2007
DOI: 10.1002/adem.200700047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Interatomic Potential for Studying CuZr Bulk Metallic Glasses

Abstract: Binary alloys capable of forming metallic glasses have been discovered recently. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] The mechanical properties of BMGs are remarkably different from the ones of ordinary metallic alloys due to the atomic level disorder in the glassy state. Unlike crystalline materials plastic deformation in metallic glasses cannot be caused by lattice defects but takes place through atomic-scale deformation events and may furthermore involve localization through formation of shear bands. For understanding … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
12
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The inset shows an example of the typical 3D atomic configuration of amorphous Cu 64 Zr 36 . This study illustrated that the nearest average interatomic distances of the Cu-Cu (r Cu-Cu = 2.48 Å), Cu-Zr (r Cu-Zr = 2.82 Å), and Zr-Zr (r Zr-Zr = 3.16 Å) pairs agreed reasonably well with the experimental measurements (r Cu-Cu = 2.48 Å, r Cu-Zr = 2.72 Å, and r Zr-Zr = 3.12 Å) and simulations (r Cu-Cu = 2.58 Å, r Cu-Zr = 2.80 Å, and r Zr-Zr = 3.21 Å) [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42]. These results support the reliability of the EAM potential used in this study to describe the atomic structures of actual MGs [43].…”
Section: D Atomic Configurationsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…The inset shows an example of the typical 3D atomic configuration of amorphous Cu 64 Zr 36 . This study illustrated that the nearest average interatomic distances of the Cu-Cu (r Cu-Cu = 2.48 Å), Cu-Zr (r Cu-Zr = 2.82 Å), and Zr-Zr (r Zr-Zr = 3.16 Å) pairs agreed reasonably well with the experimental measurements (r Cu-Cu = 2.48 Å, r Cu-Zr = 2.72 Å, and r Zr-Zr = 3.12 Å) and simulations (r Cu-Cu = 2.58 Å, r Cu-Zr = 2.80 Å, and r Zr-Zr = 3.21 Å) [34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42]. These results support the reliability of the EAM potential used in this study to describe the atomic structures of actual MGs [43].…”
Section: D Atomic Configurationsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…As an example, ZrCu alloys have attracted interest in recent years, due to their bulk metallic glass properties (Cheng, 2011;Wang, 2004;Yu, 2006;Pǎduraru, 2007;Mei-Bo, 2004), and as amorphous alloy films for their mechanical (Xu, 2004;Musil, 2003;Das, 2005) and superconductivity properties (Karpe, 1996). Dudonis et al (Dudonis, 1996) prepared thin films with Zr composition in the range of (5 ≤ x ≤ 95) by using high working power (490 W and 1380 W on Cu and Zr targets, respectively) during magnetron sputter deposition.…”
Section: Case Study 1: Zr X Cu 100-x (10 ≤ X ≤ 90) Thin Films Depositmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The parameterization procedure of the EOS follows a similar strategy to that of Paduraru et al (2007). The target parameters are those determined by Leu et al (1975) and are optimized in order to minimize simultaneously the quadratic error on the melting curve of MgO and the …”
Section: Appendix 4 Gibbs Energy Functions Of the Mgo-periclase (B1)mentioning
confidence: 99%