Fig. 8. Pressure distribution during the infiltration of preform with the 50 ¯m particles and 20 % starches: (a) 25 % filled, (b) 57 % filled, and (c) 99 % filled.

마이크로 컴퓨터 단층 촬영 검사 특성을 가진 Si 다공성 프리폼에 AlSi12 합금의 침투에 대한 실험적 연구 및 수치 시뮬레이션

Ruizhe LIU1 and Haidong ZHAO1,³
1National Engineering Research Center of Near-Net-Shape Forming for Metallic Materials, South China University of Technology,
Guangzhou 510640, China

Abstract

전분 함량(10, 20 및 30%)과 입자 크기(20, 50 및 90 m)가 다른 실리콘 입자 예비 성형체는 압축 성형 및 열처리를 통해 제작되었습니다. 프리폼의 기공 특성은 고해상도(³1 m) 3차원(3D) X선 마이크로 컴퓨터 단층 촬영(V-CT)으로 검사되었습니다. AlSi12 합금의 프리폼으로의 침투는 진공 보조 압력 침투 장치에서 800 °C 및 400 kPa의 조건에서 서로 다른 압력 적용 시간(3, 8 및 15초)으로 수행되었습니다. 고해상도(³500 nm) 수직 주사 백색광 간섭 프로파일로미터를 사용하여 복합 재료의 전면을 감지했습니다. Navier-Stokes 방정식을 기반으로 하는 ¯-CT 검사에서 실제 기공 형상을 고려하여 침투를 미시적으로 시뮬레이션했습니다. 그 결과 전분 함량과 입자크기가 증가할수록 복합재료의 표면적이 증가하는 것으로 나타났다. 전분 함량과 비교하여 입자 크기는 전면 표면적에 더 많은 영향을 미칩니다. 시뮬레이션에서 침투가 진행됨에 따라 액체 AlSi12의 압력이 감소했습니다. 복합재의 잔류 기공은 침투와 함께 증가했습니다. 실험 및 시뮬레이션 결과에 따르면 침투 방향을 따라 더 큰 압력 강하가 복합 재료의 더 많은 잔류 기공을 유도합니다.

Silicon particle preforms with different starch contents (10, 20 and 30%) and particle sizes (20, 50 and 90 ¯m) were fabricated by compression mold forming and heat treatment. The pore characteristics of preforms were inspected with a high-resolution (³1 ¯m) three-dimensional (3D) X-ray micro-computed tomography (¯-CT). The infiltration of AlSi12 alloys into the preforms were carried out under the condition of 800 °C and 400 kPa with different pressure-applied times (3, 8 and 15 s) in a vacuum-assisted pressure infiltration apparatus. A highresolution (³500 nm) vertical scanning white light interfering profilometer was used to detect the front surfaces of composites. The infiltration was simulated at micro-scale by considering the actual pore geometry from the ¯- CT inspection based on the Navier-Stokes equation. The results demonstrated that as the starch content and particle size increased, the front surface area of composite increased. Compared with the starch content, the particle size has more influence on the front surface area. In the simulation, as the infiltration progressed, the pressure of liquid AlSi12 decreased. The residual pores of composites increased with infiltration. According to the experiment and simulation results, a larger pressure drop along the infiltration direction leads to more residual pores of composites.

