Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 31, Issue 14, pp 3769–3775 | Cite as

Studies on fusion zone fracture behaviour of electron beam welds of an α+β-titanium alloy

  • T. Mohandas
  • D. Banerjee
  • Y. R. Mahajan
  • V. V. Kutumba Rao
Article

Abstract

A study was undertaken to understand the fusion zone fracture behaviour of electron beam welded α+β-titanium alloy Ti-6.5 Al-3.3 Mo-1.8 Zr and 0.25 Si. The effect of base metal microstructure, the amount of heat input and post weld heat treatment cycle on the all-weld tensile properties and fracture behaviour was investigated in this work. In general, it was found that the tensile strength and ductility of α+β-base welds are higher than that of the β-base welds and the difference was attributed to the presence of wider fusion zone grains of β-base welds. The β-base weld tensile specimens always exhibited an intergranular fracture mode irrespective of the amount of heat input. The single pass low heat input α+β-base welds failed by ductile transgranular fracture mode, while high heat input single pass welds failed by a mixed mode (intergranular plus faceted) fracture. In general high heat input welds showed low ductility mainly on account of the strain localization effects at the grain boundary alpha phase. Post-weld heat treatments of α+β-base welds resulted in the improvement of tensile ductility and were associated with transgranular fracture due to the absence of strain localization effects at the grain boundary alpha phase.

Keywords

Heat Input Fracture Mode Fusion Zone Post Weld Heat Treatment Electron Beam Weld 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    W. A. BAESLACK III and C. M. BANAS, Weld. J. 60 (1981) 121s.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. A. GREENFIELD and D. S. DUVALL, ibid. 54 (1975) 73s.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. P. SIMPSON, ibid. 56 (1977) 67s.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. A. BAESLACK III and D. W. BECKER, Metall. Trans. A 11A (1979) 1803.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Y. MAHAJAN and W. A. BAESLACK III, Scripta Metall. 13 (1979) 77.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    W. A. BAESLACK III and Y. MAHAJAN, ibid. 13 (1979) 959.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. V. VIJAYARAGHAVAN and H. MARGOLIN, Metall Trans. 19A (1988) 591.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. A. GREENFIELD and H. MARGOLIN, ibid. 3 (1972) 2649.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. MARGOLIN and Y. MAHAJAN, ibid. 9A (1978) 781.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. BANERJEE, D. MUKHERJEE, R. L. SAHA and K. BOSE, ibid. 14A (1983) 413.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. R. NARENDRANNATH and H. MARGOLIN, ibid. 19A (1988) 1163.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. W. BECKER, R. W. MESSLER Jr. and W. A. BAESLACK III, in Titanium '80 Science and Technology, Proceedings of the Conference, Kyoto, Japan, May 19–22, Eds H. Kimura and O. Izumi, TMS AIME. 1 (1980) p. 255.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. A. BAESLACK III and A. W. MULLINS, Metall. Trans. 15A (1984) 1949.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W. A. BAESLACK III, Weld. J. 61 (1982) 197S.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Mohandas
    • 1
  • D. Banerjee
    • 1
  • Y. R. Mahajan
    • 1
  • V. V. Kutumba Rao
    • 2
  1. 1.Defence Metallurgical Research LaboratoryHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Metallurgical EngineeringBanaras Hindu UniversityVaranasiIndia

Personalised recommendations