The present invention relates to aluminum casting alloys that are suitable for automotive applications. Specifically, the present invention relates to Al—Si—Mg casting alloys having a crash performance that is suitable for automotive applications.
Aluminum alloys are highly desirable for vehicle frame construction because they offer low density, good strength and corrosion resistance. Moreover, aluminum alloys can be employed to improve vehicle frame stiffness and performance characteristics. Moreover, it is believed that an aluminum vehicle frame retains the strength and crashworthiness that is typically associated with much heavier, conventional steel frame vehicle designs.
An important consideration for aluminum automotive body structures includes crashworthiness in conjunction with reducing the overall vehicle weight and/or improving vehicle performance. For the automotive applications, crashworthiness reflects the ability of a vehicle to sustain some amount of collision impact without incurring unacceptable distortion of the passenger compartment or undue deceleration of the occupants. Upon impact, the structure should deform in a prescribed manner; the energy of deformation absorbed by the structure should balance the kinetic energy of impact; the integrity of the passenger compartment should be maintained; and the primary structure should crush in such a manner as to minimize the occupant deceleration.
The demand for higher crash performance of automotive aluminum cast components has greatly increased, particularly with respect to body structures, including but not limited to: brackets, nodes (e.g. A-Post, B-Post, C-Post, etc.), crashboxes, crossmembers, subframes, and engine cradles; etc. However, the most common aluminum cast alloy, A356 has poor crushability even in T6 temper. One characterization of crashworthiness is critical fracture strain (CFS) as developed by Yeh. See J. R. Yeh, “The Development of an Aluminum Failure Model for Crashworthiness Design”, Report No. 99-016, 1999-03-11. The critical fracture strain (CFS) or A356-T6 is approximately 5-6%. Typically, the critical fracture strain (CFS) required for a crash sensitive components and applications is on the order of 10% or greater.
Therefore, a new alloy and heat treatment are needed for producing cast components with a balanced strength and crashworthiness.
The present invention provides an Al—Si—Mg base alloy suitable for gravity or low pressure permanent mold, high pressure die casting, or sand mold casting, having a tensile strength and critical fracture strain (CFS) suitable for automotive applications, including but not limited to frame components.
In one embodiment, the invention comprises of an inventive Al—Si—Mg base alloy for gravity or low pressure permanent mold, high pressure die casting, sand mold casting or like casting processes, wherein a casting produced by the inventive Al—Si—Mg alloy is suitable for F, T5 or T6 tempers in achieving a yield strength ranging from approximately 100 MPa to approximately 180 MPa, an elongation ranging from 10% to 20%, and a critical fracture strain (CFS) of at least 10%. Broadly, the composition of the Al—Si—Mg alloy of the present invention consists essentially of:
about 6.0 wt % to about 8.0 wt % Si;
about 0.12 wt % to about 0.25 wt % Mg;
less than or equal to about 0.35 wt % Cu;
less than or equal to about 4.0 wt % Zn;
less than or equal to about 0.6 wt % Mn;
less than or equal to about 0.15 wt % Fe; and
a balance of aluminum and impurities.
In one embodiment of the present invention, an Al—Si—Mg alloy is provided for Vacuum Riserless Casting (VRC)/Pressure Riserless Casting (PRC), permanent mold or sand mold casting comprising from about 6.5 wt % to about 7.5 wt % Si; from about 0.12 wt % to about 0.20 wt % Mg; less than about 0.15 wt % Mn, preferably being less than about 0.05 wt % Mn; and less than about 0.10 wt % Fe, wherein the balance comprises Al and impurities.
In another embodiment of the present invention, an Al—Si—Mg alloy is provided for high pressure die casting or Alcoa Vacuum Die Casting (AVDC) and comprises from about 6.5 wt % to about 7.5 wt % Si; from about 0.12 wt % to about 0.20 wt % Mg; from about 0.5 wt % to about 0.6 wt % Mn; and Fe less than 0.10 wt %, wherein the balance comprises Al and impurities. The increased Mn content reduces soldering of the mold during the casting process, wherein the Mn content reduces the tendency of the casting to stick to the mold.
In one preferred embodiment, the Si content ranges from 6.5 wt. % to 7.5 wt. % and the Mg content ranges from about 0.12 wt. % to about 0.19 wt. %.
In another aspect of the present invention, a process incorporating the inventive Al—Si—Mg alloy composition produces a casting having a tensile strength comparable to A356 and having a critical fracture strain (CFS) greater than A356, when cast and treated to a T5 or T6 temper. A356 typically has a composition of Al-7Si-0.35Mg, and when heat treated to a T5 or T6 temper has a tensile yield strength (TYS) ranging from 190 MPa to 240 MPa and a critical fracture strain (CFS) ranging from 5% to 6%.
