Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-01T13:25:11.247Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Grain Boundary Structural Transformations Induced by Solute Segregation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

K. Sickafus
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
S. L. Sass
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Get access

Abstract

The problem of solute segregation came to prominence with relation to studies of the temper embrittlement of low alloy steels. McLean and Northcott1(1948) first suggested that segregation of various elements to the grain boundaries was primarily responsible for the intergranular fracture observed in steels susceptible to this embrittlement. Direct evidence for segregation came much later with the development of surface sensitive analytical techniques, especially Auger electron spectroscopy (AES). Using AES, it was determined that impurity elements such as P, Sb and Sn, as well as alloying elements such as Ni and Cr, were highly concentrated at the fracture surfaces in embrittled steels2. It is not clear, however, why solute segregation changes the mechanical strength of the grain boundaries in these materials. Based on recent calculations, Messmer and Briant3 proposed that certain solute species at a grain boundary change the chemical bonding at the interface. However, other more dramatic structural rearrangements may be possible upon segregation. Such structural changes were first suggested by the observation of facetted fracture surfaces in tellurium-doped iron alloys4. In the study presented here, it is shown that low concentrations of solute can cause changes in grain boundary structure. In particular, small concentrations of Au solute were found to cause a major change in the dislocation structure of low angle [001] Fe twist boundaries. Preliminary observations on the str ucture of a Fe-0.18 at.% Au* twist boundary were presented elsewhere5. Additional results will be presented here on the effect of changes in solute concentration and misorientation angle, θ, on this structural transformation. It is believed that these observations are evidence for the occurrence of a two-dimensional phase transformation in the grain boundary, similar to that predicted by Hart6

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1985

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

1. McLean, D. and Northcott, L., J. Iron Steel Inst., (158, 169 (1948).Google Scholar
2. Marcus, H.L. and Palmberg, P.W., Trans. AIME, 245, 1664 (1968).Google Scholar
3. Messmer, R.P. and Briant, C.L., Acta Met., 30, 457 (1982).10.1016/0001-6160(82)90226-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Rellick, J.R., McMahon, C.J., Marcus, H.L. and Palmberg, P.W., Met. Trans., 1492, (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Sickafus, K. and Sass, S.L., Scripta Met., 18, 165 (1984).10.1016/0036-9748(84)90498-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hart, E.W., Scripta Met., 2, 179 (1968).10.1016/0036-9748(68)90222-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Schober, T. and Balluffi, R.W., Phil. Mag., 20, 511 (1969).10.1080/14786436908228723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Royen, P. and Reinhardt, H., Z. Anorg. Allgem. Chem., 281, 18 (1955).10.1002/zaac.19552810103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Sickafus, K. and Sass, S.L., Proc. AVS Fall Meeting, 1984, J. Vac. Sci. and Tech., to be published.Google Scholar
10. Berthier, Y., Perdereau, N. and Oudar, J., Surf. Sci., 36, 225 (1973).10.1016/0039-6028(73)90257-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Cahn, J.W., J. de Physique, 43, C6199 (1982).Google Scholar
12. Blakely, J.M. and Thapliyal, H.V., Interfacial Segregation, ASM, 137 (1979).Google Scholar