PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 8, 2026Shape Memory and Superelasticity0 citationsOpen Access

Soft and Hard Confinement Effects on Martensitic Transformation in NiTi Shape Memory Alloys: Insights from Phase-Field Simulations

HSHariharan SriramLFLongsheng FengZCZexu Chen

Key Points

  • This study aims to enhance the performance of NiTi shape memory alloys by reducing hysteresis and improving stress–strain responses through microstructural engineering.
  • Used phase-field simulations to evaluate effects of soft and hard confinement on martensitic transformation.
  • Soft confinement created concentration modulations by dissolving Ni4Ti3 nanoprecipitates to control Ni concentration.
  • Hard confinement utilized amorphous–crystalline composites to act as barriers against martensitic transformation.
  • Soft confinement resulted in smoother stress–strain curves with enhanced linearity and predictability.
  • Hard confinement effectively regulated the rapid progression of martensitic transformation, allowing for controlled strain release.
  • Both strategies improved the superelastic response, making it more stable and tunable.

Abstract

Abstract NiTi shape memory alloys (SMAs) are widely used in applications ranging from medical devices to aerospace and automotive structural actuators, yet their performance is often limited by large hysteresis and highly nonlinear pseudoelasticity, which can reduce efficiency and hinder precise control. This study presents a computational investigation of two microstructural engineering strategies aimed at achieving a more linearized and predictable stress–strain response. The first strategy, termed soft confinement , introduces concentration modulations (CMs) produced by dissolving Ni 4 Ti 3 nanoprecipitates, generating smooth spatial gradients in the martensitic start temperature (Ms) through controlled variations in the Ni concentration field. The second strategy, hard confinement , employs amorphous–crystalline composite microstructures in which a non-transforming amorphous phase serves as a robust physical barrier to martensitic progression. Phase-field simulations are used to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of each approach. The results demonstrate that both soft and hard nanoconfinement strategies successfully regulate the otherwise avalanche-like martensitic transformation (MT), enabling controlled strain release and yielding a more linear, stable, and tunable superelastic response.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sriram et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fd7f0dbfa21ec5bbf07770https://doi.org/10.1007/s40830-026-00619-3
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper