AA-AT-3-1998.pdf

《AA-AT-3-1998.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《AA-AT-3-1998.pdf（55页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。

1、- L. STD-AA AT 3-ENGL 2998 1181 Oh04500 DOL3090 133 81 A l u m i n u m A u t o m o t i v f o r e Body S h e e t i Panels . The Aluminum Asso(ciation i The Aluminum Association, Inc Incorporated : 900 19th Street, NW, Suite 300 i Washington, DC 20006 Copyright The Aluminum Association Inc. Provided b

2、y IHS under license with AA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 03:53:11 MDTNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS -,-,- STDeAA AT 3-ENGL 1978 0604500 OOL70L 07T A l u m i n u m f o r A u t o m o t i v e Body Sheet P a n e l s Aut

3、omotive design considerations, blanking and forming information, and rel- evant die design considerations; joining technology, including spot welding, fusion welding, mechan- ical fastening, and adhesive bonding technologies; and finishing processes, including both conventional phosphating and elect

4、ro-coating, plus newer alternative methods now becom ing available. Aluminum panels have excellent corrosion resistance. When they are used and finished in ways that recog- nize the unique characteristics of aluminum alloys, they will provide outstanding performance and long- term durability. The pu

5、rpose of this publication is to aid designers and manufacturers in using aluminum sheet to its maximum advantage in automotive structures. A listing of the applications of aluminum body sheet in current pro- duction applications is provided in the Annex, page 50. 2 1 Copyright The Aluminum Associati

6、on Inc. Provided by IHS under license with AA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 03:53:11 MDTNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS -,-,- STD*AA AT 3-ENGL 1998 .61 Ob04500 0017094 889 A combination of low density, high strength,

7、and excellent corrosion resistance makes aluminum alloys attractive for many automobile body panel applications. While a number of aluminum alloys may be used for such applications, several alloys have emerged as being particularly attrac- tive for body panel design; they are listed in Table 2.1 wit

8、h their com- mercial composition limits. Other properties, discussed below, are pre- sented in Tables 2.2 to 2.8, and in Figure 2.1. 2.1“ Three types of aluminm alloys are available for body panel applica- tions, aluminum-copper alloys, alu- minum-magnesium alloys, and alu- minum-magnesium-silicon a

9、lloys: a. 2xxx (Al-Cu) alloys - 2008,2010, and 2036 are the principal du- . minum-copper (Al-Cu) or 2xxx series of alloys used in body panel applications. They are heat-treat- able, and typically are supplied in the T4 (solution heat-treated and naturally aged) temper. In that condition, 2008 and 20

10、10 will experience some strengthening from precipitation aging during typical automotive paint bake cycles. Of the 2xxx alloys, 2036 has the highest strength before and after paint baking, though relatively high temperatures (higher than those in most paint bake cycles) are required to achieve addit

11、ional strengthening. Alloys 2008 and 2010 were designed to provide improved formability over 2036, and they also have better general corrosion resistance. A special temper of 2010, desig- nated T41, is resistant to the for- mation of ridging lines (paint brush lines) which may otherwise occur upon t

12、he application of transverse strain during stamping. b. SXXX (AI-Mg) alloys - 5182, 5454, and 5754 are the principal aluminum-magnesium (Al-Mg) or 5xxx series aitoys for auto body panels; they also contain man- ganese. These alloys are not pre- cipitation hardenable and so do not strengthen during t

13、he paint bake cycle. They may experience some additional strengthening from forming, but much of that may be lost during paint bake so their annealed (-0) temper prop- erties provide a conservative esti- mate of their strength for most situations. The 5xxx alloys are exceptionally formable and have

14、very high resistance to corrosion. Because the 5xxx alloys are susceptible to the formation of Luders bands during forming, they may not be good candidates for outer panels. Note also that Sxxx alloys with magnesium contents above about 3 percent, including 5182, may be subject to stress-corrosion c

15、rack- ing after forming and subsequent *2. i Numbers in brackets refer to References at the end of each section. 2008 O 50-0 8 0 40 O 7-1.1 0.30 0.25-0.50 0.10 0.25 0.10 0.05 0.15 0.05V _. . . 0.05 0.15 - 0.10 0.25 0.15 0.05 0.15 - O. 15 0.20-0.50 4.0-5.0 0.10 0.25 0.10 0.05 0.15 - 0.10 0.50-1.0 2.4

16、-3.0 0.05-0.20 0.25 0.20 0.05 0.15 - 0.304 0.20 0.15 0.05 0.15 - 0.6-1.0 0.50 0.15-0.6 0.20-0.8 0.40-0.8 0.10 0.25 0.10 0.05 0.15 - 0.8-1.5 0.05-0.20 0.01-0.1 1 0.02-0.10 0.45-0.7 0.10 0.25 0.15 0.05 0.15 - 0.10 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.15 - 2010 0.50 0.50 0.7-1.3 0.10-0.40 0.40-1.0 0.15 0.30 - 2036 0.50 0.

17、50 2.2-3.0 0.10-0.40 0.30-0.6 5182 0.20 0.35 5454 0.25 0.40 6009 6022 5754 0.40 0.40 0.10 0.50 141 2.6-3.6 hl 1 1 0bI.l O40 0.50-0.9 0.10-0.45 0.50-1.0 Notes: (1 1 Shown as percent by weight. (2) Maximum limif, unless a range is shown. (3) The sum of those “Others“ metallic elements 0.0 10 percent o

18、r mare each, expressed to the second decimol place before determining he sum (4) Mn i Cr = O. J0-0.6. Copyright The Aluminum Association Inc. Provided by IHS under license with AA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 03:53:11 MDTNo reproduction or networkin

19、g permitted without license from IHS -,-,- STD*AA AT 3-ENGL 39qd Ob04500 0033095 735 Elongation Modulus of Streigb Strength 1 or 2 in Strength Average I Ultimate Tensile Tensile Yield in 50mm Ultimaie Shear Elasticity Alloy 2 1 7.- l i 21 -T62l3 3 O0 (44) 240 (35) 13 180 (261 70 110 2) 20 1 O -T4 24

20、0 1351 130 1191 25 14.5 1211 70 110.21 -T4 1 240 1351 130 1191 25 145 1211 70 110.21 -T62IA1 270 1391 200 1291 15 160 1231 70 ( 1 0.2) 2036 -74 340 1491 195 1281 24 205 (30) 71 110.3) 5182-0 275 1401 130 1191 24 165 1241 71 110.31 -T62I3 325 (47) 290 1421 12 195 1281 69 (1 0.0) 61 Il -T4 280 1421 15

21、0 1221 26 175 1251 69 I l 0.01 -T4 1 2 70 1391 150 1221 26 160 1231 69 110 o 1 -T62“ 3 60 1521 320 (461 (1) Offset = 0.2% (2) Average for tensile and compressive loading (3) Arfificially aged Ihr. at 200-2 I O “C 1392-4 I 0 ) from the -T4 temper (4) Artificially aged 1/2 hK ai 200-2 I 0 O C 1392-4 i

22、 0F) from fhe T 4 temper (5) Typical per Aluminum Standards 5 A0.63-1.50 (0.025-0.059) 220 (32.0) 105 (1 5.0) 22 20 1 O -T4” 0.63-1.80 (O ,025-0,070) 220 (32.0) 110 (1 6.0) 22 -T4 1 I*) 0.63-1.80 (O ,025-0.070) 220 (32.0) 110 ( 16.0) 22 2036 -T4 0.63-3.20 (0.025-0.125) 290 (42.0) 160 (23.0) 20 5454

23、-o 0.50-0.80 (0.020-0.03 1 ) 215 ( 3 1 .O) la 85 ( 12.0) 12 5182-0 0.63-3.20 (0.025-0.125) 255 (37.0) l3 110 (1 6.0) 18 0.80-1.27 (0.032-0.050 215 ( 3 1 .O) 141 85 (12.0) 14 1.27-2.87 (0.051-0.1 13) 215 ( 3 1 .O) 85 (1 2.0) 16 5754 -0 0.75-1.40 (0.030-0.055) 200 129.0) 80 1 i 2.0)151 17 1.40-2.20 (0

24、.056-0.087) 200 (29.0) 80 (12.01151 18 2.20-3 50 (0.088-0.138) 200 (29.0) 80 (1 2.0115 19 6009 -T4 0.50-1.80 (0.02 1-0.070) 185 (27.0) 105 (1 5.0) 21 1.80-3.20 (0.071-0.125) 165 (24.0) 90 (1 3.0) 21 6022-T4* 0.50-3.00 (0.020-0.120) 235 (34.0) 130 (1 9.0) 23 61 1 1 -T4” OSO-1.80 (0.020-0.070) 250 (36

25、.0) 140 (20.0) 23 -T4 1 0.63-1.80 (0.025-0.070) 270 (39.0) 145 (2 1 .O) 23 (1 Offset = O. 2% (2) Tentative (3) Maximum = 325 (47.0) (4) Moximum = 285 1 4 I .O) (5) Maximum = 270 139.0) Copyright The Aluminum Association Inc. Provided by IHS under license with AA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, Us

26、er=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 03:53:11 MDTNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS -,-,- S T D e A A AT 3-ENGL 3998 0604500 0037097 598 Original Material Paint Bake Only (No Prior Strekh) 2% Stretch + Paint Bake Ultimate Tensile Elongation Ultimate Tensile Elonga

27、tion Ultimate Tensile Elongation Tensile Yield in 5Omm Tensile Yield in 5Omm Tensile YPeld in 50mm Alloy ,-I$ .-4 23. ; , J 2dc: 12: 33 .; 1 5 I- /.), r I :iC ,*.?,25 22 j ; , 4% 1 ;5 12%: f5 233: -T4 :;JI; 49; I Q j ,281 /i . . .- 250 :jc, LL: 3: 28 2 5 : ;37 115 21: LS . ,-. . -. . . . . . . . . .

28、 . . 5182 -0 275 (40) 130 (19) 21 275 (40) 130 (19) 21 275 (40) 145 (21) 19 5454-0 250 1361 1 15 1171 22 250 1361 115 1171 22 240 1351 130 1191 21 _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ ,. , I. ,I 5754-0 220 (32) 100 (14) 26 220 (32) 95 (14) 26 220 1321 110 116) 25 180 (20) 22 285 (41) 195 128) 20 6009.14 220 (32) 1

29、25 (18) 25 275 (40) 26 275 (40) 170 (25) 26 285 (41 215 (31) 24 61 1 1 -T4 290 1421 150 1221 26 3 1 0- 1451 200 1291 24 315 1461 205 1301 22 _ 6022-74 255 (37) 150 (22) -T41 290 (42) 165 (24) 25 290 (42) 180 126) 21 295 (43) 215 (31) 19 . (1) 30 min at 777C (35O“Fj Fatigue Endurance Limit, MPa (ksi)

30、 “ Sheet Axial Nohhed (K, = 3.0) R = -1 R = 0.10 R = 0.10 Alloy CC 8 TJ - - - r ( - Y L ( / A L ic.1 - - - 20 1 0-74 - 2 O 36-T4 125 (18) 5 1 83-n 1 1 5 Il 7 1 - - - - 5454-0 105 1151 5 7 . 5 4-0 80 i 121 6009-T4 115 (17) 186 (27) 69 (10) 61 11-T4 - 186 (27) 69 ( 1 O) -T6 2 - 214 1311 69 1101 R = St

31、ress roiio = minimum stress divided by moximum stress in cycle. K, = Theorericol stress concentroiion foctoi (i ) Averoge (represeniotive) endurance limif of 1050 million cycles of loading ing. Though not all of the alloys are represented in any one test condition, the data are sufficient, especiall

32、y those in Figure 2.1, to illustrate that there are only small and possibly unimportant differences in the fatigue properties of the various alloys at relatively high numbers of load repetitions and long service lives. Formability data for the alu- minum body panel alloys are shown in Table 2.7. All

33、oys 2008,5182 and 5754 are best in this respect, though all of the alloys have useful combina- tions of strength and formability. General consensus rankings of the alloys are presented in Table 2.8 based upon resistance to corrosion, general formability, fusion weldability and spot weldability. Refe

34、rences 2.1. Aluminum Standards for sources of properties not covered in Aluminum Standards prior forming. (2) Strain hardening exponent; procedures may vary somewhat but typicoily average of three directions i, 17; 45% measured over strain range of 2% to strain at ultimate strength (3) r = plastic s

35、train ratio; procedures may vary slightly buy typicaiiy average of three directions il, il; 45% measured of i 0% strain or over strain range of 7- i 2%. Resistance to General Fusion spot Alloy Corrosion Formablilify Weldability Weldability i ._I_ _I_- _I_-._ - _II_ i - - - _“I - 2008-T4 B B B B 2010

36、-T4 T41 B B B B 2036-T4 C C C B 51 824 A A A C 5454-0 A B A B 5754-0 A A A c 6009-T4 A B B A 6022-T4 A B B A 61 11-T4. T41 A B B A A = Best E = Better C = Good (1 ) Ratings are for origino/ bare oluminum alloy sheef; ratings may vory dependent upon combination o f forming and paint bake cycie. Copyr

37、ight The Aluminum Association Inc. Provided by IHS under license with AA Licensee=IHS Employees/1111111001, User=Wing, Bernie Not for Resale, 04/18/2007 03:53:11 MDTNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS -,-,- STD-AA AT 3-ENGL Ob04500 OOL7099 3b0 For the most efficient and

38、economi- cal application of aluminum for automotive panels or assemblies, it is necessary to optimize the design of the part specifically for the proper- ties and characteristics of aluminum. This requires knowledge of the physical and mechanical properties of aluminum alloys as well as an understan

39、ding of the forming and joining characteristics. When designing an automotive panel or assembly, the performance requirements for the component must be considered. Issues such as dent resistance, local stiffness, and overall torsional and bending stiff- ness should be addressed, and panel strength a

40、nd vibration effects must meet or exceed design criteria. Fatigue resistance, barrier perfor- mance and attachment strategy are typical concerns for automotive exterior panel applications. Typically, an engineer will con- sider aluminum as a lightweighting option. In some situations, it is pos- sibl

41、e to take an existing steel panel design and make minor modifica- tions to the thickness andor cross- sectional area to compensate for the lower modulus of elasticity of alu- minum and get a lightweight alu- minum panel with performance equivalent to that of the steel panel. However, to obtain the m

42、aximum weight savings, it is desirable to approach the design with the char- acteristics of aluminum in mind right from the start. A weight sav- ings of approximately 40-50% can be obtained simply by converting an existing steel design to a similar design in aluminum, while a design optimized for al

43、uminum has provid- ed weight savings up to 65% over a comparable steel panel. It is also important to consider the manufac- turing requirements early in the design stage. The following discussion will provide guidance for the use of alu- minum in automotive panel and assembly applications. Additiona

44、l valuable information is contained in References 3.1 through 3.4. Dent resistance, especially under impact conditions, is a complex issue, and the following comments will serve as a guideline to the more important factors. Reference 4 is valuable for additional treatment of this subject. The dent r

45、esistance of an outer panel is governed by the yield strength of the material, its thickness, the shape, and the unsupported panel area. Since the outer panel design typically cannot be altered by the engineer, thickness and yield strength are the available variables. In such cases, the following re

46、lation- ship should be used to obtain equiv- alent dent resistance between alu- minum and steel: - = where: ta, ts = thickness of aluminum and steel, respectively Ya YS aluminum and steel, respectively. 2 S =yield strength of There are two methods for com- paring dent performance of automo- tive bod

47、y panels: threshold velocity and equivalent depth of dent. Threshold velocity is the minimum impact velocity required to initiate a perceptible dent (or the maximum impact velocity that will not produce a perceptible dent). Threshold veloc- ities are typically determined experi- mentally. Various te

48、st have been per- formed in laboratories using steel balls to impact the surface of simu- lated body panels and actual produc- tion hoods, with the velocity of the steel ball ranging from 32.2 km/h (20 mph) to greater than 96.6 km/h (60 mph). The results of these stud- ies indicate that increased crown in a panel contributes to improved dent resistance, as does increase panel thickness. Another technique establishing dent performance is to consider depth of dent developed in compo- nents at a given velocity and mass of 8 I Copyright The Aluminum A