Fig. 1. Size distributions of Si particles.
Fig. 1. Size distributions of Si particles.
Fig. 2. Schematic of different locations of composites.
Fig. 2. Schematic of different locations of composites.
Fig. 3. Three-dimensional geometry with the reconstruction technology, enmeshment and infiltration parameters of Si preforms: (a) geometry, and (b) meshes and flow direction.
Fig. 3. Three-dimensional geometry with the reconstruction technology, enmeshment and infiltration parameters of Si preforms: (a) geometry, and (b) meshes and flow direction.
Fig. 4. Number-based frequencies of effective pore radius and throat radius: (a) effective pore radius of preforms with the 50 ¯m particles, (b) effective throat radius of preforms with the 50 ¯m particles, (c) effective pore radius of preforms with the 20 % starches, and (d) effective throat radius of preforms with the 20 % starches.
Fig. 4. Number-based frequencies of effective pore radius and throat radius: (a) effective pore radius of preforms with the 50 ¯m particles, (b) effective throat radius of preforms with the 50 ¯m particles, (c) effective pore radius of preforms with the 20 % starches, and (d) effective throat radius of preforms with the 20 % starches.
Fig. 5. 3D topological morphologies of front surfaces of composites: (a) 50 ¯m-10 %, (b) 50 ¯m-20 %, (c) 50 ¯m-30 %, (d) 20 ¯m-20 %, and (e) 90 ¯m-20 %.
Fig. 5. 3D topological morphologies of front surfaces of composites: (a) 50 ¯m-10 %, (b) 50 ¯m-20 %, (c) 50 ¯m-30 %, (d) 20 ¯m-20 %, and (e) 90 ¯m-20 %.
Fig. 6. Schematic of capillary tube.
Fig. 6. Schematic of capillary tube.
Fig. 8. Pressure distribution during the infiltration of preform with the 50 ¯m particles and 20 % starches: (a) 25 % filled, (b) 57 % filled, and (c) 99 % filled.
Fig. 8. Pressure distribution during the infiltration of preform with the 50 ¯m particles and 20 % starches: (a) 25 % filled, (b) 57 % filled, and (c) 99 % filled.
Fig. 9. Pressure distributions of liquid AlSi12 during the infiltration of preforms: (a) different fill fractions, (b) different starch contents, and (c) different particle sizes.
Fig. 9. Pressure distributions of liquid AlSi12 during the infiltration of preforms: (a) different fill fractions, (b) different starch contents, and (c) different particle sizes.
Fig. 10. Metallographs of composites: (a) different locations of composite with the 20 ¯m particles and 20 % starches, and (b) different locations of composite with the 90 ¯m particles and 20 % starches.
Fig. 10. Metallographs of composites: (a) different locations of composite with the 20 ¯m particles and 20 % starches, and (b) different locations of composite with the 90 ¯m particles and 20 % starches.
Fig. 11. Area fractions of residual pores of composites: (a) 50 ¯m (different starch contents), and (b) 20 % (different particle sizes).
Fig. 11. Area fractions of residual pores of composites: (a) 50 ¯m (different starch contents), and (b) 20 % (different particle sizes).

References

1) V. G. Resmi, K. M. Sree Manu, V. Lakshmi, M.
Brahmakumar, T. P. D. Rajan, C. Pavithran and B. C.
Pai, J. Porous Mat., 22, 1445­1454 (2015).
2) C. García-Cordovilla, E. Louis and J. Narciso, Acta
Mater., 47, 4461­4479 (1999).
3) D. B. Miracle, Compos. Sci. Technol., 65, 2526­2540
(2005).
4) J. M. Chiou and D. D. L. Chung, J. Mater. Sci., 28,
1447­1470 (1993).
5) Q. G. Zhang and M. Y. Gu, J. Compos. Mater., 40, 471­
478 (2006).
6) C. M. Lawrence Wu and G. W. Han, Compos. Part AAppl. S., 37, 1858­1862 (2006).
7) X. Y. Cai, X. W. Yin, X. K. Ma, X. M. Fan, Y. Z. Cai,
J. P. Li, L. F. Cheng and L. T. Zhang, Ceram. Int., 42,
10144­10150 (2016).
8) J. M. Molina, E. Piñero, J. Narciso, C. GarcíaCordovilla and E. Louis, Curr. Opin. Solid St. M., 9,
202­210 (2005).
9) A. Léger, L. Weber and A. Mortensen, Acta Mater., 91,
57­69 (2015).
10) Y. Q. Ma, L. H. Qi, W. G. Zheng, J. M. Zhou and L. Y.
Ju, T. Nonferr. Metal. Soc., 23, 1915­1921 (2013).
11) J. T. Tian, E. Piñero, J. Narciso and E. Louis, Scripta
Mater., 53, 1483­1488 (2005).
12) J. Narciso, A. Alonso, A. Pamies, C. García-Cordovilla
and E. Louis, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 26A, 983­990
(1995).
13) J. Roger, M. Avenel and L. Lapuyade, J. Eur. Ceram.
Soc., 40, 1859­1868 (2020).
14) J. Roger, M. Avenel and L. Lapuyade, J. Eur. Ceram.
Soc., 40, 1869­1876 (2020).
15) R. Scardovelli and S. Zaleski, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.,
31, 567­603 (1999).
16) H. D. Zhao, I. Ohnaka and J. D. Zhu, Appl. Math.
Model., 32, 185­194 (2008).
17) Y. He, A. E. Bayly, A. Hassanpour, F. Muller, K. Wu
and D. M. Yang, Powder Technol., 338, 548­562
(2018).
18) K. D. Nikitin, K. M. Terekhov and Y. V. Vassilevski,
Appl. Math. Lett., 86, 236­242 (2018).
19) J. F. Xiao, X. Liu, Y. M. Luo, J. C. Cai and J. F. Xu,
Colloid. Surface. A, 591, 124572 (2020).
20) N. Birgle, R. Masson and L. Trenty, J. Comput. Phys.,
368, 210­235 (2018).
21) M. Chaaban, Y. Heider and B. Markert, Int. J. Heat
Fluid Fl., 83, 108566 (2020).
22) S. Zhang, M. J. Zhu, X. Zhao, D. G. Xiong, H. Wan,
S. X. Bai and X. D. Wang, Compos. Part A-Appl. S., 90,
71­81 (2016).
23) J. Roger, L. Guesnet, A. Marchais and Y. Le Petitcorps,
J. Alloy. Compd., 747, 484­494 (2018).
24) Q. Wan, H. D. Zhao and C. Zou, ISIJ Int., 54, 511­515
(2014).
25) F. Liu, H. D. Zhao, R. S. Yang and F. Z. Sun, Mater.
Today Commun., 19, 114­123 (2019).
26) D. Roussel, A. Lichtner, D. Jauffrès, J. Villanova, R. K.
Bordia and C. L. Martin, Scripta Mater., 113, 250­253
(2016).
27) M. Fukushima, T. Ohji, H. Hyuga, C. Matsunaga and Y.
Yoshizawa, J. Mater. Res., 32, 3286­3293 (2017).
28) M. Fukushima, H. Hyuga, C. Matsunaga and Y.
Yoshizawa, J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 101, 3266­3270
(2018).
29) R. Z. Liu, H. D. Zhao, H. Long and B. Xie, Mater.
Charact., 137, 370­378 (2017).
30) B. Xie, H. D. Zhao, H. Long, J. L. Peng and R. Z. Liu,
Ceram. Int., 45, 23924­23933 (2019).
31) R. Z. Liu, H. D. Zhao and B. Xie, Transport Porous
Med., 131, 1053­1063 (2020).
32) Y. Li, H. W. Chen, F. Q. Wang, X. L. Xia and H. P. Tan,
Infrared Phys. Techn., 113, 103646 (2021).
33) P. Tahmasebi, M. Sahimi, A. H. Kohanpur and A.
Valocchi, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng., 155, 21­33 (2017).
34) B. Gharedaghloo, S. J. Berg and E. A. Sudicky, Adv.
Water Resour., 143, 103681 (2020).
35) A. Viswanath, M. V. Manu, S. Savithri and U. T. S.
Pillai, J. Mater. Process. Tech., 244, 320­330 (2017).
36) D. Silin and T. Patzek, Physica A, 371, 336­360 (2006).
37) W. Hui, Y. S. Wang, D. Z. Ren and H. Jin, J. Petrol. Sci.
Eng., 192, 107295 (2020).
38) H. Nakae and H. Katoh, J. Jpn. I. Met. Mater., 63,
1356­1362 (1999).

PDF View