Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:41:21.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Field-induced strain associated with polarization reversal in a rhombohedral ferroelectric ceramic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Pin Yang
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-0959
George R. Burns
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-0959
Mark A. Rodriguez
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-0959
Get access

Abstract

The polarization reversal process in a rhombohedral ferroelectric ceramic material was investigated using field-induced strain measurements and texture development. Special attention was focused on the difference in the field-induced strains between the first quarter cycle and subsequent loading conditions. Results show that the initial field-induced strain is about twelve times greater than the subsequent strain, which immediately suggests that mechanisms involved in these conditions during the polarization reversal process are different. The difference in the magnitude of field-induced strain is discussed in terms of 180° and non-180° domain reorientation processes.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

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

REFERENCES

1.Lynch, C.S., Yang, W., Collier, L., Suo, Z., and McMeeking, R.M., Ferroelectric 166, 11 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Lucato, S.L. dos Santos e, Lupascu, D.C., and Rödel, J., J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 21, 1425 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Moore, R.H., Burns, G.R., Hutchinson, M., and Yang, P., in Ceramic Transactions, Morphotropic Phase Boundary Phenomena and Perovskite Materials, edited by Wong-Ng, W., Nair, K.M., and Guo, R. (American Ceramic Society, Columbus, OH, 2002), Vol. 136, p. 105.Google Scholar
4.Merz, W.J., Phys. Rev. 95, 690 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Tu, C.S., Schmidt, V.H., Shih, I.C., and Chien, R., Phys. Rev. B 67, 020102 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Little, E.A., Phys. Rev. 98, 978 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Plumlee, R.H., IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. IM–22, 231 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Weymouth, L.J., in Process Instruments and Controls Handbook, 2nd ed., edited by Considine, D.M. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1974), pp. 8–1.Google Scholar
9.Wieder, H.H., J. Appl. Phys. 26, 1479 (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Yang, P., Rodriguez, M.A., Burns, G.R., Stavig, M., and Moore, R.H., J. Appl. Phys. (2003, submitted).Google Scholar
11.Berlincourt, D. and Kruger, H.H.A., J. Appl. Phys. 30, 1804 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Arlt, G., Ferroelectrics 76, 451 (1987).Google Scholar
13.Arlt, G. and Sasko, P., J. Appl. Phys. 51, 4956, (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Broek, D., Elementary Engineering Fracture Mechanisms (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1982), pp. 101105.Google Scholar
15.Yang, P. and Payne, D.A., J. Appl. Phys. 71, 1361 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Pan, W.Y., Dam, C.Q., Zhang, Q.M., and Cross, L.E., J. Appl. Phys. 66, 6014 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar