Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T10:15:19.761Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dislocation Confinement and Ultimate Strength in Nanoscale Polycrystals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Qizhen Li,
Peter M. Anderson,
Michael Mills and
Peter Hazzledine
Qizhen Li
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, U.S.A.
Peter M. Anderson
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, U.S.A.
Michael Mills
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, U.S.A.
Peter Hazzledine
Affiliation:
Universal Energy Systems Inc., Dayton, OH 45432, USA
Get access

Abstract

Nanoscale polycrystalline metals typically exhibit increasing hardness with decreasing grain size down to a critical value on the order of 5 to 30 nm. Below this, a plateau or decrease is often observed. Similar observations are made for nanoscale multilayer thin films. There, TEM observations and modeling suggest that the hardness peak may be associated with the inability of interfaces to contain dislocations within individual nanoscale layers. This manuscript pursues the same concept for nanoscale polycrystalline metals via an analytic study of dislocation nucleation and motion within a regular 2D hexagonal array of grains. The model predicts a hardness peak and loss of dislocation confinement in the 5 to 30 nm grain size regime, but only if the nature of dislocation interaction with grain boundaries changes in the nanoscale regime.

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Hall, EO, Proc Phys Soc B64, 747 (1952).Google Scholar
2. Petch, NJ, J Iron Steel Inst 174, 25 (1953).Google Scholar
3. Sanders, PG, Eastman, JA, Weertman, JR, Acta Mater 45, 4019 (1997).Google Scholar
4. Masumura, RA, Hazzledine, PM, Pande, CS, Acta Mater 46, 4527 (1998).Google Scholar
5. Kumar, KS, Suresh, S, Chisholm, MF, Horton, JA, Wang, P, Acta Mater 51, 387 (2003).Google Scholar
6. Yamakov, V, Wolf, D, Salazar, M, Phillpot, SR, Gleiter, H, Acta Mater 49, 2713 (2001).Google Scholar
7. Van Swygenhoven, H, Derlet, PM, Physical Review B 64, 224105 (2001).Google Scholar
8. Van Swygenhoven, H, Derlet, PM and Hasnaoui, A, Physical Review B 66, 024101 (2002).Google Scholar
9. Yamakov, V, Wolf, D, Phillpot, SR, Gleiter, H, Acta Mater 50, 5005 (2002).Google Scholar
10. Van Swygenhoven, H, Science 5565, 66 (2002).Google Scholar
11. Yamakov, V, Wolf, D, Phillpot, SR, Mukherjee, AK, Gleiter, H, Nature Materials 1, 45 (2002).Google Scholar
12. Anderson, PM, Foecke, T, Hazzledine, PM, MRS Bulletin 24(2), 27 (1999).Google Scholar
13. Foecke, T, Kramer, DE, Int J Fracture 119(4–2), 351 (2003).Google Scholar
14. Li, Q, Anderson, PM, “Simulation of Lattice Mismatch Strengthening in Nanostructured Metallic Multilayers”, in preparation (Dec. 2003).Google Scholar
15. Li, Q, Anderson, PM, “Dislocation Confinement and Ultimate Strength in Nanoscale Metallic Multilayers”, in preparation (Dec. 2003).Google Scholar
16. Hirth, JP, Lothe, J, Theory of Dislocations, 2nd ed (John Wiley & Sons, 1982).Google Scholar