Scripta Materialia, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp.

887 892, 1998

Elsevier Science Ltd
Copyright 1998 Acta Metallurgica Inc.
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved.
1359-6462/98 $19.00 1 .00

Pergamon

PII S1359-6462(97)00574-5

EFFECTS OF MICROSTRUCTURE AND ALLOY CONTENTS

ON THE LUDERS
LINE FORMATION IN Al-Mg ALLOYS
Ildong Choi1, Sunhwa Jin1 and Sukbong Kang2
1

Korea Maritime University, Pusan 606-791, Korea

Korea Institute of Machinery and Materials, Changwon 641-010, Korea

(Received June 14, 1997)

(Accepted in revised form November 24, 1997)

Introduction
There have been several efforts to replace steel with aluminum for automobile weight reduction [1 8].
Main efforts have been on the development of 5000 series Al alloys (Al-Mg alloys) because of their
good formability. However, Al-Mg alloys suffer from the formation of various types of Luders line.
Particularly, type A Luders lines formed under 1% elongation make a surface completely unacceptable
for outer auto body panels. There are various nomenclatures of Luders line according to researchers
[8 9]. Thompsons classification [8] will be used in this study because it classifies Luders lines by
surface appearance and shape of stress-strain curve. According to Thompsons classification, type A
Luders lines result in the flamboyant, random or wedge- shaped marking on the specimen surface
and yield point elongation on the stress-strain curve beyond elastic limit.
Even though both type A and type B Luders lines are known to be the result of dislocation pinning
with grain boundaries or solute atoms, the mechanisms of Luders line formation have not yet
completely been understood. However, it is generally accepted that type A Luders lines are due to the
pinning of a few existing dislocations at grain boundaries [10] and type B Luders lines are due to the
repeated pinning of dislocations with Mg atoms [9] or related with the dynamical properties of groups
of dislocations.
Generally, type A Luders lines cannot be hidden with paint, while type B Luders lines dont create
a problem in surface appearance after painting if they are not too prominent. Therefore, type A Luders
lines should be avoided for automobile application of Al-Mg alloys.
The effect of grain size and microstructure on the formation of type A Luders lines in Al-Mg alloys
has been investigated in this study. Additionally, the effect of Mg content on the mechanical properties
and Luders line formation in Al-Mg alloys has also been evaluated.

Experimental
Chemical compositions of four Al-Mg alloys (4.56;7.19%Mg) are shown in Table 1. Tensile specimens with a reduced gage section of 50 3 25 3 1.0mm were prepared from cold rolled sheet.
Specimens were T4 treated in the range of 400C to 550C for 10, 120 and 1800 seconds to produce
samples with different grain size and microstructure. In the case of Al-4.56Mg and Al-5.60Mg alloys,
887

 DERS LINE FORMATION

LU

888

Vol. 38, No. 6

TABLE 1
Chemical Compositions of Al-Mg Alloys (wt.%)
comp.
alloy comp

Si

Fe

Cu

Mn

Mg

Cr

Zn

Ti

Al

Al-4.56Mg
Al-5.60Mg
Al-6.10Mg
Al-7.19Mg

0.11
0.07
0.09
0.09

1.12
0.10
0.08
0.08

0.19
tr.
0.001
0.001

tr.
0.02
0.008
0.007

4.56
5.60
6.10
7.19

0.04
0.01
0.008
0.009

0.01
tr.
0.002
0.002

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01

bal.
bal.
bal.
bal.

specimens were reheat-treated to give variations in the quantity of solute atoms, grain size and
dislocation structure.
Tensile tests were performed with strain rate of 4 3 1024/sec at room temperature. The surface of
tensile specimen was polished to observe the formation of Luders line during tensile test.
Specimens for optical micrograph were prepared by standard metallographic techniques and etched
for 10 to 15 seconds in Kellers reagent. Thin foils for TEM observation were prepared by twin-jet
electropolishing in a nitric-methanol(1:3) solution at 230C and a voltage of 12V.
Results
Typical stress-strain curves of Al-Mg alloys under 4% elongation with and without type A Luders lines
are shown in Fig. 1. In the case of the specimen with type A Luders lines, wedge type marking on the
reduced gage section near the grips was observed under 1% elongation, and then overlapped by type B
Luders lines with continued straining. All the specimens had type B Luders line appeared as serration
on the stress-strain curves with different degree of stress drop in each serration. As shown in Fig. 2, the
magnitude of stress drop was increased with increasing strain and with increasing Mg contents.
Ultimate tensile strength and yield strength were increased slightly with an increase in Mg contents by
solution hardening from Mg atoms as shown in Fig. 3.
Figure 4 reveals the grain structure of Al-6.10Mg and Al-7.19Mg alloys. Grain size increased with
an increase in holding time. There is a relationship between grain size and type A Luders line formation.
Specimens with smaller grain size (,40 mm) had yield point elongation on the stress-strain curve, that

Figure 1. Stress-strain curves of Al-4.56Mg alloy with and without yield point elongation.

