4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

A description of stress driven bubble growth of helium implanted tungsten

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS
Volume 389, Issue 2, Pages 203-212

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2009.02.027

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Low energy (< 100 keV) helium implantation of tungsten has been shown to result in the formation of unusual Surface morphologies over a large temperature range (700-2100 degrees C). Simulation of these macroscopic phenomena requires a multiscale approach to modeling helium transport in both space and time. We present here a multiscale helium transport model by coupling spatially-resolved kinetic rate theory (KRT) with kinetic Monte Carlo (KMC) simulation to model helium bubble nucleation and growth. The KRT-based HEROS Code establishes defect concentrations as well as stable helium bubble nuclei as a function of implantation parameters and position from the implanted surface and the KMC-based Mc-HEROS Code models the growth of helium bubbles due to migration and coalescence. Temperature and stress-gradients can act as driving forces, resulting in biased bubble migration. The Mc-HEROS Code was modified to simulate the impact of stress gradients on bubble migration and coalescence. In this work, we report on bubble growth and gas release of helium implanted tungsten W/O stress gradients. First, surface pore densities and size distributions are compared with available experimental results for stress-free helium implantation conditions. Next, the impact of stress gradients on helium bubble evolution is simulated. The influence of stress fields on bubble and surface pore evolution are compared with stress-free simulations. It is shown that near surface stress gradients accelerate helium bubbles towards the free surface, but do not increasing average bubble diameters significantly. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available