4.6 Article

Study on Anomalous Rapid Solidification of Al-35 at%Ni in Microgravity

期刊

JOM
卷 74, 期 6, 页码 2420-2427

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11837-021-05098-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Space Agency: ESA Project [AO-2009-0829]
  2. Russian Science Foundation [21-19-00279]
  3. Russian Science Foundation [21-19-00279] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Experiments were conducted on the International Space Station to study the dendritic growth of Al-35 at%Ni alloy under primary solidification. The velocity versus undercooling relationship showed an anomalous behavior, with the velocity decreasing at low undercoolings and increasing at higher undercoolings. A special mechanism was identified through the different crystals having scales and dendritic morphology. This unusual behavior was confirmed experimentally and explained theoretically using analytical solutions for crystal growth.
Experiments were carried out onboard the International Space Station using the electromagnetic levitation (EML) facility on dendritic growth in Al-35 at%Ni under primary solidification of the NiAl(B2)-phase. The velocity versus undercooling'' relationship shows an anomalous behavior. At low undercoolings, Delta T < 250 K, the velocity unexpectedly decreases with increasing undercooling. For higher undercoolings, Delta T > 250 K, the crystal velocity increases with increasing undercooling following a thermodynamically consistent trend. For such anomalous behavior, a special mechanism was identified through the different crystals having scales and dendritic morphology. The scaled front consists of numerous nuclei ahead of the crystal-liquid interface that occurs in the undercooling range featuring the negative slope for the crystal growth velocity at Delta T < 250 K. This unusual behavior is confirmed experimentally and explained theoretically using analytical solutions for the crystal growth front with the polydisperse ensemble of crystals nucleating ahead of it.

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