JMEPEG (2017) 26:3410–3419 ASM International

DOI: 10.1007/s11665-017-2760-1 1059-9495/$19.00

Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Mg-SiCp

Composite Sheets Fabricated by Sintering and Warm
Rolling
S. Mohammadi, A.H. Jabbari, and M. Sedighi

(Submitted October 13, 2016; in revised form May 11, 2017; published online June 5, 2017)

In this study, magnesium matrix composite sheets were fabricated by applying powder metallurgy and
warm rolling methods. After preparing required mixtures of magnesium powder and SiC particles in
different conditions, they were cold-pressed and sintered. Then, the sintered specimens were warm rolled
through different numbers of passes. The effects of ball-milling process and the number of rolling passes
were investigated on the tensile strength, hardness, microstructure, and fracture surface of magnesium
matrix composites. The results were compared to those monolithic magnesium specimens (without rein-
forcement particle) produced in a way similar to that of the composites. The results show that among
different factors (i.e., ball-milling process, the presence of SiC particles, and the number of rolling passes),
the number of rolling passes is the most effective parameter on increasing the ultimate tensile strength
(UTS),Vickers microhardness, and grain refinement. In this regard, UTS of the samples was increased at
least 163% between second and sixth rolling passes. Moreover, for the sintered and six-pass rolled com-
posite samples, microhardness and grain refinement were improved, respectively, about 30 and 70%.

Applying powder metallurgy (PM) process, magnesium

Keywords magnesium, metal matrix composite, powder
metallurgy, rolling matrix composites could be produced with a more desirable
particle distribution and less intermetallic phases in the
interface of matrix and reinforcement phases (Ref 8-11).
Different studies have been carried out on properties of
magnesium matrix composites containing various ceramic
1. Introduction particles and produced by powder metallurgy (Ref 12-14).
Hassan and Gupta (Ref 12) studied the effect of different types
of nano-sized oxide particles on microstructural and mechanical
In recent years, many studies have been carried out in order
properties of magnesium using powder metallurgy method.
to investigate various properties of light-weight materials,
Their results showed that among the investigated particle types,
which can be used as structural materials in engineering
Al2O3 particles are the most effective ones in enhancing the
applications. Magnesium matrix composites are the lightest
ultimate tensile strength, while ZrO2 particles are the best for
metal matrix composites (MMCs) with a high strength to
enhancing ductility and work of fracture.
weight ratio in comparison with other metal-based materials
Poddar et al. (Ref 15) produced magnesium matrix com-
(Ref 1). Although magnesium has some major limitations such
posites reinforced with SiC particles via the rheocasting
as low elastic modulus and tensile strength (especially at higher
process. The results showed that a uniform distribution of
temperatures) and poor creep and wear resistance, the addition
SiC particles, minimal porosity, and good SiC-matrix interface
of harder and stiffer ceramic reinforcement particles to it can
bonding occur through this process. In addition, the presence of
significantly improve its different mechanical and metallurgical
SiC particulate led to significant improvement in hardness,
properties (Ref 2). Moreover, among all available ceramic
elastic modulus, and yield strength and decreased the ultimate
particles, SiC has the best wettability with magnesium and a
tensile strength (UTS) and ductility. Ferkel and Mordike (Ref
desirable stability in molten magnesium (Ref 3-6). Jie Shen
16) investigated the effect of nano-sized SiC particles on creep
et al. (Ref 7) studied the effect of volume ratios of micro and
resistance and mechanical properties of magnesium matrix
nano-SiC particles on grain refinement, distribution of SiC
composite. According to their obtained results, incorporation of
particle, and tensile properties of as-cast AZ31B composites.
a low-volume fraction (3%) of SiC nanoparticles develops
They reported that by applying 9 vol.% of micro-SiC and
creep resistant of the magnesium matrix composite.
1 vol.% of nano-SiC particles, excellent grain refinement could
Although there are extensive studies about rolling of
be achieved. Moreover, the results showed that the maximum
magnesium and magnesium alloys (Ref 17, 18), few investi-
yield and tensile strengths are available with a 9:1 ratio of
gations have been done on magnesium based composites.
micro to nano-SiC particles, while the 9.5:0.5 ratio yields the
Habibnejad-Korayem et al. (Ref 19) studied the effect of nano-
highest elongation.
Al2O3 particles on mechanical and physical properties of
magnesium and AZ31 composites produced by stir casting
method followed by a warm rolling process. According to their
S. Mohammadi, A.H. Jabbari, and M. Sedighi, School of
Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, results, the addition of nanoparticles significantly improves
Tehran 16846-13114, Iran. Contact e-mail: sedighi@iust.ac.ir. both hardness and tensile properties of the rolled composites.

