4.1 Article

Amorphous complexions alter the tensile failure of nanocrystalline Cu-Zr alloys

期刊

MATERIALIA
卷 17, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mtla.2021.101134

关键词

Nanocrystalline metals; Plasticity; Complexions; In situ mechanical testing

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Science and Engineering Division [DESC0021224]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the role of interfacial structural disorder on plasticity and failure of nanocrystalline Cu-Zr alloys through in situ scanning electron microscopy tensile deformation experiments. The results show that structural disorder at the grain boundaries can be beneficial for improving the ductility of nanocrystalline metals.
Grain boundary-based mechanisms are known to control the plastic deformation and failure of nanocrystalline metals, with manipulation of the boundary structure a promising path for tuning this response. In this study, the role of interfacial structural disorder on plasticity and failure of nanocrystalline Cu-Zr alloys is investigated with in situ scanning electron microscopy tensile deformation experiments. Two model materials are created, one with only the typical ordered grain boundaries and another with amorphous intergranular films interspersed into the boundary network, while the microstructures are otherwise identical. Hence, the importance of complexion type on plasticity and failure is isolated by only varying complexion structure. The tensile experiments show that failure of the samples containing amorphous films is significantly retarded, as evidenced by an increase in the cross-sectional area reduction, a decrease in the occurrence of shear-dominated failure, a decrease in strain localization, and fracture surfaces with more elongated dimple features. As a whole, this study provides direct evidence that structural disorder at the grain boundaries can be beneficial for improving the ductility of nanocrystalline metals.

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

4.1
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