Martensitic transformations structure

Residual austenite is a steel structure which during cooling at martensite transformation temperature is not completely converted into martensite and remains unchanged at room temperature together with martensite. 

In 1964, two competing series of slender volumes appeared one, the Macmillan Series in Materials Science , came from Northwestern Morris Fine wrote a fine account of Phase Transformations in Comlen.ted Systems, accompanied by Marvin Wayman s Introduction to the Crystallography of Martensite Transformations and by Elementary Dislocation Theory, written by Johannes and Julia Weertman. The second series, edited at MIT by John Wulff, was entitled The Structure and Properties of Materials , and included slim volumes on Structure, Thermodynamics of Structure, Mechanical Behaviour and Electronic Properties. 

Many metals and metallic alloys show martensitic transformations at temperatures below the melting point. Martensitic transformations are structural phase changes of first order which belong to the broader class of diffusion js solid-state phase transformations. These are structural transformations of the crystal lattice, which do not involve long-range atomic movements. A recent review of the properties and the classification of diffusionless transformations has been given by Delayed... 

In the case of Ni-Al the martensitic transformation occurs in a composition range between 62 and 67 at.% Ni where the excess Ni is accommodated randomly on the A1 sublattice. The resulting c/a ratio of the LIq structure is around 0.85, depending on composition. Below 63 at.% Ni the martensite structure has a (52) sequence of close packed planes (Zhdanov notation) which is currently denoted as 14M (formerly as 7R). At higher Ni contents this typical sequence is lost and the martensite plates are simply internally twinned without a specific periodicity. 

A martensitic transformation from a cubic CsCl-type structure by 110 (lT0> type shears occurs for NlxAli. alloys in the composition range 0.615 < x < 0.64. Precursive... 

Finally, at even lower transformation temperatures, a completely new reaction occurs. Austenite transforms to a new metastable phase called martensite, which is a supersaturated solid solution of carbon in iron and which has a body-centred tetragonal crystal structure. Furthermore, the mechanism of the transformation of austenite to martensite is fundamentally different from that of the formation of pearlite or bainite in particular martensitic transformations do not involve diffusion and are accordingly said to be diffusionless. Martensite is formed from austenite by the slight rearrangement of iron atoms required to transform the f.c.c. crystal structure into the body-centred tetragonal structure the distances involved are considerably less than the interatomic distances. A further characteristic of the martensitic transformation is that it is predominantly athermal, as opposed to the isothermal transformation of austenite to pearlite or bainite. In other words, at a temperature midway between (the temperature at which martensite starts to form) and m, (the temperature at which martensite... 

Detailed consideration of the structure of many of the advanced and complex alloys which are of considerable technological importance (high-strength titanium alloys, nickel-base superalloys, etc.) is beyond the scope of this section, other than to point out that no new principles are involved. Certain titanium alloys, for example, exhibit a martensitic transformation, while many nickel-base superalloys are age hardening. Similarly, cast irons, although by no means advanced materials, are relatively complex they are considered in Section 1.3 where graphitisation is discussed. 

Let us regard a binary A-B system that has been quenched sufficiently fast from the / -phase field into the two phase region (a + / ) (see, for example, Fig. 6-2). If the cooling did not change the state of order by activated atomic jumps, the crystal is now supersaturated with respect to component B. When further diffusional jumping is frozen, some crystals then undergo a diffusionless first-order phase transition, / ->/ , into a different crystal structure. This is called a martensitic transformation and the product of the transformation is martensite. 

Such transformations have been extensively studied in quenched steels, but they can also be found in nonferrous alloys, ceramics, minerals, and polymers. They have been studied mainly for technical reasons, since the transformed material often has useful mechanical properties (hard, stiff, high damping (internal friction), shape memory). Martensitic transformations can occur at rather low temperature ( 100 K) where diffusional jumps of atoms are definitely frozen, but also at much higher temperature. Since they occur without transport of matter, they are not of central interest to solid state kinetics. However, in view of the crystallographic as well as the elastic and even plastic implications, diffusionless transformations may inform us about the principles involved in the structural part of heterogeneous solid state reactions, and for this reason we will discuss them. 

We have mentioned above the tendency of atoms to preserve their coordination in solid state processes. This suggests that the diffusionless transformation tries to preserve close-packed planes and close-packed directions in both the parent and the martensite structure. For the example of the Bain-transformation this then means that 111) -> 011). (J = martensite) and <111> -. Obviously, the main question in this context is how to conduct the transformation (= advancement of the p/P boundary) and ensure that on a macroscopic scale the growth (habit) plane is undistorted (invariant). In addition, once nucleation has occurred, the observed high transformation velocity (nearly sound velocity) has to be explained. Isothermal martensitic transformations may well need a long time before significant volume fractions of P are transformed into / . This does not contradict the high interface velocity, but merely stresses the sluggish nucleation kinetics. The interface velocity is essentially temperature-independent since no thermal activation is necessary. 

Diffusionless transformations have been sometimes called military , in contrast to the more civilian diffusion controlled transformations. Considering their technical relevance, the crystallographic theory of martensite transformation has been worked out in much detail, and particularly for the habit plane selection of the given 0-0 lattice structural change. The reader is referred to the corresponding metallurgical literature (D.A. Porter, K.E. Easterling (1990) D.S. Liebermann (1970) C.M. Wayman (1983)]. 

However, important differences exist. Martensite and its parent phase are different phases possessing different crystal structures and densities, whereas a twin and its parent are of the same phase and differ only in their crystal orientation. The macroscopic shape changes induced by a martensitic transformation and twinning differ as shown in Fig. 24.1. In twinning, there is no volume change and the shape change (or deformation) consists of a shear parallel to the twin plane. This deformation is classified as an invariant plane strain since the twin plane is neither distorted nor rotated and is therefore an invariant plane of the deformation. 

The traverse might work acceptably well if the dynamics of the interface between the two phases is favorable systems with martensitic phase transitions may fall into this category Z. Nishiyama, Martensitic Transformations, Academic Press, New York, 1978. Note also that the special case in which the structural phase transition involves no change of symmetry can be handled within the standard multicanonical framework [55]. 

It was based on these uniqueness and commonalities, my colleague and I submitted a paper entitled Crystal Structure and A Unique martensitic Transition of TiNi to a Journal concerned with metals and alloys for publication in 1965. But, the paper was rejected outright by two anonymous reviewers who could not accept our observation that the Nitinol transition was unique. Obviously the reviews contend that by accepting Nitinol transition being unique, may make all other martensitic transformations garden variety. This may upset the theory of martensitic transition formulated thus far. We then, submitted the paper to the Journal of Applied Physics and was accepted for publication and eventually appeared in print [10]. A few months after the appearance of this article, the editor of the very journal that rejected my paper, asked me to review two papers on Nitinol for the journal. Suddenly, I was an undisputed expert in Nitinol Up to this point I had not really start to apply covalent-bond concept but devoting more time in collecting experimental data [14,15], which may be important in support or non-support of covalent-bond concept. 

---