2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2010.09.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An investigation of hardness homogeneity throughout disks processed by high-pressure torsion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
109
3

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 184 publications
(134 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
22
109
3
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, in the early stage of straining high-purity (99.99%) Al exhibits a higher hardness at the center of the disk and this value decreases with increasing straining, until it reaches a homogeneous high hardness compared to the annealed condition. [31][32][33] Similar behavior was also reported in high-purity (99.99%) Zn [34] and pure (99.9%) Mg. [35] By contrast, some metals such as the Zn-22% Al eutectoid alloy and the Pb-62% Sn eutectic alloy show different behavior where the hardness decreases significantly with increasing straining and ultimately reaches a homogeneous or saturation hardness, that is, lower than in the annealed condition. [36] These three different types of hardening behavior may be effectively illustrated as in Figure 1, [37] where the separate models delineate hardening without recovery, hardening with subsequent recovery, and an overall weakening.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 65%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, in the early stage of straining high-purity (99.99%) Al exhibits a higher hardness at the center of the disk and this value decreases with increasing straining, until it reaches a homogeneous high hardness compared to the annealed condition. [31][32][33] Similar behavior was also reported in high-purity (99.99%) Zn [34] and pure (99.9%) Mg. [35] By contrast, some metals such as the Zn-22% Al eutectoid alloy and the Pb-62% Sn eutectic alloy show different behavior where the hardness decreases significantly with increasing straining and ultimately reaches a homogeneous or saturation hardness, that is, lower than in the annealed condition. [36] These three different types of hardening behavior may be effectively illustrated as in Figure 1, [37] where the separate models delineate hardening without recovery, hardening with subsequent recovery, and an overall weakening.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…[30] In the second model, the strain hardens rapidly in the early stages of straining, then softens with rapid recovery to reach a lower saturation microhardness value. This model applies to some high purity metals such as Al, [31][32][33] Mg, [35] and Zn. [34] As shown in Figure 1a and b, both of these models have final saturation microhardness values, which lie above the annealed or as-received values.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 where the lower dashed line denotes the hardness value of Hv ≈ 50 for the as-annealed sample prior to HPT. It should be noted that pure Al and Al alloys are typical materials showing reasonable hardness homogeneity through the height directions of the disks after HPT processing [15][16][17] and thus there is no influence of the measurement sections within the disk height on the hardness variations along the disk diameters.…”
Section: Vickers Microhardness Variationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This heterogeneity in hardness distribution is attributed to the heterogeneous microstructure caused by unusual plastic ow patterns during HPT. [38][39][40] Hardening occurs at the surface of the HPT processed specimen owing to martensitic transformations, accumulation of dislocation and grain re nement. This hardening may prevent strain from developing deeply below the specimen s surface, causing the heterogeneity in the microstructure.…”
Section: Effect Of Hpt and Subsequent Short Annealing On Hardness Dismentioning
confidence: 99%