Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 42, Issue 19, pp 8334–8341 | Cite as

Determination of crystallographic orientation of dwell-fatigue fracture facets in Ti-6242 alloy

  • V. SinhaEmail author
  • M. J. Mills
  • J. C. Williams
Article

Abstract

A technique to determine the crystallographic orientation of the fracture facets has been described. The spatial orientation of the facet plane is determined in a scanning electron microscope (SEM) using a quantitative tilt fractography technique. The crystallographic orientation of the grain, across which a particular fracture facet had been produced, is determined using the electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD) technique in an SEM. These two pieces of information were combined to obtain the crystallographic orientation of the fracture facet normal. This technique was used for the characterization of dwell-fatigue fracture facets at the crack-initiation site in Ti-6242 alloy. Our results indicate that these facets are not exactly aligned with the basal plane, but are inclined at ∼10° to it.

Keywords

Tilt Angle Crystallographic Orientation Spatial Orientation Inverse Pole Figure EBSD Analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Federal Aviation Administration. The authors thank the Technical Monitor, Joseph Wilson, for his encouragement and support of this work. The donation of Ti-6242 pancake forging by Ladish Co. Foundation (Cudahy, WI) is also gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Davidson DL, Eylon D (1980) Metallurgical Transactions 11A:837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bache MR, Davies HM, Evans WJ (1995) Titanium ’95: Science and Technology, p 1347Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bache MR, Evans WJ, Davies HM (1997) Journal of Materials Science 32:3435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Woodfield AP, Gorman MD, Corderman RR, Sutliff JA, Yamrom B (1995) Titanium ’95: Science and Technology, p 1116Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sinha V, Mills MJ, Williams JC (2004) Metallurgical and Materials Transactions 35A:3141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Themelis G, Chikwembani S, Weertman J (1990) Materials Characterization 24:27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Semprimoschnig COA, Stampfl J, Pippan R, Kolednik O (1997) Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures 20(11):1541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davies PA, Randle V (2001) Journal of Microscopy 204(Pt 1):29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Slavik DC, Wert JA, Gangloff RP (1993) Journal of Materials Research 8(10):2482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sinha V, Mills MJ, Williams JC (2006) Metallurgical and Materials Transactions 37A: 2015–2026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wright SI (2000) In: Schwartz AJ, Kumar M, Adams BL (eds) Electron backscatter diffraction in materials science. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, NY, p 51Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blackburn MJ, Williams JC (1969) Metallurgical aspects of the stress corrosion cracking of Titanium alloys,” Proc. Conf. on the Fundamental Aspects of Stress Corrosion Cracking, N.A.C.E., p 620Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davies PA, Novovic M, Randle V, Bowen P (2002) Journal of Microscopy 205(Pt 3):278CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Materials and Processes DivisionUES, Inc.DaytonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations