Materials Science and Engineering A192/193 (1995) l-l 3

A review of the mechanical properties of B2 compounds

I. Baker
Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 0375.5, USA

Abstract

The mechanical properties of B2 compounds are reviewed and their major features outlined by citing specific examples. B2
compounds exist in a wide range of alloy systems and thus exhibit many different types of mechanical behavior. Generally, the
mechanical properties of B2 alloys depend strongly on the concentrations of constitutional defects; that is, on the constitutional vacan-
cies and antisite atoms present, and hence on the composition. For disorderable compounds, the mechanical properties also depend
strongly on the degree of order.

Keywords: B2 compounds; Mechanical properties

1. Introduction

The B2 crystal structure, shown in Fig. 1, is adopted

by many AB-type compounds. B2 alloys often exist
over a range of compositions on either side of the stoi-
chiometric composition, and their phase fields take
many different forms on phase diagrams [ 11.Deviations
from the stoichiometric composition are accommo-
dated by constitutional defects, i.e. either by vacancies
on the deficient element’s sublattice sites or by antisite
atoms of the excess element [2]. The mechanical
properties depend strongly on the concentrations of
these defects. In some compounds, e.g. AgMg [3,4],
deviations from the stoichiometric composition are
accommodated by antisite atoms on either side of stoi-
chiometry. However, for many compounds the defect
structures are different on either side of the stoichio-
metric composition. For example, deviations from the
stoichiometric composition in CoGa [5], FeAl [2,6,7],
NiAl[2,6-81, NiGa [9,10] and PdIn [11,12] are accom-
modated in transition-metal-rich compositions by
antisite atoms, whilst transition-metal-poor composi-
tions are accommodated by constitutional vacancies. In
some compounds, e.g. aluminum-rich NiAl, the vacan-
cies may be ordered [ 131. As in many of its properties,
FeAl exhibits point-defect behavior which differs from
that of other B2 compounds, i.e. the equilibrium consti-
tutional vacancy concentration is only weakly composi-
Fig. 1. B2 structure, showing the slip vectors.
tion-dependent from 40 to 48 at.% Al but rises
dramatically as the stoichiometric composition is
approached [ 14,151.
In addition to single constitutional defects, triple
defects (two vacancies on one sublattice site and an
antisite atom on the other sublattice) may be present
[9,10,13]. Triple defects were proposed [16] in an
attempt to explain both the anomalously low formation
energies for vacancies (calculated assuming that only
single vacancies are present) and the remarkably high
vacancy concentrations (up to several atomic percent)
that are present at elevated temperatures [ 17-191.
Triple defects, consisting of nickel vacancies and nickel
antisite atoms, occur in NiGa [lo] at all Ni:Ga ratios,
whereas they do not occur at all in PdIn [20]. The large
vacancy concentrations present at elevated tempera-

0921-5093/95/$9.50 0 1995 - Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved

SSDI 092 l-5093(94)03200-9
2 I. Baker 1 Materials Science and Engineering AI 92/l 93 (1995) l-13
ture can, on quenching, or after quenching and anneal-
ing, produce either dislocation loops and/or spiral
dislocations [21-281.
2. Elastic properties
B2 alloys are anisotropic; the extent of this aniso-
tropy, as measured by Zener’s parameter, A = 2C,,/
(C,, - C12)where C, are the elastic stiffness constants,
varies from one B2 compound to another: for example,
A is 3.28 for NiAl [29], 3.47 for AgMg [30,31], 4.95
for CuZn, 5.92 [32,33] for AuZn [33,34] and 11.86 for
AuCd [34,35]. For single crystals, Young’s modulus E
may depend strongly on orientation; e.g. near-stoichio-
metric NiAl has values of 96 GPa, 187 GPa and 275
GPa for (loo), (110) and (11 l), respectively [ 361, Other
B2 compounds might be expected to show similar
trends.
Concerning the compositional dependence of the
elastic constants, for NiAl, A depends strongly on the
Ni:Al ratio, ranging from 5.67 for Ni-45Al through
3.74 for the stoichiometric composition to 1.85 for
Ni-55Al [36,37]. Compositions given in atomic
percent throughout. For FeAl, A also decreases with
increasing Al content from 4.4 for Fe-35Al to 3.8 for
Fe-40A1[38]. But E for polycrystalline FeAl, NiAl and
CoAl is not strongly composition dependent at about
250 GPa [39-411. Both CuZn [32] and AuCd [35]
show greater anisotropy away from the stoichiometric
composition: for CuZn [32], the change in A is sharp
for a small deviation from the stoichiometric composi-
tion but moderate thereafter with, possibly, a peak
around 48 at.% Zn, whereas C,, shows a minimum at
46 at.% Zn, see Fig. 2.
A, Cll, C,2, C,,and E all decrease with increasing
temperature [29-35,411. Measurements on stoichio-
metric CuZn [32] show that whilst C,, and (C,1- C,,)
decrease more rapidly (over a range of about 150 K)
just below the temperature at which the compound dis-
Fig. 2. Graph of Zener’s parameter A and the elastic constant
C, ,, as a function of composition for CuZn [32].
orders (about 740 K), the decrease in A is not abrupt,
being 5.41 at about 0 K, 4.95 at 300 K, 4.54 at 500 K
and 3.90 at 800 K. It was concluded that the variation
in elastic constants as a function of temperature could
be explained using a second-nearest-neighbor model
[321.
3. Slip systems
Dislocations with three different slip vectors, namely
(loo), (110) and (ill), see Fig. 1, have been observed
in B2 alloys, depending on the composition and defor-
mation temperature. The high elastic anisotropy of
some B2 compounds, e.g. CuZn, means both that some
line directions are elastically unstable and are unlikely
to occur, and that dislocations are straight since they lie
along low-energy directions [42,43].
With a single exception [44,45] (see below), only
(100) or (111) Burgers vectors have been observed at
low temperature. In alloys which normally deform by
(100) slip, (111) slip can be activated in single crystals
by straining along a direction close to (OOl), when the
resolved shear stress on (lOO){Okl} systems is very low
[44,46-501. The slip vector can also be changed by
alloying. For example, at room temperature, NiAl
deforms by (00 1) slip and FeAl by (111) slip. By chang-
ing the Ni:Fe ratio for B2 alloys containing 40 at.% Al,
Patrick et al. [51] demonstrated that the (1 ll)/(OOl)
slip transition occurs at around 20 at.% Ni.
(110) slip has been reported in CuZn [52-561 and
NiAl[57-601 at higher temperatures. However, at least
in the case of NiAl, there seems to be some dispute
about whether (110) slip really occurs, since in several
studies [6 l-6 31 the (110) dislocations have been shown
to be junction dislocations, resulting from the collision
of gliding (100) dislocations. (110) dislocations have
also been noted in NiAl at low temperature [44,45].
High-resolution transmission electron microscopy
(HRTEM) has found that the cores of (110) edge dis-
locations in NiAl dissociate into either two (100) dis-
locations or into climb-dissociated partials [64], both
configurations being non-planar on a scale of about 1
run. Calculations using the embedded-atom method
suggest that only the decomposition of the (110) dis-
location into (100) dislocations is relevant to bulk
behavior and that the dissociation into partials is a thin-
foil artifact [64]. These observations tend to indicate
that (110) dislocations would not normally be mobile
in NiAl.
Some alloys, notably AgMg [47], CuZn [52-56,651
and FeAl [66-711, show a change at around 0.45 T,,,
from (111) slip to (100) slip with increasing tempera-
ture; CuZn also appears to exhibit (110) slip at higher
temperatures [52-561. In FeAl, the temperature at
 I. Baker / Materials Science and EngineeringA192/193
which (100) slip occurs increases with increasing iron
content [68], although, interestingly, from 50.8 to 52.8
at.% Fe the slip transition temperature in FeAl single
crystals has been reported to decrease [67]. The slip
transition is not sharp, at least in FeAl polycrystals, so
that at intermediate temperatures both (100) and (111)
dislocations can be observed [ 7 l].
There have been several attempts to rationalize the
observed slip vector based on:
(1) a nearest-neighbor model to estimate the critical
ordering energy [46];
(2) the dislocation mobility M and line energy [72,73];
(3) the size ratio of A-type to B-type atoms to deter-
mine the maximum out-of-plane movement for the
rigid-body relative motion of two adjacent slip
planes, d, [74];
(4) a combination of the dislocation line energy and
the product Md, [ 7 51.
These models are discussed in detail elsewhere
[76,77]. It is sufficient here to note that it is not clear
that any of the models can explain the operative slip
vector in all B2 compounds or the change from (111)
slip at low temperature to (100) slip at high tempera-
ture observed in some alloys.
The commonly-observed slip planes for (100) dis-
locations are (011) and {OOl}, although in principle
(100) dislocations can glide on any (Okl} plane. The
(100) dislocation does not dissociate into partials, and
so the screw dislocation can, if the core is undisso-
ciated, cross-slip easily. Thus, slip may be non-
crystallographic, particularly with increasing
temperature, as observed in AuZn [49]. The core
structure may change with stoichiometry; e.g. for NiAl,
HRTEM has shown that the dislocation core is com-
pact at the stoichiometric composition but becomes
spread out with the addition of Ni [78,79]. This nicely
explains observations which show that cross-slip
occurs readily in stoichiometric NiAl [44,59,80] but
that cross-slip becomes more difficult with increasing
(Ni-rich) deviation from the stoichiometric composi-
tion [80].
(111) dislocations normally slip on (0 1 l}, { 112)
or { 123). Since a(1 11) dislocations dissociate into
a/2( 111) partials coupled by an antiphase boundary
(APB), whether screws can cross-slip or not depends on
the APB energy. For large APB energies the a/2(1 11)
dislocations are close together and can recombine
and cross-slip easily. For very low APB energies,
the partials are so widely separated that they can cross-
slip independently. For intermediate values of APB
energy and, hence, intermediate partial separations, the
(111) dislocations will be confined to their slip planes
(in which case dislocation pile-ups are more likely).
(1995) 1-13 3
There have been a number of estimates of the APB
energy in various B2 compounds [77], but few
measurements. The only published effort to measure
systematically the APB energy of a B2 compound as a
function of composition was in FeAl, where it was
found that the APB energy decreased linearly with
increasing Fe from 109 to 28 mJ m-’ for 63 to 73 at.%
Fe [81]. This dependence may explain the fact that
FeAl exhibits some cross-slip at the stoichiometric
composition, where the APB energy is high and the
partials’ separation small, but that slip becomes planar
with only a small deviation from that composition,
when the APB energy is lower [80]. In contrast, for
fully-ordered FeCo, irrespective of Fe: Co ratio (from
25 to 75 at.% Co), where the APB-coupled a/2(1 11)
dislocations have intermediate partial separations,
planar slip occurs in the ordered state [82]. This
changes to wavy slip in the disordered state when the
u/2( 111) dislocations move independently [82].
The variation of APB energy with orientation has
been studied in CuZn, where it was found that the APB
energy on (011) was more (50 mJ m-‘) than that on
{ 112} (37 mJ m-*) [83]. Interestingly, APB tubes have
been observed in FeAl [84-871. These form behind
gliding-edge or near-edge APB-coupled u/2( 111) dis-
locations, but probably contribute only slightly to the
work hardening and so are of little importance [87].
4. Strength
The strength of B2-structured compounds depends
on their composition, the temperature and, for
order-disorder compounds, their degree of order.
4. I. Order-disorder compounds
The yield strength of B2 compounds which exhibit
an order-disorder transformation depends strongly on
prior heat treatment. For example, FeCo exists from
25-75 at.% Co, and disorders at a temperature which
varies with composition and is a maximum at stoichio-
metry [ 11. At room temperature, the yield strength has
a minimum at the stoichiometric composition in the
fully-ordered state but a maximum at this composition
when disordered [82,88]. FeCo in the disordered state,
particularly at the stoichiometric composition, can be
stronger than in the ordered state, an effect which has
been attributed to short-range ordering [82,89]. The
room-temperature mechanical properties of both stoi-
chiometric FeCo [90] and FeCo-2V [89] have been
investigated as a function of the long-range order
parameter S produced by quenching from different
temperatures. Their strengths exhibit peaks at S- 0.3,
and the fully-disordered states are stronger than their
4 I. Baker / Materials Science and EngineeringA192/193
700 800 900 loo0 1100
Temperature (K)
Fig. 3. Graph of flow stress (at 0.1% strain) as a function
quench temperature and test temperature for FeCo-2V [89].
highly-ordered states, see Fig. 3. This effect arises from
the change in dislocation behavior; i.e. slip in the
highly-ordered state occurs by planar glide of closely-
spaced pairs of a/2(1 11) superdislocation part&,
whereas in the disordered state deformation occurs by
wavy slip of single, unpaired a/2( 111) dislocations. As
S decreases, the spacing of the paired partial disloca-
tions increases so that at S - 0.3 they are able to move
independently. The idea is that gliding APB-coupled
dislocations leave wrong bonds behind, thus creating
APB trails, which result in an increase in strength [89].
The more widely spaced the dislocation part&, the
more wrong bonds are produced and thus the higher
the strength. Thus, the peak strength occurs just below
the value of S (0.3) where the a/2(111) dislocations
move independently. Domain strengthening arising
from short-range order may strengthen the weakly-
ordered alloys, and vacancies retained during quench-
ing also probably increase the yield strength of the
disordered state.
The strengths of both FeCo [90] and FeCo-2V [89]
also vary with testing temperature, and again exhibit
peak strengths at S - 0.3, but the ordered states exhibit
the higher strengths, Fig. 3. The strength maximum is
again associated with the degree of order above which
superpartial dislocations can glide independently. The
rapid decrease in strength above the critical tempera-
ture T, has been attributed to deformation becoming
diffusion controlled [89,91].
A second example is CuZn, which is disordered
above 740 K, exhibits its minimum yield strength at the
stoichiometric composition [92], and exhibits a peak in
both yield strength and flow stress at about 500 K 1931,
see Fig. 4. The temperature of this peak depends not
only on the orientation of the deformation axis, the
maximum temperature being associated with loading
along (100) [94], but also on the sense of the applied
stress, i.e. a higher peak temperature is observed during
tension rather than compression testing, for all orienta-
tions [95]. Several theories have been proposed to
(1995) 1-13
1200
of 0
300 400 500 600
Temperature (K)
Fig. 4. Compressive yield strength of CuZn single crystals as a
function of temperature and orientation [93].
explain the yield strength-temperature dependence for
CuZn. Umakoshi et al. [94] suggested that the increase
in flow stress with increasing temperature is related to
the cross-slip of (111) dislocations from their {0 11) slip
plane to the { 112) twinning plane, whilst Saka et al.
[55,96] proposed that the observed transition from
(111) to (110) plus (100) slip at the peak temperature,
together with the dissociation of the (111) dislocations
by climb rather than glide, could explain the peak. In
addition to the yield strength peak at about 500 K,
another peak has been observed at about 200 K [97],
which has been attributed to the translational motion of
unit screw dislocations overcoming the Peierls poten-
tial [98].
4.2. Strongly ordered compounds
At room temperature, most strongly-ordered B2
compounds, whether they deform by (100) or (111)
slip, exhibit minima in both their yield strength and
hardness at, or near to, the stoichiometric composition
[80,99-1041, Fig. 5. The reason is that both vacancies
and antisite defects provide strengthening, and these
usually have their minimum concentrations near the
stoichiometric composition. In some compounds, e.g.
AgMg [loll, AuZn [99], NiAl [SO,lOO], the strength
increase on either side of the stoichiometric composi-
tion is different, see Fig. 6. FeAl behaves differently: i.e.
the hardness exhibits a monotonic increase with
increasing Al, whereas the yield strength shows a mini-
mum at about 45 at.% Al and its highest value at the
stoichiometric composition, see Figs. 5 and 6
[14,80,104]. The reason for the unusual behavior of
FeAl is not fully understood, but appears to be related
to the very high concentrations of vacancies that are
present in near-stoichiometric compositions [ 14,151.
 I. Baker / Materials Science and EngineeringA192/193 (1995) 1-13 5

1250

250

-30 35 40 45 50 55
0
at. % Au or Al 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Fig. 5. Yield strength of AuZn [98], NiAl[99] and FeAl[80] as a Homologous Temperature
function of composition. Fig. 7. Yield strength as a function of temnerature for CoTi
[lt‘?l], NiAl[99] andYFeAl[107]. ’

f SOO-

$ 700-
1
M
5 6CQ-
2
2 5GQ-
”m 400- NiAl

B
5 3@J- FeAl

2On-t -I
-33 38 43 48 53 1s 35 55 65
at. % Al at. % Mg

Fig. 6. Hardness of CoAl [ 1291, NiAl [ 1291 and FeAl [ 1031 as a Fig. 8. Compressive yield stress as a function of at.% Mg for
function of aluminum content. AgMg at various homologous temperatures [ 1lo].

