Foaming characteristics of Al–Si–Mg (LM25)

alloy prepared by liquid metal processing

R. Nadella*, S. N. Sahu and A. A. Gokhale
LM25 (Al–Si–Mg) foams were made by melt processing route using Al foam scrap turnings as
thickening agent in place of aluminium powder or Ca metal. The effects of foaming temperature
and excess Mg content on melt expansion and cell structure were studied. The selection of
foaming temperature significantly influenced foam decay. While severe collapse occurred at
670uC, foam decay is hardly observed at 640uC. Moreover, presence of excess Mg (3 wt-%) in
this alloy enhanced collapse at 670uC, presumably due to its surface tension lowering effect.
Despite foam collapse, a well defined and uniform cell size could be obtained at 670uC as
compared to the foams obtained at 640uC. Uniaxial compression tests showed serrated plateau
stress–strain behaviour with extensive localised but non-catastrophic damage leading to
progressive breaking away of foam pieces. Overall, these experiments showed the potential to
manufacture good quality LM25 foam using inexpensive Al foam turnings.
Keywords: Al–Si alloy, Al foam, Foam collapse, Compression

Introduction elements on the quality of Al foams has not been

Aluminium foams are ultra light weight materials, which
have a high potential for structural and functional
applications involving sound and high energy absorp-
tion. Among various manufacturing techniques, liquid
metal processing, involving the addition of foaming
agent to the thickened aluminium melt, has gained an
attention due to its simplicity and low cost. Although
large amount of literature is available on Al foams, very
limited work1–3 exists on foams of one of the most
prominent cast alloys, LM25 (A356). Yang and Nakae
have carried out foaming experiments by varying TiH2
content (0?5–2?5%), and foaming temperature (620–
660uC) on A356 alloy with aluminium powder (5 wt-%
and 60 mm size) as the thickening agent.1 They suggested
an optimum combination of temperatures (640–650uC)
and TiH2 levels (1–1?5%) for good foamability. A
uniform cell structure with high void content (86%)
could be obtained with 1% TiH2 foamed at 640uC. They
have also reported that rise in viscosity (by varying the
stirring time) resulted in generation of more particles
which aided in obtaining higher porosity levels in
foams.2 Yang et al.3 showed that in an Al–6?7Si–2?8Cu
alloy with 2 wt-%Ca and 1 wt-%TiH2 foams with
different pore structures could be produced by varying
the stirring time at a foaming temperature of 667uC
(940 K). In spite of its potential cost savings, no
attempts to utilise foam scrap for Al foam production
were reported. Also, the role of surface tension reducing
Light Alloy Casting Group, Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory,
Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad 500 058, India
*Corresponding author, email nvravi_in@yahoo.co.uk
investigated.
The aim of the present work is twofold. First, to check
the feasibility of preparing Al alloy foam with Al–Ca
foam scrap turnings as the source of oxides. In this way,
in addition to cost reduction, major presence of Ca,
which is not an alloying element in aluminium alloys,
can be avoided. The other aim is to compare the foam
quality with and without Mg, which oxidises readily and
is a surface tension reducing element in Al. The work
also tries to examine the interplay between the Mg
content and the foaming temperature.
Materials and experimental method
The materials used for the foam synthesis are LM25
alloy ingots (Al–6?9Si–0?28Mg–0?12Fe), Al foam turn-
ings (Al–2Ca–0?72Ti) and TiH2 powder (all elemental
compositions are described in wt-%). The foaming
experiments were carried out in a cylindrical clay
graphite crucible (inner diameter about 90 and
410 mm height) with 1?25 kg of alloy melt, following
the general principles of Alporas technique described
elsewhere.4 Instead of Ca, pure aluminium foam turn-
ings of size range from 75 to 105 mm (4 wt-%) were
added to the melt for thickening at 680uC and stirring
was carried out at 1200 rev min21 for 10–13 min. Upon
cooling to foaming temperature, 1?25 wt-%TiH2 was
added to liquid metal and the temperature was main-
tained in order to facilitate the blowing agent (TiH2)
decomposition and foaming process. Once the foaming
activity ceased, which was confirmed visually, the
crucible was removed from the furnace and allowed to
cool in air for solidification of the foam. The holding
time at the foaming temperature varied between 3 and
7 min. Keeping all other experimental conditions

