locities. Alloy 2 displays the same general trends as Alloy 1, shown by Table 5(b), where the Weibull modulus is lower and the position parameter (Efo


) is greater, (results for Alloy 1 are


samples produced at 82 m/s. Table 5a. Weibull Modulus and Position Parameter, σo


also provided in Fig. 3 [c & d]). For Alloy 3 both the Weibull modulus and the position parameter (Efo


) are greater for the for Tensile Stress


Table 5b. Weibull Modulus and Position Parameter, Efo


for Elongation at Failure


Figure 7. Fracture surface of a sample of Alloy 2 showing a large shrinkage foam-like defect cluster on the fracture surface. Views (a) secondary electron mode, (b), backscattered electron (BSE) mode showing the extensive defect cluster, (c & d) BSE at higher magnification. (0.2% proof stress 180 MPa, UTS 296 MPa, 1.8% Ef


) 46 International Journal of Metalcasting/Summer 2011


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75