Low temperature annealing of metals with electrical wind force effects

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2018.09.069

Abstract

Abstract:

Conventional annealing is a slow, high temperature process that involves heating atoms uniformly, i.e., in both defective and crystalline regions. This study explores an electrical alternative for energy efficiency, where moderate current density is used to generate electron wind force that produces the same outcome as the thermal annealing process. We demonstrate this on a zirconium alloy using in-situ electron back scattered diffraction (EBSD) inside a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and juxtaposing the results with that from thermal annealing. Contrary to common belief that resistive heating is the dominant factor, we show that 5 × 10⁴ A/cm² current density can anneal the material in less than 15 min at only 135 °C. The resulting microstructure is essentially the same as that obtained with 600 °C processing for 360 min. We propose that unlike temperature, the electron wind force specifically targets the defective regions, which leads to unprecedented time and energy efficiency. This hypothesis was investigated with molecular dynamics simulation that implements mechanical equivalent of electron wind force to provide the atomistic insights on defect annihilation and grain growth.

Key words: Annealing, Grain-growth, Electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD), Molecular dynamics simulations, Electron wind force

Daudi Waryoba, Zahabul Islam, Baoming Wang, Aman Haque. Low temperature annealing of metals with electrical wind force effects[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2019, 35(4): 465-472.

Figures/Tables 15

Fig. 1. Scanning electron micrographs showing (a) gauge length, and (b) thickness of the specimen.

Table 1 LJ potential parameters for Zr-Sn, Zr-Fe and Sn-Fe interactions.

Chemical element	ε(kcal/mol)	σ (?)
Fe	0.013	2.912
Sn	0.567	4.392
Zr	0.069	3.124

Fig. 2. MD simulation specimen of polycrystalline zircaloy-4. Color scheme to highlight: (a) different grain orientations, and (b) atomic composition (blue, green, and red color indicates zirconium, iron and tin, respectively).

Fig. 3. Infrared image of the specimen under electrical annealing conditions (5 × 104 A/cm2).

Fig. 4. EBSD band contrast showing the microstructure of: (a) as-received, (b) electric-field annealed, and (c) thermal-annealed specimens. Scale bar is 10 μm.

Fig. 5. Grain boundary structure showing LAGBs and HAGs in: (a) as-received, (b) electric-field annealed, and (c) thermal-annealed specimens. Red boundaries are LAGBs (2°≤ θ ≤ 10°), and black boundaries are HAGBs (θ > 10°). Scale bar is 10 μm.

Fig. 6. Frequency of grain boundary misorientation in the: (a) as-received, (b) electric-field annealed, and (c) thermal-annealed specimens.

Fig. 7. X-axis inverse pole figure maps showing crystallographic orientations in the: (a) as-received, (b) electric-field annealed, and (c) thermal-annealed specimens. Scale bar is 10 μm.

Fig. 8. Pole figures showing the microtexture in the: (a) as-received, (b) electric-field annealed, and (c) thermal-annealed specimens.

Fig. 9. MD simulation depicting defective mesh and displacement vector during grain growth: (a) Initial structure, (b) at the end of the electrical annealing, (c) at the end of the thermal annealing, (d) initial displacement vector, (e) displacement vector at the end of the electrical current annealing, and (f) displacement vector at the end of the thermal annealing.

Fig. 10. Time evolution of grain growth: (a) Initial structure, (b) electrical annealing at 125 ps, (c) electrical annealing at 250 ps, (d) thermal annealing at 250 ps, and (e) thermal annealing at 500 ps.

Fig. 11. Two triple point associated with four grains: (a) before electrical annealing, and (b) after electrical annealing.

Fig. 12. Demonstration of the proposed electrical annealing method on a high temperature (nanocrystalline platinum) material. (left) Before annealing and (right) after annealing.

Fig. 13. XRD analysis of as-received (red dotted color) and electrical annealed (green color) samples.

Fig. 14. Williamson-Hall analysis of (a) as-received and (b) annealed sample.

References

[1]	F.J. Humphreys, M. Hatherly, UK, 2012, pp. 1-6.
[2]	L.M. Wang, Z.B. Wang, S. Guo, K. Lu, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 28(2012)41-45.
[3]	M.A. Tschopp, H.A. Murdoch, L.J. Kecskes, K.A. Darling, JOM 66 (2014)1000-1019.
[4]	H. Hu, B.B. Rath, Metall. Trans. 1(1970) 3181-3184.
[5]	Z. Islam, B.M. Wang, A. Haque, Scripta Mater. 144(2018) 18-21.
[6]	H. Conrad, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 322 (2002) 100-107.
[7]	L. Guan, G. Tang, P.K. Chu, J. Mater. Res. 25(2010) 1215-1224.
[8]	O. Guillon, J. Gonzalez-Julian, B. Dargatz, T. Kessel, G. Schierning, J. R?thel, M. Herrmann, Adv. Eng. Mater. 16(2014) 830-849.
[9]	J.P. Kelly, O.A. Graeve, JOM 67 (2015) 29-33.
[10]	R. Orru, R. Licheri, A.M. Locci, A. Cincotti, G.C. Cao, Mater. Sci. Eng. R 63 (2009) 127-287.
[11]	K.Q. Feng, Y. Yang, M. Hong, J.L. Wu, S.S. Lan, J. Mater. Process.Technol. 208(2008) 264-269.
[12]	I. Alexeff, T.T. Meek, Mater. Lett. 65(2011) 2111-2113.
[13]	Y.B. Park, L. Kestens, J.J. Jonas, ISIJ Int. 40(2000) 393-401.
[14]	A. Lodder, Physica A158 (1989) 723-739.
[15]	J.E. Garay, S.C. Glade, U. Anselmi-Tamburini, P. Asoka-Kumar, Z.A. Munir,Appl. Phys. Lett. 85(2004) 573-575.
[16]	Y. Yuan, W. Liu, B.Q. Fu, H.Y. Xu, G.N. Luo, G.Y. Tang, Y.B. Jiang, J. Mater. Res. 27(2012) 2630-2638.
[17]	I.A. Blech, C. Herring, Appl. Phys. Lett. 29(1976) 131-133.
[18]	A. Basavalingappa, J.R. Lloyd, IEEE Trans. Device Mater. Rel. 17(2017) 69-79.
[19]	D.N. Lee, Met. Mater. Int. 5(1999) 401-417.
[20]	M.J. Kim, K. Lee, K.H. Oh, I.S. Choi, H.H. Yu, S.T. Hong, H.N. Han, Scripta Mater.75(2014) 58-61.
[21]	V.M. Segal, J. Mater. Process.Technol. 231(2016) 50-57.
[22]	C. Basaran, M. Lin, Mech. Mater. 40(2008) 66-79.
[23]	H. Mizubayashi, K. Goto, T. Ebisawa, H. Tanimoto, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 442(2006) 342-346.
[24]	M.N. Bashir, A.S.M.A. Haseeb, A.Z.M.S. Rahman, M.A. Fazal, J. Mater. Sci.Technol. 32(2016) 1129-1136.
[25]	M.L. Huang, Z.J. Zhang, H.T. Ma, L.D. Chen, J. Mater. Sci.Technol. 30(2014)1235-1242.
[26]	H.W. He, H.Y. Zhao, F. Guo, G.C. Xu, J. Mater. Sci.Technol. 28(2012)46-52.
[27]	P. Asoka-Kumar, K. O’Brien, K.G. Lynn, P.J. Simpson, K.P. Rodbell, Appl. Phys.Lett. 68(1996) 406-408.
[28]	H. Huntington, A. Grone, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 20 (1961) 76-87.
[29]	S. Plimpton, J. Comput. Phys. 117(1995) 1-19.
[30]	G. Bonny, D. Terentyev, R.C. Pasianot, S. Ponce, A. Bakaev,Model. Simul. Mater.Sci. Eng. 19(2011), 085008.
[31]	A.K. Rappe, C.J. Casewit, K.S. Colwell, W.A. Goddard, W.M. Skiff, J. Am. Chem.Soc. 114(1992) 10024-10035.
[32]	H.B. Huntington, A.R. Grone, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 20 (1961) 76-87.
[33]	R.S. Sorbello, A. Lodder, S.J. Hoving, Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 25 (1982) 6178-6187.
[34]	J.P. Dekker, A. Lodder, J. van Ek, Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 56 (1997) 12167-12177.
[35]	P.D. Desai, H.M. James, C.Y. Ho, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 13 (1984) 1097-1130.
[36]	M. Kamaya, Mater. Charact. 60(2009) 125-132.
[37]	X. Yu, Z. Jiang, J. Zhao, D. Wei, J. Zhou, C. Zhou, Q. Huang, Surf. Coat. Technol.277(2015) 151-159.
[38]	M.C. Demirel, B.S. El-Dasher, B.L. Adams, A.D. Rollett, in: A.J. Schwartz, M.Kumar, B.L. Adams (Eds.), Electron Backscatter Diffraction in MaterialsScience, Springer, Boston, MA, 2000, pp. 65-74.
[39]	E.M. Lehockey, Y.-P. Lin, O.E. Lepik, in: A.J. Schwartz, M. Kumar, B.L. Adams(Eds.), Electron Backscatter Diffraction in Materials Science, Springer, Boston,MA, 2000, pp. 247-264.
[40]	M. Kamaya, A.J. Wilkinson, J.M. Titchmarsh, Acta Mater. 54(2006) 539-548.
[41]	P. Molnár, A. J?ger, P. Lej?ek, J. Mater. Sci. 47(2012) 3265-3271.
[42]	A. Stukowski, V.V. Bulatov, A. Arsenlis,Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 20(2012), 085007.