Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T06:57:31.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects and measurement of internal surface stresses in materials with ultrafine microstructures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

R.C. Cammarata  and
R.K. Eby
R.C. Cammarata
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218
R.K. Eby
Affiliation:
Institute of Polymer Science, University of Akron, Akron, Ohio 44325–3909
Get access

Abstract

Variations in lattice parameters for materials that form very thin lamellae are analyzed using a thermodynamic model that incorporates surface stress effects. It is predicted that lattice spacing variations should be proportional to the reciprocal of the lamella thickness, in agreement with experimental data for polyethylene, n-paraffins, and a copolymer of tetrafluoroethylene and hexafluoropropylene. The model is then used to calculate the surface stress associated with lamella interfaces in these crystalline materials. The calculated surface stress has the same order of magnitude as a surface tension, but is negative. The model is extended so that surface stresses associated with grain boundaries can be measured in very fine-grained metals and ceramics.

Type
Materials Communications
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 6 , Issue 5 , May 1991 , pp. 888 - 890
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1991

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

1Cammarata, R. C. and Sieradzki, K., Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2005 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Cammarata, R. C. and Sieradzki, K., Appl. Phys. Lett. 56, 1197 (1990).Google Scholar
3Shuttleworth, R., Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) A63, 444 (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Herring, C., in Structure and Properties of Solid Surfaces, edited by Gomer, R. and Smith, C. S. (University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 1953), p. 5.Google Scholar
5Mullins, W. W., in Metal Surfaces: Structure, Energetics, and Kinetics (American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1963), p. 17.Google Scholar
6Brooks, H., in Metal Interfaces (American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1952), p. 20.Google Scholar
7Cahn, J. W. and Larché, F., Acta Metall. 30, 51 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Shales, A. J., in Structure and Properties of Solid Surfaces, edited by Gomer, R. and Smith, C. S. (University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 1953), p. 120.Google Scholar
9Mays, C. W., Vermaak, J. S., and Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., Surf. Sci. 12, 134 (1968).Google Scholar
10Davis, G. T., Eby, R. K., and Colson, J. P., J. Appl. Phys. 41, 4316 (1970).Google Scholar
11Davis, G. T., Weeks, J. J., Martin, G. M., and Eby, R. K., J. Appl. Phys. 45, 4175 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Sanchez, I. C., Colson, J. P., and Eby, R. K., J. Appl. Phys. 44, 4332 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 If the axes 1 and 2 are taken as the crystallographic (principal) axes, the off-diagonal tensor components of the surface stress are zero (see Ref. 5).Google Scholar
14 Equation (8) corrects a factor of two error contained in Ref. 1.Google Scholar
15Wobser, G. and Blasenbrey, S., Kolloid Z. Z. Poly. 241, 985 (1970).Google Scholar
16Hoffman, J. D., Polymer 23, 656 (1982).Google Scholar
17Dregia, S. A., Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1989.Google Scholar
18 We have ignored the temperature dependence of the elastic compliance constants, which is expected to be much weaker than the exponential dependence of the strains.Google Scholar
19Broadhurst, M. G. and Mopsik, F. I., J. Chem. Phys. 54, 4239 (1971).Google Scholar
20Davis, G. T. (personal communication).Google Scholar
21Ruud, J., Witvrouw, A., and Spaepen, F. (to be published).Google Scholar