3410—Volume 26(7) July 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

 In this paper, powder metallurgy and warm rolling processes
are applied to fabricate magnesium matrix composite sheets.
Although using PM method will yield a more brittle MMC with
lower formability, producing functionally graded material
(FGM) in sheet form could be achieved after warm rolling of
the specimens. Moreover, the interaction between matrix and
reinforcements phases is more controllable and also more
desirable particle distribution could occur. In this research, the
effect of ball-milling process and the number of rolling passes
are studied on mechanical and metallurgical properties of the
produced composite; i.e., tensile strength, hardness, particle
distribution, grain size, and fracture surface. In addition, the
results are compared to those of monolithic pure magnesium
specimens with a production procedure same as that of the
composites.
2. Materials and Methods
Magnesium-SiC composites were prepared using powder
metallurgy technique and warm rolling process. Pure magne-
sium powder (99% purity with a particle size < 75 lm) and
SiC particle (with an average diameter < 10 lm) were used as
matrix and reinforcement phases, respectively. The composite
specimens were fabricated in five steps including powders
preparation (blending and/or ball-milling), drying or degassing,
cold pressing, sintering, and finally warm rolling. Figure 1
presents schematic of the experimental procedure.
Two different types of the mixture were prepared as follows:
– Sample No. 1 Pure magnesium powder and 10 wt% SiC
were blended in ball-mill jars for 1 h at 300 rpm. The ob-
tained mixture was dried at 80 C for 4 h.
– Sample No. 2 Pure magnesium powder with 1 wt% stearic
acid was ball-milled at 500 rpm for 10 h. Then, 10 wt.%
SiC particle was added to the ball-milled magnesium pow-
der and the mixture was blended together at 300 rpm. The
obtained powders were firstly heated up to 360 C and
then kept at this temperature for 30 min under a vacuum
condition to vaporize PCA and other pollutions (Ref 20).
Powder mixtures were prepared using a planetary ball-
milling machine (PM-2400) with hardened SPK jars. The
volume of jars was 500 ml, and the process was implemented
under argon atmosphere. The diameters of steel balls (coated
with chromium) were 8, 10, 12, and 15 mm with a ball to
powder weight ratio (BPR) of 20:1. After every 15 min of
blending or milling, the ball-milling machine was turned off for
15 min in order to avoid temperature rising in the jars. After
drying or degassing process, the obtained mixed powders were
cold compacted in a steel die at the pressure of 600 MPa using
Fig. 1 Schematic of composite fabrication procedure
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
a uniaxial hydraulic press to produce rectangular samples with
the dimensions of 30 mm 9 33 mm 9 3 mm. Afterward, all
samples were sintered under vacuum condition at 0.8 Tm
(465 C) for 120 min in a tube furnace.
After sintering, the samples were warm rolled in six passes.
The diameter of the rollers was 200 mm, and the roller speed
was 20 rpm. In each pass, the samples were heated in a
cylindrical resistance furnace at 350 C for 15 min and then
rolled immediately. It should be noted that, according to
implemented measurements, the samples temperatures were
about 300 C at the beginning of the rolling process for each
pass. The thickness reduction was about 10% in each pass.
After six passes, the thickness of the samples was reduced from
3 to 1.5 mm. It is noticeable that before performing the first
pass, the samples were pre-rolled with a very tiny thickness
reduction such that to reduce the porosity and crack initiation
possibility in the samples. The heating and temperature
conditions were as same as other rolling passes.
In order to investigate the effect of reinforcement particles,
pure Mg powder (without reinforcement) was prepared in a
way that the two mentioned samples were done. Table 1 shows
the fabrication steps of the samples.
The microstructural examinations of the rolled MMC and
pure samples were done using a light microscopy (LM).
Surface preparation consisted of grinding with progressively
finer SiC papers and mechanical polishing. The grain structure
was achieved by subsequent etching at room temperature for 5-
15 s in a solution of picric acid (4.2 g), acetic acid (10 ml),
water (10 ml), and ethanol (70 ml). The hardness of the
samples was determined using a Vickers microhardness
apparatus with an indenting load of 0.2 kg and a holding time
of 10 s. For each sample, hardness was measured at five points
in the central axes of the intersection (Fig. 2). As shown in
Fig. 3, tensile test specimens were prepared using wire-cut
process. The uniaxial tensile tests were carried out at room
temperature with a strain rate of 2 9 103 s1. Finally, fracture
surfaces of samples were observed by a scanning electron
microscope (SEM).
3. Results and Discussion
3.1 Microstructure
Particle distribution of the fabricated magnesium-SiC com-
posites is shown in Fig. 4 for samples No. 1 and No. 2. Both
samples have a proper distribution of SiC particles in magne-
sium matrix. However, applying a high rotational speed of ball-
milling with enough milling time has caused a more desirable
distribution.
Figure 5 shows the microstructures of different samples.
Among these samples, sample No. 1 with pure Mg powder has
Volume 26(7) July 2017—3411
 the biggest grain size (Fig. 5a), while adding SiC particle and

