1990
DOI: 10.1051/jphyscol:1990149
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interaction Between Lattice Dislocations and Grain Boundaries in FCC Metals and Ordered Compounds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The structural unit model may help us to predict the interaction between the (superpartial) screw dislocation and a long period boundary, if we know the interaction between the dislocation and the delimiting favoured boundaries. The results of a previous pair potential study of the E=57 in L1 2 ordered structure [9] support this conclusion for ordered alloys. However, there are two considerations that have to be kept in mind: first, in the case of absorption in the boundary and splitting into DSC dislocations, the distance of splitting is limited to one type of structural unit; secondly, the minority units can be thought to contain a dislocation core and there can be elastic interaction.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The structural unit model may help us to predict the interaction between the (superpartial) screw dislocation and a long period boundary, if we know the interaction between the dislocation and the delimiting favoured boundaries. The results of a previous pair potential study of the E=57 in L1 2 ordered structure [9] support this conclusion for ordered alloys. However, there are two considerations that have to be kept in mind: first, in the case of absorption in the boundary and splitting into DSC dislocations, the distance of splitting is limited to one type of structural unit; secondly, the minority units can be thought to contain a dislocation core and there can be elastic interaction.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…However, based on LRB Criterion 3, transmission behaviour would require that the transmitted dislocation have an opposite Burgers vector sign than the incoming dislocation, resulting in an increase in the residual Burgers vector and violating LRB Criterion 2. For shear loading, equation (4) follows LRB Criterion 2 applied to the GB slip plane but equation (5) does not because an alternative deformation path, with transmission of a Shockley partial, could have occurred resulting in a smaller residual Burgers vector. This implies that Criterion 3 is a stronger determinate for nucleation than Criterion 2, at least for conditions with small residual Burgers vectors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such GBDs can be localized or spread along the boundary plane [4,5,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] depending on the degree of order along the boundary and temperature. Pestman et al showed that transmission versus absorption depends strongly on the structure of the grain boundary and that predictions for long-period boundaries could be possible using the structural unit model [5]. Couzinie et al concluded that recombination of dissociated lattice dislocations is needed prior to the formation of GBDs and that reactions between GBDs in the grain boundary can lead to further relaxation [24].…”
Section: The Angle Between the Lines Of Intersection Between The Incomentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Such GBDs can be localized or spread along the boundary plane depending on the character of GB and temperature. Pestman et al [12] showed that the extent of transmission and absorption depends strongly on the structure of the GB. In order to take account of the interaction between pile-ups and tilt GB and the dislocation absorption and propagation within the GB, Dewald and Curtin [13] proposed three additional criteria, including normal compressive stress, the step associated with the residual defect and the influence of partial dislocation on resolved shear stress, based on multiscale simulations CADD.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%