This alloy heat treatment of the inventive process depends on the range of performance targeted, and covers natural aging, T4, T5, T6 and T7.
The casting complexity allows the shape of the product to reach the stiffness target performance that is comparable to or higher than that of existing steel design.
The present invention provides a casting alloy composition having a balanced strength and crashworthiness for automotive castings. Broadly, the inventive casting alloy comprises:
6.0 wt %-8.0 wt % Si,
0.12 wt %-0.25 wt % Mg,
less than 0.35 wt % Cu,
less than 4.0 wt % Zn,
less than 0.6 wt % Mn,
less than 0.15 wt % Fe,
at least one silicon modifier,
at least one grain refining element, and
a balance of aluminum and impurities.
All component percentages herein are by weight percent (wt %) unless otherwise indicated. When referring to any numerical range of values, such ranges are understood to include each and every number and/or fraction between the stated range minimum and maximum. A range of about 6.0 wt %-8.0 wt % Si, for example, would expressly include all intermediate values of about 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 wt %, all the way up to and including, 8.0 wt % Si. The term “impurities” denotes any contamination of the melt, including leaching of elements from the casting apparatus. Allowable ranges of impurities are less than 0.05 wt % for each impurity constituent and 0.15 wt % for total impurity content.
The aluminum casting alloy of the present invention has a Mg concentration that increases critical fracture strain (CFS) in the presence of excess silicon. Although silicon increases castability by promoting high fluidity and low shrinkage in the cast alloy, increased silicon content results in the formation of silicon particles resulting in a casted body having low crashworthiness. In one embodiment, the Mg concentration of the present invention is selected to produce the proper proportion of Mg2Si precipitates in the metal solution, without excessive precipitate formation at the grain boundaries, in providing a casting alloy that when subjected to precipitate hardening results in a tensile strength suitable for automotive applications and a critical fracture strain (CFS) greater than or equal to 10%.
The critical fracture strain (CFS) is one value used to characterize crashworthiness. The CFS may be derived from an engineering stress v. strain curve that is generated from a sample of an alloy being tested. The stress v. strain curve may be determined using quasi-static free bend testing (ASTME190), quasi-static crush testing, quasi-static axial crush, or quasi-static three-point bend.
Using a stress v. strain curve, as depicted in
εt,eng=εm/2+(1−(εm/2))×(1−(δr/δm))
The engineering thinning strain (εt,eng) is then used to derive the critical fracture strain (CFS) through the following equation:
CFS=−ln(1−εt,eng)
Generally, materials having a high CFS value perform better under large deformation than materials having a low CFS value. Typically, prior materials and alloy compositions encounter severe cracking during crush testing when characterized by a CFS value lower than 10%.
In one embodiment, the inventive crashworthy alloy composition comprises of an Al—Si—Mg base alloy for gravity or low pressure permanent mold, or sand mold casting with the following composition ranges (all in weight percent):
6.0 wt % to 8.0 wt % Si,
0.12 wt % to 0.25 wt % Mg,
less than 0.35 wt % Cu,
less than 4.0 wt % Zn,
less than 0.6 wt % Mn, and
less than 0.15 wt % Fe.
In another embodiment, the inventive crashworthy alloy composition comprises of an Al—Si—Mg alloy for high pressure die casting, wherein the manganese wt % may be increased to 0.55 for preventing die soldering, in which the increased manganese content decreases the likelihood that the alloy sticks to the mold during the casting process.
The Cu level of the casting alloy may be increased to increase the alloy's strength performance. But, increasing the Cu content to greater than 0.35 wt % may have a disadvantageous effect on ductility. The Zn content may be increased to reduce the alloy's sensitivity to solidification rate. It may be particularly useful to increase the Zn content for casting applications of greater thicknesses, where the solidification rate significantly differs from the center most portion of the casting in comparison to the portions of the casting that are in direct contact with the mold surface.
The inventive alloy composition may further include Si modifiers and grain refiners. In one example, a Si modifier may be included in the above alloy composition in an amount less than or equal to 0.02 wt %, wherein the Si modifier is selected from the group consisting of Ca, Na, Sr, and Sb. In one example, grain refiners may include titanium diboride, TiB2 or titanium carbide, TiC. If titanium diboride is employed as a grain refiner, the concentration of boron in the alloy may be in a range from 0.0025 wt. % to 0.05 wt. %. Likewise, if titanium carbide is employed as a grain refiner, the concentration of carbon in the alloy may be in the range from 0.0025 wt. % to 0.05 wt. %. Typical grain refiners are aluminum alloys containing TiC or TiB2.
