Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

Study the Effect of some Metallic Additives on the Physical

Properties of the Commercial Pure Aluminum Metal
1

E.M.Sakr*1, A.Nassar2, N.Tawfik2 and M.Soliman2

Physics Department- Faculty of Girls for Arts, Science & Education- Ain Shams University, 2 Physics DivisionNational Research Center (NRC), Cairo, Egypt.
*Elham.sakr@yahoo.com

Abstract: The aim of the present work is to develop the 6201 alloy, which is the most used for conductor cables by
adding different amount of Ce into Al-Mg-Si alloy namely (0.0, 0.024, 0.043, 0.054, 0.133, 0.166 and 0.194 wt%
Ce) concentration. Sample alloys were homogenized by annealing at 540 C for various duration in range ( to 5
hours), followed by water quenching. Tensile tests, hardness, electrical conductivity tests, microstructure
characterization in Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) have all been investigated as-cast and annealing. The
results indicate that the alloys with Ce content make a more refined structure of grains and have higher tensile
properties especially in range (0.043 to 0.054 wt% Ce) content and also hardly increase resistivity rather than the
alloy which is free of cerium. [Journal of American Science. 2010;6(12):239-252]. (ISSN: 1545-1003).
Keywords: Tensile test, hardness, electrical conductivity, microstructure characterization
Commercial aluminum of 99.8% purity,
magnesium and silicon of high purity were used to
produce a ternary alloy (Al- Mg- Si) in our
investigations. The alloys were melted in a graphite
crucibles open to atmosphere in a resistance furnace
held at (700 800 C). The tested alloys were stirred
well with a graphite rod, from time to time and long
melting times were used to ensure dissolution,
homogenization and uniform distribution of the
alloying elements (Si & Mg) in aluminum. Cerium
was added in the form of Al- Ce master alloy, the
estimated amount of Al-Ce master alloy wrapped in
aluminum foil, was plunged into the molten to
produce a series of ternary alloys ( Al- Mg- Si) with
different amounts of Ce. The melt was stirred with a
graphite rod then was poured in a steel mould to
solidify in atmospheric air. The alloys were provided
in the form bar of circular cross section of dimension
3 cm and length of 28 cm. Specimens test cut from
the as cast rod with different dimensions for the
required measurements before heat treatment.
For the tensile testing and resistivity samples
were drawing into wires of 1 mm diameter. Solution
treatment is the supersaturated solid solution of alloy
structure is produced to take advantages of its
precipitation hardening characteristics. Series of
samples of each alloy were homogenized at a fixed
temperature of 540C with annealing time of 30
minutes to 5 hours and thereafter immediately (within
30 seconds) quenched in cold water (at room
temperature). The samples are then rinsed and left to
dry the surface completely. Tensile test
measurements were used as an indicator of
mechanical response to heat treatment. The tensile
machine used in this investigation is of type, (2wick1425). All tensile measurements were performed on

1. Introduction:
Aluminum and its alloys are characterized
by a relatively low density, high electrical and
thermal conductivities and a resistance to corrosion
[1-3]. Many of these alloys are formed by virtue of
high ductility [3], its ductility is maintained even at
very low temperatures. The primary limitation of
aluminum is its melting temperature (660C).
Mechanical strength of aluminum can be enhanced
by cold work and by alloying [1,3]. Principle alloying
elements are copper, magnesium, silicon, manganese
and zinc. Aluminum is being widely used as a
conductor material. The suitable alloy for aluminum
conductors belong to Al-Mg-Si system with varied
composition. Alloy 6201 is ( Al- 0.8 Mg- 0.25 Si )
designed for overhead conductor cables because it
has excellent strength and good conductivity when
suitably treated [4,5,6].
The use of rare earth metal as a beneficial
addition to nonferrous alloys has affected
considerable interest in recent years. The rare earth
additions such as cerium have been claimed to led
refinement of structure and improvement in
mechanical properties. Rare earth additions were
also explored as a modifier to Al-Si alloys [7].
The main aim of the present work is the
modification of the commercial aluminum alloy,
AA6201 [Al- Mg- Si] to be used as conductor cable
in our industries. For that a series of ternary master
alloys [Al- Mg- Si] with different amount of cerium
were prepared. A study of the effect of Ce content
and heat treatment on the microstructure, the
mechanical and electrical properties was made.
2. Experimental Technique:

http://www.americanscience.org

239

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

wire of 40mm length and 1mm diameter at room

temperature. All the specimens had been heat
treatment before using.
Hardness measurements were used as an
indicator of mechanical response to heat treatment.
The sample hardness was measured using Vickers
micro Hardness Tester Shemadzu. All hardness
measurements were performed on a block of 5mm
thickness at load of 200g and the pressing time is 5
seconds. The sample hardness was measured
immediately after heat-treatment.
Microstructures of the as cast samples from
each alloy were examined by conventional optical
microscopy after mechanical polishing of the
specimen followed by etching solution is about 20%
hydrofluoric acid in distilled water. The etching was
done by immersing the samples into the solution and
waiting until a suitable contrast of the grains was
obtained. The etched samples were washed, dried and
scanned with SEM type. Joel JSM, 5410 to identify
the existing phases, their shapes, and size
distribution. To obtain further micro structural
information, SEM is well suited to identify the
existing phases, their shapes, and size distribution.
Such investigation was carried on a series of Al- MgSi alloys without and with different cerium amounts
of 0.024, 0.043, 0.054, 0.133, 0.166 and 0.194 wt%
respectively. The tested specimens were solution
heat-treated at 540 C for different times ranging
from 0.5 hour and the water quenched.
Microstructure of both as-cast and solution heattreatment alloys were characterized by Scanning
Electron Microscopy (SEM) after polishing and
etching.

c,d and g}, there are less of spherical particles

surrounded by much and continuous rod- shaped
precipitates at grain boundaries. While, in alloys with
( 0.024, 0.133 and 0.166 wt% ), there are much
discrete spherical particles can be observed either in
grains or along grain boundaries, furthermore there
are still some rod- shaped precipitates at grain
boundaries.
The morphology of all tested alloys ( without
and with Ce ) are changed after the homogenization
process as shown in the figures from Fig. 2, a-b to
Fig. 8, a-d. The rods like particles are gradually
replaced by a uniform dispersion of new particles.
With increasing homogenization time these particles
are nucleated and grown. Therefore, the
microstructure was found to have a new grains
formation. The islands of new formed particles are
thickened and spherodized at the expense of the
remaining - phase. At certain annealing time for
each alloy, the formation of a homogeneous finely
dispersed microstructure occurred. We can conclude
that, the suitable time for the concentrations (0.024,
0.043, 0.054 and 0.194 wt% Ce ) is 3 hours and it is
0.5 hour for the alloys with the concentrations ( 0.0,
0.133 and 0.16 wt% Ce ). While, further annealing
time, (i.e. the number of particles become fewer and
bigger caused by coarsening [10].
Tensile testing measurements were carried out
for as- received wires of each composition at room
temperature as shown in Fig.9. It can be seen that the
value of tensile testing for the samples containing Ce
addition up to 0.194 wt% is higher compared to the
Ce free alloy. The tensile strength and hardness
increased from (333 and 70.18 N/mm2) for the Cefree alloy to (368.65 and 102.28 N/mm2) for that
containing 0.054 wt% Ce. Further additions up to
0.054 wt% Ce, have little effect on the tensile
properties and hardness while, the maximum tensile
strength was reduced to (337.436 and 71.27 N/mm2),
when the Ce content was further increased to 0.194
wt %.
Meanwhile, with increasing Ce content in the
present alloys, the elongation was decreased
compared with the Ce- free alloy. The elongation of
alloys with contents 0.043 wt% and 0.194 wt% Ce
respectively, were generally lower than that of other
alloys. It can be concluded that increasing the Ce
content increased the tensile strength and hardness
but a slightly decreased in the elongation, compared
to the alloy without cerium. This can be accounted
due to in Al-Mg-Si alloy, to form the stoichiometric
constituent the Mg and Si, which is the primary
hardening phase. Any excess of silicon above the
required Mg2Si will contribute significantly to
hardening [11].

3. Results and Discussion:

The microstructures of the tested alloys were
examined by SEM as shown in Fig1, a-g. It can be
observed that, the addition of cerium affected the
microstructure development in the Al- Mg- Si alloy
in various ways. Firstly, for Al- Mg- Si alloy without
cerium, the alloy is composed of the primary matrix
and a secondary phase that exists in two kinds of
morphologies, i.e. a discontinuous network of coarse
particles along grain boundaries Mg2 Si, and many
spherical Si particles that distribute both inside grains
and at grain boundaries, as shown in Fig.1, a.
Secondly, after adding cerium Fig.1, b, particles
were refined. However, a new kind of distribution
characteristics from precipitate in the alloys with
Ce, these particles generally have rod-like shaped and
do not have an obvious tendency to distribute in grain
[8,9]. The - phase is found at the grain boundaries as
a network of precipitates as observed in Fig.1 b-g.
These precipitates depend upon the amount of cerium
in the alloys with 0.043, 0.054 and 0.194 wt% {Fig.1,

http://www.americanscience.org

240

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

Distribution of the Mg2Si inter-metallic

around the grain boundaries as was indicated in Fig.1,
a in SEM. This kind of distribution of the related
inter-metallic phases decreases the mechanical
properties of the metal [12].
The addition of cerium improves the
mechanical properties, this is ascribed to the grain
refining effect during casting as previously shown
from SEM micrographs. Also showed the best grain

refining which can be obtained when the content of

Ce is in the range (0.043-0.054 wt%). The structure
refinement is one of the most important methods for
improving the strength of alloys [13,14] besides the
presence of spheroidal silicon particles and intermetallic compounds of cerium (Al2Ce, Al4Ce,SiCe
and SiCe4) [15].

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)
Fig.1a-g: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy with different Ce concentrations; (a) 0.0 wt%, (b) 0.024
wt%, (c) 0.043 wt%, (d) 0.054 wt%, (e) 0.133 wt%, (f) 0.166 wt% and (g) 0.194 wt %

http://www.americanscience.org

241

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

(b) 1h

(a) 0.5h

(C) 3h

(d) 5h

Fig.2a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy without Ce with different homogenization time (a) 0.5h (b)
1h (c) 3h (d) 5h.at 450Co.

http://www.americanscience.org

242

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

(a) 0.5h

(b) 1h

( C ) 3h

(d) 5h

Fig.3 a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy 0.024 wt% Ce with different homogenization time ; (a)
0.5h (b) 1h (c) 3h (d) 5h. at 450oC.
Cerium has low resistivity coefficients and atomic radii that are relatively different from that of aluminum.
These characteristics cause solute element to react with crystal defects such as dislocations and grain boundaries and
enhance the mechanical properties of the base metal favorably [16]. It has also been reported that Ce reduced the
interdendritic spacing of the alloy which can resist the movement of dislocation. In addition, the strengthening
effects of Ce atoms segregated at the grain boundary have the contribution of keeping the highest tensile properties.
That is, to say, the main reason that makes the segregation of Ce atom at grain boundary increases the sliding
resistance of the grain boundary increase the mechanical properties. On the other hand, it is found that an excess of
Ce > 0.054 wt% can reduce its useful effect [17].
All the alloys investigated which contain Ce have the highest strength accompanied by low ductility compared
to alloy without cerium. The low ductility is due to the addition of cerium, which dissolves in the aluminum matrix
and contributes to the formation of insoluble inter-metallic phase is after solidification [18].

http://www.americanscience.org

243

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

( a) 3h

(b) 1h

(c)3h

( d ) 5h

Fig. 4a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy 0.043 wt% Ce with different homogenization time ; (a)
0.5h (b) 1h (c) 3h (d) 5h. at 450oC
The influences of solutionizing time on the mechanical properties tensile strength, hardness and ductility of
the Al-Mg-Si alloy at different Ce content in the range 0.0 wt% - 0.194 wt% are presented in Fig.10, a-c. It can be
clearly observed from the figures that, after the homogenization temperature, the changing tendency of tensile
testing is different to that at room temperature (unhomogenized alloy). It was observed that solutionizing time
causes decreasing on the mechanical strength although the positive influences may be observed on ductility of these
alloys depending on the solutionizing time of each composition as seen in Fig.10, a, b, and c. The ductility reaches
its maximum value at 3 hours for 0.024, 0.043, 0.054 and 0.194 wt% Ce alloys and at 0.5 hour for (0.0, 0.133 and
0.166 wt% Ce) alloys. Beyond this time the ductility decreases gradually with annealing time as shown in Fig.10, c.

http://www.americanscience.org

244

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

( a ) 0.5h

( b ) 1h

( c ) 3h
( d ) 5h
Fig. 5a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy 0.054Ce wt% with different homogenization time ; (a)
0.5h (b) 1h (c) 3h (d) 5h. at 450oC
All alloys homogenized and quenched exhibited reduction in both the tensile strength and hardness but the
elongation associated with the measuring of homogenized alloys is higher than the unhomogenized . The observed
improvement in ductility and the reduction of strength depends on the solutionizing time or soaking time which is
applied at the specified heat-treating temperature to provide the chance for the dissolution of undissolved soluble
phases and to achieve a homogeneous microstructure [18]. It was found that the mechanical properties change as a
function of time as a result of morphology change as shown from SEM photographs. The micro structural
development changes for all alloys during the phase transformation of to . The rod-shaped particles () are
gradually replaced by a new uniform dispersion of particles. The solutionizing time, however, is not a constant but
affect on particle size, particle geometry, and depend on overall composition [19]. So, it is important to keep the
grain size largely unchanged before anneal, because the size of the grains affects the plastic deformation of
materials. Shortened anneal time 3 hours for (0.024, 0.043, 0.054 and 0.194 wt% Ce) alloys at 0.5 hour for (0.0,
0.133 and 0.166 wt% Ce) alloys and at annealing temperature 540C were efforts to minimize the grain size as in
Table (1). Further increasing in the homogenization time, the thickness of the particles increase as a result of
coarsening mechanism, which may have a negative effect on the ductility, because the dislocations only flow around
particles smaller than a critical size. It is found that the rate of the transformation is affected by the particles size of
the alloy; if the particles are spheroidal and smaller, the dislocation may loop around the particles, thereby increase
the ductility, and the material is easier to extrude [20].
The calculated values of resistivity are summarized in Table (2), it can be observed that the resistivity
increases but the variation is low for the unhomogenized samples.

http://www.americanscience.org

245

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

( C )3h

(d) 5h

(a) 0.5h

(b)1h

Fig.6 a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy 0.133 wt% Ce with different homogenization time ; (
a) 0.5h (b) 1h (c) 3h (d) 5h. at 450oC

http://www.americanscience.org

246

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

(a) 0.5h

(b) 1h

( C ) 3h

(d) 5h

Fig.7 a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy with 0.166 wt% Ce with different homogenization time ;
(a) 0.5h (b) 1h (c) 3h (d) 5h. at 450oC.

http://www.americanscience.org

247

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

(a) 0.5h

(b)1h

( C )3h

(d) 5h

Fig.8 a-d: SEM micrographs of the Al-Mg-Si alloy with 0.194 wt% Ce with different homogenization time ;
(a) 0.5h (b) 1h (c) 3h (d) 5h. at 450oC

http://www.americanscience.org

248

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

400

7.4
6.4

300

5.4
200

Ductility

4.4
100

3.4

Hardness

0
0

0.05

0.1
0.15
Ce Content wt %

Ductility, [%]

Tensile strength and hardness

(N/mm2)

Tensile strength

2.4
0.25

0.2

Fig.9: Variation of tensile strength, hardness and ductility as function of cerium content

55
0.0 Ce wt%
0.043 Ce wt%
0.024 Ce wt%
0.194 Ce wt%

0.054 Ce wt%

0.043 Ce wt%

0.133 Ce wt%

0.024 Ce wt%

0.166 Ce wt%

0.194 Ce wt%

50
2

Hardenss (N/mm )

Tensile Strenge (N/mm )

170

0.054 Ce wt%
0.133 Ce wt%
0.166 Ce wt%

150

130

45

40

35

110
0

Homogenisation Time, (h)

(a)
32

(b)

0.0 wt% Ce
0.024 wt% Ce
0.043 wt% Ce
0.054 wt% Ce
0.133 wt% Ce
0.166 wt% Ce
0.194 wt% Ce

28
Ductility [%]

Homogenisation Time, (h)

24
20
16
12
0

Homogenization time, h

(c)
Fig.10 a, b and c: Variation of mechanical properties of Al-Mg-Si alloys; (a) tensile strength, (b) hardness
and (c) ductility for different Ce contents as a function solution treatment time at 540o

http://www.americanscience.org

249

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

The increasing in resistivity can be interpreted

as; the resistivity is a consequence of disturbances in
the atomic periodicity in a crystal structure according
to the Block model [21]. These disturbances can be
due to atomic vibrations thermal agitation, other
electrons, defects in the crystals such as vacancies
dislocations or grain boundaries, or substitution of
impurity atom in the pure metal lattice sites. The
most important of these effects is from the alloying
elements in solid solution. The elements such as : Fe,
Co, Ni, Sb, La, Ce, Cd, TH, mischmetal least
detrimental to conductivity forms eutectic phase
diagrams at the aluminum-rich end. The eutectic
reactions expressed by L + . This is in
agreement with the microstructures observed in SEM
investigation. The group of elements least detrimental
to conductivity form inter-metallic compounds which
remain out of solution. The compounds precipitate in
the grain boundaries and leave the alpha aluminum
almost pure. This helps the alpha to become pure
where, in this pure state, it takes the major burden of
the electron transport and thus hardly increases the
resistivity [22, 23].

Elements in the solution can only be least

detrimental to conductivity if they have similar
electronic structure to that of aluminum. The rare
earth elements, such as cerium have similar electronic
configuration, in the solution in an aluminum matrix,
produce a very low differential change in the
resistivity of aluminum this gives the best bonding
with the largest free energy [24]
Table.1-a: Variation of tensile strength, hardness
and ductility of Al-Mg-Si alloys for
different Ce contents
Ce content
Tensile
Ductility
Hardness
(wt%)
strength
0
333
6.603
70.18
0.024
345
6.01
72.38
0.043
367.67
3.852
102
0.054
368.65
5.532
102.28
0.133
347.56
6.533
75.133
0.166
350.23
6.015
74.4
0.194
337.436
4.68
71.27

Table1- b:Variation of tensile strength of Al-Mg-Si alloys for different Ce contents as a function of
solution treatment time at 540oC
Time
0.0 wt%
0.024 wt% 0.043 wt%
0.054 wt%
0.133 wt% 0.166 wt%
0.194 wt%
0.5
165.666
168.782
168.27
173.828
162.73
160.398
170.55
1
135.74
165.175
141.272
151.51
162.3
134.878
166.988
2
131.1
157.1
135.808
146.513
157.57
130.4
156.293
3
129.16
151.57
127.268
138.883
154.7
127.718
150.72
4
118.9
145.9
122.1
132.28
152.5
126.3
143.01
5
117.015
140.97
114.2
130
151.158
124.58
137.5
Table.1-c: Variation of hardness of Al-Mg-Si alloys for different Ce contents as a function of solution
treatment time at 540oC

Time
0.5
1
2
3
4
5

0.0 wt%
46.125
45.09
44.83
44.32
43.817
40.96

0.024
wt%
49.93
49.019
48.583
47.628
46.666
44.5

0.043 wt
%
48.543
47.386
46.614
43.85
41.37
39.875

0.054
wt%
47.34
45.95
45.21
44.7
43
41.025

Also, the solubility is controlled mainly by the

ratio of atomic size solvent and solute. If the
difference in atomic radii between two elements is
less than 15% then there is a large chance of making
extended solid solution. In case the difference is
greater than 15% solubility is always low [22]. Thus
with unfavorable size factor the alloy element will be
out of solution generally as a compound. Elements

http://www.americanscience.org

0.133
wt%
50.93
48.466
48.36
45.136
43.657
37.17

0.166
wt%
52.8
50.507
50.25
49.467
48.474
47

0.194 wt
%
53.875
48.8
48.2
47.54
43.49
42.85

out of solution form small separate particles of low

conductivity, but also occupy a very small volume
percent of the alloys, and thus have maximum effect
on the conductivity. Ce is an example that elements
least detrimental to conductivity generally have
atomic radii differing widely from that of aluminum.
The low alloy content, the resistivity can be
kept reasonably.

250

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

For the homogenized samples as seen from

Table (2), the general behavior observed is an
increasing in resistivity with annealing time. It has
been known for a long time that, the resistivity
increases nearly linearly with concentration of the
alloying elements in solid solution. This explains the

increasing in the resistivity at higher homogenization

time [26]. The quench itself often produce lattice
strain and this is usually considerably increased the
electrical resistance [27] as pointed in Table (2).

Table 2: Resistivity (x10-6.cm) for Al-Mg-Si alloys with different Ce content as- received and after solution
heat treatment at 540C for different duration time
Conc. wt %
Time .(h)

00.000
Wt%

0.024
wt%

0.043
wt%

0.054
wt%

0.133
wt%

0.166
wt%

0.194
wt%

00

3.49

3.56

3.71

3.46

4.825

3.51

3.50

0.5

3.77

3.63

3.86

3.49

3.72

3.69

3.52

3.58

3.69

3.96

3.62

3.51

3.62

3.50

3.54

3.84

3.56

3.63

3.90

3.75

3.52

3.70

3.53

3.47

3.73

3.49

3.63

3.53

3.45

3.71

4.59

3.38

3.72

4.00

3.55

3.44

3.83

3.98

4.83

3.76

3.55

3.54

4. Conclusion:
SEM shows that Al- Mg- Si alloy (free Ce)
has two kinds of morphologies, Mg2Si along grain
boundaries and round particles that distribute both
inside and at grain boundaries. The addition of Ce, a
new rod-shaped have an obvious tendency to
distribute at grain boundaries and grain refinement
the alloys.
All the alloys investigated which contain Ce
having the highest strength companied by low
ductility compared to alloy free Ce. The improvement
of mechanical properties is ascribed to the grain
refining. On the other hand, the tensile strength and
hardness show a more increase with a suitable Ce
addition in the range (0.043 to 0.054 wt%) which
have major grain boundaries and the best grain
refining, excess of Ce > 0.054 wt% reduce its useful
effect. Meanwhile the lowest ductility is due to the
formation of insoluble inter-metallic compound in the
aluminum matrix.
It is found that Ce form eutectic reaction at the
aluminum end of the phase diagram and has
electronic structure similar to that of in solution, in an
aluminum matrix that due to hardly increases
resistivity. Although, the large difference in the
atomic radii between Al and Ce but a very low
contents are less damaging to conductivity. The
quench itself often produces lattice strain and this is
usually considerably slightly increased the electrical
resistance.

