Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-28T01:54:16.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Energetics of Ideal Grain Boundary Fracture in Iron and the Thermodynamic Criterion of Impurity Embrittlement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

Genrich L. Krasko*
Affiliation:
U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Materials Division, AMSRL-WM-ME, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005–5069
Get access

Abstract

Modeling of grain boundary (GB) relaxation during ideal fracture, and the fracture energetics of a Σ3 (111) GB in Fe was performed using the modified Finnis-Sinclair semi-empirical method, and utilizing the so-called “environment-sensitive embedding energies” of impurity atoms, introduced earlier by the author. The calculations were done for both the clean GB, and GB with the following impurity atoms: H, B, C, N, O, P and S. The ideal fracture was modeled by separating the two halves of crystal normal to the GB, step-wise, minimizing the total crystal energy at every step. The interplanar distances were varied, while the Fe interatomic spacing within the hexagonal planes was held fixed. When the distance between the two crystal halves: one with the impurity and another without, exceeded the interatomic interaction cut-off radius (3.6 Å), two different free surfaces - with and without the impurity - emerged. The GB and surface energies were found both for the pure Fe, and that with impurity atoms at the GB or free surface. Both the (111) GB energy and the (111) surface energy of pure Fe agree well with experimental data and results of previous semi-empirical modeling. In general, the correlation between the embrittling/ cohesion enhancing effect of impurities in GB and the difference between the GB and free surface energies agrees with the thermodynamic criterion of embrittlement.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

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. Krasko, G. L., Int. J. Refractory Metals & Hard Materials, 12, 251 (1994).Google Scholar
2. Olson, G. B., in Innovations in Ultrahigh-Strength Steel Technology (ed. by Olson, G. B., Azrin, M., and Wright, E. S.). 34th Sagamore Army Resesarch Conference Proceedings, 1990, p. 3.Google Scholar
3. Krasko, G. L. and Olson, G. B., Solid State Commun., 76, 247 (1990);Google Scholar
Krasko, G. L. and Olson, G. B., Solid State Commun., 79, 113 (1991)Google Scholar
4. Krasko, G. L., in Structure and Properties of Interfaces in Materials (ed. Stark, A., Dahmen, U., and Briant, C. L.), Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 238, Pittsburgh, PA (1992), p. 481.Google Scholar
5. Krasko, G. L., Scripta Metall, et Mater. 28, 1543 (1993).Google Scholar
6. Wu, R., Freeman, A. J., and Olson, G. B., J. Mater. Res. 7, 2403 (1992); Phys. Rev. B47, 6855 (1993); Phys. Rev. B50, 75 (1994); Science, 265, 376 (1994).Google Scholar
7. Anderson, P. M., Wang, J-S., and Rice, J. R., in Innovations in Ultrahigh-Strength Steel Technology (ed. by Olson, G. B., Azrin, M., and Wright, E. S.). 34th Sagamore Army Resesarch Conference Proceedings, 1990, p. 619;Google Scholar
Rice, J. R. and Wang, J.-S., Mat. Sci. and Eng. A, 107, 23 (1989).Google Scholar
8. Finnis, M. W. and Sinclair, J. E., Phil. Mag., A50, 45 (1984); A53, 161 (1986).Google Scholar
9. Harrison, R. J., in Innovations in Ultrahigh-Strength Steel Technology (ed. by Olson, G. B., Azrin, M., and Wright, E. S.). 34th Sagamore Army Resesarch Conference Proceedings, 1990, p. 651 Google Scholar
10. Horsfield, A. P., et. al., Phys. Rev. B53, 12694, (1996).Google Scholar
11. Tersoff, J., Phys. Rev. B37, 6991 (1988);Google Scholar
Tang, M. and Yip, S., Phys. Rev., B52, 15150 (1995).Google Scholar