Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T00:26:46.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanical Behavior of Monocrystalline NiAl Using A Miniaturized Disk-Bend Test

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 1992

Ha K. DeMarco and
Alan J. Ardell
Ha K. DeMarco
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024-1595
Alan J. Ardell
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024-1595
Get access

Abstract

Miniaturized disk-bend tests were conducted on stoichiometric monocrystalline NiAl alloys of two different nominal purities. Disks 3 mm in diameter and ∼250 mm thick were prepared with faces oriented parallel to either (100) or (110) and tested in biaxial bending. The specimens exhibited some ductility, even in the “hard” (100) orientation, prior to catastrophic failure. The yield strength of the specimens was higher in the (100) orientation than in the (110) orientation, as expected, but the specimens in (110) orientation were considerably more ductile. The higher purity alloy was considerably more ductile in both orientations. The estimated CRSS of the samples (110) in orientation is ∼80 to 85 MPa. which is somewhat lower than reported values for deformation on the ‹001›{010} slip system. For the most part, the fracture surfaces are similar in both alloys, with cleavage being the dominant mode of fracture. There is no visual evidence on the fracture surfaces that can account for the differences in ductility of the two alloys tested.

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Darolia, R., Lahrman., D. and Field., R. Scripta Metall. Mater. 26, 1007 (1992).Google Scholar
2. Noebe, R. D. and Behehani, M. K., Scripta Metall. Mater, (submitted 1992).Google Scholar
3. Reviere, R. E., Oliver, B. F. and Burns, D. D., Mater, and Manufac. Proc. 4, 103 (1989).Google Scholar
4. Li, H., Chen, F. C., and Ardell, A. J., Met. Trans. 22A, 206 (1991).Google Scholar
5. Zhang, J. and Ardell, A. J., J. Mater. Res., 6, 1950 (1991).Google Scholar
6. Meyers, D. L., Chen, F. C., Zhang, J. and Ardell, A. J., J. Test, and Eval., to be published (1993).Google Scholar
7. Harling, O. K., Lee, M., Sohn, D.-S., Kohse, G. and Lau, C. W., in The Use of Small-Scale Specimens for Testing Irradiated Material, edited by Corwin, W. R. and Lucas, G. E. (ASTM STP 888, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, 1986). pp. 50–65.Google Scholar
8. Meyers, D. E. and Ardell, A. J., Acta Metall. Mater, (submitted 1992).Google Scholar
9. Pascoe, R. T. and Newey, C. W. A., Met. Sci. J., 2, 138 (1968).Google Scholar
10. Bowman, R. R., Noebe, R. D., and Darolia, R., HITEMP Review-1989. NASA CP-10039, 47–1 (1989).Google Scholar
11. Wasilewski, R. J., Butler, S. R., and Hanlon, J. E., Trans. Met. Soc. AIME, 239, 1357 (1967).Google Scholar
12. Lahrman, D. F., Field, R. D., and Darolia, R., in High-Temperature Ordered Intermetallic Alloys IV, edited by Johnson, L. A., Pope, D. P. and Stiegler, J. O., (Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 213. Pittsburgh, PA, 1991) pp. 603–607.Google Scholar
13. Takasugi, T., Watanabe, S., and Hanada, S., Mat. Sci. and Engr., A149, 183 (1992).Google Scholar
14. Field, R. D., Lahrman, D. F. and Darolia, R. in High-Temperature Ordered Intermetallic Allovs IV, edited by Johnson, L. A., Pope, D. P. and Stiegler, J. O., (Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 213, Pittsburgh, PA, 1991) pp. 255–260.Google Scholar
15. Hack, J. E., Brzeski, J. M. and Darolia, R., Scripta Metall. Mater., 27, 1259 (1992).Google Scholar
16. Noebe, R. D., Bowman, R. R. and Nathal, M. V., Int. Mater. Rev. (accepted for publication, 1992).Google Scholar