J. Mater. Sci. Technol. ›› 2020, Vol. 59: 26-36.DOI: 10.1016/j.jmst.2020.03.077
• Research Article • Previous Articles Next Articles
N. Ciftcia, N. Yodoshib, S. Armstronga,c, L. Mädlera,c, V. Uhlenwinkela,c,*()
Received:
2019-11-11
Revised:
2020-03-03
Accepted:
2020-03-05
Published:
2020-12-15
Online:
2020-12-18
Contact:
V. Uhlenwinkel
N. Ciftci, N. Yodoshi, S. Armstrong, L. Mädler, V. Uhlenwinkel. Processing soft ferromagnetic metallic glasses: on novel cooling strategies in gas atomization, hydrogen enhancement, and consolidation[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2020, 59: 26-36.
Fig. 1. The goal of this work was to increase the heat transfer coefficient and thus the cooling rate by developing novel cooling strategies during molten metal gas atomization. Gas atomization (GA) with conventional cooling, spray cone cooling (GA + SCC), and liquid quenching (GA + LQ) were used in this study. Both cooling techniques used distilled water as a cooling medium. Spray cone cooling used distilled water to cool the spray cone from all angles, whereas liquid quenching was performed to quench the molten droplets. Experimental details are listed in Supplementary Material.
Alloy (at.%) | Nomenclature | Elements used (wt%) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
{(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 [ (Melt atomization) | FeCoBSiNb | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe33Nb65.5 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) Co (99.8) | Binary alloys and raw elements were melted in the atomization tower (no master alloy was used). |
Fe76B10Si9P5 [ (Melt atomization) | FeBSiP | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe75.92P23.23 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) | Binary alloys and raw elements were melted in the atomization tower (no master alloy was used). |
{(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 [ (Melt spinning) | FeCoBSiNb | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe33Nb65.5 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) Co (99.8) | Master alloy and melt-spun samples were made using an induction furnace and melt spinning, respectively. Binary alloys and raw elements were used. |
Fe76B10Si9P5 [ (Melt Spinning) | FeBSiP | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe33Nb65.5 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) Co (99.8) | Master alloy and melt-spun samples were made using an induction furnace and melt spinning, respectively. Binary alloys and raw elements were used. |
Table 1 Selected soft ferromagnetic glass-forming alloys including purity information. The alloys have been processed with commercial purity. Melt spinning samples were produced for comparison.
Alloy (at.%) | Nomenclature | Elements used (wt%) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
{(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 [ (Melt atomization) | FeCoBSiNb | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe33Nb65.5 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) Co (99.8) | Binary alloys and raw elements were melted in the atomization tower (no master alloy was used). |
Fe76B10Si9P5 [ (Melt atomization) | FeBSiP | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe75.92P23.23 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) | Binary alloys and raw elements were melted in the atomization tower (no master alloy was used). |
{(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 [ (Melt spinning) | FeCoBSiNb | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe33Nb65.5 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) Co (99.8) | Master alloy and melt-spun samples were made using an induction furnace and melt spinning, respectively. Binary alloys and raw elements were used. |
Fe76B10Si9P5 [ (Melt Spinning) | FeBSiP | Fe80.51B18.26 Fe33Nb65.5 Fe (99.97), Si (99.99) Co (99.8) | Master alloy and melt-spun samples were made using an induction furnace and melt spinning, respectively. Binary alloys and raw elements were used. |
Cooling strategy | Alloy (at.%) | Atomizer | Inert gas | Vacuum (kPa) | D (mm) | Tliq (K) | TM (K) | ΔTM (K) | p (MPa) | m˙L (kg h-1) | m˙G (kg h-1) | GMR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conventional gas atomization (GA) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 149 | 780 | 5.2 |
Conventional gas atomization (GA) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 142 | 780 | 5.5 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 146 | 780 | 5.3 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 151 | 780 | 5.2 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 142 | 780 | 5.5 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 149 | 780 | 5.2 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 175 | 780 | 4.5 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 168 | 780 | 4.7 |
Liquid quenching in PEG (GA + LQ) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 141 | 780 | 5.5 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 144 | 780 | 5.4 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 148 | 780 | 5.3 |
Table 2 Process parameters including cooling strategies and alloy selection as well as gas atomization characteristics.
Cooling strategy | Alloy (at.%) | Atomizer | Inert gas | Vacuum (kPa) | D (mm) | Tliq (K) | TM (K) | ΔTM (K) | p (MPa) | m˙L (kg h-1) | m˙G (kg h-1) | GMR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Conventional gas atomization (GA) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 149 | 780 | 5.2 |
Conventional gas atomization (GA) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 142 | 780 | 5.5 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 146 | 780 | 5.3 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 151 | 780 | 5.2 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 142 | 780 | 5.5 |
Spray cone cooling (GA + SCC | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 149 | 780 | 5.2 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 175 | 780 | 4.5 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 168 | 780 | 4.7 |
Liquid quenching in PEG (GA + LQ) | {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1484 | 1834 | 350 | 1.6 | 141 | 780 | 5.5 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 144 | 780 | 5.4 |
Liquid quenching in H2O (GA + LQ) | Fe76B10Si9P5 | CD-CCA-0.8 | Argon | 1 | 2 | 1338 | 1688 | 350 | 1.6 | 148 | 780 | 5.3 |
Fig. 4. DSC analyses on (a) {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 and (b) Fe76B10Si9P5 powders for two different particle size classes (25-45 μm and 125-150 μm). The abbreviations GA, GA + SCC, and GA + LQ stand for conventional gas atomization, conventional gas atomization and spray cone cooling, and conventional gas atomization and liquid quenching, respectively (see Fig. 1).
Fig. 5. Enthalpy of crystallization describing the amorphous fraction as a function of particle diameter. (a) {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 and (b) Fe76B10Si9P5 soft ferromagnetic glass-forming alloys were considered for gas atomization with conventional cooling and the different cooling strategies. The {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 alloy was additionally quenched in poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG). The horizontal error bars represent the d16,3 and d84,3 percentiles measured by particle laser diffraction. Measurements on melt spinning (MS) samples were also plotted for comparison. The dashed line refers to the average enthalpy of crystallization and the upper and lower edges of the orange area defines the upper and lower standard deviation. The abbreviations GA, GA + SCC, and GA + LQ stand for conventional gas atomization, conventional gas atomization and spray cone cooling, and conventional gas atomization and liquid quenching, respectively (see Fig. 1).
Fig. 6. Hydrogen and oxygen measurements for {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 and Fe76B10Si9P5 powders. Different particle size classes were considered.
Fig. 7. Saturation magnetization determined from vibrating sample magnetometer measurements as a function of particle size for (a) {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 and (b) Fe76B10Si9P5 powders. Conventional gas atomization and novel cooling strategies were considered for this study. Measurements on melt spinning samples (MS) were also plotted for comparison (the dashed line refers to the average saturation magnetization and the upper and lower edges of the orange area defines the upper and lower standard deviation).
Fig. 8. Saturation magnetization determined from B-H curve tracer measurements as a function of two particle size classes (< 25 μm and 25-45 μm) for (a) {(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 and (b) Fe76B10Si9P5 as-atomized powders, as well as sintered toroidal rings. The toroidal rings had an outer and inner diameter of 13 and 8 mm as well as a height of 2.6 ± 0.15 mm. Conventional gas atomization and novel cooling strategies were considered for this study. Measurements on melt spinning samples (MS) were also plotted for comparison (the dashed line refers to the average saturation magnetization and the upper and lower edge of the orange area defines the upper and lower standard deviation). The abbreviations GA, GA + SCC, and GA + LQ stand for conventional gas atomization, conventional gas atomization and spray cone cooling, and conventional gas atomization and liquid quenching, respectively (see Fig. 1).
Fig. 9. Coercivity (a) and permeability (b) of sintered toroidal rings for two soft ferromagnetic glass-forming alloys ({(Fe0.6Co0.4)0.75B0.2Si0.05}96Nb4 and Fe76B10Si9P5). The rings had an outer and inner diameter of 13 and 8 mm as well as a height of 2.6 ± 0.15 mm. Two particle size classes were used to consolidate the powders (< 25 μm and 25-45 μm). The abbreviations GA, GA + SCC, and GA + LQ stand for conventional gas atomization, conventional gas atomization and spray cone cooling, and conventional gas atomization and liquid quenching, respectively (see Fig. 1).
[1] |
R. Hasegawa, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 215-216 (2000) 240-245.
DOI URL |
[2] |
N. Yodoshi, S. Ookawa, R. Yamada, N. Nomura, K. Kikuchi, A. Kawasaki, Mater. Res. Lett. 6 (2018) 100-105.
DOI URL |
[3] |
G. Herzer, Acta Mater. 61 (2013) 718-734.
DOI URL |
[4] |
P. Tiberto, M. Baricco, E. Olivetti, R. Piccin, Adv. Eng. Mater. 9 (2007) 468-474.
DOI URL |
[5] |
G. Herzer, IEEE Trans. Magn. 25 (1989) 3327-3329.
DOI URL |
[6] |
A. Makino, IEEE Trans. Magn. 48 (2012) 1331-1335.
DOI URL |
[7] |
A. Makino, H. Men, T. Kubota, K. Yubuta, A. Inoue, Mater. Trans. 50 (2009) 204-209.
DOI URL |
[8] |
K. Suzuki, A. Makino, N. Kataoka, A. Inoue, T. Masumoto, Mater. Trans. JIM 32 (1991) 93-102.
DOI URL |
[9] | Y. Yoshizawa, S. Oguma, K. Yamauchi, J. Appl. Phys. 4 (1988) 6044-6046. |
[10] |
K. Takenaka, N. Nishiyama, A.D. Setyawan, P. Sharma, A. Makino, J. Appl. Phys. 117 (2015), 17D519.
DOI URL |
[11] |
A. Inoue, F.L. Kong, Y. Han, S.L. Zhu, A. Churyumov, E. Shalaan, F. Al-Marzouki, J. Alloys. Compd. 731 (2018) 1303-1309.
DOI URL |
[12] | N. Ciftci, N. Ellendt, R. von Bargen, H. Henein, L. Mädler, V. Uhlenwinkel, J. Non-Cryst, Solids 394-395 (2014) 36-42. |
[13] |
J. Plummer, W.L. Johnson, Nat. Mater. 14 (2015) 553-555.
DOI URL PMID |
[14] |
X.H. Lin, W.L. Johnson, W.K. Rhim, Mater. Trans.,JIM 38 (1997) 473-477.
DOI URL |
[15] |
W.L. Johnson, G. Kaltenboeck, M.D. Demetriou, J.P. Schramm, X. Liu, K. Samwer, C.P. Kim, D.C. Hofmann, Science 332 (2011) 828-833.
DOI URL |
[16] | N. Ellendt, N. Ciftci, C. Goodreau, V. Uhlenwinkel, L. Madler, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng, 117, 2016,012057. |
[17] |
A. Miura, W. Dong, M. Fukue, N. Yodoshi, K. Takagi, A. Kawasaki, J. Alloys. Compd. 509 (2011) 5581-5586.
DOI URL |
[18] | N. Yodoshi, R. Yamada, A. Kawasaki, A. Makino, J. Alloys. Compd. 643 (2015) 2-7. |
[19] |
N. Eliaz, D. Fuks, D. Eliezer, Acta Mater. 47 (1999) 2981-2989.
DOI URL |
[20] |
R. Kirchheim, Prog. Mater. Sci. 32 (1988) 261-325.
DOI URL |
[21] | R. Kirchheim, T. Mütschele, W. Kieninger, H. Gleiter, R. Birringer, T.D. Koblé, Mater. Sci. Eng. 99 (1988) 457-462. |
[22] |
J. Kováč, L. Novák, J. Kecer, J. Alloys. Compd. 735 (2018) 1591-1595.
DOI URL |
[23] |
J. Pei, A.C. Yang, K. Zhang, H.H. Li, L.M. He, Y.F. Tian, Y.F. Qin, S.S. Kang, S.Q. Xiao, S.S. Yan, J. Alloys. Compd. 658 (2016) 98-103.
DOI URL |
[24] |
Y. Su, F. Dong, L. Luo, J. Guo, B. Han, Z. Li, B. Wang, H. Fu, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 358 (2012) 2606-2611.
DOI URL |
[25] |
Z. Wronski, A. Morrish, IEEE Trans. Magn. 19 (1983) 1895-1897.
DOI URL |
[26] |
A. Inoue, B.L. Shen, C.T. Chang, Acta Mater. 52 (2004) 4093-4099.
DOI URL |
[27] |
A. Makino, T. Kubota, C. Chang, M. Makabe, A. Inoue, Mater. Trans. 48 (2007) 3024-3027.
DOI URL |
[28] |
N. Ciftci, N. Ellendt, G. Coulthard, E. Soares Barreto, L. Mädler, V. Uhlenwinkel, Metall. Mater. Trans. B 50 (2019) 666-677.
DOI URL |
[29] |
N. Ciftci, N. Ellendt, E. Soares Barreto, L. Mädler, V. Uhlenwinkel, Adv. Powder Technol. 29 (2018) 380-385.
DOI URL |
[30] | R. Ikkene, Z. Koudil, M. Mouzali, J. ASTM Int. 7 (2010) 1-10. |
[31] | S. Waldeck, M. Castens, N. Riefler, F. Frerichs, T. Lübben, U. Fritsching, J. Heat Treat. Mater. 74 (2019) 238-256. |
[32] |
S. Yamaura, M. Hasegawa, H. Kimura, A. Inoue, Mater. Trans. 43 (2002) 2543-2547.
DOI URL |
[33] |
J. Kováč, L. Novák, J. Kecer, A. Lovas, L.F. Kiss, J. Alloys. Compd. 735 (2018) 1591-1595.
DOI URL |
[34] |
M. Stoica, R. Li, A.R. Yavari, G. Vaughan, J. Eckert, N. Van Steenberge, D.R. Romera, J. Alloys. Compd. 504 (2010) 123-128.
DOI URL |
[35] |
B. Huang, Y. Yang, A.D. Wang, Q. Wang, C.T. Liu, Intermetallics 84 (2017) 74-81.
DOI URL |
[36] |
B. Shen, A. Inoue, C. Chang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85 (2004) 4911-4913.
DOI URL |
[37] |
S. Irukuvarghula, H. Hassanin, C. Cayron, M. Aristizabal, M.M. Attallah, M. Preuss, Acta Mater. 172 (2019) 6-17.
DOI URL |
[38] |
G. Xie, O. Ohashi, M. Song, K. Furuya, T. Noda, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 34 (2003) 699-703.
DOI URL |
[39] |
J. Luan, P. Sharma, N. Yodoshi, Y. Zhang, A. Makino, AIP Adv. 6 (2016), 055934.
DOI URL |
[40] |
A. Makino, T. Kubota, C. Chang, M. Makabe, A. Inoue, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 320 (2008) 2499-2503.
