Brazing Q+A June Layout 1 5/16/13 2:14 PM Page 24 BRAZING Q&A BY
2
BRAZING Q&A BY TIM P. HIRTHE Q: We manufacture an aluminum heat ex- changer for an automotive application. It is of a round tube-to-fin design. The open ends of the tubes in the circuit are joined with a U-bend, and are brazed with a flux bearing aluminum-zinc braze alloy. We use a relatively simple fixture with four torches. We have set up to use natural gas and oxygen. The design of the heat ex- changer includes a mounting bracket that makes it difficult to heat the entire cir- cumference of one of the braze joints. We are having significant leak issues in the area where accessibility is hindered. Is there equipment available or some tech- nique that will allow us to get a quality braze in this joint? We are considering switching to an aluminum-silicon braze alloy, which we understand is a higher temperature, but which we are hearing is a better braze alloy to use. Early trials with it, however, have resulted in melting of the tubing. A photo of the joint in ques- tion is shown in Fig. 1. A: To state the obvious, the best situation would be to not have the bracket in the way in the first place. You mentioned that it is an automotive application, so the odds of removing it from the design are probably quite low. An alternative would be to redesign the assembly to have the bracket able to be out of the way prior to brazing and bent into place after brazing. Using perforations that allow bracket bending is one method. This is common practice in a variety of heat ex- changer applications. This type of ap- proach is perhaps obvious, and you prob- ably would have done it already if a de- sign change was possible. For the pur- pose of the remainder of my response, I will assume that no design change is possible. By not being able to get heat onto the back side of the joint where the bracket is located, you are relying on the thermal conductivity of the aluminum to transfer heat to obtain proper melting and wet- ting of the braze alloy on that side of the joint. I can’t determine from Fig. 1 or the information provided what the joint clearances are. The problem is that the aluminum-zinc braze alloy requires a loose fit and a rather deep joint. The rea- son for this is that these joints tend to be porous due to the zinc content. Zinc is a high vapor pressure element that will boil off at these braze temperatures. Since the braze alloy requires a loose fit, the heat transfer characteristics will be poor. You usually end up overheating one part of the joint to get another part hot enough to accept the braze alloy properly. Even if you can achieve mini- mally acceptable brazing temperatures around the circumference of the joint, you will most likely overheat it such that you will get zinc vaporization. Another difficulty I see is that you are using natural gas and oxygen. Using oxy- gen to combust the natural gas results in a flame that is relatively hot and difficult to control when brazing aluminum. When brazing aluminum, we prefer the fuel gas be combusted with air rather than oxygen. It produces a cooler, more controllable flame. We suggest a blower be used rather than plant compressed air as the latter typically contains a lot of moisture. If you are going to use plant air, you must assure that it is being dried before combusting the fuel gas. I am con- cerned about using natural gas also. Nat- ural gas fluctuates greatly in Btu content from the supplier and, depending on the time of year, it also can contain a great deal of moisture. Propane or a similar fuel is preferred. You mention you are considering moving to the aluminum-silicon braze alloy because you believe it is a better choice. It is attractive because it does not have the vapor pressure problem, and it is a stronger material than the alu- minum-zinc. There are several issues, though, that must be addressed in con- sidering switching to an aluminum-sili- con braze alloy. The most obvious one is that the aluminum-silicon braze alloy melts at a significantly higher tempera- ture. I am not sure which aluminum-zinc braze alloy you are using, but for refer- ence, the 98% zinc/2% aluminum braze alloy has a melt range of 715° to 725°F (379° to 385°C). The aluminum-silicon alloy most commonly used is the 88% aluminum/12% silicon, which has a melt range of 1070° to 1080°F (577° to 582°C). I don’t know which aluminum tubing ma- terial you are using, but I am sure it melts in the vicinity of 1200°F/649°C. There is significantly less room for overheating with the aluminum-silicon. If you are trying to use the aluminum- silicon on a joint designed for aluminum- zinc, you will have a substantial problem. As mentioned earlier, aluminum-zinc re- quires a loose fitting joint (~0.005 in./ 0.127 mm) that has considerable depth (~0.250 in./6.4 mm). The way to com- pensate for the tendency to vaporize the zinc is to provide this very deep joint. The aluminum-silicon requires a tight fitting joint (~0.001 in./0.025 mm) with less depth (~3.0 mm). Your trials with aluminum-silicon ran into the fit prob- lem. You are having a struggle getting heat to the back side of the joint with alu- minum-zinc because of the loose fit since you must overheat the front to get proper heat transferred to the back. You get away with this due to the low melting point of the aluminum-zinc. When you use aluminum-silicon, you do not have that margin of error with the tempera- ture. The result is melting of the alu- minum tube as the difference between the melting point of the tubing and that of the braze alloy is too small to tolerate this overheating. Assuming again that no design changes can be made, it would seem that changing to the 88% aluminum/12% sil- icon alloy is not feasible. Considering that the bracket cannot be taken out of the equation, overheating will occur and most likely result in tube melting. If the joint could be redesigned to accept this alloy, i.e., tighter fit and shallower depth, it may be possible; but I have ruled out the option of changing the prints. Going forward then it seems the alloy must re- main aluminum-zinc. I would look at modifying your exist- ing brazing setup to find a way to get more heat into the joint blocked by the bracket. Switching to air to combust the fuel will help. Using different torch tips that have a softer, broader, and longer flame condition that will allow heat to reach the backside of the joint will help. Adding more torches may help. In order to heat this particular joint, it may re- quire a longer cycle time as you are al- Fig. 1 — View of the customer’s brazed aluminum heat exchanger. JUNE 2013 24
Transcript of Brazing Q+A June Layout 1 5/16/13 2:14 PM Page 24 BRAZING Q&A BY
BRAZINGQ&A BY TIM P. HIRTHE
Q: We manufacture an aluminum heat ex-changer for an automotive application. Itis of a round tube-to-fin design. The openends of the tubes in the circuit are joinedwith a U-bend, and are brazed with a fluxbearing aluminum-zinc braze alloy. Weuse a relatively simple fixture with fourtorches. We have set up to use natural gasand oxygen. The design of the heat ex-changer includes a mounting bracket thatmakes it difficult to heat the entire cir-cumference of one of the braze joints. Weare having significant leak issues in thearea where accessibility is hindered. Isthere equipment available or some tech-nique that will allow us to get a qualitybraze in this joint? We are consideringswitching to an aluminum-silicon brazealloy, which we understand is a highertemperature, but which we are hearing isa better braze alloy to use. Early trialswith it, however, have resulted in meltingof the tubing. A photo of the joint in ques-tion is shown in Fig. 1.
A: To state the obvious, the best situationwould be to not have the bracket in theway in the first place. You mentionedthat it is an automotive application, sothe odds of removing it from the designare probably quite low. An alternativewould be to redesign the assembly tohave the bracket able to be out of the wayprior to brazing and bent into place afterbrazing. Using perforations that allowbracket bending is one method. This iscommon practice in a variety of heat ex-changer applications. This type of ap-proach is perhaps obvious, and you prob-ably would have done it already if a de-sign change was possible. For the pur-pose of the remainder of my response, Iwill assume that no design change is possible.
By not being able to get heat onto theback side of the joint where the bracketis located, you are relying on the thermalconductivity of the aluminum to transferheat to obtain proper melting and wet-ting of the braze alloy on that side of thejoint. I can’t determine from Fig. 1 or theinformation provided what the jointclearances are. The problem is that thealuminum-zinc braze alloy requires aloose fit and a rather deep joint. The rea-son for this is that these joints tend to beporous due to the zinc content. Zinc is ahigh vapor pressure element that willboil off at these braze temperatures.Since the braze alloy requires a loose fit,the heat transfer characteristics will bepoor. You usually end up overheatingone part of the joint to get another parthot enough to accept the braze alloy
properly. Even if you can achieve mini-mally acceptable brazing temperaturesaround the circumference of the joint,you will most likely overheat it such thatyou will get zinc vaporization.
Another difficulty I see is that you areusing natural gas and oxygen. Using oxy-gen to combust the natural gas results ina flame that is relatively hot and difficultto control when brazing aluminum.When brazing aluminum, we prefer thefuel gas be combusted with air ratherthan oxygen. It produces a cooler, morecontrollable flame. We suggest a blowerbe used rather than plant compressed airas the latter typically contains a lot ofmoisture. If you are going to use plantair, you must assure that it is being driedbefore combusting the fuel gas. I am con-cerned about using natural gas also. Nat-ural gas fluctuates greatly in Btu contentfrom the supplier and, depending on thetime of year, it also can contain a greatdeal of moisture. Propane or a similarfuel is preferred.
