2018
DOI: 10.4314/jfas.v10i1.7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental investigation of industrial copper deformed by wire drawing process

Abstract: The scope of this work is to investigate the effect of the cold deformation by wire-drawing on microstructure and physical properties of industrial copper wires. Copper wires were provided by E.N.I.CA.Biskra (Algeria). We investigated some wires with different strain levels (as received, 1.20, 2.10, and ε = 3.35). X-ray diffraction, optical microscopy, and electrical resistivity measurement have been used as characterization techniques. We analyzed the photographs using "ImageJ" software and DRX patterns using… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The values estimated from WPPM analysis for as-received Fe powder are $0.2 Â 10 15 and $2 Â 10 15 m À2 for the narrow and broad components of the microstructures, respectively. The corresponding average value $1.2 Â 10 15 m À2 is in good agreement with the dislocation density ($1 Â 10 15 m À2 ) reported by several authors using LPA for as-received or pure Fe (Ré vé sz et al, 1996;Williamson & Smallman, 1956), sintered Fe-Mo (1.5 wt%) powder D'Incau et al, 2007), Fe ($97-98 wt%)-based lath martensite steels (Ó dor et al, 2020;Ungá r et al, 2017), as-received Cu wire (Fellah & Boumerzoug, 2018), a Cu tablet (Scardi & Leoni, 1999), Cu powder (Ustinov et al, 2004), Cu deformed by equal-channel angular pressing Ungá r et al, 2001), as-received Ni powder (Scardi & Leoni, 2002), Ni-Al 2 O 3 composite powder (Deb & Chatterjee, 2019), annealed Ni 0.9 Zn 0.1 O powder (Kremenović et al, 2010), A356-Si 3 N 4 metal matrix composite powders (Ferná ndez et al, 2019), and CeO 2 powder (Aghdaee & Soleimanian, 2009). The average values estimated from mWH plot analysis are $2.86 Â 10 15 and $8.6 Â 10 15 m À2 for M 2 values 1/3.3 and 1/10, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The values estimated from WPPM analysis for as-received Fe powder are $0.2 Â 10 15 and $2 Â 10 15 m À2 for the narrow and broad components of the microstructures, respectively. The corresponding average value $1.2 Â 10 15 m À2 is in good agreement with the dislocation density ($1 Â 10 15 m À2 ) reported by several authors using LPA for as-received or pure Fe (Ré vé sz et al, 1996;Williamson & Smallman, 1956), sintered Fe-Mo (1.5 wt%) powder D'Incau et al, 2007), Fe ($97-98 wt%)-based lath martensite steels (Ó dor et al, 2020;Ungá r et al, 2017), as-received Cu wire (Fellah & Boumerzoug, 2018), a Cu tablet (Scardi & Leoni, 1999), Cu powder (Ustinov et al, 2004), Cu deformed by equal-channel angular pressing Ungá r et al, 2001), as-received Ni powder (Scardi & Leoni, 2002), Ni-Al 2 O 3 composite powder (Deb & Chatterjee, 2019), annealed Ni 0.9 Zn 0.1 O powder (Kremenović et al, 2010), A356-Si 3 N 4 metal matrix composite powders (Ferná ndez et al, 2019), and CeO 2 powder (Aghdaee & Soleimanian, 2009). The average values estimated from mWH plot analysis are $2.86 Â 10 15 and $8.6 Â 10 15 m À2 for M 2 values 1/3.3 and 1/10, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Such differences between particle and crystallite sizes have been reported for all four oxide powders ZnO, TiO 2 , Cr 2 O 3 and CeO 2 of NIST SRM 674b (Certificate of Analysis, 15 November 2017, https://www-s.nist.gov/srmors/certificates/ 674b.pdf). Large D V values are reported in the literature on LPA Scardi, D'incau et al, 2010;Fellah & Boumerzoug, 2018;Deb & Chatterjee, 2019) and are possible in as-received Fe powder too. When the crystallite sizes are below $100 nm, an accuracy of LPA methods of up to $10% is reliably achievable (Jones, 1941;Warren, 1990;Cullity & Stock, 2001;Scardi, Ortolani et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%