Understanding size effects on the strength of single crystals through high-temperature micropillar compression
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Compression tests of 〈1 1 1〉-oriented LiF single-crystal micropillars 1–5 μm in diameter were carried out from 25 °C to 250 °C. While the flow stress at ambient temperature was independent of the micropillar diameter, a strong size effect developed with elevated temperature. This behavior was explained by rigorously accounting for the different contributions to the flow stress of the micropillars as a function of temperature and pillar diameter: the lattice resistance, the forest hardening; and the size-dependent contribution as a result of the operation of single-arm dislocation sources. This was possible because the micropillars were obtained by chemically etching away the surrounding matrix in directionally solidified LiF–NaCl and LiF–KCl eutectics, avoiding any use of focused ion beam methods, yielding micropillars with a controlled dislocation density, independent of the sample preparation technique. In particular, the role of the lattice resistance on the size effect of micrometer-size single crystals was demonstrated unambiguously for the first time. This result rationalizes the different values of power-law exponent for the size effect found in the literature for face-centered cubic and body-centered cubic metals as well as for covalent and ionic solids.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Microstructure and mechanical properties · Advanced ceramic materials synthesis · Fusion materials and technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (48)
Show source-provided references
1. Uchic · Science · 2004 · 305 · 98610.1126/science.1098993 ↗
2. Greer · Acta Mater · 2005 · 53 · 182110.1016/j.actamat.2004.12.031 ↗
3. Volkert · Philos Mag · 2006 · 86 · 556710.1080/14786430600567739 ↗
4. Uchic · Annu Rev Mater Res · 2009 · 39 · 36110.1146/annurev-matsci-082908-145422 ↗
5. Dehm · Prog Mater Sci · 2009 · 54 · 66410.1016/j.pmatsci.2009.03.005 ↗
6. Greer · Prog Mater Sci · 2011 · 56 · 65410.1016/j.pmatsci.2011.01.005 ↗
7. Parthasarathy · Scr Mater · 2007 · 56 · 31310.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.09.016 ↗
8. Rao · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 324510.1016/j.actamat.2008.03.011 ↗
9. Tang · Phys Rev Lett · 2008 · 100 · 18550310.1103/PhysRevLett.100.185503 ↗
10. Greer · Mat Sci Eng A · 2008 · 493 · 2110.1016/j.msea.2007.08.093 ↗
11. Schneider · Mater Sci Eng A · 2009 · 508 · 24110.1016/j.msea.2009.01.011 ↗
12. Schneider · Phys Rev Lett · 2009 · 103 · 10550110.1103/PhysRevLett.103.105501 ↗
13. Michler · Appl Phys Lett · 2007 · 90 · 04312310.1063/1.2432277 ↗
14. Rabier · Phys Status Solidi · 2013 · 1 · 1110.1002/pssc.201200546 ↗
15. Moser · J Mater Res · 2007 · 22 · 100410.1557/jmr.2007.0140 ↗
16. Thilly · Philos Mag · 2012 · 92 · 331510.1080/14786435.2012.704422 ↗
17. Korte · Int J Plast · 2011 · 27 · 1866
18. Korte · Philos Mag · 2011 · 91 · 115010.1080/14786435.2010.505179 ↗
19. Soler · Int J Plast · 2012 · 36 · 5010.1016/j.ijplas.2012.03.005 ↗
20. Ng · Philos Mag · 2008 · 88 · 67710.1080/14786430801953126 ↗
21. Norfleet · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 298810.1016/j.actamat.2008.02.046 ↗
22. Zou · Acta Mater · 2014 · 65 · 8510.1016/j.actamat.2013.11.049 ↗
23. Zou · Philos Mag Lett · 2013 · 93 · 43110.1080/09500839.2013.797616 ↗
24. Lee · Philos Mag · 2012 · 92 · 123810.1080/14786435.2011.643250 ↗
25. Lotfian · Acta Mater · 2013 · 61 · 443910.1016/j.actamat.2013.04.013 ↗
26. Schneider · Philos Mag Lett · 2013 · 93 · 33110.1080/09500839.2013.777815 ↗
27. Orera · Opt Mater · 2005 · 27 · 172610.1016/j.optmat.2004.10.025 ↗
28. Orera · Acta Phys Slova · 2005 · 55 · 261
29. Wheeler · Rev Sci Instrum · 2013 · 84 · 04510310.1063/1.4795829 ↗
30. Wheeler · Int J Plast · 2013 · 40 · 14010.1016/j.ijplas.2012.08.001 ↗
31. Bei · Scr Mater · 2007 · 57 · 39710.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.05.010 ↗
32. Kiener · Mater Sci Eng A · 2007 · 459 · 26210.1016/j.msea.2007.01.046 ↗
33. Maas · Scr Mater · 2008 · 59 · 47110.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.04.034 ↗
34. Wheeler · Philos Mag · 2012 · 92 · 2510.1080/14786435.2012.674647 ↗
35. Cox · Appl Phys · 1952 · 3 · 72
36. Soler · Adv Eng Mater · 2012 · 14 · 100410.1002/adem.201200019 ↗
37. Ng · Scr Mater · 2008 · 59 · 79610.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.06.019 ↗
38. Ng · Acta Mater · 2008 · 56 · 171210.1016/j.actamat.2007.12.016 ↗
39. Suzuki · J Phys Soc Jpn · 1975 · 39 · 156610.1143/JPSJ.39.1566 ↗
40. Gilman · Aust J Phys · 1960 · 13 · 32710.1071/PH600327a ↗
41. Liu · Phys Stat Sol · 1982 · A70 · 43310.1002/pssa.2210700210 ↗
42. Nadgorny · J Mater Res · 2008 · 23 · 28410.1557/JMR.2008.0349 ↗
43. Bhakhri · J Mater Res · 2012 · 27 · 6510.1557/jmr.2011.246 ↗
44. Clegg · Sci Eng Ceram III · 2006 · 317–318 · 271
45. Östlund · Philos Mag · 2010 · 91 · 119010.1080/14786435.2010.509286 ↗
46. Evans · Phys Stat Sol · 1969 · 34 · 910.1002/pssb.19690340102 ↗
47. Gilman J, Johnston WG. Dislocations and Mechanical Properties of Crystals, Conference: 1956. p. 116–163.
48. Hart · J Phys D Appl Phys · 1977 · 10 · 26110.1088/0022-3727/10/18/004 ↗