Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:57:55.902Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Antiphase Boundary Calculations for the L12 Structure Using an Embedded Atom Method Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Jeanne R. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903
Robert A. Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903
Get access

Abstract

A model based on the embedded atom method [1] has been used to calculate antiphase boundary (APB) energies of three low-index planes for alloys having the L12 structure. The lattice constant, cohesive energy, unrelaxed vacancy formation energy, bulk modulus, and average shear modulus for each element are used as inputs into the model. Effects of the APB orientation and of the range of interaction in the model are examined. Both unrelaxed and relaxed APB energies are compared with available experimental values and earlier theoretical results. A strong anisotropy was found in six of the seven alloys studied. The {111} APB energy was consistently smaller than that for the {110} APB, while the {100} APB energy was found to be very close to zero with very little difference between the unrelaxed and relaxed values. For both energy and relaxation amounts, the results did not vary much with the range of interaction, so that 3rd nearest-neighbor calculations were found to be satisfactory approximations.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1991

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. Johnson, R.A., Phys. Rev. B 41, 9717 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Daw, M.S. and Baskes, M.I., Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1285 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Daw, M.S. and Baskes, M.I., Phys. Rev. B 29, 6443 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Johnson, R.A., in Computer Simulation In Materials Science. edited by Arsenault, R.J.,Beeler, J.R. Jr., and Esterling, D.M. (American Society for Metals,Metals Park, OH,1987), p. 29.Google Scholar
5. Foiles, S.M., Baskes, M.I., and Daw, M.S., Phys. Rev B 33, 7983 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Johnson, R.A., Phys. Rev. B 37, 3924 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Johnson, R.A., Phys. Rev. B 37, 6121 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Johnson, R.A., Phys. Rev. B 39, 12554 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Johnson, R.A. and Oh, D.J., J. Mater. Res. 4, 1195 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Sastry, S.M.L. and Ramaswami, B., Phil. Mag. 31, 375 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Cowley, J.M., Phys. Rev. 71, 669 (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Yang, C.N., J. Chem. Phys. D 3, 66 (1945).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Kear, B.H. and Wilsdorf, H.G., Trans. T.M.S.-A.I.M.E. 224, 382 (1962).Google Scholar
14. Takeuchi, S. and Kuramoto, E., Acta. Metall. 21, 415 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Flinn, P.A., Trans. T.M.S.-A.I.M.E. 218, 145 (1960).Google Scholar