Finite element modeling and mechanical testing of metal composites made by composite metal foil manufacturing

N/ACitations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Foils of aluminum 1050 H14 12 hard temper and 99.9% copper with 500-micron thickness have been used to manufacture similar and dissimilar composites by composite metal foil manufacturing (CMFM). The metal foils are bonded to each other using a special 80% zinc and 20% aluminum by weight brazing paste. A 3D finite element model has been developed to numerically analyze the time required to heat the metal foils so that a strong bond can be developed by the paste. The numerical simulations run in ANSYS 19.1 have been validated through experiments and rectangular layered composite products have been developed for flexural testing. The flexural test results for layered Al and Al/Cu composites are compared with solid samples of Al 1050 and 99.9% pure copper made by subtractive method. The results show that the layered Al composite is 5.2% stronger whereas the Al/Cu sample is 11.5% stronger in resisting bending loads compared to a solid Al 1050 sample. A higher bend load indicates the presence of a strong intermetallic bond created by the brazing paste between the metal foils. Corrosion testing was also carried out on the composite samples to assess the effect of corrosion on flexural strength. The tests revealed that the composites made by CMFM are not affected by galvanic corrosion after 7 days of testing and the flexural loads remained consistent with composites that were not immersed in a solution of distilled water and NaCl.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Butt, J., Ghorabian, M., Mohaghegh, V., & Shirvani, H. (2019). Finite element modeling and mechanical testing of metal composites made by composite metal foil manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp3030081

Readers over time

‘19‘21‘22‘23‘2402468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

67%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

33%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 6

75%

Social Sciences 1

13%

Computer Science 1

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0