journal article·2001-10

Particle size dependence of fatigue crack propagation in SiC particulate-reinforced aluminium alloy composites

Z. Z. Chen, K. Tokaji, A. Minagi

Journal of Materials Science· Volume 36· Issue 20
Publisher page

Abstract

Fatigue crack propagation (FCP) and fracture mechanisms have been studied for two orientations in powder metallurgy 2024 aluminium alloy matrix composites reinforced with three different sizes of silicon carbide particles. Particular attention has been paid to make a better understanding for the mechanistic role of particle size. The FCP rates of the composites decreased with increasing particle size regardless of orientation and were slightly faster in the FCP direction parallel to the extrusion direction. After allowing for crack closure, the differences in FCP rate among the composites and between two orientations were significantly diminished, but the composites showed lower FCP rates than the corresponding unreinforced alloy. Fracture surface roughness was found to be more remarkable with increasing particle size and in the FCP direction perpendicular to the extrusion direction. Taking into account the difference in the modulus of elasticity in addition to crack closure, the differences in FCP rate between the unreinforced alloy and the composites were almost eliminated.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Aluminum Alloys Composites Properties · Aluminum Alloy Microstructure Properties · Bauxite Residue and Utilization

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (13)

Show source-provided references
1. J. D. Hall, J. W. Jones and A. K. Sachdev, Mater. Sci.Eng. A183 (1994) 69.10.1016/0921-5093(94)90891-5 ↗
2. K. Tokaji, H. Shiota and K. Kobayashi, Fatigue Fract. Eng.Mater.Struct. 22 (1999) 281.10.1046/j.1460-2695.1999.00163.x ↗
3. Y. Sugimura and S. Suresh, Metall.Trans. 23A (1992) 2231.10.1007/BF02646016 ↗
4. T. Kobayashi, H. Iwanari, S. Hakamata, M. Niinomi and H. Toda, J.Japan Inst.Metals 55 (1991) 72.10.2320/jinstmet1952.55.1_72 ↗
5. D. L. Davidson, Engng Fract.Mech. 33 (1989) 965.10.1016/0013-7944(89)90111-2 ↗
6. W. A. Logsdon and P. K. Liaw, ibid. 24 (1986) 737.10.1016/0013-7944(86)90246-8 ↗
7. D. M. Knowles and J. E. King, Acta Metall.Mater. 39 (1991) 793.10.1016/0956-7151(91)90279-A ↗
8. K. Li, X.-D. Jin, B.-D. Yan and P.-X. Li, Composites 23 (1992) 54.10.1016/0010-4361(92)90286-4 ↗
9. J. J. Mason and R. O. Ritchie, Mater.Sci.Eng. A231 (1997) 170.10.1016/S0921-5093(97)00086-5 ↗
10. M. Levin and B. Karlsson, Mater.Sci.Tech. 7 (1991) 596.10.1179/mst.1991.7.7.596 ↗
11. S. Kumai, K. Yoshida, Y. Higo and S. Nunomura, Int.J.Fatigue 14 (1992) 105.10.1016/0142-1123(92)90086-R ↗
12. J. K. Shang, W. Yu and R. O. Ritchie, Mater.Sci.Eng. A102 (1988) 181.10.1016/0025-5416(88)90573-3 ↗
13. X. Li and H. Misawa, Trans.Japan Soc.Mech.Engers. 61 (1995) 251.10.1299/kikaia.61.251 ↗