The influence of modified intermetallics and Si particles on fatigue

crack paths in a cast A356 Al alloy

K . G A L L , N . YA N G , M . H O R S T E M E Y E R , D. L . M c D O W E L L 1 a n d J . FA N 1
Materials & Engineering Sciences Center, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA 94550, USA, 1 GWW School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA

Received in final form 16 July 1999

A B S T R A C T Mechanical fatigue tests were conducted on uniaxial specimens machined from a cast
A356-T6 aluminium alloy plate at total strain amplitudes ranging from 0.1 to 0.8%
(R=−1). The cast alloy contains strontium-modified silicon particles (vol. fract. ~6%)
within an Al–Si eutectic, dispersed a intermetallic particles, Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2 (vol. fract.
~1%), and an extremely low overall volume fraction of porosity (0.01%). During the
initial stages of the fatigue process, we observed that a small semicircular fatigue crack
propagated almost exclusively through the Al–1% Si dendrite cells. The small crack
avoided the modified silicon particles in the Al–Si eutectic and only propagated along
the a intermetallics if they were directly in line with the crack plane. These growth
characteristics were observed up to a maximum stress intensity factor of ~K max tr
=
1/2
7.0 MPa m (maximum plastic zone size of 96 mm). When the fatigue crack propagated
with a maximum crack tip driving force above 7.0 MPa m1/2 the larger fatigue crack tip
process zone fractured an increased number of silicon particles and a intermetallics
ahead of the crack tip, and the crack subsequently propagated preferentially through
the damaged regions. As the crack tip driving force further increased, the area fraction
of damaged a intermetallics and silicon particles on the fatigue fracture surfaces also
increased. The final stage of failure (fast fracture) was observed to occur almost
exclusively through the Al–Si eutectic regions and the a intermetallics.
Keywords cast Al–Si alloy, fatigue crack propagation, silicon and intermetallic
particles.

NOMENCLATURE a=crack length

af =final crack length
aMSC =crack length of a microstructurally small crack
atrans =transition crack length
d=gauge section diameter
E=elastic modulus
f ( g)=geometric factor
Kmax =maximum applied stress intensity factor
tr
K max =transition maximum applied stress intensity factor
rp =plastic (process) zone size
R=load ratio, smin /smax
a=Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2 intermetallic
DKeff =effective stress intensity range
DKeff, th =effective threshold stress intensity range

De=applied far-field strain range

smax =maximum applied far-field stress
smin =minimum applied far-field stress
sy =yield strength

© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172 159
160 K. GALL et al.
INTRODUCTION
Depending on their size, microstructural inhomogeneit-
ies can have a strong influence on the fatigue properties
of cast aluminium–silicon alloys. Previous research
efforts have demonstrated that if large casting pores
(&100 mm) are present, they control the fatigue life of
the cast samples.1–13 When fatigue cracks initiate from
the inner surfaces of large pores, the effective crack
length (pore size+initial crack length) is long with
respect to other microstructural features, e.g. the den-
drite cell size and silicon particle diameter. Consequently,
numerous fracture mechanics approaches based on aver-
age material properties have been successfully used to
predict the fatigue life of cast aluminium alloys contain-
ing relatively large pores.3,4,6,7,11–13 All of the referenced
models are based on semiempirical approaches that
estimate fatigue life by integrating a Paris law crack
growth rate equation. Some of the models also use
empirical equations to estimate the initiation life of the
fatigue cracks, thus accounting for incubation periods
as cracks nucleate from defects.4,12 Other research-
ers3,6,7,11,13 assumed the initial crack size to be approxi-
mately equal to the initial defect size. Another distinction
between the different fatigue life prediction models is
related to the parameter used to characterize the crack
tip driving force. Nearly all of the models use a transient-
closure modified stress intensity factor,3,4,6,7,12 while one
uses a so-called strain intensity factor.11,13 Notably, the
latter parameter has more physical meaning when the
fatigue cracks are expected to violate small-scale yielding
conditions.
The semiempirical models predict several experimen-
tally observed fatigue phenomena in cast alloys, e.g. the
effect of maximum pore size,3,6 mean stress effects,3
short crack and pore interactions,4 underload effects,11
and notch size effects.13 The models rely primarily upon
a Paris law crack growth exponent determined from
fatigue crack growth tests in, e.g. compact tension speci-
mens. However, continual advances in casting technology
are decreasing the maximum defect sizes found in indus-
trial cast components. In parallel with these materials
processing developments, it is imperative to further
understand the micromechanisms of fatigue crack growth
over multiple length scales. This knowledge is required
because fracture mechanics approaches may underesti-
mate fatigue lives as initial defect sizes reach the length
scale of other microstructural features that are distributed
throughout the material. In an initial effort to understand
fatigue crack growth mechanisms in cast Al–Si alloys,
several studies have shown that the growth rate of long
cracks is dependent on the silicon particle morphology
in an average sense.14–17 The silicon particle morphology
can be modified from a coarse lamellar structure to one
containing well-dispersed and spherodized particles by
alloying with trace amounts of strontium or sodium, or
subjecting the casting to extended solutionizing heat
treatments. Cast Al–Si alloys with modified silicon par-
ticles generally exhibit a better resistance to long fatigue
crack growth compared to unmodified alloys.14–17
Even though silicon particles play a key role in the
fatigue crack growth characteristics of cast Al–Si alloys,
silicon particles are not the only second phase constituent
common to this alloy system. Commercial Al–Si alloys
often contain trace amounts of iron (%1%) as an
impurity or an alloying element added to prevent die
soldering for castings solidified under high pressures.18
Although the iron circumvents the die soldering, it also
readily combines with aluminium and silicon to form
intermetallic flakes that are detrimental to the fatigue
life of cast aluminium.19 To rectify the loss in mechanical
properties due to the brittle iron intermetallic flakes,
elements, e.g. beryllium or manganese are further added
to the melt. It has been demonstrated that the cyclic20
and monotonic21–23 mechanical properties of cast Al–Si
alloys are improved by the subsequent addition of
manganese or beryllium. These elements promote the
formation of compounded intermetallic phases, e.g. the
a intermetallic Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2 .20 The manganese-
modified a intermetallics have an intricate branched
structure and thus are sometimes referred to as the
Chinese script phase.21 Alternatively, the beryllium-
modified iron intermetallics possess a nearly spherical
shape.22
Improvements in the mechanical properties of cast
Al–Si alloys have been demonstrated by modifying the
intermetallics and silicon particles, but the explicit role
of the two coexisting phases on the local fatigue mechan-
isms has not been elucidated. One reason that the
influence of iron intermetallics has not received strong
attention is because some research-grade materials do
not contain significant amounts of iron. However, indus-
trial castings will invariably contain iron that was inten-
tionally added to avoid die soldering or inadvertently
present from extracting the pure aluminium from the
ore. Therefore, it is important to understand the poten-
tial role of iron intermetallics in addition to modified
silicon particles on the local fatigue mechanisms of cast
Al–Si alloys.
With this background, the primary aim of the present
work is to study the microstructural paths chosen by
fatigue cracks at different stages during the fatigue
process. The observed changes in the local crack growth
mechanisms will be correlated to changes in the crack
tip driving force by using fracture mechanics concepts.
Such detailed information can be used to guide the
development of multiscale fatigue models that incorpor-
ate the spatial distribution of defects and local defor-
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172

