A quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings

Abstract

The present invention belongs to the field of material engineering technology, and specifically is a quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings, which includes a forging forging module, a forging appearance verification module, a forging grouping evaluation module, a forging quality judgment module, a process optimization feedback module, a process effective output module and a cloud database. By performing appearance qualification verification, physical property testing and microstructure analysis on a target batch of forgings forged by a preset forging process window, the appearance, physical property and microstructure analysis indicators are integrated to accurately judge whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards. If it is judged to meet the standards, the validity of the preset forging process window is confirmed and output; if it is judged to be not up to the standards, the reason why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards is traced, and the optimization parameter direction of the preset forging process window is fed back, so as to effectively improve the systematicness and reliability of the quality performance evaluation of aluminum-based composite forgings, and further optimize the process production.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of material engineering, and in particular relates to a quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite material forgings. Background Art

[0002] With the rapid development of modern aviation industry, the performance requirements for aircraft engines and aircraft structural materials are increasing day by day. As the leader in the family of metal matrix composite materials, aluminum-based composite materials have shown broad application prospects in the aviation field because they combine the light weight and processability of aluminum alloys with the high strength and high modulus characteristics of the reinforcement phase. However, the performance of aluminum-based composite materials is complexly affected by many factors such as the type of matrix alloy, the morphology, content and distribution of the reinforcement phase, and the interface bonding strength. The evaluation and optimization of its quality performance has become a major technical challenge.

[0003] The existing optimization technology for the quality and performance evaluation of aluminum-based composite forgings still has the following limitations, specifically: 1. The existing technology for the quality and performance evaluation of aluminum-based composite forgings usually focuses on appearance qualification inspection and physical property inspection, and ignores the necessity of microstructure inspection and analysis of forgings. When mass-producing aluminum-based composite forgings, even if the appearance and conventional physical property test results meet the requirements, fluctuations in the microstructure may also lead to inconsistent forging quality. Due to the lack of micro-level inspection, some forgings with unstable quality may be mixed into qualified products, affecting the quality consistency of batch products, making it difficult to meet the development of aviation applications.

[0004] 2. The existing technology lacks detailed considerations in the appearance inspection and physical property inspection for the quality performance evaluation of aluminum-based composite forgings, and only stays at the superficial routine analysis. For example, in the physical property inspection, the hardness performance test only relies on the two values ​​of compressive strength and yield strength for routine judgment, which cannot fully reflect the true performance of forgings under complex stress environments.

[0005] 3. When the quality performance evaluation of aluminum-based composite forgings does not meet the standards, the existing technology lacks a forging cause tracing mechanism, and thus cannot provide an optimization direction for the forging of aluminum-based composite forgings. Summary of the invention

[0006] In order to overcome the shortcomings of the background technology, an embodiment of the present invention provides an aviation aluminum-based composite material forging quality performance evaluation and optimization system, which can effectively solve the problems involved in the above-mentioned background technology.

[0007] The purpose of the present invention can be achieved through the following technical solutions: a quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings, including: a forging forging module, a forging appearance verification module, a forging grouping evaluation module, a forging quality judgment module, a process optimization feedback module, a process effective output module and a cloud database.

[0008] The forging forging module is respectively connected to the forging appearance verification module and the forging grouping evaluation module, the forging appearance verification module and the forging grouping evaluation module are both connected to the forging quality judgment module, the forging quality judgment module is respectively connected to the process optimization feedback module and the process effective output module, and the cloud database is respectively connected to the forging quality judgment module and the process optimization feedback module.

[0009] The forging forging module is used for forging a preset number of aluminum matrix composite forgings according to a preset forging process window, which are marked as target batch forgings.

[0010] The forging appearance verification module is used to verify the appearance of the target batch of forgings.

[0011] The forging grouping and evaluation module is used to divide the target batch of forgings into forging group 1 and forging group 2, conduct physical property tests on forging group 1, and conduct microstructure analysis on forging group 2.

[0012] The forging quality judgment module is used to combine the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings to judge whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards. If it is judged that it does not meet the standards, the process optimization feedback module is executed; if it is judged that it meets the standards, the process effective output module is executed.

[0013] The process optimization feedback module is used to trace the reasons why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards, and to provide feedback on the optimization parameter direction of the preset forging process window.

[0014] The process validity output module is used to confirm the forging validity of the preset forging process window and output the preset forging process window.

[0015] The cloud database is used to store the appearance qualification verification results of unit batches of aluminum-based composite forgings, the physical property test results of a group of forgings, the microstructure analysis results of a group of forgings, the corresponding qualified value ranges of each indicator item, and the corresponding forging process parameters corresponding to the preset forging process window.

[0016] Compared with the prior art, the embodiments of the present invention have at least the following advantages or beneficial effects: (1) The present invention realizes the appearance qualification verification of the target batch of forgings through the overall shape and position qualification index and the overall appearance qualification index. It not only pays attention to whether the geometric features such as size, shape, position, etc. of the forgings meet the design requirements, but also covers the appearance defect detection, thereby ensuring the comprehensive accuracy of the verification process.

