Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T07:42:19.737Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strength of Metals in the Light of Modern Physics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

H. J. Gough  and
W. A. Wood
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The strengths of the metals at present available to industry are of especial importance to the aeronautical engineer who is also in a position to appreciate the need for greatly improved materials, the absence of which often places restriction on much needed developments. Although the materials of the future may become available by the somewhat fortuitous development methods at present employed, it is undeniable that greatly accelerated developments would result if a correct understanding was obtained of the fundamental characteristics of the cohesion and fracture of metals, of which the former belongs to the field of the atomic physicist.

It has been found possible, for the first time, to show that failure under static and fatigue stressing is associated with changes in the crystalline structure which are identical. These changes are (1) a dislocation of the initially perfect grains into large components which vary in orientation from that of the internal grain by amounts up to about 2°,(2) the formation of “crystallites,” approximately 10-4 to 10-5 cm. in size, whose orientation varies widely from that of the original grains, and (3) the presence of severe internal stresses in the crystallites. At fracture, whatever the type of applied stressing, the whole of the specimen behaves to the X-ray beam as a medium of crystallites showing marked lattice distortion and oriented completely at random. X-ray diffraction methods are shown to distinguish clearly between the effects of the application of safe and unsafe ranges of stress; the first method that has been successful in this respect.

In order to show the relationship between the new work described and previous work dealing with the use of X-rays in studying the deformation characteristics of metals, a preliminary section of the paper deals with cold-rolling and drawing. A survey is also presented of the present position regarding strength and atomic structure, together with references to various theories regarding the imperfections of crystals as encountered in practice. An introductory section describes briefly the atomic structure of metals, as revealed by X-rays.

Type
Proceedings
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 40 , Issue 309 , September 1936 , pp. 586 - 621
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1936

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In this work much attention has been given to the fatigue aspects for various definite reasons. In the first place, fatigue is recognised as one of the most urgent of theengineering problems of materials; secondly, it is convenient to use cyclic stressing as, with a uniform material, the essential characteristics—fatigue limit, endurance, etc.—can be repeated on successive specimens, subjected to fatigue stressing, with much greater reliability than with any other form of stressing; also, the course of failure can be most conveniently studied at various progressive stages of a test on any one specimen; also, under suitably chosen stress conditions, the changes in shape of the specimen can be reduced to a minimum. Nevertheless, the essential facts which emerge from the research are capable of much wider interpretation than as relating to fatigue.

2 The structure consists merely of positively and negatively charged atoms (Sodium and Chloride) arranged alternately; the atoms are held together by forces of mutual attraction and repulsion due to the charges as distinct from “homo-polar” binding, where the atoms are held together by mutually-shared electrons.

3 Smekal, A., Handbuch der Physik, 2nd Edition (Berlin, 1933).Google Scholar

4 Zwicky, F., Z. fur Phys. 25, p. 223, 1924.Google Scholar

5 Zwicky, F., Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci., U.S.A. (a) 15, p. 253, 1929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zwicky, F., Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci., U.S.A. (b) 15, p. 816, 1929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zwicky, F., Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci., U.S.A. (c) 17, p. 524, 1931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zwicky, F., Phys. Rev. (a) 40, p. 63, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zwicky, F., Phys. Rev. (b) 43, p. 765, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Orowan, E., Z. fur Phys., 89, p. 774, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Goetz, A., Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci., 16, p. 99, 1930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Dean, R. S. and Koster, J., “Mineral Physics,” U.S. Bur. Mines, p. 17, 1933.Google Scholar

9 Belaiew, , Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 108, p. 295, 1925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Straumanis, M., Z. fur Phys. Chem. B, 13, p. 316, 1931, and 19, p. 63, 1932.Google Scholar

Straumanis, M., Z. fur Krist., 75, p. 430, 1930.Google Scholar

11 Buerger, M. J., Z. fur Krist., 89, p. 195, 1934.Google Scholar

12 James, R. W., Z. fur Krist., 89, p. 295, 1934.Google Scholar

13 Joffe, A., “Physics of Crystals,” McGraw Hill (1928).Google Scholar

14 Griffith, A., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A, 221, p. 180, 1921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Piatti, L., Z. fur Phys., 77, p. 401, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Orowan, E., Z. fur Phys., 82, p. 239, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Taylor, G. I., Proc. Roy. Soc., 145, p. 362, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Polanyi, M., Z. fur Phys., 89, p. 660, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Orowan, E., Z. fur Phys., 89, p. 314, 1934.Google Scholar

