4.8 Article

Understanding Grain Boundary Electrical Resistivity in Cu: The Effect of Boundary Structure

Journal

ACS NANO
Volume 15, Issue 10, Pages 16607-16615

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.1c06367

Keywords

grain boundaries; electrical resistivity; grain boundary structure; copper; excess volume

Funding

  1. ERC Advanced Grant GB CORRELATE [787446 GB-CORRELATE]
  2. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found a consistent relationship between the coincidence site lattice (CSL) type of grain boundaries (GBs) and their resistivity, where high dislocation density and corresponding strain fields contribute to increased resistivity. Additionally, the resistivity of GBs is approximately correlated with their excess volume.
Grain boundaries (GBs) in metals usually increase electrical resistivity due to their distinct atomic arrangement compared to the grain interior. While the GB structure has a crucial influence on the electrical properties, its relationship with resistivity is poorly understood. Here, we perform a systematic study on the resistivity-structure relationship in Cu tilt GBs, employing high-resolution in situ electrical measurements coupled with atomic structure analysis of the GBs. Excess volume and energies of selected GBs are calculated using molecular dynamics simulations. We find a consistent relation between the coincidence site lattice (CSL) type of the GB and its resistivity. The most resistive GBs are in the high range of low-angle GBs (14 degrees-18 degrees) with twice the resistivity of high angle tilt GBs, due to the high dislocation density and corresponding strain fields. Regarding the atomistic structure, GB resistivity approximately correlates with the GB excess volume. Moreover, we show that GB curvature increases resistivity by similar to 80%, while phase variations and defects within the same CSL type do not considerably change it.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available