Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-18T06:19:23.200Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Icosahedral phase formation in rapidly quenched aluminum-ruthenium alloys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Steven M. Anlage ,
Brent Fultz  and
Kannan M. Krishnan
Steven M. Anlage
Affiliation:
Applied Physics and Materials Science, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125
Brent Fultz
Affiliation:
Applied Physics and Materials Science, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125
Kannan M. Krishnan
Affiliation:
National Center for Electron Microscopy, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720
Get access

Abstract

Systematic rapid quenching experiments on the icosahedral phase-forming system Al1 − xRux were performed for × < 20 at. %. The solidified alloys have been studied by electron microscopy and x-ray diffraction to determine their composition, constituent phases, and phase morphology. It has been determined that the icosahedral phase must form directly from the liquid and, at these quench rates, is always found in the presence of second or third phases. The results have been summarized in a metastable phase diagram appropriate for rapid solidification of Al1 − xRux at piston and anvil quench rates. This metastable phase diagram describes the results for Ru concentrations less than 14 at. %.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , June 1988 , pp. 421 - 425
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1988

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1Shechtman, D., Blech, I. A., Gratias, D., and Cahn, J. W., Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1951 (1984).Google Scholar
2See, for example, J. Phys. (Paris) 47, Colloq. C3 (1986).Google Scholar
3Anlage, S. M., Nash, P., Ramachandran, R., and Schwarz, R. B., J. Less Common Met. 136, 237 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Pietrokowsky, P., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 34, 445 (1963).Google Scholar
5Kroeger, D. M., Coghlan, W. A., Easton, D. S., Koch, C. C., and Scarbrough, J. O., J. Appl. Phys. 53, 1445 (1982).Google Scholar
6Perepezko, J. H. and Boettinger, W. J., in Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 19, 223 (1983).Google Scholar
7Our measured value is somewhat less than the 3.2 at. % Ru determined from x-ray analysis of rapidly quenched dilute Al-Ru alloys by Varich, A. N. and Lyukevich, R. B., Izv. Acad. Sci. USSR, Met. 1, 73 (1973).Google Scholar
8Edshammar, L., Acta Chem. Scand. 22, 2374 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Edshammar, L., Acta Chem. Scand. 19, 2124 (1965).Google Scholar
10Bendersky, L. A. and Ridder, S. D., J. Mater. Res. 1, 405 (1986).Google Scholar
11Schaefer, R. J., Scr. Metall. 20, 1187 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Knappand, J. A.Follstaedt, D. M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2454 (1987).Google Scholar
13Knapp, J. A. and Follstaedt, D. M. (private communication).Google Scholar
14The size distribution of icosahedral particles is rather sharp with a skew towards small particle sizes. For diffusion analysis, we chose to consider the largest particles because it is most likely that they formed early and were least affected by the diffusion fields of neighboring particles.Google Scholar