at 300 C (6 passes)
using ball-milling process decrease the grain size (Fig. 5b).
Moreover, applying warm rolling process improves grain

Rolling

Rolling
refinement in the magnesium matrix (Fig. 5c).
Figure 6 shows the grain size of the samples after a different
number of rolling passes. The measurement was carried out in

Step 5
two longitudinal and transverse directions of the rolling process
using the intercept method. During this process, five lines at

at 300 C (1 pass)
least were used in each direction. The length of these lines was

Pre-rolling
about 250 lm (at magnification of 2009), and the grain size
Pre-rolling was measured in different parts of the samples cross sec-
tion. According to the obtained results, grain size reduction is
not very significant in both longitudinal and transverse
at 465 C for 2 h directions. There are some possible reasons which have
barricaded more grain refinement. The most important reason
is the repetition of heating step for each rolling pass, which
Sintering
Step 4

could cause grain growing in the samples and decrease the

effect of dynamic recrystallization (DRX). DRX in magnesium
strongly depends on deformation temperature, initial grain size,
and amount and rate of strain (Ref 17). Due to the low amount
of applied strain in the samples during each pass and also
Cold pressing
(at 600 MPa)

deformation temperature (300 C), DRX and consequently

Step 3

grain size refinement were not significant. It should be noted

that the grain size has less reduction in longitudinal direction
due to grain stretching in the rolling process.
Figure 6 also shows the effect of SiC particles on grain
Degassing at 465 C

refinement of the composite samples. In comparison with pure

Drying at 80 C

for 30 min

samples (No. 1 and No. 2), composite specimens have a finer

for 4 h
Step 2

grain size (though not considerable) in both directions. The

presence of SiC particles could cause grain refinement during
blending and ball-milling and prevent grain size growing when
the samples are being heated up. Moreover, the ball-milling
process has an important role in the matrix grain refinement.
Mg and SiCp at 300 rpm
Ball-milling of Mg for 10 h at 500 rpm blending of ball-milled

Based on the results of pure magnesium samples at the sixth

passes, the average grain size of pure sample No. 2 in
comparison with that of pure sample No. 1 has 40 and 33%
decreases in the rolling and the transverse directions, respec-
tively. For their composites samples, the amount of grain size
reduction is about 41% in the rolling direction and 20% in the
transverse one.
Ball-milling of Mg for 10 h at 500 rpm …
Blending of Mg and SiCp for 1 h at 300 rpm

Among ball-milling process, SiC presence, and the number

of rolling passes, the last one has the highest effect on the grain
Step 1

refinement. For instance, the grain size reduction in the

Blending of Mg for 1 h at 300 rpm

composite sample No. 2 is about 70% after six passes.

