J O U R N A L O F M AT E R I A L S S C I E N C E L E T T E R S 1 8 ( 1 9 9 9 ) 1 6 7 ± 1 6 9

The role of surface ®nish in contact brazing

T. MOHANDAS
Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Hyderabad - 500 058, India

V. S. R. MURTHY
Mechanical Engineering Department, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India

ABHIJIT DUTTA
Mechanical Engineering Department, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India

P. MALLESHAM
Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Hyderabad - 500 058, India

Surface roughness plays an important role in brazing TA B L E I Composition of the Al-Li alloy 8090
and diffusion bonding. In capillary brazing, joint Element Aluminum Lithium Copper Magne- Zirconium
gaps control braze joint strength [1]. Too narrow and sium
too wide gaps lead to reduced joint strengths. An
Wt (%) balance 2.5 1.2 0.7 0.12
optimum joint gap, which depends on the brazing
alloy and base metal characteristics, results in
maximum joint strength. In the diffusion bonding
of Ti-6 Al-4 V, it is reported that the ratio (X=R) of surface ®nishes, namely polishing, grinding, and
self-diffusion distance (X) and surface ®nish (R) milling have been investigated. The details on
dictates joint strength [2]. A ratio of X=R greater surface roughness are furnished in Table II. The
than unity results in void-free joints with high sheets were electroplated with copper. The thickness
strength. This implies that smoooth surface ®nishes of plating was of the order of 2 ìm, including a pre-
result in increased joint strengths. It is also reported coating of zinc. Lap joints of 10 mm width and
that surface roughness greater than 2 ìm is bene- 10 mm length were obtained through a vacuum-
®cial for better joint strengths in diffusion bonding brazing route. For better contact and uniformity in
[3]. However, data on the effect of surface roughness the experiments, a suitable ®xture was used. A
in contact brazing are scarce. The present study is uniform load was also applied by means of a torque
aimed to investigate this aspect. spanner. Brazing was performed at a temperature of
Aluminium-lithium alloys are of current interest 560 8C. The holding time at the brazing temperature
for applications in the aerospace industry due to was 10 min. Thereafter, the specimens were furnace-
their high speci®c strength. Weldability aspects of cooled. The braze joints were characterized for
these alloys have been addressed to some degree [4± microstructure, and tensile shear strength was
6] and further studies are in progress for compre- evaluated. For microstructural examination, optical
hensive understanding. These alloys exhibit low and scanning electron microscopes were used.
solidus temperature and hence require brazing alloys Keller's reagent was used to reveal the microstruc-
of melting lower than those employed for the brazing ture. For strength determination, an Instron testing
of conventional aluminum alloys. Al-Cu-Si-Ni alloy machine was used.
has been investigated for the brazing 8090 Al-Li The optical and scanning electron micrographs of
alloy [7, 8]. the braze joints are presented in Fig. 1. A clear-cut,
Data on contact brazing of these alloys are scarce. wide interface is observed in the polished specimen.
This type of brazing is employed in the brazing of The width of this interface is about twice the plating
heat exchangers where large concealed areas are to thickness. In ground and milled specimens, there is a
be brazed. In these applications, brazing alloy is tendency to eliminate the interface. This tendency is
provided in the form of clad overlay. Al-Cu forms an
eutectic at 548 8C. However, this eutectic is highly
brittle. Therefore, clad sheets with this alloy as TA B L E I I Data on surface roughness ( ìm)
overlay are impractical by conventional methods of Method of RA RZ RZ RZ
clad sheet production. In view of this, studies have surface ®nish (Inter- (Minimum) (Maximum)
been taken up with electroplating as a method of mediate)
providing copper on the Al-Li alloy 8090. Insitu Polished 0.46 3 2.4 5.6
alloy formation is the basis for this study. Ground 1.4 9 1.8 10
Aluminium-lithium alloy 8090, whose composi- Milled 2.02 7.6 2.1 27
tion is given in Table I, is used in this program. RA : mean surface roughness value; RZ : average of sum of the
Sheets of 2 mn thickness were used. Three types of differences between ®ve peaks and ®ve valleys.

0261-8028 # 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers 167

Figure 1 Microstructures of the brazed joints: (a) polished surface ®nish; (b) ground surface ®nish; (c) milled surface ®nish.

more in the ground specimen. In the milled speci- Shear strength data on brazed joints are presented
men, voids are also observed at the interface. In the in Table III. The joint strength is low in respect to
ground and milled surface ®nishes, copper-rich, the polished surface ®nish (about 9 MPa). The
white needle-like precipitates are also present. average strength of the ground and milled surface
®nished specimens is nearly similar ( 14:5 MPa).
However, large scatter is observed in the milled
specimen, commensurate with the microstructure,
TA B L E I I I Tensile shear strength of the brazed joints
which exhibited more voids at the interface. From
Method of Strength (MPa) the results it is proposed that the observed strength
surface ®nish improvement with increased surface roughness (RA )
Min. Max.
is due to the enhanced interdiffusion, aided by
Milled 11.507 17.659 plastic deformation at the asperities of these rough
Ground 13.852 15.335 surfaces [9, 10]. This situation led to copper-
Polished 8.942 8.5
enriched precipitates at the original interface. There
168
TA B L E I V Typical microhardness data around the interface
Method of surface Typical microhardness Average micro-
®nish values (Hv, 50 g) hardness (Hv, 50 g)
Polished 90 105 113 115 106
Ground 101 117 111 117 112
Milled 107 108 120 118 113
is also a possibility of additional contributions due to
solid solution strengthening as a consequence of the
availability of more copper in and around the
interface. This view is supported by typical micro-
hardness data around the interface (Table IV). The
average hardness is the least in the polished surface
®nish. In respect to the ground and milled surface
®nishes, the average hardness is nearly the same.
High peak hardness is observed in the milled
specimen. The least minimum hardness is observed
in the polished specimen. The joint strengths are
poor, however.
In conclusion, this study has demonstrated that
rough surfaces are bene®cial for enhanced joint
strengths in contact brazing. This is proposed to be a
consequence of enhanced diffusion due to strain-
induced diffusion [9, 10]. However, there could be a
change in the trends as rougher surfaces are used,
which can result in increased diffusion distances.
The joint strengths are very low, however, irrespec-
tive of surface roughness. This trend could be
attributed to the brittle nature of Al-Cu eutetic.
Prolonged diffusion treatments might offer a solution
to this. Further studies in this area can be directed to
address this issue.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the Defence Research
and Development Organisation for providing ®nan-
cial support. The authors are thankful to Dr. D.
Banerjee for continued support and encouragement,
and permission to publish this work. We acknowl-
edge the support received for microstructural exam-
ination. We thank Sri. M. Subrahmanyam for
electroplating. We place on record the help received
from Sri. S. Rajeswararao and the brazing staff for
the vacuum brazing.
References
1. J. W. C H A S T E E N and G . E . M E T Z G E R , Weld. J. 58
(1979) 111s.
2. H . A N D R E Z E J E W S K I , K . F. B A D AV I and B . R O L L -
A N D , ibid. 72 (1993) 435s.
3. O . O H A S H I and T. H A S H I M O T O , Trans. Natl. Inst. Met.
(Japan) 24 (1982) 202.
4. T. S . S R I VAT S A N and T. S . S U D A R S H A N , Weld. J. 70
(1991) 173s.
5. N . G . T R E T YA K , A . Y. I S C H E N KO and M . R . YAVO R -
S K AYA , Welding in the World 35 (1995) 44.
6. M . J. DVO R N A K , R . H . F R O S T and D. L . O L S O N Weld.
J. 68 (1989) 327s.
7. G . H U M P S T O N , S . P. S . S A N G H A and D. M . JA C O B -
S O N , Mater. Sci. Technol. 11 (1995) 1161.
8. D. M . JA C O B S O N , G . H U M P S T O N and S . P. S .
S A N G H A Weld. J. 75 (1996) 243s.
9. R . W. B A L L U F F I and A . L . R U O F F J. Appl. Phys. 34
(1963) 1634.
10. A . L . R U O F F and R . W. B A L L U F F I J. Appl. Phys. 34
(1963) 1848.
Received 1 April
and accepted 15 May 1998
169