4.3 Article

Deformation Analysis of the Long-Period Stacking-Ordered Phase by Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations: Kink Deformation under Compression and Kink Boundary Migration under Tensile Strain

期刊

MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS
卷 56, 期 7, 页码 957-962

出版社

JAPAN INST METALS & MATERIALS
DOI: 10.2320/matertrans.MH201408

关键词

molecular dynamics; dislocation; long-period stacking-ordered structure; kinks; deformation

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The long-period stacking-ordered (LPSO) phase discovered in magnesium alloys is deformed upon the generation of a large number of unique deformation zones, which have no distinct orientation relationships at the deformation boundaries. These deformation zones are considered kink bands, but the mechanisms underlying their generation are not well understood. It has been suggested that the kink bands are responsible for the deformation of the LPSO phase, while simultaneously strengthening the material. In this study, the kink deformation process of the LPSO phase under compressive deformation was investigated through molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. The MD simulations showed that numerous prismatic < a > dislocations were nucleated first, which led to cross-slips towards various basal planes and caused kink deformation. This was followed by the nucleation and motion of a large number of basal dislocations, as well as kink deformations in tandem with the formation of kink bands, which occurred through another process. In addition, the individual dislocations were indistinguishable at kink boundaries. In other words, sharp boundaries were formed. Next, a simulation was performed that applied tensile strain to the model after the compressive deformation described above was implemented on it. This revealed that while kink boundaries with large misorientation angles intermittently migrated because of the tensile strain, the kink bands were not easily removed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据