3.2 Microhardness
Microhardness results of the samples No. 1 and No. 2 are
Table 1 Fabrication steps of the samples

shown in Fig. 7. According to the results, the microhardness of

the samples has been increased by applying ball-milling
process, adding SiC particles, and enhancing the number of
rolling passes.
SiC particles have an important effect on increasing of
microhardness in the matrix. In samples No. 1 and No. 2, after
sintering (but not rolling), SiC particles increase microhardness
Materials

about 14.7 and 13.7%, while this increasing is about 11.3 and
Mg-SiCp

Mg-SiCp
Pure Mg

Pure Mg

22.6% after the sixth pass. It has been revealed that reinforce-
ment phase (similar to the ball-milling and warm rolling) causes
grain refinement in the composite, which has a direct effect on
Sample No. 1

Sample No. 2

increasing of the hardness. Indeed, grain boundaries barricade

dislocation movements causing some difficulty for local plastic
number
Sample

deformation. As a result, finer grains would create more grain

boundaries and increase microhardness. In addition, SiC

3412—Volume 26(7) July 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

Fig. 2 Cold-pressed sample: (a) the schematic of cold-pressed samples and the position of hardness measuring and (b) the magnesium matrix
composite after cold pressing
Fig. 3 Tensile test specimens; (a) the dimensions of tensile test
specimens and (b) tensile test specimen of magnesium matrix com-
posite
particles have a higher hardness and stiffness rather than Mg.
Besides, when they are distributed in Mg matrix, they could
make local plastic deformation in the matrix more difficult. As
a result, the hardness in the matrix would be increased. In
addition, a uniform distribution of SiC particles can enhance
microhardness of Mg matrix more efficiently. This purpose
could be achieved by applying a ball-milling process, which
could also decrease particle and grain size of Mg powder,
improve their mechanical properties by cold working, and
produce a more desirable interface between Mg powder and
SiC particles.
Another parameter with a high impact on microhardness is
the number of rolling passes. According to Fig. 7, higher
microhardness could be achieved in a higher number of passes.
For instance, microhardness of the composite sample No. 2 was
improved about 29.5% during six passes. The most important
explanation for this observation is work hardening in the
matrix; however, high temperature decreases the advantages of
work hardening. In addition, rolling process could lead to a
better particle distribution and matrix-reinforcement interface in
the composites.
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
3.3 Uniaxial Tensile Test
Engineering stress-strain curves of samples No. 1 and 2 are
shown in Fig. 8, 9 and 10 after a different number of rolling
passes.
Based on these results, UTS of all samples indicates an
increase by adding SiC particles, ball-milling process, and
applying for more rolling passes. Moreover, the maximum
elongation of sample No. 2 (both pure magnesium and
composite) was enhanced by increasing the number of passes,
while for sample No. 1 the highest elongation was reached in
the fourth pass. Figures 11 and 12 present the UTS and
maximum elongation of the samples in a different number of
passes, respectively. These figures have been obtained from
Fig. 8, 9, and 10.
The presence of SiC particles could increase yield stress and
UTS of the composites. Having a proper interface between
matrix and reinforcement phases would lead to better load
transfer and the increased strength of the composites. Indeed,
the matrix transfers the externally applied force to reinforce-
ment and thereby these two phases would tolerate it together
(Ref 21). Since SiC particle has higher mechanical properties
such as elastic modulus, yield stress, and ultimate strength, the
total strength of the composite will be increased according to
the rule of mixtures. In addition, the difference between thermal
expansion and elastic modulus of reinforcement particles and
matrix would increase dislocations in the matrix and enhance
yield stress and UTS, consequently. As shown in Fig. 10, UTS
in composites No. 1 and No. 2 is improved about 94 and 38%
in comparison with pure Mg sample in the sixth pass,
respectively.
As explained in microhardness section, ball-milling process
improved the interface and increased the strength of matrix
powder by implementing cold working and plastic deformation
on particles. These all could improve the UTS of the specimens.
For example, in the six-pass rolled samples, UTS in composite
No. 2 was increased about 40% in comparison with composite
No. 1, while this enhancement is about 97% for pure
magnesium samples.
Volume 26(7) July 2017—3413
Fig. 4 Distribution of SiC particles in magnesium matrix: (a) sample No. 1 and (b) sample No. 2

