Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T04:41:01.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Role of the α/β Interface in the Plastic Anisotropy of Single Colony Crystals in Titanium Alloys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

M. F. Savage ,
J. Tatalovich  and
M. J. Mills
M. F. Savage
Affiliation:
Materials and Process Engineering, Pratt and Whitney, East Hartford, CT 06108
J. Tatalovich
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210
M. J. Mills
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210
Get access

Abstract

The anisotropy in room temperature plastic deformation has been investigated in single α(HCP)/β(BCC) colonies of a commercial α/β titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-2Sn-4Zr-2Mo-0.1Si) oriented for activation of individual basal slip systems. Detailed transmission electron microscopy (TEM) studies of the slip transmission mechanisms through the α/β interfaces have been performed to elucidate the role of these interfaces in determining yield and strain hardening behavior. Significant anisotropy in the yield strengths and hardening rates for the 3 unique basal slip systems is measured, and is attributed to the different slip transmission mechanisms active due to the near-Burgers orientation relationship existing between α- and β-phases. These results are should be transferable to other alloy systems exhibiting this orientation relationship.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 819: Symposia N/P – Interfacial Engineering for Optimized Properties III , 2004 , N1.6
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

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

1. Lee, T. C., Robertson, I. M., Birnbaum, H. K., Metall. Trans. 21A, 3001 (1990).Google Scholar
2. Taisne, A., B. Decamps and Priester, L., Phil. Mag. A 82, 2791 (2002).Google Scholar
3. Wiezorek, J. M. K., Deluca, P. M. and Fraser, H. L., Intermetallics 8, 99 (2000).Google Scholar
4. Xu, H. and Wiezorek, J. M. K., Acta Mater. 52, 395 (2004)Google Scholar
5. Ambard, A., Guétaz, L., Louchet, F. and Guichard, D., 2001, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 319, 404.Google Scholar
6. Miller, W. H., Chen, R. T. and Starke, E. A., Metall. Trans. 18A, 1451 (1987).Google Scholar
7. Chan, K. S., Wojcik, C. C., and Koss, D. A., Metall. Trans. A 12, 1899 (1981).Google Scholar
8. Suri, S., Viswanathan, G. B., Neeraj, T., Hou, D. H. and Mills, M. J., Acta Mater. 47, 1019 (1999).Google Scholar
9. Mills, M. J., Hou, D. H., Suri, S., and Viswanathan, G. B., Boundaries and Interfaces in Materials, edited by Pond, R.C., Clark, W.A.T., King, A.H. and Williams, D.B. (TMS, Warrendale, Pennsylvania, 1998), 295.Google Scholar
10. Lin, F. S., Starke, E. A., Chakrabortty, S. B. and Gysler, A., Metall. Trans A 15, 1229 (1984).Google Scholar
11. Ambard, A., Guetaz, L., Louchet, F. and Guichard, D., Mater. Sci. Eng. A319, 404 (2001).Google Scholar
12. Savage, M. F., Tatalovich, J. and Mills, M. J., Phil. Mag. A 84, 1127 (2004).Google Scholar
13. Savage, M. F., Neeraj, T., and Mills, M. J., Metall. and Mater. Trans A 33, 891 (2002).Google Scholar
14. Dahmen, U., Acta Metall. 30, 63 (1982).Google Scholar
15. Naka, S., Lasalmonie, A., Costa, P. and Lubin, L. P., Phil. Mag. A 57, 717 (1988).Google Scholar
16. Neeraj, T. and Mills, M.J., Mater. Sci. Eng. A 319, 415 (2001).Google Scholar