Vol. 38, No. 6

DERS LINE FORMATION

LU

889

Figure 2. Relation between percent strain and Mg contents and the magnitude of serrated yield (Ds) deformed at room
temperature.

is, type A Luders line. On the contrary, specimens with medium grain size(40 mm,grain size,70 mm)
didnt show type A Luders line and specimens with larger grain size(.70 mm) showed an orange peel
effect with irregular serration on stress-strain curve. Therefore, specimens with fine grain formed type
A Luders line regardless of Mg content.
Optical microstructures of Al-4.56Mg and Al-5.60Mg alloys are shown in Fig. 5. Grain shape is
fairly uniform and the quantity of precipitates is lower in Al-5.60Mg alloy than Al-4.56Mg alloy.
Among 8 specimens, yield point elongation was observed in Al-4.56Mg alloy reheat-treated at 400C
and 450C(Fig. 5(b) and (c)). In Al-4.56Mg alloy, specimens reheat-treated at 400C and 450C showed
a lower density of precipitates than T4 treated specimen (Fig. 5 (a)). These precipitates were Al-Mg-Si
confirmed by energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis. This means that the amount of Mg
atoms in solid solution were increased by reheat-treatment. Mg atoms, which are larger than Al atoms,
occupy lattice sites in the core of dislocations. In such case, energy state becomes lower and the force
necessary to move the dislocations is increased, restricting the dislocation movement. However, there
is no change in the quantity of precipitates with reheat-treatment in Al-5.60Mg alloy. It suggests that
the characteristics of precipitates in two alloys are different. It can be thought that the precipitates in
Al-4.56Mg alloys are soluble and the precipitates in Al-5.60Mg alloys are stable at reheat-treat
temperature. DSC measurement also indicates that there is endothermic reaction under 450C in
Al-4.56Mg alloy.
TEM observations for dislocation structures of T4 and reheat-treated specimens of Al-4.56Mg and

Figure 3. Variation of strength with Mg content for alloys T4 treated at 450C for 120 sec.

890

DERS LINE FORMATION

LU

Vol. 38, No. 6

Figure 4. Optical micrographs of Al-6.10Mg and Al-7.19Mg alloy T4 treated at 500C.

Al-5.60Mg alloys are shown in Fig. 6. Dislocations are uniformly distributed in T4 treated Al-4.56Mg
alloy, but dislocations form cell structures in reheat-treated specimen. In the case of Al-5.60Mg alloy,
dislocation cell structures does not form with reheat-treatment. It is considered that cross-slip is difficult
in higher Mg containing alloys because stacking fault energy decreases with increasing Mg content.
There are various explanations [9,11] for type A Luders line formation. Dislocation pinning and
unpinning is a common reason. Dislocations are pinned by solute atoms, grain boundaries or dislocation

Figure 5. Optical micrographs of Al-4.56Mg and Al-5.60Mg alloy with T4 and reheat-treatment.

Vol. 38, No. 6

DERS LINE FORMATION

LU

891

Figure 6. TEM micrographs showing dislocation structures in Al-4.56Mg and Al-5.60Mg alloy.

cell structures. EDS analysis shows that the Mg atoms in solid solution increases by reheat-treatment
for Al-4.56Mg alloy. It is possible that higher quantity of Mg atoms in solid solution enhances
dislocation pinning, resulting in yield point elongation. However, this explanation for dislocation
pinning by solute atoms is insufficient because type A Luders lines are localized near the grips in spite
of uniform distribution of solute atoms. Also, type A Luders line is not found in Al-5.60Mg alloy in
spite of large quantity of solute atoms. Type A Luders line formation in specimens with smaller grain
size (Fig. 4) or with dislocation cell structures (Fig. 6) can be explained by the mechanism of dislocation
pinning at grain boundaries or dislocation cell structures. However, this explanation is also not enough
because of locality of type A Luders line in spite of uniform distribution of grains and dislocation cell
structures.
In a tensile specimen, there are some places where the loads are slightly higher than any other places
and dislocations will be pulled away from the pinning at these points. Such dislocations can keep
moving at a reduced load since they are no longer pinned, and therefore, a burst of deformation occurs
at one locality [9]. This might explain the locality of type A Luders line in this study.
Therefore, conclusively through above discussions, dislocation pinning at grain boundaries and/or
dislocation cell structures in the early stage is the main cause of type A Luders line formation and then some
of pinned dislocations are freed at the places with higher load explains the locality of type A Luders line.
Conclusions
1. Type A Luders lines are formed in specimens with smaller grain sizes and/or dislocation cell
structures. It is considered that type A Luders lines are due to dislocation pinning at grain boundaries
or cell structures.
2. The magnitude of stress drop in each serration on the stress-strain curves was increased with
increasing strain and Mg contents.

892

DERS LINE FORMATION

LU

Vol. 38, No. 6

3. Ultimate tensile strength and yield strength were increased slightly with an increase in Mg contents
by solution hardening.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation with grant no. of
951-0806-011-1. Thanks are given for its financial supports.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

J. R. Dieffenbach and A. E. Mascarin, J. Met. 16 (1993).

Aluminium Association Document T9, 1st edn., May (1974).
G. S. Hsu and D. S. Thompson, Sheet Metal Ind. 51, 772 (1974).
W. A. Anderson, R. D. Blackburn, and B. S. Shabel, SAE Paper, 740077 (1974).
J. W. Evancho and J. G. Kaufman, SAE Paper, 770307 (1977).
R. Deshamps, R. Develoy, and J. Peyraud, J. Met. 15 (1976).
P. E. Fortin, M. J. Bull, and D. M. Moore, SAE Paper, 830096 (1983).
D. S. Thompson, SAE Paper, 770203 (1977).
B. J. Brindley and P. J. Worthington, Metallurgical Rev. 15, 101 (1970).
G. Han, I. D. Choi, and S. B. Kang, J. Korean Inst. Met. Mater. 34, 470 (1996).
Y. Estrin, L. P. Kubin, and E. C. Aifantis, Scripta Metall. 29, 1147 (1993).