Fig. 5 Grain structure, LM; (a) sample No. 1, pure Mg, before rolling, (b) sample No. 2, composite, before rolling and (c) sample No. 2, com-
posite, after six passes of rolling

Longitudinal It can be observed that increasing the number of rolling

Sample No.1-Pure Mg passes has the most critical effect on the tensile behavior of the
Sample No.1-Composite
20
Sample No.2-Pure Mg
samples. First, the applied compressive stress during warm
18 rolling decreases the porosity of the specimens increasing UTS
Sample No.2-Composite
16
Grain Size (μm)

and elongation. Second, warm rolling could help to have a

14
12 better interface between two phases. Also, it introduces hard
10 working in different passes and increases the dislocation
8 density. For pure magnesium samples, a 464 and 392%
6 increase is achieved between the second and sixth passes for
4
2
sample No. 1 and No. 2, respectively, while this rise is,
0 respectively, 239 and 163% for the composites. Moreover,
0 2 4 6 warm rolling decreases the grain size. In general, grain
Number of Passes refinement in the presence of reinforcement particle, applying
Transvers ball-milling process and warm rolling improves yield stress and
18 Sample No.1-Pure Mg
UTS, which could be explained by Hall-Petch relationship. The
16 Sample No.1-Composite grain size dependence of the yield stress can be expressed
14 Sample No.2-Pure Mg through Eq 1 (Ref 22):
Grain Size (μm)

12 Sample No.2-Composite 1
10 rY ¼ r0 þ Kd 2 : ðEq 1Þ
8
6
where d is the average grain diameter, r0 is a constant value,
4 and K is the Hall-Petch coefficient or the Hall-Petch slope.
2 The value of K depends on different parameters such as tem-
0 perature, texture, composition, and preparation. The amount
0 2 4 6
of K is about 0.21 MPa m1/2 for Mg and Mg alloys according
Number of Passes to the published results (Ref 22). Figures 13 and 14, respec-
tively, show the yield stress and the hardness versus inverse
Fig. 6 Grain size of different samples in longitudinal and trans- square root of the average grain size (in both directions) for
verse directions all the samples.

3414—Volume 26(7) July 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

 Sample No.1-Pure Mg

70 Sample No.1-Composite
Sample No.2-Pure Mg
Sample No.2-Composite

Vickers Microhardness
60

50

40

30

20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Number of Passes

Fig. 7 Microhardness of samples No. 1 and No. 2

80 180 Sample No.1 - Pure Mg

Sample No.1 - Composite
Sample No.1 - Pure Mg Sample No.2 - Pure Mg
Sample No.1 - Composite
150
Sample No.2 - Composite
60 Sample No.2 - Pure Mg
120

Stress(MPa)
Stress(MPa)

Sample No.2 - Composite

90
40
60
20 30

0
0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Elongation(%)
Elongation(%)

Fig. 10 Engineering stress-strain curve for samples No. 1 and No.

Fig. 8 Engineering stress-strain curve for samples No. 1 and No. 2 2 after six rolling passes
after two rolling passes

120 180
Sample No.1-Pure Mg
Ultimate Tensile Strength (MPa)

Sample No.1 - Pure Mg 160

Sample No.1 - Composite Sample No.1-Composite
100
Sample No.2 - Pure Mg 140 Sample No.2-Pure Mg
80 Sample No.2 - Composite 120 Sample No.2-Composite
Stress(MPa)

100
60
80
40
60
20 40

20
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0
Elongation(%) 2 4 6
Number of Passes
Fig. 9 Engineering stress-strain curve for samples No. 1 and No. 2
after four rolling passes Fig. 11 Ultimate tensile strength (UTS) of the samples at different
number of passes

