Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Abstract
Bonding of AlPb alloy strips and hot-dipped Al or Al2% Si steel sheets were carried out using hot rolling. The effects of addition of
2% Si to the bath, the dipping time, the thickness of the intermetallic layers and the fraction of the blank interfaces on the bonding strength
are investigated. In all case, two different kinds of interfaces are produced, hot-dip aluminized steel sheets and AlPb alloy strips are
bonded through the mechanism of blank and block interface bonding. The total bonding strength depends mainly on that of blank interface
and the fraction of the blank interfaces. The bonding strength of blank interfaces is four or five times as high as that of block interfaces.
There is a linear relationship between the bonding strength and the fraction of the blank interfaces. An EPMA linescan across the blank
interface reveals that higher concentration of aluminum in the transition layer of Fe and Al formed in the blank interface region for a dipped
specimen of Al2% Si than that for a dipped specimen of Al. # 2002 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.
Fig. 2. Photomicrographs of aluminized layers treated at 700 8C (for 2 min): (a) pure aluminum; (b) Al2% Si.
aluminum or AlSi alloy, respectively, whilst below it is the 3.2. The bonding strength
intermetallic compound layer adjacent to steel substrate. In
the case of a pure aluminum bath, the tongue-like layer of The variation in bonding strength with dipping time for
Fig. 2 is mainly composed of Z-phase (Fe2Al5). In the case AlPb alloyhot-dipped Al steel, Alhot-dipped Al steel and
of a melt containing 2% Si, the silicon renders the inner face AlPb alloyhot-dipped Al2% Si steel, is shown in Fig. 4.
of the intermetallic layer smoother, the intermetallic com- It is noted that the bonding strength for specimens dipped in
pound being mainly composed of Z-phase (Fe2(AlSi)5) Al2% Si is much higher than that for those dipped in
from the ternary FeAlSi system as given by Rivlin and aluminum, the bonding strength for all the hot-dipped Al and
Raynor [13], in which silicon atoms occupy the structural AlSi alloy increasing with dipping time up to 2 min, but
vacancies of the Fe2Al5 phase, affording good diffusion decreasing beyond 2 min. However, the dipping time has no
possibilities for aluminum atoms in the pure (binary) state, effect on the intermetallic structure and composition but
resulting in a slower solid state growth, as previously only affects its thickness in these experimental situations.
reported [14]. Thus, the relationship between bonding strength and inter-
It is observed clearly that the thickness of the intermetallic metallic thickness is more direct than that between bonding
layers decreases with the increase in Si content. The thick- strength and dipping time. Therefore, the variation in bond-
ness of the intermetallic layers is measured using a Nikon ing strength with the intermetallic thickness is plotted in
optical microscope, a parabolic relationship between thick- Fig. 5. It is observed that the bonding strength for both hot-
ness and dipping time as shown in Fig. 3 being obtained as dipped Al and AlSi alloys varies in the same pattern of
previously reported by others [12,15]. The thickness of the increase with increasing thickness of the intermetallic initi-
intermetallic layers increases with dipping time. ally until a certain thickness of the intermetallic layer is
Fig. 6. Microstructures of bonded interfaces: (a) longitudinal section photograph of AlPb alloyhot-dipped Al2% Si steel (OM); (b) longitudinal section
photograph of AlPb alloyhot-dipped Al steel (OM); (c) fractured interface on the hot-dipped Al steel side (SEM); (d) parallel blanks across the fractured
interface on the hot-dipped Al steel side (SEM).
34 J. An et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 120 (2002) 3036
of the latter. The fracture occurs along the weaker interface, lc lci (7)
i1
i.e. Al (or AlSi) layer/compound blocks and steel substrate
interface. Thus the fractured interface is composed of block where i is the individual intermetallic block or blank
interfaces between the Al (or AlSi) and compound blocks between the intermetallic blocks as shown in Fig. 7, and
and blank interfaces between the Al (or AlSi) and the steel n the total number of intermetallic blocks or blanks included
substrate. Based on the present observations, the position of
these interfaces mentioned above are as sketched in Fig. 7.
Obviously the total bonding strength depends on that of
these two different parts of the fractured interfaces, i.e. the
blank interfacial bonding strength and the block interfacial
strength. The stronger one will affect the total strength
considerably. The total bonding strength can be represented
with two different kinds of interface strength as the follow-
ing equation:
F Fb Kb Fc Kc (1)
Fig. 10. Microprobe traces of Al and Fe across the blank interface: (a) AlPb alloyhot-dipped Al2% Si steel; (b) AlPb alloyhot-dipped Al steel.
in the length of l. In this experimental situation, considering aluminum steel sheets. Thus the total bonding strength owes
the feasibility and precision of the experimental data of lb a lot to the bonding strength of the blank interfaces and the
and lc, n is selected as 20. fraction of the blank interfaces.
Fig. 8 shows that for hot-dipped aluminum and hot-dipped Electron microscopy and microprobe analyses in Fig. 10
Al2% Si specimens, the fraction of blank interfaces reveal that there is not an evident transition layer of Fe and
increases with the intermetallic layer thickness up to 73 Al in the blank interface region for bonded specimens
and 15 mm, respectively, but decreases beyond 73 and dipped in pure aluminum, while a 5 mm transition layer
15 mm, respectively. The total bonding strength can also of Fe and Al forms in the blank interface region for those
be represented as the following equation: dipped in Al2% Si alloy, and along with a higher concen-
tration of aluminum. This may be the reason why the
F Fb Fc Kb Fc (8)
interfacial bonding strength increases; the presence of Si
There should be a linear relationship between F and Kb, and increases the diffusion coefficient and the rate of Al diffu-
F should increase with an increase of Kb. The variation in sion into the steel substrate during annealing at 400 8C.
bonding strength with the fraction of blank interfaces for
both AlPb alloy and Alhot-dipped aluminum steel sheets,
and AlPb alloyhot-dipped AlSi steel sheets, is shown in 4. Conclusions
Fig. 9. The data points are a perfect linear fit. The values of
Fb and Fc can be obtained from the ordinate in Fig. 6, as the 1. Under a given reduction, the bonding strength for both
values of Kb are 0 and 1; the values of Kb being 0 or 1 means specimens dipped in aluminum and in Al2% Si melt
that the bonded interface consists entirely of block interfaces baths increases with the thickness of intermetallic
or blank interfaces. Fb and Fc are found to be 876.93 and compound layer up to 73 and 15 mm respectively,
201.04 N for hot-dipped aluminum steel sheets, and 1492.29 beyond which it decreases.
and 258.85 N for hot-dipped Al2% Si steel sheets, respec- 2. The bonding of AlPb bearing alloy strips and hot-dip
tively, indicating that the bonding strength of the blank aluminized steel sheets by hot rolling is through a
interfaces is four or five times as high as that of the block mechanism, where during rolling the intermetallic
interfaces on the top of the intermetallic. The bonding compound breaks into blocks, and between them form
strength of the blank interfaces for hot-dipped Al2% Si blanks. Thus AlPb alloy strips are bonded with an Al or
steel sheets is significantly higher than for hot-dipped AlSi top-coat layer, and part of Al or AlSi top-coat
36 J. An et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 120 (2002) 3036