Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Coatings PDF
Coatings PDF
Abstract
55%Al-Zn coated steel has been evaluated by statistical design of experiment, DOE. In these
experiments the four response variables viz.; hardness, area fraction of cracks, the mean crack
width, and cracking inter distance are connected to the major process parameters; coating
thickness, temper rolling, post heat treatment and ageing. Scanning electron microscopy
(SEM), energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX), image analysis and micro hardness
The results show that statistical design of experiments provides a good method of quantifying
the effects of various process parameters on the coating cracking behaviour of 55%Al-Zn
coated steel. The hardness of the coating was significantly influenced by temper rolling, post
heat treatment and coating thickness. Temper rolling gives a small deformation hardening
effect, while heat treatment transforms coherent Guinier-Preston zones to greater and softer
-1-
phases and therefore decreases the coating hardness. The cracking tendency was found to be
Keywords: Hot-dip coated steel sheet; 55%Al-Zn; statistical design of experiment (DOE);
1 Introduction
Hot-dip zinc and zinc-aluminium alloy coated steel are today frequently used in a large
number of industrial applications, e.g. in the building and automotive industry. In many of
these applications the performance of the coated steel is controlled by its formability,
weldability, paintability, surface finish and corrosion resistance. Unfortunately many of the
forming operations may result in severe cracking of the coating and exposure of the steel
outmost importance to understand the effect of different process parameters on the coating
cracking behaviour of the material in order to avoid extensive cracking during forming.
The ductility and coating cracking behaviour of 55%Al-Zn coating has been investigated in
previous works [1,2,3]. Observations of 55%Al-Zn coated steel strained in uniaxial and planar
tension have shown that the coating has a relatively low ductility with crack initiation at
tensile strains as low as 2-5 %. Cracks may nucleate in the intermetallic layer, at silicon
particles, at dross (intermetallic particles) or at pores within the coating [4,5]. The individual
-2-
Due to ageing, i.e. precipitation hardening, the coating will obtain a relatively high hardness
(and consequently a low ductility) during room temperature storage. The maximum hardness
In order to obtain a planar and smoother surface of improved paintability, the coated sheet is
temper rolled, frequently using sand blasted rolls, at reductions of less than 1% true strain, in
a continuous rolling mill. It has been shown that this treatment induces isolated cracks in the
The coating thickness is controlled by the gas flow in the air jet knifes used for removal of
superfluous melted metal. The thickness of the intermetallic layer at the coating/steel substrate
interface is mainly determined by the speed of the strip throw the bath. It is expected that an
increased coating thickness as well as an increased intermetallic layer thickness will increase
the cracking tendency. However, Willis et al. [2] observed that intermetallic layer thicknesses
By post heat treatment the strength (ductility) of the coating may be decreased (increased).
The use of heat treatment to improve the ductility of 55% Al-Zn coating has been
precipitation reactions and particle coarsening. Willis et al. [2] found that heat treatment
significantly reduces the crack severity if the coating is heat treated at 200 °C for 30 minutes
followed by furnace cooling resulting in a slow cooling rate of 5 °C/min. By this kind of heat
treatment the level of cracking found on a sample deformed to 18% can be reduced to that
-3-
There have been several previous investigations of the cracking behaviour (ductility) of 55%
Al-Zn coating. Nevertheless, all these studies were done by the classical method of
experimentation, which allowed variation of only one factor at a time. The present
investigation was carried out by varying all the selected factors simultaneously with the help
of statistical design of experiment (DOE). The factors were chosen on the basis of knowledge
In the present investigation statistical design of experiments has been used to develop
behaviour of the coating. In these experiments three response variables viz.; area fraction of
cracks, the mean crack width, and cracking inter distance are connected to the major process
parameters; coating thickness, post heat treatment, temper rolling and ageing. Scanning
electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX), image analysis and
and optimisation of materials and processes [10]. Compared with commonly used one-factor-
reduced resources such as staff, time, etc. Besides, experimental design and statistical analysis
also give quantitative information on the significance of each factor and their interactions on
the measured response. Statistical design of experiments (DOE) also helps to develop a
regression function between the response variables η1→ l, (e.g., area fraction of cracks, crack
mean inter distance, etc.) and the independent variables x1, x2,.., x k (e.g., post heat treatment,
-4-
coating thickness etc.). The most common, as well as the simplest, form of regression
the expression:
where β0, β1, β2, β3, β12, β13, β23 are regression coefficients of the function. The first
coefficient, β0, is the overall average effect of all factors and corresponds to the level of
response at origin. The coefficients β1, β2, β3 represent the linear effect on the response η. The
coefficients β12, β13, β23 represent the effect on the response η as explained by the interaction
between the variables x1x2, x1x3, x 2x 3, respectively. The coefficients are calculated on the basis
of the least square method by fitting equation (1) to a number of observations, N, which is
3 Materials
In the present study four different coils of 55.0 wt% Al, 43.4 wt% Zn, 1.6 wt% Si coated steel
produced in the continuous hot dip coating line at SSAB Tunnplåt AB, Sweden, were
investigated, see Table 1. The role of Si in the alloy coating is to prevent a strong exothermic
reaction between the Al-Zn bath and the steel substrate [11, 12, 13].
