Hostname: page-component-669899f699-rg895 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T16:09:29.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Role of Schottky Disorder on the Stability and Structure of (100) Twist Grain Boundaries in Nio*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

D. Wolf
D. Wolf*
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Technology Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439
Get access

Abstract

Recent calculations on (100) coincidence-site lattice (CSL) twist boundaries in the NaCl structure have shown that without point defects these boundaries are only marginally stable. Following an earlier suggestion that point defects are the likely source for the considerable stability of these boundaries observed experimentally for Mgo and NiO, Tasker and Duffy have shown recently that the creation of a Schottky pair can, indeed, stabilize a (100) twist boundary in NiO. In this article a variety of configurations in which one or more Schottky pairs have been created in the perfect CSL or anti-CSL unit cell are investigated. It is concluded that many metastable structures may exist which differ mainly with respect to their different interfacial mass densities and the relative translation of the two halves of the bicrystal.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 24: Symposium B – Defect Properties and Processing of High-Technology Nonmetallic Materials , 1983 , 47
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1984

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

Thiswork was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy.

References

REFERENCES

1. Sun, C. P. and Balluffi, R. W., Phil. Mag. A46, 49 (1982).Google Scholar
2. Liou, K. Y. and Peterson, N. L., in Surfaces and Interfaces in Ceramic and Ceramic-Metal Systems, ed. by Pask, J. and Evans, A. (Plenum, New York), p. 1981, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Eastman, J., Schmuckle, J., Vaudin, M., and Sass, S. L., Advances in Ceramics 6 (in press).Google Scholar
4. Wolf, D. and Benedek, R., Advances in Ceramics 1, 107 (1981).Google Scholar
5. Wolf, D., J. de Physique, Colloque C6 43, C6–45 (1982).Google Scholar
6. Wolf, D., J. Am. Ceramic Soc. (in press).Google Scholar
7. Wolf, D., Advances in Ceramics 12 (in press).Google Scholar
8. Wolf, D., Phil. Mag. A (in press).Google Scholar
9. Wolf, D., Advances in Ceramics 6, 36 (1983).Google Scholar
10. Wolf, D., Radiation Effects 75, 203 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Tasker, P. W. and Duffy, D. M., Phil. Mag. A 47, L45 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Catlow, C. R. A., Mackrodt, W. C., Norgett, M. J., and Stoneham, A. M., Phil. Mag. 35, 177 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Sangster, M. J. L. and Stoneham, A. M., Phil. Hag. B43, 597 (1981).Google Scholar