4.7 Article

First-principles study on solute-basal dislocation interaction in Mg alloys

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLOYS AND COMPOUNDS
卷 785, 期 -, 页码 911-917

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.01.262

关键词

Magnesium alloys; Dislocation cores; Solutes; Density functional theory

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51471038]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2018CDPTCG0001/42]
  3. National special support program for high-level personnel recruitment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To better understand the influence of alloying elements on the mechanical properties of Mg-X (Al, Sn, Ca, Y, Sc, Er, Gd, and Nd) binary alloys, the local interactions between the solute atoms and basal screw dislocation cores were investigated using first-principles calculations. It is revealed that Rare Earth (Y, Sc, Er, Gd, and Nd) and Ca solute atoms can hinder the dissociation behavior of the full basal dislocation core to different extents. Moreover, Y, Sc, and Er tend to stabilize the perfect Burgers vector of basal dislocations. Furthermore, Sn, Y, and Nd were selected to access the interactions between solute atoms and partial dislocations. It is found that Y and Nd can alter the structure of partial dislocation and reduce the width of the stacking fault at specific locations. By comparison, Al and Sn solutes slightly influence the width of the stacking fault. The energies of relaxed basal dislocation cores decorated by Rare Earth and Ca are significantly lower than those decorated by Al and Sn, which suggests that a stronger binding is present between Rare Earth elements, Ca solute atoms, and basal dislocation cores. Moreover, non-planar basal dislocation cores would be induced by Rare Earth solutes. Finally, the physical factors of alloying elements influencing dislocation core structures and the implications of the diverse geometries of dislocation cores to mechanical properties of Mg alloys are discussed. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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