Please wait a minute...
Chinese Journal of Materials Research  2021, Vol. 35 Issue (1): 25-35    DOI: 10.11901/1005.3093.2020.080
ARTICLES Current Issue | Archive | Adv Search |
Effect of Heat Treatment on Microstructure and Al-water Reactivity of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn Alloys
DU Bangdeng1, LIU Jun2, WANG Xiaowan1, WANG Wei1(), CHEN Demin1()
1.Institute of Metal Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China
2.Institute of Petroleum Engineering Research, Sinopec Jianghan Oilfield, Wuhan 430035, China
Cite this article: 

DU Bangdeng, LIU Jun, WANG Xiaowan, WANG Wei, CHEN Demin. Effect of Heat Treatment on Microstructure and Al-water Reactivity of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn Alloys. Chinese Journal of Materials Research, 2021, 35(1): 25-35.

Download:  HTML  PDF(19993KB) 
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  

Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys with different Mg-contents were prepared and then subjected to solution and aging treatment. The microstructure and corrosion morphology after immersion in water of alloys was characterized by means of XRD and SEM with EDX. The Volta potential differences (ΔVPD) of interfacial phases with respect to Al matrix were measured using AFM/SKPFM. The Al-water reactivity of alloys in waters at different temperature were measured by using drainage method. The heat treatment influences the phase type, morphology of interfacial phases, and the content of Mg and Ga inside Al grains. As the Mg content is below 4% the heat-treated alloys contain interfacial phases of Mg2Sn, MgGa, MgGa2 andMgIn. Mg5Ga2 and Mg2Ga phases occurs as the Mg content of alloy is c.a. 5%. MgGa phase precipitates within Al grains of the aged alloys. The heat-treated alloys exhibit higher the Volta potential differences (ΔVPD) of interfacial phases with respect to Al in comparison with the cast ones. The generation rate and yield amount of hydrogen correlate with Mg contents of the heat-treated alloys. The reasons that the heat treatment affects the microstructures of alloys and the Volta potential differences (ΔVPD) of interfacial phases with respect to Al were analyzed, and the effect of heat treatment on the Al-water reactivity of alloys was also discussed.

Key words:  metallic materials      aluminum alloy      magnesium      heat treatment      microstructures      Al-water reactivity      Volta potential differences     
Received:  16 March 2020     
ZTFLH:  TG14  
Fund: National Science and Technology Major Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology of China(2016ZX05060004);Foundation of Chinese Academic of Science(GXJJ-17-M158)

URL: 

https://www.cjmr.org/EN/10.11901/1005.3093.2020.080     OR     https://www.cjmr.org/EN/Y2021/V35/I1/25

Fig.1  XRD patterns of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn solution treated (1~4) and aged (5~8) alloys with different Mg content (1) 2%; (2) 3%; (3) 4%; (4) 5%; (5) 2%; (6) 3%; (7) 4%; (8) 5%
Fig.2  Fracture surfaces of solution treated (a~d) and aged (e~f) Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys with different Mg content (a) 2%; (b) 3 %; (c) 4%; (d) 5%; (e) 3%; (f) 4%

Sample

/mass fraction

SpectrumPhaseElement/atom fraction, %
MgAlGaInSn
2 %, solutionG11.8996.531.58--
GB266.342.201.11-30.34
GB314.3069.9414.361.40-
GB429.9235.415.2929.39-
GB534.0926.5619.0020.34-
3%, solutionG63.0995.521.39--
GB762.407.19--30.41
GB841.6918.068.0132.24-
GB935.0635.0228.401.51-
GB1038.3927.3322.8011.48-
4%, solutionG114.2294.711.07--
GB1266.291.051.08-31.58
GB1319.5954.4120.455.55-
GB1433.5327.0220.0819.37-
5%, solutionG155.1093.950.95--
GB1649.8627.85--22.29
GB1758.577.5920.3313.52-
GB1838.7021.7719.7419.78-
GB1927.9949.5722.44--
GB2036.8623.756.7332.66-
3%, agingG213.1195.501.39--
GB2244.3332.340.95-22.39
GB2325.9449.4218.725.93-
GB2425.2247.412.8624.52-
GB2536.2421.2928.2714.20-
4%, agingG264.2294.621.16--
GB2741.5230.780.98-26.72
GB2835.0635.0228.401.51-
GB2927.5744.6710.8316.93-
GB3035.3226.5420.5717.58-
Table 1  Compositions of Al grains and grain boundary phases of heat treated Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys
Fig.3  Fracture surfaces (a, b, d) of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn aged alloys with Mg contents 2% (a), 3% (b) and 5% (d) and EDX mapping of precipitates of Al grains from (a, c)
Fig.4  Relationship between Mg (a) and Ga (b) contents in Al grains in Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys and Mg content of alloys
Fig.5  H2 production curves of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys with different Mg contents of alloys (a) 2%; (b) 3%; (c) 4%; (d) 5%
Fig.6  H2 generation rates (a) and yields (b) as a function of Mg content of alloys
Fig.7  SEM image (a), SKPFM image (b), a VPD profile (c) in Mg2Sn phase and SEM image (d), SKPFM image (e), VPD profiles (f) in MgGa and MgGa+MgIn phases in aged alloys with Mg content of 3%
Fig.8  SEM image (a), SKPFM image (b), a VPD profile (c) in Mg2Sn phase and SEM image (d), SKPFM image (e), VPD profiles (f) in MgGa and MgGa+MgIn phases in aged alloys with Mg content of 5%
SampleΔVPD/mV
MgIn+MgGaMg2SnMgInMg5Ga2MgGa
3%, as-cast--180±15-128±18--70±15
5%, as-cast--196±15-74±20-
3%, aging-426±78-260±15---164±15
5%, aging--229±4-118±14-105±19-91±10
Table 2  ?VPD values of interfacial phases with respect to Al matrix of aged alloys with Mg content of 3% and 5%
Fig.9  Corrosion morphologies of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys after immersion in water of 70℃ for different time: aged alloy with Mg content of 2% (a) polished; (b) 60 s; (c) enlarged image of (b); (d) 10 min; solution treated alloy with Mg content of 2% (e) 60 s; aged alloy with Mg content of 5% (f) 60 s

