PART IV - Prediction of Sigma-Type Phase Occurrence from Compositions in Austenitic Superalloys

Theories correlating the formation of u and related intermetallic compounds to the electron-per-atom density of binary and ternary alloys have appeared regularly in recent technical literature. These same principles can be modified and applied to complex precipitation-strengthened alloys such as the iron-, cobalt-, and nickel-base superalloys and the stainless steels. Since these complex alloys contain carbides and other phases that normally precipitate before the U-type phases, the nature and amount of the precipitated phases must be calculated first. The following general formula is then applied to the residual matrix composition of the alloy: element. The magnitude of the resulting number is indicative of whether the alloy will form a a -type phase. When these calculations (which are computerized) are systematically applied to alloys of knoun phase analysis, a breakoff in average electron-vacancy number is noted between U-free and U-prone alloys. Alloys with an average electron-vacancy number higher than the breakoff form a-type phases, while those with lower ones do not form these phases. This method could then be used to eliminate from consideration all experimental compositions that would precipitate undesirable phases. It also is useful in evaluating analyzed heats of alloys where minor heat-to-heat variations determine whether the alloy is o-free or o-prone. THE highly significant development of strong, ductile superalloys to provide reliable construction materials in the 1000" to 2500° F temperature range has been due principally to unremitting application of Edisonian techniques and logic by the dedicated physical metallurgists who have shouldered this responsibility. Tools such as the electron microscope, phase analysis, and computers to accomplish regression analyses have been used heavily, but the effort has been essentially practice of an art, rather than a science. The objective of this paper is to describe and illustrate application of some relatively fundamental principles to certain of these alloy systems in an attempt to remove some of the empiricism from the technology. Specifically, the work presented here deals with the use of periodic-group relationships to predict the formation of intermetallic phases which can occur in primarily austenitic (fcc) structures. Calculations that have been developed might be applied in the design of new alloys and the evaluation of known alloys, and thus have the potential of eliminating vast areas of unnecessary alloy preparation and evaluation. ALLOYING CONCEPTS AND STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF SUPERALLOYS Strength is produced in austenitic superalloys by three principle mechanisms: 1) precipitation of y'; 2) formation of carbides; 3) solid-solution hardening by soluble refractory metals. The first mechanism requires the addition of aluminum and titanium, the second requires carbon and carbide-forming elements, while the third calls for the addition of molybdenum and/or tungsten. A considerable concentration of chromium is usually maintained to resist oxidation/corrosion, but it is also an important carbide-forming element. Fig. 1 shows a sketch and electron micrograph of the structure of a typical wrought nickel-base super-