Advertisement

Inter- and Transgranular Nucleation and Growth of Voids in Shock Loaded Copper Bicrystals

  • Elizabeth FortinEmail author
  • Benjamin Shaffer
  • Saul Opie
  • Matthew Catlett
  • Pedro Peralta
Conference paper
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)

Abstract

Understanding the evolution of dynamic deformation and damage due to spall at grain boundaries (GBs) can provide a basis for connecting micro- to macroscale failure behavior in polycrystalline metals undergoing extreme loading conditions. Bicrystal samples grown from the melt were tested using flyer-plate impacts with shock stresses from 3 to 5 GPa. Pulse duration and crystal orientation along the shock direction were varied for a fixed boundary misorientation to determine thresholds for void nucleation and coalescence in both the bulk and the boundary. Sample characterization was performed using electron backscattering diffraction (EBSD) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to gather microstructural information at and around the GB, with emphasis on damage at the boundary. Simulations were performed to interpret experimental results. Initial results show that the kinetics of damage growth at the boundary is strongly affected by pulse duration and stress level and that once a threshold level is reached, damage increases faster at the GB compared to the grain bulks.

Keywords

Spall Bicrystal Pulse duration Grain boundary 

References

  1. 1.
    Meyers MA (1994) Dynamic behavior of materials. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Minich RW, Cazamias JU, Kumar M, Schwartz AJ (2004) Effect of microstructural length scales on spall behavior of copper. Metall Mater Trans A 35A(9):2663–2673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koller DD, Hixson RS, Gray GT III, Rigg PA, Addessio LB, Cerreta EK, Maestas JD, Yablinsky CA (2005) Influence of shock-wave profile shape on dynamically induced damage in high-purity copper. J Appl Phys 98:103518-1–103518-7.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2128493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buchar J, Elices M, Cortez R (1991) The influence of grain size on the spall fracture of copper. J Phys IV Col 1(C3):C3-623–C3-630.  https://doi.org/10.1051/jp4:1991387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peralta P, DiGiacomo S, Hashemian S, Luo SN, Paisley D, Dickerson R, Loomis E, Byler D, McClellan KJ, D’Armas H (2008) Characterization of incipient spall damage in shocked copper multicrystals. Int J Damage Mech 18:393–413.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789508097550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wayne L (2009) Three-dimensional characterization of spall damage at microstructural weak links in shock-loaded copper polycrystals. Master’s thesis, Arizona State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cerreta EK, Escobedo JP, Perez-Bergquist A, Koller DD, Trujillo CP, Gray GT III, Brandl C, Germann TC (2012) Early stage dynamic damage and the role of grain boundary type. Scripta Mater 66:638–641.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2012.01.051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Escobedo JP, Dennis-Koller D, Cerreta EK, Patterson BM, Bronkhorst CA, Hansen BL, Tonks D, Lebensohn RA (2011) Effects of grain size and boundary structure on the dynamic tensile response of copper. J Appl Phys 110:033513-1–033513-13.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3607294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    An Q, Han WZ, Luo SN, Germann TC, Tonks DL, Goddard WA III (2012) Left-right loading dependence of shock response of (111)//(112) Cu bicrystals: deformation and spallation. J Appl Phys 111(5):053525-1–053525-4.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3692079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wayne L, Krishnan K, DiGiacomo S, Kovvali N, Peralta P, Luo SN, Greenfield S, Byler D, Paisley D, McClellan KJ, Koskelo A, Dickerson R (2010) Statistics of weak grain boundaries for spall damage in polycrystalline copper. Scripta Mater 63:1065–1068.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2010.08.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brown A (2014) Three dimensional characterization of microstructural effects on spall damage in shocked polycrystalline copper. Ph.D. thesis, Arizona State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brown A, Wayne L, Pham Q, Krishnan K, Peralta P, Luo SN, Patterson BM, Greenfield S, Byler D, McClellan KJ, Koskelo A, Dickerson R, Xiao X (2015) Microstructural effects on damage nucleation in shock-loaded polycrystalline copper. Metall Mater Trans A 46(10):4539–4547.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-014-2482-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Escobedo JP, Cerreta EK, Dennis-Koller D (2013) Effect of crystalline structure on intergranular failure during shock loading. JOM 66(1):156–164.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-013-0798-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gray GT III, Bourne NK, Henrie BL (2007) On the influence of loading profile upon the tensile failure of stainless steel. J Appl Phys 101:093507-1–093507-9.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2720099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gray III GT, Bourne NK, Livescu V, Trujillo CP, MacDonald S, Withers P (2014) The influence of shock-loading path on the spallation response of Ta. Paper presented at the 18th APS-shock compression of condensed matter and 24th International Association for the Advancement of High Pressure Science and Technology, Seattle, WA, 7–12 July 2013. J Phys Conf Ser 500(11).  https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/500/11/112031Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rudd RE, Belak JF (2002) Void nucleation and associated plasticity in dynamic fracture of polycrystalline copper: an atomistic simulation. Comput Mater Sci 24:148–153.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-0256(02)00181-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilkerson JW, Ramesh KT (2014) A dynamic void growth model governed by dislocation kinetics. J Mech Phys Solids 70:262–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2014.05.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen GS, Aimone PR, Gao M, Miller CD, Wei RP (1997) Growth of nickel-base superalloy bicyrstals by the seeding technique with a modified Bridgman method. J Cryst Growth 179:635–646.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0248(97)00134-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Krishnan K, Brown A, Wayne L, Vo J, Opie S, Lim H, Peralta P, Luo SN, Byler D, McClellan KJ, Koskelo A, Dickerson R (2015) Three-dimensional characterization and modeling of microstructural weak links for spall damage. Metall Mater Trans A 46(10):4527–4538.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-014-2667-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Potirniche G, Horstemeyer M (2007) An internal state variable damage model in crystal plasticity. Mech Mater 39:941–952.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2007.04.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bammann DJ, Aifantis EC (1989) A damage model for ductile metals. Nucl Eng Des 116:355–362.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-5493(89)90095-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu B, Li Z, Xu F, Kikuchi M (2011) Influence and sensitivity of inertial effect on void growth and behavior in ductile metals. In: Ariffin AK, Abdullah S, Ali A, Muchtar A, Ghazali MJ, Sajuri Z (eds) Key Eng Mater 462–463:449–454.  https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.462-463.449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wilkerson JW, Ramesh KT (2016) Unraveling the anomalous grain size dependence of cavitation. Phys Rev Lett 117(21):215503-1–215503-5.  https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.117.215503

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth Fortin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Benjamin Shaffer
    • 1
  • Saul Opie
    • 2
  • Matthew Catlett
    • 3
  • Pedro Peralta
    • 1
  1. 1.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.General AtomicsPalmdaleUSA
  3. 3.Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos AlamosUSA

Personalised recommendations