Search Documents

By C. D. Wiseman

THE concept of alloying to increase the strength of metals originated during the bronze age. However, at the present time there is no single theory capable of explaining all of the observed strengthening effects of alloying elements on the mechanical properties. In general, it may be said that solid solutions are stronger than the pure metal and that the strengthening effect increases with increasing alloy content. Various theories for solution hardening have been proposed, the first of which was presented by Rosenhain who suggested that the alloying elements roughened the slip planes, thereby requiring a higher stress to initiate slip. Recent work by French and Hibbard2 confirmed Norbury's3 conclusion that those alloying elements which cause a greater change in lattice parameter have larger effects on hardness. However, a given change in lattice parameter produced by different alloying elements does not cause the same change in hardness. A further refinement was suggested by Dorn, Pietrokowski, and Tietz4 who considered differences in valence between the solute and solvent with the change in lattice parameter to explain the plastic properties of aluminum alloys. Allen, Schofield, and Tate5 further investigated the valency contribution to solution strengthening by testing some copper-base solid-solution alloys having constant electron densities. Tensile tests performed on these alloys gave identical stress-strain curves even though the atomic size effect, which varied by a factor of two, was neglected. The advent of dislocation theory6-8 provided a new and powerful tool capable of explaining many phenomena of plastic deformation and indicated new approaches to solution hardening. The basic con- cept of recent theories is that solution hardening is not due to stresses associated with randomly dispersed solute atoms, but rather to a nonuniform distribution of the solute. This conclusion was reached by consideration of the effective tension present on each dislocation line and the ability of a dislocation to pass an obstacle. cottrell suggested the possibility that the internal stresses due to randomly distributed solute atoms would offer essentially no resistance to the passage of dislocations. He reasoned that an edge dislocation may be considered as a rigid line discontinuity. As the dislocation moved through a crystal, the random stress fields would be equally distributed along its length. Since half of the stress fields would be acting to move the dislocation forward and the other half trying to move it back, the net effect on the dislocation would be zero. Thus the randomly distributed solute atoms would not contribute appreciably to solution strengthening. Mott and Nabarro10 considered the dislocation as a flexible, rather than a rigid, discontinuity. They obtained a simple model for a dislocation moving in a lattice having precipated particles, where the dislocation would actually bend around the obstacle until it would loop back onto itself to rejoin and then continue onward. Their work indicated that the minimum radius of curvature of the dislocation line, under the action of an external stress and in the region of an internal stress, would be such that the dislocation would be unable to pass through a matrix containing small closely spaced precipates by the looping process. The dislocations would tend to remain rather straight, approaching the condition of Cottrell's rigid dislocation. Hence, the strengthening must not be due to random solute atoms; however, it might be due to the concentration of atoms, either as clusters of like atoms or as short-range ordered regions, or to the concentration of solute atoms around dislocations. To date, four mechanisms of solution strength-

Jan 1, 1959

Jan 1, 1928

Jan 1, 1916

Jan 1, 1890

Jan 1, 1948

Jan 1, 1894

Jan 1, 1949

Jan 1, 1943

Jan 1, 1939

Jan 1, 1935

[ ]

Jan 1, 1946

Jan 1, 1923

[ ]

Jan 1, 1928

Jan 1, 1941

By R. G. Bowman

Discussions of processes for the manufacture of white lead generally open with the statement that white lead is the oldest chemical pigment known to man. This fact is of more than historical interest; in the light of the present extensive use of white lead, it indicates that the compound possesses characteristics that make it unique among white pigments, and superior to all in its particular field. A greater variety of processes have been proposed for manufacturing white lend than for any other one chemical compound. Only a few of these processes have come into commercial use, however, and a large part of the present production here and abroad is made by the process used in ancient times. The outstanding disadvantages of the old process are that it is slow and laborious, affords no control of the product, and yields at best an impure material lacking in uniformity. Improved processes, sometimes classed all together as "quick processes," have had as their main object the shortening of the time required. Most of them accomplish this and some have yielded a superior product as well, but only two or three are now in use commercially. For centuries the manufacture and mixing of paints have been treated as an art, and the practice has been much influenced by tradition and precedent. There is a reluctance to abandon old materials for this purpose, and as few new uses for white lead have been developed, the adoption of the quick processes has been slow. The electrolytic production of white lead is not new, a large number of processes and forms of apparatus have been proposed and patented within the past 25 years, all directed toward the production of white lead, wholly or in part, by electrolysis. One or two of these processes were tried commercially but proved unsuccessful. Process The Sperry process, used by the Anaconda Lead Products Co., is the invention of Elmer A. Sperry, and was worked out to a commercial basis at the East Chicago plant. It resembles, in a general way, earlier methods, but embodies the features that make it possible to operate

Jan 1, 1926

Jan 1, 1942

Jan 1, 1950

Jan 1, 1946

Jan 1, 1942

Jan 1, 1936