Institute of Metals Division - Copper-Zinc Constitution Diagram, Redetermined in the Vicinity of the Beta Phase by Means of Quantitative Metallography

KNOWLEDGE of the Cu-Zn constitution diagram was critically examined in 1944 by G. V. Ray-nor,1 who suggested the diagram reproduced in Fig. 1 as the best evaluation of available data. No pertinent work on the constitution has been published since that time, although a number of authors have discussed transformation kinetics and theory. Despite the large amount of work that has been done on the constitution of these industrially important and scientifically interesting alloys, minor uncertainties still exist. For example, it is still not possible to say definitely whether a two-phase region exists between the ordered and disordered forms of the 8 phase. A careful re-examination of the phase boundaries in this part of the diagram was therefore undertaken. Two methods were selected for the new investigation—quantitative metallography for the higher temperatures and precision lattice parameter measurement for lower temperatures. Because of the relatively narrow two-phase regions flanking the ß phase in these alloys, quantitative metallography is particularly suited for their examination, since the relative amounts of the two phases are very sensitive to their compositions. The method, however, is useless below about 350°C because of the inadequate resolution of the two constituents. Below 400°, however, the X-ray diffraction method is applicable, although it is of somewhat lower sensitivity in this system. The changes of composition that occur during quenching from above about 500°C entirely vitiate X-ray measurements at room temperature though they do not affect metallographic area measurements. The two methods overlap and supplement each other admirably. Both methods depend on the attainment of equilibrium composition of the two phases in a more or less intimate mixture and thus avoid the difficult problems of nucleation and long range diffusion involved in the conventional metallographic bracketing method. The alloys were melted from a master alloy made from re-electrolyzed cathode copper and Horsehead 99.99 pct Zn. Melting was done under a cover of either borax or charcoal and the alloys cast into a 7/8 in. sq graphite mold for the a-ß alloys or a 3/8 in. diam cylindrical graphite mold for the ß-? alloys. The a-ß alloys were rolled at 750°C to 5/8 in. sq; annealed for 24 hr at 800°C and quenched; then rolled and swaged at 200°C to 3/8 in. diam rods, annealed 24 hr at 200°C, quenched and cold rolled 2 pct reduction. This treatment was intended to obtain a small grain size and to produce many nuclei of the minor phase for growth on subsequent heat treatment. The unworkable ß-? alloys were given preliminary treatment by sealing in Vycor tubes in vacuum and annealing for 4 hr at 800°C followed by cooling in air. Samples of homogenized alloys were checked spectrographically for impurities, but the principal components were determined on samples subsequent to heat treatment. The impurities analyzed averaged approximately as follows: Ag, 0.0002 pct; Fe, 0.004; Si, 0.0008; Cd, 0.005; Mg, 0.0002; and Pb, 0.002. For metallography, samples of appropriate composition were cut into rods 5/8 in. long, sealed in pyrex tubes in vacuum and annealed for eight weeks at temperatures of 470°C and below, two weeks at 480°, 500°, and 600°C, and 4 hr at 700°C, followed by quenching in cold water. Temperatures were accurate to ±2°C. The cylinders were then machined to 8.7 mm diam and a slice weighing 1.5 g cut with a thin saw transversely from the center of each. This