1984
DOI: 10.1016/0001-6160(84)90212-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strain rate sensitivity: The role of dislocation loop and point defect recovery

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2) and indicate that elimination of the fraction of obstacles that are transparent to dislocations, and do not contribute to the flow stress at lower strain rates, results in an increase in the strain-rate sensitivity of the material. The data are in agreement with studies of plastically deformed Al by Saimoto and Duesbery [30], who observed increased strain-rate sensitivity after annealing samples above 300 K, which was attributed by the authors to the recovery of point defect clusters and submicroscopic dislocation loops.…”
Section: Thermally Activated Plastic Flowsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…2) and indicate that elimination of the fraction of obstacles that are transparent to dislocations, and do not contribute to the flow stress at lower strain rates, results in an increase in the strain-rate sensitivity of the material. The data are in agreement with studies of plastically deformed Al by Saimoto and Duesbery [30], who observed increased strain-rate sensitivity after annealing samples above 300 K, which was attributed by the authors to the recovery of point defect clusters and submicroscopic dislocation loops.…”
Section: Thermally Activated Plastic Flowsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Nevertheless despite this complexity, overall the results suggest that the computer models of dislocation flow through dispersed obstacles is reaffirmed. Some of the ambiguity of debris identification is reduced if dynamic recovery at 298 K [22] is avoided. By testing at 78 K at which recovery does not occur, an estimate of the strength of debris α deb can be made as follows.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One explanation for this bifurcation could be dissolution of the solute clusters into smaller more complex objects, as described by Chen et al [50] for Al-Cu, which ultimately decreases the apparent activation volume via a decrease in both the activation distance, d, and spacing of the obstacles, l, such that V' = bdl decreases. An alternative mechanism for the decrease could be dislocation interactions in the solute cluster field during straining generating dislocation debris (small loops), which are weak obstacles that recover rapidly during the downchanges, though this effect is unexpected at such low strains [51], [52] Based on the calculated S values shown for the three alloys in Figure 7, it is possible to estimate the activation distance, representative of the size of the rate-controlling obstacles, based on the relationship:…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The likely cause of this is the ability for dislocation-dislocation and dislocationsolute/cluster interaction products to be recovered during the down-change strain rate change [53] whereby there is an effect on the spacing l, rather than d. Niewczas and Park [53] showed that in pure Al, dislocation-dislocation interaction products do not anneal out at temperatures below 100K; in contrast, such recoverable components must be considered here. Saimoto [29] and Saimoto and Duesbery [51] have argued that the presence of these dislocation interaction products contribute to the SRS in the down-change at ambient temperatures due to their likelihood to anneal out during the rate-change; in the strain rate change test, this effect would appear as an added relaxation during a perfectly compensated strain rate change. This would be coupled with the extensive work performed by Niewczas [52], [53] for observing the dislocation interaction products at low temperatures and the corresponding annealing temperatures, and how they influence the flow stress.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%