Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T19:22:06.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth of Grain Boundary Precipitates as a Function of Misorientation in an Al-5 WT% Cu Alloy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

M. A. Cantrell  and
G. J. Shiflet
M. A. Cantrell
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903
G. J. Shiflet
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903
Get access

Abstract

The size evolution of θ phase (CuAl2) precipitates as a function of time was used to study the growth of grain boundary precipitates in an Al-5 wt % Cu alloy. The kinetics were: modeled using the Brailsford and Aaron treatment of the collector plate mechanism. It was found, for a given time, that the size varied in a reproducible manner as a function of misorientation between the grains. Precipitate size was found to vary from 5 x 10-6 cm to 5 x 10-5 cm, while misorientation varied from 20 to 50 degrees for a given heat treatment period. Grain boundary misorientation was determined to be the most important factor influencing precipitate size for a given grain boundary. The grain boundary plane orientation plays a secondary role in the growth of precipitates. From these data, the relationship between grain boundary misorientation and grain boundary diffusion has been determined.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 319: Symposia CB – Defect-Interface Interactions , 1993 , 351
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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

1) Aaron, B. and Aaronson, H. I., Acta Met, 16, 789 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2) Brailsford, A. D. and Aaron, H. B., Journal of Applied Physics, 40, (4), (1969).Google Scholar
3) Hackney, S. A., Fonda, R. W., and Shiflet, G. J., Materials Science andEngineering, A113 153–160 Google Scholar
4) Gudmundsson, H., Brooks, D.D., and Wert, J.A., ActaMet., 39, 19 (1991).Google Scholar
5) Brooks, D.D., Gudmundsson, H., and Wert, J.A., Hot Deformation of Aluminum Alloys, edited by Langdon, T.G., Merchant, H.D., Morris, J.G., Zaidi, M.A., (TMS, 55, Warrendale, PA 1991) pp. 55–88.Google Scholar
6) Cantrell, M. A. and Shiflet, G. J. Defect - Interface Interactions edited by Kvan, E. P., Sands, T. D., Mills, M. J., Vitek, V., King, A. H., (MRS, 319, Pittsburgh, PA 1994, Cb3.10).Google Scholar
7) Coze, J. Le, Biscondi, M., Levy, J. and Goux, C., Memories Scientifiques Rev Metallurg., LXX No. 5, (1973).Google Scholar
8) Coze, J. Le and R., C. Goux C., Acad. Sc. Paris, t. 271 serie C - 1225 (1970).Google Scholar