The temperature dependence of the yield strength of (4) Above about 0.6 T,, diffusional processes contri-
strongly-ordered B2 compounds is broadly similar to bute to deformation, and the yield strength decreases
that of bee metals with four distinct regions, see Fig. 7: rapidly with decreasing strain rate and increasing tem-
(1) Below room temperature the yield strength perature.
decreases rapidly with increasing temperature; behav- In some compounds, at elevated temperatures the
ior attributed to control of yielding by the Peierls variation of strength and hardness with composition
double kink mechanism. observed at low temperature is reversed, so that the
(2) Between room temperature and about 0.4 T,,, the maximum strength is observed at the stoichiometric
yield strength is approximately independent of tem- composition, Fig. 8 [ 110,l 111. This behavior arises
perature (in some cases there is a peak in strength at because deformation is diffusion controlled and the
about 0.4T,) [70,102,105-1071. In this regime constitutional vacancies in off-stoichiometric alloys
impurity atoms have a strong effect on yielding, result- enhance diffusion, thereby reducing the strength com-
ing in prominent yield points. The peak in yield pared with the stoichiometric alloy [70,101,112]. The
strength observed in some compounds has been peak strength at the stoichiometric composition may
attributed to thermally activated cross-slip of screw arise because this composition generally has the
dislocations which become sessile and inhibit further highest melting point and deformation is, therefore, at
dislocation motion [102]. Another explanation is that a lower homologous temperature.
the peak arises because of the change in slip systems At room temperature, grain refinement has been
which is observed in some compounds with increasing shown to increase the yield strength of B2 alloys, e.g.
temperature, e.g. FeAl[70,108,109]. AuZn [99], FeAl [80], FeCo [82,113] and NiAl
(3) At intermediate temperatures ( - 0.4 T, < T< - [80,114]. The variation of the Hall-Petch relationship
0.6 T,) the interaction of solute atoms with dislocations parameter k has been studied as a function of composi-
becomes dynamic, producing phenomena such as a tion and order in a number of compounds, see Fig. 9.
maximum in the temperature dependence of strain For AuZn [99,115] and NiAl[80] k is very small at the
hardening and serrated stress-stain curves stoichiometric composition but increases with increas-
(Portevin-Le Chatelier effect); ing deviation from that composition, whereas for FeAl
6 I. Baker I MaterialsScience and EngineeringA192/193
1750
04 0 8 I 1 1 impurities occupying interstitial positions with a result-
25 35 45 55 65 75
at. % Al or Co
Fig. 9. Graph of the Hall-Petch parameter k as a function of at.%
Al in FeAl and NiAl [80] and as a function of at.% Co in FeCo
IQ].
k has a minimum value at 45 at.% Al and its largest
value at the stoichiometric composition [80]. In these
cases the variation of k with composition largely
mirrors the variation in lattice resistance with composi-
tion [80]. In contrast, for FeCo, k is a maximum at the
stoichiometric composition in both the ordered and
disordered states [82] but has no clear relationship to
the lattice resistance. For FeCo, both disordering
[82,113] and increasing the temperature [ 116,117]
reduce k.
5. Ductility
It is worth noting that several extrinsic phenomena
can significantly affect the room-temperature ductility
of some B2 compounds. First, the testing environment
may substantially change the room-temperature ductil-
ity. This has been reviewed elsewhere [ 1 l&120] and
will not be dealt with in detail here. It is sufficient to
note that water vapor can dramatically decrease the
ductility of some compounds, particularly those con-
taining Al, such as FeAl. It appears that atomic hydro-
gen arising from a reaction between water vapor and
Al atoms leads to crack-tip embrittlement [ 1211. The
intrinsic ductility of a compound such as FeAl is thus
only observed when testing is in an atmosphere con-
taining little water vapor [ 1211 or, if water vapor is
present, at high loading rates [ 1221. Similarly, poly-
crystalline P-brasses are prone to intergranular
fracture when tested in air, salt water or aqueous
ammonia [123,124].
Second, surface finish can have an effect on ductility.
For example, the ductility of polycrystalline NiAl may
be reduced by oxidation, possibly owing to the pres-
ence of small crack-like wedges of oxide at the grain
boundaries [ 1251. In contrast, thin oxide films on
single-crystal NiAl may improve ductility (and reduce
yield strength) by “surface film softening”, a pheno-
menon whereby mobile non-screw dislocations are
(1995) 1-13
nucleated at the oxide/metal interface [ 1261. Many
low-ductility B2 compounds are also sensitive to
surface roughness after machining [ 1271.
Third, impurities can dramatically affect ductility if
by segregating to the grain boundaries they cause inter-
granular fracture. For example, it has been demon-
strated that impurities at the grain boundaries in AgMg
and NiGa result in hardening there through the
ant ductility loss, the familiar {pest} problem
[128-1321.
Fourth, ductility can be strongly affected by the
cooling rate after annealing, not only in disorderable
compounds, where changes in the degree of order
occur, but also in strongly-ordered compounds. For
example, large numbers of vacancies are retained in
FeAl after rapid cooling [133]. This results in increased
hardness and yield strength for polycrystalline FeAl,
together with a reduction in ductility and an increased
incidence of intergranular fracture [134-l 361. In
contrast, air cooling of stoichiometric NiAl single
crystals after elevated-temperature annealing (as
opposed to furnace cooling) can raise the fracture
toughness value on { 100) from about 4 MPa m1i2 to
about 13 MPa m1i2 [ 1371. Even higher values ( 17 MPa
m1’2) can be obtained by giving crystals a 673 K anneal
followed by an air cool [137]. These effects arise from
strain aging whereby interstitial solutes lock disloca-
tions and prevent plastic energy-dissipative processes.
Larger elongations can also be obtained in stoichio-
metric NiAl by appropriate heat treatment [ 1381,
5.1. Compounds exhibiting (100) slip
B2 compounds which deform by (100) slip have
only three independent slip systems. This is insufficient
for generalized plastic flow in a polycrystalline
aggregate [139] and, thus, polycrystals are not be
expected to be ductile. Twinning could provide
additional deformation modes, but B2 compounds
cannot twin by the mode observed in bee metals,
(11 l)( 112}, since this would result in a loss in order.
However, twinning has been observed on { 114) in NiTi
through a mechanism involving both shear and shuffle
[ 1401.
Single-crystal stoichiometric NiAl is the most
extensively studied compound in this group, and sub-
stantial plastic flow occurs under compression
[44,50,100,112,141,142], with the strain to failure
depending upon the compression axis. At room tem-
perature, non-(00 l)-oriented crystals are more ductile
than (OOl)-oriented crystals since the critical resolved
shear stress required to activate (100) slip is less than
that required to activate other slip vectors. Even with
only three independent slip systems, several percent
 I. Baker i Materials Science and Engineering A1921193 (1995) I-13
elongation (78%) can typically be obtained in stoi-
chiometric NiAl single crystals under tension before
failure ensues [138].
Polycrystalline NiAl is generally regarded as being
brittle at room temperature, fracturing intergranularly
at the stoichiometric composition and with increasing
transgranular fracture with increasing deviation
fracture that composition [113,143,144]. Limited
tensile elongation (2%) has been observed in polycrys-
tals of stoichiometric NiAl [ 145-1481 but the tensile
fracture strain falls rapidly to zero with small devia-
tions from the stoichiometric composition, see Fig. 10.
Near-stoichiometric compositions of both PdIn [ 1491
and CsBr [ 1501 also show limited tensile elongations
(2-6%) and also exhibit principally intergranular frac-
ture. In contrast, polycrystalline AuZn [99] shows
extensive tensile ductility at all Au:Zn ratios, where it
has been suggested that (111) slip contributes to defor-
mation, although no direct experimental evidence was
provided [99]. It has also been suggested that poly-
crystalline AuZn exhibits a stress-induced martensitic
reaction, which may be responsible for its ductility
[ 15 11. Several B2 compounds which deform by (100)
slip, e.g. NiTi [ 1451 and (Co,Ni)Zr-based compounds
[ 152,153], display considerable ductility at room
temperature (the fracture strain of (Co,,Ni,,)Zr,, is
more than 40%); behavior associated with stress-
induced reversible martensitic transformations or
stress-induced pseudoelasticity [ 1541.
Grain refinement can substantially improve ductility,
e.g. at 400 “C the ductility of polycrystalline Ni-49Al
can be improved dramatically by reducing the grains to
below a critical size (20 pm), when tensile elongations
over 40% are achieved [ 1141. Unfortunately, for
Ni-49Al the critical grain size appears to be less than
about 4 pm at room temperature. The critical grain
size is largest for stoichiometric NiAl owing to lack of
(hardening from) constitutional defects [ 1251.
Polycrystalline stoichiometric NiAl shows a sharp
increase in tensile ductility above 0.45 T, [ 112,146].
Recovery processes such as dislocation climb provide
additional deformation modes and thus stress relief at
the grain boundaries [ 1551. The stoichiometric alloy, at
least at large grain sizes, requires the highest tempera-
ture to become ductile, presumably owing to the lack of
constitutional defects. In contrast, the ductility of
AuZn was found to increase with temperature from 77
K to 273 K and above 423 K, but decreased from 273
K to 423 K [99].
5.2. Compounds exhibiting (111) slip
Polycrystals of B2 compounds which display (111)
slip have five independent slip systems and are thus
more likely to be inherently ductile than compounds
7
displaying (100) slip. It is, perhaps, surprising then that
whilst single crystals of FeAl can undergo considerable
plastic flow in compression [156], iron-rich crystals
(Fe-40Al), which are the most ductile, show only about
1% failure strain in tension [ 1571. This behavior
appears to be associated with highly localized yielding.
In contrast, single crystals of both AgMg [47,48] and
CuZn [ 1581 are quite ductile under tension.
Polycrystals of AgMg and CuZn [101,103] (and
compounds which exhibit (100) slip, such as NiAl) are
most ductile where they exhibit a minimum yield
strength, i.e. at the stoichiometric composition. In
contrast, FeAl is both brittle, failing intergranularly,
and has its highest yield strength at the stoichiometric
composition [80,144,148]. The ductility of FeAl
increases with increased Fe content, fracture occurring
by increasing amounts of transgranular cleavage as the
iron concentration increases [ 144,148], see Fig. 10.
As might be expected, the ductilities of both AgMg
[ 1011 and CuZn [93] mcrease
. with increasing tempera-
ture. As noted above, with increasing temperature
some compounds undergo a transition from (111) slip
to (100) slip, which provides insufficient slip systems
for plastic flow [ 1391. At higher deformation tempera-
tures, diffusion-controlled processes, such as climb,
can contribute additional deformation modes [ 1591.
Thus, for example, the ductility of FeAl increases with
increasing temperature even though a change from
(111)to(100)slipoccurs[15,70].
5.3. Disorderable compounds
The effect of the degree of order and of alloy stoi-
chiometry on the ductility of this class of compounds
has been investigated quite extensively for FeCo. It has
been shown that in the fully-ordered state the com-
pound is quite brittle, failing before yielding, both at
the stoichiometric composition and when iron-rich (30
at.% Co) but shows about 18% elongation when Co-
rich (70 at.% Co) [82,89]. The alloys exhibited the
same trends in the disordered states, but with slightly
greater ductilities [82]. It should be noted that the rapid
g6 oC_FeAl
01
32 37 42 47 52
at. % Al
Fig. 10. Strain to failure vs. at.% Al for polycrystalline NiAl and
FeAl tested in vacuum [ 1441.
8 I. Baker / Materials Science and EngineeringA
ordering kinetics of FeCo always results in a partially-
ordered state [155]. The addition of V or Cr improves
the ductility of stoichiometric FeCo, producing greater
tensile elongations in both the ordered (about 5%) and
disordered states (about 15%) [89]. For FeCo-2V there
is a marked room-temperature brittle-to-ductile transi-
tion at S- 0.3 with decreasing order, with a con-
comitant change in fracture mode from transgranular
cleavage to ductile shear (see Fig. 1 l), an effect due to
the change in slip behavior from planar glide of paired
a/2(1 11) dislocations in the ordered state to wavy slip
of single a/2(1 11) dislocations in the disordered state
[89,160]. Both disordered and ordered FeCo-2V
become more ductile as the testing temperature
increases, as indicated by the brittle-to-ductile transi-
tions that occur in both states [ 1601. However, the
transition occurs around 173 K for the disordered state
but at about 723 K for the ordered state. The improved
ductility in the ordered state with increasing tempera-
ture arises because dislocation cross-slip becomes
easier with increasing temperature [ 1601.
The effect of ternary additions, which affect the
degree of order, on the ductility to CuZn has been
examined. Mn additions reduce T, and reduce the
degree of order [161,162]. Hence, the a/2(111) super-
lattice partials spacing becomes larger and the planarity
of slip increases. This has the effect of increasing the
yield strength (the yield strength is also increased by
solid-solution strengthening) but reducing the ductility.
Conversely, additions of Au or Ni increase T,, which
increases order, so that superlattice partials become
more closely spaced and slip becomes more wavy. This
still results in a slight decrease in ductility, compared
with unalloyed CuZn, presumably because of the yield
strength increase from solution hardening.
6. Fatigue
Phenomenologically the fatigue behavior of ordered
alloys is similar to that of non-ordered alloys; i.e.
graphs of fatigue crack length increase per cycle
4
s 6 -9.
. -0
4
700 800 900 1000 1100
Quench Temperature (K)
Fig. 11. Graph of elongation vs. quench temperature for FeCo
f891.
(1995) l-13
(da/dl\r) vs. stress intensity factor range AK exhibit the
usual three stages [163]. Many microstructural
features, such as extrusions/intrusions, surface rough-
ening, fatigue striations and persistent slip bands,
which occur during fatigue of non-orderable alloys,
also occur in ordered alloys [163-1831.
Most research has been on order/disorder com-
pounds [163-170,175,179], which generally show
greater fatigue resistance in the ordered state than in
the disordered state [ 1651, with the crack nucleation
rate being affected more than the crack propagation
rate. This behavior is attributed to the greater difficulty
of cross-slip [ 1651 in the ordered state. Generally, in
the ordered state crack nucleation is suppressed
[163,165,167] and crack propagation rates may be
reduced for low and intermediate values of AK [ 1731
but little affected for high AK values [175]. Inter-
estingly, ordering FeCo-V decreases the rate of fatigue
crack nucleation but increases the fatigue crack propa-
gation rate [177], a feature possibly related to the
brittle behavior of the ordered material.
7. Diffusion and creep
The creep behavior of a material is closely related to
its diffusion behavior and, hence, to the point defects
present. Thus, the diffusion behavior of B2 compounds
is briefly surveyed. The dimensionless parameter
Q/RTrn, where Q is the activation energy for diffusion
and R is the gas constant, varies widely for B2 com-
pounds [ 184-1911 from about 11 for Ga in NiGa
[ 1921, typical of a bee rare earth, through 15 for Ni in
NiAl [ 1841, a value typical for bee transition metals
[193],toabout25forCoorGainCoGa[194].
For a particular B2 compound, the diffusion behav-
ior mirrors the variation of constitutional vacancy con-
centration with alloy stoichiometry. For alloys such as
AgMg [3,4], in which the excess of either element is
accommodated by antisite atoms, it has been shown
that the diffusion coefficient, D,+,, increases and that
both Q,+,t and the diffusion constant, Do (in the
Arrhenius equation), decrease with increasing devia-
tion from the stoichiometric composition [3,4], see Fig.
12; a result which has been concluded to support the
six-jump cycle diffusion mechanism [161,195,196].
DNi in NiAl[197,198] and DAUin AuCd [199,200] also
have minima at their stoichiometric compositions but
for NiAl, L& increases more rapidly with deviation
from the stoichiometric composition on the Al-rich
side, a feature related to the large numbers of consti-
1200 tutional vacancies on the Ni sites. As might be
expected, QNi for NiAl shows a maximum at the stoi-
chiometric composition, when few antisite atoms or
constitutional vacancies are present.
 I. Baker / Materials Science and EngineeringA192/193 (1995) l-13 9

The diffusion behavior of CoGa is somewhat differ- NiGa shows different behavior again [ 1921: DNi is
ent. D, and Q for both Co and Ga increase slowly with independent of composition, whilst Do, is (for all but
increasing Ga concentration [ 1941, i.e. with the increas- the lowest temperature measured) found to be a
ing concentration of constitutional vacancies, see Fig. minimum at the stoichiometric composition. DNi in
13. This correlated diffusion behavior has also been NiGa was also somewhat higher than DNi in NiAl, DA,,
taken as evidence for the six-jump cycle mechanism. in AuCd or DAs in AgMg at similar homologous tem-
peratures. Both these features of the Ni diffusion
behavior are consistent with the existence of vacancies
-4000
on the Ni sublattice on both sides of the stoichiometric
composition. QNi and D,(Ni) have maxima, and Qoa
- 3oca
and D,,(Ga) have minima at the stoichiometric com-
a
position, Fig. 13, whilst Do, is always somewhat
6 smaller than &. The differences in the compositional
s
-2ooo dependencies of the two species in NiGa led to the
B
conclusion that the Ni and Ga diffuse by two different
uncorrelated mechanisms.
- loo0
For B2 alloys at an elevated temperature, the strain
rate i can be related to the applied stress 0 through the
Dorn equation; i=A(o/G)” exp( -AH/RT)
1,010 40 50 60
at the
absolute temperature T, where A is a constant and G is
at. % Mg the shear modulus. The activation energy for creep,
Fig. 12. Activation energy Q and diffusion coefficient Do for Ag AH, and the stress exponent n obtained by fitting data
in AgMg [3]. to this relationship are shown in Table 1 for several B2
alloys. Interestingly, values of the dimensionless
parameter AH/RTm and of II are similar for AgMg,
CoAl and NiAl to those for bee a-iron [201].
The effect of ordering, which inhibits diffusion, on
Q(Ga) in CoGa
creep has been studied for CuZn [202] from 600 K to

8 /------f(,.,.
\3i T,, and it was shown that, whilst II does not change,
there is a large increase in creep rate and a decrease in

8‘2
.$
2@)-
Q(Ga)in NiGa
AH above T,, see Table 1. Similar behavior was
observed for FeCo [203] and FeCo-2V [204], indicat-
ing that ordering improves creep resistance. However,
in some alloys the beneficial effects on creep of long-
9
Q(Ni) in NiGa ??
‘- range ordering can be offset by the large concentra-
tions of constitutional defects and thermal vacancies
42 44 46 48 50 52 54 present.
At. % Ga There have been several creep studies on NiAl,
Fig. 13. Activation energy for diffusion, Q, as a function of at.% although the results are ambiguous. Both Vandervoort
Ga for Ni and Ga in NiGa [192], and for Co and Ga in CoGa et al. [205] and Yang and Dodd [206] demonstrated
/:1941. that the creep rate varied with both composition and

Table 1
Activation energies for creep, AH, and stress exponents, n, for B2 compounds. Compositions are nominally stoichiometric for CoAI,
FeAl and NiAl

Alloy Structure AH (kJ mol-‘) AH/RT, n Reference

CuZn Ordered 160 17 3.5

CuZn Disordered 97 10 3.5
FeCo-V Ordered 689 47 4.6
FeCo-V Disordered 395 27 4.6 t;i;
NiAl Ordered 310 20 5.5 [2081
CoAl Ordered 310 20 4.7 m91
FeAl Ordered 453 34 3or6 12111
AgMg Ordered 213 23 5.7 12161
10 I. Baker / Materials Science and Engineering Al 92/l 93 (I 995) I-13
grain size. At temperatures of 1500 K or higher, the
stoichiometric alloy showed the greatest creep resist-
ance, presumably since this composition had fewer
constitutional vacancies and was at a lower homolo-
gous temperature than other compositions, see Fig. 14.
The creep rate was higher for the Al-rich alloys than
that for the Ni-rich compositions, reflecting the defect-
controlled diffusion behavior. At lower temperatures,
creep resistance was a minimum at the stoichiometric
composition, because the lower constitutional defect
concentration in this composition would hardly
impede dislocation movement [205,207]. The creep
rate was reported to decrease with decreasing grain
size between 1073 K and 1273 K [205,206]. In
contrast, in a later report, except at low strain rates and
very high temperatures, the creep rate between 1200 K
and 1400 K was found to be independent of composi-
tion and grain size for NiAl containing between 44 and
53 at.% Al [208].
The creep rate of CoAl has also been reported to be
independent of grain size, with a minimum at the stoi-
chiometric composition [209]. CoAl undergoes a reviewed. This class of materials occurs in a wide range
transition in dislocation creep behavior, from viscous
glide control at 1200 K to climb control at 1400 K
[210]. In contrast, between 1100 K and 1400 K, the
creep rate of FeAl appears to be largely independent of
composition, but depends on grain size in two distinct
regimes [ 2 11,2 121, i.e. a high-stress-exponent regime
(n - 6) where creep strength increased with decreasing
grain size; and a low-stress-exponent regime (n - 3)
where the creep strength decreased with decreasing
grain size. Although the mechanisms in these regions
must be different, they appear to have the same activa-
tion energy.
The most comprehensive study of creep in B2 alloys
was performed in compression between 923 K and
1373 K for (Fe,Ni),,Al,, alloys in which the Ni:Fe ratio
was varied [2 13-2151. At higher stresses the alloys
01
45 48 51 54 57 60
at. % Al
Fig. 14. Log flow stress in shear (p = 10e4 s-l) vs. composition
for NiAl[205].
exhibited dislocation creep, at strain rates between
1O-9 s-l and lop5 s-i, and the secondary strain rate
could be described by the Dorn equation. For FeAl and
the iron-rich alloys, II was about 3.5 and the micro-
structure consisted of dislocation tangles, consistent
with creep controlled by viscous glide. For NiAl and
the nickel-rich alloys, II was about 5 and the micro-
structure consisted of well-defined subgrains, suggest-
ing dislocation-climb-controlled creep. At lower
stresses, diffusion creep occurred, as-described by
C=A(QD/RTd2) u, where Q is the atomic volume, d
is the grain diameter, and D is the effective diffusion
coefficient, for both diffusion through the grain
(Nabarro-Herring creep) and along grain boundaries
(Coble creep). The Ni-rich compositions demonstrated
a greater tendency to exhibit diffusion creep.
8. Conclusions
The mechanical properties of B2 alloys have been
of alloy systems and thus encompasses several different
types of behavior. The mechanical properties of B2
compounds are dominated by the presence of constitu-
tional defects, i.e. constitutional vacancies and antisite
defects, the presence of which is generally understood.
One of the key features of the deformation of B2 com-
pounds, the occurrence of (100) vs. (111) slip, has still
not been explained adequately.
There are several apparent anomalies in mechanical
behavior of B2 compounds. For example, it is not clear
why some B2 compounds show a creep strength which
depends on grain size, e.g. FeAl, whilst others, e.g.
CoAl, do not. Also, it is unclear why some B2 com-
pounds which deform by (111) slip are brittle, whilst
others which deform by (100) slip can show limited
ductility. The origins of the yield strength peaks
observed in some compounds are also still unclear.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Mr. D. Mandal for help
with preparing the figures and Dr. F. Liu for helpful
comments on the manuscript. This work was
supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of
Basic Energy Sciences through contract DE-FG02-
87ER45311.
References
[l] T.B. Massalski (ed.), Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams, ASM,
Metals Park, OH, 1986.
 1. Baker / Materials Science and Engineering Al921193 (1995) I-13
[2] A.J. Bradley and A. Taylor, Proc. R. Sot. Lond. A, 159
11937156.
[31 H.A. Domain and H.I. Aaronson, TMS AIME, 230 (1964)
44.
I41 W.C. Hagel and J.H. Westbrook, TMS AIME, 221 (196 1)
951.
[51 D. Berner, G. Geibel, V. Gerold and E. Wachtel, J. Phys.
Chem. Solids, 36( 1975) 221.
[a N. Ridley, J. Inst. Metals, 94 (1966) 255.
[71 A.J. Bradley and A. Taylor, Proc. R. Sot. Lond. A, 136
(1932) 210.
M.J. Cooper, Phil. Mag., 8 ( 1963) 805.
;;; R.J. Wasilewski, S.R. Butler and J.E. Hanlon, J. Appl.
Phys., 39( 1968) 4234.
[lOI A.T. Donaldson and R.D. Rawlings, Acta Metall., 24
(1976)811.
[Ill I.R. Harris, M. Norman and A.W. Bryant, J. Less-
Common Metals, 26 (1968) 427.
[I21 D. Fort, R.E. Smallman and I.R. Harris, J. Less-Common
Metals, 31(1973) 263.
[I31 P. Delavignette, H. Richel and S. Amelinkx, Phys. Stat. Sol.
(a), 13(1972)545.
1141 Y.A. Chang, L.M. Pike, C.T. Liu, A.R. Bilbrey and D.S.
Stone, J. Intermet., l(l993) 107.
1151 H. Xiao and I. Baker, Acta Metall. Mater., in press.
11’51R.J. Wasilewski, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 29(1968) 39.
R.J. Wasilewski, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 29 ( 1968) 5 1.
ttx’i R. Meyer, E. Waschete and V. Gerold, 2. Metallkde., 67
(1976)97.
I191 D. Paris and P. Lesbats, J. Nucl. Mater., 69/70( 1978) 628.
H.G. Miiller and H. Hahn, Phil. Mag. A, 50 (1984) 71.
;‘,:; A. Ball and R.E. Smallman, Acta Metall., 16 (1968) 234.
[=I J. Rinnovatore and N. Brown, TMS AIME, 239 (1967)
225
P31 G.W. Marshall and J.O. Brittain, Metall. Trans. A, 6A
(1975) 921.
[241 T.C. Tisone, G.W. Marshall and J.O. Brittain, J. Appl.
Phys., 39(1968)3714.
[251 J. L&y and J. Rieu, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 274 (1972) 836.
[261 A. Fourdeux and P. Lesbats, Phil. Mag. A, 45 (1982) 8 1.
P71 A.J. Morton, Phil. Mag., 22 (1970) 483.
[281 N. Junqua, J.C. Desoyer and P. Moine, Phys. Stat. Sol. (a),
18( 1973) 387.
R.J. Wasilewski, TMSAZME, 236 (1966) 455.
t;;; C.H. Cheng, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 28 ( 1967) 4 13.
I311 Y.A. Chang, L. Himmel and J.P. Neumann, J. Appl. Phys.,
38(1967)649.
G.M. McManus, Phys. Rev., 129 (1963) 2004.
t::; F.B. Bateman, H.J. McSkimin and M.J. Whelan, J. Appl.
Phys., 30 (1959) 544.
S. Zirinsky, Acra Metall., 4 (1956) 164.
t:;‘i H.J. Leamy, E.D. Gibson and F.X. Kayser, Acta Merall.,
l5(1967) 1827.
[361 N. Rusovic and H. Warlimont, Phys. Stat. Sol. (a), 44
(1977) 609.
R.J. Wasilewski, Trans. AZME, 236, (1966) 455.
;:i; H.J. Leamy, E.D. Gibson and F.X. Kayser, Acta Metall. 15,
(1967) 1827.
[391 M.R. Harmouche and A. Wolfenden, Mat. Sci. Eng., 84
(1986) 35.
[401 M.R. Harmouche and A. Wolfenden, J. Test Eval., 15
(1987) 101.
[411 M.R. Harmouche and A. Wolfenden, Proc. MRS, 39
(1985)343.
[421 A.K. Head, Phys. Stat. Sol., 29( 1967) 185.
[431 A.J. Morton, Phil. Mag. A, 52 (1985) 99.
II
[441 R.T. Pascoe and C.W.A. Newey, Phys. Stat. Sol., 29 (1968)
357.
[451 D.B. Miracle, Acta Metall. Mater. 39 ( 199 1) 1457.
[461 W.A. Rachinger and A.H. Cottrell, Acta Melall., 4 (1956 J
109.
[471 J.B. Mitchell, 0. Abo-el-Fotoh and J.E. Dorn, Metall.
Trans. A, 2A (1971) 3265.
[481 K. Murakami, Y. Umakoshi and M. Yamaguchi, Phil. Mag.
A, 37( 1978) 719.
[491 E.M. Schulson and E. Teghtsoonian, Phil. Mag., 19 (1969)
155.
[501 M.H. Loretto and R.J. Wasilewski, Phil. Mag., 2_?(1971)
1311.
[511 D.K. Patrick, K.-M. Chang, D.B. Miracle and H.A. Lipsitt,
in L.A. Johnson, D.P. Pope and J.O. Stiegler (eds.), High-
Temperature Ordered Intermetallic Alloys, Vol. lx Mater.
Res. Sot. Symp. Proc., 213, Pittsburgh, PA, 1991, p. 267.
1521 A.K. Head, M.H. Loretto and P. Humble, Phys. Stat. Sol.
(a), 20(1967) 521.
N. Broom and P. Humble, Phil. Mag., J9 (1969) 639.
i::i H. Saka and M. Kawase, Phil. Mag. A, 49 (1984) 525.
[551 H. Saka, Y.M. Zhu, M. Kawase, A. Nohara and T. Imura,
Phil. Msg. A, Sl(l985) 365.
I561 A. Nohara, T. Imura and H. Saka, Scripta Metall., 18
(1984) 1267.
[571 C.H. Lloyd and M.H. Loretto, Phys. Stat. Sol., 39 (1970)
163.
1581 G.M. Rowe, J. Ingram and P.R. Strutt, Proc. EMSA, 29
(1971) 118.
[591 J. Bevk, R.A. Dodd and P.R. Strutt, Metall. Trans. A, 4A
(1973) 159.
WI A. Lasalmonie, J. Mat. Sci, 17( 1982) 24 19.
b11 N.J. Zaluzec and H.L. Fraser, Scripta Metall., 8 (1974)
1049.
[Ql I. Baker and E.M. Schulson, Metal/. Trans. A., l5A ( 1984)
1129.
b31 P.R. Munroe and I. Baker, Scripta Metall., 23 (1989) 495.
[641 M.J. Mills, M.S. Daw, SM. Foiles and D.B. Miracle, in I.
Baker, R. Darolia, J.D. Whittenberger, and M.H. Yoo
(eds.), High-Temperature Ordered Intermetallic Alloys,
Vol. V, Mater. Res. Sot. Symp. Proc., 288, Pittsburgh, PA,
1993, p. 257.
1651 A. Nohara and T. Imura, Phys. Stat. Sol. (a), 91 (1985)
559.
ml Y. Umakoshi and M. Yamaguchi, Phil. Mug. A, 41 ( 1980)
573.
[671 Y. Umakoshi and M. Yamaguchi, Phil. Mag. A, 44 (198 1)
711.
[681 M.G. Mendiratta, H.K. Kim and H.A. Lipsitt, Metal/.
Trans. A, ISA (1984) 395.
I. Baker and D. J. Gaydosh, Proc. MRS, 81( 1987) 3 15.
t;;; I. Baker and D.J. Gaydosh, Mat. Sci. Eng., 96 (1987) 3 15.
P.R. Munroe and I. Baker, J. Mat. Sci., 24 ( 1989) 4246.
i::i A. Ball and R.E. Smallman, Acta Metall., 14 (1966) 15 17.
D.I. Potter, Mat. Sci. Eng., 5 (1969/70) 201.
;:q E.P. Lautenschlager, T. Hughes and J.O. Brittain, Acta
Metall., 15 (1967) 1347.
[751 M.G. Mendiratta and CC. Law, J. Mat. Sci., 22 (1987)
607.
[761 I. Baker and P.R. Munroe, in S.H. Whang, CT. Liu, D.P.
Pope and J.O. Stiegler (eds.), Proc. Symp. on High Tem-
perature Aluminides and Intermetallics, The Metallurgical
Society, Pittsburgh, PA, 1990, p. 425.
[771 M. Yamaguchi and Y. Umakoshi, Prog. Mat. Sci., 34
(1990) 1.
[781 M.J. Mills and D.B. Miracle, Actu Merall. Mater., 41
12 I. Baker / Materials Science and EngineeringA192/193
(1993) 85.
1791 S.C. Tonn, Y. Zhang and M.A. Crimp, Mat. Sci. Eng. A,
170(1993)95.
[80] I. Baker, P. Nagpal, F. Liu and P.R. Munroe, Acta Metall.
Mater., 39( 1991) 1637.
[81] I.L.F. Ray, R.C. Crawford and D.J.H. Cockayne, Phil.
Mag., 21(1970) 1027.
[82] Lie Zhao and I. Baker, Acta Metall. Mater., 42( 1994)
1953.
[83] H. Saka, M. Kawase, A. Nohara and T. Imura, Phil. Mag.
A, 50( 1984) 65.
[84] C.T. ChouandP.B.Hirsch, Phil. Msg. A, 44(1981) 1415.
[85] C.T. Chou and P.B. Hirsch, Inst. Phys. Conf Series, 61
(1982) 459.
[86] C.T. Chou and P.B. Hirsch, Proc. R. Sot. Lond. A, 387
(1983) 91.
[87] P.M. Hazzledine and P.B. Hirsch, Proc. MRS, 81 (1987)
75.
[88] M.J. Marcinkowski, J. Inst. Metals, 93 (1965) 476.
[89] N.S. Stoloff and R.G. Davies, Acta Metall., 12 (1964) 473.
[90] M.J. Marcinkowski and H. Chessin, Phil. Mag, 10 (1964)
837.
[91] N.S. Stoloff and R.G. Davies, Prog. Mat. Sci., 13 (1966) 1.
[92] M.M. Shea and N.S. Stoloff, Metall. Trans. A, 5A (1974)
755.
[93] G.W. Ardley and A.H. Cottrell, Proc. R. Sot. Land., 219
(1953) 328.
[94] Y. Umakoshi, M. Yamaguchi, Y. Namba and M. Mura-
kami, Acta Metall., 24 (1976) 89.
[95] A. Nohara and T. Imura, Phys. Stat. Sol. (a), 84 (1984)
501.
[96] H. Saka and Y.M. Zhu, Phil. Mag. A, X(1985) 629.
[97] S. Hanada, M. Mohri and 0. Izumi, Trans. Jpn. Inst.
Metals, 16 (1976) 453.
[98] S. Takeuchi, Proc. 5th Int. Conf on Strength of Metals and
Alloys, Melbourne, Australia, 1979, p. 53.
[99] A.R. Causey and E. Teghtsoonian, Metall. Trans. A, 1A
(1970) 1177.
[loo] R.T. Pascoe and C.W.A. Newey, Met. Sci., 2 (1968) 138.
[loll D.L. Wood and J.H. Westbrook, TMS AIME, 224 (1962)
1024.
[102] T. Takasugi and 0. Izumi, J. Mat. Sci., 23 (1988) 1265.
[ 1031 J.H. Westbrook, J. Electrochem. Sot., 103 (1956) 54.
[ 1041 P. Nagpal and I. Baker, Metall. Trans., 21A (1990) 2281.
[105] M. Nakamura and Y. Sakka, J. Mat. Sci., 23 (1988) 4041.
[106] H. Xiao and I. Baker, Scripta Metall. Mater., 28 (1993)
1411.
[107] I. Baker, H. Xiao, 0. Klein, C. Nelson and J.D. Whitten-
berger, Acta Metall. Mater., in press.
[108] M.G. Mendiratta, S.K. Ehlers, D.M. Dimiduk, W.R. Kerr,
S. Mazdiyasni and H.A. Lipsitt, Proc. MRS, 81 (1987)
393.
[109] K. Yoshimi and S. Hanada, in R. Darolia, J.J. Lewandoski,
C.T. Liu, P.L. Martin, D.B. Miracle and M.V. Nathal (eds.),
Structural Intermetallics, The Metallurgical Society,
Warrendale, PA, 1993, p. 475.
[llO] J.G. Byrne, Metall. Trans. A, 18A (1987) 1153.
[ 11l] J.H. Westbrook, J. Electrochem. Sot., 104 (1957) 369.
[112] A. Ball and R.E. Smallman, Acta Metall., 14 (1966) 1349.
[ 1131 M.J. Marcinkowski and R.M. Fisher, TMS AZME, 233
(1965) 293.
[ 1141 D.R. Barker and E.M. Schulson, Scripta Metall., 17 (1983)
519.
[115] A. Causey, Ph.D. Thesis, University of British Columbia,
Canada, 1968.
[116] K.R. Jordan and N.S. Stoloff, Trans AZME, 245 (1969)
(1995) I-13
2027.
[ 1171 K.R. Jordan and N.S. Stoloff, Trans. Jpn. Inst. Metals, 9
(1968) 281.
[ 1181 CT. Li and C.G. Mckamey, in R. Darolia, J.J. Lewan-
doski, C.T. Liu, P.L. Martin, D.B. Miracle and M.V. Nathal
(eds.), Structural Intermetallics, The Metallurgical Society,
Warrendale, PA, 1993, p. 133.
[ 1191 E.P. George, private communication, 1994.
[ 1201 N.S. Stoloff and C.T. Liu, J. Zntermetall., 2 (1994) 75.
[ 12 l] C.T. Liu, E.H. Lee and C.G. McKamey, Scripta Metall., 23
(1989) 875.
[122] P. Nagpal and I. Baker, Scripta Metall. Mater., 25 (1991)
2577.
[ 1231 A.R. Bailey and L.E. Samuels, J. Inst. Metals, 84 (1956)
[ 1241 &4. Shea and N.S. Stoloff Mat Sci. Eng 12 (1973) 245
[ 1251 R.B. Graham, M.S. Thesis,‘Da&outh College, Hanover,
NH, 1984.
[126] R.D. Noebe and R. Gibala, Scripta Metall., 20 (1986)
1635.
[127] S. Guha, P. Munroe and I. Baker, Scripta Metall., 23
(1989) 897.
[ 1281 A.U. Seybolt and J.H. Westbrook, Acta Metall., 12 (1964)
449.
[ 1291 J.H. Westbrook, Metallurg. Rev., 9 ( 1964) 415.
[ 1301 A.U. Seybolt and J.H. Westbrook, Plansee Proc.l964-
Metallwerk Plansee, Springer, Vienna (1965) 845.
[ 13 l] D.L. Wood and J.H. Westbrook, J. Nucl. Mater., 12 (1964)
208.
[ 1321 J.H. Westbrook, Metall. Trans. A, 8A (1977) 1327.
[133] D. Weber, M. Meurtin, D. Paris, A. Fourdeux and P.
Lesbats, J. Physique C7, 38( 1977) 332.
[ 1341 M.A. Crimp, K.M. Vedula and D.J. Gaydosh, Proc. MRS,
81 (1987) 499.
[135] B. Schmidt, P. Nagpal and I. Baker, Proc. MRS, 133 (1989)
755.
[ 1361 0. Klein and I. Baker, Scripta Metall. Mater., 30 (1994)
627.
[137] J.E. Hack, J.M. Brzeski and R. Darolia, Scripta Metall.
Mater., 27( 1992) 1259.
[138] R.D. Field, D.F. Lahrman, and R. Darolia, in I. Baker, R.
Darolia, J.D. Whittenberger and M.H. Yoo (eds.), High-
Temperature Ordered Intermetallic Alloys, Vol. V, Mater.
Res. Sot. Symp. Proc., 288, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993, p. 423.
[139] R. von Mises, Z. Agnew. Math. Mech., 8(1928) 161.
[ 1401 E. Goo, T. Duerig, K. Melton and R. Sinclair, Acta Metall.,
33 (1985) 1725.
[141] H.L. Fraser, R.E. Smallman and M.H. Loretto, Phil. Msg.,
28( 1973) 657.
[ 1421 R.J. Wasilewski, S.R. Butler and J.E. Hanlon, TMS AZME,
239(1967) 1357.
[ 1431 E.M. Grala, in J.H. Westbrook (ed.), Mechanical Properties
of Intermetallic Compounds, Wiley, New York, 1960, p.
358.
[144] P. Nagpal and I. Baker, Mater. Char., 27( 1991) 167.
[145] A.G. Rozner and R.J. Wasilewski, J. Inst. Metals, 94
(1966) 169.
[ 1461 K.H. Hahn and K. Vedula, Scripta Metall., 23 (1989) 7.
[ 1471 P. Nagpal and I. Baker, Scripta Metall. Mater., 24 (1990)
2381.
[148] I. Baker, P. Nagpal, F. Liu and 0. Klein, in M.H. Loretto
and C.J. Beevers (eds.), The Processing, Properties and
Applications of Metallic and Ceramic Materials,
Birmingham, UK, September, 1992, Vol. II, p. 665.
[149] P.R. Munroe, I. Baker and P. Nagpal, J. Mater. Sci., 26
(1991) 4303.
 I. Baker 1 Materials Science and Engineering A1921193 (1995) l-13 13

[ 1.501 L.D. Johnson and J.A. Pask, J. Am. Ceram. Sot., 47
(1964) 437.
[ 15 l] E.M. Schulson, personal communication, 1989.
[152] C. Lall, M.H. Loretto and I.R. Harris, Acta Metall., 26
(1978) 1631.
[ 1531 D. Hossain, I.R. Harris and G. Barraclough, J. Less-
Common Metals, 37( 1974) 35.
[ 1541 H. Pops, Merall. Trans. A, IA (1970) 251.
[ 1551 N.S. Stoloff and I.L. Dillamore, in B.H. Kear, C.T. Sims,
N.S. Stoloff and J.H. Westbrook (eds.), Ordered Alloys:
Structural Applications and Physical Metallurgy, Claitors
Publishing, Baton Rouge, LA, 1970.
[ 1561 T. Yamagata and H. Yoshida, Mat. Sci. Eng., 12 (1973) 95.
[157] D.J. Gaydosh, S.L. Draper, R.D. Noebe and M.V. Nathal,
Mat. Sci. Eng. A, 150 (1992) 7.
[ 1581 G.W. Ardley and A.H. Cottrell, Proc. R. Sot. Land., 219
(1953) 328.
[159] G.W. Groves and A. Kelly, Phil. Mag., 8( 1963) 877.
[160] T.L. Johnson, R.G. Davies and N.S. Stoloff, Phil. Mag., 12
(1965) 305.
[161] H.B. Huntington, personal communication to L. Slifkin,
reported in Ref. [ 1951.
[ 1621 G.H. Cheng and M.A. Dayananda, Metall. Trans. A, 1OA
(1979) 1415.
[163] N.S. Stoloff, G.E. Fuchs, A.K. Kuruvilla and S.J. Choe,
Proc. MRS, 81(1987) 247.
[164] G. Rudolph et al., Proc. International Conference on
Fracture 1, Sendai, Japan, 1965, p. 501.
[ 1651 R.C. Boettner, N.S. Stoloff and R.G. Davies, TMS AZME,
236jl966) 131.
[ 1661 H.McI. Clark, Nature, 5019 ( 1966) 193.
[ 1671 H.D. Williams and G.C. Smith, Phil. Msg., 13 (1966) 835.
[ 1681 A. Gittens, Met. Sci., 2 (1968) 114.
[ 1691 P.F. Timmins and AS. Wronski, Nature, 235 (1972) 113.
[170] K.H. Chien and E.A. Starke Jr., Acta Merall., 23 (1975)
1173.
[171] J.E. Doherty, A.F. Giamei and B.H. Kear, Metall. Trans.
A, 6A (1975) 2195.
[172] S.M.L. Sastry and H.A. Lipsitt, Acta Metall., 2.5 (1977)
1279.
[173] S.M.L. Sastry and H.A. Lipsitt, Metall. Trans. A, 8A
(1977) 299.
[ 1741 S. Ashok, K. Kain, J.M. Tartaglia and N.S. Stoloff, Metall.
Trans. A, 14A (1983) 1997.
[ 1751 A.K. Kurvilla and N.S. Stoloff, MetalI. Trans. A, 16A
(1985)815.
[ 1761 A.K. Kurvilla and N.S. Stoloff, Proc. MRS, 39 (1985) 229.
[ 1771 A.K. Kurvilla and N.S. Stoloff, Proc. ZCSMA 7, MontrPal,
Canada, 1985,~. 1335.
[178] H.-R. Pak, L.-M. Hsiung and M. Kato, Proc. MRS, 39
(1985) 239.
[ 1791 G.E. Fuchs and N.S. Stoloff, Acta Metall., 36 (1988) 1381.
[180] H.-R. Pak, J. Chu, M. Kato and D.P. Pope, Mar. Sci. Eng.,
rOO(1988) 31.
[181] C.A. Hippsley and J.H. DeVan, Acta Metall., 37 (1989)
1485.
[182] P.B. Aswath and S. Suresh. Mat. Sci. Eng. A, 114 (1989)
[183] k?!& Hsiung, Ph.D. Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Insti-
tute, Troy, N.Y., 1989.
[184] M.M.P. Janssen, Metall. Trans.A, 4A (1973) 1623.
[ 1851 A.B. Kuper, D. Lazarus, J.R. Manning and CT. Tomizuka,
Phys. Rev., 104( 1956) 1536.
[ 1861 J.D. Whittenberger, Metall. Trans. A, 3A (1972) 2010.
[ 1871 R. Smoluchowski and C.C. Seager, Phys. Rev., 76 (1949)
301.
[188] EC. Nixand F.E. Jaumont, Phys. Rev., 83(1951) 1275.
[189] A. Green and N. Swindells, Mater. Sci. Tech., 1 (1985)
101.
[ 1901 D. Gupta and D.S. Leiberman, Phys. Rev., B4 (1971)
1070.
[191] C. Lexcellent, Acta Metall., 37( 1985) 1989.
[192] A.T. Donaldson and R.D. Rawlings, Acta Metall., 24
(1976) 285.
[193] A.M. Brown and M.F. Ashby, Acta Metall., 28 (1980)
1085.
[194] A. Bose, G. Froberg and H. Wever, Phys. Stat. Sol. (a), 52
(1979) 509.
[ 1951 E.W. Elcock and C.W. McCombie, Phys. Rev., 209 (1958)
605.
[ 1961 M. Arita, M. Koiwa and S. Ishioka, Trans. Jpn. Inst. Met.,
29( 1988) 439.
[197] A.E. Berkowitz, F.E. Jaumont and EC. Nix, Phys. Rev., 9S
(1954) 1185.
[198] G.F. Hancock and B.R. McDonnell, Phys. Star. Sol., 4
(1971) 143.
[ 1991 H.B. Huntington, N.C. Miller and V. Nerses, Acta Metall.,
9(1961)749.
[200] D. Gupta, D. Lazarus and D.S. Lieberman, Phys. Rev., 153
(1967) 863.
[201] A. Lawley, J.A. Co11 and R.W. Calm, TMS AZME, 218
(1960) 166.
[202] M. Herman and N. Brown, TMSAIME, 206 (1956) 166.
[203] J.A. Martin, M. Herman and N. Brown, TMS AIME, 209
(1957) 78.
[204] J.A. Hren and O.D. Sherby, Appl. Mar. Rex, 4( 1965) 41.
[205] R.R. Vandervoort, A.K. Mukhejee and J.E. Dorn, Trans.
ASM, 59(1966) 930.
[206] W.YangandR.A.Dodd,MetalSci., 7(1973)41.
[207] E.P. Lautenschlager, D.A. Kiewit and J.O. Brittain, TMS
AZME, 233 (1965) 1297.
[208] J.D. Whittenberger, J. Mat. Sci., 23 (1987) 394.
[209] J.D. Whittenberger, Mat. Sci. Eng., 73 (1985) 87.
[210] D.L. Yaney and W.D. Nix, J. Mat. Sci., 23 (1988) 3088.
[21 l] J.D. Whittenberger, Mat. Sci. Eng., 77( 1986) 103.
[212] J.D. Whittenberger, Mat. Sci. Eng., .57( 1983) 77.
[213] M.RudyandG.Sauthoff, Proc. MRS, 39(1985)327.
[214] I. Jung, M. Rudy and G. Sauthoff, Proc. MRS, 81 (1987)
263.
[215] M. Rudy and G. Sauthoff, Mat. Sci. Eng., 81(1986) 525.
[216] A.K. Mukhejee and J.E. Dorn, J. Inst. Metals, 93 (1965)
397.