4.7 Article

Prediction of a wide variety of linear complexions in face centered cubic alloys

期刊

ACTA MATERIALIA
卷 185, 期 -, 页码 129-141

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2019.11.069

关键词

Dislocations; Stacking faults; Complexions; Phase transformations; Atomistic simulations

资金

  1. U.S. Army Research Office [W911NF-16-1-0369]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Linear complexions are defect states that have been recently discovered along dislocations in body centered cubic Fe-based alloys. In this work, we use atomistic simulations to extend this concept and explore segregation-driven structural transitions at dislocations in face centered cubic alloys. We identify a variety of stable, nanoscale-size structural and chemical states, which are confined near dislocations and can be classified as linear complexions. Depending on the alloy system and thermodynamic conditions, such new states can preserve, partially modify, or relax the original dislocation cores they were born at. By considering different temperatures and compositions, we construct linear complexion diagrams that are similar to bulk phase diagrams, defining the important conditions for complexion formation while also specifying an expected complexion size and type. Several notable new complexion types were predicted here: (1) nanoparticle arrays comprised of L1(2) phases in Ni-Fe, Ni-Al, and Al-Zr, (2) replacement of stacking faults with layered complexions comprised of (111) planes from the CusZr intermetallic phase in Cu-Zr, (3) platelet arrays comprised of two-dimensional Guinier-Preston zones in Al-Cu, and finally (4) coexistence of multiple linear complexions containing both Guinier-Preston zones and L1(2) phases in ternary Al-Cu-Zr. All of these new complexion states are expected to alter material properties and affect the stability of the dislocations themselves, offering a unique opportunity for future materials design. (C) 2019 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据