One aspect of the present invention, is a process for forming a casting from the above alloy composition, including a specified heat treatment. This alloy heat treatment depends on the range and type of performance targeted, and covers natural aging, T4, T5, T6 and T7 temper. In one embodiment, a T5 heat treatment typically includes an artificial aging treatment at a temperature of about 150° C. to 250° C. for a time period ranging from a ½ hour to 10 hours.
Typically, a T6 treatment includes a three stage treatment beginning with a solution heat treatment of 450° C. to 550° C. for a time period ranging from approximately ½ hour to approximately 6 hours. Following solution heat treatment, a quench process is conducted using air quench, forced air quench, liquid mist quench or liquid submersion quench. It is noted that the quench rate may be increased, so long as the casting is not distorted or residual stresses are not induced into the casting surface, or the quench rate may be decreased, so long as the percentage of precipitating elements remaining in the supersaturated solution is not so adversely affected to substantially reduce the casting's strength. Following quench, the casting is then artificially aged to peak strength, wherein the aging process is similar to that used in processing to T5 temper.
A T4 treatment typically includes a three stage treatment similar to T6, but in the final stage of the T4 treatment the casting is naturally aged, whereas in T6 heat treatments the casting is artificially aged at an elevated temperature. More specifically, the first stage of the T4 treatment is preferably a solution heat treatment of 450° C. to 550° C. for a time period ranging from approximately ½ hour to approximately 6 hours. Following solution heat treatment, a quench process is conducted using air quench, forced air quench, liquid mist quench or liquid submersion quench. Following quench, the casting is then naturally aged.
The T7 heat treatment is similar to T6 and also comprises solution heat treatment, quench and aging process steps. Opposed to T6 temper in which the artificial aging step is conducted to peak strength, the aging process step of the T7 heat treatment continues until overaging, wherein in some embodiments overaging of the castings while having a negative effect on strength advantageously increases corrosion resistance.
The casting complexity allows the shape of the product to reach a stiffness target performance that is comparable or higher than that of existing steel design.
The combination of the targeted Al—Si—Mg alloy and the manufacturing process provide castings suitable for crash applications.
In one embodiment, Vacuum Riserless Casting/Pressure Riserless Casting (VRC/PRC) of the present alloy provides very flexible process parameters that permit casting of any part, wherein the cast parts may have a wall thickness of 3 mm or higher, in which the castings may be solid or hollow.
The Vacuum Riserless Casting (VRC)/Pressure Riserless Casting (PRC) process is suitable for mass production of high integrity aluminum automotive chassis and suspension components. VRC/PRC is a low pressure casting process, in which in some embodiments the pressure may be on the order of 6.0 Psi. In VRC/PRC, a mold is positioned over a hermetically sealed furnace and the casting cavity is connected to the melt by feed tubes(s). Melt is drawn into the mold cavity by applying a pressure to the furnace through the application of an inert gas, such as Ar. A constant melt level is maintained in the furnace of the VRC/PRC apparatus, avoiding back-surges that are sometimes experienced in the more traditional low pressure system.
Multiple fill tubes (stalks) provide ideal metal distribution in the mold cavity. Multiple fill points combined with close coupling between the mold and melt surface allows lower metal temperatures, minimizes hydrogen and oxide contamination and provides maximum feeding of shrinkage-prone areas in the casting. The multiple fill tubes also allow multiple yet independent cavities in a mold. Carefully sequenced thermal controls quickly solidify castings from extreme back to fill tubes, which then function as feed risers.
In another embodiment of the present invention, the alloy may be utilized in die casting applications, preferably being high pressure die casting, such as Alcoa Vacuum Die Casting (AVDC). A more detailed discussion of AVDC is described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,246,055, titled “Vacuum Die-Casting Machine with Apparatus and Method for Controlling Pressure Behind the Piston”, which is incorporated in its entirety by reference.
Die casting is a process in which molten metal is injected at high velocity and pressure into a mold (die) cavity preferably made of high-quality steel. Under ideal conditions the metal does not solidify before the cavity is filled.
Alcoa Vacuum Die Casting (AVDC) is a form of high pressure die casting, wherein AVDC preferably evacuates the entire die cavity and shot system as it draws melt under vacuum into the shot tube and then injects it under high pressure into the die. AVDC substantially reduces, preferably eliminating, the atmosphere in the shot systems and die cavity. To accomplish this, the shot and die cavity system are preferably well sealed to avoid drawing in ambient air when under high vacuum. In comparison to typical die casting, AVDC produces a vacuum at least one order of magnitude greater than the highers vacuum that can possibly be provided by typical die casting. If the atmosphere in the shot system and die cavity are essentially eliminated there can be little to no air available to be admixed and entrapped in the molten metal during cavity fill.
In comparison to low pressure Vacuum Riserless Casting (VRC)/Pressure Riserless Casting (PRC) providing a pressure on the order of 6 Psi, AVDC produces a high pressure that is orders of magnitude greater than the pressure produced by VRC/PRC casting operations, whereas in some embodiments AVDC provides a pressure on the order of 10 Ksi or greater.
In one embodiment, the alloy of the present invention when utilized in VRC/PRC castings unexpectable provides comparable bending performance to castings formed by high pressure die castings, such as AVDC castings, whereas an observable advantage in bending performance is typically present in alloys cast by high pressure die castings when compared to castings prepared by VRC/PRC.
AVDC typically provides a higher solidification rate than VRC/PRC, and therefore results in castings having a smaller grain size, smaller particle size and smaller dendritic spacing, which all contribute to greater ductility and greater bending performance. Comparable bending performance in castings formed using VRC/PRC casting technology can be unexpectedly obtained, by utilizing the casting alloy of the present invention, in which the Mg content has been tailored to reduce Mg2Si particle formation, in combination with reducing the thickness of the castings by utilizing sand cores to provide wall thicknesses of less than 6 mm, preferably being 4.0 mm, and being as thin as 2.0 mm, so long as castability is not adversely affected.
The following examples are provided to further illustrate the present invention and demonstrate some advantages that arise therefrom. It is not intended that the invention be limited to the specific examples disclosed.
Castings representing three alloy compositions within the inventive alloy composition were prepared from direction solidification molds and permanent molds. One example of permanent mold systems includes Vacuum Riserless Casting/Pressure Riserless Casting. The composition of each alloy sample tested are provided in Table I, in which sample A was prepared on a laboratory scale from a directional solidification mold and samples B and C were prepared on a production scale from Vacuum Riserless Casting/Pressure Riserless Casting molds utilizing a sand core to provide a hollow casting having a wall thickness on the order of approximately 4 mm.
Following casting the samples where then air cooled. Regardless of the casting process, the solidification rates of the cast structures from the directionally solidified molds and the permanent molds were substantially equal. The cast structures where then heat treated to F, T5 or T6 temper. T5 heat treatment comprised artificial aging at a temperature of about 150° C. to 250° C. for a time period ranging from a ½ hour to 10 hours. T6 treatment comprised a solution heat treatment of 450° C. to 550° C. for a time period ranging from approximately ½ hour to approximately 6 hours, liquid quench, and artificial aging at a temperature of 150° C. to 250° C. for a time period ranging from a ½ hour to 10 hours. Following heat treatment the casting where then machined into test samples and subjected to tensile testing in accordance with ASTM B557. (See ASTM B557: Tension testing wrought and cast aluminum and magnesium alloy products). The ultimate tensile strength, yield tensile strength, and elongation of the alloys listed in Table I were then recorded. A stress-strain curve was provided for each alloy listed in Table I, from which the critical fracture strain (CFS) was determined. The critical fracture strength (CFS), ultimate fractures strength (UTS), tensile yield strength (TYS), and Elongation was then recorded in Table II.
The results indicate that an adequate combination of strength and crashworthiness can be achieved in Al—Si—Mg alloys for automotive applications by controlling the alloy composition and heat treatment. High ductility and high critical fracture strain are generally observed in the invented alloy. Both T5 and T6 tempers increase the strength of the alloy. However, the decrease of ductility and critical fracture toughness observed with increasing strength is slower in T6 temper when compared to T5 temper.
VRC/PRC castings were then prepared using alloy composition C, as listed in Table I, treated to T5 and T6 temper, and then subjected to bend testing and visual inspection for cracking. The castings were prepared from (VRC)/(PRC) casting technology as described above using a sand core to provide a wall thickness on the order of approximately 4.0 mm. The temperature for the T5 and T6 heat treatments was similar to the description of the heat treatments described in Example 1. The time period for heat treatment was varied to test the bending performance for varying strengths of the specified alloys. Table III illustrates the casting samples and heat treatments.
