Damage-tolerant Zr–Cu–Al-based bulk metallic glasses with record-breaking fracture toughness
Source abstract
Abstract
Bulk metallic glasses (BMGs) exhibit high yield strength but little tensile ductility. For this class of materials, damage tolerance is a key mechanical design parameter needed for their engineering use. Recently we have discovered a correlation between the local structural characteristics in the glass and the propensity for shear transformations. Based on the dependence of glass structure on alloy composition, zirconium (Zr)-rich Zr-titanium (Ti)-copper (Cu)-aluminum (Al) compositions are predicted to be more prone to spread-out plastic deformation and hence profuse shear banding. This structural perspective has guided us to locate a Zr61Ti2Cu25Al12(ZT1) BMG that exhibits a record-breaking fracture toughness, on par with the palladium (Pd)-based BMG recently developed at Caltech. At the same time, the new BMG consists of common metals and has robust glass-forming ability. Interestingly, the ZT1 BMG derives its high toughness from its high propensity for crack deflection and local loading-mode change (from mode I to substantially mode II) at the crack tip due to extensive shear band interactions. A crack-resistance curve (R-curve) has been obtained following American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards, employing both “single-specimen” and “multiple-specimen” techniques as well as fatigue precracked specimens. The combination of high strength and fracture toughness places ZT1 atop all engineering metallic alloys in the strength-toughness Ashby diagram, pushing the envelop accessible to a structural material in terms of its damage tolerance.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metallic Glasses and Amorphous Alloys · Glass properties and applications · Quasicrystal Structures and Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (25)
Show source-provided references
1. 2008 · 1
2. 10.1016/j.actamat.2007.01.05210.1016/j.actamat.2007.01.052 ↗
3. Anderson · 2004
4. 10.1016/j.actamat.2008.07.01110.1016/j.actamat.2008.07.011 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.actamat.2014.02.00510.1016/j.actamat.2014.02.005 ↗
6. 10.1103/PhysRevB.78.01420710.1103/PhysRevB.78.014207 ↗
7. 10.1016/S1359-6462(99)00243-210.1016/S1359-6462(99)00243-2 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.jmps.2009.07.00610.1016/j.jmps.2009.07.006 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.jmps.2006.05.00310.1016/j.jmps.2006.05.003 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.actamat.2012.05.02810.1016/j.actamat.2012.05.028 ↗
11. 10.1016/S1005-0302(12)60180-710.1016/S1005-0302(12)60180-7 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.actamat.2009.03.02710.1016/j.actamat.2009.03.027 ↗
13. 10.1080/0950083050008047410.1080/09500830500080474 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2010.12.00210.1016/j.pmatsci.2010.12.002 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.actamat.2008.11.00210.1016/j.actamat.2008.11.002 ↗
16. 10.1038/nmat311510.1038/nmat3115 ↗
17. 10.1063/1.315602610.1063/1.3156026 ↗
18. 10.1038/nmat293010.1038/nmat2930 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.actamat.2010.09.02510.1016/j.actamat.2010.09.025 ↗
20. 10.1007/s11661-009-0059-z10.1007/s11661-009-0059-z ↗
21. 10.1016/j.mser.2013.04.00110.1016/j.mser.2013.04.001 ↗
22. 10.1007/s11837-010-0052-410.1007/s11837-010-0052-4 ↗
23. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.24550110.1103/PhysRevLett.102.245501 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.intermet.2013.11.00610.1016/j.intermet.2013.11.006 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.09.05110.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.09.051 ↗