Review SMM 1
Review SMM 1
Review SMM 1
Ni
"
precipitates
[57, 61, 95]. As a result, the shape-memory behaviour
of the thin lms is very sensitive to the annealing
conditions. Taking into account that the SMA lms
may combine with dissimilar materials to form hybrid
composites, the crystallization temperatures should be
as low as possible. Jardine et al. [57] reported that the
crystallization kinetics at 723 K were very slow, full
crystallization occurring after a 7.5 h anneal. However,
the crystallization temperature can be further lowered
at 673 K through cold-working via rolling [57, 83].
2.1.2.6. Residual stress and adhesion. The residual
stresses in the lms will aect the mechanical behav-
iour and the static and dynamical compatibility with
the substrates or dissimilar materials. Generally, the
thin lms deposited at low working gas pressure show
large compressive intrinsic stresses. The biaxial resid-
ual stress, c
'
, in the lm is given by the well-known
Stoney equation [61]
c
'
"
1
6
E
'
1!v
'
t`
'
t
'
1
(1)
Upon heating, the stresses increase in magnitude with
increasing temperature and the rate of the stress
evolution, dc/d is determined by [116]
dc
d
"
E
'
1!v
(
'
!
'
) (2)
where E is the lm modulus, the coecient of ther-
mal expansion (CTE), v the lm Poissons ratio, t the
thickness, the substrate radius of curvature, and the
subscripts s and f refer to substrate and lm, respec-
tively. For the TiNi lmdeposited on (1 0 0) Si, the rate
was estimated to be about !1.5 MPa K [116]. The
compressive stress tends to zero when approaching
the crystallization temperature and then becomes
a tensile stress of 50100 MPa as a result of the lm
densication. The evolution of the high tensile stress
may lead to cracking and delamination when anneal-
ing the amorphous SMA lms on Si [89, 116]. How-
ever, the stress can be relaxed on cooling by the
stress-induced martensitic transformation, and on
heating a recovery stress will be generated, forming
the basis for reversible cyclic actuation of the SMA/Si
composites applicable to MEMS [57, 61, 89, 116, 117].
The deposited thin lms can exhibit both perfect
shape-memory eect and pseudoelasticity, and the
thermomechanical properties are comparable to those
of their bulk counterpart [61, 88, 9194, 96]. A more
specic review of the sputtering process, characteriza-
tion of the microstructures and phase transformations,
and the thermomechanical properties of the deposited
SMA thin lms will be presented in a separate paper
[118].
2.2. Shape-memory ceramics
2.2.1. Visocelastic shape-memory ceramics
Some mica glass-ceramics exhibit clear shape-memory
phenomenon, i.e., a nearly perfect recovery of up to
Figure 1 Torsional strain recovery of a mica glass-ceramic as
a function of time. The material was deformed in axial compression
at 773 K before cooling under load to room temperature, and then
reheated to dierent temperatures [120].
0.5% prestrain, after high-temperature plastic defor-
mation, cooling under load to room temperature, and
then reheating [119124]. These materials typically
have a heterostructure of a volume fraction of between
0.4 and 0.6 mica as the principal crystalline phase
dispersed in a continuous glassy phase. Unlike shape-
memory alloys, the shape-memory phenomenon in the
heterostructure arises from the elastic energy intro-
duced into the rigid matrix driving a viscous plastic
strain reversal in the dispersed crystalline element on
reheating. At temperatures above 573 K, the mica can
be deformed plastically by basal slip and the plastic
strain in the crystalline constituent accommodated
elastically by the surrounding rigid glass. Because the
glide through dislocations in mica is not possible at
low temperature, the deformation of the material at
elevated temperatures will be retained even if the load
is removed, after cooling under load to ambient tem-
peratures. The elastic strain energy stored in the glassy
phase thus will provide a driving force for recovering
the original shape. If the deformed mica is reheated to
a high temperature at which the stored elastic strain
energy is sucient to activate the dislocation glide, the
phase mixture will reverse the original plastic defor-
mation. Fig. 1 shows the torsional strain recovery of
a mica glass-ceramic as a function of time at several
temperatures. The sample was deformed in axial com-
pression at 773 K before cooling under load to room
temperature, and a strain recovery of 99% was ob-
served on prolonged annealing at 1073 K [120]. The
viscoelastic shape-memory phenomenon is not limited
to mica glass-ceramics or glass-ceramics. |-spodu-
mene glass-ceramics and 2ZnOB
`
O
`
glass-ceramics,
and a variety of sintered ceramics that contain very
little glass phase, including mica (KMg
`
AlSi
`
O
"
F
`
),
silicone nitride (Si
`
N
"
), silicone carbide (SiC), zirconia
(ZrO
`
) and alumina (Al
`
O
`
), also exhibit the shape-
memory behaviour [121124]. However, the recover-
able strain of the ceramics is much smaller (about
0.1%). Corresponding to the shape-recovery process,
stress relaxation was observed. The activation ener-
gies for the shape-recovery process in the glass-ceram-
ics were found to be much lower than those for high-
temperature creep of the same mica glass-ceramics,
3747
thereby dierentiating the two phenomena. Because
the materials are visco-elastic and thermally stimu-
lated, the shape-recovery percentage and shape-recov-
ery force show a strong dependence on the prestrain,
pre-deformation temperature, pre-deformation rate,
reheating temperature and holding time [121, 123].
2.2.2. Martensitic shape-memory ceramics
Some inorganic or ceramic compounds undergo mar-
tensitic or displacive transformations which can be
either stress or thermally activated, often resulting in
transformation plasticity or transformation toughen-
ing. As a matter of fact, transformation toughening via
the martensitic transformation is one of the most
eective ways of improving the reliability and struc-
tural integrity of engineering ceramics, and has led to
the wide recognition of the technological importance
of the transformations in ceramics [125]. If the trans-
formations in some ceramics are thermoelastic or
ferroelastic, reversible strain or shape recovery, that is,
pseudoelasticity and shape-memory eect can be ex-
pected. In certain ZrO
`
-containing ceramics, the
transformation between the tetragonal structure (t-
ZrO
`
) at intermediate temperatures and the mono-
clinic structure (m-ZrO
`
) at low temperatures, can
occur thermoelastically [125]. The magnesia-partially
stabilized zirconia (Mg-PSZ) [119, 126] and the
ceria-stabilized, tetragonal zirconia polycrystals
(CeO
`
TZP) [119, 127129] have been reported to
show shape-memory behaviour. In the CeO
`
TZP,
the tm transformation occurs at a characteristic tem-
perature M
'
on cooling, which depends on the grain
size. The tm transformation can also be stress-in-
duced at temperatures above M
'
, resulting in seem-
ingly plastic deformation. On subsequent reheating,
the mt transformation occurs and the strain can be
recovered. Fig. 2 shows the shape-memory eect ob-
served in a ZrO
`
12 mol %CeO
`
ceramic. In the ce-
ramic, total strains up to 1.5%2% in uniaxial
compression can be almost fully recovered, but signi-
cant grain-boundary microcracking and other irre-
versible damage occur which lead to a degradation in
shape recovery and premature fracture. However, a near
full shape recovery of axial compressive plastic strains of
up to 4.5% can be achieved while the tendency of
microcracking be suppressed in the samples deformed in
hydraulic compression [119, 127]. More displacive
or martensitic-like transformations and potential
shape-memory materials can be found in a variety
of structural ceramics [130, 131]. In addition, some
ionic materials such as Pb
`
(PO
"
)
`
and LnNbO
"
(Ln"La, Nd), crystals [132136], and some super-
conductors such as VSi and ZrHfV [137],
YBaCuO, Bi(Pb)SrCaCuO and TiBaCa
CuO [138141], also exhibit remarkable pseudoelas-
ticity and shape-memory eect, due to rst-order mar-
tensitic transformations or the rearrangements of the
ferroelastic domains in the materials. Using the
ceramics, some new shape-memory device can be
designed for high temperature application where
ordinary shape-memory alloys are not applicable.
However, the technological application of the
Figure 2 Axial stressstrain curve for ZrO
`
-12mol.%CeO2 under
uniaxial compression at room temperature, together with temper-
aturestrain curve showing strain recovery on subsequent heating
[129].
shape-memory capacity is limited by the small magni-
tudes of recoverable strains and the tendency of the
ceramics to microcracking.