[0017] (2) The present invention divides a group of forgings into three layers, carefully considers the overall strength, fracture toughness and fatigue resistance of the forgings, and implements a group of physical property tests on the forgings, which not only improves the scientificity and effectiveness of the physical property tests on the forgings, but also provides a data basis for subsequent quality control and process optimization.

[0018] (3) The present invention helps to fully understand the microstructure of each forging in the two groups of forgings through phase distribution characteristic analysis, grain characteristic analysis and grain boundary characteristic analysis, which makes up for the lack of microstructure analysis of forgings in the prior art and helps to more deeply evaluate the comprehensive performance of forgings, thereby ensuring the high quality and reliability of the final aluminum-based composite material forging products.

[0019] (4) The present invention integrates the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings to accurately determine whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards, and further traces the reasons for the forgings that do not meet the standards, and provides feedback on the optimization parameter direction of the preset forging process window, which helps to optimize the production process and improve production efficiency and the product quality of aluminum-based composite material forgings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0020] The present invention is further described using the accompanying drawings, but the embodiments in the accompanying drawings do not constitute any limitation to the present invention. A person skilled in the art can obtain other drawings based on the following drawings without creative work.

[0021] Figure 1 It is a schematic diagram of module connection of the present invention.

[0022] Figure 2 A logical schematic diagram of a set of physical property tests of forgings of the present invention.

[0023] Figure 3 It is a logical schematic diagram of the target forging microstructure analysis of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0024] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0025] Reference Figure 1 As shown, the present invention provides an aviation aluminum-based composite forging quality performance evaluation and optimization system, including: a forging forging module, a forging appearance verification module, a forging grouping evaluation module, a forging quality judgment module, a process optimization feedback module, a process effective output module and a cloud database.

[0026] The forging forging module is respectively connected to the forging appearance verification module and the forging grouping evaluation module, the forging appearance verification module and the forging grouping evaluation module are both connected to the forging quality judgment module, the forging quality judgment module is respectively connected to the process optimization feedback module and the process effective output module, and the cloud database is respectively connected to the forging quality judgment module and the process optimization feedback module.

[0027] The forging forging module is used to forge a preset number of aluminum-based composite material forgings according to a preset forging process window, which are marked as target batch forgings.

[0028] It should be noted that the above-mentioned preset forging process window refers to a preset forging process parameter combination, including forging temperature, forging pressure, cooling rate and phase transformation measurement.

[0029] The forging appearance verification module is used to verify the appearance of the target batch of forgings.

[0030] Specifically, the appearance qualification verification of the target batch of forgings includes: scanning each forging in the target batch to construct a three-dimensional model of each forging, comparing it with the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample, collecting the distortion and error of each forging in the target batch relative to the designed forging sample, combining the distortion and error corresponding to the preset allowable threshold of the shape and position tolerance specification of aluminum-based composite material forgings, and analyzing the overall shape and position qualification index of the target batch of forgings. .

[0031] It should be noted that the process of obtaining the distortion and error of each forging in the above-mentioned target batch of forgings relative to the designed forging sample is as follows: the three-dimensional model of each forging and the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample are imported into the three-dimensional modeling software and adjusted to the same coordinate system, and the spherical harmonic function descriptors of the three-dimensional model of each forging and the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample are respectively obtained according to the shape descriptor calculation tool of the three-dimensional modeling software, and the difference between the spherical harmonic function descriptors of the three-dimensional model of each forging and the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample is analyzed by the cosine similarity formula, and after normalization, the distortion of each forging in the target batch of forgings relative to the designed forging sample is obtained.

[0032] A preset number of identical feature points are randomly selected for each forging three-dimensional model and the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample, and the offset distance between the coordinate position of each feature point of each forging three-dimensional model and the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample is measured. The average offset distance between the coordinate position of each feature point of each forging three-dimensional model and the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample is obtained by mean calculation, and the ratio of the offset distance to the preset reference offset distance is used as the error degree of each forging in the target batch of forgings relative to the designed forging sample.

[0033] Above The analysis process is to compare the distortion of each forging in the target batch of forgings relative to the design forging sample with the preset permissible threshold corresponding to the distortion of the form and position tolerance specification of the aluminum-based composite material forging. If the distortion of a forging in the target batch of forgings relative to the design forging sample is less than or equal to the preset permissible threshold corresponding to the distortion of the form and position tolerance specification of the aluminum-based composite material forging, the relative morphological qualification of the forging in the target batch of forgings is set to 1. Otherwise, the distortion of a forging in the target batch of forgings relative to the design forging sample is calculated. Preset permissible threshold value for distortion of shape and position tolerance specification of aluminum matrix composite forgings The over-limit value, that is , according to the formula Calculate the conformity of the forging in the target batch of forgings. is a natural constant, from which the relative morphological conformity of each forging in the target batch of forgings can be obtained.

[0034] The calculation method of the relative morphological conformity of each forging in the target batch of forgings is consistent with that of the forgings. The relative position conformity of each forging in the target batch of forgings is obtained based on the comparison of the deviation of each forging in the target batch of forgings relative to the designed forging sample and the deviation of the form and position tolerance specification of aluminum-based composite material forgings corresponding to the preset allowable threshold.

[0035] The relative position qualification and the relative form qualification are multiplied to obtain the form and position qualification index of each forging in the target batch of forgings, and the overall form and position qualification index of the target batch of forgings is further obtained by mean calculation.

[0036] Identify the surface defect characteristics of each forging in the target batch of forgings, collect the maximum defect depth, cumulative defect area percentage, surface roughness and color uniformity of each forging in the target batch of forgings, and calculate the corresponding ratios with the preset maximum defect depth allowable threshold, cumulative defect area allowable threshold, surface roughness allowable threshold and color uniformity reasonable threshold required by the aluminum-based composite material forging application specification. The calculated ratios are recorded as , is the number of each forging in the target batch of forgings, , according to the formula Obtain the apparent conformity of each forging in the target batch of forgings, To preset a constant to prevent the denominator from being zero, Perform mean calculation to analyze and obtain the overall apparent conformity index of the target batch of forgings .

[0037] Will , Together they serve as the qualified appearance verification results of the target batch of forgings, thereby achieving qualified appearance verification of the target batch of forgings.

[0038] The embodiment of the present invention realizes the appearance qualification verification of the target batch of forgings through the overall shape and position qualification index and the overall appearance qualification index. It not only pays attention to whether the geometric characteristics such as size, shape, position, etc. of the forgings meet the design requirements, but also covers the appearance defect detection, thereby ensuring the comprehensive accuracy of the verification process.

[0039] The forging grouping and evaluation module is used to divide the target batch of forgings into a first group of forgings and a second group of forgings, perform physical property tests on the first group of forgings, and perform microstructure analysis on the second group of forgings.

[0040] Reference Figure 2 As shown, specifically, the physical property test on a group of forgings includes: dividing the forgings in the group into first-level forgings, second-level forgings and third-level forgings according to a predefined principle.

[0041] It should be noted that the above-mentioned predefined principle specifically refers to: counting the total number of forgings in a group of forgings and dividing it by 3, in the calculation result obtained, the integer value is used as the benchmark average number of first-level forgings, second-level forgings, and third-level forgings, and the remainder is allocated to the first-level forgings as the additional number of forgings, thereby dividing each first-level forging, each second-level forging, and each third-level forging.

[0042] The strength performance test of each first-level forging is carried out by a material testing machine, and the stress-strain curve of each first-level forging during the strength performance test is recorded. The corresponding curve segment of each tensile behavior stage of each first-level forging is identified. Each tensile behavior stage includes an elastic stage, a yield stage, a strengthening stage and a necking stage. The elastic modulus and proportional limit of the elastic stage, the yield strength and yield platform length of the yield stage, the tensile strength and uniform deformation of the strengthening stage, and the necking stress and development speed of the necking stage of each first-level forging during the strength performance test are obtained. In this way, the strength performance coefficient of each first-level forging is comprehensively analyzed, and the strength performance coefficient of each first-level forging is averaged to obtain the overall strength performance evaluation index of a group of forgings. .

[0043] It should be noted that the identification basis of the curve segments corresponding to each tensile behavior stage of the stress-strain curve is as follows: in the initial part of the stress-strain curve, the curve rises in a straight line, the slope remains unchanged, and the stress and strain are linearly related, which conforms to the elastic stage. At this time, the slope is the elastic modulus, and the stress value corresponding to the end point of the elastic stage is the proportional limit.

[0044] As the strain continues to increase, the slope of the stress-strain curve gradually decreases and enters the yield stage. In this stage, the forging begins to produce obvious plastic deformation, and a yield platform appears on the curve. Specifically, the stress remains basically unchanged while the strain continues to increase. The yield strength is the stress value when the forging begins to produce plastic deformation in the yield stage.

[0045] After the yield stage, the forging enters the strengthening stage. The stress continues to increase with the increase of strain, but the growth rate gradually slows down and the slope of the curve gradually decreases. The end point of the strengthening stage is the maximum stress point that the forging can withstand, that is, the tensile strength.

[0046] When the stress reaches the tensile strength, the material begins to shrink locally, which is called necking. The stress-strain curve shows that the stress decreases as the strain increases, and the slope of the curve becomes negative.

[0047] Specifically, the stress-strain curve can be imported into professional software such as Origin, and the curve fitting tool of the software can be used to identify the corresponding curve segments and related parameters of each tensile behavior stage.

[0048] It needs to be explained that the tensile test of forgings is one of the methods for testing the strength performance of forgings. The tensile behavior of forgings will inevitably go through the elastic stage, yield stage, strengthening stage and necking stage. These four stages are not independent of the tensile process, but appear in sequence and are interrelated in the entire tensile process, and together serve as the basis for reflecting the strength performance of forgings. The elastic stage shows the linear response of the forgings at the initial stage of stress, and its stress and strain are proportional, reflecting the initial stiffness of the forgings. The yield stage marks the beginning of plastic deformation of the forgings. At this time, the stress is almost unchanged and the strain continues to increase, reflecting the yield strength of the forgings. The strengthening stage shows that the forgings have an enhanced ability to resist deformation when further stressed, reflecting the strengthening characteristics and ultimate bearing capacity of the forgings. The necking stage is a local deformation phenomenon of the forgings when they are close to destruction, which can assist in judging the fracture behavior and ultimate strength limit of the forgings. In summary, these four stages together constitute the complete mechanical behavior of forgings in tensile tests, and are all analytical considerations for the strength performance coefficient of forgings.

[0049] It should be noted that the comprehensive analysis process of the strength performance coefficient of each of the above-mentioned first-level forgings is as follows: the collected values ​​of each parameter in each tensile behavior stage during the current strength performance test of each first-level forging are compared with the reference specification values ​​of the corresponding parameters in the corresponding tensile shape and position stage in the preset aluminum-based composite material forging strength performance evaluation standard specification content, and the performance evaluation indicators of each tensile behavior stage of each first-level forging are obtained, and the strength performance coefficient of each first-level forging is obtained after accumulation.

[0050] The fracture toughness tester and prefabricated crack device are used to test the fracture toughness of each secondary forging. The prefabricated crack positions of each secondary forging are required to be different. The fracture toughness index of each secondary forging is measured, and the influence weight of the prefabricated crack position corresponding to each secondary forging is set. The overall fracture toughness evaluation index of a group of forgings is obtained by analysis. .

[0051] It should be noted that the overall fracture toughness evaluation index of a group of forgings is obtained by multiplying and accumulating the fracture toughness index of each secondary forging with the influence weight of the corresponding prefabricated crack position, and performing ratio analysis on the accumulated value and the number of secondary forgings.

[0052] The fatigue performance test of each three-level forging is carried out by a fatigue testing machine. The fatigue test strength of each three-level forging is required to be different. The fatigue resistance index of each three-level forging is measured, and the corresponding fatigue test strength influence weight of each three-level forging is set. The overall fatigue resistance performance evaluation index of a group of forgings is obtained by analysis. .

[0053] It should be noted that the above-mentioned fatigue resistance performance index of each three-level forging is multiplied and accumulated by its corresponding fatigue test strength influence weight, and the accumulated value is ratio analyzed with the number of three-level forgings to obtain the overall fatigue resistance performance evaluation index of a group of forgings.

[0054] Will , , Together they serve as a set of physical property test results for forgings, realizing a set of physical property tests for forgings.

[0055] The embodiment of the present invention divides a group of forgings into three layers, carefully considers the overall strength, fracture toughness and fatigue resistance of the forgings, and implements a group of physical property tests on the forgings, which not only improves the scientificity and effectiveness of the physical property tests on the forgings, but also provides a data basis for subsequent quality control and process optimization.

[0056] Reference Figure 3 As shown, specifically, the microstructure analysis of the two groups of forgings includes: marking a forging in the two groups of forgings as a target forging, longitudinally cutting the target forging in sequence according to a preset interval, obtaining each cutting surface of the target forging after polishing, collecting the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging by using a microscope, identifying the morphological characteristics of the aluminum matrix phase, the reinforcement phase, the interface phase and the defect phase, analyzing the phase distribution uniformity coefficient and the phase distribution rationality coefficient of the target forging, and taking the cumulative value of the two as the phase distribution characteristic index of the target forging.

[0057] Exemplarily, the above-mentioned microscopic equipment is specifically a scanning electron microscope or a transmission electron microscope.

[0058] Identify the grain characteristics and grain boundary characteristics in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging, and outline the contours of each grain area in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging to obtain its corresponding diameter and aspect ratio , is the number of each cutting surface of the target forging, , is the number of each grain region in the aluminum matrix phase, According to the requirements of the application specifications of aluminum-based composite forgings, the grain preset reasonable diameter range and preset reasonable aspect ratio range are analyzed, and the grain rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the target forging is analyzed and its calculated mean value is used as the grain characteristic index of the target forging.

[0059] It should be noted that the analysis formula of the grain rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the above target forging is: , They are the calculated average values ​​of the upper and lower limits of the reasonable grain diameter range and the reasonable aspect ratio range required by the aluminum matrix composite forging application specification. They are the upper limit of the reasonable diameter range of grain preset required by the application specification of aluminum matrix composite forgings and The difference between the preset reasonable aspect ratio range upper limit and The difference.

[0060] Specifically, the microstructural analysis of the two groups of forgings also includes: outlining the contours of each grain boundary region in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging, using the pixel gradient value of the edge of the contour of each grain boundary region to represent the clarity of the corresponding grain boundary region, randomly selecting any pixel point in the contour of each grain boundary region, tracing the grain boundary path along the direction of the maximum pixel grayscale change value in its adjacent pixel points until reaching the corresponding grain boundary contour boundary, obtaining the number of broken pixel points in the contour of each grain boundary region, and using the ratio of the number of pixel points of the corresponding grain boundary region contour width as the discontinuity of each grain boundary region, and combining the clarity of each grain boundary region in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging. and discontinuity , is the number of each grain boundary region in the aluminum matrix phase, , according to the formula The grain boundary rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the target forging is obtained and its calculated mean is used as the grain boundary characteristic index of the target forging. , They are respectively the reference clarity and reference discontinuity of the grain boundary region in the preset aluminum matrix phase.

