Effective Degassing for Reduced Variability in High-Pressure Die Casting Performance

The reduced solubility of hydrogen in molten aluminium is believed to be a key factor influencing the formation of gas porosity, which adversely affects the mechanical properties. In this study, two crucibles of AlSi10MnMg alloy were degassed using conventional rotary degassing and high shear melt c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:JOM (1989) 2019-02, Vol.71 (2), p.824-830
Main Authors: Lordan, Ewan, Lazaro-Nebreda, Jaime, Zhang, Yijie, Fan, Zhongyun
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alloys
Aluminum
Bubbles
Casting
Chemistry/Food Science
Crucibles
Defects
Degassing
Die casting
Dies
Earth Sciences
Efficiency
Engineering
Environment
Gas formation
Hydrogen
Hydrogen storage
Mechanical properties
Microscopy
Physics
Pore size
Porosity
Pressure casting
Pressure die casting
Quasi-steady states
Scanning electron microscopy
Technical Article
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The reduced solubility of hydrogen in molten aluminium is believed to be a key factor influencing the formation of gas porosity, which adversely affects the mechanical properties. In this study, two crucibles of AlSi10MnMg alloy were degassed using conventional rotary degassing and high shear melt conditioning (HSMC) respectively and then cast into tensile specimens using the high-pressure die casting (HPDC) process. An optimal holding time of 10 min was established for both processing techniques corresponding to reduced density index (DI) and reduced variation in tensile performance. After rotary degassing, DI values were found to increase with increasing holding times, rising to 4.1% after 70 min. For HSMC, a quasi-steady state was observed with a maximum DI value of 1.4% after 190 min. The pore size in HPDC cast specimens was observed to be considerably lower after degassing with the HSMC device compared with rotary degassing.
ISSN:1047-4838
1543-1851
DOI:10.1007/s11837-018-3186-4