Samples 1 and 2 were treated to T5 temper, in which the aging time of sample 1 was greater than the aging time of sample 2. Samples 3 and 4 were treated to a T6 temper, in which the aging time of sample 4 was greater than the aging time of sample 3.
Following heat treatment, the samples were machined into test plates 30a, 30b a having a length of approximately 60 mm, a width of approximately 30 mm, and a thickness on the order of approximately 2 mm.
The Tensile Yield Strength (TYS) and the Critical Fracture Strength (CFS) were measured in accordance with the method discussed in Example 1, and are listed here for comparative purposes with respect to the visual bend test.
Referring to
Following bend testing the samples were visually inspected for cracking. The incidence of cracking indicates a sample that is less suitable for crash applications than a sample that does not display cracking.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
It is further noted that a correlation exists between cracking during bend test and critical fracture strains less than 10%. Specifically, with reference to Table III,
Test samples representing the inventive alloy composition were prepared using Vacuum Riserless Casting/Pressure Riserless Casting and High Pressure Die Casting. The test samples were heat treated, machined into test plates 30a, 30b, and subjected to bend testing. The alloy composition was composed of approximately 9.0-10.0 wt % Si, approximately 0.2 wt % Mg, approximately 0.5-0.6 wt % Mn, and a balance of aluminum and impurities.
VRC/PRC test samples were cast using a sand core to provide a wall thickness on the order of approximately 4.0 mm. Die cast test samples had a thickness on the order of approximately 2.5 mm.
The test samples formed using VRC/PRC casting processes where heat treated to T6 temper. T6 treatment comprised a solution heat treatment of 450° C. to 550° C. for a time period ranging from approximately ½ hour to approximately 6 hours, liquid quench, and artificial aging at a temperature of 150° C. to 250° C. for a time period ranging from a ½ hour to 10 hours.
The test samples formed using high pressure die casting, were also heat treated to peak strength including slightly higher aging temperatures of about 250° C. to 300° C. Following heat treatment the test samples were machined into test plates 30a, 30b having a thickness on the order of approximately 2.0 mm.
A bend test was conducted on the VRC/PRC castings and the high pressure die castings. Referring to
The force applied to the casting is the force applied through the loading nose 35. Referring to
As indicated in Table IV, the bending performance of VRC/PRC castings was comparable to the bending performance of high pressure die castings. Specifically, VRC/PRC castings (samples #1-4) were recorded having an angle failure of 44 to 52°, and high pressure die castings (samples #6-14) were recorded having an angle failure of 40 to 54°.
While the present invention has been particularly shown and described with respect to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the foregoing and other changes in forms and details may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. It is therefore intended that the present invention not be limited to the exact forms and details described and illustrated, but fall within the scope of the appended claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/297,209, filed Nov. 15, 2011, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/553,236, filed Oct. 26, 2006, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,083,871, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/731,046, filed Oct. 28, 2005, each application of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3135633 | Hornus | Jun 1964 | A |
3305410 | Sublett et al. | Feb 1967 | A |
3542606 | Westerman et al. | Nov 1970 | A |
3619181 | Willey et al. | Nov 1971 | A |
3645804 | Ponchel | Feb 1972 | A |
3741827 | Reynolds et al. | Jun 1973 | A |
3762916 | Kirman | Oct 1973 | A |
3836405 | Staley et al. | Sep 1974 | A |
3856584 | Cina | Dec 1974 | A |
3881966 | Staley et al. | May 1975 | A |
3925067 | Sperry et al. | Dec 1975 | A |
3945860 | Winter et al. | Mar 1976 | A |
3947297 | Reimann et al. | Mar 1976 | A |
4067733 | Urdea | Jan 1978 | A |
4094705 | Sperry et al. | Jun 1978 | A |
4104089 | Miki | Aug 1978 | A |
4189334 | Dubost et al. | Feb 1980 | A |
4200476 | Dubost et al. | Apr 1980 | A |
4294625 | Hyatt et al. | Oct 1981 | A |
4323399 | Dubost et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
4345951 | Coupry et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
4431467 | Staley et al. | Feb 1984 | A |
4477292 | Brown | Oct 1984 | A |
4488913 | Ferton | Dec 1984 | A |
4609031 | Sasaki | Sep 1986 | A |
4618382 | Miyagi et al. | Oct 1986 | A |
4629517 | Lifka et al. | Dec 1986 | A |
4648913 | Hunt, Jr. et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4711762 | Vernam et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4747890 | Meyer | May 1988 | A |
4797165 | Bretz et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4816087 | Cho | Mar 1989 | A |
4828631 | Ponchel et al. | May 1989 | A |
4830826 | Ichiro | May 1989 | A |
4832758 | Brown | May 1989 | A |
4863528 | Brown et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4873054 | Sigworth | Oct 1989 | A |
4946517 | Cho | Aug 1990 | A |
4954188 | Ponchel et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4961792 | Rioja et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4988394 | Cho | Jan 1991 | A |
5047092 | Faure | Sep 1991 | A |
5066342 | Rioja et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5108520 | Liu et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5110372 | Faure | May 1992 | A |
5120354 | Ichiki | Jun 1992 | A |
