A unified mechanistic model for size-dependent deformation in nanocrystalline and nanotwinned metals
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract We present a unified mechanistic model to rationalize size-dependent flow stress, activation volume and strain-rate sensitivity for metals with either nanocrystalline grains or nanoscale twins. The non-uniform partial dislocation model for flow stress [Asaro and Suresh, Acta Mater, Vol. 53, pp. 3369–3382, 2005; Gu et al., Scripta Mater, Vol. 62, pp. 361–364, 2010] is generalized here to consider both grain-size dependence and twin-thickness dependence of nanotwinned metals. A non-homogeneous nucleation model is proposed to predict the dependence of activation volume on both grain-size and twin-thickness. With the activation volume predicted from the non-homogeneous nucleation model and the flow stress obtained via the non-uniform partial dislocation model, strain-rate sensitivity as a function of characteristic structural length scale is also evaluated. This provides a unified approach from envisioning partial dislocation emission for the three size-dependent parameters characterizing the plastic deformation mechanism, flow stress, activation volume and strain-rate sensitivity, so that each one of these parameters is predicted when the geometry of the grains or nanotwins is known. The model predictions are shown to be consistent with a variety of available experimental data.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Microstructure and mechanical properties · Metal and Thin Film Mechanics · Aluminum Alloys Composites Properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. Suresh · Nature · 2008 · 456 · 71610.1038/456716a ↗
2. Asaro · Philos Mag Lett · 2003 · 83 · 73310.1080/09500830310001614540 ↗
3. Asaro · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 336910.1016/j.actamat.2005.03.047 ↗
4. Dao · Acta Mater · 2007 · 55 · 404110.1016/j.actamat.2007.01.038 ↗
5. Gu · Scripta Mater · 2010 · 62 · 36110.1016/j.scriptamat.2009.10.035 ↗
6. Lu · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 216910.1016/j.actamat.2005.01.031 ↗
7. Zhu · PNAS · 2007 · 104 · 303110.1073/pnas.0611097104 ↗
8. Asaro · Scripta Mater · 2008 · 58 · 38910.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.06.066 ↗
9. Lu · Science · 2009 · 323 · 60710.1126/science.1167641 ↗
10. Lu · Scripta Mater · 2009 · 60 · 106210.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.12.039 ↗
11. Lu · Acta Mater · 2009 · 57 · 516510.1016/j.actamat.2009.07.018 ↗
12. Lu · Science · 2009 · 324 · 34910.1126/science.1159610 ↗
13. Van Swygenhoven · Acta Mater · 1999 · 47 · 311710.1016/S1359-6454(99)00109-3 ↗
14. Conrad · Metall Mater Trans A · 2004 · 35 · 268110.1007/s11661-004-0214-5 ↗
15. Armstrong · Philos Mag · 2006 · 86 · 578710.1080/14786430600764872 ↗
16. Conrad · Nanotechnology · 2007 · 18 · 32570110.1088/0957-4484/18/32/325701 ↗
17. Hall · Proc Phys Soc London, Sect B · 1951 · 64 · 74710.1088/0370-1301/64/9/303 ↗
18. Petch · J Iron Steel Inst · 1953 · 174 · 25
19. Dao · Acta Mater · 2006 · 54 · 542110.1016/j.actamat.2006.06.062 ↗
20. Li · Nature · 2010 · 464 · 87710.1038/nature08929 ↗
21. Kulkarni · Acta Mater · 2009 · 57 · 483510.1016/j.actamat.2009.06.047 ↗
22. Jin · Scripta Mater · 2006 · 54 · 116310.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.11.072 ↗
23. Jin · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 112610.1016/j.actamat.2007.11.020 ↗
24. Dewald · Philos Mag · 2007 · 87 · 461510.1080/14786430701297590 ↗
25. Schuh · Acta Mater · 2003 · 51 · 43110.1016/S1359-6454(02)00427-5 ↗
26. Van Vliet · Appl Phys Lett · 2003 · 83 · 144110.1063/1.1597417 ↗
27. Asaro · J Mech Phys Solids · 1977 · 25 · 30910.1016/0022-5096(77)90001-1 ↗
28. Zhu · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 482510.1016/j.actamat.2005.06.033 ↗
29. Zhang · Appl Phys Lett · 2006 · 87 · 06192110.1063/1.2008377 ↗
30. Liao · Appl Phys Lett · 2006 · 88 · 02190910.1063/1.2159088 ↗
31. Sutton · 1995
32. Kulkarni · Scripta Mater · 2009 · 60 · 53210.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.12.007 ↗
33. Fang · Science · 2011 · 331 · 158710.1126/science.1200177 ↗