DOI URL |
[41] |
K. Amiya, A. Urata, N. Nishiyama, A. Inoue, J. Appl. Phys. 97 (2005), 10F913.
DOI URL |
[1] | Xiangtao Yu, Xiangyu Ren, Yanwei Zhang, Zhangfu Yuan, Zhuyin Sui, Mingyong Wang. Self-supporting hierarchically micro/nano-porous Ni3P-Co2P-based film with high hydrophilicity for efficient hydrogen production [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 65(0): 118-125. |
[2] | Xiangang Lin, Xiaojuan Hou, Lixia Cui, Shiqiang Zhao, Hong Bi, Haiwei Du, Yupeng Yuan. Increasing π-electron availability in benzene ring incorporated graphitic carbon nitride for increased photocatalytic hydrogen generation [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 65(0): 164-170. |
[3] | Yong Li, Zhiyong Liu, Endian Fan, Yunhua Huang, Yi Fan, Bojie Zhao. Effect of cathodic potential on stress corrosion cracking behavior of different heat-affected zone microstructures of E690 steel in artificial seawater [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 64(0): 141-152. |
[4] | Baoguo Yuan, Xing Liu, Jiangfei Du, Qiang Chen, Yuanyuan Wan, Yunliang Xiang, Yan Tang, Xiaoxue Zhang, Zhongyue Huang. Effects of hydrogenation temperature on room-temperature compressive properties of CMHT-treated Ti6Al4V alloy [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 72(0): 132-143. |
[5] | Man Zhang, Di Hu, Zhenhao Xu, Biying Liu, Mebrouka Boubeche, Zuo Chen, Yuchen Wang, Huixia Luo, Kai Yan. Facile synthesis of Ni-, Co-, Cu-metal organic frameworks electrocatalyst boosting for hydrogen evolution reaction [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 72(0): 172-179. |
[6] | Yanli Lu, Yi Wang, Yifan Wang, Meng Gao, Yao Chen, Zheng Chen. First-principles study on the mechanical, thermal properties and hydrogen behavior of ternary V-Ni-M alloys [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 70(0): 83-90. |
[7] | Yuan-Yun Zhao, Feng Qian, Chengliang Zhao, Chunxiao Xie, Jianguo Wang, Chuntao Chang, Yanjun Li, Lai-Chang Zhang. Facile fabrication of ultrathin freestanding nanoporous Cu and Cu-Ag films with high SERS sensitivity by dealloying Mg-Cu(Ag)-Gd metallic glasses [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 70(0): 205-213. |
[8] | Yufang Zhao, Jinyu Zhang, YaQiang Wang, Shenghua Wu, Xiaoqing Liang, Kai Wu, Gang Liu, Jun Sun. The metastable constituent effects on size-dependent deformation behavior of nanolaminated micropillars: Cu/FeCoCrNi vs Cu/CuZr [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 68(0): 16-29. |
[9] | D.X. Han, L. Zhao, S.H. Chen, G. Wang, K.C. Chan. Critical transitions in the shape morphing of kirigami metallic glass [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 61(0): 204-212. |
[10] | Qiaoyue Zhang, Shun-Xing Liang, Zhe Jia, Wenchang Zhang, Weimin Wang, Lai-Chang Zhang. Efficient nanostructured heterogeneous catalysts by electrochemical etching of partially crystallized Fe-based metallic glass ribbons [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 61(0): 159-168. |
[11] | L. Deng, K. Kosiba, R. Limbach, L. Wondraczek, U. Kühn, S. Pauly. Plastic deformation of a Zr-based bulk metallic glass fabricated by selective laser melting [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 60(0): 139-146. |
[12] | Seung Woo Lee, Bongho Lee, Chaekyung Baik, Tae-Yang Kim, Chanho Pak. Multifunctional Ir-Ru alloy catalysts for reversal-tolerant anodes of polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 60(0): 105-112. |
[13] | Yanxin Qiao, Daokui Xu, Shuo Wang, Yingjie Ma, Jian Chen, Yuxin Wang, Huiling Zhou. Effect of hydrogen charging on microstructural evolution and corrosion behavior of Ti-4Al-2V-1Mo-1Fe alloy [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 60(0): 168-176. |
[14] | Zhuwei Lv, Chenchen Yuan, Haibo Ke, Baolong Shen. Defects activation in CoFe-based metallic glasses during creep deformation [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 69(0): 42-47. |
[15] | M.C. Ri, D.W. Ding, Y.H. Sun, W.H. Wang. Microstructure change in Fe-based metallic glass and nanocrystalline alloy induced by liquid nitrogen treatment [J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 69(0): 1-6. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||