4.7 Article

Strengthening mechanisms in a high-strength bulk nanostructured Cu-Zn-Al alloy processed via cryomilling and spark plasma sintering

期刊

ACTA MATERIALIA
卷 61, 期 8, 页码 2769-2782

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2012.09.036

关键词

Nanostructured metals; Microstructure; Mechanical properties; Strengthening mechanism; Atom-probe tomography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A bulk nanostructured alloy with the nominal composition Cu-30Zn-0.8Al wt.% (commercial designation brass 260) was fabricated by cryomilling of brass powders and subsequent spark plasma sintering (SPS) of the cryomilled powders, yielding a compressive yield strength of 950 MPa, which is significantly higher than the yield strength of commercial brass 260 alloys (similar to 200-400 MPa). Transmission electron microscopy investigations revealed that cryomilling results in an average grain diameter of 26 nm and a high density of deformation twins. Nearly fully dense bulk samples were obtained after SPS of cryomilled powders, with average grain diameter 110 nm. After SPS, 10 vol.% of twins is retained with average twin thickness 30 nm. Three-dimensional atom-probe tomography studies demonstrate that the distribution of Al is highly inhomogeneous in the sintered bulk samples, and Al-containing precipitates including Al(Cu,Zn)-O-N, Al-O-N and Al-N are distributed in the matrix. The precipitates have an average diameter of 1.7 nm and a volume fraction of 0.39%. Quantitative calculations were performed for different strengthening contributions in the sintered bulk samples, including grain boundary, twin boundary, precipitate, dislocation and solid-solution strengthening. Results from the analyses demonstrate that precipitate and grain boundary strengthening are the dominant strengthening mechanisms, and the calculated overall yield strength is in reasonable agreement with the experimentally determined compressive yield strength. (c) 2012 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