Technical Papers and Notes - Institute of Metals Division - Solid Solution Hardening

Evidence is presented which confirms previous findings that models of solution strengthening depending solely on lattice parameter changes are incomplete. Direct evidence for the Suzuki interaction of chemical effects was obtained from alloys with constant lattice parameter, for which solution strengthening was nearly independent of temperature from 300° to 20°K. SOLUTION hardening principles have been reviewed recently by Parker and Hazlett.' In addition, the interactions of dislocations and solute atoms were reviewed by Cottrell.' It is not proposed to review this information again here, but to refer only to those details which are pertinent to the developments which have occurred since these papers were published. Literature Survey To set the stage, it has been known for some time that solid solutions are stronger than the pure parent metals, and that the strength increases with increasing amounts of alloying element. One of the most extensive earlier investigations was that of Lacy and Gensamer,3 who reported that the solid solution strengthening of iron is a power function of the composition, that the relative strengthening is a function of the solubility limit, and that the rate of strain hardening is a function of the amount of solution hardening. Thus, the slope of the plastic portion of the stress-strain curve increases with increasing yield strength. An approach to the development of principles resulted from work by Gulyeav,4 who reported that the strengthening effect of solid solution alloys is periodic in character when plotted as a function of the atomic number of the solute. A more quantitative approach was to relate the amount of solution hardening to the lattice parameter of a solid solution. This was done quite early by Norbury,5 and later by Brick, Martin, and Angier,6 Frye and Hume-Rothery,7 and French and Hibbard. This relationship is only approximate in character. The next development was to relate the amount of solution hardening to lattice stress, as proposed by Frye and co-workers.9 They calculated what they called ionic overlap from the lattice parameter changes represented as a change in volume, using Bridgman's hydrostatic compression equation. The resulting correlation was somewhat improved as compared to the simple correlation with lattice parameter. The next step was carried out by Dorn, Pietrow-sky, and Tietz,10 who suggested an effect of valence differences in addition to the effect of lattice parameter. Their proposed parameter shows flow stress as a single valued function of the concentration and a relationship involving these two atomic variables. In addition, they contributed new data on the temperature dependence of solution hardening which indicated that it was a strong function of temperature for aluminum alloys. Allen, Schofield, and Tate11 carried the valency effect even further by reporting data indicating that with a given solvent element the stress-strain curve is a function of electron density, entirely neglecting the size factor, which varied by a factor of two. This evidence led to a quantum mechanical calculation by Cottrell, Hunter, and Nabarro,12 based on the formation of a dipole around an edge disloca-