20 Wood, W. A., Phil. Mag., XIV, p. 656, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Wood, W. A., Phil. Mag., XV, p. 553, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Wood, W. A., Trans. Far. Soc., XXXI, p. 1248, 1935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Wood, W. A., Phil. Mag., XX, p. 964, 1935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Wood, W. A., Phil. Mag., XVI, p. 719, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 Wood, W. A., Proc. Phys. Soc., 44, p. 67, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26 Wood, W. A., Phil. Mag., XIX, p. 219, 1935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 Wood, W. A., Phil. Mag., XIII, p. 355, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 For critical reviews of this work and that of other investigators in the same subject, see :— Gough (a) “Fatigue of Metals,” E. Benn ; (b) Trans. Faraday Soc, November, 1927; (c) Cantor Lectures, J. Roy. Soc. Arts, February, 1928 ; (d) Autumn Lecture, J. Inst. Met., Vol. 49, No. 2, 1932; (e) Proc. I.A.T.M., Zürich Congress, 1931; (f) 8th Edgar Marburg Lecture, Proc. A.S.T.M., Vol. 33, Part 2, 1933.

29 Gough, “Engineering,” September 8th, 1922.

30 Southwell, and Gough, , Phil. Mag., Vol. I, January, 1926.Google Scholar

Gough, Repts. and Mem. Aero. Res. Committee, No. 743, 1921, and No. 843.

31 Gough, and Tapsell, , Repts. and Mem. Aero. Res. Committee, No. 1012, 1926.Google Scholar

32 Gough, and Sopwith, , (a) Jour. Inst. Metals, Vol. XLIX, No. 2, 1932.Google Scholar

Gough, and Sopwith, , (b) Jour. Inst. Metals, Vol. LVI, No. 2, 1935.Google Scholar

33 Gough, and Sopwith, , Jour. Iron and Steel Inst., No. 1, 1933.Google Scholar

34 Gough and Pollard, Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs., November, 1935.

35 Gough, and Hanson, , Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 104. 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 Ewing, and Humfrey, , Phil. Trans. A, Vol. 200, 1903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 Stanton, and Bairstow, , Proc. Inst. Civil Engrs., Vol. 166, 1906.Google Scholar

38 Gough, Hanson and Wright, , (a) Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 226, 1924;Google Scholar

(b) Repts. and Mem., Aero. Res. Committee, No. 1022, 1925, No. 1024, 1926, No. 1025, 1926;

(c) Jour. Inst. Metals, Vol. 36, No. 2, 1926. Gough, Cox and Sopwith, Vol. 54, No. 1, 1934.

39 Gough, and Sopwith, , (a) Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 135, 1932;CrossRefGoogle Scholar

(b) Jour. Inst. Metals, Vol. 52, No. 2, 1933.

40 Gough and Forrest, Repts. and Mem., Aero. Res. Committee, No. 1476, 1932.

41 Gough, Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 118, 1928.

42 Gough, and Cox, , (a) Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 123, 1929;CrossRefGoogle Scholar

(b) Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 127, 1930.

43 Gough, and Cox, , Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 127, 1930.Google Scholar

44 Gough, and Cox, , Jour. Inst. Metals, Vol. 48, No. 1, 1932.Google Scholar

45 Gough, and Cox, , Jour. Inst. Metals, Vol. 45, No. 1, 1931.Google Scholar

46 Taylor, and Elam, , Proc. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 102, 1923, and subsequent papers.Google Scholar

47 Gough, , Hanson, and Wright, , Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A, Vol. 226, 1926.Google Scholar

48 See 8th Marburg Lecture, Proc. A.S.T.M., Vol. 33, Part 2, 1933, p. 53.

49 “A new attack upon the Problem of Fatigue of Metals, using X-Ray Methods of Precision.” Gough, H. J. and Wood, W. A.. Proc. Roy. Soc. A., No. 883 Vol 154 pp. 510—539, May, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

50 Reckoned on the original area.

51 Hereinafter the term “ photograph” will be used.

52 These tests were made using a Haigh electro-magnetic fatigue testing machine, operating at a speed of 2,000 stress cycles per minute.