http://www.americanscience.org

Corresponding author
E.M.Sakr
Physics Department- Faculty of Girls for Arts,
Science & Education- Ain Shams University.
*Elham.sakr@yahoo.com
5. References
1- R. E. Smallman, Modern Physical
Metallurgy, Fourth Edition. Butter worths,
(1983).
2- John D. Verhoeven, Fundamentals of
Physical Metallurgy, John Wiley & Sons,
( 1975).
3- Calin D. Marioara, A TEM study of the
precipitates no. 6082 Al- Mg- Si Alloy
System. PhD Thesis, NTNU, (2000).
4- L.Sd, Properties and Selection of NonFerrous Alloys, ASM Metals Handbook,
10th ed, ASM, Metals Park, OH, pp.29-112,
(1990).
5- P. Sakaris, H. J. Mc Queen, L. Armberg, et
al. (Eds), Aluminum Alloys: Their Physical
and Mechanical Properties, ICCA3, NTH
Sinteff, Trondheim, pp. 276-281, (1992).
6- P. Sakaris, H. J. Mc Queen, Q. Meng, Y.
Cui, B, Li, in: M. M, Avedersian (Ed.),
Advances in Production and Fabrication of
Light Metals, CIM, Montreal, pp.605-617,
(1992).
7- R. Sharan and S. N. Prasad, Ranchi, India.
Light Metal Age, 23-26, (1989).

251

editor@americanscience.org

Journal of American Science

2010;6(12)

8- M. H. Mulazimoglu, A. Zaluska, J. E.
Gruzleski, F. Paray, Metallurgical and
Materials Transactions A, 27A, pp. 929-936,
(1996).
9- C. Romming, V. Hansen, J. Gjonnes, Acta
Crystallogr. B, B 50, 307, (1994).
10- S. Zajac, B. Hutchinson, A. Johansson and
L. O. Gullman, Materials Science and
Technology, 10, pp.323, (1994).
11- Sadat Karabay, Muzaffer Zeren and
Muharrem Yilmaz, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 135, pp.101 108,
(2003).
12- Sadat Karabay, Muzaffer Zeren and
Muharrem Yilmaz, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 160, pp.138-147,
(2005).
13- Liao Hengcheng, Sun Yu, and Sun
Guoxiong,
Materials
Science
and
Engineering A358, pp. 164-170, (2003).
14- Chen Yuyong, Li Qingehun and Jiang
Zhuling, Journal of the Less Common
Metals, 110, pp. 175-178, (1985).
15- A. R. Daud, Karen M. C. Wong, Materials
Letters 58, pp.2545-2547, (2004).
16- A. Takahashi, L.C. Mcdonald and H.
Yasuda Phys. Stat. Sol. 160, 413, (1997).
17- Mingang Zhang, Zhiliang Chang, Junmin
Yan and Jin Zhihao, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology , 115, pp. 294-297,
(2001).
18- H. R. Ammar, C. Moreau, A. M. Samuel, F.
A. Samuel and H. W. Doty, Materials
Science and Engineering, A489, pp. 426438, (2008).
19- F. J. Vermolen, C. Vuik, S. Van der Zwaag,
Materials Science and Engineering, A347,
pp. 265-279, (2003).
20- S. Zajac, Gullman, A. Johansson, B.
Bengtsson, Material Science Forum, 217222, pp. 1193-1198, (1996).
21- S. Klays, (ed) CRC handbook of electrical
resistivities of binary metallic alloys,
( CRC, Boca Raton, Fl., pp. 3-102, (1983).
22- R. P. Eliott, Constitution of Binary Alloys,
First Supplement, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
N.Y., (1965).
23- F. A. Shunk, Constitution of Binary Alloys,
Second Supplement McGraw-Hill Book
Co., N.Y., (1969).
24- L. Brewer in Phase Stability in Metals and
Alloys, ed. P. Rudwan, J. Striger, R. I.
Jaffe, McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y., (1967).
25- M. Hansen, Constitution of Binary Alloys,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y., (1958).

http://www.americanscience.org

26- P. Olafsson, R. Sandstorm, A. Karlsson,

Journals of Materials Science, 32, pp. 43834390, (1979).
27- R. E. Smallman, Modern Physical
Metallurgy, 69, pp. 402,302, (1976).
6/25/2010

252

editor@americanscience.org