You mention you are consideringmoving to the aluminum-silicon brazealloy because you believe it is a betterchoice. It is attractive because it does nothave the vapor pressure problem, and itis a stronger material than the alu-minum-zinc. There are several issues,though, that must be addressed in con-sidering switching to an aluminum-sili-con braze alloy. The most obvious one isthat the aluminum-silicon braze alloymelts at a significantly higher tempera-ture. I am not sure which aluminum-zincbraze alloy you are using, but for refer-ence, the 98% zinc/2% aluminum brazealloy has a melt range of 715° to 725°F(379° to 385°C). The aluminum-siliconalloy most commonly used is the 88%aluminum/12% silicon, which has a meltrange of 1070° to 1080°F (577° to 582°C).I don’t know which aluminum tubing ma-terial you are using, but I am sure it meltsin the vicinity of 1200°F/649°C. There issignificantly less room for overheatingwith the aluminum-silicon.
If you are trying to use the aluminum-silicon on a joint designed for aluminum-zinc, you will have a substantial problem.As mentioned earlier, aluminum-zinc re-quires a loose fitting joint (~0.005 in./0.127 mm) that has considerable depth(~0.250 in./6.4 mm). The way to com-pensate for the tendency to vaporize thezinc is to provide this very deep joint.The aluminum-silicon requires a tightfitting joint (~0.001 in./0.025 mm) withless depth (~3.0 mm). Your trials withaluminum-silicon ran into the fit prob-lem. You are having a struggle getting
heat to the back side of the joint with alu-minum-zinc because of the loose fit sinceyou must overheat the front to getproper heat transferred to the back. Youget away with this due to the low meltingpoint of the aluminum-zinc. When youuse aluminum-silicon, you do not havethat margin of error with the tempera-ture. The result is melting of the alu-minum tube as the difference betweenthe melting point of the tubing and thatof the braze alloy is too small to toleratethis overheating.
Assuming again that no designchanges can be made, it would seem thatchanging to the 88% aluminum/12% sil-icon alloy is not feasible. Consideringthat the bracket cannot be taken out ofthe equation, overheating will occur andmost likely result in tube melting. If thejoint could be redesigned to accept thisalloy, i.e., tighter fit and shallower depth,it may be possible; but I have ruled outthe option of changing the prints. Goingforward then it seems the alloy must re-main aluminum-zinc.
I would look at modifying your exist-ing brazing setup to find a way to getmore heat into the joint blocked by thebracket. Switching to air to combust thefuel will help. Using different torch tipsthat have a softer, broader, and longerflame condition that will allow heat toreach the backside of the joint will help.Adding more torches may help. In orderto heat this particular joint, it may re-quire a longer cycle time as you are al-
Fig. 1 — View of the customer’s brazedaluminum heat exchanger.
JUNE 201324
Brazing Q+A June_Layout 1 5/16/13 2:14 PM Page 24
2525WELDING JOURNAL
lowing for the heat to transfer to theproblematic area of the joint. You mayalso want to contact induction heatingmanufacturers as they may have heatingcoils that can preferentially heat differ-ent locations on the joint circumference.The lesson to be learned here is to takeinto account the joint accessibility whendesigning the assembly.♦
This column is written sequentially byTIM P. HIRTHE, ALEXANDER E.SHAPIRO, and DAN KAY. Hirthe andShapiro are members of and Kay is an ad-visor to the C3 Committee on Brazing andSoldering. All three have contributed to the5th edition of AWS Brazing Handbook.
Hirthe ([email protected]) currentlyserves as a BSMC vice chair and owns hisown consulting business.
Shapiro ([email protected]) is brazing products manager atTitanium Brazing, Inc., Columbus, Ohio.
Kay ([email protected]), with 40years of experience in the industry, operateshis own brazing training and consultingbusiness.
Readers are requested to post theirquestions for use in this column on theBrazing Forum section of the BSMC Website www.brazingandsoldering.com.
COMMERCIAL DIVE TRAINING
Education That Works
AIM HIGH. DIVE DEEP. Call Today!
1.800.238.DIVE (3483)www.diversacademy.com
Near Atlantic City, New Jersey
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
For info go to www.aws.org/ad-index
Brazing Q+A June_Layout 1 5/16/13 2:18 PM Page 25
