Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T14:01:38.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Alloying Elements (Ga, Ge, Si) on Pseudoelasticity in Fe3Al Single Crystals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Hiroyuki Y. Yasuda ,
Takashi Kase  and
Yukichi Umakoshi
Hiroyuki Y. Yasuda
Affiliation:
Research Center for Ultra-High Voltage Electron Microscopy, Osaka University, 7–1, Mihogaoka, Ibaraki, Osaka 567–0047, Japan Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, 2–1, Yamada-oka, Suita, Osaka 565–0871, Japan
Takashi Kase
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, 2–1, Yamada-oka, Suita, Osaka 565–0871, Japan
Yukichi Umakoshi
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, 2–1, Yamada-oka, Suita, Osaka 565–0871, Japan
Get access

Abstract

Pseudoelasticity in Fe3Al single crystals doped with a small amount of Ga, Ge and Si was investigated focusing on the antiphase boundary (APB) energy and the ordered domain structure. Single crystals of Fe-23at%Al and Fe-21at%Al-2at%X (X=Ga, Ge, Si) were grown by a floating zone method. In Fe-23at%Al single crystals, superpartial dislocations with Burgers vector (b) of 1/4<111> moved dragging APB during loading, while APB pulled back the superpartials during unloading. This resulted in giant pseudoelasticity regardless of martensitic transformation and the recoverable strain was about 5%. Ga addition was found to be effective in increasing the recovery strain compared with Fe-23at%Al crystals. In contrast, both Ge and Si additions decreased the amount of shape recovery. Stress at which the shape recovery started, was increased by Ga, Ge and Si additions. This means the APB energy increased by the additions, since the surface tension of APB pulling back the superpartials increases with increasing the energy. On the other hand, the frictional stress of the superpartials with b=1/4<111> increased significantly by Ge or Si doping due to solid solution hardening, though the stress of Ga-doped crystals was almost the same as that of the binary crystals. Higher frictional stress of Ge- and Si-doped crystals made the reversible motion of the superpartials difficult, resulting in the small recovery ratio. Ordered domains with displacement vector (R) of 1/4<111> in Fe-23at%Al and Fe-Al-Ga alloys were observed to be small, less than 100nm. In contrast, Ge and Si additions increased the domain size to more than 500nm. Since the domain boundaries with R=1/4<111> played an important role in the individual motion of the superpartials with b=1/4<111>, the fine domain structure was found to be favorable for giant pseudoelasticity in Fe3Al single crystals. Ga addition increased the APB energy following the superpartials and kept the domain size small, resulting in the increase in recovery strain.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 842: Symposium S – Integrative and Interdisciplinary Aspects of Intermetallics , 2004 , S1.10
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Otsuka, K. and Wayman, C. M., Shape Memory Materials, (Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp.27.Google Scholar
2. Kubin, L. P., Fourdeux, A., Guedou, J. Y. and Rieu, J., Phil. Mag., A46, 357 (1982).Google Scholar
3. Yasuda, H.Y., Nakano, K., Nakajima, T., Ueda, M. and Umakoshi, Y., Acta Mater., 51, 5101 (2003).Google Scholar
4. Yasuda, H.Y., Nakano, K., Ueda, M. and Umakoshi, Y., Mater. Sci. Forum, 426–432, 1801 (2003).Google Scholar
5. Marcinkowski, M. J. and Brown, N., Acta Metall., 9, 764 (1961).Google Scholar
6. Ikeda, O., Kainuma, R., Ohnuma, I., Fukamichi, K. and Ishida, K., J. Alloys Comp., 347, 198 (2002).Google Scholar
7. Binary Alloy phase diagrams, edited by T.B. Massalski (Materials Park, ASM International, 1990)Google Scholar
8. Yasuda, H.Y., Aoki, M. and Umakoshi, Y., Scripta Mater., in press.Google Scholar
9. Zuqing, S., Wangyue, Y., Lizhen, S., Yuanding, H., Baisheng, Z. and Jilian, Y., Mater. Sci. Eng., A258, 69 (1998).Google Scholar