| Literature DB >> 30352963 |
Petr Šesták1,2, Martin Friák3, David Holec4, Monika Všianská5,6,7, Mojmír Šob8,9,10.
Abstract
We present an ab initio and atomistic study of the stress-strain response and elastic stability of the ordered al">Fe 3 Al compound with the <span class="Chemical">D0 3 structure and a disordered Fe-Al solid solution with 18.75 at.% Al as well as of a nanocomposite consisting of an equal molar amount of both phases under uniaxial loading along the [001] direction. The tensile tests were performed under complex conditions including the effect of the lateral stress on the tensile strength and temperature effect. By comparing the behavior of individual phases with that of the nanocomposite we find that the disordered Fe-Al phase represents the weakest point of the studied nanocomposite in terms of tensile loading. The cleavage plane of the whole nanocomposite is identical to that identified when loading is applied solely to the disordered Fe-Al phase. It also turns out that the mechanical stability is strongly affected by softening of elastic constants C ' and/or C 66 and by corresponding elastic instabilities. Interestingly, we found that uniaxial straining of the ordered Fe 3 Al with the D0 3 structure leads almost to hydrostatic loading. Furthermore, increasing lateral stress linearly increases the tensile strength. This was also confirmed by molecular dynamics simulations employing Embedded Atom Method (EAM) potential. The molecular dynamics simulations also revealed that the thermal vibrations significantly decrease the tensile strength.Entities:
Keywords: Fe-Al; ab initio; elasticity; nanocomposite; order; stability; superalloys; tensile strength
Year: 2018 PMID: 30352963 PMCID: PMC6265909 DOI: 10.3390/nano8110873
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Figure 1A schematic visualization of a supercell used in our ab initio calculations. The 32-atom supercell contains a disordered Fe-Al phase (left-hand side) and an ordered FeAl compound with the D0 structure (right-hand side). The interface between both phases is highlighted by the blue planes.
Figure 2The stress-strain dependencies obtained from ab initio simulations for the uniaxial deformation (OUD) and uniaxial loading (OUL) deformation models for perfect FeAl with the D0 structure (a), a disordered Fe-Al phase (b) and their nanocomposite (c). The blue, magenta and orange curves represent axial and two transverse stresses for the OUD model while the red one belongs to the axial load of the OUL model. Elastic instabilities are marked by black dashed lines.
The tensile strengths in the [001] direction for the FeAl compound and the disordered Fe-Al phase with 18.75 at.% Al together with their nanocomposite from ab initio calculations, from quasi-static simulations and from the molecular dynamics simulations at temperature of 1 K. The table contains the tensile strengths obtained from maximum at stress-strain dependence (ab initio; except of the value of 24.7 GPa for FeAl OUD, which corresponds rather to a structural transformation), the ab initio tensile strength obtained from elastic instability (ab initio + ei), molecular static (MD (qs)) and molecular dynamics at the temperature of 1 K.
| ab initio | ab initio + ei | MD (qs) | MD (1 K) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fe | 24.7 | 22.0 | 18.6 | 16.7 |
| Fe | 4.1 | 4.1 | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Fe-Al disordered OUD | 22.9 | - | 17.7 | 17.3 |
| Fe-Al disordered OUL | 7.8 | - | 8.5 | 8.4 |
| nanocomposite OUD | 23.0 | 21.4 | 16.6 | 16.0 |
| nanocomposite OUL | 5.6 | 5.5 | 7.0 | 7.2 |
Figure 3The effect of the transverse stresses on the tensile strength as studied by quantum-mechanical calculations (marked as DFT-GGA) and atomistic Embeded Atom Method (EAM) potentials (marked as EAM-FS).
The coefficients and from Equation (3) that were determined directly from the stress-strain dependence and via Equation (4), respectively. The Table also contains the tensile strengths for elemental Fe (bcc) [71,72,74,75,76,77,78], Al (fcc) (present calculations and Refs. [79,80,81,82,83]) and Fe-Al-based systems. Most values of strength given in the Table correspond to the maximum of stress at the stress-strain curve. All values without a reference come from the present work. The for Al was computed from Equation (4) and the elastic constants were taken from Ref. [84] ( = 123 GPa, = 70.8 GPa and = 30.9 GPa). The values of for Fe-Al systems were obtained from the elastic constants calculated here (see Table 3).
| elemental Fe (bcc) | 0.63 [ | 0.67 [ | 12.7 [ |
| elemental Al (fcc) | 0.00 | 0.73 | 12.6 [ |
| 9.20** [ | |||
| Fe-Al - nanocomposite | 0.82 | 0.86 | 5.5 |
| Fe | 0.89 | 0.87 | 4.1 |
| Fe-Al - disordered | 0.79 | 0.75 | 7.8 |
* corresponding to elastic instabilities occurring prior to reaching the maximum stress at the stress-strain curve, ** obtained from a phonon instability with finite wave vector.
Figure 4The tensile strength of FeAl and disordered Fe-Al phases together with their nanocomposite as functions of the temperature (the simulations were performed for 1, 10, 50, 100, 200, 300 and 400 K). Blue and yellow curves show the results obtained within OUD and OUL, respectively.
The computed anisotropic elastic constants , and together with homogenized bulk modulus B, Young’s modulus E, shear modulus G, Poisson ratio and the Cauchy pressure –. The Table also contains previous theoretical results [96,97,98] as well as available experimental data [99]. All elastic constants (except for Poisson’s ratio) and moduli are given in GPa.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ordered Fe | 211 | 161 | 139 | 178 | 73 |
| 225 [ | 160 [ | 147 [ | 180 [ | 101 [ | |
| 283 [ | 206 [ | 149 [ | 232 [ | 87 [ | |
| 285 [ | 208 [ | 151 [ | 233 [ | 88 [ | |
| 159 [ | 138 [ | 138 [ | 144* [ | – | |
| experiment | 179 [ | 131 [ | 138 [ | 147 [ | – |
| disordered Fe-Al | 217 | 131 | 120 | 160 | 80 |
| nanocomposite | 193 | 144 | 127 | 160 | 68 |
|
| |||||
| ordered Fe | 193 | 0.319 | 2.438 | 22 | |
| 347 [ | 0.179 [ | 1.782 [ | 13 [ | ||
| – | 0.400 [ | 2.632 [ | 57 [ | ||
| 234 [ | 0.333 [ | 2.65 [ | 57 [ | ||
| disordered Fe-Al | 206 | 0.285 | 2.000 | 11 | |
| nanocomposite | 178 | 0.314 | 2.353 | 17 |
* derived from elastic constants, ** directly from TB-LMTO calculations.
Figure 5Directional dependencies of Young’s modulus of the ground-state configuration of FeAl compound (a); disordered Fe-Al (b) and the nanocomposite consisting of these two phases (c). All three dependencies were visualized using the SC-EMA software package (see it freely available at the web page scema.mpie.de) [88,89,90].
Figure 6The location of the cleavage plane highlighted by the red plane. The blue planes mark the interfaces between D0 and disordered phases.