Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T09:24:40.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cyclic hardening/softening experimental data in nano-clay-composite and aluminum alloy under high-temperature strain-controlled loading

Subject: Engineering

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2022

Mohammad Azadi*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran
Hamed Bahmanabadi
Affiliation:
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran
Florian Gruen
Affiliation:
Chair of Mechanical Engineering, Montanuniversität Leoben, Leoben, Austria
Gerhard Winter
Affiliation:
Chair of Mechanical Engineering, Montanuniversität Leoben, Leoben, Austria
Benjamin Seisenbacher
Affiliation:
Chair of Mechanical Engineering, Montanuniversität Leoben, Leoben, Austria
*
*Corresponding author. Email: m_azadi@semnan.ac.ir

Abstract

This article presents cyclic hardening/softening behaviors (experimental data) of the heat-treated aluminum-matrix nano-clay-composite (AlSi_N_HT6), compared to those of the piston aluminum alloy (AlSi) under strain-controlled loading. For such an objective, standard samples were fabricated by gravity and stir-casting methods. Low-cycle fatigue experiments were carried out under different strain amplitudes (0.20–0.45%) and at various temperatures (25–300°C). Obtained results implied that no obvious change was observed on material properties of aluminum alloy by reinforcements, but a decrement was observed due to increasing the temperature. Results also indicated that the increase of the temperature from 25°C to 200°C has changed the cyclic behavior of both materials (AlSi_N_HT6 and AlSi) from hardening to softening. Moreover, the temperature effect was more significant than the total strain amplitude influences in cyclic behaviors.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. The uniaxial tensile test results for the AlSi_N_HT6 and AlSi specimens at various temperatures.

Figure 1

Figure 2. The Ramberg–Osgood relation for AlSi_N_HT6 and AlSi at the temperature of (a) 25°C, (b) 250°C, and (c) 300°C.

Figure 2

Table 1. The ratio of the UTS to YS for both samples at various temperatures

Figure 3

Figure 3. The maximum stress and the minimum stress during cycles for (a) AlSi at 25°C, (b) AlSi_N_HT6 at 25°C, (c) AlSi at 200°C, (d) AlSi_N_HT6 at 200°C, (e) AlSi at 250°C, (f) AlSi_N_HT6 at 250°C, (g) AlSi at 300°C, and (h) AlSi_N_HT6 at 300°C.

Figure 4

Figure 4. The maximum stress and the minimum stress during cycles under (a) 0.45% for AlSi, (b) 0.45% for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 0.40% for AlSi, (d) 0.40% for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 0.35% for AlSi, (f) 0.35% for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 0.30% for AlSi, (h) 0.30 for AlSi_N_HT6, (i) 0.25% for AlSi, (j) 0.25% for AlSi_N_HT6, (k) 0.20% for AlSi, and (l) 0.20% for AlSi_N_HT6 of the total strain amplitude.

Figure 5

Figure 5. The amplitude of the plastic strain during cycles at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 6

Figure 6. The effect of the total strain amplitude on the hysteresis loop at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 7

Figure 7. The temperature effect on the hysteresis loop under the strain amplitude of (a) 0.45% for AlSi, (b) 0.45% for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 0.40% for AlSi, (d) 0.40% for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 0.35% for AlSi, (f) 0.35% for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 0.30% for AlSi, (h) 0.30% for AlSi_N_HT6, (i) 0.25% for AlSi, (j) 0.25% for AlSi_N_HT6, (k) 0.20% for AlSi, and (l) 0.20% for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 8

Figure 8. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at 25°C and at the strain amplitude of (a) 0.45% for AlSi, (b) 0.45% for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 0.40% for AlSi, (d) 0.40% for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 0.35% for AlSi, (f) 0.35% for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 0.30% for AlSi, (h) 0.30% for AlSi_N_HT6, (i) 0.25% for AlSi, (j) 0.25% for AlSi_N_HT6, (k) 0.20% for AlSi, and (l) 0.20% for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 9

Figure 9. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at 200°C and at the strain amplitude of (a) 0.45% for AlSi, (b) 0.45% for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 0.40% for AlSi, (d) 0.40% for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 0.35% for AlSi, (f) 0.35% for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 0.30% for AlSi, (h) 0.30% for AlSi_N_HT6, (i) 0.25% for AlSi, (j) 0.25% for AlSi_N_HT6, (k) 0.20% for AlSi, and (l) 0.20% for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 10

Figure 10. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at 250°C and at the strain amplitude of (a) 0.45% for AlSi, (b) 0.45% for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 0.40% for AlSi, (d) 0.40% for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 0.35% for AlSi, (f) 0.35% for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 0.30% for AlSi, (h) 0.30% for AlSi_N_HT6, (i) 0.25% for AlSi, (j) 0.25% for AlSi_N_HT6, (k) 0.20% for AlSi, and (l) 0.20% for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 11

Figure 11. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at 300°C and at the strain amplitude of (a) 0.45% for AlSi, (b) 0.45% for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 0.40% for AlSi, (d) 0.40% for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 0.35% for AlSi, (f) 0.35% for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 0.30% for AlSi, (h) 0.30% for AlSi_N_HT6, (i) 0.25% for AlSi, (j) 0.25% for AlSi_N_HT6, (k) 0.20% for AlSi, and (l) 0.20% for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 12

Figure 12. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at the total strain amplitude of 0.45% and at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 13

Figure 13. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at the total strain amplitude of 0.40% and at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 14

Figure 14. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at the total strain amplitude of 0.35% and at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 15

Figure 15. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at the total strain amplitude of 0.30% and at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 16

Figure 16. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at the total strain amplitude of 0.25% and at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 17

Figure 17. The stress–strain hysteresis for the first cycle, the mid-life cycle and the final cycle at the total strain amplitude of 0.20% and at the temperature of (a) 25°C for AlSi, (b) 25°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (c) 200°C for AlSi, (d) 200°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (e) 250°C for AlSi, (f) 250°C for AlSi_N_HT6, (g) 300°C for AlSi, and (h) 300°C for AlSi_N_HT6.

Figure 18

Table 2. The cyclic behavior of AlSi and AlSi_N_HT6 using Ramberg–Osgood equation

Figure 19

Table 3. The Ramberg–Osgood parameters

Figure 20

Table 4. The amount and the rate of the cyclic hardening/softening behaviors, separately at various temperatures

Figure 21

Table 5. The amount and the rate of the cyclic hardening/softening behaviors, separately at various values of the total strain amplitude

Supplementary material: File

Azadi et al. supplementary material

Azadi et al. supplementary material

Download Azadi et al. supplementary material(File)
File 24.3 KB
Reviewing editor:  Mert Celikin University College Dublin, Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Dublin, Ireland, 4
This article has been accepted because it is deemed to be scientifically sound, has the correct controls, has appropriate methodology and is statistically valid, and has been sent for additional statistical evaluation and met required revisions.

Review 1: Cyclic Hardening/Softening Behaviors in Nano-Clay-Composite and Aluminum Alloy under High-Temperature Strain-Controlled Loading

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none

Comments

Comments to the Author: This experimental study offers very useful results for the characterisation of the cyclic behaviour of the subject matter alloys. It can enrich the published literature in this area. The research has been conducted correctly but English requires drastic improvement, specifically in relation to syntax, grammar and accurate use of language in many instances - i.e. ‘enhancement of temperature’ should be ‘increase of temperature’, ‘effect of temperature was higher…’, ‘Researches about cyclic behaviors’ should be ‘research studies on …’, etc etc. The poor use of English affects greatly the readability of this paper. Also, the authors are requested to clarify/amend the following issues:

• The methodology section should be expanded to include further details on the test configuration, material, etc. It is currently very briefly, lacking important information.

• Figure 3 and 4 should be broken down to separate figures, showing clearly the different features and avoid using the strain level ‘boxed’ indicators.

• Figure 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17: Using circles for the data points makes visualisation difficult. Please use dots or dashes instead.

• Table 3 results: Can the authors please comment (add further details in the paper) on the increasing Average Error% with the increase of temperature? For example, is there an influence of the Ramberg-Osgood parameters’ choice?

• Table 4 and 5: Is four decimal points’ accuracy necessary? If yes please justify, if not please reduce to two decimals.

• The results are very lightly discussed in many instances, despite the extensive array of data presented in the paper. The authors should expand the discussion throughout. That includes expanding the discussion on limitations.

• Many of the bullet points in the Conclusions section are unclear - i.e. ‘Under the same strain amplitude, the amount of cyclic hardening decreased by temperature increasing.’ which is the same strain amplitude in this case?). The authors are requested to rewrite this section.

Presentation

Overall score 2.7 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
1 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
3 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
4 out of 5

Context

Overall score 3.5 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
3 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
3 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
4 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 3.6 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
4 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
3 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
4 out of 5

Review 2: Cyclic Hardening/Softening Behaviors in Nano-Clay-Composite and Aluminum Alloy under High-Temperature Strain-Controlled Loading

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none

Comments

Comments to the Author: The background for this work is not clear stated in the introduction part that why the compostied is used and what’s the advantage/disadvantage compared with Al-Si cast alloys. Besides, there is no explanation on the general evolution of LCF with tempeature and strain amplitude, which must relate to the evolution of precipiates. Meanwhile, no explaination on the differences of LCF between two different materials, which should relate the reforcement particles. Therefore, I would like to reject it from the view of point of materials science.

Presentation

Overall score 3 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
4 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
3 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
2 out of 5

Context

Overall score 3 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
2 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
2 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 2 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
1 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
3 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
2 out of 5

Review 3: Cyclic Hardening/Softening Behaviors in Nano-Clay-Composite and Aluminum Alloy under High-Temperature Strain-Controlled Loading

Conflict of interest statement

Nil

Comments

Comments to the Author: 1. Literature survey is not included.

Presentation

Overall score 4 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
4 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
4 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
4 out of 5

Context

Overall score 3.8 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
4 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
3 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 3.6 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
3 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
4 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
4 out of 5