The present study focuses on modelling, optimisation and experimental investigation into properties and microstructure of supersolidus liquid phase sintered Cu–28Zn brass from prealloyed powder. The experiments are designed using response surface methodology based on central composite rotatable design to evaluate the effect of process variables on liquid phase sintering of prealloyed brass powder. Three variables namely temperature, time and atmosphere were changed during sintering. The mathematical equations were derived to predict densification and impact energy using second order regression analysis. The optimum condition was predicted when the sintering variables were set at about 876°C, 43 min and N2 atmosphere. Selecting optimum sintering parameters is an important factor for achieving improved properties and relatively homogeneous microstructure. Gravitational force has a detrimental influence on homogeneity which is reflected by a graded structure that is formed especially at higher sintering temperature and extended time. Also structural coarsening occurs at higher sintering temperatures and longer times. It is concluded that both gravitational effect and structural coarsening should be considered in manufacturing of Cu–28Zn alloy parts. Furthermore, a combination of modelling and experimental investigation provide a new concept for better understanding and analysing the sintering process of brass and related structures.
CapusJM: ‘Metal powders: a global survey of production, applications and markets’; 2000, Oxford, Elsevier.
2.
ImaiH, KosakaY, KojimaA, LiS, KondohK, UmedaJ and AtsumiH: ‘Characteristics and machinability of lead-free P/M Cu60–Zn40 brass alloys dispersed with graphite’, Powder Technol., 2010, 198, (3), 417–421.
3.
LiS, KondohK, ImaiH and AtsumiH: ‘Fabrication and properties of lead-free machinable brass with Ti additive by powder metallurgy’, Powder Technol., 2011, 205, (1), 242–249.
4.
LiS, ImaiH, AtsumiH and KondohK: ‘Contribution of Ti addition to characteristics of extruded Cu40Zn brass alloy prepared by powder metallurgy’, Mater. Des., 2011, 32, (1), 192–197.
5.
NeikovOD and NaboychenkoSS: ‘Handbook of non-ferrous metal powders: technologies and applications’; 2009, Oxford, Elsevier Science Limited.
6.
GermanRM: ‘Liquid phase sintering’; 1985, New York, Springer.
7.
GanesanR, GriffoA and GermanRM: ‘Finite element modeling of distortion during liquid phase sintering’, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 1998, 29A, (2), 659–664.
8.
JohnsonJL, BrezovskyJJ and GermanRM: ‘Effect of liquid content on distortion and rearrangement densification of liquid-phase-sintered W-Cu’, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2005, 36A, (6), 1557–1565.
9.
LiuJ, LalA and GermanRM: ‘Densification and shape retention in supersolidus liquid phase sintering’, Acta Mater., 1999, 47, (18), 4615–4626.
10.
Sabahi NaminiA, AzadbehM and MohammadzadehA: ‘Microstructure and densification behavior of liquid phase sintered Cu–28Zn prealloyed powder’, Sci. Sinter., 2013, 45, 351–362.
11.
KoharaS and TatsuzawaK: ‘Mechanical properties of sintered Fe–Cu alloys prepared with plated powder’, J. Jpn Soc. Powder Powder Metall., 1986, 33, (3), 139–144.
12.
UpadhyayaA and GermanRM: ‘Gravitational effects during liquid phase sintering’, Mater. Chem. Phys., 2001, 67, (1–3), 25–31.
13.
LuK and GermanRM: ‘Microstructure analysis of samples sintered at different gravitational conditions’, J. Mater. Sci., 2010, 45, (16), 4454–4461.
14.
HeaneyDF, GermanRM and AhnIS: ‘The gravitational effects on low solid-volume fraction liquid-phase sintering’, J. Mater. Sci., 1995, 30, (22), 5808–5812.
15.
LiuY, HeaneyDF and GermanRM: ‘Gravity induced solid grain packing during liquid phase sintering’, Acta Metall. Mater., 1995, 43, (4), 1587–1592.
16.
RamanR and GermanRM: ‘A mathematical model for gravity-induced distortion during liquid-phase sintering’, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 1995, 26A, (3), 653–659.
