4.6 Article

Grain-Size-Governed Shear Failure Mechanism of Polycrystalline Methane Hydrates

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 125, 期 18, 页码 10034-10042

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c00901

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway, FRINATEK Grant [231621]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFE0126400]
  3. Department of Natural Resources of Guangdong Province Project [GDNRC[2020]-047]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In polycrystalline methane hydrates, different shear behaviors exist depending on the grain sizes, with strengthening behavior and weakening behavior being two distinct modes of shear behavior.
The shear failure mechanism of polycrystalline gas hydrates is critical for understanding marine geohazards related to gas hydrates under a changing climate and for safe gas recovery from gas hydrate reservoirs. Since current experimental techniques cannot resolve the mechanism on a spatial and temporal nanoscale, molecular simulations can assist with proposing and substantiating nanoscale failure mechanisms. Here, we report the shear failure of polycrystalline methane hydrates using direct molecular dynamics simulations. Based on these simulations, we suggest two modes of shear behavior, depending on the grain sizes, d, in the polycrystal: grain-size-strengthening behavior with a d(1/3) grain size dependence for small grain sizes and grain-size-weakening behavior for large grain sizes. Through the crossover from strengthening to weakening behavior, the failure mode changes from shear failure with a failure plane parallel to the applied shear to tensile failure with a failure plane lying at an angle with the applied shear, spanning a network of grain boundaries. The existence of such a change in mechanism suggests that the Hall-Petch breakdown in methane hydrates is due to a change from grain boundary sliding to tensile opening being the most important failure mechanism when the grain size increases.

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

4.6
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