Lightweight, crash-sensitive automotive component

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9353430
  • Patent Number
    9,353,430
  • Date Filed
    Sunday, March 23, 2014
    10 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 31, 2016
    8 years ago
Abstract
The present invention provides a casting having increased crashworthiness including an an aluminum alloy 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; and less than or equal to about 0.15 wt % Fe, wherein the cast body is treated to a T5 or T6 temper and has a tensile strength ranging from 100 MPa to 180 MPa and has a critical fracture strain greater than 10%. The present invention further provides a method of forming a casting having increased crashworthiness.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

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.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

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.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

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.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 depicts a stress v. strain curve.



FIG. 2 (side view) depicts a three point bending test.



FIGS. 3a-3d pictorially represent bend test specimens treated to T5 temper.



FIGS. 4a-4d pictorially represent bend test specimens treated to T6 temper.



FIG. 5 depicts a plot of the bending performance of high pressure die castings composed of an aluminum alloy within the scope of the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

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 FIG. 1, the engineering strain at maximum load (εm) 10, the engineering stress at maximum load (δm) 15 and the engineering stress at the fracture load (δr) 20 may be determined and then entered into the following equation to provide the engineering thinning strain (εt,eng):

εt,engm/2+(1−(εm/2))×(1−(δrm))


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.


EXAMPLE 1
Critical Fracture Strain

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.









TABLE I







Compositions of the alloy














Alloy








composition
Si
Mg
Cu
Zn
Fe


















A
7.05
0.1
0
2.57
0.02



B
7.03
0.16
0.35
0
0.06



C
7.01
0.177
0
0.0025
0.087










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.









TABLE II







Tensile properties and CFS of the alloy














Test

TYS
UTS
E
CFS


Alloy
Scale
Temper
(MPa)
(MPa)
(%)
(%)
















A
Lab
T5
122
204
18



B
Lab
T5
150
232
10



C
Plant
F
90
200
14



C
Plant
T5
144
218
10
7


C
Plant
T5
110
190
14
10


C
Plant
T6
166
256
14
14


C
Plant
T6
135
227
16
24


C
Plant
T6
180
270
10
9









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.


EXAMPLE II
Visual Inspection for Cracking in Bend Testing

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.









TABLE III







Compositions of the Alloy and Temper












Test

TYS
CFS


Sample
Scale
Temper
(MPa)
(%)














1
Plant
T5
144
7


2
Plant
T5
110
10


3
Plant
T6
135
24


4
Plant
T6
180
9









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 FIG. 2, the bend test was similar to three point bend testing, in which the base points 25 have a cylindrical geometry and the loading nose 35 has a wedge geometry. During actuation the loading wedge contacts the centerline of the test plate 30a, 30b (the test plate prior to deformation is designated by reference number 30a, the test plate following deformation is designated by reference number 30b) deforming the test plate 30a, 30b against the base points. The deformation of the test plate 30a, 30b continues until angle α1 of approximately 15° is formed at the apex A1 of displacement D1 of the deformed plate 30b relative to a plane p1 passing through the apex A1 and being parallel to the plate 30a prior to deformation.


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 FIGS. 3a and 3b, pictorial representations are provided for Sample 1, in which the test plate was deformed to an angle of 15° with visual cracking on the bending surface. Specifically, Sample 1 comprised alloy composition C at T5 temper with an aging time to provide a TYS on the order of 144 MPa.


Referring to FIGS. 3c and 3d, pictorial representations are provided for Sample 2, in which the test plate was deformed to an angle of 15° without substantial visual cracking on the bending surface. Specifically, Sample 2 comprised alloy composition C at T5 temper with an aging time to provide a TYS on the order of 110 MPa, wherein the aging time used to prepare Sample 2 is lesser than the aging time of Sample 1. Comparing Samples 1 and 2 indicates that increasing aging time, while increasing TYS, also increases the incidence of cracking resulting in decreased crashworthiness.


Referring to FIGS. 4a and 4b, pictorial representations are provided for Sample 3, in which the test plate was deformed to an angle of 15° without substantial visual cracking on the bending surface. Specifically, Sample 3 comprised alloy composition C at T6 temper with an aging time to provide a TYS on the order of 135 MPa.


Referring to FIGS. 4c and 4d, pictorial representations are provided for Sample 4, in which the test plate was deformed to an angle of 15° with visual cracking on the bending surface. Specifically, Sample 4 comprised alloy composition C at T6 temper with an aging time to provide a TYS on the order of 180 MPa, wherein the aging time used to prepare Sample 4 is greater than the aging time used to prepare Sample 3. Comparing Samples 3 and 4 indicates that increasing aging time, while increasing TYS, decreases crashworthiness.


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, FIGS. 3a-3d and FIGS. 4a-4d, it is noted that visual cracking is noted in bend tests for alloys and heat treatments characterized by a critical fracture strain less than 10%, such as samples 1 and 4.


EXAMPLE III
Bending Performance Comparison of High Pressure Die Casting and Vacuum Riserless Casting (VRC)/Pressure Riserless Casting (PRC)

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 FIG. 2, the bend test is similar to three point bend test, in which the base points 25 have a cylindrical geometry and the loading nose 35 has a wedge geometry. During actuation the loading nose 35 contacts the centerline of the test plate 30a, 30b deforming the test plate 30a, 30b against the base points. The deformation of the test plate 30a, 30b continues until the incidence of cracking was visually confirmed. The force applied to the casting and the angle of bending at the incidence of cracking.


The force applied to the casting is the force applied through the loading nose 35. Referring to FIG. 2, the failure angle is the angle a1 at which cracking was visually verified. The failure angle a1 is measured from the apex A1 of displacement D1 of the deformed plate 30b relative to the plane p1 passing through the apex A1 and being parallel to the plate 30a prior to deformation. The failure angle a1 and force for the VRC/PRC castings and the high pressure die castings formed of the alloy of the present invention is recorded in Table IV.









TABLE IV







COMPARISON OF HIGH PRESSURE DIE CASTING


AND VRC/PRC BENDING PERFORMANCE











Force




Sample
(N)
Failure Angle
Casting Method













1
1386
44
VRC/PRC


2
1369
46
VRC/PRC


3
986
52
VRC/PRC


4
895
51
VRC/PRC


5
1018
53
High Pressure Die





Casting


6
1044
54
High Pressure Die





Casting


7
1039
50
High Pressure Die





Casting


8
1039
53
High Pressure Die





Casting


9
1059
53
High Pressure Die





Casting


10
882
45
High Pressure Die





Casting


11
813
40
High Pressure Die





Casting


12
1008
51
High Pressure Die





Casting


13
928
48
High Pressure Die





Casting


14
940
47
High Pressure Die





Casting









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°.



FIG. 5 depicts a plot graphically representing the bending performance of the high pressure die casting samples recorded in Table IV (sample #'s 6-14), wherein the y-axis depicts the force (N) applied through the loading nose 35, and the displacement (mm) represents the displacement at the apex of the plate 30b resulting from the force of the loading nose. Each plotted data line represents a test sample, wherein the data lines have been shifted along the x-axis for clarity. The area above each curve represents the force and displacement that results in visual cracking during bending and the area below each curve represents the force and displacement that does not result in visual cracking.


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.

Claims
  • 1. A method of casting an aluminum alloy into a crash-sensitive automotive component having a desired critical fracture strain for collision impact, the method comprising: selecting a crash-sensitive automotive component to cast;providing a melt having an alloy comprising: about 6.0 wt % to about 7.8 wt % Si;about 0.10 wt % to about 0.18 wt % Mg;less than or equal to about 0.35 wt % Cu;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;casting the melt into a cast body of the crash-sensitive automotive component; and,heat treating the cast body, the treating including a solution heating at 450° C. to 550° C. for about ½ hour to about 6 hours; quenching, and aging at a temperature of about 150° C. to about 250° C. for about ½ hour to about 10 hours;wherein, the crash-sensitive automotive component has a critical fracture strain of at least about 10%.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the heat treating comprises processing to a T6 temper.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the processing comprises a solution heat treatment of the crash-sensitive automotive component at 450° C. to 550° C. for a time period ranging from approximately a ½ hour to approximately 6 hours, quenching, and aging; the processing creating a tensile yield strength in the cast body ranging from 190 MPa to 240 MPa.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the Mn content is less than 0.15 wt %, and the casting of the cast body includes using a vacuum riserless casting/pressure riserless process.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the casting of the cast body includes using a sand core in combination with a vacuum riserless casting/pressure riserless process to provide a wall thickness as thin as 2.0 mm.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the cast body is in T6 temper and has a tensile yield strength ranging from 100 MPa to 180 MPa.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the Mn content of the cast body is less than about 0.05 wt % Mn.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the heat treating comprises T6 or T7 to further provide an elongation that exceeds 14%.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, the melt having about 7.0 wt % Si and from about 0.10 wt % to about 0.18 wt % Mg.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, the melt having about 0.12 wt % Mg and from about 6.0 wt % to about 7.8 wt % Si.
  • 11. A method of making a vehicle with a crash-sensitive automotive component having a desired performance during collision, the performance measured using critical fracture strain, the method comprising: obtaining a crash-sensitive automotive component that was produced using a process including;providing a melt having an alloy comprising: about 6.0 wt % to about 7.8 wt % Si;about 0.10 wt % to about 0.18 wt % Mg;less than or equal to about 0.35 wt % Cu;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;casting the melt into a cast body of the crash-sensitive automotive component; and,heat treating the cast body, the heat treating including a solution heating at 450° C. to 550° C. for about ½ hour to about 6 hours; quenching, and aging at a temperature of about 150° C. to about 250° C. for about ½ hour to about 10 hours;and,employing the crash-sensitive component in the vehicle to provide a critical fracture strain of at least about 10% in the crash-sensitive component.
  • 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the crash-sensitive automotive component is a part of a vehicle frame construction.
  • 13. The method of claim 11, wherein the crash-sensitive automotive component is a part of a body structure.
  • 14. The method of claim 11, wherein the crash-sensitive automotive component is selected from a group consisting of a bracket, a node, a crashbox, a crossmember, a subframe, and an engine cradle.
  • 15. The method of claim 11, wherein the heat treating comprises processing the cast body to a T6 temper.
  • 16. The method of claim 11, wherein the heat treating comprises a solution heat treatment of the cast body at 450° C. to 550° C. for a time period ranging from approximately a ½ hour to approximately 6 hours, quenching, and aging; the processing creating a tensile yield strength in the cast body ranging from 190 MPa to 240 MPa.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

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.

US Referenced Citations (205)
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
Foreign Referenced Citations (71)
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
Non-Patent Literature Citations (30)
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).
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140202598 A1 Jul 2014 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60731046 Oct 2005 US
Continuations (2)
Number Date Country
Parent 13297209 Nov 2011 US
Child 14222648 US
Parent 11553236 Oct 2006 US
Child 13297209 US