mation mechanism.24 In addition, information on the
micromechanisms of fatigue crack growth is useful for
designing commercial cast alloys to be more resistant to
fatigue crack nucleation and propagation. The present
study will not consider alloys containing unmodified
silicon particles as it is well established that the fatigue
properties of these alloys are relatively poor, particularly
at high stress ratios.14–16 In addition, it is a widely
accepted industrial practice to modify cast Al–Si alloys.18
EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES
The nominal compositions of typical A356 aluminium
alloys are presented in Table 1. To produce A356 cast
plates for the present study, a high-grade A356.2 ingot
(Table 1) was melted in an induction furnace. The melt
was grain refined with titanium–boron, strontium modi-
fied, and degassed using a rotary degasser. The castings
were poured under the influence of gravity between 950
and 977 K in room temperature air, and then fully cooled
over a 16-h period. The A356 aluminium plates were
cast in rectangular moulds with interior dimensions of
25–14–5 cm. Iron chills were employed on the top,
bottom and end of the casting mould to simulate a
permanent mould casting. A no-bake silica sand was
used to create the sides of the plate, the riser, and the
down sprue. A ceramic foam filter was used between the
down sprue and the riser. The plates were removed from
the mould and then heat treated with a T6 ageing
treatment (solutionized at 810 K for 16 h, quenched in
hot water at 344 K, and then aged for 4 h at 518 K).
Standard ASTM low-cycle fatigue specimens were
machined from the ends of the plates where porosity
levels were minimized (0.01% average porosity). The
gauge length of the specimens was 25.4 mm and the
gauge section diameter was 9.53 mm. The average den-
drite cell size of the cast material in the region with low
porosity was ~40 mm. The fatigue specimens were all
given an axial polish to minimize machining surface
roughness effects on fatigue. Constant amplitude fatigue
tests were conducted in strain control at total strain
amplitudes ranging from 0.1 to 0.8% (R=−1, fre-
quency=0.5 Hz). After cyclic saturation in high-cycle
Table 1 Typical composition of A356
alloys, including the A356.2 alloy employed
for the present study
Material Al
A356.0 Balance
A356.1 Balance
A356.2 Balance
The concentrations for Fe, Mn, Zn, Ti and other elements are maximum allowed values of
the Aluminium Association.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172
M I C R O S TR U C T U R A L I N H O M O G E N E I TI E S I N A l A L LOY 161
fatigue tests, the machine feedback mode was switched
to load control and the frequency was increased to
10 Hz. Local fatigue mechanisms were evaluated by
examining fracture surfaces with a scanning electron
microscope (SEM) using either secondary electron imag-
ing (SEI) or backscatter electron imaging (BEI). When
information containing the spatial arrangement and area
fraction of a particular phase was required, BEI was
used. BEI differs from SEI in that contrast depends on
the atomic mass of the constituent elements of a particu-
lar phase. Because of this, phases comprised of higher
atomic mass elements create more backscatter electrons
and thus appear brighter on the SEM image. In the
current material, iron has a much higher atomic weight
versus aluminium or silicon, thus it appears brighter in
BEI. Because aluminium and silicon have comparable
atomic weights they appear similar in BEI. Consequently,
the chemical compositions on the samples were measured
using an energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) analysis. The
EDX analysis is a semiquantitative measurement of the
relative composition of the area of interest. The EDX
measurements are not used to characterize the exact
composition of the alloy, but rather to approximate the
relative differences in the area fraction of different phases
between fractured samples and undeformed cross-sec-
tions. In addition, X-ray mapping was used to determine
the spatial arrangement of silicon particles on one par-
ticular fracture surface.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Mechanical fatigue tests
The fatigue life curve based on total strain amplitude
for the cast A356 aluminium alloy is shown in Fig. 1.
Even in this premium cast alloy, specimen lives demon-
strate significant variability at a given applied strain
amplitude. This is caused by the fact that the largest
defect in the gauge section controls the fatigue process
in cast materials. Due to the statistical nature of pore
nucleation and growth during solidification,25,26 the
maximum pore size will vary between samples.
Specimens containing a relatively large pore in the gauge
Others
Si Mg Fe Mn Zn Ti Each Total
6.5–7.5 0.25–0.45 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.05 0.15
6.5–7.5 0.30–0.45 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.05 0.15
6.5–7.5 0.30–0.45 0.12 0.05 0.05 0.20 0.05 0.15
162 K. GALL et al.
Fig. 1 Total strain life curve for cast A356 Al. All samples were
cycled until failure with exception of the sample cycled at a 0.1%
strain amplitude.
section will demonstrate a severely reduced fatigue life
as a nucleated fatigue crack will begin its growth as a
very long effective crack. The pore size effect is partially
accounted for by fracture mechanics-based approaches3,6
as a larger initial defect size dramatically decreases the
predicted crack propagation life. Furthermore, even in
specimens with negligible porosity, variability will occur
because of the statistical nature of crack interactions
with silicon particles and other inclusions. Three failed
specimens cycled at strain amplitudes of 0.2, 0.4 and
0.8% were used for fractographic analysis.
Fractography
A typical undeformed microstructure of the cast material
is shown in Fig. 2. On this backscatter electron image,
the grey matrix is Al–1% Si, the small black circles are
silicon particles, and the bright flakes are a intermetallic
particles.21 The compositions of these features were
verified with local EDX measurements and found to be
consistent with expectations. The large circular feature
on the lower right-hand side of the image is contami-
nation and not representative of the microstructure.
Given the relative metallographic information for an
arbitrary material cross-section, we will now examine
the fracture surface features on the fatigued samples. Of
the samples fatigued at different strain amplitudes, the
fracture surface on the specimen cycled at 0.2% strain
demonstrated the most obvious demarcation between a
region that failed by progressive fatigue crack propa-
gation and one that failed by local tensile overload.
Figure 3(a,b) shows low-magnification images of the
overall fracture surface on the samples cycled at 0.2%
strain. Figure 3(a) was imaged using SEI while Fig. 3(b)
was imaged using BEI to reveal the area fraction and
spatial distribution of the a intermetallic. In Fig. 3(b),
Fig. 2 Backscatter SEM image of an arbitrary transverse cross-
section through an undeformed sample. The bright flakes are the a
Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2 intermetallics, the small black circles are silicon
particles, and the grey background is Al. The sample was etched
with a slightly acidic water solution to mark the silicon particles.
the dark grey regions are Al–1% Si and the Al–Si
eutectic, the bright particles are a intermetallics
(Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2 ) and the black areas are valleys on the
fracture surface. We note that Al5 FeSi or so-called b
intermetallics are also common to the present alloy
system.21 In nearly all cases, Mn was discovered in the
Fe inclusions using EDX analysis, thus we assert that
the majority of the inclusions in the present alloy are a
intermetallics. Nevertheless, a small volume fraction of
the b intermetallics surely exists.
The crack initiation point was identified as a horse-
shoe-shaped aluminium oxide inclusion (confirmed with
EDX) shown in Fig. 4. The fatigue crack initiating oxide
inclusion is relatively close to the specimen surface as
has been observed in previous fatigue studies on cast
Al–Si alloys.4,13 Aluminium oxide inclusions trapped
during solidification often serve as nucleation sites for
shrinkage-assisted gas porosity.25,26 However, in this
particular specimen machined from the casting, a casting
pore surrounding the oxide inclusion was not present.
We note that even in the present alloy, which contained
a low overall volume fraction of porosity (0.01%), fatigue
crack nucleation also occurred at relative casting pores
in specimens with shorter fatigue lives (Fig. 1). However,
the aim of the present study is to characterize the growth
behaviour of small cracks, thus only a specimen with a
relatively small oxide initiation site was carefully analysed
in the SEM.
In the present study, the fatigue crack growth mechan-
isms in two different stages will be elucidated. Although
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172

(a)
(b)
Fig. 3 Low-magnification SEM images of the overall fracture
surface on the 0.2% sample taken in: (a) secondary electron mode;
(b) backscatter electron mode. FCGR stands for fatigue crack
growth (specimen life=~150 000 cycles).
it is difficult to partition the growth of the crack into
different stages using Fig. 3(a), the backscatter SEM
picture in Fig. 3(b) more clearly identifies the transitions
between different growth patterns. Black lines in
Fig. 3(b) are used to indicate the crack positions corre-
sponding to macroscopic transitions in the fracture sur-
face morphology. The curvatures of the crack paths were
drawn to match approximate contours of constant area
fraction of the a intermetallics. The positions of the
crack paths were chosen where the area fraction of a
intermetallics demonstrated the most obvious macro-
scopic increases. Notably, the local fatigue mechanisms
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172
M I C R O S TR U C T U R A L I N H O M O G E N E I TI E S I N A l A L LOY 163
Fig. 4 SEM image of the fatigue crack initiation point at an
aluminium oxide inclusion in the sample cycled at 0.2% strain.
will not change abruptly at the distinct crack fronts, but
rather undergo a gradual transition at a smaller length
scale. However, as there are significant changes in the
overall fracture surface appearance at low magnifications,
the two crack fronts drawn in Fig. 3(b) are meaningful
from a macroscopic point of view. The different growth
stages proposed within these regions are labelled in
Fig. 3(a), where FCGR stands for fatigue crack growth
rates. The justification for the labels in Fig. 3(b) will
now be discussed in detail using SEM and EDX results.
High-magnification images in the low FCGR region
reveals extended flat areas perpendicular to the loading
axis [Fig. 5(a)]. The corresponding backscatter image to
Fig. 5(a) shows that the area fraction of a intermetallics
in the low FCGR region [Fig. 5(b)] is only slightly
higher than in the undeformed material cross-section
(Fig. 2). At even higher magnifications, we found that
the flat surfaces in Fig. 5 are covered with fine fatigue
striations [Fig. 6(a)]. In these regions, the very low
volume fraction of silicon particles on the fracture surface
coupled with the overall planar appearance of the fracture
surface indicates that the fatigue cracks cut straight
through the Al–1% Si dendrite cells. Consequently, the
cracks did encounter some a intermetallics, which are
found randomly within the Al–1% Si dendrite cells
[Fig. 5(b)]. When the crack encountered the a intermet-
allics, it propagated preferentially along or through them
as evident from the slight increase in the area fraction
of a in Fig. 5(b) versus Fig. 2. It should be noted that
wherever the area fraction of damaged a intermetallics
on the fracture surface was low, the corresponding area
fraction of silicon particles was also relatively low. Thus,
the a intermetallics served as reliable indicators for the
overall silicon particle distribution on the fracture sur-
164 K. GALL et al.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 5 Intermediate magnification SEM images of the fracture
surface on the 0.2% sample near the fatigue crack nucleation site
taken in: (a) secondary electron mode; (b) backscatter electron
mode.
face. The observations near the crack nucleation site in
the 0.2% sample also hold true for the sample cycled at
0.4% strain as demonstrated in Fig. 7(a),(b). The
nucleation site in the 0.4% sample was also an oxide
inclusion, however, the area of the fracture surface
covered by fatigue striations on the Al–1% Si was smaller
compared to the 0.2% sample. The sample cycled at
0.8% strain showed very little evidence of fatigue stri-
ations on the specimen fracture surface.
As the crack grows a significant distance from the
(a)
(b)
Fig. 6 High-magnification SEM images of the fracture surface on
the 0.2% sample near the fatigue crack nucleation site taken in:
(a) secondary electron mode; (b) backscatter electron mode.
initiation site and becomes larger, the local crack tip
driving force increases as the maximum far field applied
strain (stress) amplitude is kept constant. An increase in
the local crack tip driving force results in higher (steady)
fatigue crack propagation rates. In the region of steady
FCGR, the area fraction of a intermetallics is noticeably
higher compared to the regions where the cracks experi-
enced low FCGR [Fig. 3(b)]. Furthermore, the gradual
increase in local crack tip driving force is also
accompanied by increases in the area fraction of silicon
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172

(a)
(b)
Fig. 7 High-magnification SEM images of the fracture surface on
the 0.4% sample near the fatigue crack nucleation site taken in:
(a) secondary electron mode; (b) backscatter electron mode.
particles during steady FCGR. The fatigue cracks experi-
ence instantaneous extension through the a intermet-
allics as the particles showed clear evidence of cleavage
failure, as will be shown in subsequent micrographs.
Such a brittle phase is not capable of promoting crack
tip blunting and resharpening, a mechanism required for
the steady growth of fatigue cracks.27,28 Consequently,
the irregular shaped a intermetallics provide little or no
resistance to fatigue crack propagation when the crack
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172
M I C R O S TR U C T U R A L I N H O M O G E N E I TI E S I N A l A L LOY 165
tip encounters them. The silicon particles in the eutectic
provide more resistance to fatigue crack growth due to
their disperse and spherodized nature within the ductile
Al–1% Si phase.
When the crack tip driving force becomes large
enough, the remainder of the specimen fails through
tensile overload. Figure 8(a)–(c) shows representative
images taken from an overloaded region of the fracture
surface on the specimen cycled at 0.8% strain. The
fracture surfaces in the overloaded regions on the 0.4
and 0.2% specimens appeared identical to Fig. 8. The
overloaded regions [Fig. 8(a)] consist of an even mixture
of faceted and dimpled areas. To identify the phases
corresponding to the different types of fracture, images
of the region in Fig. 8(a) were captured using backscatt-
ered electrons [Fig. 8(b)] and silicon Ka X-ray mapping
[Fig. 8(c)]. Figure 8(b) shows the distribution of a inter-
metallics (the bright areas) in a typical overloaded region.
The area fraction of the a intermetallics on the over-
loaded fracture surface is significantly larger than in the
undeformed material cross-section (Fig. 2), the low
FCGR region [Fig. 5(b)], or the steady FCGR region
[Fig. 3(b)]. By comparing Fig. 8(a) and (b), one observes
that the faceted regions correspond directly to fractured
a intermetallic particles. Figure 8(c) highlights the distri-
bution of silicon particles (the white specks) on the
region of the fracture surface that failed through tensile
overload. The area fraction of silicon particles on the
overloaded fracture surface is also significantly larger
than was found on the undeformed material cross-section
(Fig. 2) or the low FCGR regions [Fig. 6(b)]. Higher
magnification images of the different fractured phases in
the overloaded regions are shown in Fig. 9(a),(b). The a
intermetallics demonstrate a very flat appearance on the
fracture surface, which indicates that they fractured
through cleavage. It will be noted that the a intermet-
allics demonstrated brittle fracture characteristics
[Fig. 9(a)] in both the fatigued and overloaded regions.
The Al–Si eutectic regions are covered with dimples
containing fractured silicon particles. Thus, the eutectic
regions failed primarily through particle cleavage and
extensive ductile tearing.
EDX analysis
To confirm and better quantify the above observations,
measurements of element concentrations were made on
the fracture surfaces and the arbitrary undeformed mate-
rial cross-section. If a phase area fraction is relatively
high on the fracture surface, it can be asserted that the
particle provides a weak link for material failure, regard-
less of the local fracture mechanism. The measurements
on the undeformed cross-section (Fig. 2) provide a base-
line comparison tool for EDX measurements on the
166 K. GALL et al.

(a)

(a)

(b)
(b)
Fig. 9 High-magnification SEM images of the fracture surface on
the 0.8% sample in a region that experienced tensile overload taken
in: (a) secondary electron mode; (b) backscatter electron mode.

fracture surfaces. Row 1 of Table 2 presents the measured

elemental concentrations on the arbitrary undeformed
material cross-section for a sampling area of ~4 mm2 .
The measured iron and manganese concentrations on
the surface of the undeformed sample are <1.0%. The
difference between this result and the nominal composi-

Fig. 8 SEM images of the fracture surface on the 0.8% sample in a

region that experienced tensile overload taken in: (a) secondary
electron mode; (b) backscatter electron mode; (c) X-ray mapping
mode.