According to Fig. 13, the corresponding maximum and
minimum Hall-Petch slope is 2.12 MPa m1/2 and 1.06 MPa m1/2
for composite No. 2 and pure sample No. 1, respectively. These
Hall-Petch slopes are significantly higher than published results
for pure Mg. Indeed, in addition to grain refinement, there are
other factors which have enhanced yield stress. As it is
mentioned previously, during warm rolling process, porosity
dramatically reduced and the particles interfaces improved.
Moreover, dislocation density increased in each pass. As a
result, enhancement of yield stress is not occurred only due to
grain refinement. Although the amount of Hall-Petch slope is
reduced in the diagram of hardness versus inverse square root of

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance Volume 26(7) July 2017—3415

 1 the average grain size (Fig. 14), it is still high in comparison
Sample No.1-Pure Mg
0.9 Sample No.1-Composite with reported amounts. It could be explained by considering the
Maximum Elongation (%) 0.8 Sample No.2-Pure Mg higher impact of porosities and weak interfaces on the tensile
Sample No.2-Composite
0.7 yield stress rather than hardness (which is a local plastic
0.6 deformation). So, by applying higher number of rolling passes,
0.5 yield stress could increase due to grain refinement, decrease of
0.4 porosity, and creation of better interface.
0.3
0.2 3.4 Fracture Surface
0.1 The images of fracture surface in different samples are
0 shown in Fig. 15, 16 and 17. Figure 15 presents the effect
2 4 6
Number of Passes
of SiC particles on the fracture surface of sample No. 2.
After rolling the pure magnesium and composite specimens
for six passes, SiC particles indicated an important effect on
Fig. 12 Maximum elongation of (UTS) of the samples at different
number of passes the fracture surface of the composite. Crack growth
occurred between magnesium initial particles in the pure

140 Sample No.2 -Pure Mg

Sample No.2 Composite
120 Sample No.1 - Pure Mg
K = 2.1179
Sample No.1 - Composite
100
Yield stress (MPa)

K = 1.2066
80
K = 0.7253
60
K = 1.0627
40

20

0
250 300 350 400 450
d-0.5 (m-0.5)

Fig. 13 Yield stress vs. inverse square root of the average grain size

700 Sample No.2 - Pure Mg

Sample No.2 - Composite K = 1.6338
Sample No.1 - Pure Mg
Sample No.1 - Composite

600
Hardness (MPa)

K = 0.7471

K = 1.1022

500 K = 1.0318

400
250 300 350 400 450
d-0.5 (m-0.5)

Fig. 14 Hardness vs. inverse square root of the average grain size

3416—Volume 26(7) July 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

Fig. 15 Effect of SiC particles on decohesion of samples obtained from ball-milled powder mixture and rolled in six passes: (a) pure magne-
sium, (b) Mg-SiCp composite, fractured surface, SEM

Fig. 16 Effect of powder ball-milling on decohesion of pure magnesium sinters: (a) samples with blended powder and (b) sample with ball-
milled powder, fractured surface, SEM

specimen. In comparison, it occurred between and through
the grains as transgranular and intergranular fractures in the
composite (in addition to particle decohesion). This obser-
vation would account for the enhancement of UTS in the
composite.
The effect of the ball-milling process on the fracture surface
of pure sintered samples (before rolling process) is shown in
Fig. 16 for samples No. 1 and 2. Considering the grain size of
both specimens, decohesion occurred among the initial mag-
nesium particles. It means that magnesium particles have not
had a good interface in the sintered samples, probably due to
lack of a strengthening process after sintering. In addition,
sample No. 2 has finer particles because of the ball-milling
process.
Figure 17 illustrates the effect of pass number on the
fracture surface of sample No. 2 before rolling and after a
different number of passes (2, 4, and 6).According to the
results, fewer microcracks are observed by increasing the
number of rolling, which leads to an increased elongation in the
six-pass composite.

