Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T04:07:07.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Defects in Laser Surface-Melted Metals Studied by Pac

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Gary S. Collins ,
Carl Aliard ,
Christoph Hohenemser  and
Clifton W. Draper
Gary S. Collins
Affiliation:
Washington State University, Department of Physics, Pullman, WA 99164
Carl Aliard
Affiliation:
Clark University, Department of Physics, Worcester, MA 01610
Christoph Hohenemser
Affiliation:
Clark University, Department of Physics, Worcester, MA 01610
Clifton W. Draper
Affiliation:
AT&t Technologies Engineering Research Center, Princeton, NJ 08540
Get access

Abstract

Following nanosecond-duration laser surface-melting, lattice locations of illIn probe atoms in Ni and Pt samples were studied using the technique of perturbed gamma-gamma angular correlations (PAC). After melting and annealing, no probe atoms were observed to become associated with unique vacancy clusters observed after other methods of damaging, while many probe atoms were found on non-unique sites. 111In probe atoms were observed to move to the surface and to be expelled at anomalously low temperatures. These observations are partially reconciled by the hypothesis that probe atoms diffusing in the molten surface layer become trapped on dislocations during resolidification, and during later annealing return to the surface via pipe diffusion.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 82: Symposium I – Characterization of Defects in Materials , 1986 , 53
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1987

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. Recknagel, E., Schatz, G. and Wichert, Th., in Hyperfine Interactions of Radioactive Nuclei, edited by Christiansen, J., Topics in Current Physics, Vol. 31 (Springer, Berlin, 1983) p. 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Pleiter, F. and Hohenemser, C., Phys. Rev. B25, 106 (1982).Google Scholar
3. Pleiter, F. and Prasad, K. G., Phys. Lett. 84A, 345 (1981); Hyperfine Interactions 20, 221 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Kaufmann, E. N., Buene, L., McDonald, M. L., Kothaus, J., Freitag, K., Vianden, R. and Draper, C. W., Nucl. Instr. Meth 209/210, 427 (1983).Google Scholar
5. Buene, L., Kaufmann, E. N., McDonald, M., Kothaus, J., Vianden, R., Freitag, K., and Draper, C. W., in Nuclear and Electron Resonance Spec-troscopies Applied to Materials Science, edited by Kaufmann, E. N. and Shenoy, G. K. (Elsevier North-Holland, New York, 1981) p. 391.Google Scholar
6. Draper, C. W., Buene, L., Poate, J. M. and Jacobson, D. C., Applied Optics 20, 1730 (1981).Google Scholar
7.The pattern is very similar to the one shown in fig. 1 of ref. 5.Google Scholar
8. Collins, G. S. and Schuhmann, R. B., Hyperfine Interactions 15/16, 391 (1983).Google Scholar
9. Gust, W., Hintz, M. B., Lodding, A., Odelius, H., Phil Mag. A43, 1205 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Buene, L., Jacobson, D. C., Nakahara, S., Poate, J. M., Draper, C. W. and Hirvonen, J. K., in Laser and Electron-Beam Solid Interactions, edited by Hess, Gibbons and Sigmon, (Elsevier North-Holland, New York, 1981) p. 583.Google Scholar