Viewed in a plane parallel to the steel sheet surface, see Fig. 1, the coating is seen to consist
regions is also seen in cross-section, see Fig. 2, where also silicon particles, 5-20 µm in size,
can be seen in the interdendritic regions. At the substrate-coating interface a thin, 0.5-2 µm,
-5-
intermetallic layer is formed by solid-state diffusion of aluminium, zinc and silicon into the
steel surface. This layer consists of Fe-Zn-Al and Fe-Zn-Al-Si compounds [13, 14] and acts to
4 Experimental
The list of factors investigated is presented in Table 2. The effects of the four factors: ageing
(x 1) temper rolling (x2) post heat treatment (x3) and coating thickness (x4) were studied at two
levels, whereas the effect of deformation (x5) was evaluated at eight different levels. The
samples were tested in accordance with the treatment combinations given in the design
matrixes in Tables 3 and 4. Each trail was repeated three times, i.e. three replicates of each
The cold rolled strip was processed in the Aluzink® line, at SSAB Tunnplåt AB, using an
annealing temperature of 700-800 °C and a metal bath temperature of 600 °C. To achieve
desired coating thickness values the pressure in the air jet knifes were modulated. After
coating deposition the strip was post heat treated at a coil temperature of 260 °C. After
reaching the annealing temperature, the cooling starts immediately, i.e. there is no holding
time. Temper rolling was performed to reductions of approximately 0.7-1.0%. The ageing
process was performed for 7 weeks at room temperature. Samples (5 cm × 5 cm) were
-6-
4.3 Micro Hardness
The hardness of the coatings was obtained for a load of 15 g using a conventional Vickers
samples.
Cracks on the tension side of the formed specimens were thoroughly examined by using SEM
and EDS (Fig. 3). Coating damage parameters, such as area fraction of cracks, mean crack
width and mean crack inter distance, were obtained by performing image analysis on
thresholded (Fig 4a) SEM images (Fig. 4b). Digital image processing operations and image
measurements were performed using the commercial available software, Quantimet 520.
the samples investigated. The matrices were treated mathematically by performing multiple
linear regression (MLR). The regression coefficients and corresponding limits of significance
are presented in Tables 7 and 8. The significance of each coefficient can be determined by
studying the confidence limits in comparison with the value of each coefficient. If the value of
a regression coefficient is inside the confidence interval then the regression coefficient is
insignificant at the 5% level. In the following sections the results from the micro hardness
-7-
5.1 Micro Hardness
From Table 7, it can be seen that the ageing coefficient and all interaction coefficients are
insignificant and therefore negligible. Thus, the regression equation obtained is given as:
x2 = Temper rolling
x4 = Coating thickness
x5 = Deformation
When one is studying equation (1) it is important to remember that temper rolling (x2) and
post heat treatment (x3) are discrete and qualitative variables, which describe variation at
fixed levels (-1 or +1), see Table 5. Thus, equation (1) reveals that the use of post heat
treatment decreases the coating hardness by 33.8 [kg/mm2]. This can be explained by the fact
that the post heat treatment transforms coherent Guinier-Preston zones to larger and more
stable phases, which are less effective to prevent deformation by slip of dislocations. It can
also be seen that temper rolling increases the coating hardness due to deformation hardening.
Equation (1) also shows that thinner coatings have a higher hardness as compared with
thicker coatings. However, this effect is probably due to the fact that the indentation load was
to high, and consequently the harder underlying steel substrate will contribute to the
-8-
5.2 Cracking characteristics
Table 6 was analysed in order to get the effects of the main factors and the interactions listed
in Table 8.
x4 = Coating thickness
x5 = Deformation
As can be seen, post heat treatment (x3) has a significant decreasing effect on the area fraction
of cracks (eq. 2), the mean crack width (eq. 3) and a significant increasing effect on the mean
crack inter distance (eq. 4). Furthermore, the coating thickness (x4) has a significant effect on
the mean crack width. For example, if the coating thickness is increased by approximately 5
µm, the crack width is increased by 1 µm. Finally, the forming operations have very strong
effects on the response variables. As expected, the area fraction of cracks and the mean crack
width will increase while the crack inter distance will decrease during forming operations.
-9-
6 Conclusions
In the present investigation, the influence of different processing parameters on the coating
(1) The statistical design of experiments provides a good method of quantifying the effects of
(2) The Vickers hardness of the coating was found to be significantly influenced by temper
rolling, post heat treatment and coating thickness. Temper rolling gives a small hardening
effect, while heat treatment transforms coherent Guinier-Preston zones to greater and
softer phases.
(3) Post heat treatment has a significant decreasing effect on the area fraction of cracks, the
mean crack width and a significant increasing effect on the mean crack inter distance.
Acknowledgements
SSAB Tunnplåt AB is gratefully acknowledged for the financial support and for delivering
the test samples. Dr. Göran Engberg, Dr. Hans Klang and Dr. Sven Erik Hörnström, SSAB
- 10 -
References
1 D.J. Willis, J.S.H. Lake, The Influence of the Interaction Between the Coating and the
2 D.J. Willis, Z.F. Zhou, Factors influencing the ductility of 55% Al-Zn coatings, Iron
3 V. Rangarajan, N.M. Giallourakis, D.K. Matlock, G.V. Krauss, The effect of texture
4 D.J. Willis, Coated sheet steel viewed as a composite material, Strength of Metals and
Alloys (ICSMA6), Proceedings in the 6th Int. Conf., Melbourne, ed. R C Gifkins,
International Conference on Zinc and Zinc Alloy Coated Steel Sheet, GALVATECH
7 S.R. Shah, J.A. Dilewijns, R.D. Jones, The structure and deformation behaviour of zinc-
rich coatings on steel sheet, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 5 (5)
- 11 -
q
8 T.E. Torok, P.W. Shin, A.R. Borzillo, Method of imroving the ductility of the coating of
9 E. Aguirre, B. Fernandez, J.M. Puente, Post-Annealed 55% Al--Zn Alloy Coated Steel
10 G.E.P. Box, W.G. Hunter, J.S. Hunter, Statistics for Experimenters, John Wiley & Sons,
11 A.R. Borzillo, J.B. Horton, U.S. patent #3343930, September 26, 1967.
12 J.H. Selverian, A.R. Marder, M.R. Notis, Metall. Trans. A., 19A, 1988, pp. 1193-1203.
13 J.H. Selverian, A.R. Marder, M.R. Notis, Metall. Trans. A., 20A, 1989, pp. 543-55.
14 J.H. Selverian, A.R. Marder, M.R. Notis, J. Electron Micro. Tech., 5(3), 1987, pp. 223-
26.
- 12 -
Tables
x5 35
Effective strain 11% 21% 30% 19% 36% 52% 60%
%
- 13 -
Table 3 Matrix of experimental design for coating hardness evaluation.
Trial Process parameters Interactions
x1 x2 x3 x4 x1 x2 x1 x3 x1 x4 x2 x3 x2 x4 x3 x4
Temper Post heat Coating
Ageing
rolling treatm. thickness
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1
3 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1
4 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1
5 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1
6 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1
7 -1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1
8 1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1
9 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1
10 1 -1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1
11 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1
12 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1
13 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1
14 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1
15 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
- 14 -
Table 4 Matrix of experimental design for cracking behaviour evaluation.
Trial Process parameters
x1 x2 x3 x4 x5
Ageing Temper Post heat Coating Strain
rolling treatment thickness
[%]
1 - - - - 19
2 - - - - 35
3 + - - - 60
4 + - - - 21
5 - + - - 60
6 - + - - 21
7 + + - - 19
8 + + - - 35
9 - - + - 11
10 - - + - 52
11 + - + - 36
12 + - + - 30
13 - + + - 36
14 - + + - 30
15 + + + - 11
16 + + + - 52
17 - - - + 11
18 - - - + 52
19 + - - + 36
20 + - - + 30
21 - + - + 36
22 - + - + 30
23 + + - + 11
24 + + - + 52
25 - - + + 19
26 - - + + 35
27 + - + + 60
28 + - + + 21
29 - + + + 60
30 - + + + 21
31 + + + + 19
32 + + + + 35
- 15 -
Table 5 Vickers hardness for different parameter combinations.
Trial Process parameters Response
x1 x2 x3 x4 Vickers Standard
Hardness deviation
Temper Post heat Coating
Ageing [HV15g] [HV15g]
rolling treatment thickness
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 108.3 11.0
2 1 -1 -1 -1 106.0 9.3
3 -1 1 -1 -1 115.1 13.0
4 1 1 -1 -1 106.3 10.4
5 -1 -1 1 -1 70.4 2.8
6 1 -1 1 -1 72.5 6.0
7 -1 1 1 -1 78.4 4.0
8 1 1 1 -1 75.3 3.6
9 -1 -1 -1 1 96.6 7.3
10 1 -1 -1 1 100.9 6.6
11 -1 1 -1 1 107.3 10.9
12 1 1 -1 1 107.7 6.1
13 -1 -1 1 1 69.6 8.0
14 1 -1 1 1 62.1 4.3
15 -1 1 1 1 77.0 4.3
16 1 1 1 1 72.7 5.9
- 16 -
Table 6 Area fraction of cracks, mean crack width and mean crack inter distance
for different parameter combinations.
Trial Process parameters Responses
x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 Area Mean crack Mean crack
fraction of width inter
cracks distance
Ageing Temper Post Coating Strain
rolling heat thickn.
treatm.
[%] [%] [µm] [µm]
1 - - - - 19 1.5 5.8 393
2 - - - - 35 4.7 6.9 149
3 + - - - 60 9.1 10.7 118
4 + - - - 21 2.5 5.5 231
5 - + - - 60 10.0 12.1 122
6 - + - - 21 2.1 5.0 249
7 + + - - 19 1.5 5.9 382
8 + + - - 35 5.2 7.6 148
9 - - + - 11 0.1 3.7 5590
10 - - + - 52 0.9 5.9 694
11 + - + - 36 0.2 5.5 3176
12 + - + - 30 1.5 4.5 325
13 - + + - 36 0.4 4.5 1186
14 - + + - 30 1.7 4.6 277
15 + + + - 11 0.4 4.1 1565
16 + + + - 52 0.7 5.6 840
17 - - - + 11 0.5 4.3 1068
18 - - - + 52 6.5 12.0 187
19 + - - + 36 2.6 7.9 303
20 + - - + 30 5.3 9.5 212
21 - + - + 36 2.6 8.8 336
22 - + - + 30 6.2 10.3 168
23 + + - + 11 0.2 3.9 1766
24 + + - + 52 7.6 12.2 163
25 - - + + 19 0.3 4.8 1737
26 - - + + 35 2.1 5.7 281
27 + - + + 60 1.4 6.8 527
28 + - + + 21 1.0 4.6 517
29 - + + + 60 1.4 6.6 457
30 - + + + 21 0.5 4.1 864
31 + + + + 19 0.2 4.5 3814
32 + + + + 35 2.6 7.0 273
- 17 -
Table 7 Regression coefficients and corresponding confident limits as obtained in
the micro hardness test.
Regression Coefficient
Confident limit
Process parameters Regression coefficient for Micro hardness
(P=0.05)
[HV15g]
x0 β0 89.14 2.21
x1 β1 -1.20 2.21
x2 β2 3.34 2.21
x3 β3 -16.89 2.21
x4 β4 -2.40 2.21
x1 x2 β12 -0.78 2.21
x1 x3 β13 -0.40 2.21
x1 x4 β14 0.31 2.21
x2 x3 β23 0.26 2.21
x2 x4 β24 1.10 2.21
x3 x4 β34 0.50 2.21
- 18 -
Figure captions
Figure 1 SEM micrograph (a) of 55%Al-Zn coated steel viewed in a plane parallel
to the surface. (b) elemental maps recorded from the surface.
Figure 3 SEM micrograph (a) and elemental maps recorded from corresponding
surface (b) of a typical crack formed on bended 55%Al-Zn coated steel.
Figure 4 Binary image (a) used for coating cracking evaluation after tresholding of
image (b). SEM micrograph of a typical crack pattern formed on bended
55%Al-Zn coated steel (b).
- 19 -
Figures
(a) (b)
Figure 1
(a) (b)
Figure 2
- 20 -
(a) (b)
Figure 3
(a) (b)
Figure 4
- 21 -