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance Volume 26(7) July 2017—3417

Fig. 17 Effect of the number of rolling passes on decohesion of Mg-SiCp composite obtained from ball-milled powder: (a) reference material
before rolling, (b), (c), and (d) rolled in 2, 4, and 6 passes, respectively, fractured surface, SEM
4. Conclusions
In this work, for the first time, magnesium-SiC composite
sheets were produced using powder metallurgy and warm
rolling methods. Also, the effects of reinforcement particles,
ball-milling process, and the number of rolling passes were
investigated on tensile strength, hardness, and microstructure of
composites and the results were compared to those of
monolithic magnesium specimens. According to the results,
the following points can be concluded:
– Monolithic Mg and Mg-10 wt.% SiC composite sheets can
be successfully fabricated using powder metallurgy tech-
niques followed by warm rolling.
– Adding SiC particles, ball-milling process, and increasing
the number of rolling passes are three important parameters
which could decrease grain size and enhance mechanical
properties; however, applying more rolling passes is the
most effective one.
3418—Volume 26(7) July 2017
– These parameters lead to a grain refinement in the magne-
sium matrix in both longitudinal and transverse directions;
however, this reduction is not very significant due to warm
rolling. For example, the grain size reduction in the six-pass
rolled composite (with ball-milled powder) is about 70%.
– The results of tensile tests reveal that increasing the number of
passes significantly improves UTS. For pure magnesium spec-
imens, an increasing about 464 and 392% was achieved be-
tween the second and sixth passes for samples with blended
and ball-milled powders, respectively, while this increasing is,
respectively, about 239 and 163% for the composites.
– According to the fracture surface images, different mecha-
nisms of materials decohesion were observed in the sam-
ples. Furthermore, adding SiC particles to magnesium
matrix and applying ball-milling and the warm rolling pro-
cess affected the fracture surfaces. For instance, there is
less microcrack in the rolled sample compared to the un-
rolled sample. It could be one of the reasons increasing the
maximum elongation in the rolled composites.
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
References
1. M. Gupta, M.O. Lai, and D. Saravanaranganathan, Synthesis,
Microstructure and Properties Characterization of Disintegrated Melt
Deposited Mg/SiC Composites, J. Mater. Sci., 2000, 35(9), p 2155–
2165. doi:10.1023/A:1004706321731
2. M. Gupta and N.M.L. Sharon, Magnesium, Magnesium Alloys, and
Magnesium Composites, Wiley, Hoboken, 2011. doi:10.1002/978047
0905098
3. H. Yu, H.S. Yu, Z.Y. Zhang, G.H. Min, and B.S. You, Effect of SiC
Particles on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of AZ91
Magnesium Matrix Composites. In 18th International Conference on
Composite Materials, The Korean Society of Composite Materials.
(Jeju International Convention Center, Jeju Island, 2011)
4. S. Kawamori and T. Machida, Silicon Carbide Dispersion Strengthen-
ing of Magnesium Using Mechanical Alloying Method, Mater. Trans.,
2008, 49, p 304–309. doi:10.2320/matertrans.P-MRA2007883
5. M.J. Shen, X.J. Wang, C.D. Li, M.F. Zhang, X.S. Hu, M.Y. Zheng, and
K. Wu, Effect of Submicron Size SiC Particles on Microstructure and
Mechanical Properties of AZ31B Magnesium Matrix Composites,
Mater. Des., 2014, 54, p 436–442. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2015.03.001
6. P. Asadi, G. Faraji, A. Masoumi, and M.K.B. Givi, Experimental
Investigation of Magnesium-Base Nano Composite Produced by
Friction Stir Processing: Effects of Particle Types and Number of
Friction Stir Processing Passes, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2011, 42(9), p
2820. doi:10.1007/s11661-011-0698-8
