4.7 Article

Strength-ductility synergy in Mg98.3Y1.3Ni0.4 alloy processed by high temperature homogenization and rolling

期刊

SCRIPTA MATERIALIA
卷 208, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2021.114345

关键词

Magnesium alloys; Rolling; Electron backscattering diffraction (EBSD); Plastic deformation; Strength-ductility synergy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new Mg98.3Y1.3Ni0.4 alloy with good strength-ductility synergy, high ultimate tensile strength, and low work hardening rate has been prepared through high temperature homogenization and rolling. The strength increment in the alloy is attributed to refined grains, broken LPSO phases, and high-density geometrically necessary dislocations. The good ductility and low work hardening rate are due to weak basal texture, activation of non-basal slips with high Schmid factors, and annihilation of high-density dislocations.
A new Mg98.3Y1.3Ni0.4 alloy containing long period stacking ordered (LPSO) phases with good strength-ductility synergy was prepared by high temperature homogenization and rolling, which possesses a high ultimate tensile strength of 320 MPa and elongation of 17.0% and low work hardening rate during ten-sile deformation. Bulk LPSO phases with lamellar morphology exist in original grains after homogeniza-tion. Refined grains, broken LPSO phases and high-density geometrically necessary dislocations provide a good strength for as-rolled alloy with the strength increment of 146.3 MPa, 51.7 MPa and 68.3 MPa, respectively. Good ductility and low work hardening rate are attributed to weak basal texture, activation of non-basal slips with high Schmid factors and annihilation of high-density dislocations. In situ tensile testing result shows deformation coordination by non-basal slips, deformation twinning, grain rotation and absorption of plastic deformation energy by LPSO phases, which suggests a good ductility as well. (C) 2021 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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