Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T17:57:18.921Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mechanical behavior and microstructural characteristics of magnesium alloy containing {10-12} twin lamellar structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2012

Chao Lou
Affiliation:
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
Xiyan Zhang*
Affiliation:
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
Runhong Wang
Affiliation:
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
Qing Liu
Affiliation:
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400030, China
*
a) Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: kehen888@163.com

Abstract

A hot-rolled AZ31 Mg alloy sheet was subjected to dynamic plastic deformation parallel to the rolling direction with the aim of introducing {10-12} twins. Subsequent tensile tests were carried out along the predeformed direction and the initial transverse direction (TD). It was found that untwinning led to a significant drop in yield stress when tension is carried out along the predeformed direction. And {10-12} twins and strain caused by twinning were recovered by untwinning. The tensile yield stress increased slightly with prestrain was correlated with the texture hardening caused by untwinning. When tension is carried out along initial TD, {10-12} twinning activity was restrained and slip dominated plastic deformation. The tensile yield stress increased significantly with prestrain was strongly correlated with the hardening contributions of {10-12} twins. {10-12} twinning led to the obvious yield stress in-plane anisotropy but had little effect on the maximum flow stress.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012
Figure 0

FIG. 1. Microstructural characteristics of the as-rolled material: (a) EBSD micrograph and (b) (0001) pole figure. RD and TD represent the rolling direction and the transverse direction, respectively.

Figure 1

FIG. 2. Schematic illustration of the sample orientations used for DPD and subsequent tensile testing. RD, TD, ND, and LD represent the rolling direction, the transverse direction, the normal direction, and the loading direction, respectively. The arrows indicate the DPD direction.

Figure 2

FIG. 3. Typical tensile flow curves of AZ31 samples with and without precompression deformation: (a) 0° tension and (b) 90° tension.

Figure 3

FIG. 4. EBSD micrographs illustrating the microstructure evolution of predeformed AZ31 samples after 0° and 90° tension: (a) εDPD = 1%; (b) εDPD = 3%; and (c) εDPD= 7%. The red lines, pink lines, and blue lines indicate {10-12} twin boundaries, {10-11} twin boundaries, and {10-11}–{10-12} twin boundaries, respectively.

Figure 4

FIG. 5. EBSD micrographs illustrating texture evolution of predeformed AZ31 samples before and after 0° and 90° tension: (a) εDPD = 1%; (b) εDPD = 3%; and (c) εDPD= 7%.

Figure 5

TABLE I. Twin volume fractions of predeformed AZ31 alloys.

Figure 6

TABLE II. Tensile properties of predeformed AZ31 alloys.

Figure 7

FIG. 6. Schematic drawings showing the change of orientation due to twinning and untwinning during (a) 0° tension and (b) 90° tension.

Figure 8

FIG. 7. Variation of the yield stress (a) and the maximum flow stress σmax(b) with predeformed strain increasing.

Figure 9

FIG. 8. Variation in in-plane yield stress anisotropy (a) and the maximum flow stress σmax(b) with increasing predeformed strain. 0°-T and 90°-T represent 0° tension and 90° tension. respectively.