7. M.J. Shen, T. Ying, F.Y. Chen, and J.M. Hou, Effect of Micro and
Nano-SiC Particulate Reinforcements in Magnesium-Based Metal
Matrix Composites, J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 2016, 25(6), p 2222. doi:
10.1007/s11665-016-2068-6
8. G. Garcs, E. Oorbe, P. Prez, M. Klaus, C. Genzel, and P. Adeva,
Influence of SiC Particles on Compressive Deformation of Magnesium
Matrix Composites, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2012, 533, p 119–123. doi:
10.1016/j.msea.2011.10.103
9. Y.B. Liu, S.C. Lim, L. Lu, and M.O. Lai, Recent Development in the
Fabrication of Metal Matrix-Particulate Composites Using Powder
Metallurgy Techniques, J. Mater. Sci., 1994, 29(8), p 1999–2007. doi:
10.1007/bf01154673
10. P. Prez, G. Garcs, and P. Adeva, Influence of Texture on the
Mechanical Properties of Commercially Pure Magnesium Prepared
by Powder Metallurgy, J. Mater. Sci., 2007, 42(11), p 3969–3976. doi:
10.1007/s10853-006-1301-3
11. W.N.A.W. Muhammad, Z. Sajuri, Y. Mutoh, and Y. Miyashita,
Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Magnesium Composites
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
Prepared by Spark Plasma Sintering Technology, J. Alloys Compd.,
2011, 509(20), p 6021–6029. doi:10.1016/j.jallcom.2011.02.153
12. S.F. Hassan and M. Gupta, Effect of Different Types of Nano-Size
Oxide particulates on Microstructural and Mechanical properties of
Elemental Mg, J. Mater. Sci., 2006, 41(8), p 2229–2236. doi:
10.1007/s10853-006-7178-3
13. K. Purazrang, J. Schroeder, and K.U. Kainer, Tensile and Fracture
Toughness Behaviour of Reinforced Magnesium Composites, Devel-
opments in the Science and Technology of Composite Materials. In
Fourth European Conference on Composite Materials (Stuttgart-
Germany). (Springer, 1990), pp. 301–306. doi: 10.1007/978-94-
009-1123-9
14. W.W.L. Eugene and M. Gupta, Characteristics of Aluminum and
Magnesium Based Nano-composites Processed Using Hybrid Micro-
wave Sintering, Microw. Power Electromagn. Energy, 2010, 44(1), p
14–27. doi:10.1080/08327823.2010.11689773
15. P. Poddar, S. Mukherjee, and K.L. Sahoo, The Microstructure and
Mechanical Properties of Sic Reinforced Magnesium Based Compos-
ites by Rheocasting Process, J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 2009, 18(7), p
849–855. doi:10.1007/s11665-008-9334-1
16. H. Ferkel and B.L. Mordike, Magnesium Strengthened by SiC Nano-
Particles, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2001, 298(1), p 193–199. doi:
10.1016/S0921-5093(00)01283-1 ((in English))
17. F. Zarandi and S. Yue, in Magnesium Sheet; Challenges and
Opportunities, Magnesium Alloys, Design, Processing and Properties,
ed. by F. Czerwinski. ISBN: 978-953-307-520-4, In Tech. http://
www.intechopen.com/books/magnesium-alloys-design-processing-and
properties/magnesium-sheet-challenges-and-opportunities, 2011
18. M.L. Olguı́n-González, D. Hernández-Silva, M.A. Garcı́a-Bernal, and
V.M. Sauce-Rangel, Hot Deformation Behavior of Hot-Rolled AZ31
and AZ61 Magnesium Alloys, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2014, 597, p 82–88.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2013.12.027
19. M. Habibnejad-Korayem, R. Mahmudi, and W.J. Poole, Enhanced
Properties of Mg-Based Nano-Composites Reinforced with Al2O3
Nano-Particles, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2009, 519(1–2), p 198–203. doi:
10.1016/j.msea.2009.05.001
20. P. Burke, Investigation of the Sintering Fundamentals of Magnesium,
Ph.D. Thesis, Dalhousie University Halifax, 2011
21. S.F. Hassan and M. Gupta, Enhancing Physical and Mechanical
Properties of Mg Using Nano-Sized Al2O3 Particulates as Reinforce-
ment, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2004, 36(8), p 2253. doi:
10.1007/s11661-005-0344-4
22. H. Friedrich and B.L. Mordike, Magnesium Technology, 1st ed.,
Springer, Berlin, 2011
Volume 26(7) July 2017—3419