Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
QUENCHING OF
ALUMINUM ALLOYS:
COOLING RATE, STRENGTH,
AND INTERGRANULAR CORROSION
Cooling time-temperature
data are not routinely
shown, and correlations of
cooling rate data, strength,
and intergranular corrosion
with either residual stress or
distortion are rarely
reported together. This
article addresses this issue.
Patricia Mariane Kavalco
and Lauralice C. F. Canale*
University of So Paulo
So Carlos, SP, Brazil
Aged
d
ole
co
w
o
Sl
Qu
en
ch
ed
Aged
At room temperature
After aging
Fig. 1 Schematic illustration of the solid diffusion processes that may occur during solution heat treatment
of aluminum.
25
200 Pm
(a)
200 Pm
(b)
480
425
Temperature, C
700
370
Predominantly intergranular
315
600
260
Predominantly pitting
205
150
0.1
500
10
Critical time, s
100
1000
Fig. 3 Curve indicating cooling rate dependent mechanism of corrosion attack on aluminum alloy 2024-T4
sheet.
26
IGC Control
The degree of IGC may be controlled by the selection of the temper
and maximizing the cooling rate that
will provide minimum distortion. For
example, the T4 and T6 temper conditions are typically selected when optimum resistance to IGC is required[15].
Schuler reported that the critical
cooling rates (cooling rates between
750 and 550F) for the 7xxx series to be
<400F/s and 1000F/s for the 2xxx se-
Concentration of
elements in particles
Grain A
Depleted zone
Noble particles
Grain B
Active particles
1. Measured in an aqueous solution of 53 g NaCl + 3 g water per liter at 25C. [The order of the EMF values in the table indicates the ability of a compound to reduce any compound metal below it. The values are reduction potentials. The D(Ag-Mg)
(Mg5Al8) compound at the top of the list has the most negative number, which indicates that it is the strongest reducing agent
in the series shown. The strongest oxidizing agent is silicon with the least negative (most positive) EMF potential.] Source: Ref 1.
27
that often in the industry, cooling behavior of various quench media is determined using an Inconel 600 probe
A
Grain direction
Sample ID
A
B
50
30
17
Location(a)
Surface
Center
Surface
Center
Surface
Center
Surface
Center
Depth of attack, mm
0.46
0.56
0.30
0.86
0.46
0.61
0.74
1.09
(a) Surface: within 3.2 mm of cylinder surface. Center: within 3.2 mm of centerline of the cylinder. Source: Ref 16.
(a)
(b)
800
Te
Ag 99.5
AlMgSiCu
Ts
200
ts AlMgSiCu
0
ts Ag 99.5
10
20
Immersion time, s
0
30
Conductance (G), %
Temperature (TZ), C
100
400
O
Ux Cp
where D is thermal diffusivity, Cp is specific heat capacity, O is thermal conductivity, and U is density of the material.
Tensi, et. al., compared cooling
curves recorded during quenching of
an aluminum (AlMgSiCu) and a silver
specimen (Ag 99.5) in a Type I watersoluble polymer quenchant solution.
The Type I aqueous polymer quenchant concentration was 10% by
volume and the bath temperature was
25C. The temperature of both probe
materials when quenched was 520C.
Both probes were cleaned with 600 grit
abrasive paper before each test. The
cooling curves obtained are shown in
Fig. 5.
300
Ag 99.5
AlMgSiCu
Te = Ts
D =
250
Ag 99.5
600
AlMgSiCu
200
150
100
50
0
200
400
600
Temperature (TZ), C
800
Fig. 5 Comparison of the cooling processes of a cylindrical AlMgSiCu probe (15 mm diam. 45 mm) with those of a silver probe; cooled into a 10% solution of a
water-soluble polymer at 25C (temperatures recorded at the geometric center of the probe); solution treating temperature is 520C for the AlMgSiCu probe; annealing
temperature is 800C for the silver probe; (a) changes in temperature and conductivity as a function of time; (b) cooling rate as a function of temperature.
28
(a)
(b)
600
Te
250
100
400
Ag 99.5
300
AlMgSiCu
200
100
AlMgSiCu
Conductance (G), %
Temperature (TZ), C
500
300
Ag 99.5
AlMgSiCu
200
150
100
50
Ag 99.5
0
5
10
Immersion time, s
15
200
400
Temperature (TZ), C
600
Fig. 6 Comparison of cooling processes of a cylindrical AlMgSiCu probe (15mm diam x 45mm) with those of a silver probe; probes quenched into distilled water at
25 (probe temperatures recorded at the geometric center); solution treating temperature is 520C for the AlMgSiCu probe; annealing temperature is 520C for the
silver probe; (a) changes in temperature and conductivity as a function of time; (b) cooling rate as a function of temperature.
Conclusions
An overview of the IGC process
was provided and contrasted to pitting corrosion. It was shown that the
propensity for IGC of heat treatable
aluminum alloys is cooling rate dependent. It is recommended that in
view of IGC processes in many applications such as aerospace and automotive, that IGC should be evaluated
along with strength and residual
stress/distortion as important and
more routine screening parameters
29
Donate by Phone.
www.asmfoundation.org
800-336-5152
Donate by Mail.
Chuck Hayes
Executive Director
Ext. 5506
Pergentina Deatherage
Program Administrator
Ext. 5533
Donate Today!
Traditional
Personal check for file
Ginny Shirk
Foundation Assistant
Ext. 5538
Donate Today!
Talk to a person
Friendly voice
Get answers
30