Is there room for any more
How AMAG CrossAlloy®.68 squeezes additional strength from 6xxx alloys and improves recycling
The youngest member of the AMAG CrossAlloy® family, CrossAlloy®.68, is a textbook example of the adaptation of material characteristics using thermomechanical processes and structural control. In the pursuit of recycling-friendly wrought aluminium alloys, a typical 6xxx alloy was supplemented with a high iron content, as is common in 8xxx alloys used for foil applications. The experiment provided some interesting observations.As we reported in AluReport 01/2023, a high volume fraction of iron-rich intermetallic phases can help to achieve a small grain size. Overall, the alloy has good cold work hardening rates, which indicates good deep drawing capacity. On the path to industrialization, a series of potentially recycling-friendly compositions were subjected to laboratory testing, focusing on industry-relevant processing parameters. This report is based on an article recently published in Acta Materialia [1].
Al-Mg-Si alloys (i.e. 6xxx alloys) form the basis of many heat-treatable wrought alloys and are used in a range of products due to their outstanding physical and chemical characteristics [2]. Formability and paint bake respone are hugely important for 6xxx sheets [3]. However, the low cold work hardening of Al-Mg-Si alloys, which is considerably poorer than that of non-heat-treatable Al-Mg alloys (5xxx), reduces its stretch formability [4,5].A high Fe content is typical for 8xxx foil alloys, which are primarily made from Al with Fe as the alloying element [7]. An important characteristic of Fe in 8xxx alloys is grain refinement, which is essential in foils in order to retain the material’s formability at low foil thicknesses [7-9]. A crossover approach aims to combine the positive characteristics of 6xxx alloys with the microstructure control provided by primary intermetallic phases (IMPs), which are important in foil materials. Given that the microstructure does not reflect the sum of the material’s mechanical properties, these structural optimizations should produce higher strength values as well as improved ductility despite the high proportion of iron-rich intermetallic phases. At low solidification rates, however, coarse and brittle IMPs form, which reports suggest can reduce ductility and negatively impact the formability of wrought alloys [2,10-12]. These coarse IMPs, and particularly those with an elongated morphology, are sites where damage typically occurs due to the formation of microcracks in particles or the loss of cohesion at the matrix - IMP interface [13,14].The variable composition of aluminium scrap and the introduction of impurities complicates recycling of aluminium. Fe presents a particular challenge as it is difficult to remove with metallurgical methods and gradually accumulates in wrought alloys when secondary aluminium is recycled [11,15].A number of strategies are used to control the morphology of iron-containing IMPs. Alloying elements such as manganese, which acts as an “Fe corrector”, can be used to suppress the formation of the elongated, needle-shaped β-AlFeSi-phase and promote the development of fine-branched α-AlFeSi [11,16,17]. Rapid solidification (> 10 K/s) also promotes the beneficial formation of a refined α-phase instead of β-AlFeSi, with a higher solidification rate required for a higher Fe content. [11,18]. Fe-rich IMPs can also be partially dissolved [19], fragmented [20,21] and converted into rounder shapes using heat treatments [7].
Alloy | Si [%] | Fe [%] | Mn [%] | Mg [%] | Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ref.6016 | 1,09 | 0,19 | 0,06 | 0,33 | Reference alloy |
0.8Fe0.1Mn1.5Si | 1,47 | 0,86 | 0,07 | 0,32 | ↑ Fe |
0.8Fe0.5Mn1.6Si | 1,60 | 0,87 | 0,52 | 0,34 | ↑ Fe ↑ Mn |
1.5Fe0.1Mn2.0Si | 1,98 | 1,55 | 0,10 | 0,31 | ↑↑ Fe |
This study shows that Fe-rich IMPs can be effectively deployed in thermomechanical processes to positively influence grain size and material properties. Even coarse IMPs that form during slow solidification can be sufficiently fragmented through conventional rolling and used to control microstructure development in Al-Mg-Si-Fe crossover alloys. This significantly improves the alloys’ capacity for cold work hardening while maintaining good hardening potential [1].
EN-AW 6016 containing 1.2% Si, 0.4% Mg, 0.2% Fe and 0.1% Mn - which served as a reference - was remelted with Mn, Fe and Si added to synthesize test alloys (figures in wt. %). The chemical compositions of the test alloys with a high IMP content are detailed in Table 1. In addition to Fe and Mn, the Si content was also deliberately increased to take account of the incorporation of Si in IMPs (AlFeSi phases) and ensure comparable precipitation hardening characteristics [1].Figure 1 shows BSE micrographs of the test alloys for fast and slow solidification rates. At fast cooling rates, the IMPs have a fine, lamellar structure similar to that of an α-AlFeSi eutectic network. This morphology indicates the α-Al(Fe,Mn)Si phase. At slow solidification rates, the primary iron-rich phases are much larger and have lamellar and elongated structures, indicating α-AlFeSi and β-AlFeSi phase [1].
Favorable α-AlFeSi is dominant over needle-shaped β-AlFeSi
Figure 2 shows the final morphology of the primary phases after solution heat treatment.Complete fragmentation of IMPs into fine particles (~1 μm for fast solidification, ~2 μm for slow solidification) was achieved for all alloys. During the rolling process, the particles are organized in rolling direction and create chain-like structures. The influence of manganese is evident in the 0.8Fe0.5Mn1.6Si alloy. In addition to the formation of dispersoids, Mn forms finer AlFeSi structures that can be fragmented into even smaller IMPs in the rolling process [1]. Figure 3 depicts the microstructure of the test alloys after solution annealing, as obtained by combined EBSD and EDX analysis. The grain colours represent the equivalent circle diameter (ECD) brighter colours (yellowish) indicate a greater ECD. By superimposing the EDX signal, the fragmented IMPs are shown in red. The mean ECD of the test alloys, which are completely recrystallized during solution annealing, is in the range of 8-12 μm. Thus, the microstructure was refined by a factor of 2 compared to the reference alloy 6016 (24 μm). The grain refinement in alloys featuring high Fe-content can be attributed to an enhanced nucleation rate during recrystallization due to particle stimulated nucleation (PSN). In the neighbourhood of IMPs a high dislocation density is formed during the rolling process, which acts as a favourable site for recrystallization nuclei. The chain-like arrangement of the primary phases in the rolling direction generates a grain size distribution with fine grains in high particle density areas and adjacent coarser grains, [1].
Figure 4 shows the stress-strain curves from the alloys’ tensile tests after 14 days of natural aging (T4) for both solidification conditions. The alloys show an attractive combination of strength and ductility as well as high cold work hardening. It is notable that ductility is not impaired by the high iron content, which indicates successful optimization of the microstructure by primary phase fragmentation. In addition to greater strength, the 0.8Fe0.5Mn1.6Si alloy for slow solidification also demonstrates higher cold work hardening and exceptionally high elongation to fracture, which highlights the alloy system’s significant potential for industrial use.
Successful particle fragmentation and microstructure modification throughout the examined range of compositions
As mentioned in the introduction to this report, age-hardening is particularly important during paint bake of 6xxx series alloys. For this reason, the alloys (slow solidification) were also subjected to a paint-bake simulation: pre-aging for 5 hours at 100°C → 11 days of natural aging → application of 2% plastic elongation → 3 days of natural curing → artificial aging for 20 minutes at 185°C. Table 2 summerizes the results ΔRp0.2 stands for the curing reaction of the paint-bake treatment compared to the condition after 14 days of natural aging (T4). These test alloys have pronounced artificial aging potential and mechanical properties that are very comparable with those of the 6016 reference alloy with a low Fe content [1]. The size and morphology of Fe-rich primary intermetallic phases can be effectively modified by casting conditions and, more importantly, through thermomechanical treatments. Furthermore, IMPs are used to achieve a finer-grained structure than the 6016 reference alloy. Both fine-branched IMPs (which form at fast solidifcation rates) and significantly coarser intermetallic AlFeSi phases (which form at slow hardening rates, comparable with those of industrial continuous casting) can be fragmented into fine particles. The age hardening potential of Al-Mg-Si alloys and the microstructure-controlling effect of primary intermetallic phases on processing in the context of foil materials were successfully combined with a crossover approach. This offers considerable potential to expand the properties of Al-Mg-Si alloys to include higher cold work hardening capacity and improvements in recyclability [1]. We have completed the first laboratory scale development phase and have now commenced industrialization. The first industrial-scale casting and rolling tests have been successful. We are now examining a wide spectrum of material characteristics of CrossAlloy®.68 to provide comprehensive data for interested customers.
Alloy | Yield strength Rp0,2 [MPa] | Tensile strength Rm [Mpa] | Uniform elongation Au [%] | Elongation at fracture A30 [%] | ΔRp0,2 [MPa] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reference 6016 | 218±1 | 276±2 | 14.6±0.3 | 19.2±1.2 | 108 |
0.8Fe0.1Mn1.5Si | 240±1 | 301±2 | 14.2±0.2 | 19.7±2.2 | 113 |
0.8Fe0.5Mn1.6Si | 254±1 | 317±1 | 14.5±0.3 | 20.0±0.4 | 106 |
1.5Fe0.1Mn2.0Si | 254±1 | 313±1 | 13.3±0.1 | 18.2±0.1 | 118 |
Benefits for customers
We have continuously expanded our knowledge of the novel CrossAlloy®.68 system, which combines attractive recycling potential with unique material characteristics. This enables us to offer our customers a number of benefits:
- Novel alloy concept ready for industrialization
- Recycling-friendly alloy with the potential to reduce CO2 emissions
- Potential to adjust unique combinations of characteristics to customers’ requirements by altering a series of compositions and controlling material microstructure
This report is based on a scientific article: “Processing and microstructure-property relations of Al-Mg-Si-Fe crossover alloys”, Acta Materialia 257 (2023) 119160, (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2023.119160) authored by B. Trink, I. Weissensteiner, P.J. Uggowitzer, K. Strobel, A. Roblyek, S. Pogatscher.
References
[1] B. Trink, I. Weißensteiner, P.J. Uggowitzer, K. Strobel, A. Hofer-Roblyek, S. Pogatscher, Acta Materialia 257 (2023) 119160.[2] F. Ostermann, Anwendungstechnologie Aluminium, 3rd ed., Springer Vieweg, Berlin, 2014.[3] R. Prillhofer, J. Berneder, G. Rank, H. Antrekowitsch, S. Pogatscher, P.J. Uggowitzer, in: J. Grandfield (Ed.), Light Metals 2014, Springer International Publishing; Imprint; Springer, Cham, 2016, pp. 227-232.[4] R.A. Antunes, M.C.L. de Oliveira, Materials & Design 63 (2014) 247-256.[5] F. Grabner, B. Gruber, C. Schlögl, C. Chimani, Aluminium Alloys - Their Physical and Mechanical Properties 941 (2018) 1397-1403.[6] B. Trink, I. Weißensteiner, P.J. Uggowitzer, K. Strobel, S. Pogatscher, Scripta Materialia 215 (2022) 114701.[7] M. Lentz, G. Laptyeva, O. Engler, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 660 (2016) 276-288.[8] L. Pan, K. Liu, F. Breton, X. -Grant Chen, J. of Materi Eng and Perform 25 (2016) 5201-5208.[9] O. Engler, J. Aegerter, D. Calmer, Materials Science and Engineering: A 775 (2020) 138965.[10] L.F. Mondolfo, Aluminium alloys: Structure and properties, Butterworth, London, Boston, 1979.[11] L. Zhang, J. Gao, L.N.W. Damoah, D.G. Robertson, Mineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review 33 (2012) 99-157.[12] D. Raabe, D. Ponge, P.J. Uggowitzer, M. Roscher, M. Paolantonio, C. Liu, H. Antrekowitsch, E. Kozeschnik, D. Seidmann, B. Gault, F. de Geuser, A. Deschamps, C. Hutchinson, C. Liu, Z. Li, P. Prangnell, J. Robson, P. Shanthraj, S. Vakili, C. Sinclair, L. Bourgeois, S. Pogatscher, Progress in Materials Science 128 (2022) 100947.[13] A. Bjurenstedt, E. Ghassemali, S. Seifeddine, A.K. Dahle, Materials Science and Engineering: A 756 (2019) 502-507.[14] D. Broek, Engineering Fracture Mechanics 5 (1973) 55-66.[15] J.A.S. Green, Aluminum Recycling and Processing for Energy Conservation and Sustainability, A S M International, Materials Park, 2007.[16] S. Ji, W. Yang, F. Gao, D. Watson, Z. Fan, Materials Science and Engineering: A 564 (2013) 130-139.[17] M.S. Remøe, K. Marthinsen, I. Westermann, K. Pedersen, J. Røyset, C. Marioara, Materials Science and Engineering: A 693 (2017) 60-72.[18] S. Belmares-Perales, Met. Mater. Int. 14 (2008) 307-314.[19] F. Alvarez-Antolin, J. Asensio-Lozano, A. Cofiño-Villar, A. Gonzalez-Pociño, Metals 10 (2020) 620.[20] N. Kuijpers, C.  , W, F. Vermolen, J, K. Vuik, S. van der Zwaag, Mater. Trans. 44 (2003) 1448-1456.[21] S.G. Shabestari, M. Ghanbari, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 508 (2010) 315-319.