[0061] Thus, the phase distribution characteristic index, grain characteristic index, and grain boundary characteristic index of each forging in the two forging groups are obtained, the microstructure analysis results of the two forging groups are obtained, and the microstructure analysis of the two forging groups is realized.

[0062] Specifically, the analysis of the phase distribution uniformity coefficient of the target forging includes: comparing the similarity of the phase distribution characteristic diagrams of a certain cutting surface of the target forging with those of other cutting surfaces, and calculating the mean value as the distribution similarity uniformity between the cutting surfaces of the target forging.

[0063] The spacing distances between each reinforcement phase and its adjacent reinforcement phase in each cutting surface of the target forging are collected, and the spacing variance of the reinforcement phases in each cutting surface of the target forging is calculated, and the inverse of the calculated mean is used as the reinforcement phase distribution uniformity of the cutting surface of the target forging.

[0064] The thickness of each interface phase in each cutting surface of the target forging is collected, and the thickness variance of the reinforcement phase in each cutting surface of the target forging is calculated, and the inverse of the calculated mean is used as the interface phase distribution uniformity of the cutting surface of the target forging.

[0065] The distribution similarity uniformity between the cutting surfaces of the target forging, the distribution uniformity of the reinforcement phase of the cutting surface, and the distribution uniformity of the interface phase of the cutting surface are respectively accumulated with the products of their corresponding preset weights to obtain the phase distribution uniformity coefficient of the target forging.

[0066] Specifically, the phase distribution rationality coefficient of the target forging is analyzed, including: collecting the cumulative volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase in each cutting surface of the target forging The average thickness of the interface phase is compared with the preset reasonable volume ratio range of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase and the preset reasonable thickness range of the interface phase required by the application specification of aluminum-based composite forgings, and the rationality index of the reinforcement phase and interface phase distribution of the target forging is analyzed.

[0067] It should be noted that the analysis formula of the rationality index of the reinforcement phase distribution of the above-mentioned target forging is: ,in It is the calculated average of the upper and lower limits of the preset reasonable volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase required by the application specification of aluminum-based composite forgings. The application specification of aluminum matrix composite forgings requires the upper limit of the preset reasonable volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase and The difference, is the number of cutting surfaces of the target forging.

[0068] The same analysis process of the reinforcement phase distribution rationality index of the target forging is consistent with the target forging, and the interface phase distribution rationality index of the target forging is calculated. .

[0069] Collect the cumulative volume ratio of the defect phase to the aluminum matrix phase in each cutting surface of the target forging, and add them up to obtain the defect phase distribution factor of the target forging .

[0070] The reinforcement phase and interface phase distribution rationality indexes of the target forging are accumulated, and further ratio analysis is performed with the defect phase distribution factor to obtain the phase distribution rationality coefficient of the target forging.

[0071] Specifically, the obtaining of the microstructure analysis results of the two groups of forgings includes: calculating the average of the phase distribution characteristic index, grain characteristic index, and grain boundary characteristic index of each forging in the two groups of forgings, so as to obtain the overall phase distribution characteristic index of the two groups of forgings. , Overall grain characteristic index and overall grain boundary characteristic index , and these are taken together as the microstructural analysis results of the two groups of forgings.

[0072] The embodiments of the present invention help to fully understand the microstructure of each forging in the two groups of forgings through phase distribution characteristic analysis, grain characteristic analysis and grain boundary characteristic analysis, make up for the lack of microstructure analysis of forgings in the prior art, and contribute to a more in-depth evaluation of the comprehensive performance of forgings, thereby ensuring the high quality and reliability of the final aluminum-based composite material forging products.

[0073] The forging quality judgment module is used to judge whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards by combining the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings. If it is judged that it does not meet the standards, the process optimization feedback module is executed; if it is judged that it meets the standards, the process effective output module is executed.

[0074] Specifically, the determination of whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards includes: if the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings, and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings are all within the corresponding qualified value ranges stored in the cloud database, then it is determined that the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards; otherwise, it is determined that the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards.

[0075] The process optimization feedback module is used to trace the reasons why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards, and to provide feedback on the optimization parameter direction of the preset forging process window.

[0076] Specifically, the tracing of reasons why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards includes: extracting each abnormal indicator item in the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of a group of forgings, and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings that are outside the corresponding standard value range stored in the cloud database, and further extracting the pointing forging process parameters of the preset forging process window corresponding to each abnormal indicator item stored in the cloud database, so as to count the number of pointing times of each forging process parameter in the preset forging process window, and use the ratio of the pointing number to the total number of pointing times of the forging process parameters as the abnormal pointing ratio of each forging process parameter in the preset forging process window, and select each forging process parameter whose abnormal pointing ratio is greater than the preset warning value as the tracing reason why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards.

[0077] The embodiment of the present invention integrates the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings to accurately determine whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards, and further traces the reasons for the forgings not meeting the standards, and feeds back the optimization parameter direction of the preset forging process window, which helps to optimize the production process and improve production efficiency and the product quality of aluminum-based composite material forgings.

[0078] The process validity output module is used to confirm the forging validity of the preset forging process window and output the preset forging process window.

[0079] The cloud database is used to store the appearance qualification verification results of a unit batch of aluminum-based composite material forgings, the physical property test results of a group of forgings, the microstructure analysis results of a group of forgings, the corresponding qualified value ranges of each indicator item, and the directional forging process parameters corresponding to the preset forging process window.

[0080] It should be noted that the appearance qualification verification results of unit batches of aluminum-based composite forgings, the physical properties test results of a group of forgings, the microstructure analysis results of a group of forgings, the corresponding qualified numerical ranges of each indicator item and the corresponding directional forging process parameters of the preset forging process window stored in the cloud database are all derived from system development and implantation. For specific examples of the directional forging process parameters of the preset forging process window, please refer to Table 1 below.

[0081] Table 1. Reference table of specific examples of forging process parameters corresponding to preset forging process windows for each indicator item in the cloud database

[0082]

[0083] It should be noted that abnormal overall shape and position qualification indicators indicate that the shape or size of the forging does not meet the design requirements, and point to the reasons of forging temperature and forging pressure: too high forging temperature may cause excessive softening of the material, which may easily lead to local excessive deformation during the forging process, affecting the shape and position accuracy; too low forging temperature may lead to insufficient plasticity of the material, which may cause cracks or folds during forging, affecting the shape and position qualification; too high forging pressure may cause local excessive deformation of the forging and destroy the overall shape; too low forging pressure may cause the material to fail to fully fill the mold, affecting the shape and position accuracy.

[0084] Abnormal overall surface conformity index indicates too many surface defects, pointing to the causes of forging temperature and cooling rate: too high forging temperature will cause serious oxidation of the material surface, affecting the apparent quality; too low forging temperature may cause cold work hardening on the material surface during the forging process, affecting the apparent smoothness; too fast cooling rate may cause cracks or wrinkles on the forging surface, affecting the apparent quality; too slow cooling rate may aggravate the oxidation of the material surface and reduce the apparent quality.

[0085] Abnormal overall strength performance evaluation index indicates low strength, pointing to the reasons of forging temperature and deformation measurement: too high forging temperature may make the material grain coarse and reduce strength; too low forging temperature may increase the deformation resistance of the material, and defects are likely to occur during the forging process, affecting the strength; too large deformation may cause a large number of dislocations and defects inside the material, affecting the strength; too small deformation may make the material's organizational improvement unclear and the strength cannot be effectively improved.

[0086] Abnormal overall fracture toughness evaluation index indicates insufficient toughness, pointing to the reasons of cooling rate and phase transformation measurement: too fast cooling rate may cause internal stress in the material and reduce the fracture toughness; too slow cooling rate may cause grain growth and reduce the fracture toughness; too large deformation may cause defects such as microcracks in the material and reduce the fracture toughness; too small deformation may make the material's organizational improvement unclear and the fracture toughness cannot be effectively improved.

[0087] Abnormal overall fatigue resistance evaluation index indicates decreased fatigue resistance, which points to the cooling rate and forging pressure as the reasons: inappropriate cooling rate may lead to an increase in microscopic defects inside the material, affecting fatigue resistance; insufficient pressure may lead to insufficiently compacted areas inside the material, forming fatigue sources.

[0088] Abnormal overall phase distribution characteristic indicators indicate uneven or unreasonable phase distribution, pointing to the reasons for forging temperature and phase transformation measurement: inaccurate forging temperature control may lead to incomplete or uneven phase transformation, and inappropriate phase transformation measurement may lead to uneven stress distribution inside the material, affecting the uniform distribution of phases.

[0089] Abnormal overall grain characteristic indicators indicate inappropriate grain size and shape, pointing to the reasons for forging temperature and deformation measurement: too high forging temperature or too large deformation may cause grain growth, resulting in excessive grain breakage and affecting grain characteristics; too low temperature or too small deformation may refine the grains but reduce the plasticity of the material, the grain refinement effect is not obvious and affects the grain size.

[0090] Abnormal overall grain boundary characteristic indicators indicate poor grain boundary clarity or poor continuity, pointing to the forging temperature and cooling rate as the cause: too fast a cooling rate may cause the grain boundary precipitates to not have enough time to diffuse, affecting the grain boundary clarity; too high a temperature may cause an increase in grain boundary precipitates, affecting the grain boundary continuity.

[0091] It should also be noted that the settings of the preset forging process windows corresponding to the above-mentioned index items are closely related to multiple forging process parameters, and the present invention focuses on selecting two forging process parameters that have a more significant or more direct impact on the index items.