(c)
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172

Table 2 Average element concentrations on
an arbitrary transverse cross-section surface
and the specimen fracture surfaces
Sample
Undeformed arbitrary cross-section
0.2% low FCGR region
0.2% overloaded region
EDX measurements are cumulative values taken at a magnification of 50×, covering large
specimen areas. Area fraction calculations assume that the a particles have a Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2
composition.
tion of the alloy (Table 1) is of the order of the exper-
imental detection limitations (<1%) in the EDX
measurements. The silicon concentration in the unde-
formed sample surface is twice what is expected, and this
is primarily due to the peak overlap between the alu-
minium and silicon spectra. The peak overlap will affect
all semiquantitative EDX calculations similarly, thus the
relative differences in compositions between samples will
still have comparative significance. Because all of the
iron in the melt will readily form an intermetallic,18 the
area fraction of a particles, Al and silicon particles
expected on an arbitrary cross-section can be calculated
from the EDX data. The results of these calculations
are shown in bold in row 1 in Table 2.
For the sample cycled at 0.2% strain, EDX measure-
ments were taken over 1-mm2 areas in the ‘low FCGR’
region and ‘overloaded region’ indicated in Fig. 3(a).
The last two rows in Table 2 present the results of the
EDX measurements on the 0.2% sample’s fracture sur-
face. For calculations of the area fraction of different
phases on the fracture surfaces, we assumed that all of
the iron forms the a intermetallic. The calculated phase
area fractions on the respective fracture surface regions
are shown in bold in Table 2. The area fractions found
in row 2 of Table 2 are consistent with visual SEM
observations in regions that failed through progressive
fatigue failure on all specimens (0.2, 0.4 and 0.8%). The
EDX measurements confirm that the fatigue cracks
initially propagate straight through the Al–1% Si den-
drite cells as the arbitrary material cross-section and low
FCGR region have comparable phase area fractions.
Because the overall area fraction of the silicon phase
decreases in the fatigued region, the fatigue cracks
growing at low rates are effectively evading the modified
silicon particles. Furthermore, the fatigue cracks growing
at low rates must be avoiding the eutectic phases altog-
ether as a larger volume fraction of silicon particles on
the fracture surface would be observed if they cut
through the tortuous network of silicon particles in the
Al–Si eutectic. However, fatigue cracks are expected to
propagate preferentially along the a intermetallics when
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172
M I C R O S TR U C T U R A L I N H O M O G E N E I TI E S I N A l A L LOY 167
Measured elemental Calculated approximate phase
concentrations (%) area fractions (%)
Al Si Fe Mn Al–1% Si Si Particles a
85.0 14.3 0.2 0.4 84.0 14.2 1.3
86.8 11.8 1.0 0.4 81.8 11.1 6.7
67.8 25.1 4.9 2.2 43.3 21.8 32.7
the crack tip directly encounters them. This is evident
from the slight increase in the area fraction of a in the
EDX calculations (Table 2) and the fatigued fracture
surface images [Fig. 2 versus Fig. 5(b)].
The region that failed through tensile overload
[Fig. 3(a)] demonstrates a greater area fraction of a and
silicon on the 0.2% fracture surface compared to the
undeformed cross-section (Table 2). The area fractions
found in row 3 of Table 2 are consistent with SEM obser-
vations in regions that failed through tensile overloaded
on all specimens (0.2, 0.4 and 0.8%). The increase of
silicon in the fracture surface is undoubtedly due to prefe-
rential fracture through the Al–Si eutectic. The pro-
gression of fracture through the silicon particles in the
eutectic under large strain monotonic loading (i.e. an
overload) is consistent with previous observations in modi-
fied alloys.20,21,29,30 However, the progression of fracture
through the a intermetallics during a tensile overload has
not received considerable attention. It has been previously
observed that iron intermetallics fracture during tensile
loading,21 however, it was not quantitatively demonstrated
that they play such a dominant role as reported here.
According to the results presented in Table 2, the a inter-
metallics cover ~one-third of the fracture surface in an
overloaded region. Considering the fact that the area
fraction of a intermetallics in the undeformed material
cross-section is ~1% (Table 2), this increase is remarkable.
The fact that the a intermetallics appear this frequently
on the overloaded fracture surface compared to a random
cross-section decisively identifies them as weak microstruc-
tural links for damage progression during an overload. In
unmodified cast Al–Si alloys, the large volume fraction of
coarse silicon particles in the eutectic controls the ductility
of the alloy.21 However, in the present alloy, which contains
an optimally modified silicon particle microstructure, the
a intermetallics limit the macroscopic ductility of the
material. If the a intermetallics were not present, the
Al–1% Si dendrite cells would be capable of plastically
deforming to very large strain levels, and the modified
silicon particles in the eutectic would once again limit
the ductility.
168 K. GALL et al.
DISCUSSION
Using the SEM and EDX results from the fatigued
fracture surfaces as a guide, a schematic of the pro-
gression of fatigue damage in cast Al–Si alloys is pre-
sented in Fig. 10. As previously reported, the most
dominant fatigue crack is envisioned to nucleate from
the largest microstructural defect, e.g. an oxide inclusion
or casting pore near the specimen surface. The incu-
bation period (crack nucleation life) of the formation of
such cracks in Al–Si alloys has only received approximate
treatments in the literature. A local strain approach for
predicting fatigue crack nucleation life from large initial
pores (average size of 500 mm) was utilized by Ting and
Lawrence on cast A319 aluminium.4 For smaller initial
defects (Si particles and pores ranging from 10 to
190 mm), Shiozawa et al.12 used a fracture mechanics-
based approach to predict the nucleation life of fatigue
cracks. However, there is some uncertainty over what
defects will control fatigue crack nucleation when the
maximum pore size becomes less than ~100 mm. In the
absence of large pores, it has been argued that fatigue
crack nucleation occurs from the largest silicon particles
or clusters.12,31 Nevertheless, there exists conflicting
evidence6 that fatigue cracks initiate from micropores
on the specimen surface of the order of 12 mm despite
the fact that silicon particles as large as 15 mm were
present. Consequently, more work is needed on the
actual mechanisms of fatigue crack nucleation from
defects of varying size in cast Al–Si alloys. During high-
cycle fatigue, the time spent forming cracks near defects
is critical as it will constitute a considerable fraction of
the total fatigue life in premium cast Al–Si alloys.6,12
After nucleation, the microstructurally small cracks
propagate towards the specimen surface and into the
bulk material (Fig. 10). A crack is considered microstruc-
turally small if the crack length and crack tip process
(plastic) zone exist at the same length scale as pertinent
microstructural features. The crack tip process zone is a
region containing highly localized plasticity and high
triaxial stress levels. Research on low-porosity squeeze
cast Al–Si alloys has demonstrated that a crack experi-
ences microstructural small growth rate effects if its size
is of the order of several dendrite cell sizes.31 Therefore,
if the initial defect size is larger than several dendrite
cell sizes, the crack will spend a negligible amount of
time propagating as a microstructurally small crack. In
the specimen cycled at 0.2% strain, the crack-initiating
oxide inclusion was nearly three times the dendrite cell
size. Consequently, the fraction of life spent while the
crack propagated in the microstructurally small regime
(a<aMSC ) is small or negligible.
Even after the crack is no longer microstructurally
small, a>aMSC , it continues to propagate straight
through the Al–1% Si dendrite cells (Fig. 10). During
this growth period, the local fracture surface is rather
flat and perpendicular to the tensile axis even at the
microscale. The advancing fatigue crack avoids the sili-
con particle-rich eutectic and only propagates preferen-
tially through a intermetallic particles if they are in-line
with the crack plane. The fatigue crack propagation at
low rates through the Al–1% Si dendrite cells only
continues up to a definite crack length. At a transition
crack length, atrans , the fatigued fracture surface begins
to show increased evidence of damaged a intermetallics
and silicon particles (Fig. 10). The magnitude of atrans is
dictated by the microstructure of the alloy and the crack
tip driving force. The microstructural effect is charac-
terized by the propensity of the silicon and a particles
to crack/debond coupled with the nearest-neighbour
Fig. 10 Schematic illustration of the crack
paths and progression of fatigue damage in
cast Al–Si alloys containing defects of the
order of several dendrite cell sizes.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172

