4.7 Article

Effects of twin-twin interactions and deformation bands on the nucleation of recrystallization in AZ31 magnesium alloy

期刊

MATERIALS & DESIGN
卷 194, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108936

关键词

Magnesium alloys; Recrystallization; Twin twin interactions; Texture evolution; Cryogenic rolling

资金

  1. Imperial College London
  2. EPSRC Lightform project [EP/R001715/1]
  3. EPSRC [EP/R001715/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Investigating recrystallization is essential lo optimize the microstructure including texture weakening and grain refinement in the rolling of magnesium alloys, thus to improve the mechanical properties of magnesium sheets tot industrial applications. This research has gained an in-depth understanding of the effects of deformation bands and twin-twin interactions on recrystallization, which will potentially lead to improved manufacturing processes and mechanical properties of magnesium alloys. To study their individual effects, the recrystallization mechanisms of the room-temperature (RT)-rolled and liquid-nitrogen-temperature (LNT)-rolled samples during the annealing process were analysed with the quasi-in-situ electron backscatter diffraction method, respectively. It is found that recrystallization mainly occurred in deformation bands in the RT-rolled sample, which enhanced the initially formed texture, clue to oriented and inhomogeneous grain growth. However, it is of great interest to see that the recrystallized sites were mainly located around the (10 (1) over bar2)-(01 (1) over bar2) twin-twin interactions with high kernel average misorientation (KAM) values in the LINT-rolled samples, resulting in rather weaker texture, finer grain size and more homogeneous microstructure, because of the randomized orientations of recrystallized grains and uniform grain growth, while almost no recrystallization was observed around the single tension twin variant, (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据