Sample

/mass fraction

SpectrumElement/atom fraction, %
OMgAlGaInSn

As-prepared,

2% aged alloy

122.9847.186.46--23.29
29.1332.6522.2435.98--
349.871.6026.88-21.65-

2% aged alloy,

immersed for 60 s

456.7619.179.51--14.57
567.421.6614.231.2718.12-
643.375.6037.9711.521.54-

2% aged alloy,

immersed for

10 min

753.7922.168.58--15.48
868.535.0614.882.289.25-
960.0913.7810.191.351.2513.35

5% aged alloy,

immersed for

60 s

1069.8415.365.89--8.91
1147.5923.747.0813.837.75-
1265.282.6519.7210.312.04-
1368.014.8915.89-11.21-
Table 3  Phase composition of the aged Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys after immersion in water of 70℃ for different time obtained using EDX
1 Hossain M M, Rahman M K. Numerical simulation of complex fracture growth during tight reservoir stimulation by hydraulic fracturing [J]. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng., 2008, 60: 86
2 Montgomery C T, Smith M B. Hydraulic fracturing: History of an enduring technology [J]. J. Petrol. Technol., 2010, 62: 26
3 Themig D. New technologies enhance efficiency of horizontal, multistage fracturing [J]. J. Pet. Technol., 2011, 63: 26
4 Ostojic J, Rezaee R, Bahrami H. Production performance of hydraulic fractures in tight gas sands, a numerical simulation approach [J]. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng., 2012, 88-89: 75
5 Rutqvist J, Rinaldi A P, Cappa F, et al. Modeling of fault reactivation and induced seismicity during hydraulic fracturing of shale-gas reservoirs [J]. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng., 2013, 107: 31
6 Fukui R, Greenfield C, Pogue K, et al. Experience curve for natural gas production by hydraulic fracturing [J]. Energ. Policy, 2017, 105: 263
7 Lai F P, Li Z P, Wang Y N. Impact of water blocking in fractures on the performance of hydraulically fractured horizontal wells in tight gas reservoir [J]. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng., 2017, 156: 134
8 Wilson A. Controlled-electrolytic-metallics completion devices combine strength with dissolution [J]. J. Petrol. Technol., 2013, 65: 145
9 Geng Z W, Xiao D H, Chen L. Microstructure, mechanical properties, and corrosion behavior of degradable Mg-Al-Cu-Zn-Gd alloys [J]. J. Alloys Compd., 2016, 686: 145
10 Zheng C, Liu Y H, Wang X H, et al. Dissolvable fracturing tool based on a controlled electrolytic method [J]. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng., 2017, 153: 81
11 Yang J, Wang J S, Yin J L, et al. Microstructure and properties of soluble alloy used for fracturing separation tools [J]. Mater. Mech. Eng., 2017, 41(9): 32
12 Park M H, Terada D, Marya M, et al. Microstructures and mechanical properties of an artificially-aged Al-Mg-Ga alloy [J]. Mater. Sci. Forum, 2014, 794-796: 1032
13 Yang B B, Zhu J F, Jiang T, et al. Effect of heat treatment on Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloy for hydrogen generation through hydrolysis reaction [J]. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy., 2017, 42: 24393
14 Du B D, He T T, Liu G L, et al. Al-water reactivity of Al-Mg-Ga-In-Sn alloys used for hydraulic fracturing tools [J]. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy, 2018, 43: 7201
15 Flamini D O, Saidman S B. Electrochemical behaviour of Al-Zn-Ga and Al-In-Ga alloys in chloride media [J]. Mater. Chem. Phys, 2012, 136: 103
16 Moghanni-Bavil-Olyaei H, Arjomandi J, Hosseini M. Effects of gallium and lead on the electrochemical behavior of Al-Mg-Sn-Ga-Pb as anode of high rate discharge battery [J]. J. Alloys Compd., 2017, 695: 2637
17 Baldwin K R, Bates R I, Arnell R D, et al. Aluminium-magnesium alloys as corrosion resistant coatings for steel [J]. Corros. Sci., 1996, 38: 155
18 Vuelvas S, Valdez-Rodriguez S, Gonzalez-Rodriguez J G. Effect of Mg and Sn addition on the corrosion behavior of an Al-Mn alloy in 0.5 M H2SO4 [J]. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci., 2012, 7: 4171
[1] MAO Jianjun, FU Tong, PAN Hucheng, TENG Changqing, ZHANG Wei, XIE Dongsheng, WU Lu. Kr Ions Irradiation Damage Behavior of AlNbMoZrB Refractory High-entropy Alloy[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(9): 641-648.
[2] SONG Lifang, YAN Jiahao, ZHANG Diankang, XUE Cheng, XIA Huiyun, NIU Yanhui. Carbon Dioxide Adsorption Capacity of Alkali-metal Cation Dopped MIL125[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(9): 649-654.
[3] ZHAO Zhengxiang, LIAO Luhai, XU Fanghong, ZHANG Wei, LI Jingyuan. Hot Deformation Behavior and Microstructue Evolution of Super Austenitic Stainless Steel 24Cr-22Ni-7Mo-0.4N[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(9): 655-667.
[4] SHAO Hongmei, CUI Yong, XU Wendi, ZHANG Wei, SHEN Xiaoyi, ZHAI Yuchun. Template-free Hydrothermal Preparation and Adsorption Capacity of Hollow Spherical AlOOH[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(9): 675-684.
[5] XING Dingqin, TU Jian, LUO Sen, ZHOU Zhiming. Effect of Different C Contents on Microstructure and Properties of VCoNi Medium-entropy Alloys[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(9): 685-696.
[6] OUYANG Kangxin, ZHOU Da, YANG Yufan, ZHANG Lei. Microstructure and Tensile Properties of Mg-Y-Er-Ni Alloy with Long Period Stacking Ordered Phases[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(9): 697-705.
[7] XU Lijun, ZHENG Ce, FENG Xiaohui, HUANG Qiuyan, LI Yingju, YANG Yuansheng. Effects of Directional Recrystallization on Microstructure and Superelastic Property of Hot-rolled Cu71Al18Mn11 Alloy[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(8): 571-580.
[8] XIONG Shiqi, LIU Enze, TAN Zheng, NING Likui, TONG Jian, ZHENG Zhi, LI Haiying. Effect of Solution Heat Treatment on Microstructure of DZ125L Superalloy with Low Segregation[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(8): 603-613.
[9] LIU Jihao, CHI Hongxiao, WU Huibin, MA Dangshen, ZHOU Jian, XU Huixia. Heat Treatment Related Microstructure Evolution and Low Hardness Issue of Spray Forming M3 High Speed Steel[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(8): 625-632.
[10] YOU Baodong, ZHU Mingwei, YANG Pengju, HE Jie. Research Progress in Preparation of Porous Metal Materials by Alloy Phase Separation[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(8): 561-570.
[11] REN Fuyan, OUYANG Erming. Photocatalytic Degradation of Tetracycline Hydrochloride by g-C3N4 Modified Bi2O3[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(8): 633-640.
[12] WANG Hao, CUI Junjun, ZHAO Mingjiu. Recrystallization and Grain Growth Behavior for Strip and Foil of Ni-based Superalloy GH3536[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(7): 535-542.
[13] LIU Mingzhu, FAN Rao, ZHANG Xiaoyu, MA Zeyuan, LIANG Chengyang, CAO Ying, GENG Shitong, LI Ling. Effect of Photoanode Film Thickness of SnO2 as Scattering Layer on the Photovoltaic Performance of Quantum Dot Dye-sensitized Solar Cells[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(7): 554-560.
[14] QIN Heyong, LI Zhentuan, ZHAO Guangpu, ZHANG Wenyun, ZHANG Xiaomin. Effect of Solution Temperature on Mechanical Properties and γ' Phase of GH4742 Superalloy[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(7): 502-510.
[15] GUO Fei, ZHENG Chengwu, WANG Pei, LI Dianzhong. Effect of Rare Earth Elements on Austenite-Ferrite Phase Transformation Kinetics of Low Carbon Steels[J]. 材料研究学报, 2023, 37(7): 495-501.
No Suggested Reading articles found!