distance between the respective phases. The silicon
particles are concentrated in a compact cell wall-type
structure while the a intermetallics are evenly dispersed
over a much larger length scale. Thus, even if the brittle
irregular shaped a intermetallics possess negligible resist-
ance to cracking, they will not strongly affect the crack
propagation rates until the crack tip process zone is large
enough to sense a statistically significant number of
them.
It is useful to quantify the macroscopic transition
point between dominant fatigue crack growth through
the dendrite cells versus the second phase particle
regions. The most widespread parameter used to charac-
terize the crack tip driving force during fatigue is the
effective stress intensity range, DKeff .34,35 However, in
the present study the maximum stress intensity value,
Kmax , will be calculated and used as the parameter
governing the fatigue crack path transition. The Kmax
and DKeff parameters both have potential advantages for
analysing the transition behaviour. In general, DKeff may
better characterize the fatigue crack driving force, how-
ever, Kmax may better characterize the propensity for the
a intermetallics and silicon particles to crack during
fatigue. Consequently, Kmax will be used to quantify the
transition point between growth patterns through the
Al–Si eutectic and a intermetallics versus through the
Al–1% Si dendrite cells. Using the fracture surface
observations, it is possible to estimate the value of the
maximum stress intensity factor when the fatigue cracks
first begin to propagate more preferentially through the
a intermetallics and silicon particles. The calculations
will be performed using the fracture surface markings
on the sample cycled at 0.2% strain. By definition, the
transition stress intensity value that is determined from
the 0.2% sample is valid for other conditions (geometries
or applied stress) provided the cracks do not violate the
small-scale yielding criteria. In Fig. 3(b) the smaller black
semicircle indicates the approximate crack shape and size
corresponding to the point where the area fraction of
the a intermetallics begins to noticeably increase on the
fracture surface. At this transition point the crack also
begins to propagate more often through fractured silicon
particles in the eutectic region. With this, the crack
position in Fig. 3(b) is defined a priori as the transition
length, atrans , for the 0.2% specimen. The generalized
solution for the maximum stress factor is written as:
Kmax = f (g)smax 앀pa
where smax is the maximum applied cyclic stress during
the fatigue test, a is the crack length, and f ( g) is a
constant dependent on the specimen geometry.
The smax value is 140 MPa as determined by the far-
field boundary conditions. The other values to be esti-
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172
M I C R O S TR U C T U R A L I N H O M O G E N E I TI E S I N A l A L LOY 169
mated in Eq. (1) are the appropriate measure of crack
length and the geometry factor. Several works have
provided numerical solutions of the stress intensity fac-
tors for semicircular or semielliptical flaws in a cylindrical
specimen subjected to tensile loading.36,37 Experimental
evidence38 suggests that a crack in a cylindrical specimen
grows with a semicircular crack front. As the crack
grows, the front remains almost perfectly circular, how-
ever, the radius of curvature continually increases. The
approximate crack fronts marked by the constant area
fraction contours of a intermetallics [Fig. 3(b)] are
extremely well defined using circular arcs. Consequently,
the numerical stress intensity solution for an expanding
semicircular crack37 is used in this analysis:
AB AB
2 3
a a a
f (g)=0.67−1.24 +28.0 −162.4
d d d
AB AB AB
4 5 6
a a a
+472.2 −629.6 +326.1 (2)
d d d
In Eq. (2), d is the specimen diameter and a is the
maximum crack depth measured towards the centre of
the specimen. It will be noted that Eq. (2) only deter-
mines the stress intensity shape factor at the deepest
point in the crack. For an elliptical crack in a flat plate
it is usually assumed that the stress intensity factor
remains constant along the periphery of the crack, thus
requiring the crack aspect ratio to remain the same.
However, for a curved free surface, the crack aspect ratio
has been observed to change as the crack moves towards
the centre of the specimen. Thus, a numerical model for
the stress intensity factor must allow the crack radius to
change. Furthermore, the stress intensity factor must be
correlated as a function of a/d as in Eq. (2). The details
of the approach and determination of Eq. (2) are dis-
cussed more thoroughly by Liu.37 The maximum depth
of the small crack in Fig. 3(b) is atrans =1.39 mm and
the specimen diameter is d=9.53 mm. Using these
dimensions, Eq. (3) yields f ( g)=0.756 for the smaller
crack in Fig. 3(b). It will be noted that an average value
of f ( g)=0.767 was obtained using the solution for an
elliptical crack36 in a round tension specimen [crack size
of a=1.39, 2b=2.78 from Fig. 3(b)]. The numbers
differ by ~1%, and thus either approach is appropriate
for the analysis here. Substituting the calculated values
into Eq. (1) yields:
(1) tr
K max =7.0 MPa m1/2 (3)
The previous calculations indicate that when the
maximum fatigue crack tip driving force is ~K max tr
=
1/2
7.0 MPa m the crack will begin to propagate more
preferentially through a intermetallics and silicon par-
ticles as seen in Fig. 3(b). Preferential propagation
170 K. GALL et al.
occurs because the fraction of damaged particles at a
significant distance from the crack tip increases due to
the larger crack tip process zone. The maximum size of
the crack tip process (plastic) zone at the transition
point between local fatigue mechanisms can be esti-
mated using an Irwin-based approach.39 For the crack
geometry and loading conditions given above, the
maximum process zone size under plane strain con-
ditions is estimated as:
A B
tr
K max
rp =0.11 #96 mm (4)
sy
In Eq. (4), sy =240 MPa is the yield strength of the
A356 aluminium alloy. The calculation using Eq. (4)
reveals that at the critical transition point, the crack tip
process zone is ~two–three times the average dendrite
cell size. Within this process zone, intense local plasticity
and high triaxial stress fields will lead to the fracture and
debonding of a intermetallics and silicon particles.32,33
Subsequently, the crack links up with isolated second
phase regions that have experienced extensive damage.
The local coalescence occurs because it is energetically
favourable for the crack to change its growth direction
and travel through weakened material paths.
Although the aforementioned process can be envi-
sioned when a fatigue crack propagates with a maximum
stress intensity factor lower than 7.0 MPa m1/2 it is not
as likely to occur for two critical reasons.
1 The process zone in which the local crack tip stress
and plasticity are capable of damaging particles does
not sample a statistically significant number of
particles.
2 The deformation band between any damaged particle
regions and the existing crack tip is not intense enough
to promote crack tip meandering.
The transition stress intensity factor is expected to be
strongly dependent on the material, particularly the a
and silicon particle distribution and morphology. It can
also be asserted that the transition value should change
if the material ahead of the crack tip has been subjected
to a random fatigue overload or been excessively
fatigued. Either situation could lead to the premature
fracture of silicon and a particles, and the subsequent
growth of isolated microcracks (Fig. 10). However, even
if the microcracks are present, the crack tip driving
force still must be large enough to envelope these
fractured particles and link them to the main crack. In
any case, given the applied stress level it is now possible
to estimate the approximate transition crack length,
atrans , where the cracks will start to significantly follow
the a intermetallic and silicon particles. Because the
transition stress intensity value is a material parameter,
a higher applied stress will decrease the length of atrans
through fracture mechanics arguments. In other words,
the area fraction covered by steady fatigue crack growth
through the Al–1% Si dendrites will decrease as the
applied stress amplitude increases. This is consistent
with observations as the area fraction of fatigue stri-
ations decreased dramatically as the applied strain
amplitude was increased from 0.2% strain to 0.8%
strain.
It is insightful to compare the relation between the
maximum transition stress intensity factor and a tra-
ditional fatigue crack growth curve for similar Al–Si–Mg
alloys. The effective threshold stress intensity factor
is ~DKeff,th =1.5 MPa m1/2 for A356 alloys.40 In modi-
fied alloys with much higher silicon particle concentra-
tions, DKeff, th is consistently larger (as high as
4.0 MPa m1/2 ).16,17 The increase is due to the fact that
cracks propagating with a maximum applied stress intensity
factor below the transition stress intensity value proposed
here (K maxtr
=7.0 MPa m1/2 ), are slowed by growth
through eutectic regions as the forward crack tip driving
force is not large enough to damage the silicon particles.
Consequently, an alloy with a higher percentage of silicon
particles will present a more torturous route for cracks
propagating with a maximum stress intensity below K max tr
=7.0 MPa m . For da/dN–DKeff crack growth curves
1/2
for various Al–Si–Mg alloys, the values at ~5–7 MPa m1/2
correspond to the transition point between near threshold
growth and Paris law crack growth.2,7,16 Thus, in the
regime where the crack growth is represented by a Paris
law, the a intermetallics and silicon particles are expected
to control the resistance to long crack propagation in a
sense quantifiable by overall average material properties.
However, below the K maxtr
=7.0 MPa m1/2 transition value,
the crack growth characteristics will also depend on the
properties of the Al–1% Si dendrite cells and the blockage
induced by the intermittent Si particle-rich Al–Si eutectic
regions. During high-cycle fatigue, alloys with smaller
maximum defect sizes will have lives primarily spent during
the growth of cracks below the Paris law regime. Thus,
explicitly understanding the micromechanics of crack
growth through the dendrite cells is pertinent to these
fatigue situations.
The final stage of fatigue occurs when the crack length
(stress intensity value) reaches a critical value denoted as
af . At this point the maximum crack tip driving force is
extremely large and the fatigue crack is propagating almost
exclusively through the fractured silicon particles in the
eutectic and a intermetallics (Fig. 10). Once the maximum
applied stress intensity factor is greater than the fracture
toughness, KIc , the remaining material fails through a
tensile overload process involving rapid crack growth. As
in the final stages of the fatigue process, the overloaded
regions fail almost exclusively through the silicon particles
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172

in the Al–Si eutectic and a intermetallics. The approximate
location of the crack front at the point of unstable crack
propagation is indicated in Fig. 3(b) by the larger circular
arc. Therefore, the crack size corresponding to the chosen
crack front in Fig. 3(b) is a priori defined as af (Fig. 10).
The crack front position was chosen as an approximate
contour where the increasing area fraction of a intermet-
allics saturated. To validate the fracture mechanics
approach and the selection procedure for the final crack
size, the KIc value for the cast alloy can be calculated and
compared to other experimental values.
The KIc value is calculated using Eqs (1) and (2), and
the maximum depth of the large crack in Fig. 3(b), a=
3.51 mm. For a specimen diameter of d=9.53 mm, Eq. (2)
yields f (g)=1.14 for the larger crack in Fig. 3(b).
Substituting these values into Eq. (1) using smax =
140 MPa yields KIc =16.8 MPa m1/2 . Previous studies
have reported KIc values of ~17–18 MPa m1/2 for a similar
composition and dendrite cell size to the current material.2
Thus, the fracture mechanics analysis and crack locating
procedure yield a reasonable KIc value for this alloy, thus
the overall technique is a viable tool for analysing the
transition behaviour during fatigue.
In summary, we assert that the progression of fatigue
damage presented in Fig. 10 is applicable to most cast
Al–Si alloys containing modified silicon particles and dis-
perse a intermetallics. However, careful consideration of
the size of the defect that initiates the fatigue process must
be taken. Fatigue crack paths through the Al–1% Si
dendrites have been previously reported3 for similar size
initiation sites. Nevertheless, conflicting evidence that
fatigue cracks propagate through the eutectic rather than
the Al–1% Si dendrites exists.31 The aforementioned con-
clusion was based on observations in a squeeze casting
with lower porosity and oxide inclusion contents than the
present alloy. They demonstrated that crack nucleation
occurred at eutectic silicon particles and that the small
cracks never meandered significantly past the eutectic
region. The discrepancy between the present work and
the work on squeeze cast Al–Si is primarily caused by the
dispersed nature of fatigue damage in squeeze cast alloys
with small maximum defect sizes. The fatigue process in
such squeeze cast alloys is more dominated by isolated
nucleation events and microcracking. By the time several
of these microcracks link together, the growth phase at
low rates through the dendrite cells has been bypassed.
On the other hand, when nucleation occurs from a defect
of 100 mm or so the growth of this dominant crack will
experience a growth stage through the Al–1% Si dendrite
cells as observed here. Conversely, if the crack nucleating
defect is several hundred mm, the driving force at initiation
may be higher than the transition value derived here, and
the low crack growth rates through the Al–1% Si dendrite
cells are also bypassed.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172
M I C R O S TR U C T U R A L I N H O M O G E N E I TI E S I N A l A L LOY 171
CONCLUSIONS
By studying the fatigue behaviour of a premium cast
Al–Si alloy containing a low volume fraction of porosity
(0.01% on average), modified silicon particles and modi-
fied iron intermetallics (a-Al15 (Fe,Mn)3 Si2 ), the follow-
ing significant conclusions can be drawn.
1 During the initial stages of fatigue crack growth
from a defect of the order of 100 mm, a crack
propagates almost exclusively through the Al–1% Si
dendrite cells. The crack avoids the Al–Si eutectic
phase and only follows the a intermetallic particles
if they are in line with the crack plane. During the
later stages of fatigue, the fatigue cracks propagate
preferentially through damaged a intermetallics and
silicon particles. The final overload fracture occurs
almost exclusively through a ductile tearing in the
Al–Si eutectic phase and a cleavage-like fracture in
the a intermetallics.
2 The transition between the two fatigue crack growth
mechanisms occurs when the forward crack tip driving
force and process zone are large enough to damage a
statistically significant number of silicon and a inter-
metallic particles ahead of the crack tip. Then it
becomes energetically favourable for the crack to
meander and propagate through these weakened mate-
rial zones.
3 Using a fracture mechanics solution for a semicircular-
shaped crack in a cylindrical specimen, coupled with
fracture surface markings, the stress intensity value at
the transition point between the fatigue crack growth
mechanisms in point (2) is determined to be ~K max tr
=7.0 MPa m . For a traditional da/dN–DK curve
1/2
for similar Al–Si cast materials, this value falls close
to the transition point between near threshold and
Paris law fatigue crack growth. Furthermore, the
maximum crack tip process (plastic) zone size corre-
sponding to this driving force was estimated to be
rp =96 mm (two–three times the average dendrite
cell size).
4 As the applied strain amplitude is increased from 0.2%
to 0.8% the fraction of material which fails through
fatigue crack growth at low rates through the Al–1%
Si dendrite cells decreases. This occurs because in the
samples cycled at higher strain (stress) the forward
crack tip driving force exceeds K maxtr
=7.0 MPa m1/2
at much smaller crack lengths.
Acknowledgements
This work has been sponsored by the US Department
of Energy, Sandia National Laboratories under contract
DE-AC04-94AL85000. This work was performed under
172 K. GALL et al.
the leadership of Dick Osborne and Don Penrod for the
USCAR Lightweight Metals Group. We would like to
thank Gerry Shulke for providing the material and
Westmoreland Mechanical Testing and Research for
conducting the fatigue tests.
REFERENCES
1 P. C. Inguanti (1985) Cast aluminum fatigue property/micro-
structure relationships. In: 17th SAMPE Conference, 22–24
October, pp. 61–72.
2 C. C. Wigant and R. I. Stephens (1987) In: Fatigue and Fracture
Toughness of A356-T6 Cast Aluminum Alloy-SAE SP 760,
Warrendale, PA, pp. 1–100.
3 M. J. Couper, A. E. Neeson and J. R. Griffiths (1990) Casting
defects and the fatigue behavior of an aluminum casting alloy.
Fatigue Fract. Engng Mater. Struct. 13, 213–227.
4 J. C. Ting and F. V. Lawrence (1993) Modeling the long-life
fatigue behavior of a cast aluminum alloy. Fatigue Fract. Engng
Mater. Struct. 16, 631–647.
5 S. E. Stanzl-Tschegg, H. R. Mayer, E. K. Tschegg and A. Beste
(1993) In-service loading of AlSi11 aluminium cast alloy in the
very high cycle regime. Int. J. Fatigue 15, 311–316.
6 S. Gungor and L. Edwards (1993) Effect of surface texture on
fatigue life in a squeeze cast 6082 aluminum alloy. Fatigue Fract.
Engng Mater. Struct. 16, 391–403.
7 B. Skallerud, T. Iveland and G. Harkegard (1993) Fatigue life
assessment of aluminum alloys with casting defects. Engng
Fracture Mech. 44, 857–874.
8 C. M. Sonsino and J. Ziese (1993) Fatigue strength and
applications of cast aluminum alloys with different degrees of
porosity. Int. J. Fatigue 15, 75–84.
9 R. B. Gundlach, B. Ross, A. Hetke, S. Valtierra and J. F. Mojica
(1994) Thermal fatigue resistance of hypoeutectic aluminum–
silicon alloys. AFS Trans. 102, 205–223.
10 J. F. Major (1994) Porosity control and the fatigue behavior in
A356-T61 aluminum alloy. AFS Trans. 102, 901–906.
11 A. A. Dabayeh, R. X. Xu, B. P. Du and T. H. Topper (1996)
Fatigue of cast aluminum alloys under constant and variable
amplitude loading. Int. J. Fatigue 18, 95–104.
12 K. Shiozawa, Y. Tohda and S.-M. Sun (1997) Crack initiation
and small fatigue crack growth behavior of squeeze-cast Al–Si
aluminum alloys. Fatigue Fract. Engng Mater. Struct. 20,
237–247.
13 A. A. Dabayeh, A. J. Berube and T. H. Topper (1998) An
experimental study of the effect of a flaw at a notch root on
the fatigue life of cast Al319. Int. J. Fatigue 20, 517–530.
14 G. A. Hoskin, J. W. Provan and J. E. Gruzleski (1988) The
in-situ fatigue testing of a cast aluminum–silicon alloy. Theor.
Appl. Fract. Mech. 10, 27–41.~.
15 F. T. Lee, J. F. Major and F. H. Samuel (1995) Fracture Behavior
of Al12wt%Si0.35wt%Mg(0–0.02)wt%Sr castings under fatigue
testing. Fatigue Fract. Engng Mater. Struct. 18, 385–396.
16 F. T. Lee, J. F. Major and F. H. Samuel (1995) Effect of silicon
particles on the fatigue crack growth characteristics of Al–12
Wt Pct Si-0.35 Wt Pct Mg-(0–0.02) Wt Pct Sr casting alloys.
Metall. Mater. Trans. 26A, 1553–1570.
17 M. Schaefer and R. A. Fournelle (1996) Effect of strontium
modification on near-threshold fatigue crack growth in an
Al–Si–Cu die cast alloy. Metall. Mater. Trans. 27A, 1293–1302.
18 A. Kearney and E. L. Rooy (1990) Aluminum foundry products.
ASM Handbook 2, 123–151.
19 A. Wickberg, G. Gustafsson and L.-E. Larsson (1984)
Microstructural effects on the fatigue properties of a cast
A17SiMg alloy. SAE Trans. 840 (121), 1.728–1.735.
20 S. Murali, T. S. Arvind, K. S. Raman and K. S. S. Murthy
(1997) Fatigue properties of sand cast, stircast and extruded
Al–7Si–0.3Mg alloy with trace additions of Be and Mn. Mater.
Trans. JIM 38, 28–36.
21 A. M. Samuel and F. H. Samuel (1995) A metallographic study
of porosity and fracture behavior in relation to the tensile
properties in 319.2 end chill castings. Metall. Mater. Trans. 26A,
2359–2372.
22 S. Murali, A. Trivedi, K. S. Shamanna and K. S. S. Murthy
(1996) Effect of iron and combined iron and beryllium additions
on the fracture toughness and microstructures of squeeze cast
Al–7Si-0.3Mg alloy. J. Mater. Engng Perform. 5, 462–468.
23 Y. H. Tan, S. L. Lee and Y. L. Lin (1995) Effects of Be and
iron content on plane strain fracture toughness in A357 alloys.
Metall. Mater. Trans. A 26A, 2937–2945.
24 D. L. McDowell, J. Fan and M. F. Horstemeyer (in press)
Multi-length scale analyses of cyclically loaded A356 cast
aluminium alloy. AFS Trans.
25 J. Campbell (1991) Castings, Butterworth Heinemann.
26 K. E. Tynelius, J. F. Major and D. Apelian (1993) A parametric
study of microporosity in the A356 casting alloy system. AFS
Trans. 101, 401–413.
27 R. M. N. Pelloux (1969) Mechanisms of formation of ductile
fatigue striations. Trans ASME 62, 281–285.
28 P. Neumann (1974) New experiments concerning the slip
processes at propagating fatigue cracks—I. Acta. Metall. 22,
1155–1165.
29 R. C. Voigt and D. R. Bye (1991) Microstructural aspects of
fracture in A356. AFS Trans. 99, 33–50.
30 M. D. Dighe and A. M. Gokhale (1997) Relationship between
microstructural extremium and fracture path in a cast Al–Si-Mg
alloy. Scr. Mett. 37, 1435–1440.
31 A. Plumtree and S. Schafer (1986) Initiation and short crack
behavior in aluminum alloy castings. In: The Mechanical Behavior
of Short Fatigue Cracks (Edited by K. J. Miller and E. R. de los
Rios), EGF Publication 1, Suffolk, UK, pp. 215–227.
32 J.-W. Yeh and W.-P. Liu (1996) The cracking mechanism of
silicon particles in an A357 aluminum alloy. Metall. Mater.
Trans. 27A, 3558–3568.
33 A. Needleman (1987) A continuum model for void nucleation
by inclusion debonding. J. Appl. Mech. 109, 525–531.
34 P. C. Paris and F. Erdogan (1963) A critical analysis of crack
propagation laws. Trans. ASME, J. Basic Engng D85, 528–534.
35 W. Elber (1970) Fatigue crack closure under cyclic tension.
Engng Fracture Mech. 2, 37–45.
36 Y. Murakami (1987) Stress Intensity Factors Handbook, Vols 1, 2,
Pergamon Press, Oxford.
37 A. F. Liu (1995) Behavior of fatigue cracks in a tension bolt.
Structural Integrity Fasteners, ASTM STP 1236, pp. 124–140.
38 T. L. Mackay and B. J. Alperin (1995) Stress-intensity factors
for fatigue cracking in high strength bolts. Engng Fracture Mech.
21, 391–397.
39 H. L. Ewalds and R. J. H. Wanhill (1989) Fracture Mechanics,
Chapman and Hall, New York, NY, USA.
40 M. J. Couper and J. R. Griffiths (1990) Effects of crack closure
and mean stress on the threshold stress intensity factor for
fatigue of an aluminum casting alloy. Fatigue Fract. Engng Mater.
Struct. 13, 615–624.
© 2000 Blackwell Science Ltd. Fatigue Fract Engng Mater Struct 23, 159–172