4.6 Article

Correlation between mechanical properties and valence electron concentration for NbTiZrM (M=Hf, Ta, W) refractory high entropy alloys: an ab initio study

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00339-021-04449-1

关键词

Refractory high entropy alloy; Valence electron concentration; Elastic properties; Debye temperature; Ab initio calculations

资金

  1. National Natural Sciences Foundation of China [51461002]
  2. Key Project of Guangxi Scientific Foundation [2018GXNSFDA281010]
  3. Innovation Project of Guangxi Graduate Education [YCBZ2020010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanical properties of NbTiZrM alloys are closely correlated with valence electron concentration (VEC), with increasing VEC leading to higher single-crystal elastic parameters and elastic moduli. The alloys exhibit better ductility with lower VEC, as indicated by Poisson's ratio and Pugh's ratio. In addition, increasing VEC results in decreased elastic anisotropies and increased Debye temperatures in NbTiZrM alloys.
On basis of systematical ab initio study of mechanical properties of body-centered cubic NbTiZrM (M=Hf, Ta, W) refractory high entropy alloys, the correlation between mechanical properties and valence electron concentration (VEC) is appreciably revealed. The present investigation demonstrates that both the single-crystal elastic parameters and the elastic moduli of NbTiZrM alloys increase for M from Hf to W, similar to the variation trend of VEC. Hence, the strength and hardness of NbTiZrM alloys exhibit apparent correlation with the VEC. Because the Poisson's ratio and the Pugh's ratio suggest the alloys are more ductile for M from W to Hf, the lower VEC obviously correlates with the better ductility of NbTiZrM alloys. Moreover, with increasing VEC, the elastic anisotropies of NbTiZrM alloys are predicted to decrease, whereas the Debye temperatures of these alloys show increasing tendency. Noticeably, the VEC is an effective adjusting parameter to obtain excellent mechanical properties.

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

4.6
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