Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T10:30:55.681Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Effect of Carbon and Thermal Exposure on the Tensile Behavior of Ti-48Al-1V (at%)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 1992

William T. Donlon
Affiliation:
Ford Motor Company, Research Laboratory, S-2065, P.O. Box 2053, Dearborn, MI 48121
W.E. Dowling Jr.
Affiliation:
Ford Motor Company, Research Laboratory, S-2065, P.O. Box 2053, Dearborn, MI 48121
Get access

Abstract

Room temperature tensile properties of Ti-47.5Al-lV-0.2C (at%) and Ti-48.2Al-lV-.06C (at%) alloys were measured after thermal exposure at 775°C (in air and vacuum) to evaluate the influence of carbide precipitation and environment. Both alloys possess 蝶2% tensile ductility in the unexposed condition. Thermal exposure of fully machined tensile samples consistently reduces the ductility of the 0.2 carbon alloy to 蝶0.5%. Exposure of the low carbon (0.06) alloy in vacuum results in no ductility loss, while exposure in air reduces the ductility to 1.3%. Yield strengths are unaffected by thermal exposure and are 450 MPa and 300 MPa for the 0.2 and the low carbon alloys, respectively. The pre-exposure ductility is recovered for tests in which thermally exposed machined tensile samples had 蝶10µm of their surfaces removed by polishing. Thermal exposure prior to machining results in no change in tensile behavior. SEM and TEM examination of thermally exposed surfaces show that below the oxide surface layer, a layer close in composition to Ti2Al, having a simple cubic (aQ=6.85Å) structure is present. Beneath this layer, Ti3AlC carbides are observed in the 0.2 carbon alloy. The density of these carbides is observed to decrease away from the surface. No carbides were observed in the low carbon alloy. Although carbon significantly enhances the yield strength of this alloy it also makes it much more susceptible to embrittlement from thermal exposure.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Kim, Y.-W., Journal of Metals, 41, 24,(1989)Google Scholar
2. Shih, D.S., Huang, S.C., Scarr, G.K., Jang, H. and Chestnutt, J.C., in Microstructure/Propertv Relationships in Titanium Aluminides & Alloys, edited by Kim, W-Y and Boyer, R.R., TMS, 135 (1991).Google Scholar
3. Chen, S., Beaven, P.A. and Wagner, R., Scripta Metall., 26, 1205,(1992).Google Scholar
4. Donlon, W.T., and Dowling, W.E. (unpublished results).Google Scholar
5. Antony, K.C., Journal of Materials, 1, 456, (1966).Google Scholar
6. Meier, G.H. and Pettit, F.S., Mats. Sci. and Eng ., A153, 548, (1992).Google Scholar
7. Dowling, W.E. Jr. and Allison, J.E., in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Fatigue and Fatigue Thresholds. Part III, edited by Kitagawa, H. and Tanaka, T., 1923, (1990).Google Scholar
8. Dowling, W.E. Jr. and Donlon, W.T., Scripta Metall., 27, 1663, (1992).Google Scholar
9. Maki, K., Shioda, M., Sayashi, M., Shimizu, T. and Isobe, S., Mats. Sci. and Eng., A153, 591, (1992).Google Scholar