Structure and mechanical properties of the directionally solidified Al-Cu-Mg eutectic
- 109 Downloads
- 1 Citations
Abstract
The ternary eutectic is located at Al-33.1 pct Cu-6.25 pet Mg and consists of an aluminum-rich phase, CuAl2, and CuMgAl2. In this work its morphology, crystallography, interfacial dislocation arrangements, and mechanical properties have been studied. The scale of the phases is proportional to the negative one-half power of the growth rate. The phases have preferred growth directions and, in many cases, preferred interfacial planes. Interfaces between the aluminum-rich and the CuMgAl2 lamellar phases are semicoherent, having a/2 〈110〉 {111} aluminum misfit dislocations spaced 300Å apart. The observed dislocations are imaged only in the aluminum and appear to be aluminum-phase slip dislocations. The deformation of the composite to failure in tension is macroscopically elastic, and the failure strength depends on growth rate. It is shown that Griffith brittle fracture theory may be applied to the failure process, with cracks developed in the CuMgAl2 phase during loading acting as the required Griffith cracks. A specific failure mechanism is proposed and related to observations of the fracture surface.
Keywords
Metallurgical Transaction Burger Vector Misfit Dislocation Ternary Eutectic Interfacial DislocationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.G. A. Chadwick:Prog. Mater. Sci., 1963, vol. 12, p. 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.M. J. Salkind, F. D. Lemkey, and F. D. George:Whisker Technology, A. P. Levitt, ed., Ch. 10, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
- 3.F. S. Galasso:High Modulus Fibers and Composites, p. 86, Gordon and Breach, New York, 1969.Google Scholar
- 4.K. A. Jackson and J. D. Hunt:Trans. TMS-AIME, 1966, vol. 236, p. 1129.Google Scholar
- 5.H. E. Cline and J. L. Walter:Met. Trans., 1970, vol. 1, p. 2907.Google Scholar
- 6.D. J. S. Cooksey and A. Hellawell:J. Inst. Metals, 1967, vol. 95, p. 183.Google Scholar
- 7.L. M. Hogan, R. W. Kraft, and F. D. Lemkey,Advan. Mater. Res., vol. 5, H. Herman, ed., p. 83, Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1971.Google Scholar
- 8.K. R. Van Horn, ed.:Aluminum, vol. I,Properties, Physical Metallurgy, and Phase Diagrams, pp. 52,384, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio, 1967.Google Scholar
- 9.H. Perlitz and A. Westgren:Ark. Kemi, Mineral. Geol, 1943, vol. 16, p. 1.Google Scholar
- 10.H. W. Kerr, J. A. Bell, and W. C. Winegard:J. Aust. Inst. Metals, 1965, vol. 10, p. 64.Google Scholar
- 11.G. C. Weatherly:Metal. Sci. J., 1968, vol. 2, p. 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.J. M. Silcock:J. Inst. Metals, 1961, vol. 89, p. 203.Google Scholar
- 13.G. C. Weatherly and R. B.Nicholson:Phil Mag., 1968, vol. 17, p. 801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.R. W. Kraft:Trans. TMS-AIME, 1962, vol. 224, p. 65.Google Scholar
- 15.H. E. Cline, J. L. Walter, E. F. Koch, and L. M. Osika,Acta Met., 1971, vol. 19, p. 405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.M. H. Loretto and R. J. Wasilewski:Proc. of Second Int. Conf. on the Strength of Metals and Alloys, p. 113, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio, 1970.Google Scholar
- 17.G. A. Alers and Y. C. Liu:Trans. TMS-AIME, 1966, vol. 236, p. 482.Google Scholar
- 18.A. A. Griffith,Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc, 1920, vol. 221A, p. 163.Google Scholar
- 19.A. S. Tetelman and A. J. McEvily, Jr.:Fracture of Structural Materials, p. 50, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
- 20.E. D. Hondros, inInterfaces-Proc. Int. Conf, Melbourne, p. 77, Butterworths, 1969.Google Scholar
- 21.G. A. Chadwick:Prog. Mater. Sci., 1963, vol. 12, p. 141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.E. Orowan:Progr. Phys. 1948, vol. XII, p. 185.Google Scholar
- 23.C. F. Elam:Distortion of Metal Crystals, Figs. 1 and 2, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1935.Google Scholar
- 24.A. S. Tetelman and A. J. McEvily, Jr.:Fracture of Structural Materials, p. 212, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
- 25.F. W. Crossman, A. S. Yue, and A. E. Vidoz:Trans. TMS-AIME, 1969, vol. 245, p.397.Google Scholar
- 26.H. Brooks: inMetal Interfaces, p. 50, American Society for Metals, Cleveland, 1952.Google Scholar