Part II – February 1969 - Papers - The Interaction of Crystal Boundaries with Second- Phase Particles

A grain boundary in a metal interacts with second-phase particles, which exert a pinning force (first estimated by Zener) on the boundary opposing its motion. We have computed the shape of boundaries which interact with more or less spherical second-phase particles and have constructed a soap-film model to reproduce the shape of the boundary surface. An important result is that measurement of this shape allows the pressure, or driving force, on the boundary to be measured. We hare applied this technique to grain boundaries in two alloys and hate measured the pinning force exerted by single second-phase jwrticles on the boundaries. It is in good agreement with Zener's estimate. J\. boundary between two grains, or two bulk phases, interacts with small inclusions or particles of a second phase, whether they are gas or solid. This interaction means that the boundary, forced to migrate by a difference in free energy between the material of the two grains or phases which it separates, exerts a force on a particle which it touches, tending to drag it forward. (The movement of inclusions through metals under the influence of this force, has, in fact, been observed. 1-3) Equally, the particle can be thought of as exerting a pinning force on the boundary, tending to hold it back. Zener (in a celebrated private communication4) first realized that this interaction, and the resulting pinning force, existed. His calculation of its magnitude was crude but adequate: a spherical inclusion of radius r blanks off an area nr2 of the boundary on which it sits; since the boundary has an energy of rMM x per unit area, the blanlung-olf decreases the energy of the system by MM: this energy is returned to the system if the boundary is pulled free from the inclusion— a forward movement of the boundary by a distance r will do this—so that the maximum pinning force is Trrym.M- A similar argument can be made for inter-phase boundaries. The nature of the particle itself did not enter this, or two subsequent treatments.5,6 When it is considered, tic leifthe energyoftheb a) The boundary may enter and pass through the particle if the energy of the boundary is lower within the particle than in the matrix. Fig. l(r/). Certain coherent precipitate particles behave like this. h) More usually, the boundary will bend round the particle, enveloping and bypassing it. Fig. l(b). In doing so, it changes the structure and energy of the interface between the particle and its matrix. This means that the boundary does not touch the particle surface at right angles, as early treatments assumed,5'9 but at some angle a which depends on this change in surface energy of the particle, and can be calculated from the equilibrium of surface tensions. Most precipitate particles and inclusions behave like this. Gas bubbles or liquid drops can be regarded as belonging to either group. The progress of bypassing is conveniently measured by the angle shown in Fig. 1. When the nature of the particle is ignored, its maximum pinning force is exerted when - 45 deg. When it is considered, this critical value of is found to depend on a and thus on the nature of the particle. The maximum pinning force lies between nryMM and 2jtjMM (Appendix 1). not very different from Zener's result. In reality, a boundary between crystals has a specific energy and tension which varies with the orientation of the boundary. Furthermore, recent experiments7 indicate that such a boundary is not atom-ically smooth, but has steps on it: migration of the boundary corresponds to the sweeping of these steps across the boundary surface, like the Frank model of crystal growth from the vapor. This means that the interaction of a boundary with particles should really be considered in terms of the way in which particles hinder the movement of these steps. To suppose a grain boundary or interphase boundary to be smooth, and to ignore the variation of its energy with orientation, is to liken it to a soap film. The advantage of this soap film approximation, which we have used throughout this paper, is that interaction energies and boundary shapes can be calculated easily. We have done this by numerical computation and by using a soap film model, and have compared the results with grain boundaries in an aluminum-based and a copper-based alloy. It turns out that the shape of the boundary which bulges between particles allows the pressure an it to be calculated; that is, the local driving force an the boundary can be measured. This has allowed us to check the Zener relationship experimentally.