RE34008 | Quist et al. | Jul 1992 | E |
5135713 | Rioja et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5151136 | Witters et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5211910 | Pickens et al. | May 1993 | A |
5213639 | Colvin et al. | May 1993 | A |
5221377 | Hunt, Jr. et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5240522 | Tanaka et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5246055 | Fields et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5277719 | Kuhlman et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5334266 | Kawanishi et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5376192 | Cassada, III | Dec 1994 | A |
5413650 | Jarrett et al. | May 1995 | A |
5496426 | Murtha | Mar 1996 | A |
5512112 | Cassada, III | Apr 1996 | A |
5537969 | Hata et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5560789 | Sainfort et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5576112 | Izuchi et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5588477 | Sokol et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5593516 | Cassada, III | Jan 1997 | A |
5597529 | Tack | Jan 1997 | A |
5630889 | Karabin | May 1997 | A |
5652063 | Karabin | Jul 1997 | A |
5665306 | Karabin | Sep 1997 | A |
5669990 | Adachi et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5759302 | Nakai et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5800927 | Karabin | Sep 1998 | A |
5837070 | Sainfort et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5846347 | Tanaka et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5863359 | Karabin et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5865911 | Miyasato et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5865914 | Karabin et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5879475 | Karabin | Mar 1999 | A |
5922147 | Valtierra-Gallardo et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5932037 | Holroyd et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5989495 | Isayama et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6027582 | Lassince et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6048415 | Nakai et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6070643 | Colvin | Jun 2000 | A |
6145466 | Herbein et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6148899 | Cornie et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6182591 | Whitesides et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6224693 | Garza-Ondarza et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6231809 | Matsumoto et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6231995 | Yamashita et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6267829 | Backerud et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6302973 | Haszler et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308999 | Tan et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311759 | Tausig et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6314905 | Herbein et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6338817 | Yamashita et al. | Jan 2002 | B2 |
6342111 | Meki et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6364970 | Hielscher et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6368427 | Sigworth | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6412164 | DeYoung et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6423163 | Smolej et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6444058 | Liu et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6458224 | Ren et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6508035 | Seksaria et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6511555 | Feikus et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6562155 | Mikubo et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6565684 | Sigli et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6595467 | Schmidt | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6711819 | Stall et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6755235 | Nedic | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6755461 | Seksaria et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6769733 | Seksaria et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6773666 | Lin et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6780525 | Litwinski | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6783730 | Lin et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6783869 | Humer et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6790407 | Fridlyander et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6808003 | Raghunathan et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6848233 | Haszler et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6855234 | D'Astolfo, Jr. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6884637 | Umemura et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6886886 | Seksaria et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6893065 | Seksaria et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6972110 | Chakrabarti et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
7045094 | Axenov et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7048815 | Senkov et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7060139 | Senkov et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7087125 | Lin et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7097719 | Bray et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7118166 | Seksaria et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7135077 | Warner | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7163076 | Seksaria et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7214279 | Fischer et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7214281 | Gheorghe et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7217279 | Reese | May 2007 | B2 |
7229508 | Cho et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7229509 | Cho et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7383776 | Amick | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7438772 | Rioja et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7449073 | Lin et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7452429 | Boselli et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7490752 | Ehrstrom et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7547366 | Lin et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7550110 | Warner et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7625454 | Lin et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7666267 | Benedictus et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
8083871 | Lin et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8721811 | Lin et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
20010028860 | Fang et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010028861 | Fang et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020060059 | Komazaki et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020106300 | Ochiai et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020150498 | Chakrabarti et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020153072 | Tanaka et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020155023 | Barresi et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162609 | Warner | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030085592 | Seksaria et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030178106 | DasGupta | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20040062678 | DasGupta | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040079198 | Bryant et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040099352 | Gheorghe et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040107823 | Kiley et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040163492 | Crowley et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040170523 | Koch | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040261916 | Lin et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050000609 | Butler et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050008890 | Raghunathan et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050034794 | Benedictus et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050056353 | Brooks et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050072497 | Eberl et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050079376 | Benedictus et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050098245 | Venema et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050100473 | Ikuno et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050150578 | Bes et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050150579 | Chakrabarti et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050155676 | Cosse et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050161128 | DasGupta | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050163647 | Donahue et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050167012 | Lin et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050191204 | Lin et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050199318 | Doty | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050224145 | Laslaz et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050238528 | Lin et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050238529 | Lin et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050269000 | Denzer et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060054666 | Ehrstrom et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060151075 | Van Der Veen et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060157172 | Fischer et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060174980 | Benedictus et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060182650 | Eberl et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060191609 | Dangerfield et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060289093 | Yan et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070017604 | Yan et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070029016 | Gheorghe | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070151636 | Buerger et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080066833 | Lin et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080173377 | Khosla et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080173378 | Khosla et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080283163 | Bray et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080299000 | Gheorghe et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090180920 | Reichlinger et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090320969 | Benedictus et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100037998 | Bray et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20120261034 | Lin et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120261035 | Lin et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1154013 | Aug 1966 | AU |
0677779 | Oct 1995 | EP |
0829552 | Mar 1998 | EP |
0377779 | Sep 2001 | EP |
1143027 | Oct 2001 | EP |
1188501 | Mar 2002 | EP |
1205567 | May 2002 | EP |
1229141 | Aug 2002 | EP |
1544315 | Jun 2005 | EP |
1799391 | Mar 2006 | EP |
2078470 | Oct 1971 | FR |
2853666 | Oct 2004 | FR |
2872172 | Dec 2005 | FR |
1217765 | Dec 1970 | GB |
1320271 | Jun 1973 | GB |
1529305 | Oct 1978 | GB |
2366531 | Mar 2002 | GB |
2402943 | Dec 2004 | GB |
48007822 | Jan 1973 | JP |
356163234 | Dec 1981 | JP |
57079142 | May 1982 | JP |
58161747 | Sep 1983 | JP |
58213852 | Dec 1983 | JP |
5928555 | Feb 1984 | JP |