2.2.3. Ferroelectric shape-memory ceramics
In pervoskite-type oxides, the crystallite domains may
exist in a variety of states such as cubic, tetragonal,
rhombohedral or orthorhombic, which may be either
paraelectric, ferroelectric or antiferroelectric, depend-
ing upon the exact composition, as well as external
conditions such as temperature, stress and electric
eld. The phase transitions between the dierent
structures, such as the paraelectricferroelectric
(PEFE) transition and the antiferroelectricferroelec-
tric (AFEFE) transition, may be accompanied by
a considerable strain in the ceramics. In particular, it
has been observed that the orthorhombic antifer-
roelectric (AFE) to tetragonal ferroelectric (FE)
transition in some ceramics usually generate large
strains [119, 142148]. Very importantly, in suitable
compositions, the AFEFE transition can be induced
by application of a suciently large electric eld. The
phase transition, which is caused by the switching or
reorientation of the polarized domains, is accom-
panied by a lattice distortion leading to a linear
digital displacement and a net volume expansion
[146, 147]. Because the total strain is comprised of (i)
a spontaneous strain which occurs due to the phase
transformation, and (ii) a strain associated with do-
main alignment on poling, the induced strain is much
larger than that resulting from the converse piezoelec-
tric eect in the conventional piezoelectrics. Total
strains of up to 0.6% have been reported to
occur during the transition [144, 146]. When the
electric eld is removed, conventional electroceramics
will return to their original state. This is a typical
3748
Figure 3 Comparison of the longitudinal strains for ferroelectric
and antiferroelectric materials. (a) Spontaneous strain due to polar-
ization in a ferroelectric, (b) eld-induced transformation strain
from AFE to FE state [148].
ferroelectric behaviour. Some ceramics, however, are
metastable in either of the ferroelectric and antifer-
roelectric states at zero eld, and they will remain in
the ferroelectric state as the eld is removed. To return
to their original states, it can be achieved either rap-
idly by reversing the polarity of the applied eld, or
slowly by heating to eect the reverse FEAFE trans-
formation, thus giving rise to a shape-memory behav-
iour similar to those observed in shape-memory alloys.
Fig. 3 shows a comparison of the led-induced strains
for ferroelectric and antiferroelectric materials. The
shape-memory eect has been observed in the perov-
skite-type oxides (Pb, La) (Zr, Ti)O
`
(PZSTs) [119, 142,
143], Pb(Zr, Sn, Sn, Ti)O
`
(PZSTs) [119, 142, 144,
145], (Pb, La) (Zr, Sn, Ti)O
`
(PLSnZTs) and (Pb,Nb)
(Zr, Sn, Ti) O
`
[146150], (Sr, Ba) Nb
`
O
'
[151] and
the hexagonal manganites RMnO
`
(R"Ho, Y)
[152]. Although the shape-memory ceramics have
lower strain levels than shape-memory alloys, they
have some clear advantages and may be more suitable
for certain applications. For instance, because an elec-
tric eld can be readily changed at much higher rates
than temperature, the shape-memory ceramics may be
actuated at higher bandwidths, with the maximum
response speed of only a microsecond [142]. A proto-
type adaptive structure using the shape-memory cer-
amics has been demonstrated by Ghandi and Hagood
[147, 148].
2.2.4. Ferromagnetic shape-memory
ceramics
Some transition metal oxides undergo paramag-
neticferromagnetic, paramagneticantiferromagnetic
transformation, or orbital orderdisorder transitions
and the reversible transformations are also accom-
panied by recoverable lattice distortions. In the tetra-
gonal manganite spinels Mn
V
(Zn, Cd)
V
Mn
`
O
"
[153, 154] and in the non-stoichiometric orthoman-
ganites RMnO
`>V
(R"Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy) [155],
the orbital ordered and disordered phases coexist
in a wide temperature interval, and short-range
ferromagnetic (or antiferromagnetic) ordering or
JahnTeller phase transitions may take place,
resulting in a shape-memory eect. Because, most
of the manganites are antiferromagnets and their
Ne el temperatures are very low, spontaneous
magnetization of the compounds is only achievable
at very low temperatures. As a result, the eects of
magnetic eld on the transformation and ferromag-
netic shape-memory eect in the compounds are less
investigated.
2.3. Shape-memory polymers and gels
Shape-memory polymers (SMPs) were introduced in
1984 in Japan, and have since gained much attention
in Japan and in the United States [156, 157]. It is well
known that polymers exist in a rubbery state at higher
temperatures and in a glassy state at lower temper-
atures. Owing to the lower rubbery modulus, poly-
mers can be subjected to a very large deformation at
higher temperatures. Because the glassy modulus is at
least two orders of magnitude times the rubbery
modulus, the stored elastic stress is not large enough
to drive the reverse deformation in the glassy state as
the load is removed. As a result, the deformation can
be frozen in the glassy state on quenching or after
cooling under load to the lower temperatures. Usu-
ally, ordinary polymers cannot completely restore
their residual inelastic deformation upon reheating to
the rubbery state. In contrast, shape-memory poly-
mers can recover almost all the residual deformation.
These polymers typically consist of two phases, name-
ly xed phase and reversible phase. Amongst them, the
polynorborene, the trans-isopolyprene and the styrene
butadiene copolymer were the rst few polymers re-
ported to exhibit shape-memory eect. However, the
commercial application of the early-developed shape-
memory polymers were much limited because of their
undesirable properties, namely a narrow range of glass
transition temperature,
"
c
(4)
where H is the transformation enthalpy, c the
transformation strain, the molar volume and
"
is
the temperature at which the parent and martensite
phases are in equilibrium at zero stress. Generally, the
value of c
t
increases linearly with increasing temper-
ature. Fig. 6 shows the stressstrain curves at dierent
temperatures for a TiNi SMA and Ce-TZP SMM.
More systematic descriptions of the stressstraintem-
perature space can be demonstrated by the well-estab-
lished constitutive relations [182186]. The most
simple form of the one-dimensional SMA constitutive
equation is given by
c!c
"
"D(c!c
"
)#(!
"
)#(!
"
) (5)
where D is Youngs modulus, is the thermoelastic
tensor, is the transformation tensor, and c, c and
are the state variables for stress, strain and temper-
ature, respectively. (c, ) is the martensitic fraction.
The stress-induced martensitic transformations in
most SMAs (excluding some iron-based alloys) are
reversible when unloading, giving rise to a mechanical
shape memory: this eect is usually called pseudo-
elasticity. More importantly, the recoverable trans-
formation strain for most polycrystalline SMAs can be
as much as up to 8%, for some single-crystalline
SMAs may exceed 10% [13, 14, 18], resulting in
a very high elastic energy storage capacity.
The martensite phase consists of highly twinned
polydomains (martensite variants). There are 24 pos-
sible kinds of martensite variants in SMAs. The crys-
tallographic characteristics can be well described by
the phenomenological crystallographic theory of mar-
tensitic transformations [13]. When subjecting the
material in the matensite state to an applied stress, the
variants undergo a self-accommodating pattern of
shear-induced shrinkage, growth and reorientation by
detwinning, resulting in twin-induced inelastic strains
which can be described by some simple relations, as
established by Roytburd [187, 188]. Unloading from
the inelastic state may leave a residual strain, but it
can be recovered by heating the material to the parent
phase. This is the so-called shape-memory eect
(SME). The mechanism of the shape-memory eect
was overviewed in more detail by Miyazaki and Ot-
suka [13]. Besides the unique behaviour, heat-induced
formation of the parent phase generates a consider-
able recovery stress, which can be used for mechanical
actuation. The recovery stress is a function of pre-
strain and temperature (i.e. the volume fraction of
3752
Figure 6 Typical stressstrain curves at various temperatures for
shape-memory materials. (a) A Ti49.8 at % Ni shape-memory alloy
[13]; (b) a CeO
`
-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Ce-TZP)
shape-memory ceramic [127] () axial, (- - -) radial. In both the
materials the critical stress to induce the transformation shows
a remarkable increase with increasing temperature.
transformed phase), and can be experimentally deter-
mined or theoretically estimated from the constitutive
relations [182186]. Fig. 7 shows the measured recov-
ery stress as a function of temperature for a TiNi
alloy for dierent prestrains. Through thermo-
mechanical training, both one-way SME and two-way
SME can be achieved. These characteristics of
SMAs can be applied for actuation, shape or position
Figure 7 Recovery stress as a function of temperature and prestrain
for a binary TiNi shape-memory alloy [20].
control, impact or creep resistance and energy
conversion.
From a thermodynamic point of view, pressure, like
temperature, is an independent variable that can
change the free energy and thus phase state of a mater-
ial. It is well known that the Gibbs chemical free
energy, G, is dened as
G"H!S (6)
where is temperature, H and S are the enthalpy and
entropy of the system, respectively. Based on the rst
and second laws of thermodynamics, it can be easily
derived that
dG"dP!Sd (7)
where P is pressure and is volume. It is evident that
the free energy can be altered by varying either pres-
sure or temperature. At a given temperature, the in-
crease in pressure will increase the free energy of the
system. As a consequence, the system will tend to
transform into other phases that have a lower free
energy under the pressure, or, to decrease its volume
through contraction, which will change the electronic
structures and in turn the physical properties, and
thermodynamic state of the material. Pressure-in-
duced phase transitions have been observed in a very
wide range of materials. Of particular interest are the
reversible pressure-induced transitions, which may
implicate shape-memory eect. More recently, a mem-
ory glass exhibiting structural reversibility has been
discovered by Kruger and Jeanloz [189]. At 300 K,
both polycrystalline and single-crystal AlPO
"
be-
rlinite became amorphous when the pressure was in-
creased above 15 GPa. On reducing the pressure
below 5 GPa, they reconverted from the glassy state to
the crystalline state with the same orientation as the
original crystal, implying a memory capacity of the
crystallographic structure. Similar phase transitions
have been observed in GaAsO
"
and other quartz-like
structure [190, 191].
The eects of hydrostatic pressure on martensitic
transformations in some shape-memory alloys, in-
cluding CuAlNi, TiNi, FePt, FeNi, FeNiC,
FeNiMn and FeNiCoTi alloys have been
3753
systematically investigated by Kakeshita and co-
workers [192]. The M
'
temperature may be increased
or decreased with increasing hydrostatic pressure, de-
pending upon the volume change associated with the
martensitic transformation. If volume contraction oc-
curs in the transformation, as in CuAlNi, TiNi and
some iron-based alloys exhibiting thermoelastic trans-
formations, static pressures can induce the martensitic
transformation, and the M
'
temperature increases lin-
early with increasing pressure. On the other hand, in
ferrous alloys exhibiting non-thermoelastic trans-
formation, hydrostatic pressures decrease M
'
temper-
ature due to the volume expansion associated with the
transformation. Because the Invar eect introduces
additional volume changes in some ferrous Invar
alloys, the eects of static pressure on the martensitic
transformation are aected by the Invar eect. Although
the pressure-induced martensite is dened as stress-as-
sisted martensite, the morphology is, however, very
similar to that of thermally induced ones [192].
Martensitic transformations can also be induced by
dynamic pressures generated by intense shock waves.
A well-known example is that oriented graphite will
undergo a martensitic transformation to form dia-
mond under shock compression [193]. Shock-induced
martensites have been observed in TiNi SMAs,
FeMn, FeNi, FeNiC and other kinds of steel
[194197].
3.3. Magnetic eld-induced
transformations
In some |-phase and iron-based shape-memory
alloys, the paramagneticferromagnetic transitions or
magnetic ordering transitions occur at temperatures
above the start points of martensitic transformations.
In these alloys, the martensitic transformations may
be induced by applying magnetic elds. The eects of
magnetic elds on the martensitic transformations in
some ferrous alloys and steels have been extensively
investigated [198204]. It has been established that
the critical magnetic eld for inducing martensites and
the transformation start temperature obey to the fol-
lowing equation [202]
G(M
'
)!G()"!M()H!
1
2
_
"
H`
#c
ju
jH
HB (8)
where G(M
'
) and G() represent the dierence in
Gibbs chemical free energy between the austenite and
martensite phases at M
'
and temperatures, respec-
tively. M() the dierence in spontaneous magnetiz-
ation between the austenitic and martensitic states at
, H the magnetic eld, _
"
the high magnetic eld
susceptibility in the austenite phase, c
"
the trans-
formation strain, u the forced volume magnetostric-
tion and B the austenitic bulk modulus. The rst,
second and third terms on the right-hand side of
Equation 8 represent the energies due to the magneto-
static, high-eld susceptibility and forced volume
magnetostriction eects, respectively [202]. Generally,
a large dierence in magnetic moment between parent
and martensite phases facilitates the eld-induced
transformation, and vice versa. It has been found that
the martensitic transformations in TiNi and
CuAlNi shape-memory alloys are not aected by
magnetic eld because of their small dierence in the
magnetic moment between the parent and martensite
phases [202]. However, Kakeshita et al. [203] found
a magnetoelastic martensitic transformation in an
ausaged FeNiCoTi SMA. In the alloy, the marten-
sites are induced when a magnetic eld is applied and
revert to the parent phase once the magnetic eld is
removed. This kind of shape-memory alloy may be
utilized as a magnetically sensitive device as well as
a thermally sensitive one [202].
If the martensites are ferromagnetic, there also
exists the possibility of rearranging the martensite
variants by applying a magnetic eld. Because the
spontaneous strain in martensitic materials is com-
monly one order of magnitude larger than that of
giant magnetostrictive materials, the eld-induced
strain available from the materials is potentially much
larger than giant magnetostrictive materials [205207].
Fig. 8 schematically illustrates the magnetic eld-in-
duced deformation process in comparison with the
stress-induced martensite detwinning and electric-eld
deformation processes. In the ferromagnetic marten-
site, the magnetization vectors are aligned to the easy
magnetization direction in each twin variant. When an
external magnetic eld is applied, the magnetization
vectors will tend to turn parallel to the direction of the
external magnetic eld. If the martensite has a large
saturation magnetization and a favourable anisotropy
and the energy for twin-boundary motion is low,
which can guarantee some easy crystallographic axes
and low energy transformation paths, then the twin
variant will reorientate in the same way as in the
stress-induced detwinning. In certain conditions, the
twin boundaries will move back when the external
eld is switched o or a reverse eld is applied, result-
ing in magnetoelasticity and magnetosuperelastic-
ity [205211].
Experimentally, James and Wuttig [207] and Ullakko
et al. [208, 209] have evinced the eld-generated
movement of martensite domains and the remarkable
change of volume fractions in several ferromagnetic
alloys. Fig. 9 shows that for Fe
`"
Pd
`"
single crystals at
modest elds with a two-eld arrangement, strains of
up to 0.6% were obtained by applying a transverse
eld parallel to [0, 0.95, 0.31] at 256 K, with a xed
axial eld of 2300 Oe [207]. Meanwhile, the eld-
induced strains of nearly up to 0.2% along [0 0 1] in
unstressed crystals of the Heusler alloy Ni
`
MnGa
with magnetic elds of 8 kOe at 265 K were demon-
strated [208]. The low level of strains was due to the
fact that only a small fraction of variants was rear-
ranged by the eld. To achieve larger strains, the
magnetization energy and the anisotropy should be
sucient and favourable to induce the motion of all
the twin boundaries.
3.4. Electric eld-induced transformations
At ambient temperatures, the perovskites may have
either a ferroelectric or an antiferroelectric phase with
3754
Figure 8 Schematic illustration of the deformation processes in the ferroelastic, ferromagnetic, and ferroelectric materials. (a) Stress-induced
martensitic transformation by twinning and reorientation of martensite domains by detwinning, (b) magnetic eld-induced transformation
and reorientation of magnetic domains, (c) electric eld-induced AFEFE transformation and polarization of FE.
rhombohedral or tetragonal structure [175, 212]. As
mentioned above, the compositions of the ferroelectric
shape-memory ceramics are usually so selected that
the ceramics have an antiferroelectric structure but
they are close to the ferroelectric phase boundary, as
shown in Fig. 10. In this region, the antiferroelectric
can be transformed into the ferroelectric at high elec-
tric elds. Both the metastable AFE and FE phases
may coexist, rendering the forward switching
AFEFE under increasing eld and the backward
switching FEAFE under decreasing eld. The phase
stability of the phases can be predicted based on
a thermodynamic model [145]. The transformations
can also be approached within the constrained the-
ory established by James and Wuttig for ferromag-
netics [207]. Because antiferroelectrics do not display
any macroscopic polarization and very little strain is
achieved when applied at low electric elds, the
AFEFEtransformation and the subsequent poling of
the ferroelectric domains will cause mechanical
strains, as illustrated in Fig. 8c. Suppose the magni-
tude of the sublattice polarization remains essentially
unchanged during the transformation, then, according
to the two-sublattice model [146, 150], the spontan-
eous strain associated with eld-induced paraelectric
ferroelectric (PE-FE) transition is described by
c
"'
"QP`
(9)
while the spontaneous strain in the antiferroelectric
state, c
^''
, and the strain in the ferroelectric state
induced from the antiferroelectric by applying a eld,
c
''
, can be expressed, respectively, as
c
^''
"Q(1!)P`
^
(10)
c
''
"Q(1#)P`
'
(11)
where P
^
and P
'
are two-sublattice based polariza-
tions, P
'
is the eld-induced polarization, Q and are
3755
Figure 9 Magnetic eld-induced strains in a Fe
`"
Pd
`"
single-crystal
shape-memory alloy with two-eld arrangements. The solid lines
were measured at 290 K, with a xed axial eld at 2300 Oe and
variable transverse eld, no stress was applied. (- - -) Measured at
309 K, with a xed transverse eld at 2300 Oe and variable axial
eld, no stress was applied [207].