ß 2010 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining

Published by Maney on behalf of the Institute
Received 27 February 2009; accepted 17 March 2009
908 DOI 10.1179/174328409X430500 Materials Science and Technology 2010 VOL 26 NO 8

1 Liquid foam decay of sample F-3 during cooling from
670uC
unchanged, two foaming temperatures, namely 640 and
670uC, and three excess Mg levels, namely 0, 0?25/0?5
and 3% were used (Table 1).
The foaming ratio is computed as the ratio of total
height of solid foam h to the height of the original melt
ho. For evaluation, the solid cylindrical foams were
sectioned longitudinally with electrodischarge sawing.
Cell size measurements were carried out on scanned
sections of electrodischarge sawing cut foams by linear
intercept method. In cases where the cell structure is not
easily discernible, an approximate estimate was made.
Chemical composition was analysed through wet analy-
sis. Metallography was carried out on selected foam
samples by optical and scanning electron microscopy
(SEM).
Compression tests were carried out at an initial strain
rate of 0?05 s21 on electrodischarge machined wire cut
samples of 25625630 mm size, with longer dimension
corresponding to the foaming direction as well as
loading direction.
Results and discussion
Foam collapse and quality
Soon after attaining maximum expansion, liquid foams
made at 670uC dropped to various heights during
cooling, depending on the Mg content. Such a behaviour
was not observed in foams made at 640uC. The height
reduction was most severe in foam F-3, from initial
272 mm to final 62 mm in the solidified foam. The
variation of liquid foam height with time after attaining
maximum expansion was monitored for foam F-3 using
Table 1 Details of foaming experiments on LM25 alloy
Foam no. Excess Mg, wt-% Cell size, mm
F-1 … 2.72
F-2 0.25 2.82
F-3 3 …
F-4 … 5.20
F-5 0.5 6.82*
F-6 3 3.64–6.51
*Approximate estimate from the macrostructure.
Nadella et al. Foaming characteristics of Al–Si–Mg (LM25) alloy
a simple scale, as shown in Fig. 1. Such a large drop in
height cannot be attributed to thermal contraction or
solidification shrinkage.
The macrostructures of the foams in longitudinal
section (Fig. 2) showed well defined cell structure, except
for F-3 foam. This could have been expected since the
foam turnings contain foam stabilising oxides (due to
original foam processing) and a large amount of surface
oxides. Thus foam turnings seemed to have served the
role of Al powder used by other researchers1,2 as a
thickening agent. The vigorous stirring before foaming
must have helped in the creation of new oxides and
distribution of oxides present in foam turnings. In the
foams made at 670uC, folded areas were seen in the top
and side portions. This suggests that the drop in height
during cooling phase was accompanied by severe cell
collapse, and this terminology will be adopted to
describe the height drop in what follows.
In all cases, solid (unfoamed) portion was present in
the bottom region of the foam ingot. Similar observa-
tions have been reported in the past and were attributed
to liquid drainage.2 Interestingly, chemical analysis
showed only 0?33%Ti in the solid bottom portion and
1–1?5% in the foamed portion. The lower Ti content in
the solid bottom was probably due to the lack of
thorough mixing and consequently little penetration of
TiH2 up to the bottom of the alloy melt, explaining lack
of foaming. However, considering that the bottom
portion of the melt did not foam at all, the foaming
ratios were recomputed by deducting the height of the
solid bottom from both numerator and denominator of
the ratios, as presented in Fig. 3.
In general, foaming ratios were higher at the foaming
temperature of 640uC than at 670uC. In the case of foam
F-3, the liquid foam expanded to a maximum height of
272 mm, as reported above (Fig. 1). This corresponds to
a foaming ratio of 13?6 in the liquid state (after
compensating for the unfoamed bottom). This value is
slightly higher than all the foaming ratios at 640uC, as
shown in Fig. 3. Thus, it can be inferred that the lower
foaming ratios at 670uC were not due to any inherent
lack of foamability but due to foam collapse in the liquid
state.
The cell structure of the collapsed regions shown by
magnified image in Fig. 2 indicates that they are
compressed under atmospheric pressure. This would be
possible only if the cell internal pressure fell below the
atmospheric pressure, while the foams were in liquid
state. The former would decrease if hydrogen loss from
the cells by diffusion through the liquid cell walls to the
atmosphere was significant. Considering that the hydro-
gen diffusion coefficient in liquid aluminium is very
high,5 this mechanism is a strong possibility. The closer
the cells are to the external surface, the greater would be
Foaming temperature, uC
670
640
Materials Science and Technology 2010 VOL 26 NO 8 909
Nadella et al. Foaming characteristics of Al–Si–Mg (LM25) alloy
2 Macrostructures of LM25 foams produced at two foaming temperatures: excess Mg addition made to parent alloy is
indicated
the hydrogen loss. Indeed the collapsed regions are
found to be near the external surfaces. Coalescence
between neighbouring cells during compression under
atmospheric pressure is also likely.
Effect of foaming temperature on collapse can be
explained as follows. Higher the foaming temperature,
greater is the diffusion coefficient of hydrogen in liquid
aluminium and the longer it takes to reach the liquidus
temperature, leading to greater loss of hydrogen and,
therefore, greater amount of collapse as observed.
Similarly, if the foaming temperature is high, more
liquid drainage and, therefore, cell wall thinning
(especially from upper regions of the foam) can be
3 Foaming ratios of LM25 foams as varied with Mg con-
tent and foaming temperature
910 Materials Science and Technology 2010 VOL 26
expected. This may further aid cell coalescence in the
upper regions and foam collapse. Whatever is the actual
mechanism of cell collapse, it is clear that in such cases,
the oxide particles present in the cell walls, though
suitable to give a thermodynamically stable foam (as
indicated by large foaming ratios in the liquid state),
were not adequate to give stability against atmospheric
pressure and/or liquid drainage.
Figures 2 and 3 show that even the standard LM25
alloy foamed well, i.e. excess Mg is not essential for
formation of foam. However, in the absence of collapse,
i.e. at 640uC foaming temperature, presence of excess
Mg helped in increasing the foaming ratio, though no
systematic trend could be observed.
Effect of Mg on foaming behaviour of LM25 alloy
can be analysed as follows. The calculated liquidus
temperatures Al–Si alloys, with an algorithm developed
by Hernandez et al.,6 based on their chemical composi-
tions, showed that addition of Mg up to 3% to LM25
alloy does not lower its liquidus temperature by .0?2uC.
The corresponding superheats and therefore hydrogen
loss from liquid foam would be insensitive to the Mg
content (barring the small influence Mg may have on
hydrogen diffusion in liquid Al).
However, presence of Mg in LM25 modifies its
surface tension, which is an important physical property
(other than viscosity) influencing foaming behaviour in
gas blown liquid foams. Measured data by Goicochea
et al.7 at 973 K (700uC) indicates that addition of 8%Si
to pure Al decreases the surface tension from 869 to
855 mN m21. With further addition of 0?5% Mg, this
NO 8

