3.8 Article

On recoil-energy-dependent defect accumulation in pure copper - Part II. Theoretical treatment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over the years, an enormous amount of experimental results have been reported on damage accumulation (e.g. void swelling) in metals and alloys irradiated under vastly different recoil energy conditions. Unfortunately, however, very little is known either experimentally or theoretically about the effect of recoil energy on damage accumulation. Recently, dedicated irradiation experiments using 2.5 MeV electrons, 3.0 MeV protons and fission neutrons have been carried out to determine the effect of recoil energy on the damage accumulation behaviour in pure copper and the results have been reported in part I of this paper (Singh et al., 2001, Phil. Mag. A, 80, 2629). The present paper attempts to provide a theoretical framework within which the effect of recoil energy on damage accumulation behaviour can be understood. The damage accumulation under Frenkel pair production (e.g. 2.5 MeV electron) has been treated in terms of the standard rate theory (SRT) model whereas the evolution of the defect microstructure under cascade damage conditions (e.g. 3.0 MeV protons and fission neutrons) has been calculated within the framework of the production bias model (PBM). Theoretical results, in agreement with experimental results, show that the damage accumulation behaviour is very sensitive to the recoil energy and under cascade damage conditions can be treated only within the framework of the PBM. The intracascade clustering of self-interstitial atoms (SIAs) and the properties of SIA clusters such as one-dimensional diffusional transport and thermal stability are found to be the main reasons for the recoil-energy-dependent vacancy supersaturation. The vacancy supersaturation is the main driving force for the void nucleation and void swelling. In the case of Frenkel pair production, the experimental results are found to be consistent with the SRT model with a dislocation bias value of 2%.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available