60234955 | May 1984 | JP |
59118865 | Jul 1984 | JP |
60145365 | Jul 1985 | JP |
60180637 | Sep 1985 | JP |
60194041 | Oct 1985 | JP |
361139635 | Jun 1986 | JP |
62250149 | Oct 1987 | JP |
63-057751 | Mar 1988 | JP |
03107440 | May 1991 | JP |
05295478 | Nov 1993 | JP |
06065666 | Mar 1994 | JP |
06212338 | Aug 1994 | JP |
07252573 | Oct 1995 | JP |
08144031 | Jun 1996 | JP |
10130768 | May 1998 | JP |
10168536 | Jun 1998 | JP |
10298692 | Nov 1998 | JP |
11241135 | Sep 1999 | JP |
2001 073056 | Mar 2001 | JP |
2001 226731 | Aug 2001 | JP |
2001 335874 | Dec 2001 | JP |
2002 105611 | Apr 2002 | JP |
2002 371333 | Dec 2002 | JP |
3122246 | Jun 2006 | JP |
3122247 | Jun 2006 | JP |
3122248 | Jun 2006 | JP |
WO 9610099 | Apr 1996 | WO |
WO 9852707 | Nov 1998 | WO |
WO 0026020 | May 2000 | WO |
WO 2004003244 | Jan 2004 | WO |
WO 2004046402 | Jun 2004 | WO |
WO 2004090183 | Oct 2004 | WO |
WO 2004090185 | Oct 2004 | WO |
WO 2004111282 | Dec 2004 | WO |
WO 2005010224 | Feb 2005 | WO |
WO 2005040440 | May 2005 | WO |
WO 2005071127 | Aug 2005 | WO |
WO 2005075692 | Aug 2005 | WO |
WO 2005090628 | Sep 2005 | WO |
WO 2006019946 | Feb 2006 | WO |
WO 2006030123 | Mar 2006 | WO |
WO 2006086534 | Aug 2006 | WO |
WO 2006127812 | Nov 2006 | WO |
WO 2007051162 | May 2007 | WO |
WO 2007111634 | Oct 2007 | WO |
WO 2008036760 | Mar 2008 | WO |
WO 2008156532 | Dec 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Aluminum 1100 (commericially pure aluminum). Alloy Digest, Engineering Alloys Digest, Inc. (Oct. 1956 and revised on Feb. 1974). |
ASM Handbook vol. 15 Casting. ASM International. pp. 327, 332-334, 743-746, 754, 757-759, 767 (1988). |
ASM Handbook vol. 4 Heat Treating. ASM International. 850 (1991). |
ASM Handbook Aluminum and Aluminum Alloys. ASM International pp. 26, 41, 91-93, 104, 718-721, (1993). |
Chemical Composition Limits. Aluminum association teal sheets 10-12 (2009). |
Chemical Composition Limits. Aluminum association pink sheets 7 (date unknown). |
Dasgupta, R. The stretch, limit and path forward for particle reinforced metal matrix composites of 7075 A1-alloys. Engineering 2: 237-256 (2010). |
Dorward, R. Enhanced corrosion resistance in Al—Zn—Mg—Cu alloys. Extraction, refining and fabrication of light metals. 383-391(1990). |
Fridlyander, J.N. Advanced Russian aluminum alloys, proceedings of the 4th international conference on aluminium alloys, Sep. 11-16, vol. II, Atlanta, Georgia, 80-87(1994). |
Fridlyander, J.N. et al. Development and application of high-strength Al—Zn—Mg—Cu Alloys. Materials Science Forum. vols. 217-222(3): 1813-1818 (1996). |
Glossary of metallurgical and metalworking terms. ASM handbooks online (2002). URL: http://products.asminternational.org/hbk/index.jsp [retrieved Dec. 8, 2008]. |
Grasso, P.D. et al. Hot tear formation and coalescene observations in organic alloys. JOM-e, Jan. 2002, [online] URL: http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0201/Grasso/Grasso-0201.html [retrieved on May 17, 2010]. |
Hatch, J. Aluminum: Properties and physical metallurgy. ASM International 367-368 (1984). |
International alloy designations and chemical compositions limits for wrought aluminum and wrought aluminum alloys. Registration Record Series, Aluminum Association, Washington DC, 1-26 (Jan. 1, 2004). |
Islam, et al. Retrogression and reaging response of 7475 aluminum alloy. Metals Technology 10: 386-392 (Oct. 1983). |
Kaufman, J.G. Handbook of Materials Selection. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 89, 96-97 (2002). |
Kaufman, G. et al. Aluminum alloy castings: Properties, processes, and applications. ASM International (Dec. 2004). |
Laha, T. et al. Synthesis of bulk nanostructured aluminum alloy component through vacuum plasma spray technique. Acta Materialia 53(20): 5429-5438 (Dec. 2005). |
Rajan, et al. Microstructural study of a high-strength stress-corrosion resistant 7075 aluminum alloy. Journal of Materials Science 17: 2817-2824 (1982). |
Metals Handbook: Desk Edition, 2nd Edition, ASM International 419-422, 445-460, (1998). |
Miao, W.F. et al. Effects of Cu content and presaging on precipitation characteristics in aluminum alloy 6022. Metallurgical and materials transactions (31): 361-371 (2000). |
Ostwald, P.F. et al. Manufacturing processes and systems. Ninth edition 92-94. John Wiley and Sons, 1997. |
Sato, T. et al. Aluminum Alloys: Their physical and mechanical properties. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Aluminum Alloys Jul. 5-10, vol. II, Toyohashi, Japan, 1-5 (1994). |
Schijve, J. The significance of flight-simulation fatigue tests. Delft University report (LR-466) (Jun. 1985). |
Shahani, R. et al. High strength 7XXX alloys for ultra-thick aerospace plate: optimisation of alloy composition. Aluminum Alloys 2: 1105-1110 (1998). |
Teleshov, et al. Influence of chemical compositions on high-and low-cycle fatigue with zero-start extension of sheets of D16 and D95 alloys. Russian Metallurgica Moscow 141-144 (1983). |
Tumanov, A.T. Use of aluminum alloys. Moscow Metalourgia Publishers 181 (1973. |
Tumanov, A.T. Application of aluminum alloy. Moscow Metalourgia Publishers 131-133, 139 (1973). |
Wallace, W. A new approach to the problem of stress corrosion cracking in 7075-T6 aluminum. Canadian Aeronautics & Space journal 27(3): 222-232 (1981). |
Warner, T.J., et al. Aluminum alloy development for affordable airframe structures. Third ASM International Paris Convention on Synthesis, processing and modeling of advanced materials. 79-88 (1997). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140202598 A1 | Jul 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60731046 | Oct 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13297209 | Nov 2011 | US |
Child | 14222648 | US | |
Parent | 11553236 | Oct 2006 | US |
Child | 13297209 | US |