[0092] The above contents are merely examples and explanations of the structure of the present invention. The technicians in this technical field may make various modifications or additions to the specific embodiments described or replace them in a similar manner. As long as they do not deviate from the structure of the invention or exceed the scope defined by the present invention, they should all fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings, characterized in that: The system includes: a forging forging module, used for forging a preset number of aluminum-based composite forgings according to a preset forging process window, which are marked as target batch forgings; Forging appearance verification module, used to verify the appearance of target batches of forgings; The forging grouping and evaluation module is used to divide the target batch of forgings into forging group 1 and forging group 2, conduct physical property tests on forging group 1, and conduct microstructure analysis on forging group 2; The forging quality judgment module is used to judge whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards by combining the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings. If it is judged that it does not meet the standards, the process optimization feedback module is executed; if it is judged that it meets the standards, the process effective output module is executed; The process optimization feedback module is used to trace the reasons why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards, and to provide feedback on the optimization parameter direction of the preset forging process window; The process validity output module is used to confirm the forging validity of the preset forging process window and output the preset forging process window; The cloud database is used to store the appearance qualification verification results of unit batches of aluminum-based composite forgings, the physical property test results of a group of forgings, the microstructure analysis results of a group of forgings, the corresponding qualified value ranges of each indicator item, and the corresponding forging process parameters corresponding to the preset forging process window; The microstructure analysis of the two groups of forgings includes: marking a forging in the two groups of forgings as a target forging, longitudinally cutting the target forging in sequence according to a preset spacing, obtaining each cutting surface of the target forging after polishing, collecting a phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging by using a microscope, identifying the morphological characteristics of the aluminum matrix phase, the reinforcement phase, the interface phase and the defect phase, analyzing the phase distribution uniformity coefficient and the phase distribution rationality coefficient of the target forging, and taking the cumulative value of the two as the phase distribution characteristic index of the target forging; Identify the grain characteristics and grain boundary characteristics in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging, outline the contours of each grain region in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging to obtain its corresponding diameter and aspect ratio, preset a reasonable diameter range and preset a reasonable aspect ratio range for the grain according to the application specification of aluminum-based composite forgings, analyze the grain rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the target forging and calculate its average value as the grain characteristic index of the target forging; Identify the grain characteristics and grain boundary characteristics in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging, and outline the contours of each grain area in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging to obtain its corresponding diameter and aspect ratio , is the number of each cutting surface of the target forging, , is the number of each grain region in the aluminum matrix phase, According to the requirements of the application specification of aluminum-based composite forgings, the grain preset reasonable diameter range and preset reasonable aspect ratio range are analyzed, and the grain rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the target forging is analyzed and its calculated mean value is used as the grain characteristic index of the target forging; The analysis formula of the grain rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the above target forging is: , They are the calculated average values ​​of the upper and lower limits of the reasonable grain diameter range and the reasonable aspect ratio range required by the aluminum matrix composite forging application specification. They are the upper limit of the reasonable diameter range of grain preset required by the application specification of aluminum matrix composite forgings and The difference between the preset reasonable aspect ratio range upper limit and The difference between The analyzing the phase distribution uniformity coefficient of the target forging includes: comparing the similarity of the phase distribution characteristic diagram of a certain cutting surface of the target forging with that of other cutting surfaces, and analyzing the distribution similarity uniformity between the cutting surfaces of the target forging; Collect the spacing distance between each reinforcement phase and its adjacent reinforcement phase in each cutting surface of the target forging, calculate the spacing variance of the reinforcement phase in each cutting surface of the target forging, so as to obtain the uniformity of the reinforcement phase distribution on the cutting surface of the target forging; The thickness of each interface phase in each cutting surface of the target forging is collected, and the thickness variance of the reinforcement phase in each cutting surface of the target forging is calculated, so as to obtain the uniformity of the interface phase distribution on the cutting surface of the target forging; The distribution similarity uniformity between the cutting surfaces of the target forging, the distribution uniformity of the reinforcement phase of the cutting surface, and the distribution uniformity of the interface phase of the cutting surface are respectively accumulated with the products of their corresponding preset weights to obtain the phase distribution uniformity coefficient of the target forging; The analysis of the phase distribution rationality coefficient of the target forging includes: collecting the cumulative volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase and the average thickness of the interface phase in each cutting surface of the target forging, respectively comparing with the preset reasonable volume ratio interval of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase and the preset reasonable thickness interval of the interface phase required by the application specification of the aluminum-based composite material forging, and analyzing the reinforcement phase and interface phase distribution rationality index of the target forging; The analysis formula of the rationality index of the reinforcement phase distribution of the above target forgings is: ,in It is the calculated average of the upper and lower limits of the preset reasonable volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase required by the application specification of aluminum-based composite forgings. The application specification of aluminum matrix composite forgings requires the upper limit of the preset reasonable volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase and The difference, is the number of cutting surfaces of the target forging, It indicates the cumulative volume ratio of the reinforcement phase to the aluminum matrix phase in each cutting surface of the target forging; The same analysis process of the reinforcement phase distribution rationality index of the target forging is consistent with the target forging, and the interface phase distribution rationality index of the target forging is calculated. ; Collect the cumulative volume ratio of the defect phase to the aluminum matrix phase in each cutting surface of the target forging to evaluate the defect phase distribution factor of the target forging ; The phase distribution rationality coefficient of the target forging is calculated by combining the reinforcement phase, interface phase distribution rationality index and defect phase distribution factor of the target forging.

2. The quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings according to claim 1 is characterized by: The appearance qualification verification of the target batch of forgings includes: scanning each forging in the target batch to construct a three-dimensional model of each forging, comparing it with the three-dimensional model of the designed forging sample, collecting the distortion and error of each forging in the target batch relative to the designed forging sample, combining the distortion and error corresponding to the preset allowable threshold of the shape and position tolerance specification of aluminum-based composite material forgings, and analyzing the overall shape and position qualification index of the target batch of forgings. ; Identify the surface defect characteristics of each forging in the target batch of forgings and analyze the overall apparent conformity index of the target batch of forgings ; Will , Together they serve as the qualified appearance verification results of the target batch of forgings, thereby achieving qualified appearance verification of the target batch of forgings.

3. The quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings according to claim 1 is characterized by: The physical property test of the group of forgings includes: dividing the forgings in the group of forgings into first-level forgings, second-level forgings and third-level forgings according to a predefined principle; The strength performance test of each first-level forging is carried out by a material testing machine, and the stress-strain curve of each first-level forging during the strength performance test is recorded. The corresponding curve segment of each tensile behavior stage of each first-level forging is identified. Each tensile behavior stage includes an elastic stage, a yield stage, a strengthening stage, and a necking stage. The elastic modulus and proportional limit of the elastic stage, the yield strength and yield platform length of the yield stage, the tensile strength and uniform deformation of the strengthening stage, and the necking stress and development speed of the necking stage are obtained during the strength performance test of each first-level forging. In this way, the strength performance coefficient of each first-level forging is comprehensively analyzed, and the overall strength performance evaluation index of a group of forgings is obtained by mean calculation. ; The fracture toughness tester and prefabricated crack device are used to test the fracture toughness of each secondary forging. The prefabricated crack positions of each secondary forging are required to be different. The fracture toughness index of each secondary forging is measured, and the influence weight of the prefabricated crack position corresponding to each secondary forging is set. The overall fracture toughness evaluation index of a group of forgings is obtained by analysis. ; The fatigue performance test of each three-level forging is carried out by a fatigue testing machine. The fatigue test strength of each three-level forging is required to be different. The fatigue resistance index of each three-level forging is measured, and the corresponding fatigue test strength influence weight of each three-level forging is set. The overall fatigue resistance performance evaluation index of a group of forgings is obtained by analysis. ; Will , , Together they serve as a set of physical property test results for forgings, realizing a set of physical property tests for forgings.

4. The quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings according to claim 1 is characterized by: The microstructure analysis of the two groups of forgings also includes: outlining the contours of each grain boundary region in the aluminum matrix phase in the phase distribution characteristic diagram of each cutting surface of the target forging, using the pixel gradient value of the edge of the contour of each grain boundary region to represent the clarity of the corresponding grain boundary region, using the ratio of the number of fracture pixel points obtained by path tracing of each grain boundary region to the number of pixel points of the corresponding grain boundary region width to represent the discontinuity of the corresponding grain boundary region, and combining the clarity and discontinuity, analyzing the grain boundary rationality coefficient of each cutting surface of the target forging and calculating the average value thereof as the grain boundary characteristic index of the target forging; Thus, the phase distribution characteristic index, grain characteristic index, and grain boundary characteristic index of each forging in the two forging groups are obtained, the microstructure analysis results of the two forging groups are obtained, and the microstructure analysis of the two forging groups is realized.

5. The quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The obtaining of the microstructure analysis results of the two groups of forgings includes: calculating the average of the phase distribution characteristic index, the grain characteristic index, and the grain boundary characteristic index of each forging in the two groups of forgings, so as to obtain the overall phase distribution characteristic index of the two groups of forgings. , Overall grain characteristic index and overall grain boundary characteristic index , and these are taken together as the microstructural analysis results of the two groups of forgings.

6. The quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings according to claim 1 is characterized by: The judging whether the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards includes: if the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings, and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings are all within the corresponding qualified value ranges stored in the cloud database, then it is judged that the forging quality of the target batch of forgings meets the standards; otherwise, it is judged that the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards.

7. The quality performance evaluation and optimization system for aviation aluminum-based composite forgings according to claim 1 is characterized by: The tracing of reasons why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards includes: extracting various abnormal indicator items that are outside the corresponding standard value range stored in the cloud database in the appearance qualification verification results of the target batch of forgings, the physical property test results of the first group of forgings, and the microstructure analysis results of the second group of forgings, and extracting the pointing forging process parameters of the preset forging process window corresponding to each abnormal indicator item stored in the cloud database, thereby counting the number of pointing times of each forging process parameter in the preset forging process window, and using the ratio of the pointing number to the total number of pointing times of the forging process parameters as the abnormal pointing ratio of each forging process parameter in the preset forging process window, and selecting each forging process parameter whose abnormal pointing ratio is greater than the preset warning value as the tracing reason why the forging quality of the target batch of forgings does not meet the standards.

Images