Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:41:09.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Threshold displacement and interstitial-atom formation energies in Ni3Al

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

A. Caro ,
M. Victoria  and
R. S. Averback
A. Caro
Affiliation:
Paul Scherrer Institute, CH-5232 Villingen, Switzerland
M. Victoria
Affiliation:
Paul Scherrer Institute, CH-5232 Villingen, Switzerland
R. S. Averback
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801
Get access

Abstract

Threshold displacement energies for atomic displacements along 〈110〉, 〈100〉, and 〈111〉 directions, and formation enthalpies of several symmetric interstitial atom configurations were calculated for Ni3Al by computer simulation using “embedded atom method” potentials. The Ni–Ni (100) dumbbell in the plane containing only Ni atoms has the lowest interstitial-atom enthalpy although the enthalpies of other configurations are similar. Interstitial configurations involving Al atoms all have much higher enthalpies. The anisotropy of the threshold energies in Ni3Al is similar to pure metals and no significant difference in threshold energy was observed for 〈110〉 replacement chains in rows containing all Ni atoms or alternating Ni–Al atoms. Various metastable interstitial atom configurations were observed, including crowd-ions. In addition, the spontaneous recombination volume for some configurations can be much smaller than in pure metals. The consequences of these results for radiation induced segregation and amorphization are discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 5 , Issue 7 , July 1990 , pp. 1409 - 1413
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Gibson, J. B., Goland, A. N., Milgram, M., and Vineyard, G. H., Phys. Rev. 120, 1229 (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Diaz, T. de la Rubia, Averback, R. S., Benedek, R., and King, W. E., Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 1930 (1987).Google Scholar
3 See, e.g., Interatomic Potentials and Simulation of Lattice Defects, edited by Gehlen, P. C., Beeler, J. R. Jr, and Jaffee, R. I. (Plenum, New York, 1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Foiles, S. M., Baskes, M. I., and Daw, M. S., Phys. Rev. B 33, 7983 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Vineyard, G. H., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 18, Suppl. Ill, 144 (1963).Google Scholar
6Foiles, S. M. and Daw, M. S., J. Mater. Res. 2 (1), 5 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Bui, T., Klatt, J. L., Robertson, I. M., and Averback, R. S. (unpublished research).Google Scholar
8Potter, D. I. and Ryding, D. G., J. Nucl. Mater. 71, 14 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 The Dyn52 code was written by Baskes, M. I., Daw, M. S., and Foiles, S. M..Google Scholar
10 Although the threshold energies have not been determined for Ni3Al, the values obtained by simulations are typical of those in Ni and other fee metals. (See, e.g., Lucasson, P., in Fundamental Aspects of Radiation Damage in Metals, edited by M. T. Robinson and F. W. Young, Jr. (1975), p. 42.Google Scholar