Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T06:55:48.151Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structural Study of a [100] 45° Twist Plus 7.5° Tilt Grain Boundary in Aluminium by HREM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

M. Shamsuzzoha ,
P. A. Deymier  and
David J. Smith
M. Shamsuzzoha
Affiliation:
School of Mines and Energy Development and Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487
P. A. Deymier
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721
David J. Smith
Affiliation:
Center for Solid State Science and Department of Physics and Astronomy, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85827
Get access

Abstract

A [100] 45° twist plus 7.5° tilt grain boundary in aluminium prepared by cold rolling and annealing has been studied by high-resolution electron microscopy. The direct interpretability of the image features in terms of atomic column positions allows structural models of the grain boundary to be developed. The boundary exibits a high concentration of steps due to the 7.5° tilt from a perfect [100] 45° quasiperiodic misorientation. Occurrence of co-incidence and pseudo co-incidence of atomic planes across the interface appears to play an important role in the formation of steps along this boundary. Local relaxation of atoms resulting from the perturbation of the [100] 45° twist bi-crystal determines the boundary structure

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 589 , 1999 , 353
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Kronberg, M. L. and Wilson, F. M., Trans A.I.M.E., 85, 26 (1964).Google Scholar
2.Bollmann, M., Crystal Defects and Crystalline Interfaces, Springer, New York (1970).Google Scholar
3.Balluffi, R. W., in Interfacial Segregation, A.S.M., Metals Park, Ohio (1977).Google Scholar
4.Smith, D. A., and Ponds, R. C., Intern. Metals Reviews, 205, 61 (1976).Google Scholar
5.Shamsuzzoha, M., Vazquez, I., Deymier, P. A., and Smith, D. J., Interface Science, 3, 227 (1996).Google Scholar
6.Shamsuzzoha, M., Smith, D. J., and Deymier, P. A., Phil. Mag., 24, 1303 (1990).Google Scholar
7.Penisson, J. M., J. de Phys. CS 49, 87 (1988).Google Scholar
8.Skrotzki, W., Wendt, H., Carter, C. B., and Kohlstedt, D., Phil. Mag., A57, 383 (1988).Google Scholar
9.Elkajbaji, M., and Thibault-Desseaux, J., Phil. Mag., A58, 325 (1988).Google Scholar
10.D‘Anterroches, C., and Bourret, A., Phil. Mag. A 49, 783 (1985).Google Scholar
11.Shamsuizzoha, M., and Deymier, P. A., Scripta Metall. Mater., 24, 1303 (1990).Google Scholar
12.Saxton, W. O., and Smith, D. J., Ultramicroscopy, 18, 39 (1985).Google Scholar
13.Sutton, A. P., Progress in Materials Science, 36, 167 (1992).Google Scholar
14.Shamsuzzoha, M., Deymnier, P. A., and Smith, D. J., Scripta Mater., 35, 327 (1996).Google Scholar