a 670uC (F1); b 640uC (F4)
4 Effect of foaming temperature on cell morphology of
LM25 foam
value comes down to 850 mN m21. But adding 3%Mg to
Al–8%Si brings down the surface tension to
y800 mN m21. Although the above composition differs
slightly from that of the alloy used in our investigations,
the trend seems clear. Also, as shown by Anson et al.,
hydrogen atmosphere has no dramatic influence on the
surface tension of A356 alloy.8 Alloys with lower surface
tension require smaller activation energy to form bubbles,
and, therefore, are expected to foam more easily. Thus, the
lower surface tension of excess Mg containing alloys
(especially with 3%) must have resulted in easy bubble
nucleation. Although the effect of melt composition on
coalescence is not well documented, it is known that alloys
with low surface tension are more vulnerable to cell
coalescence as demonstrated for Al foams.9
With increasing Mg content, a higher volume fraction
of oxides is expected to form during melt stirring cycle.
At present it is not known whether these oxides are
effective in stabilising aluminium foams, in the way
alumina or Ca–Al oxides are. The large amount of
collapse observed in the LM25z3%Mg alloy foamed at
670uC (F-3) would indicate that the surface tension
effect is more dominant than particle stabilisation.
For LM25z3%Mg alloy foamed at 640uC combina-
tion of easy bubble nucleation and vulnerability to
bubble coalescence (both due to lower surface tension)
might be responsible for the cell size variation observed
(Fig. 2 and Table 1). For the base alloy, it was observed
that the higher foaming temperature gave finer and
Nadella et al. Foaming characteristics of Al–Si–Mg (LM25) alloy
5 a typical microstructures of LM25 foams exhibiting
change of eutectic Si morphology between the solid
bottom and the originated foam. Magnified pictures
(inset) show the needle-like structure (left) in the solid
bottom, and the fibrous Si network (right) in the foam.
b High magnification SEM image shows a part of that
network within the cell wall
better defined cells as illustrated by the magnified images
of LM25 foam (Fig. 4). This is possibly due to higher
nucleation rate expected in view of faster dissociation of
TiH2 creating greater supersaturation of hydrogen in
liquid alloy. Further experimentation may be necessary
to optimise the foaming temperature for minimising
foam collapse and simultaneously obtaining fine and
well defined cell structure.
Structure
Cell wall microstructures showed a regular network of
eutectic Si and the foam microstructures did not exhibit
any noticeable variation with change in their Mg content
and the foaming temperature. Close examination
revealed a distinct difference in Si morphology with a
well refined Si within the cell wall in contrast to the
needle-like Si in the solid bottom. This is illustrated in
Fig. 5, which was taken in the transition point between
solid and foam. In the areas where the foaming has just
originated, one can see the morphological change in
eutectic Si that formed a network within the cell walls. A
high magnification SEM image (Fig. 5b) clearly shows
the refined Si, which is in the range of 2–5 mm. In Al–Si
alloys, eutectic Si forms during solidification much below
the coherency temperature and hence has no effect on the
foam stability. The presence of Si network indicates that
Materials Science and Technology 2010 VOL 26 NO 8 911
Nadella et al. Foaming characteristics of Al–Si–Mg (LM25) alloy

