4.7 Article

Anomalous effect of grain size on the room-temperature bendability of Mg-Gd alloy sheet

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2021.142397

关键词

Mg-2Gd alloy; Grain size; Microstructure; Microcracks; Bendability

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [U1764253, 51971044, U1910213, 52001037, U2037601]
  2. Qinghai Scientific & Techno-logical Program [2018-GX-A1]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing [cstc2019jcyj-msxmX0234]
  4. Chongqing Sci-ence and Technology Commission [cstc2020jcyj-msxmX0184, cstc2019jscx-mbdxX0031, cstc2019jcyj-bshX0031]
  5. Chongqing University of Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that grain size has an impact on the bendability of Mg-2Gd alloy sheets, with coarser grain size leading to poorer bendability. This phenomenon is significantly different from traditional Mg alloys.
In this work, grain size impacted on the bendability of the Mg-2Gd (wt. %) alloy sheets was investigated. The microstructures and textures evolution during the bending test were analyzed by the electron back-scattered diffraction (EBSD) and the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) technique. The results showed an anomalous grain size-dependent bendability in this alloy. The coarser grain size sample corresponded to a poorer bendability in the Mg-Gd alloys, which was dramatically different from the traditional Mg alloys (such as AZ31B alloys). This opposite mode between the Mg-Gd and traditional rare earth (RE) free Mg alloys was mainly attributed to the difference of microcracks nucleation mechanism during the bending test. The nucleation sites of microcracks were almost in the grain boundaries for the Mg-Gd alloys, while in the intragranular for the traditional Mg alloys. Furthermore, the larger size of initial microcracks and the more heterogeneous strain distributions in the coarser grain Mg-Gd samples led to a premature failure in the bending process and gave rise to this anomalous grain size-dependent bendability.

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