Figure 10 Phase diagram for Pb
""`
La
""`
(ZrTiSn)O
`
shape-mem-
ory ceramics [147, 150]. The shadowed area indicates the composi-
tion range wherein the antiferroelectricferroelectric transition can
be induced by applying a eld.
the electrostrictive coecients. Because, P`
^
"P`
'
, the
total eld-induced strains in an antiferroelectric crys-
tal, c
^'
, can be estimated as
c
^'
"c
''
!c
^''
"2QP`
'
"QP`
(12)
By comparing Equations 9 and 12, it is evident that
the strain is larger if the ferroelectric polarization is
Figure 11 Electric eld-induced transverse elastic strains at various
temperatures for the Pb
"""
Nb
""`
((Zr
"'
Sn
""
)
"""
Ti
""'
)
""`
O
`
shape-memory ceramic [146].
induced from an antiferroelectric state than if it is
induced from a paraelectric state because '1
[150]. Besides composition and eld strength, the
eld-induced strains show a strong temperature de-
pendence which can be described by the modied
ClausiusClaperon relation [145]
dE
d
"!
H
P
(13)
where E is the eld strength, the temperature, H
and P are the enthalpy and polarization change at
the AFEFE transitions, respectively. In addition,
other factors such as pressure, stress and the frequency
of the electric eld also aect the transformation and
the eld-induced strains [142, 146, 147, 150]. System-
atic descriptions of the static and dynamic responses
of the material can be approached by employing phe-
nomenological models based on rate laws [148]. Fig. 11
shows the transverse elastic strains induced by eld at
various temperatures in a Pb
"""
Nb
""`
((Zr
"'
Sn
""
)
W
Ti
W
)
""`
O
`
(y"0.06) ceramic.
Some phase transformations in polymers, gels or
inorganic substances can be activated by certain
chemical stimuli, resulting in so-called chemostrictive
eects which may implicate shape-memory capacity.
Further information on the phase transitions can be
found in some recent reviews [168, 169, 175].
3756
4. Inherent functions and adaptive
properties
The phase transformations in the shape-memory ma-
terials are accompained by remarkable or even drastic
changes in the physical and mechanical properties,
such as yield stress, elastic modulus, hardness, damp-
ing, shape recovery, thermal conductivity, thermal ex-
pansion coecient, resistivity, magnetic susceptibility,
exibility, vapour permeability, shape xity and di-
electric constant, enabling the materials to exhibit
some novel functions or making themadaptable to the
external changes in temperature, stress, magnetic or
electrical eld. In general, the following features or
inherent primitive intelligence of shape-memory ma-
terials may be utilized in various envisaged engineer-
ing approaches for smart systems:
1. sensing SMMs are sensitive to some environ-
mental changes such as thermal, stress, magnetic or
electric eld stimuli;
2. switch or control capacity the environmental
stimulus must reach to a critical value to trigger the
operation;
3. actuation SMMs can provide very large dis-
placements (superelasticity or pseudoelasticity) and
huge forces for actuation;
4. adaptivity various properties show remarkable
changes due to phase transformations;
5. memory and recovery the shape or other
changes are reversible and can be repeated;
6. energy storage and conversion a considerable
amount of energy can be stored, and thermalmechan-
ical, chemicalmechanical, magneticmechanical and
electricmechanical energy conversions may be
achieved;
7. damping most SMMs have high inherent speci-
c damping capacity due to the characteristic micro-
structures and phase transitions.
Table I summarizes some typical properties of bi-
nary TiNi shape-memory alloys, in the martensite
and parent-phase state. Because the properties are
sensitive to the alloy composition, processing para-
meters, testing methods and conditions, the recorded
data of the SMAs are largely scattered. The values
given in Table I are based on the report by Jackson
et al. [20], but modied according to the numerous
data resources obtained by various researchers during
recent years. The changes in the properties can be
utilized to achieve some adaptive functions such as
self-strengthening, self-relaxation or self-healing in en-
gineering structures. By incorporating the SMMs with
other functional materials or structural materials, it is
possible to tune or tailor the static and dynamic prop-
erties of the composites and structures. The engineer-
ing approaches in this area will be described in the
following paper [213].
5. Technical challenges and perspectives
Table II compares some selective features of shape-
memory material (TiNi SMA), piezoelectric ceramic
(PZT) and magnetostrictive material (Terfenol-D).
TABLE I Some typical properties of binary TiNi shape-memory
alloys
Melting point :1573K
Density 6.46.5 g cm`
Transformation temperatures 173390K
Transformation enthalpy 1.461.88kJ mol
Transformation hysteresis 2050
Recoverable strain
one-way-eect (8%
two-way-eect (5%
Recovery stress (500 MPa
Damping capacity, Q :10`
Ultimate tensile strength 8001100MPa
Yield strength
Parent phase 200800MPa
Martensite 70200MPa
Youngs modulus
Parent phase 5090 GPa
Martensite 1035 GPa
Shear modulus
Parent phase 1520 GPa
Martensite 3.55 GPa
Thermal expansion coecient
Parent phase 10.011.0;10' K
Martensite 5.88.6;10' K
Thermal conductivity
Parent phase 0.18 Wcm K
Martensite 0.086Wcm K
Electrical resistivity
Parent phase 70110 cm
Martensite 4070 cm
Magnetic susceptibility
Parent phase 2.73.0;10' e.m.u. g
Martensite 1.92.1;10' e.m.u. g
Among the smart materials, SMAs have the largest
output energy density, and can provide the greatest
displacements or strokes. However, shape-memory
materials do have some shortcomings to be overcome
before their engineering signicance is more widely
recognized in the industrial world. The problems ad-
dressed range from fundamental to engineering as-
pects: fabrication and processing of demanding high-
quality and low-cost materials; precise prediction and
modelling of the material behaviour and optimal de-
sign; controlling the microstructures and, above all,
tailoring some crucial technical parameters such as
characteristic transformation temperatures within de-
sirable range; clear understanding of the origins of
such issues as hysteresis, phase instabilities and ageing
eects, degradation and fatigue, etc. In addition to the
eorts to improve the even commercial materials, new
shape-memory materials with higher technical quality
should be designed and developed to meet the increas-
ing demand of the Hi-tech society. Of particular tech-
nical signicance are new shape-memory materials
that can provide large displacements, huge stresses
and exhibit superior dynamic response. This can be
approached in two ways. The rst route is to incorpor-
ate SMMs with other structural or functional mater-
ials to form hybrid composites which will benet from
individual component materials, thereby achieving
compromised but optimized overall performance of
the component materials system. For instance, the
main disadvantages of SMAs are their insuperior dy-
namic response and low eciency. Meanwhile, the
3757
TABLE II Comparison of characteristics of shape-memory alloys, piezoelectric ceramics and magnetostrictive materials as actuation
materials
Properties Shape-memory alloy Piezoelectric Magnetostrictive
(TiNi) (PZT) (Terfenol-D)
Compressive stress (MPa) :800 60 700
Tensile strength (MPa) 8001000 3055 2835
Youngs modulus (GPa) 5090 (P) 6090 (Y') 2535 (Y')
1035 (M) :110 (Y')' 5055 (Y")
Maximum strain :0.1 :0.001 :0.01
Frequency (Hz) 0100 120 000 110 000
Coupling coecient : 0.75 0.75
Eciency (%) 35 50 80
Energy density (kJ m`) 300600 :1.0 1425
modulus for constant electric eld
' modulus for constant electric displacement
modulus for constant magnetizing eld
modulus for constant induction eld
conventional piezoelectric or electrostrictive ceramics
have a superior dynamic response but their displace-
ments are quite small and most of them are very
brittle. Combining SMAs with piezoelectric or mag-
netostrictive materials, eld-activated smart com-
posites can be designed, which may generate a larger
displacement than conventional piezoelectric ceramics
or magnetostrictive materials and have an improved
dynamic response as compared to monolithic SMAs.
More recently, some pioneers have explored the tech-
nical feasibility of smart thin-lm heterostructures by
depositing the SMA thin lms on piezoelectric or
magnetostrictive substrates. However, the complexity
of the fabrication processing and the interface bonding
and dynamic coupling of dissimilar components re-
main tough issues for the composites [213].
The alternative is to improve the monolithic shape-
memory materials by employing new processing tech-
niques or to design a new generation of shape-memory
materials. The development of deposited thin-lm
shape-memory alloys, as we described above, is one of
the eorts directed to this objective. Also worth men-
tion are the recently developed porous shape-memory
alloys [214, 215]. Bulk TiNi alloys with dierent por-
osity, exhibiting superelasticity and shape-memory
eect, have been successfully manufactured via the
powder metallurgical route. The porous SMAs are
very desirable for some biomedical applications be-
cause the alloys have good biocompatibility and their
porous structure favours in-growth of living tissues
and rm xation. Naturally, it reminds us of bone
a typical biomimetic model. Bone is also porous;
moreover, it exhibits pyroelectricity and piezoelectric-
ity, and maintains the skeletal homeostasis and min-
eral homeostasis for the body [1]. After the model,
biomimetic articial bone materials based on the
porous SMAs and other advanced materials may be
developed. For instance, microballoons or microtubes
coated by some functional material layers can be
constructed in the porous SMAs which may provide
a suitable substrate or skeleton to grow heterostruc-
tures with certain intelligence.
In principle, the deformation of the polydomains in
the ferromagnetic and ferroelectric materials by ap-
plying external elds can be controlled just the same
way as the stress-induced deformation of the marten-
sites in ferroelastic SMAs. The next challenging
objective, therefore, is to explore new potentially com-
mercial materials wherein the martensitic-like trans-
formations and the reorientation of the domains can
be induced by magnetic elds or electric elds at
ambient temperatures. The design concepts and strat-
egies for nding new ferromagnetic and ferroelectric
shape-memory materials have been proposed [142,
205211]. In this aspect, the remarked common fea-
tures shared by several smart material systems, and
the successful development story of the giant mag-
netostrictive materials Terfenol-D [176, 216218]
may oer some clues or inspirations.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Prof. J. Van Humbeeck of K. U.
Leuven and Mr J. Cederstrom, Scandinavian Memory
Metals, AB, for critical reading of the manuscript,
Professor R. D. James, University of Minnesota, and
Professor D. S. Grummon, Michigan State University,
for providing their papers prior to publication. One of
the authors (Z G W) wishes to acknowledge the Royal
Institute of Technology (KTH) for oer of a fellowship
to work at KTH.
References
1. M. V. GANDHI and B. S. THOMPSON, Smart Materials
and Structures (Chapman & Hall, New York, 1992).
2. T. TAKAGIL, J. Intelligent Mater. System Struct. 1 (1990)
149.
3. Idem, in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on
Intelligent Materials, edited by P. F. Gobin and J. Tatibouet
(Technomic, Lancaster, 1996) p. 2.
4. C. A. JAEGER and C. A. ROGERS, in Proceedings of the
ARO Workshop on Smart Materials, Structures and Math-
ematical Issues, edited by C. A. Rogers (ARO, Washington,
1988) p. 14.
5. S. NOZAKI and K. TAKAHASHI , in Proceedings of the
2nd International Conference on Intelligent Materials,
edited by C. A. Rogers and G. G. Wallace (Technomic,
Lancaster, 1994) p. 1230.
6. G. BECK and P. F. GOBIN, in Proceedings of the 1st
International Conference on Intelligent Materials, edited by
T. Takagi, K. Takahashi, M. Aizawa and S. Miyata (Tech-
nomic, Lancaster, 1992) p. 9.
3758
7. F. MUCKLICH and H. JANOCHA, Z. Metallkde 87 (1996)
357.
8. C. A. ROGERS, J. Intelligent Mater. System Struct. 4 (1993) 4.
9. M. SHAHI NPOOR, Smart Structures and Materials 1996:
Smart Materials Technologies and Biomimietics, Vol. 2716
(SPIE, Bellingham, 1996) p. 238.
10. H. B. STROCK, Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 75 (4) (1996) 71.
11. W. B. SPILLMAN Jr, J. S. SIRKI S and P. T. GARDINER,
Smart Mater. Struct. 5 (1996) 247.
12. W. J. BUEHLER, J. V. GI LFRI CH and K. C. WEILEY,
J. Appl. Phys. 34 (1963) 1467.
13. S. MIYAZAKI and K. OTSUKA, ISIJ Int. 29 (1989) 353.
14. H. FUNAKUBO ( ed. ) , Shape Memory Alloys (Gordon and
Breach Science, New York, 1984).
15. T. W. DUERIG, K. N. MELTON, D. STO CKEL and C. M.
WAYMAN (eds), Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory
Alloys, (Butterworth-Heinemann, London, 1990).
16. Y. CHU and H. TU (eds), Shape Memory Materials 94
(International Academic, Beijing, 1994).
17. A. R. PELTON, D. HODGSON and T. DUERIG (eds),
Shape Memory and Superelastic Technologies (SMST,
Pacic Grove, CA, 1994, 1997).
18. For example, Proceedings of International Conference on
Martensitic Transformations, (Switzerland, 1995), (USA,
1992), (Australia, 1989), (Japan, 1986), etc..
19. C. M. WAYMAN, Progr. Mater. Sci. 36 (1992) 203.
20. C. M. JACKSON, H. J. WAGNER and R. J.
WASILEWSKI, 55-NitinolThe Alloy With a Memory: Its
Physical Metallurgy, Properties, and Applications: A Re-
port (NASA Washington, 1972).
21. D. E. HODGSON, M. H. WU and R. J. BIERMANN,
Shape Memory alloys (Shape Memory Applications, Inc.,
Santa Clara, 1995).
22. T. W. DUERIG and A. R. PELTON, Materials Properties
Handbook: TitaniumAlloys (ASM, Metals Park, 1994) p. 1035.
23. R. STALMANS and J. VAN HUMBEECK, Shape Memory
Alloys: Functional and Smart (Katholieke Universiteit
Leuven, Leuven, 1996).
24. T. H. NAM, T. SABURI and K. SHIMIZU, Mater. rans.
JIM 32 (1990) 959.
25. T. H. NAM, T. SABURI, Y. NAKATA and K. SHIMIZU,
ibid. 31 (1990) 1050.
26. K. OTSUKA, in Shape Memory Materials 94, edited by
Y. Chu and H. Tu, (International Academic, Beijing, 1994) p.
129.
27. W. J. MOBERLY and K. N. MELTON, in Engineering
Aspects of Shape Memory Alloys, edited by T. W. Duerig,
K. N. Melton, D. Sto ckel and C. M. Wayman (Butterworth-
Heinemann, London, 1990) p. 46.
28. K. N. MELTON, ibid., p. 21.
29. T. W. DUERIG, K. N. MELTON and J. L. PROFT, ibid.,
p. 130.
30. M. PI AO, S. MI YAZAKI, K. OTSUKA and N. NISHIDA,
Mater. rans. JIM 33 (1992) 337.
31. Idem, ibid. 33 (1992) 346.
32. C. S. ZHANG, L. C. ZHAO, T. W. DUERIG and C. M.
WAYMAN, Scripta Metall. Mater. 24 (1990) 1807.
33. P. G. LINDQUIST and C. M. WAYMAN, in Engineering
Aspects of Shape Memory Alloys, edited by T. W. Duerig,
K. N. Melton, D. Sto ckel and C. M. Wayman (Butterworth-
Heinemann, London, 1990) p. 58.
34. J. BEYERS and J. H. MULDER, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp.
Proc. 360 (1995) 443.
35. S. M. RUSSELL and F. SCZERZENI E, ibid., p. 455.
36. S. M. TUOMINEN, in Proceedings of the 1st International
Conference on Shape Memory and Superelastic Technolo-
gies, edited by A. R. Pelton, D. Hodgson and T. Duerig,
(SMST, Fremont, 1994) p. 49.
37. J. H. MULDER, J. BEYER, P. DONNER and J. PETER-
SEI M, ibid., p. 55.
38. S. K. WU and Y. C. LO, Mater. Sci. Forum 5668 (1990) 619.
39. M. H. WU, in Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory
Alloys, edited by T. W. Duerig, K. N. Melton, D. Sto ckel
and C. M. Wayman (Butterworth-Heinemann, London,
1990) p. 69.
40. D. Z. YANG and Z. G. WEI, in Shape Memory Materials
94, edited by Y. Chu and H. Tu (International Academic,
Beijing, 1994) p. 319.
41. D. P. DUNNE and N. F. KENNON, Metals Forum 4 (1981)
176.
42. M. A. MORRIS, Acta Metall. Mater. 40 (1992) 1573.
43. Z. G. WEI, H. Y. PENG, W. ZOU and D. Z. YANG, Metall.
Mater. rans. 28A (1997) 955.
44. K. SUGI MOTO, K. KAMEI and M. NAKANIWA, in
Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory Alloys, edited by
T. W. Duerig, K. N. Melton, D. Sto ckel and C. M. Wayman
(Butterworth-Heinemann, London, 1990) p. 89.
45. J. VAN HUMBEECK, in Proceedings of the 3rd Interna-
tional Conference on Intelligent Materials, edited by P. F.
Gobin and J. Tatibouet (Technomic, Lancaster, 1996) p. 442.
46. S. MIYAZAKI, Shape Memory Alloys, (Springer, Vienna,
New York, 1996) p. 69.
47. J. VAN HUMBEECK and J. CEDESTROM, in Proceed-
ings of the 1st International Conference on Shape Memory
and Superelastic Technologies, edited by A. R. Pelton,
D. Hodgson and T. Duerig, (SMST, Fremont, 1994) p. 1.
48. T. MAKI, Mater. Sci. Forum 5658 (1990) 156.
49. R. KAINUMA, N. ONO and K. ISHIDA, Mater. Res. Soc.
Symp. Proc. 360 (1995) 467.
50. E. P. GEORGE, C. T. LIU, J. A. HORTON, C. J. SPARKS,
M. KAO, H. KUNSMANA and T. KING, Mater. Charact.
32 (1994) 139.
51. R. KAINUMA, K. ISHIDA and T. NISHI ZAWA, Metall.
rans. 23A (1992) 1447.
52. V. A. CHERNENKOand V. V. KOKORIN, in Proceedings
of the International Conference on Martensitic Transforma-
tions 92, edited by C. M. Wayman and J. Perkins (Monterey
Inst. of Advanced Studies, Monterey, 1993) p. 1205.
53. Y. N. KOVAL, G. S. FIRSTOV, J. VAN HUMBEECK,
L. DELAEY and W. Y. JANG, J. Phys. I C8 (1995) 1103.
54. C. Y. LEI , J. S. LEE PARK, H. R. P. INOUE, C. M.
WAYMAN, in Proceedings of the International Conference
on Martensitic Transformations 92, edited by C. M. Way-
man and J. Perkins (Monterey Inst. of Advanced Studies,
Monterey, 1993) p. 539.
55. J. S. LEE PARK, C. Y. LEI, M. H. WU, H. R. P. INOUE,
C. M. WAYMAN, ibid., p. 533.
56. M. R. IBARRA, T. S. CHIEN and A. S. PAVLOVIC, J.
ess-Common Metals 153 (1989) 233.
57. A. P. JARDINE, J. S. MADSEN and P. G. MERCADO,
Mater. Charact. 32 (1994) 169.
58. A. P. JARDI NE, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 276 (1992)
31.
59. A. D. JOHNSON, J. D. BUSCH, C. A. RAYand C. SLOAN,
ibid. 276 (1992) 151.
60. A. D. JOHNSON, J. D. BUSCH, in Proceedings of the 1st
International Conference on Shape Memory and Superelas-
tic Technologies, edited by A. R. Pelton, D. Hodgson and T.
Duerig, (SMST, Fremont, 1994) p. 299.
61. P. KRULEVITCH, A. P. LEE, P. B. RAMSEY, J. C.
TREVINO, J. HAMILTON and M. A. NORTHRUP, J.
Microelectromech. Systems 5 (1996) 270.
62. A. P. JARDINE, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 246 (1992) 427.
63. Q. SU, T. KIM, Y. ZHENG and M. WUTTI G, Smart
Structures and Materials 1995: Smart Materials, Vol. 2441
(SPIE, Bellingham, 1995) p. 179.
64. A. P. JARDINE, Smart Mater. Struct. 3 (1994) 140.
65. H. ANDOH, T. MINEMURA, I. I KUTA and Y. KITA,
J. Jpn Inst. Metals 50 (1986) 430.
66. J. A. WALKER, K. J. GABRIEL and M. MEHREGANY,
Sensors and Actuators A21-A23 (1990) 243.
67. J. D. BUSCH, A. D. JOHNSON, C. H. LEE and D. A.
STEVENSON, J. Appl. Phys. 68 (1990) 6224.
68. A. D. JOHNSON, J. Micromech Microeng. 1 (1991) 34.
69. K. IKUTA, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Con-
ference Robotics and Actuation, (IEEE, Los Alamitos, 1990)
p. 2156.
70. K. IKUTA, H. FIJITA, M. I KEDA and S. YAMASHITA,
in Proceedings of the IEEE Micro-Electro-Mechanical
Systems, (IEEE, Napa Valley, 1990) p. 38.
3759
71. K. KURIBAYASHI and M. YOSHI TAKE, ibid., p. 217.
72. K. KURI BAYASHI, T. TANI GUCHI, M. YOSITAKE
and S. OGAWA, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 276 (1992)
167.
73. L. CHANG, C. H. SIMPSON, D. S. GRUMMON, W.
PRATT and R. LO LO EE, ibid. 187 (1990) 137.
74. L. CHANG and D. G. GRUMMON, Scripta Metall. 25
(1991) 2079.
75. Idem, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 246 (1992) 141.
76. B. WALLOS, L. CHANG and D. S. GRUMMON, ibid. 246
(1992) 349.
77. S. MIYAZAKI, A. ISHIDA and A. TAKEI, in Proceedings
of the International Symposium on Measurement and Con-
trol in Robotics, (IEEE, Tsukuba, 1992) p. 495.
78. A. I SHIDA, A. TAKEI and S. MIYAZAKI, hin Solid Films
228 (1993) 210.
79. S. MIYAZAKI, A. ISHIDA and A. TAKEI, in Proceedings
of the International Conference on Martensitic Transforma-
tions 92, edited by C. M. Wayman and J. Perkins, see Ref.
52, p. 893.
80. S. MIYAZAKI and A. I SHIDA, Mater. rans. JIM 35
(1994) 14.
81. A. P. JARDINE, H. ZHANG and L. D. WASIELESKY,
Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 187 (1990) 137.
82. A. P. JARDINE and L. D. WASIELESKY, ibid. 187 (1990)
181.
83. J. S. MADSEN and A. P. JARDI NE, Scripta Metall. Mater.
30 (1994) 1189.
84. C. M. SU, Z. S. HUA and M. WUTTIG, in Proceedings of
Damping of Multiphase Inorganic Materials Symposium
edited by R. B. Baghat (ASM International Pub., New York,
1993) p. 165.
85. S. Z. HUA, C. M. SU and M. WUTTI G, Mater. Res. Soc.
Symp. Proc. 308 (1993) 33.
86. C. M. SU and M. WUTTIG, J. Adhes. Sci. echnol. 8 (1994)
1.
87. LI HOU and D. S. GRUMMON, Scripta Metall. Mater. 33
(1995) 989.
88. D. S. GRUMMON and T. J. PENCE, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp.
Proc. 588 (1997) 331.
89. D. S. GRUMMON, LI HOU, Z. ZHAO and T. J. PENCE,
J. Phys. I C8 (1995) 665.
90. R. H. WOLF and A. H. HEUER, J. Microelectromech.
Systems 4 (1995) 206.
91. S. MIYAZAKI and K. NOMURA, in Proceedings of the
IEEE Micro Electro Mechanical Systems, (IEEE, Oiso
1994) p. 176.
92. A. ISHIDA, A. TAKEI, M. SATO and S. MIYAZAKI, hin
Solid Films 281-282 (1996) 337.
93. K. NOMURA and S. MIYAZAKI, Smart Structures and
Materials 1995: Smart Materials, Vol. 2441 (SPIE, Bellin-
gham, 1995) p. 149.
94. A. ISHIDA, M. SATO, A. TAKEI and S. MIYAZAKI,
Mater. rans. JIM 36 (1995) 1349.
95. A. ISHIDA, M. SATO, A. TAKEI, K. NOMURA and S.
MIYAZAKI, Metall. Mater. rans. 27A (1996) 3753.
96. S. MIYAZAKI, K. NOMURA and Z. HE, in Proceedings of
the 1st International Conference on Shape Memory and
Superelastic Technologies, edited by A. R. Pelton, D. Hodg-
son and T. Duerig (SMST, Fremon, 1994) p. 19.
97. Y. NAKATA, T. TADAKI, H. SAKAMOTO, A. TANAKA
and K. SHIMIZU, J. Phys. I C8 (1995) 671.
98. S. MIYAZAKI, K. NOMURA and A. ISHIDA, ibid. C8
(1995) 677.
99. Y. KAWAMURA, A. GYOBU, H. HORIKAWA and T.
SABURIT, ibid. C8 (1995) 683.
100. K. NOMURA, S. MIYAZAKI and A. ISHIDA, ibid. C8
(1995) 695.
101. LI HOU, T. J. PENCE and D. S. GRUMMON, Mater. Res.
Soc. Symp. Proc. 360 (1995) 369.
102. T. HASHI NAGA, S. MI YAZAKI, T. UEKI and H. HOR-
IKAWA, J. Phys. I C8 (1995) 689.
103. S. MIYAZAKI, T. HOSHINAGA and K. YUMIKURA,
Smart Structures and Materials 1995: Smart Materials,
Vol. 2441 (SPIE, Bellingham, 1995) p. 156.
104. S. MIYAZAKI, T. HASHI NAGA and A. ISHIDA, hin
Solid Films 281-282 (1996) 364.
105. P. KRULEVITCH, P. B. RAMSEY, D. M.
MAKOWIECKI, A. P. LEE, G. C. JOHNSON and M. A.
NORTHRUP, in Proceedings of the 1st International Con-
ference on Shape Memory and Superelastic Technologies,
edited by A. R. Pelton, D. Hodgson and T. Duerig (SMST,
Fremon, 1994) p. 19.
106. L. CHANG and D. S. GRUMMON, Philos. Mag. A, 76
(1997) 163.
107. Idem, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 311 (1993) 167.
108. E. QUANDT, C. HALENE, H. HOLLECK, K. FEI T, M.
KOHL, P. SCHLO{MACHER, A. SKOKAN and K. D.
SKROBANEK, Sensors and Actuators A53 (1996) 434.
109. A. D. JOHNSON, V. V. MARTYNOV and E. J.
SHAHOIAN, Smart Structures and Materials 1995: Smart
Materials, Vol. 2441 (SPIE, Bellingham, 1995) p. 165.
110. A. D. JOHNSON, V. V. MARTYNOVand R. S. MI NNERS,
J. Phys. I C8 (1995) 783.
111. K. IKUTA, H. FUJI SHIRO, M. HAYASHI and T. MAT-
SUURA, in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference
on Shape Memory and Superelastic Technologies, edited by
A. R. Pelton, D. Hodgson and T. Duerig (SMST, Fremon,
1994) p. 13.
112. K. N. MELTON, in Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory
Alloys, edited by T. W. Duerig, K. N. Melton, D. Sto ckel
and C. M. Wayman (Butterworth-Heinemann, London,
1990) p. 23.
113. W. TANG, PhD dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology
(1996) p. 19.
114. S. TAKABAYASHI, K. TANINO, S. FUKUMOTO, Y.
MIMATSU, S. YAMASHITA and Y. ICHIKAWA, Jpn. J.
Appl. Phys. 35 (1996) 200.
115. A. P. JARDINE, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 360 (1995) 293.
116. J. ZHANG and D. S. GRUMMON, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp.
Proc. 588 (1997) 451.
117. M. MERTMANN, E. HORNBOGEN and K. ESCHER, in
Shape Memory Materials94, edited by Y. Chou and H. Tu
(International Academic, Beijing, 1994) p. 556.
118. S. MIYAZAKI, to be published.
119. B. C. MUDDLE and R. M. TRAIL, in Shape Memory
Materials 94, edited by Y. Chu and H. Tu (International
Academic, Beijing, 1994) p. 689.
120. K. E. SCHURCH and K. H. G. ASHBEE, Nature 266 (1977)
706.
121. A. ITOH, Y. MIWA and N. IGUCHI, J. Jpn. Inst. Metals 52
(1988) 523.
122. Idem, ibid. 54 (1990) 117.
123. Y. MIWA, A. ITOH and M. HIROK, in Proceedings of the
28th Japan Congress on Materials Research (SMS of Japan,
Kyoto, 1985) p. 189.
124. A. ITOH, Y. MIWA and N. IGUCHI, in Proceedings of the
31st Japan Congress on Materials Research, (SMS of Japan,
Kyoto, 1988) p. 117.
125. A. H. HEUER, M. RUHLE and D. B. MARSHALL,
J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 73 (1990) 1084.
126. M. V. SWAINT, Nature 322 (1986) 234.
127. B. JIANG, J. TU, T. Y. HSU, X. QI, X. ZHENG and J.
ZHONG, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 246 (1992) 213.
128. P. E. REYES- MOREL, J. S. CHERNY and I. W. CHEN, J.
Am. Ceram. Soc. 71 (1988) 343.
129. Idem, ibid. 71 (1988) 648.
130. B. C. MUDDLE and G. R. HUGO, in Proceedings of the
International Conference on Martensitic Transforma-
tions92, edited by C. M. Wayman and J. Perkins (see Ref.
52) p. 647.
131. W. M. KRIVEN, J. Phys. I 5 (1995) C8-101.
132. Y. YAMADA, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 246 (1992) 149.
133. S. TSUNEKAWA and Y. UESU, Phys. Status Solidi A 50
(1978) 695.
134. J. LI and C. M. WAYMAN, Mater. ett. 26 (1996) 1.
135. Y. YAMADA and Y. UESU, Solid State Commun. 81 (1992)
777.
136. S. TSUNEKAWA, M. SUEZAWA and H. TAKEI, Phys.
Stat. Solid. (a), 40 (1997) 434.
3760
137. I. G. ZAKREVSKII, V. V. KOKORIN and A. D. SHEV-
CHENKO, Fiz. Met. Metallor. 61 (1986) 412.
138. Y. N. WANG, H. M. SHEN, M. ZHU, Y. N. HUANG, Z. F.
ZHANG, Z. M. LIU and P. C. W. FUNG, Mater. Res. Soc.
Symp. Proc. 246 (1992) 207.
139. Y. N. WANG, H. M. SHEN and M. ZHU, Phys. ett. A 158
(1991) 413.
140. R. TIWARI and V. K. WADHAWAN, Phase rans. B35
(1991) 47.
141. H. M. SHEN, S. CHEN, Z. YU, Y. N. WANG, Z. X. ZHAO
and P. LIU, J. ow emp. Phys. 92 (1993) 181.
142. L. E. CROSS, J. Intelligent Mater. Systems Struct. 6 (1995)
55.
143. V. K. WADHAWAN, M. C. KERNI ON, T. KIMURA and
R. E. NEWNHAM, Ferroelectrics 37 (1981) 575.
144. P. YANG and D. A. PAYNE, in Proceedings of the Interna-
tional Conference on Martensitic Transformations 92,
edited by C. M. Wayman and J. Perkins, (see Ref. 52)
p. 719.
145. P. YANG and D. A. PAYNE, J. Appl. Phys. 71 (1992)
1361.
146. K. UCHINO, in Proceedings of the MRS International
Meeting on Advanced Materials, edited by K. Otsuka and
K. Shimizu, Vol. 9 (MRS, Pittsburgh, 1989) p. 489.
147. K. GHANDI and N. W. HAGOOD, AIAA J. 33 (1995) 2165.
148. K. GHANDI and N. W. HAGOOD, Shape Memory Ce-
ramic Actuation of Adaptive Structures, Research Report,
MIT (1995).
149. A. FURUTA, K. Y. OHand K. UCHINO, in Proceedings of
the 1990 IEEE 7th International Symposium on Applications
of Ferroelectrics, (IEEE, New York, 1991) p. 528.
150. W. Y. PAN, C. Q. DAM, Q. M. ZHANG and L. E. CROSS,
J. Appl. Phys. 66 (1989) 6014.
151. P. ROTH and E. GMELIN, Ferroelectrics 126 (1992) 221.
152. N. V. KASPER, A. I. AKIMOV, L. A. BLIZNYUK and
I. O. TROYANCHUK, Phys. Solid State 37 (1995) 680.
153. I. O. TROYANCHUYK, A. I. AKIMOV, N. V. KASPER
and V. V. MI KHAILOV, ibid. 36 (1994) 1736.
154. I. O. TROYANCHUK, H. SZYMCZAK and N. V. KAS-
PER, Phys. Status Solidi A 157 (1996) 159.
155. N. V. KASPER and I. O. TROYANCHUK, J. Phys. Chem.
Solids 57 (1996) 1601.
156. C. LIANG, C. A. ROGERS and E. MALAFEEW, Smart
Structures and Materials, AD-Vol. 24/AMD-Vol. 123
(ASME, New York, 1991) p. 97.
157. C. A. ROGERS, in USJapan Workshop on Smart/Intelli-
gent Materials and Systems, edited by I. Ahmad, A.
Crowson and C. A. Rogers, Technomic, Lancaster, 1990, p. 11.
158. C. LIANG, C. A. ROGERS and E. MALAFEEW, J. Intelli-
gent Mater. Systems Struct. 8 (1997) 380.
159. R. F. GORDON, in Proceedings of the 1st International
Conference on Shape Memory and Superelastic Technolo-
gies, edited by A. R. Pelton, D. Hodgson and T. Duerig
(SMST, Fremon, 1994) p. 115.
160. R. F. GORDON, Mater. echnol. 8 (1993) 254.
161. B. K. KIM, S. Y. LEE and M. XU, Polymer 37 (1996) 5781.
162. X. LUO, X. ZHANG, M. WANG, D. MA, M. XU and F. LI,
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 64 (1997) 2433.
163. H. TOBUSHI, S. HAYASHI and P. H. LIN, in Proceedings
of the International Conference on Shape Memory and
Superelastic Technologies, edited by A. R. Pelton, D. Hodg-
son and T. Duerig (SMST, Fremon, 1994) p. 109.
164. H. TOBUSHI, H. HARA, E. YAMADA and S. HAYASHI,
Smart Mate. Struct. 5 (1996) 483.
165. H. TOBUSHI, H. HARA, E. YAMADA and S. HAYASHI,
in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Intel-
ligent Materials, edited by P. F. Gobin and J. Tatibouet
(Technomic, Lancaster, 1996) p. 418.
166. T. TAKAHASHI, N. HAYASHI and S. HAYASHI, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci. 60 (1996) 1061.
167. Y. OSADA and B. ROSS-MURPHY, Sci. Am. 268 (1993) 82.
168. Y. LI and T. TANAKA, Ann. Rev. Mater. Sci. 22 (1992)
243.
169. M. SHIBAYAMA and T. TANAKA, Adv. Polym. Sci. 109
(1993) 1.
170. Y. OSADA, Y. UEOKAand J. P. GONG, in Proceedings of
the 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Materials,
edited by P. F. Gobin and J. Tatibouet (Technomic, Lancas-
ter, 1996) p. 344.
171. Z. J. ZHANG and B. Z. JANG, Smart Structures and Ma-
terials 1995: Industrial and Commercial Applications of
Smart Structures Technology, Vol. 2447 (SPIE, Bellingham,
1995) p. 26.
172. Z. HU, Y. LI, X. ZHANG and Y. CHEN, Smart Structures
and Materials 1996: Smart Materials Technologies and Bio-
mimetics, Vol. 2716 (SPIE, Bellingham, 1996) 224.
173. H. ICHIJO, R. KISHI, E. ONE, T. SEKIYA, O. HIRASA,
O. OOGANE, K. SAHARA, M. OOWADA and E.
KOKUFATA, in Proceedings of the 1st International Con-
ference on Intelligent Materials, edited by T. Takagi, K.
Takahashi, M. Aizawa and S. Miyata (Technomic, Lancaster,
1992) p. 306.
174. K. OTSUKA, in Engineering Aspects of Shape Memory
Alloys, edited by T. W. Duerig, K. N. Melton, D. Sto ckel
and C. M. Wayman (Butterworth-Heinemann, London,
1990) p. 36.
175. R. E. NEWNHAM, MRS Bul l . ( 1997) 20.
176. A . E. C L A R K, in Ferromagnetic Materials 1, edited by
E. P. Wohlfarth (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1980) p. 531.
177. H. CHEN and H. KUBO, Curr. Opinion Solid State Mater.
Sci. 1 (1996) 349.
178. T. KAKESHITA, K. KUROIWA, K. SHIMIZU, T.
IKEDA, A. YAMAGOSHI and M. DATE, Mater. rans.
JIM 34 (1993) 423.
179. K. OTSUKA and K. SHIMIZU, Int. Metals Rev. 31 (1986)
93.
180. K. SHIMIZU and T. KAKESHITA, ISIJ Int. 29 (1989)
97.
181. J. R. PATEL and M. COHEN, Acta Metall. 1 (1953) 531.
182. M. FREMOND, Shape Memory Alloys (Springer, Vienna,
New York, 1996) p. 3.
183. K. TANAKA, J. Pressure essel ech. 112 (1990) 158.
184. C. LIANG and C. A. ROGERS, J. Intelligent Mater. System
Struct. 1 (1990) 223.
185. J. G. BOYD and D. C. LAGOUDAS, Int. J. Plasticity 12
(1996) 805.
186. Q. P. SUN and K. C. HWANG, J. Mech Phys. Solids 41
(1993) 1.
187. A. L. ROYTBURD, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 246 (1992)
91.
188. A. L. ROYTBURD and J. SLUTSKER, ibid. 360 (1995) 299.
189. M. B. KRUGER and R. JEANLOZ, Science 249 (1990) 647.
190. S. M. CLARK and A. G. CHRISTY, Phys. Rev. B 51 (1995)
38.
191. H. SHANKARAN, S. K. SIKKA and R. CHIDAMBARAM,
High Press. Res. 4 (1990) 393.
192. T. KAKESHITA and K. SHIMIZU, Mater. rans. JIM 38
(1997) 668.
193. D. J. ERSKINE and W. J. NELLI S, Nature 349 (1991) 317.
194. A. M. THAKUR, N. N. THADHANI and R. B. SCHWARZ,
Metall. Mater. rans. 28A (1997) 1445.
195. A. CHRISTOU, Scripta Metall. 4 (1970) 437.
196. M. A. MEYERS and J. R. C. GUIMARAES, Mater. Sci. Eng.
24 (1976) 289.
197. V. A. LOBODI UK, Akad. Nauk kr. SSR Metalloz. 76
(1979) 3.
198. T. KAKESHITA and K. SHIMI ZU, in Proceedings of the
International Conference on Martensitic Transforma-
tions86 (JIM, Nara, 1987) p. 230.
199. V. D. SADOVSKY, L. V. SMIRNOV, Ye. FOKINA, P. A.
MALINEN and I. P. SOROSKI N, Fiz. Met. Metallov. 24
(1967) 918.
200. E. SUN, D. Z. YANG and F. M. YANG, Strong Magnetic
Field-induced Martensitic Transformations, Research Re-
port, Dalian University of Technology (1988).
201. T. KAKESHITA, K. SHIMIZU, M. ONO and M. DATE,
Mater. rans. JIM 33 (1992) 461.
202. T. KAKESHITA, K. KUROIWA, K. SHIMIZU,
T. IKEDA, A. YAMAGISHI and M. DATE, ibid. 34 (1993)
415.
3761
203. T. KAKESHI TA, T. SABURI and K. KINDO and S.
ENDO: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 36 (1997) 7083.
204. T. KAKESHITA, K. SHIMIZU, T. MAKI , I . TAMURA, S.
KIJIMA and M. DATE, Scripta Metall. 19 (1985) 973.
205. R. D. JAMES and D. KINDERLEHRER, Philos. Mag. B 68
(1993) 237.
206. R. D. JAMES and M. WUTTIG, Smart Structures and
Materials 1996: Mathematics and Control in Smart Struc-
tures, Vol. 2715 (SPIE, Bellingham, 1996) p. 420.
207. R. D. JAMES and M. WUTTIG, Philos. Mag. A, 77 (1998)
1273.
208. K. ULLAKKO, J. K. HUANG, C. KANTNER, R. C.
O HANDLEY and V. V. KOKORIN, Appl. Phys. ett 69
(1996) 1967.
209. K. ULLAKKO, J. K. HUANG, V. V. KOKORIN and R. C.
O HANDLEY, Scripta Mater. 36 (1997) 1133.
210. K. ULLAKKO, in Proceedings of the 3rd International
Conference on Intelligent Materials, edited by P. F. Gobin
and J. Tatibouet (Technomic, Lancaster, 1996) p. 505.
211. K. ULLAKKO, P. G. YAKOVENKO and V. G. GAVRIL-
JUK, Smart Structures and Materials 1996: Mathematics
and Control in Smart Structures, Vol. 2715 (SPIE, Bellin-
gham, 1996) p. 42.
212. N. BRAITHWAITE and G. WEAVER, Electronic Mater-
ials (Materials in Action Series), (Alden Press, London, 1990)
p. 175.
213. Z. G. WEI, R. SANDSTRO M and S. MIYAZAKI, J. Mater.
Sci. 33 (1998) 0000
214. S. A. SHABALOVSKAYA, V. I. ITI N and V. E. GYUN-
TER, in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on
Shape Memory and Superelastic Technologies, edited by
A. R. Pelton, D. Hodgson and T. Duerig (SMST, Fremon,
1994) p. 7.
215. V. I . ITIN, V. E. GYUNTER, S. A. SHABALOVSKAYA
and R. L. C. SACHDEVA, Mater. Charac. 32 (1994) 179.
216. D. C. JI LES, in NewMaterials and Their Application 1990,
edited by D. Holland (IOP Publishing, London, 1990) p. 365.
217. A. E. CLARK, in Proceedings of the Conference on Recent
Advances in Adaptive and Sensory Materials and their
Applications, edited by C. A. Rogers and R. C. Rogers
(Technomic, Lancaster, 1992) p. 387.
218. Idem, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 360 (1995) 171.
Received 10 September 1997
and accepted 22 April 1998
3762