandramohan, S. Dinesh Kumar, M. Dhanashekar, T. Sathish,
Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 981–987, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matpr.2019.09.141.
[4] Krishnaswamy Haribabu, Muthukrishnan Sivaprakash, Thanikodi Sathish,
Arockiaraj Godwin Antony, Venkatraman Vijayan, Thermal Sci. (2019),
https://doi.org/10.2298/TSCI190409397K.
[5] M. Dhanashekar, P. Loganathan, S. Ayyanar, S.R. Mohan, T. Sathish, Mater. Today
Proc. 21 (2020) 1008–1012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.10.052.
[6] M. Swapna Sai, V. Dhinakaran, K.P. Manoj Kumar, V. Rajkumar, B. Stalin, T.
Sathish, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 948–953, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matpr.2019.09.027.
[7] Muthukrishnan Sivaprakash, Krishnaswamy Haribabu, Thanikodi Sathish,
Sundaresan Dinesh, Venkatraman Vijayan, Thermal Sci. (2019), https://doi.
org/10.2298/TSCI190419398M.
[8] K. Muthukumar, R.V. Sabariraj, S. Dinesh Kumar, T. Sathish, Mater. Today Proc.
21 (2020) 976–980, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.09.140.
[9] R. Praveen Kumar, P. Periyasamy, S. Rangarajan, T. Sathish, Mater. Today Proc.
21 (2020) 504–510, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.06.646.
[10] S. Dinesh Kumar, D. Chandramohan, K. Purushothaman, T. Sathish, Mater.
Today Proc. 21 (2020) 876–881, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.07.710.
[11] S. Dinesh Kumar, K. Purushothaman, D. Chandramohan, M. Mohinish
Dushyantraj, T. Sathish, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 263–267, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.05.426.
[12] S. Karthick, S. Perumal Sankar, T. Raja Prathab. In 2018 International
Conference on Emerging Trends and Innovations in Engineering And
Technological Research (ICETIETR), (2018) 1–7.
[13] S.P. Palaniappan, K. Muthukumar, R.V. Sabariraj, S. Dinesh Kumar, T. Sathish,
Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 1013–1021, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matpr.2019.10.053.
[14] T. Adithiyaa, D. Chandramohan, T. Sathish, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 1000–
1007, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.10.051.
[15] T. Adithiyaa, D. Chandramohan, T. Sathish, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 882–
886, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.07.711.
[16] T. Sathish, A. Muthulakshmanan, Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 8 (2018)
1119–1126.
[17] T. Sathish, J. Jayaprakash, Int. J. Mech. Mechatron. Eng. IJMME-IJENS 15 (2015)
59–67.
[18] T. Sathish, D. Chandramohan, Int. J. Recent Technol. Eng. 7 (2019) 291–293.
[19] T. Sathish, Int. J. Ambient Energy (2019), https://doi.org/10.1080/
01430750.2019.1608861.
[20] T. Sathish, J. Jayaprakash, Int. J. Logistics Systems Manage. 26 (2017).
[21] T. Sathish, J. Jayaprakash, Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 7 (2017) 551–560.
[22] T. Sathish, J. Jayaprakash, P.V. Senthil, R. Saravanan, FME Trans. 45 (2017) 172–
180.
[23] T. Sathish, J. Mater. Res. Technol. 8 (2019) 4354–4363.
[24] T. Sathish, K. Muthukumar, B. Palani Kumar, Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 8
(2018) 1515–1535.
[25] T. Sathish, M.D. Vijayakumar, A. Krishnan Ayyangar, Mater. Today Proc. 5
(2018) 14489–14498.
[26] T. Sathish, Mater. Today. Proc. 5 (2018) 14416–14422.
[27] T. Sathish, Mater. Today. Proc. 5 (2018) 14448–14457.
[28] T. Sathish, Mater. Today. Proc. 5 (2018) 14545–14552.
[29] T. Sathish, P. Periyasamy, Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 13 (2019) 1–6.
[30] T. Sathish, P. Periyasamy, Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. (2018) 165–178.
[31] T. Sathish, Prog. Ind. Ecol. 12 (2018) 112–119.
[32] T. Sathish, S. Dinesh Kumar, K. Muthukumar, S. Karthick, Mater. Today Proc. 21
(2020) 847–856, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.07.601.
[33] T. Sathish, S. Dinesh Kumar, K. Muthukumar, S. Karthick, Mater. Today Proc. 21
(2020) 843–846, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.07.600.
[34] T. Sathish, S. Dinesh Kumar, S. Karthick, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 971–975,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.09.139.
[35] T. Sathish, S. Rangarajan, A. Muthuram, R. Praveen Kumar, Mater. Today Proc.,
Elsevier
Publisher
21
(2020)
108–112,
https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matpr.2019.05.371.
[36] T. Sathish, S. Saravanan, V. Vijayan, Mater. Res. Innovations (2019), https://doi.
org/10.1080/14328917.2019.1614321.
[37] T. Sathish, Trans. Canadian Soc. Mech. Eng. 43 (2019) 551–559.
[38] T. Sathish, Int. J. Ambient Energy 39 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1080/
01430750.2018.1492456.
[39] T. Sathish, J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 10 (2017) 41–50.
[40] T. Sathish, J. New Mater. Electrochem. Syst. 20 (2017) 161–167.
[41] T. Sathish, Lecture Notes Mech. Eng. (2019) 391–397, https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-981-13-6374-0_45.
[42] T. Sathish, Lecture Notes Mech. Eng. – Springer (2019) 391–397, https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-981-13-6374-0_45.
[43] T. Sathish, A. Muthulakshmanan, J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 11 (2018) 39–44.
[44] T. Sathish, P. Periyasamy, D. Chandramohan, N. Nagabhooshanam, Int. J. Mech.
Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. (2018) 711–716.
[45] T. Sathish, P. Periyasamy, D. Chandramohan, N. Nagabhooshanam, Int. J. Mech.
Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 2018 (2018) 705–710.
[46] T. Sathish, V. Mohanavel, J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 11 (2018) 31–37.
[47] V. Dhinakaran, J. Ajith, A. Fathima Yasin Fahmidha, T. Jagadeesha, T. Sathish, B.
Stalin, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 920–925, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matpr.2019.08.159.
[48] V. Dhinakaran, M. Varsha Shree, T. Jagadeesha, P.M. Bupathi Ram, T. Sathish, B.
Stalin, Mater. Today Proc. 21 (2020) 908–911, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.matpr.2019.08.079.
[49] V. Mohanavel, M. Ravichandran, T. Sathish, S. Suresh Kumar, M.M. Ravikumar,
S. Mahendiran, L. Yeshwanth Nathan, J. Balkan Tribol. Assoc. 25 (2019) 342–
352.
[50] V. Mohanavel, S. Suresh Kumar, T. Sathish, T. Adithiyaa, K. Mariyappan, Mater.
Today Proc. 5 (2018) 26860–26865.
[51] V. Mohanavel, S. Suresh Kumar, T. Sathish, K.T. Anand, Mater. Today: Proc. 5
(2018) 13601–13605.