4.3 Article

Investigating the electronic origins of the repulsion between substitutional and interstitial solutes in hcp Ti

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW MATERIALS
卷 5, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.5.073604

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation DMREF Grant [DMR-1729166]
  2. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  3. Center for Scientific Computing from the CNSI
  4. MRL
  5. NSF MRSEC [DMR-1720256]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The addition of alloying elements to titanium leads to short-ranged repulsive interactions with interstitial oxygen, likely due to accumulation of charge and misfit strains. A unique hybridization between dissolved substitutional elements and interstitial oxygen within hcp Ti is identified, resulting in a repulsive interaction at short distances.
The high solubility of oxygen in Ti, Zr, and Hf makes it difficult to stabilize protective oxide scales on their surfaces as the subsurface regions can serve as boundless sinks that continuously dissolve oxygen. Alloying elements are crucial to reduce the oxygen solubility and diffusivity within early transition metals. Past studies have shown that most substitutional alloying additions to titanium repel interstitial oxygen. Here we use firstprinciples calculations to show that this repulsion is short ranged and explore several factors that are likely responsible for the repulsive interaction. Calculations of Bader charges suggest the existence of short-range Coulomb interactions due to the accumulation of charge on the substitutional solute and interstitial oxygen that is drawn from the Ti host. Misfit strains due to differences in the atomic radii of the solutes and Ti are also found to play a role. We identify a unique hybridization phenomenon between dissolved substitutional elements and interstitial oxygen within hcp Ti that leads to a repulsive interaction at short distances, similar to that between closed-shell atoms, which is especially pronounced for Al and Si solutes.

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