17.
TewariA, GokhaleAM and GermanRM: ‘Effect of gravity on three-dimensional coordination number distribution in liquid phase sintered microstructures’, Acta Mater., 1999, 47, (13), 3721–3734.
18.
AzadbehM, DanningerH and GierlC: ‘Evaluation of properties and graded densification during sintering of Cu-20Zn prepared from prealloyed powder’, Euro PM2011, Barcelona, Spain, October 2011, EPMA.
19.
NekahiA and DehghaniK: ‘Modeling the thermomechanical effects on baking behavior of low carbon steels using response surface methodology’, Mater. Des., 2010, 31, (8), 3845–3851.
20.
HeidarzadehA, KhodaverdizadehH, MahmoudiA and NazariE: ‘Tensile behavior of friction stir welded AA 6061-T4 aluminum alloy joints’, Mater. Des., 2012, 37, 166–173.
21.
MohammadzadehA, AzadbehM and NaminiAS: ‘Densification and volumetric change during supersolidus liquid phase sintering of prealloyed brass Cu28Zn powder: modeling and optimization’, Sci. Sinter., 2014, 46, 23–35.
22.
HeidarzadehA, SaeidT, KhodaverdizadehH, MahmoudiA and NazariE: ‘Establishing a mathematical model to predict the tensile strength of friction stir welded pure copper joints’, Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 2013, 44B, (1), 175–183.
23.
HeidarzadehA and SaeidT: ‘Prediction of mechanical properties in friction stir welds of pure copper’, Mater. Des., 2013, 52, 1077–1087.
24.
DhanapalA, Rajendra BoopathyS, and BalasubramanianV: ‘Developing an empirical relationship to predict the corrosion rate of friction stir welded AZ61A magnesium alloy under salt fog environment’, Mater. Des., 2011, 32, 5066–5072.
25.
OraonB, MajumdarG and GhoshB: ‘Parametric optimization and prediction of electroless Ni–B deposition’, Mater. Des., 2007, 28, 2138–2148.
26.
OraonB, MajumdarG and GhoshB: ‘Application of response surface method for predicting electroless nickel plating’, Mater. Des., 2006, 27, (10), 1035–1045.
27.
Shanmuga SundaramN and MuruganN: ‘Tensile behavior of dissimilar friction stir welded joints of aluminium alloys’, Mater. Des., 2010, 31, 4184–4193.
28.
KhanF, DwivediD and SharmaS: ‘Development of response surface model for tensile shear strength of weld-bonds of aluminium alloy 6061 T651’, Mater. Des., 2012, 34, 673–678.
29.
NekahiA and DehghaniK: ‘Modeling the thermomechanical effects on baking behavior of low carbon steels using response surface methodology’, Mater. Des., 2010, 31, 3845–3851.
30.
DehghaniK, NekahiA and MirzaieMAM: ‘Optimizing the bake hardening behavior of Al7075 using response surface methodology’, Mater. Des., 2010, 31, (4), 1768–1775.
31.
AslanN: ‘Application of response surface methodology and central composite rotatable design for modeling and optimization of a multi-gravity separator for chromite concentration’, Powder Technol., 2008, 185, (1), 80–86.
32.
UpadhyayaG: ‘Powder metallurgy technology’; 1997, Cambridge, Cambridge Int Science Publ.
33.
SalakA, SeleckaSM, and DanningerH: ‘Machinability of powder metallurgy steels’; 2005, Cambridge, Cambridge Int Science Publishing.
34.
MyersRH, MontgomeryDC and Anderson-CookCM: ‘Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments’; 2009, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley.
35.
BoxGEP and WilsonKB: ‘On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions’, J. R. Statist. Soc., 1951, 13, (1), 1–45.
36.
AzadbehM, MohammadzadehA and DanningerH: ‘Modeling the response of physical and mechanical properties of Cr–Mo prealloyed sintered steels to key manufacturing parameters’, Mater. Des., 2014, 55, 633–643.
37.
SpeyerRF: ‘Thermal analysis of materials’, 1994, New York, CRC Press.