that is the last solidified portion within the cell wall.

Calcium is known to induce chemical modification of
eutectic Si in Al–Si alloys and the work of Knuutinen et al.
showed even at the trace levels of 36 ppm, considerable
structural refinement of eutectic Si takes place.10 In the
present work, 0?08 wt-%Ca in the alloy helped to achieve
the Si modification. However, it may not be entirely due to
Ca, because Ca is supposed to be distributed throughout
even in the unfoamed solid portion.

Compression tests
Initial compression tests were carried out on one of the
good quality foams (F-1) for which the density is in the
range of 0?35–0?38 g cc21. Typical compression stress–
strain curve deduced from the load displacement data is
given in Fig. 6a. Consistent with any Al foam, the plot
exhibits three distinct regions, namely an initial elastic
portion, yield point with a long plateau region followed
by a region of rapid increase in stress corresponding to
foam densification.
Compressive strength is taken as the highest stress
(upper yield stress) immediately after the elastic defor-
mation. The drop in stress that followed is called lower
yield stress. Plateau stress is defined as the average stress
over a strain range of 0?1–0?6. Plateau strain ep is
computed where the plateau stress crossed the tangent
associated with densification region (Fig. 6a). Within the
limited data, it can be stated that the compression
strength and plateau stress seem to vary with the relative
density (Table 2). Within 2 mm deformation (0?07
strain), the load dropped by .50% indicating severe
damage during the initial straining of the sample.
During the course of deformation, the plateau region
exhibited serrations (inset in Fig. 6a) and visual
observations showed the breakage of cell walls into
small pieces, which indicates that these foams are not
ductile. A partially compressed (0?1 strain) specimen
exemplifies this point (Fig. 6b). It can also be seen that
the deformation is entirely confined to small portion of
the sample (in this case, the bottom most region,
Fig. 6b). This behaviour is much similar to Al/SiCP
composite foams, as observed by Ruan et al.,11 where
progressive damage and densification of small areas
characterised the overall compression. The brittle nature a typical compression stress–strain curve showing pla-
of LM25 foams may be due to the presence of Si teau region followed by densification (inset: enlarged
particles and in particular to its network distribution portion of plateau region exhibiting serrations); b par-
within the cell wall (Fig. 5a). tially compressed sample (y0?1 strain) with broken foam
pieces
6 Compression tests on LM25 alloy foam
Conclusions
LM25 alloy foams were successfully prepared with Al tendency at 670uC. Overall, higher foaming ratios were
foam turnings additions and TiH2. Foaming temperature obtained with 640uC as the foaming temperature. A
selection significantly influenced the foam decay with change in Si morphology from unmodified needles to well
higher foaming temperature of 670uC leading to severe modified fibrous network is noticed in the transition
foam collapse. On the other hand, foam decay is hardly region where the foaming has just initiated. Overall, these
noticed at the foaming temperature of 640uC. Presence of experiments exhibited the potential to obtain good quality
extra Mg (3 wt-%) in this alloy aggravated the collapsing LM25 foam using cheaper Al foam turnings.
Table 2 Details of compression tests performed at strain rate of 561022 s21

Relative density (r/rs)* Compression strength, MPa Lower yield stress, MPa Plateau stress, MPa Plateau strain

0.149 4.9 2.3 4.1 0.82

0.142 4.5 1.1 3.7 0.78
0.130 4.3 1.0 …{ …{
*rs is the solid density of LM25 which is 2685 kg m23.
{Test discontinued at 0?1 strain.

912 Materials Science and Technology 2010 VOL 26 NO 8


Uniaxial compression tests in these foams showed
similar behaviour as that of Al–Ca foam, but with
localised damage induced during the initial phase of
deformation. A fine Si network within the cell walls may
be responsible for the observed behaviour.
Acknowledgements
The authors sincerely thank the Defence Research and
Development Organisation for their financial assistance
and the Director, Defence Metallurgical Research
Laboratory, for his encouragement.
References
1. C. C. Yang and H. Nakae: J. Alloys Compd, 2000, 313, 188–191.
2. C. C. Yang and H. Nakae: J. Mater. Proc. Technol., 2003, 141,
202–206.
Nadella et al. Foaming characteristics of Al–Si–Mg (LM25) alloy
3. D. H. Yang, B. Y. Hur, D. P. He and S. R. Yang: Mater. Sci. Eng.
A, 2007, A445–446, 415–426.
4. T. Miyoshi, M. Itoh, S. Akiyama and A. Kitahara: Adv. Eng.
Mater., 2000, 2, 179–183.
5. D. E. J. Talbot: ‘The effects of hydrogen in aluminium and its
alloys’, 141; 2004, London, Maney Publishing.
6. F. C. R. Hernandez, M. B. Djurdjevic, W. T. Kierkus and
J. H. Sokolowski: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2005, A396, 271–
276.
7. J. Goicoechea, C. Garcia-Cordovilla, E. Louis and A. Pamies:
J. Mater. Sci., 1992, 27, 5247–5252.
8. J. P. Anson, R. A. L. Drew and J. E. Gruzleski: Metall. Mater.
Trans. B, 1999, 30B, 1027–1032
9. T. Miyoshi, T. Kasai, T. Mukai and K. Higashi: Proc. Conf. on
‘Cellular metals and metal foaming technology’, Bremen,
Germany, June 2001, Verlag MIT, 167.
10. A. Knuutinen, K. Nogita, S. D. McDonald and A. K. Dahle:
J. Light Met., 2001, 1, 229–240.
11. D. Ruan, G. Lu, F. L. Chen and E. Siores: Compos. Struct., 2002,
57, 331–336.
Materials Science and Technology 2010 VOL 26 NO 8 913