Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 29, Issue 23, pp 6167–6174 | Cite as

Hot workability of an Al-Mg alloy AA5182 with 1 wt% Cu

  • S. Martinez De La Puente
  • B. Verlinden
  • L. Delaey


A comparative study of the hot workability of two aluminium alloys, alloy AA5182 used for automotive applications and a variant modified with 1 wt% copper, has been carried out. Hot torsion tests were performed on both alloys subjected to two different heat treatments: a low temperature preheat to 450 °C and a high temperature preheat at 540 °C. The results from the torsion experiments are interpreted in terms of microstructural features. Both treatments produce the same strength, but the high temperature preheat leads to better ductility. This improvement is related to the homogenization of solute elements in the matrix; and, concerning AA5182 + Cu, also to the dissolution of a non-equilibrium Al-Mg-Cu ternary eutectic present in the as-cast microstructure. The precipitation of (Fe, Mn)Al6 precipitates in the matrix of both alloys is induced by the high temperature heat treatment. Comparison of the results obtained by hot torsion shows that at low deformation rates AA5182 + Cu has better ductility than the classical alloy, but its ductility is lower at strain rates above 0.6–0.8 s−1. The null ductility transition temperature is lower compared with that in the classical alloy, restricting the range of hot working temperatures. Inside this range the strength of both alloys is approximately the same, although the strain rate sensitivity coefficient is increased by copper additions. The experimental strength values follow the classical sinus-hyperbolic constitutive equation for hot working.


Strain Rate Sensitivity Alloy AA5182 Torsion Test Good Ductility Ternary Eutectic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. W. Evancho and J. G. Kaufman, Aluminium 53 (1977) 609.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    K. Cambell, I. Dovert, T. R. Ramachandraan and J. D. Embury, Metals Forum 2 (1979) 229.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Komatsubara, T. Muramatsu and M. Matsuo, European Patent No. 0259700B1, Bulletin 90/22, 1990 (Sky Aluminium Co., Tokyo (JP)).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B. Verlinden, ATB Metallurgie 29 (1989) 39.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    “Aluminium Alloys” from Metals Handbook, 9th Edn, Vol. 9 revised by R. H. Stevens (American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1985) pp. 351–388.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Villars and L. D. Calvert, “Pearson's Handbook of Crystallographic Data for Intermetallic Phases”, Vol. 2, (American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1985) p. 1018.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. A. Hollinshead, Mater. Sci. Technol. 8 (1992) 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. H. Sanders, Metall. 14 (1981) 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    N. Raghunatan and T. Sheppard, Mater. Sci. Technol. 5 (1989) 542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Martinez De La Puente
    • 1
  • B. Verlinden
    • 1
  • L. Delaey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Metallurgy and Materials EngineeringKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations