Determination of Preferred Morphology of Self-Accommodating Martensite in Ti-Nb-Al Shape Memory Alloy Using Optical Microscopy

Article Preview

Abstract:

The preferred morphology of self-accommodation (SA) microstructure in a Ti-Nb-Al shape memory alloy was investigated by the evaluation of the frequency distribution of the habit plane variant (HPV) clusters using in-situ optical microscopy. The observed HPV clusters were classified into two different types; one is the cluster connected by the {111}o type I twin (Type I) and the other is connected by the <211>o type II twin (Type II). The total fractions of the Type I and Type II clusters were 52% and 48%, respectively. The incompatibility at junction planes (JPs) of the two clusters was almost the same among these clusters. However, most of the larger martensite plates (> 50μm) formed Type I cluster at the later stage of the reverse martensitic transformation, i.e., at the early stage of the forward transformation upon cooling. The ratio of the fraction of Type I and II is almost 2:1 at the early stage of the forward transformation.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

260-263

Citation:

Online since:

May 2014

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2014 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] J. S. Bowles and J. K. Mackenzie, Acta Metall. 2 (1954) 129-137.

Google Scholar

[2] J. K. Mackenzie and J. S. Bowles, Acta Metall. 2 (1954) 138-147.

Google Scholar

[3] M. S. Wechsler, D. S. Lieberman and T. A. Read, Trans. AIME 197 (1953) 1503-1515.

Google Scholar

[4] K. Otsuka and C. M. Wayman, Shape Memory Materials, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1998).

Google Scholar

[5] J. M. Ball and R. D. James, Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal. 100 (1987) 13-52.

Google Scholar

[6] K. Bhattacharya, Microstructure of martensite, Oxford University Press, New York, (2003).

Google Scholar

[7] J. M. Ball and D. Schryvers, J. Phys. IV (Paris) 112 (2003) 159-162.

Google Scholar

[8] P. H. Boullay, D. Schryvers and J. M. Ball, Acta Mater. 51 (2003) 1421-1436.

Google Scholar

[9] X. Balandraud, D. Delpueyo, M. Grediac and G. Zanzotto, Acta Mater. 58 (2010) 4559-4577.

DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2010.03.032

Google Scholar

[10] M. Nishida, T. Nishiura, H. Kawano and T. Inamura, Philos. Mag. 92 (2012) 2215-2233.

Google Scholar

[11] M. Nishida, E. Okunishi, T. Nishiura, H. Kawano, T. Inamura, S. Ii and T. Hara, Philos. Mag. 92 (2012) 2234-2246.

Google Scholar

[12] T. Inamura, T. Nishiura, H. Kawano, H. Hosoda and M. Nishida, Philos. Mag. 92 (2012) 2247-2263.

Google Scholar

[13] T. Inamura, H. Hosoda and S. Miyazaki, Philos. Mag. 93 (2013) 618-634.

Google Scholar

[14] T. Inamura, J. I. Kim, H. Y. Kim, H. Hosoda, K. Wakashima and S. Miyazaki, Philos. Mag. 87 (2007) 3325-3350.

Google Scholar

[15] G. V. Kurdjumov, J. Iron Steel Inst. 195 (1960) 26-48.

Google Scholar